EDITORIAL (Vol. 1, Issue 2, September 2009)
Researching on Jinnah appears to have become a fatal obsession for leaders of the BJP. The spectre of Jinnah has claimed yet another victim, Jaswant Singh, a senior leader of the BJP. In 2005, L.K. Advani had almost dug his own grave when he spoke in glowing terms about Mohammad Ali Jinnah at his mausoleum in Pakistan and described him as a rare secular man! What therefore draws these right-wing leaders towards Jinnah like fire-flies towards the proverbial fire?
The partition between India and Pakistan has always been the source of the divisive communal politics of BJP. To make Jinnah the villain of the partition suited BJP (as well as the Congress) since that pitted one community against the other. The communal contradiction covered up all other contradictions that in fact gave rise to the two nation theory. Unfortunately however, blaming Jinnah alone would not result in political dividend forever for BJP. Somewhere down the line, a realization dawned inside BJP that unless Congress and, more particularly, Nehru could be shown as equally responsible for the partition, the anti-congress Hindu votes couldn’t be attracted. The problem however lay in balancing the acts of Congress leaders like Nehru, Sardar Patel, Gandhiji with that of Jinnah.
In 2005, Advani made the first attempt under the guise of paying tributes to Jinnah, got his act all mixed up and ended up losing his hold over the party. Jaswant Singh’s attempt is even more pathetic. He did attack Nehru but committed the blasphemy of attacking Sardar Patel as well who undoubtedly is an icon in Gujarat. Jaswant Singh did not have a chance to last after making that gross blunder. Who will be the next to try the fine tuning?
The real history of the division of course lies in understanding the socio-economic development of the Indian sub-continent. Though it was not the objective of the Britishers to usher capitalism in India, colonization over a period 150 years had sown the seeds of capitalism in the semi-feudal soil. Analysing the conflict in the nascent capitalism at the time of Independence, we had in August 2002, written the following in the manifesto of the New Socialist Movement:
“The pre-independence contradiction between the Muslim league represented by Jinnah and the Congress led by Gandhi, Nehru and Patel reflected the quest of the “Muslim Capital” to carve out for itself a separate nation state in order to safeguard its existence, growth and development from the suppression by the “Hindu Capital” of the majority community in case of an undivided India. The partition of the country, instead of resolving this contradiction, accentuated the same manifolds leading to the consolidation of the communal forces in both the countries. The suspicion of each others motive egged on by the fundamentalist elements of both the countries, never brought peace amongst these unnatural twins having centuries of common lifestyle and culture.”
The Muslim league, which he headed, did make attempts to remain in an united federated India and M.A Jinnah presented his famous fourteen points on March 28, 1929 to the Muslim League Council at their session in Delhi. Primarily, the fourteen points dealt with the safe-guarding of the political power of the minorities within the Indian federation more particularly in the Central legislature. Jinnah wanted atleast 1/3rd seats to be reserved for the Muslims. The proposal of Jinnah was of course rejected by Congress.
Nation-states in the era of capitalism have their own dynamics and growth as did the births of India and Pakistan. No amount of rewriting history can change this reality. What should concern us is not what took place sixty two years back but where India and Pakistan are today and where we would go from here.
Researching on Jinnah appears to have become a fatal obsession for leaders of the BJP. The spectre of Jinnah has claimed yet another victim, Jaswant Singh, a senior leader of the BJP. In 2005, L.K. Advani had almost dug his own grave when he spoke in glowing terms about Mohammad Ali Jinnah at his mausoleum in Pakistan and described him as a rare secular man! What therefore draws these right-wing leaders towards Jinnah like fire-flies towards the proverbial fire?
The partition between India and Pakistan has always been the source of the divisive communal politics of BJP. To make Jinnah the villain of the partition suited BJP (as well as the Congress) since that pitted one community against the other. The communal contradiction covered up all other contradictions that in fact gave rise to the two nation theory. Unfortunately however, blaming Jinnah alone would not result in political dividend forever for BJP. Somewhere down the line, a realization dawned inside BJP that unless Congress and, more particularly, Nehru could be shown as equally responsible for the partition, the anti-congress Hindu votes couldn’t be attracted. The problem however lay in balancing the acts of Congress leaders like Nehru, Sardar Patel, Gandhiji with that of Jinnah.
In 2005, Advani made the first attempt under the guise of paying tributes to Jinnah, got his act all mixed up and ended up losing his hold over the party. Jaswant Singh’s attempt is even more pathetic. He did attack Nehru but committed the blasphemy of attacking Sardar Patel as well who undoubtedly is an icon in Gujarat. Jaswant Singh did not have a chance to last after making that gross blunder. Who will be the next to try the fine tuning?
The real history of the division of course lies in understanding the socio-economic development of the Indian sub-continent. Though it was not the objective of the Britishers to usher capitalism in India, colonization over a period 150 years had sown the seeds of capitalism in the semi-feudal soil. Analysing the conflict in the nascent capitalism at the time of Independence, we had in August 2002, written the following in the manifesto of the New Socialist Movement:
“The pre-independence contradiction between the Muslim league represented by Jinnah and the Congress led by Gandhi, Nehru and Patel reflected the quest of the “Muslim Capital” to carve out for itself a separate nation state in order to safeguard its existence, growth and development from the suppression by the “Hindu Capital” of the majority community in case of an undivided India. The partition of the country, instead of resolving this contradiction, accentuated the same manifolds leading to the consolidation of the communal forces in both the countries. The suspicion of each others motive egged on by the fundamentalist elements of both the countries, never brought peace amongst these unnatural twins having centuries of common lifestyle and culture.”
The Muslim league, which he headed, did make attempts to remain in an united federated India and M.A Jinnah presented his famous fourteen points on March 28, 1929 to the Muslim League Council at their session in Delhi. Primarily, the fourteen points dealt with the safe-guarding of the political power of the minorities within the Indian federation more particularly in the Central legislature. Jinnah wanted atleast 1/3rd seats to be reserved for the Muslims. The proposal of Jinnah was of course rejected by Congress.
Nation-states in the era of capitalism have their own dynamics and growth as did the births of India and Pakistan. No amount of rewriting history can change this reality. What should concern us is not what took place sixty two years back but where India and Pakistan are today and where we would go from here.
No comments:
Post a Comment