Jaswant singh new book

rehanbutt
By rehanbutt

IS it possible that Jaswant Singh’s book on Jinnah and partition should help the subcontinent’s scholars bury the mythology of partition that has been hanging around the South Asian people’s necks like an albatross? However unlikely this may appear, the idea is worth pursuing.
Everybody knows that the subcontinent was divided by agreement between the Muslim League, the Congress and the British government because no alternative was acceptable. But the narrow considerations of factional politics in both India and Pakistan have kept the engines of hate running and the game of seeking power by demonising the other has been played for so long and with such zeal that anyone who tries to put the record straight is pilloried even before he has had his say.

Thus Jinnah and Muslims are demon ised in India and Nehru and Patel are deified. No decent trait can be attributed to the former and even a most legitimate criticism of the latter cannot be allowed. Likewise in Pakistan, Nehru and Patel (often Gandhi is added) and Hindus are demonised and Jinnah and his followers are worshipped for their infallibility.

As a result of this extended cooperation in substituting belief for history the people of India and Pakistan have been diverted from the path of peaceful coexistence and condemned to remain prisoners of pre-partition communal politics.

Since South Asia cannot play a healthy role in the affairs of the world and the people of India and Pakistan cannot realise themselves unless the hateful myths surrounding partition are completely discarded, the urgency of recording and recounting a truthful account of partition is manifest. If this is what Jaswant Singh had in mind, he will receive a thundering endorsement from all genuine students of history.

From the accounts appearing in the media it does not appear that Jaswant Singh has advanced any argument that had not been heard before. It is common knowledge that Jinnah was for long hailed as an ambassador of HinduMuslim unity, that he was reluctant to join the Muslim League, that he sought safeguards for Muslims within a united India till 1938 and agreed to the Cabinet Mission Plan until Mountbatten became the agent to implement the British plan to withdraw from the subcontinent. Jaswant Singh has committed no heresy if he has said that partition was not Jinnah’s first option.

Similarly, the record of the Congress leaders’ acceptance of partition, indeed their preference of partition over Jinnah’s interpretation of the Cabinet Mission Plan, is fully recorded. With them too partition may have been an option of the last resort, as Patel said about himself. The fact is that all Congress leaders not only accepted partition but contributed in varying degrees to make this denouement inevitable.

The only difference in the case of some of the Congress leaders was that they conceded the principle of the Muslim majority areas’ separation in the hope that if the Muslims’ right to secede was acknowledged matters could be managed short of actual division. These leaders included Rajagopalacharia (1943), Gandhi (1944) and Abul Kalam Azad (1945). They found a like-minded Cripps to draw support from.

Some other Congress leaders, Rajendra Prasad foremost among them, used the logic of partition to talk Jinnah out of his demand by frightening him with the partition of Bengal and Punjab, a strategy Mountbatten tried to use till the early months of 1947.

Incidentally, perhaps the first nonMuslim leader to acknowledge the strength of the Pakistan idea was Ambedkar who wrote in 1940, the year the Lahore Resolution was adopted, that by graduating from a minority to a nation (which, according to him the Muslims had become while the Hindus still had not) the Indian Muslims had identified their destination. He did say though that the creation of Pakistan could not solve any community’s problems.

However, nobody can deny that the partition plan could not have been implemented without Patel’s blessings, however reluctantly extended. In 1947 it was he who controlled the Congress machine much more than Gandhi or Nehru.

When Mountbatten and Nehru had agreed on the goal of dominion status and Nehru was unsure of the Congress high command’s concurrence, was it not Patel who said, “Leave that to me. That’s my business”?

The reason for Jaswant Singh’s decision to recall oft-told tales will be debated for long. The compliments he received on his earlier book, for his writing skills and the effect of releasing a cat among pigeons, may have shown him a path to fame beyond politics. A stronger motive could have been his desire to improve the Indian Muslims’ relations with the BJP, or he might have been ambitious enough to hope that the BJP could start having some use for reason and democratic culture.

The BJP bosses’ panic and their decision to expel Jaswant Singh from the party suggests that they suspected just that. Of course, BJP will die the day it starts having any truck with truth, reason and rationality. So will its Muslim counterparts in Pakistan if they could be persuaded to shed their dogmatism, their paranoia and their obsession with living in the past.

What one should like to humbly suggest to Jaswant Singh and others in the field of historical research is the need to view the events in 20th-century India in a historical context and not as games of poker played by some prominent professionals. Gandhi, Jinnah, Nehru and Patel were contending with forces bigger than all of them put together. They were more driven by history than by being its makers. The responsibility for partition lies on all the parties that were in the field –—the League, the Congress, the communists, the British, the Americans and the history of the preceding millennium.

It is certainly time the people of India and Pakistan acquired the maturity to honour their heroes for their wisdom and courage and also to take stock of their mistakes which all of them committed. Nothing will be gained by apportioning blame to a single party. What is needed today is acceptance of history without reservations and to look for the possibilities of glory that India and Pakistan can achieve by cooperating with one another and thus doing a good turn to the disadvantaged among their people — those who have been denied the fruits of freedom for six long decades. ¦

is it possible that jaswant sin- gh’s book on jinnah and partiti- on should help the subcontine- nt’s scholars bury the mythology of partition that has been hang- ing around the south asian peo- ple’s necks like an albatross? ho- wever unlikely this may appear, the idea is worth pursuing. everybody knows that the subconti- nent was divided by agreement between the muslim league, the congress and the british government because no alter- native was acceptable. but the narrow considerations of factional politics in both india and pakistan have kept the engines of hate running and the game of seeking power by demonising the other has been played for so long and with such zeal that anyone who tries to put the record straight is pilloried even be- fore he has had his say. thus jinnah and muslims are demon- ised in india and nehru and patel are deified. no decent trait can be attributed to the former and even a most legiti- mate criticism of the lat- ter cannot be allowed. likewise in pakistan, nehru and patel (often gandhi is added) and hindus are demonised and jinnah and his followers are worshipped for their infallibility. as a result of this extended coopera- tion in substituting belief for history the people of india and pakistan have been diverted from the path of peaceful coex- istence and condemned to remain pris- oners of pre-partition communal politics. since south asia cannot play a healthy role in the affairs of the world and the people of india and pakistan cannot realise themselves unless the hateful myths surrounding partition are completely discarded, the urgency of re- cording and recounting a truthful ac- count of partition is manifest. if this is what jaswant singh had in mind, he will receive a thundering endorsement from all genuine students of history. from the accounts appearing in the media it does not appear that jaswant singh has advanced any argument that had not been heard before. it is common knowledge that jinnah was for long hailed as an ambassador of hindu- muslim unity, that he was reluctant to join the muslim league, that he sought safeguards for muslims within a united india till 1938 and agreed to the cabinet mission plan until mountbatten became the agent to implement the british plan to withdraw from the subcontinent. jaswant singh has committed no heresy if he has said that partition was not jinnah’s first option. similarly, the record of the congress leaders’ acceptance of partition, indeed their preference of partition over jinnah’s interpretation of the cabinet mission plan, is fully recorded. with them too partition may have been an op- tion of the last resort, as patel said about himself. the fact is that all congress leaders not only accepted partition but contributed in varying degrees to make this denouement inevitable. the only difference in the case of some of the congress leaders was that they conceded the principle of the muslim majority areas’ separation in the hope that if the muslims’ right to secede was acknowledged matters could be managed short of actual division. these leaders included rajagopalacharia (1943), gandhi (1944) and abul kalam azad (1945). they found a like-minded cripps to draw support from. some other congress leaders, rajendra prasad foremost among them, used the logic of partition to talk jinnah out of his demand by frightening him with the partition of bengal and punjab, a strategy mountbatten tried to use till the early months of 1947. incidentally, perhaps the first non- muslim leader to acknowledge the strength of the pakistan idea was ambedkar who wrote in 1940, the year the lahore resolution was adopted, that by graduating from a minority to a nation (which, according to him the muslims had become while the hindus still had not) the indian muslims had identified their destination. he did say though that the creation of pakistan could not solve any communi- ty’s problems. however, nobody can deny that the partition plan could not have been im- plemented without patel’s blessings, however reluctantly extended. in 1947 it was he who controlled the congress ma- chine much more than gandhi or nehru. when mountbatten and nehru had agreed on the goal of dominion status and nehru was unsure of the congress high command’s concurrence, was it not patel who said, “leave that to me. that’s my business”? the reason for jaswant singh’s deci- sion to recall oft-told tales will be deba- ted for long. the compliments he re- ceived on his earlier book, for his writing skills and the effect of releasing a cat among pigeons, may have shown him a path to fame beyond politics. a stronger motive could have been his desire to im- prove the indian muslims’ relations with the bjp, or he might have been ambi- tious enough to hope that the bjp could start having some use for reason and democratic culture. the bjp bosses’ panic and their deci- sion to expel jaswant singh from the party suggests that they suspected just that. of course, bjp will die the day it starts having any truck with truth, rea- son and rationality. so will its muslim counterparts in pakistan if they could be persua- ded to shed their dogma- tism, their paranoia and their obsession with liv- ing in the past. what one should like to humbly suggest to jaswant singh and others in the field of historical research is the need to view the events in 20th-century india in a his- torical context and not as games of pok- er played by some prominent professio- nals. gandhi, jinnah, nehru and patel were contending with forces bigger than all of them put together. they were more driven by history than by be- ing its makers. the responsibility for partition lies on all the parties that were in the field –—the league, the congress, the communists, the british, the americans and the history of the preceding millennium. it is certainly time the people of india and pakistan acquired the maturity to honour their heroes for their wisdom and courage and also to take stock of their mistakes which all of them commit- ted. nothing will be gained by apportion- ing blame to a single party. what is nee- ded today is acceptance of history with- out reservations and to look for the pos- sibilities of glory that india and pakistan can achieve by cooperating with one an- other and thus doing a good turn to the disadvantaged among their people — those who have been denied the fruits of freedom for six long decades. ¦

By KHATTAK• 27 Aug 2009 15:41
KHATTAK

.....lolzzz MD

My apology to the thread starter.....i couldnt stop it :D

-------------------------------------------------------

Whenever I find the KEY to SUCCESS...Someone STEALS it.

By anonymous• 27 Aug 2009 15:04
anonymous

In Qatar Indians partition almost every villa, so they can stuff in more people.

By anonymous• 27 Aug 2009 15:00
anonymous

its only beacause of BJP india is still behind ,they always create problems for the democartic country , they say we are democartic but always follow hindutva .

how a party can be democartic.

The BJP always become barrier when INDIA tries to advance its relationship with super powers for example nuclear deal(123 agreement)which can be helpful to generate electricity with low cost

becuase of this policies they lost two elections ,I really Appreciate the secular & educated citizens of INDIA who selected a secular govrnment not on the basis of religion but on the basis of secularism

Now its a time of Revolution let this potician bark &

we try our best efforts to make our country free from unemployment,poverty & illeteracy

JAI HIND

Log in or register to post comments

More from Qatar Living

Qatar’s top beaches for water sports thrills

Qatar’s top beaches for water sports thrills

Let's dive into the best beaches in Qatar, where you can have a blast with water activities, sports and all around fun times.
Most Useful Apps In Qatar - Part Two

Most Useful Apps In Qatar - Part Two

This guide brings you the top apps that will simplify the use of government services in Qatar.
Most Useful Apps In Qatar - Part One

Most Useful Apps In Qatar - Part One

this guide presents the top must-have Qatar-based apps to help you navigate, dine, explore, access government services, and more in the country.
Winter is coming – Qatar’s seasonal adventures await!

Winter is coming – Qatar’s seasonal adventures await!

Qatar's winter months are brimming with unmissable experiences, from the AFC Asian Cup 2023 to the World Aquatics Championships Doha 2024 and a variety of outdoor adventures and cultural delights.
7 Days of Fun: One-Week Activity Plan for Kids

7 Days of Fun: One-Week Activity Plan for Kids

Stuck with a week-long holiday and bored kids? We've got a one week activity plan for fun, learning, and lasting memories.
Wallet-friendly Mango Sticky Rice restaurants that are delightful on a budget

Wallet-friendly Mango Sticky Rice restaurants that are delightful on a budget

Fasten your seatbelts and get ready for a sweet escape into the world of budget-friendly Mango Sticky Rice that's sure to satisfy both your cravings and your budget!
Places to enjoy Mango Sticky Rice in  high-end elegance

Places to enjoy Mango Sticky Rice in high-end elegance

Delve into a world of culinary luxury as we explore the upmarket hotels and fine dining restaurants serving exquisite Mango Sticky Rice.
Where to celebrate World Vegan Day in Qatar

Where to celebrate World Vegan Day in Qatar

Celebrate World Vegan Day with our list of vegan food outlets offering an array of delectable options, spanning from colorful salads to savory shawarma and indulgent desserts.