Both, Pakistan and Congress leaders, are deluded
The image of Pakistan in the world is much akin to that of Congress in India. The only difference being that unlike Pakistan, Congress doesn’t lack in party funds. It cannot be denied that whether by Prime Minister Narendra Modi or on its own, Pakistan is now set on the path to a tragic end
Dr SB Misra 4 Sep 2019 6:09 AM GMT
Pakistan's maker Mohammed Ali Jinnah was himself a deluded man because when in Congress, he called himself secular but no sooner did he enter Muslim League in 1930 that he began harping about bi-nationalism and Pakistan.
When in May 1947 Mountbatten, Jinnah and Nehru had agreed to the Pakistan Draft, no one would have thought that one day Pakistan's Prime Minister would declare to destroy the Indian subcontinent's 110 crore Hindus along with 40 crore Muslims by the force of an atomic bomb. Prime Minister Imran Khan, despite knowing that both nations are atomic powers and both shall annihilate, still threatens of the use of an atomic bomb. India's oldest political party, Congress, too is displaying its flawed trait by quietly siding with Pakistan.
134 years ago, when AO Hume and AC Banerjee had established Congress, little did they know that the same party will help divide the nation and its leaders would reach out to the enemy state in order to get rid of Prime Minister Modi. Think about it — Navjot Singh Sidhu, Ghulam Nabi Azad, Shashi Tharoor, Digvijay Singh and Rahul Gandhi himself are presenting a skewed picture of their nation and the government to the world due to latter's removal of a temporary provision.
The truth is that all these years the Nehru family used to take up the job of thinking while others worked, but now the thinking power has diminished; common outlook and democratic tradition has remained underdeveloped in the party otherwise conflicting voices wouldn't have been heard within the party on Article 370.
Similar is the state of Pakistan where the army thinks and politicians merely engage themselves with the propaganda. Pakistan was borne out of the rift and so has the traits of confrontation and terror. India had launched its secular democratic constitution based upon non-violence on January 26, 1950, and so firmly adhered to the principle of Parliamentary democracy. Indian Army never got to interfere in the functioning of the government. India saw to the safety of both its PMs and democracy.
On the other side, the very first PM of Pakistan, Liyaqat Ali Khan was assassinated in 1951. Violence impeded Pakistan's growth in the way of democracy. The two politicians aspiring to establish democracy in Pakistan — West Pakistan's Zulfikar Ali Bhutto and East Pakistan's Sheikh Mujibur Rehman — met with a tragic end. Now, how would Imran Saheb know what democracy is if the latter could hardly thrive in Pakistan?
Before the Partition, people of Pakistan and India had grown upon the common soil although their mindset had fundamentally altered so much so that till 1977 when the then PM Atal Bihari Vajpayee initiated 'people to people' communication, they lived in isolation from each other. He tried to wash away the animosity by measures such as bus to Lahore but was replied with Kargil War. With Imran Khan severing all the links, including trade with India, it remains to be seen where this all may lead to.
The present state of Congress in India mirrors the plight of Pakistan internationally with the difference being that the former doesn't lack in any party fund. It cannot be denied that whether by PM Modi or on its own, Pakistan is now set on the path to a tragic end. One can only hope that someone would advise it to act sanely but then it hardly has any well-wisher left. Modi had spoken of a Congress-free nation, but it would indeed be sad to see the oldest political party of the country, providing glorious national leaders, to be faded into oblivion due to lack of effective leadership.