Why did Jinnah's secularism fail in Pakistan?

(Appeared in Dawn, Special Report supplement on the 135th Anniversary of Quaid-i-Azam's birthday, 25 Dec 2011, under the title Why his Egalitarianism Failed)

Before answering this question, we need to ask a couple of our own. First, what is meant by secularism? The term means separation of religion from the state. From the viewpoint of secularists this translates to equality before the law. To anti-secularists (for want of a better term), secularism is at odds with the Muslim view that there is no such thing as the separation of God (and by implication, His moral law) from the state. But we can also safely say that barring some religious fundamentalists, neither side opposes egalitarianism in principle.

And what principle did Jinnah chiefly stand for? Undoubtedly it was egalitarianism. Indeed, the cry for equality underpinned the Pakistan movement. Yet Jinnah attributed his political convictions to his faith, and never uttered the word 'secular'. Even on 11 August 1947, when asked to unequivocally declare Pakistan a 'secular state', he promised full equality before the law, and not, despite claims to the contrary, that 'religion' itself would be separated from the state. In other speeches he spoke of 'Islamic democracy', by which he meant an innovative and forward-looking polity, rather than the recreation of some outmoded historical model. He emphasised timeless ideals, not ideology fixed in time and space. Hence in March 1948 he said that he shared the sentiment of the masses in accepting 'Islamic socialism' and 'no other ism'. He hoped the people would soon move beyond the mundane questions of government and fix their vision 'on the limitless possibilities of [both] our state and our nation'.

It seems hardly fair to attribute any ism to a man who defied all existing isms, so let us reword the title question: Why did Jinnah's egalitarianism fail in Pakistan? Despite having had a Christian Chief Justice who happily described himself as a 'constitutional Muslim', and despite boasting the first female head of state in the modern Muslim world, Pakistan frequently witnesses discrimination and violence against its religious minorities and its women. Aside from social inequality, there is also the economic divide that makes it impossible for millions to meet even their basic material needs, let alone demand equality in other spheres. Landlordism should have been abolished, but it remains the scourge of Pakistan. Neither secular nor religious parties have adequately addressed these issues. Meanwhile the never-ending debate over ideology has become a farce in the hands of the far left and the extreme right, and the middle ground opinion of the masses has been largely ignored.

In short, the cause of Pakistan's problems can be traced to a single factor: A lack of intellectual unity. Jinnah was acutely aware of this danger, which is why he strongly urged people not to become divided on caste, creed, provincialism or language. But in the 1950s an ideological-cum-personal conflict between the secular left and the religious right led to Pakistan's first dictatorship. Ironically, whilst some had feared the introduction of a religious dictatorship after the Objectives Resolution, both Pakistan's first dictator and the Chief Justice who upheld his actions and introduced the 'doctrine of necessity' were secularists. In 1971 a similar lack of intellectual unity between the two halves of Pakistan, underscored with allegations imagined and real of economic and ethnic discrimination, led to the secession of present-day Bangladesh.

With unity, faith and discipline, Pakistan can steer a course to liberty and justice. Its people need only to recognise the qualities that unite them, overlook their differences, and work together towards a common goal. Extreme views have no place in Pakistan. Our next question therefore should be to ask how to get rid of Pakistan's most divisive elements.

Saleena Karim is the author of Secular Jinnah & Pakistan: What the Nation Doesn't Know