Nurturing of the Pakistan Plant

Posted on by Anurupa

“Judge not by the glib words spoken with a forked tongue, judge by the actions that follow them.”

- Anurupa Cinar

Hi, Everyone! In March 1940, the Muslim League made a formal demand for Pakistan. And by May 1940, Gandhi started talking with a forked tongue!

While researching Gandhi I have noticed he has a remarkable talent for expressing two opposing ideas and making them seem reasonable. The unpleasant point is made in a negative form and the one intended to be applauded, quoted, and publicized is made very positively.

I am giving a prime example of it below:

“‘As a man of nonviolence,’ he [Gandhi] observed, ‘I cannot forcibly resist the proposed partition if the Muslims of India really insist upon it.’”

That’s the negative form, and a euphemistic way of really saying he will accept Pakistan—for the Muslims in India were most certainly insisting upon it . . . !

In the next sentence he says:

“But I can never be a willing party to the vivisection. . . .”[1]

How very much this sentence been quoted . . . ! Though, even in that there is a catch, for he can claim to be an “unwilling” party to the vivisection. There’s his out.

See how it is? I intend to devote a whole post one day to highlighting many of Gandhi’s such double-talk.

Congress was certainly wishing to get rid of Jinnah. Pakistan plan was insidiously being spoken off in an agreeable way. Check out what Gandhi has to say— openly published in his Harijan —to an Englishman.

“While answering an Englishman, Gandhi replied in Harijan of May 4, 1940: ‘I would any day prefer Muslim rule to British rule. . . . The partition proposal had altered the face of Hindu-Muslim problem. . . .’ And he granted that “Pakistan cannot be worse than foreign domination.’”

And Keer further asks, as a comment on this flimflaming of Gandhi’s:

“Was it an explanation of his stand or a direction for the Muslim leaders to draw up their plans?”[2]

By 1942, Congress was done with these oblique references to accepting Pakistan. Jinnah and the Muslim League were becoming a big hindrance in their path. Viceroy Linlithgow was not entertaining their demands, especially ones that aimed at giving Congress sole power in free India. The Congress High Command now made a drastic, treacherous move.

“The Working Committee of the Indian National Congress proclaimed emphatically by a resolution at Delhi in April 1942, ‘that the Congress could not think in terms of compelling the people of any territorial unit to join the Indian Union against their declared and established will.’

This historic resolution brought into bold relief the fact that the Congress favoured the provinces with the right of self-determination or secession and such secession was called by the Muslims ‘Pakistan.’

Dealing with Congress resolution four years later, Dr. Pattabhi Sitaramayya had to admit: ‘It is evident that the passage concedes the division of India into more than one State and gives the go-by to the Unity and integrity of India.’”[3]

Pakistan resolution was now passed by the Congress Working Committee . . . ! And that in April 1942—five years before Partition and independence.

The All-India Congress Committee, though, was as yet clueless re this treacherous resolution of their Working Committee.

Now the Congress High Command had to ensure that the A.I.C.C. too accepted the Pakistan resolution. Rajagopalachari set to work to do the deed.

“On 23April 1942 Rajagopalachari managed to get two resolutions passed by the Congress members in the Madras legislature. The first recommended to the All-India Congress Committee (which was about to meet in Allahbad) that Congressmen should acknowledge the Muslim League’s claim for separation, should the same be persisted in when the time came for framing the constitution of India . . . The resolution urged that ‘to sacrifice the chances of the formation of a national government for the doubtful advantage of maintaining a controversy over the unity of India is the most unwise policy’ and that it had become necessary to choose the lesser evil. . . .

The Muslim League was naturally jubilant at its ideal of Pakistan having been brought down at last from the clouds of speculation to the level of practical politics . . .

The All-India Congress Committee, meeting in Allahabad on 29 April, rejected his resolution by an overwhelming majority and adopted a counter-resolution ‘that any proposal to disintegrate India by giving liberty to any component State or territorial unit to secede from the Indian Union or Federation will be detrimental to the best interests of the people of the different States and provinces and the country as a whole and the Congress, therefore, cannot agree to any such proposal.’”[4]

The Congress members were not in favor of their High Command’s sellout of the Motherland. They stated so, unequivocally in their resolution.

But the Congress High Command who were absolute dictators of the Congress (and had disregarded, overturned, and schemed against relatively minor issues) were not about to let their Delhi resolution of acceding Pakistan, upon which depended their getting total power in free India (or so they believed,) be swept away.

“Upon this Dr. Sayyid Abdul Latif of Hyderabad asked Maulana Azad whether Jagat Narayan’s resolution had in any way modified or affected the Delhi resolution of the Working Committee. Maulana Azad in his letter of August 6, 1942, replied: ‘No part of the Delhi resolution to which you refer has in any way been affected or modified by any subsequent resolution of the A.I.C.C.’”

“To the same question of Dr. Latif, Jawaharlal Nehru also replied that Babu Jagat Narayan’s ‘resolution does not in any way override the Delhi Working Committee resolution.’”^{^[5]}

· So the Congress Working Committee resolution acceding Pakistan reigned supreme—as affirmed by the Congress dictators on August 6, 1942.

Read on to discover the Machiavellian timing of this Delhi resolution . . .

Anurupa

[1] Mahatma Gandhi, Dhananjay Keer, Page 682.

[2] Mahatma Gandhi, Dhananjay Keer, Page 682-683.

[3] Veer Savarkar, Dhananjay Keer, page 307.

[4]Transfer of Power, V. P. Menon, page 139.

[5]Mahatma Gandhi, Keer, page 700.

The Turning Point . . .

Posted on by Anurupa

“History is not the story of heroes entirely. It is often the story of cruelty and injustice and shortsightedness. There are monsters, there is evil, there is betrayal.”

- David C. McCullough

Hi, Everyone! By 1939, WWII was well under way. With the Muslims making up the bulk of the army, the Viceroy was going to keep them happy.

Jinnah himself had astutely perceived this.

“Jinnah remarked later [after September 4, 1939, meeting], ‘After the war . . . suddenly there came a change in the attitude towards me. I was treated on the same basis as Mr. Gandhi. I was wonderstruck why all of a sudden I was promoted and given a place side by side with Mr. Gandhi.’”[1]

“In the Viceroy’s view, it remained as important as ever to give the fullest weight to the Muslim position at a time when their assistance and support were so essential to His Majesty’s Government, both from the military point of view (they were providing 60 percent of the army) and because of possible reactions in other countries.”[2]

But the Congress was in a strong position with the Viceroy as well. Viceroy Linlithgow was really walking a tightrope politically.

· With the Congress running eight of the eleven Provincial governments, the Viceroy was not going to upset them. This was the time to use bargaining power wisely.

· Unfortunately, the Congress High Command simply had no political acumen! And so proceeded to lose the only political advantage they had.

The Congress was demanding that “India must be declared an independent nation and present application must be given to this status to the largest possible extent.”

There wasn’t any way the British were going to focus on leaving India (even had they wanted to) when they were desperately trying to save their own skin and freedom from Hitler . . . !^{^[3]}

“The Viceroy, Lord Linlithgow, issued a statement on 17 October, 1939. He reiterated that Dominion Status was the goal of British policy, but pointed out that for the present the Act of 1935 held the field. . . .

The Congress Working Committee regarded the Viceroy’s statement as ‘an unequivocal reiteration of the imperialist policy’ and therefore declared itself unable to give any support to Great Britain, for it would amount to an endorsement of the imperialistic policy, which it has always sought to end. As a first step in this direction the Committee called upon the Congress Ministers to resign. All the Congress Ministries accordingly resigned beween 27 October and 15 November, 1939.

Both the Secretary of State, Sir Samuel Hoare, and the Viceroy tried to win over the Congress leaders by granting more powers to Indians in the administration.

But the Congress ‘declined to consider any steps to further co-operation’ unless the British Government clearly declared its policy in favour of Indian independence, and demanded the appointment of a Constituent Assembly. . . .”

Here was a great opportunity lost by the Congress short-sightedness! Surely, this was the time to hang in there, especially with more powers being given?

· Is there ever anything to gain by resigning and taking oneself off the scene?

The Congress strategy to resign from ministries and disrupt the functioning of the Provinces failed—one more time! They did not learn from their mistakes.

To continue:

“The Viceroy felt relieved by the resignation of Congress Ministeries, for they controlled eight out of the eleven Provinces and so had power to impair war-efforts of the Government. As the eight Provinces were now being ruled by the Governors, there was no longer any need to placate the Congress, and the Viceroy canvassed the support of the Muslim League.

This considerably strengthened the position of the League and it was joined by the waverers among the Muslims. In March, 1940, the Muslim League, at its Lahore Session, made a formal demand for a separate Muslim State.”[4]

With increased influence with the Viceroy of the Muslim League, the Pakistan demand was now formally made . . . !—a direct cause-and-effect of the Congress misguided decision to resign from their provincial ministeries.

· Jinnah was not one to let grass grow beneath his feet!

“The decision of the Congress to resign was widely regretted. Even within the Congress there were some who were opposed to this course. We shall see, as we proceed, how it only weakened the bargaining power of the Congress. . . .

At the start Lord Linlithgow had recognized that he could not leave the Congress out of his reckoning. It was not only the largest and most important political party in the country; it was at the time responsible for the government of eight of the eleven provinces, and so had within its power seriously to impair the Government’s capacity to prosecute the war effort. When, however, the Congress resigned office, Lord Linlithgow’s attitude automatically changed. There was no longer any necessity to woo the Congress . .

From now on, Lord Linlithgow began to lean more on the support of the Muslim League and to discountenance any move on the part of the Congress to return to office except on his own terms. . . .

With the Congress in wilderness and Jinnah’s hand considerably strengthened, waverers among the Muslims began trickling into the League. For all practical purposes Jinnah was given a veto on further constitutional progress and, Jinnah adroit politician that he was, he made the very most of the situation.”[5]

There! Not only had the Congress put themselves outside the political pale, their asininity in doing so led directly to a strong Muslim League making a formal Pakistan demand!

· This is inexcusable.

· And to counteract their own political blunders and to rid themselves of Jinnah and the League, they began (as we shall see in later posts) to push the Pakistan scheme themselves . . . !

Anurupa

[1]Transfer of Power, V. P. Menon, page 59.

[2]Ibid, page 87.

[3]“If the Congress leaders had only discussed the details of the reconstitution of the Executive council, it is possible that the Viceroy would have gone more than half to way meet the Congress. In the wartime there was no question of converting the Executive Council into a national government. Lord Linlithgow was firm on this issue and so was His Majesty’s Government. Had the Congress joined the Viceroy’s Executive Council at this time, and with Congress ministries coming back into power in the provinces, the political situation would have changed immensely to the advantage of the Congress. Once the Congress rejected the offer the Viceroy was in no mood to carry on any further parleys with it.” Transfer of Power, V. P. Menon, page 97.

[4]HFMI, vol III, R. C. Majumdar, pages 598-600.

[5] Transfer of Power, V. P. Menon. Page 68

Whither Congress . . . ?

Posted on by Anurupa

“Those who seek power are not to be trusted with it.”

Hi, Everyone! In 1939, with the WWII well under way, Viceroy Linlithgow was trying to keep all parties of India happy. He met fifty-two leaders of the various parties of India as a “thorough way of hearing a cross-section of opinion at a vital moment.” He was also thinking along the lines of having an all-party meeting in an attempt to ease the situation toward making the Central Federation work and getting cooperation for his war efforts.

He first met the Congress leaders, one by one. With the Congress controlling eight out of the eleven provinces and being such a powerful party of India, their cooperation was essential.

What did the Congress High Command do?

They angled for total control at the center and threatened resigning from the ministries and boycotting of the all-party meeting as a way of twisting the Viceroy’s arm.

Here is how the meeting between Gandhi and the Viceroy proceeded.

“Gandhi then asked the Viceroy for a declaration by Government of what he called ‘a really satisfying kind: Congress were in a special position and could alone achieve results.’ He wanted a declaration of British intentions and an arrangement by which Congress could share power at the Centre with the Government”[1]

The Viceroy was not going to entertain the Congress demand for total control at the center! He needed the Muslim cooperation much too much for that. The army—so critical for running the Empire and Britain’s war efforts—was made up mostly of Muslims. But the Congress never grasped that, they still set themself against the Central Federation since their demands were not being met.

“The Viceroy pointed out that the essential preliminary to such a government was that measure of agreement between parties, communities and interests which he had been so anxious to foster, but to which the excessive claims and the totalitarian ambitions of the Congress and its leaders had been so consistently an obstacle.”[2]

“‘I [Linlithgow] was bound to remind him [Gandhi] that to most thinking men they appeared to make the attainment of Dominion Status, or of complete self-government difficult to a degree, if not wholly impossible at this stage.’. . .

The Viceroy said that he had been thinking of all possible ways of easing the situation. He had thought of an All-parties meeting.”[3]

But the Congress High Command were unanimous in their stand against an All-Party meeting. For them it was Congress and only Congress who should be considered in the politics of India.

“Gandhi thought that an All-Parties conference should be avoided at all costs. . . .

As for an All-Parties Conference, he [Rajendra Prasad] was resolutely against the idea. . .

Nehru, too, was against an All-Parties Conference, which both he and Prasad thought the Congress would boycott.”[4]

Here was the stand Jinnah took:

“Jinnah did not like the idea of a declaration as it would only increase communal tension. He saw no chance of unity unless Congress gave up the claim to speak on behalf of all parties and recognized the Muslim League as spokesman for the Muslims.”[5]

Status quo was maintained. Congress wanting to be the only party in Indian politics, Jinnah most determined that that will not happen. He wanted the Muslim League to be the only party to represent the Muslims.

So what happened next? Find out tomorrow.

Anurupa

[1] The Viceroy at Bay, John Glendevon, page 142.

[2]Transfer of Power, V. P. Menon, page 148.

[3] The Viceroy at Bay, John Glendevon, page 143.

[4] The Viceroy at Bay, John Glendevon, page 144-147.

[5] The Viceroy at Bay, John Glendevon, page 150.

The seeds of Pakistan now planted in 1938!

Posted on by Anurupa

Mother India: “By the pricking of my thumbs,

Something wicked this way comes.”

Hi, Everyone! In 1937, the Congress had prodded the beast in Jinnah by arrogantly demanding dissolution of the Muslim League and by dangling the carrot of political power—only available by joining the Congress, they implied—before the Muslims.

Jinnah, filled with hatred and suspicion of the Congress, Gandhi, and Nehru, retaliated with a master-stroke reducing the Congress to a “Hindu” party in effect.

How Gandhi and Nehru must have wished he would just go poof!

· But since the “bogey” Jinnah could not be made to go poof, they sought to be rid of him through partition.

Nehru’s words in his diary illuminate this quite clearly. On December 28, 1943, he writes:

“Instinctively I think it is better to have Pakistan or almost nothing if only to keep Jinnah far away and not allow his muddled and arrogant head from (sic) interfering continually in India’s progress.”

The axe ready to chop India had even now, in 1938, made its grim appearance on the political scene!

Let us see the how the first seed of Pakistan was planted.

The Government of India Act of 1935 required that a Central Federation be formed. Viceroy Linlithgow was avidly seeking to form this Federation.

But the Congress had set itself against the Federation and did its very best to hamper the Viceroy’s attempts to form this Federation in every possible way.

Surely, forming a Central Federation—one that united all the Provinces and the Princely States—was extremely desirable? Would it not have nipped any thought of partition in the bud?

Instead the Congress chose to oppose it. And not just oppose, Birla, one of Gandhi’s mouthpieces to the Viceroy, put an unbelievable proposal before the Viceroy!

“Birla said that the communal position in India was getting rapidly worse. Congress was aware of it and its leaders were deeply anxious. He then suggested that the best course might be to let the Muslims have their Federation of the North-West. This astonished Linlithgow, who thought at first that Birla was teasing him. When he saw that the suggestion was serious he asked Birla whether he envisaged the perpetuation of British military power to keep peace between Muslim and Hindu Federation . . .

This was a most interesting conversation. It showed clearly Linlithgow’s dread of partition and therefore his shock at encouragement for it coming from a Hindu.”[1]

This conversation has taken place in 1938. Let the truth not escape anyone:

· “Muslim Federation of the North-West”: what is that but another name for Pakistan?

· A demand for a separate Hindu and Muslim Federation in private and the public face . . . ? A vociferous demand for Hindu-Muslim unity . . . !

Yes indeed, the seed of Pakistan has now been planted, on the soil that was tilled in 1937.

Anurupa

[1] Viceroy Lord Linlithgow’s biography, The Viceroy at Bay, by John Glendevon, page 88.

The seeds of Pakistan . . . ! (Part II)

Posted on by Anurupa

Mother India: “By the pricking of my thumbs,

Something wicked this way comes.”

Hi, Everyone! The period 1937 to 1938 was crucial in Indian Freedom Movement history. It is at this time that the Congress ambitions—of acquiring total control in governing India—became crystal clear, not to the poor gullible Indians, but to Viceroy Linlithgow, Jinnah, and Savarkar.

From here on:

· Congress chances of total control were on a downward spiral, which increased their desperation and led to them sacrificing the motherland more and more.

· Jinnah set himself against the Congress and their ambition by wielding Islam as a very formidable weapon.

· Savarkar swooped upon the political field to rouse the Hindus into saving their motherland.

A vicious circle was formed: the more Congress aimed for control—greedily, the more Jinnah wielded the Islam weapon—successfully, the more Savarkar roused the Hindus—desperately. This led back to the Congress indulging in more scheming.

On an aside I have to say that the Congress misrepresented, misinterpreted, and misunderstood Savarkar’s bid to rouse the Hindus—who else was he going to rouse to save the Motherland but the national majority?—and till today continue the unjust maligning of his name.

What exactly did Congress, particularly Nehru, do to trigger this vicious circle?

“It was taken for granted both in the Report of the Simon Commission and the discussions in the Round Table Conference that the main communities, particularly the Muslims, ought to be, and in fact would be, represented in the Provincial Ministries. . . .”

Having made their bed of thorns by accepting, without a protest, the Communal Award, it was now incumbent upon the Congress to accept its dictates.

· But the Congress High Command ruling the Congress like a dictatorship, sought to govern the Provinces in the same manner!

To continue:

“But when the Congress decided to accept office there arose a strong difference between the two [Congress and League] . . . the Congress, in pursuance of their principle mentioned above [that in Congress Provinces the Ministers should be selected solely from the Congress Party,] offered to include the members of the Muslim League only on certain conditions which practically meant dissolution of the Muslim League and the incorporation of its members in the Congress organization . . .

These detailed terms only translated into practice the pithy saying attributed to Nehru that ‘there were only two parties in the country—the Congress and the British Government.’”

It was preposterously arrogant and short-sighted of the Congress to imagine that Jinnah and the Muslim League would meekly become Congress puppets . . . !

Throughout the rest of the history of the Freedom Movement, every move the Congress made was aimed at ensuring they were the only party to be given the opportunity to rule the roost.

· This was their guiding principle.

To continue:

“No wise statesman could seriously believe that the Muslim League would readily give up its own separate identity and merge itself in the Congress. The Muslim League refused to commit political Harikiri at the bidding of the Congress.”[1]

In addition to this, the Congress mass contact movement for the Muslims had a shocking approach—though one in keeping with their arrogant dictatorship.

“In effect, though not in actual words, it [Congress mass contact movement for the Muslims] amounted to an insidious propaganda of the following type: ‘Political power with all the patronage and influence it implied was exclusively in Congress hands, and there it would remain.

True to its principles, the Congress would not deny a fair share of its appointments from Minister’s office downwards to the Moslem minority, but it could not be expected to bestow them on any but the Congress Moslems. For a Moslem to stay in the League, therefore, was to condemn himself to a lifetime of wilderness. Let him make the other choice, and make it at once while the door was still open.’”[2]

This stung Jinnah into instant retaliation.

And Jinnah, the master politician, out-maneuvered the Congress High Command practically overnight . . . !

He laid down conditions for negotiations that cut at the very foundation upon which the Congress was based for the last so many years.

Let us see how by 1938, the situation had changed drastically.

· The Congress pride came before a great fall, indeed! And that at the hands of Jinnah.

“Jinnah took up the position that the condition precedent to all negotiations was a frank recognition of the Congress and the League as the only representative bodies, respectively, of the Hindus and Muslims of India.

The executive Committee of the All-India Muslim League passed a resolution to the effect that ‘it is not possible for the All-India Muslim League to treat and negotiate with the Congress the question of Hindu-Muslim settlement except on the basis that the Muslim League is the authoritative and representative organization of the Musalmans of India.’

But this was not all. Jinnah made it clear in his letter to Subhas Bose, dated 2 August, 1938, that the committee appointed by the Congress to discuss the Hindu-Muslim questions should not include any Musalman. . . .

It is easy to see that the Congress could not accept these demands without stultifying its whole history as a national organization of Indians of all faith and communities.

The Congress demand in 1937 that the Muslims must liquidate the Muslim League if they wanted to share powers with the Congress was bad enough, but it was far worse to demand that the Indian National Congress, with its proud records of more than half a century’s service as a national organization, should voluntarily degrade itself into a communal Organization only to serve as a counterpart to the Muslim League.”[3]

Oh, how neatly Jinnah had turned the tables on the Congress!

Jinnah was turning out to be a serious problem for the Congress.

· And since the “bogey” Jinnah could not be made to go poof, the Congress sought to be rid of him through partition.

The axe ready to chop India had now made its grim appearance on the political scene!

Anurupa

[1] Ibid, 561

[2] HFMI, vol III, R. C. Majumdar, page 566.

[3] Ibid, 569

“Now, if at this moment the Muslims were fully assured that this sort of composite government would be formed at the centre, and that the Muslims in it would be real representatives of the Muslim community and not merely nominees of the Hindus, they would probably be satisfied. But owing to the recent conduct of the Congress they feel no such assurance. They believe that Congress’s aim is to establish Hindu Raj at the center . . . Congress policy has certainly created this impression. For after sweeping victories in the provincial elections, Congress proceeded to form pure Congress ministries in every Province. In none of them would they admit the principle of coalition. . . . It is pure Congress Raj . . .” Strangers in India, by Penderel Moon, I.C.S., page 106.

“When the Congress decided to accept office there was a proposal that it should form coalition ministries with the Muslim League. . . . The Congress decided to have homogeneous ministries of its own and chose Muslim ministers from amongst those who were members of the Congress Party. This was the beginning of a serious rift between the Congress and the League and was a factor which induced neutral Muslim opinion to turn to the support of Jinnah. . . .

Jinnah and the other leaders of the Muslim League, embittered by the controversy on the issue of coalition ministries, now began to play with the idea of a separate State, and turned against the conception of an all-India federation.” Transfer of Power, V. P. Menon, pages 56-57

The Seeds of Pakistan . . . !

Posted on by Anurupa

Mother India: “By the pricking of my thumbs,

Something wicked this way comes.”

Hi, Everyone! In 1937, the Congress came right out and revealed its goal of total control in the governing of India. They had the Hindus in their pocket, and were under the impression that the Muslims would also happily crawl in there. Well, they certainly had a rude awakening!

In his book, History of the Freedom Movement in India, vol. III (hence forth in all the posts to be called HFMI, vol. III) page 551-552, R. C. Majumdar, a noted historian, writes:

“The result of the elections held in 1937 belied the claims of both the Congress and the Muslim League. . . . It was a clear indication that the Congress organization had no contact with the Muslim masses and had very little influence over them. The Congress could not therefore advance any reasonable claim to represent the Muslims. . . .

It is not a little curious that the Muslim League had a specially bad record of election success in those Provinces like Bengal, the Punjab, Sindh and North-West Frontier Province where the Muslims formed the majority community, and fared much better in the Provinces which had a strong Hindu majority with a significant and vocal minority.”

[Point to note:

· the Muslims of the very provinces which went to Pakistan in 1947 had happily voted for nationalist Muslim parties in 1937. . . !

A Central Federation at this time would have bound them to a united India.]

“The reason is that the Muslim League had no special positive programme which distinguished it from the other parties and had no local influence in any Province. It throve only on its assumed character as a bulwark of defence against Hindu attack. The Provinces with a Muslim majority had no genuine fear of such an attack, and were not therefore susceptible to the propaganda of the League.

It is only when the Muslim masses learnt to look upon the problem from an all-India perspective that the Muslim League emerged as the most powerful Muslim organization. . . .

The credit of Jinnah lies in the fact that he succeeded in developing this political consciousness among the Muslims within an incredibly short time. . . .”

And to do that, he too brought religion into politics.

“He touched the chord of religious feelings of the Muslims which have always proved a potent factor in Muslim politics. ‘The Mullahs of the countryside were soon up in arms against the Congress propagandist . . .’ The Congress mass contact movement, which had made some headway, collapsed under the attack of the Mullahs.”[1]

To continue (HFMI, vol. III, page 551-552):

“The intransigence of the Congress high command helped its growth. They took their stand on the theory that the Congress represented the whole of India . . . They ignored the Muslim League as having no influence over the masses and only representing a ‘microscopic minority’ of the Muslims . . . But they discounted the idea that there may be a national urge among the Muslims limited to their own community . . . and though a nationalist may disapprove such a development, a Statesman can ignore it at his peril.

Jawaharlal Nehru in particular, among the Congress leaders must be held highly guilty in this respect. . . .

It [Congress] did not learn the obvious lesson of coming to terms with the Muslim League till by its [Congress’s] folly the League had attained a position when it could dictate its own terms, and demanded Pakistan as the only basis of settlement.”

This is how R. C. Majumdar wraps it up in a nutshell:

· “In 1937 his [Nehru’s] outright rejection of Jinnah’s offer of Congress-League Coalition Ministry ruined the last chance of a Hindu-Muslim agreement.”

So much for the much-touted Congress Hindu-Muslim unity demand of the Congress. . . !

· As I said, making a demand is one thing but without follow-up by action it is just so much hot air.

But what exactly was it that Congress and Nehru did?

Find out tomorrow!

Anurupa

[1] HIFM, vol III, R. C. Majumdar, page 568.

Tilling the soil for the Pakistan Plant, Part II

Posted on by Anurupa

“I am concerned for the security of our great Nation; not so much because of any threat from without, but because of the insidious forces working from within.”

-General MacArthur

Hi, Everyone! Jinnah had been truly secular and nationalist in his early political days. But besides the Congress there was no other national party of substance at the time. Once Jinnah left the Congress, he had no nationalist party to join.

Being Muslim, there was no way Jinnah was going to able to charm the Hindu majority—so bedazzled by the Mahatma that it was—away from the dangerous and self-serving politics of the Congress by himself.

To counteract the Congress, Gandhi, and Nehru—and that had become the ruling passion of his life—his only option was to build a strong Muslim party. And in doing so he sacrificed his secular and nationalist principles.

He sacrificed India.

So in 1937, we have Jinnah of the political acumen par excellence full of animus against Gandhi and Nehru and extremely suspicious of their intentions.

On the other side we have Gandhi and Nehru (he too bore ill-will to Jinnah)[1]who were riding high with the Congress being the only national party of substance and the tremendous support of the Hindu majority. Congress was bound to be the ruling party in free India.

· If only they had been satisfied with that much.

But no, Gandhi and Nehru’s lust for power knew no bounds.

Within the Congress itself they brooked no opposition and ruled with total control and power (we have seen examples of it in earlier posts,) and they sought to throw that mantle over the whole of India.

Hindu-Muslim power struggle

The Constitution of India being communal—and the responsibility for that can be unambiguously laid at the Congress door—as Penderel Moon, I.C.S., puts it in his Strangers in India, ( page 101):

“In essence the struggle [Hindu-Muslim communal struggle] is one for posts and political power between two communities distinguished by religion and culture.”

And how was this power distributed in India in 1937?

· Congress was the only national Indian party of substance

· Jinnah and the Muslim League with no clout as yet

· Savarkar, only just released from bondage in 1937, not quite yet on the political field.

This was the moment for the Congress to embrace the Federation plan of the British, and tie the whole of India—Hindus, Muslims, Princely States et al—into one unified force. The Viceroy Linlithgow was pushing heavily for it.

Did the Congress do that? No!

What did they actually do?

They sabotaged the Federation plan—

· by antagonizing the Princely States and the Muslim League

And they also set about duping the Hindus with words that were not backed up by actions.

At this moment in Indian politics Savarkar was released from bondage. He swept upon the political scene and roused the Hindus into full awareness of the treacherous goal of the Congress.

· With the communal electorate, the only avenue for Savarkar to check the Congress was to build up a solid Hindu party. Which he did.

This is the background of Indian politics in 1937. From the next post on, I am going to show you—in detail with documentation—how the Congress actually went about bludgeoning India’s chances of a united freedom.

Anurupa

[1]Jinnah’s wife had been (she died in 1929, and was separated from Jinnah at the time) close friends with both Nehru’s sister, Nan, and Padmaja Naidu who later became Nehru’s lover (from Alex Tunzelmann’s Indian Summer, page 81.) Who can say what kind of personal differences these two may have had arising from this situation?

But they should not have allowed it to come into Indian politics.

Tilling the soil for the Pakistan Plant, Part I

Posted on by Anurupa

“History is not history unless it is the truth.”

-Abraham Lincoln

Hi, Everyone! Before going into the political situation in India in 1937, it is necessary to give some background into the Jinnah-Nehru-Gandhi situation.

· The tragedy of India was the undercurrents and clashes between Jinnah and Gandhi-Nehru; none of them looked beyond their own petty egos and aspirations to power and consider what was right for the motherland.

In her book Indian Summer (page 80-81), Alex Von Tunzelmann has captured the essence of the situation.

“Jinnah had begun his political career in Congress. He made himself a figurehead for Hindu-Muslim unity and was acclaimed as such by Hindu Congress luminaries. He joined the Muslim League in 1913, confident that he could act as a bridge between the political parties. But it was the emergence of Gandhi as the spiritual leader of Congress in 1920 that began to push Jinnah out. “I will have nothing to do with this pseudo-religious approach to politics,” Jinnah had said, rejecting the call for satyagraha. . . .

There was a profound and deadly clash of personality between Jinnah and the other English gentleman of Congress, Jawaharlal Nehru. . . .”

In case anyone has any objections to Nehru being referred to as the “other English gentleman,” check out this little snippet from an interview of John Kenneth Galbraith by Arun Venugopal:

“While the pace of his day has slowed down, John Kenneth Galbraith’smind remains vibrant and unrelenting. He also talks of his close friendship with Nehru, who figures in his book Name-Dropping. “You realise, Galbraith,” Nehru had once told him, “I am the last Englishman to rule in India.”

Read the whole interview @

http://www.outlookindia.com/article.aspx?212952

What a tragedy for India . . . ! To be freed from the British Raj only to be “ruled” by an Englishman passing himself off as an Indian . . . ?

Isn’t democracy a government of the people, by the people, for the people?

· Was Nehru supposed to “rule” India? Is that what he believed?

On an aside: was it this delusion that made him trample upon the rights of so many Hindus and unleash a Reign of Terror in the aftermath of Gandhi’s murder . . . ?

To continue with Alex Von Tunzelmann’s account:

“After the Conference [Round Table Conference, 1931], he [Jinnah] returned to private life—until a friend reported to him a comment made by his archrival, Jawaharlal Nehru. In conversation at a private dinner party, Jawahar had remarked that Jinnah was ‘finished.’ Jinnah was so furious that he packed up and headed back to India immediately, with the stated intent to ‘show Nehru.’”

And “show Nehru” he did indeed . . . !

From that moment on, Jinnah pitted his considerable political skills against the Gandhi-Nehru-led Congress, whose fumbling and bumbling in their thirst for total power was no match for “one of the most brilliant politicians of his day.”

The scene is now set for the beheading of India.

Anurupa

The Pakistan Plant, Part II

Posted on by Anurupa

“History is not history unless it is the truth.”

-Abraham Lincoln

Hi, Everyone! The last three years plus I have spent doing some intensive research in the Freedom Movement of India. There was no getting away from it for me. Understanding that was an essential part of writing my novel.

I meandered through a forest of words, which at first appeared to me like a lot of “abbledy-gabbledy.” Even as a kid, when studying the history of the Indian freedom movement I had many moments of perplexity. So many things just didn’t make sense! And now I was back there again. But I gritted my teeth, and sternly told myself to only focus on what actually happened, and not on the yak-yak that was surrounding the facts. Let the facts reveal themselves, I told myself.

And then, I had many moments of: “Ah!” and “O-o-oh!” and “Oh my God!”

The landmarks in the pathway to Partition in the Freedom Movement of India:

Khilafat Movement

Gandhi attached the Indian Freedom movement to the Khilafat Movement, leading directly to religion entering the politics of India.

Indians were now Indians no more, but Hindus and Muslims. Or rather, as they were referred to in Transfer of Power days, Non-Muslims and Muslims . . . !

Noncooperation Movement, 1921
The Communal Award in 1931

Instead of sending the 16 delegates to the Round Table Conference, Gandhi went as the sole representative of Congress. Congress made no effort to oppose the Communal Award.

Religion now entered the Constitutionof India . . . !

Hindus could only vote for Hindus, Muslims for Muslims and so on.

To gain a clear cut majority in the elections, Congress needed to woo the Muslims to gain their votes. Muslim appeasement reached new heights from here onwards.

Congress attitude in forming ministries in 1937
Congress policy of boycott and resignation from ministries to (unsuccessfully) twist the British arm

This led to tremendously strengthening Jinnah’s position in Indian politics!

Rajaji and Pakistan, 1942-1944
Bhulabhai-Liaquat Pact, 1944
Elections in 1945
Cabinet Mission, 1946
Nehru’s Press Conference, 1946, leading directly to Muslim League Direct Action and partition.
Partition and Freedom, 1947.

From tomorrow, I shall elaborate on these bullet points and lay bare the skeleton in the closet of Indian history.

Anurupa

The Pakistan Plant

Posted on by Anurupa

Hi, Everyone! I have now reached the point of putting before you the most sensitive, and probably the most unacceptable-to-all and difficult-to-believe, facts of the Freedom Movement of India.

In the next series of posts I shall outline—always with documentation—how the Congress, Gandhi, and Jawaharlal Nehru planted the seed of Pakistan, nurtured the plant tenderly, and then plucked the fruit. There is a truckload of documentation, beginning as early as 1938.

They did this in two ways:

· actively, by promoting the Pakistan scheme; and

· passively, by taking several wrong political decisions in their quest for total power in free India.

Indians (and indeed the accepted version of Indian history) do so love to put the responsibility of Partition on the shoulders of Jinnah or the British. They make verygood and obvious scapegoats.

They are certainly not without responsibility in partitioning India. But one must keep in mind that:

· The British were serving the British Raj. When they schemed to keep power, they were working for their country.

And they did try to preserve the unity of India in the latter years.

· Jinnah was not claiming India as his Motherland. When he fought for partition—horrendous, inhuman, barbarous depths though he sank to—he was fighting for his country. He was loyal to his Pakistan.

· The Congress, on the other hand, claimed to be Indian nationalists. Their actions in promoting Pakistan can only be considered as treachery to India and Indians.

The Congress High Command was so busy scheming to get control and power in free India, they didn’t care what cost India and Indians would have to pay.

· Having come to power they have orchestrated one of the most successful cover-ups in world history.

But I shall remind you of Abraham Lincoln’s words:

“History is not history unless it is the truth.”

And so I seek to set the record straight.

My maxim in life is:

If someone was not ashamed to do the deed, I shall not be ashamed to talk about it.

I do want to make one point very clear. Making a demand for Pakistan is one thing—anyone can demand anything—to actively promote the Pakistan scheme, give the demand body and shape in the politics of India, especially while screaming for Hindu-Muslim unity, is quite another.

Note also:

· Jinnah demanded Pakistan, vociferously and propounded many agendas too.

But in actual fact, he always managed to side step taking any decision re it, even when Pakistan was being handed on a platter—until the very end.

Burying heads in the sand is an easy thing to do; it is so much more comfortable than facing the stark, horrendous reality.

But those of you who are willing to face reality, hang on to your seats and follow my posts from tomorrow.

Anurupa