The Pakistan Resolution: A defining moment in history

Seventy-eight years after independence, Pakistan continues to wrestle with deep internal and external challenges. The trauma of its 1971 breakup lingers, even as separatist movements simmer in Balochistan and hostile non-state actors, including the Taliban, destabilise Khyber Pakhtunkhwa. In such times, it becomes imperative to look back to the nation's founding inspiration-the Pakistan Resolution of 1940-and to realign national priorities with the principles that once rallied the Muslims of the subcontinent in their struggle for an independent homeland.

Following a major setback in the 1937 provincial elections, the All-India Muslim League struggled to assert itself. The Indian National Congress formed ministries in most provinces, including some Muslim-majority areas, sidelining the League and exposing its weak support base. Recognising the danger, Quaid-i-Azam Muhammad Ali Jinnah mobilised Muslim sentiment, criticising Congress rule for its discriminatory policies and warning of political and economic marginalisation.

This urgency led to the Lahore Session of March 22-24, 1940-a turning point in the struggle for Muslim autonomy. The Pakistan Resolution rejected the federal scheme of the Government of India Act 1935, which concentrated defence, foreign affairs, and communications in a powerful central government. The League declared the arrangement "totally unsuited" to India's conditions and unacceptable to Muslim interests, demanding instead greater autonomy and self-determination.

Ironically, Pakistan today operates under a federal system similar in structure to what the League once opposed. The concerns voiced in 1940-that centralised control would weaken provinces, marginalise local leadership, and create uneven development-still resonate. Provinces such as Balochistan, interior Sindh, and parts of KP remain underdeveloped despite the 18th Amendment (2010), which devolved powers over health, education, and local governance. Economic dependence on the centre persists, limiting true provincial autonomy.

A confederal model-granting provinces control over economic policy and greater say in defence-could address long-standing grievances. Creating new provinces such as South Punjab, Karachi, and Hazara within this framework could improve resource allocation, political representation, and governance.

The Pakistan Resolution's original wording-calling for "independent states" where constituent units would be "autonomous and sovereign"-suggests that multiple self-governing Muslim states were initially envisioned, not a single centralised federation. Though the League shifted to a unified state model by 1946, various regions retained autonomy after 1947. Examples include:

* FATA and FANA's special status until 2018.

* Swat, Dir, Hunza, and Nagar retaining princely privileges until the 1960s-70s.

* Balochistan's delayed provincial status, sparking resistance in 1948.

These historical arrangements underline how the federal model evolved by absorbing autonomous regions-often through involuntary integration-without resolving their grievances. The result has been persistent unrest in marginalised areas. The 1971 secession of East Pakistan, driven by political exclusion and economic neglect, remains a stark reminder of the dangers of centralised governance.

To avoid further fragmentation, Pakistan must reorient its constitutional framework toward genuine provincial autonomy, as envisaged in the 1940 Resolution. A confederal structure ensuring equitable development, meaningful political representation, and respect for local identity could foster stability, unity, and prosperity-diminishing the risk of renewed separatist movements and regional alienation.

(Photo courtesy: Author-original text of the Pakistan Resolution).

—The author has done Masters in Religion and Global Futures / University of Bayreuth-Germany and pursuing MPhil in History from the University

of Karachi