Vol. 8 · pages 226–230
Pakistan or the Partition of India
This text was extracted automatically from the official PDF of Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar: Writings and Speeches, so it may contain small errors. Always check the original page before quoting.
PDF page 226 (printed page 201)
201PAKISTAN : MUSLIM ALTERNATIVE TO PAKISTAN
their responsibilities, in every walk of life and in every sphere
of human activity are the same. The Indian Muslim by virtue
of these rights and responsibilities, is unquestionable an Indian
national and in every part of the country is entitled to equal
privileges with that of every Indian national in every sphere
of governmental, economic and other national activities and
in public services. For that very reason Muslims own equal
responsibilities with other Indians for striving and making
sacrifices to achieve the country’s independence. This is a selfevident proposition, the truth of which no right thinking Muslim
will question. This Conference declares unequivocally and with
all emphasis at its command that the goal of Indian Muslims
is complete independence along with protection of their religion
and communal rights, and that they are anxious to attain this
goal as early as possible. Inspired by this aim they have in the
past made great sacrifices and are ever ready to make greater
sacrifices.
“The Conference unreservedly and strongly repudiates the
baseless charge levelled against Indian Muslims by the agents
of British Imperialism and others that they are an obstacle in
the path of Indian freedom and emphatically declares that the
Muslims are fully alive to their responsibilities and consider it
inconsistent with their traditions and derogatory to their honour
to lag behind others in the struggle for independence.”
By this Resolution they repudiated the scheme of Pakistan.
Their second Resolution was in the following terms :—
“This is the considered view of this Conference that only
that constitution for the future Government of India would be
acceptable to the people of India which is framed by the Indians
themselves elected by means of adult franchise. The constitution
should fully safeguard all the legitimate interests of the Muslims
in accordance with the recommendations of the Muslim members
of the Constituent Assembly. The representatives of other
communities or of an outside power would have no right to
interfere in the determination of these safeguards.”
By this Resolution the Conference asserted that the
safeguards for the Muslims must be determined by the Muslims
alone.
Their third Resolution was as under:—
“Whereas in the future constitution of India it would
be essential, in order to ensure stability of government and
preservation of security, that every citizen and community should
feel satisfied, this Conference considers it necessary that a scheme
of safeguards as regards vital matters mentioned below should
be prepared to the satisfaction of the Muslims.
PDF page 227 (printed page 202)
202 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES
“This Conference appoints a board consisting of 27 persons.
This board, after the fullest investigation, consultation and
consideration, shall make its recommendations for submission
to the next session of this Conference, so that the Conference
may utilise the recommendations as a means of securing a
permanent national settlement of the communal question. This
recommendation should be submitted within two months. The
matters referred to the board are the following:
“1. The protection of Muslim culture, personal law
and religious rights.
“2. Political rights of Muslims and their protection.
“3. The formation of future constitution of India to
be non-unitary and federal, with absolutely essential and
unavoidable powers for the Federal Government.
“The provision of safeguards for the economic, social
and cultural rights of Muslims and for their share in
public services.
“The board will be empowered to fill up any vacancy
in a suitable manner. The board will have the right to
co-opt other members. It will be empowered also to consult
other Muslim bodies and if it considers necessary, any
responsible organisation in the country. The 27 members
of the board will be nominated by the president.
“The quorum for the meeting will be nine.
“Since the safeguards of the communal rights of
different communities will be determined in the constituent
assembly referred to in the resolution which this Conference
has passed, this Conference considers it necessary to
declare that Muslim members of this constituent will be
elected by Muslims themselves.”
We must await the report* of this board to know what
safeguards the Azad Muslim Conference will devise for the
safety and protection of Muslims. But there appears no reason
to hope that they will not be in favour of what I have guessed
to be the likely alternative for Pakistan. It cannot be overlooked
that the Azad Muslim Conference was a body of Muslims who
were not only opposed to the Muslim League but were equally
opposed to the Nationalist Muslims. There is, therefore, no
ground to trust that they will be more merciful to the Hindus
than the League has been or will be.
* This report has not appeared even now.
PDF page 228 (printed page 203)
203PAKISTAN : MUSLIM ALTERNATIVE TO PAKISTAN
Supposing my guess turns out to be correct, it would be
interesting to know what the Hindus will have to say in reply.
Should they prefer such an alternative to Pakistan ? Or should
they rather prefer Pakistan to such an alternative ? Those are
questions which I must leave the Hindus and their leaders to
answer. All I would like to say in this connection is that the
Hindus before determining their attitude towards this question
should note certain important considerations. In particular they
should note that there is a difference between Macht Politic*
and Gravamin Politic †; that there is a difference between
Communitas Communitatum and a nation of nations; that there
is a difference between safeguards to allay apprehensions of
the weak and contrivances to satisfy the ambition for power
of the strong: that there is a difference between providing
safeguards and handing over the country. Further, they should
also note that what may with safety be conceded to Gravamin
Politic may not be conceded to Macht Politic. What may be
conceded with safety to a community may not be conceded to
a nation and what may be conceded with safety to the weak
to be used by it as a weapon of defence may not be conceded
to the strong who may use it as a weapon of attack.
These are important considerations and, if the Hindus
overlook them, they will do so at their peril. For the Muslim
alternative is really a frightful and dangerous alternative.
zz
* Macht Politic means Power Politics.
† Gravamin Politic means in which the main strategy is to gain power by
manufacturing grievances.
PDF page 229
No text on this page (it may be blank, a title page or an image).
PDF page 230
CHAPTER IX
LESSONS FROM ABROAD
Hindus who will not yield to the demand of the Muslims
for the division of India into Pakistan and Hindustan and
would insist upon maintaining the geographical unity of India
without counting the cost, will do well to study the fate that
has befallen other countries which, like India, harboured many
nations and sought to harmonise them.
It is not necessary to review the history of all such countries.
It is enough to recount here the story of two, Turkey and
Czechoslovakia.
I
To begin with Turkey. The emergence of the Turks in
history was due to the fact that they were driven away by
the Mongols from their home in Central Asia, somewhere
between 1230-40 A. D., which led them to settle in north-west
Anatolia. Their career as the builders of the Turkish Empire
began in 1326 with the conquest of Brusa. In 1360-61, they
conquered Thrace from the Aegean to the Black Sea ; in 136162, the Byzantine Government of Constantinople accepted
their supremacy. In 1369 Bulgaria followed suit. In 1371-72
Macedonia was conquered. In 1373 Constantiople definitely
accepted Ottoman sovereignty. In 1389 Servia was conquered,
in 1430 Salonica, in 1453 Constantinople, in 1461 Trebizond,
in 1465 Quraman, and in 1475 Kaffa and Tana were annexed.
After a short lull, they conquered Mosul in 1514, Syria, Egypt,
the Hiaz and the Yaman in 1516-17 and Belgrade in 1521.
This was followed in 1526 by victory over the Hungarians
at Mohacz. In 1554 took place the first conquest of Baghdad
and in 1639 the second conquest of Baghdad. Twice they laid
siege to Vienna, first in 1529 and again in 1683 with a view
to extend their conquest beyond. But on both occasions they
were repulsed with the result that their expansion in Europe