What's new

Do Bangladeshis consider Quaid Azam MA Jinnah their leader?

hassan zohaib

FULL MEMBER
Joined
Feb 11, 2012
Messages
672
Reaction score
0
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan
Today is Quaid Azam MA Jinnah's birthday and west Pakistan or present Pakistan is observing the day with respect and zeal and everyone whether a Politician, general, PM or media or public tweeting & sending messages regarding his contribution to the nation.

We know Real pakistan consisted of East n west Pak but nowadays only west one is considered Pakistan so my question is that Do Bangladeshi consider Quaid as their leader or not.?
 
. . . .
As a Pakistani, my answer to this would be that most Bangladeshis see him through the prism of post-1971 politics. Factually, this perception remains historically inaccurate and clouded by jingoism. Without Jinnah, Bangladesh would not even exist today of course.If you want to learn someone true character about person , you learn from his/her enemy.Jinnah: India-Partition-Independence is a book written by Jaswant Singh, a former Finance Minister of India and an External Affairs Minister, on Pakistan's founder Quaid-e-Azam Muhammad Ali Jinnah and the politics associated with the Partition of India.

It was due to Jinnah’s leadership that West and East Pakistan (now Bangladesh) were formed, and the movement for Pakistan was spearheaded mainly by his efforts. There is academic consensus over this. Before 1949, Sheikh Mujibur Rahman, whom the Bengalis call “Bangabandhu”, was, in fact, one of the staunch loyalists of Jinnah and the Muslim League’s campaign for an independent Pakistan. Without East Pakistan separating, the Bangladeshis would undoubtedly be Indians today, and perhaps living as second-class citizens there; much like the East Bengali refugees whom Indians call a “burden”.This should be much better punishement of hypocrite nation.

Many Bengali commentators cite the 1950s Bengali Language Movement as the reason for animosity. But the truth is that Jinnah died in 1948 (a year after Pakistan’s independence), and the seeds of Bengali agitation were laid much later (due to political reasons which is a whole another debate).

There is then the vague reference to a speech in Dhaka where he advocated Urdu as a national language, which other Bangladeshi nationalists prefer to cite. But there is no evidence that Jinnah even opposed the use of Bengali at a provincial level; he simply maintained that at the federal level, Pakistan should have one national language (a lingua franca) which would be used as the official mode of communication between all groups. Similar to how English is used today. It did not prevent the Punjabis, Sindhis, Pashtuns, Baloch, Kashmiris, Saraikis etc. from using or studying their own native languages within their provinces. None of these ethnicities had major problems either with using one standard lingua franca. If one looks at India, they have given a special union status to Hindi and English, while all other languages are designated ‘co-official’ in their respective states. Similarly Urdu historically has a significant role among the Muslim masses of the subcontinent. Even today, most Bangladeshis are more likely to understand Urdu than Pakistanis are to understand Bengali.

Therefore it can be concluded that the Bangladeshi narrative of Jinnah is mostly fabricated and one that relies on the anti-Pakistan narrative which developed from 1950s onwards. It does not have any meaningful foundations. There were definitely no anti-Jinnah sentiments in 1947/1948 when East Pakistan became independent. It was artificially manufactured post-1950 to 1970s.

Most Pakistanis belong to the younger generation, who were born after 1971, and therefore do not have any sentimental attachment to Bangladesh. It is like a chapter of history relegated to textbooks. I personally think even if all had gone well, the Western and Eastern wings would still not have remained unified for long. Muhammad Iqbal’s idea of Pakistan did not mention Bengal anywhere. Neither did Chaudhry Rahmat Ali mention Bengal when he coined the term “PAKISTAN” (he saw it as a separate state). Therefore most Pakistanis have come to believe that it is feasible for both states to be separate.

One may look at the present Pakistan—Bangladesh diplomatic relations to understand the dynamics. Our political structure, ideology, culture, foreign policy, military histories, and outlook remain divergent. Bangladesh’s secular government has generally leaned more towards India and is happy playing second fiddle, while Pakistanis prefer to be independent Islamic state and sovereignty belong to Allah and do not appreciate any regional hegemony.
In After surrender of West Pakistan army and declaration of independent Bangladesh, within a matter of four years person called father of nation Sheikh Mujibur Rahman was assassinated along with his whole family in a Military coup, only this time army was not from West Pakistan but from their own Bangladesh.Allah expose and punish the hypocrites.
 
Last edited:
.
Today is Quaid Azam MA Jinnah's birthday and west Pakistan or present Pakistan is observing the day with respect and zeal and everyone whether a Politician, general, PM or media or public tweeting & sending messages regarding his contribution to the nation.

We know Real pakistan consisted of East n west Pak but nowadays only west one is considered Pakistan so my question is that Do Bangladeshi consider Quaid as their leader or not.?


as far as i know they dont see him as their leader. freedom fighter ? maybe.

one of the main reason they started their freedom movement is feeling of being too alien to even the North Indian Culture of Urdu, Punjabi, etc. to them Jinnah must be some Gujarati Muslim who fought for Independence of the Subcontinent like Gandhi or Nehru.
 
.
I don't want to be in their shoes, the community i belong also been Oppressed in Pakistan(Past) , but majority of us don't take Indian Help to break our Pakistan .

Indian "help" was never taken, brother.It was enforced upon several East Pakistanis against their will.You and us are being taught Bhutto's version so that he and his children could rule us for years.It was strategic planning of Bhutto and some elements in Bangladesh so that each can have their own rule without any share.Nobody thought of us, our will and desire was masked by their loud sound.That's why several Bangladeshi posters are here, in PDF.Please do not repeat the same mistake.What was lost in the past was lost.They are still here with us with identity that was chosen for them.Accept it and make sure that now our relationship with Bangladesh prospers.

Regards
 
.
As a Pakistani, my answer to this would be that most Bangladeshis see him through the prism of post-1971 politics. Factually, this perception remains historically inaccurate and clouded by jingoism. Without Jinnah, Bangladesh would not even exist today of course.

It was due to Jinnah’s leadership that West and East Pakistan (now Bangladesh) were formed, and the movement for Pakistan was spearheaded mainly by his efforts. There is academic consensus over this. Before 1949, Sheikh Mujibur Rahman, whom the Bengalis call “Bangabandhu”, was, in fact, one of the staunch loyalists of Jinnah and the Muslim League’s campaign for an independent Pakistan. Without East Pakistan separating, the Bangladeshis would undoubtedly be Indians today, and perhaps living as second-class citizens there; much like the East Bengali refugees whom Indians call a “burden”.

Many Bengali commentators cite the 1950s Bengali Language Movement as the reason for animosity. But the truth is that Jinnah died in 1948 (a year after Pakistan’s independence), and the seeds of Bengali agitation were laid much later (due to political reasons which is a whole another debate).

There is then the vague reference to a speech in Dhaka where he advocated Urdu as a national language, which other Bangladeshi nationalists prefer to cite. But there is no evidence that Jinnah even opposed the use of Bengali at a provincial level; he simply maintained that at the federal level, Pakistan should have one national language (a lingua franca) which would be used as the official mode of communication between all groups. Similar to how English is used today. It did not prevent the Punjabis, Sindhis, Pashtuns, Baloch, Kashmiris, Saraikis etc. from using or studying their own native languages within their provinces. None of these ethnicities had major problems either with using one standard lingua franca. If one looks at India, they have given a special union status to Hindi and English, while all other languages are designated ‘co-official’ in their respective states. Similarly Urdu historically has a significant role among the Muslim masses of the subcontinent. Even today, most Bangladeshis are more likely to understand Urdu than Pakistanis are to understand Bengali.

Therefore it can be concluded that the Bangladeshi narrative of Jinnah is mostly fabricated and one that relies on the anti-Pakistan narrative which developed from 1950s onwards. It does not have any meaningful foundations. There were definitely no anti-Jinnah sentiments in 1947/1948 when East Pakistan became independent. It was artificially manufactured post-1950 to 1970s.

Most Pakistanis belong to the younger generation, who were born after 1971, and therefore do not have any sentimental attachment to Bangladesh. It is like a chapter of history relegated to textbooks. I personally think even if all had gone well, the Western and Eastern wings would still not have remained unified for long. Muhammad Iqbal’s idea of Pakistan did not mention Bengal anywhere. Neither did Chaudhry Rahmat Ali mention Bengal when he coined the term “PAKISTAN” (he saw it as a separate state). Therefore most Pakistanis have come to believe that it is feasible for both states to be separate.

One may look at the present Pakistan—Bangladesh diplomatic relations to understand the dynamics. Our political structure, ideology, culture, foreign policy, military histories, and outlook remain divergent. Bangladesh’s secular government has generally leaned more towards India and is happy playing second fiddle, while Pakistanis prefer to be independent Islamic state and sovereignty belong to Allah and do not appreciate any regional hegemony.
In After surrender of West Pakistan army and declaration of independent Bangladesh, within a matter of four years person called father of nation Sheikh Mujibur Rahman was assassinated along with his whole family in a Military coup, only this time army was not from West Pakistan but from their own Bangladesh.Allah expose and punish the hypocrites.
Actually, imo, it was all about how we present history to our masses.
We all know whom v get liberation from-The English but we are taught that it was Hindus who were oppressor. Why don't v have the animosities for Britannia than we have for India? Same is like with Bangladesh.
Thing is we are taught the history which is distorted and which starts from certain date as exactly in this case After 71. So whenever a balanced n neutral writer or reader read history he connects it with the bigger picture...
 
.
Indian "help" was never taken, brother.It was enforced upon several East Pakistanis against their will.You and us are being taught Bhutto's version so that he and his children could rule us for years.It was strategic planning of Bhutto and some elements in Bangladesh so that each can have their own rule without any share.Nobody thought of us, our will and desire was masked by their loud sound.That's why several Bangladeshi posters are here, in PDF.Please do not repeat the same mistake.What was lost in the past was lost.They are still here with us with identity that was chosen for them.Accept it and make sure that now our relationship with Bangladesh prospers.

Regards

I don't agree with you completely but lets leave it that brother ..
 
.
Indian "help" was never taken, brother.It was enforced upon several East Pakistanis against their will.

That's a load of nonsense, Urdu speakers aside, East Pakistan has always been weird. The only use they had to us was being a source of revenue and I guess they can also boost our ego by a being a country we used to rule over.
 
.
It was all a well planned strategy by hindus and british from the begining. Qaid however spotted that right from the start.
The plan was to give bangladesh to Pakistan and take muslim majority areas of Punjab away from Pakistan
- to make a route for india to 'stan' states like afghanistan, turkemanistan
- to create a buffer zone between hindustan and pakistan with sikhs in it, who hated muslims at that time
- to divide and break pakistan later on with far more ease
Qaid was against adding Bangladesh to Pakistan from the start. He wanted Bangladesh to be a seperate country. They had nothing common with us.
Bangladesh was a problem right from start logistically and ruling it was hard. So plan worked and Pakistan broke but it was never meant to be together. Atleast that was not Qaids vision.
 
.
Well Fatimah Jinnah won in East Pakistan and lost in Punjab!!! that was in 1965 , six years before 71. Do Punjabi's consider Jinnah as their leader or Ayub Khan?????
 
. .
Well Fatimah Jinnah won in East Pakistan and lost in Punjab!!! that was in 1965 , six years before 71. Do Punjabi's consider Jinnah as their leader or Ayub Khan?????
Not to mention that election was a farce to begin with. But East Pakistan at that time overwhelmingly supported Fatimah Jinnah while West chose Ayub Khan.

In Bangladesh Mr. Jinnah is pretty much forgotten. Pakistani leaders who are rembered are Ayub, Yahya and Bhutto for their notoriety. Some Bengali leaders are remembered fondly like Sher e Bangla A.K. Fazlul Haq and Suhrawardy. Khwaza Nazimuddin is seen negatively. Nawab Salimullah(founder of Muslim League) is also remembered fondly. I don't remember seeing Mr. Jinnah anywhere mentioned anywhere in Bangladesh. Maybe one or two articles in the newspaper mention him every year. His name is present in the social science books (history section about transition from British rule to Pakistan period), but that does not get enough attention.

Well, I guess Pakistan can keep Mr. Jinnah completely for themselves. You would not want to share him with us even if wanted him. And we have no intention to ask part of Jinnah from you guys either. We have our leaders whom we remember with great respect.

Finally, Happy belated birthday to late Mr. M A Jinnah. My respect to him for his contribution to the formation of Pakistan.

Joy Bangla.
 
.
It was all a well planned strategy by hindus and british from the begining. Qaid however spotted that right from the start.
The plan was to give bangladesh to Pakistan and take muslim majority areas of Punjab away from Pakistan
- to make a route for india to 'stan' states like afghanistan, turkemanistan
- to create a buffer zone between hindustan and pakistan with sikhs in it, who hated muslims at that time
- to divide and break pakistan later on with far more ease
Qaid was against adding Bangladesh to Pakistan from the start. He wanted Bangladesh to be a seperate country. They had nothing common with us.
Bangladesh was a problem right from start logistically and ruling it was hard. So plan worked and Pakistan broke but it was never meant to be together. Atleast that was not Qaids vision.
Or in Allama Iqbal’s vision.

What do you mean by Real Pakistan?
Allama Iqbal did not envision Bengal is his Muslim homeland. Neither did Chaudry Rehmat Ali and Quaid e Azaam reluctantly accepted East Bengal to be part of Pakistan.
Do you mean Pakistan pre 1971???
Today is Quaid Azam MA Jinnah's birthday and west Pakistan or present Pakistan is observing the day with respect and zeal and everyone whether a Politician, general, PM or media or public tweeting & sending messages regarding his contribution to the nation.

We know Real pakistan consisted of East n west Pak but nowadays only west one is considered Pakistan so my question is that Do Bangladeshi consider Quaid as their leader or not.?
 
.

Pakistan Defence Latest Posts

Pakistan Affairs Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom