Views on the issue of national language in Pakistan

[Neo]

Languages can and are imposed. Since we in Pakistan have never had true democracy ( unless you think that feudal gathering otherwise known as the NA is a repository of public will ) to say the people of Pakistan chose anything is disingenous.

To impose a language is not to say its forced down peoples mouth at gun point but its done by indirect and subtle ways. A modern state is a powerful agent of change, it can and does use its agencies, influence, sponsorship, to directly or indirectly mould the masses.

Besides the effect of declaring Urdu as its national language, the state has sponsored Urdu directly in the our educational system teaches Urdu to all students, the effect of which is to create millions of people able to speak that language. All mediums ( TV or others ) use Urdu which helps in its transmission to even people who have not been to school.

Indeed it was the British who first fostered its use and spread. Since then the Pakistani state has been busy for the last 55 years in spreading it further whilst simultaneously across the border in India Urdu's sister language Hindi is being spread. What the British started off on ( to create pan trans-India language ) has been continued by both Pakistan and India with one minor difference, the former in Perso-Arabic script the latter in Devangiri script.

In the past different peoples of India/Pakistan would not have been able to communicate with each other - or been limited to a small elite speaking perhaps Farsi but not too long in the future Indo-Pakistan will be 100% capable of inter-communication in Hindi/Urdu. We will be locked into the Indo realm forever with just a political line dividing us - as language is a powerful vehicle of culture Pakistan being smaller will just become a satellite of India.

By patronizing Urdu you are bonding Pakistan with India .. if that's what people want then fair enough but I have to ask why the costly partition of 1947 then? If the point of 1947 was to lead us to a destiny different from India we seem to have chosen the same road as India ... yeh maybe have a different color of vehicle but the destination will be same as India.

Again I realize that Punjab ( the only Pak. province ) overlaps into Indian Punjab but Indian Punjab does not epitomize India .. clearly being 5% of India its just marginal to the main body of India.

Just because part of Pakistan is able to communicate effectively with 5% of India does not mean we got to make all of Pakistan able to communicate with all of 1,060 million Indians .. which is what's going to happen if we continue with Urdu.

[Neo]

1. Pakistan came into being in 1947 and I don't really care how it came about much less that we should forever be locked into the reasons, the basis or the idealogy that gave birth to it.

2. 1947 event was a historical determinant which just undid what had happened in another historical determinant of 1847 when this region ( Indus Valley ) had been fabricated into the British India. Was there any fundamental reason in 1847 which lead to this ( Indus Valley region ) to become wedded to British India? No there was not, it was just a historical accident motivated by British greed. Yes greed had brought us under the colonial British India.

4. I don't treat the events, forces or the ideologies that gave birth to Pakistan in 1947 as holy or feel obligated to them beyond the fact that 1947 event was historical in that it undid the 1847 event, the former neutralizing the latter. It corrected a anomaly caused by colonial lust!!!

5. Colonialism forced us into British India and colonialism created forces ( the English educated predominantly Mahajir ) who were the force majeaur behind Pakistan. Why should I thank the latter? Without British colonialism there would have been no Jinnah, no Muslim Leaque but then again there would have been no need for 1947 because the region that is Pakistan now would have evolved on its own.

6. Prior to the British interfering in our region ( Indus Valley ) this area had independent Khanates, Emirates and Kingdoms ( Mirs of Sindh, Khans of Balochistan and Sikh Kingdom of Punjab ) and we would have evolved naturally without third party dictation - British. I do know though that the evolution of this region probably would have ended up with either states or state somewhat different from what we have now but the solid realities on the ground would have impacted on the evolution - the foremost being that this region has and had a solid Moslem majority, probably greater than 80%. Today there would either have been states or a state in the area that is Pakistan ( geographic Indus Valley ) that would be colored by two ground realities - the peoples, Punjabi, Pashtun, Sindhi, Baloch and predominantly with a Islamic flavor.

7. At end of the day its 'the boots on the ground' that makes the real difference as indeed it did in 1947, had this region not had a Moslem majority whose numbers carried the weight to give substance to the dreams of Muslim Leaque. It was this region ( the four provinces ) that elected to join the federation without which the combined votes and intellectual vigor of all the Moslems scattered all over India ( UP, Bihar, Madya Pradesh etc ) would have produced zilch.

8. So one set of historical circumstances ( British colonialism ) created a negativity for us but at the same time gave birth to another set of circumstances ( British education and ideas flourished in what is now India on account of having been colonialized much earlier with the populace have imbibed modern concepts which would help to counter the British with the Muslim Leaque/Congress being the manifestation of this ) which neutralized the negativity. Without one the other would neither have existed or been needed. So put it simply 1947 was just a reaction to the action of 1847 - Like I don't need to try to rationalize or find the deep motives, philosophies or higher ideals for the 1847 event I don't need to for 1947 either other then look at them both as very significant historical determinants that altered and realtered the land of my forefathers, in both which my people slept through or had very marginal input.

9. Since 1847 the land of my forefathers has gone through a rollercoaster with my people as helpless occupants but reality is today we have a Pakistan, the sovereignty belongs to the 'sons of the soil' again. My concern today is with them and which direction we go to now. Although a citizen of Britain and having the deepest respect for the English people I detest the colonial era and all its attendant ills/effects/legacy.

8. The colonial era cemented us with rest of India ( geographic ) more efficiently then any other power had done, its administrative ability, its economic power, its modern rail network 'Indianized' us more effectively then had we evolved free from British interference. In short they wedded us to the greater India and by default to the countries that inherited the British Indian Empire - India, Bangladesh and Sri Lanka.

9. Although I have a healthy respect for many Indians ( indeed I would count some as friends ) I loath the idea with every sinew of my body that we are a extension or just a offshoot of Bharat. I want us to have a solid identity exclusive of Bharat and based on our own peoples.

10. I look at the Mahajirs as carriers of the 'Indian vector', now you might say what about the Punjabi's? After all they are also a 'bridge' to India but its important to note that Indian Punjabi's are a minority. Yes there are other sub groups of Pakistan ( Kashmiri or Sindhi ) who also happen to be found in India but again their numbers are a drop in the ocean that India is. Whets more these groups do not form the gravitas of the Indian state.

11. The Indian state has adopted the language of the Ganges plains ( Hindi ) as its national tongue and will over time homogenize all the divergent peoples of India into one block under the overarching label 'Indian'. All states do this, they adopt one particular brand ( often the one belonging to the majority/most influential ) and over time create a homogenized block out of variety of cultures/peoples. Modern states tend to do it faster and more effectively on back of better administrative structures/economics and technology ( TV etc ) the effect of this over time will bring together the Telagu, Tamil, Punjabi, Assamese, Ladaki, Malaylam, Orrisan and all other strange peoples - I say strange because bar the Indian Punjabi/Rajasthani most Pakistani's have not had any deep contact with or knowledge of. This will eventually ( it already is well on the way ) create a solid block of over a billion people speaking Hindi going under the banner 'Indian'.

12. In Pakistan the imported Mahajir group also predominantly comes from the Gangetic Valley and from the same source that Bharat ( India ) draws its gravitas from. Thus Urdu and Hindi are essentially the same languages bar the scripts - clearly a Hindi speaker can speak with ease to a Urdu speaker. Not surprising since both languages were fashioned in the same furnace - the Ganges Valley.

13. The British standardized Urdu/Hindi to serve as their common pan India language and act as the interface with the host of different peoples. India has adopted Hindi and we have adopted Urdu so in essence we are continuing on the British mission .... to construct a sub continental realm call it India if you want.

14. Just to prove my contention go back to 1850 and ask yourself how many peoples of present day Pakistan could have communicated in their 'native' language with a Tamil, a Bengali, a Telagu, a Assamese, a Kanadese etc? Not many I suspect!!!

15. But now fast forward to say 2050 and we have a Pakistan that has 100% literacy which would mean over time Urdu as native tongue to 100% .... Whilst in India all Indians would have achieved 100% proficiency in their national language Hindi ............... Given this scenario in 2050 100% of Pakistan could communicate in their national language with 100% Indians in their native language. We would have created a sub continent that would be uniformalized and finished off the project launched by the British.

Is that what we want? Is that why we broke off at great expense in 1947? To become part of the ocean of humanity with just a script to identify us? This thought terrifies me!!!

[Neo]

1. Urdu was neither spoken nor understood by the majority of the Pakistani population i.e. 54% Bangalis, 24% Punjabis, 10% Pashtuns, 3% Baluchis, and 8% Sindhis. It was the mother tongue of only 3% immigrants from UP. So it wasn’t as a common language in almost all Pakhtunkhwa, Baluchistan, East Bangal, rural Sindh, and most of the Punjab except few urban centers.

2. It was not native to the land and its relationship to the land didn’t predate the British Raj. On the contrary, Dari/Persian was a lingua-franca for a much longer period and was probably as much better understood in rural areas of West Pakistan than Urdu.

3. As it was a minority language, its imposition caused resentment among the locals. Its declaration as a national language was a blunder that had long as well as short term consequences for the political future and distinct cultural development/evolution of Pakistan as we saw it in the dismemberment in 1971 and we are seeing it in the gradual lapse of non-Urdu speaking communities in the broader Hindustani Cultural milieu today.

Important point here is an identity distinct from Hindustan. And for that Pakistan would have to orient itself towards Central Asia because that is a Muslim region as well as geographically contiguous to Pakistan.

Pakistan would have to make three shifts in order to do that:

Cultural Shift: The first thing would be doing away with Urdu as a national language and adopting Dari as language of communication. That would break one link of the communities of Pakistan with India.

Other links with Hindustan will also have to be cut off e.g. food, dress, social rituals (marriage, child birth, death ceremonies, etc.), architecture, music, dance, and other cultural practices would have to be nativised. The middle and upper classes would have to take initiative in that regard because usually it is these classes that are the trend setters.

Economic Shift: Economic ties with the Neighbors in the North (Tajakistan, Karghizia), West (Afghanistan and Turkamanistan/Uzbakistan beyond), and South-West (Iran) would have to be vitalized. Currently, there are a number of communication projects underway e.g. Peshawar-Islamabad Motorway would be open for traffic in 2006. In 2005, work on an express-way from Peshawar to Torkham i.e Pak-Afghan border will be commenced. This would link Punjab and NWFP with Central Asia.

To link Karachi with Central Asia, the present single-carriage Indus high-way will be converted into a double-carriage way. From Saroki in DI Khan, there will be a road built to Ghulam Khan (in Waziristan Pak-Afghan border) connecting DI Khan and Southern Punjab to Ghulam Khan, so another trade route.

Probably railway and road links from Queta-to-Qandahar are also under consideration. This will tie Pakistan with Afghanistan and Turkaministan via Queta-Qandahar-Herat route.

There is already the Karakuram Highway only if we wouldn't export fundamentalism into Sinkiang. Probably, they are also digging a tunnel in Lowari (between Dir and Chitral). Currently, NHA is working on access route to Lowari. I don't know how much is the political will to construct this tunnel but if realy constructed, that would become a route to Tajakistan via Wakhan and Badakhshan.

I don't know about the road links between Pakistan and Iran.

All this is going to give huge boost to tourism as well. And Punjabis and Urdu-speakers should start learning bit of Pashto/Baluchi/Dari to have good relations with these communities.

The interaction will help bring cultural influences from Central Asia and will enrich the native culture.

Political Shift: Pakistan must not consider Afghanistan its zone of influence because that country is in proximity to many important regions and countries and all have stakes in it. In the short run, political disputes with the countries to the North-West should be resolved amicably-borders should be made bit soft. In the long-run, some sort of regional political configuration, based on bit greater autonomy to communites involved and volutary political relations gauranteed by a sacred constitution/contract, is inevitable.

Frankly speaking, Pashtuns as well Baluchis have a stake in Afghanistan/Iran as well as Pakistan. Recently, I talked to few Pakhtoons of Afghanistan and they told me that when Pakistan looses a cricket match, they become unhappy/sad. Another friend told me that people in Kabul generally have the impression that Pakistan is a good country.

By trying to conquer Afghanistan, the ambitious leaders of Pakistan have harmed Pakistan as well as Pakhtoons. Had they not become so deeply involved in Afghanistan, today Afghans would've been the greatest allies of Pakistan. Moreover, they have been insulted/humuliated by Pakistani police.

So the political shift should be from a hegemonistic and Islam-exporting attitude to friendly political relations based on mutual respect. Certain problems relating to integration of communities and water disputes should be addressed.

Common ground should not be Pan-Islam rather geographical proximity, neighborhood, common Muslim Culture, and foremost economy. Also never bring Arabs into this because they will spoil everything using the opportunity for strengthening Pan-Arab world-power ambitions. Never involve political Mullahs. We don't have any greater common ground with Arabs e.g. they are Semites, they maintain Harems, they consider themselves superior, they are sons of desert we plain land and mountains, we have lived around great rivers, they around springs and torrents, etc.

[Neo]

Muhajirs may be more competent but there are reasons for it.

> The native Pakistanis were mostly rural/agrarian-peasant/tribal people with little civic amenities to enhance their skills/competencies. Muhajirs on the other hand hailed from the traditional centers of leaning/industry. They therefore were better educated/skilled and had superior enterprenuering abilities compared to natives.

> When they migrated to Pakistan, they got detached from the static/rigid set up of extended/joint family and feudal culture and entered a more flexible, vibrant urban socio-economic setup, which afforded them better individual freedom and opportunities for economic activism. Transformation from extended/joint family system to nuclear family is inevitable for a transition to capitalistic-industrial based system.

Natives on the other hand remained tied to the stagnant agrarian social setup which greatly inhibits initiative and activism within the individual.

> On arrival, Muhajirs grabbed the economic assets left by the prosperous Hinus/Sikhs. These resources included urban-based property as well as agricultural land. Almost, every Muhajir got some share and probably greater than he/she left in Hindustan. Amongst the natives, on the other hand, the class-based system, i.e. haves and have-nots, survived.

Prime Minister Liaqat Ali Khan allotted his son three ice-factories and two cinemas in Lahore alone.

> Because Liaqat Ali Khan had left his constituency in Karnal/Ambala and had no constituency to be elected from, he had Muhajirs settled in the port city of Karachi, which gave Muhajirs huge advantage over natives in terms of trade and business.

> Liaqat Ali Khan also promoted Muhajir politicians e.g. Choudri Khaliquzaman. This choudri Khaliquzaman had been "appointed" by Mohammad Ali Jinnah as the leader of Muslim League in India at the time of partition and had taken oath as an Indian citizen, so much so that he had also issued a statement against Pakistan on the issue of Hindus-Sikhs-Muslims roits during partition. But when he saw the opportunity in newly-born Pakistan, he silently left India and migrated to Pakistan within a few days.

> Muhajirs also got greater share in jobs and services in the new Pakistan. Liaqat Ali Khan had sat aside two types of quota for Muhajirs; one for Muhajirs that had already migrated; and the other (15%) for those that had not yet migrated but were "AAzimeen-i-Hijrat" (who had decided to migrate but were still in Hindustan).

> Karach was the capital city and Muhajirs were better poised to have access to the centralized system of resource allocation. Huge investments were done in Karachi. Most of the industrialists and owners of financial institutions were Muhajirs at that time. The bureaucratic structure running these institutions was also Muhajir dominated. Interestingly these Muhajir owners, industrialists, and bureaucrats also were members of Industrial Law Authority of Pakistan, which framed laws regarding issuing of industrial loans.

> Urdu and Muhajir Culture of UP was promoted as "Pakistani and Islamic Culture" and the rest were considered un-Islamic and anti-Pakistani languages/cultures. Those in services who couldn't or didn't speak Urdu well were considered disloyal to the state and were discriminated against in promotion and other economic opportunities. As Muhajir on the other hand practiced the "favored" Pakistani Culture (i.e. Urdu etc.), that benefited them economically and politically.

> Because of this undue importance to Urdu and UP Culture and their dominant position in economy, Muhajirs started considering themselves superior to natives, whom they considered uncouth and raw.

> Two-Nation Theory was also invented by Gen Sher Ali Khan, a Muhajir, in late 1970s, this to weaken local identities and native cultures and to firmly en-grass the concept of resource-acquisition based on merit in the system despite the fact that socio-economic development in Pakistan was very uneven and backward communities had to be given extra opportunities to pull them up to a reasonable level of development.

> I have found them very Muhajir-centric. When I was at Peshawar University, I met many Muhajir teachers who, despite life long career in the university and among Pakhtoons, had no respect for local culture and didn't like students to talk to each other in local languages. Against this, there were Gligitis, Punjabis, Baluchis, Sindhis, etc. who would easily mix with locals and would try to learn local languages. Interestingly, both Muhajirs and Punjabis migrated to Mardan (NWFP) but whereas Punjabis assimilated in the local culture, adopting Pashto as a language, Muhajirs didn't. Muhajirs sold their properties and migrated to Karachi. Same occurred in Kohat and Peshawar. Some Punjabis that have migrated to Malakand Division have developed harmony with the local culture. One guy has become a leader also and is popular among young people.

> It seems Pakistan doesn't have a native culture. The present Pakistani Culture with Urdu at its core doesn't truly reflect what Pakistan culturally is. This must be changed. One point that I notice in Muhajirs is that, because they are an exclusively urban community (dominating Karachi, Sakhar, Hyderabad leaving poor Sindhis with only one urban center i.e. Larkana), they cannot understand the worth and significance of rural values. True there may be a lot of bad things in rural outlook but there are a number of good points in rural values as well.

I am not against Muhajirs but they should understand that times are changed now. The native communities of Pakistan are waking up from their deep slumber by adopting modernization and soon they will be making demands regarding their share in economy and due recognition to their culture. So Muhajirs should stop being cultural/economic hegemon. They should improve relations with natives and should give bit of space and respect to the cultural sensitivities of native communities.

This opportunity-based-on merit is a misleading notion until I am also allotted some property left back by Hindus/Sikhs at the time of partition

[Neo]

The critical mass of Punjabi population is in Pakistan while in India they are a small, insignificant minority. Being a minority, Indian Punjab cannot influence Pakistani Punjabis as much as Pakistani Punjabis can influence Indian Punjabis. Had the Punjabi language been allowed to flourish in Pakistan, cultural influences from Pakistani Punjab over Indian Punjab would have rather been more profound than vice versa? Moreover, as Pakistani Punjabis are in majority, Punjabi would have evolved independently and gone it own course than Punjabi in India. By preferring Urdu to Punjabi, you have culturally weakened Punjabis making them more vulnerable to cultural influences from across Wahga. Had they been allowed cultural creativity in their own Central-South Asian environment and Muslim civilizational context, they might probably have had solidified their distinct Central-South Asian Muslim Punjabi identity.

(I think we are committing the gravest blunder by blocking /arresting cultural creativity in native languages and imposing Urdu-Hindi, we are making Pakistanis communities more vulnerable to the cultural/civilizational onslaught of Hindustan…this religion thing wouldn’t be effective for longer especially when the globalization and secularization trend would strengthen and further gain momentum.)

Punjabi is also native to Pakistan. True it is also native to India but in Hindustan, it doesn’t have that grand-scale influence as Urdu-Hindi has. It doesn’t symbolize Hindustan and its Civilization to the extent as Urdu-Hindi does. It doesn’t form the kind of stronger link/interface to India as Urdu-Hindi forms and its ability as a vehicle to spread Hindustani Cultural influences is limited. Most of the culture of Hindustan is not broadcasted through Punjabi or Sindhi but Urdu-Hindi.

Moreover, Punjabis have never demanded making it a national language of Pakistan. The same is true of Bengali, Sindhi, and Kashmiri, which are spoken by more people outside Hindustan than inside Hindustan, which are native to Kashmir, Sindh, and Bangla Desh, and which are not identified with Hindustani Civilization as Urdu-Hindi is, and which are not as much and as strong “carriers” for Hindustani cultural influences as Urdu-Hindi.

However, let us assume, and as the fact is, that Urdu-Hindi as well as Punjabi are spoken in Hindustan. Now is Punjabi the stronger link with Hindustan or Urdu? Which link should be cut first, the stronger or the weaker? The irony is, by suppressing the native Punjabi and retaining foreign Urdu-Hindi, the stronger link has further been strengthened. Either both links should be cut or the stronger link.

[Neo]

Punjabi is a beautiful language just like other Pakistani languages. However, I don't think it will be a good idea as our national language. The reason is simply because we will still face the issue of one ethnic group's cultural domination on others, and the resentment by others because of that. Plus, we don't want to give another reason for the ethnic nationalists to complain about and label Pakistan as a true "Punjabistan". Simply put, its a recipe for disaster and possible insurgencies.

Dari/Farsi should be easy to replace Urdu because it has some commonality with it... plus historically was the official language in the region.

[Neo]

I think the future World would be increasingly organized along civilizational lines.

Due to a number of factors including the nature of modern state/society, political and state patronage, modern means of communication, modern institutions and education, internal colonialism, movement of populations across porous borders, and consumerism/commercialism, the civilizations that have historical antiquity and cultural depth would further expand their zones of influence. Dominent civilizations would bring increasing number of tribal and rural communities under their fold.

One example would suffice to elaborate this point. A Pashto T.V. Channel was launched a year ago. It started looking for advertisement but faced tremendous difficulties because companies considered Pashto a local language and Urdu understandable by Pashtuns. Obviously, if there is a lingua franca, why should companies spend on advertising in "local languages"!

Bollywood is producing films in Urindi ( Urdu-Hindi ) because the vast market from Khyber to Dhaka enhances the profit margin for their products significantly.

Multinationals and national companies also tend to prefer languages patronized by state and state elite to secure favor and to gain access to market and resources. Consequently, local artists get less for their creative effort.

Coming back to the point, Gangetic plain was the bastion of Hindustani civilization. And the territories to the north were either the invasion routes for Central Asian hordes or transit places where they camped. Gagetic plain was a sort of final home/destination for these hordes where they got passively assimilated, vanishing forever, in the wider Hindustani society, like an element submerges into a compound or a river drains into an ocean.

In my opinion Hindustani identity is more mythical than other northwestern identities because the core of this identity sprung from a more stable and broader ecological base (i.e. Gangetic plain) and comparatively in more ancient times. Owing to this stability, civilizational continuity in Gangetic plain remained intact like the flow of a perennial ocean/river whereas in the northwestern territories, it was disrupted again and again by the invaders (like a seasonal torrent which flows only for a while).

In the northern territories, on the other hand, the invaders actively participated in the formation of juvenile ethnicities e.g. Baluchi, Sindhi, Punjabi, and Pashtun etc. In terms of Chemistry, these ethnicities are like solutions/mixtures with distinct complexion but retaining the characteristics of their constituents. And due to geographical proximity with Gangetic plains on one side and Central Asia the other, they borrowed influences from both sides. They are truly swing communities that can go one way or the other depending on the priorities of the state of which they are a part as well as the thrust of their neighboring civilizations on them.

As for Gangetic plain is concerned, the influence of its civilization has increased on these northwestern communities during the last one-and-half century, thanks the colonialist policies of the British Raj and the ever-increasing modernization trend. The presence of Urdu-speakers in Karachi and their emphasis on Urdu as the language of communication has further accelerated the diffusion of Hindustani cultural influences into the northwest.

The successor states of the British Raj i.e. Pakistan and India have retained the same policy regarding language issue as British Raj, although each has put a varying degree of explicit or implicit emphasis on religion to "assert" its distinct identity, more so true of Pakistan. But it is a fact that the influence of Central Asia/Persia on these "swing" communities has largely vanished making them vulnerable to the gravitational pull of Hindustani civilization. Today, a member of these communities finds it more convenient to communicate with a Hindustani than with a "co-religioust” from the north or the west.

Overall Hindustani civilizational influence is on the rise, expanding northwest to integrate the Dards, Punjabis, Sindhis, Siraikis, Pashtuns, and Baluchis into its mold.

Would religion be able to repel this tide?

Religion has not been so far and it is least likely to be in future. It would be a mistake to think that religion would have any big role to play, except in the limited social-personal life, in the future global world, where individuals, with divergent views on broader matters of life, would have to increasingly interact.. Religious assertion has been a destabilizing factor historically and it is so more in the Central-South Asian context, threatening the very existence of the societies involved and doomening their future as normally functioning societal units.

A more rational paradigm would have to be sought with religion forming a part of the overall culture but not directing the political or social process to a dangerous degree. Probably, a civilizational approach centered on history, regional lingua-franca, ethnicity, geographical proximity, etc. would have to be adopted in order to have a sense of broader identity as well as retain distinct sub cultural individuality. Religious approach is anachronistic, impracticable, irrational, and destructive.

So what destiny lies ahead the "swing communities"?

Especially if the Hindustani Civilization is allowed to expand farther north, what would be the consequences? More interesting is the question what would be its farther limits in the northwest?


Well the limit could be Indus, Khyber, or less likely Hindukush but one thing is certain that it wouldn't spread beyond Indus or Khyber or Hinudkush because these points define the southeastern extremities of Persian-Turkian World.

The options for the "swing communities" are many! For example to east-south is the Hindustani Civilization, in the north-West is the Persian or Perso-Turkik Civilization; in the north-east is Sinic Civilization; and towards the south-west across Indus Ocean, is the Arab Civilization. No civilization is inherently good or bad but in the coming world, isolated societies based on ethnicity and local culture wouldn't be viable/feasible units for survival; probably, they would have to align themselves with one of the existing civilizations.

It is for Pakistani political and intellectual elite to decide which way to go but one thing is almost certain that systems and societies based on religious identities wouldn't be viable in the future world. Sinic Civilization could not be a choice neither Arab Civilization could be because of a number of factors. The choices could only be Perso-Turkik (A greater Central Asia) or Hindustani Civilizations (a greater South Asia).

[Neo]

Following approach could be adopted to align with the Central Asian World:

1. For the short run, make Urdu, along with English, only a language of communication, not a national language.

2. Put more and more emphasis on English in official work and education.

3. At the same time, make it compulsory for a Pakistani to learn one native language other than mother his/her mother tongue tongue i.e. either Punjabi, or Pashto, or Sindhi, or Siraiki, or Baluchi.

4. On media, give more and more coverage to native languages.

5. At the same time introduce Dari on media and in education.

(Personally, I think transition to Dari or any other lingua-franca would be via English i.e. Urdu-to-English and then from English to Dari etc.)

Hopefully, the above measures would significantly erode the influence of Urdu-Hindi. Then apply direct measures i.e. introduce Dari at mass-scale. Alongside, take the following measures:

6. Rewrite history books, emphasizing geographic, ethnic, and cultural ties, Gandhara and Indus civilizations, and Central-South Asian cultural heritage.

7. Establish cultural, political, and economic ties with Central Asian and Middle-Eastern countries. The strongest link with Central Asia will be a common lingua franca, which would make communication among inhabitants of Pakistan and Central Asian people possible.

8. And most importantly, make Pakistan a true federal country with secular orientations and with as much autonomy for the federating units as possible. No strategy for a distinct Pakistani identity will be succeed until this pre-requisite is met.

Adoptation of Urdu/Hindi was a shrewd move, by Colonialists, to tie diverse people together into a single polity. In particular, they wanted to detach the north-westerners from their Central-Middle Eastern heritage and integram them into the Indian amalgam.

Although, the motives mostly were political but the devices employed were cultural.

Can the migration of Urdu-speakers be likened to that of Arabs outside Arab Peninsula 1400 years back, which Arabized the present non-Peninsular Arab world? Or should we compare it to the gradual Chinization of Siberia due the increasing number of Chinese settlers?

I mean are there other such examples to give us a better insight into the issue?

The migration of Urdu speakers to Karachi shouldn't be considered a normal event. It would have historical impacts. It accelerated the process of Indianization of the native communities as begun by British.

And it would have future consequences.

Down the road, in a time-span of 15-20 years, when borders would become softer and the Urdu speakers in both the states would start interacting with each other increasingly and in increasing numbers, that would open another dimension of integration i.e. integration at demographic level.

I read somewhere that when Mongolia secured freedom back in 1920s, the father of Mongolian freedom struggle wrote a letter to Stalin or Lenin requesting Russia for close political, strategic, and cultural ties. This was to protect Mongolia against the Chinese cultural, political, and demographic threat. He had said, we would be swarmed by Chinese.

[Neo]

I have a problem with Urdu because:

1. It has no historical basis in Pakistan region before the British occupation.

2. It is native to only north India and continues to welcome cultural invasion from India

3. It is the mother-tongue of only 7% Pakistanis (i.e. Muhajirs), and is resented as cultural domination of one ethnic group over the others.

4. It is almost the same language as Hindi (minus the script & loanwords), and thus Indian films, tv, music, news, etc. are brainwashing Pakistanis with Indocentrism and Hinduism

5. It has caused an identity crises in Pakistan because many people falsely perceive Indians and Pakistan as the same people because their national languages (i.e. Urdu-Hindi) are the same.

6. It is undoing (contradicting) the creation of Pakistan by forcing the distinct native peoples of Pakistan to be "Indianized"

7. It is responsible for starting the Bengali separatism leading to dismemberment of East Pakistan.

.... the list goes on and on.....

By the way, I am not against English! English should be definitely taught in schools as an optional subject for foreign student or global economy purposes. But I am against making English our national language since we are not under British occupation/slavery any more, nor are we stooges of the Anglo-Americans. Plus, with English as our national language, we will be still stuck with dilemma of identity between the English-speaking Indians and English-speaking Pakistanis!

Also, local/native languages of Pakistan should still be protected and promoted. Dari/Farsi language will just replace Urdu as our national language.. for inter-provincial communication and a stronger distinct national identity!

[Neo]

I was looking at your website and reading through your rather passionately and persuasively argued case for switching to Farsi as Pakistan's national language. I've always had the same feeling about Urdu - that it was somehow imposed overnight and Farsi condemned to death without even consulting the intelligentsia, let alone the common people!

I'm myself from Kashmir and our official language and language of education had always been Farsi from the 14th century to 1906 - that's 600 years. Suddenly, the Hindu Tyrant who ruled over Kashmir changed it to Urdu because the Brits told him to do so. Even then the common people of Kashmir refused to accept this change - they continued to use Farsi (my grandfather spoke and wrote it fluently - indeed he was a poet in it!). However, once the Gangetics (and their brainwashed lackeys) invaded Kashmir they exacerbated the death of Farsi by removing it from the syllabus and teaching only Urdu. The situation now is that Farsi is completely dead from Kashmir - apart from a few Rumi and Hafiz enthusiasts.

I too believe that Pakistanis were robbed of their 3000-year old Farsi/Iranic heritage by this devious sleight of hand by the Gangetics (who dominated the Muslim League). I think it was these people who unduly influenced Jinnah (who himself couldn't speak Urdu - hence had no emotional ties with it). Had Jinnah been apprised of the situation fully I'm sure he would have supported Farsi. But it doesn't mean we can't change things. I think we should keep campaigning for Farsi/Dari - our first goal should be to demand its teaching in schools so that a generation of fluent Farsi speakers emerges. There should also be a new Farsi channel which can offer courses.

Keep up your efforts