SOURCE: AFI
On April 16, 2025, Pakistan’s Army Chief, General Asim Munir, delivered a vitriolic speech at the Overseas Pakistanis Convention in Islamabad that laid bare the foundational ideology of Pakistan: an unapologetic rejection of Hindu identity, both religious and cultural. In a sweeping diatribe, Munir declared, “Our forefathers thought we were different from Hindus in every possible aspect of life. 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.” This stark pronouncement from Pakistan’s most powerful figure not only reignited the divisive two-nation theory but also demolished the oft-repeated clichés peddled by India’s self-styled defense analysts and the so-called ‘Aman ki Asha’ cabal, who naively champion the idea that a “stable Pakistan” serves India’s interests.
Munir’s speech was a clarion call to Pakistanis to “narrate the story of Pakistan” to their children, emphasizing that the nation’s very existence—its wajood—is rooted in the rejection of Hindu identity. By invoking the two-nation theory, coined by the Muslim League and championed by Muhammad Ali Jinnah, Munir underscored that Pakistan was created as a separate state for Muslims to escape the perceived cultural and political dominance of Hindus in a united India. His assertion that Hindus and Muslims differ in “every possible aspect of life” is not merely rhetorical; it is a reaffirmation of Pakistan’s state ideology, which views Hindu identity as antithetical to its existence.
This is not a new sentiment. Pakistan’s history is replete with leaders who have framed Hindus as the perpetual “other.” Former President Muhammad Ayub Khan, in his 1959 writings, expressed disdain for Hindus, arguing that they could never be friends of Pakistan due to ideological differences. Munir’s rant echoes this legacy, positioning Hindus as an existential threat to Pakistan’s identity. His speech leaves no room for ambiguity: to be Pakistani is to reject Hindu culture, religion, and even the possibility of coexistence.
For years, a section of India’s defense analysts, think-tank pundits, and media personalities have peddled the notion that a “stable Pakistan” is in India’s interest. The argument goes that a prosperous, secure Pakistan would reduce cross-border terrorism, stabilize South Asia, and foster economic cooperation. Munir’s speech shatters this delusion. A stable Pakistan, as envisioned by its military establishment, is not one that seeks peace with India but one that doubles down on its anti-Hindu ideology to unify its fractious society.
Pakistan’s stability, as Munir’s words suggest, hinges on perpetuating a narrative of hostility toward Hindus and, by extension, India. The two-nation theory, which Munir champions, is inherently exclusionary, designed to consolidate Pakistan’s identity by demonizing its eastern neighbor. Far from fostering peace, a “stable” Pakistan under this ideology would likely intensify its efforts to undermine India, whether through propaganda, support for terrorism, or provocative actions in Jammu and Kashmir. Munir’s own remarks on Kashmir, where he claimed no power could separate it from Pakistan, reinforce this aggressive posture.
The idea that India benefits from a stable Pakistan ignores the reality of Pakistan’s state-sponsored anti-India activities. From the 1999 Kargil War, which Munir recently admitted involved Pakistani military forces, to the 2008 Mumbai attacks orchestrated by Lashkar-e-Taiba with alleged ties to Pakistan’s ISI, the Pakistani establishment has consistently acted against India’s interests. A stable Pakistan, governed by a military that thrives on anti-Hindu rhetoric, would only embolden these efforts, not diminish them.
The ‘Aman ki Asha’ (Hope for Peace) initiative, promoted by certain Indian and Pakistani media houses and intellectuals, has long advocated for people-to-people contact and dialogue to bridge the India-Pakistan divide. While well-intentioned, this narrative grossly underestimates the Pakistani military’s grip on the nation’s psyche and its unwavering commitment to an anti-Hindu worldview. Munir’s speech is a slap in the face to those who believe in the possibility of cultural or civilizational reconciliation.
The Pakistani Army, which Munir represents, has ruled the country for nearly half its existence and controls its foreign and security policies. His explicit rejection of Hindu-Muslim coexistence—“We are two nations, we are not one nation”—directly contradicts the rosy assumptions of ‘Aman ki Asha’ proponents who imagine a shared cultural heritage could unite the two nations. Pakistan’s treatment of its Hindu minority, reduced from 14.6% of the population in 1941 to a mere 2.17% in 2023, further exposes the hollowness of this vision. Reports of forced conversions, temple desecrations, and systemic discrimination against Hindus in Pakistan paint a grim picture of a state fundamentally at odds with pluralism.
The ‘Aman ki Asha’ cabal often ignores the Pakistani military’s role in perpetuating this hostility. Munir’s speech is a reminder that Pakistan’s identity, as defined by its most powerful institution, is not about embracing diversity but about excluding Hindus and, by extension, India. The romanticized notion of peace through cultural exchanges or cricket diplomacy crumbles when confronted with the reality of a military that thrives on division.
Munir’s speech is not just a rant; it is a clear articulation of Pakistan’s raison d’être. The Pakistani state, as he envisions it, exists to assert its distinctiveness from India by rejecting Hindu identity in all its forms. This rejection is not merely religious but encompasses cultural, social, and political dimensions. Munir’s call to “narrate Pakistan’s story” to future generations is a directive to perpetuate this divisive narrative, ensuring that anti-Hindu sentiment remains the bedrock of Pakistani nationalism.
This ideology has real-world consequences. Pakistan’s Hindu community faces systemic persecution, with reports of over 1,000 forced conversions annually in Sindh alone and violent attacks on temples, such as the 2021 assault on a Hindu temple in Rahim Yar Khan. The Pakistani state’s indifference to these atrocities reflects its alignment with Munir’s vision of a nation where Hindu identity has no place. Even the rare inclusion of Hindus in the Pakistani Army, such as Major Kelash Garvada in 2019, is tokenistic, with no Hindu officer rising beyond the rank of Major in seven decades.
Munir’s speech should serve as a wake-up call for India’s policymakers, analysts, and citizens. The notion that a stable Pakistan would be a benign neighbor is a dangerous fantasy, rooted in a misunderstanding of Pakistan’s core ideology. A militarily and economically stable Pakistan, under the current establishment, would likely channel its resources into more sophisticated forms of hostility, from cyber warfare to proxy terrorism.
NOTE: AFI is a proud outsourced content creator partner of IDRW.ORG. All content created by AFI is the sole property of AFI and is protected by copyright. AFI takes copyright infringement seriously and will pursue all legal options available to protect its content.