Yes you put your finger on the heart of the issue exactly. The reason India has been a relaitively successful story in terms of democratic civilian governance while Pakistan has been a basket case is that in India national identity, citizenship itself is defined in political democratic terms. All citizens are Indian regardless of religion or ethnicity. Including, as I pointed out earlier, the Muslim population of India who outnumber Muslims in Pakistan. Think about that a moment .There are more Muslims in the subcontinent who call themselves Indian than those in a nation built for Muslims on the belief that Muslims could never be Indian. The utter absurdity of the entire Pakistan project is summed up in that example.
On the whole, Indian identity is embracing and inclusive. Pakistan however was a separatist project that specifically denied that aspect of Indian identity.As such it was from birth an anti democratic project. Pakistan itself represents the rejection of the secular political democratic ideal of nationhood. It spits in its face.
Jinnah said that Muslims were not and could never be Indian solely by the fact that they were Muslim. Their religion made coexistence impossible and survival demanded separation. (an argument mirrored interestingly by Pakistan's nemesis Israel)While the Indian concept of nationhood embraces diversity, celebrates it in fact. Pakistan denies it and instead presents a notion of nationality based on a supposed religious commonality alone. But once it was born Pakistan faced the problem that its premis was false. Religion is not nation. and in a country like Pakistan religion proved to be a divisive not an inclusive identity when it became the basis for citizenship. Noone could agree which Islam was to be embraced by its citizens and no one could agree which Islam was to be the basis of Pakistans laws and institutions. and the Islam of some was the blasphemy of others. Jinnah initially wanted Pakistan to be a secular state in a bizarre sectarian imitation of Nehru. Years later realising Pakistans existential contradictions Zia attempted to create national identity by imposing a vicious reactionary theocraticy onto Pakistan. Neither succeeded in overcoming Pakistans fundamental flaw however and of course they couldn't because the flaw was Pakistan itself
The very reason for Pakistan was false. In a nutshell Muslims are not a nation (any more than Jews are a nation in the zionist narrative) They are followers of a religion There are Muslim citizens of most countries on the planet and their religious identity and national identity hold no contradiction. To create a country solely on the basis of religion and then leave more Muslims in the nation you are leaving just adds to the absurdity. Worse, most people who voted for Pakistan were minority communities in India. Communities that were afraid for their lives in the escalating communal violence. But these minority Muslim areas were precisely the areas that were not transferred to Pakistan which was based on majority Muslim communities. Thus the people who chose Pakistan remained Indian.
To add a final insult the communities who did pack their bags and leave india to join the geographic areas that became Pakistan, the migrants who were the true believers in the Pakistan ideal(known as Mohijirs) have since declared themselves Pakistans 5th nationality. Even the true believers reject Islam as the basis for national identity.
In Pakistans case, the claim to religious national identity was built on social and political absurdity but on geographical absurdity too. Remember Pakistan initially included East Pakistan, now Bangladesh. Two wings East and West seperated by a thousand kilometres of Indian territory, two peoples different in every sense but one held together by the tenuous claim that Islam was enough to unite them. A claim dealt a real blow early on when West Pakistan after years of oppressive behaviour committed horrendous atrocities on its "brother" Muslims ( or more accurately "sister Muslims given that mass rape was one of the principle crimes committed by West Pakistan troops) in the East and East Bengal Separated to become Bangladesh.
What a total and utter disaster from day one. If India is a celebration of the bourgeois democratic political ideal. Pakistan is its criminal brother who long ago walked out the door and sits in the shed staring into the house with envy and anger and bitterness and despair nurturing his hurt and plotting to return to burn the house down out of spite .
But this is an important point to bear in mind. The failure of Pakistan is not a failure of Islam in itself. The religion followed of the people of that country is not the cause of the problem. The attempted creation of a nation state with that religion as the sole basis for its existance and the only basis on which to build national identity is the problem. Not religion but religious nationalism. We must be careful here. Anyone blaming Jews or Judaism for the crimes of the Israeli state would and should be called an anti semite. The fault in Israel is not judaism but the religious nationalism at the heart of Israel idea namely Zionism. and It is at Zionism that the finger of blame should point not at Jews. . In exactly the same way, it is religious nationalism not religious belief that has created the mess that is Pakistan. Blame religious nationalism not Muslims for the failure of Pakistan.
.
The best thing that could happen to Pakistan is if it just packed it in said sorry and returned to India (and Baluchistan to Afganistan) where its citizens really belong. In fact I will be bold and make a prediction that Pakistan will cease to exist in the next 50 years. It will either tear itself apart in an orgy of regional blood letting and civil war or in its desperation it will launch a suicidal war against India. The result will be the end of Pakistan
( i have just realised that this lengthy post is probably a massive derail. So if it is ok I may remove it later and put it in the Pakistan blasphemy thread. Sorry I get carried away sometimes)
