The British Empire in South Asia ended in August 1947 when India and Pakistan hoisted the flag of freedom after an epoch-making struggle. Sri Lanka followed suit a year later.
Of the two quasi-independent Himalayan kingdoms of Nepal and Bhutan, the former asserted its total sovereignty while the latter opted for a time-bound treaty relationship with India accepting an Indian oversight on foreign and security policies.
On the periphery of the Raj, Afghanistan too went through stirrings which were destined to eventually turn it into the epicentre of explosive international politics.
The withdrawal of British paramountcy produced different narratives as the newly independent states defined their national identity in their respective political, demographic and cultural ethos.
Nation-forming in most cases was marked by dialectic tensions within each polity as well as by periods of rivalry, confrontation and conflict with neighbours. More than 60 years later each of the seven states that emerged from the shadow of an alien imperial power has much to be proud of and, at the same time, much to be concerned about.
Pakistan's history has been particularly eventful with a chequered balance sheet of achievements and failures. Faced with an existential crisis in the very moment of its birth, it disproved dark prognostications of its impending collapse.
The nascent euphoria of independence translated into the extraordinary resilience of its people. It created the essential infrastructure of a modern state from nothing and starting from an abysmal base line achieved impressive economic growth.
Considered the rural backyard of the metropolitan New Delhi-based British Indian Empire, the new country went through a brisk process of urbanisation and industrialisation. Faced with a serious security dilemma, it raised one of the larger armies in the world and is today one of the known eight nuclear-weapon capable powers.
Ironically, Pakistan has also shown a persistent deficit in state building reflected in an endemic tussle between democracy that its people seem to cherish and the authoritarianism of an entrenched civil and military establishment.
Like its 60th anniversary of independence, the celebrations a year later in 2008 would once again take place in the midst of great tension between resurgent democratic forces and the remaining strongholds of the autocratic order established by General Pervez Musharraf.
The year 2007 saw the first big challenge to Musharraf's authority by a popular movement of lawyers seeking to reverse his dismissal of nearly 50 judges suspected of doubts about the legality of his bid for another five-year term of office.
This year will be remembered for a decisive battle between an already weakened autocratic regime and the democratic forces that won the general election of February 18
This coalition of winners had genuinely explored the possibility of working out a modus vivendi with Musharraf for months before abandoning it and confronting him with a move to impeach him in parliament.
No Pakistani head of state has ever faced an impeachment that, under the Pakistani Constitution, requires a two-third majority in a combined session of the National Assembly and the Senate.
In order to dramatise this rejection by the entire federation, each of the four provincial assemblies is set to demand that Musharraf seeks a vote of confidence from parliament. It is a defining moment in the country's tangled struggle for constitutionalism and the supremacy of parliament.
Exponents of Musharraf's impeachment argue that this unprecedented step is meant to remind future military leaders that staging a coup d'etat is treason under the law of the land.
Simple question
Since mid-1990s it has, however, not been a simple question of relative power claimed by elected civilians and the self-appointed Praetorian Guard. Militant groups that have no faith in traditional politics have defied the authority of the state in the name of religion, ethnicity and economic disparities.
A further dimension has been added to a complex situation by Pakistan's geopolitical situation. The American military intervention and the indefinite presence of Nato in Afghanistan have transformed the strategic environment.
Musharraf took great pride in making Pakistan a frontline state in the war against terror, but that role is fast becoming a mainspring of its present and future sorrows. He had little leverage on the duration and the nature of the Afghan conflict.
Its prolongation and Pakistan's heavy losses progressively weakened the regime polarising the society on political, economic and ideological lines.
Notwithstanding the wear and tear of the last decade, Pakistan's basic institutions are intact. So when analysts talk of the country making a new beginning on its 62nd birthday the situation is not analogous to 1947.
The problems are grave, but amenable to creative and resolute solutions. The exaggerated federalism of military rule affected inter-provincial harmony. The new political coalition has to go beyond damage limitation and fulfil the promise of the 1973 Constitution to provide greater provincial autonomy.
The rift between modernists and "Islamists" cannot be simply legislated away; it will need a long term solution based on continuous negotiations, restructuring of the educational system and equalisation of economic opportunities between the westernised elite that grabs most of them and the orthodox segments that get locked out of a system linked to a globalised neo-liberal economic order.
Pakistan must also strengthen cooperative linkages with its regional neighbours. This means an irreversible rapprochement with India and Afghanistan and consolidation of time- tested ties with China and the Arab world, especially, the Gulf Cooperation Council states that are increasingly investing in its vital development projects.
Iran is another neighbour with which the occasional ambivalence has to be overcome. Like the rest of the world, Pakistan has to manage its relations with the United States, as well as it can, but that does not take away the salience of a sound regional policy.
It is decision time in Pakistan on domestic polity, a more egalitarian economic system and a new orientation in foreign and security policy. It seems to have coincided with its 62nd birthday.
Tanvir Ahmad Khan is a former ambassador and foreign secretary of Pakistan. He currently heads the Institute of Strategic Studies, Islamabad.
Send us your comments
TERMS AND CONDITIONS
Gulf News may edit comments for length and clarity but will not change the tone of the message. Comments will only be accepted if all fields (including name) are filled correctly and the message isn't abusive, defamatory or offensive. The Gulf News website will only print your first name along with your comment. Please state in the message if you wish to remain anonymous. All comments sent may be forwarded for use in the Gulf News newspaper.
