15th August, 1947, an undivided India was torn into two pieces- India and Pakistan. It is very astonishing to think of ; Only to get hold of power and obsessed with the bigotry of religion, those who steered riot, and let the thousands of Indian’s blood flow on the streets, gave birth of pakistan , amongst them someone became father of Pakistan, someone became the architect of India. Though, to highlight this tarnished history some people may say that it is the British imperial, and divisive policy which is to be blamed.
Someone may say it is Jinnah and the congress leaders who are the master-mind / played the colossal role behind the partition.
Many Muslim authors legitimised the demand of Pakistan, they are not supportable, very similarly, a point of view with a biased hindutva bigotry is not fair and it is against the true spirit of history.
It is a true fact that, Jinna did never explain , even amongst his minion, any clear vision of Pakistan .Even The popular Lahore resolution did not include any words about the partition of the country. Actually the ambiguity, that lies in the concept of ‘Pakistan’, itself makes this slogan so powerful. ” Bengal divided Hindu Communalism and Partition 1932-1947″ , a book by Mrs. Jaya Chatterji which reflects the response of the people of Bengal province and their concern with deep insight, adds an inclusive dimension to the partition history.
This particular research work about the partition may change our biased view about the top politicians and the Muslim-politics.
It has to be recalled that, not all the Indian Muslims were in support of Pakistan.
Yet, there are certain critiques who cite Muhammad Iqbal’s adress on 1930,29 december in Allahabad session of Muslim League as an communal attempt aimed at Partition of India and Pakistan.
But the true part of the history is , in this speech he didn’t articulate anything about formation of Muslim-State.
Here, Both the hindu and Muslim communal forces, as well as, the colonial historians and journalists are responsible for spreading of these types of false messages.
Allama Iqbal wanted an autonomous state within India . He called to amalgamate punjab, north west frontier province, sind, and Balochistan into one state.
In his book “Legacy of a Divided Nation” , Mushirul Hasan remarked about the dividation of India and emergence of Pakistan that , the way a handful people have played with the life of mass Muslim has no parallel in the world history. Besides, apart from Gandhi’s intentions, a large portion of the congress men were in favour of the partition in 47 .
The communal Hindu organisations were asking for partition very strongly to accredit their Hindu issues. “Towards Freedom “, ( volume-3) edited by Partha Sarathi , records many unknown and important historical documents on the communal organisations, both Hindu and Muslims.
Even , Documents in Bengal Detective department unveil how , in secrecy, early in 1944,the Sangh was carrying out their activities in different districts of Bengal. If these information are placed side by side, in the context of 1947 partition , the one-sided story of partition history could be avoided.
Very relevantly, during the divulging situation of 1947Lord Mount Baton comes as the viceroy after Lord wavel. Nehru was the man, who played the role behind.
Not only the removal of Wavel, but in his position mt baton was appointed on Nehru’s recommendation. Lord wavel notes it clearly noted in his dairy. At that time Nehru denied the charges. Nehru may deny the charges, but the book “Freedom at Midnight”, by Lapierre and Collins, which attested the narrative as true. It states that, ” lest Muslim League comes to know, so the entire matter was kept secret strictly”.
It is very unfortunate that Mountbatten was unaware of the fact that Jinna could Trust Lord Wavell. Jinna even promised at the end that if Congress accords to formulate groups according to the declaration of 16th May ( 1946 ), he will let off the the idea of partition. But, when he ( Lord Wavell )was replaced by Lord Mountbatten , on Nehru’s request, Jinna decided not to conform to the policies of Mountbatten. But the trajectory of history failed to notice, that the day Wavell was replaced and in his place Mountbatton was nominated on the basis of recommendation from Nehru, the entire drama of partition precipitated to an end.
On August, early in 1947, In reply to a question, posed by Nirmal Kumar Basu, a prominent Gandhian, Mahatma Gandhi said, ” with whom I will continue the struggle . Can’t you understand that year-long riots turned all Indian as communal ? The could see nothing but communal questions. They Frightened and tired”.
Gandhiji himself, in his conscious mind, accepted the partition of India. Inspite of being present there in All-India Congress Working Committee on 15th June, 1947 why he didn’t oppose the British plan for the partition?
And surprisingly, Gandhiji himself influenced the congress workmen to agree with the planned proposal of partition.
It is also true that not tending towards partition could have triggered a civil war unrestrained.
It would have caused a massive bloodshed. But, after all, the integrity of the country could be retained.
In United States of America, Abraham Lincon had allowed the blood-shed to happen for the sake of the Integrity of his country. He had succeeded to hold his country’s integrity by allowing many to die. Therefore, the logic that the consequences of riots compelled the Congress party to accept the plan for partition, is illusory.
Could partition save India from communal riots and bloodshed?
Interestingly, during the 1946 riots British didn’t take any effective measures to stop the riots, instead, indirectly, they helped in fuelling it. And it is evident from various documents.
Congress leaders ( except few) did not put any effort to mobilise people to mass-movement in order to compel the British to take necessary steps in restraining the riots.
Besides, as shattered was British government from every end in World War II , on June , 1947 they declared to give India its Independence.
But what made them to hasten to announce the Independence 10 months before ?
While the British Government itself offered a proposal of an integrated Independent India , why then India’s Independence was comprised by allowing it to be split into two pieces ?
In this regard, did the National leaders able to perform their role with due responsibility?
Did they go astray; lost their ideological conscience?
Were they entrapped by avarice?
The stark reality is that their utmost preference was to get hold over power, which they took as their ultimate goal.
Leonard Mosley, who was more sensible to the Indian cause than our National leaders, wrote in his book ‘The Last Days of British Raj’ , ” There was no necessity to leap into a decision so speedily . Very easily this subversion could have been averted. Only it needed a bit patient to hold on. With the passage of time, with proper administrative steps riots, bloodshed one day all would have been stopped. After so many years of struggle and fighting for freedom an additional 10 months waiting was so impossible? Power became more important than India’s integrity! Yes, Sucheta Mahajan in her book acknowledged, ” it is the yearning greed of power which led Nehru and Patel to such quick proposition of partition”.