By Yasser Latif Hamdani
Ever since the 1990s, when it became clear and the new academic orthodoxy that Jinnah had settled for Cabinet Mission Plan which would kept India united on fair and equitable terms for all Indians Hindus, Muslims and Dalits, Caste Hindu fanatics and NRIs like MacGupta aka Arun Gupta of New Jersey and his obsessed dishonest sister Sadhana Gupta (who also goes by Sadna Gupta) have come up lies after lies about Cabinet Mission Plan. One of the ridiculous formulations put into motion by these deliberately dishonest caste Hindu NRIs was this notion that had India accepted the Cabinet Mission Plan, Pakistan provinces would have driven the rest of India against its will into Afghan Jehad in the 1980s.
When this preposterous and ridiculous theory was first aired by Sadna Gupta on a website called Chowk.com, I pointed out from the text of the Cabinet Mission Plan, that there was a dual communal veto – that neither Hindus nor Muslims could take an action unilaterally unless a majority of both agreed to a course of action. Once Sadna’s lies were exposed in such a blatant fashion, she adopted this new fanciful theory which I reproduce in full:
Communal veto in Central legislature
Under paragraph 15(2) of the Cabinet Mission Plan (ref. CMP(3)),
(2) The Union should have an Executive and a Legislature constituted from British Indian and States’ representatives. Any question raising a major communal issue in the Legislature should require for its decision a majority of the representatives present and voting of each of the two major communities as well as a majority of all members present and voting.
The Congress supported the provision of such a communal veto in the Union Constituent Assembly, but not in any future Union legislature. Jinnah was against the existence of any Union legislature, but wanted such a veto if such a Union legislature existed(CMP(2)).
A communal veto meant that a majority of each community, i.e., a majority of Hindus AND a majority of Muslims had to vote in favor of a measure for that measure to be passed in the legislature.
Here is an example of what separate communal voting in legislature implied in real numbers.
Suppose there were 78 Muslims and 214 General+ Sikh in a hypothetical future Union Legislative Assembly, taking the same numbers as constituted the Constituent Assembly without the princely states.
Now suppose some country approached the Pakistan section of the Indian Union and promised it aid, and convinced it of the need to wage jihad in Afghanistan ( a not inconceivable possibility). But though a majority of the Union legislature voted against it, ‘Pakistani’ Muslims, though a minority, went ahead and adopted the jihad policy and the Union of India could not stop them.
How did this happen? Under paragraph 15(2) of the Cabinet Mission Plan.
The way it happened was
a) ‘Pakistani’ Muslims said that the issue of whether to wage jihad in Afghanistan was a major communal issue.
So under paragraph 15 (2) separate communal voting had to be held in Union legislature (which decided matters on three subjects only – defence, foreign affairs and communications related to defence).
b) During this vote, 214 General+sikh voted against since they did not favor waging jihad in Afghanistan.
c) Some Muslims also voted against it but ‘Pakistani’ Muslims who were the majority of the 78 Muslims in Legislature voted FOR waging jihad.
d) Since the measure could not be passed unless a majority of both communities voted for it, the measure in favor of jihad did not pass.
e) But Muslims had had 50% weight in voting. Pakistani Muslims who had first brought up the issue said “islam was in danger again, because who the heck are non Muslims to disallow jihad which is our farz and the Union can not stop us anyway”.
Muslim League had already gotten the Indian Army dissolved and reconstituted on two-nation basis as Jinnah had demanded. So Pakistan and the Pakistan Army decided to launch jihad in Afghanistan against the wishes of the majority of India and the Union which could not prevent it.
f) Again, why couldn’t the anti-jihad majority prevent it? Because the non Muslim part of that dissenting majority though holding 214 seats had had only 50% say in the matter and the Muslim part of the dissenting majority was outvoted by the Pakistani Muslims in their section of 78 seats.
The Muslims and non Muslims who opposed jihad though an overall overwhelming majority combined were forbidden from such combining by paragraph 15(2) rule of Cabinet Mission Plan’s insistence on separate communal voting.
Under this rule their votes were to be counted separately – the non Muslims’ no go votes counted for only 50% and the dissenting Muslims no go votes were outvoted by the Pakistani Muslims.
So the majority could not together garner an anti-jihad majority consensus to empower the Union government to prevent the minority Pakistani Muslims/Army from waging jihad in Afghanistan.
What were the numbers?
Under paragraph 15(2), if only a majority of the Muslim members, in other words, 78/2+1 = 40 Muslims out of a total Union legislature of 292 voted in favor of Pakistani Army waging jihad in Afghanistan, no one in United India could stop them under the Cabinet Mission Plan.
Clearly it didn’t matter what were the absolute numbers, one more than exactly half of the total Muslim members, whatever their number, were all that were needed.
Sadna Gupta is one of the most dishonest people you will come across on the internet. Yes Jinnah demanded that Indian army be split into two and reconstituted but that was before the Cabinet Mission Plan. The Cabinet Mission Plan DID NOT PROVIDE FOR SEPARATION OF INDIAN ARMY INTO TWO. JINNAH ACCEPTED THE CABINET MISSION PLAN AS IS. For Jinnah the demand for Pakistan as for reconstitution of army were maximum demands but he accepted the Cabinet Mission Plan without any amendments or spurious interpretations that Congress leaders gave it.
So entire scenario conjured up in thin air by the Guptas of New Jersey shows me just how deep their hatred for anything Pakistani or Muslim is. And the tragedy is that there are people who actually consider them honest interlocutors.
So long as I am alive I will continue to expose the lies of these fanatics, be they the Guptas of New Jersey or the Khatme-e-Nabuwat/Ahrar fanatics from Pakistan. They are one and the same. The historic product of diseased mentality.