Pak Tea House » Uncategorized » Responding to Ishtiaq Ahmed’s latest myths about partition
Responding to Ishtiaq Ahmed’s latest myths about partition
By Yasser Latif Hamdani
My Original Article in Daily Times
Ishtiaq Ahmed’s Part I in response to my original article published today.
First of all, I cannot be bothered to dedicate my weekly space in Daily Times to engage in an endless back and forth with Dr Ishtiaq Ahmed who – as he knows very well- I have a particular opinion of not just because he wages pseudo-history as revenge (in a country where everything from democracy to judiciary is waged as revenge) but because when confronted with a counter-point of view he resorts to the usual: “I am the foremost political science professor trained in democracy and the authors you quote– like Ayesha Jalal and H M Seervai – have no training in democratic thinking or constitutional theory”. Indeed I would not wasted this space had Ishtiaq Ahmed not resorted to ad hominem. So this is essentially a response to his personal attack in an “article” published in today’s Daily Times.
Whether Congress demanded partition of Punjab and Sikhs seconded it or whether Sikhs demanded partition of Punjab and Congress seconded it is a point entirely irrelevant to the point I made in my article i.e. partition of Punjab and Bengal was imposed on the Muslim League – a point that Ishtiaq Ahmed has been unable to controvert. For Ishtiaq Ahmed’s information: V P Menon, later Nehru’s closest confidant, had prepared a scheme as early as 23 January 1946 which sought to partition Punjab and Bengal and the partition that finally happened was to the dot based on that scheme. This much is clear from Menon’s letter to George Abell of the above dated. It is serialized at No. R. 205/46 and contains an enclosure titled “Demarcation of Pakistan areas” with “Most Secret”. For a careful researcher like Ishtiaq Ahmed isn’t it a bit odd to have left out this very important piece of evidence that connects Congress to the partition plan long before Ishtiaq Ahmed deems it so? This predates the Cabinet Mission Plan.
In respect of what Congress and League could have done to keep India united, his entire point when stripped off his personal insults against me was that a consociational government was not possible because of trust deficit. Again his research is problematic. The Cabinet Mission Plan did for implementation did not require Congress and the Muslim League to give up their differences and trust each other but for a brief period till the constitution was in place. Maulana Azad, Sarat Chanderbose and several Congressmen were on board with the idea. It was Gandhi and Nehru who took the wind out of the idea. They also insisted on partition of Punjab and Bengal even when Bengal was ready to go its own independent secular way. The “coalition” government formed in September 1946 comes after the burial of the Cabinet Mission Plan and was not a coalition government; it was an “interim government”. In fact it was called an interim government. Surely Ishtiaq Ahmed – as the great political scientist and expert on constitutional theory- knows the difference between a coalition government and an interim government. An interim government encompasses varying interests – often working at cross purposes- to preside over the formation of permanent political system either through constitution making or elections. This is why interim governments are not called coalition governments. They are not meant to function as coalitions.
The dangers that Ishtiaq Ahmed claims the Cabinet Mission Plan was fraught with are not really there. The 10 year out clause does not figure in the Cabinet Mission Plan. That was a demand that was not finally placed in those terms. There was absolutely no mention of 10 year secession in the Cabinet Mission Plan! This view is confirmed by Ayesha Jalal (who according to Ishtiaq Ahmed is not a well trained scholar) on page 196 of the Sole Spokesman Sange Meel Reprint 1992: “But there was no mention of the right of secession from the union. All in all the 16th May statement contained evidence of greater deference to Congress standpoint, hinting to Jinnah that perhaps he had missed the bus”.
The second point: Consider how Pakistan and India dealt with Princely India. Princely India was to be part of the federation and would be giving three subjects including foreign affairs and defence to the Union. Therefore no question of what Ishtiaq Ahmed says arises in the least. To think that the fourth group could carry out a policy in contradiction to the rest of India is stretching. However the most important thing – it is must be emphasized – is that Congress did not raise any of the points raised by Ishtiaq Ahmed, so his post hoc excuses for why the Congress could not agree to Cabinet Mission Plan were not stated by the Congress itself. Unless Ishtiaq Ahmed thinks he can guess what Gandhi and Nehru were thinking, historical record suggests that Congress accepted the Cabinet Mission Plan but tried to undo its clauses by making a fuss about what the grouping clause actually meant. Even after Cabinet Mission clarified what it meant, they continued to insist on it. Wavell’s famous meeting with Gandhi and Nehru in this regard is an eye opener. At the end you had the two great infallible saints of Ishtiaq Ahmed’s Pantheon of Gods pleading “but we are lawyers”. Such was the sophistry of the Congress position.
Unable to counter my points logically – he lashed out against me calling me a hagiographer and a defender and Knight Templar of the two nation theory. I will quote a paragraph from my article and let the reader decide if this is the defence of the two nation theory:
“Ironically, Jinnah, the ultimate villain in Doctor Ahmed’s reckoning, had pleaded for exactly that. He told Mountbatten that a Hindu or a Muslim was a Punjabi or a Bengali before he was Hindu or a Muslim. This indicates a complex understanding of nationalisms and sub-nationalisms on the part of the Quaid-e-Azam.”
This is no defence of the two nation theory.
In comparison Ishtiaq Ahmed’s insistence that Congress seconded and not initiated the demand for partition of Punjab after Sikh is itself evidence enough of his soft corner for Gandhi and Nehru. Pakistan’s tragedy is that we are caught between hagiographers and ideologues. On the one hand you have Safdar Mahmood who speaks of an Islamic Quaid-e-Azam who might even have been a Deobandi partitioning India in the name of Islam and on the other hand you have people like Ishtiaq Ahmed – willing to give Mahatma Gandhi and Pandit Nehru a clean chit while denigrating Jinnah.
Neither of these narratives are historically accurate and must be countered for the progress of Pakistan and indeed a stable relationship between India and Pakistan. I hope Ishtiaq Ahmed- for the sake of his reputation – comes up with something more concrete than deliberate obfuscation in the second part of his response to my solitary article.
The views expressed here are those of the author’s and do not represent the position of all editors, authors at PTH.
Filed under: Uncategorized · Tags: Congress, government, Ishtiaq Ahmed, myths
162 Responses to "Responding to Ishtiaq Ahmed’s latest myths about partition"
Leave a Reply
Recent Comments
- RajTOO
said Rex Minor,
brainwashing can make anyone believe an... - Ex-Paki
said Raj,
Can any muslim….
That is a totally irra... - Rex Minor
said Raj,
O’h you do not hurt a muslim or me peso... - RajTOO said Tajender,
We of Indian soil are proud Bharatiyas....
- Rex Minor said Raj,
No you do not speaks fo sikhs! They have publ...
- RajTOO said Rex Minor,
When I speak of Hindus, I speak of Budd...
- anti cellulite treatment
said We’re a group of volunteers and starting a n... - cellulite treatment said This is really interesting, You’re a very sk...
- Rex Minor said Raj,
And when an Indian presents itself solely wit...
- tajender
said Can any Muslim, Paki or Indian put any rational ar...
YLH writes with elan and tries to stick to the truth, no matter how inconvenient. His grasp of the man made disaster of partition is firm. I would lay 75% of the blame of the partition of india at the door of Gandhi, Nehru and most importantly PATEL. Patel was the most powerful man in India at that point in time. His power emanated from his ability to collect funds (money) for running the Congress machine, elections etc. Naturally the one who pays the piper, calls the tune. The argument/wisdom of partition gained currency in 1920s itself. Savarkar, Moonje (HMS) and even Lajpat Rai openly advocated the partition of Panjab. They openly said that Hindus and Muslims were different “nations” and incompatible to co-exist.
Savarkar-Moonje-Lajpat Rai— Gandhi-Nehru-Patel ! It is a chain. The Savarkarian idea crystallised and took the form it did. Patel was the first one to sabotage the Cabinet Mission Plan. To quote Gandhiji : “But this is worst than partition”. Gandhiji wanted, desperately wanted partition of India.
This idea was cemented after the assasination of Arya Samaj leader Swami Shraddhanand. Gandhiji (read Patel, who was Gandhiji’s master in every sense of the word) realised that co-existence with Muslims would undermine Hindu interests.
Muslims along with Princes/others (3rd party) would affect Hindu polity. Nehru also said that “Muslims were practically incapable of co-operation).
YLH is absolutely right when he calls the Partition Plan the “VP Menon Plan”. VP Menon ICS was the (Home) Secretary of Sardar Patel (and not Nehru.. as YLH says). And VP Menon’s mindset was fashioned after the Moplah Rebellion in Kerala. [VP Menon was a Brahmin from Kerala]. Please note that June 3 Plan was based on a note prepared by VP Menon years ago !!!
Jinnah knew it was a trap. But the muslim mood was on the up-swing. It was only Maulana Abulkalam Azad who realised that this was a political suicide for Indian muslims. Congress (Arya Samaj/RSS/HMS members were 4-Anna Congress Members too!) spread so much dirt and hatred against muslims that vitiated the atmosphere. Of course there are no “angels’ in the play. The muslims responded with hatred too. But the ability of Muslims was always in the spirit of a “reaction”. India was pre-dominantly a Non-Muslim country… and to quote the words of M R Jayakar, who openly said to Mr. Jinnah : “Mr. Jinnah : 25 can never be equal to 75″.
Muslims wanted to be treated “equally” and the problem was that 25 were 3 times lesser than 75 ! M.C. Chagla had agreed to the Nehru Report. Chagla pleaded so effectively in favor of the report that Jinnah postponed the meeting. After that Chagla parted ways with Jinnah.
I think to understand Jinnah’s mind.. Pakistan was a defeat for Jinnah, and all that he had stood for in his life. But once it was a reality, he felt he could mould it and make something out of it. He spoke to Mr. Rushdie, BA (Alig).. father of Salman Rushdie in Calcutta.. and he said : “Pakistan had been my biggest blunder”. Some people doubt this statement as a bluff. Given Jinnah’s personality, it seems un-true too. But what went on in his mind is for someone only to guess. At best, it can be a guess-work.
Fact of the matter is this : The Hindus were sick and tired of living under Muslim rule. So the British (to them) were friends, who helped get rid of Muslim Rule. They came in as a “Blessing”. That was the Hindu mind. Thanks to the British that they got rid of the muslim yoke ! And they did not want the Muslims again as “Partners”. They wanted to get rid of the Muslims. “Cut the head off to get rid of the headache”, to quote Nehru.
Muslim insistence on parity / equality was also flawed. 25 should never have aspired for equality with 75. That was a cardinal mistake on the part of Muslim league.
In short both party played mind-games. But Patel succeeded in getting what he had wished for.
Now that Pakistan is a reality, it must be made to work. But it is not working because various interests are clashing against each other. India too is corrupt and has its problems, but because of the sheer size, it is reaping the benefits of the “economies of scale”. Inspite of a million flaws, India will rise. Reason is : after getting what he wanted, Patel could have turned India into a Hindu Raj, but he did not. He made India a de-facto Hindu Raj, but kept India secular de-jure. That was the genius of Patel.
Patel was the real man who partitioned India. Gandhi-Jinnah-Nehru were Tier 2. Patel hated Maulana Azad more than he hated Jinnah. Only Azad had understood Patel’s mind and the dangers it held for Indian muslims.
Ultimately Indian muslims fell into the trap. Hindus wanted to experiment with Ram Raj., and Muslims wanted a laboratory where they experimented with Islamic Raj. It was an intrinsic desire in both communities. Hindus wanted to revert to Pre-Islamic Hindustan. Muslims wanted to revert to the “Mughal Court” (albeit in a smaller size). This was the psychology.
It is a complex story – but after 63 yrs – we can dissect and get closer to truth. Ayesha Jalal has done wonderful work in this direction…
Dronacharya,
Here comes one more aman ki aasha do-gooder
Blame the Sikhs! Blame the Sikhs! Blame the Sikhs!
history is nothing but the version of past aspects that people have decided to agree upon(napolean)
The real villain of partition and blood-shed is islam. What Vallabh-bhai Patel did was to counter islam’s machinations through muslimized indians and quislings of islam. Examine islam and you will find in it totalitarian arrogance and separatism, fascist methods and violence-glorification against non-muslims, arabic hegemony and ethno-fascism. Has the development in Pakistan (and other muslim lands) not proved that?
In 2012 we should not be blaming Patel or Gandhi. Not even Jinnah, who was just a quisling obeying orders of his imported imperialist totalitarian ideology. Since he had been a quasi-non-muslim for decades he wanted to make good by being especially islamic.
Don’t blame hindus. They were defending their land (which was theirs since long before Mohammad constructed his allah and islam) as good as possible. As regards blaming muslims – they carry the main thrust of islam’s long-term goal of bringing the world under the boot of islam. And Pakistan idea (ideology) is part of this plan. Why do pakistani children learn that Mohammad bin Kasim is the first founder of Pakistan? Why are they taught that Jinnah is the supreme hero (only next to Mohammad bin Kasim and Mohammad bin Abdullah), for he created Pakistan for the supposedly terribly-suffering muslims of british India against a “sly dirty-minded clique of evil hindu banias” who wished to keep muslism as their slaves?
Analyse from what we know now, in this god-damned year 2012 – about islam, about islamic goals, intentions and methods etc. Jinnah is just a bubble of hydrogen sulphide (a stinking poisonous gas) in this putrid quicksandy swamp of “muslim-aggressor-vs-hindu-defender” history.
As I wrote earlier sufism marks the indirect and non-violent victory of hindu religions over islam. That is why sufism is being slandered and eliminated from muslim societies today (Auranzeb killing Dara Shukoh, tablighi, wahhabi, salafi, deobandi, arab-oriented muta’rriba etc.). The fate of the ahamadiya and bahai also point to the same evilness.
Let us not waste ourselves on defending/criticizing Patel or Jinnah. Let them be the peaceful dead.
The real villain of partition and blood-shed is islam
bullshit.
partition of india was engineered by lal pal and bal.banias in nexus with brhmns wanted to divide india,to haave absolute control on market.that is how beggar of marwar became billionaire.
to engrich
You may as well call yourself an ostrich that buries its head in sand to ignore truth and facts.
Partition of british was and is part of islam’s goal of bringing whole of mankind under islamic fascism-imperialism. Pakistan has proved this through its past 65 years of blighted existence. So your islam-glorifying claims are invalid.
Putting blame for creation of Pakistan on hindus is the cry-baby attitude of muslims, now that islam’s failures and evils become more clearly evident in the islamic paradise of Pakistan (and also in other islam-dominated societies).
Muslims think that muslims alone have the right to defend themselves. Hindus were defending their land against islam – unfortunately Gandhi was not strong enough to carry out this crucial defence of hindus. Gandhi tried to use soft-hearted christian methods to deal with islam (an arrogant fascist ideology) and its agents and quislings. That is why he lost and Pakistan could be created. When muslim population component goes above the 5-10% mark then the sociopolitical development is blackmailed by islamic fascism. Jinnah wanted to reserve a place in the arab god’s heaven. In that process he was ready to lie and to let loose and defend muslim killers on non-muslims.
{}
How many killers, robbers, rapists, double-dealers, islam-enforcers etc. from the Khan clan? From the khanate?
Ahem, I personally don’t know any — do you?
Hindus were defending their land against islam – unfortunately Gandhi was not strong enough
hindus are only 2.5%.u were fooling and selling india.now u are like python around body of bharat mata.
Partition of british was and is part of islam’s goal of bringing whole of mankind under islamic fascism-imperialism
they remained as king for 7-900 years could do easily if this was aim.
Partition of british was and is part of islam’s goal of bringing whole of mankind under islamic fascism-imperialism. Pakistan has proved this through its past 65 years of blighted existence. So your islam-glorifying claims are invalid.
one hindu poet soordaas says,
bania can rob his fathe without any hesitation.partition was brhmn bania game to rule and rob india and indians.u both make 7% of indian population.
BJ Kumar says:
July 22, 2012 at 6:04 pm
Ahem, I personally don’t know any — do you?
THUG IS ANOTHER NAME OF BRHMN.
OLD CHESTNUT!
Pakistan was found on a two nation theory …..Jinnah gave it a form…..to the utter disgust, shame and folly of the non.muslim Indian leaders of that time.
ylh
digging old graves and twisting facts with baseless and false conclusiond won’t help you get back
the status you crave for……
For more go to http://www.irshad.com
is part of this plan. Why do pakistani children learn that Mohammad bin Kasim is the first founder of Pakistan
he brought light of equality and justice in otherwise apartheid india.
paki children should be taught that LAL,PAL AND BAL ENGINEERED THE PARTITION OF INDIA.
@rex
jinnah was backed by strong demand fr injustices done by Indoos to muslims.he founded a country for muslims and not for external people to settle down there. Israel is an unnatural n illegitimate colony of foreign settlers. This is not so with Pakistan.
YLH is totally pathetic in his attempt to mischaracterize the author’s quote.
now is using jedi mind trick to change the subject in the article.
Why did the partition even come to subject because Muslims and Sikhs wanted
status quo (British staying). When Congress called their bluff. Muslims took it.
Now are crying over it.
Nobody gives rat’s ass about YLH theory.
Congress also believed the Pakistan was not viable and that they would come back.
Obviously Congress was wrong because America had differ ideas but I am sure YLH’s
little mind can’t fathom that Congress believed in Two Nation theory or such non sense.
Yasser Latif Hamdani: With respect, you say that you have a “very low opinion” of Dr. Ishtiaq Ahmed and that he wages (not writes) “pseudo-history”. You have also stated that Ishtiaq Ahmed “stooped so low as to resort to ad hominem and straw man fallacies.”
You even have refused to accept that he wrote an article. According to you, he launched a fallacy-ridden personal attack masqueraded as an “article” in today’s Daily Times. You have also accused him of spreading myths. These are very strong statements. It seems the anger got the the better of you.
You criticized his book in the Daily Times (July 16). Do you think the Daily Times should have denied him the right to reply to your criticism?
Is Ishtiaq Ahmed’s “pseudo-history” worse than what is taught in the Pakistani educational institutions? Besides Ayesha Jalal, is there any other Pakistani scholar who writes genuine history? What is your opinion of Dr. Safdar Mahmood, if I may ask? Have you ever confronted him? His writings in Jang reach millions of people every weak. Ishtiaq Ahmed’s writings remain limited a microscopic minority in Pakistan. Who is doing more harm to the minds of Pakistanis? Is it Ishtiaq Ahmed?
In conclusion, I wonder why are not able to disagree without being disagreeable.
we might have another partition headed our way…between house of God and house of kuffar. MTG
vivekanand called kerala the land of vedas ,as asylum of lunatics.if not physically,dividing the people mentally &hiding peoples wealth in basement of temples,is your main expertize
Dronacharya,what a balance analysis.thanks
shakil if you read the article youshould be able to fathom my opinion of safdar mahmood and i have confronted him vociferously. as for ishtiaq i did not start the personal attacks he did.
I’ve been immersed in partitionania and churchill’s butchery in the bengal famine for so many months and I’m inexorably drawn into this debate.:-
(a) Cabinet mission or anyone cannot fetter the people of india or the constituent assembly, duly elected. Yes, minority and indivudual rights are paramount, stipulate 2/3rds or 3/4ths majority for every constitutional clause, but a pack of foreigners cannot impose “grouping” or something on the elected assembly’
(b)Yasirji, how do you expect that a 27% minority in united India would exercise self-determination while a 45% minority would not , in Punjab, exercise the right to separate.?
(c) Even so, fact is that Churchill had promised Jinnah, undivided Punjab for Pakistan. In 1941, he sent a message to Jinnah thru Sikandar Hyat Khan that “..punjab has fought in WW2 so ably,…you’ll get pakistan for this”. Churchill was least bothered that hindus and sikh from punjab had contributed as much as muslims from punjab. For the thousands who gave up their lives in north africa, what punjab got was that the widows and orphans were killed or uprooted.
(d) Pakistan movement simply had less traction than the Brits made out.Muslim league were soon after independence eased out by pak army. In fact, all politicians were marginalised. Yasirji, you quote v p menon’s plan of jan 1946 (Incidentally, v p was only a glorified office boy of mountbatten). But, in the same month, nehru wrote to cripps that pakistan is an impossibility as NWFP wud not join pak. (Stalin told Indian communist leader Rajeswar rao in 1951 that pakistan is an underhand trick played by the british.
(e)Churchill manipulated situation and pressed jinnah to take an extreme stand. The crux was that congress won in NWFP, the province with highest muslim percentage. Unfortunately, congress ceased all agitation which they should hv continued along with negotiation.Brits were a spent force. they ran away at dunkirk, fled singapore and only in India they refused to go.Nehru and Patel betrayed NWFP, and yielded to mountbatten’s concoction of a referendum which was probably rigged by british officials.In return for the concession on NMWFP, mountbatten agreed to division of punjab. If NWFP had gone to ML, Brit would have ridden roughshod and refused even division of punjab/bengal. We indians owe much, therefore to khudai kidmatgars.
(f)It is high time we accept our separate mistakes of the past and strive for SAARC as a EU-style group
(g)I dont know why people fail to percieve the simple marxist understanding of cabinet mission grouping. Nazimuddin formed the govt in Bengal with the help of GOvernor, sir john herbert, who eased out sher-e-bangla fazlul haque. 25 European members of bengal provincial assembly voted to ernable a majority for ML and nazimuddin. Brits owned jute mills in kolkata and tea gardens in assam. It suited them fine to have all this in group C under a ml govt,
This is for everyone – very precise…
http://youtu.be/dbh5l0b2-0o
rajtoo,
wherre are u.i hope u will agree with me that,
M.K. Gandhi hailed as the apostle of non-violence, walking with a simple loin cloth and fountain head of Hindu spiritualism, was the king of all the Hindu corrupt crorepatis. He made the Marwadis, once beggars, into multi-millionaires. Birlas, Dalmias, Bajajs, Ambanis, Goenkas, Sahu Jains were all blessed by Gandhi to loot the country and become rich.
“Hindu spiritualism” is the other name for Brahminical blood-sucking exercise
@Mythbuster
You know that Sikhs are the one who made a huge mistake of taking sides and destroying themselves in the process. The were rich land owners of Punjab, and if they stayed neutral, they would be among top communities. Today they stand defeated in every sense. Their youth is killing itself by drug use and female abortions. This is a clear victory for Ram Raj. Congratulation is in order.
Also I must thank you for acknowledging that Ram Raj uses Indian Muslim minority as hostages against Pakistan.
Mythbuster,
Agree to most of your points except that it was not masses who voted in the referendum but the educated elite who served as useful idiots (in the words of lenin) for the agenda of the interested parties.
Pervez,
With few exceptions,
There is no and cant be such real thing to be called indian Muslim. There is nothing indian about them in any cultural, linguistic, social,spirtual sense. They deserve to go to their islamic dream home Pakistan for which they sacrificed lot under the leadership of great MAJ. Transfer of all the Kaffirs stuck in Pakistan to india and all the Pakistan deserving Muslamans to be sent across Wagha is the key to lasting peace. Also, dont forget these so called Sufies, make sure to carry them along so they dont face any takleef from Kuffar thriving in their own land.
Nehru and Gandhi were wrong to diagnose ganagrine and cancer as headache and Sikhs too do deserve the blame twice. One under Khalsa Sarkar , they were content just by forcing feiminine dress of Salwar Kameej on islamist males and second time in 47 when they failed to make rest of India follow their lead in making partition complete.
Good news is that now indians are much more aware of the problem now than they ever was in past and they are thankful to Pakistani people for this favor in recognising and realising the nature of danger they face and problem they need to solve.
Mythbuster
Had there been any warning and proper preparedness been made by the Hindus and Sikhs of Punjab, there would have been no partition of Punjab in 47. Indian border would have sharing border with Afghanistan and completely failed the Birtish plan. History tells us that Punjabi Muslaman have no record of resistence, winning war or self rule. It Wont be a surprise if the same options open up in next 10-15 years for both Afghanistan and India to negotiate mutally satisfactory boundary somewhere near Attock.
Parvez M,
.
What you say has been speculated by others but the track record of the Pakistani state would suggest otherwise.
Look at the evidence.
Like I said, Mandal and his Dalit supporters of AIML, hounded out.
East Bengal, operation Searchlight.
Ahmedyas in Pakistan today…
Do you think the Sikhs would have been any different?
I doubt it.
@Mythbuster
I do not speculate, I leave that task to you.
The case for Sikh community is a done deal and I have duly congratulated you on mission accomplished.
Dalits/untouhables/tribals are there for you to deal with and do you any solution for them also?
Countdown to a Tragedy:The Partition of Punjab-I
Whether the Partition of Punjab was ‘imposed on the AIML’ or it was the Muslims of the United Provinces who imposed it on the people of Punjab (who in 1937 had voted the secular, non-ML non-Congressi Unionist Govt.) is open to historical debate.
What is clear though is that the AIML was privately ready to divide Punjab almost from the time of the Lahore session as a price to attain it’s goals yet kept on insisting the exact opposite in Public to it’s supporters in Punjab.
1. The real question is, would the Punjabi Mussalman have supported the Pakistan movement if it had not been so deceived?
2. Those blaming the current day Punjabis alone for the mess in Pakistan must also answer that question when apportioning blame.
Read below:
.
“Mohammad Aslam Malik’s work The Making of the Pakistan (Oxford University Press, Karachi, 2001) draws extensively on the archives to record the deliberations that preceded the adoption of the Lahore Resolution in the Subjects Committee of the League’s session at its second sitting on March 23, 1940. “Among the amendments introduced in the second sitting, three are noteworthy: (1) Substitution of the word provinces with areas, (2) addition of the words territorial adjustments, and (3) addition of the words in consultation with. The first two amendments are, in fact interconnected. As the provinces with their existing boundaries were not intended to be included in Pakistan, it was replaced with the word areas. The term areas, which had an undefined meaning, needed a qualifying clause like the one deployed, i.e., territorial adjustments” (page 150).
In a statement on October 4, 1944, after the collapse of his talks with Gandhi, Jinnah clarified that “territorial adjustment” applied to both sides and could be tackled once the two governments were set up (Ahmad, Volume 2, page 135). But the division should be “on the basis of the present boundaries of the six provinces… subject to territorial adjustments that might be necessary” (ibid., page 135).
On December 10, 1945, in an interview to the Associated Press of India, he said: “There will also, doubtless, have to be frontier adjustments where primarily Hindu and Muslim lands are contiguous to the Hindustan or Pakistan states” (ibid., page 263).
All this was a far, far cry from Jinnah’s emphatic statement in public on April 30, 1947 – as the partition of India became inevitable and demands were raised for the partition of Punjab and Bengal – rejecting those demands (Mehrunnisa Ali (ed.); Jinnah on World Affairs: (Select Documents, 1908-1948 ),; Pakistan Study Centre, University of Karachi, 2007, page 370). In an interview to Doon Campbell of Reuters published on May 21, 1947, a fortnight before the June 3, 1947, plan on the partition, he said: “I am deadly against the partition of Bengal and the Punjab and we shall fight every inch against it” (ibid., page 378).
It was a most unfortunate statement, reflecting a most disastrous stand. It sent a misleading message to Muslims of East Punjab and West Bengal and conveyed a threat to the Sikhs, particularly, that, whether they liked it or not, they would be yoked to a Muslim state. They perceived it to be an existential threat to be averted by recourse to violence. It was, moreover, utterly lacking in candour for right then Jinnah was negotiating with the Viceroy on the terms of reference of the proposed Boundary Commissions for partitioned Punjab and Bengal…..”
(from Jinnah’s concept of Pakistan:AG Noorani in Frontline, June 2012)
Miyan Pervez M
Guess inbreeding has killed the ability of comprehension. Musalmans whose leader was MAJ have been left stuck in india. This dont make them Indians as they are the rightful owner of Paki islamic Paradise.Its time to pay for the bill of partition and give the fair share of islamic paradise to the Musalmans still stranded in india . They are living in takleef to see kuffar flourishing around them. Reason, honesty demand they move across Attari to their Islamic home build by MAJ or one day Indian Army will be forced to do Bangla Desh type justice for them by making room for them right there in Pakjab. They cant be denied tehir share of Pakiland fpr long .
The NWFP territory belongs to Afghanistan.Durand line is artificial. Punjab rightfully belongs to Sikhs and Hindus and soon it will be under our control. Btw india is one of the most popular and the largest donors to Afghanistan and helping them build their own institutions an infrastructure like roads, hospital and Dams to utilize their own water for power and irrigation purpose. While Pakis are killing Afghans , Indians are helping them to be their own and independent entity. There is not a single Afghan in right mind who do not show the distate and contempt for Pakjabi. Same for Baluchi and now Sindhis are beginning to do the same.
@Sachbol
Sorry it is you, who is ignoring history, As sun rises in the East, rivers go South, your rulers come from West. The only choice is how far West you want to go. We have already built an expressway to make it easier. Afghan have special something for Dilli. I offer you three million Afghan as an early batch. If you treat them with love, you have a chance to improve your gene pool and Bollywood would have a new lease on life. Have not you heard of Love jahad, hearing that your Brahaman guides are throwing a fit. Arabs are offering similar services. You would rather kill unborn baby girls. It is not nice to play with mother nature. Afghans are known Bachebaz and that is your fate.
I recognize that Pakistan has corrupt leaders and I don’t support them at all but you don’t even know that that your county is ruled by an Italian woman. Truth is bitter and pushing things under the rug does not make it go away.
Why does it bother you that I’m responding to you from US. Do you have a special claim on America. America has been good to you and you should say thank you. All of India neighbors know the kind of tolerance you preach. I don’t buy Gandhi’s deceptive approach to peace.
In any case my comment was not for you and let Sachbol answer it.
Shakil SB,
Not true at all. 1. I have already written about Safdar Chaudhry and Pakistan’s distorted history. 2. Ishtiaq Ahmed has always resorted to personal attacks. I have demolished his myths in some detail. I do have a very low opinion of Ishtiaq Ahmed and I have shown why.
2 minutes ago · As for denying the right to reply to criticism… why would do I do that? Ishtiaq Ahmed has the right to criticise me but then I have the right to express my opinion of him and his work.
about a minute ago
I think it’s fair to criticize someone’s book only after reading his/her book. Looks like the author, as he usually does, has launched his criticism of Ishtiaq Ahmed’s book without even bothering to read it fully.
.
“First of all, I cannot be bothered to dedicate my weekly space in Daily Times to engage in an endless back and forth with Dr Ishtiaq Ahmed who – as he knows very well- I have a particular opinion of not just because he wages pseudo-history as revenge”
.
Umm..seems like a cop-out, exactly in line with the Muslim elite who wanted a separate country for Muslims in 1947. Oh-we-cannot-compete-so-we-want-a-separate-country thing.
And this from the original article penned by the author:
.
“The principle of contributory negligence suggests that it is the last person responsible that is to be held accountable. The violence at partition thus logically lies at the door of the party that did not allow the Cabinet Mission Plan to work and that insisted on dividing Punjab.”
.
Exquisite. And I remember at another place, the author has criticized Nehru and Gandhi to be too lawyer like!
ParvezM,
Well Paki hate towards Indians has caused innumerable deaths as a consequence of terrorism-sponsorship.
.
Indian hate for Pakis on this blog is a reaction to that and comparatively really harmless.
to PTH
The basic training (indoctrination) given to muslim-pakistani mind is:
Muslims defeated hindus, we who became muslims are the superior allah-chosen human beings, if we insult or injure you it’s only what you hindus deserve, we muslims write history and define what is justice, we muslims alone have the right to possess and use earth’s resources and non-muslims must live at our mercy, we muslims alone define boundaries, culture, politics, hero-worship etc. and so on.
—
Some honest pakistanis admit that such a training is being given sonce 60 or 600 or 1200 years to the muslims.
Then the muslims say “it is you hindus who produce all the hate and lies”. And because we muslims say it so, hence it is the truth.
What right does an ideology (a fascist-totalitarian, primitive-tribal, arab-centric ideology) created in Makkah and Madinah have to determine life in the indian subcontinent? None. None at all.
—
Jinnah was a successful rich lawyer. How does a lawyer become rich? By catering to the needs of the poor? Never. Only by helping the rich break laws and cover that up does a lawyer become rich. No lawyer ever became rich by helping the poor. That is why M K Gandhi was unsuccessful as lawyer and he left the profession.
A nation established by a man like Jinnah is going to become a nation for the rich and the deceitful. He talked a few idealized words here and there to fool the people. On that basis you cannot build a good nation.
Islam is inherently totalitarian and MUST use fascist methods, briberies and lies for its survival or expansion. That is the basic truth being proved about islam in all islam-based societies and regions. No muslim has or can have the honesty and the courage to face this truth.
—
Consequently: the muslims will compulsively slander and ridicule non-muslims and blame non-muslims for the sufferings of the muslims and then also accuse the non-muslims of spreading hate!!!
Don’t expect anything else from muslims.
“It is not hard to imagine how things would have panned out differently had they taken Jinnah’s offer. Punjab would have avoided communal bloodletting…….Pakistan would have remained a secular state, since, as many as 40 percent of Pakistanis would be non-Muslims i.e. Sikhs, Hindus and Christians…..”
YLH, I admire you for your personal courage and dedication to liberal causes but I think your speculation above ignores the ground realities in 1947. It may have been possible in the Punjab of 1937 but from 1940 onwards the AIML’s rhetoric and actions had vitiated the atmosphere so much that it was impossible for the non Muslims of Punjab to agree to voluntarily throw their lot with Pakistan.
.
Their is enough historical evidence for this and people who actually cared, knew it.
For example, A G Noorani, (a strong critic of the congress and author you often quote) wrote in an article about the partition of Punjab that way back in 1940 Sir Sikander Hyatt Khan strongly admonished Jinnah’s demand for establishing Pakistan for he foresaw that it would tear Punjab apart and:
“Pakistan would mean a massacre….”
He further quotes Sikander from a speech in the Provincial Assembly, on March 11, that his conception of Pakistan differed fundamentally from Jinnah’s; saying:
.
“A Muslim Raj here and a Hindu Raj elsewhere, if that is what Pakistan means, I will have nothing to do with it.”
.
It is a Punjabi misfortune that Sikander Hyatt Khan died when he did and left the non Punjabi leaders of the congress and the AIML inflict a tragedy foretold on the unsuspecting people of Punjab.
Once the partition of India was accepted, the partition of Punjab was a foregone conclusion and among all the leaders, Jinnah knew it, according to the well researched article by Noorani that I mentioned.
What right does an ideology (a fascist-totalitarian, primitive-tribal, arab-centric ideology) created in Makkah and Madinah have to determine life in the indian subcontinent? None
before arrival of muslims india was far far backward that mecca and medina which was glowing with light of islam.india was suffering under hindu apartheism.
from Indians on this blog and every other place on internet? Is that what Gandhi taught
rajtoo,
pakistani dont hate anybody.those who see the evil deeds of high caste hindus hate them.they are like pythons.gandhi was showing himself as saint.while he will remember his boyfriend,the moment he will spot grease anywhere.he was the most evil person indian of 20th century.destroyed life of many many young girls.he was your idol.he established apartheism in india and divided india.
rajtoo…………..
Indian hate for Pakis on this blog is a reaction to that and comparatively really harmless
hate is the oxygen of brhmnst.they will die without this.
to tajender
It is your typical muslim blind-belief that Makkah was more advanced than India in the 7th century.
Even if this belief is true, what about the 21st century? We are not living in the 7th century.
Today Makkah and Arab lands are examples of backwardness, violence-glorification, irrationality and manipulating human beings (through violence and briberies) to believe in lies.
If you want to live in the 7th cenutry then why do you use the internet?
Even if India was backward than Makkah, it still does not mean arabs and muslims had the right to invade India. You don’t like it when USA invades Irak calling Irak a backward land.
So the truth remains: an ideology created in Makkah has no right to determine politics etc. in the indian subcontinent. Neither in the 7th nor in the 21st century.
—
Your islamized brain may not be able to understand this matter of self-respect and dignity of indians. Your idea that everything brahmins (jews) did was bad and everything bad came from brahmins (jews) and everything became better through muslims reveals you as an islamically idiotized person. When will you grow out of that stupidity? How old are you? How long have you been mentally enslaved under islam? When will islamic lies vanish from your brain? Any hope of that?
ahem give me name of one brhmn who did something good for the people i studied u people very thoroghly.u are gang of chamoleons hurt everybody around.under hindu raj did u invented any thing.u kept india india in darkness.
to tajender
No brahmin ever did anything good. But the others were worse.
How do we come out of this trap or ditch in the 21st century?
ParvezM
Proves my contention, he runs to many of his fourfathers to save him from the indians fearing they might chase Paki further WEST. Having nothing temporal or spirtual of his own , spitting on soil he eats from and continue besseeching every passer by to be either Awliya or father is but a pathetic existence. Paki have fallen so low in intellect and material field that Indians might as well take the offer and talk to Arabic, American and Afghan fathers of Nabalig Paki to decide the future course.
No brahmin ever did anything good. But the others were worse.
lie and wrong.muslims did 1001 innovative inventions which helped the humanity.
How do we come out of this trap or ditch in the 21st century?
we are under brrhmncl trap.
The whole of Europe and even India were sunk in total intellectual and cultural darkness while Islam lit the world with it’s enlightenment.
Mohd bin Qasim was sent to India to fix up things and teach the indoooo villains to live decently. Unfortunately they have still not grown up and another Jinnah or Mohd bin Qasim or Mahmud Ghaznavi seems getting ready to fix them up….maybe some descendent of Chengiz Khan or someone from the Ming dynasty awaits somewhere to ride over mothor india to shatter her false pride and vanity.
‘
Yet more….may be some anothr Mirja Ghulla is born in Indoooostan to set the minds of the indooo’s level…..and to chain Muslims around there. Who knows????