By Adnan Syed
Ethnocentrism is wrong, but what is worse is denial of ethnic identity/differences. As different ethnic groups, we have more than enough commonality to be a strong nation. Differences between sub-cultures/ethnicities exists in most countries, but what holds a nation together is basic cultural, linguistic, religious, historical, and/or geographic commonalities. We should accept and respect our ethnic differences, after all Pakistan is a federation of such, and be united as a nation based on our commonality in being linguistically/culturally Indo-Iranic, racially mostly Caucasoid, geographically based on Indus Valley, having a common history, and following the religion/culture of Islam.
All of these common factors among the different Pakistani ethnic groups makes them close to each other, yet very different from the Indians. These common factors defines the Pakistani nationhood, not just religion as many Pakistanis are made to believe in. The present-day provincial setup of Pakistan has its origins from the British era. The British rulers drew boundaries of provinces not based on ethnic demographics, but the politics of that era for their interersts. As has always been the case, the ethnic demographics have also evolved since 1947. In reality, the current provincial setup of Pakistan is artificial.
The large southern region of "Punjab" is Seraiki, its southwest is Baluchi, and northwest Hindkowi. The huge northeast part of "NWFP" is Hindkowi, and the north is Khowari/Shina/etc. Almost half of "Baluchistan" is Pakhtun (northern part), with pockets of Brauhis the central region and Jats/etc. in the southeast. Almost half of "Sindh" is Lashkari-speaking (urban areas).
Not to mention the countless Afghan, Central Asian, Iranian, Bengladeshi, etc. refugees, and inter-ethnic migrations in various parts of the country. Though outdated and slightly flawed, here is an article of interest on this subject by Ahmed Abdalla published in 1973: For the last few years the question of Pakistan's "nationalities" is being debated, propagated, supported and contested at various levels and in different quarters.
Unfortunately, in these lively discourses some basic issues have been ignored. We shall make an attempt here to discuss and analyse two most salient aspects of the problem. Firstly, are the nationalities, so often spoken of, located in clearly demarcated and distinct areas to division on regional basis? Secondly, have the nationalities, whatever regions they are living in, settled down permanently or, is the population pattern still fluid and changing, yet to assume a final shape and a stable character?
Let us address ourselves to the first question province-wise: NWFP: The province known as NWFP has an area of 39,283 sq. miles with a population of one crore ten lacs. Its most populous district called Hazara on the eastern bank of river Indus is inhabited, from Manshera downward, by non-Pakhtuns, mostly Gujjars and Hindko speaking Pathans of mixed blood.
In the regions west of river Indus starting from the north, the people of the (former) state of Chitral are non-Pakhtuns belonging to the racial stock of Chinese Turkestan akin to the people of Gilgit, Skardu, Hunza, Yasin and Nagar.
Next, the majority of the people of the province’s biggest city, Peshawar, belong to various Iranic and Central Asian stocks and are not Pakhtuns. In the southern region, half the people od D.I. Khan district are, again, non-Pakhtuns mostly Awans, Jats, Rajputs and Baluchis. In this context how would an advocate of four nationalities determine the exact boundaries of Pakhtunistan which, if scrupulously adhered to on racial and linguistic considerations, may shrink to very unpalatable proportions.
This population complex also explains the limited success in NWFP of Wali Khan (a protagonist of Pakhtunistan) in the general elections of December 1970. BALUCHISTAN: The province called Baluchistan has an area of 134,000 sq. miles with a population of about 24 lacs. Of the ten districts of Baluchistan province, three districts viz Quetta-Pishin, Zhob and Loralai are overwhelmingly Pathan; two districts viz Kachchi and Lasbela are inhabited by Rajputs, Jats and their allied tribes while the remaining five viz Sibi, Chagi, Kalat, Mahran and Kharan are largely Brohi-Baluchi.
Even in some of the tehsils of these five districts non-Baluchis are in majority. For instance, Sharigh Tehsil (Harnai) of Sibi distric has a fairly large percentage of Pathans. Population-wise about seven lacs are Pathans; over four lac Rajputs and Jats and about one lac Punjabis, Muhajirs and Gilgiti labour taking the total of non-Baluchis to 12 lacs leaving only 12 lac Baluchi and Brohi tribes in a population of 24 lacs. In this state of affairs how much area and what percentage of population of Baluchistan will accrue to a province based on Baluchi-Brohi nationality? Out of ten districts they will, at best, get five.
If the Baluchis/Brohis seriously think of having particular areas of Baluchistan marked on the basis of nationality, they may indeed come to grief. SIND: Sind has an area of over 54,000 sq. miles and a population of one crore 40 lacs. Of this about 55 lacs are Muhajars, Pathans and Punjabis. Of the remaining 85 lacs, about 25 lacs are of Baluchi/Brohi origin (Sindhi-speaking), leaving barely 60 lac old Sindhis in a total of 140 lacs.
Most of the regions west of Indus from Jacobabad to Dadu are inhabited by Baluchi and Brohi tribes since long before independence. After independence the population pattern of the province has drastically and basically altered due to the influx of refugees from India and immigrants from other provinces of Pakistan.
These refugees and immigrants, are of different origins. Any attempt to re-demarcate the boundaries of the province of Sind on the basis of nationality may diminish the size of the Sindhi nationality province to a disagreeable size. PUNJAB: Punjab has an area of 79,542 sq. miles with a population of 3 crores 75 lacs.
It may be pointed out that the present boundaries of Punjab were determined by the British more on the basis of political considerations than on racial or cultural grounds. For instance, the D. G. Khan and Muzaffargarh districts are overwhelmingly Baluchi, while Multan and Bahawalpur have, all through history, had closer affinities with Sind than with Punjab.
Multan was the capital of Sind for a long time so much so that in western India Sindhis were usually called Multanis. Even today the spiritual home of the Sindhis is the tomb of Hazrat Bahauddin Zakaria in Multan. Sindhis have such great veneration for this Saint that they make it a point to visit his Mazar by walking bare-footed.
If the Punjabis think of basing their provincial boundaries on nationality, they may not be able to retain all the areas that today constitute Punjab. In view of this background, if the four nationalities concept is accepted, it would become essential and unavoidable to re-demarcate the present provincial boundaries which have neither racial nor linguistic basis.
In case of re-demarcation of provincial boundaries major portions of Hazara and D. I. Khan districts of NWFP will go to Punjab; whole of D. G. Khan and part of Muzaffargarh districts of the Punjab will go to Baluchistan; three districts of Baluchistan will go to NWFP and two to Sind while Jacobabad and parts of a few districts of Sind west of Indus will go to Baluchistan.
If this exercise is resorted to, two problems will crop up: Firstly, several sub-nationalities with strong historical claims will put up their own demands for separate provinces which would be difficult to refuse. Whatever the claims and pretensions of four nationalities, the rights and merits of the sub-nationalities are much more strong and have a more cogent and powerful historical backing. As such, further vivisection will become inevitable.
What is more important is that there is hardly an instance of these so-called nationalities having a separate, distinct existence in history, Pakhtuns have never presented a united front. Khushal Khan Khattak bemoans this weakness of the Pakhtuns throughout his poetry and hurls the most bitter invectives on them for their failure to forge unity.
In fact the most outstanding aspect of the Pakhtun history has been their refusal to act as one nation or nationality. As regards Baluchistan, its entire history is replete with struggles, wars and rivalries between Baluchi and Brohi tribes not to speak of intertribal conflicts among Baluchis and Brohis themselves. Northern Punjab being the route of the invading armies from Central Asia into Gangetic valley, never had any opportunity to have separate nationality.
As for Sind, it has been expanding and shrinking in size depending upon both internal and external situations, particularly on the conditions prevailing in Iran, Central Asia and India. At one time it embraced the whole of the present-day Pakistan, plus vast portions of Rajputana in the east and Qandhar in the west. And at another it was confined only of lower Sind with Thatta as its capital.
In this process it has been absorbing and shedding the nationalities living to its north, east and west. Moreover, even if it is decided to re-demarcate the present provincial boundaries on the basis of nationalities, will the people living in one province for generations agree to become part of another? Will the Sindhi- speaking and Punjabi-speaking Baluchis, playing such important role in the politics of the provinces of their adoption, consent to join Baluchistan?
Similarly, would the non-Pushtu-speaking people of D.I. Khan and Hazara wish to be absorbed by Punjab? Same applies to Quetta Division, Lasbela, Kachchi, etc., etc. Adoption of four nationalities basis and consequent re-drawing of boundaries will necessitate holding of referendum in various regions of each province. The result of such a referendum is anybody’s guess.
Instead of solving the problem it will open up a pandora’s box and lead to further vivisection. For instance, once the four nationalities get their provinces strictly on the basis of regrouping of nationalities, further rivalries inherent in those nationalities will come up to surface. Clash between Baluchi-Brohi groups in Baluchistan, between northern-southern Pathans in Pakhtunistan, between Punjabis-Seraikis in Punjab and between Sindhis-Muhajirs in Sind, will become inevitable.
On what basis will the protagonists of four nationalities theory deny the sub-nationalities their right to have separate status when the latter have both history and language to back their stand. Another important factor in this context cannot be overlooked.
Each one of the present provinces is multi-lingual. Pushtu, Hindko and Punjabi are the major languages spoken in the NWFP; Punjabi, Seraiki, Lashkari and Baluchi in the Punjab; Baluchi, Brohi , Lasi, Kurd and Pushtu in Baluchistan; Sindhi, Lashkari and Baluchi in Sind. PROBLEM OF MIGRATION Next we shall discuss the second factor relating to the concept of nationality which is as important as the previous one.
Unlike India where people are living a settled life in clearly demarcated regions based on various languages in vogue there, the conditions in Pakistan are quite different, its population being yet in a fluid state. Large groups of people living in all the four provinces are still mobile, constantly migrating from one province to another.
There has been a regular flow of Pathans and Baluchis into the Punjab and Sind which continues even today. Lakhs of Pathans are employed in Karachi and other industrial cities of Sind and Punjab such as Hyderabad, Sukkur, Larkana, Multan, Lyallpur, Daudkhel, Rawalpindi, etc. Similarly, the flow of Baluch tribes into Sind has not yet stopped.
The people of Punjab are also flowing out in small numbers into Sind, Baluchistan and NWFP. They have either acquired lands or doing business in other provinces. Baluchistan and NWFP, in turn, are not free from influx from further west—there being a constant flow of Powindas and others from Afghanistan. It is generally believed that the Powindas go back after winter season. But this is not so; several of them remain behind.
It would be of interest to note that many of our distinguished personalities are Powindas and recent immigrants from Iran and Afghanistan. Maulana Mufti Mahmud, a leader of Jamiat-ul-ulamai Islam comes from the Naaser tribe of Powindas. Gandapurs of D. I. Khan are Powindas. From his mother’s side, Mr. Ghaus Bakhsh Bizenjo, a leader of National Awmi Party is an Iranian Powinda. Some of his maternal relations are still in Iran.
General Mohammad Musa, former C-in-C of the Pakistan Army belong to the Hazara tribe of Afghanistan; his father had migrated from Afghanistan and settled in Quetta. General Yahya Khan, former President of Pakistan is a Qizilbash from northern Iran whose family had settled in Peshawar. That the process of the settlement of Powinda families has not yet stopped in NWFP and Baluchistan is proved by the fact that in 1972 the NAP Government of Baluchistan put restrictions on their permanent settlement in the Quetta Division.
This measure was strongly resented by the Pakhtoon leader, Abdus Samad Khan Achakzai on the ground that it was aimed at the Pakhtun elements of Baluchistan's population.
A special personality who deserves mention in this context is the First Lady of Pakistan, Begum Nusrat Bhutto, wife of President Zulfikar Ali Bhutto. She is a 'Kurd' from Kirmanshah in Iran and belongs to the tribe which produced the illustrious Muslim general and monarch Sultan Salahuddin Ayubi. Pakistan is indeed fortunate to have its first lady from the kith and kin of a soldier of whom the entire Muslim world is proud.
There are many other groups and individuals in Pakistan who have recently arrived from Iran and Afghanistan and the process continues. In this fluid situation, would the protagonists of four nationalities theory agree to have the provincial boundaries re-demarcated, with resulting restrictions on the flow of population from one province to another? It would not only be impractical but outrageous and harmful to each one of the so-called nationalities, spelling their economic ruin.
With the process of migration still in progress and the final population pattern yet to take definite shape and form; with the so-called nationalities inter-mingled with each other in every province; and with each nationality carrying within its fold district sub-nationalities. It has neither historical background nor geographical roots nor racial or linguistic basis. The idea is irrational, illogical and anomalous. Its implementation would be politically tragic and economically disastrous for all the four.
Pakistan is one of the few countries in the world whose provincial boundaries cannot be demarcated on the basis of nationalities because of the intermingling of various racial and linguistic groups with each other.
In fact nationalities in the true sense of the word do not exist in Pakistan in clearly demarcated areas as they do in India, USSR, Afghanistan, Yugoslavia, Switzerland, Czechoslovakia, Belgium, Canada, etc. From Karakoram to Karachi, Pakistan is a solid land mass with distinct geographical boundaries; inhabited by people of same racial stock, having a common history, heritage, dress and diet; pursuing the same religion, with Lashkari understood by all and regional languages having a common script.
Very few nations in the world possess such strong uniting factors as the people of Pakistan. Centrifugal and separatist tendencies that are at present being highlighted by outside powers in collaboration with a few so-called leaders, have hardly any roots in the masses.
The people of Pakistan, irrespective of the province they belong to, think and act alike. Separatist tendencies have not even touched them; they are simple, religious-minded, hard-working innocent folk. They commonly regard themselves firstly Muslims, secondly, Pakistanis and thirdly, their allegiance is to the tribe they belong to. Four nationalities concept does not form part of their thought-pattern.
Published in 1973 by A. Abdalla
No comments:
Post a Comment