Pakistan Textbooks Acknowledge Role of Minorities

[RiazHaq]

Haq's Musings: Pakistani Textbooks Acknowledge National Contribution of Minorities

Pakistani history books for middle and high school students now describe the role played by Christians, Hindus and Sikhs have had in building the country after independence, according to Pakistan Christian Post.



Professor Anjum James Paul, Chairman of Pakistan Minorities Teachers’ Association (PMTA) and member of the Textbook Review Committee, says that “Role of minorities in the creation of Pakistan” for History 8 and “ Role of minorities in Pakistan” for Pakistan Studies 10 are now part of the National Curriculum.

The new textbooks acknowledge that minority leaders attended the Annual meeting of the All India Muslim League which on 23rd March 1940 when the Pakistan Resolution was passed. Among the attendees were Diwan Bahadar Sittia Parkash Singha, a renowned lawyer Chaudhry Chandu Lal, CE Gibbon, F.E. Chaudary, Raj Kumari Amrit, Fazal Ilahi, Alfried Purshad and S.S. Albert.

As the Pakistan Movement neared its goal of partition, Quaid-e-Azam Mohammad Ali Jinnah sought and received the support of the Christian leader Ch. Chandu Lal and the Sikh leader Giani Kartar Singh in Lahore.

The Punjab Boundary Commission representing Pakistan's interests at the time of partition included Justice Din Muhammad, Sir Zafarullah Khan and Sardar Baddar Singh. Several Christian leaders appearing before it asked that the Christian population of Punjab be counted as a part of Pakistan.

In Sindh, the Parsi community played an important role. A Parsee leader named Jamshed Nusser Wangee Mehta became the first mayor of Karachi after the creation of Pakistan. He was instrumental in welcoming the Muhajirs from India and helped them settle in Karachi.

Pakistan has had several top judges, bureaucrats and military officers who have the served the nation with distinction. Among the most prominent of them are Supreme Court Chief Justice A.R. Cornelius, Justice Bhawan Das, Justice Dorab Patel, Major General Julian Peter, Maj Gen Israel Khokhar, Group Captain Cecil Chaudhry and Air Commodore Władysław Turowicz.

Better late than never. It's good to see Pakistan finally acknowledge the role of minorities in its creation and development. I hope it's just the beginning of the march toward Quaid-e-Azam Mohammad Ali Jinnah's vision of a more inclusive Pakistan.

Related Links:

Haq's Musings

Rising Tide of Intolerance Threatens Pakistan

Akhand Bharat Part of Indian Textbooks

Hindutva Distortions in Indian Textbooks

Fighting Agents of Intolerance in Pakistan

Muslim Scholars Must Fight Hate in Pakistan

South Asian Christians Celebrate Christmas in Fear

Quaid-e-Azam Mohammad Ali Jinnah's Vision

Pakistan Must Defeat Agents of Intolerance

Celebrating Quaid-e-Azam M.A. Jinnah's Birthday




Haq's Musings: Pakistani Textbooks Acknowledge National Contribution of Minorities

 

[Providence]

Jinnah thought that muslims are a better and more righteous religion and a country with majority muslims will automatically translate into a secular country where minorities can feel safe and empowered. We all know what kind of depths pakistan has reached after independence. Although we still cannot go ahead and say what jinnah thought was wrong but Jinnah obviously didn't think through the process which will unravel if the region was to get a new muslim majority country.

(With out blaming muslims in particular) The boundary spawned with blood of millions of humans and brought untold misery to both sides which fundamentally changed the thought process of generations to come. The religious bigots got empowered in the process on both sides and further killings of minorities ensued on either sides unabated for many more years to come.

Now situation would have been equally worse in India and pakistan but the difference I suppose was, India's heavy push towards reforming and strengthening of democratic institutions immediately after independence. Indians were lucky to have an army of reformists/visionaries in different domains to carry out the process in first 10-15 years which kept an automatic check on bigots to some extent . Pakistan had only handful and the feudal nature of the society was allowed to persist for far longer. Thus, the institutional check for safeguarding of minorities in pakistan was missing...

Above is my simplistic understanding of different course of history for pakistan and India. I can be wrong. Be good enough to correct me

 

[Rajaraja Chola]

Jinnah thought that muslims are a better and more righteous religion and a country with majority muslims will automatically translate into a secular country where minorities can feel safe and empowered. We all know what kind of depths pakistan has reached after independence. Although we still cannot go ahead and say what jinnah thought was wrong but Jinnah obviously didn't think through the process which will unravel if the region was to get a new muslim majority country.

(With out blaming muslims in particular) The boundary spawned with blood of millions of humans and brought untold misery to both sides which fundamentally changed the thought process of generations to come. The religious bigots got empowered in the process on both sides and further killings of minorities ensued on either sides unabated for many more years to come.

Now situation would have been equally worse in India and pakistan but the difference I suppose was, India's heavy push towards reforming and strengthening of democratic institutions immediately after independence. Indians were lucky to have an army of reformists/visionaries in different domains to carry out the process in first 10-15 years which kept an automatic check on bigots to some extent . Pakistan had only handful and the feudal nature of the society was allowed to persist for far longer. Thus, the institutional check for safeguarding of minorities in pakistan was missing...

Above is my simplistic understanding of different course of history for pakistan and India. I can be wrong. Be good enough to correct me

India had its own drawbacks. The major disadvantage of Pakistan is the passing away of Jinnah immediately after Independence and the only other leader who had any popularity Liaqat Ali Khan died soon in 1951, which left Pakistan devoid of major political leaders with a base, allowing military to play spoil sport with the nation.

On the other hand, Nehru and his cabinet had large followings. Nehru ruled till 1964 and many of his decisions went quite unchallenged however wrong it might be. Like on the Kashmir issue, ignoring Sardar Patel and going to UN, recognising Tibet immediately, war with China etc. But even if Nehru had died immediately , India had leaders who would have filled up the void like Abul Kalam Azad, Kamaraj, Ambedkar etc

 

[macnurv]

Jinnah thought that muslims are a better and more righteous religion and a country with majority muslims will automatically translate into a secular country where minorities can feel safe and empowered. We all know what kind of depths pakistan has reached after independence. Although we still cannot go ahead and say what jinnah thought was wrong but Jinnah obviously didn't think through the process which will unravel if the region was to get a new muslim majority country.

(With out blaming muslims in particular) The boundary spawned with blood of millions of humans and brought untold misery to both sides which fundamentally changed the thought process of generations to come. The religious bigots got empowered in the process on both sides and further killings of minorities ensued on either sides unabated for many more years to come.

Now situation would have been equally worse in India and pakistan but the difference I suppose was, India's heavy push towards reforming and strengthening of democratic institutions immediately after independence. Indians were lucky to have an army of reformists/visionaries in different domains to carry out the process in first 10-15 years which kept an automatic check on bigots to some extent . Pakistan had only handful and the feudal nature of the society was allowed to persist for far longer. Thus, the institutional check for safeguarding of minorities in pakistan was missing...

Above is my simplistic understanding of different course of history for pakistan and India. I can be wrong. Be good enough to correct me

Indeed it is a very simplistic opinion. Every religious person or followers of all religion that they are more righteous than others, so it would be true for all. Jinnah was not interested in partition of India but was not left any choice. That is a discussion for another time.
The story of partition is a bloody one and the bad seed that was sowed, both the countries are still suffering from it even after 70+ years.

India had its own drawbacks. The major disadvantage of Pakistan is the passing away of Jinnah immediately after Independence and the only other leader who had any popularity Liaqat Ali Khan died soon in 1951, which left Pakistan devoid of major political leaders with a base, allowing military to play spoil sport with the nation.

On the other hand, Nehru and his cabinet had large followings. Nehru ruled till 1964 and many of his decisions went quite unchallenged however wrong it might be. Like on the Kashmir issue, ignoring Sardar Patel and going to UN, recognising Tibet immediately, war with China etc. But even if Nehru had died immediately , India had leaders who would have filled up the void like Abul Kalam Azad, Kamaraj, Ambedkar etc

I agree, for the most part.

 

[nForce]

Indeed it is a very simplistic opinion. Every religious person or followers of all religion that they are more righteous than others, so it would be true for all. Jinnah was not interested in partition of India but was not left any choice. That is a discussion for another time.
The story of partition is a bloody one and the bad seed that was sowed, both the countries are still suffering from it even after 70+ years.




I agree, for the most part.

Partition was never necessary. It was Jinnah's ego all along. There cannot be any other reason. His argument that Muslims cannot live in a Hindu majority India has already been rebutted by the fact that India has more Muslim population than Pakistan and they are doing quite well. Muslims are well represented in Indian society.
And the famous two-nation theory went for a toss when Bangladesh was created.

It's funny, because now Pakistan exists just not to be India.What kind of existence is that ?

 

[Pakistani E]

Partition was never necessary. It was Jinnah's ego all along. There cannot be any other reason. His argument that Muslims cannot live in a Hindu majority India has already been rebutted by the fact that India has more Muslim population than Pakistan and they are doing quite well. Muslims are well represented in Indian society.
And the famous two-nation theory went for a toss when Bangladesh was created.

It's funny, because now Pakistan exists just not to be India.What kind of existence is that ?

Well you are well on your way to becoming like Pakistan with electing a "Hindu" nationalist as the prime minister of a secular country. Looks like the Hindus were not happy with the secular Constitution ?

EDIT: Point being, Jinnah was right.

 

[nForce]

Well you are well on your way to becoming like Pakistan with electing a "Hindu" nationalist as the prime minister of a secular country. Looks like the Hindus were not happy with the secular Constitution ?

EDIT: Point being, Jinnah was right.

You are over extrapolating it. Ground reality is not what you think it to be. The idea of India is greater than an Indian, which is why India continues to exist inspite of such a massive diversity in religion, race, ethnicity.

Every country has its fair share of right-wing elements and India is not an exception. You may of course choose to disagree.

So, far as Jinnah's decisions are concerned, I will tell you this, the historical pointers proving him wrong are far greater than those proving him right. I mean, what do you have here ? A thin possibility that Modi will change the secular status of India ? Do you think the people of India will let that happen ?

Jinnah took it personally when he lost to Nehru.He wanted to get back and changed the story from a separate electorate for Muslims to a separate country for Islam.

And till this date, Pakistan happens to be the only country that was created for Islam.
And what a crude destiny, probably more Muslims get killed in Pakistan today than rest of the Muslim World put together, well probably Syria or Iraq are close.

Answer me this,if religion can be the cradle of nationality, then why there are so many Arab countries ? They have same language,same religion, same culture, but they have different countries.

@Pakistani Exile Just imagine what we could have achieved together. With the land and the natural resources and no fighting, access to China, Central Asia, access to Indian ocean,Arabian sea, we could have made it a much better place to live in.
Instead of that, what do we have ? Line of control and terrorism and war and border skirmishes, not to mention the arms race.. Worth it ?

 

[Rau]

The idea of India is greater than an Indian, which is why India continues to exist inspite of such a massive diversity in religion, race, ethnicity.

Exactly, i cant understand why such hard to understand to these people that we are Indian in past, present and in future. Only name changes like from Bharat,Hindustan and now India. India its like big family where everybody has its own personality but having only one identity "India". Its in our blood.

@Pakistani Exile Just imagine what we could have achieved together.

No, its only thing they have given us. Imagine if large part like Pakistan in India, what would be our status on economic front. Ek UP state se ye haal hai to Pakistan se kya hota.

 

[Ocelot]

Just imagine what we could have achieved together. With the land and the natural resources and no fighting, access to China, Central Asia, access to Indian ocean,Arabian sea, we could have made it a much better place to live in.
Instead of that, what do we have ? Line of control and terrorism and war and border skirmishes, not to mention the arms race.. Worth it ?

Thanks, but no thanks. Granted that our stocks have gone down since Zia-ul-Haq's rule and Soviet-Afghan-War, there was a time that Pakistan's economy was booming and the country was thriving, and had that continued today, Pakistan and India would've been like Singapore and Malaysia respectively. Our Airline was among the best, helped created many other airlines, including Emirates; even Chinese used it to travel to Europe. Karachi was one of the best cities in Asia. We used to win hockey world cups just for the heck of it. Our cricket team was better than India's for a large part of 20th century. Any international prestigious institutions Indians work, you'd find Pakistanis there. Pakistan was sharp and dynamic; India was a slow behemoth.

Jinnah was right; Maudodis and Zia-ul-Haqs of the world were wrong, and their ideologies needs to be defeated. Pakistan will fight back and rise again, I've full faith the abilities and competencies of my people.

 

[Sine Nomine]

Partition was never necessary. It was Jinnah's ego all along.

1920 choa chori riots,1911 annulment of Partition of Bengal and above all see result of 1937 election League was not popular it was only after rule of congress for 2 years which changed minds of Muslims in India.

 

[Tayyab1796]

Thanks to Mr Jinnah we can eat beef burgers and enjoy minced beef dishes as and when we want...

 

[nForce]

1920 choa chori riots,1911 annulment of Partition of Bengal and above all see result of 1937 election League was not popular it was only after rule of congress for 2 years which changed minds of Muslims in India.

Changed the minds of Muslims of India ?
Are you even thinking ? Muslims of India were not even organized together. All the decisions were being taken by a few elite families who had vested personal interests. And that, is exactly what gave rise to long-standing feudalism in Pakistan.

Thanks, but no thanks. Granted that our stocks have gone down since Zia-ul-Haq's rule and Soviet-Afghan-War, there was a time that Pakistan's economy was booming and the country was thriving, and had that continued today, Pakistan and India would've been like Singapore and Malaysia respectively. Our Airline was among the best, helped created many other airlines, including Emirates; even Chinese used it to travel to Europe. Karachi was one of the best cities in Asia. We used to win hockey world cups just for the heck of it. Our cricket team was better than India's for a large part of 20th century. Any international prestigious institutions Indians work, you'd find Pakistanis there. Pakistan was sharp and dynamic; India was a slow behemoth.

Jinnah was right; Maudodis and Zia-ul-Haqs of the world were wrong, and their ideologies needs to be defeated. Pakistan will fight back and rise again, I've full faith the abilities and competencies of my people.

As always, short-sighted. You economy was always hollow from inside. Tell me what was your chief export in those days ? What was the scientific progress ? How many Iron & steel manufacturing plants you have constructed on your own ? Do you produce your own rail engines ? How many automobile industries are there in Pakistan that manufacture their own cars and bikes ? The reality is not even a moped engine has been designed in Pakistan.

The country used to run on American money and Saudi money. They Americans needed you because they wanted to use that airbase in Peshawar and to use you as a shield against the advent of the Soviets. You need to see the bigger picture here. Holistic, organic and self-sustaining progress & development.. you never saw it.

 

[Sine Nomine]

Changed the minds of Muslims of India ?
Are you even thinking ? Muslims of India were not even organized together. All the decisions were being taken by a few elite families who had vested personal interests. And that, is exactly what gave rise to long-standing feudalism in Pakistan.

Read about 1946 elections...

As always, short-sighted. You economy was always hollow from inside. Tell me what was your chief export in those days ?1) What was the scientific progress ? 2)How many Iron & steel manufacturing plants you have constructed on your own ? 3)Do you produce your own rail engines ? How many automobile industries are there in Pakistan that manufacture their own cars and bikes ? The reality is not even a moped engine has been designed in Pakistan.

The country used to run on American money and Saudi money. They Americans needed you because they wanted to use that airbase in Peshawar and to use you as a shield against the advent of the Soviets. You need to see the bigger picture here. Holistic, organic and self-sustaining progress & development.. you never saw it.

1.Pakistan built first small reactor in 1960,SUPARCO did On 7 June 1962, SUPARCO landed a record achievement when it launched first unmanned solid-fuel sounding rocket and took its first initial space flight from the Sonmiani Terminal Launch.
2.First steel mill at Chittagong East Pakistan and second at Karachi with 26 manu units.
3.Pakistan produced electric locomotives with help from Japan.
Joke of century kid no country can run fully on foreign Aid even today Aid makes up 1% of our budget and saudis saw economic boom only after 80's and still we have better living standard then Bhartis...

 

[Kambojaric]

Good to hear this. Should have been done a long time ago. We need to make this country an inclusive country as our Quaid wanted. All religions, sects, races, creeds should be able to live in peace and harmony side by side and work towards the good of the nation.

 

[Kompromat]

Jinnah thought that muslims are a better and more righteous religion and a country with majority muslims will automatically translate into a secular country where minorities can feel safe and empowered. We all know what kind of depths pakistan has reached after independence. Although we still cannot go ahead and say what jinnah thought was wrong but Jinnah obviously didn't think through the process which will unravel if the region was to get a new muslim majority country.

(With out blaming muslims in particular) The boundary spawned with blood of millions of humans and brought untold misery to both sides which fundamentally changed the thought process of generations to come. The religious bigots got empowered in the process on both sides and further killings of minorities ensued on either sides unabated for many more years to come.

Now situation would have been equally worse in India and pakistan but the difference I suppose was, India's heavy push towards reforming and strengthening of democratic institutions immediately after independence. Indians were lucky to have an army of reformists/visionaries in different domains to carry out the process in first 10-15 years which kept an automatic check on bigots to some extent . Pakistan had only handful and the feudal nature of the society was allowed to persist for far longer. Thus, the institutional check for safeguarding of minorities in pakistan was missing...

Above is my simplistic understanding of different course of history for pakistan and India. I can be wrong. Be good enough to correct me

Pakistan's biggest issue is illiteracy. Despite the odds, we have made great advances as compared to our post Independence state of affairs.