Daily Times

In recent times, there has been increasing negative propaganda surrounding Quaid-e-Azam Muhammad Ali Jinnah, particularly referencing the predictions of Abdul Kalam Azad. This discourse on the current state of Pakistan and Jinnah’s vision for the nation raises several pressing questions.

Muhammad Ali Jinnah was the most outstanding Muslim political leader the Indian subcontinent ever had, and it is unlikely that the region will see another leader like him again. Jinnah’s vision extended beyond the creation of a Muslim state for Indian Muslims; he envisioned an Islamic state that would serve as a symbol for the Muslim Ummah. Jinnah began his political career by joining the Indian National Congress (INC) in 1906 and was elected to the Imperial Legislative Council in 1910. During his early days in Congress, he was seen as a symbol of Hindu-Muslim unity.

Jinnah’s fair and just policies aimed to unite Indians by ensuring a fair share for all segments of society through constitutional means. Prominent Indian leaders recognized him as a symbol of Hindu-Muslim unity. Gopal Krishna Gokhale, a great social reformer, political mentor of Mahatma Gandhi, and senior Congress politician, called Jinnah “the best ambassador of Hindu-Muslim unity.” However, Jinnah’s mission was to secure the social, political, and religious rights of Indian Muslims, who were the second-largest segment of the Indian nation.

Influential Muslim personalities and politicians, many of whom were not part of Congress, formed the All-India Muslim League (AIML) in 1906 to advocate for the rights of Indian Muslims. However, they struggled to find a strong Muslim leader who could fearlessly fight for the constitutional rights of Indian Muslims. Therefore, they invited Muhammad Ali Jinnah to join AIML. In 1913, Jinnah joined AIML and soon after left the INC. He was elected president of the AIML in the Lucknow conference’s session in 1916 and served as the President of AIML from 1920 to 1930 and again from 1937 to 1947.

On the other hand, Moulana Abul Kalam Azad was also an active freedom fighter, advocating non-violence and Hindu-Muslim unity. A competent and experienced politician even in his middle age, he held prominent positions within the INC. In 1923, at the age of 35, he became the President of the Indian National Congress and later served as Secretary-General and then again, the President again from 1940 to 1946. However, AIML leaders, including Mr Jinnah, saw Moulana Azad as an opportunist who prioritized his interests and secured key positions in Congress over fighting for the rights of the Indian Muslims.

When Pakistan came into existence, Mr Jinnah emphasized that Pakistan was a nation for all its citizens despite diverse races, cultures, history, and faiths.

Moulana Azad opposed Jinnah’s Two-Nation theory and promoted a united, harmonious India for all religions and cultures. However, he never presented a concrete plan for Indian Muslims that would ensure their constitutional rights, especially when the British ruler was planning to leave India. Despite having the influence and key position in the INC to advocate for Muslims’ rights, Moulana Azad failed to do so.

Mr. Jinnah, as the President of AIML, fought for the legislative rights of Muslims. In 1913, Jinnah attended the Round Table Conference, where he declared, “The Hindu-Muslim dispute must be settled before the enforcement of any system or constitution. Until you guarantee the safeguard of Muslim interests, you will not win Muslim cooperation, and any constitution you enforce shall not last even 24 hours.”

In 1916, the Lucknow Pact was signed between the INC and AIML, agreeing on the following points:

The number of Muslims in the provincial legislatures should be determined province by province.

Muslims should be given one-third representation in the Central Government.

There should be separate electorates for all communities until they request a joint electorate.

Half of the members of the Imperial Legislative Council must be Indians.

The Lucknow Pact was a significant breakthrough, raising hopes that Hindu-Muslim political rights would be resolved smoothly. However, three subsequent round table conferences between INC and AIML failed to achieve further progress. In these conferences, Moulana Azad’s contributions were negligible or silent. He never supported AIML’s political agenda for Indian Muslims, instead, he criticized AIML leadership and praised Congress leaders. Azad’s silence or opposition to AIML and Mr Jinnah signalled that he prioritized securing his position in Congress over the genuine legislative rights of Muslims.

The political philosophies of Mr Jinnah and Moulana Azad can be contrasted through their actions. Mr Jinnah’s strong leadership abilities can be judged through his famous saying, “I do not believe in taking the right decision; I take a decision and make it right.” Mr Jinnah proved this by devising a plan for the creation of an Islamic state in the subcontinent, staying true to his mission, and successfully establishing Pakistan on 14 August 1947. When AIML’s movement for Pakistan gained momentum, Mahatma Gandhi offered Jinnah the position of Indian Prime minister, but Jinnah declined, stating that his mission was not for personal gain but for the Muslims of India. In contrast, even Moulana Azad was regarded as an Islamic scholar, yet he remained loyal to the INC and its secular views. When INC offered the position of India’s Education Minister, he accepted and served in the role from 15 August 1947 to 2 February 1958.

Thus, there is no real comparison between Muhammad Ali Jinnah and Maulana Abul Kalam Azad.

Pakistan was created on the ideology that:

Sovereignty belongs to Allah.

An Islamic state governed by the teachings of the Quran and Sunnah.

To preserve the distinct religious, political, economic, cultural, and social identity of Muslims.

In his address on 18th June 1945 to the Frontier Muslim Students Federation, Mr Jinnah said, “Pakistan not only means freedom and independence but Muslim ideology, which has to be preserved, a precious gift and treasure which we hope others will share with us.”

Today, regarding whether the ideology of Pakistan is still alive among its nation, leaders, and rulers, the situation is regrettable.

In 1946, at Islamia College, Peshawar, Jinnah said, “We do not demand Pakistan simply to have a piece of land, but we want a laboratory where we could experiment on Islamic principles.”

When Pakistan came into existence, Mr. Jinnah emphasized that Pakistan was a nation for all its citizens despite diverse races, culture, history, and faith. He said, “You belong to a nation now; you have carved out a territory, a vast territory. It is all yours; it does not belong to a Punjabi or a Sindhi or a Pathan or a Bengali; it is yours.”

Mr. Jinnah warned the newly created Pakistani nation, saying, “We are now all Pakistanis-not Baluchis, Pathans, Sindhis, Bengalis, or Punjabis. And as Pakistanis, we must act accordingly, and we should be proud to be known as Pakistanis and nothing else.”

In a radio broadcast from Dacca on 28 March 1948, Mr. Jinnah further cautioned, “If we begin to think of ourselves as Punjabis, Sindhis, etc. first, and Muslims and Pakistanis incidentally, then Pakistan is bound to disintegrate. Do not think that this is some abstruse proposition; our enemies are fully aware of its possibilities, and I must warn you that they are already busy exploiting them.”

Unfortunately, the newly created Pakistani nation and those who held power in the early years of Pakistan’s existence rule the country in a manner completely contrary to the Resolution of Pakistan, the Objectives Resolution, and the guidelines laid out by Quaid-e-Azam Muhammad Ali Jinnah. Eventually, the consequences resulted the disintegration of Pakistan, with the separation of East Pakistan as Bangladesh within just 25 years of Pakistan’s creation. In the remaining provinces, national identity is overshadowed by regional identities such as Punjabi, Sindhi, Pathan, Balochi, Saraiki, and Muhajir.

The founder of Pakistan, Quaid-e-Azam Muhammad Ali Jinnah had already warned the nation, saying, “We are now all Pakistanis-not Baluchis, Pathans, Sindhis, Bengalis, Punjabis, and so on-and as Pakistanis, we must act accordingly, and we should be proud to be known as Pakistanis and nothing else.”

The writer is a Sydney-based journalist, analyst, writer and author. Email: shassan@tribune-intl.com