A controversial book on the partition of India in 1947

`Jinnah India-Partition Independence': A BOOK BY JASWANT SINGH

(EX-BJP LEADER)

(Saturday, August 29, 2009)

In his controversial book, Singh has been effusive in his praise of Jinnah, even perhaps, at the expense of Gandhi.

Jinnah India-Partition IndependenceJaswant SinghRupa & Co,2009, pp 669, Rs 695“This is that account of Jinnah, the man and his heroic endeavours and of the others, too. And of these is a story written: but (then) Allah alone knoweth all?” Thus spake Jaswant Singh at the end of his book, Jinnah India–Partition Independence, the controversial tome which apparently earned him his expulsion from the party of which he was a founder over 30 years ago. There are wheels within wheels in the current episode involving his forced departure from the party as well as the historic saga of Partition 62 years ago that he seeks ‘to reveal’. Political life is layered and so is history.

Mohammad Ali Jinnah’s transformation from a modern-liberal persona (three–piece suits, cigars, cigarette holder, rebellious eating habits and King’s English etc) to a politician fiercely committed to a Muslim nation could be subject to many interpretations — depending on which side of the fence one is sitting on. At what point of time in history Jinnah muted a change in his personality (thinking and outward appearance — Sherwani and Jinnah cap) has been written umpteenth times by several historians as well as those participating in the freedom movement — a majority of the accounts, rightly or wrongly, blaming Jinnah for the tragic Partition.

Singh has joined ‘the minority of the writers’ in blaming Sardar Patel and Jawaharlal Nehru and the Congress party for causing the Partition.Singh says the seed of the idea to write a book on Jinnah sprouted during Atal Bihari Vajpayee’s historical bus journey to Lahore in 1999 and a visit to Minar-e-Pakistan where Muslim League adopted a resolution for the creation of Pakistan on March 23, 1940.

Singh has been effusive in his praise of Jinnah even, perhaps, at the expense of Mahatma Gandhi. “The first meeting of Gandhi and Jinnah in January 1915 at the Gurjar Sabha was convened to felicitate Gandhi’s return from South Africa... Gandhi had somewhat accommodatingly said he was glad to find a Muslim not only belonging to his own region’s Sabha, but chairing it. Gandhi had singled out Jinnah as a Muslim, though, neither in appearance nor in conduct was Jinnah anywhere near to being any of the stereotypes of the religious identity ascribed by Gandhi. Jinnah, on the other hand, was far more fulsome in his praise.”

On another occasion, the writer refers to Gandhi’s support to the Islamic Khilafat movement which many saw as retrograde step in the freedom movement. “While Jinnah had remained aloof from any involvement in pan-Islamic activities, Gandhi a proto-typical Hindu, chose to ride this tiger of the Khilafat agitation,” says Singh, alluding to the early progressive persona of Jinnah “who recognised the political impress only of Dadabhai and Gokhle.”

From a casual votary of Islam to the one staunchly propagating the two-nation theory and that of Muslim identity, Jinnah’s transformation has been explained by Singh in terms of Nehru-Patel and the Congress refusal to accede to Muslim League’s demands, leading to the Lahore resolution of 1946 when ‘direct action’ for creation of Pakistan was mooted by the League.The portion of the book for which Singh courted controversy include Sardar Patel’s letter to Kanji Dwarkadas (March 4, 1947) where he, according to the author, for the first time, even if by implication, accepted Partition on condition of a division of the Punjab and Bengal by passing a resolution. Singh says the resolution was passed when Gandhi was away in his healing mission in Bihar, and Maulana Azad was ill and absent — the two could oppose the resolution. Singh says this resolution was a fundamental change in the Congress party’s stand and strategy. Mountbatten, who had by then assumed charge as Viceroy, jubilantly assessed that Patel by accepting the division of Punjab had implicitly recognised the principle of India’s Partition too. Within a month of Mountabatten’s arrival in India on March 20, 1947, Nehru, until then a vocal opponent of Partition, had become a committed advocate of it. The resolution amounted to an acceptance of Jinnah’s two-nation theory, concludes the author.In another indirect reference on the unification of the princely states, Singh quotes senior journalist M J Akbar from his yet to be published book The Major Minority, that the Muslims felt empowered in the princely state of Hyderabad with 84 per cent Hindu population as long as descendants of Nizam-ul Mulk, a Mughal governor, ruled the state. “In 1948, (as soon as) the Nizam was deposed and Hyderabad was absorbed in the new Union of India, the same Muslims suddenly began to think of themselves as a minority.” The writer broods that it is in this, a false minority syndrome that the dry rot of Partition first set in.

The cure, Jinnah said, was Partition and Nehru-Patel and others of the Congress also finally agreed. Singh quotes, among others, Ram Manohar Lohia, an arch critic of Nehru, saying that Nehru and Patel between themselves decided on Partition and sought not to scare Gandhi away before the deed was definitely resolved upon. As it turns out, Gandhi himself openly confessed that he represented nobody and at best could use his influence on the Congress. As against this, Jinnah saw none but himself as the sole leader and spokesman of the Muslims.

Gandhi and Jinnah — both born into Kathiawaris trading communities in Gujarat, ironically failed and succeeded in their missions. Gandhi could not prevent Partition, though he remained wedded to a united India until his death, and Jinnah (described as an ambassador of Hindu-Muslim unity by Gopal Krishna Gokhle) ‘achieved’ Pakistan, but possibly failed in his original avtar of Hindu-Muslim oneness. Singh retells the epic story of the Partition in a scholarly and disciplined manner — a reflection of his own persona. But it does not breaks any new grounds. Who caused the Partition? There may be yet another book digging the layers of history to reach the bottom. But the best is to draw again from the concluding wisdom of Singh’s book: “And of these is a story written: but (then) Allah alone knoweth all?”

62nd Indian Independence-Day: 'Reaching out to moon'

Saturday, August 15, 2009

-->
Looking back is an exercise to rummage through the myriad happy and sad memories of the past and to squeeze out ''substance'' for the future course correction. Individuals undergo the process as much as nations.

As India celebrates its 62nd birthday, the highs and lows of its journey to this date, the fade-in and fade-out of its history evokes palpable hopes and despondency in equal measure. The country went through the mammoth electoral process and constituted the 15th Lok Sabha barely two months ago. The successive conduct of elections (barring the hiatus of Emergency) is seen as a high point of Indian nation, particularly in the light of “the interrupted democracy” in the neighbourhood Pakistan which celebrated its Independence Day on August 14 amid little signs of military loosening its control over the fragile democracy. “The owner’s pride, neighbour’s envy” syndrome, however, takes a beating when judged from the point of view of the developed democracies which could usher in a politically, socially and economically more equitable and just society than what we have in our country in the 62nd year of Independence. As India (already a nuclear-powered nation) in July launched the first nuclear-powered submarine “Arihant” built on its soil, asserting itself as a world power by joining just five other countries that can design and construct such vessels, the country continued to grapple with the gigantic task of abysmal poverty.

By the admission of the current dispensation at the Centre, nearly half of Indian population earns less than Rs 20 per day. Similarly, close to 50 per cent of children’s population in the country remain malnourished.There are contradictions galore. The country experiences starvation deaths but, at the same time, remains an exporter of food items. And while India has one of the largest population of unemployed and uneducated, it also has one of the largest talent pools. Though fancied by the developed world as having potential of being the future super power, India has yet to come to terms with insurgency, left wing extremism, separatism and growing terrorist attacks. It may be an odd statement to make but the country with the second largest population in the world could, so far, produce only one gold medallist in its long history of Olympic participation.

The march from the Nehruvian mixed-economy model to the globalisation clock set by the Narsimha Rao government has unwittingly unleashed forces which have created islands of prosperity along with sprawling slums and rural areas where, as a rule, farmers commit suicide on account failure of crops and indebtedness.

The minimum wages in the country remain in the pathetic range of Rs 65 (Meghalaya) to the maximum140 (Chandigarh). Ironically, the left-ruled West-Bengal has one of the lowest minimum wages.The futuristic planning for India by the second UPA dispensation is rather ambitious. Progressing from the “politically successful” National Rural Employment Guarantee Act that ensured 100 days of work for unskilled labourers per family, the Manmohan Singh government is set to bring the Right to Food Bill that proposes a national food security law under which every poor family would get 25 kg of food grain per month at Rs 3 per kg.During the last 62 years, the country has moved away from the domination of a single party to the increasing influence of the smaller parties based on caste and region. The profile of the Lok Sabha has changed with even representation from the subaltern class of Indian society. The Women’s Reservation Bill, if passed this year, may hopefully induce “a progressive churning” in the male-dominated polity. “Antodaya” (uplift of the last man) should be a precursor to the proposed setting of foot by an Indian on the far-off moon in 2025. All Indians are, undoubtedly, `trying to reach out to the full moon`-allbeit in their dreams.