Two state solution, the divine narrative as Munir revises history

The inclusion of support to Gaza, and the underlining that Pakistan was the first state in modern history to be formed on the basis of Islam (Kalima) 1300 years after Prophet Mohammed formed the first Islamic state in his speech, Pakistan’s Chief of Army Staff Asim Munir essentially used political Islam to declare war on India, Israel and the west during his recent speech.

More interesting in Gen. Munir’s speech was his view of the two state solution, a narrative Islamic extremists such as Hamas are also trying to promote in the west. While India and Pakistan were separated from one country and are a people who originate from the same historical, geographical and cultural basis, Gen. Munir instead preferred to declare that the Muslims of Pakistan are a different race and of social and cultural thought than the Indians (read Hindus) and this was the reason why the formation of Pakistan was a necessity and was divinely supported.

The two state solution has largely failed in the Indian-subcontinent and in 1971 East Pakistan separated from the West, partially due to its imposition of its orthodox brand of Islam, language and racist supremacy into Bangladesh. Munir’s speech could not have been further from the truth. The foundation of Pakistan was justified by its proponents as to protect the Muslim minority in a Hindu majority in India. Eventually united India had around a 25% Muslim population and post partition this was reduced to around 15% Muslims in India, the rest divided into Pakistan and modern Bangladesh. 

The speech of Gen. Munir is important in several contexts to Israel. First because of his support to Gaza and Hamas and his unconditional condemnation of Israel. Second and more importantly due to the narrative that Gen. Munir chose to spread, which is very similar to that which Hamas and other radical groups are spreading. Most importantly is because Pakistan is an Islamic nuclear power and Gen. Munir today controls the government, much has the army has done over the past decades in the country.

In January, one of Iran’s top military commanders Lt. Gen. Bagheri visited Pakistan and in his meetings especially with Gen. Munir asked for closer defense ties, especially in the field of military production and intelligence sharing.

Despite Sunni Shia tensions, it is widely agreed that Iran and Pakistan collaborate on intelligence operations overseas, especially targeting Israel. Pakistan has often also been accused of helping Iran’s nuclear program.

A hardline position by Pakistan’s most powerful leader, at a point where the US and Iran are negotiating to reach an agreement for the security of West Asia and Israel, cannot be taken lightly. Also his narrative, similar to the Palestinian narrative, demonizes in this case the Hindu’s and Indians and glorifies the divine approval for the formation of Pakistan. While this has been normalized by anti-Israel groups in the west in the past months, it is to be taken seriously when a senior powerful Pakistani army leader echoes the sentiment.

“Our religion is different, our customs are different, our traditions are different, our thoughts are different, our ambitions are different — that’s where the foundation of the two-nation theory was laid. We are two nations, we are not one nation,” he said. What created more unease was his insistence that children be taught these concepts.

As Pakistan Army Chief General Asim Munir strikes a defiant tone on Balochistan—calling for unity and warning against separatist narratives—the echoes of history grow louder. In 1971, then-President and Army Chief Yahya Khan issued similar proclamations about East Pakistan: invoking patriotism, blaming foreign conspiracies, and dismissing popular dissent as the work of fringe insurgents.

But history tells a different tale. The refusal to acknowledge political grievances, the choice of military might over meaningful dialogue, and the branding of resistance as treason only accelerated the path to rupture. The voices from Dhaka were silenced—until they could no longer be ignored, and Bangladesh was born out of blood and denial.

Today, Balochistan bears haunting similarities. Whispers of alienation, accounts of enforced disappearances, and an entire generation growing up in a climate of fear. Yet the official rhetoric remains frozen in time: dismissive, unyielding, and determined to project an image of control.

General Munir’s recent remarks attempt to paint a picture of unity and order. But when history knocks again, it begs the question—has Pakistan truly learned from 1971, or is it simply repeating the same tragic script in a different theatre? More importantly, how much of Gen. Munir’s rhetoric will show up as support to terrorist groups operating against India and Israel?