The politics of the post-World War II era were framed as a global struggle towards decolonization and the dismantling of imperialism. The objective of this international movement by the colonized states was the liberation from the despotic and hegemonic rule of the colonizers and the reclamation of their land, language, cultural identities, and economic resources. Though the states succeeded in ousting the imperialistic powers from their land, their structural legacies persisted. Consequently, the post-colonial government utilized the structural legacies it left behind in the formation of internal colonies. Therefore, the colonized communities, after attaining independence, got recolonized by their own governments.
Similarly, within this global movement against anti-colonialism, the inception of Pakistan was the direct consequence in the subcontinent. The anti-imperialistic struggle of Pakistan, like other states, was embodied by the desire for true independence, sovereignty, and equality for all citizens against the British Raj in the subcontinent.
However, after attaining independence from the British Raj, Pakistan reverted to imperialistic practices by revitalizing the colonial residues. The post-colonial elites in Pakistan re-established social hierarchies, exploited natural resources in the peripheral areas, and exercised control, replicating colonial regimes. Furthermore, the state apparatus in Pakistan, through its legal and political institutions, reproduced the British legacies, entrenching the social exclusion of marginalized communities.
Hence, this article will discuss the internal colonization in Pakistan by proceeding in two parts; first, it outlines the foundation of colonization and decolonization, drawing from the theory of Frantz Fanon. Second, it examines Pakistan’s governance structure, institutionalizing internal colonization, further highlighting the socio-political impacts of these colonial legacies on the marginalized communities of Pakistan.
From Decolonization to Internal Colonization: A Fanonian Framework
Before World War II, Great Britain, France, Portugal, the United States, Germany, Italy, and Belgium collectively colonized Africa, Asia, America, and various parts of Oceania. They established their imperialistic hegemony in these territories by either exploiting their economies and extracting their resources or by forming settler colonies in these territories. According to Frantz Fanon, this colonization of states was characterized by the economic immiseration of the natives, social dissolution, dehumanization of the indigenous communities, and obliteration of the social fabric by dissolving the cultural identities of these nations. According to him, the colonization systemically institutionalized the exclusion of indigenous communities.
However, post-World War II, the system of colonialism collapsed. The colonized states emerged independent, and their struggle for their emancipation from imperialism began. Frantz Fanon, in his work, offers critical insights into this process of decoloniality. According to him, anti-colonialism does not reciprocate decolonization. In his work, Fanon reflects on the process of post-colonial transformation in these states. Fanon argued that decolonization means wiping out all the traces of colonial legacies.
He characterized this post-colonial emancipation by the decentralization of political structures to decimate traces of despotic rule. Furthermore, he called for the rebirth of social order for the reintegration of otherized indigenous communities into the social fabric. He argued that this should be carried out by reorganizing economic relations, promoting political consciousness, and restoring cultural values by promoting native languages and literature.
Unfortunately, the efforts of decoloniality proved to be futile in underdeveloped colonized states like Pakistan. According to Fanon, the imperial edifice has been systemically equipped by the dominant groups to internally colonize subordinate ethnic or racial groups in these post-colonial states. Furthermore, in states like Pakistan, the colonization was primarily exploitative in nature; the British Empire rapaciously extracted resources from the subcontinent to accumulate wealth while maintaining its political dominion in the region. However, to maintain their imperial hegemony, they assimilated the local culture by establishing a durable infrastructure of control—centralized bureaucracy, codified laws, military structures, and promotion of English as a language.
Therefore, these established institutions are embedded as colonial relics in the post-colonial state. According to Fanon, decoloniality does not mean reciprocating imperialism with domestic rulers if the exploitative infrastructure remains intact. It is pertinent to dismantle the colonial infrastructure; otherwise, it causes internalization and re-enactment of the colonial order.
In the case of Pakistan, after the formal exit of the British Empire, colonial legacies survived in the form of bureaucratic, military, and judicial institutions. Rather than social integration, rebuilding of the social fabric, and revival of local languages and traditions, the centralized control was continued. This continuity is a stark reminder that Pakistan never truly underwent decolonization; rather, it transitioned from external colonization—the British Raj—to internal colonization—feudal ruling elites.
Manifestations in Pakistan: Colonized Policies and Internal Colonization
The shadows of colonialism never left Pakistan; rather, it morphed into internal colonization. The entrenched legacies of imperialism can still be seen in the legal, economic, and administrative structure of Pakistan. The political elites in Pakistan superseded decoloniality and intentionally fostered the colonial order for the sustenance of their power. This internal colonization is evident from the political history of Pakistan forged by the economic and political marginalization of subordinate ethnic groups.
An unholy alliance of aristocratic political leaders emerged to colonize weaker provinces, communities, and their language, culture, and economies in Pakistan. The aristocratic leaders exchanged seats as rulers, and the bureaucratic, legal, and administrative institutions facilitated this alliance, further solidifying centralization of power.
Economic Disparities Between Provinces
The concentration of power in a few hands in Pakistan is sustained through the strategic immiseration of provincial minorities. This is evident from the political and economic exploitation in Balochistan, morphing it into an interior colony within the state. Though it is the largest province of Pakistan, rich in minerals and resources, it remains the most underdeveloped part of the state. Due to the resource exploitation, Balochistan has become a battleground between the state and the individuals.
This economic and political repression has caused widespread unrest among the people of Balochistan. They see the actions of the government as a form of land colonization, where the local resources have been extracted by the central government without adequate compensation to the natives. The situation has worsened over the past decades because of the rising rates of unemployment, drastic decreases in per capita income, and a lack of developmental infrastructure despite Balochistan’s rich resources.
The conflict between the state and the people of Balochistan has further intensified after the initiation of the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) project. This project promised economic and infrastructural development in Balochistan. However, the local people of Balochistan have reaped no economic benefit from this project. The key component of this project was the Gwadar port, but no substantial employment or economic benefit was provided to the people of Balochistan. On the other hand, they witnessed a greater influx of Chinese workers and military personnel in the area; this further entrenched their impression of suppression and internal colonization.
Political Repression of Marginalized Communities
According to Fanon, the first and foremost priority of any state during decolonization is to ensure the political consciousness of the people and promote collective activism in society. However, in Pakistan, the state apparatus has been systemically employed to repress political minorities. The legal system adopted colonial relics to marginalize minorities and to curb unrest as a colonial strategy, and to prevent the national consciousness of the people.
This is evident from the state oppression in Balochistan. The people of Balochistan have called for greater autonomy over their regional resources. However, their demands are met with the obstinate callousness of the central government. They resort to heavy-handed tactics to curb dissent. This includes human rights abuses, enforced disappearances, extrajudicial killings, and political disenfranchisement in Balochistan. People of Balochistan have raised concerns over possible rigging of electorates, lack of genuine political representation, and the establishment-backed provincial government. Nevertheless, the central government is deafeningly complacent to their struggles.
Furthermore, religious minorities have also been politically repressed since the inception of Pakistan. Blasphemy laws have been utilized to abuse religious minorities. The blasphemy laws of Pakistan are the colonial residues adopted by the British to govern the multi-religious subcontinent. In 1927, after the publication of a pamphlet, Rangila Rasul, that was offensive to the Muslims, riots broke out in the subcontinent. To control the situation of law and order, the British Raj introduced Section 295A in the IPC. The purpose of this colonial law was not justice but control. The same tactics have been employed by the post-colonial governments in Pakistan.
This has been exemplified by Zia-ul-Haq, who, to protect his authoritarian regime, Islamized the colonial legacies and awarded arbitrary and punitive punishments as a mode of statecraft. The Hadood Ordinance, 1979, legislated by Zia’s regime, applied to Muslims and non-Muslims alike, further curtailing their basic rights. All of these actions culminate in the internal colonization of regional and religious minorities inside the geographical borders of their own country by their own government.
Dissolution of Regional Languages
In the post-colonial landscape, the state of Pakistan, to marginalize the communities in peripheral areas of the state and to re-establish the social hierarchies, dissolved the regional languages. Furthermore, the ruling elite in Pakistan devised a five-tier system of language hierarchies, assigning a particular role to each regional language. In this system, English has become the royal language. It became the medium of communication for a small, educated class, military elites, the ruling class, and the educated aristocracy of Pakistan. As a colonial relic, it was made the official language of the provincial and federal governments. In contemporary times, it has further expanded as a medium of education and a symbol of nobility in the country.
Accordingly, the status of Urdu was regressed to a second-tier language, which has become the mode of communication for the middle and lower middle classes of the country. Furthermore, the major regional languages such as Saraiki, Pashtu, Sindhi, Balochi, and Bihari have become third-tier languages. The development of these languages has become stagnant, and gradually their cultural value is vanishing. Whereas other languages have been relegated to the status of local languages and have become insignificant and irrelevant in the political discourse.
However, the poets and writers who tried to defy the hierarchies established by the state and challenged this internal colonialism were tortured, harassed, and traumatized by the state since the early years of independence. These poets included Ahmed Faraz, Habib Jalib, Faiz Ahmed Faiz, and Ustad Daman. These poets resisted this internal colonization with their poetic verses and were prosecuted and exiled by the military and civil leadership of the state. Furthermore, the poetic discourse by the poets in their native languages exposed and boldly challenged the system of internal oppression in post-colonial Pakistan.
Consequently, this dissolution of languages has been favored by the ruling elites to control the narrative and political discourse in Pakistan. A vast majority of the country did not understand either English or Urdu. The regional languages endorsed as insignificant by the state represent 77.24% of the population. Therefore, this language and cultural oppression by the state facilitates them in curtailing political consciousness and assists in stabilizing the system of internal colonies in the peripheral regions of Pakistan.
Conclusion
Even after 87 years of independence, the project of decolonization of Pakistan remains unfinished. The colonial legacies persist, haunting the existence of marginalized communities in Pakistan. The absorption of colonial legacies in the post-colonial structure of Pakistan established interior colonies in the state. Utilizing Frantz Fanon’s concept of internal colonization, it becomes clear that the remnants of colonialism are not just artifacts of the past but influential forces that shape the current political and legal environment in Pakistan. Legal frameworks, policies, and institutions—many of which are directly inherited from the British—serve as tools of exclusion, reinforcing hierarchies and perpetuating unequal power dynamics.
For Pakistan to transcend its colonial legacy, it must address the persistent continuities ingrained in its legal, political, and economic systems. Authentic liberation demands that we not only recognize these internal colonial structures but also rethink governance based on principles of inclusivity, pluralism, and fairness. Only by doing this can the vision of independence be realized, transforming decolonization from a mere symbolic act into a tangible experience for all the citizens.
If you want to submit your articles and/or research papers, please visit the Submissions page.
To stay updated with the latest jobs, CSS news, internships, scholarships, and current affairs articles, join our Community Forum!
The views and opinions expressed in this article/paper are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect the editorial position of Paradigm Shift.
