Salim_Chauhan - a reply

Salim

I have noted your heart-felt and erudite comments. You probably know that I admire you for your valour, compassion and analytical mind.

I would differ on your view that Jinnah was responsible for the whole-scale massacre during Partition. Through his technical, legal and political skills undoubtedly Jinnah was responsible for achieving the creation of Pakistan. But the impetus for the creation was the almost unanimous understanding of the Muslims that they could not live under a Hindu Raj after the British left. This understanding was a product of history and circumstance.

If Jinnah had died before he personally achieved the creation of Pakistan the mutual ill-feeling between the two communities would anyway have resulted in carnage. Partition or no partition. Jinnah or no Jinnah

Here is what one noted Western historian writes:

Jinnah, star of the East reborn - Andrew Roberts

Excerpt

Without Jinnah there might never have been a Pakistan. The sub-continent would have been subjected to the horrific consequences of 90m Muslims being forced into a unitary state dominated by 225m Hindus. However unfortunate some parts of Pakistan’s history has been – with three leaders shot, hanged and blown up – it cannot have been anything like as bad as the civil war which would undoubtedly have resulted had Jinnah not won partition.

Never more than today do Pakistanis need to be reminded of the tolerant, tough-minded, secularist pluralist who created their nation. India and Pakistan have fought three wars since independence, and are probably now both nuclear powers. Mutual trust can be built only through both sides appreciating each other’s historical perceptions. In the sub-continent all border and political arguments between the countries inevitably return to 1947. A proper understanding of Jinnah's role is a crucial piece of the jigsaw puzzle. Only by placing him in his proper context, as an actor equally as great as Gandhi and Nehru in the 1947 drama, can Indians and Pakistanis gain a proper perspective.

The Sunday Times August 1996