It is now fashionable to trim down the role of Quaid-e-Azam Mohammad Ali Jinnah in the formation of Pakistan. The trend is especially conspicuous in the Urdu press of Pakistan. Many columnists writing in Urdu dailies have been found propagating that under the spell of Capitalism, Great Britain and allies laid the foundation of Pakistan by dividing the Indian subcontinent into two halves to preclude the Communist wave sweeping across the region. Some writers also believe that Pakistan’s formation was part of a conspiracy hatched by the British to weaken the united India so that the huge subcontinent could never challenge afterwards the imperialist designs of Great Britain (or its allies) physically or economically. Nothing else can harm the cause of federalism in Pakistan but such sort of propaganda. If Jinnah were considered a passive actor in Pakistan’s genesis, the federating units would be thinking that they might had been hoodwinked into the formation of a country the job of which was not to serve them but to protect capitalist-cum-imperialist designs of foreign powers in the region. The propagandists overlook the importance of the Fourteen Points of Jinnah (1929). In response to the Nehru Report pronounced by Pandit Moti Lal Nehru in 1928, through his points Jinnah proposed a constitutional reform formula to safeguard politico-economic and socio-cultural rights of Indian Muslims in united India. The efforts of Jinnah predated any international conflict, as at that time there was no sign of the Second World War (1939 -1945), the end of which actuated the conclusion of colonialism in the world. During Jinnah’s political struggle for protecting the rights of Indian Muslims through constitutional means, the Jamiat Ulema-e-Hind (JUH) remained averse to him. Secondly, the JUH was also opposed to the idea of the formation of Pakistan flouted by the All India Muslim League. The JUH considered that the cause of Indian Muslims (and Islam) could be served better by joining hands with the Indian National Congress (and by keeping India united). In fact, it was predicating on the supposed goodwill of the Congress while Jinnah wanted to ensure constitutional guarantees for the rights of Indian Muslims before the end of the colonial status of India. Jinnah was not indisposed to the idea of Hindu-Muslim unity. The Lucknow Pact (1916) was the first testament to that fact. The Delhi Muslim Proposals (1927) was the second step in that direction as in those proposals Jinnah yielded the demand of Separate Electorate (which had been conceded by the Congress in the Lucknow Pact) for Indian Muslims in case the proposals were accepted by the Congress. The proposals were to balance two points: first, forging Hindu-Muslim unity, and secondly, protecting constitutional rights of Indian Muslims. Afterwards, the Cabinet Mission Plan (1946) offered by the British government was the modus operandi for both Hindus and Muslims to live together for another 10 years before they decided for the division of the united India. It was Jinnah that agreed to the plan but it was Abul Kalam Azad, Jawahar Lal Nehru, Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi and Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel that misinterpreted (or rejected) either one part of the plan or the other. That attitude led to the surfacing of acerbic feelings between the League and the Congress and resulted in the division of the united India in 1947. Jaswant Singh, former foreign minister of India, has mentioned this point clearly in his book Jinnah: India-Partition-Independence. If the Congress had accepted the plan (the way Jinnah was interpreting it), the partition of India could have been delayed for at least another 10 years. The acceptance of the plan by Jinnah meant that at that time the preference of Jinnah was not to implement immediately the Lahore Resolution of 1940 but to safeguard Indian Muslims’ rights through constitutional means, whether within the united India or out of it. Hence, Pakistan was established neither to act as a bulwark against the communist ideology nor to serve any imperialist cause: Pakistan was not an artifact of any conspiracy. Jinnah served Indian Muslims far more than just the creation of Pakistan. The Government of India Act (1935) could not have been in the federal and minority-friendly shape had Jinnah not spoken for the constitutional rights of Indian Muslims (as a minority) in his Fourteen Points (1929). The same Act gave birth to the Constitutions of Pakistan and India after 1947. In his points, Jinnah educated Indian Muslims how to appreciate their rights in any constitutional scheme in the future. The next generation of Indian Muslims who benefitted from the efforts of Jinnah is now residing in Pakistan, India, and Bangladesh. Secondly, in the present India, the existing Hindu-Muslim harmony could not have been possible had the Hindus not felt the pain of the vivisection of the united India. Jinnah militated against the constitutional Brahmanism of the Hindus and taught them the lesson of showing respect for Indian minorities of all hues. One Urdu writer also writes that the youth of Pakistan like the older generation might not know that Pakistan was founded to save the Indian subcontinent from the eruption of communal riots and a consequent civil war. This argument is again flawed. If Hindu-Muslim riots had the power to create a country, Pakistan could have been founded before the 1945-46 elections. Many people still do not believe that one person could singlehandedly protect constitutional rights of Indian Muslims. Many people also think that the British cannot be defeated unless they themselves selected to be defeated. The ignorant lot in Pakistan underrates the brilliance of Jinnah as a constitutional expert and undervalues his courage to speak for the rights of Indian Muslims. Jinnah was not only a constitutional expert but also a politician. He knew how to win an argument against the JUH, the Congress and the British. Jinnah subordinated the role of any religion, ethnicity or race to the constitution. In a nutshell, the genesis of Pakistan is rooted in the protection of the constitutional rights of the Indian Muslims, and nothing else. The writer is a freelance columnist and can be reached at qaisarrashid@yahoo.com