The Lahore Resolution, aka Pakistan Resolution, written by Sher-e-Bangla A.K. Fazlul Huq, said that Muslims in India were a separate country with their own social, religious, and cultural identities. It called for the creation of independent states in areas where Muslims predominated. Despite the resolution’s own lack of mention of the term “Pakistan,” it planted the seeds for its ultimate establishment. Millions of Muslims’ hopes for their political future were brought to life and given a tangible vision by the Lahore Resolution. Intellectuals like Allama Iqbal, who emphasised the political, social, and cultural distinctions between Muslims and Hindus, were instrumental in developing the idea of a distinct Muslim state. The concept gained more popularity after Choudhary Rahmat Ali’s 1933 pamphlet “Now or Never”, which suggested calling the hypothetical state “Pakistan”, was published.
Pakistan is an odd outlier in the vast fabric of geopolitical history, a nation that appeared out of thin air and lacks a tangible locus. Its establishment in 1947, during the mayhem of British decolonization in the Indian subcontinent, was not a product of historical or cultural evolution, but rather of political expediency. Ever since its establishment, Pakistan has faced difficulties in defining its identity and navigating issues related to legitimacy, governance, and identity beyond its arbitrary borders.
Pakistan was created by political plotting motivated by the demands of sectarian politics and colonial legacies, not by a natural process based on nationalism. Pakistan was created by the division of British India. Pakistan’s ideological foundation came from the Two-Nation Theory, which maintained that Muslims and Hindus were two distinct nations that could not cohabit in a single state. Nevertheless, this notion oversimplified the complex sociocultural context of the Indian subcontinent and ignored the diversity within Muslim communities.
Pakistan’s identity gets more complex by its large geographical region. Divided by over a thousand miles of Indian territory, East and West Pakistan (now Bangladesh and Pakistan, respectively) had little in common except their shared religious beliefs. This physical separation further undermined the legitimacy of the Pakistani state, escalating racial tensions and ultimately leading to the bloody battle and Bangladesh’s secession in 1971.
Two-Nation Theory of Muhammad Ali Jinnah was weak and unimpressive. It was hollow on an intellectual level and disconnected from reality. Muslims were everywhere throughout India and all of them would not have been able to have had their own homeland without a massive population swap. Although Ambedkar and Jinnah discussed it in passing but both must have understood how unrealistic it was. Yet, Jinnah was able to stir up fleeting feelings and sway Muslim sentiment in his favour. The day India was divided proved its falsehood. Just slightly more than half of the 100 million Muslims migrated to Pakistan. The remainder chose to remain in India.[1]
Jinnah, leader of the All-India Muslim League, fiercely advocated Muslims’ rights in British India. He believed that the Muslims of the subcontinent were a distinct people and that they ought to have their own nation where they could openly practice their religion and have their rights to politics and culture protected. This idea served as the cornerstone of his political campaign to establish Pakistan.
A fundamental element of Jinnah’s scheme and subsequent partition of the Indian subcontinent was the Two-Nation Theory. The argument that Muslims and Hindus in British India were two different nations with irreconcilable differences was used by Jinnah and his Muslim League to support the demand for a separate Muslim state.[2]
With support from Muslim League, Jinnah formulated the Two-Nation Theory for the purpose of defending their political, cultural, and religious rights, contented that Muslims needed their own state. This increased tensions between communities and prepared the ground for the terrible violence and uprooting that precipitated division in 1947. In fact, the split itself continues to rank among the most horrific events in the history of the region, causing extensive killings, large-scale migrations, and lingering hostilities.
There is no denying that Jinnah’s Two-Nation Theory still has an impact on South Asia’s political climate today. The contentious relations between India and Pakistan and the continuous discussions in the region about nationalism, identity, and religious plurality are all affected by the legacy of partition.
Dismissing the Myth That Hindus and Muslims Cannot Coexist
With a population of over a billion, India is home to both one of the biggest Muslim populations in the world and a majority Hindu population, dispelling the idea that the two religions cannot live in harmony. Most Muslims and Hindus in India live in harmony, sharing homes, workplaces, and cultural activities. This coexistence is a result of centuries of shared history and respect for one another, not just an oddity.
Rhetoric that asserts Muslims and Hindus cannot live in harmony has reappeared in recent years. The long history of tranquilly and cohabitation between these two cultures in the Indian subcontinent is undermined by this dividing narrative, which is frequently supported by political agendas and sectarian interests.
The belief that Muslims and Hindus cannot live together exaggerates complex social realities and ignores millennia of shared cultural history and respect. Many religious sects have historically called India home, contributing to the country’s rich cultural diversity.
First of all, these claims are contradicted by India’s own history. For centuries, Muslims and Hindus have coexisted in the same social and cultural context, sometimes amicably and other times tensely. The blending of these two major religions is attested to by the nation’s syncretic traditions, which are seen in its literature, festivals, and architectural design. From ancient times India has been a melting pot of several religions, where mutual respect and understanding have often prevailed.
During the Indian Independence movement, Muslims and Hindus fought side by side against British colonial rule. Visionaries like Mahatma Gandhi and Maulana Abul Kalam Azad, who highlighted that all Indians, regardless of their creed, share a common destiny, advocated religious harmony and cooperation.
There are countless examples of Hindus and Muslims living side by side in harmony and peace throughout India. The reality on the ground belies the limited story of religious hatred, from companies where colleagues of all backgrounds collaborate effortlessly to neighbourhoods where families of different faiths enjoy each other’s festivals.
Furthermore, to generalise all Muslims as being fundamentally incompatible with Hindus is unfair and ignores the wide range of views and behaviours within Islam itself. Like how Hinduism has numerous sects and interpretations, Islam is made up of many different customs, civilizations, and philosophies. Assuming that all Muslims behave or think in the same way as a single group is dangerous and simplistic.
Promoting interfaith understanding, religious tolerance, and socioeconomic equality is essential to building a peaceful society where Muslims and Hindus can live side by side and even prosper. Regardless of one’s religious affiliations, education, understanding, and empathy are essential for eradicating stereotypes and creating a feeling of community among all individuals.
The claim that Muslims and Hindus cannot coexist frequently results from individual instances or political motivations rather than being based on true theological differences. Even if they are tragic, acts of communal violence may not necessarily indicate that the two communities cannot get along. Rather than religious doctrine, social tensions, economic inequalities, and political agendas frequently drive these kinds of disputes.
It’s critical to understand that diversity is a strength rather than a cause for conflict. Societies benefit from accepting religious plurality because it promotes cooperation, understanding, and tolerance. We should work to appreciate our diversity and create common ground based on shared principles of justice, equality, and compassion rather than continuing to spread divisive narratives.
It is risky as well as superficial to claim that Muslims and Hindus cannot coexist. It undercuts the diversity within both religious communities, dismisses the innumerable instances of peaceful cohabitation that exist throughout the nation, and denies the rich tapestry of Indian history and culture. Let’s embrace the tolerance, empathy, and respect that have long been prized in India’s pluralistic community rather than giving in to dividing narratives. The historical record indicates to the reality that harmonious coexistence between Muslims and Hindus is not only feasible but has been associated with India’s cultural legacy. Building a society where all cultures may coexist peacefully, overcoming barriers of religion and ethnicity requires embracing variety, encouraging inclusivity, and respecting secularism’s core values.
Pakistan – A State with no Status:
Pakistan’s identity crisis is made worse by the nation’s multiethnic, multilingual, and multisectarian composition. The country is home to various ethnic groups, including Sindhis, Punjabis, Mohajirs, Baloch, and Pashtuns, each with their own cultural history and previous grievances. Tensions and conflicts resulting from this heterogeneity have damaged the notion of a single national identity.
Throughout its history, Pakistan has experienced military coups, totalitarian regimes, and political unrest. Often to the detriment of democratic institutions and civilian government, the military has abused its authority. The state’s legitimacy has been called into question by the pervasive breaches of human rights, the suppression of opposition, and the suppression of civil society.
Furthermore, Pakistan’s foreign policy stance, which fluctuates between promoting the West and an Islamist resurgence, puts it in a delicate geopolitical and diplomatic position. The nation’s participation in proxy conflicts, especially in Afghanistan, a neighbour, has drawn criticism from other countries and increased insecurity in the area.
Pakistan’s economy, which is characterised by recurring underdevelopment, extreme poverty, and an unequal distribution of resources, reflects the country’s political instability. Despite its potential as an agrarian economy and strategic geoeconomic location, Pakistan has struggled with issues including corruption, energy scarcity, and an intensifying debt crisis, making it impossible to achieve sustainable growth and development.
Given these difficulties, it is easy to see Pakistan as a fictitious nation without a solid basis—a failed geopolitical experiment. Pakistan nevertheless continues to exist as a sovereign nation on the international scene despite its turbulent past and numerous internal problems. In the face of hardship, it’s tough and diverse population manages to establish a common destiny while navigating the difficulties of national identity.
There are many nuances, conflicts, and contestations in Pakistan’s history as a nation-state. Although it might be seen on the map as a geopolitical entity, its identity and consistency as a state are yet in doubt. The story of Pakistan as a “made-up state with no locus” highlights the need for reflection, peacemaking, and inclusive nation-building initiatives to overcome the historical legacies of conflict and division. Its narrative serves as a warning about the dangers of artificial nation-building and the ongoing challenge of balancing conflicting ideas about identity and government in a world that is changing rapidly.
[1] https://indianexpress.com/article/opinion/columns/india-pakistan-partition-mohammad-ali-jinnah-mahatma-gandhi-jawahar-lal-nehru-8888485/
[2] Ref: https://encyclopedia.pub/entry/37726
(Author Pummy M. Pandita currently holds the position of Head of Operations at the Centre for Integrated and Holistic Studies (CIHS). She graduated with a degree in Science from Kashmir University.)
About The Author
