Dr. Umar Khan
Dr. Khan belongs to a Lahore based Think Tank.
19-5-26
Pakistan Was Made for Pakistanis, Not Imperialists
“A nation is not
merely a territory; it is the people who unite to build a shared future.”
After
the recent Israeli and American assault on Iran, Pakistan, after years of
relative irrelevance, moved to the centre stage by arranging a ceasefire and
peace talks in Islamabad. After decades of emitting mostly bad news, this was a
tremendously positive development, bringing Pakistan into spotlight favorably as
a peacemaker helping to end a dangerous war.
After
years of political instability, extremism, allegations of exporting terrorism,
and a faltering economy, receiving this kind of positive attention was
encouraging. However, it also brought back some unpleasant memories. These
strange cycles started soon after Pakistan’s inception.
The
Muslims of India, after tremendous struggle and against overwhelming odds,
managed to create Pakistan — a country where their political and economic
rights would be protected from what they feared could become a hostile
Hindu-majority India. In Pakistan, Muslims were supposed to have democracy,
safety, security, prosperity, self-esteem, and good relations with all
neighbors. In Pakistan freedom, human rights, and the collective will of the
people was to be the priority.
Muslims
in India had been severely abused, marginalized, and left poor and backward.
All of this was supposed to be corrected with the creation of the world’s first
religion-based state, a process that uprooted millions and caused a big loss of
life.
Despite
the welfare of Indian Muslims being its primary objective, strange things began
happening immediately after Pakistan’s creation. Pakistan became a bulwark
against communism, launching campaigns against communists by arresting and
persecuting famous figures such as Sahir Ludhianvi and Sajjad Zaheer. The
welfare of Pakistanis took a back seat, while this ideological battle became
sanctified, earning accolades from the very former colonizers and subjugators
responsible for many of the region’s centuries-old problems.
It
was only the beginning. The anti-communist world found Pakistan to be its most
eager partner, especially after communism was portrayed as inherently
incompatible with Islamic beliefs.
At
the outset of the Korean War, the bloodiest conflict since World War II,
Pakistan supported the allied side without directly contributing forces.
During the Suez Crisis, Pakistan joined the users’ conference supporting the Franco-British-Israeli aggression against newly independent Egypt — an Islamic country. This strange decision by the Pakistani government still affects Egyptian perceptions of Pakistan negatively.
Later,
Pakistan joined SEATO and CENTO, officially embracing the cause of the
capitalist and imperialist world. It also secretly provided airbases to the
United States against the USSR, further deepening its involvement. A U-2 spy
plane launched from a U.S. airbase in Pakistan was shot down over the USSR,
making Pakistan a target for Soviet hostility — something that may have
contributed to its dismemberment in 1971.
During
the 1962 Sino-Indian War, Pakistan, reportedly under U.S. pressure, refused to
take advantage of India’s military disarray to secure the disputed territory of
Kashmir. Interests of Pakistan took the back seat during the rule of Field
Marshal Ayub Khan.
In
1971, while facing a terrible civil war at home and yet another financial
crisis, Pakistan engineered a diplomatic miracle by helping bring the United
States and China together. This single act placed enormous pressure on
America’s Cold War rival, the USSR. Despite this invaluable service, and
Kissinger’s eagerness, General Yahya Khan secured no meaningful benefits for
Pakistan or Pakistanis. Perhaps his legitimacy as an unelected ruler was enough
for him.
Later,
during the 1980s, Pakistan became a frontline state fighting a proxy war for
the United States in Afghanistan against the USSR. Once again, this service was
provided under military rule. This landmark war was won by the West at a
remarkably low financial cost — less than US$10 billion — not counting the
immense price paid by Pakistan and Pakistanis, whose social structure and
national fabric were devastated by violence, extremism, drugs, and militancy.
Pakistan
is still suffering the effects and complications of that Afghan war.
In
modern history, few major conflicts have been fought so cheaply by a superpower.
Ironically, America’s later Afghan war became a failure costing over a trillion
dollars. General Zia-ul-Haq did, however, secure his legitimacy for a decade —
at enormous cost to the nation.
History
repeated itself in the early 21st century when Pakistan fought another Afghan
war for peanuts, while another military ruler, General Musharraf, gained
international legitimacy.
Now
Pakistan is involved in another diplomatic miracle by mediating in the
U.S./Israeli conflict with Iran, gaining international attention and
admiration. After a long time, Pakistan has entered the global headlines
positively. Let us see what this brings for ordinary Pakistanis, beyond
financial and political bonuses for a few generals.
In
these 80 years, despite larger-than-life achievements and participation in
international conflicts, Pakistan remains a basket case known for its economic
and social crises. Pakistan’s rankings in education, healthcare, infant
mortality, per capita income, human rights, democracy, press freedom, judicial
independence, and many other indicators remain among the lowest and continue to
deteriorate.
Apparently,
the state has absolved itself of responsibility toward its citizens while
focusing primarily on international affairs.
The
situation has become so bleak that, in this supposed land of opportunity and
Muslim dreamland, much of the younger generation has lost hope and dreams only
of leaving the country to build lives abroad. Many have already left, while
others continue trying.
Ironically,
alongside this rush to emigrate, traveling on a Pakistani passport has itself
become a nightmare because of Pakistan’s poor international standing. This is
understandable: no one respects people whose own government appears not to
respect them.
Now,
Pakistan’s mediation on the highest international stage is strangely
represented by an army chief serving on extension and associated with
questionable democratic credentials. This has exposed the weakness of Pakistani
democracy, often described as “hybrid,” thereby belittling the Pakistani nation
itself.
It
suggests that Pakistanis supposedly lack the ability to govern themselves and
perpetually require a strongman to guide them like a flock of sheep.
Ironically, this was the same colonial logic the British used to justify
exploitation and domination.
A
general running a country’s foreign policy is a profound public humiliation.
Unfortunately,
most of Pakistan’s sources of pride and achievement remain military or
international in nature. Most civilian achievements occur not because of a
supportive environment created by the state, but despite it.
The
callousness, disrespect, and contempt shown by the state toward its citizens
have become so extensive that merely due to the possible arrival of
international dignitaries for peace negotiations, the twin cities of Rawalpindi
and Islamabad were effectively sealed for over a week, turning them into giant
open-air prisons. This caused tremendous financial losses and severe
restrictions on personal freedom for residents.
Will
anyone answer for or justify this brutality by the state?
We
must ask why Pakistan performs so effectively internationally while failing so
miserably domestically. A political entity created to serve and nurture the
Muslims of India appears to have lost its direction.
I
wish Pakistan would earn appreciation for developing human potential,
strengthening its economy, and improving the lives of its citizens rather than
for participating in foreign adventures. A country that fails to serve its
people and create conditions that allow them to thrive loses its raison d'être
— its very reason for existence.
Pakistan
has served imperialist interests exceptionally well while neglecting
Pakistanis, and this must stop. There has to be an expiry date on prioritizing
foreign agendas or personal interests over national interests.
The
state of Pakistan must begin focusing on the welfare and interests of
Pakistanis instead of reinforcing the arguments of those who claim that the
creation of Pakistan was an imperialist project from the beginning.
