There is no negation there. Unless you take the two nation theory the same way as you would a heading to chapter and simply not bother to read the rest.
The two nation theory is still very applicable and is even in practice in India itself. There is a clear distinction made within the different minorities of India with the Majority.. Bollywoods on and off portrayal, appeasement and almost alienlike fascination with the Indian Muslim population is clear proof of it... the increasing Islamophobia demonstrated all over facebook(
lest we think anonymous forums are the only gauge) is clear proof that regardless of the undeniable and bloodline strong similarities.. the Muslims(
and certain other faiths which for this discussion are irrelevant) of the
Subcontinent and Hindus of the Subcontinent are two distinct nations with their own identities and ideals regarding life.
Now, whether that translates directly to needing separate electorates to separate states is another matter entirely.
Long story short, today if we sat as just plain Muslims and Hindus from the subcontinent.. I would understand you, joke with you, eat with you.. dress as you.. enjoy the same music and look nearly indistinguishable.. But I will know.. I am not you.. and not you me. My faith compels me so and forms an identity.. and so it should for you. And, when that core identity is threatened.. I will side with a Muslim.. and you with a Hindu(
or whatever). Nothing more glorious in it than plain old psychology and human nature.. since religion for many in the subcontinent remains their core inner sanctuary and "treasure". The inhabitants of the subcontinent aren't the centre of the world as we all mistakenly think and there are various nations and races and subdivisions within them that have had such factors join and divide them throughout history.
All that remains is to then realize that this psychological trigger has different limit triggers for different people and communities.. and exists on different levels for the same. The British knew this trigger and used it fairly effectively..
As for Afghanistan, it has nothing to do with the two nation theory despite your attempt to link it with it(
although not without merit as many here consider themselves of this turkic Afghan stock and somehow think themselves superior and with some connection to the Afghans).
The Afghanistan conundrum has the to do with their national tribal mentality that revolves around trying to hold on to supposed ancestral land(not much different than the Zionist Israelis) and remaining pretty much business faced to the outside world. Dont interfere in Afghanistan(or criticise our ways) but lets do business was always their motto.. sadly.. that did not work out too well now did it?
Pakistan is guilty of completely mucking about in Afghanistan.. and whilst on the surface it seems to be with the notion of Muslim brotherhood.. within the deeper state and the various "notes" handed down from key leadership to key leadership.. it revolves around gaining access to the energy resources of Central Asia.. namely the former Soviet republics. See, China for all its depths and heights of friendship will not let us have free lunch via its connection to Tajikistan and lets face it; with neighbours like India which cannot rest till it has had its national leadership psyche of finally defeating the Muslim conquerors(
in this case their descendants Muslims of the subcontinent) and throwing them out/converting etc of Bharat mata; that Karokaram route wasnt very feasible.
Hence, Afghanistan or rather that little bit of it that sticks out between Pakistan and Tajikistan... and this isnt a 90's thing. Have it on good.. rather excellent authority that even good old hypocrite Zia-ul-Haq had dreams of Koh-Kaaf(look it up).
So the whole idea with the bull about ummah on top has always been securing the energy corridor for Pakistan and providing us with energy resources and becoming a much better trading pathway for all these central Asian states.. not a bad economic outlook if it ever came to fruition.
That aside, those Afghan refugees were as good as dead had it not been for Pakistan letting them in. And it is us who trained a good deal of them to win against the Soviets(
despite the fact that we could only have the myopia to influence and bet on the religious nutjob and not the stable man aka Masood who despite being a Tajik would have really united the Afghans). So regardless of what we wanted, we saved the skin of millions of Afghans whilst ruining our societies not just in the northwest(
Peshawar and other areas of the Northwest were a very peaceful region in the 70s with increasing education and development on its way.) but all over.
And yet these ungrateful leftovers of Alexander's march think we owe them anything? I say nay.. throw them and all those who sympathize with them over the Durand line and impose a complete blockage.. let India try and airlift food if it can over the Iranian side.
The energy corridor has finally come to some sort of fruition(
even if not the original optimized form Pakistan sought it). and so there is little need for that barren trash land to our west. If it was upto me, Id build a wall that would make the one in Gaza look like a picket fence.
@Horus , I think we need to create a new write up that combines all the theories and known knowns on Af-Pak relations and ideals...put some basis to the supposed Ummah ideals.
@Slav Defence
Whilst considering all other nations inferior and worthy of murder and subjugation. That knowledge means zilch if it is fuelled by bigotry, racism and hatred.
