The Historian 2009

The Historian
VOLUME 7 JANUARY-JUNE 2009 NUMBER 1
Department of History
GC University, Lahore
The Historian
Volume 7 (January-June 2009) Number 1
© The Historian is published by the Department of History, GC

University, Katchehry Road, 54000 Lahore, Pakistan.
No potion of this journal may be reproduced by any mechanical,

photographic or electronic process, or in the form of a photographic
recording without written permission from the copyright holders.
ISSN. 2074-5672
Price: 250 PKR

Editor: Tahir Kamran
Associate Editors: Tahir Jamil, Hussain Ahmad Khan, Noor Rehman
Design & Production Incharge: Shifa Ahmad
Editorial Advisory Board

David Gilmartin – Department of History, North Carolina State University, USA
Farhat Mahmud - Department of History, GC University, Lahore, Pakistan
Francis Robinson – Department of History, Royal Holloway, University of London,
UK
Gyanesh Kudaisya – South Asian Studies Programme, National University of
Singapore, Singapore
Ian Talbot- Department of History, University of Southampton, UK
Iftikhar Haider Malik - Department of History, University College of Newton Park,
UK
Kathrine Adeney - Department of Political Science, University of Sheffield, UK
Mohammad Waseem – Department of Social Sciences, Lahore University of
Management Sciences, Lahore, Pakistan
Mridula Mukherjee - Nehru Memorial Museum and Library, New Delhi, India
Pippa Virdee- Department of Historical and Social Sciences, De Montfort
University, Leicester, UK
Qalb-i-Abid – Department of History, University of the Punjab, Lahore, Pakistan
Sharif-ul-Mujahid – Pakistan Study Centre, University of Karachi, Karachi, Pakistan
Shinder S. Thandi - Department of Economics, Coventry University , UK
Shuan Gregory – Peace Studies, Bradford University, UK
Surrinder Singh - Department of History, Panjab University, Chandigarh, India
Tariq Rahman – National Institute of Pakistan Studies, Quaid-i-Azam University,
Islamabad, Pakistan
Virinder Kalra - Department of Social Sciences, University of Manchester, UK
THE HISTORIAN
JANUARY-JUNE 2009 (VOLUME 7, NUMBER 1)
ARTICLES
RELIGIOUS CONTROVERSIES IN THE PUNJAB: THE ‘APOSTASY’ OF GHAZI
MEHMUD DHARAMPAL …. ALI USMAN QASMI 05
BLEEDING WOUND: ANALYZING PAKISTAN’S KASHMIR POLICY

(1989-95) .… IRFAN WAHEED USMANI 25
THE GROUND OF HISTORY: A RELATIONAL UNDERSTANDING OF HEGEL

AND HEIDEGGER …. UMBER BIN IBAD 63
RATIONALIZING THE MYSTICAL RELATIONSHIP OF ART WITH ARTIST: ART

DISCOURSES IN ENGLAND AND FORMATIVE YEARS OF MAYO SCHOOL OF
ARTS, LAHORE (1875-1895) .…HUSSAIN AHMAD KHAN 89
BOOK REVIEWS
MUNIR AHMED MUNIR AND FE CHAUDHRY, AB WO LAHORE KAHAN

(LAHORE: MAHANAMA ATISH FISHAAN, 2009) 113
AZIZ UD DIN AHMAD, PUNJAB AUR IS KEY BERUNI HAMLA AWAR (PUNJAB
AND ITS FOREIGN INVADERS) (LAHORE: BOOK HOMES, 2007) 117
NOTES FOR CONTRIBUTORS AND REVIEWERS

Ali Usman Qasmi: Religious Controversies
RELIGIOUS CONTROVERSIES IN THE PUNJAB: THE

‘APOSTASY’ OF GHAZI MEHMUD DHARAMPAL
ALI USMAN QASMI

UNIVERSITY OF HEIDELBERG
GERMANY
ABSTRACT
This article looks at the contours of the identity

formations in Punjab in the context of British
colonialism and the apparatuses of administration
and patronage, among other tools of modernity,
appended to it. The pervasive influence of print
medium and discursive ‘pigeon-holing’ of subject
population by administrators, orientalists and
missionaries alike has also been taken into
cognizance while explaining these processes. Special
emphasis, however, is laid on the question of Muslim
identity formation which has been brought forth and
compared with similar processes at operation among
the Hindus and the Sikhs. With emphasis on the
particular case of Ghazi Mehmud Dharampal’s
‘apostasy’, the imperative towards the need felt in the
Muslim community for cohesive action in protection
of religious ideals and projection of Islam suited to
the dictates of modern times and amiable to the
concerns of ‘college graduates’, has been
highlighted.
KEY WORDS: Ghazi Mehmud Dharampal, British Punjab, Orientalists,

Hindus, Sikhs, Muslims, Christian Missionaries.
With the annexation of Punjab in 1849 the British proceeded, in

accordance with the votaries of selective benevolence espoused by the
‘Lawrence school’ of colonial administrators of Punjab, to lay down a
purportedly paternalistic colonial regime supplemented with an
impersonal law system. It was accompanied with the assumption of the
responsibility for administering both the civil and criminal justice and a
policy of bestowing political favors and economic opportunities on the
basis of relative strength of a particular group or community. For this
elaborate colonial enterprise to function, the British deemed it
mandatory to know their subjects. The newly introduced practice of
5
‘stock-taking’ of the subjects by means of census served as an index of

the populace defined within the constraining ambit of essentalized
categories with ensuing ambiguities sliced off and calcified in the
cauldron of Colonialist-Orientalist knowledge archive so as to ensure
an abridged understanding – overlooking the complexities of South
Asian population and vagaries of its different lifestyles – for the benefit
of British administrators entrusted with policy-making and smooth
functioning of the empire. 1
This consideration was even more important for an area like
the Punjab marked with plural coexistence. A precarious population
balance existed between Muslims and Hindus while Sikhs basked
nostalgically in their recently lost glory as the rulers of Punjab and
Christians strove hard on the margins to ‘claim’ this land for Jesus. The
strategic significance of Punjab as the single most important recruiting
ground of ‘martial races’ for the Imperial army and its fertile
agricultural land with feasible potentialities for an expansion of revenue
base, further served to highlight the importance of a stable colonial
order and administrative set up in Punjab.
These re-arrangements opened up a whole new range of
opportunities and at the same time posed fresh challenges to
communities populating Punjab. The ushering in of a new economic-
administrative order with British ascendancy concomitantly gave rise to
a broad new associational patterning and organizational structuring in
realms of social interaction, self-perception and group feeling among
the communities. Old modes of interaction crumbled under the weight
of socio-political workings of the colonial regime. Alternatively, the
British ‘offering’ of a ‘neutral’ public space was conceived by them as
a competing arena in which communities – constellated on the basis of
religion, caste, profession and so on – would vie with each other for
prominence while remaining subject to rules of the game specified by
the colonial authority. In this way, the colonized were impressed upon
with the potential power of the colonizer – both real and perceived but
never, in Ranajit Guha’s words, hegemonic 2 – to allocate resources,
extend patronage and administer law.
As the British were trying to identify their subjects and
determine their approximate numbers, it became important for the
communities under scrutiny to evolve effective methods of association
and organization to reach out to the colonial distributors of resources by
capturing a noticeable niche in the public space in order to preclude
rival communities from making similar gains. 3 In line with the British
mapping of these communities, the members themselves felt entrusted
with the task of wearing a uniform outlook by rounding off variances
and arbitrarily subsuming otherwise mutable or ‘fuzzy’ 4 peripheral
groups under its fold. This concern for appropriation of identities in a
community gave further impetus to the establishment of new groups
and guilds on the basis of religion, kinship, caste or other such interests
6
and considerations. An additional source of inspiration was provided by

the so-called ‘Dalhousian Revolution’ whereby emergence of
community representative groups not only became possible but was
also deemed to be desirable. A better communication infrastructure in
the form of well connected railways and efficient postal system could
facilitate assemblage of group members and maintenance of regular
contacts. The advent of print afforded a new way of broadcasting one’s
views to a wider audience.
Accompanying these developments was the invasive influence
of the Western education system ‘proselytized’ through government
run schools and colleges, which propounded a vague concept of
‘rationality’ in challenging the tenets of prevalent religious traditions.
A perceived threat from the Christian missionaries, operating allegedly
in collusion with the British officials at some level, further heightened
the mistrust of Punjabis in matters of religion. These Euro-centric
canons of rationality and Judeo-Christian forms of ‘higher religion’
appeared two pronged threats undermining the cohesiveness of a
community eventually diminishing its numbers and so bearing an
impact on its socio-economic status and political relevance. A
cumulative effect of these factors led to a mushrooming of a number of
religion-based community groups, especially among the Hindus and
Sikhs of Punjab, with a concern for revision of certain aspects of faith
for those among their clientele desirous of a more rational
interpretation of religion to be self-assured of the superiority of their
dogma above that of the others. There was also a pressing need for
appropriation of identities so as to forge unity among the community
members and swell its ranks in comparison to others. In doing so, these
communities were simultaneously being abetted and limited by colonial
structures of power and knowledge in place and their actions
engendered intertwined chains of reactions from rival communities,
hence embroiling them further in competition with one another.
THE BEGINNINGS OF RELIGIOUS CONTROVERSIES IN PUNJAB
Other than the direct take over of Punjab by the British in 1849, a
tangible aspect of the colonial polity was witnessed by the Punjabis in
the shape of an enhanced missionary activity since the first launching
of proselytizing mission in 1834 in Ludhiana by the American
Presbyterians and later by Church Mission Society, Methodist
Episcopal Missionaries and others. Within a few decades following the
annexation of Punjab, these missions had expanded their work to
emerging canal colonies and urban centers of Punjab like Sialkot,
Rawalpindi, Gujranwala, Gurdaspur, Jehlum and Lyallpur among other
areas. The setting up of a printing press in Ludhiana in 1836 by
American Presbyterian Mission introduced an alternative and more
effective mean of mass dissemination of Christian scriptures printed in
7
vernaculars throughout Punjab. Between 1861 and 1871 alone the

Ludhiana press had published 31 editions of Christian scriptures in
Urdu, Hindi and Punjabi numbering 188,000 copies in total, along with
286 tracts and books with a total print numbering 1,346,675 copies. 5
Other than that, the missionaries established a number of educational
institutes and hospitals in Punjab. The earliest missionary educational
institution for boys was opened at Kotgarh near Simla in 1843 by
Church Missionary Society. The American Mission followed by
establishing its first English medium school at Jallandur in 1848 and in
Lahore the next year. 6 Forman Christian College Lahore (formerly
Lahore Mission College) and Murray College Sialkot emerged as two
important centers for western learning in Punjab during the late
nineteenth century run by the Christian Missions.
Mission schools and hospitals, along with freely available
missionary literature in vernaculars, facilitated the missionary activity
in Punjab and allowed reaching out to especially those among the local
communities condemned as outcastes – most importantly the Chūhŕās
or the sweepers in the context of mission influence in Punjab – for the
menial and lowly occupations they were associated with. 7 The results
were startling for the missionaries themselves: a 410% increase in
Christian population of Punjab was witnessed as their total numbers
swelled to 19,750 in 1891. By 1911, their population had risen up to
163,994. 8
The conversion of even outcaste ‘members’ of a religious
community was significant in over all impact since it diminished the
total numbers of a community in the census reports, and suggested a
lack of egalitarian-rational spirit in their religious doctrines and absence
of organizational apparatuses to prevent the conversions from taking
place. Successful missionary attempts to prey upon learned and
influential members of the communities was a further source of
embarrassment as the local religious traditions in their existing forms
appeared unable to rationally satisfy the concerns of western educated
‘graduates’. Events like the attempted en masse conversion of Sikh
students of Amritsar Mission School in 1873 or baptism in 1894 of
Maulvī Hāfiz Nabī Bakhsh of Muslim High School Amritsar, were of
even more significance than the decennial publication of census
reports. These cases helped to generate a lot of debate in the local press
and added to the intensity of polemical disputations taking place
throughout Punjab between the clerics of different faiths. The high-
profile converts helped project the image of Christian successes in
establishing itself as a viable alternative in Punjab and, more
importantly, a form of ‘higher’ religion more suitable to the concerns of
a humane and informed believer.
The challenge posed by Christianity to local religious
traditions of Punjab clearly demanded similar organizational responses
along with modifications in some matters of faith to chalk out a
8
successful counter-strategy for proselytization. In the context of

Punjab, establishment of Āryā Samāj in 1875 by Svāmī Dayānand (d.
1883) was indicative of a significant development in the religious
traditions, especially Hinduism, as believed and practiced in Punjab.
Dayānand tried to configure Hinduism closely to the dictates of a
colonized polity and socio-religious traditions espoused by the
missionary groups. The key point in Dayānand’s idea of a reformed
Hinduism under the auspices of Āryā Samāj was an emphasis on the
Vedas as the bearer of central authority and authentic source of
guidance for Hindu religion. This assertion in the centrality of Vedas
served as Dayānand’s vision of a standardized Hindu belief system and
canonized ritual practices – in comparison to and a complete disregard
for the hoary sets of disparate beliefs and diverse practices of Hindus in
the vast stretches of South Asia – to which one could refer to or
proselytize to add new converts into its fold. In doing so Dayānand was
cognizant of the need to rely on Vedas as an authentic textual
representation of the Hindu religion as a counter to the established
scriptural representation of religions like Islam and Christianity. 9 In
Dayānand’s opinion,
The Vedic truth as it existed in its pure form in the

ancient past, unadulterated by latter day indigenous
or foreign influences, was to be retrieved and
emphasized as true Hindu faith. All must read the
truth in its pure Vedic form and should the Vedas
prove difficult to comprehend then Arya literature
stood ready to explain and interpret them. 10
Other than complying with the tradition of textual representation as in

Semitic religions, Svāmī Dayānand went further to rid Hinduism of its
‘polytheistic’ aspects targeted by the missionaries by arguing for an
adherence to a rather monotheistic concept of a single, all-powerful
deity. 11 An additional pressure emanating from the missionaries and
other rival religious communities with which Āryā Samāj had to cope
with were certain ‘objectionable’ teachings and ideas which were being
attributed to Hinduism. Earlier Ram Mohan Roy had sorted a way out
by distinguishing between “real Hindooism” and the superstitious
practices that deformed the “Hindoo religion” and had nothing to do
with the “pure spirit of its dictates.” In his quest for a more reasonable
alternative to superstitious and Brahnamic dominated, ritualized
Hinduism, Ram Mohan Roy ended up scrapping everything except
Vedas and Upanishads, which he decreed to be the core of Hindu
tradition, which in turn created a precedent for a later foregrounding of
the Vedas by Svāmī Dayānand. 12 But Ram Mohan Roy’s successor
Dēvendrānāth Tagore found the ‘idolatrous teachings’ of Vedas
incongruent with his own perceptions of a Supreme Being or Deity and
9
abandoned it as the basis of religious authority for members of

Tattvabodhini Sabha and Brāhmo Samāj, to be replaced by reason and
nature. 13 On the other extreme were Sanātan Dharmī groups who
accorded canonical stature not only to Vedas but also Purānās, Tāntras
and a host of other Hindu devotional literature to argue in favor of more
traditional form of Hinduism.
Svāmī Dayānand’s belief in the Vedas as the eternal and
infallible word of God as true representation of Hinduism required that
all additional Hindu scriptures or devotional literatures should be
summarily dismissed insofar as they contradicted the teachings of
Vedas, and thus remove any vulnerability to scathing criticism of
missionaries, non-Āryā Hindus and other religious groups. As for the
alleged polytheism, brahmanized rituals and traces of an asymmetrical
caste society envisaged in Vedic texts, Svāmī Dayānand resorted to a
revisionist reading of these texts to make them conform to his scheme
of a monotheistic and de-brahmanized Hindu religion with an
egalitarian outlook. In this endeavor a reinterpretation of certain Vedic
passages was as important as questioning the scriptural authority of
Purānās and other such texts. 14
After having established Hinduism as derived from the
teachings of Vedas, it became possible to proselytize it as a distinct
religion as Āryā Samāj’s arbitrarily constructed uniform Hindu dogma
and reductive understanding of its various aspects narrowed down the
definition of a Hindu to a person believing in the teachings of Vedas.
The undertaking of evangelical missions was not just to apprise the
Hindus about ‘true doctrines' of their faith but was also demanded by
political expediencies and economic compulsions. There was a growing
anxiety among the Āryā Samājīs – and most of the other Hindu groups
or movements that cropped up during this period – about dwindling
numbers of the Hindus as suggested by census reports. The weakening
of ‘Hindu race’ and decline in its numbers was understood as a
phenomenon that had been in progress since the advent of Muslim rule
in South Asia and speeded up under the British.
With the teachings of Svāmī Dayānand serving as a rallying
cry for a reformed, Vedic-only Hinduism and Āryā Samāj being used
as a platform and representative Hindu organization to propagate this
new form of Hindu faith – a reversal of the conversion process was
sought by targeting an audience comprising mainly of non-Ārya Samājī
Hindus or those who had converted to other religions, along with
Muslims and Christians. 15 That the proselytizing of Hindu religion was
a pioneering accomplishment on the part of Svāmī Dayānand and Āryā
Samāj is evident from the fact that traditionally Hinduism had lacked a
conversion ritual but the perception of a decline in the numbers of
Hindus in Punjab was a stimulus powerful enough to allow for novel
methods of initiating new members into the fold of Hinduism. One
such ritual was Shuddhī or purification. One of the first reported
10
Shuddhī was performed by Svāmī Dayānand in 1877 to a Hindu of

Jallundar who had converted to Christianity. 16 The earliest known
Shuddhī of a Muslim dates back to the same year. A Muslim from
Dehra Dun was administered with conversion rites by Dayānand and
given a Hindu name of Alakhdhārī. 17 On the whole, Āryā Samāj’s
efforts met with moderate success as their numbers grew steadily to
reach 92,419 in 1901 18 though it fell drastically short of a figure
desired by them. The organizational expansion of Āryā Samāj was,
however, more impressive as their affiliated branches spread widely to
different parts of India It was able to establish schools and colleges
imparting Vedic and modern education.
One of the communities most affected by the religious
controversies plaguing Punjab, especially the ones waged by Āryā
Samāj, was that of Sikhs. They not only had to cope with their recent
loss of political authority in Punjab but also negotiate with threats to
their existence as a separate religious entity. The Sikhs, like others,
were being beset by the efforts of missionaries aimed at bringing about
large scale conversions, and, in addition, faced an increasingly
offensive challenge from the Āryā Samājīs to subsume them under the
category of Hinduism for religious and numerical purposes. The Āryā
Samājī literature was critical of revered Sikh figures including Baba
Guru Nanak but at the same time emphasized the mutual religio-
spiritual ancestry of the two religions in various tracts published and
public disputations held. Further encroachments were made by Āryā
Samājis during the Shuddhī campaign of 1890’s when Sikhs, mostly
from the lower-castes, were converted to Hinduism in public
ceremonies of conversion with rituals involving cutting of hairs – a
sacrilegious act in Sikhism. A similar effort, albeit at a much lesser
scale and mostly as an exercise in academics, was made by individual
Muslims who tried to present Baba Guru Nanak as a Muslim by citing
‘credible historical evidences’ in this regard.
In response to their opponent’s exploitation of vaguely defined
contours of Sikh religion and certain aspects of its teachings, there were
varied interpretations of Sikh religious traditions by its adherents. In
pre-1849 Punjab, there had already started a process of religious reform
among the Sikhs as groups such as the Nirankārīs and Namdhārīs
strove to revitalize Sikhism’s devotional spirit among the believers in
their own different ways. 19 But it was the post -1849 period that
witnessed a rapid growth of Sikh organizations named as Singh Sabhās
which dealt with various questions facing the community by providing
infrastructural groundings to promote a Sikh identity in accordance
with their respective differentiated understandings of the Sikh tradition.
The first Sabhā was established in Amritsar in 1873. The
purported aim of the organization was to restore the purity and glory of
Sikhism by bringing about awareness among the Sikhs with the
publication of books, tracts and journals. The Lahore Singh Sabhā
11
which held its first meeting in 1879 had a similar agenda but with a
more reformist and egalitarian outlook. The Lahore and Amritsar
sabhās, along with dozens of such organizations established in most
parts of Punjab, briefly allowed themselves to be jointly overseen by a
larger central body of Khālsa Dīvān established in 1883 to be replaced
by Chief Khalsa Diwan in 1902. By 1900 there were more than one
hundred Singh Sabhas in Punjab and neighboring areas without there
being unanimity among them on the question of defining a Sikh and
determining Sikh religious traditions. They approached questions
regarding idolatry, female education and caste system in accordance
with their readings of the Sikh scriptures.
The issue of Sikhism’s relation to Hinduism clearly seemed to
be settling in favor of those championing a distinct Sikh identity to the
loss of those who concurred with Āryā Samājīs and other Hindus in
seeing Sikhism as an offshoot of a broadly defined Hinduism and
derived from commonly respected scriptural sources. This was made
possible by organizations a Tract Society founded in 1894 which
regularly publishedsuch as Khāls didactic and polemical literature,
evidenced by references from Sikh scriptures, to emphasize the non-
Hindu nature of Sikhism. 20 Moreover, the efforts undertaken by
Professor Gurmukh Singh (d. 1898) and Bhā’ī Kahām Singh (d. 1938)
in locating and publishing old texts, exploring hitherto unknown local
biographies of Guru Nanak (Janam Sakhīs) and ascertaining the
relative credibility of these sources helped add to the confidence of the
Sikhs in the veracity and richness of their religious literature and
textually recorded documentation of its history. Research and
publication bodies affiliated with Singh Sabhās ensured that authentic
editions of Janam Sakhīs and Adī Granth were brought out. 21 In this
way Singh Sabhā led initiatives for Sikhs resulted in the sharpening of
a recognizable Sikh identity, afforded an organizational framework
leading to the establishment of a number of schools and colleges for
Sikhs, and opened up debate on various aspects of Sikh traditions in
order to render it dogmatically compatible with the socio-religious
milieu of colonial Punjab and shrug off attempts by rival communities
to undermine the belief system and practices of Sikhism. From the
plurality of views that emerged from these discourses on Sikhism, the
British, however, gave credence and extended a Sikhs – who tallied
withpatronage to a rather militaristic variant of Khāls projected image
of the Sikhs as one of the ‘martial races’ of Punjab – for their own
administrative conveniences and fulfillment of colonialist objectives.
MUSLIM REACTION TO RELIGIOUS CONTROVERSIES IN PUNJAB
The Muslim reaction to the religious controversies in Punjab was

different insofar as it did not involve a significant effort to resolve the
problematic of their distinct religious identity vis-à-vis Hindus and
12
Sikhs. This does not, however, suggest that the Muslims of Punjab
constituted a monolithic community or that religion alone defined their
identity or determined the contours of community consciousness.
Muslims too were a religious group constructed or perceived in the
colonial logbooks as a community shot through with class, regional,
linguistic, sectarian and individual differences. 22 Therefore, Muslims
too were similarly cognizant of the dilemmas and challenges posed by
colonial polity and socio-economic changes accompanying it, and faced
the brunt of opposition from rival religious communities, especially
Āryā Samājīs. The dynamics of their politics and discourse on the idea
of ‘reform’ in religion was not so dissimilar from the rest. A number of
voluntary organizations patronized by Muslim nobility and
professionals came into existence to support modern and religious
education of Muslims by building schools and colleges. 23 They also
became actively involved in religious disputations and wrote polemical
tracts 24 in order to forestall sporadic encroaching attempts to baptize
the Muslims or to cajole them back to their ‘original’ Hindu roots.
Apart from missionaries who posed a ‘common’ threat to the
local religious traditions of Punjab, Muslim religious rhetoric with
regard to Hindus was noticeably more strained. A number of mutually
acrimonious tracts were exchanged after the publication of Maulvī
Ismā‘īl’s Radd-i Hunūd from Bombay followed by Maulvī
‘Ubaydullāh, a Hindu convert to Islam, who wrote Tuhfa tul-Hind in
1874. 25 It was responded to by Munshī Indarman in his tract Tuhfa tul-
Islām published from Muradabad. A total of at least 15 tracts were
exchanged between the contesting sides. 26 As this trend flourished,
Svāmī Dayānand joined the fray by writing Satyārath Parkāsh whose
contents were considered potentially offensive to Muslim sensitivities
regarding their religion. The fourteenth chapter of Dayānand’s book
focusing on the Quran and some aspects of Islamic teachings was
meant as an academic exercise in belittling the genuineness of non-
Hindu religions to underline their untenability as a universal religion so
as to reiterate the credibility of Vedas as divine scriptures relevant to
the dictates of modern times. In case of the Quran, Dayānand criticized
its teachings which allegedly sanction violence, killing of non-
believers, sexual promiscuity, moral laxities, and encourage a certain
kind of idolatry by centralizing the importance of the Ka‘ba in prayer
and pilgrimage performances. He concludes his criticism by saying that
Quran is neither the Book of God nor does it even qualify as the work
of an erudite scholar. 27 Muslim scholars responded in kind by raising
objections against Vedas and drawing ‘evidence’ from its text to prove
that the charges leveled against Quran can more appropriately be
leveled against Vedas for its treatment of the same issues in an even
more inhumane and irrational manner. 28 Dayānand’s Vedic solution of
Niyoga (levirate) to the question of widow remarriage was, in
particular, repeatedly exploited by his opponents, often with ridicule
13
and satire, as an example of Veda’s crass sexuality and hence a valid

proof of its un-divine nature.
The religious debate had, hence, boiled down to an
enumeration of scriptural authorities of competing religions on the
basis of their historical veracity, rational compatibility and universal
appeal. This trend invited fiery responses from competing religions.
Lēkh Rām (d. 1897), an Āryā Samājī proselytizer, aggravated the
religious controversies by penning provocative literature against Islam
and its Prophet. In doing so he was mad – the founderresponding to a
spate of similar writings by Mirzā Ghulām Ah madīya movement
generally denounced by rest of the Muslims asof messianic Ah
heretical – and other Muslim polemicists. In dealings with his Muslim
rivals, Lēkh Rām was concerned less about proving Vedas as the
central exponent of Hinduism than to disqualify the Quran as a divine
text in accordance with criterion laid down by him. According to that
criterion a Book had to be devoid of supernatural events contrary to
human reason and partiality towards any particular community or group
of followers in order to qualify the status of divinity. 29 In addition to
lacking a rational and universalistic spirit, Quran was considered by
Lēkh Rām as historically less credible than the Vedas. Lēkh Rām built
this argument on the basis of reports found in both Sunnī and Shī‘a
Ahādīth to the effect that parts of Quranic text had been lost. In the
same vein Lēkh Rām’s portrayal of Islam as a religion of murder, theft,
slavery and perverse sexual acts 30 is derived from traditionally revered
Muslim texts of classical exegesis and other juridical-theological
writings. When reminded by his Muslim counterparts of sexual
indulgences of Krishan with gopīs and vanities of various Hindu
rituals, Lēkh Rām discounted the criticism by reemphasizing the Āryā
doctrine of dissociation from non-Vedic Hindu texts.
THE ‘APOSTASY’ OF GHĀZĪ MEHMŪD DHARAMPĀL (D. 1960)
In order for newly emerged groups to claim credence as true

representatives of their respective religions and boost the confidence of
their followers in the articles of faith expounded by them, it was
necessary to make efforts – other than just arguing in terms of
historicity of the sacred text or its rational-universalistic teachings – for
mass conversions into the fold of one’s religion or to strive for cases of
high-profile conversions. In the latter case such individuals could then
be taken around and presented during religious disputations and
publicized through journals and newspapers as living examples of the
successful efforts made by the group for the promotion of religion and
in establishing its genuineness.
One such case of high-profile conversion, which in case of
Āryā Samāj considerably substantiated their credibility and exemplified
the success of their proselytizing efforts in favor of Hindu religion, was
14
that of Ghāzī Mehmūd Dharampāl’s adoption of Hinduism. Ghāzī

Mehmūd’s original name was ‘Abdul Ghafūr. He was born in
Hoshiarpur in 1882. During his formative years he developed a
skeptical outlook regarding Islam and undertook a comparative study of
religions to arrive at the true one. What weakened his previously
staunch belief in Islam was an incident during the early years of his
life. According to Ghāzī Mehmūd, he once listened to a Friday prayer
sermon in which the speaker said that true believers are blessed with a
magnificent vision in the last days of the Muslim holy month of
Ramażān. Ghāzī Mehmūd studiously observed his prayers and spent
sleepless night in the hope of receiving such a vision. Failing to receive
one, he became skeptical and as a way of soul searching he started
reading the biographies and teachings of reformers, saints and
prophets. 31 This religious introspection brought him closer, at first, to
Dēv Samājīs. 32 They, in turn, supported Ghāzī Mehmūd by financing
his academic pursuits as well. By 1899, Ghāzī Mehmūd had ceased to
be a practicing Muslim as shown by his letters in which he wrote
Dharampāl with his name and greeted his brother with a namastē. 33 He
remained a Dēv Samājī, and registered himself as one in the census, at
least till 1901 before shunning contact with them on the account of
their alleged malpractices and false beliefs. His opponents, however,
accused him of making the switch for he had lost ground both among
the Muslims and Dēv Samājīs, and needed financial support for
himself. 34 When Ghāzī Mehmūd came into contact with Āryā Samājīs
while he was serving as a school teacher in Gujranwala, he showed his
inclination towards embracing Hinduism after being convinced of the
truthfulness of the Aryan principles of religion. By 1903, Ghāzī
Mehmūd had turned twenty-one and so there could be no legal bar on
him to formally declare his renunciation of Islam and initiation into
Hinduism, and change his name from ‘Abdul Ghafūr to Dharampāl.
But Ghāzī Mehmūd objected to the term Shuddhī being used for his
conversion to Hinduism because it implied that he was being
transformed from a ritual state of impurity to that of purity. With some
reluctance the Āryā Samājī organizers of the event acquiesced to his
demands and a mutually acceptable term of pardēsh (entry) was
adopted. Also, Ghāzī Mehmūd did not want to allow shaving of his
head as part of the conversion ritual. A failure to do that would have
embarrassed the Āryā Samājis in the eyes of their rival Hindu sects. A
compromise was reached whereby Ghāzī Mehmūd was to wear a
turban in order to cover his hair. 35 The whole event was publicized well
in advance so as to attract maximum attention and continued to be
trumpeted in the press as the living example of Āryā Samāj’s successful
representation of Hinduism. It was a rather theatrical display of ritual
performances orchestrated by Āryā Samājīs with Ghāzī Mehmūd
playing his part of the script by reading out a lengthy lecture against the
teachings of Islam.
15
Ghāzī Mehmūd’s charge sheet against Islam in his lecture

titled Tark-i Islām (Renunciation of Islam) 36 was a reiteration of the
critique made by Svāmī Dayānand. It followed Dayānand’s format of
quoting a Quranic verse and criticizing the content or injunction of that
verse with satirical comments. His main thrust of argument against
Quran rested mostly on the concepts regarding God, cosmology,
supernaturalism, rights of women, Jihad and the Hereafter described in
its text.
In addition to that he wrote a number of other monographs
criticizing the life and teachings of Prophet Muhammad, especially his
private life, along with numerous other aspects of Islam. In his
writings, Ghāzī Mehmūd does not figure as an astute scholar of Islam
or that of its classical texts. In many instances his understanding of the
Quran is either simplistic or out rightly flawed though still effective in
raising doubts among the believers with limited knowledge of the
scripture. His works were equally important for those among the Āryā
Samāj who sought reaffirmation of the superiority of their own faith
with the testimony of a former Muslim. In consequence, despite the
evidently flawed reasoning and deficient knowledge in Ghāzī
Mehmūd’s works, they were widely challenged by numerous Muslim
scholars. In all, no less than thirty books were written in response to
different works of Ghāzī Mehmūd. 37 Most prominent among them
were the monographs penned by Thanā’ullāh Amritsarī, the fiery Ahl-i
Hadīth polemicist and editor of weekly Ahl-i Hadīth, and Hakīm Nūr
ud-Dīn, the leader of Mirzā Ghulām Ahmad’s Ahmadīya Jamā‘t after
his death. Both were trained religious scholars with years of experience
in polemical disputations with rival Muslims sects as well as the
Hindus. Thanā’ullāh Amritsarī, especially, had a thorough
understanding of the Hindu scriptures as well. 38 Thanā’ullāh Amritsarī
rebutted Ghāzī Mehmūd’s objections by two means: First, he pointed
out the flaws in his counterpart’s understanding of the Quranic text by
citing the rules of Arabic grammar and other lexicographical
references; 39 second, Thanā’ullāh compared the Quranic verses deemed
objectionable by Ghāzī Mehmūd with corresponding references from
Vedas to either emphasize the similarity between the two regarding a
particular injunction or to justify the excellence and practicality of
former’s ruling over and above that of latter’s in dealing with some
issue discussed by both. 40 The same was done by Hakim Nūr ud-Dīn in
his treatise against Ghāzī Mehmūd Dharampāl.
Ghāzī Mehmūd remained actively involved in the activities of
Āryā Samāj and regularly visited the religious gatherings and polemics
organized by them. He even published his own journal Indar to
propagate Āryā Samājī Hinduism. His association with Āryā Samāj
gradually came to an end after his marriage to a Brahman widow
Gayān Dēvī. The marriage raised opposition for it was concluded
between a non-Brahman with a widow senior to him in age. Since his
16
marriage with Gayān Dēvī was not sanctioned by Āryā Samāj nor was
there an assurance of respectable status for his children borne by her,
Ghāzī Mehmūd published and widely circulated an appeal to scholars
of all religions asking if their religion could guarantee the rights of his
wife and children without discrimination. 41 In response, Qāżī
Sulaymān Mansūrpūrī (d. 1930) – a learned Ahl-i Hadīth scholar and a
session judge in the princely state of Patiala – wrote back to him
declaring that the couple was lawfully wedded and their children had
equal rights in every aspect even if their mother chose to remain Hindu.
Such a positive response prompted Ghāzī Mehmūd to visit Qażī
Sulaymān and reembrace Islam in 1914. 42
From 1914 onwards Ghāzī Mehmūd Dharampāl took out a
number of journals and was actively involved against the Āryā Samājīs
during the Shuddhī campaigns of 1920’s. But even though he became a
Muslim, his understanding of the religion remained unconventional as
he tilted toward the Ahl al-Qur’ān – especially in his views on Ahādīth
which are denounced by him for depicting Prophet’s sexual life with
graphic details. 43 He also found fault with the approach of ‘Ulāmā’ in
insisting on a strict adherence to minute details prescribed by Sunnat
for ritual observances of Islam. He considered it unnecessary to
perform ablution or follow any schematic ritual order for the offering of
prayers. The Quran, according to him, allowed a believer to offer
prayer at any appointed time and in any order deemed fit by him. That
Allah Himself had refrained from specifying the details of Namāz was
taken by him as evidence of their insignificance. 44 This clearly shows
proximity of his new ideas about Islam with those of some Ahl al-
Qur’ān groups, especially the one founded by Khvāja Ahmad ud-Dīn
Amritsarī. It is no wonder then that Ahl al-Qur’ān groups claimed
Ghāzī Mehmūd Dharampāl as one of their members and that his
‘apostasy’ came to an end because of a monograph 45 written by Maulvī
‘Abdullāh Chakŕālavī (d. 1916) – the founder of Ahl al-Qur’ān
movement in Lahore and the first person in modern Muslim history to
denounce the Hadīth literature in total.
CONCLUSION
The present article has been an attempt to introduce the figure of Ghazi
Mehmud Dharampal and underscore the importance of his act of
apostasy in the context of Colonial Punjab’s raging religious polemics
and controversies. After his re-admission to Islam, Dharampal’s career
as a polemicist took a new turn as he assumed for himself the duty of
responding to the challenge of Hindu extremist groups that cropped up
in the 1920’s calling for the mass re-conversion of Muslims into
Hinduism or the outright expulsion of its population from the Indian
soil. In the differentiated socio-economic context of the 1920’s,
Dharampal’s prolific corpus of writings – including both monographs
17
and pamphlets – assumed considerable significance in meeting the

proselytizing challenge of Hinduism and adding to the simmering
communal tensions of that period. This, however, demands a whole
different study altogether. It is hoped that the present article would
arouse enough curiosity for further research in the person of Ghazi
Mehmud and his writings and enlarge upon our understanding of the
discourses of communalism and religious polemics of 20th century
Punjab.
18
END-NOTES
1
Kenneth W. Jones has described the census as providing “a new
conceptualization of religion as a community, an aggregate of individuals
united by a formal definition and given characteristics based on qualified data.
Religions became communities mapped, counted, and above all compared with
other religious communities.” Kenneth W. Jones, “Religious Identity and the
Indian Census” in Gerald Barrier, ed. Census in British India: New
Perspectives (New Delhi, 1981). p, 84.
2
Ranajit Guha, Dominance Without Hegemony: History and Power in Colonial
India (Cambridge: Harvard university Press: 1998)
3
Guha’s critiques such an overarching, all-pervasive conceptualization of
colonial power structure as an elitist, neo-colonialist ‘Cambridge School’ of
historiography since it reduces history to the study of native responses to
Imperialist stimuli. It endows the imperial government alone with the initiative
that defines the structure and movement of politics while the colonized are
denied having any will of their own. They are simply described as slotting into
a framework made for them by their rulers by replicating their institutional
patterns to benefit, as clients, from their patrons in the form of jobs, titles,
agricultural land and canal water. Ibid. p, 85. Even though Guha is rightly
critical of the underlying assumptions of such an approach to history, its
usefulness, nevertheless, in the understanding of colonial set up as envisioned
by its framers and its reception by the traditional landed aristocracy, newly
emerging elite groups, members of services sector and those from trading
classes co-opted into a symbiotic relationship with the empire – cannot be set
aside. In other words, the purpose is to outline the conceptual framework of
British Colonialism’s paternalism in Punjab without denying agency or
initiative to various sections of the Punjabi population. Events, figures, political
and religious groups – whether bourgeoisie or subaltern – resisting British
colonialism and operating beyond the immediacy of patron-client relationship
on their own initiative, are too numerous, mass-based and influential in
disrupting the homogenizing tendencies of this narrative that they cannot be
subdued, silenced, ignored or overlooked. Studies concerned with the dynamics
of identity formation in colonial Punjab, while giving primacy to the role
played by colonialism and its apparatuses, have nevertheless located these
processes in pre-Colonial history and have invested the agency in the
communities themselves as makers of their own identity. Two important
studies in this regard are: Harjot Oberoi, The Construction of Religious
Boundaries: Culture, Identity and Diversity in the Sikh Tradition (New Delhi,
1994); Nonica Datta, Forming an Identity: A Social History of the Jats (New
Delhi, 1999)
4
For further elaboration of the concept of ‘fuzzy’ communities, cf. Sudipta
Kaviraj, “The Imaginary Institution of India”, in Partha Chatterjee, and
Gyanendra Pandey, eds. Subaltern Studies VII. Writings on South Asian History
and Society (New Delhi, 1993), pp. 20-6. Kaviraj does not deny the existence
of communities based on an idea of identity in pre-modern social forms. On the
contrary, he argues that the sense of community feeling was usually more
intense than those of modern societies. Yet he justifies the description of these
communities as ‘fuzzy’ because they had vague boundaries and, unlike modern
communities, were not enumerated. The enumeration of fuzzy communities, by
19
census and other means along with the imperative of ‘nation-formation’,

transformed these identities into choate, focused and organized entities during
the colonial period. Scholars like Sumit Sarkar, Gyanendra Pandey and Sandria
Freitag, arguing from their respective perspectives, have offered similar
explanations for the process of identity formation during the colonial period. C.
A. Bayly, on the other hand, has traced the historical formation of religious
identities from the pre-colonial period. Cited in Datta, Social History of the Jats
(New Delhi, 1999), p.3.
5
Jeffery Cox, Imperial Fault Lines: Christianity and Colonial Power in India
(Stanford, 2002) p, 56. Overall in Punjab the number of printing press
increased by over 70% between 1864 and 1883 with a five fold cumulative
increase in the number of books published between 1875 and 1880. Ian Talbot,
India and Pakistan (London, 2000), p. 60.
6
Om Parkash Kaushal, The Radha Soami Movement: 1891-1997 (Jalandhar,
1998), p.12. The zenana or female wing of the Christian missions made
available similar opportunities for western learning to the women of Punjab by
opening a number of schools.
7
The Church Mission Society first reported the spread of Chūhŕā conversion
movement into the area they ‘occupied’ in 1884-85. From their main centre of
activity in Sialkot, it reached south to Narowal and from Gurdaspur south into
the Batala Tehsil. Cf. John C. B. Webster, “Christian Conversion in Punjab:
What has Changed?” in Rowena Robinson and Sathianathan Clarke (eds.),
Religious Conversion in India: Modes, Motivations, and Meanings (New Delhi,
2003), p.363.
8
Kenneth W. Jones, Arya Dharm: The Hindu Consciousness in Nineteenth-
Century Punjab (New Delhi, 1989), p.10.
9
What facilitated such an approach was the publication of an ‘authentic’
edition of Vedas edited by Max Müller and later by other of his colleagues in
Germany as part of modernity’s project to textually represent the ‘East’ in
correct texts and exact translations, and a matching desire on the part of Hindu
scholars to have scripturally authoritative texts like Islam and Christianity. As
Peter van der Veer notes: “If ‘history’ and ‘nation’ are only possible in the
presence of the written printed word, then it is quite understandable that the
orality of Hindu traditions was a ‘national’ embarrassment for Indian scholars
who were confronted with the comparison with the West.” Peter Van der Veer,
Imperial Encounters: Religion and Modernity in India and Britain (Princeton,
2001), pp.119-20.
10
Jones, Arya Dharm, p. 33.
11
Ibid., p. 27.
12
Uma Chakaravati, “Whatever happened to the Vedic Dasi? Orientalism,
Nationalism and a Script for the Past” in Zoya Hasan (ed.), Forging Identities:
Gender, Communities and the State (New Delhi, 1994), p. 34.
13
Geoffery A. Oddie, “Constructing ‘Hinduism’: the Impact of Protestant
Missionary Movement on Hindu Self-Understanding” in Robert Eric
Frykenberg, ed. Christians and Missionaries in India: Cross-Cultural
Communication since 1500 (London, 2003), p.176. A similar approach was
adopted by Pandit Shiv Narayan Agnihotri when he founded Dev Samaj in
1887. But soon he deviated from these doctrines to introduce a dual worship of
himself and God in 1892. Three years later the worship of God was dispensed
20
with. Kenneth W. Jones, Socio-Religious Reform Movements in British India

(New Delhi, repr. 2003), p. 105.
14
This technique was carried forward by his disciples, most notably Svāmi
Sharaddhānand kī Nāpāk Ta‘līm sē Bacho’ (Save Yourself From(d. 1926). In
his book ‘Purānon the Unholy Teachings of Purānās), Sharaddhānand deals
with the issue of true sources of Hinduism by questioning the validity of
Purānās. In his method of quellenkritik Sharaddhānand discredits a particular
Purānā – for example Bhavishya – with the historical proof for its very recent
composition. He argues that far from being the work of the ancient rishī Vyāsā,
it was written in the middle of the 17th century as shown by its material which
he found to be offensive to reason and morality. For more details about the life
and works of Swami Sharaddhānand, cf. J.T.F. Jordens, Swami
Sharaddhananda, his Life and Causes (New Delhi, 1981), p. 61.
15
Other than publishing journals and newspapers, and translating Sanskrit text
into vernaculars, Āryā Samājīs also developed a system of paid missionaries
called Updēshaks. Kenneth W. Jones, “The Arya Samaj in British India, 1857-
1947” in Robert D. Baird (ed.), Religion in Modern India. p.33.
16
J.T.F. Jorden, “Reconversion to Hinduism: the Shuddhī of the Arya Samaj”,
in G. A. Oddie (ed.), Religion in South Asia: Religious Conversion and Revival
Movements in South Asia in Medieval and Modern Times (New Delhi, 1991), p.
216.
17
There were attempts to target not just individuals but groups of Muslims to
bring about mass conversions – especially among ‘Neo-Muslims’. The first
actual attempt of mass Shuddhī of Muslim converts is said to have been made
at Deeg in the Bharatpur state in eastern Rajputana. Yoginder Sikand, “Arya
Shuddhī and Muslim Tabligh: Muslim Reactions to Arya Samaj Proselytization
(1923-30)” in Rowena Robinson and Sathianathan Clarke (eds.), Religious
Conversion, pp.101-02.
18
Jones, “The Arya Samaj in British India”, p.35.
19
For these reasons, Harjot Oberoi, in his study of Sikh identity formation,
does not “single out the colonial state as an instrument for stamping Sikhism
with a new consciousness and altered symbolic universe”. But he does admit
that the Sikh identity was gradually crystallized into an impermeable one
during the colonial period only. Oberoi, Construction of Religious Boundaries,
pp. 371-2.
20
Norman Gerald Barrier, “The Singh Sabhas and the Evolution of Modern
Sikhism, 1875-1925” in Robert D. Baird, ed. Religion in Modern India, p. 204.
One of the classic expositions of distinct Sikh identity was Bhā’ī Kāhn Singh’s
best known works titled ‘ HaynHum Hindū Nahīn’ (We are not Hindus). A
conscious effort was made by Singh Sabha movements to dissociate themselves
from Muslims – with whom they shared a monotheistic concept of God and
much of Punjab’s Sufi poetry – by supporting such acts as purposefully
slaughtering the animals in a way different to that of the Muslims.
21
Norman G. Barrier, The Sikhs and their Literature: A Guide to Tracts, Books
and Periodicals, 1849-1919 (Delhi, 1970), p. xxi.
22
Ayesha Jalal, Self and Sovereignty: Individual and Community in Islam since
1850 (London, 2000), p. 41.
21
23
For details about these organizations and mad Sa‘īd,associations, cf. Ahmad
Saeed, Musalmanān-i Panjāb kī Samājī aur Falāhi Anjumanayn : Ēk Tajziyātī
Mutala  (Lahore, 2004).
24
Of 70-80,000 books and pamphlets published in Punjab between 1867-1914,
25-30,000 were written by Muslims or published by them to meet the needs of
the community in defending or proselytizing its religion. Edward Churchill,
“Printed Literature of the Punjabi Muslims, 1860-1900” in W. Eric Gustafson
and Kenneth W. Jones, eds. Sources on Punjab History (New Delhi, 1975) p,
257. These also included books with intra-religious debates among the Muslims
– especially between Ahl-i Hadith and Hanafis.
25
Maulāna ‘Ubayd Ullāh Sindhī (d. 1945) – a noted Deobandī cleric – is
reported to have accepted Islam after reading this tract. He was born as a Sikh.
26
Lēkh Rām, Kulīyāt-i Āryā Musāfir (Lahore, 1897), p. 626. For details, Cf.
Gustafson and Jones (eds.), Punjab History.
27
Svāmī Dayānand, Satyārath Parkāsh, trans. Vandematharam Ramachandra
Rao as Spot-Light on Truth: Swami Dayanand’s Satyaratha Parkash in English
with Comments (Hyderabad, 1988), p. 78.
28
Though written much after Svāmī Dayānand’s death, Thanā’ullāh
Amritsarī’s Haqq Parkāsh bajavāb Satyārath Parkāsh (Lahore, repr. 2001)
published in 1900 can be cited as one of the most important anti-Āryā Samājī
work that continued to be relevant in the Hindu-Muslim debates, especially
during the Shuddhī movement of 1920’s.
29
Lēkh Rām, Kulīyāt, p. 636.
30
This description of Islam by Lēkh Rām is to be found in his most
controversial tract published in 1892 titled Risāla-i Jihād ya‘nī Dīn-i
Muhammadī kī Bunyād (Lahore, 1892). Even missionary newspaper Nūr
Afshān commented disfavourably about it due to the apprehension that it could
further heighten the feelings of hostility between the members of the two
communities. Spencer Lavan, The Ahmadiyah Movement: A History and
Perspective (New Delhi, 1974), p.76. This prediction of worsening of
communal harmony and the ‘prophecy’ about Lēkh Rām’s disgraceful death
was materializedmade by Mirzā Ghulām Ahmad when Lēkh Rām was
assassinated by some unknown assailant in 1897.
31
Ghāzī Mehmūd Dharampāl, Dāstān-i Gham (Lahore, 1954), pp. II, 85.
32
Dēv Samāj was started by a former Brahmo Samāj activist of Punjab, Pandit
Shiv Narā’in Agnīhotrī, who described his religious doctrines as “in Harmony
with Facts and Laws of Nature and based on the Evolution or Dissolution of
Man’s Life-Power.” Dēv Samāj “combined positivist ideas of the evolution of
society and knowledge in stages with a deep veneration and worship of Pandit
Agnihotri.” Gyan Parkash, “Science Between the Lines” in Shahid Amin and
Dipesh Chakrabarty, eds. Subaltern Studies IX (New Delhi, 1996), p. 73.
33
Muhammad Ishāq Bhaṫṫī, “Ghāzī Mehmūd Dharampāl“ in Al-Ay‘tasām
(Lahore) pp,55, 23( June 2003), pp, 28-9.
34
Such accusations were made against him by Dēv Ratnā in a tract titled Dēv
Samāj kā ‘Abdul Ghafūr aur Āryā Samāj kā Dharampāl and Lālā Lachman
Dās’s Dharampāl kī Khudkushī. Cited in Qāsim ‘Alī Ahmadī, Shuddhī kī
Ashuddhī (Delhi, 1909), pp. 4 - 64.
35
Bhaṫṫī, al-Ay‘tasām pp, 55, 25 (June 2003), p.14. With communal tension
running high, a precautionary measure was taken by the Āryā Samājīs to send
22
Ghāzī Mehmūd to a secure Vedic Āshram to avoid any unpleasant incident.

Dharampāl, Dāstān-i Gham, pp. II- 165.
36
Dharampāl, Tark-i Islām (Gujranwala, 1903)
37
Thanā’ullāh Amritsarī, Turk-i Islām, (Amritsar, repr. 1918), p. 6.
38
As noted earlier, Thanā’ullāh Amritsarī had responded to Svāmī Dayānnad’s
work as well and had alluded to various Hindu scriptures in his response. Ghāzī
Mehmūd too, in his late writings, acknowledged that he found it impossible to
counter the arguments put forward by Thanā’ullāh Amritsarī.
39
An interesting example of that is found in the discussion of term makar
which has been understood by Ghāzī Mehmūd as implying that God is deceitful
in His dealings with the enemies. According to Thanā’ullāh Amritsarī, it is
improper to equate the term makar with deceit. The meanings described by him
are that of a politician or statesman like Gladstone and Bismarck were.
Amritsarī, Turk-i Islām, p.18.
40
A good example of that can be seen in Thanā’ullāh Amritsarī’s treatment of
the issue of Jihad. According to Thanā’ullāh, Quran sanctions Jihad only in
peculiar set of conditions. The Vedas on the other hand allow a free license to
kill one’s enemy. Hence, Quranic concept of war is more humane and
reasonable. Ibid.. pp.156-7.
41
This appeal was titled as Gayān Parkāsh and published in April 1914. Cf. Al-
Muslim, 1915, pp.544-45.
42
Muhammad Ishaq Bhaṫṫī, Qāżī Muhammad Sulaymān Munsūrpūrī, (Lahore,
2007), pp.201-24. His new Muslim name was proposed as Ghāzī Mehmūd and
he was allowed to retain Dharampāl as part of his name since its meaning did
not suggest any Hindu-specific connotation.
43
Cited in Ahl-i Hadīth (Amritsar), 1st October 1915, p. 2.
44
Cited in Ahl-i Hadīth, 13th February 1925, pp.1-2.
45
Hujjat ul-Islām (Lahore, n.d.) by Maulvi ‘Abdullāh Chakŕālavī was one of
the many books written against Ghazi Mehmūd Dharampāl. Some of the works
written in response to Dharampāl and his works were: Hakīm Nūr ud-Dīn, Nūr
ud-Dīn bajavāb Tark-i Islām (Amritsar, n.d.); Qāsim ‘Alī Ahmadī, Sā‘iqa-i
Dhuljalāl bar Nakhal-i Dharampāl (Delhi, 1909); Maulvī Nabī Bakhsh, Tuzk-i
Islām ba tardīd Tark-i Islām (Wazirabad, ca. 1903); Maulvī Muhammad
Hużūrul Hasnayn, Risāla Takzīb-i Vēd va Tasdīq-i Qur’ān bajavāb Tark-i
Islām Dharampāl (Muradabad, ca. 1904); Thanā’ullāh Amritsarī, Risāla
Taghlīb ul-Islām bar Tehzīb ul-Islām (Amritsar, 1905).
23
Irfan Waheed Usmani: Bleeding Wound
BLEEDING WOUND: ANALYZING PAKISTAN’S

KASHMIR POLICY (1989-95)
IRFAN WAHEED USMANI

GC UNIVERSITY, LAHORE
PAKISTAN
ABSTRACT
This article analyses Pakistan’s Kashmir policy from

1989 to 1995. This period constitutes a new phase in
Pakistan’s Kashmir policy as it was synchronized
with the resurgence of Kashmiri resistance
movement. During the previous two decades Kashmir
issue was overlooked because Pakistan was
entangled with many other problems, ranging from
crisis in East Pakistan to the problems arising from
the Soviet intervention in Afghanistan. Therefore,
Pakistan was providing only lip service by placing
rhetorical emphasis on the UN’s resolution
concerning Kashmir. During 1989-95, Pakistani
governments tried to align themselves with the
‘Kashmir cause’ because not only it was in tune with
the ‘popular sentiments’ but also it was crucial for
the very survival of these civilian regimes. The entry
of civilian forces in the post-Zia political arena under
certain checks and balances of the military elites and
non-political actors who kept themselves away from
power but not the politics, therefore, the civilian
political forces found not other alternative but to tip-
toe the agenda scripted by these non-political actors
which pulled the strings from behind. In this
backdrop, it becomes quite convenient to develop the
hypothesis that Pakistan’s Kashmir policy remained
consistent, i.e., it stressed on the solution of Kashmir
dispute on the basis of the UN resolutions. Though
this objective remained the same yet the strategy to
pursue it somewhat underwent an insidious change
as Pakistani authorities through overt and covert
support to the Jehadi elements, tried to engage India
in a low intensity conflict so as to increase the cost of
the Indian occupation. Pakistani authorities also
found it an effective tool to internationalize the
25
Kashmir dispute. This paper also highlights the main

trajectories of Pakistan’s Kashmir policy like
Pakistan’s leadership posturing on Kashmir, efforts
for public mobilization, Pakistan’s quest for
internationalization of Kashmir dispute and
endeavors of governments to negotiate with
international pressures. Besides this, it also analyses
the successes and failures of Pakistan’s Kashmir
policy between the years 1989 to 1995 along with
examining the role of forces of status-quo (primarily
military establishment, jingoistic press and rightists
and religious parties) and forces of change
(extraneous pressures) in defining the dynamics of
Pakistan’s foreign policy.
KEY WORDS: Jehadi organizations, Kashmir, India, Pakistan, Benazir

Bhutto, Nawaz Sharif.
The changing geo-political situation in the late 1980s and internal

developments in Kashmir provided Pakistan with a new opportunity to
pursue its policy on its own terms. It began to provide material support
and training and used some of the militant groups to pursue its foreign
policy objectives in Kashmir. 1 Pakistan’s strategy was to engage India
through jehadi outfits in a low-intensity conflict in Kashmir with
favourable results. These jehadi outfits were armed with sophisticated
weapons, motivated through religious indoctrination and were
convinced about their ultimate victory. 2 Several elements in Pakistan
especially the right wing religious parties discovered an opportunity
opening up in Kashmir to avenge India’s bifurcation of Pakistan. 3
Pakistan’s civil and military authorities began to view India as “a state
on the verge of the early throes of a process of disintegration”, as they
believed that “the world history was marching against world’s
remaining conglomerate or “imperial state such as India”. 4 Like the
Soviet Union and eastern Europe, they believed that “Kashmir… was
likely to be one of these breakaway segments”. 5 These convictions
were further accentuated by the rise of an intifada-type movement in
Kashmir that began “to look like perhaps the early stage of what
happened in Afghanistan”. 6 Other main planks of the Pakistan’s
Kashmir policy which were mutually inclusive were: the
internationalization of Kashmir dispute on the basis of the UN
resolutions and the “bleeding of Indian resources” 7 to increase its
occupation cost to pressurize India to concede to a compromise. These
very convictions of librating Kashmir from India defined the contours
of Pakistan’s Kashmir policy from 1989 to 1995. This article analyzes
the operationalization of such convictions in the Pakistan’s domestic
26
and foreign policies. The article is divided into three parts: first portion
explores various diamensions of Pakistan’s Kashmir policy pursued by
various civilian governments; second part highlights the successes and
failures of the Kashmir policy; whereas the third part analyzes various
pressures which put weighty constrains on the Pakistani policy makers
to pursue their agenda.
(I)
During 1989-95, Pakistani governments took various initiatives to

project the Kashmir cause intentionally and demonstrate Pakistan’s
unflinching support for Kashmir’s right for self-determination. These
initiatives were translated into the following policies: (i) show of
solidarity and moral support for Kashmiris in strongly worded speeches
and policy statements as well as public posturing of Pakistan’s ruling
hierarchy; (ii) public mobilization to elicit popular support for the
Kashmir cause; (iii) internationalization of Kashmir dispute through
diplomatic initiatives to draw world’s attention towards Kashmir
problem; (iv) countering diplomatic pressure against Pakistan which
were directed towards dissuading it from its traditional stance on
Kashmir.
The most recurring theme of Pakistan’s Kashmir policy was
the rhetorical emphasis on the solution of Kashmir dispute according to
the UN resolutions. All those leaders which were at the helm of affairs
during 1988-95 such as president Ghulam Ishaq Khan, Prime Minister
Benazir Bhutto, Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif, President Farooq
Leghari and Foreign Minister Sahibzada Yaqoob Khan and Sardar Asif
Ahmed Ali, showed very strong commitment towards Kashmir cause
and stressed the need to resolve Kashmir dispute as per UN resolutions.
Initially, Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto took a cautious and
low profile stand on the deteriorating situation. 8 She only became more
vocal when the uprising became visibly explicit in 1989. 9 Ahmed
Rashid, a renowned Pakistani journalist on regional affairs claimed that
when the Kashmir insurgency erupted in late 1989, it took Pakistan’s
government and military completely by surprise and even the
Pakistan’s Inter Services Intelligence (ISI) was ill-prepared to take
advantage of the situation. 10 This observation was also corroborated by
Robert Oukely (then US Ambassador in Pakistan) who believed that
the initial popular uprising in Kashmir was “primarily spontaneous”. 11
President Ghulam Ishaque Khan was the first leader to re-invoke the
slogan of Kashmir as the “unfinished agenda of partition”. 12 Prime
Minister Benazir Bhutto in an interview with the “United News of
India” on February 8, 1989 stated that:
27
Our position is based on the UN resolutions

according to which the question of the accession of
the state of Jammu and Kashmir to Pakistan or India
is to be decided through the democratic method of a
free and impartial plebiscite. 13
While addressing the Joint session of Parliament on 2nd December

1989, President Ghulam Ishaque Khan maintained that:
Pakistan shall not waver in its support for the

exercise by the people of Jammu and Kashmir of
their right of self-determination through a free and
impartial plebiscite. 14
Foreign Minister Sahibzada Yaqoob Khan categorically stated before

the Senate that:
Pakistan’s stand on Kashmir remained steadfast and

undiluted as it was committed to a fair and free
plebiscite on the basis of the United Nation’s
resolutions for the solution of this problem. 15
It would not be out of place to mention here that by early 1990s when
the resistance movement was in full swing, a conscious policy decision
was made by Islamabad, i.e., “to curb the independence sentiment” that
“clearly lay at the foundation of this movement”. 16 According to
Robert. G. Wirsing, Benazir Bhutto, then the Prime Minister, held a
meeting in Islamabad in early February. It was also attended by Chief
of Army Staff General Mirza Aslam Beg and President and Prime
Minister of Azad Kashmir. The participants were apprehensive of the
possibility that the “uprising could boom-rang on Pakistan, and that
Pakistan could loose not only Jammu and Kashmir but the northern
areas as well”, therefore, “they decided to curb the Azadi forces”. 17 It
became a key feature of Pakistan’s Kashmir policy to discourage those
elements involved in Kashmiri resistance movement who were vying
for an independent Kashmir. On 24 May 1990, Benazir Bhutto rejected
the idea of independent Kashmir by describing it dangerous for the
region. 18
After the dismissal of Benazir Bhutto’s government an interim
government was formed under the Prime Minister Ghulam Mustafa
Jatoi. His government also remained steadfast to Pakistan’s avowed
stance on Kashmir. He assured the Kashmiris that Pakistan would
continue its moral, political and diplomatic support to their just cause: 19
On 24 September, Prime Minister Jatoi stated:
28
Present Freedom Movement was an important

milestone in the history of freedom struggle and
formed part of principles and spirit of Pakistan
movement. 20
After the October 1990 elections Nawaz Sharif was elected as

Prime Minister. Pakistan’s official policy on Kashmir during his tenure
remained unchanged. 21 Nawaz Sharif announced that the IJI
government with the full backing of the people would go all out to
support and assist the on-going Kashmiri Liberation Movement across
the border. He maintained that India should respect the aspiration for
freedom in wake of worldwide sweeping wave of independence. 22
During her second stint as Prime Minister, Benazir’s stance on
Kashmir became more though as she vigorously pursued Pakistan’s
traditional Kashmir policy. In response to a message of facilitation by
the Indian Prime Minister, she explicitly stated:
Jammu and Kashmir issue is the main obstacle in the

way of better relations between the two countries and
that its solution must be based on the aspirations and
the legitimate rights of the Kashmiri people. 23
In her address to the National Assembly on 27th October, 1993, after

obtaining the vote of confidence she made an impassionate “appeal to
the UN and the international community to take notice of the grave
situation in the occupied Kashmir before it deteriorates further and take
steps for the solution of the problem at the earliest”. 24
Next two years saw Pakistan’s Kashmir policy becoming more
and more inflexible. As could be gauged from the Pakistan’s foreign
minister, Sardar Asif Ahmed Ali’s tone while addressing a press
conference in Islamabad: “we are not ready to talk to India on its
agenda”. 25 On 24 May 1995, President Farooq Leghari visited
Muzaffarabad, the capital of Azad Kashmir, and became the first
Pakistani President to address a Joint Session of the Azad Kashmir
Legislative Assembly and Council. He maintained that “India had lost
the battle of Kashmir and that Pakistan could return any Indian
aggression”. 26 He declared that:
I today announce that Pakistan would extend all out

political diplomatic and moral support to Kashmir as
Kashmir is the life-line of Pakistan. 27
Public mobilization may also be described as a conspicuous plank of

Pakistan’s Kashmir policy during this period. The Pakistani
governments took many initiatives ranging from evolving consensus
29
among political forces in Pakistan on Kashmir cause to the observance

of country wide strikes. The political forces also evoked public support
in favor of Kashmir through their rhetoric.
Prime Minister Benazir called a conference of the political
leaders of Pakistan on 4th February 1990 and took them in to
confidence on the Kashmir dispute. Benazir Bhutto also gave a call to
the people of Pakistan to observe a country-wide-strike on 5th February
1990 to express solidarity with people of Jammu and Kashmir. 28 As a
manifestation of Pakistan’s policy on Kashmir, a unanimous resolution
was adopted on 10th February in a Joint sitting of the parliament of
Pakistan”. 29 In order to demonstrate solidarity with the people of
Jammu and Kashmir and to give encouragement to the freedom fighters
across the boarder, the Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto also visited
Muzaffarabad on 13th March 1990 where she addressed a big gathering
and challenged her Indian counter-part to visit Srinagar. 30 During her
speech she promised a “thousand year war” in support of militants and
announced the creation of a four million fund to support the “freedom
fighters” across Line of Control. 31 She also addressed a joint session of
Azad Jammu and Kashmir Assembly and the Council. In her public
address she declared ‘We have supported the Kashmir’s struggle for
right of self-determination in the past. We support them today and will
continue to support them till death. And even if we die our last words
will be: “fight for humanity, fight for right of self-determination, fight
for Kashmir.” 32 She raised further public euphoria over Kashmir by
making another belligerent speech to an over-charged crowd in Lahore
on 23rd March, 1990. 33
The Prime Minister of Azad Kashmir, Mumtaz Rathore, durng
this very period also tried to mobilize public support in Azad Kashmir.
In this connection he took number of steps. He held four public rallies
at four strategic locations in order to electrify the people. He also
announced imparting military training at school and college level in
Azad Jammu and Kashmir. He also established publicity centres at each
district headquarter in Azad Jammu and Kashmir to keep alive the
Kashmir issue. 34
Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif in his first stint as Prime
Minister also tried to mobilize public opinion for the Kashmir cause.
During the summer of 1992 he addressed a series of public gatherings
where he chanted the slogan Kashmir banye ga Pakistan (Kashmir will
become Pakistan). An Indian newspaper Tribune Chandigarh, blamed
Nawaz Sharif of “creating hysteria in his country over Kashmir
cause.” 35
The most conspicuous feature of Pakistan’s Kashmir policy
during this period was the incessant efforts on the part of various
Pakistani governments to internationalize the Kashmir issue. As
Pakistani policy makers deemed it necessary in order to internationalize
30
Kashmir dispute to divert world attention towards Kashmiris’ cause of

self-determination. Perhaps they might be encouraged by the world’s
response towards the issues of self-determination and human rights in
Eastern Europe.
Benazir government during her first stint took the number of
major initiatives to internationalize the Kashmir depute. The most
important of these was the convening of Pakistan’s envoy conference in
Islamabad in March 1990. This conference was held from 25 March to
2 April 1990. In her inaugural address the Prime Minister impressed
upon the participants to direct their efforts to secure support from
brotherly Muslim countries particularly the Arab countries. 36
In the concluding address at the Envoy’s conference at the
foreign office on April 2, 1990, she highlighted:
The two issues are immediate, and indeed urgent

concern for Pakistan, mainly Kashmir and
Afghanistan, would require your particular attention
in your capitals…And effective strategies must be
devised to project these issues in the international
media, opinion making circles and governments in
such a manner that they are persuaded of the
righteousness and principled nature of our cause. 37
Another major initiative taken by the Benazir’s Government was to

give a serious consideration to the possibility of raising Kashmir issue
at United Nations. This fact is corroborated by policy statements of
senior members of ruling hierarchy. Senior Federal Minister, Mrs.
Nusrat Bhutto stated: ‘Kashmir issue could be taken to the UN along
with Diplomatic offensive.’ 38 On March 11, 1990, Prime Minister said
that ‘Pakistan reserved the right to take the issue to the United
Nations”. 39 Iqbal A Khund, Advisor on Foreign Affairs revealed that
‘Pakistan would take the Kashmir issue to the Security Council at the
proper time.’ 40
The Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto in her bid to
internationalize Kashmir issue personally visited 14 Arab Islamic
countries, where she raised this issue to the highest level. 41 Her
Government also moved a resolution on Kashmir in 19th OIC Foreign
Minister’s Conference at Cairo in the beginning of August. 42
After the dismissal of Benazir Bhutto Government an interim
government was installed for holding elections. This government was
headed by Ghulam Mustafa Jatoi who in his brief tenure also tried to
internationalize the Kashmir issue. Sahibzada Yaqoob Khan, the
Foreign Minister, raised the Kashmir issue at a thirty minutes meeting
with UN Secretary General Perez de Cullear on 25 September, 1990. 43
31
During Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif’s first government the

internationalization of Kashmir dispute also remained the focal point of
Pakistan’s Kashmir policy. In December 1990, Pakistan’s delegate at
the UN, told the special session of General Assembly:
Jammu and Kashmir is a disputed territory and we

have always maintained that this problem needs to be
resolved in accordance with the relevant UN
resolutions and in the spirit of Simla Agreement. 44
On 25 March 1991, Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif while addressing

Pakistani nation urged international action on Kashmir. 45 During his
first stint as Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif had the opportunity to
frequently deliberate with his Indian counterpart Mr. P.K. Narshima
Rao during various conferences and moots. Pakistani government used
these opportunities to internationalize Kashmir issue. From October
1991 to September 1992, the two Prime Ministers met for five times. 46
During these meetings Pakistani Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif raised
the question of Kashmir and informed the Indian Prime Minister about
Pakistan’s position on the issue. But these meetings failed to yield
results as the both sides stuck to their traditional stances. During this
period Pakistan also tried to raise Kashmir issue at various International
forums such as United Nations, OIC, Saarc and NAM. 47 The efforts led
India to concede that Pakistan is “hell bent on internationalizing the
Kashmir issue to ease the increasing global pressure on it”. 48
Another initiative taken by Pakistan’s Government was to
engage India in a dialogue over Kashmir. Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif
addressed a letter to Indian Prime Minister Narsima Rao in early 1992,
proposing a dialogue at the level of heads of government in accordance
with Article 6 of the Simla Agreement. 49 In September 1992 Pakistan’s
Foreign Secretary, Mr. Sheryar Khan delivered another letter of
Pakistan’s Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif to the Indian Prime Minister
P.V. Narsimaha Rao, formally invoking para 6 of the Simla accord, to
call for Indo-Pakistan negotiations on Kashmir. 50 This initiative failed
to bring any change in Indian stance over Kashmir and the Indian
response was “couched in terms that virtually shut the order on the
possibility of a dialogue of the Kashmir dispute.” 51
In 1992 Pakistan government made concerted efforts to
internationalize the Kashmir dispute. Chairman Senate Wasim Sajjad
was sent to US on 10 days visit, as Prime Minister’s special envoy on
Kashmir. During his visit he met UN Secretary General Boutros Ghali
and also discussed the Kashmir issue with the Senior Bush
Administration officials. During his thirty minutes meeting with UN
Secretary General Wasim Sajjad urged Secretary General to use his
good offices to end the human rights violations in Indian-occupied
32
Kashmir and to resolve this dispute on the basis of UNSC resolutions. 52

Prime Minister of Pakistan also made a personal appeal to United
Nations Secretary General Boutros Ghali to persuade India to respond
to Pakistan’s efforts. 53 Pakistan also tried to draw maximum mileage
out of Indo-Pakistan Foreign Secretaries level talks, the final round of
these talks was concluded in November 1992. 54 With respect to the
core issue of Kashmir, the two sides restated their conflicting positions.
Some agreements regarding confidence-building measures were
reached during the meetings. Even India’s premier newspaper
commented that Pakistan successfully thwarted Indian bid to side track
Kashmir disputes. 55
After taking the oath of Prime Minister during her second stint
as Prime Minister, Benazir Bhutto once more strived for the
internationalization of the Kashmir dispute systematically. The Prime
Minister of Pakistan, Benazir Bhutto attended the Common Wealth
Heads of Government meeting held in Cyprus. She expressed grave
concern over the human rights situation in the Indian held Kashmir.
She said that the policy of double standards should be discarded with a
view to seek peaceful settlement of international disputes. 56 She
stressed that:
Kashmir had a special importance and symbolism for

Pakistan and its people. We believe that such disputes
must be settled through peaceful negotiations. 57
She also wrote to UN Sectary General on 6th November 1993 and drew
his attention to the serious situation in the valley of Kashmir. 58 In her
meeting with US Assistant Secretary of State, Mrs. Robin Raphel, on
7th November 1993, Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto discussed the
Kashmir situation and ‘retreated Pakistan’s position of the urgent need
to find a negotiated peaceful settlement of the Kashmir dispute in
accordance with the UN resolutions and in the spirit of the Simla
agreement”. 59
Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto also urged the world leaders to
use their influence to persuade India to end its repression in occupied
Kashmir and engage in a substantive dialogue with Pakistan to resolve
the Kashmir dispute in accordance with UN resolutions. In this
connection, special messages were addressed to the leaders of a number
of friendly countries, included the Heads of government of Bangladesh,
China, Egypt, France, Germany, Indonesia, Iran, Japan, Malaysia,
Russian Federation, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Turkey, UK, USA and the
UN Secretary General. 60
The most concrete measure to institutionalize Pakistan’s
commitment towards internationalization of this dispute was the
establishment of Kashmir Committee of National Assembly. 61 This
33
committee was headed by veteran politician Nawabzada Nasrullah

Khan. The first step taken by the committee was to give a call for a
general strike in Pakistan, Azad Kashmir and occupied Kashmir. Prime
Minister of Pakistan addressed the nation on T.V and Radio.
Nawabazada Nasurllah Khan enticed opposition support. The members
of the Kashmir committee went to the four-provincial capitals and held
meeting with provincial chief ministers and opposition leaders. The
strike called invited unprecedented public response. As Nawabzada
Nasrullah Khan acknowledged himself that “he had never seen such a
successful strike. There was not a single city, town or village in
Pakistan where complete strike was not observed. BBC had to
acknowledge that even in those remote parts of occupied Kashmir
where the movement was not so intense, there too strike was
complete”. 62
The next step which the Kashmir Committee took was to form
five delegations to tour different regions of the world. One delegation
was sent to Middle East, the other delegation headed by Nawabzada
Nasrulalh Khan went to Western Europe. It met a cross section of
members of parliament belonging to the conservative, the labour and
social democratic parties, particularly those members who belonged to
human right organizations. 63 It also held meetings with the Foreign
Relations Committees of Belgium, Holland, France, Sweden, Spain,
Austria and Egypt. 64 The delegation also talked to human rights
organization in France headed by Madamme Mitterrand wife of the
French President. The committee also visited Sweden to express
gratitude to the Swedish parliament, which had passed a resolution
condemning human rights violations by India in Kashmir. 65 The
delegation of committee also visited Austria, Turkey and Spain. In
Austria it also met Austrian president besides holding talks with the
members of Foreign Relations Committee. In Spain it held talks with
foreign relations committee and the chairman of the Senate. In Turkey
the Committee members called on Ismet Inonu’s son who was the
Chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee. It also met Turkish
President Suleman Demirel and the speaker of the Grand National
Assembly. It also held meeting with Ne Jmettin Erbakan President of
Mili Refah Party. 66 The Committee under Nasrullah played a crucial
role to bring a consensus between opposition and the government, raise
funds for Kashmiris and project Pakistan’s stance abroad. 67
As result of these initiatives India came under tremendous
pressure for instance the US President Bill Clinton, while addressing
the UN General Assembly in 1993 recognized that Kashmir was a
disputed area. Furthermore, Mrs. Robin Raphel’s stated that “US did
not recognize the instrument of accession, as meaning that Kashmir
was an integral part of India.” 68 The US pronouncement of challenging
the legal status of Kashmir and condemning India for human rights
34
abuses angered New Delhi and jubilated Islamabad. Pakistan reacted by

enhancing its attempt to internationalize the issue and decided to put
the question of human rights abuses in the valley before the 48th session
of the UN General Assembly in September 1993. To counter such
moves India offered Pakistan dialogue over Kashmir as a separate
agenda item. The offer made Pakistan defer the proposed resolution. 69
This indicated a change in Indian attitude as the Indian Minister for
External Affairs proposed a dialogue with Pakistan to promote a
climate of stability in the region. 70 Hence after a lapse of seventeen
months, foreign secretary level talks between Pakistan and India were
held in January 1994. Kashmir was included as an exclusive agenda for
the first time in almost thirty years. 71 This offer was termed as a great
success of Pakistan’s policy on Kashmir by various observers. 72
During these talks Pakistan demanded that India should reduce
the number of its troops in the valley and release all political prisoners
in the Indian-held Kashmir Pakistan also urged upon India to remove
such draconian laws as the public Safety Act, Disturbed Areas Act and
Armed forces Special Act etc. 73 Pakistan also suggested that India
should allow the international media and human rights organizations to
visit the valley. On the other hand, India blamed Pakistan for
supporting terrorism in Kashmir and Pakistan denied the charges. 74 The
talks failed to resolve the dispute as the two sides remained stuck to
their respective positions on Kashmir. 75 Though the two countries
failed to make progress on Kashmir issue, it marked a significant
achievement in this context that Kashmir was at least discussed as an
exclusive agenda during Pakistan India talks it further implied that
India had accepted Kashmir as a dispute between the two countries. 76
As the bilateral talks failed to break the impasse over the
Kashmir issue, Pakistan decided to approach international forums. In
this regard, Pakistan decided to table a resolution at the 50th session of
Human Rights Commission on 25 February 1994, which expressed
grave concern over the human rights violations in the Indian held
Kashmir and asked the commission to send a fact finding mission to
investigate the situation in the valley. 77 In order to counter Pakistan’s
move Indian government resorted to extensive lobbying against
Pakistan’s resolution. India sent a large delegation of top-ranking
diplomats to Geneva to lobby against the Pakistan’s move. Even Indian
external affairs Minister Dinesh Singh visited Iran to seek its support
for India. 78
Pakistan was scheduled to table resolution on violation of
human rights in the state of Jammu and Kashmir at the UN Human
Rights Commission (UNHRC), on 9th March 1994. But Pakistan
withdrew on the persuasion of China and Iran. 79 According to one
account, Iran played a mediatory role and dissuaded Pakistan from
insisting on voting. In return Iran assured Pakistan that it would exert
35
pressure on India to improve human rights situation in Kashmir and to

allow a fact-finding mission comprising the ambassadors of Muslim
countries to visit Kashmir. Iran’s proposal was supported by fifteen
other countries including China. 80 India agreed to allow the Muslim
ambassadors to visit the valley. 81 The government of Pakistan came
under severe criticism with in the country against the withdrawal of the
resolution. There was general skepticism in Pakistan that withdrawal of
resolution did not achieve what it was expected to. Prime Minister
Benazir Bhutto’s government claimed that despite withdrawal of the
resolution “it was a great victory and we have achieved our purpose of
internationalizing the Kashmir issue.” 82 While the main opposition
party PML (N), described it as the “biggest foreign policy fiasco.” 83
Saeed Shafqat a perceptive analyst on Pakistan affair does not seem to
accord too much value to claims and counters claims concerning who
won who lost over withdrawal of Pakistan Resolution. In his estimation
this episode certainly led to “globalization of Kashmir”. 84
During her interviews given to various foreign newspapers
and magazine in July 1994 Pakistani premier Benazir Bhutto further
highlighted Kashmir dispute for instance, in an interview published in
“Khaleej Times” she maintained that she was leaving the door open for
talks with India on Kashmir. Similarly in an other interview with
French Weekly Globe she stated that the “apathy and indifference
towards the plight of the Kashmiris is comparable to the attitude
towards the tragic situations in Bosnia Herzegovina”. 85 While giving
an interview to French Journalist in Islamabad during the same month
the Prime Minister said “that Pakistan was determined to help the
Kashmiris to get their rights under the aegis of the UN, which should
intervene as it did in Kuwait and Somalia”. 86
Pakistan government took quite unambiguous stance on
Kashmir dispute during a conference of newly restored democracies
which was held in Nicaragua on July 7 1994. It maintained that “a
delay in granting the right of self-determination to the people of Jammu
and Kashmir, constituted a threat not only to the security of the region,
but also to democracy”. 87 Benazir Bhutto vigorously raised the Kashmir
issue during her US visit. The recurrent theme of her stance on Kashmir
during her visit was to ask the US “to mediate on Kashmir” her
massage to US media was that “some body has got to step in and try
and find a solution, either it has to be the UN or the US”. 88 In May
1995, President Farooq Leghari represented Pakistan in New Delhi at
the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC)
Summit. Although bilateral and political issues cannot be raised in
SAARC summit, he nevertheless used the opportunity to defend
vociferously the Kashmir cause. He also warned about the dangers of
missile race in the region and insisted that India should come to the
negotiated table. 89 On October 25, Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto
36
antagonized Indian delegation in New York by suggesting the UN

Secretary General to set up an “international criminal court” to try
perpetrators of atrocities in Rawanda, Bosnia and Kashmir. 90
Pakistani government attempted to counter all diplomatic
pressure aimed at dissuading Pakistan to change its stance on Kashmir.
In its bid to keep Kashmir policy consistent, Pakistan’s leadership
resisted international pressure, however, it had to bear the brunt of
advocating a very aggressive policy on Kashmir. The Kashmir issue
had greatly affected India-Pakistan relations tenures of Benazir Bhutto
in Pakistan and V.P. Singh in India. When the special envoy of the
Pakistani Prime Minister, Abdus Sattar went to Delhi Indian media
reported about V.P. Singh’s “warning regarding alleged Pakistani
support to the Kashmir struggle”, however, it was denied by Sattar and
other Pakistani officials. 91
After Sattar’s mission, Shabzada Yaqoob Khan, the Foreign
Minister Pakistan was directed by the defence committee of the cabinet
to convey a “tough message” regarding Kashmir. 92 Yaqoob
communicated Pakistan’s concern to the Indian leaders. While
expressing the strong sentiments prevailing in Pakistan, he projected
Kashmir was an “emotional issue”. 93 Three meetings were held
between Yaqoob Khan and the Indian leaders. In the his first meeting
with the Indian foreign minister, Inder Kumar Gujral, Yaqoob
conveyed a “hard” message suggesting that India needs to resolve the
Kashmir problem by according a free choice to the Kashmiris. 94 At a
dinner, just after the meeting, both leaders read Faiz Ahmed Faiz’s
couplets. Those by Gujral referred to “lover who had lost each other”
but those recited by Yaqoob were about “lovers being separated by
objective circumstances”. It created an impression in India that
Pakistan was conveying an implicit warning. 95 Indian cabinet decided
to reciprocate by warning Pakistan to “keep off Kashmir”. 96 This
warning was given by Gujral to Yaqoob in their third meeting, 97
however, the later told former that if New Delhi did not meet a certain
“dead line” then the “subcontinent would be set on fire”. 98
Yaqoob Khan also held meeting with Indian Prime Minister
V.P. Singh. In this meeting he tried to impress upon the Indian leader
about Pakistan’s compulsions concerning Kashmir but Singh
maintained that the domestic politics of Pakistan was its internal matter
and India had nothing to do with it. 99 Yaqoob Khan’s tough posture
regarding Kashmir resulted into the hardening of Indian stance. After
the emergency meeting of his cabinet V.P. Singh declared that India
would “retaliate even it meant war”. 100 Upon his return to Pakistan
Yaqoob Khan in his unprecedented address on national television
reiterated Pakistan’s stand on Kashmir in a very “clear, forceful and
unambiguous manner. It appeared to further exacerbate, the
increasingly hawkish Pakistani mood on Kashmir”. 101
37
These developments caused certain dip in India-Pakistan

relations, and brought these two states on the brink of war, it is also
known as the crisis of 1990s. The situation led to the reconciliatory
efforts of the US. On May 16, the White House announced that a
special envoy Robert Gates, the Deputy National Security advisor,
would be sent to South Asia. The Gates mission visited India and
Pakistan between 19-21 May 1990. 102 At the time of the mission’s
arrival Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto was on the tour of Middle East
to elicit Arab support for Pakistan’s stance on Kashmir. As Gates
mission tried to approach Benazir, she apparently tried to avoid the
Gates mission. 103 As one member of the mission revealed that “we
tried to meet her on three places in the Middle East, but she never
showed up”. 104
The Gates mission, upon its arrival, on May 20, held meetings
with President Ghulam Ishaque Khan and Army Chief General Mirza
Aslam Beg. General Beg and President Ghulam Ishaque Khan
responded defensively, claiming that India was using terrorist tactics in
Kashmir, that Pakistan public statements had been moderate, and that
Pakistani military movements had been less aggressive than India’s. 105
During its visit Gates mission also met Iqbal Akhund prime minister’s
advisor on national security and Foreign Relations. Akhund reiterated
Pakistani efforts to reduce tension and resolve the ongoing Kashmir
dispute. 106 Publicly the Gates mission statement declared that “our
major objective is to help both sides avoid a conflict over Kashmir,
which would entail great loss of life, and damage to both countries, and
to begin the sort of political dialogue which would not only reduce
tension but could lead to a peaceful and permanent resolution of the
Kashmir problem, as called for under the Simla Agreement”. 107 During
its visit the mission communicated the following message to the
Pakistan Government:
(i) Washington had thoroughly war-gamed a

potential India Pakistan military conflict and Pakistan
was a loser in every scenario. This exercise had been
carried out by its Joint Chiefs of Staff.
(ii) In the event of a war, Islamabad could
expect no assistance from Washington.
(iii) Pakistan must refrain from supporting
terrorism in Indian occupied Kashmir.
(iv) Both sides need to adopt CBMS…. so that
this crisis would be more speedily defused and future
ones prevented.
(v) Gates offered US intelligence support—
based on its own “national technical means” to verify
a confidence building regime involving limitations on
38
the deployment near the border. If both India and

Pakistan concluded such an agreement and were
(supposed) to withdraw their forces from the near
boarder. 108
Chari, Cheema and Cohen believed that the mission never received a
positive response from Pakistan regarding intelligence sharing. Though
this mission failed to break the deadlock yet it was instrumental in de-
escalating the looming threat of war. 109 After the departure of the Gates
mission, both countries took three significant steps to defuse the crises:
(i) Indian government announced the

withdrawal of its armed forces from the boarders.
(ii) It also proposed a package of military/non-
military confidence building measures to Pakistan. 110
(iii) In response, Pakistan agreed to explore the
expansion of old CBMs and the establishment of new
ones. It further suggested of holding foreign secretary
level talks to resolve all the issues between the two
countries. 111
Despite these reconciliatory efforts made by the US government,

Pakistan-India relations continued to deteriorate, for instance, India
complained that Pakistan and Afghan Mujahiddin were involved in
“terrorist activities” in Kashmir. These accusations were lent further
credence when US put Pakistan on the terrorist watch list in order to
pressurize its government so as to dissuade it from any kind of
assistance to Kashmiri freedom fighters. 112 In 1992 the US State
department came very close to declare Pakistan a “terrorist state”. 113
But the damage control actions by the Benazir Bhutto government got
Pakistan off the hook next year. 114
Pressure began to mount gradually on Pakistan regarding its
Kashmir policy. The tension between Pakistan and India over Kashmir
coupled with the rising specter of nuclear proliferation in South Asia
further accentuated the US apprehensions. 115 With the coming of
Clinton administration to power another dimension into US perception
regarding Kashmir was added, i.e., Kashmir now began to be viewed in
context of human rights violations and nuclear proliferation. 116
Particularly the issue of nuclear non-proliferation appeared to dominate
the Clinton administration’s policy in South Asia. This policy was
mainly based on the idea of capping and then eliminating “the
possession of weapons of mass destruction and their means of
delivery”. It primarily aimed at nuclear free South Asia. 117 For a very
brief period in 1993 US appeared to pressurize India in context of its
dismal human rights record but with the passage of time this policy
39
under went a complete change. Now Washington developed a strategy

which revolved around appeasing India, while on the other hand it
began to pressurize Pakistan to cap its nuclear programme. 118 This
reversal not only led to the softening of the US criticism of Indian
repressive policies in Kashmir but it also delinked the problem of
nuclear proliferation from the Kashmir issue. 119 Robin Raphel, the US
Assistant Secretary of State, explained this policy as:
We are working very hard right now with Pakistan to

persuade them to cap their programme. We have
realized to try to get Pakistan and India to move
simultaneously did not seem to be working, so we are
trying a new tactic. If we can get Pakistan to cap their
programme, it’s very much in the interest of
everybody in the region, including India. 120
In November 1993, Raphel held detailed discussions with Pakistani

leadership on nuclear non-proliferation, Kashmir and drug trafficking.
She particularly insisted that Pakistan should sign Non-Proliferation
Treaty (NPT) so that the Pressler Amendment could be modified in
Pakistan’s favour. 121 However, Pakistan maintained that it could not
unilaterally sign NPT or give up its nuclear programme as it was
closely linked with the situation in Kashmir. Prime Minister Benazir
Bhutto refused to roll back Pakistan’s nuclear programme, and termed
this demand as unfair in view of the regional situation. 122
Strobe Talbatt, the US Deputy Secretary of State, paid an
important visit to Pakistan in April 1994 to discuss the nuclear non-
proliferation. He insisted that Pakistan should cap its nuclear
programme alongwith further reduction and elimination of the weapons
of mass destruction. He also asked Pakistan not to link the Kashmir
issue with nuclear as nuclear non-proliferation was so important that it
should not be linked with any other issue and that dialogue on the issue
would continue through secret diplomacy. 123 But Benazir’s government
remained stuck to its stance that the nuclear issue could not be
deliberated unless Kashmir issue was linked with it.
In early 1995, western powers made a determined bid to
persuade Pakistan to support India’s attempt to hold elections in
Kashmir. Elections had not been taken place since 1987 and the
western powers hoped that the process of elections would expedite the
pace of dialogue between the Indian government and the Kashmiri
militants. 124 US ambassador in India Frank G. Wisner floated the idea
of election and began a campaign in its favour. He personally met with
the several Hurriyat Conference leaders to convince them to participate
in elections. 125 Not only Wisner but US Senator Hank Brown, who
proposed the Brown Amendment, also visited Srinagar and urged
40
Kashmiri activists not to boycott the elections. 126 Pakistan considered

such moves detrimental to its traditional stance, therefore, it out rightly
rejected it. Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto condemned it as “sham” and
immediately requested the UN to convene a multilateral conference
(involving India, Pakistan and the five members of security council as
well as Germany and Japan) to resolve Kashmir issue and establish a
regional security system in South Asia. 127
It would not be out of place to mention the stance of Britain
regarding the issue of elections in Kashmir, the Britain fully trusted
India’s intentions. For instance, the British foreign secretary, Douglas
Hurd (who arrived in Pakistan on a two day visit on 8 January),
publicly stated British position on Kashmir:
Two things are necessary to find an answer to the

problem of Kashmir one is direct discussions
between Pakistan and India. The second is a political
process in Kashmir which is credible, so that the
Kashmiris feel they can elect people who can
genuinely represent them. 128
Hurd was harshly criticized by the Benazir’s government and was

diplomatically snubbed. Sharply reacting to the allegations that
Pakistan was helping the Kashmiris Pakistanis official replied, “this
position is at variance with history, law and the reality in Kashmir”. 129
Pakistan’s though stance on the issue of holding elections in Indian
held Kashmir was vindicated as India was forced to postpone these
elections. 130
(III)
This portion of the article discusses the successes and failures of

Pakistan’s Kashmir policy from 1989 to 1995. This policy may be
termed as successful because it substantially led to the
internationalization of the Kashmir dispute, drew world’s attention
towards “miserable plights of Kashmiris”, elicited support of various
forums (like OIC, PLO, EU, Swedish Parliament, and various human
rights organizations) as well as distinguished statesmen (like few
members of British House of Lords, US senators, UN secretary-
general).
he 19th OIC Foreign Minister Conference on 4 August 1990 in
Cairo, unanimously adopted a resolution on Jammu and Kashmir
calling for a peaceful settlement of the issue in accordance with the
relevant UN resolutions and the Simla agreement. The resolution also
expressed deep concern over the violation of human rights in the Indian
held Kashmir and mandated the chairman of the conference to send a
41
good office mission to Pakistan and India to defuse tensions and find a
way out for a peaceful settlement of the Kashmir dispute. 131 Another
resolution was adopted at the 20th OIC Foreign Minister Conference
held in Islamabad on 10 August 1991 which condemned the massive
violation of human rights in Jammu and Kashmir and called for
supporting the cause of Kashmiris for self-determination. The
conference also called upon India to allow human rights groups and
humanitarian organizations to visit the Indian-held Kashmir. 132 In
September 1994, the 7th extra-ordinary session of Islamic Conference
of Foreign Ministers was convened in Islamabad and a strong
resolution was adopted which condemned the gross violations of
human rights in Jammu and Kashmir and called for a peaceful
settlement of the dispute. It also unanimously decided to establish an
OIC contact group on Jammu and Kashmir to coordinate the effort of
member countries for promoting the right of self-determination of the
people of Kashmir. 133 In 1994, India for the first time allowed
Kashmiri resistance leaders to meet Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto and
other Muslim head of states at the summit of the organization of
Islamic Conference (OIC) in Casablanca in December 1994. 134
n December 1990, the Palestinian Liberation Organization
(PLO) for the first time openly supported the cause of Kashmiris. Its
ambassador to Pakistan, Ahmed Abdur Razzaq, traveled to Azad
Kashmir and participated in a rally organized by Azad Kashmir’s Prime
Minister, Mumtaz Hussain Rathore. The Palestinian Ambassador
expressed his unequivocal support to Kashmiris in their just struggle.
He said that there was a great similarly between the struggle of
Palestine people for freedom and struggle of Kashmir for
independence. 135
On 12 March 1992, European community passed a resolution
supported the Kashmiris’ right of self-determination and urged the
United Nations Security Council to re-examine the issue. 136 In May
1992, the Swedish parliament expressed its “deepest concern” on the
violation of human rights in Kashmir by India. The situation in the
Indian held Kashmir was described as “chaotic” and “terrible” with eye
witness accounts of torture, arson, gang rape, imprisonment without
trial. The debate on Kashmir in the Swedish parliament was initiated by
Margereta Vikluna, a Member of Parliament from KDs party and also a
member of the standing committee of foreign affairs. The Minister for
International Development (Foreign Aid) and Human Right issues Alf
Svensson briefly traced the historic background of the issue. Reflecting
on the contents of UN resolution “that final accession should be
decided by a referendum” the Minister underlined the Swedish position
by stating that:
42
This is a method, which the Swedish government also

recommends.” The debate made clear that the
Swedish Government recommended implementation
of the UN resolutions on referendum for accession to
Pakistan or India as a “method” to resolve the
Kashmir issue, while no other option, including
autonomy contained in the resolutions. 137
Another success of Pakistan’s efforts for internationalizing Kashmir

issue manifested from the renewed focus of international human rights
groups and organization in various parts of the world which is evident
from their extensive documentation of the atrocities by Indian forces in
Kashmir. These organizations included Amnesty International, Asia
Watch, even the Indian Human Rights Organizations such a Peoples
Union for Civil Liberties, (PUCL), Peoples Union for Democratic
Rights (PUDR) and Citizen’s Forum for Democracy (CFD) raised their
dissenting voices over the issue. 138
Pakistani officials were able to draw support from many
British parliamentarians. For instance, in May 1992, the British
member of the House of Lords, Lord Avebury vociferously advocated
the cause of self-determination of Kashmiris. From 1994 to 1996, the
members Labour Party also supported Pakistan’s stance. Even, the
British parliament established a Kashmir committee. In his Pakistan’s
visit, Lord Avebury suggested that similar Kashmir Committees should
also be formed in parliaments of other democratic countries, and they
should work in coordination with the Kashmir committee in
Pakistan. 139 Nearly about sixty members of the British parliament
condemned the large-scale Indian violation of human rights in Indian
held Kashmir, when Indian Prime Minister Narsima Rao, was about to
meet the British Prime Minister. They presented a memorandum to
John Major, demanding that during negotiations India’s attention
should be drawn to its atrocities in the valley and should be asked to
put an end to such atrocities and allow Human Rights Organizations to
visit the valley and have a first hand knowledge of the conditions there
and that the Kashmir people should be given the right of self-
determination according to the intentionally recognized principles. 140 In
1995 Roy Hattersley, a Labour ideologue supported Pakistan stance on
Kashmir and had it known through the NEC statement of October
1995. According to Wajid Shams-ul-Hasan, Robin Cook one of the
most influential British statesmen of his generation moved this NEC
resolution on Kashmir as a shadow foreign secretary. 141
Lke the British parliamentarians the US officials also
expressed their deep concern over the critical situation in Kashmir. On
December 15, 1990 the US Ambassador to India Frank Weisner
reiterated that Kashmir was a dispute between India and Pakistan and
43
maintained that his country favoured a dialogue between the two

countries for resolving the dispute. 142 In May 1992, the US senator,
Dan Steven, also supported Kashmiris right of self determination. In
the same month, the Chairman of House Committee and of US
Congress Mr. Dante Fascell, and the Chairman of the sub-committee on
Human Rights sent joint letters to the US Secretary of State James
Baker and the Indian Ambassador in the United States condemning
India’s violation of Human Rights. They complained, “we can only
conclude that torture committed by government authorities is taking
place in India on regular and systematic basis”. 143
With the coming of President Bill Clinton to power, the US
Kashmir policy took a new turn. Due to its emphasis on human rights,
the US government increasingly began to focus on the Kashmir issue. It
established a Bureau of South Asian Affairs. The American academia
and think-tank also narrowed down their focus on Kashmir. From
September to December 1993, about a dozen seminars were sponsored
by the Asia Foundation, Stimson Centre, Woodrow Wilson Centre,
Centre for Strategic and International Studies and Carnegie Institute of
Peace. 144 In his address to the UN General Assembly, President Bill
Clinton recognized the disputed of Kashmir as being “a trouble spot
where bloody, ethnic religious war ranges”. 145 A strong US policy
statement on Kashmir appeared in October 1993, when the US
Assistant Secretary of State for South Asian Affairs, Robin Raphel
made a statement that:
We view Kashmir as a disputed territory and that

means we do not recognize that instrument of
accession as meaning that Kashmir is forever more
an integral part of India. 146
On March 15, 1992, Madame Lirin Belgium’s Secretary of State for

foreign trade said that Belgium supported the idea of implementing UN
resolution to right for self-determination. 147 In May 1992, the United
Nations, Secretary General, Mr. Botrus Ghali expressed his concern
over the situation in Kashmir. Ghali urged the both parties India and
Pakistan to approach the United Nations before moving to resolve the
conflict. 148
Despite these successes Pakistan’s Kashmir policy also
received certain set backs which in turn contributed towards the
inconsistencies of the Kashmir policy witnessed during the subsequent
period (1996-99). Among these set backs were the inability of
Pakistan’s government to counter poise campaign launched by Indian
government which projected Kashmiri resistance movement as a state
sponsored terrorism. This campaign went a long way towards changing
western perception regarding this movement. Moreover, Pakistani
44
authorities could not muster requisite international support from its

friends like US, China and Iran for the internationalization of Kashmir
dispute in the world forums particularly in the United Nations in terms
of getting favorable resolutions for the expeditious solution of Kashmir
dispute on the basis of UN resolution. In addition to that, Pakistani
government could not prevent US tilt towards India, which, not only
enhanced Indian clout in the region but also contributed towards
corresponding decline in Pakistan’s clout.
In June 1990 Stephen Solarz warned Pakistan that all
American assistance to Pakistan would be suspended unless Islamabad
stopped its support to militants in Kashmir. 149 A campaign against
Pakistan’s nuclear programme was also launched and a concern for the
alleged role of Pakistan in Kashmir conflict became the more explicit in
the US policy. In 1992 the US placed Pakistan on the watch list of the
countries promoting terrorism. 150 Even before his inauguration US
President Bill Clinton sent a message to the Pakistani government with
the warning that Pakistan was being placed on a “watch list” of nations
suspected of abetting international terrorism. It would be given four to
six months to refute Indian charges about sponsoring separatist
insurgencies in the Indian Punjab and Kashmir. 151 After Charar-e-
Sharif incident, India made strong accusations that Pakistan encouraged
Afghan and Arab mujahideen to join the Kashmiri resistance and that
“Afghans” were responsible for burning the shrine. 152 In March 1993,
India accused Pakistan of carrying out bomb blasts in Bombay that
killed 300 people and injured more than 1,000. 153 Although Pakistan
denied these charges yet the western diplomats were quite skeptical of
Pakistan’s clarification. They apprehended that the Kashmiri struggle
for self-determination may become an international jihad like that in
Afghanistan. Such apprehensions lent further credence when an Afghan
led militant group kidnapped five western tourists in Kashmir in July
1993. 154
The most conspicuous failure of Pakistan’s Kashmir policy
was that despite all the efforts for internationalization Pakistani
governments failed to get requisite support from UN or to convince the
UN the desirability of implementation of UNSC resolutions. In March
1994 at the UN Human Rights Conference in Geneva, Pakistan had to
withdraw a resolution condemning the human rights violation in
Kashmir due to the lack of international support. The critics of
Pakistan’s Kashmir policy at home and abroad termed it as a failure.
Even China and Iran, the two closed allies of Pakistan as well as most
other Muslim states were reluctant to support the resolution. 155
Similarly, in November 1994 at the UN General Assembly, Pakistan
failed to table a Resolution against India causing further embarrassment
for the Pakistani policy makers. 156
45
The ambivalent US policy also point towards the failure of

Pakistan’s Kashmir policy. This ambivalence can partially be attributed
to US tilt towards India which became more explicit by the end of
1993. During the period, the tone of US officials suggested insidious
shift in their strategy concerning India. For instance, in February 1994,
the address of US Assistant Secretary of State, Robin Raphel, at the
Asian Society in Washington dealt with the Human Rights issue in very
general terms by over looking the Kashmir issue. 157 At another
occasion, she referred to the uprising in Kashmir as an insurgency and
avoided any mention of the right of self-determination of the people of
Kashmir. 158 Right after the UNHRC’s sessions in Geneva, she visited
New Delhi and tried to address India apprehensions regarding her
statements on Kashmir. She retracted her earlier statements on the issue
by declaring that she had been quoted out of context. She also denied
having challenged Kashmir’s instrument of accession. 159 She stressed
upon the need to resolve the dispute through a bilateral framework
while referring to the Simla Agreement. 160 Farzana Shakoor argues that
“Robin Raphel’s visit was aimed at dispelling the Indian impression
that the US had titled towards Pakistan on Kashmir”. 161
During Narsimha Rao’s visit to the US in May 1994, the issue
of human rights violations in Kashmir was almost shelved as it was not
mentioned in the joint communiqué. By excluding a reference to the
people of Kashmir, it simply vindicated the Indian stance. 162 It was the
US new approach towards India, the bottom line of which was not to
push the issues like human rights which could prove detrimental to US
economic interests in India in one way or the other. 163 Diluting its
traditional position on the Kashmir dispute “US advised Pakistan to
forget about history and see ahead”. 164 Perhaps the main reason behind
this new approach was the changing US perception concerning
Kashmir dispute as it now began to view Kashmir resistance as a
militant Islamic movement which could prove detrimental to its
interests in the region. 165 This changed US attitude towards Kashmir
found its visible expression in the language of US State Department
annual report. This report also held militants responsible for human
rights. With this new found phrase US started to encourage political
process in the Indian held Kashmir. US almost stopped criticizing New
Delhi and started to appreciate it for taking different steps to improve
the ground situation. 166
(IV)
A cursory analysis of Pakistan’s Kashmir policy during 1989-90 shows

that right from the very outset Pakistan’ Kashmir policy was caught up
in a dilemma. Forces of status quo such as military, jehadi
organizations which had formulated and conditioned our Kashmir
46
policy tended to keep it inconsonance with ideological underpinnings

of our traditional stance on Kashmir. The UN resolutions remained the
focal point of this Kashmir policy, these resolution had increasingly
become irrelevant during cold war due to international apathy,
ineffectiveness of the UN and vested interests of global and regional
powers. The resurgence of Kashmir resistance movement provided
Pakistan with an opportunity to internationalize the Kashmir dispute
and impress upon the international community the relevance and
viability of the UN resolutions for just and honourable solution of
Kashmir dispute. During this period the governments of Benazir Bhutto
and Nawaz Sharif were able to demonstrate their unflinching
commitment to Kashmir cause by pursuing a very aggressive policy on
Kashmir dispute. From early 1990s another main plank was added to
this traditional Kashmir policy i.e. Pakistan also began to pursue a low
cost strategy to engage India in low intensity conflict in order to make
it relent to UN resolutions. But the operationalization of this policy
proved exceedingly tenuous with the passage of time as the other
factors such as the western apprehensions of the rising specter of
militancy, clash of civilization scenario, the growing Chinese concerns
regarding dominant Islamic trait of the resistance movement in
Kashmir and the US tilt towards India in context of its political and
economic clout adversely affected Pakistan’s Kashmir policy and
pushed it towards the opposite direction. Till mid 1990s Kashmir
policy had been virtually bogged downed in contrasting pulls and
strains, its contradictions were now fully exposed which became more
explicit between 1996-99.
The forces of status quo were represented by military, Jehadi
organizations and jingoistic press. The military in Pakistan viewed
itself as the last bastion of stability and security:
As an institution…the army remained the ultimate

guarantor of a non-compromise inflexible policy
towards India unless Delhi is prepared to concede the
Kashmir issue. 167
According to Ahmed Rashid, the military had accepted Benazir

Bhutto’s installation with reluctance and remained hostile towards her
government. 168 When she assumed the office of Prime Minister, there
was a general perception that she would operate with in the foreign
policy framework of the previous military regime. 169 After assuming
power, Benazir Bhutto quickly conceded herself as not a “free-agent”
on Pakistan’s political scene and had to make major compromises to
form the government. 170 She was left with a few alternatives but to
appease military. Therefore, she agreed to let General Aslam Beg to
continue as a Chief of the Army Staff (COAS) and to allow military a
47
pro-active role in the foreign policy, as is evident from the appointment

of Sahibzada Yaqoob Khan as Foreign Minister, who was considered as
a representative of establishment and was elected on the ticket of IJI. 171
She remained nominal head of the defence committee and did not
interfere in the internal affairs of the military. She allocated a large
budget for the armed forces, and gave military a free-hand in Afghan
policy. She also agreed to support the candidacy of Ghulam Ishaque
Khan as president. 172 On the other hand, Ghulam Ishaque Khan and
Aslam Beg, the other two members of the ruling troika were contented
to “let the popular and populist” Benazir Bhutto to represent Pakistan.
However, president and the army chief remained dominant in
formulating Pakistan’s policies concerning nuclear programme and
relations with India. 173
The dominance of forces of status quo in Pakistan’s Kashmir
policy cannot be fully comprehended without taking into account the
functioning of the whole mechanism responsible for the formulation,
execution and implementation of Kashmir policy: (a)The higher
military command set the direction of Kashmir policy; (b) The role of
the ISI was to assess intelligence from India and Kashmir, to plan
secret intelligence operations, their operationalization as well as
conducting counter intelligence. In this manner it often played the role
of what Ahemd Rasid calls “the conceptualiser and agent of
operation”. 174 It was also assigned the task of directing public relations
campaign; 175 (c) The civil bureaucracy represented by the ministry of
Foreign Affairs was primarily responsible for implementing Kashmir
policy at diplomatic level. In case of difference between civil and
military bureaucracy over the direction of the foreign policy, the
military and ISI views prevailed. 176 Thus in this whole mechanism
from formulation to the execution of Kashmir policy the civilian
leadership had absolutely no say.
Moreover, the involvement of troika in Pakistan’s political
structure, “where the president and the army chief worked in tandem
made the prime minister the executor of the policy rather the
formulator”. 177 The Kashmir policy continued to be formulated and
executed in the same fashion throughout the decade of 1990s. During
this period the army and Inter Services Intelligence (ISI) executed the
Kashmir policy whereas the civilian government was allowed “to keep
the façade of diplomacy alive” in order to provide “diplomatic cushion
to the military led foreign policy”. 178
There are numerous instances to show the limitations of the
elected government in executing the Pakistan’s Kashmir policy. Chari,
Cheema and Cohen note that the ISI nominally reported to the prime
minister, it did not brief her about details of its operation in Kashmir or
in Afghanistan. “Kashmir was not an issue for Benazir Bhutto”. 179 The
Kashmir policy was continued to be administered in the same pattern
48
during Nawaz Sharif’s first stint as prime minister (1990-1993). During

Benazir Bhutto’s second stint as prime minister she systematically tried
to a smooth working relationship with the ISI and the GHQ. The ISI
chief from 1993 to August 1995, Lt. General Javed Ashraf Qazi was
considered as one of her closest foreign and diplomatic policy advisors.
According to Ahmed Rashid, by 1995, “the ISI was the major provider
of intelligence and most important advisor to both the army and the
civilian government, giving it a formidable power in policy-making
towards India. Correspondingly, the role of foreign ministry in decision
making was weakened”. 180
The other significant features of Pakistan’s Kashmir policy
directed by the military establishment were: (i) The army executed the
Kashmir policy, the civilian government’s foreign policy agenda was to
keep it in tandem with the military approach. (ii) The military elite
wanted civilian government to support the uprising in Kashmir much
vigorously so as to internationalize the dispute. For instance, Lt.
General K.M. Arif writes:
To keep the issue alive Kashmir must hit the

headlines in the press and electronic media in the
West…My suggestion is that we should project India
as a usurper of Human Rights…India should be
portrayed as an occupation force, a country which is
holding the Kashmiris against their will. We should
portray India hurting minorities. Kashmiris are
suffering because they happen to be Muslims in a
Hindu state. 181
(iii) The military encouraged by the Afghan experience wanted to

engage India in Kashmir to make it “vulnerable”. 182 This strategy was
employed by Zia regime to provide some support to Sikh separatist
after 1984 to engage India in East Punjab during Pakistan’s
involvement in Afghan crisis 1979-88. 183 It was the part of military
establishment’s belief that a dominant India needed to be balanced
against a dominant Pakistan for a peaceful South Asia and to resolve
the Kashmir issue. 184 This policy was “camouflaged under the guise
of the Pakistan’s official stance that Pakistan was only providing
diplomatic and moral support to the Kashmir freedom fighters”. (iv)
Another main plank of this policy was that Pakistan Army developed
a low cost strategy to engage India in low intensity conflict without
evoking a general war in Kashmir. (v) Down playing bi-lateralism
also constituted main plank of this strategy. 185 Subsequently the
significance of the Simla accord as a reference point to bilateral ties
became irrelevant. (vi) This policy was directed towards extending
moral support to those elements of Kashmiri resistance movement
49
who supported the slogan “Kashmir baney ga Pakistan (Kashmir will

become integral part of Pakistan) at the expense of “Azadi element”
vying for the third option.
However, the forces of change were causing a drift in
Pakistan’s Kashmir Policy. Incompatibility of these two forces (status-
quo and change) was mainly responsible for the dilemma faced by
Pakistan’s Kashmir policy during the mid 90s. For instance, the U-turn
in the US Kashmir policy put Pakistan at a disadvantageous position
vis-à-vis India. 186 Pakistan’s position became further vulnerable on
account of following discernable shifts in the US policy: (i) The US
policy favoured dialogue which focused on economic rather than the
political aspect of bilateral relationship. (ii) This urge for a dialogue on
part of the US was more in tuned with the Indian line as it pressed
Pakistan to create conducive environment which implied that Pakistan
should help India in suppressing the resistance movement in Kashmir.
However, from Pakistan’s point of view, it was tantamount to resolve
the Kashmir issue as per Indian desires.
Not only did the US Kashmir policy underwent complete
change but also Chinese Kashmir perception of Kashmir also showed
discernable shift. Chinese authorities were apprehensive about spill
over effects of the uprising in Kashmir in its two border provinces,
Tibet and Sinkiang. China implicitly complained of foreign
interference. 187 The dominant fundamentalist trait of resistance
movement further arose Chinese concerns. This proved to be the main
cause behind Chinese reluctance to provide all out support to
Kashmiris. This also provides also plausible explanation behind
Chinese role in dissuading Pakistan to withdraw its resolution at
UNHRC. During the same period, China also began working towards
improved relations with India. In 1993, the two countries had singed a
peace agreement to reduce tensions along the disputed Sino-Indian
border. China also hinted that Pakistan should consider accepting the
LoC as permanent border. 188
This analysis of Pakistan’s foreign policy presents quite a
muddled picture. Though this policy was apparently premised upon the
support of Kashmiris right of self-determination yet ostensibly it was
used as a smoke screen to camouflage its new trajectories which were
added under the influence of forces of status quo, i.e., engagement of
India in a low intensity conflict by increasing its occupation cost.
Perhaps, Pakistan’s military establishment was encouraged by its
experience in the Afghan jihad. A plausible explanation to this question
as why this policy failed to achieve dividend may be that the Pakistan’s
policy makers failed to take into account the changed geo-political
situation in which this policy was to be operationalized. Thus, this
policy was designed with a cold war mind set without taking
cognizance of the dynamics of changing regional and world situation.
50
In the final analysis this proved to be the main factor behind the
undoing of the whole policy.
51
END-NOTES
1
Smruti S. Partanaik, “Pakistan’s Kashmir Policy: Objectives and
Approaches”, Stratagic Analysis, vol 26(11) (April- June 2002), p. 202.
2
Ibid. The involvement of these radical Islamic groups had two objectives.
First it would not only save Pakistan from a direct military involvement but at
the same time would achieve Pakistan’s objective to inflict damage to India.
Second, according to a Pakistan strategy, it would pressurize India to concede
some sort of compromise on the Kashmir issue.
3
P.R. Chari, P.I. Cheema and S.P. Cohen, Perceptions Politics and Security in
South Asia (London: Routledge Curzon, 2003), p. 69.
4
Ibid., p.121.
5
Ibid.
6
Michael Krepon and Mishi Faruquee (eds.), “Conflict Prevention and
Confidence-Building Measures in South Asia: The 1990 Crisis:” Occasional
Paper No.17 (Washington D.C.: The Henry L. Stimson Center, 1994), p.6 cited
in Chari, et.al., Perceptions Politics and Security in South Asia, p. 67.
Pakistan’s involvement in Afghanistan was an apprenticeship for its low
intensity conflict in Kashmir. According to this newly found belief Pakistan’s
ability to control violence could give Pakistan the capability and influence to
dictate peace in the valley.
7
Ibid.
8
India Today (28 February, 1990)
9
According to observers she adopted more hawkish policy as a result domestic
political pressures as her government increasingly came under attack by
opposition which enjoyed tacit support of hawkish elements in the
establishment. Her stance towards India became more tough after she barely
survived a no-confidence vote on October, 31, 1989. According to an informed
Indian observer the then High Commission J. N. Dixit. “One of the sticks used
by the opposition to beat her was the so-called compromising attitude towards
India and her having failed to extract any compromise form Rajiv Gandhi
despite the alleged softness which he had shown towards Pakistan”.J.N. Dixit,
Anatomy of a Flawed inheritance: India Pakistan Relations, 1970-1994 (New
Delhi: Konark, 1995),pp.124-5.
10
At the time, ISI was deeply involved in Afghanistan the last soviet troops had
left Afghanistan in February, 1989 and the ISI was pre-occupied in trying to
organize the Afghan Mujahideen to seize Kabul. Ahmed Rashid, “Decision
Making Process: Pakistan India Relations”, in Saeed Shafqat (ed),
Contemporary Issues in Pakistan Studies (Lahore: Vanguard, 1999), p.158.
11
Michael Krepon and Mishi Faruquee, “The 1990 Crisis”. 6 cited in Chari,
et.al., Perceptions Politics and Security in South Asia, p. 67.
12
Rashid, “Decision Making Process: Pakistan India Relations”, p.153.
13
Ijaz Ahmed (ed.), Benazir Bhutto’s Foreign Policies: A study of Pakistan’s
Relations with Major Powers (Lahore: Classic, 1993), p.148.
14
Ibid, pp.149-50.
15
The Nation (5 January, 1990)
16
Robert G. Wirsing, Pakistan India and Kashmir Dispute, On Regional
Conflict and its Resolution (London: Macmillan, 1994), p.122.
17
Ibid.
52
18
Monis Ahmer, Middle East and South Asia (Karachi: Pakistan Study Centre,
University of Karachi, 2000), p.45.
19
Jatoi’s statement on 23 September 1990 cited in Ibid., p.53.
20
Ibid.
21
Khan Zaman Mirza, “Pakistan’s Foreign Policy in 1990s”, South Asian
Studies, vol. 11 (July 1994) p. 75.
22
Nawaz Sharif’s statement on Kashmir, cited in Ahmer, Middle East and
South Asia, p.45.
23
The Muslim (21 October, 1993)
24
The Muslim (26 October, 1993)
25
Ahmer, Middle East and South Asia, p.45.
26
Khalid Qayyum, “India has lost the battle for Kashmir says Leghari”, The
Nation (24 May, 1995).
27
Ibid.
28
Government of Pakistan, Speeches and statements of Mohtarma Benazir
Bhutto, vol 3. (Islamabad, Directorate of Films and Publications Ministry of
Information and Broadcasting, 1990), p. 37.
29
The Muslim (11 February, 1990).
30
Mirza, “Pakistan’s Foreign Policy in 1990s”, p. 75.
31
Raja Asghar, “Bhutto predicts victory for Kashmir Independence
Campaign”, Reuters Library Report (13 March, 1990). The speech invited the
attention of the press and its certain sections were video taped and widely
distributed. “Jag-Jag, mo-mo, han-han” she proclaimed implying that she
wanted to chop up the Indian governor in Kashmir likes the syllables of his
name.
32
Government of Pakistan, Speeches and Statements of Mohtarma Benazir
Bhutto, p. 57.
33
Frontier Post (23 March, 1990)
34
Mumtaz Hussain Rathore, “Azad Kashmir as base camp for Freedom
Struggle”, The Muslim (12 January, 1991)
35
The Tribune (7 July, 1992)
36
Government of Pakistan, Speeches and Statements of Mohtarma Benazir
Bhutto, p.107.
37
Mirza, “Pakistan’s Foreign Policy in 1990s”, p. 78.
38
Mrs. Nusrat Bhutto’s statement, cited in Ahmer, Middle East and South Asia,
p. 45.
39
Jang (11 March, 1990)
40
Ahmer, Middle East and South Asia, p.47. These efforts could not make any
head way on account of Benazir Bhutto’s dismissal.
41
Tanveer Ahmed Khan, “Pakistan’s Regional Policy with Special Reference
to India and Afghanistan”, Pakistan Horizon, vol. 43 (4), (October 1990), p.22.
42
The Muslim (5 August, 1990).
43
44
Ahmed Ijaz (ed.), Benazir Bhutto’s Foreign Policies: A Study of Pakistan’s
Relations with Major Powers (Lahore: Classic, 1993), p.150.
45
“Prime Minister’s Address” (Text of Radio Pakistan Islamabad, Home
service in Urdu 0200 gmt, 25 March 1991). Cited in The Kashmir Resistance
Movement: World Press on Kashmir Jan, 1991-June 17, 1991 (Rawalpindi,
n.p, 1991), pp.17-18.
53
46
The two Prime Ministers had their first meeting at Harare on October 17,
1991, where the two leader attended Common Wealth summit. The second
meeting took place at beautiful tourist resort of Ginavaru at Male on 23
November, 1991. The two Prime Ministers also held one talks at the Congress
hall of World Economic Forum. The fifth meeting took place at Jakarta during
the NAM summit. For details see, Ahmer, Middle East and South Asia, pp.56-
57. The Muslim (23 November, 1990). Hindustan Times (4 September, 1992).
Tribune (Chandigarh, 5 September, 1992)
47
Pakistan Times (9 January, 1991)
48
A.G. Noorani, “Kashmir Issue: Challenges ahead for New Delhi”, The
Statesman (New Delhi, 10 September, 1992)
49
K.M. Arif, “Kashmir Problem Over View”, in Ghulam Sarwar (ed.), Kashmir
Problem: Challenge and Response, (Islamabad: Institute for Policy Studies,
1990), p. 67.
50
Ibid.
51
ibid.
52
Kashmir Calling (1st May to 25th May 1992), p.1.
53
Kashmir Calling (25th May to 15th June), p.1.
54
Arif, “Kashmir Problem Over View”, p. 67.
55
Hindustan Times (Editorial), (13 August and 3 September, 1992). Tribune
(Chandigarh, 3 September 1992)
56
Pakistan Times (24 October, 1993)
57
The Frontier Post (23 October, 1993), The Muslim (23 October, 1993)
58
Pakistan Times (8 November, 1993)
59
Ibid.
60
The Muslim (10 December, 1993), Pakistan Times (10 December, 1993)
61
The Muslim (23 December, 1993)
62
Nawabzada Nasrullah Khan, “The Kashmir Issue”, Pakistan Horizon, vol.47
(3), (July 1994), p.21.
63
Ibid., p.27.
64
Ibid, p.28.
65
Ibid., p.29.
66
Ibid., pp.29-31.
67
Rashid, “Decision Making Process: Pakistan India Relations”, p. 157.
68
Tehmina Mehmood, “Pakistan’s Foreign Policies: Post Cold War Period”,
Pakistan Horizon, vol. 50(3), (July, 1997), p.114.
69
Farzana Shakoor, “Kashmir Issue and US Global objectives”, Pakistan
Horizon, vol 47 (3) (July, 1994), p. 77.
70
Dawn (1st October, 1993)
71
Pakistan Horizon, vol. 47(2), (April 1994), pp.1-2. According to Wirsing,
Indian Prime Minister Rao had suggested resumption of the talks in a letter of
congratulation to Benazir Bhutto when she became the Prime Minister of
Pakistan for the second time in October 1993. In an unprecedented gesture his
letters had offered a comprehensive dialogue on Kashmir—apparently with out
pre-conditions. Wirsing, India, Pakistan and Kashmir Dispute, p.194.
72
See Mahmud, “Pakistan’s Foreign Policies: Post Cold War Period”; Wirsing,
India, Pakistan and Kashmir Dispute, p. 194.
54
73
Pakistan Horizon, vol. 47(2), (April 1994), pp.1-2. These laws provided the
Indian Security Forces absolute discretionary powers to crush the Kashmiris
movement.
74
Ibid.
75
Mehmood, “Pakistan’s Foreign Policies: Post Cold War Period”. p 110. That
it used the diplomatic exercise to buy time and engage Pakistan in a
meaningless dialogue. The motive was to exclude a possible US mediation or
influence over the issue. Also see, Shakoor, “Kashmir Issue and US Global
objectives”. According to a report published in India Today: “The invitation to
Benazir Bhutto for the summit was borne out of this new calculation. Once
India invites Pakistan it would be impossible for the US to claim a locus standi
or seek a mediating role or participation of the Kashmiri people…The
immediate gain of the summit’s move was to render irrelevant Pakistan’s
attempt to raise Kashmir issue at the UN, demanding an inquiry by the Human
Rights Commission”. India Today (15 December 1993)
76
Ibid., p.115. According to some analysts India’s offer to Pakistan for a
dialogue over Kashmir was a calculated maneuver on the part of India to
deflect the international pressure on India to negotiate on Kashmir. The Indian
rigidity throughout the talks suggested
77
Dawn (26 February, 1994). The resolution did not mention India and the
matter of right of self-determination; it simply focused on human rights abuses
in Kashmir for this, two reasons were given; first to preempt a no action
resolution by India against Pakistan’s move and second the Human Rights
Commission dealt exclusively with the protection and promotion of human
rights as enshrined in the charter of the UN. Pakistan Horizon, vol. 47 (2)
(April 1994), p.3.
78
Saeed Shafqat, “Kashmir Issue: Review of Recent Research Proposals for the
Resolution of the Conflict”, in Saeed Shafqat (ed.), Contemporary Issues in
Pakistan Studies (Lahore: Vanguard, 1999), p.189.
79
Pakistan Horizon, vol. 47(2) (April 1994), p.4.
80
Ibid.
81
Mehmood, “Pakistan’s Foreign Policies: Post Cold War Period”, p. 111.
Various reasons have been attributed to the withdrawal of resolution by
Pakistan at UN Human Rights Commission these include: (i) Iran and China
obliged India for reasons of their own by persuading Pakistan to withdraw its
resolution on the eve of the voting. For China it was time to return the favour,
which India did her in November 1993, when it voted against a resolution at
UN General Assembly regarding the human rights abuses in India. The Iranian
support was won by offering the technology if needed for its defence
equipment. (ii) The US also showed unwillingness to support Pakistan on
proposed resolution as was indicated by a lack of reference to human rights
abuses in Kashmir in the US delegate’s speech at UN Human Rights
Commission who otherwise condemned many other countries for human rights
violations. The US decision to abstain on the proposed resolution left Pakistan
with little choice but to withdraw it. (iii) Another reason behind lack of support
on the part of some Muslim countries and Pakistan’s other friends was that
their own record of human rights was not praise worthy. For details see: India
Today (31 March, 1994). Shakoor, “Kashmir Issue and US Global Objectives”.
p.78. Mirza, “Pakistan’s Foreign Policy in 1990s”, p.85.
55
82
Shafqat, “Kashmir Issue: Review of Recent Research Proposals for the
Resolution of the Conflict”, p. 190. Defending the withdrawal of the resolution,
Pakistan’s Foreign Minister Sardar Asif Ahmed Ali said that many countries
had deplored the human rights situation in the Indian-held Kashmir and asked
India to open it for the fact-finding missions which was the main objective of
the resolution. He pointed out that as India had agreed to allow two delegations
to visit the Indian-held Kashmir, the main purpose of the resolution had been
achieved. He further said that if was for the first time that after twenty nine
years Kashmir problem had been internationalized at a global forum. The
Nation (10 March, 1994). According to Tehmina Mehmood, “From
government’s point of view, its main objective was to draw world’s attention to
the Kashmir issue”. Mehmood, “Pakistan’s Foreign Policies: Post Cold War
Period”, p.111. Naseem Zohra, “A Damocles sword over India”, The Nation
(Lahore, March 10, 1994). Abbas Rashid, “Learning from Geneva”, The
Frontier Post (Lahore, 11 March, 1994). Even an Indian observer
acknowledged that Pakistan has internationalized the Kashmir issue. He wrote
that “Despite claims of India’s diplomatic victory, India has come out
considerably bruised having to affect morally unjustifiable deals with several
countries around the world with dubious human rights records. Pakistan, too,
has achieved at least at par to fit its objective by internationalizing the issue”.
See “Triumph of Diplomacy”, India Today (11 March, 1994).
83
Resolution of the Conflict”, p.189.
84
Ibid.
85
Kashmir News (July 1994), p.3.
86
Ibid., p.6.
87
Ibid.
88
Shaheen Sehbai, “Benazir Bhutto calls for US Mediation on Kashmir”, Dawn
(11April, 1995)
89
Khalid Qayyum, “India has lost the battle for Kashmir says Leghari”, The
Nation (24 May, 1995)
90
91
Khalid Akhtar, “Kashmir Issue: Pakistan Diplomacy on Test”, The Muslim
(Islamabad, 28 January 1990). Indian Foreign Minister warned Pakistan of dire
consequences if it did not cease its “wanton and uncalled for interference in the
India’s affairs”. Air Marshal (Retd) Ayaz A. Khan, “The War in Kashmir, (27
January 1990)
92
Chari, et.al., Perceptions Politics and Security in South Asia, p.72.
93
Ibid.
94
Ibid. In this meeting the Indian Foreign Minister I.K. Gujral seemed to show
some understanding of Pakistani domestic political necessity to express
sympathy for the militants.
95
Ibid., pp.71-72.
96
Ibid.
97
Ibid., p.72.
98
Ibid.
99
Ibid.
100
The Frontier Post (21 January, 1990). On February 21, V.P. Singh stated
that “India would have to review its peaceful nuclear policy if Pakistan
56
employed its nuclear power for militancy purposes”. The Xinhua General
Overseas News Agency (21 February, 1990), cited in Chari, Cheema and
Cohen, Perceptions Politics and Security in South Asia, p.73. Singh continued
the take this belligerent posture afterwards In May 1990, in his interview with
Far Eastern Economic Review, He stated that “we want to avoid conflict, but if
it comes we have nothing to fear”. Far Eastern Economic Review (May 17,
1990), p.11.
101
“Policy on Kashmir”, Editorial, The Muslim (1st February, 1990)
102
The Muslim (22 May, 1990)
103
Chari, et.al., Perceptions Politics and Security in South Asia, p.102. Though
Benazir Bhutto later asserted that she had never been contacted by Americans.
But the US account has it that she was indeed contacted directly in various
countries. Observers have identified various reasons behind Benazir Bhutto’s
elusiveness. These include: (i) It is unclear whether her caution stemmed from
pride and haughtier. (ii) Whether she feared a confrontation over Pakistan’s
actions and its covert nuclear program of which she later, improbably denied
knowledge. (iii) It is possible that she wanted the President and Army Chief to
bear responsibility for yielding to US pressure.
104
Ibid.
105
Ibid., p.102.
106
Ibid., p.104.
107
Ibid., p.103.
108
Ibid., p.104. The American’s believed, however, that Pakistan would shut
down training camps for Kashmiri militants and that Islamabad welcomed US
efforts to prevent a war between India and Pakistan.
109
The Seymour M. Hersh in his article entitled “On the Nuclear Edge”, New
York (29 March, 1993) and Burrows and Winderm, Critical Mass, pp-16-17
cited in Chari, et.al., Perceptions Politics and Security in South Asia, p.110.
Characterize it as an unqualified success. Barrows and Windrem maintain that
“Gates quietly defused a situation on the sub-continent that was threatening to
go out of control with horrendous consequences”. Times of India (8 June,
1990).
110
The proposed package contained the following CBMS: (i) Further
information sharing on military exercise. (ii) Information sharing on filed firing
to avoid civilian causalities across the border. (iii) Communication being
increased between local commanders. (iii) Joint border patrolling. (iv)
Exchange of delegations to re-affirm these arrangements. See Xinhua General
News Service (3 June, 1990) cited in Chari, et.al., Perceptions Politics and
Security in South Asia, p.108.
111
Times of India (8 June, 1990). For further details of Gates mission’s visit to
Pakistan John F. Burns urges Pakistan to settle fund with India over Kashmir”,
New York Times (21 May, 1990)
112
Tensions arouse further in 1992 as both countries expelled each other’s
diplomats for spying and Kashmiris in Pakistan marched to LOC and had to be
stopped forcibly from crossing it by Pakistan Security Forces. On 6th December
1992 relations took an even more violent turn when Hindu fundamentalists
stoned the Babri Mosque at Ayodhia. Riots in Pakistan led to the death of some
25 Hindus and the destruction of 61 Hindu temples. More than 800 people were
killed in India as a result of Hindu-Muslim riots.
57
113
Mujeeb Afzal, “Pakistan-US Relations Post Cold War Phase”, Pakistan
Journal of American Studies, vol.14 (1 & 2) (Spring and Fall 1996), p.78.
114
Rais Ahmed Khan, “Fifty years of Pakistan-US Relations”, Pakistan
Journal of American Studies, vol.16(1) (Spring 1998), p.11.
115
Shakoor, “Kashmir Issue and US Global objectives”, p.78. Also see
Pakistan Horizon, vol.47(3) (July 1994), p.73.
116
Ibid.
117
For Eastern Economic Review (23 December, 1993)
118
Shakoor, “Kashmir Issue and US Global Objectives”, p.80.
119
Ibid., p.83.
120
India Today (15 April, 1994). The main features of this strategy were as
follows: (i) It overlooked the link between the nuclear programmes of Pakistan
and India abandoned the regional approach to the problem of nuclear
proliferation South Asia. (ii) It delinked the issue of nuclear proliferation from
the conflict in Kashmir and tried to address it in isolation. (iii) It accepted India
as a proven nuclear power but coerced Pakistan to enter into commitments
which envisaged a verifiable cap to the country’s nuclear programme.
The strategy was in definite contrast to the one pursued by Clinton
administration during 1993. Throughout that year the link between the Kashmir
conflict and nuclear proliferation was acknowledged whenever the two issues
came up for discussion between Pakistan and US. Similarly pressure was put
on both Pakistan and India to accede to Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty
(NPT). Pakistan and India, however, have different perceptions on the issue,
remained unresponsive to the US demand. See for details, Shakoor, “Kashmir
Issue and US Global Objectives”, pp. 80-81.
121
Pakistan Horizon, vol.47(1) (Jan. 1994), p.4.
122
Ibid.
123
The Muslim (Islamabad, 16 April, 1994)
124
125
Ershad Mehmood, “Post-Cold War US Kashmir Policy” in Policy
Perspectives, p. 91.
126
“Washington stance on Kashmiris”, Dawn (18 August, 1996). Pakistan and
the Kashmiris sharply denounced Wisner’s pro-election campaign and the
people boycotted the elections. Pakistan’s Foreign Minister Asif Ahmed Ali
commented on Wisner’s remarks in a very critical manner “Wisner is acting as
a devil’s advocate”. He said Wisner ignored the ground realities and his
statements did not reflect US official policy. See Saheen Sehbai, “US owns
Wisner’s Views on Kashmir”, Dawn (6 August, 1996)
127
Victoria Schofield, Kashmir in Conflict: Pakistan and Unfinished War
(London: IB Tauris, 2001), p.194.
128
Daily Telegraph (9 January, 1995)
129
Ibid.
130
Ahmed Rashid is of the view that Pakistan’s success in forcing India to
postpone its elections plan in Kashmir was not the result of Pakistan’s
diplomacy, initiative, or new proposals, but because of the blunder committed
by Indian army and the escalation by the Kashmiris in their struggle for self-
determination. Rashid, “Decision Making Process: Pakistan India Relations”,
pp.166-167.
131
The Muslim (5 August, 1990)
58
132
Ibid., p.69.
133
Government of Pakistan, Achievement of the Present Government in the
sphere of Foreign Affairs during the last two years (1994-95), (Islamabad:
Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Policy Planning Division, n.d.)
134
Dawn (31 December, 1994)
135
The Muslim (Islamabad, 12 January 1991)
136
Kashmir Calling (16-31 May, 1992)
137
138
Shaheena Akhtar, “Human Rights Violations in Indian-Held Kashmir” in
K.F. Yousaf (ed.), Perspective on Kashmir (Islamabad: Pakistan Forum, 1994),
p.160.
139
Nawabzada Nasrullah Khan, “The Kashmir Issue”, Pakistan Horizon,
vol.47(3) (July 1994), p.21.
140
Ibid., p.28.
141
Wajid Shamsul Hassan, “Matters of Movement: Kashmir – Why not induct
Benazir Bhutto”, Dawn (18 July, 1998)
142
143
Kashmir Calling (16-31 May, 1992).
144
145
Dawn (27 September, 1993)
146
Nation (3 April, 1995)
147
148
149
Solarz’s statement on 22, June 1990, cited in Ahmer, Middle East and South
Asia, p.45.
150
151
Kathy Gannon, “Pakistan”, Associated Press Wire Service (9 January, 1993)
152
During that period, Pakistan took a number of steps allegedly including the
shutting down of training camps to convince Washington that it was not guilty
of the terrorism charges. Its efforts ultimately paid off. At the end of April
1993, the State Department’s annual report Patterns of Global Terrorism made
little mention of Pakistan. Jyoti Bhusan Das Gupta, Jammu and Kashmir
(Hague: Martinus Nijhoff, 1998), pp. 374-75. After the dismissal of the Nawaz
Sharif government in July the US threat was withdraw after a major reshuffle in
the ISI, in which same 60 officers from Zia era were dismissed. Rashid,
“Decision Making Process: Pakistan India Relations”, p.160.
153
Rashid, “Decision Making Process: Pakistan India Relations”, p. 160.
154
Ibid., p.166.
155
156
Ibid.
157
Dawn (12 February, 1994)
158
Ibid.
159
India Today (15 April 1994)
160
Ibid.
161
162
Ibid.
163
Ibid.
59
164
Shabana Fayyaz, “Kashmir Conflict US Post Cold War Perspective” in
Pakistan Journal of American Studies, vol.15 (Spring/Fall 1997), p.76.
165
For instance, in one congressional testimony Raphel cited the formation of a
national Human Rights Commission in India, as well as the Indian Army’s
crackdown on its own soldiers as the steps “in the right direction”. Mahmud,
“Post-Cold War US Kashmir Policy”, p.90. While giving briefly to House
International Relations sub-committee on Asia and Pacific Ms. Raphel
observed “to be fair, I think it is a bit more complicated… The difficulty is that
a lot of history has gone by since that time, number one, number two, the
government of India at this time does not share the view that those resolutions
are still relevant. And third, in practical terms, as I said in my statement, it is
time to move forward, not to look at past prescriptions but to come put with a
prescription that fits the situation on the ground and current reality”. A local
newspaper observed. “There may be a slight shift in US position on Kashmir”.
The Nation (December 8, 1995)
166
167
“Survey: India and Pakistan”, The Economist (22 May, 1999)
168
169
Resolution of the Conflict”, pp. 243-44.
170
Ibid.
171
Chari, et.al., Perceptions Politics and Security in South Asia, p.28. Yaqoob
was not Benazir Bhutto’s choice as Foreign Minister, as having been Zia’s
Foreign Minister. When Benazir Bhutto became Prime Minister on December
1, 1988. In a deal brokered by the US Embassy, Yaqoob’s continuation as
Foreign Minister was part of the package she had to accept. This was to ensure
the “continuity in the Foreign Policy” according to one of her supporters, it
meant that she would show a willingness not to consciously attempt to break
with the “Ziast” World view. Sayid Rifaat Hussain, “Benazir Bhutto’s
Downfall: The International Dimension”, The News (10 August 1991)
172
Resolution of the Conflict”, pp. 243-44.
173
Chari, et.al., Perceptions Politics and Security in South Asia, p. 28.
174
175
Suba Chandran, “Pakistan’s Kashmir Policy: A Critique of ICJ Report”,
website: www.ipcs.org/Pak_Pub_03-PakKashmirPolicyCritique.pdf, p.2.
176
Ibid.
177
Partanaik, “Pakistan’s Kashmir Policy: Objectives and Approaches”, p.203.
178
Ibid., 203-04.
179
Chari, et.al., Perceptions Politics and Security in South Asia, p.31. Pakistani
Intelligence agencies and several private organizations supported Kashmiri
militants. There were three different ways of support ways of support: (i) Some
groups were supported by Pakistan. (ii) Certain groups were support by private
groups. (iii) Some of these were officially sponsored to undertone unregulated
cover operations. There is evidence of all three. In February 1990, Indian
intelligence had disclosed over 46 camps throughout Azad Kashmir which they
described as “safe houses” where militant were given weapons and explosives
training. In 1990s the Kashmiri Jehadi Organization which continued to
predominate include: Laskhar-e-Tayyaba (the Army of the pure), Hakat-ul-
60
Ansar and Hizb-ul-Mujahideen, established in 1989, had most of the adherents.

The United Jihad Council led by Syed Salah-ud-din was the umbrella of
organizations for fourteen smaller groups, operating out of Muzaffarabad which
included Al-badar, and Tehrik-e-Jihad. In June 1990 financial times journalist
David House go traveled throughout Azad Kashmir and was shown Jamat-I-
Islami refugee camps. The Pakistani and the Azad Kashmir governments
denied that they were giving any material support to the militants. But the
activists of the Janat-i-Islami and other militants sympathizers were obviously
not restricted. “there are no training camps in Pakistan, of course, but in So far
as Kashmir is concerned, this is part and parcel of the state of Jammu and
Kashmir. We can establish military training camps there and we have been
doing it”. Victoria Schofield’s interview with Azam Inquilabi, Islamabad 25
March 1994, cited in Schofield, Kashmir at Crossroads, p.155.
180
181
Arif, “Kashmir Problem over View”, p.67.
182
Chari, et.al., Perceptions Politics and Security in South Asia, p. 29.
183
Ibid.
184
Ibid; 205.
185
Stephen Cohen, The Pakistan Army (Karachi: Oxford University Press,
1998), p.173.
186
Farzana Shakoor, “Kashmir Issue and US Global objectives”, p.78. With the
pull out of Soviet forces from Afghanistan in 1989 Pakistan was relegated from
the status of a front line state to a category of “unfavourable nations” with a
tendency towards hostility for US and its interest. After the collapse of Soviet
Union US now began to review its policy towards South Asia without the
constraints of cold war. It attempted to develop US relations with India and
Pakistan on the basis of their respective economic strategy potential. Therefore,
the effect on the part of the US to recast Pakistan-India relationship in the post-
cold war era, it on the one hand, reflected the significance it attached to India as
the regional power, on the other brought into focus its willingness to
acknowledge India as the regional power. The growing US economic interests
in India virtually rendered ineffective its drive for Human Rights and nuclear
non-proliferation in South Asia. With India emerging as one of the top ten
markets for the US, economic interests took precedence over the priorities such
as Human Rights and nuclear non-proliferation in US foreign policy.
Consequently, the US objectives like human rights and nuclear non-
proliferation lost their universal appeal and remained confined to the
framework of a growing Indo-US slowly but surely Washington put Kashmir
and human issues on backburner and gave preference to the economic relations.
According to one report US investment in India during 1993 was estimated to
be Rs.3,2000 crore. Moreover, the American viewpoint regarding the validity
of Pakistan as a state underwent transformation. Its perception that threat to
Pakistan security does not stem from any external sources particularly from
India, rather it lies somewhere in the internal fabric of Pakistan. These were
very meaningful references to Pakistan’s political and economic situation
besides unlike Pakistan India was not dependent on the world leading lending
institutions like the IMF or World Bank for any economic or financial
assistance. It, therefore, could offend to be very obdurate on its Kashmir stance.
61
For details see, Afzal, “Pakistan-US Relations Post Cold War Phase”, p.30.
India Today (15 April, 1994), Dawn (21 February, 1991).
187
188
62
Umber Bin Ibad: The Ground of History
THE GROUND OF HISTORY: A STUDY INTO THE

RELATIONAL UNDERSTANDING OF HEGEL AND
HEIDEGGER
UMBER BIN IBAD

PAKISTAN
ABSTRACT
To accept certain conception of history depends upon
the ground that let that conception comes out. For
both Hegel and Heidegger, their understanding of
history depends upon their self-reflective
understanding of ground of history. One needs to go
into the philosophical writings of Hegel for
understanding his conception of the ground of
history. His conception of ground appears synonym
with the “Causality principle” in his Logic, helping
grouping together the triadic form of knowledge. His
showing Cartesian principle as founding the ground
of modern philosophy betrays his established
prejudices. Heidegger locates Hegel’s conception of
ground in Leibnizian principle of Reason letting
accepting the mode of truth only as propositional
assertions. Heidegger brings forth critically that
grounding is establishing and giving basis like that of
Hegel, but the critically engaged existence, also
struggles to place itself at a distance from established
prejudices of tradition.
KEY WORDS: Hegel, Heidegger, Causality principle, Authentic,

Ground, Reason, Being, Essents, History.
For Hegel, the very acceptance of the understanding of history lies in

owning the idea of Reason. This very en-owning directs each student of
history, for Hegel, to understand any happening in the past as
connected in the already prevailed Universal structure of Reason. And
only through such placing within Reason, the particular instance finds
its very sense. If it does not find its sense being subservient to
Universal, the particular instance is not an instance at all. This
particular is now part of the very un-differentiated world yet to be
63
scrutinized through the categories of Reason. The prevalence and

acceptance of Reason, therefore, becomes the very ground of the
existence of Reality.
History is real, for Hegel, largely because it is Rational.
History, in both of its senses, that is “historiography” and the
“understanding of past-ness,” is Rational and therefore Real. Only
through this rational reality can history acquire a force and owns that
teleological dynamism that for Hegel is a hallmark of the Universal
world history. 1 This Universal World history, if it is to be grasped and
understood in its totality, has to be philosophical. The ground of
history, or the Reason of history, as understood by Hegel, lies not in
history but in philosophy; “The only Thought which Philosophy brings
with it to the contemplation of History, is the simple conception of
Reason; that Reason is the Sovereign of the World; that the history of
the world, therefore, presents us with a rational process. This
conviction and intuition is a hypothesis in the domain of history as
such.” 2
Hegel presents this recommendation as a hypothesis for a
student of history, yet he claims it is ‘no’ hypothesis for a student of
philosophy: “In that of Philosophy it is no hypothesis. It is there proved
by speculative cognition, that Reason — and this term may here suffice
us, without investigating the relation sustained by the Universe to the
Divine Being — is Substance, as well as Infinite Power; its own
Infinite Material underlying all the natural and spiritual life which it
originates, as also the Infinite Form — that which sets this Material in
motion.” 3
This very thesis that has been proved in philosophy provides
the justifying ground to the very conception of history for Hegel. To
find out the proof of the ground of history, therefore, one has to go into
the complex systems of Hegelian philosophy. To venture into the
depths of Hegelian philosophical construction is a task only a giant can
venture. Instead, to take a humbler position, one can dare to understand
the very concept of ‘Ground’ itself as he himself brings forward. And
even that with the emphasis upon only two of the Hegelian writings:
first his Logic, where one finds Hegel’s engagement with the concept
of Ground; and second, his History of Philosophy, where one can trace
that very moment when the conception of Ground appears through the
writings of Descartes.
For Heidegger, however, this concept of Ground, as such and
as the ground of history, remains problematic through out his life-long
research. To accept the meaning of ground as self-evident, for him, is
not an authentic living for Da-sein 4 . For him Dasein is essentially
historical, that is embedded in tradition and prejudices of They.
However, the historicality of Dasein emerges out of its finitude and
thrown-ness. 5 The coming out of its being gives Dasein the insight of
its own being that is temporal and therefore historical. Dasein’s
64
constitution as They let it move and construct itself upon the already
established ground/s. For Heidegger, however, it is the very point
where long stay is essential with that very distance that let its view
make clear.
Heidegger understands the history of human-beings as
Geschishk, depth-tradition. He avoids entangling within the World-
history, like that of Hegel, and engages himself instead with western
history, from within. In this history, the very principle of understanding
and history, that is Reason, understood and owned through the very
determining of Being in different epochs. This determining of Being
provides the very fateful direction of the Western history immersing at
the same time into the obliviousness of Being. The very belonging of
Being attains the relational direction through Essents 6 . It is the
movement, from Essents to Being, that brings out the picture of Being
itself. But this picture, for Heidegger, is always incomplete because it is
capturing Being from already immersed and engaged life with Essents
already grasped through their unique ways of being.
The Heideggerian position gradually opens itself towards the
possibilities of the manifestation of Being. Locating the history of
Western civilization into the metaphysical en-owning of different
epochs he distinguishes their manifold characteristics. Different epochs,
while holding different but correlating metaphysical positions, manifest
their belongingness with Being, manifesting thematic philosophical
constructions. He, however, finds himself at the significant point in the
history of metaphysical ideas. Instead of building system while being
immersed into a metaphysical position, he gradually moves beyond, not
in the sense of overcoming, but in the sense of purifying, toward the
engagement with Being; instead of “saying”, towards the patient
listening. His position from “things themselves”, takes him to question
the very concept of “things” themselves; and even to question
“concept” itself. From initial phenomenological critical holding, gives
way, though gradually, to the “letting be”. Instead of ‘capturing’ Being
through already constructed verbal framework, his persistent ‘caring’
engagement with Being, takes him to the point where he lets ‘Being’
speaks itself. Being appears for him in manifold possibilities through
its ‘poietic’ expressions. Yet he reaches this position gradually.
His emphasis upon Authentic existence over against living as
idle chatters, his focus upon the compulsion of making choices over
against the moving in the directions of They and his stress upon
understanding the attunement towards the attuned being-present-at-
hand as ready-to-hand against living in the abstract ideals unable to
bring forth Dasein’s true historical but finitude existence, gives
Heidegger his early popularity through Being and Time (1927). His
ideas soon, however, merged with the call to join National Socialistic
agenda, as reanimating the destructed German spiritual existence 7 .
Heidegger however soon started reinterpreting his position and
65
gradually secured the distance from the ideologue of National

Socialism. His reinterpretation of early ideas, Being and Time (1927),
let him move away from his stress upon Authentic existence as a
political ideal to the origin of aesthetic expression, to the occurrence of
truth. The change of ‘stress’ let his understanding of truth appears
visibly within the opening up of the very openness of a caring being 8 .
The struggle of authentic existence for establishing ground gives way
to the struggle of caring being let see the groundlessness of each
establishing ground.
Heidegger’s critical understanding of the concept of Ground
as “the principle of Reason”, in an essay, comes as early as 1929. It
shows his intention to question the very basis of Western Reason even
as an “Early Heidegger” of Being and Time (1927) where
methodological effort of Fundamental Ontology and the critical project
of “De-structuring” of the Western metaphysics were still under the
Hermeneutical Phenomenology, 9 thus projecting authentic foundational
self. Even in the principle of Reason, the transcendental projective
understanding prevails with the emphasis upon authentic existence.
However, the ground of truth in this essay appears as grounding the
possibility of truth out of many other possibilities. It’s appearing in the
freedom of Dasein entails not only the establishing of truth but also
shows the clear signs of opening up the very openness within which
truth is to appear.
In what follows, in this chapter, I’ll trace the concept of
Ground, as it is understood and explained in the writings of both Hegel
and Heidegger. This understanding will give us closer look how these
two philosophers understand the concept of ‘Ground’ ‘themselves’.
This activity of understanding is itself critical and interpretive, thus
giving us a relational understanding of both points of views. For this I
divide this article into two major parts: first part deals with Hegelian
conception of Ground and the second describes Heideggerian
conception of Ground. The first section is further divided into two
parts: one focuses Hegel’s conception of Ground while reading through
his Logic; the other brings out Hegel’s understanding of Ground when
it initiates in History of Philosophy. The second section let Heidegger
engages critically with the Hegel’s conception of Ground by locating it
in the Leibnizian principle of truth. This second section is further
divided into three sub-sections: first section deals with grounding
“appears as establishing”; the second explains grounding “as taking up
basis”; the third describes grounding “as grounding of something”.
HEGEL’S CONCEPT OF GROUND IN LOGIC
In Hegel’s science of logic, the category of Ground appears as a full

chapter comprising of triply divided sub-divisions. Hegel brings out his
understanding in this chapter that traditional metaphysical
66
understanding treats “Causality Principle” as the ground of rational

happening. But, Hegel takes causation as one mode of Ground: “Since
the category of causation is a special case of Ground, Hegel offers
many examples that come from the field of Causation. But the notion of
Ground is wider than that of notion of Causation: it covers any case in
which a reason might be offered or applying some concept.” 10
ABSOLUTE GROUND
The first main division of the Category of Ground comes under the title
Absolute Ground. This title is further constituted of three other
supporting subtitles:
I) Form and Essence

II) Form and Matter
III) Form and Content
These subtitles suggest that Hegel is, here, importing the Aristotelian
conception of “Form” & “Matter” to bring out the nature of existence.
“It seems plain that Hegel has pushed the Dialectic in the present
direction in order to take in the Aristotelian concepts of matter.” 11
I) FORM AND ESSENCE
Like Aristotle, for Hegel form appears as a movement providing

specific shape to what is, that I being. It is like making ‘Essential’ of
‘that is’. “By the formal aspect of Essence Hegel seems to be
conceiving of Essence as active, as grounding or determining whatever
flows from it, and as embodying itself an passing away in what it
grounds. It is an account of, by virtue of the Ground the Grounded must
be posited, and as so grounding what follows from it, Essence is
considered as active and formative.” 12 This activity, however, can’t
take place until the activity takes place upon some passive being, that
is, being that let itself be shaped as the active Essence intends it to be.
“But grounding or determining involves also a being grounded or a
being determined, and that this means that the Essence can also be
conceived in an inactive undetermined material aspect, as providing a
basis or Grundlage which is to undergo various determinations.” 13 This
position, however, soon dissolves itself by showing the very
insubstantiality as in this general form being can take any form and it is
difficult to distinguish between active and inactive position of Ground
and Grounded. “Since the Form itself is absolute identity with self, and
so contains the ‘Matter’ in itself, and since the Matter similarly in its
pure abstraction and absolute negativity contains the Form in itself, the
activity of the Form on the Matter, and the latter’s determination by the
former, is rather the removal of the appearance of their indifference and
67
of their difference. This relation of determination is accordingly the

mediation of either with self through its own non-being-but these two
mediations constitute one movement and the restoration of their
original identity—the remembering of their dismembering.” 14
II) FORM AND MATTER
As above, this time dialectic moves in that very fashion, but opposite in
direction. Previously Essence was all active and grounding, while, here
it is Matter, that is the underlying substance upon which Form acts, that
is active but in as general a way as that of above. For Hegel: “Form, in
so far as it presupposes a matter as its other, is finite. It is not ground
but only the active principle. Similarly, matter, in so far as it
presupposes form as its non-being, is finite matter; just as little is it
ground of its unity with form, but only the basis for form. But this finite
matter as well as the finite form has no truth; each relates itself to the
other, in other words, only their unity is their truth. Into this unity both
these determinations withdraw and therein sublate their self-
subsistence: this unity thus demonstrates it-self to be their ground.
Matter is therefore ground of its form-determination only in so far as it
is not matter as matter, but the absolute unity of essence and form;
similarly, form is ground of the subsistence of its determinations only
in so far as it is the same one unity. But this one unity as absolute
negativity, and more specifically, as exclusive unity is, in its reflection,
presupposing; or, there is but a single activity: form in its positing both
preserves itself, as posited, in the unity, and also repels itself from
itself; it is related to itself as itself and also to itself as an other. Or, the
process by which matter is determined by form is the mediation of
essence as ground with itself in a unity, through its own self and
through the negation of itself.” 15
III) FORM AND CONTENT
The generality of above position gives rise to the notion of Content

which can indifferently be taken to represent Materialized Form or
Formed Matter. This position is like considering ground in action,
annulling itself and yet preserving itself in whiat it grounds. “Hegel is
eager to distinguish the notion of Content from the common notion
which makes Content indifferent to the Form in which it is
expressed…The Content of a thing in the sense used by Hegel is
inseparably one with its form: Romeo and Juliet could not have had the
same Content if produced in prose or some non-verbal medium.” 16
The content of the ground is, therefore, the ground

that has returned into its unity with itself; ground is at
first the essence that in its positedness is self-
68
identical; as different from and indifferent to its

positedness it is indeterminate matter; but as content
it is also formed identity and this form becomes
ground relation because the determinations of its
opposition are also posited as negated in the content.
Further, the content is determinate in its own self; not
merely like matter as the indifferent in general but as
formed matter, so that the determinations of form
have a material indifferent subsistence. On the one
hand, content is the essential identity of ground with
itself in its positedness; on the other hand, it is the
posited identity over against the ground relation; this
positedness, which is present in this identity as a
form-determination, stands over against the free
positedness, that is to say, over against the form as a
whole relation of ground and grounded; this form is
the total positedness that has returned into itself, and
the former is therefore only positedness as
immediate, determinateness as such. 17
The ground has thereby simply converted itself into determinate

ground, and the determinateness itself is twofold: first, that of form,
and secondly, that of content. The former is its determinateness of
being external to the content as such which is indifferent to this
relation. The latter is the determinateness of the content possessed by
the ground.
DETERMINATE GROUND
The determinate ground appears, following Hegelian triadic logic, in

three elements:
A) Formal Ground
B) Real Ground
C) Complete Ground
A) FORMAL GROUND
This position is again generalized mode of Determined Ground. In this

way the similarity between grounded and the Ground are so general
that it is difficult to distinguish whether it is only verbal displacement
of naming one from the other. Hegel gives as examples of such a
merely formal-ground relation from physical sciences:
The sciences, especially the physical sciences, are

full of tautologies of this kind which constitute as it
were a prerogative of science. For example, the
69
ground of the movement of the planets round the sun

is said to be the attractive force of the earth and sun
on one another. As regards content, this expresses
nothing other than what is contained in the
phenomenon, namely the relation of these bodies to
one another, only in the form of a determination
reflected into itself, the form of force. If one asks
what kind of a force the attractive force is, the answer
is that it is the force that makes the earth move round
the sun; that is, it has precisely the same content as
the phenomenon of which it is supposed to be the
ground; the relation of the earth and sun in respect of
motion is the identical substrate of the ground and the
grounded. 18
B) REAL GROUND
The movement of explaining Formal Ground reduces itself to the

insufficiency of its presence. Its neglect of ‘differences’ makes it
unwanted concept for the category of Ground. This movement now
takes the direction of un-like-nesses between Ground and Grounded.
“There must, it seems, be additional features in the Ground, features
unessential to its grounding function, and merely accompanying it in
the same “something,” which will serve to differentiate it from what it
grounds. A Ground so embellished by unessential additions, whose
presence is nonetheless essential to its being a Ground, is called by
Hegel a Real Ground.” 19
The concept of real ground appears to reduce the generality of
Formal Ground, but it also loses its force by un-abling to differentiate
among externalities and thus appearing as arbitrary. Formal Grounding
appears as a tautology while Real Ground disperses itself into
externality and arbitrariness. 20 Hegel sees this arbitrariness in multiple
social, educational and ethical modes of existence.
The search for and assignment of grounds, in which

argumentation mainly consists, is accordingly an
endless pursuit which does not reach a final
determination; for any and every thing one or more
good grounds can be given, and also for its opposite;
and a host of grounds can exist without anything
following from them. What Socrates and Plato call
sophistry is nothing else but argumentation from
grounds; to this, Plato opposes the contemplation of
the Idea, that is, of the subject matter in and for itself
or in its Notion. Grounds are taken only from
essential determinations of a content, essential
70
relationships and aspects, and of these every subject

matter, just like its opposite, possesses several; in
their form of essentiality, one is as valid as another;
because it does not embrace the whole extent of the
subject matter, each is a one-sided ground, the other
particular sides having on their part particular
grounds, and none of them exhausts the subject
matter which constitutes their togetherness
[Verknüpfung] and contains them all; none is a
sufficient ground, that is, the Notion. 21
C) COMPLETE GROUND
The incompleteness of formal and Real Ground gives way to

another position that may bring out the concept of Complete
Ground. This position requires previous positions to get assimilated
into each other towards the very direction of completion of the
Ground itself. It means “the Formal Ground for anything must be
such as to complete itself by one or other out of an indefinite range
of additional cirumstances or conditions, and the character of what is
grounded will depend, likewise, not merely on the formal character
of the Ground as such, but on the particular conditions and
circumstances which go with it.” 22
We can see, through the examples of Hegel, as when
“attractive force,” that is otherwise a formal ground, turns into the
complete ground after getting employed in the collocation of the
gravitating bodies; or when general ethical principles, being formal
grounds, are seen into particular circumstances, only then the ground
gets completed. “Hegel seems to suggest that while there is
arbitrariness and Contingency in the completion of the ‘formal’ element
by the real element both in the Ground itself and in what is grounded.
We can’t say a-priori how the ground will be circumstantially
completed, not just what outcome it will have if so completed. Yet the
completion is in this sense necessary and essential, that there could be
no Ground-relation without it.” 23
From here onward, another concept that comes to fore for the
completion of Ground is Condition. The stress on conditions provides
the Hegelian emphasis upon the historical moments necessary for the
completing Ground. Following the triadic line the concept of
Conditions split itself into three divisions. First two among them stand
against each other as opposites. The third element or moment in triadic
transition appears as assimilating sameness and rejecting arbitrariness
from the contradictory identities. In this way the passage towards the
concept of complete ground or Un-conditioned ground gets prepared.
71
CONDITIONS
I. The Relatively Unconditioned

II. Absolutely Unconditioned
III. Matter of Fact as Existence
I. THE RELATIVELY UNCONDITIONED
The condition appears, initially, as the immediate indeterminacy. “The

immediate to which the ground is related as to its essential
presupposition is condition; real ground is therefore essentially
conditioned. The determinateness which it contains is the otherness of
itself.” 24 The condition appears in its immediate indeterminacy as a
being but this immediacy remains indifferent to other relations.
“Through its immediacy it is indifferent to this relation; but, in so far as
it enters into this relation, it constitutes the in-itself of the ground and is
for the latter the unconditioned. In order to be condition, it has in the
ground its presupposition and is itself conditioned; but this
determination is external to it.” 25
The condition comes out as immediate, as being merely there,
but because of its indifference to other relations seems to remain
ungrounded. It appears as the condition is indifferent to the ground’s
existence though at the same there to be included as the ‘material’ of
the ground. “The two sides of the whole, condition and ground, are,
then, on the one hand, indifferent and unconditioned in relation to each
other; the one, as the unrelated, to which the relation in which it is
condition is external, the other as the relation or form, for which the
determinate being of the condition exists only as material, as something
passive, whose form, which it possesses on its own account, is
unessential. But further, the two sides are also mediated. Condition is
the in-itself of the ground; so much is it an essential moment of the
ground-relation, that it is the simple self-identity of the ground. But
this, too, is sublated; this in-itself is only a positedness; the immediate
determinate being is indifferent to the fact that it is condition. The fact,
therefore, that the condition is an in-itself for the ground constitutes
that side of it which makes it mediated. Similarly, the ground-relation,
in its self-subsistence, also has a presupposition, and has its in-itself
outside it. Thus each of the two sides is the contradiction of indifferent
immediacy and essential mediation, both in a single relation-or the
contradiction of self subsistent existence and the determination of being
only a moment.” 26
II. THE ABSOLUTELY UNCONDITIONED
The indifference being of Relative Unconditioned Condition that may

relate with other relations to turn into a material of ground remain there
72
but not in interlocked condition. “At first, each of the two relatively
unconditioned sides is reflected into the other; condition, as an
immediate, into the form relation of the ground, and the latter into the
immediate determinate being as its positedness; but each, apart from
this reflected being of its other in it, is self-subsistent and has its own
peculiar content.” 27
This position calls for the other side of this position and
condition appears as absolutely unconditioned. “The two sides of the
whole, condition and ground, are therefore one essential unity,
equally as content and as form. They spontaneously pass over into
one another or, since they are reflections, they posit themselves as
sublated, relate themselves to this their negation and reciprocally
presuppose one another. But at the same time this is only a single
reflection of both and therefore their presupposing is also only one;
or rather this reciprocal presupposing becomes a presupposing of
their one identity as their subsistence and substrate. This identity of
their common content and unity of form is the truly unconditioned,
the fact in its own self. As we saw above, condition is only the
relatively unconditioned. It is therefore usually regarded as itself
conditioned and a fresh condition is asked for, and thus the usual
infinite progress from condition to condition is introduced. Now
why does a condition prompt us to ask for a fresh condition, that is,
why does a condition regarded as a conditioned? Because, it is a
finite determinate being. But this is a further determination, which is
not contained in its Notion. Condition as such is conditioned, solely
because it is a posited in-itself; it is therefore sublated in the
absolutely unconditioned.” 28
III. EMERGENCE OF THE FACT [SACHE] INTO EXISTENCE
The relative unconditioned condition gives way to its other, for its
complete understanding, that appears as the absolute condition. Both
appear as indifferent to each other yet they stand into the unity. The
first position sublates itself to the other position and the absolute
ground finds its existence in the Matter of Fact. “The absolutely
unconditioned is the absolute ground that is identical with its condition,
the immediate fact in its truly essential nature. As ground, it relates
itself negatively to itself, makes itself into a positedness; but this
positedness is a reflection that is complete in both its aspects and a
form-relation that is self-identical in them as we have seen from their
Notion. This positedness is accordingly, first, the sublated ground, the
fact as the reflectionless immediate-the side of conditions. This is the
totality of the determinations of the fact-the fact itself, but cast out into
the externality of being, the restored sphere of being. The other side of
this reflective movement [Scheinen] of the unconditioned is the ground-
relation as such, determined as form over against the immediacy of the
73
conditions and the content. But it is the form of the absolute fact, and it
possesses within itself the unity of its form with itself, or its content;
and in the very act of determining this content to be condition it
sublates the diversity of the content and reduces it to a moment, just as,
conversely, as essenceless form it gives itself the immediacy of a
subsistence in this self-identity. The reflection of the ground sublates
the immediacy of the conditions and relates them, so making them
moments in the unity of the fact; but the conditions are presupposed by
the unconditioned fact itself, which thus sublates its own positing, or its
positing directly converts itself equally into a becoming. The two are
therefore one unity; the immanent movement of the conditions is a
becoming, a withdrawal into ground to the positing of ground; but the
ground as posited, that is to say, as sublated, is the immediate. The
ground relates itself negatively to itself, makes itself into a positedness
and grounds the conditions; but in thus determining immediate
determinate being as a posited, the ground sublates it and thereby first
constitutes itself ground. This reflection is accordingly the mediation of
the unconditioned fact with itself through its negation.” 29
The internal movement of reflection, into relative
unconditioned condition and the groundless absolute becoming,
disappears mediation and brings out fact into Existence. The fact in this
sense appears as it is related with manifold conditions that enable this
fact to exist. These manifold conditions may be the universe of
relations. For Hegel, “the reflection of the unconditioned is at first a
presupposing-but this sublating of itself is immediately a positing
which determines; secondly, in this presupposing, reflection is
immediately a sublating of what is presupposed and a determining from
within itself; thus this determining is again a sublating of the positing
and is in its own self a becoming. In this, the mediation as a return-to-
self through negation has vanished; it is the simple, internal movement
of reflection [einfache, in sich scheinende Reflexion] and groundless
absolute becoming. The movement of the fact to become posited, on
the one hand through its conditions, and on the other through its
ground, is merely the vanishing of the illusion of mediation. The
process by which the fact is posited is accordingly an emergence, the
simple entry of the fact into Existence, the pure movement of the fact to
itself.” 30
GROUND AS IN THE HEGEL’S HISTORY OF PHILOSOPHY
It was Descartes with which Hegel thinks, in the history of philosophy,

a new beginning took place. This beginning was heralding a new
ground upon which the upcoming age has to stand its world. This
ground was not the reflection of abstract universality but a concrete
reflection of popular spirit emerging to construct a modern world. “In
Philosophy Descartes struck out quite original lines; with him the new
74
epoch in Philosophy begins, whereby it was permitted to culture to

grasp in the form of universality the principle of its higher spirit in
thought.” 31
Hegel initiates his description of Descartes, in the history of
philosophy, with the praise of his boldness. Hegel thinks Descartes
gives birth to those principles that remained concealed within the debris
of time. He unearth them and let the other knows them well. Hegel
thinks that to find out the new ground and to make it public both
required boldness. Hegel, perhaps, while signaling towards the
ecclesiastical condition of the time, trying to bring out the needed
personal trait for bringing out the new ground.
Yet what was that ground for which this praise was given and
what did that ground do. Descartes initiated a new way of doing
philosophy. This way gives skepticism a full reign to move till the self-
supporting is achieved. It is to doubt every determinate principle or the
presuppositions adopted on behalf of religious authority. The
determinate point that is to reach would be a self-supporting point that
is to unify both thought and being. This point would achieve that
certainty that, otherwise, could only be achieved through the
subjugation of authority. The moment of certainty would be a moment
of joy; and it was the joyous moment. For Hegel, “With him (namely,
with Descartes), we properly enter upon a self-supporting philosophy.
Here, we can say that we are home and, like the sailor who has
journeyed on the stormy sea for a long time, cry: ‘Land ho.’” 32
This very ground, that is even understood through the imagery
of land itself, gives individual not only the strength to think itself, but
also to think from a point that can not be doubted, from a subjective
view point. This commencement of thought from ones own-self opened
up the way to refuse the authority of the church with the certainty of
ones own belonging to truth. This moment of certainty is not only an
inception of a philosophical movement but also the beginning of
modern times. This very moment of certainty comes out in the thinking
mode as: cogito ergo sum, I think, therefore, I am. 33
For Descartes, it is this ‘I’ that becomes a point of foundation
on which one can stand and encounter the flow of doubting. One can
doubt on this moment of consciousness also, but this doubting would
entail the very moment of consciousness. To doubt further becomes
impossible, the certainty is achieved and a new foundation takes place.
With this certainty ‘I’ transforms as subjectum; etymologically
meaning that which already lies before. To the philosophical tradition
ensued thereby, it means, the authoritative position of thinking
individual can belong with truth and assert this truth in public. 34
75
HEIDEGGER’S UNDERSTANDING OF GROUND
For Heidegger, like that of Hegel, ground becomes a problem. But

unlike Hegel, Heidegger engages with it deeply, that is going into the
presuppositions of the holding of ground. For him, the importance lies
in “destructuring” the accepted mode of reasoning, instead of moving
forward like Hegel, while constructing and expanding system of
knowledge. It is important for him to start understanding from a
distance. His engagement with Hegel reveals the ground of Hegel’s
Reason quite clearly. This engagement also provides him opportunity
to bring forth his own understanding of ground.
GROUND AS LEIBNIZIAN PRINCIPLE OF REASON
Heidegger locates the Hegelian understanding of Ground as embedded

into the Leibnizian principle of reason. The Leibnizian argument, that
appears in his “Primae Veritates” (1686) presents this point as: Thus a
predicate, or consequent, is always present in a subject, or antecedent:
and in this fact consists the universal nature of truth, or the connection
between the terms of the assertion, as Aristotle has also observed. This
connection and inclusion of the predicate in the subject is explicit in the
relations of identity. In all other relations it is implicit and is revealed
through an analysis of notions, upon which a priori of demonstration is
possible. 35
The above holds true for every affirmative truth, whether
universal or singular, necessary or contingent, as well as for both
intrinsic and extrinsic denomination. This wondrous secret goes
unnoticed, this secret that reveals the nature of contingency, or the
essential distinction between necessary and contingent truths, and
which even removes the difficulty regarding the inevitable necessity of
free beings.
From these things, which have not been adequately considered
due to their great simplicity, there follow many other things of great
importance. Indeed, from them there at once arises the familiar axiom:
“Nothing is without reason,” “or there is no effect without a cause.” If
the axiom didn’t hold, there might be a truth that could not be proved a
priori, i.e., which could not be resolved into relations of identity; and
this is contrary to the nature of truth, which is identical, whether
explicitly or implicitly.” 36
Leibniz brings out this point, and Hegel follows it too, that it
is absurd to think that identities carry on presencing without being
resolved as identities. It appears as “there would be true things that
would resist being resolved into identities, there would be truths that
would contravene the “nature” of truth in general.” 37 This is, however,
impossible to have truth and don’t have identity at the same time. For
Leibniz, the principle of reason, or the ground of reason, as “principium
76
rationim,” arises from the essence of truth. The essence of truth,

however, Leibniz locates in the proposition as “the connection of
subject and predicate.” Leibniz, in this way, conceives of truth in the
assertion of truth. “He determines the nexus as the inesse 38 of P in S,
and the inesse as idem esse 39 . Identity as the essence of propositional
truth here evidently does not mean the empty sameness of something
with itself, but unity in the sense of the original unitary agreement of
that which belongs together. Truth thus means a unitary accord which
for its part can be such only as an overarching accordance with
whatever is announced as unitary in the identity. In keeping with their
nature, “truths” – true assertions- assume a relation to something on
whose grounds they are able to be in accord. That linking which is a
taking apart within every truth in each case always is what it is on the
grounds of …, that is, as self-grounding. In its very essence, truth thus
houses a relation to something like ground.” 40
For Leibniz, and also for Hegel, each proposition, while
bringing out its truth needs truth as already being understood. “The
overarching accordance of the nexus with beings, and their consequent
accord, do not as such primarily make beings accessible. Rather beings,
as the concern of any predicative determination, must already be
manifest before such predication and for it.” 41
The discussion regarding Leibnizian principle shows that
“propositional truth always needs ‘grounding’ and … the concept of
truth is intrinsically linked up with that of ground.” 42 The truth, as it is
linked with the connection of subject and predicate, makes Leibniz and
Hegel see the truth through Being of essents. “A consideration of truth
in the ontic sense (the pre-predicative manifest-ness of essents, in
which propositional truth is rooted) as well as in the ontological (the
overtness of Being which renders ontic truth itself possible) sows the
same inner connection and suggests, further, that basic to both Truth
and Ground is Dasein’s transcendence, which also renders these
possible.” 43
HEIDEGGER’S CRITIQUE OF GROUND
The relationship between Being and beings or Being and essents, as

they are employed in the ground of truth, becomes the point of critique
of Heidegger to launch his project. Heidegger brings out the point that
history of philosophy, especially the history of western philosophy
remains engaged with the conception of truth moving from essents to
its being. Heidegger makes ground synonym with arche, that is, origin
or the moment of beginning. Heidegger thinks the Leibnizian
understanding of truth goes back to the works of Aristotle where the
concept of ground arises in threefold mode. The ground of truth is
linked with:
77
a) The ground of the what

b) Of the ‘that’ and
c) Of the truth of anything.
The principle of ground or principle of reason as brought out by

Leibniz, Heidegger thinks does not bring out the understanding of
ground itself. Hegel who follows Leibniz in this matter also becomes
the victim of the critique of Heidegger in this sense. Heidegger brings
out the point that “in its positive formulation (everything has a ground),
it speaks of the essent, saying that everything that is must have a
ground but says nothing of the nature of ground as such.” 44
Heidegger makes his point further clear regarding the
relationship between essents and Being, and bringing out the point that
truth can be obtained either from essents or through Being. “They are
intrinsically bound up with each other because of their relationship with
the distinction between Being and beings (Ontological difference).
Along with the emergence of this distinction, and based on it, there
appears truth in this bifurcated form.” For Heidegger the truth comes
out through ignoring the difference that ignores essentially the ground
of truth. Instead of appearing with the difference, the truth appears as a
propositional truth, that is, as presenting. The very rootedness,
however, of propositional truth from where the truth appears
primordially and more originary, remain oblivious. “Propositional truth
is rooted in a more originary truth (unconcealment), in the pre-
predicative manifestness of beings, which may be called ontic truth. In
keeping with the different kinds and domains of beings, the character of
their possible manifestness and of the accompanying ways of
interpretively determining them changes.” 45
For Heidegger, the propositional truth presupposes the world
of beings, or the world in which we live in. “Ontic manifestation,
however, occurs in our finding ourselves, in accordance with our
attunement and drives, in the midst of beings and in those ways of
comporting ourselves toward beings in accordance with our striving
and willing that also grounded therein. Yet even such kinds of
comportment, whether they are interpreted as pre-predicative or as
predicative, would be incapable of making beings accessible in
themselves if their making manifest were not always illuminated and
guided in advance by an understanding of being… of beings.” 46
From Leibniz this point comes out clearly that there is
relatedness between the problem of “ground” and that of being. The
essence of truth means already in the truth as in the form of idea of
essence. “For Leibniz, however, verum esse - being true, at the same
time means being “in truth” – esse pure and simple. What constitutes an
ens as an ens is ‘identity,’ unity correctly understood that, as simple
unity, originarily unifies and simultaneously individuates in such
unifying. That unifying, however, that individuates originarily (in
78
advance) and simply; and which constitutes the essence of beings as

such, is the essence of the ‘subjectivity’ of the subjectum (substantiality
of substance) understood monadologically. Leibniz’s derivation of the
principium rationis from the essence of propositional truth tells us that
it is grounded upon a quite specific idea of being in general, an idea in
whose light alone that ‘deduction’ becomes possible.” 47
Through presenting the point of view of Leibnizian derivation
of the principle of reason from the essence of truth, Heidegger clarifies
“the connection between the problem of ground and the question
concerning the inner possibility of ontological truth, i.e., ultimately the
more originary and accordingly more comprehensive question
concerning the essence of transcendence. Transcendence is thus the
domain within which the problem of ground must allow itself to be
encountered.” 48
With an interesting move Heidegger moves to that point of
origin or arche to the truth of the ground from where the truth is taken
as self-evident. Heidegger manifests that self-evident-ness and instead
places “surpassing” or “going beyond” or “transcendence” as the
essence of ground. This transcending, for him, is presupposed by each
propositional truth assertion. Without incorporating that initial leap no
explanation can be accepted satisfactorily. But what is this
transcendence? Before answering Heidegger gives few instances what
this transcendence is not. He emphasizes that “transcendence may also
no longer be determined as a ‘subject-object relation.’ In that case,
transcendent Dasein surpasses neither a boundary placed before the
subject, forcing it in advance to remain inside (immanence), nor a gap
separating it from the object. Yet nor are objects-the beings that are
objectified-that toward which a surpassing occurs.” 49
For Heidegger, it is the transcendence that makes object and
subject first of all possible. In transcendence an occurring takes place
that moves Dasein toward which that transcending occurs. “What is
surpassed is precisely and solely beings themselves, indeed every being
that can be or become unconcealed for Dasein, thus including precisely
that being as which it itself is.” 50 For Heidegger, the selfhood can only
arise out of the occurrence of transcendence. “In this surpassing Dasein
for the first time comes toward that being that it is, and comes toward it
as it ‘itself.’ Transcendence constitutes selfhood. Yet once again, it
never in the first instance constitutes only selfhood; rather, the
surpassing in each case intrinsically concerns also beings that Dasein
‘itself’ is not…in and through this surpassing it first becomes possible
to distinguish among beings and to decide who and in what way a ‘self’
is, and what I not a ‘self.’ Yet in so far and only in-so-far as Dasein
exists as a self, it can comport ‘itself’ toward beings, which prior to this
must have been surpassed. Although it exists in the midst of beings and
embraced by them, Dasein as existing has always already surpassed
nature.” 51
79
For Heidegger, Dasein discloses itself within world, that is,

being-in-the-world. The world is, then, the term for everything that is,
for totality as the unity that determines “everything” only in terms of its
being taken together, and no further. If we take this world as underlying
the talk of being-in-the-world, then we must indeed ascribe
“transcendence” to everything as present at hand. 52 Yet this present at
hand, within which transcendence takes place, is not being itself. The
“world as a wholeness is not a being, but that from out of which Dasein
gives itself the signification of whatever beings it is able to comport
itself in whatever way. The Dasein gives itself such signification from
out of its world then means: In this coming toward itself from out of the
world Dasein gives rise to itself as a self, i.e., as a being entrusted with
having to be. In the being of this being what is at issue is its potentiality
for being. Dasein is in such a way that it exists for the sake of itself. If,
however, it is a surpassing in the direction of the world that first gives
rise to selfhood, then world shows itself to be that for the sake of which
Dasein exists. World has the fundamental character of the “for the sake
of…,” and indeed in the originary sense that it first provides the
intrinsic possibility for every factically self-determining “for your
sake,” “for his sake,” “for the sake of that,” etc. Yet that for the sake of
which Dasein exists is it itself. To selfhood there belongs world; world
is essentially related to Dasein.” 53
The surpassing that occurs ‘for the sake of,’ it occurs in the
will that “projects itself upon possibilities of itself. This will that
essentially casts the “for the sake of itself” over and thereby before
Dasein cannot therefore be a particular willing, an act of will as distinct
from other forms of comportment (such as representing, judging or
enjoyment). All forms of comportment are rooted in transcendence.
The will in question, however, must first form the “for-the-sake-of”
itself as and in a surpassing. Yet whatever, in accordance with its
essence, casts something like the ‘for the sake of’ projectively before it,
rather than simply producing it as an occasional and additional
accomplishment, is that which we call freedom. Surpassing in the
direction of world is freedom itself. Accordingly, transcendence does
not merely come upon the ‘for the sake of’ toward itself, and does so as
freedom. In this transcending that holds the ‘for the sake of’ toward
itself there occurs the Dasein in human beings, such that in the essence
of their existence they can be obligated to themselves, i.e., be free
selves. In this, however, freedom simultaneously unveils itself as
making possible something binding, indeed obligation in general.
Freedom alone can let a world prevail and let it world for Dasein.” 54
Heidegger names the originary relation of freedom to ground
“a grounding.” For him its freedom that takes and gives grounding
through transcending. Heidegger locates this transcending in three
ways. 55
80
A) grounding appears as establishing

B) grounding appears as taking up basis
C) grounding as grounding of something
A) GROUNDING APPEARS AS ESTABLISHING
This first form of grounding appears first, not because establishing

takes primacy in grounding, but because it is with which the other two
groundings make possible. In this sense only it has primacy. This
grounding appears with the projective surpassing of Dasein ‘for the
sake of’. It is only through this grounding, beings come back to Dasein
in the first place. It is through it beings appear as beings and Dasein
appears ‘in the midst of.’ The grounding as projective transcending
becomes the possibility of the unveiling of beings in the first place.
“The ‘for the sake of’ that is projectively cast before us points back to
the entirety of those beings that can be unveiled within this horizon of
the world…Yet in the projection of world, such beings are not yet
manifest in themselves. Indeed, they would have to remain concealed,
were it not for the fact that Dasein in its projecting is, as projecting,
also already in the midst of such beings…this being in the midst of
…belongs to transcendence. That which surpasses, in passing over and
beyond and thus elevating itself, must find it-self as such among
beings. As finding itself, Dasein is absorbed by beings in such a way
that, in its belonging to beings, it is thoroughly attuned by them.” 56
B) GROUNDING APPEARS AS TAKING UP BASIS
The projective transcendence of Dasein makes possible the appearance

of beings first of all. This appearance, though, comes as establishing
the ground of beings within the projective living, yet the basis becomes
the way this establishing takes place. Dasein projects the world through
its absorption as beings are already attuned through the very attunement
of Dasein. “Transcendence means projection of world in such a way
that those beings that are surpassed also already pervade and attune that
which projects. With this absorption by beings that belongs to
transcendence, Dasein has taken up a basis within beings, gained
ground.” 57
The unity of projective understanding and the attuned
absorption within beings and through beings, the ground appears as
establishing the possibilities of being of beings. The possibilities,
however, remain manifold until the potentiality of actual realizes itself
through the assertive projection of beings. This assertive projection
through the comportment of Dasein becomes manifest through bringing
out the associative relation of being with beings, that is, become ground
of something.
81
C) GROUNDING AS GROUNDING OF SOMETHING
The manifestation of the unity of projective absorption of Dasein

makes ontic truth appear as the grounding of something. “In this form
of grounding, the transcendence of Dasein assumes the role of making
possible the manifestation of beings in them-selves, the possibility of
ontic truth.” 58 The ontic truth, thus, assumes the character of bringing
out acquaintance of being of beings. The truth of being arises by taking
determined direction through the absorbing projectiveness. The truth of
being appears but in the direction of manifesting beings within which
the projective transcendence of Dasein is absorbed through its facticity.
Heidegger makes it clear at this point that he is not interested
in proving certain propositional mode of truth. His concern lies with
bringing out the originary relation erupts with the question of why. This
very eruption conceals within it the moment of originary truth that
otherwise conceals itself within the assertive mode of Dasein’s living.
“The why even becomes manifold at its very origin. Its fundamental
forms are: why in this way and not otherwise? Why this and not that?
Why something at all and not nothing? In this ‘why,’ in whatever
manner it is expressed, there also lies already a pre-understanding,
albeit a pre-conceptual one, of what being, how-being and being in
general. This understanding of being first makes possible the why.” 59
The ground, as grounding, for Heidegger, appears as a whole,
in all three modes and co-temporally. It is not the case that one appears
in the absence of others. It is through whole of Dasein’s living as in the
condition of certain comportment toward beings with the projective
transcendence that the essence of ground resides. “The essence of
ground is the transcendental springing forth of grounding, strewn
threefold into projection of world, absorption within beings, and
ontological grounding of beings.” 60
Moving against the Leibnizian, and therefore, the Hegelian
position and understanding of ground, Heidegger locates the essence of
ground within the wholeness of the Dasein’s constitutive world. 61
Taking the essence of truth from the principle of reason, for Heidegger
is to move from a cut off point. “For even declaring this principle to be
a grounding principle, and for instance placing it together with the
principle of identity and contradiction, or even deriving it from these,
does not lead us into the origin, but is equivalent to cutting off all
further questioning.” 62
His constitutive understanding of ground gives Heidegger the
threefold strewn division of ground. But all three modes of ground are
linked with each other through the general sameness with each other.
This general sameness that keeps all the three divisions into the
generality of ground, that is as the essence of ground, comes out for
Heidegger as the freedom. “The ground that springs forth in
82
transcending folds back upon freedom itself, and freedom as origin

itself becomes ground. Freedom is the ground of ground.” 63
The understanding of ground that appears through Hegel’s
writings is located in the principle of reason. This very principle of
reason is the cornerstone of the Leibizian understanding of truth and his
metaphysical positions. The engagement of Heidegger with this
position brings out the “cut off” point into the relief through his
insistence that the essence of ground lies in the wholeness of Dasein’s
living. This living takes place through the concern for the three-fold
divisions of ground: “establishing, taking up a basis, and legitimation
each in their own way spring forth from a care for steadfastness and
subsistence, a care that in turn is itself possible only as temporality.” 64
Moving backward to the originary position gives Heidegger
the nearness of the very absence that is forcefully kept as absence
through the Leibnizian and/or Hegelian understanding of ground. That
absence appears for Heidegger as the non-essence of ground that gives
beings their understanding of being. The non-essence of ground, like
the essence of ground presupposes transcendence as surpassing, as the
essence of ground. The non-essence, however, remains concealed
within the truth coming out through the essence of ground. For
Heidegger the very concealment of the essence of ground brings out the
problem of congealing the appearance of possibilities. The congealing
of possibilities takes place due to the non-acknowledgment of the
distance between the unity of subject-predicate and the assertiveness of
truth grounding it. Instead of looking the distance between the principle
of reason and the propositional statement, the Hegeialin and Leibnizian
position moves to understand ground as grounding of statements
corresponding reality, whether objectively or subjectively. However,
the human being is a creature of distance; “And so the human being,
existing as a transcendence that exceeds in the direction of possibilities,
is a creature of distance. Only through originary distances that he forms
for himself in his transcendence with respect to all beings does a true
nearness to things begin to arise in him. And only being able to listen
into the distance awakens Dasein as a self to the response of the other
Dasein in whose company it can surrender its I-ness so as to attain itself
as authentic being.” 65
CONCLUSION
For Hegel, the movement of Reason is essentially dialectical. The

dialectical movement, however, arises out of immersing into the
already established propositional assertions triggered to bring forth
identity of subject-predicate. Each time a propositional assertion arises
in its immediacy, its incompleteness, instantly, betrays its meditational
existence, thus its positional status against its other. The movement of
Reason, however, keeps its journey as grouping-together of opposing
83
“propositional assertions”, or popularly stated, as synthesis of thesis

and anti-thesis. This dialectical journey keeps building knowledge as
grouping-together of identities, and let it move towards completion.
The ground as ground of history remains embedded in
Philosophy and Logic for Hegel. His description of Ground brings forth
the mode of completion of knowledge. His conception of Ground, in
Logic, shows the triadic movement completing structure of knowledge.
The ground of Ground, however, remains concealed and remained
embedded within the accepted tradition of sciences. For Hegel to doubt
this tradition is not acceptable and to grow knowledge following the
dynamism of traditional prejudices is the best suitable task. Hegel’s
reference to Descartes as a moment of modern thinking, with the
imagery of land, shows clearly his conscious preference for the
accepted tradition. This imagery gives him that very ground whose self-
conscious awareness only increases his entrenching in this tradition.
The ground of Ground, or the presupposition of Ground, for
Hegel, remains dyadic: the desire to move forward; and the direction to
construct unitary structures. Both these positions, though doesn’t
remain concealed, yet appeared as the justified mode of being. Hegel
seems to be sharing the general prejudice of his time or the spirit of his
unique age and accepted moving further without any hesitation. To
question them is not that important for him, instead to follow them
while being immersed remains important. For Heidegger, however, this
is not the case.
Heidegger’s position brings forth the need for consistent
reflective thinking. The consistent thinking arises out of consistent
questioning. Each time the moment of questioning arises it opens up
many other possibilities. Each reflective moment is also a moment of
Freedom and brings with it the field in which truth has to encounter. It
is the engaged human existence with its critical directedness towards
presuppositions of accepted knowledge position that provides truth to
its own self.
Heidegger locates the authentic existence by going back to the
originary position or living in a distance. For him the authentic living is
still a living entails primacy and the self-sameness of subjectivity. Re-
energizing the self-sameness through residing in distancing removes
the incompleteness of the understanding of Hegelian ground. This
residing in the distance will enable Dasein to bring out the possibilities,
so far remains congealed due to the initial suppression of the principle
of reason. He, however, ignores the point that the opening up of the
possibilities would ward off another possibility of linking or connecting
with being as such.
What comes out through the suppression of non-essence
makes rationality autonomous. The autonomy of reason from the non-
essence, gives reason the separate existence. This separate existence
keeps on living as the dwelling of truth, as the only dwelling of truth. It
84
conceals that energetic comportment and the will to engage with beings
through the already directed being. It gives logic the very superiority it
enjoys abstractly and truth the status of staying independently of being
living in the world. It gives that perspective primacy, out of many
others, that let the understanding of Hegelian history enjoys the status
of truth through its grounding upon the very reason itself grounded
upon the abstract principle of reason.
85
END-NOTES
1
For Hegel History-proper can only be understood as falling within World
History. See Introduction of GWF Hegel, Philosophy of History (New York:
Dover publications, 1996)
2
Ibid., p.9.
3
Ibid.
4
Dasein means “being-there”, this is a special Heideggerian concept connoting
human-being.
5
David Farrell Krell, “General Introduction: The Question of Being”, in David
Farrell Krell (ed.), Martin Heidegger: Basic Writings (San Francisco: Harpers,
1992), p.21.
6
Essents can be understood as the “owned understanding of beings”, even as
“beings”.
7
Hans-Georg Gadamer, Heidegger’s Later Philosophy in Philosophical
Hermeneutics, trans. and ed. by David E. Linge (London: University of
California Press, 1977), pp.214-215.
8
Ibid., pp.225,224.
9
Ibid., p.215.
10
J.N. Findlay, Hegel: A Re-examination (New York: Collier Books, 1962),
p.197.
11
Ibid., p.198.
12
Ibid.
13
Ibid.
14
GWF Hegel, Science of Logic, see website:
http://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/hegel/index.htm.
15
Ibid.
16
Findley, Hegel, p.198.
17
Hegel, Science of Logic.
18
Ibid.
19
20
Ibid.
21
22
23
Ibid., p.201.
24
25
Ibid.
26
Ibid.
27
Ibid.
28
Ibid.
29
Ibid.
30
Ibid.
31
GWF Hegel, History of Philosophy. See website:
http://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/hegel/works/hp/hpdescar.htm,
accessed on May 11, 2008.
32
Martin Heidegger, Hegel and Greeks. William McNeill (ed.),
(Melbourn:Cambridge University Press, 1998), p. 325.
33
Hegel, The History of Philosophy.
34
Ibid.
86
35
Martin Heidegger, On the Essence of Ground. William McNeill (ed.),
(Melbourn: Cambridge University Press, 1998), p.101.
36
Ibid., p.102.
37
Ibid.
38
“It means ‘the accidental existence.’”
39
“It means ‘identity of what is’.”
40
Heidegger, On the Essence of Ground, p.102.
41
Ibid, p.103.
42
J.L. Mehta, The Philosophy of Martin Heidegger (NY: Harper Torchbooks,
1971),p.89.
43 Heidegger, On the Essence of Ground. P.102.
44 Ibid., p.89.
45
Ibid., p.103.
46
Ibid., p.102.
47
Ibid., p.106.
48
Ibid., p.107.
49
Ibid., p.108.
50
Ibid.
51
Ibid.
52
Ibid., p.110.
53
Ibid., p.122.
54
Ibid., p.126.
55
Ibid., p.127.
56
Ibid., p.128.
57
Ibid.
58
Ibid., p.129.
59
Ibid., p.130.
60
Ibid., p.132.
61
Mehta, The Philosophy of Martin Heidegger, p.92.
62
Heidegger, On the Essence of Ground, p.133.
63
Ibid., p.134.
64
Ibid., p.132.
65
Ibid., p.135.
87
Hussain Ahmad Khan: Rationalizing the Relationship
RATIONALIZING THE MYSTICAL RELATIONSHIP

OF ART WITH ARTIST: ART DISCOURSES IN
ENGLAND AND FORMATIVE YEARS OF MAYO
SCHOOL OF ARTS, LAHORE (1875-1895)
HUSSAIN AHMAD KHAN

NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF SINGAPORE,
SINGAPORE
ABSTRACT
GWF Hegel (1770-1831) was not alone who termed

Indian civilization as a mystical one. There were
several others like Johann Gottfried von Herder
(1744-1803), James Fergusson (1808-1886) and
James Mill (1773-1836) who held the same opinion
about the Indian civilization. Such sensibility came to
the forefront with the Great Exhibition, held in 1851.
Literature on the Great Exhibition suggests multiple
views on Indian art; a few art critics termed it as
barbaric, some romanticized it as the European past,
and the rest believed that the Europeans can learn
artistic skills from the Indians. The exhibition also
generated a design discourse which formalized a
“mystical relationship” of Indian craftsman with his
product. This article studies how did the British
rationalize the presumably mystical or non-rational
relationship of craftsman with his craft through
education in the later half of the 19th century colonial
Punjab? It also highlights the cognitive failures of
the British art administrators to understand the
context and dynamics of the province. These
cognitive failures were due to the problems faced by
the British in the colonies, and due to some
preconceived notions developed over a period of time
in the metropolitan. Different dynamics, new
challenges and crisis not only altered the
preconceived notions of the British art administrators
but also made them aware of that rationalization
might not work in the colony. In other words, the
British art administrators realized that the modernity
89
of metropolitan could not work in the colony and a

different rationality was required to work in the
subcontinent.
KEY WORDS: Colonial Art, Subcontinent, JL Kipling, Punjab,

Rationality, Craftsmen, Mayo School of Arts, Mystical.
Many noted historians and art critics, such as Partha Mitter 1 and Tapati
Thakurta 2 argue that Europeans looked upon the oriental art with a
clear-cut distinction or the binary(ies) of barbarian and civilized.
Oriental civilization was used by deploying Hegelian terms like
‘conscious’ symbolism of the West and ‘unconscious’ symbolism of
the East. Regarding art schools in India, Partha Mitter agrees that the
intention of art schools in India was different in various official circles
but these schools played an important part in disseminating western
discourses in the public sphere. 3 Tapati Thakurta identifies the
problems of “in-built notion of great art” and the artistic excellence, as
the “sacrosanct standards of histories of art and culture”. Arguing
ideological motives behind the establishment of art instruction in India,
she writes, (in the art instruction) “Britain’s growing appreciation of
Indian-art ware could be contained within the dominance of western
aesthetic norms and the westernized art establishment of the Empire”. 4
Her analysis also underlines the articulation of colonial discourses
through art instruction inspired by a monolithic western art
establishment. Similarly, Arindam Dutta argues that it was the colonial
strategy to incorporate native agency in the art domain. He traces this
strategy within the larger context of “dual rationale” or “two-tiered
policy where customary jurisprudence devolved to native authorities
and the colonial administration retained control over political, criminal,
and economic policy”. 5 Dutta understands the development of the
Mayo School of Arts, Lahore and the Lahore Museum within this
context.
Taking a different point of view from these art historians, this
article argues that the cognitive failure of the British art administrators
to grasp ‘the forces at work’ made it impossible for the modernity to
work in the colony exactly like in the metropolitan. This approach
precisely points out the limitations of the British empire whose role in
the art domain is over-exaggerated by developing the argument within
the parameters set forth by Edward Said’s Orientalism. By highlighting
the limitations of British empire, this article indirectly creates a niche
for the subaltern classes which were dominant in the public sphere of
the 19th century colonial Punjab and are over looked or treated as
‘subjects’ (rather than an instrument of change) in the post-colonial
histories. The article also suggests that in the nineteenth century art
90
domain, neither the British art administrators nor their trained artisans
could penetrate in the public sphere. In fact, the British had to re-define
their role to establish the negotiating grounds with the locals. British
agenda of introducing theoretical instruction in art education primarily
remained a futile attempt to rationalize the works of art in the
nineteenth century colonial Punjab. This article is divided into three
parts: first part discusses the nineteenth century debates concerning art
in the British empire which later on also influenced the understanding
of Indian art; second part highlights the deliberations within the
colonial state regarding art instruction in India. This portion also gives
a brief over view of colonial strategy to rationalize the local art by
adopting theoretical teaching. The third part of this article explains the
problems faced by the Mayo School of Arts which, to a great extend,
altered the modernity or rationality of the colonial state and highlights
the cognitive failure of the colonial art administrators to understand the
situational circumstances.
(I)
In the middle of the nineteenth century, contemporary literature 6 and

the Great Exhibition presented India as a mystical civilization. George
Christopher Molesworth Birdwood (1832-1917), an Anglo-Indian
officer, naturalist and an art critic, termed India a “living force” of
“antiquity survived into modernity” which was “predestined to prove a
commanding exemplar in the revival of all the sumptuary arts of life in
Aryan Europe”. 7 He further substantiates his point of view in his book,
The Industrial Art of India: “Indian Art, in every decorative detail,
Aryans or Turanian, bears witness to the universal conviction that the
character of man’s being and destiny is supernatural; and that human
duty, and all that gives to daily intercourse the charm of art and grace
of culture, possess their reality and true meaning only in the purposes
of a life beyond life”. 8 Similarly, Moncure Daniel Conway (1832-
1907), an American writer, in his book Travels in South Kensington
published in 1882, mentioned the awe-aspiring beauty of the goods of
Indian courts as “its Muslim temple photographs, Hindu jewellery, and
Buddhist gates provided a spiritual biography of the subcontinent while
offering transcendent lessons that surpassed the particularity of place”. 9
To Owen Jones (1809 –1874), an architect and designer of Welsh
descent and famous for his studies of Alhamra Palace and drawing
publications, “Indian design arose from instinct. It evinced the very
faith that the people brought to their religion, habits, and modes of
thought”. 10 Such effusion elevates the position of the Indian art to the
status of mystical heights.
91
Not all the commentators termed Indian art as mystical and

romantic, there were many others who saw Indian art as un-aesthetic
and worthless. From an English architect, Digby Wyatt’s 11 label of
“rude instruments” for the Indian tools 12 to the accusation of Indian art
as a wasteful labour, 13 many discussions aimed at denigration of
oriental art and resentment towards its primitive and barbaric nature. 14
For instance, the Westminster Review sees “the ornate daggers, arrows,
and guns in the Indian collection” as “the work of an idle people who
indulged in cruel and morbid fancies”. 15 John Cassell (1871-65), a
British tea and coffee merchant and publisher of magazines for the
middle class, showed his disdain for the Indian craftsmen by portraying
them as “a lean, starved-out regiment of squalid beggars, half naked, or
with scanty folds of coarsest cotton flung around their wasted limbs”. 16
Similarly, John Tallis, (1815/16 –1876), an English cartographic
publisher who published maps and atlases, called the Indian efforts as
“misplaced” and a “waste of human labour”. 17
By viewing Indian art as mystical, romantic and decadent, the
art critics termed it irrational because it lacked conceptualization. There
was no relation between the art and the artist, the craft and the craft-
person. It was one of the major objectives of establishing art schools in
India to introduce a rational relationship between the art and the artist
or craft person and craft. Such process of rationalizing the relationship
of labour and product had its context in the larger developments taking
place in the nineteenth century England and the role of radical
intellectuals involved in the debates on aesthetics, mechanization and
hand-made products.
In the development of visual culture and art education in the
nineteenth century England, Henry Cole’s circle played an important
part. Henry Cole (1808-1882), a son of a Dragoon officer, was
introduced to a circle of radical intellectuals by Thomas Love Peacock
when Cole was working under Francis Palgrave at the Record
Commission in the 1820s. The circle of radical intellectuals comprised
John Stuart Mill (1806 –1873), an influential liberal thinker, political
economist, civil servant and parliamentarian, Horace Grant, who wrote
drawing manuals for educational purposes, Edward Chadwick, Charles
Buller, and others. 18 Many of them were impressed by Jermy
Benthem’s utilitarian Philosophy, especially Stuart Mill who acted as
Cole’s mentor during the initial career of his life. 19 Their discussion
largely revolved around the reforms concerning adult suffrage and
secret ballot in the 1820s and 30s. To some extent, the events and
political atmosphere of the 1830s, like the Reform Bill of 1832 which
considerably increased the role of English middle class within the
power structure, developed the tastes of the Englishmen. Arts and
education became the increasing concern of policy makers and
92
intelligentsia. Since 1832, British museum was also under construction

and in 1836, the new building of British parliament was completed.
Prospects of trade in the global market further stimulated the official
interests in the arts of the East. The Parliamentary Committee was
established in 1835 to explore the possibilities of extending art
knowledge and principles of design to the manufacturing population of
the country. 20
Henry Cole played an important role in the nineteenth century
art discourses developed through his publications, and also by
organizing the Great Exhibition. His publications focussed on thirteenth
and fourteenth centuries’ political history of England, architectural
designs and art of Westminster Abbey. To allure the tourists, he had
also published Railway Charts describing the main architectural
buildings, monuments, and important places around the railway track.
These writings bring to the fore his views about aesthetics. He actively
engaged himself in the debates regarding the role of state to direct the
course of art instruction, protection of crafts against the mechanical
mass production, and the significance of utilitarian arts against the
decorative beauty. Such considerations led to the formulation of
binaries of art as ‘Fine’ and ‘Applied’. 21 For the first time Cole used
the term ‘Art Manufacture’ in 1845, which stood for “Fine art applied
to mechanical production” which was meant to improve the industrial
products by influencing public tastes. 22 By that time the meaning of
‘Fine Art’ was specifically attached with the Greco-Roman sculpture
and the art of high Renaissance. It was on Cole’s persuasion that Prince
Albert, German husband of Queen Victoria, decided to organize Great
Exhibition by displaying the art and industry of all nations. Now, Cole
engaged himself with manufacturers, railway companies, committees at
local levels, and with various governments which helped him to
disseminate his ideas on art and industry.
Whether it was a new beginning or a continuation of previous
tradition, 23 the Great Exhibition did address “the artisanal skills” that
had always been a focal point in the “preceding efforts at design
reform”. 24 The offshoot literature 25 of the Great Exhibition and the
lectures delivered by architects, Digby Wyatt and Owen Jones, 26 during
the 1850s incorporated various art theories into the codified body of
systematized knowledge which also extended its critique on Indian arts
and formed the integral part of British understanding of the
complexities of design art. 27 The British art critics concluded that
“ancient art should be studied, but not indiscriminately imitated; nature
was to be a source of inspiration; and ornament must suit the material
and function of the object for which it is intended”. 28 For art critics,
problems in the British designs were due to the ignorance and lack of
training of the British artisans 29 in comparison to the Indian artisans
93
who according to them were better equipped than the former. In this
sense, the Exhibition glorified labour and labourer, and the critics
called it a “festival of working man”. 30
The Great Exhibition called for reforms in art instruction, as
the art critics were not satisfied with the British displays. For this
purpose, a Department of Practical Art (renamed as Department of
Science and Art in 1855) was established in Marlborough House, and
Henry Cole was its General Superintendent, Richard Redgrave (1804-
1888), painter, etcher and art administrator, was appointed as Art
Superintendent, while Owen Jones became Redgrave’s assistant. Cole,
Redgrave and William Dyce (1806-1864) a renowned Scottish art-
educationist, prepared a report which recommended the control of the
department over sixteen art schools (by 1850). It was suggested that the
department would guide school administration in developing
curriculum and training of the students in design education. Cole and
Redgrave were also members of a committee appointed by the
Government to select the objects for instruction in the schools of
design. Cole termed the Indian display at the Great Exhibition as the
“highest instructional value to students in design”, 31 and therefore, the
committee purchased nearly 200 articles for instruction in England
which included ornaments and utensils made of horn, shell, ivory and
sandal wood, textile products, inlaid metals, and locally made arms.
The impact of these developments can be seen by a sudden
rise in art schools throughout the country. By 1855, over one thousand
teachers were trained in drawing at these art schools. In 1857, the
Department’s headquarter was established at South Kensington and its
control was transferred from the Board of Trustees to the Council of
Education. In the same year, South Kensington Museum was
established largely by the efforts of Cole who was also made its first
director. Along with it, the Royal School of Art was set up in 1859.
This school was to guide other art schools in England and to “supply
art teachers to all places which seek to establish art schools”. 32 It was
from here that the art instructors were sent to the Punjab and elsewhere
in India to promote the discourse of aesthetics and design developed at
South Kensington. The South Kensington Museum became a beacon
house of enlightenment with its cultural legacy accessible to all. The
Department of Science and Art arranged lectures for the craftsmen by
arranging ‘penny seats’ in its lecture theatre. For the first time the
working men began to see their entrance in the existing public sphere.
Cole realized the relevance of culture in the arena of politics “as the Art
Journal noted Cole recorded the numbers of visitors to South
Kensington as assiduously as a politician might count votes at an
election”. 33 Henry Cole’s South Kensington Art School catered to the
needs of the artisan and art pupils. But still, “for designs featuring the
94
human figure, manufacturers had to look to the continent even as late as

the 1880s”. 34 By 1860s the South Kensington became more inflexible
and adopted a bureaucratic apparatus when Henry Cole became
increasingly stringent confining himself to the administrative matters
only, thus, “the guidance of public taste was left …to manufacturers
who sought their inspiration increasingly in Museum display”. 35
There were also some dissenting voices critiquing Cole’s
theoretical and administrative measures like John Ruskin (1819 –1900),
a British artist, art critic and social thinker, and William Morris (1834 –
1896), an English architect, furniture and textile designer, writer, and
founding father of Art and Craft Movement. Ruskin criticized Cole
who had “corrupted the system of art teaching all over England into a
state of abortion and falsehood from which it will take twenty years to
recover”. 36 During the same period, art and craft movement also
projected the need of awareness among the craftpersons about their
craft. Following Ruskin, William Morris, Walter Crane and Lawrence
Alma Tadema were the leading figures in this movement which
brought up the issues of craft culture. The movement was especially
known for its patronage of the “lesser arts” and the socialist views
“which sought to reform the arts and redesign the world for all, not just
those who were able to purchase its works”. 37 The art and craft
movement followers discussed the individuality in art “whether in
painting, architecture or applied design”. 38 They resented the direct
imitation of medieval paintings. Inspired by Ruskin’s socialist views,
Morris thought “the greed of capitalism” and “commercial tyranny
oppressed the lives” 39 and deteriorate art. He emphasized that the
artists/architects should have command over the manual skills or
applied arts. They should possess the knowledge about the materials
used in the design formation. It would give more satisfaction to the
artists which they could not attain by merely copying the natural
landscapes. 40
The arts and crafts movement offered a well-argued critique
on industrialization, alienation, and mechanization which was missing
in the doctrine of Cole and his circle. However, Cole and his circle
addressed the larger audience which included all “artisans throughout
the nation”. 41 The arts and crafts movement limited itself to the middle
class artists. Its idea of unity of art was not a novel contribution as it
was the legacy of Pre-Raphaelite theorists. 42 A few British art critics
most prominent among them was George Birdwood found this division
of art and craft irrelevant to the Indian context because products in
India were made by hand which could be called art. 43 John Lockwood
Kipling (1837-1911), father of Rudyard Kipling and first principal of
Mayo School of Arts, Lahore, also adopted the same argument and
95
insisted on preserving the lesser art and making artisans aware of their
work.
The clamouring of radical reforms in England also largely
influenced many intellectuals to address the issues of education, art,
aesthetics and governance in the subcontinent. For instance, James
Mill’s History of British India (1817) measured India on the “scale of
civilization” and questioned the “structure and purpose of imperial rule
in India”. 44 Mill advocated the radical reforms in the subcontinent
many of which were, later on, incorporated by Lord Thomas Babington
Macaulay, a British Poet, historian and Whig politician, in his Minute
on Education (1834). Some of these reforms were the introduction of
western education, free press, and application of utilitarian principles in
law and administration. Most of these reforms were implemented
during Bentinck’s Governor-Generalship of India. Macaulay’s Minute
somewhat settled down the long controversy between ‘Anglicists’ vs
‘Orientalists’. “There are no books”, argued Macaulay, “on any subject
which deserve to be compared to our own; whether 45 , when we can
teach European science, we shall teach systems which by universal
confession whenever they differ from that of Europe differ for the
worse…”. 46 Macaulay’s Minute on Indian education may be termed as
a most significant development in the course of colonial Indian history
primarily for two reasons: first, it laid down the future directions for the
education system in India; secondly, it formulated or set new standards
of elitism in India which were to dominate in the coming centuries.
People who came from England were influenced by Utilitarianism and
Evangelism. Their prime objective was to rebuild the society which
was, in Macaulay’s words, “sunk (to) the lowest depths of slavery and
superstition”. Krishna Kumar, an Indian scholar on colonial education,
conceptualizes it as adult-child relationship. According to him, “the
colonizer took the role of the adult, and the native became the child”
and this very relationship defined the educational and academic
landscape of the colonial India. 47
Apart from reformist or imperialist tendencies, the British
products flooded markets in the subcontinent which taxed the local
industry and threatened the existence of craftsmanship in India. It
resulted in desperate attempts by British Indian officials to re-capture
the market for Indian products. Charles Edward Trevelyan (1807-
1886), a British Civil Servant and Governor of Madras, in 1853
suggested to the Select Committee, House of Lords, to establish art
schools in India:
“….to give the natives of India all the advantage in

the cultivation of the arts which it is in our power to
give, for in order to favour our own manufactures
96
imported into India and partly by levying a heavy

duty upon Indian manufactures imported into
England, in addition to the natural manufacturing
superiority of England, we have by these means
swept away great branches of manufacture and have
caused great distress in India. Consequently, I
consider that we owe a great debt to India in this
respect and it is specially our duty to give our Indian
fellow subjects every possible aid in cultivating those
branches of art that still remain to them”. 48
Inspired by economic considerations and Henry Cole’s ventures,

Trevelyan’s proposal was meant to Europeanize the art of locals and to
“modify existing designs in the light of British tastes” 49 (to make them
suitable for export) through education which was to be devised on the
lines of Macaulay’s Minute. Trevelyan’s policy was almost identical to
that of Macaulay. In 1853, he said:
“The only means at our disposal for preventing

revolution is to set the natives on a process of
European improvement. They will then cease to
desire and aim at independence on the old Indian
footing. The national activity will be fully and
harmlessly employed in acquiring and diffusing
European knowledge and naturalizing European
constitutions…in following this course we should be
trying no experiment. The Romans at once civilized
the nations of Europe and attached them to their rule
by Romanizing them; or, in other words, by
educating them in the Roman literature and arts and
teaching them to emulate their conquerors instead of
opposing them. The Indians will, I hope, soon stand
in the same position towards us in which we once
stood towards the Roman”. 50
Art schools at Madras, Bombay, Calcutta and Lahore were set up on

these conflicting principles, 51 which on one hand meant to revive the
local arts by using European/Indian principles and, on the other hand,
to incorporate Indian artisans within the metropolitan economy by
sensitizing them about the possibilities of markets in Europe. All these
conflicting interests reflected in the debates of British art
administrators. In 1875, the Mayo School of Industrial Art was
established in Lahore and J L Kipling, who spent much of his time at
South Kensington, was appointed its first principal. Highlighting the
97
objectives of the school, Kipling termed (it) “the most important of

local educational institutions.... the object of the Lahore School (later
Mayo School) is to revive crafts now half forgotten, and to discourage
as much as possible the crude attempts at reproduction of the worst
features of Birmingham and Manchester work now (so) much common
among natives”. 52 Here Kipling explicitly articulates the intention of
colonial state to make artisan aware of the importance of their work.
This could only be done by teaching locals the theoretical basis of their
own art to enable them to understand the rationality of their own
product. How did the British art administrators plan this relationship of
rationality with the craft-person and craft, makes the next part of this
article.
(II)
The main actors behind devising a policy for art instruction in the
colonial Punjab were Baden Powell (1841-1901), British Civil Servant,
writer and art critic, Richard Temple (1826-1902), art critic and English
Civil Servant, H H Locke (d.1885), first Principal of Calcutta School of
Arts, J L Kipling, and Dr De Fabeck, Principal, Jeypore School of Arts.
They deliberated on the location of art schools, theoretical instruction
and training of teachers.
Most of the British officials in India like J L Kipling, HH
Lock and De Fabeck favoured the establishment of art schools in
provincial capitals and big cities. Kipling suggested Dehli, Agra,
Allahabad while De Fabeck favoured Bengal Presidency, Allahabad
and Ajmer. 53 This strategy of establishing schools “under the eyes of
government” 54 was: first to attract local princes, chiefs and elites in
order “to mould (their) character and tastes, and to improve the
intelligence”; 55 second, to establish the schools which were well-
equipped in order to achieve the objectives. 56 However, Temple
pointed out that people from villages would not be interested in taking
admission in these schools. Conscious of this apprehension, the British
government decided to establish these schools in the administrative
centres away from craft-centres. Possible intention was to attract
“native aristocracy” and to make them as a role model for the rest of
locals.
The British art administrators like Richard Temple and Baden
Powell believed that the Indian art was “wholly empirical” and lacked
theoretical basis. Such theoretical insensibility emptied the Indian art
from systematization and rationalization. Indians have instinctive
sympathy with nature, but they do not posses reasoning to explain their
art. Lack of theoretical insight made Indian art stagnant, substandard
and reduced Indian arts and craftspersons to merely copyist. Indians
98
even imitate European art without acquiring its sensibility. This

theoretical problem could be resolved in three ways; first, by
introducing sciences 57 ; second, by introducing drawing 58 and third, by
giving some examples of good work in museums 59 . Baden Powel
suggested that a separate chair of Applied Art should be established
under the director of the school of arts. Students should be taught
physical sciences, principles of machinery, and elementary chemistry. 60
The British laid special emphasis on drawing 61 because it was a skill
which reflected the intelligence of observation through a co-ordination
of eye, mind and hand. By acquiring this skill, one would be able to
enhance his faculties of perception and precision, discrimination and
classification. The nineteenth century drawing manuals suggest five
major objectives: “Firstly, that drawing is important as a source of
useful knowledge and moral edification, especially for the lower
classes of the society; secondly, that the exercise of drawing is
particularly suited to training eye and hand, thereby perfecting their
manual operation; thirdly, that drawing and writing are fundamentally
related as forms of visual and manual expression, making it
advantageous to learn them in tandem; fourthly, that drawing is a
universal language, comprehensible to people of all races and
nationalities; and lastly, that drawing provides a means of intellectual
and moral refinement, exercising an elevating influence capable of
raising the mind above sensual or material pursuits”. 62
Temple believed that “theoretical instruction which we as
Europeans are best qualified to supply”. 63 Others like Locke, Kipling,
Powell held the same view. Temple was of the opinion that to ensure
the proper functioning of the school “I would suggest that picked men
be sent out through the Secretary of State to be Principals and
Professors and Assistant Masters in our art schools, just as picked men
are secured and sent out to us for our Telegraph Department, our Forest
Department, our Educational Department, and for other services
wherein it is now admitted that a special and technical education is
indispensable. If this were done for our art schools, I have little doubt
but that the improvement in their organization and system would be
most immediately discernible in its results, and would increase as time
went on”. 64 However, Kipling was in favour of training some locals to
assist in teaching and other projects like making a new building of
museum. He found youths of the mistree, and rungsas class most
suitable for this job in designing the museum which would become “a
comprehensive object book of reference”. 65
Theoretically, the purpose of art instruction in India was to
disseminate ‘general art culture’, so that at least as the future deputy
magistrate or government clerk must know about Chaucer, Edwardian
glories in the stone building, Elizabethian literature, etc. 66 It was also
99
intended to revive old art and craft and to address elite class to
formulate the local aesthetics. JL Kipling in one of his reports argued
that “an art school cannot well be conducted like a factory or jail”. 67 He
was right. The plans made for the instruction could not have been
materialized in the educational centre. The reason was obvious. These
plans were insensitive to the forces at work. It makes the last part of
this article.
(III)
From the very beginning, Kipling realized the problems and these
problems exceeded to his anticipation, which altered the colonial
agenda of changing local aesthetics. 68 The main problems were
different classes of students, pre-colonial traditions of craftmanship,
lack of funds, lack of trained staff, and problem of language. These
problems and crisis changed, in one way or the other, the colonial
agenda of making artisans aware of what is beautiful and what is not.
The art schools were established in the capitals and big cities
to attract local elites. However, in Mayo School of Arts, the local elite
did not take interest. The students from lower strata took admission.
Many even did not complete their period and left the school due to
different reasons. Those students, who could not get admission in
institutions like Aitcheson College, Government College Lahore,
Punjab University, Lahore, took admission in this school and they had
no passion for art. Apart from drop-out, many students did not bother to
attend the schools. But it was the school’s policy that they did not
refuse any admission which was free of cost. 69 Kipling complains that
“...low level of intelligence is our worst drawback. It is comparatively
easy to get a geometrical problem understood or a perspective diagram
drawn, but most difficult is to secure an intelligent appreciation of real
delicacy and truth in free hand drawing or of an idea outside an
ordinary practice. There may be less to observe in an Indian town than
in the European one, but the neglect of the faculty of observation by
Punjab youths has other causes than the blankness of their
surroundings. I am afraid it may justly be said that the care and pains
have only half the effect that might be produced on better material”. 70
Many of the students entered in the school were more interested in
getting government jobs rather than learning art. However, on regularly
attending the class, they quickly realize that it was not the place for
them, so they leave the school as soon as possible. 71
Students who were not from any artisan family preferred
drawing and refused to do any manual work like woodwork, etc. 72 The
Director Public Instructions and Kipling repeatedly mentioned in their
reports that the school would not be able to achieve its objectives
100
because of the students who neither had any enthusiasm of art nor had
necessary understanding of the aims of school. 73
Kipling’s reports mentioned that students from artisan families
did take admission in the school. To name a few, these students were
Bhai Ram Singh, Miran Bakhsh. It seems that the pre-colonial structure
of Gharana art/craft remained intact even after the establishment of this
modern institution. It might look modern, but in a sense it carried
tradition by imparting training to the artisans and craft persons. Many
of these artisans and craft persons were later hired in the school as
assistant teachers, and teachers. Bhai Ram Singh’s example may be
quoted here. Even after acquiring some certificates, these people
continued with their family profession. For instance, the report of 1875-
76 mentions few promising students of the school. They were Bhai
Ram Singh who was a carpenter, Muhammad Din, who was engraver,
and Sher Muhammad who was a ‘luhar’ by profession. 74 Kipling
mentions that only the sons of artisans are performing well in the
school and they possess natural talent in doing so. 75
With the passage of time, the school administration
appreciated that the industrial side was “fully developed” because of
the interest of artisan families, 76 and this interest could be promoted by
offering more scholarships. Kipling also realized that the families
would be more useful institution in teaching than school in India
because “an honest blacksmith’s shop would be a more useful
institution than a school in India that sets out to teach a theory and
principles of art pur et simple”. 77 Kipling’s effort to teach drawing to
the artisans was not very successful, because they thought it more
slavish rather than means of learning. 78 They believed it as a
“mechanical and thoughtless work”. 79 It is not to suggest that no artisan
learnt drawing and decorative art, for instance, Sher Muhammad “one
of the very few natives with a strongly marked vocation for pictorial
art, and a love of work for its own sake” learnt drawing and was invited
by Major Biddulph who was posted in Gilgit to prepare “illustrations of
the people and domestic life of that region”. 80 Few instances also
suggest that the school administration attached as much importance to
the works of artisans who were not even trained in the newly
established art schools. For example, in 1879-80, woodcarvers from
Amritsar were involved to make wood carvan show for the Melbourn
Exhibition because of the shortage of time. Artisans in the school were
not interested in the theoretical works, and Kipling was happy to see
them excelling in practical art. 81
Another important problem which the Mayo School of Arts
faced was that of funds. Because of insufficient funds, neither the
trained staff from Europe could be hired, nor the students could be
offered luxurious scholarships. Similarly, building could not be
101
extended. Problems emanating from the paucity of funds exposed

students to the market. They had to accept outside assignments in order
to meet their own as well as school’s expenses. Sometimes, even
classes could not be held regularly because of these assignments. These
assignments essentially represented non-Europeanized version of
art/craft. Most of them were traditional and indigenously designed.
Many writings especially that of Thomas Metcalf, suggest, the British
used Indo-Saracenic architecture as a mean of glorifying the empire.
The students of the Mayo School of Arts were trained to design such
buildings. In Colonial Punjab, a number of buildings were constructed
in this style like Lahore Museum, Mayo School of Arts, Atchison
College and Lahore Railway Station. However, a close reading of many
official reports reveal that these buildings were not a mean of
celebrating empire, but a way of using space to serve the purpose.
These buildings were constructed under limited budget and decoration
was avoided to minimize the expenses. 82 Kipling admitted in his
reports that the school was misguided because the draughtsmen were
not trained in the local architecture. Official buildings in indo-saracenic
style may badly affect the public taste as local elite would copy such a
style for their own buildings. However, it was also a question of crucial
importance for them whether talented youth could be attracted and
trained in local architecture? 83 As Thomas Metcalf points out that in
British buildings in India, Indian/Saracanic elements of design like
arches, dome, brackets, etc. could be variously used in any spatial
location, 84 Kipling too had had the same understanding of Indian
architecture. It is precisely because of this reason that not all the
buildings of British empire were built in indo-saracenic style. High
British officials in Punjab preferred pre-colonial buildings for
residential purposes. For instance, Governor House in Lahore, offices
in civil secretariat were constructed in traditional pattern. Students of
Mayo school of Arts were trained to design buildings within a limited
budget. They were not trained to build the monuments of empire, in
fact, their training was meant to realize under-funded projects.
Since the school was not exactly in tune with the European
aesthetics, the European community therefore did not take interest in
the school’s work. Only European students of Eastern art appreciated
the works of staff and students. 85 From 1884-85 onwards, principal and
then vice principal began to visit the local market and industry to
acquaint themselves with the contemporary trends. Besides, the school
staff was engaged by the private artisans for advice and guidance. 86
However, many students who completed their courses from the school
were later on involved in the Public Works Department (PWD) and did
not have any direct contact with the people, therefore, could not
impinge upon the public taste directly. 87 The PWD was the “biggest
102
building monopoly” in the nineteenth century, however, it was

essentially Indian in character as it hired artisans in constructing
official buildings. 88
Due to the inadequate funds and lack of interest, the school
could not hire European teachers in a sufficient number. Hence, the
administration had to hire locals in the school; to run workshop, so-
called ‘illiterate’ artists and craft persons were employed. This tradition
persists to date. It was apprehended by the Director Public Instruction
that the school would not be able to perform well, if natives were not
trained to oversee the affairs of school in Kipling’s absence. 89 In 1884-
85, the number of teaching staff in the school was five in which three
were locals (Ram Singh, Sher Muhammad and Lala Dhanpat Rai) while
two were foreigners (J L Kipling and Gervaise P Pinto). 90
Language was emphasized in the theoretical art training.
Kipling complained, the students who were talented artists did not
posses good language skills and were at disadvantage as compared to
those who had good command over language but lacked talent for art.
However, the school administration preferred students who had talent
in art and craft. This leads us to believe that the students deficient in
language skills were not aware of the theoretical debates in Europe, but
still school administration patronized them. In 1885-86, Arabic
language and other vernaculars were used as technical language and
English was ignored. Director and principal regretted its use, but they
had no other option. 91 English was offered, but as an optional subject.
To guide the students, Burchett’s Practical Geometry was taught in
vernacular in which terms of Arabic, Urdu and English were used. 92
The Director Public Instructions and Kipling realized that the artisans
and other students were not well-versed in English which impeded their
understanding of the theoretical aspects. It was suggested that more
general education was required to orientate them in theory. 93
Owing to the above mentioned reasons, the colonial art
administrators appeared to be disdainful, and dissatisfied in their
reports. For instance, the officiating director Public Instruction Punjab,
while reporting about the working of the school in 1883-84 described it
as a “superior sort of workshop”, and the school should “exercise a
general influence over the artistic industries of the Province, by acting
as aesthetic centre, a school of design, and the source of enlightened
criticism and advice” 94 which it failed to become. Andrew, Principal,
Mayo School of Arts noted that the school “gave all knowledge of what
the province produces”. 95 The Indian schools, as interpreted by Partha
Mitter, Thakurta, and others, disarticulated the very artistic values of
the subcontinent. However, the case of Mayo School of Arts
demonstrates a comparatively different view. Pre-colonial structure of
artisan Gharana (family) remained active in the developments in the
103
domain of arts and crafts apparently dominated by the colonial state.

Language, drawing techniques could not be properly introduced in the
later half of the nineteenth century Punjab. By comparing, the debates
and reports, cognitive failure of the British art administrators becomes
quite obvious. In most of the reports, they acknowledged their
limitations and re-defined their strategy of educating locals by
appropriating or accepting local norms.
104
END-NOTES

1
Parha Mitter, Art and Nationalism in Colonial India, 1850-1922: Occidental
Orientations (Cambridge & NY: Cambridge University Press, 1994). Also see
Partha Mitter, Much Maligned Monsters : History of European Reactions to
Indian Art (Oxford : Clarendon Press, 1977)
2
Tapati Guha-Thakurta, The Making of a New "Indian" Art: Artists, Aesthetics,
and Nationalism in Bengal, c. 1850-1920 (Cambridge & NY: Cambridge
University Press, 1992). Also see Tapati Guha-Thakurta, Monuments, Objects,
Histories: Institutions of Art in Colonial and Postcolonial India (New York :
Columbia University Press, 2004)
3
See for discussion, Partha Mitter, “Status and Patronage of Artists During
British Rule in India (c. 1850-1900)” in Barbara Stoler Miller (ed.), The
Powers of Art: Patronage in Indian Culture (Dehli: Oxford University Press,
1992), pp.277-230.
4
Thakurta, The Making of a New "Indian" Art.
5
Arindam Dutta, “Infinite Justice: An Architectural Coda”, Grey Room, No.07,
On 9/11 (Spring, 2002), p.44.
6
For instance, Illustrations of Ancient Architecture in Hindustan (1840) by
James Fergusson, True Principles of Pointed or Christian Architecture (1841)
by Welby Pugin, Modern Painters (1843) by John Ruskin, Nineveh and its
Remains (1848) and Nineveh and Babylon (1853) both by Layard.
7
Mahrukh Keki Tarapor, Art and Design: The Discovery of India in Art and
Literature, 1851-1947 (unpublished PhD dissertation, Harvard University,
Cambridge, July 1977), p.8.
8
George C. M. Birdwood, The Industrial Arts of India (London: Committee of
Council on Education, 1880), p. 344.
9
Lara Kriegel, Grand Designs: Labor, Empire, and the Museum in Victorian
Culture (Durham & London: Duke University Press, 2007), p.192.
10
Ibid., p.142.
11
Matthew Digby Wyatt (1820 –1877) was a British architect and an art
historian. He also worked as secretary of the Great Exhibition, Surveyor of the
East India Company and the Slade Professor of Fine Art at the University of
Cambridge.
12
Kriegel, Grand Designs, p.116.
13
Ibid., p.120.
14
Ibid.
15
Ibid.
16
Ibid., p.117.
17
Ibid., p.120-21.
18
See for Henry Cole’s career as an art administrator with particular reference
to the Department of Science and Art Arindam Dutta, The Bureaucracy of
Beauty: Design in the Age of its Global Reproducibility (NY & London:
Routledge, 2007).
19
Ibid., p.17.
20
Tarapor, Art and Design, p.6.
21
Ibid., p.7.
105

22
Ibid.
23
Daniel Conway in Travels in South Kensington paid tribute to Henry Cole’s
efforts that awakened the Victorian taste towards art. However, Lara Kriegal
discards this notion of Conway as an imperial piece of writing. Kriegal
addresses the continuities rather than the breaks that the Great Exhibition
brought into central position.
24
25
For instance price winning essay of Ralph Nicholson, “The Exhibition as a
Lesson in Taste”, and Redgrave’s Supplementary Report on Design. In his
report, Redgrave states, ‘to this day, Indian ornament is composed of the same
form as it was in the earliest known works’. Cole and his colleagues advocated
the fundamentals of design in the Journal of Design and exemplified the Indian
products. Tarapor, Art and Design, p.8.
26
Like “An Attempt to Define the Principles which should determine Form in
the Decorative Arts”, “An attempt to define Principles which should regulate
the Employment of Colour in the Decorative Arts” to name a few. Ibid.
27
Digby Wyatt’s folio on Industrial Arts of the Nineteenth Century (1851) and
then Metal-Work, Wornum’s Analysis of Ornament (1856), Redgrave’s Manual
of Design, Owen Jones’s Grammer of Ornament (1856). This grammar
comprised various articles written on the principles of design which ‘presented
final codification of the principles of design as these had been evolved over the
past twenty years by the South Kensington theorists’. Ibid., p. 17.
28
Ibid.
29
See for details N.W. Senior, et. al., On the Improvement of Designs and
Patterns, and the Extension of Copyright (London, 1841)
30
31
Arjun Appadurai, The Social Life of Things: Commodities in Cultural
Perspective (Cambridge, 1986) p. 34.
32
Tim Barringer and Tom Flynn, Colonialism and the Object: Empire,
Material Culture and the Museum (NY, 1998), p. 49.
33
34
Ibid., p.199.
35
Dutta, The Bureaucracy of Beauty.
36
Ibid.
37
38
Gillian Naylor, The Arts and Crafts Movement: A Study of its Sources, Ideals
and Influence on Design Theory (London: Trefoil Publications, 1990), p.101.
39
Art and Its Producers, Collected works of William Morris, vol. Xxii (London,
1914), p.352.
40
Naylor, The Arts and Crafts Movement, p.104.
41
Kriegel, Grand Designs.
42
Naylor, The Arts and Crafts Movement, p.101.
43
Samual K Parker, “Artistic Practice and Education in India: A Historical
View” in Journal of Aesthetic Education, Vol. 21, No. 04 (Winter, 1987),
p.132.
106

44
James Mill, The History of British India (London, 1817). Also see Karuna
Mantena, “The Crisis of Liberal Imperialism” in Ducan Bell, Victorian Visions
of Global Order: Empire and International Relations in Nineteenth-Century
Political Thought (NY & London: Cambridge University Press, 2007), p.116.
45
Krishna Kumar, “Colonial Citizen as an Educational Ideal” in Economic and
Political Weekly, Vol. 24, No. 04 (Jan 28, 1989), p. PE-45. Also see a more
detailed account Krishna Kumar, Political Agenda of Education: A Study of
Colonialist and Nationalist Ideas (New Delhi: Sage Publisher, 2005).
46
Macaulay’s Minute on Education.
47
Kumar, “Colonial Citizen as an Educational Ideal”, p. PE-45.
48
Tarapor, Art and Design, p. 55.
49
Ibid., p. 57.
50
WG Archer, India and Modern Art (London, 1959) pp. 18-19.
51
Mitter, “Status and Patronage of Artists During British Rule in India (c.
1850-1900)”, pp.277, 281, 289.
52
J L Kipling and T H Thronton, Lahore As It Was (Lahore: National College
of Arts, reprinted in 2001) p. 49.
53
“Memorandum on the formation of Mayo School of Art by Dr De Fabeck,
Principle Jeypore School of Art (1874)” in Samina Choonara (ed), “Official”
Chronicle of the Mayo School of Art: Formative Years under JL Kipling (1874-
94) (Lahore: National College of Arts, 2003), p.157.
54
“Memorandum on the formation of Mayo School of Art by Henry Hoover
Lock, Principal of Calcutta School of Art (dated 26 July 1873)” in Ibid.
55
“Memorandum on the formation of Mayo School of Art by Dr De Fabeck,
Principle Jeypore School of Art (1874)” in Ibid.
56
Although Henry Hoover Locke who was another main actor behind the
Indian art education suggested that two or three well-equipped schools could
serve art than a dozens ill-equipped but Temple disagreed and opined that the
natives would not travel too long to take admission in such schools and the
school would only ‘increase the artistic culture’ of the town where it was
located and the other places would not be influenced by it. See for decussion
Memorandum on the formation of Mayo School of Art by HH Lock and by Sir
Richard Temple in Choonara (ed), “Official” Chronicle of the Mayo School of
Art.
57
“Memorandum on the the Formation of Mayo School of Art by Baden
Powell (Dated 31 May 1872)” in Ibid., p. 137.
58
Memoranda on the formation of Mayo School of Art by Baden Powell,
Henry Hoover Locke and Richard Temple in Ibid..
59
Memoranda on the formation of Mayo School of Art by JL Kipling, Richard
Temple and HH Locke in Ibid.
60
“Memorandum on the formation of Mayo School of Art by Baden Powell” in
Ibid., p.137.
61
See for the discussion on drawing in education in the 19th century Britain,
Mervyn Romans, “A Question of Taste: Re-examining the Rationale for the
Introduction of Public Art and Design Education to Britain in the Early
107

Nineteenth Century” in Mervyn Romans (ed), Histories of Art and Design

Education: Collected Essays (Bristol: Intellect Books, 2005).
62
Rafael Cardoso, “A Preliminary Survey of Drawing Manuals in Britain c.
1825-1875 in Ibid., p.30.
63
“Memorandum on the formation of Mayo School of Art by Richard Temple”,
in Choonara (ed), “Official” Chronicle of the Mayo School of Art, p. 143.
64
Ibid., p.143.
65
“Memorandum on the formation of Mayo School of Art by JL Kipling” in
Ibid.
66
“Memorandum on the formation of Mayo School of Art by Henry Hoover
Locke” in Ibid., p.155.
67
“JL Kipling’s Report on the Mayo School of Art, Lahore, for 1886-87” in
Ibid., p.74.
68
“Director Public Instruction’s Report on the Mayo School of Art, Lahore, for
1876-77”, p. 38. “Director Public Instruction’s Report on the Mayo School of
Art, Lahore, for 1877-78”, p. 39, in Choonara (ed), “Official” Chronicle of the
Mayo School of Art.
69
1886-87” in Ibid., p.72.
70
Ibid., p.73.
71
1876-77” in Ibid., p.36.
72
Choonara (ed), “Official” Chronicle of the Mayo School of Art, p.38.
73
1879-80”, p.41. “Director Public Instruction’s Report on the Mayo School of
Art, Lahore, for 1881-82”, p. 43. “Director Public Instruction’s Report on the
Mayo School of Art, Lahore, for 1882-83”, p. 45. “JL Kipling’s Report on the
Mayo School of Art, Lahore, for 1884-85”, p.59. “Director Public Instruction’s
Report on the Mayo School of Art, Lahore, for 1886-87”, p.72. “Director
Public Instruction’s Report on the Mayo School of Art, Lahore, for 1889-90”,
p. 81, in Ibid.
74
1875-76”, p.33 in Ibid.
75
1876-77” in Ibid.
76
Ibid.
77
Ibid.
78
Ibid., p. 37.
79
Choonara (ed), “Official” Chronicle of the Mayo School of Art, p. 52.
80
1879-80” in Ibid.,p. 40.
81
Ibid., p.73.
108

82
1876-77”, p. 38. Government buildings were also constructed by keeping in
view the limitation of funds. “JL Kipling’s Report on the Mayo School of Art,
Lahore, for 1884-85”, p. 61 in Choonara (ed), “Official” Chronicle of the Mayo
School of Art.
83
1879-80”, p. 41, in Ibid.
84
Thomas R Metcalf, “Past and Present: Toward an Aesthetic of Colonialism”
in GHR Tillotson (ed.), Paradigms of Indian Architecture: Space and Time in
Representation and Design (Great Britain: Curzon Press, 1998), p.17.
85
Choonara (ed), “Official” Chronicle of the Mayo School of Art, p.49.
86
1881-82”, p. 43. Also see “Director Public Instruction’s Report on the Mayo
School of Art, Lahore, for 1883-84”, p. 50. in Ibid.
87
1891-92”, p. 87. “JL Kipling’s Report on the Mayo School of Art, Lahore, for
1892-93”, p. 93 in Ibid.
88
Arindam Dutta argues that “Foucault’s critiques of power/knowledge have
proved all too convenient in identifying the PWD’s systematizing strategy as a
rationalist teleology”. See Arindam Dutta, “Strangers within the Gate: Public
Works and Industrial Art Reform” in Peter Scriver and Vikramaditya Prakash
(eds.), Colonial Modernities: Building, Dwelling and Architecture in British
India and Ceylon (London & NY: Routledge, 2007).
89
1883-84” in Choonara (ed), “Official” Chronicle of the Mayo School of Art, p.
51.
90
1884-85” in Ibid.
91
1885-86” in Ibid.
92
Ibid., p. 69.
93
1891-92” in Ibid., p. 81.
94
1883-84” in Ibid.
95
“Andrew’s Report on the Mayo School of Art, Lahore, for 1893-94”, in Ibid.,
p. 96.
109
BOOK REVIEWS
Shifa Ahmed: Book Review
MUNIR AHMED MUNIR & FE CHAUDHERY, AB WO

LAHORE KAHAN, (LAHORE: MAHANAMA ATISH FISHAAN,
2009)
His camera that continued clicking on every historic moment, 'Chacha'

F.E. Chaudhry (affectionately called Chacha by Lahore pressmen), the
oldest and the most decorated photographer is a living album on
Lahore's life during the past many decades. For those who do not know
him, he is among the first ones who stomping around the city with a
camera slingling down his shoulders ready to capture shots of anything
seemed interesting for a news picture in Pakistan Times. Now he is one
hundred years old but the zest is still effervescent.
He remembers with extraordinary fondness Lahore of yester
years with a population of under 300,000, when only three cars rolled
majestically up the heavily tree-lined 30-ft.-wide Mall. The draw bridge
near Mori Gate was still intact. A green belt encircled the Walled City
where 'pehalwaans' could be seen exercising and practicing their art.
And a whiff of jasmine was the only smell to be found in streets of
Lahore. When the light began to fade, ‘Mora’, the lantern wala, would
appear and light the oil lanterns on the streets and then disappear. How
much change Lahore has gone through over the decades can only be
seen by a person like F.E. Chaudhry.
Faustin Elmer Chaudhry was born on March 15, 1909 in a
Christian family of Saharanpur, Uttar Paradesh, India. His parents
moved to Dhalwal, Jhelum district while he was still a boy. Later, a
Jhelum girl was to become his wife with whom he has been happily
married for well over half a century. Although he is 100 years old, there
is something in his personality that makes one realize that time has
been benevolent to him. He still is quite energetic and zestfully
vivacious.
The book under review entitled ‘Ab Wo Lahore Kahan’, is
based on a detailed interview conducted by Munir Ahmed Munir, one
of the aficionados of F.E. Chaudhry. Munir presented this book as gift
to Mr. F.E. Chaudhry at the celebrations of his 100 birthday. Memoirs
of F.E. Chaudhry about old Lahore is the principal theme in this book
as he was talking at the time of interview i.e. ‘Lahore main pehle itni
“Abaadi Uboodi” nahin hoti thi’. Without editing, this book is a
primary source of knowledge about life of the old city. One can see the
real Lahore through the kaleidoscopic viewfinder as Mr. F.E.Chaudhry
is.
Mr. Chaudhry's contribution for Pakistan Movement has been
quite tangible in its own way. He covered various functions, meetings,
processions and demonstrations of the Muslim League. The
photographs he took got published in newspapers all over the
113
subcontinent. In 1938 when Raja Mohammad Afzal Khan of Dhalwal

District, Jhelum, formed a Muslim League of the Salt Rang, Mr.
Chaudhry toured the whole area with him on a horseback. He went
from village to village and took many photographs of historical
importance.
Always on the lookout for new topics and subjects he was the
first one to introduce photographic coverage of a village life in the
Punjab, which subsequently became a regular feature in the Statesman
under the caption of "Up Country".
When Pakistan came into being Mr. Chaudhry was working as
a freelance. He was running a studio of his own and doing extra
ordinary good business as a photographer. At that time the Pakistan
Times was on a look out for a staff photographer. Since, the paltry
salary of Rs. 250 which they offered held no attraction for Mr.
Chaudhry. Therefore, idea of applying for this post never entered his
mind, One day, he reminisces, he received a message from the editor
none other than the famous poet Faiz Ahmad Faiz. At that time Mr.
Chaudhry hardly knew him, he presented himself promptly before Faiz
Sahib. In his typical soft spoken tone he asked Mr. Chaudhry’ a
photograph of the Civil and Military Gazzett (CMG) building, in which
at that time the offices of both the Pakistan Times and Imroze were
housed. However, he wanted Mr. Chaudhry to take a picture showing
depth. As there was no depth in the building, Mr. Chaudhry refused
point-blank. However Faiz Sahib was able to convince him to at least
give it a try. Reaching the spot he meticulously studied the building
from all angles. Finally he could produce desired results. The quality of
his work and his quickness impressed Faiz Sahib and he asked him to
join the Pakistan Times. Finally a salary of Rs. 350 was negotiated and
Mr. Chaudhry joined the Times in 1949, working there till his
retirement in 1973.
When F E Chaudhry recalls those days, 1936 sticks out in his
memory as the year he took his first exclusive of the Quaid,
MuhammadAli Jinnah who had come to address a crowd on the
Shaheed Ganj Masjid issue in Lahore and F E Chaudhry was quick to
judge the news potential of the event. The other two freelance
photographers did not have news sense and stayed away. With pride F
.E. Chaudhry recollects, how did he angle and maneuver to photograph
Quaid as he sat on a dais, which was put up on a water tank along with
Maulana Zafar Ali Khan, Editor of the Daily, Zamindar. The exclusive
snap was carried by all the Lahore newspapers and many other Indian
papers.
By 1940, the number of freelance photographers had swelled
to eight. One would think that competition may have lowered the
remunerations, but some publications like the ‘Illustrated Weekly’ of
India were paying a reasonable sum of Rs. 7.50 per piece and F.E.
Chaudhry had concluded a lucrative contract with the National
114
Geographic magazine. In those days when the rent for his flat on
Beadon Road was Rs. 16 per month and a roll of film cost 12 annas,
photography was becoming a lucrative profession.
By 1947, with the Independence tempo on the rise, F. E.
Chaudhry recalls, processions had become so commonplace that they
had lost their news value. At one point Mr. Chaudhry thought that the
24th January Civil Liberty March was too mundane for the newspapers.
He decided to join the protest instead. He was arrested and unloaded
hours later at deserted outskirts of Lahore - the Cantonment area. Quite
unwittingly he was now contributing more than his photography to the
independence struggle, and recording it as he went along.
Not one to be modest about his achievements, he says without
batting an eyelid. "The importance of news photography in Lahore
began with me." To his credit, he introduced creative photography with
series such as "The first dawn of the new year' expose photos such as
LMC 'plague spots,' and an educative 'trade' series on craftsmen at
work. Besides the creative and news side in photography F .E.
Chaudhry began to make several technological breakthroughs. He
improvised new lens for his camera and developed the technique of
taking T.V. photographs, now in popular use in print journalism. He
continued taking news photographs till the day of his retirement in
1973. "I took the last photograph of the former Prime Minister Zulfiqar
Ali Bhutto as he came out of the Lahore High Court after being
convicted" despite warnings from the police.
F .E. Chaudhry certainly has proved his mettle by winning several
national awards for dedicated services, including the Tamgha-e-
Khidmat in 1970, the President's Pride of Performance Award in 1987'
and the highest award in the minority scheme. F .E. Chaudhry's,
contribution in photo' journalism will be the source of enthusiasm and
inspiration for posterity.
At hundred, his experience increased with every crease on his face. The
lens before the retina of F E Chaudhry is now clearer and sharper to see
the frames of life. How erroneous would it be, to say that a
photographer can be retired.
SHIFA AHMAD
115
Saeed Ahmad Butt: Book Review
AZIZ UD DIN AHMAD, PUNJAB AUR IS KEY BERUNI

HAMLA AWAR (PUNJAB AND ITS FOREIGN
INVADERS) (LAHORE: BOOK HOMES, 2007)
The book under review is written by a renowned scholar of leftist

leaning, Aziz ud din Ahmad. This book consists of eight parts, in which
he undertakes to unravel the controversies that had plagued the history
and culture of the Punjab, with particular respect to the Punjab’s role
against the invaders including the British. Besides, he criticizes
somewhat trenchantly, such ‘text-book’ historians, who portray
expansionist invaders in India as Islamic heroes. There is no gainsaying
the fact that a class of beneficiaries flourished in the Punjab, after the
1857 war of independence and served the British interest. Some
historians do emphasize this fact that the annexation of the Punjab by
the British in 1849 brought not only material benefits to Muslims but it
also restored their erstwhile status, reminiscent of the Mughal era.
Having said all that British also drove a communal wedge into the
demography of the Punjab thereby deployed the divide and rule policy,
which remained a very effective instrument of colonial control. As a
consequence Hindus, Muslims and Sikhs were driven apart into
antagonistic religious communities. Aziz ud Din Ahmed has tried to
vindicate the role of Punjabis against the rule of the British thus
rectified the distorted image of Punjabis etched out by the prejudiced
historians. Those historians have laid all the blame on to the door step
of the Punjabi folks without even bothering to look at the resistant
movements launched by the residents of the Punjab against the British.
The British occupation of the Punjab, according to Hamza
Alvi facilitated the transfer of wealth and raw material, particularly
cotton from India (Punjab) to England, so that British need for the raw
material in the wake of industrial revolution could be fulfilled.
Concurrently Punjab s potential as the military recruitment area
enhanced its importance even more. As it has been exhibited by
Mustapha Kamal Pasha, Tan Tai Yong and Rajit Mauzumdar, from
1880s onwards most of the military personnel used to be recruited from
the Punjab. The military recruits from the Punjab served with utmost
zeal and zest the British interests during the Boer War and subsequently
during the two world wars. Those recruited belonged to the rural areas
of the province. The feudal lords played a vital role in that process of
military recruitment. Thus, jagirdars (feudal lords), a class of
beneficiaries won the British patronage in return. The construction of
roads, railway lines, digging up of the canals and establishment of
modern educational institutions brought the social changes in India.
The progress was limited only to those areas, which were considered
important by the British. But the far flung areas in the Seraiki belt in
117
the south or districts like Mianwali in the north remained

underdeveloped with no traces of the industrial growth and
development because these areas had just marginal significance for the
British. The social changes like educational expansion, introduction of
industry and communication network etc played important role in
undermining British rule in India.
Following the Divide and Rule policy, British adopted such
measures which precluded the Hindu, Muslim and Sikh unity. They on
the one hand showed benefaction to the Muslims and on the other hand
made Hindus and Sikhs realize that they had put a permanent check on
the invaders from Afghanistan. So in order to strengthen their position
they must join British army. To counter the influence of the urban
based reform-movement of the three communities, British helped its
own cronies to establish the Unionist Party in 1923. Hence the rural
urban divide which had already been created by promulgating the Land
Alienation Act in 1900-01 was further accentuated. That policy went a
long way in creating dissentions among Punjabi populace which proved
one of the major reasons for the partition of the Punjab in 1947.
Aziz ud Din Ahmad devotes a substantial part of the book in
explicating the motives of the invaders in the Punjab. He gives primacy
to the economic determinant of invasions. Most of the invaders came to
India, plundered its wealth and returned to their native countries,
leaving behind the devastated India. Even the Muslim conquerors
including Mahmud of Ghazna, Ahmad Shah Abdali, Nadir shah etc.
looted the Indian wealth, though used Islam for their selfish motives.
According to the author, they had no concern for the Islamic practices.
They preferred their native cultural practices in India and put aside the
true Islamic values. As the Turkish conquerors patronized the Turkish
customs and traditions in India, which left indelible imprints on the
Indian life during the Sultanate period. Similarly we find profound
Persian cultural influence on Indian society during the Mughal period.
The author, therefore, describes them as expansionists, who expanded
their empire to fulfill their selfish motives. The author laments that the
prejudiced historians portray such invaders as the champions of Islam.
They tend to forget the services of the Sufis for spread of Islam in
India. The author also sheds light on the role of those Sufis, who
practically condemned the caste system and the religious division and
tried to bind people from different castes, creeds and kinships in a bond
of humanity. They preached and professed the ideology of Sulah-I- kul.
Sufis like Khawaja Moeen ud din Ajmari, Bahao ud Din Zikrya
Multani, Sheikh Rukn-i-Alam , Sakhi Sarwar , Baba Farid Ganj Shakar,
Hazarat Mian Mir, shah Hussain, Amir kabir Syed Hamdani and Noor
kutb ul Alim disseminated the message of toleration and peace among
the people of different religious denominations and castes and creeds.
Not only Muslims, but the Hindus and more specifically Sikhs also
were influenced by the Sufis. Sufis lit the light of friendship, peace and
118
harmony in otherwise socially and religiously divided social formation.

Hence, Sufis, according to the author represented the true essence of
Islam.
The author also underscored the importance of the reforms
introduced by the ‘invaders’ in India. But the real motive of those
reforms was to achieve their selfish interest. Like Grand Trunk Road
was built by Sher Shah Suri, but this provided a save passage to Afghan
conquerors to India. Though building roads, forts, beautiful forests, and
palaces provided employment to thousands, however it did not change
the life pattern of common folks. Similarly British also paid attention to
social and economic progress in India, but destroyed the textile industry
of Bengal in order to facilitate its own cronies and more importantly to
fulfill the economic interests of Great Britain in the post Industrial
Revolution era. Author maintains quite categorically that the
conquerors of India altered native industry at the expense of their
interests. On the contrary, the author tries to remove misconceptions
about Ranjit Singh. Sadly enough Ranjit Singh has been subjected to
the historical erasure as allusions about his persona or reign are
conspicuously absent from Pakistani historiography. If he is at all
referred to, in any history book, Ranjit Singh appears to be an epitome
of villainous, anti-Muslim character. Objective assessment is in short
supply. Objectivity calls for setting the record straight. Punjab was not
clearly demarcated province before Ranjit Singh had established his
sway over the region. During his rule, Punjab became an autonomous
region, because Ranjit Singh united and strengthened it. He organized
army on modern lines under the supervision of western generals. He
also put in place a judicial system here. Aziz ud Din Ahmad also
reflects on the state of the Punjab in the pre-Ranjit Singh era when the
region was undergoing anarchy and disorder. He contends Punjab as
the only region whose strategic location had tangible impact on the
historical process, because the Turko Afghan conquerors ruined the
economic life of Punjab every now and then, but sagacious Rangit
Singh, with his formidable Khalsa army made that region quite
impregnable. The demise of Ranjit Singh in 1839 provided a safe
passage to British to conquer Punjab. The author throws light on the
role of Punjabis against the coercive rule of British. He also dispels the
false impression spawned by the historians with anti-Punjabi bias, who
implicate Punjabis as collaborators of the British Raj and did not offer
any resistance during the 1857 war of independence. In order to prove
his point, the author quotes various examples of insurgency against
British in the Punjab. He eulogized the gallantry of Rai Ahmad Khan
Kharal from Gogera in this regard. Similarly Colonization Bill of
Punjab in 1907 made the embers of discontentment smoulder and then
conflagrated among Hindus, Sikhs and Muslims against British. That
discontentment led to the Pagri Sambhal Jatta movement in Punjab,
which eventually forced the British to withdraw the controversial Bill.
119
He opines that canal colonization in Punjab disturbed the time

honoured social fabric, which led to joint resistance of Muslims,
Hindus and Sikh against the British rule. The deployment of divide and
rule policy by British in India had its manifestation in 1883 when
British promulgated the formula of separate electorate in the local
board elections which subverted Hindu, Muslims and Sikh unity in the
Punjab.
Aziz ud Din Ahmed also sheds light on the objectives of
Ghaddar Party, founded in California in 1913. He explains how that
party saw the domestic politics of the Punjab in international
perspective. Ghaddar party accorded a lot of importance to agitational
politics in India to achieve its objectives. While the author exposes
diplomatic deficiencies of the principal exponents of Hijrat movement.
These movements amply demonstrate the anti-imperial role of the
Punjab. The scions of the land of five rivers like Bhagat Singh, Ajit
Singh and Ahmed Khan Kharral testify to the fact that Punjab was at
par with the other regions in the movement for freedom. Baghat Singh
became inspiration for the young generation of not only the Punjabis
but of the whole India of 1930s. All said and done that book is a
masterpiece of progress analysis of history of the Punjab which merits a
place in every library of Pakistan. For the young students of not only
history but all the disciplines, that book is highly recommended. It is
written in simple and accessible style which indeed is a pleasure for
any one interested in the history of the Punjab.
SAEED AHMAD BUTT

GC UNIVERSITY LAHORE
120
NOTES FOR CONTRIBUTORS & REVIEWERS
1. Research papers, notes, review articles, comments, rejoinders and

book reviews-in English only should be sent in duplicate together with
floppy in MS-Word to:
Dr Tahir Kamran, The Editor, The Historian, Department of History,

GC University, Lahore (e-mail: [email protected],
[email protected]).
2. Papers will be accepted for consideration on the understanding that

they are original contributions to the existing knowledge in the fields of
History, International Relations, International Political Economy,
Current Affairs, Strategic Studies, Women Studies, Sociology
Journalism, Political Science, Statistics, Psychology, Philosophy, etc.
3. Each paper should be typed and should carry a margin of an inch and
a half on the left-hand side of the typed page.
4. The first page of the research article should contain the title of the
paper, the name(s), abstract and any acknowledgements.
5. Tables for the main text and each of its appendices should be
numbered serially and separately. The title of each table should be
given in a footnote immediately below the line at the bottom of the
table.
6. Endnotes should be numbered consecutively.
7. All references used in the text should be listed in alphabetical order

of the author's surnames at the end of the text. References in the text
should include the name(s) of author(s) with the year of publication in
parentheses. Attempt should be made to conform to the style of the
Journal. Further information on questions of style may be obtained
from the Editor of this Journal.
8. Each author will receive one copy of The Historian.
9. Book Reviews should give a description of the contents of the

volume and a critical evaluation of the book. It should not exceed 05 or
06 typewritten pages. Each request for a book review in the journal
must be accompanied by one copy of the book concerned.
121
122

The Historian 2009

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

The Historian 2009

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

The Historian 2009

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

The Historian

VOLUME 7 JANUARY-JUNE 2009 NUMBER 1

© The Historian is published by the Department of History, GC

No potion of this journal may be reproduced by any mechanical,

Price: 250 PKR

Associate Editors: Tahir Jamil, Hussain Ahmad Khan, Noor Rehman

Design & Production Incharge: Shifa Ahmad

Editorial Advisory Board

BLEEDING WOUND: ANALYZING PAKISTAN’S KASHMIR POLICY

THE GROUND OF HISTORY: A RELATIONAL UNDERSTANDING OF HEGEL

RATIONALIZING THE MYSTICAL RELATIONSHIP OF ART WITH ARTIST: ART

MUNIR AHMED MUNIR AND FE CHAUDHRY, AB WO LAHORE KAHAN

NOTES FOR CONTRIBUTORS AND REVIEWERS

RELIGIOUS CONTROVERSIES IN THE PUNJAB: THE

ALI USMAN QASMI

This article looks at the contours of the identity

KEY WORDS: Ghazi Mehmud Dharampal, British Punjab, Orientalists,

With the annexation of Punjab in 1849 the British proceeded, in

‘stock-taking’ of the subjects by means of census served as an index of

and considerations. An additional source of inspiration was provided by

THE BEGINNINGS OF RELIGIOUS CONTROVERSIES IN PUNJAB

vernaculars throughout Punjab. Between 1861 and 1871 alone the

successful counter-strategy for proselytization. In the context of

The Vedic truth as it existed in its pure form in the

Other than complying with the tradition of textual representation as in

abandoned it as the basis of religious authority for members of

Shuddhī was performed by Svāmī Dayānand in 1877 to a Hindu of

MUSLIM REACTION TO RELIGIOUS CONTROVERSIES IN PUNJAB

The Muslim reaction to the religious controversies in Punjab was

and satire, as an example of Veda’s crass sexuality and hence a valid

THE ‘APOSTASY’ OF GHĀZĪ MEHMŪD DHARAMPĀL (D. 1960)

In order for newly emerged groups to claim credence as true

that of Ghāzī Mehmūd Dharampāl’s adoption of Hinduism. Ghāzī

Ghāzī Mehmūd’s charge sheet against Islam in his lecture

and pamphlets – assumed considerable significance in meeting the

census and other means along with the imperative of ‘nation-formation’,

with. Kenneth W. Jones, Socio-Religious Reform Movements in British India

Ghāzī Mehmūd to a secure Vedic Āshram to avoid any unpleasant incident.

BLEEDING WOUND: ANALYZING PAKISTAN’S

IRFAN WAHEED USMANI

This article analyses Pakistan’s Kashmir policy from

Kashmir dispute. This paper also highlights the main

KEY WORDS: Jehadi organizations, Kashmir, India, Pakistan, Benazir

The changing geo-political situation in the late 1980s and internal

During 1989-95, Pakistani governments took various initiatives to

Our position is based on the UN resolutions

While addressing the Joint session of Parliament on 2nd December

Pakistan shall not waver in its support for the

Foreign Minister Sahibzada Yaqoob Khan categorically stated before

Pakistan’s stand on Kashmir remained steadfast and

Present Freedom Movement was an important

After the October 1990 elections Nawaz Sharif was elected as

Jammu and Kashmir issue is the main obstacle in the

In her address to the National Assembly on 27th October, 1993, after

I today announce that Pakistan would extend all out

Public mobilization may also be described as a conspicuous plank of

among political forces in Pakistan on Kashmir cause to the observance

Kashmir dispute to divert world attention towards Kashmiris’ cause of

The two issues are immediate, and indeed urgent