Twin nations that chose different trajectories: A Pakistani perspective

By Manahil Jaffer -   -   -

In August 1947, British India was divided into two countries, India and Pakistan. Even though these two nations became independent countries on the global stage in the same year, their histories and the direction they have taken over the years have been very different. India was able to hold itself as an impressive democracy and experience a booming economy, while Pakistan has been battling a range of challenges such as political instability, poverty, and security threats. 

The unequal inheritance

At the time of Partition, the distribution of resources between India and Pakistan was highly unbalanced and placed Pakistan in a disadvantageous situation. The British Indian Empire possessed financial funds, military supplies, and organizational structures which had to be apportioned on the basis of population with Pakistan entitled to get about 17. 5% of these assets.

At that time, the Reserve Bank of India had about $1 billion in cash. Based on the agreed ratio, Pakistan had a right to almost $175 million. At the onset, Pakistan received only $50 million. India denied the rest $125 million payment citing escalating tension in the relationship especially on the issue of Kashmir. India agreed to transfer the $125 million only after international pressure and intervention of Mahatma Gandhi but by then the delay had severely hampered Pakistan’s economy.

Of the total military assets of the British Indian Army valued at approximately $800 million, Pakistan was due to receive $140 million. However, Pakistan got far cheaper machinery, including many items that were either decommissioned or defunct, most often refurbished spare parts. In addition, unlike in British India which had 16 ordnance factories, none of these were in Pakistan, so the new state could not produce its weapons or ammunition by itself.

The industrial divide was also essential in understanding the different trajectories of both countries. Up till the commencement of the colonial period, most of the construction of industrial infrastructure such as textile mills, steel factories and engineering companies were initiated in territories that later formed part of India. Pakistan inherited just a tenth of the industrial plants of British India, valued at less than $25 million, while India retained the rest, worth several hundred million dollars.

The massive refugee problem following the partition added to the troubles of Pakistan, as it witnessed one of the largest migrations in modern history. About 14-18 million people migrated, with around 10 million Muslims migrating to Pakistan from India. Pakistan’s problems were aggravated by a fast flow of refugees and their impact intensified economic and social issues. Pakistan started with scarce financial capital, weak military hardware, and poor infrastructure, and encountered significant difficulties in its formative years, though it found ways to sustain and even grow out of these odds.

Political foundations and leadership

Political structure and leadership of the two countries that each inherited at the time of their independence also played an important role as to why the two are different today. The Indian National Congress brought India to a relatively stable political form that practiced democracy, secularism, and a mixed economy. A socialist state with strong central institutions was envisaged by Jawaharlal Nehru which contributed to building political stability in India and paved the way for slow but sure economic growth.

On the other hand, the base of Pakistan's political structure was comparatively weaker. For the Muslim League, which spearheaded the demand for Pakistan, it was more of a movement than a well-oiled machine like a political party. After independence, the party had a very hard time moving from a freedom-fighting party to a ruling political party. Uncertainty was also influenced by the death of Pakistan’s founding father Muhammad Ali Jinnah in 1948 and the assassination of Prime Minister Liaquat Ali Khan in 1951 which caused a lot of political instability. Being a country of rather diverse ethnicity, the linguistic and cultural differences between East and West Pakistan created many problems in administration and governance. It kept the two wings drifting apart, culminating in the separation of 1971.

Economic strategies and industrial development

It is evident that India has fared better than Pakistan and has taken a better path. During the premiership of Nehru, India adopted the Mixed Economy Model which advocated state intervention in the industrialization process along with the policy of self-reliance. The Indian government put into practice a number of Five-Year Plans for the development of certain strategic sectors and infrastructure and for the improvement of agriculture. While this path is not free from shortcomings, it succeeded in sowing the seeds of India’s long-term structural transformation.

Pakistan, on the other hand, had immense teething problems and challenges with steering the economy. It It did not have a strong industrial base, particularly in West Pakistan, and a large dependence was on agriculture which was subject to vagaries of weather and foreign markets. The early development policies of Pakistan was to foster growth of a central authority for the country’s businesses that in turn will become drivers of the economy but the effort was sometimes marred by political instabilities and resource constraints.

However, Pakistan achieved significant economic development in the early years especially in the 1960s during the regime of President Ayub Khan. Some of the economic reforms implemented by Ayub’s government included the Green Revolution to improve the country’s agriculture production, and the setting up of large-scale industrial units in Karachi and Lahore. These reforms produced high rates of economic growth and Pakistan often was named as a model of development for other developing countries. However, the growth that took place in the 1960s did not get distributed equitably, thereby deepening existing disparities between the two wings of Pakistan and leading to political turmoil. The 1971 loss of East Pakistan had a devastating effect on the country’s economy, but after some time as international aid became available Pakistan recovered from the damages.

Social cohesion and national Identity

Political stability and unity of the nation have been significant factors in deciding the destinies of India and Pakistan. It is important to note that, given its complicated ethnic and political structure and contrary to many expectations, India is successfully embarking on the formation of a national idea based on secularism and democracy. The Indian Constitution, adopted in the year 1950, enshrined the foundational principles of equality, justice, and fraternity which in turn helped in building up a feeling of  unity in diversity among Indian citizens.

On the other hand Pakistan faced some challenges to evolve a nationwide identification. The very idea of Pakistan was based on the Two-Nation Theory which emphasized Muslims’ different way of life from that of the Hindus in the subcontinent. However, mere religious identity of a nation without reconciling Pakistan’s diverse ethnic, linguistic, and cultural groups was not enough to hold it together. The political relations between East and West Pakistan which had social divisions based on language, culture and economic disparity caused the breakup of the country in 1971.

After East Pakistan seceded, the government sought to make Islam as the focal marker of nationalism. While this has been somewhat successful, this strategy has also had its challenges, especially in the management of religion in a public context, especially in dealing with the diversity of the country.

Pakistan’s resilience and survival

Despite wars and political instabilities, economic disruptions and natural disasters, this nation has managed to retain its sovereignty and growth.

Pakistan enjoys a very strategic location which has proved essential for the existence of the country and it plays a very significant role in regional and world politics. During the Cold War period the nature of relationship between Pakistan and the United States was mutually beneficial because the latter not only helped Pakistan in enhancing its defenses but also assisted in its development process. After the Cold War, Pakistan remained vital to counter-terrorism, and of particular relevance is its role in Afghanistan and South Asia.

One of the reasons that has kept Pakistan going is its robust and resilient civil society. Even though political unrest and economic uncertainties remain significant challenges in Pakistan, it has a vibrant civil society, a growing private sector, and expanding middle income-earning groups. Many entrepreneurs have emerged in the country, especially among the youth who have played a significant role in the development of sectors such as technology, media, and even education.

Divergent paths and future prospects

Both India and Pakistan have had diverging paths since independence because of various factors that include the uneven distribution of resources at the time of Partition, the contrasting political and economic policies they adopted, as well as their different social structures. While political stability gave India a better economic ground to stand on as well as a common identity, Pakistan is still struggling with several issues like unequal distribution of resources and recurrent instability in the political arena. 

But Pakistan’s story is not a failure. For the country to move forward, Pakistan needs to learn from past lessons and capitalize on its human resources to carve a bright future for itself.

(The author is a graduate of international affairs with interests in foreign policy, national security, and geopolitics. She has worked with the National Assembly of Pakistan. Views are personal. She can be reached at manahil.jaffer786@gmail.com )

Read more at: https://www.southasiamonitor.org/perspective/twin-nations-chose-different-trajectories-pakistani-perspective

@SAM