PARTITION, JASWANT SINGH, JINNAH, AND US

The recent book by Mr. Jaswant Singh, the former defense, foreign and finance minister of the Bharatia Janata Party (BJP) government and one of the most respected senior leaders of Bharatia Janata Party on the partition of India and the historic roles played by the major players namely Mr. Jinnah, Mr. Nehru and Mr. Mr. Patel has precipitated a furor in India particularly in the Bharatia Janata Party so much so that Mr. Singh has been expelled from the party. Mr. Singh’s book has generated quite a storm in the politics of the Subcontinent. Why? Because Mr. Singh has told an unpopular truth and that is it was Mr. Nehru and Mr. Patel rather than Mr. Jinnah who were responsible for the Partition of India. This is something which we have known all along. Mr. Advani, the current leader of the opposition of the Indian Parliament and the BJP stalwart also got into trouble in 2005 essentially said the same thing while he was visiting his childhood home in Karachi. Another great Indian nationalist and a former President of Congress Party Mr. Abul Kalam Azad also blamed Nehru and Patel for the partition of India in his book ‘India Wins Freedom’. It is no historical coincidence that now Mr. Jaswant Singh has come to the same conclusion in his 600 page book “JINNAH, India-Partition, Independence”. This has proven again that truth shall prevail. Truth cannot be suppressed forever. This is history’s lesson. If it was not Jaswant Singh, somebody else would have delivered the same message. This has already been done and will be done again and again that Mohammed Ali Jinnah was a great leader and was sufficiently great to shun communalism. He was much above the communal stuff.

It was Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru and Mr. Ballabbhai Patel who were responsible for the partition of India and who skillfully demonized Jinnah and at the same time shouldered the blame on Jinnah for the partition. Panditji was actually a Norendra Modi in disguise. Mr. Modi and his likes are great believer of their party’s motto and that is “Hindustan, Hindu, Hindi”. There is no room for any others. This will be consistent with Nehru’s aggressive actions as the first Prime Minister of Independent India. He has taken Hyderabad by force, he has taken Junagarh by force, he has taken Goa by force and he has taken Kashmir by force. He held on to Kashmir in violation of the United Nations Security Council Resolution. And he would have gone on more serious adventures had he not been stopped by the Chinese Premier Chou En -lai at the turbulent terrain of North-East India in 1962 in the border war between India and China. That war broke Nehru and shattered his imperial dream for a far greater Hindustan. Because of Nehru’s aggressive design there has not been peace in South Asia right from the dawn of partition and there does not seem to be any hope for peace in near future in South Asia. Kashmir is and has remained the sticking problem for the last sixty years. This is Nehru’s legacy. He has negated all peace initiatives on Kashmir and his successors are in no mood to free Kashmir from India’s strangle hold. The human rights violations of the Kashmiris by nearly half a million Indian troops is wanton, cruel and unprecedented. Just in the last twenty years 70,000 Kashmiris have been exterminated by the Indian troops and para-troops. Tens of thousands Kashmiri parents are in search of their missing children. This is what the so called secular India is. Ms. Arundoti Roy, the great Indian writer and thinker put it more appropriately and that is ”Kashmir is world’s biggest democracy’s biggest prison”. This is Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru’s deliberate, unnecessary, unjust and uncalled-for hegemonistic design which has kept the peoples of South Asia mired in war and hostilities since the first days of the partition. As long as Kashmir bleeds there is no hope for peace in South Asia. Thanks to Ms. Arundoti Roy for her illuminating write-ups on Kashmir, Gujarat, Iraq and Afghanistan which have enriched our lives greatly.

Nehru’s successors be it of Congress or Bharatia Janata Party are even more desperate to spread Hindu hegemonism. Babri Mosque was demolished under the watchful eyes of Mr. Narasima Rao, the then Congress Prime Minister of India. I recall with disdain Mr. Rao’s visit to Bangladesh. He gave the impression as if he was visiting his backyard. Mr. Pranab Mukherjee’s recent visit to our country was not any better. Mr. Mukherjee was also very casual in his attire and attitude. He came in the morning and by afternoon he already met our Prime Minister and was ready to go home. Does this sort of thing happen in any other country? This sort of thing makes one wonder whether we have a country. Having a flag or a cricket team does not give the credence of a sovereign country. Hong Kong also has a flag and has a cricket team. Whereas when Mr. Mukherjee visits Pakistan, he is very well dressed (I mean not the very informal chati and dhoti that he uses when he visits Bangladesh), formal and respectful which is expected of a foreign dignitary visiting a foreign country. What I meant to say was that Mr. Mukherjee maintained the same hegemonistic attitude that Mr. Rao practiced.

The hegemonists are the people who refer to our Prime Minister as Chief Minister. These are the people who did not let Mr. A. K. Khondaker, the current honorable Minister for Planning to sit in the Sarwardy Uddan as the representative of the Mukti Bahini in the Niazi’s surrender ceremony even though he was brought by General Aurora for the purpose. The Hindu hegemonists and their supporters did not let the Sikh general have his way to pay the due respect and honor that Mukti Bahini deserved. This great overture that General Aurora had intended to show to Mukti Bahini, was too much for the Hindu hegemonist to forgive the Sikh general. This might have cost the general the top most position in the Indian army.

The hegemonists were the peoples who had sent administrators to our country in the early days of Independence as if we were bunch of dumb bunnies that we did not have persons with administrative experience. These were the peoples who were not pleased to see the emergence of Bangladesh as an independent country rather they would have preferred to see the rise of the former East Bengal from the ashes of former East Pakistan. The hegemonists have not given up their hope. They were and still at it. They have been able to manipulate the Dhaka University Intelligentsia to rename Jinnah Hall and Iqbal Hall of the University as the Surja Sen and Sargeant Johurul Hoq hall respectively. The intelligentsia and the decision makers were hoodwinked. That was a major historic blunder. That was dumb, stupid and unpardonable. The independent Bangladesh paid a heavy price morally if not materially for the historic blunder and will continue to pay unless the former names of the Halls are restored.

Let us face the facts, whatever the Indians say today or tomorrow, by not allowing any representative of the Mukti Bahini to sit at the Sarwardy Uddan, India had denied the great contribution that the Mukti Bahini made towards the ignominious defeat and surrender of the Pakistan army. It was not a mistake by the Indian leadership rather a deliberate snub and insult by the Hindu hegemonists to Mukti Bahini. When Niazi surrendered, he had thirty thousand troops in Dhaka at his command while he was surrounded by only three thousand troops of General Jacob, Chief of Staff, Eastern Army Command. This is what General Jacob told the Press which was published in the Weekly Holiday. Niazi surrendered because his troops were weary and did not have a chance because of the Mukti Bahini. This was shamefully denied by the Indian army. This was not the first war that Indian and the Pakistani armies fought. Has the Indian army rooted the Pakistan army as decisively and as badly as in the 1971 war? Definitely not. This was possible because of the Mukti Bahini. The Indian army knows that very well. Having said what I have just said, it should also be made abundantly clear that in 1971 our big neighbor was generous and provided all kinds of help that we needed. We are eternally grateful but not sold out to our large neighbor for that.

My youngest brother shahid Wahidur Rahman Wodud (who was a final year hons. student of Dhaka University , a deputy commander of the Mukti Bahini of the greater Noakhali area) and thousands of other Mukti Bahini freedom fighters laid their lives for the freedom , security and liberty that we enjoy today. They certainly did not make the supreme sacrifice to play second fiddle to any neighbor, large or small.

We must not forget that the now infamous Muslim League was founded in Dhaka under the leadership of Nawab Salimullah in 1906. Pakistan could not have been established without the massive support of former East Bangalis. Punjab’s leader Mr. Khizir Hayat was not a great supporter of the Pakistan movement. The important personalities who founded the Muslim league in Dhaka were in the vanguard of the Pakistan movement. Mohammed Ali Jinnah was not in the scene in the beginning. He has taken the leadership of the Muslim League much later. The Pakistan resolution was tabled in the 1940 Muslim League Conference held in Lahore by a person of the stature of Sher-E-bangla A.K. Fazlul Hoque, an East Bengali Muslim. These events are of recent rather than medieval history. We must not pretend to forget them or try to divert them for the interests of the vested quarters. Bengali leaders who were in the Muslim League movement were also the personalities who gave leadership to the establishment of the University of Dhaka. What an important and historic contributions those Muslim leaders of the Muslim league made towards what we are today! Are we supposed to forget all those contributions because they were made by Muslim leaders? In these troubled times that seem to be the convenient thing to do.

Despite heavy odds we, the former East Bengalis/East Pakistanis have come a long way, the middle class is surely but slowly made its mark in the region and beyond. It is stable, vibrant and growing every day. This certainly would not have been possible, absolutely no way, as East Bengal or in any other form of a part of India. Look at the miserable conditions of the Muslims of West Bengal, who are at the lowest rung of development of the Indian society despite decades of leadership given by Jyoti Basu and Buddhudev Bhattacharya who are relatively decent, progressive and good leaders. Muslims constitute 27 percent of West Bengal population; unfortunately they do not hold even 3 percent of the government jobs. Because, the Narendra modiites, the Hindu hegemonists are deeply entrenched in the Indian society who would not like to see the Muslims come out of the vicious cycles of poverty, under-education, under-nutrition, under-sanitation, etc. Narendra Modi’s Gujrat might have gotten a bad publicity after the 2002 massacre of 2000 innocent Muslims and making another 200,000 Muslims homeless and destitute. They remain destitute even to this day; Muslims are not any better in West Bengal. As a matter of fact in many vital sectors such as jobs, education, health, sanitation, etc. Muslims in West Bengali do worse than in Gujrat. Dr. Monmohan Singh, the current Indian Prime Minister is also a very good man, but has he been able to make any difference with regard to trade, tariff, border killings, etc.? The answer is no. Because the Hindu hegemonists do not pay attention to whatever Dr. Singh says. He is just ignored.

Did we get the much publicized rice and other assistance that were promised by Mr. Mukherjee following the disaster caused by sidr? No we did not and we won’t in future also. Because the underlying chemistry is the same. It is an inherent hatred by the hegemonists towards us because we refuge to be a part of the greater Hindustan ranging from Afganistan to Arakan.

What about Mr. Narendra Modi of Gujarat? He has become even more popular following his leadership in the massacre of unarmed helpless and hapless Muslims of Gujarat in. He is now a serious contender for the top most job in the country. If the Congress fails in the next election, it will not be a big surprise to find Modi the next Prime Minister of ‘secular’ India. That tells a great deal about the Indian mentality, their attitude and their psyche towards the Muslim community of their country. Gujarat’s law enforcement individuals who had taken direct or indirect part in the decimation of innocent Muslims in 2002 have gotten promoted rather than demoted.

I am not an anti-Indian or an anti-hindu. As a matter of fact next to my parents, my school head master late Mr. P.K. Bhatta of Kalyan High School, Maijdi Court, Noakhali, remains my most respected and revered person. Head master sir has contributed greatly to the education of our area. He had served with dedication, diligence and determination. He was a leader. His courage, character and commitment left an indelible mark on many of us. I was born in 1941 in an undivided India. My parents and their parents were born in undivided India. Therefore my ancestors and myself are part and parcel of the Indian heritage. India is a great country and it has great history and culture of which anybody can be proud of. As a former citizen of undivided India I also take pride in Indian history and its extremely rich and diverse culture.

In 1971 during the liberation war I was at Stanford University, Stanford, California, doing a postdoctoral fellowship following my doctoral at Dalhousie, Halifax, Nova Scotia. That was a time that we just could not sit idle and do nothing for our country. An American league for Bangladesh sprang up spontaneously with me as the convener/president of the League. Stanford students of many nationalities and their wives actively and very sincerely worked for Bangladesh. By far the largest contingent of student participants in our organization was from West Bengal. I am eternally grateful to them for their very sincere help, cooperation and guidance in our struggle at Stanford and in the Sanfrancisco bay area. I will be deeply hurt if I am misunderstood by friends at Stanford who worked very hard for Bangladesh and love Bangladesh.

I pay homage and deep respect to the memory of over three thousand Indian soldiers who laid their lives to liberate our country from the inhuman and barbarous atrocities of the Pakistan army. India is an emerging super power. All we want is a modest respect from our giant neighbor to our independence and sovereignty for which we paid a terrible price. Hundreds of thousands of our countrymen made the supreme sacrifice for the freedom and liberty that we enjoy today. Therefore, to our giant neighbor we say let us treat each other with respect and honor. No hegemonistic design, please.

Finally thanks to Mr. Jaswant Singh for his courage and convictions to finally tell the truth on the partition of India. He deserves cheers from all of us for overcoming convenience over convictions. It is very important to hear from a person of Mr. Singh’s stature that Mr. Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru and Mr. Patel rather than Mr. Jinnah are responsible for the partition of India. Although Mr. Singh’s book came out rather late in the day, it is still heartening and gratifying.

Now that Mr. Jaswant Singh, Mr. Advani and Abul Kalam Azad have cleared Jinnah from the India Partition blame, when do we do our part, that is, restore Jinnah to his historical place as the leader whose bold leadership and vision brought a large segment of the Muslims of the subcontinent out of centuries of misery, oppression and neglect? There is no question that Jinnah blundered on 21 March, 1948, when he said first in the then race course (the present Sarwardy Uddan) and then in the Curzon Hall that Urdu and Urdu only shall be the state language of Pakistan. Let us not forget that in the same race course speech Jinnah also declared ‘that whether Bengali shall be the official language of this province is a matter for the elected representatives of the peoples of this province to decide. I have no doubt that this question shall be decided solely in accordance with the wishes of the inhabitants of this province at an appropriate time’. How many of us knew about this part of Jinnah’s speech? In my view, not many. It was because of a disinformation campaign against Jinnah. Most of us were of the view that Jinnah wanted to force Urdu on us as the official language of East Pakistan. As a matter of fact he was not. His race course speech was a testimony to that.

Didn’t Bangabandu blunder? Of course he did. Didn’t he form BAKSAL, which was extremely anti-democratic? Didn’t he sack Tajuddin sahib in preference to Mr. Khondaker Mostaq? Those were very grave blunders. For those can we deny the contributions that Bangabandu made towards the emergence of Independent Bangladesh? Of course not. Mohammed Ali Jinnah’s historic position should be restored to its place as it was before the emergence of independent Bangladesh. Jinnah or Iqbal cannot be crucified for the atrocities committed by the Pakistan army. Jinnah Avenue, Jinnah and Iqbal Halls should be restored to their original names. We have taken a low road to deny the rightful place that Jinnah occupies in the history of the Indian Subcontinent. Jinnah lives and will continue to live in the hearts and minds of millions.

Rafiqur Rahman