Bridging the Divide: Moving Beyond the Two-Nation Theory for India-Pakistan Peace

In April 2025, Pakistan’s Army Chief, General Asim Munir, stirred controversy by reaffirming the two-nation theory, a belief that Hindus and Muslims are so different they need separate countries. Speaking at a convention, he claimed Pakistanis differ from Hindus in religion, culture, and ambitions, even calling Kashmir Pakistan’s “jugular vein.” These remarks, rooted in an idea from the 1940s, have reignited debates about whether this theory still matters today. While Pakistan clings to it, India rejects it, and many argue it’s outdated. This article explores the theory’s history, its role in today’s tensions, and why it might be time to move on.

The two-nation theory was born in the early 20th century when some Muslim leaders, like Muhammad Ali Jinnah, argued that Hindus and Muslims couldn’t live together as one nation. They believed differences in faith, traditions, and culture were too deep. This idea fueled the demand for Pakistan, leading to India’s partition in 1947. Pakistan became a homeland for Muslims, while India chose secularism, embracing all religions. With over 14% of its population being Muslim, India proved that people of different faiths could share one nation. Yet, Pakistan’s leaders, even today, see the theory as the heart of their identity.

General Munir’s recent comments show how strongly Pakistan holds onto this idea. On April 17, 2025, he urged Pakistanis to teach their children they are “fundamentally different” from Hindus. He also repeated Pakistan’s claim on Kashmir, a region both countries dispute. India’s leaders quickly hit back. Assam’s Chief Minister, Himanta Biswa Sarma, said it’s time to stop hoping for friendship with Pakistan. Foreign affairs expert Robinder Sachdev called Munir’s views “backwards,” arguing they block any chance for peace. These sharp reactions highlight how the theory keeps India and Pakistan at odds.

Related Articles

But is the two-nation theory still relevant? Many signs suggest it’s not. When Bangladesh broke away from Pakistan in 1971, it showed that religion alone doesn’t unite a nation. Language and culture mattered more for Bengalis. Pakistan also faces internal struggles, like demands for autonomy in Balochistan and economic challenges. Focusing on an old theory distracts from fixing these problems. Meanwhile, India’s success as a diverse, secular nation—with Muslims thriving in every field—challenges the idea that Hindus and Muslims can’t coexist.

Back in 1982, Indian thinker K Subrahmanyam (father of External Affairs Minister S Jaishankar) explained why Pakistan sticks to the theory. He said it’s driven by fear—fear that without it, Pakistan might lose its identity or even be absorbed by India. It also justifies their claim on Kashmir. But Subrahmanyam pointed out flaws. For example, Pakistan didn’t follow the same logic for Junagarh and Hyderabad, areas with Hindu majorities that joined India despite Muslim rulers. He also noted that India’s support for Bangladesh’s independence showed no desire to “take over” Pakistan. These arguments still hold true today.

The theory’s biggest harm is how it fuels conflict. By emphasizing differences, it deepens mistrust between India and Pakistan. Munir’s comments, for instance, could stir unrest or inspire extremist groups, as some critics fear. Instead of solving real issues like poverty or development, leaders on both sides get caught in this old debate. Globalization has also changed the world—people of different faiths now live and work together everywhere. Clinging to a divisive idea seems out of step with these modern realities.

For the common people in both India and Pakistan, life is about simple things: good jobs, safety for their families, and a chance to live in peace. This old talk of two separate nations sometimes makes these simple dreams harder to reach. Many folks on both sides share a love for similar things, like the tasty food we eat and the songs we enjoy listening to. Think about biryani or the old film songs – they are loved by many, no matter which side of the border they live on.

In India, we see that people of different religions live together and work together. You can find Muslims in all kinds of jobs, helping to build the country, just like their Hindu, Sikh, and Christian brothers and sisters. This shows that living together and working together is possible.

The issue of Kashmir is a big one, and sometimes this two-nation theory is brought up when talking about it. But focusing only on who is different can make it harder to find a solution that everyone can agree on.

If India and Pakistan decide to look ahead and work together on things that affect everyone – like the weather changing or doing more trade – it could bring positive changes for all. Maybe then, the focus will shift from what divides us to what we can achieve together.

In the end, General Munir’s remarks remind us how the two-nation theory keeps India and Pakistan stuck in the past. It’s a barrier to peace, feeding tensions over Kashmir and beyond. For ordinary people in both countries, who want jobs, safety, and a better future, this old idea offers nothing. It’s time for leaders to look beyond it, embrace shared goals, and build a future where differences don’t divide. Only then can South Asia truly move forward.

(Girish Linganna, the author of this article, is an award-winning Science Writer and a Defence, Aerospace & Political Analyst based in Bengaluru. He is also Director of ADD Engineering Components, India, Pvt. Ltd, a subsidiary of ADD Engineering GmbH, Germany. You can reach him, at: [email address removed])