What Pakistan Was Meant To Be

Now is a good time for Pakistanis to remind themselves of the vision that their founder, Muhammad Ali Jinnah, held for the country as he outlined it three days before it gained its independence, in August 1947:

"We should begin to work in that spirit and in course of time all these angularities of the majority and minority communities, the Hindu community and the Muslim community, because even as regards Muslims you have Pathans, Punjabis, Shias, Sunnis and so on, and among the Hindus you have Brahmins, Vashnavas, Khatris, also Bengalis, Madrasis and so on, will vanish.

Indeed if you ask me, this has been the biggest hindrance in the way of India to attain the freedom and independence and but for this we would have been free people long long ago. No power can hold another nation, and specially a nation of 400 million souls in subjection; nobody could have conquered you, and even if it had happened, nobody could have continued its hold on you for any length of time, but for this. Therefore, we must learn a lesson from this.

You are free; you are free to go to your temples, you are free to go to your mosques or to any other place or worship in this State of Pakistan. You may belong to any religion or caste or creed; that has nothing to do with the business of the State.

As you know, history shows that in England, conditions, some time ago, were much worse than those prevailing in India today. The Roman Catholics and the Protestants persecuted each other. Even now there are some States in existence where there are discriminations made and bars imposed against a particular class. Thank God, we are not starting in those days.

We are starting in the days where there is no discrimination, no distinction between one community and another, no discrimination between one caste or creed and another. We are starting with this fundamental principle that we are all citizens and equal citizens of one State.

The people of England in course of time had to face the realities of the situation and had to discharge the responsibilities and burdens placed upon them by the government of their country and they went through that fire step by step. Today, you might say with justice that Roman Catholics and Protestants do not exist; what exists now is that every man is a citizen, an equal citizen of Great Britain and they are all members of the Nation.

Now I think we should keep that in front of us as our ideal, and you will find that in course of time Hindus would cease to be Hindus and Muslims would cease to be Muslims, not in the religious sense, because that is the personal faith of each individual, but in the political sense as citizens of the State.

Well, gentlemen, I do not wish to take up any more of your time and thank you again for the honour you have done to me. I shall always be guided by the principles of justice and fairplay without any, as is put in the political language, prejudice or ill-will, in other words, partiality or favouritism.

My guiding principle will be justice and complete impartiality, and I am sure that with your support and co-operation, I can look forward to Pakistan becoming one of the greatest nations of the world."

[Thanks to Shahjahan Chaudhary for the link.]

The Middle East Conflict is Still a Religion-Fueled One

Forty four percent of America is a large voting bloc.

That is the percentage of Americans - 44% - who, according to a 2003 Pew Research poll, said they believed that the land of Israel was given to the Jews by God.

According to the same poll, 36% believed that the creation of the state of Israel is a step toward the Second Coming of Jesus Christ.

One in three that supported Israel cited their religious beliefs as their primary reason for doing so.

These numbers can be difficult to dismiss - specially if you're trying to get elected, whether as a Democrat or a Republican.

Despite the current contention that the Arab-Israeli conflict is rooted in politics and economics - it is naive and dangerous to overlook its religious roots.

A video of Rabbi Yisroel Dovid Weiss is making the rounds on YouTube where he accuses Zionists of hijacking Judaism and politicizing it, while he stands in front of a sign that says "Torah Forbids a Jewish State."

Unfortunately, apart from losing credibility even among non-Zionist Jews by attending and speaking at Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmedinejad's Holocaust denial conference in Tehran in 2006 (Weiss' parents were Holocaust survivors), and being skewered by Bill Maher in his comedy Religulous last year, Weiss' statements and the sign he stands in front of are very, very wrong.

Zionism, often thought to be a politicization of Judaism, takes root in the Torah which Jews believe is the word of God revealed to Moses, and is also accepted by Christians as part of the Bible, where it forms the first five books of the Old Testament.

There are numerous passages in the book that are explicitly consistent with the Zionist goal of a Jewish state in the Middle East. Genesis 15:18 states:

"In the same day the LORD made a covenant with Abram, saying, Unto thy seed have I given this land, from the river of Egypt unto the great river, the river Euphrates."

Exodus 23:31 gives us an idea of geography of the Promised Land:

"I will establish your borders from the Red Sea to the Sea of the Philistines, and from the desert to the River. I will hand over to you the people who live in the land and you will drive them out before you."

Deuteronomy 1:8 reiterates the promise:

"See, I have placed the land before you; go in and possess the land which the LORD swore to give to your fathers, to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob, to them and their descendants after them."

Several other passages descibe the borders of this land in great detail.

Christians - who make up most of those that the Pew poll surveyed - rely on the presence of the Jews in the Promised Land for the Second Coming of Christ and subsequent salvation to happen.

In 2006, Pat Robertson - the American evangelist whose considerable influence among American Christians is evidenced partially by his defeating George H. W. Bush in the 1988 Republican presidential caucuses in Iowa - declared that then-Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon's stroke was divine punishment for "dividing God's land."

He was widely denounced for his statement, but again - Scripture backs him up.

Although they'll play the role of mere pawns when it happens, the return of the Jews to Israel is promised by God in the Bible as a prelude to the Second Coming of Christ. Again, of many passages, here are two:

Ezekiel 20:34:

"I will bring you from the nations and gather you from the countries where you have been scattered - with a mighty hand and an outstretched arm and with outpoured wrath."

Isaiah 11:11-12:

"In that day the Lord will reach out his hand a second time to reclaim the remnant that is left of his people from Assyria, from Lower Egypt, from Upper Egypt, from Cush, from Elam, from Babylonia, from Hamath and from the islands of the sea. He will raise a banner for the nations and gather the exiles of Israel; he will assemble the scattered people of Judah from the four quarters of the earth."

Even Scripture-adhering Christians, who believe as per Biblical teaching that Jews who do not accept Jesus Christ as their savior will end up in hell, tend to be pro-Israel largely because they still need for the Jews to be in the Promised Land for Christ to return.

Remember - forty four percent.

Islam is the third and latest of the Abrahamic religions. Although the Muslims in the conflict are probably the most unabashed and vocal in associating their struggle with their religion, the Quran - which they believe to be the indisputable, undeniable word of God as revealed to Muhammad - isn't as unequivocal about granting any specific chunk of real estate to them.

However, the Palestinians elected Hamas in what is considered to be a free, fair democratic election, a party whose Covenant clearly defines the group's program as an "Islamic movement" in Article One, and quotes profusely from the Quran and the hadith (the traditions of the prophet Muhammad) throughout its text, which begins with verses 3:110-111:

"Ye are the best nation that hath been raised up unto mankind: ye command that which is just, and ye forbid that which is unjust, and ye believe in Allah. And if they who have received the scriptures had believed, it had surely been the better for them: there are believers among them, but the greater part of them are transgressors. They shall not hurt you, unless with a slight hurt; and if they fight against you, they shall turn their backs to you, and they shall not be helped..."

Article 13 of the Covenant references another unflattering verse, 2:120:

"But the Jews will not be pleased with thee, neither the Christians, until thou follow their religion; say, The direction of Allah is the true direction. And verily if thou follow their desires, after the knowledge which hath been given thee, thou shalt find no patron or protector against Allah."

It is true that the Middle East conflict has devolved into a conglomeration of political, geographic, economic, and human rights issues in the thousands of years since these texts were written.

The dynamics, however, remain tribalistic.

The Arab-Israeli schism isn't one between the rich and the poor - Israel's economic might is balanced well by oil-rich Arab states. In the same way, there are both men and women, people of varying ethnicities, different levels of education, and of different political leanings - conservative, liberal, or otherwise - on both sides.

The dividing factor, by and large, is that of religious heritage and religious belief. Worldwide, those born in Muslim families overwhelmingly and almost unconditionally side with the Palestinian struggle; and Jews and Christians, whose scriptural teachings are more in line with the Israeli cause, support Israel.

The phenomenon is that of tribalistic loyalty, which is indoctrinated according to identity at birth: if you know deep down that you may have supported the other side if you were born into a different family, you've been indoctrinated, and it's most likely this partially blind loyalty, not rationality or conscience, that dictates what rally you attend, what your sign says, which consulate you're protesting in front of, and yes - whether you're praying to Yahweh for Israel or Allah for Palestine.

European Christians learned their lessons the hard way, over centuries, before they embraced secularism and the separation of religion and state as the only workable way to a peaceful coexistence with others. Secularism is not about taking religion out of society, but about dissociating it from government, politics, and legislation.

Israel claims to have done this, but this is a difficult claim to substantiate. If a non-Jewish majority in Israel as the consequence of a one-state solution is unacceptable because it would interfere with Israel's character as a "Jewish" state, Israel is not truly a secular state. If all Jews are automatically eligible for Israeli citizenship (including converts to Judaism who may be of any ethnicity or race) over those of other religions or no religion, Israel is blatantly engaging in religious discrimination, against secular principles, in the way that Jordan and Saudi Arabia do.

Arabs and Muslims on the other hand could take a lesson from studying the Jewish and Japanese communities after both underwent horrible atrocities during World War II. If, after sixty years of struggle and occupation, you're still throwing shoes instead of having the patience and long-term vision to educate your next generation, build your economy, and embrace modernity - you're missing the big picture.

A distinct separation of religion and state is the starting point for any kind of resolution, as has been seen often throughout recent history. In the Middle East, this would mean an unequivocal abandonment - at the state level - of archaic scriptural concepts like a Promised Land from Yahweh, or armed jihad in the way of Allah. These texts and their spokespersons should have no more influence over state policy and legislation than a Harry Potter book or an astrologer.

Pointing fingers, protesting, and praying can be very satisfying, but the new generation that's going to inherit these issues will need to do a much more courageous thing: consciously make an effort to break out of the shackles of a rigidly conditioned, tribalistic, indoctrination-borne loyalty in order to embrace rationality, reason, and an all-encompassing humanistic approach to this conflict, which for now seems to have almost limitless staying power.

Decades have passed. Thousands are dead.

The other approach - obviously - has not worked.