It is widely recognized that Pakistan is a nation associated with terrorism, extremism, and sexual violence. The only difference is that most countries remain silent, with only a few willing to speak out. Silence can be a powerful weapon, often politically motivated. However, when we do not break silence when needed, it can have devastating consequences, akin to a nuclear attack. Unfortunately, the world often realizes this only after a tragic event has occurred, which can be far too late to take action.
I urge everyone to understand the reality of Pakistan before it is too late. It is a ticking time bomb that could explode anywhere in the world at any moment. You may wonder why I make such a bold statement. Let’s explore the reasons why Pakistan is a land of terror, extremism, radicalization, bigotry, and sexual violence.
1) The Existence of Pakistan
The very existence of Pakistan underscores its radical nature. Following the end of British rule, many extremists and separatists migrated to Pakistan just around India gained independence on August 15, 1947. Barrister Ali Jinnah, the founder of Pakistan and a former leader of the Muslim League, approached Lord Mountbatten, the Viceroy and Governor-General of India at the time, to advocate for a separate nation based on the Islamic faith. Jinnah was the only prominent figure pushing for this division; he played the religious and victimization cards to garner support.
Please also read my blog ‘Pakistan’s current and historical views on Women – PolyBlogger.com’, to know more about events that occurred during partitions.
His ultimate goal was to become the first Prime Minister of India, but he recognized that this was unattainable. Thus, he demanded the partition of a united India. Mountbatten and the British royal family were keen to keep India unstable and embroiled in conflict, which would hinder its development. They welcomed Jinnah’s radical demands.
Jinnah incited Muslims across India, leading to strikes and riots throughout the country. Prominent leaders like Jawaharlal Nehru, Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel, and even Mahatma Gandhi opposed the partition. However, their efforts to prevent it were in vain. Ultimately, Nehru, who also aspired to be the first Prime Minister of independent India, approved the partition.
In essence, even before its formation, the roots of the foundation of Pakistan were in radicalization and extremism. It emerged as a fundamentally bigoted and extremist nation.
2) The Partition Timeline
India gained independence on August 15, 1947. Jinnah sought an earlier independence date, but that was not feasible. Instead, he chose to declare Pakistan’s independence a day earlier, on August 14, 1947. He intended to demonstrate to the world that Pakistan achieved independence before India, positioning India as secondary to Pakistan.
By the time of independence, no countries had the boundaries clear and final. The entire nation was aware that there would be a partition, with Muslims moving to Pakistan and Hindus to India. However, Mahatma Gandhi stated that any Muslim who wished to remain in India can stay back. In contrast, Jinnah’s supporters insisted that Pakistan should be exclusively for Muslims, leading to a rise in extremism.
On August 14, 1947, a train departed from Peshawar, Pakistan, heading to Delhi, India. The radical individuals, predominantly radical Muslims attacked the train. Almost all Hindu and Sikh passengers were killed, and the women on board were subjected to horrific violence, with many raped multiple times. When the train finally reached Delhi, it was full with the bodies of adults and children. The scenes were gruesome, with dismembered bodies and women left naked. This event marked a severe escalation of hatred against Hindus and Sikhs, transforming former neighbours into enemies overnight.
This extreme mindset also took root in India. A train leaving Delhi and stopping in Punjab was attacked by Sikhs, resulting in four deaths and numerous violent confrontations. In response to these events, Pakistan became even more radicalized, committing to the mission of killing Sikhs and Hindus at any cost. Another train departed from Lahore, Pakistan, to Ludhiana, Indian Punjab, on August 15, 1947, filled with the bodies of men, women, and children.
Many women were gang-raped by groups of eight to ten men before being sent to India. This train bore a message that read, “Nehru and Patel ko Azadi ka tohfa” (a gift of independence for Nehru and Patel). Nehru and Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel found themselves in a dilemma, torn between celebrating independence after 200 years of colonial rule and addressing the horrific situation unfolding around them.
In the aftermath of these incidents, numerous riots erupted between Hindus and Muslims in India. Over 2 million people lost their lives, and countless rapes occured and history has documented it now. The situation in Pakistan was similarly dire, but the number of victims remains unknown due to the suppression of data. Nearly 14 million people were displaced as a result of Jinnah’s demands. Such horrific Jinnah was.
This is how Pakistan began its descent into extremism, radicalism, and bigotry, becoming associated with acts of violence and sexual assault. One might question how India differs if similar actions occurred there. It is crucial to remember who initiated the violence, who sought partition based on religious grounds, and who aimed to expel all Hindus from the region. Attacks made in self-defence are not the same as unprovoked aggression. As you continue reading this blog, you will understand why Pakistan is labelled as extremist and radical, while India is not.
3) Radicalism and Extremism
As previously mentioned, the existence of Pakistan is rooted in radical thinking and Islam religion. Not all Islamic people are radical however, the majority of Pakistanis are radical. We have already discussed the pre- and post-partition movements in Pakistan. Now, let’s delve into the next chapter.
- After independence, both India and Pakistan still had some states that needed to merge with India.
- Pakistan had already obtained what it wanted, as agreed upon during the partition.
- A British lawyer named Cyril Radcliffe, who lacked knowledge of the region’s history, geography, culture, and religious sites, was tasked with drawing the border between India and Pakistan.
- He created the boundary arbitrarily, resulting in significant misalignments. For instance, Kartarpur Sahib, a holy site for Sikhs, ended up in Pakistan.
- Several states, such as Jammu and Kashmir, Hyderabad, Junagarh, Goa, Diu, Daman, and Dadra Nagar Haveli, were far from Pakistan, making it impractical for them to be incorporated into that country.
- Only Jammu and Kashmir shared a border with Pakistan.
- Junagarh was a princely state ruled by Mahabat Khan, who, without consulting the people or the Indian government, decided to join Pakistan.
- The Indian government later learned of this decision, prompting Nehru and Patel to issue a stern warning to Mahabat Khan.
- Junagarh had a 90% Hindu majority, leading to widespread protests. Pakistan argued that the ruler’s decision should determine the state’s fate.
- However, Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel firmly warned Pakistan and demanded for a plebiscite. In a significant vote, the plebiscite ultimately favoured India, resulting in Junagarh’s merger with India.
- Hyderabad, on the other hand, had a Muslim ruler, the Nizam, who initially wanted to join Pakistan. Sardar Patel urged the Nizam to surrender and merge with India, emphasizing that Pakistan was far away.
- The Nizam ignored these requests, prompting Patel to send a stern letter demanding surrender within three days.
- When the Nizam still did not comply, Patel dispatched the army to Hyderabad. Unable to withstand the pressure, the Nizam accepted defeat and merged Hyderabad with India.
- Goa later gained independence from the Dutch in 1971 after Indian forces intervened, leading to its incorporation into India.
Kashmir was a princely state ruled by Maharaja Hari Singh, who faced the choice of joining either India or Pakistan. While he deliberated, the Pakistani army feared he would align with India. To prevent this, they sent local Islamic tribal groups, known as “Kabaylis” (singular: Kabayli) and Pashtuns, to infiltrate Kashmir. These groups included trained soldiers disguised as civilians. They exploited religious sentiments, persuading some of Maharaja’s Muslim soldiers to join their cause. Consequently, Maharaja Hari Singh’s forces turned against him, leading to a massive attack in Muzaffarabad and quickly advancing to Baramulla in Kashmir.
Nehru, the first Prime Minister of India, was informed about the infiltration but could not act decisively, as Kashmir was still under Maharaja Hari Singh’s rule. As the Maharaja lost territory, he sought assistance from India. Sardar Patel and Nehru agreed to send forces on the condition that the Maharaja would sign an agreement to merge Kashmir with India. On October 26, 1947, Maharaja Hari Singh signed the agreement, making entire Kashmir a part of India.
India then sent its army, which bravely fought to reclaim much of the territory, including Srinagar, Kargil, Dras, Zojila Pass, Baramulla, Poonch, Uri, Rajauri, Gulmarg, and more.
However, Nehru made a significant error by taking the Kashmir issue to the United Nations. This is such an error, that, the UN could never settle it but on the contrary created more issues. This may be due to the incapable officers, and biased policies; to date.
The UN called for a ceasefire, which both countries accepted, leading to the establishment of a Line of Control (LOC). The UN also suggested a plebiscite to allow the Kashmiri people to decide their future. Given the Muslim majority in the region, it was likely that the vote would favour Pakistan. India played a political game, insisting that the UN require Pakistan to withdraw its forces from Jammu and Kashmir to ensure a safe and unbiased election. Pakistan refused, fearing that India would regain full control of the territory, thus preventing any voting.
Since that time, two-thirds of Kashmir has remained with India, while one-third is with Pakistan. For the past 77 years, no concrete resolution has been reached.
These events illustrate how radicalism and bigotry facilitated Pakistan’s intrusion into India. Since then, Pakistan has engaged in three additional wars based on similar motives, yet it has not succeeded in any of them.
4) Recent Radicalism and Extremism
This is a current incident that highlights the ongoing radicalism and extremism in Pakistan. While watching the news, I learned about a troubling event involving the Ahmadia sect of Islam, which, like Shia and Sunni, is one of the sub-castes within the religion. A person was arrested for distributing religious leaflets in Pakistan. This arrest occurred because Pakistan has laws prohibiting the spread of religions other than Islam, and Ahmadis are classified as non-Muslims.
This situation exemplifies the extremism present in the country. Even within Islam, the existence of sub-castes is intolerable to some. They believe their sect is superior and that no other religions or sects should exist. This mindset reflects the depth of radicalism and intolerance.
The case went to court, and the Chief Justice of Pakistan’s Supreme Court granted the individual bail. This decision sparked outrage among radical groups across Pakistan. As of today, August 22, 2024, at 12:35 PM, these groups are causing disturbances and riots, demanding to know how a non-Muslim could receive bail when there is a law against it. Ironically, Pakistani radical people view this inherently radical law as a blessing for Pakistan, and they are now using it to justify their actions.
Pakistan, along with many Islamic states, seems intent on spreading this extreme ideology globally. This escalating hatred poses a threat that could either destroy the world or lead to self-destruction. We must unite against extremism and radicalism.
I make it clear that I do not oppose to any religion, but to the intent behind violence, instability, and ignorance. We stand firmly against extremism and radicalism.
We welcome your thoughts on this issue, so please leave your comments below. Thank you for reading.
5) Punishment in Blasphemy Crime
In a democratic world, blasphemy is a freedom of speech. It is termed ideological thinking, often cut by other sensible and ideological thinking.
However, in Pakistan, blasphemy is an extreme crime, and the only punishment is ‘sar tan se juda’ (behead the person).
One Sri Lankan citizen took a job in Pakistan. He had his cabin to sit. On the door, someone had pasted a sticker having some lines from Quran, in Urdu language. Unknowingly, he removed that sticker. This news wildfires across Pakistan.
Radical groups entered the cabin he was sitting in. They beheaded him on the grounds of blasphemy, by lynching him and pulling him out of the office. This was in the news for several days. You may want to search for it on the Internet.
Even Europe is facing such a threat, every day.
Looking at such radicalised ideology often leads to extremism and violence. What does a normal person want to leave? Some earning, a family and a peace in the life. This radical thinking often brings instability in life leading to chaotic life. No one would want such a life. But I don’t know how Pakistani people are surviving with such radical thinking around them. I do not understand what is the future of all these.
Do let me know in the comment section below, what do you think about this ideology. Do like and share this blog.
