WHEN DREAMS LEAD TO DISILLUSIONMENT—-(21)
FROM THE FAILED REVOLUTION OF FIELD MARSHAL AYUB KHAN
TO THE PROMISE TODAY OF THE EMERGENCE OF NEW PAKISTAN
FROM THE DASHED EXPECTATIONS OF OVER FIVE DECADES.
TO THE SURGE OF NEW HOPES TAKING BIRTH TODAY.
THIS IS MY STORY.
MY JOURNEY THROUGH THE ERA OF AYUB KHAN TO THE TIMES OF IMRAN KHAN.
READ FROM TUESDAY THE 13TH OF NOVEMBER 2018 IN INSTALMENTS.
MEANWHILE THE ECHOES OF THE HEART WILL CONTINUE FROM THE PAST.
GHULAM AKBAR
21—The Year When Nasser Became My Hero
1956 was also the year when I fell in love with the leadership of Gamal Abdul Nasser of Egypt. He became fourth of my ‘modern times’ heroes, the previous three being Jinnah, AtaTurk and Hitler. Mao at that time had yet to find access to my innermost recesses of heart.
When Gamal Abdul Nasser announced the nationalization of the Suez Canal Company, he made history. From then on, the Egypt’s revolutionary leader, a supporter of non-alignment became one of the most important leaders in the Third World. T a par with Nehru of India and Tito of Yugoslavia.
The symbolism of the canal’s nationalization was tremendous. For the first time, a former colonized country had managed to regain its economic independence. Nasser had become the champion of the Arab World. He decided to address the nations directly, totally disregarding the leaders of the ‘reactionary’ regimes. Nothing seemed to stop him.
It was in those days that I remember an interview of Nasser had appeared in an issue of Life, one of the four magazines that I used to read nearly regularly—the others being Reader’s Digest Newsweek and Time.
Infact Life’s seniormost editor had travelled himself, to Cairo to interview Nasser.
A few questions and answers I still remember. Unfortunately I don’t have the habit of maintaining a diary or notes. I have always relied heavily on my memory.
To a question regarding Bandung Conference, Nasser had replied. “Non-aligned countries have a role to play. But I don’t find any sense in China and India going along together for long. They are, for the simple reason of their geopolitical and strategic position alone, logical adversaries. I don’t find any future for Hindi-Chinese brotherhood slogans.”
In reply to another question, Nasser had said: “It is unlikely that Pakistan and India will ever find peace in their relationship. Their case is even worse than that of Arabs and Israel. My political acumen says that Pakistan and China are unlikely not to form a lasting geo-political and stratetigically important bond in near future. This will happen despite Pakistan’s huge reliance on the West.”
Nasser’s words were to prove to be prophetic.
Nasser was a moving orator too. I had grown fond of reading about him in the Suez Canal war days.
Before he adopted Arab Nationalism as his philosophy, Nasser had flirted very convincingly with the concept of Universal Islamism.
In his speech on the occasion of his pilgrimage to Makkah as head of an Egyptian delegation some years earlier, he had said: I am looking forward to an era when this place will be the headquarters of the World of Islam—the seat of Islamic Unity. I have visions of Makkah becoming the Capital of the United Nations of Islam where scholars, politicians and scientists from all the Muslim countries will assemble every year to forge common policies, and common goals.”
This aspect of Nasser’s personality was not to find tangible political expression—largely due to the fact that the West had sucked in the Islamic World as allies in its confrontation with the Godless Soviet Union.
Another speech of Nasser that had a huge impact on my mind and thinking processes was about Social Justice.
“It is not the Will of God,” he had said, “that Riches be hereditary and Poverty be hereditary, that Health be hereditary and Disease be hereditary, that Privilege of Education be hereditary and Fate of Ignorance be hereditary and that the Right to rule be hereditary and the Indignity of being Subjects be hereditary.”
