Matter of Identity

Dr. Sher Zaman Taizi

An Open Letter

Publishing Date: Thursday, June 15 2006

Dear Sirs,

This is with reference to a letter appeared in your esteemed daily on 15 June 2006.

The author of the letter, SWK Aseer, has very strange arguments to oppose the issue. He, probably, does not realise that he opposes, although indirectly, the very ideology and creation of Pakistan and its nomenclature.

Pakistan or independence of India was not the problem of the common man. The problem of the common man all over the world is the same – roti, kapra and makan. It is universal. It has nothing to do with political and social problems, which are local. Political and social problems are tackled every where by selected and privileged groups.

Religion is over and above geographical boundaries, political and racial discrimination. If the religion accepts the name of Pakistan, why should it oppose the name of Pukhtunkhwa?

The matter of Pukhtunistan and Pukhtunkhwa is a social problem. It is a matter of identity of Pukhtuns. If the over whelming majority of Pukhtuns are denied identity in Pakistan then what right the ignorable minorities should claim for them in the frontier province?

Pakistan means the house of pure people. Let Mr Aseer put light on this name; how many pure people and how many impure people, leaving the non-Muslim apart, live in this country? His arguments do not justify at all this name, but it is there. Why he denies historical facts that political decisions are taken by majority – even a single vote majority effect changes.

This chapter can not be closed until the identity of Pukhtuns is recognised.

Let me tell Mr Aseer that it is not a new problem. The name of Pathanistan was suggested for this area by Mohammad V, the ruler of Turkey, when he was the Caliph of Islam, during the World War I. In 1946, the Khudai Khidmatgars followed the verdict of the Caliph of Islam to demand Pukhtunistan – Pushto form of Pathanistan. In the Constituent Assembly of Pakistan, Bacha Khan made it clear in response to queries by Liaquat Ali Khan and Firoz Khan Noon that he wanted renaming of the frontier province as Pukhtunistan. Quaid-e-Azam had agreed to that and he invited Bacha Khan to tea, after his address in the constituent assembly. The common man has never opposed the name of Pukhtunistan or Pukhtunkhwa, but the few non-Pukhtun bureaucrats in the province whose pose themselves ‘more loyal than the king’ sponsor and pat the few opponents.

Another point is that it is a matter of the identity of Pukhtuns; hence, Pukhtuns and only Pukhtuns should tackle and decide it. Other people should not poke nose in Pukhtuns’ affairs. They should behave as ‘minorities in Pakistan.’

In Pakistan, many names were changed; Campbellpure to Attock, Montgomery to Sahiwal, Cunningham Park to Jinnah Park. Was the common man ever bothered about these changes? Then why the common man comes up, all of a sudden, to turn against the change of the name of NWFP to Pukhtunkhwa.

Dr. Sher Zaman Taizi,

Usmanabad, Pabbi, District Nowshera,

Email dszt@brain.net.pk

Comments powered by Disqus