One of the greatest tragedies of South Asia has been the emergence of the ‘Two Nation Theory,’ which opposed the anti-colonial Indian National Movement. This theory greatly aided British colonialists in maintaining their rule over this vast land. It led to the formation of Pakistan based on a Muslim majority (Islam), while the remaining part, India, emerged as a secular state with a large Muslim population. These Muslims, either by force of circumstances or by choice, decided to stay in India. The partition also triggered large-scale migrations of Hindus from Pakistan to India and Muslims to Pakistan, resulting in horrific suffering.
Seven decades after this tragedy, we see contrasting trajectories. On one hand, Pakistan has been sliding down the scales of democracy, social well-being, and progress. On the other hand, India, which initially embraced pluralism and development, is witnessing a resurgence of the ‘Two Nation Theory’ in the form of communal forces striving to establish a Hindu Nation. Dr. B.R. Ambedkar, in his book on Partition, warned that the creation of Pakistan would pave the way for Hindu Raj—a prediction that seems increasingly prescient. The efforts of Gandhi, Maulana Azad, and the Congress to prevent this tragedy were thwarted by the British policy of ‘Divide and Rule,’ which was bolstered by the communal ideologies of the Muslim League on one side and the Hindu Mahasabha-RSS on the other.
The Partition debate and the underlying Two Nation Theory continue to resurface in both countries. Sectarian nationalisms—both Muslim and Hindu—blame each other for this tragedy, ignoring its deeper roots in the declining feudal sections of society, supported by the clergy on both sides. These sectarian forces spread hatred against the ‘other’ community, intensifying communal violence. Figures like Gandhi and Maulana Azad were unable to prevent the ghastly events that followed.
Each communal stream—Hindu and Muslim—has its own version of these events. However, a holistic understanding emerges when viewed through the lens of the Indian National Movement and its opposition by the declining feudal and clerical sections of society.
This debate resurfaced recently when Pakistan’s General Asim Munir, addressing the Overseas Pakistani Convention in Islamabad, eulogized the “Two Nation Theory.” He paid tribute to those who worked for Pakistan’s formation, stating, "Our religion is different, our customs are different, our traditions are different, our thoughts are different, our ambitions are different—that’s where the foundation of the Two Nation Theory was laid. We are two nations; we are not one nation."
This perspective contrasts sharply with the views of Gandhi and Nehru, who envisioned India’s diverse communities interacting to create a unique syncretic culture. This culture, enriched by contributions from all communities, is epitomized by the Bhakti and Sufi traditions. Gandhi expressed this unity in his prayer, Ishwar Allah Tero Naam, while Nehru articulated it as Ganga Jamuni Tehzeeb.
The Two Nation Theory was not a sudden articulation. As the National Movement gained momentum among sections of society associated with modern education, industry, and communication, Indian Nationalism overshadowed other divisive ideologies. However, feudal and pre-modern values gave rise to the Muslim League on one side and the Hindu Mahasabha on the other. Both were exclusionist, upholding caste and gender hierarchies and opposing education for Dalits and women.
The British subtly supported these trends to suppress the National Movement. While one side advocated for an Islamic Nation, the other pushed for a Hindu Nation. Opposition to the Indian National Congress emerged early, with Rajas and Nawabs pledging loyalty to the British. Over time, parallel communal streams developed, with the Muslim League forming in 1906 (encouraged by the British), the Punjab Hindu Sabha in 1909, the Hindu Mahasabha in 1915, and the RSS in 1925. Both streams vehemently criticized Gandhi. The Two Nation Theory was formally articulated by Vinayak Damodar Savarkar, guiding Hindu Nationalism, while Muslim Nationalism began advocating for Pakistan by 1930 and was strongly articulated by Jinnah in 1940.
Today, RSS ideologues (e.g., BJP leaders and RSS leader Ram Madhav) present the Two Nation Theory as solely the creation of the Muslim League, downplaying the roles of figures like Allah Baksh, Maulana Azad, and Khan Abdul Ghaffar Khan, who opposed the demand for Pakistan. Pakistan, formed on the Two Nation Theory, fractured into Bangladesh and Pakistan within 25 years, marking the grave of this theory. Its abysmal condition today is evident.
In India, Hindu Nationalism was quietly nurtured, with its first dangerous manifestation occurring when RSS-trained Nathuram Godse assassinated Gandhi. Its divisive agenda became starkly visible in the 1980s with the campaign to demolish the Babri Masjid.
Pakistani poet Fahmida Riyaz aptly captured this parallel in her poem:
"Arre Tum bhi Hum Jaise Nikle, Ab tak Kahan chhupe the bhai."
(Oh, you have turned out to be like us; where were you hiding so far!)
Since then, attacks on secularism, inclusive politics, and the values of the Indian Constitution have intensified. Emotive issues now dominate the political landscape. The product of the Two Nation Theory—Pakistan—is in the grip of mullahs and the military, subservient to external powers. Meanwhile, the other component, Hindu Nationalism, has gained significant traction in India. The values and outcomes of nationalism on both sides of the divide are similar, differing only in form. Criticizing the Two Nation Theory while attributing it solely to Muslims is only half the truth.
---
Comments