What game theory teaches about war?

[war&peace]

Pakistan cant be trusted. It is not Pakistan who want a united sub-continent but the Indian RSS dream and objective ... sometime i wonder do Indians are really that ill informed or are they biggest liar ...

Simply, they are liars..pathological liars... nothing else. They know that they are lying.

 

[niaz]

I am glad you liked my reply. As you know already I have high respect for you from many years of 'fencing' we had. My entire education and thought has been constructed within the British system. My interest in Pakistan began from late teens. I had deeply been effected by 1971 event because I saw my parents concerned [we had family in the army back in PK] and built hatred for Banglas. Shows how kids can imbibe their environment at home. Where am I going with this? My outlook on Pakistan is almost like a outsider. I developed as a adult and then got to know Pakistan. Therefore my views always will be minority. But then so was Rehmat Ali, Jinnah or the great Iqbal. All had been significantly formed abroad.

But one question that I asked my dad maybe when I was about 19 but never got a full answer. If Pakistan is homeland of Muslims. Why are some Muslims citizens but some not? Do we have a brahmin caste system in Pakistan that privilages some with citizenship and not others. Then to complicate things further it has citizenship to some non Muslims. These facts cannot sit with "Pakistan is homeland of Muslims".

Israel is homeland of Jews but then it will accept any Jew from any corner of earth. The only visa they need at Tel Aviv is "I am a Jew".

Honorable Indus Pakistan,

The points you raise are genuine. However, before anything else we need to agree on what makes a “Nation”? Is it the land, language or religion that makes a 'Nation'.

Iqbal proposed the ‘Two Nation’ theory in his Presidential Address to the Muslim League at Lucknow in 1930 where he claimed that the Nation was determined by religion. Maulana Abul Kalam Azad and Maulana Hassan Madani (Head of Deoband); two renowned Muslim leaders of the time, strongly disagreed. Mauling Madani’s point was that it is the ‘Watan’ (implying place of your and your forefathers birth) that defines your nationality not the language nor the religion. His view was that the majority of the subcontinent's Muslims were Converts from Hindus and if an Indian Hindu converts to Islam or Christianity; he still remains an Indian.

“Madani's criticism of the two-nation theory was based on his assumption that Muslims did not constitute a qawm (nation) different from non-Muslim Indians. He argued that in the Quran and in the practice of Prophet Muhammad, the term qawm had a non-religious connotation. Indian Muslims were part of the world-wide Muslim ummah and could not be restricted to a territoriality based on Muslim nationality.

In the process, Maulana Madani had rather fierce and engaging debate with poet Allama Muhammad Iqbal on whether the identity of a nation depends upon its land or religion.

https://www.orfonline.org/expert-speak/44385-why-we-miss-scholars-like-maulana-madani-today/

I asked my late father who was a Muslim League activist during his college days during the 1930s what did he think? My father replied that before we go into the pro & cons of the Two Nation Theory, we have to understand the circumstances prevailing in the subcontinent at that time.

Towards the latter half of the 19th Century, Hinduism in the subcontinent had a ‘Renaissance’ through the formation of Arya Samaj founded by the ascetic Dayanand Sarawati in 1875. There had been no overt attempt to convert the local population back to the Hindu faith since the 7th & 8th centuries when Buddhists converted to Hinduism on large scale, primarily because of coercive policies by the staunchly Hindu ruling Karkota & Pratihar dynasties of the Northern subcontinent and the Pandyas & Pallavas in the South. Arya Samaj actively pursued the reconversion to Hinduism policy.

Akhil Bharat Hindu Maha Sabah was formed in 1907 from which the politics of Hindutva was born. The term Hindutva was coined by Vinayak Damodar Savarkar in 1923, an extreme right-wing Hindu nationalist. Soon after, Rashtriya Swayasevak Sangh (RSS), another extremist Hindu militant movement came into being.

By the late 1920’s it had become clear that the British will sooner or later quit India. Allama Iqbal was a foresighted and intelligent scholar. He sensed that in a united subcontinent where Muslims constituted about 25% of the population, Muslims risked being marginalized and persecuted, if an extremist Hindu organization somehow managed to come to power; as it has happened with the sudden popularity of BJP following the Advani’s ‘Rath Yatra'.

Allama Iqbal’s Two-Nation Theory of 1930 should be viewed in light of the circumstances prevailing at that time. Allama wanted to ensure that Muslims of the subcontinent have a home where they would be able to pursue religious practices and eat whatever is Halal without the fear of reprisals from the majority Hindu population.

Coming to your point, even though Israel & Pakistan are the only two countries that were created on the basis of religion; there is an essential difference.

After the ‘Holocaust’ there were barely 11-million Jews in the world and every Jew had the right to live in Israel. Subcontinent population in 1946 was close to 390-million out of which about 92-million were Muslim. Pakistan was meant for the Muslim of the subcontinent only who could exercise this option until 1951. There were more than 400-million Muslims in the world at that time and most already had their own homeland.

Personally speaking, Two-Nation Theory was necessary until 1947 but ceased to be relevant after the cessation of East Pakistan into Bangla Dash in 1971. Maulana Madani was most probably correct in his assertion that it is the land of the birth that determined your nationality, not your religion.