It was India’s historic destiny that many human races and cultures should flow to her, finding a home in her hospitable soil, and that many a caravan should find rest here … Eleven hundred years of common history [of Islam and Hinduism] have enriched India with our common achievements. Our languages, our poetrym our literature, our culture, our art, our dress, our manners and customs, the innumerable happenings of our daily life, everything bears the stamp of our joint endeavour … These thousand years of our joint life have moulded us into a common nationality … Whether we like it or not, we have now become an Indian nation, united and indivisible. No fantasy or artificial scheming to spearate and divide can break this unity.
MAULANA ABUL KALAM AZAD, Congress Presidential Address, 1940
The problem in India is not of an intercommunal but manifestly of an international character, and must be treated as such … It is a dream that Hindus and Muslims can evolve a common nationality, and this misconception of one Indian nation has gone far beyond the limits, and is the cause of most of our troubles, and will lead India to destruction, if we fail to revise our actions in time. The Hindus and Muslims belong to two different religious philosophies, social customs, and literature. They neither intermarry, nor interdine together, and indeed they belong to two different civilizations which are based mainly on conflicting ideas and conceptions. Their aspects on and of life are different.
M. A. JINNAH, Muslim League Presidential Address, 1940
I have never really thought about this question before – did India have to be partitioned? I know from the first chapter that Gandhi was in favor of a united nation but that the animosity between Hindus and Muslims had gone beyond the point where you can still mend relationships and so partition must have been the only solution. The author says there are three different answers on offer:
- Congress leadership underestimated Jinnah and muslims.
- There was this period of time when Jinnah wanted to strike a deal with Congress but Congress ignored him.
- Later on when Jinnah had built up a large following he didn’t feel any need to negotiate with the Congress.
- Gandhi had even offered to make Jinnah the first Prime Minister of India if he gave up his demand for a separate country!
- Jinnah wanted to pursue his goal of a separate country regardless of human consequences.
- This chapter paints a very poor image of Jinnah.
- Some of Jinnah’s political turns defy any explanation other than that of personal ambition.
- Jinnah was once the ‘ambassador of Hindu-Muslim unity’.
- British promoted a divide between Hindus and Muslims to perpetuate their rule.
Apparently it was obvious as early as 1940 that Partition could not be avoided. Jinnah had successfully campaigned with the call “Islam in Danger” and united all Muslims under one party. The Muslim population lost faith in the Congress being a secular organization.
There is more likelihood of obtaining Hindu consent to Division than Muslim consent to Union.
Penderel Moon, A Fellow of All Souls and ex-member of Indian Civil Services
In preparation of the transfer of power, elections were held in 1946. Nehru and Congress appealed for hope, for economic prosperity and social peace. Jinnah and Muslim League instead chose to fight the elections as a battle of Pakistan. They believed the elections to be the beginning of the end of the united India. And indeed when the Muslim League swept away all of Muslim seats, here’s what League’s paper Dawn published:
Those who have been elected this time to the Legislatures have been charged by the voters with the duty … of winning Pakistan. Within and outside the Provincial and Central Assemblies and Councils that and that alone is now the “priority job”. The time for decision is over; the time for action has come.
Another surprising thing I learnt from this chapter was the character of Lord Mountbatten. All he cared was how people think of him and had very little concern for India. Jury is still out on whether his declaration to leave India within 8 weeks instead of the earlier committed 12 months only intensified Hindu-Muslim communal riots.
Reconsider the terms of any early announcement emboying a solution of the INdian political problem. In Punjab we are going to be faced with a complete refusal of the communities to cooperate on any basis at all. It would clearly be futile to announce a partition of the Punjab which no community would accept.
Sir Jenkins Evans, Governor of Punjab to Lord Mountbatten
Bengal was mostly sorted out. The decision to split it into two halves and handover the East Bengal to Pakistan had been made. However the Punjab situation was much more uncertain. For one it was impossible to come up with a solution that could satisfy anyone in Punjab.
The Muslims had hoped for the whole of Punjab, whereas the Sikhs and Hindus were fearful that they would lose Lahore. ‘It would be difficult enough’, archly commented the governor, ‘to partition within six weeks a country of 30 million people which has been governed as a unit for 98 years, even if all concerned were friendly and anxious to make progress.
Even though the partition line had been finalized a week before Independence, Mountbatten decided to postpone the declaration until the day after Independence. Mountbatten was sure that uncontrollable riots would break out once Punjab division is declared and he did not want history to blame the British administration. So he instead chose to let the Indian government declare the division and manage the resulting chaos and bloodshed.
Without question, the earlier it was published, the more the British would have to bear responsibility for the disturbances which would undoubtedly result. The latter we postponed publication, the less would the inevitable odium react upon the British.
Lord Mountbatten
Another blunder by Lord Mountbatten was to move all the troops to protect British nationals and not leave anyone to deal with communal violence. Had they not been so insecure they could have dealt better with the riots and prevented a lot of death.
Our fault lay in not accepting the reality of Partition and prepare for it better. Jinnah didn’t need to provoke the Muslims against Hindus to get his wish. I do think he stepped over the line and is more than responsible for the death toll. Partly we can blame the Congress for not paying enough attention to Muslim community. They wouldn’t have revolted this badly had they any confidence in Congress. But most of all, the blame lay on British for handling the Partition so poorly.