Opinion

(Notes of Naeem Baig at FB Debate held on 12.3.2013 among few famous and learned scholars/ writers of India & Pakistan on the role of Muslim Leaders in the Pre-partition era especially Moulana Azad) I don't remember the articles but I remember Dr sahib’s view point though I'd not much political conscience at that age when I used to see him 1975 in Quetta. God bless you for truthfully revealing the personality of Moulana Abul Kalam Azad. Most of the contemporaries of Muslim Leaders irrespective of their political views of that era (I mean pre-partition) individually everyone has his own great significance and contribution towards Muslims cause and towards humanity. But actually when we evaluate the work of an individual in context with the contribution towards keeping Muslims non-violent and simultaneously insisting for their rights as minorities, you could not disagree with the role of All India Congress versus All India Muslim League, where Moulana put his weight on the side of AIC claiming himself sole representative of the Indian Muslims that was inked by the history later his role for united India. Though Jinnah himself was a great advocate for united India (in his early days) but later on considering the role of AIC and especially Nehru, he conceded with Cabinet Mission, which Moulana rejected as President of AIC in Lord Wavell last conference on Cabinet Mission. That was the time when Muslims rejected his views and he became unpopular among Indian Muslims. These were the facts which turned history in the sub-continent. I totally agree with you folks. You have made my work more easy go. That’s what I was trying to express though I didn't mention it, only because of keeping some respect for Moulana as Muslim, but his versatility as you mentioned amounted to his contradictory personality which even witnessed by Gandhi while expressing in the Lord Wavell's conference criticizing Moulana's remarks against the minorities. The fact is mentioned in great book "SHAMEFUL FLIGHT" by famous Historian Stanley Wolpert an expert on South Asian history. To that extent, what you have narrated, I agree because it is post partition history and we all know it. What actually I was taking into my focus was upon the characteristics of Moulana alone as Muslim leader against other Muslim leaders who anyway instrumented by default or not to give birth to Pakistan. I'm too have many reservations upon the hasty and painful partition but still believe in the Muslim’s cause which too is defeated here as well as you observed. I have read all the worthy comments and remarks of learned people of your caliber in last few posts on this issue. I'm in agreement with most part of the posts/statements of you folks. Basically it’s not some sort of arguments rather we can say it an academic discussion between the friends on the role played by pre-partition Muslim leadership and recorded by the history. And that was actually my focal point when my friend defended Moulana Azad on his political visionary viewpoint. In this context two points need to be clarified first... One that in the era of Lord Wavell's ending tenure as his viceroyalty, Moulana Azad was President of AIC which perhaps, my friend, by mistake corrected me as not. I'm attaching if I could, few pages from Jaswant Singh Book "Jinnah- India-PartitionIndependence". I preferred this great writer because any other Muslim writer could be maligned in distorting the facts. So you would kindly see a letter Moulana Azad wrote to Lord Wavell on 25th June 1946 as President of AIC. Secondly my point was that had Moulana accepted Cabinet Mission's recommendations and Jinnah's principle of parity, the creation of Pakistan would have been seized

to affect and what ultimately now we folks are beating the bush keeping the Pakistan's present situation in mind would have not been arisen. What actually happened after partition is none of my subject as leaders irrespective of AIML (later formed PML) have not proved worthy of leadership. It was perhaps only M. A. Jinnah who provided the leadership and unfortunately he remained on bed almost after creation of Pakistan finally succumbed to his longing TB in 1948. From my side submission is final. Your viewpoint is however welcomed. I'm sorry for finding no scope to put the imaged photo of pages of Jaswant Singh book. I'm pasting it on wall, where from friends can see it. If you have read the relevant pages I have posted on the wall. There is a letter from Moulana Azad written to Lord Wavell. This letter has significantly impressed upon Congress Leaders despite Moulana's conjecture view point that lead to his removal from AIC. Congress leaders were sheer shrewd people including Nehru who was dying to have leadership again as he wanted to become PM/CEO of United or Divided India as tipped by HMG. Anyway I enjoyed having learned discussion with you. We will keep on exchanging our views in future too. I never said anything against the respected Moulana. He was a great Muslim so what if he due to his political viewpoint, had joined his hands with Congress. Still I respect him a lot. You are right and I believe you if Moulana himself admitted the fact about cabinet mission. I knew and history has inked it that Pundit Nehru was power hungry though attained the stature of an English aristocrat posing socialist. And you know once finally Lord MB in may 47 met with Gandhi. Gandhi proposed Jinnah as PM for united India which stunned MB and soon Gandhi left MB called Nehru and told him about the suggestion. Nehru despite having understood the reason behind this proposal refused instantly and asked MB that he should not disclose this suggestion to anybody otherwise his (MB) plan would be defeated. Actually he didn’t want to defeat his own plan to become PM. Nehru was playing two way game that revealed his own malafide. I take your statement as a whole very positive and thought provoking especially its last part, what you have identified. Now the time has come to speak truth and only truth no part is hidden nor is half truth spoken. Our new generation needs to know it otherwise we would not be honest with us and with them. So the responsibility lies on our shoulders to do it whatsoever cost we have to bear for it. It’s question of our survival. Finally before I get back, I must say, I'm very much impressed from the substance of debate carried out here by you folks and other friends. I have also read the article on Gandhi je. It’s true and reported at many places I mean in books by even European Historians about Gandhi je murder and its reasons. However the PS note of editor is totally false as you have already condemned it vehemently. However, essence of the debate is to consider the present circumstances in between both the countries and to bring a path of peace and harmony among the people and forcefully (still we need to) stop the leadership through scholar’s hectic efforts to be shown in their writings acquiring the media's support as well, so that now onward no one could exploit the plain people's emotions and destroy the path of development and alleviation of “poverty” which is the main monstrous evil still exits in both India & Pakistan. Thank you very much. All rights Reserved with Author Naeem Baig at skans.ex@gmail.com published March, 2013.

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful