I am compelled to respond to Hamid Abdul Karim’s article titled “Was Jinnah wrong?” (Sunday Times, August 30). I would like to give some perspective to your writer about some of his erroneous facts and opinions on the issue.
Mr. Karim says, “Up until now one could blame Muhammed Ali Jinnah for the break-up of India. Blaming a Hindu was taboo as Jaswant Singh has come to realise much to his grief.”
For decades, different segments of India’s plural society blamed Nehru, Gandhi and Sardar Patel for the partition. The Rashitriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS), Communist Party historians and a number of widely published documents suggest that Mohammed Ali Jinnah did not single-handedly carve out India: the carving of India was the result of British divisiveness, Indian Congress leaders’ power lust and Jinnah’s myopia, all together resulting in the partition.
For the writer’s information, Pandit Nehru, Mahatma Gandhi and Sardar Patel were all Hindus. In fact, Mahatma Gandhi was shot dead by a Hindu zealot who blamed him for the partition of India.
Mr. Karim says, “[Jaswant] Singh has committed the ultimate crime. Up until now no Indian scholar or politician had spoken in public about the roles Hindus played in the partitioning of India, though they may probably have conceded that aspect of history in private discussions. The popular policy was to heap the blame on Muslims.”
This again is erroneous. Even L. K. Advani, leader of the Indian Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), set a cat among the pigeons by praising Jinnah in Pakistan. But the fact is that even Mr. Advani praised Jinnah.
Mr. Karim says, “Recent events like the destruction of the Barbri Masjid and the anti-Muslim riots that followed along with Gujarat riots give credence to his fears. More so now that the role of Chief Minister Narendra Modi has come out in the open with startling revelations that the then Bharatiya Janata Party Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee wanted to sack Modi for his role in the riots. But he couldn’t do any such thing because his deputy Advani opposed it. This is the type of ‘democracy’ Jinnah had feared – a democracy where the majority oppresses the minority because of their strength in numbers.”
My response: India is a liberal democratic republic, but not without problems. The Gujarat riots are a blot on Indian democracy. But we have a vigorous judiciary that pursues the guilty. Justice is eventually done. Our press is free to reveal various aspects of the crime and do so with gusto and without fear. The fact that Sri Vajpayee saw it prudent to sack Narendra Modi itself shows our leadership’s intent. That he was vetoed by a deputy also in some way reflects non-hierarchical decision-making in a key political party.
Mr. Karim says, “Jinnah’s fears are also reflected in the vitriolic speech that Varun Gandhi made during the recent general elections in which he threatened to ‘chase’ Indian Muslims to Pakistan. Jinnah’s worse fears find a solid confirmation in Varun Gandhi’s election victory, backed as he was to the hilt by his party, the communal BJP, even after making such outlandish racist remarks.”
One of the many reasons given for the BJP’s failure to return to power in India is Varun Gandhi’s hateful speech. Indians have shown maturity by rejecting hate and punishing hatred with rejection at the ballot. Increasingly, the message from the electorate is clear: “Try to divide us on communal, caste or regional grounds and we shall reject you.”
Finally, Mr. Karim poses this question: “In the context of Jaswant Singh’s disclosures and recent history, can anyone say Jinnah was wrong when he opted for Pakistan or that he was the villain of the partition?”
I do not know the definitive answer to this deep question. I am not sure anyone ever will. But I offer your writer an alternate view for consideration –an article by the eminent South-Asian writer M. J. Akbar, titled “A Flawed Idea” (Times of India, March 8, 2009).
Santosh Menon,
Mumbai |
E-mail