Remembering H.M. Seervai (1906-1996)

Perhaps the most common phrases one reads in discussions of recent history are ..``Jinnah thought,`` ``Nehru thought,`` and ``Gandhi thought.``

Could everyone please start telling us how one reaches those conclusions. Are there any references or are we just making these things up as we go along?

Thanks.

``While Muslim League`s greatest supporters were in Muslim Minority Areas... the Pakistan demand had already taken root rather firmly in the Muslim majority areas... without Muslim League`s intervention... Example of this is the popularity of Rahmat Ali`s scheme and also of A Punjabi`s ``Confederacy of India``... (the name was originally called ``Pakistan`` but changed on Jinnah`s request ironically). So Muslim League in order to negotiate had to take up Pakistan... it was imposed on the Muslim League by us the people of the Muslim Majority Areas... and we are proud of it. ``

This is a myth.the muslim majority areas had supporters of the pakistan demand before 1940, but no where was it popular infact chowdhury rahmat ali`s scheme had been laughed of by jinnah himself, he had rudely turned the students away when they had come to his house in the erly thirties in england with this demand saying that they wanted to destroy the one good that the British had done in their 200 years in the subcontinent.

the Unionists who were the feudal/secularist party ruling punjab were afraid of coingress` strong centralising tendency, but even in the Lahore resolution sir sikandar hayat khan, the prime minister of punjab, who had been co-opted by jinnah onto the league platform, had altered the 1940 Lahore resolution, to include a center. It was jinnah who cut out the reference ostensibly as a negotiating strategy.

In 1942 Sir Sikandar wanted to publicise the fact that in case of partition and pakistan the punjab would also be partitioned, for until then most pakistan supporters believed it would come whole all the way to delhi, which was never a realistic possibility, but Jinnah had kept the whole thing vague, this would have taken a lot of the wind out of the pakistan movement, but Wavell prevailed upon him not to publicise it else it would weaken Jinnah and the league, there by strengthening the congress!!

it is true some like Iqbal suppoprted Pakistan in order to preserve muslim culture and establish a state on islamic ideals, which never turned out also there was an element of racism in this demand for it viewed, the racial characteristics, diet and clothes of these inhabitants of northwest india along with their religion forming a distinctive nation.

In bengal similarly fazlul haq, leader of the ruling Krishak praja party was virtualy arm twisted by jinnah who broke fazlul`s coalition ministry and made him dependent on league support in order to remain in power. later as he polarised the communities the muslim league won and jinnah could claim that the pakistan demand was but natural, a demand wchich had been virtually unknown to the muslim masess until 1940 was said to be created when the first muslim converted!!!

even later when Jinnah realised calcutta would not come with east bengal he agred to let bengal remain united and independent an understanding which suhrawardy and the bengal congress (sarat chandra etc ) had arrived at, but congres at the center did not agree, nehru also thought that east bengal would any way fall back into india, it had no other choice.

Compare two eyes of a bride with this

``The non hindu peoples in hindustan must either adopt the Hindu culture and language, must learn to respect and hold in reverence hindu religion, must entertain no ideas but those of glorification of the hindu race and culture..... in a word they must cease to be foreigners , or may stay in this country, wholly subordinated to the Hindu nation, claiming nothing, deserving no priviliges, far less any preferential treatment - not even citizen`s righjts.``

the mahasabha at its ajmer session in 1933 ``Urdu is a foreign language which is a living monument to our slavery. it must be eradicated from the page of existence. urdu is the language of the malechhas which has done great harm to our national ends by attaining popularity in india.``

bhai parmanand told th same session of the mahasabha ``hindustan is the land of the hindus alone, and musalmans and christians and other nations living in india are only our guests. they can live here as long as they wish to remain as guests``

or Aurobindo ghosh in 1909 at Uttarpara `` i say it is the sanatan dharma (hinduism) which for us is nationalism. The hindu nationwas born with the santan dharma , with it it moves and with it it grows.``

Malviya was upset and was organising protests against the ``rights`` that the muslims had aquired against playing of music outside mosques during prayers.

The arya samaj wanted to reconvert all hindus who had been converted to islam by ``force``. the only problem was their definition included virtually all muslims. the remaining they would consider foreigners!!

Re: # 127
//....he was calling for constitutional gerry mandering to create effective safeguards....//

Well - gerrymandering is always a bad thing to do.....and naturally nobody liked his attempt to do so.....I mean what do you expect people to do? Go along with a bad idea just because Mr Jinnah wants it?

Mr jinnah had all wrong ideas and nobody liked it... it fell flat...

[ger·ry·man·der = To divide (a geographic area) into voting districts so as to give unfair advantage to one party in elections.]

Re: # 125 feroz

I am sure there were quite a bit of pushes and pulls in the pre-partition politics, as would be expected under such situations ...... and the players must have taken various temporary positions while jockeying for a final settlement of their liking , during those days of tumult and uncertainty..........You can call such transient positions as ``nuances`` and make a drama out of it - but those things should be ignored

The basic issue still remains very simple, really.....

[…studying Jinnah or his politics has nothing to do with the fact that Pakistan had emerged as a major demand in the Muslim Majority areas…]

They ASKED for it.

They GOT it.

O’ what a feeling! (But not Toyota!!!)

They are sure enjoying its ride!

The rides of their lives!

#120 Hindvi

[It must be said here that the first person to use the term two nations was sir syed, but sir syed balanced that by also talking of muslims and hindus as the two eyes of that beautiful bride called india so he seemed to follow the principle of separate but equal, more or less the League`s line.]

So separate but equal was a “good” thing – enough to “balance” this bad thing called partition – at last, a rare insight (or perhaps a “beautiful” (like a “bride”) insight) into the mind of the greatest of the great Hindvi!!

Yes, an act of REAL balance, and what an act of beauty – and how eloquently those results speak for themselves – if only the contemporary self-appointed representatives of Muslim intellectuals (the best and the brightest? (shudder!!!)) would not have to suffer the inconvenience of looking at them!

Too bad the great Hindvi did not have his beHIND parked in these parts in the U.S. during the time of the Jim Crow laws – he could obtain a good dose of the taste of those beautiful “separate but equal” laws for himself and what are a few lashes of the whip on a firmly parked hip for a good cause!

Way to go!

Mohar11...

Whatever he was asking- please show us that how much did he finally agreed to guaranteeing anything of the sort. He was calling for constitutional gerry mandering to create effective safeguards.. and not explicit communal reservation. The plan he agreed to was the brainchild of the Congress president... who lost his job later. The absurdity emerges from ignoring the nuances... because it was not the form but the substance.
So- the absurdity, even if we accept that it was indeed absurdity, did not exist in the plan that Congress rejected...


Hindvi...

You are looking at from the perspective of an Indian Muslim. It is quite different to be supportive of the League and being supportive of the Pakistan demand.

While Muslim League`s greatest supporters were in Muslim Minority Areas... the Pakistan demand had already taken root rather firmly in the Muslim majority areas... without Muslim League`s intervention... Example of this is the popularity of Rahmat Ali`s scheme and also of A Punjabi`s ``Confederacy of India``... (the name was originally called ``Pakistan`` but changed on Jinnah`s request ironically). So Muslim League in order to negotiate had to take up Pakistan... it was imposed on the Muslim League by us the people of the Muslim Majority Areas... and we are proud of it.

A disturbing trend I see is that some of our Indian friends assume that since we are providing a historical perspective (entirely from Indian authors btw) , we are somehow decrying Pakistan... make no mistake about it... studying Jinnah or his politics has nothing to do with the fact that Pakistan had emerged as a major demand in the Muslim Majority areas- which is why Jinnah was obliged to consider it...

Re: # 123 YLH

OK - that`s what I thought. Mr J was asking for approx 33% reservation for muslims..... That was in proportion of the population at that time, I think...

Whatever the number may be - such proportional representation system was neither possible nor desirable. So Congress did the right thing to reject such absurd demands....

Re: # 23

Mohar, the article by Yasser proves just how nuanced history really is and when people try to make history the complexity of the past`s reality into a simplification, the truth suffers.

Yes; the truth is out there and given the facts of life in the Sub-Continent, I have more faith in Agents Mulder and Scully to unearth the truth than in the combined historical brigade of Indo-Pakistani historians! :)

Besides, history is a soap opera played on a lavish and a grand scale and like any soap opera, the search for the truth in all the lies and deceptions, which mar it makes it an interesting past time. :)

Ciao

+/- given to chance... under joint electorates-which ultimately would emerge.

Jinnah completely agreed to a plan which provided for representation as is under 1935 GOIA. By no arithmetic could that be 50%.

At most it would 35% ... +/- 5

It is a lie that congress rejected the plan because it provided 50-50... a figment of Indian imagination... the plan was almost entirely the brain child of Congress President Azad to begin with and Jinnah agreed to it.

Re: # 116 YLH
//...All in all Seervai is right...//

Of course he is :) - it`s all congress`s fault....that is already proved beyond doubt.

But I wanted a simple answer to a direct question: How much was Mr ``J.`` asking for? just give me a number...

Golwalkar actually landed up in delhi around august 47 and looked upon the partition violence as a great ``opportunity`` he was organising the RSS in delhi and its vicinity to riot and push out muslims in which they largely succeeded in delhi except for a very small area around Balli maran and Nizammudin

dost mittar u are right hindu nationalists had been talking of two nations from around 1920 onwards Lajpat Rai even wanted punjab partitioned on that basis and the muslim areas of north west (pakistan of today) separated from the rest of the country. Many hindu nationalisists like savarkar, golwalkar wanted muslims out so that hindu culture and and ethos could be resetablished in india, to which they saw muslims as the biggest impediment. It must be said here that the first person to use the term two nations was sir syed, but sir syed balanced that by also talking of muslims and hindus as the two eyes of that beautiful bride called india so he seemed to follow the principle of seperate but equal, more or less the League`s line.

Re: Urstruly # 39

You seem to be mistaken.

Great Britain declared war on Germany on September 3, 1939.

If memory serves me right, I believe that it was a Sunday and the BBC radio would make the announcement of Britain`s declaration of war in the afternoon by carrying the speech of Neville Chamberlain, who was the Prime Minister at the time ``live`` from the Cabinet Room at 10 Downing Street. Later in the evening, Chamberlain would make a statement to British Parliament saying that since British ultimatum to Germany to withdraw its troops from Poland had not been heeded and that consequently, Great Britain was at war with Germany.

The date of September 27, 1939 would suggest the Soviet Union`s declaration of war on Poland in keeping with its secret understanding, with Nazi Germany to divide up Poland. The German-Soviet Union Non-Aggression Pact of 1939 signed secretly in Moscow by the German Foreign Minister von Ribbentrop and the Soviet Foreign Minister Molotov allowed both nations to carve up Polish territory. Germany in order to prevent a two-front war had agreed to divide up Poland with the Soviets and three weeks after the German invasion; Soviets invaded Poland from the east.

Ciao