The uptightness of Punjabi majoritarianism

Second Opinion: http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=story_25-9-2002_pg3_4
Khaled Ahmed’s Tv Review

The Sindhis first struggled against the dominance of Hindus who were in majority in the cities. The muhajirs moved into Sindhi cities to occupy the higher urban status abandoned by the Hindus. The MQM has postponed this “assimilation” for the muhajirs under Pakistan ideology. If the MQM gets a separate province, all the cities of Sindh will fall to the muhajirs

One big problem with Pakistan has been the majority province of Punjab. It is 62 percent of the country in population and has always been hated by the smaller provinces, triggering separatist movements in them. Usually the big majorities are easy while discussing matters with the minorities, allowing the latter to vent their feelings, secure in the feeling that their majoritarianism will win the day in the end. But the Punjabis in Pakistan are always uptight when confronted with the plaints of the “smaller” provinces. They assert ideology and rely on the device of “treason” to silence what they think is cry-baby nonsense. Any suggestion that Punjab do something realistic to whittle down its size raises hackles, implying that any effort in this direction would break up the country.

ARY DIGITAL (18 September 2002) held a “discussion” on inter-provincial relations with four personalities: Chief editor “Khabrain” Zia Shahid, Tahir Rasheed of PML(N), Dr Muhammad Anwar of MQM and Dr Ishrat of MQM. The MQM stance was that the establishment in Pakistan was Punjabi-dominated and no one could rule without its assent. This establishment controlled the elected governments and forced them to undertake actions that discriminate against the smaller provinces and deprive them of their rights. Punjab was too big and got the lion’s share of the resources — resources that often originated in the smaller provinces. For instance, 67 percent of the state revenue accrued from Sindh but Sindh got only 20 percent from the divisible pool while Punjab got 58 percent from the 40 percent that is allocated to the provinces by the centre. Editor Zia Shahid said that Punjabis did not “plan” to become such a large majority. He was of the opinion that the province of Punjab must be divided further to rationalise its size. He said, in India, a much smaller Punjab province was divided into three states, but in Pakistan the federation was seen to be in danger every time this question was put forward. Tahir Rasheed said that Sindh was not made up of only Sindhis but was home to all nationalities who worked there to create its wealth. The imports on which duties were levied in Karachi were the imports that went to all the provinces. Dr Anwar raised the point that today Punjab asserted its majority but in the 1956 Constitution the Bengali majority in East Pakistan was deprived through the principle of parity, which meant that the Punjabis did not observe the rule of majority when it did not suit them. Tahir Rasheed emotionally asserted that the MQM was created by the army, to which host Dr Masood added that that the Nawaz League too was a creation of the army. Tahir Rasheed vehemently denied that. He said it was Nawaz Sharif who brought the Biharis from Bangladesh and settled them in Mian Channu in Punjab, to which Dr Anwar said that the chief minister Wyne who organised this migration was thereafter killed. The discussion frequently declined into non-intellectual emotionalism, mainly through ill-chosen rhetoric by Dr Muhammad Anwar and Tahir Rasheed.

The discussion was a shameful demonstration of how ignorant and emotional the leaders from both sides were about the problems faced by Pakistan. They cut each other in mid-sentence and resorted to what in the common parlance is called “bull****”; and even Dr Muhammad Anwar, who began rationally, used language not appropriate for the dialogue. Minorities live on fear and assert this fear when under democracy. Muslims of India went through this experience vis-à-vis the Hindu majority. An uptight Hindu majority led by Congress made the mistake of not being easy with this assertion. Today, India wants no one to come into South Asia, while Pakistan wants outside powers to come in and arbitrate. G.M Syed of Jiye Sindh and Ghaffar Khan of NAP wanted India to come in and arbitrate, and Punjab did not like it. Now MQM has common interests with PPP, PML and the Nationalists, but also has points of disagreement. In 1988, MQM reached an agreement with the PPP in power, based on the joint stand about the rights of the “locals” in Sindh against Punjabis, but fell out with it soon afterwards because of its condition of “separate” nationality for the “muhajirs” and acceptance of more Biharis from Bangladesh.

As narrated by M.S. Korejo in his book “A Testament of Sindh” (OUP), in 1989, it reached another agreement with PML after supporting a no-confidence vote against the PPP government in the National Assembly. This agreement, asking for the transfer of “stranded Pakistanis” from Bangladesh, was against the Sindhis who vehemently opposed it. It made shipwreck in 1990 and the ethnic mayhem started in the cities of Sindh. In 1992, the army stepped in and hunted down the ethnic terrorists. In 1993, another MQM-PPP agreement on the basis of 19 MQM demands could not be concluded, but the PML(N), coming to power in 1997, began to let off MQM convicts in order to build itself up in Sindh against the PPP.

The MQM’s separatists at one point also joined up with Jiye Sindh against Punjabis. MQM’s demand for a separate province in Sindh parallels the demand of Sindh National Front (led by Mumtaz Bhutto) that Sindh be treated as a sovereign state as mentioned in the Pakistan Resolution of 1940. Under the 1989 agreement with MQM, PML(N) settled 67 Bihari families from Bangladesh in Mian Channu in Punjab ignoring an almost unanimous opposition expressed by the Sindhi press. Within months, these families fled to Karachi. Chief minister Wyne was not killed because he settled the Biharis in Mian Channu. The need for the creation of new provinces in three “smaller” provinces in Pakistan may be unfeasible, but the logic of dividing Punjab three ways is irresistible. Punjab too is suffering because of its size. Funds and infrastructure that should go to the South and the plateau of Potohar get “smuggled” to Lahore because politicians from these regions have started living in Lahore because of the location of the Punjab Assembly. The High Court serves these regions inefficiently through “benches”. The MQM remains a non-intellectual set-up because of the semi-literate personality of Altaf Hussain. As a movement MQM plays the other parties against one another and has not grasped the tragedy of the Sindhi in his own province.

Suhail Zaheer Lari in his book “An Illustrated History of Sindh” (Heritage) tells us that the Sindhi majority first struggled against the dominance of the Hindu minority who were in majority in the cities. The muhajirs, whose minority in India had formed urban majorities there, moved into Sindhi cities to occupy the higher urban status abandoned by the Hindus. The Sindhis themselves are not all ethnically Sindhi but outsiders who have been assimilated. The MQM has postponed this “assimilation” for the muhajirs under Pakistan ideology. If the MQM gets a separate province, all the cities of Sindh will go to them.

It must be mentioned that when the muhajirs arrived in Sindh in 1947, the Sindhi feudals bullied them and made at least a million out of the over-all seven to return to India. The same feudals looted the Hindu refugees fleeing to India. The Punjabis began by ruling Pakistan in tandem with the muhajirs because of their shared anti-province “Pakistan Ideology” under One Unit. Today PML(N), a product of the Pakistan army, and the MQM, another product of the Pakistan army, are at cross purposes, and the Sindhis are divided into nationalists and supporters of the PPP, the last increasingly seen by the Pakistan army and the Punjabis as a “security risk”. People like Tahir Rasheed will bring shame to any province they represent.

Look out for Khaled Ahmed’s TV reviews on Wednesdays and Urdu Press reviews on Mondays and Fridays

Re: The uptightness of Punjabi majoritarianism

So I guess they missed Junejo (not -punjabi), and Benazir (twice, not punjabi), Ghulam Ishaq Khan (not punjabi) and now Musharraf (also not punjabi).

These guys should go back to worshipping a speakerphone.

Pakistani Friends - Please do no tfall for the antics of your Politicians.

There is no need to Break any of the Provinces of Pakistan.

We Indians have been foolish in breaking Punjaj into Punjab, haryana and Himachal Pradesh.

similarly there has been abreak in Utter Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh and Bihar.

Now the Politicians of other Indian States would like to break Gujarat (I am a Gujarati) into Gujarat, Saurashtra and Kutch.

This break up creates more State Governments, Assemblies, Adminisatrations etc. so that more of our taxes are spent on the Leaders and Bureaucracy than on the People.

Pakistan should not divide its provinces at all.

In addition if Punabis for Sixty Two percent of the population then fine, let them guard their majority.

I am sure that the other minorities in Pakistan can get along with the Punjabis of Pakistan and the Punjabis will be reasonable in ensuring that the Minoritiy Provinces of Pakistan do not suffer.

Please give it your best try.

Have a nice day

America has 50 states while it has almost twice Pakistans population. Anyway The problem is not about provinces or states. It's about discrimination and a feeling of not being part of Pakistan by a racist establishment!

Re: Re: The uptightness of Punjabi majoritarianism

I guess some one missed the word assent . Please go back and refer to a dictionary.

Zakk, you have point. Why not break up existing provinces into many small states/provinces like India has? I think, that should solve this Punjab problem.

It simply does not make sense to me that a province
should be sliced into pieces so that it does not
remain a majority province. Even if you divide
Punjab into many smaller provinces, you will
actually be seeding seeds of hatred in the hearts
of Punjabis who will never forget that they had
been cut into pieces only because they were a
majority. And what type of a sin is it to be a
majority by the way?

I belong to Punjab but do not take any pride in
this fact that my province has been a prominent
province of Pakistan and Punjabis have been ruling
this country for a long time in several shifts.
Similarly, it does not bother me at all that there
have been many Sindhis in the corridor of powers at
different stages of time and that the whole of the
current government comes from Sindh. Isn't it be
more wiser to move from provincialism to nationalism?

Why shall I be called a Punjabi and why shall you
be called a Sindhi when we both have a more greater
identity to use - Pakistanis.

Actually Punjab is not purely Punjabi...especially in Mianwali, Attock..and the southern belt. By hiding issues of ethicity you dont solve them you just make them come back another day.

How does breaking up Punjab solve anything???
If the Sindhis and everyone else is right, and Punjabis do have some sort of malicious intent, bent on sideling the minorities, then breaking up the province will only mean that a broken up Punjab will be suppressing the minorities. Just because Punjabis are broken down into smaller states, doesn't change the fact that they are still Punjabi. The solution is more provincial autonomy, as much as I would like to think that the Pakistani identity can over shadow our provincial identities, I doubt a Sindhi or Pathan or Balochi would ever consider themselves Pakistani first. I say lets stop trying to fool ourselves into thinking that Pakistani identity is enough to keep us together. Thats being naive, the solution is to recognize the fact that most people in Pakistan do not consider themselves Pakistani first. For the sake of the country, lets allow the provinces to express their identity through provincial autonomy.

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Zakk: *
Actually Punjab is not purely Punjabi...especially in Mianwali, Attock..and the southern belt. By hiding issues of ethicity you dont solve them you just make them come back another day.
[/QUOTE]

I agree. However most of the subgroups do fall under the "proto-punjabi" category. Attock added to Punjab from NWFP and no one complained except for the hardcore Pashtun nationalists and the Gov't of Afghanistan.

Punjab will not and must not be broken up. It is a province that has been a cohesive state since the Mughals, ofcourse that includes Indian Punjab. Nonetheless, if you call for the breakup of Punjab, then I or any other Pakistani could call for the break up for Sindh, Baluchistan and Sarhad on very similar grounds of the provinces having substantial ethnicities. No more break ups, as it would lead to major problems.

Zakk, what is your solution to cure the illnesses of provincialism?

Well, the US had a similar problem -- if you based votes on the population of each state - some states would have the upper hand just cuz of size and population...on the other hand, some said, each state ought to have one vote.

they compromised and came up with a system that incorporated both ways of representation...maybe Pakistan should do something along the same lines...?

In this way, Punjab wont be broken up. If it was, it'll mean more tax money being wasted ...

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by RajputFury: *

Nonetheless, if you call for the breakup of Punjab, then I or any other Pakistani could call for the break up for Sindh, Baluchistan and Sarhad on very similar grounds of the provinces having substantial ethnicities.

[/QUOTE]

That's what I was trying to say. Lets break up all the existing provinces into many smaller onces.

Saade Multani/saraiki bhirawan da khayal kaun rakhesi?Hunanda kya theesi?

Re: Re: Re: The uptightness of Punjabi majoritarianism

The MQM stance was that the establishment in Pakistan was Punjabi-dominated

I guess someone missed the fact that this was MQMs stance, not something out of the constitution that you quoted.
And if MQM is so high on nationalism, then they wouldnt have been involved in terrorism against their own kind.

And if at all they were so high on it, they wouldnt call themselves muhajirs to begin with.

Back to your dictionary referral, how did Benazir rule? What ‘punjabi’ assent did she have? Nawaz Sharif’s?

Re: Re: Re: Re: The uptightness of Punjabi majoritarianism

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Akif: *

The MQM stance was that the establishment in Pakistan was Punjabi-dominated

I guess someone missed the fact that this was MQMs stance, not something out of the constitution that you quoted.
And if MQM is so high on nationalism, then they wouldnt have been involved in terrorism against their own kind.

And if at all they were so high on it, they wouldnt call themselves muhajirs to begin with.

Back to your dictionary referral, how did Benazir rule? What 'punjabi' assent did she have? Nawaz Sharif's?
[/QUOTE]

The only rationale responses come from Akif here... Anywayz, there are a bunch of ppl (another vocal majority) in Sindh, NWFP and Baluchistan who have nothing better to do but carry out a wave of anti-Punjabi (and anti-Pakistani) propoganda and win sympathy from other anti-Pakistanis. However, I am glad the Punjabis are over this, and do not care about this, one of the very reasons they are progressing and have done so well in the field of business. These handful of people from the other provinces should learn from them and devote themselves into actually doing something for this country than to cry all the time.

RF..Salam I ain’t seen you online for awhile..hope everythings been ok!

Simple fact, the Provinces are to large and unwieldy to work anymore, how. What does a CSS officer in Lahore know about whats going on in Multan?

Even if the officers family is from Multan when they get into Pakistani establishment system. They tend to look at things in narrow terms, if you ask for anything or complain about anything you are anti Pakistani and promoting “provincialism”, no matter.
A simialir and worse problem occurs in Baluchistan, problems in Makran can be solved in Makran rather then go all the way to Quetta and get stuck in red tape.

To give an idea on the extent of problems and how bad things are in other parts of Pakistan I am pasting some excerpts of this report about poverty in Pakistan and how the North South divide is getting worse:

http://www.dawn.com/2002/09/25/top9.htm
The World Bank Human Index 2000 put Pakistan on 135th position out of 174 countries. About 31 per cent of Pakistan population was found to earn less than one dollar a day thus implying that every third household in Pakistan does not have sufficient income to afford daily intake of 2,150 calories.

A report prepared of Asian Development Bank prepared by a private consultant mentions poverty at 54 per cent in Balochistan, 53 per cent in Sindh, 29 per cent in Punjab and 24 per cent in NWFP.

The preliminary conclusion of the qualitative poverty assessment (QPA) by Aga Khan University reveals the presence of extreme poverty in rural areas of Sindh. As compared to other provinces, social indicators in Sindh are very low. Large number of people earn little and consume little.

Mind you I don’t have anything against Punjab, I have a problem with a establishment that considers the other provinces rights autonomy as a threat to Pakistan. People like Ghulam Ishaq and Musharraf might be Pashtuns or Mohajirs in name, but they have done little for their own areas. The same goes for Punjabi politicians who are made and created in Islamabad guest houses. But because most leaders from the army and civil service are from Northern Punjab, there are strong feelings of discrimination in Baluchistan, Sindh and to a lesser extent Sarhad.

Zakk bhai, if you think that the ppl who governed this country and belonged to these so called underlooked provinces didnt do anything for their provinces, then why is it our fault? There have been countless leaders from these provinces. You cannot say you werent given a chance to govern. Just like rulers from our province didnt do such a good job, yours never did a good job to satisfy you, so its not our fault. If I were you, and even if I believed in my heart that my province was being neglected, I would keep quiet and stop spreading the anti-Pakistani word around. There are other enemies that we have, and the biggest enemy, that looms accress our east, and their people are overjoyed whenever they see you and me spreading provincial hatred and disunity.

I dont see anything wrong with breaking up Punjab state, although I dont think it will solve any problems. We will still be Pakistanis. Punjab gains nothing and loses nothing. If the fedral govt decides to break up the province, I wouldnt be against it..

Is it our fault the Baluchi and Sindhis dont step up? If they are discriminated against because of the Punjabi ruled Army, why dont you people start joing the Army yourselves and Counter this discrimination?
Is it our fault you people wont join the Army as willingly as we, even if its to your advantage. I hope you dont mean to imply that Punjabis wont allow you people to join… If that were the case, then how do you explain President Musharaf???

uh HELLO!!!

speaking from some views i've gotten from people with first hand experiences...you can certainly go to the army and apply for the job, but the punjabi will get picked over u...you can't make a claim that non-punjabis aren't doing their part or aren't doing a good job for their country. Last time I checked, Punjabis were running out of the country, just like sindhis, memons, gujratis, christians, balochis, pasthuns, seraikis, and on and on...

I think in order to support your claim, you'd have to come up with some stats that show that of all the applicants to the army, the OVERWHELMING are punjabis...then I'd buy your viewpoint that we nonpunjabis have done nothing for the country, while you punjabis have had to bear all the burdens.

FYI, speaking for memons since I am one, I think memons have made vast contributions to Pakistan...and I for one will not stand it when someone accuses the memons of contributing any less than the punjabis.