Najam Sethi - Cambridge educated renowned Pakistani journalist and editor of the Friday Times - provides a comprehensive, authoritative, and deeply insightful account of the rise of the national security state in Pakistan in sharp contrast to the social welfare state envisioned by the country's founder, Quaid-e-Azam Muhammed Ali Jinnah.
1) 1940 - late 1950s
Mr. Sethi explains how: (a) the demand for Pakistan grew out of a perceived need to protect economic and political rights of Muslims in a Hindu-dominated post-British democratic India; (b) Islam was never in danger and Muslim League leaders espoused universal Islamic values (like equality and justice) as opposed to Sharia; (c) initial concept of Pakistan consisted of separate states within an Indian federation; (d) Jinnah's envisioned a secular, constitutional, democratic, pluralist, and progressive Pakistan; (e) an Islamic identity began to emerge after Partition on account of communalism and Kashmir war; (f) Liaquat Ali Khan shifted the debate towards Islam with the Objectives Resolution; (g) Liaquat's assassination stopped political evolution by destroying Muslim League's leadership; (h) civil bureaucracy along with military started asserting themselves in the political void as the two most powerful colonial structures; and (i) America's growing geopolitical interests in Pakistan via defense pacts gave military the confidence to seize power with Ayub Khan's Martial Law in 1958.
2) 1960 - late 1980s
Mr. Sethi explains how: (a) Ayub Khan laid the foundation of the national security state by propagating fear of and enmity with India, strengthening military relationship with United States for weapons, centralizing administration and economic development, and instituting absolute dictatorship for national governance; (b) Ayub's policies produced a disgruntled labor class, feelings of alienation in East Pakistan, and strong provincial sub-nationalism; (c) Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto exploited the anti-Indian sentiment to launch a populist movement in the wake of Tashkent peace accord with India; (d) denial of power transfer to Bengalis after election win led to East Pakistan's separatist and secessionist movement; (e) Bhutto chose to maintain the national security state by rebuilding armed forces and propagating enmity with India; (f) America helped overthrow Bhutto on account of his attempt to form an Islamic block and develop nuclear weapons; and (g) General Zia-ul-Haq formally introduced religion into the national security state via massive Islamization and support of Jihad in Afghanistan.
3) 1990 - Present
Mr. Sethi explains how: (a) military establishment could not launch a Martial Law after Zia's death but worked behind the scenes to undermine populist governments; (b) the national security state continued under Benazir Bhutto and Nawaz Sharif's regimes via active support of Kashmir jihad against India; (c) the military establishment prevented change in status quo with India via dismissal of Benazir Bhutto's government on national security grounds and launch of Kargil war to scuttle Nawaz Sharif's peacemaking with Indian Prime Minister Vajpayee; (d) General Pervez Musharraf formally reasserted the national security state with his coup but adapted it to support America's war on terror; and (e) despite the democratic front of Asif Ali Zardari's government, the army is still very much present in the background to take reins should the politicians falter again.
This program was recorded for Pak TV program in August 2009.
PLEASE READ MY COMMENTS ON THE VIDEO BEFORE WATCHING.
Loading...
10:22
Sethi: Murder of History in Pak -6/6by KashifHKhan4,319 views
@rohitigc
You are right. At the end of the day, Pakistan is Jinnahs blunder. The people of Pakistan are part of the north Indian branch of the great Indian family. Pakistan is an aberration and the theory on which pakistan was founded does not hold water. Pakistan must reconcile with India in peace in a south asia without borders as a first step.
zafarso 5 months ago
Im sorry to say and I have no disrespect for any pakistani but I feel Mr Jinnah did not think through the idea of Pakistan. I guess the problems Mr Sethi is suggesting in this conversation, which Mr Jinnah faced after the partition should have been considered while asking for a separate state. The fact that two most powerful leaders (Jinah & Liaquat Ali) of league did not know anything about the social and geo political state of the region they acquired.
rohitigc 8 months ago
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia:-
The mass genocide type killing of Hindus by Muslims was initiated in Calcutta and Bengal by the call for direct action by Mohammed Ali Jinnah in 1945-46 during Muslim League rule in Bengal. It was done to create condition for partition. The first rioting in Punjab in 1947 was in the west Punjab area dominated by Muslims. So, the killing of Hindus and Sikhs was done first by Muslims in Muslim dominated areas.this phrase is totally biased
hitmanruturns 10 months ago
Jinnah demanded fixed portfolio for Muslims like defense, home etc. In the whole world this rule can not implemented in any nation. This rule was introduced in Lebanon. Now that nation is in civil war. Nehru was a wise man. He rejected Jinnah's communal demands. So Pakistan is actually a men made nation not a natural country.
ynrldh 10 months ago
i m not agreed with the fact . jinnah was also in the same line as nehru
both want to be the supremo of india n 4 tht they better got the solution of devision
MrQwertyui12345678 1 year ago
With due respect,I would like to remind Mr. Sethi that even the family of Mr.Jinnahlives in india.Jinnah had one daughter who married a parsi guy their relations(jinnah nd daug.) soured and she moved to US.But his Grandchildren remain in India and His Grandson is NUSLI WADIA OF BOMBAY DYEING.
xizvw 1 year ago
nehru was the best qualified person..if india would have atheist state..then he would have pm and no partition....but with the same thing..britian would have not ruled india !!!
sushil2002 1 year ago
Patel and Nehru were right, it is impossible to leave with Muslim. Look at the world now. It is leaving proof. Full of terror.
France, Germany, Engkand, United State all gave Pakistania refuse and what did Pakistan gave them? Only terror, you teh largest exporter of terror. That is your industry.
No your fault, it is all Mumamuds fault. He started Islam with violence and that is what you have. Good luck Pakis.
Glad India was split, otherwaise blood bath would have been at mass scale.
savita1926 1 year ago
Hmm, hmm wrong. I agree that the original vision of Jinnah was not a relegious one, where Najam Sethi goes wrong is in beliving that India wanted to take away muslim rights. Real reason for creation of pakistan is the simple question of whether a community's rights can be protected without the safeguards that Jinnah wanted. Nehru believed that it should be protected by creating a secular of that sort- Jinnah believed that was too naive.
bozrich 1 year ago
The argument of Sethiji about who broke India is faulty. If Jinnah wanted unity, how come he agreed to partition? Jinnah put forth argument of loose federation that wasnt accetable so partiiton was the outcome. Jinnah if wanted unity, had to keep faith in India(the motherland) and not even coin partition idea, forget accepting it. India made a wise choice, given where Pakistan is today and where India is today!
2009desibanda 1 year ago