Speech delivered by Mr. Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, the Foreign Minister of Pakistan to the Pakistan Islamic Council for International Affairs, Karachi, June 13, 1965

An essential feature of the foreign policy of Pakistan is its marked emphasis on the extensive civilization of Islam as a force of emancipation and progress. The nature of this emphasis has passed through its own variations from the earlier days of Islam in this subcontinent. The quality of belief and the intensity of intellectual and spiritual pre-occupation with its objectives, however, have not been impaired by the passage of time.

At the centre of the Islamic world, stability and security had given rise to an attitude of mind akin to unconcern. On the contrary, the frontier regions which had to struggle against hostile forces never ceased to manifest an intense loyalty to the unity of Islam.

The Muslims of the Indo-Pakistan sub-continent which formed part of the zone of confrontation were always dedicated to the concept of a central Islamic authority. Even though the Caliphate had, since the middle of the tenth century, lost all effective power, it was remarkable that there remained a solitary corner of the Islamic world which still looked towards the centre, passionately striving to restore its pristine image and authority. To further this end and to preserve the unity of the ummat, mighty rulers of Hindustan like Mahmud of Ghazni, Iltumisk and Balban sought, with utmost humility, the approval of the Caliphate of their rule over kingdoms which they had carved out by themselves.

Even though the Mughals who came to power in 1526 refused to acknowledge the Turkish Sultan as Caliph, it did not prevent them from taking an active interest in all Islamic and pan-Islamic affairs.

ASCENDANCY OF THE COLONIALISTS

With the decline of Mughal power in the eighteenth century began the era of British ascendancy in India. Politically independent Muslim states on the peripheries of the Islamic world fell one by one before the onslaught of Western powers. The Empire of the Mughals was finally liquidated in 1857. By 1886, Russia had conquered the Caucasus and extended her empire to the frontiers of Iran and Afghanistan, who were themselves the victims of the Anglo-Russian scramble for empires. Malaya, long subjected to European intrigues and infiltration, came within British occupation towards the close of the century.

The Muslims enlisted in the Hijrat Movement with such fervor and such readiness, to undergo the suffering involved in being uprooted from their homes and migrating to other Muslim lands, that the whole of India was amazed at the heroic effort and sacrifice. The force and the momentum behind the Khilafat Movement and the determination of the Muslims to keep it going regardless of the sacrifices involved was such that it influenced to an appreciable degree the British decision to reappraise their plans for breaking up whatever remained of the Turkish Empire. However, it was at this stage, after 1922, that the founder of modern Turkey, Mustafa Kemal Ataturk and his companions, finding a resuscitated Caliphate incompatible with their political ideas, first equated the Caliphate with ‘spiritual’, as opposed to ‘temporal’, power and then finally abolished the institution altogether.

With the abolition of the Caliphate, pan-Islamism changed from an active to a dormant force. Although it was revived from time to time, in essence it lost its compelling appeal to the leaders of Islamic political thought.

While Turkey was in the grip of a radical upsurge under the leadership of Kemal Ataturk, the Muslims of the sub-continent had already embarked on a painful process of self-analysis and introspection to restate and redefine the political philosophy and values of Islam in the face of the Western challenge. The lingering feeling of pride in their past achievements was given a coherent expression by the leaders of Muslim thought in the sub-continent.

Among the first to reinterpret Islamic doctrine was Sir Syed Ahmed Khan (1812-98). His thesis was that Islam and modern thought, in the ultimate analysis, were not mutually exclusive. He founded at Aligarh in 1875 a college in which religious education was combined with the study of modern science. He was the first in the Muslim world to establish a modernist institution in Islam.

Among the several writers who popularized new liberal thought and ethics, the leading figure was Sir Amir Ali, a distinguished jurist. His book, the “Spirit of Islam”, published in 1891, furnished the awakening political consciousness of Muslims with a reasoned basis for their self-esteem which they needed in order to confront the Western world. The most eminent service performed by Syed Amir Ali in the cause of Islam was the subtle reformulation of Islamic doctrine in terms of Western thought. He presented the teachings of Islam in the light of contemporary social ideals.

Philosophy of Iqbal

The argument that in taking over modern western learning and science Muslims were only reverting to the heritage of their own civilization was persuasively stated by Allama Muhammad Iqbal (1876-1938), an exponent of the most sweeping reformulation of Islamic doctrine in many centuries. His activist philosophy exerted a powerful influence on the younger generation of Muslims and contributed to the rise of Pakistan as a Muslim State in 1947. Iqbal’s ideas were seized upon by several militant movements to propel themselves onto the road of power—the Ikhwan in the Arab world, the Khaksars in the sub-continent, the Iashm iris in Iran and Darul Islam in Indonesia. In fact, the ideas of Iqbal have exerted a great deal of influence on modern Islam, whose renaissance has been more ebullient than thoughtful; and indeed it has been aimed more at recapturing the vitality than at redefining the content of the faith.

The post-Caliphate era of Islam, therefore, saw the resurgence of a new movement for activation of the Islamic spirit on the one hand, while, on the other, significant steps were taken to come to terms with the social, political and scientific requirements of the contemporary world. It was in this period of time that Pakistan was conceived and won to provide the Muslims of the sub-continent with a separate homeland in which they might pursue their own destiny. Conceived as a political expression of an ideological dedication of a hundred million Muslims, Pakistan came to manifest a deep interest and real concern in the welfare of all Muslims and in their struggle for freedom and emancipation.

Zionism

It was as early as the time of the Khilafat Movement that the Muslims of the sub-continent became deeply concerned about Zionist ambitions with regard to the Holy Land. Meetings and demonstrations were held throughout undivided India, denouncing Zionist intrigues and the British policy of turning Palestine, an Arab territory and a land holy to Muslims, into a home for the Jews from all over the world. The support unstintedly extended to the cause of the Palestine Arabs was not entirely lost on the British Government.

When the flow of Jewish immigrants into Palestine became a flood after Hitler’s rise to power in Germany, a revolt broke out in Palestine. In the sub-continent the Muslim League under the leadership of the Quaid-i-Azam denounced expropriation of the indigenous population of Palestine by Alien immigrants and called upon the British Government to stop further Jewish immigration and to permit the Arabs to exercise their full political rights. The British Government appointed a Royal Commission to study the tangled situation and to recommend possible solutions for the Palestine problem. The recommendations of the Royal Commission were shelved because of the outbreak of the Second World War. When Pakistan emerged as an independent State in August 1947, the Palestine situation was nearing the explosion point. Illegal and organised immigration had swelled the Jewish population of Palestine to one-third of the total. The Jewish settlers, heavily armed with modern weapons, were ready for war. Powerful political pressures were being exercised by the Zionist Movement in the United States and other Western countries and in the U. N. to open Palestine to unlimited Jewish immigration and for the immediate establishment of a sovereign Jewish state.

Pakistan and the Palestine Question

The Palestine problem thus became the first to engage the deep concern of the newly independent State of Pakistan. The position taken by the Muslim League under the leadership of the Quaid-i-Azam was that the Balfour Declaration and the Mandate of the League of Nations with regard to Palestine, against the declared wishes of the people of Palestine and in violation of the pre-existing legal obligations of the British Government which had pledged independence to the Arabs, were null and void and that the proposal to partition Palestine and to create in it a state for aliens, in the teeth of opposition from the majority of the indigenous population, was a violation of International Law and contrary to the Charter of the United Nations.

One of the first acts of the Founder of Pakistan, the Quaid-i-Azam, in his capacity as Governor-General, was to address a forceful letter to President Truman to desist from the “monstrous” attempt to deprive the Arabs of their country which had been their homeland for two thousand years. When the Palestine question was referred to the General Assembly of the U. N., Sir Zafrullah Khan declared that the Pakistan Delegation was utterly and uncompromisingly opposed to the partition. Explaining that the scheme of partition as proposed was unfair and impractical and if implemented would lead to strife within Palestine. Pakistan urged that the juridical questions involved should be referred to the International Court of Justice. Sir Zafrullah Khan said that Pakistan deeply sympathized with the Jews in the misfortunes they had suffered in Europe, but the right solution of the problem was that the Jewish refugees should be re-integrated in the countries to which they belonged. Should this not be possible, Zafrullah Khan pleaded that they should be offered facilities for settlement in the larger, newer countries which had more space and greater resources than tiny Palestine.

The supporters of the partition scheme, however, were determined to carry it through, at all costs. Great Powers resorted to tactics of naked coercion and duress against the smaller Member States of the United Nations to procure the necessary two-thirds majority for the adoption of a resolution of the General Assembly in November 1947, recommending the partition of Palestine and the establishment of a Jewish state.

Pakistan has remained unswervingly and resolutely opposed to “Israel” which was proclaimed in May, 1948. It has refused to recognize this state or to have any relations with it. Pakistan continued to take an active interest in all subsequent developments resulting from the United Nations’ scheme of partition and to sponsor resolutions on behalf of the Arabs of Palestine year after year since 1948. Invariably, Pakistan has remained in the forefront of those defending the principles of justice and international law so cynically violated by the majority of United Nations members in planting an alien state in the heart of the Arab world.

Only recently when the veil of secrecy which had shrouded the German-Israel agreement of 1960 for the supply of war materials to Israel was removed, the strong reaction of the Arab countries, whose security had thereby been jeopardized, was fully appreciated in Pakistan. Despite its friendship with West Germany, Pakistan’s sympathy was with the Arabs.

Pakistan’s stand on the Palestine question is an excellent example of its dedication to the struggle against Colonial and Imperialist domination. The consistency with which Pakistan has maintained its support for the cause of the Muslims of Palestine points to an underlying conviction that its destiny is closely linked with the establishment of a world community on the basis of equality, justice and fraternity, in consonance with the Islamic concept of a world order. Its complete unconcern for racial or geographical factors in relation to the people of Palestine highlights the tradition of Islamic brotherhood. The intensity with which Pakistan continues to voice its opposition to alien domination over the homeland of Palestinian Arabs exemplifies the Islamic spirit which enjoins perpetual struggle against injustice. There are other important characteristics of Islam whose relevance to our contemporary times has been confirmed by no less an authority than Arnold Toynbee, and I quote from his “Civilization on Trial”:

The forces of racial toleration, which at present seem to be fighting a losing battle in a spiritual struggle of immense importance to mankind, might still regain the upper hand if any strong influence militating against race consciousness that has hitherto been held in reserve were now to be thrown into the scales. It is conceivable that the spirit of Islam might be the timely reinforcement which would decide this issue in favor of tolerance and peace.

Historians have unanimously acclaimed the spirit of equality and brotherhood practiced in the civilization of Islam. The manifestation of this historic virtue of Islam is a vital need in the world of today, divided as it is by differences of race, color and diversity of political, economic and social institutions.

It is not only the doctrine of Islam nor only its historic association with the struggle of mankind against tyranny and oppression that inspires the leadership of Islamic countries today to identify itself with the movement for the liquidation of all types of foreign domination. It must also be remembered that Islam itself has suffered most from the onslaught of alien domination. Right from the Middle Ages starting with the Crusades, the lands of Islam have faced successive invasions from the citadels of imperialism and colonialism. From Morocco to Indonesia, the heart and soul of Islam has suffered from the colonial domination of every colonial power in Europe. The British, the French, the Germans, the Dutch and the Portuguese have held sway over one or the other part of the Islamic world.

In the case of Islam, its experience of colonialism in all its manifestations has been an enduring phenomenon with all its attendant humiliations, indignities and sufferings. It was a case of a live and dynamic civilization stifled by oppression and systematically dismembered limb by limb. Its anguish was not even relieved by any opiate of unconsciousness. Compared to the endless humiliation, subjugation and exploitation suffered by the world of Islam, even the awareness of a Washington or a Lenin of the inequities and dangers of imperialism and colonialism appear somewhat academic.

Islam as a force was concerned in the struggle for equality and justice. It is only in the fitness of things that having suffered extensively under the combined hegemonies of Imperialism and Colonialism, it should now reflected in the hour of its emancipation an even greater dedication to the cause of human liberty, justice and equality. The opposition to imperialism and colonialism of other forces is at best founded on a doctrinaire conviction and an apprehension; but to Islam, this is not only a creed—a part of the religion itself—but is its natural role as a force, perhaps the only force which has managed to survive the combined onslaught of extensive imperialist and colonialist domination of such protraction. Thus Islam is committed historically, morally and politically to be in the vanguard of the struggle against the forces of domination and exploitation.

Other Anti-Colonial Causes

Pakistan has viewed the emancipation of Muslim peoples as an essential prerequisite for the revival of Islamic values. I have described Pakistan’s support for the just cause of Palestinian Muslims. Permit me to make brief mention of some of the other instances in which Pakistan has extended its unflinching support for the struggle of Muslim peoples to regain their freedom and to restore their dignity so that they may play their rightful role in the quest of mankind for a better world.

The question of the future of former Italian Colonies of Libya, Italian Somaliland and Eritrea was considered by the General Assembly of the United Nations during its Third Session,’ in 1949. The First Committee of the General Assembly recommended a solution identical with that previously agreed upon between the three occupying powers—Britain, France and Italy—in the Bevin-Sforza Agreement. This solution envisaged a united independent Libya after ten years; in the interim, the territory was to be divided in Trusteeship between the three Powers.

Cause of former colonies

Pakistan unreservedly espoused the cause of the people of these former colonies. Our then Foreign Minister, Choudhry Zafruilah Khan, vehemently opposed the trusteeship sought to be given to former colonial powers and urged that independence be given to a united Libya, comprising Tripolitania, Cyrenaica, and the Fezzan. If it was considered that immediate independence was not feasible, we argued, Libya should be placed under the direct administration of the Trusteeship Council itself to prepare her for independence in the shortest possible time. This stand of Pakistan in opposition to the Western Powers was vindicated when the General Assembly decided in November, 1949, that a united Libya should become independent by January, 1952. The General Assembly appointed a U. N. Commission to assist in the transition to independence. Pakistan was elected a member of this Commission and it played an active part in bringing the country into the family of free nations. Libya was admitted to membership of the United Nations on December 14, 1955.

As regards Italian Somaliland, Pakistan put forward a radical solution, suggesting the amalgamation of all Somali areas—namely those formerly under Italian or British rule and those still under French rule—to form an independent greater Somalia. The stand taken by Pakistan resulted in the supersession of the original Western proposal. The General Assembly decided that Italian Somaliland consisting of the former British and Italian areas be placed under U. N. Trusteeship for a period of ten years, after which they were to become united and independent. Somalia was admitted to the United Nations on September 20, 1960.

Tunisia and Morocco

The freedom movements of the three countries of the Maghreb evoked a deep sense of sympathy in Pakistan. Maghreb leaders—Habib Bourguiba, Allal-Fassi, Mohammad Yazid and others—visited Pakistan and were enthusiastically received. For its part, the Government of Pakistan gave all possible support to the aspirations of the people of North Africa for the restoration of their full sovereignty and independence. On all the three questions, namely of Tunisia, Morocco and Algeria, Pakistan played a leading role, and was therefore frequently chosen by the Asian-African nations as their spokesman in the United Nations.

Pakistan was a member of the Security Council (and its representative, Ahmed Shah Bokhari, was its President for that month) when in April 1953, the Tunisian Government complained to the United Nations and requested the Security Council to consider the grave situation that had arisen as a result of French suppression. While the Tunisian question had been placed on the provisional agenda of the Council, its formal adoption was strongly opposed by France on the ground that as Tunisia was a French protectorate, Franco-Tunisian relations were a matter essentially within the domestic jurisdiction of a member State and was as such outside the competence of the United Nations by virtue of Article 2, paragraph (7) of its Charter. After the unfortunate decision Prof. Bokhari told the Council meeting:

Today, 10 April, 1953, will go down in the history of the United Nations as the day on which the foundations were laid for the suppression of free discussion in the United Nations. This would be the first instance in the history of the United Nations in which the mere adoption of an agenda item was opposed so stoutly in the Council, and to the death. This will also go down in the history of the United Nations as the day of very great and lamentable reversals of policy.

Frustrated in the Security Council, the Asian-African nations brought the matter before the General Assembly in 1953. A resolution introduced by Pakistan called for the restoration of civil liberties in Tunisia and for negotiations with a view to enabling the Tunisian people to exercise their right of self-determination. The resolution was supported by most of the African-Asian States, but in spite of their determined effort, a combination of forces opposed to the resolution, prevented its adoption.

Pakistan continued to take a deep interest in the restoration of full sovereign rights of the Tunisian people until this goal was achieved in 1956.

The question of Morocco was analogous to that of Tunisia. Under the Treaty of Fez of 1912, the Sultan of Morocco had been coerced into ceding to France its sovereign right to conduct the foreign relations of Morocco. Invoking the provisions of this Treaty, France maintained that the United Nations was debarred under Article 2(7) of the Charter relating to domestic jurisdiction, from considering the Moroccan question which had been inscribed on the agenda of the General Assembly in 1952, at the instance of certain African-Asian States, Pakistan being one of them.

In 1953, the African-Asian States at the United Nations requested the President of the Security Council to call an urgent meeting to consider the Moroccan situation when Sultan Mohammed V was deposed and imprisoned by the French Government. Despite every effort by Pakistan and Lebanon, which were members of the Council at that time, the item was not inscribed on the Council’s agenda. In the General Assembly Session later that year, Choudhry Zafrullah Khan again pleaded the cause of Morocco and denounced the imposition by imperialist powers on smaller and weaker states of unequal treaties such as the Treaty of Fez. Thirteen African-Asian nations sponsored a draft resolution recommending that martial law be terminated and civil liberties resorted in Morocco and that steps be taken to make the independence of Morocco possible within five years. This proposal could not secure the necessary majority in the face of a strong opposition.

Pakistan was again one of the fourteen African-Asian States which requested the inclusion of the Moroccan question on the agenda of the ninth session of the General Assembly in 1954. The consideration of the item was, however, postponed in view of the impending negotiations between France and Morocco.

Morocco attained independence in 1956. The realization of Moroccan aspirations was in no small measure due to the strong public opinion generated by the espousal of the Moroccan cause by the Asian-African members of the United Nations.

Algeria

Towards the end of 1954, the Algerian people rose in armed insurrection against French colonial rule. The following year, Pakistan, along with some of the African-Asian States, decided in the Bandung Conference to support the Algerian struggle for independence and demanded the consideration of the Algerian question by the General Assembly, at its tenth Session in 1955. France again challenged the competence of the United Nations to discuss the question, invoking paragraph 7 of Article 2 of the Charter—the argument of domestic jurisdiction. The leader of the Pakistan Delegation, the late Mr. Mohammad Ali Bogra, in refuting this contention, said:

For over a hundred years the rulers of Algeria have pursued a policy of assimilation to make the native population French in feeling, living and thinking, to fit them into the procrustean bed of French civilization and way of life for the greater glory and power of France. But the people of Algeria have stubbornly resisted this Policy of assimilation and integration and remained adamantly Algerian, apart in language, religion, culture and way of life from their self-constituted benefactors. Why? Although Algeria is claimed to be as much a part and parcel of France as Brittany or Savoy, yet there is no equality of status between the Algerian and the other departments of France. There is no equality in the rights of franchise, to political representation, or to participation in the Government of the French Republic. The constitutional and judicial situation in Algeria, in law as well as in fact, rests on the principle of national and racial discrimination applied to all fields of life. Therefore, though France claims that Algerians are French citizens under her law, they remain French subjects in practice.

In the following year, Pakistan co-sponsored a draft resolution recognizing the right of the people of Algeria to self-determination and inviting France and the Algerian people to enter into immediate negotiations for a cessation of hostilities and bringing about a peaceful settlement in accordance with the principles of the Charter.

The resolution of the Asian-African countries was not adopted.

When I led the Pakistan Delegation to the General Assembly in 1959, Pakistan extended not only its fullest support, but it also took initiative in sponsoring draft resolutions acceptable to the representatives of the Algerian National Liberation Front. That year, Pakistan was unanimously requested by the Asian-African group to be the sole sponsor and mover of a draft resolution on behalf of the Group calling for recognition of Algeria’s right of self-determination and independence and negotiations between the Government of France and the representatives of the FLN for a peaceful settlement of the Algerian question in accordance with the purpose and principles of the Charter.

Speaking before the U. N. General Assembly again in 1960, I pointed out that Algeria was a “strife-torn land where the blood of patriots still flows in their tight for freedom.” I went on to declare that, and I quote:

The sympathies of the people of Pakistan are with the valiant sons of Algeria; fighting heroically for their freedom. At a time when so many countries on the continent of Africa are taking their place in this Assembly, it is with great sorrow that we note the absence of Algeria.

In August, 1961, Pakistan took the bold step of according formal recognition to the provisional Government of Algeria. This action was hailed not only by Algeria but by all African people. We took this step despite the risk of alienating French support in the Security Council for the right of self-determination of the people of Jammu and Kashmir.

I must here pay rich tribute to President de Gaulle. As a great Statesman he understood that our action was prompted by our respect for the principle of self-determination and not by any towards France. a country with which Pakistan has maintained warm and cordial relations.

Later, in December 1961, Pakistan moved on behalf of 34 other states, a resolution in the General Assembly of the United Nations, urging the French Government to bring about an immediate termination of hunger strikes by Algerian prisoners in France and to redress their grievances. This resolution was adopted by the General Assembly. The hunger strikes ended and an atmosphere more conducive to a Franco-Algerian settlement was created. Finally President de Gaulle conceded independence to Algeria and also set in motion a gigantic process of decolonization in Africa as a result of which all her African territories emerged as sovereign independent states and were admitted as members of the United Nations. This was a magnificent manifestation of the highest traditions of French liberalism.

Pakistan—The U. A. R.

Let me now turn to our relations with the Arab countries of the Middle East.

Among them the United Arab Republic occupies a position of pivotal importance not only by reasons of its size strategic position and cultural leadership, but also because of the radical changes in its international status as well as in its internal life brought by the Nasser revolution. The UAR plays a preeminent role in the affairs of the Arab world. For this reason and also because of its Islamic orientation, Pakistan has always placed the highest emphasis on the promotion of fraternal relations with that country.

It is a matter of profound regret to us that from time to time. Pakistan-UAR relations have been subject to certain stresses and strains.

Pakistan had extended its support to the Egyptian struggle against imperialism. It had backed the Egyptian demand for the evacuation of British occupation forces from the Suez Canal Zone and for the negotiation of a new settlement over the problem of Anglo-Egyptian Sudan. Pakistan was instrumental in promoting the resumption of negotiations between Egypt and the United Kingdom which had reached a deadlock.

President Nasser chose non-alignment between the two power blocks as the basis of his foreign policy. Pakistan on the other hand, concluded an agreement with the United States for military aid in 1954 and joined SEATO later that year in the quest for security from the threat of Indian aggression. A year later, Iraq under the regime of Nuni-as-Said, concluded the Baghdad Pact with Turkey for cooperation in defence, to which Iran and Pakistan acceded a few months later.

This development gave umbrage to Egypt which regarded the Baghdad Pact as a move to sow disunity and division in the Arab world and portending a renewed threat from imperialism because of British membership of and American support to that Pact. Fears were expressed in the Arab world that Pakistan’s policy of support for the Arabs of Palestine in particular, and Arab liberation movements in general, would no longer be sustained.

Pakistan soon demonstrated that these fears were unfounded. Membership of the Baghdad Pact and SEATO did not inhibit Pakistan in pursuing its traditional policy of lending support to Arab aspirations for full sovereignty, dignity and unity, and to the struggle of the people of Asia and Africa against imperialism and colonialism. In fact, Pakistan used the forum provided by these Pacts to promote the causes of fraternal countries.

In July, the Suez crisis was precipitated by the reversal of the United States offer to finance construction of the Aswan Dam. President Nasser reacted by nationalizing the Suez Canal Company. Pakistan upheld the right of Egypt as a sovereign state to nationalize any undertaking within its territorial jurisdiction.

Pakistan’s interest in maintaining freedom of navigation through the canal was direct and immediate. At the time of nationalization, 56% of Pakistan’s exports and 49% of its imports passed through that international waterway. Nevertheless, Pakistan publicly stated that nationalization was a justifiable act and directs its diplomacy to dissuading the British Government from resorting to armed action to re-impose international control, or to attempt to overthrow international control, or to attempt to overthrow the Nasser regime.

In the London Conference, which was convened on the initiative of Mr. Dulles to consider the grave situation, Pakistan reaffirmed its position that nationalization of the Suez Canal was in consonance with the sovereign prerogatives of Egypt and that a peaceful solution of the Anglo-French dispute with Egypt should be found through negotiation. The Pakistan Delegation also successfully pressed amendments to substantially modify the Western proposals. Pakistan was motivated by the need to avert an imminent threat of Anglo-French invasion by keeping open the door to a negotiated settlement with President Nasser and thereby to frustrate the aims of those powers which were determined to serve an ultimatum on him. Pakistan warned against the violation of the Charter of the United Nations or any attempt to dictate terms to President Nasser. It opposed the proposal to set up a Suez Canal Users Association and suggested that the users might negotiate directly with Egypt. This stand of Pakistan and some other countries eventually prevented the establishment of the Users’ Association.

When the Australian Prime Minister Mr. Menzies’ negotiations with President Nasser failed, and the tripartite armed aggression took place, the people of Pakistan rose as one man in condemnation of the action of Britain, France and Israel. For weeks, cities and towns in all parts of Pakistan resounded with the denunciation of the three powers, and with expression of sympathy and support for the people of Egypt.

In the United Nations, Pakistan was actively associated with every move to bring about a ceasefire, withdrawal of the invading forces, and dispatch of a United Nations Emergency Force.

President Nasser was not entirely satisfied with the role of Pakistan in the first and second London Conference. At the actual moment of Anglo-French-Israeli invasion of Egypt, President Nasser believed that Pakistan’s support could have been more positive and forthright. This feeling led him to decline to let the Prime Minister of Pakistan visit Egypt or to agree to the inclusion of a Pakistani contingent in the United Nations Emergency Force. Attacks against Pakistan as a Baghdad Pact country were intensified.

With the overthrow of the monarchy in Iraq in July, 1958 and the withdrawal of that country from membership of the Baghdad Pact, there was a noticeable improvement in the attitude of the UAR towards Pakistan. With the advent of the revolution in Pakistan in October 1958, and the removal from power of politicians against some, of whom President Nasser nurtured a sense of grievance, the improvement of relations was further accelerated.

The UAR President visited Pakistan in 1960 and had useful discussions with President Ayub Khan. This led to a much better mutual appreciation of the interests and policies of the two countries. The President of Pakistan paid a return visit to the UAR where he was given a warm and enthusiastic reception. His penetrating analysis of the ills of Muslim societies and his call for a progressive outlook and modernistic approach to the problems confronting them, made a deep impression throughout the Middle East.

In 1962 and 1963 there was some retrogression in the relations between the two countries. The UAR objected to the sale of rifles and ammunition by Pakistan to Saudi Arabia under an agreement made in December 1961, on the ground that these arms were being passed on to the royalist forces in Yemen who were fighting against the republican regime and the UAR forces. The sale of arms to Saudi Arabia was a normal government-to-government transaction and the Saudi Government denied that it was supplying the royalists with Pakistani weapons. Nevertheless, Pakistan stopped the sale of weapons in deference to UAR’s sentiments, particularly as it had never been Pakistan’s policy to take sides in inter-Arab disputes. In addition to this, Pakistan recognized the new republican regime in Yemen.

It was because of the fund of goodwill that existed in Pakistan towards the UAR that deep regret was felt here over the role of the UAR delegation in the Security Council when the Kashmir dispute was discussed in the first half of 1962. More recently the Indo-UAR Agreement in 1964 for collaboration in the production of supersonic planes has aroused Pakistan’s concern, since it would facilitate acquisition by India of greater air offensive capability. Nevertheless, Pakistan continues to seek closer understanding with the United Arab Republic.

The visit by the Pakistan Military delegation led by the Commander-in-Chief, Pakistan Army, in December, 1954 has achieved success in removing differences between the two countries and in promoting mutual good-will. I have no doubt that the relationship between Pakistan and UAR will become even closer with the forthcoming visit of President Ayub Khan to Cairo (The President visited Cairo from July 14 to 16, 1965). A meeting between two eminent statesmen is always an occasion of great significance. It is our sincere hope that when our President meets President Nasser in Cairo tomorrow, it will herald the beginning of a new era of friendship and understanding between our two countries.

Other Middle East States

Our cordial relations with Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Syria, Yemen and Lebanon have reflected the fraternal warmth that characterizes the sentiments of the peoples of these countries and Pakistan towards one another. Neither changes in government nor vicissitudes of policy have marred the fraternal character of this relationship. While Pakistan has recognized that a non-aligned policy may suit these countries, they have also displayed an understanding of the special problems which had led Pakistan to join the alliances. Even the most virulent critics have admitted that Pakistan’s membership of CENTO has not been aimed against any of the countries of the Middle East, or for that matter any other region, but that it has on the contrary enabled Pakistan to project the Arab view-point from an additional international forum. Iraq’s decision to withdraw from the Baghdad Pact in July, 1958 had little effect on the continuance of friendly relations between Pakistan and Iraq, which once again proved that Pakistan’s friendship towards the Muslim world transcends transitory considerations.

President Abdus Salam Aref visited Pakistan in April. 1964. He held constructive talks with the President of Pakistan. The joint communiqué issued at the end of this meeting reaffirmed Iraq’s support for an early settlement of the Jammu and Kashmir dispute in the spirit of Afro-Asian solidarity and in conformity with the Charter and resolutions of the United Nations. The wide measure of accord between Iraq and Pakistan was again demonstrated by the support and understanding which President Aref showed towards Pakistan in its current crisis with India.

Saudi Arabia is the guardian of the two Holy Cities of Islam which radiate the deepest spiritual and emotional influence on Muslims throughout the world. So profound was the attachment of the Muslims of this sub-continent to the sacred cities of Mecca and Madina that the safeguarding of the future of these holy places of Islam during and after the First World War became a passion with them. The famous Khilafat Movement was aimed both at the preservation of the holy places and the Hedjaz from the threat of alien rule as well as at preserving the territorial integrity of the Turkish homelands.

Viewed against this background, it should be obvious that the bonds between Pakistan and Saudi Arabia are unbreakable. It is a matter of special satisfaction to Pakistan that it has been able to extend advice and technical assistance to Saudi Arabia in defence and other fields, and that Pakistani doctors, engineers, consultants and workers in the oil industry are making their contribution to the progress of that country.

Jordan, as the custodian of the Masjid-i-Aqsa, has always occupied a place of great affection in the hearts of Muslims of Pakistan and has attracted Pakistani pilgrims by the thousand. Pakistan’s relations with Jordan have always been very cordial and a large measure of political cooperation has existed between the two countries. The suggestion of Choudhry Mohammad Zafrullah Khan, while he was Pakistan’s Foreign Minister, to convene a conference of Muslim countries at Jerusalem to evolve some positive policy for united action for countering the menace of the State of Israel is a manifestation of the keen interest of Pakistan in the welfare and security of Jordan.

King Hussein paid a State visit to Pakistan in 1955. His second visit to Pakistan together with his consort is eagerly awaited. In the joint Pakistan-Jordan communiqué issued after the Pakistan Prime Minister’s visit to Jordan in August 1957, the two countries pledged themselves to cooperate with each other in pursuance of their common policies and interests. In April 1964, the people-to-people delegation led by Mir Waiz Mohammad Yusuf of Kashmir visited Jordan where he was accorded a warm welcome. During their stay in Jordan, the delegation received full support of the Jordanian Government to the right of self-determination of the people of Jammu and Kashmir. In August, 1964, Pakistan sent a delegation to the celebration marking the completion of repairs to the Masjid-j-Aqsa.

Damascus has been one of the great power centers of the Muslim world. It is a matter of satisfaction to Pakistan that its relations with Syria have always been cordial. When Syria joined the United Arab Republic, Pakistan, consistent with its policy of good-will and sympathy towards the movement for Arab unity, extended its welcome to the Union. Later, when Syria decided to separate, Pakistan took a non-partisan stand but noted with satisfaction that Arab unity remained an important goal of Syrian policy.

Historically, Lebanon has been a meeting place of the empires and civilizations of Asia and Europe. The Lebanese have been a great sea-faring and mercantile people: Their ancestors, the Phoenicians who founded Carthage and are credited with the invention of the alphabet have through the ages demonstrated a remarkable genius for trade and commerce. Contacts between Pakistan and Lebanon have greatly expanded in recent years with the introduction of direct air service. Now the exchange of visits between scholars, businessmen and others will prove mutually beneficial.

Pakistan did not immediately recognize the Revolutionary Government in Yemen in 1963 because of its policy of non-interference in intra-Arab controversies. But since then not only have Pakistan’s diplomatic representatives paid visits to that country but also Pakistan has been associated with the U. N. Observation Mission in Yemen. Pakistan has expressed the hope (Since come true. An agreement has been reached where UAR and Saudi Arabia, and the monarchy restored in the Yemen) that peaceful conditions will soon be restored in Yemen and a political settlement acceptable to the people of Yemen and also to Saudi Arabia and the UAR will be reached which will heal the wound of fratricidal strife, promote reforms in Yemen and remove a cause of division within the Arab world.

With the Shaikhdom of Kuwait, Pakistan has established cordial and friendly relations. Pakistan opened a Consulate General which has since been raised to the level of Embassy. A number of visits have been exchanged by Ministers of the two countries and there is no doubt that fruitful and mutually advantageous cooperation between the two countries will continue to increase.

South Arabia, which has long been struggling against colonial rule, cannot much longer he denied its legitimate demand for freedom and independence. Pakistan has joined with Arab and African-Asian States in supporting U. N. resolutions favouring freedom and self-determination for South Arabia.

Pakistan’s policy towards the Arab world is characterized by its support of all measures unanimously adopted by the Arab States. We welcome all manifestations of Arab unity and solidarity and acclaim their economic and social achievements. We regret some of the transient differences between Arab States, and maintain a policy of strict non-interference and non-involvement in intra-Arab disputes. Pakistan will continue to extend its complete and unqualified support for the Arab movement for greater political, economic and cultural cooperation in the interest of their own collective security and welfare which contributes to solidarity among Muslim States and to greater Afro-Asian unity. This is not merely a matter of state policy where Pakistan is concerned, but it is enshrined in the hearts and minds of every single citizen of this land.

Africa

The emergence of independent nations in the continent of Africa opened a new vista of cooperation between the peoples of this great continent and those of others. Pakistan has reason for special gratification as Africa occupies a very important place in the Islamic world. A large number of the inhabitants of this continent are followers of Islam. Twenty-two out of thirty-five independent African countries have a majority of Muslim populations. But the importance of Africa in the Muslim world derives not only from the large number of Muslims inhabiting this continent, but also from the noble contribution it has made to the concept of Islamic universalism.

Africa has now broken the shackles of alien bondage, and Muslims from this vigorous continent are taking active interest in the revival of the dynamic forces of Islam within the general framework of Afro-Asian unity. Sir Ahmadu Bello, the Sarduana of Sokoto and the Prime Minister of Northern Nigeria has carried the torch of Islamic renaissance into countries far and wide. Somali was the scene of the 6th conference of the World Muslim Congress. Interest of Mr. Aden Abdulfait Osman, the President of Somalia, in the Congress has been of long standing. African delegations are also playing a prominent role in Islamic conference outside their continent, such as the African-Asian Islamic Conference held in Bandung in March 1955. Pakistan looks forward to forging new ties of friendship and cordiality with these countries of Africa. The contribution and vigor and of Afro-Asian solidarity has already received recognition and acclaim.

Africa is a continent in revolt. The forces of enlightenment and progress are engaged in securing their full emancipation from colonial domination. The movement for independence from colonial rule has already achieved impressive results. Apart from South Africa, Angola, Mozambique and other areas, where the liberation struggle continues to intensify, there is the task of consolidation of the independence and sovereignty of newly independent nations.

Islam is at the forefront of the revolution in Africa. The manifestation of human dignity, equality and social justice, which is such an urgent need, has found ready response from the proselytizing forces of Islam who have merged and identified themselves with the revolution. Alien missionaries are fighting a losing battle against the revolutionary forces of Islam which derives strength from its indigenous character and from its impressive record as the greatest moral force against racial discrimination.

It is the universality of the spirit of Islam, its emphasis on the brotherhood and equality between man and man, its inherent vitality and vigor which have led to its fusion with the progressive revolution in Africa. The African revolution, and Islam’s contribution to the emancipation and progress of the African people, will play a role of great significance, of significance not only to the continent of Africa but to the whole world.

The future of mankind is inseparably linked with its ability to cultivate and nurture bonds of fraternity between peoples in different parts of the world with different racial and cultural backgrounds. To Pakistan the important role of Islam in Africa is of immediate concern both for its own sake and also because the success of the African struggle for progress, emancipation and solidarity is of such vital importance to the future of humanity.

China

From the vibrant scene of resurgent Africa, we come to the ancient civilization of China. Relations between the territories which today constitute Pakistan and China were established at a very early stage of i heir known history. Pre-Muslim relations of the sub-continent with the general region of China remained strictly confined to the spiritual field. Such cultural intercourse as took place was a corollary to the visits of prominent Chinese Buddhist leaders to their places of pilgrimage in the sub-continent.

With the spread of Islam into the Central Asian region and the Indo-Pakistan subcontinent, and with the travels of several Muslim geographers, explorers and historians, definite over-land routes were established between Central Asia and some regions of China. Similarly, Muslim mariners, whose mercantile activities extended to the Malayan Archipolago, came into direct contact with Chinese merchants and a sea-route was thus established all the way from China to the Mediterranean.

With Halaku (Hulagu) Khan’s invasion, the fall of the Abbasid Caliphate and the resulting anarchy in Iran, the established over-land trade routes were closed. This led to the discovery of a transverse route from Kashgar to Gilgit and down the Indus Valley to Debal (Thatta), on the Arabian Sea, from where merchandise was transshipped to western cities.

The establishment of a new alternate route brought the sub-continent, especially its Western part, into intimate political, cultural, commercial and diplomatic contact with both China and the Central Asian territories. One of the most famous embassies to be exchanged between the Chinese Emperors and the Tughlaq Sultans of the sub-continent was led by the famous traveler Ibne Batuta. This embassy was in response to one sent to Muhammad Tughlaq by the Chinese Emperor, Hyan Ti, and is important because it set the pattern of trade between China and the sub-continent under Muslim rule. The exchange of commercial products brought in its wake the exchange of craftsmanship, technological skills and fine arts.

There is a large Muslim population in north-west China and its Sinkiang province. Good neighborly ties of Pakistan with the People’s Republic of China once again enable the resumption of its historical and cultural relations with this important segment of the Chinese population after a virtual rupture of contact during the period of colonial rule in the sub continent.

The USSR

The Central Asian Republic of the Soviet Union contains a sizeable Muslim population. With them, the relations of our people are even more intimate. It is among the people of this region that the great Taimur and Babar were born who were among the progenitors of Muslim India. The names of Samarkand and Bukhara invoke feelings of romance and kinship among our people even to this day. In the wake of independence, a growing awareness of our cultural and historical affinities has made an important contribution to our quest for friendship and good neighborliness with the Soviet Union.

Iran and Turkey

With Iran and Turkey, the Foreign Policy of Pakistan reflects a continuity of the traditional sense of fraternity felt by the Muslims of the sub-continent towards them. Since independence, Pakistan’s friendly relations with the two countries have been further developed and consolidated. Common membership of CENTO was one of the consequences of these relations. Pakistan’s sympathy and support for the two countries on questions involving their rights and interests has been unequivocal.

I have already dealt with Pakistan’s sentiments towards Turkey in connection with my reference to the Khilafat Movement launched by the Muslims of the sub-continent. I might add that our relations with modern Turkey now are based on the same spirit of kinship and fellow-feelings which inspired our previous generation to treat the cause of Turkey as their own and to make such monumental sacrifices in demonstrating their solidarity with the Turkish people. The memory of Kemal Ataturk, founder of modern Turkey, is venerated in Pakistan as much as it is in the land of his birth.

With Iran, our people are bound by innumerable historical, cultural and ethnic links that go back to the dim past of ancient history. Notwithstanding two centuries of colonial domination, the people of Pakistan have retained their rich heritage from their intimate past association with Iran. The feeling of fraternity and oneness that the people of Pakistan have for the people of Iran, who are in more than one sense the progenitors of the Muslims in the sub-continent, is a living reality even to this day. The people of Pakistan hold the Shahinshah of Iran in great esteem and value his personal contribution to the continued development of friendship and fraternity between the two countries. The brotherly equation between the Shahinshah and the President of Pakistan is a symbol of the essential unity of our peoples.

When, in the early fifties, the Government of Iran nationalized the oil industry and terminated the concession of the Anglo-Iranian Oil Company, Pakistan upheld the sovereign right of Iran to take this action. The boundary between the two countries had remained unsettled during the entire period of British rule. Agreement as to its alignment was reached without any difficulty and the boundary was demarcated by the experts of the two countries working in close collaboration.

At a historic meeting between the Heads of States of Iran, Pakistan and Turkey held in Istanbul in July 1964, agreement was reached as a result of which the three countries established the Regional Cooperation for Development. The initiative taken by the President of Pakistan was indeed symbolic of the true nature of Muslim renaissance. Notwithstanding the many problems facing each of the three countries separately, they decided to launch a supranational joint venture which has been acclaimed as an event of the greatest significance i6 the future.

Cyprus

I now turn to the Mediterranean region to deal briefly with Pakistan’s stand on the question of Cyprus.

When this question was referred to the United Nations General Assembly in 1954 and discussed that year and in the following year, the Pakistan Delegation defended the historical and legal claims of Turkey to the island. In 1957, speaking on the Greek Delegation’s resolution that Cyprus be granted the right of self-determination, the Pakistan Delegation pointed out that the resolution had been so drafted as to imperil the human rights and legitimate aspirations of the Turkish Cypriots.

Cyprus achieved independence in 1960 under the Treaty of Zurich, guaranteed by Turkey, Greece and the United Kingdom. The right of Turkey to intervene in the event of a violation of the Constitution of Cyprus which formed an integral part of the treaty was expressly recognized.

Expressing the concern of the Government and people of Pakistan on this serious situation on 27th December 1963, I stated, and I quote:

The Agreements which brought about the settlement of the problem of Cyprus have to be respected as they are solemn international commitments . . .

We are with Turkey in her moment of crisis and whatever cooperation may be needed from Pakistan will be extended in the fullest measures.

Afghanistan

With Afghanistan we have ethnic, historic and linguistic ties. Our mutual association goes back to the dawn of history, to the influx of Aryans more than three thousand years ago.

It was to be expected that upon emergence from alien domination. Pakistan and Afghanistan would develop their relationship in consonance with their abiding and close fraternal ties. Their ties had been interrupted by barriers of isolation during the era of colonial rule. In the early stages after independence, relations between the two countries showed signs of reserve and mutual suspicion. Pakistan, on its part, has since maintained an attitude of understanding and reason, in the firm belief that the two countries have too much in common to permit any problem to permanently detract from the natural development of close and good neighborly relations. In fact, objectively speaking, no two countries have so much in common as Afghanistan and Pakistan.

Recent developments evince an encouraging trend. The cordial meeting between King Zahir Shah and President Ayub Khan in June 1964 set the tone for further improvement of relations between the two countries, of which the Transit Trade Agreement successfully concluded in February 1965 is a clear manifestation. It may be mentioned that the Transit Trade Agreement between Pakistan and Afghanistan provides for Afghanistan facilities and terms as are among the best and most liberal in the world. It certainly contrasts with the Transit Trade Agreement between India and Nepal, in which after placing every conceivable difficulty in the way of land-locked Nepal, India finally agreed to provide only limited facilities.

Indonesia

Pakistan’s policy of good neighborliness and friendship has extended eastwards to the islands of Indonesia. The history of Pakistan’s relations with Indonesia is also based on the unfailing support of the Muslims of this sub-continent for their brethren in other countries. The people of Indonesia in their struggle for freedom had all the sympathy and support of the people of Pakistan. Pakistan residents in Indonesia fought side by side with their Indonesian brethren in their war of liberation. The infant State of Pakistan in those days extended its whole-hearted support to their cause both within and outside the United Nations and rejoiced when their struggle came to a successful end with the establishment of the independent Republic of Indonesia. In their subsequent struggle over West Iran, Indonesia had the full sympathy of Pakistan which sent a sizeable contingent of troops to assist the United Nations in its supervisory functions.

There has been significant economic cooperation between the two countries with the largest Muslim populations in the world. In the development of even closer relations between Indonesia and Pakistan, a historic event took place when at a conference held in Karachi in March, 1965 “IPECC” (Indonesia-Pakistan Economic and Cultural Cooperation) was established. This provided for RCD-type Cooperation between the two countries in order to maximize trade and promote joint ventures in industry and cooperation in communications for their mutual benefit. It also provided for development of cultural contacts to cement existing ties between peoples of the two countries.

Cooperation between Pakistan and Indonesia has extended to various fields, particularly in international affairs. Pakistan and Indonesia were both co-sponsors of the first African-Asian Conference that adopted the historic Bandung principles which have now been recognized as a universal norm of conduct between states. Pakistan and Indonesia are at present collaborating with each other to ensure the resounding success of the 2nd African-Asian Conference to be held in Algiers in June. (Since postponed to November)

I would also refer to our unflinching support to the President of Indonesia for the establishment of Ganefo. Pakistan was a member of the Committee which organized the first Ganefo games. (“Games of the New Emerging Forces”—an Olympics of new nations insisted by President Soekarno). It is also on the organizing Committee for the Second Ganefo Games. We also supported Indonesia’s case in the international Olympic Committee meetings.

The exchange of state visits between the President of Pakistan and the President of Indonesia were occasions of great significance in which important discussions between the two leaders resulted in an even closer mutual understanding. It was in the context of our mutual support for just causes and the dedication of the two countries to the implementation of the right of self-determination of all peoples that Indonesia extended its unequivocal support to Pakistan with regard to the Jammu and Kashmir dispute.

Malaysia

The feeling of identity that the people of Pakistan have with their co-religionists has been an important factor in its relations with South-East Asia in general. Even before the independence of Malaya there was considerable contact between the leaders of Pakistan and Malaya. In 1955 Tunku Abdur Rahman on his way to the independence talks in London broke journey in Karachi for consultations with the Pakistan Prime Minister. Needless to say that Pakistan extended its whole-hearted support to the demand for Malaya’s independence. Pakistan also made an important contribution to the Reid Commission of 1957 which drew up the Constitution of Malaya. There have been exchange of numerous visits—the most notable of which were the visits to Pakistan of the Paramount Ruler of Malaya in December, 1961, and Prime Minister Tunku Abdur Rahman’s visit in October, 1962. These visits have helped to maintain close political, commercial and cultural relations between the two countries.

With the formation of Malaysia, difficulties arose in that region which have yet to be resolved. In September, 1963, President Ayub Khan wrote to the Prime Ministers of Indonesia, Malaysia and the Philippines, expressing his concern. Again in April, 1964, the President offered to the three parties facilities for holding a Conference in Pakistan should they so desire. The President also placed his good offices at their disposal. In July, 1964, the President gave a statement in London expressing the hope that Indonesia and Malaysia would continue to explore possibilities of an amicable settlement. He said that the important thing was that the dialogue should not be interrupted. Pakistan is undoubtedly concerned over the persistence of this dispute between countries with both of whom it has cordial and friendly relations. It shall continue to advocate an amicable settlement through peaceful means. Our efforts will be directed towards that end.

I have recounted some of the contributions that Pakistan has made to the cause of Muslims in other parts of the world and attempted to illustrate the consistent good-will, support and identification which have characterized our relations with Muslim countries. In doing so, I had no intention of claiming credit for Pakistan. Our policy towards Muslim countries is not based on desire for gain or for gratitude. It is based on much more fundamental considerations and compulsions. Even before the inception of the Pakistan movement, the leaders of Muslim renaissance in the sub-continent had identified themselves with the greater cause of an awakening of the Islamic world as a whole.

The ideology of Pakistan was not only confined to the need for the emancipation of the Muslims of the sub-continent. It was vitally concerned with the manifestation in the twentieth century of Islamic values of social Justice and universal brotherhood. Pakistan was thus conceived with a very pronounced external purpose and it has consistently sought to discharge its obligation in the field of international affairs—an obligation which it had inherited with the very birth of Pakistan as an independent State. The promotion of amity, peace and justice in international affairs has, therefore, been an important principle with Pakistan in the conduct of its foreign policy. Its ideological basis, its dedication to the cause of emancipation, solidarity and progress of Islam in the twentieth century, and its zealous quest for peace with justice and equity and for the fulfillment of its purpose in the scheme of things in the Muslim world were decisive factors.

Muslims in India

While Pakistan will always be ready to share with Muslim peoples all over the world their joys and their sorrows, it is the welfare of the Muslims of India that is closest to its concern. This is only natural because the Muslims of Pakistan and India have the same heritage and history and were but a single community until the independence of the two countries divided them. It is for this reason that Pakistan has always shown concern over the problems of the 50 million Muslims of India.

The creation of a separate state comprising the Muslim majority of the sub-continent was designed to enable the two nations to live in peace and amity. It was designed specifically to remove the cause of friction and strife between the two major communities. With the partition of the sub-continent on the basis of the two-nation theory, the minorities in both these nations were to be enabled to lead a life free from fear and intimidation which had become their lot in the persistent conflict between the two communities.

Notwithstanding the high purpose and the noble objectives formulated by the architects of independence, the holocaust let loose at the very time of Partition in 1947, was a clear indication that the fate of Muslims in India was uncertain. Although, under the Liaquat Nehru Agreement of 1950 the Governments of India and Pakistan pledged themselves to ensure to their respective minorities complete equality of citizenship and full sense of security in respect of life, culture, property and personal honor, the position of Muslims in India has gone from bed to worse. There have been more than 550 anti-Muslim riots in India since 1950. Hardly any Muslim festival has passed without the Muslim community being subjected to attacks of communal frenzy in one part of India or the other. The existence of the Muslims as a distinct cultural group is in peril despite India’s protestations of secularism. The new written accounts of Indian history go so far as completely to ignore the great contributions which Islam has made towards the culture and civilization of India. The aims of the majority community can be judged from the statement of the President of Hindu Mahasabha who said that:

Methods should have to be devised whereby these elements, that are Muslims, can be merged with the flow of national life in the country which is nothing other than Hindu.

A number of other Hindu leaders have voiced such sinister intentions against the Muslim population of India.

As if political, economic and cultural disintegration of Muslim was not enough, certain elements of the majority community in India have launched an organized campaign of genocide of Muslims. Treating the Muslims as hostages in the political vendetta against Pakistan, the Indian authorities have done little to protect the lives of thousands of innocent Muslims who have been massacred in the oft-recurring communal riots. Mr. Selig Harrison, a keen observer of the contemporary Indian scene, writing in the American quarterly “Foreign Affairs” of January, 1965 said that in India, secularism was dead. He added:

The traditional tone in social patterns has a political parallel in the slow stirrings of a coarse-grain nationalism which is frankly, even belligerently, Hindu in its inspiration . . . . It is not enough that a unified state with a Hindu majority—clearly dominant over a Muslim minority now reduced to 11 percent—has been established at long last in the Indian sub-continent in one form or another.

On our Eastern frontiers, India has launched a most callous drive against their own Muslims forcing them to leave their home and hearth to seek shelter in East Pakistan. Half a million helpless Muslims from India have taken refuge in East Pakistan. This is a cynical demonstration of India’s ‘secular’ methods. By using Indian Muslims as human pawns in this ruthless and diabolic fashion, India hopes to score against Pakistan. Such utter lack of concern for human standards is a blot on the conscience of mankind. India thinks that by continuing forcible evictions, she will gain on two fronts: it will eliminate the 50 million Muslims of India, and, at the same time, bring unbearable pressure to bear on Pakistan. She does not stop to think that long before she reaches either of her objectives, she would have succeeded in bringing about her own down-fall. Callousness only begets callousness. To pursue this path is to court disaster at the hands of human indignation. It is my firm conviction that the present leadership in India, which meets out such injustice to one section of its people, can neither retain the loyalty nor the support of the other sections of its population for length of time.

Human Problem

The Muslim minority in India is faced with an ordeal which should evoke the concern of all peoples who are pledged to the respect of human rights. The minority problem in India is not a political but a human problem. All that Pakistan is anxious to do is to secure for the Muslims of India an existence in which they are delivered from the threat to their lives, their honor and their possessions, and to secure for them the equality of citizenship promised in the Indian Constitution, on the secular character of which India prides herself so much.

Pakistan has appealed to India to stop the persecution of Muslims and to take steps to protect their elementary human rights. Pakistan has also brought the plight of Indian Muslims to the attention of the United Nations with a view to stirring the conscience of the world.

If world opinion, particularly public opinion in the Muslim countries, were also to express their deep concern over the situation in which the Muslim minority in India finds itself, the Indian authorities might be quickened into a realization of their duties and responsibilities. The interest of the Governments of Muslim countries in the welfare of the Indian Muslims would be a most potent factor in persuading the Government of India to ensure that the principles of secularism proclaimed in the Indian Constitution is also applied to its Muslim minority.

Under international law and the Charter of the United Nations, the universal observance of respect for human rights, regardless of birth, race and religion, is a subject of legitimate concern to every individual State and also to any collectively organized community of States. Needless to say that it is in India’s own larger interest that 50 million Indians should be allowed to live in decency and safety instead of being scarified on the altar of prejudice merely because they are Muslims.

The Muslims of India have given much and scarified greatly for the cause of Muslims beyond their own frontiers. Is it too much to hope that they in their turn will not be abandoned by the Muslim world in their hour of peril?

The poignant position of the 50 million Muslim minority in India and the discrimination and deprivations Muslims continue to suffer calls for united action on the part of Muslim peoples who have the ability and power to join together in defence of freedom, justice and fundamental human rights.

Kashmir

For the purpose of this discourse I do not wish to dwell at length on the liberation struggle of the Muslims of Jammu and Kashmir. Let it suffice to say that the enduring injustice which the State of Jammu and Kashmir has had to suffer at the hands of India presents to the world of Islam its greatest challenge. If Islam is to operate in the 20th century as a force of liberation, as a force dedicated to the liquidation of oppression, injustice and tyranny, as a force sworn to uphold the rights and dignities and just causes of suffering humanity, a beginning will have to be made in Kashmir. It is here that contemporary Islam faces its greatest trial.

India continues its illegal occupation of Jammu and Kashmir in flagrant violation of its international commitments. The people of Jammu and Kashmir continue to be denied their right of self-determination due to Indian intransigence. The Muslims of Jammu and Kashmir continue to suffer under the heels of Indian colonial domination. They continue to be deprived of their fundamental human right to choose their own destiny. A reign of terror has been let loose in the Valley. Their valiant fighters for freedom fall by the wayside as Indian forces impose their tyranny on unarmed and helpless Muslims. Their leaders rot in jails and yet the struggle continues and will continue, if necessary till the seas run dry.

Islam and the Muslims

There is gratifying evidence to show that the reawakening Muslim peoples are not unmindful of their obligation. After two centuries of stagnation and apathy, they are beginning to feel a flow of life in their veins. The resurgent Muslim world is a force in world affairs.

The most recent demonstration of their solidarity was at the African-Asian Muslim Peoples’ conference held at Jakarta in March, 1965. Representatives from 33 countries took part in this Conference which was the first of its type. The Conference stressed the need for collaboration amongst Muslim countries and peoples for protecting the common interests of Muslims, promoting their welfare and safeguarding their security. The Conference has served to deepen the consciousness of Islam and its great potential as an instrument of freedom in the struggle of the peoples of the New Emerging Forces against imperialism and colonialism. At this Conference, President Soekarno made an inspiring exhortation to the Muslim world to safeguard their freedom through progress, and to rebuild a prosperous and better world for themselves.

In the past, Islamic political philosophers and jurists looked upon the Caliphate as the ideal practical expression of the unity and solidarity of Islam. The unity of the Islamic community was predicted and indeed actualized on the universal rule of the Caliphs. The gradual disintegration and the final dissolution of this institution is a matter of history.

Taken collectively, the confines of the Muslim world of today extended from the Atlantic to the Pacific. They differ in their forms of government, political organization, and in their economic and social systems. Their national interests, as dictated by geopolitical and historical factors, need to be harmonized.

Let us examine the concept of nationalism in Islam and see if it is at variance with universal brotherhood of mankind which it preaches. In the early days of Islam when it overflowed the confines of Arabia and with irresistible force reached the far corners of the civilized world of those days, it was only the spirit and the force of its ideology and its mission which remained unitary. In its application it assumed distinct federal characteristics. At no time in the history of Islam did the central authority dominate its far-flung provinces. On the contrary, it was more often that the kingdoms on its peripheries sought to identify themselves with the centre. I referred to a classic instance of this phenomenon at the very beginning when discussing the unity of the ummat. I mentioned how mighty rulers of Hindustan like Mahmud Ghazni, Iltumish and Balban sought, with utmost humility, the approval of the Caliphate to their rule over Kingdoms which they had carved out by themselves. Thus we see Islam acting as a positive unifying force and bringing about a complete harmonization of an outward looking nationalism with a progressive international unity. This exposes the myth of the oft-repeated contention that nationalism is invariably in conflict with internationalism. Islam has abundantly illustrated the complete reconciliation of nationalism with internationalism.

The questions then arise: Can the consciousness of the universal policy of Islam be given a concrete political expression in our times? Is the Quranic concept of the unity of the universal community of Islam, transcending national barriers, still valid? Does this sense of an international fraternity of peoples permeate the consciousness of our Muslim brethren from Morocco to Indonesia, across the breadth of two continents, as it continues to animate the Muslims of Pakistan?

It is true that a lasting association cannot be based on doctrine alone as this would inevitably lead to dissensions and strife on account of different interpretations. Nor can we hope to build on nostalgia or sentiment, because with the passage of time the world and its events have left those memories behind. It is not also feasible to think in terms of an association of Muslim countries to the exclusion of all others. This would be a negation of the universal spirit of Islam. Apart from the fact that it would be both negative and self-defeating, such a trend would invariably create more problems than it would solve. The answer is to be found in a unity based on the principles of peace, justice and brotherhood, and dedication to the struggle against tyranny. There are essential ingredients of Islam. A unity based on enlightenment; reform and reconstruction acting as an impetus to international cooperation. A unity which will act in collaboration and as partisans in the common struggle against domination, and indeed as a spearhead of progressive and revolutionary forces.

The future of Islam is beginning to take shape. The Arab States come together periodically at the Summit level. So do the Maghreb States and the RCD and IPECC countries. In their totality, the growing contacts between Muslim nations constitute a force of immediate significance. What needs to be done is to vastly enlarge the existing scale of such contacts to multilateral meetings between the Heads of States and governments. Directed towards the achievement of a unity of purpose, towards the achievement of social and economic progress and the promotion of universal brotherhood, this is capable of giving a powerful impetus to the renaissance of Islam in the 20th century.

I have dwelt at some length on the nature of support which the Muslims of the subcontinent have extended to the struggle for revival of the civilization of Islam in our contemporary times. From the Pan-Islamic attitudes of the concluding phases of the Caliphate there has been a rapid evolution—through Modern revivalists such as Sir Syed and Sir Amir Ali, the activities led by All’ama Iqbal up to the present phase in which the civilization of Islam is engaged in the most crucial task of providing a sheet anchor for the elimination of the last vestiges of domination and exploitation. The contemporary role of Islam is consistent with the role it played in the struggle of mankind against tyranny until it was itself weakened by internal strife and schisms to fall into decay in the face of the Imperialist onslaught. The new spirit of Islam is finding its natural expression through its association with the most urgent need for the establishment of a new world order based on equality, justice and fraternity. It is only the success with which the struggle against exploitation and domination can be carried to a satisfactory conclusion that will determine whether or not we can see the dawn of a new era in the affairs of man.

With the revolutionary discoveries of science and technology, new vistas and indeed new dimensions are being added to human experience with terrifying speed. The present only provides a glimpse of the dynamism which would be the hallmark of our world of tomorrow. Citizens of the future will need an atmosphere of unparalleled social justice and equality if they are to succeed in facing the unprecedented challenge which will be theirs to face.

To achieve these conditions we would need in our generation to make monumental efforts and prepare for physical and intellectual discipline of the highest order. In a broad sense our endeavor has already begun. Beginnings are being made, but they would need to be supported and given direction and content. The egalitarian principles of Islam would need to be practiced and manifested. The role is of leadership. The intelligentsia of the Muslim world would do well to establish their own clearing house of new ideas and fresh interpretation of known values. National leaders will need to maintain a high degree of awareness of the movements not only within the polity of Islam, but in the world as a whole. National policies will need to be harmonized with regional needs which, in their turn, will have to take into account the realities of the international situation as a whole.

Without setting our sights too high, we can hope to see the gradual evolution of regional institutions such as RCD and IPECC, a greater measure of cohesion among the Arab States, closer institutional links between the countries of the Maghreb, and the reinforcement of the African personality. These and other developments would inevitably bring us to the next phase of cooperation which would include the development of inter-institutional relations between these various regional organizations for cooperation.

The Role of Pakistan

Pakistan has a role of the utmost importance to play in this evolutionary phase. Its situation on the peripheries of the Middle East on the one hand and the Far East on the other is in itself a compelling factor. Its ideological basis provides the motive power. It is the particular heritage of Pakistan, however, which remains the most potent factor in the determination of both the nature and scope of its role. The Muslims of Pakistan have inherited, along with their Islamic fervour, an admixture of all the other great civilizations that have helped to shape human destiny. From the Buddhists and the Hindus among whom they have lived for almost a thousand years, from their extensive contacts through Central Asia with the ancient civilization of China, and from their association with the West which has left its own legacy, the followers of Islam in Pakistan have developed a rich and unique cosmopolitan outlook. The totality of its circumstances is such that in the world of tomorrow Pakistan cannot but play a vital role.

Conceived as an ideological State, Pakistan is dedicated to the manifestation of the most comprehensive code of social, economic and political conduct, to the realization of the highest concepts of an egalitarian society and to the liquidation of disparity, discrimination and exploitation—in fact it is dedicated to the achievement of true equality and brotherhood in human relations. This total embodiment of the values of Islam with its internal and external dimensions finds itself in complete harmony with the most progressive, economic, and political and social forces of the contemporary world.

If mankind is to avoid the many pitfalls which lie in its path, many a bridge will have to be established in the world of the future. A mere glance at the human, political and physical geography of the world will show the importance of the situation of Pakistan. Situated as it is, one cannot conclude otherwise than to say that the bridges across Pakistan will carry for the world the lifeblood of its future generations with all the promise of peace, brotherhood, progress and enlightenment—in fact the true ingredients of a better world.

If this conclusion as to our destiny should sound pretentious, I would merely end by quoting from the renowned Philip K. Hitti:

If someone in the first third of the 7th Christian century had the audacity of prophesy that within a decade or so some unheralded, unforeseen power from the hitherto barbarous and little known land of Arabia was to make its appearance, hurl itself against the only two world powers of the age, fall heir to the one (the Sasanid) and strip the other (the Byzantine) of its fairest provinces, he would undoubtedly have been declared a lunatic. Yet that was exactly what happened.

To come nearer home, it was not so long ago when the idea of Pakistan was mooted, there was no dearth of skeptics who pointed out that such a proposition was nothing short of an absurdity. But, as Victor Hugo said, nothing is more powerful in the world than the force of an idea whose time has come.