Vol. 8 · pages 431–435
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 431 (printed page 406)
406 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES
(7) On the assumption that the two-nation theory has come to
stay, will not India as one single unit become an incoherent
body without organic unity, incapable of developing into a
strong united nation bound by a common faith in a common
destiny and therefore likely to remain a feeble and sickly
country, easy to be kept in perpetual subjection either of
the British or of any other foreign power ?
(8) If India cannot be one united country, is it not belter that
Indians should help India in the peaceful dissolution of this
incoherent whole into its natural parts, namely, Pakistan
and Hindustan ?
(9) Whether it is not better to provide for the growth of
two independent and separate nations, a Muslim nation
inhabiting Pakistan and a Hindu nation inhabiting
Hindustan, than pursue the vain attempt to keep India
as one undivided country in the false hope that Hindus
and Muslims will some day be one and occupy it as the
members of one nation and sons of one motherland ?
Nothing can come in the way of an Indian getting to grips
with these issues and reaching his own conclusions with the help
of the material contained in the foregoing pages except three
things : (1) A false sentiment of historical patriotism, (2) a false
conception of the exclusive ownership of territory and (3) absence
of willingness to think for oneself. Of these obstacles, the last is
the most difficult to get over. Unfortunately thought in India is
rare and free thought is rarer still. This is particularly true of
Hindus. That is why a large part of the argument of this book
has been addressed to them. The reasons for this are obvious. The
Hindus are in a majority. Being in a majority, their view point
must count. There is not much possibility of peaceful solution if no
attempt is made to meet their objections rational or sentimental.
But there are special reasons which have led me to address so
large a part of the argument to them and which may not be quite
so obvious to others. I feel that those Hindus who are guiding the
destinies of their fellows have lost what Carlyle calls “the Seeing
Eye” and are walking in the glamour of certain vain illusions, the
consequences of which must, I fear, be terrible for the Hindus.
The Hindus are in the grip of the Congress and the Congress
is in the grip of Mr. Gandhi. It cannot be said that Mr. Gandhi
has given the Congress the right lead. Mr. Gandhi first sought to
avoid facing the issue by taking refuge in two things. He started
by saying that to partition India is a moral wrong and a sin
to which he will never be a party. This is a strange argument.
PDF page 432
407
PAKISTAN : EPILOGUE
India is not the only country faced with the issue of partition
or shifting of frontiers based on natural and historical
factors to those based on the national factors. Poland
has been partitioned three times and no one can be sure
that there will be no more partition of Poland. There are
very few countries in Europe which have not undergone
partition during the last 150 years. This shows that the
partition of a country is neither moral nor immoral. It is
unmoral. It is a social, political or militay question. Sin
has no place in it.
As a second refuge Mr. Gandhi started by protesting
that the Muslim League did not represent the Muslims
and that Pakistan was only a fancy of Mr. Jinnah. It
is difficult to understand how Mr. Gandhi could be so
blind as not to see how Mr. Jinnah’s ... influence over the
Muslim masses has been growing day by day and how he
has engaged himself in mobilizing all his forces for battle.
Never before was Mr. Jinnah a man for the masses. He
distrusted them.* To exclude them from political power
he was always for a high franchise. Mr. Jinnah was never
known to be a very devout, pious or a professing Muslim.
Besides kissing the Holy Koran as and when he was sworn
in as an M.L.A., he does not appear to have bothered much
about its contents or its special tenets. It is doubtful if he
frequented any mosque either out of curiosity or religious
fervour. Mr. Jinnah was never found in the midst of Muslim
mass congregations, religious or political. Today one finds
a complete change in Mr. Jinnah. He has become a man
of the masses. He is no longer above them. He is among
them. Now they have raised him above themselves and
call him their Qaid-e-Azam. He has not only become a
believer in Islam, but is prepared to die for Islam. Today,
he knows more of Islam than mere Kalama. Today, he
goes to the mosque to hear Khutba and takes delight in
joining the Id congregational prayers. Dongri and Null
Bazaar once knew Mr. Jinnah by name. Today they know
him by his presence. No Muslim meeting in Bombay begins
or ends without Allah-ho-Akbar and Long Live Qaid-eAzam. In this Mr. Jinnah has merely followed King Henry
IV of France—the unhappy father-in-law of the English
* Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru in his autobiography says that Mr. Jinnah wanted
the Congress to restrict its membership to matriculates.
PDF page 433 (printed page 408)
408 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES
King Charles I. Henry IV was a Huguenot by faith. But he
did not hesitate to attend mass in a Catholic Church in Paris.
He believed that to change his Huguenot faith and go to mass
was an easy price to pay for the powerful support of Paris.
As Paris became worth a mass to Henry IV, so have Dongri
and Null Bazaar become worth a mass to Mr. Jinnah and
for similar reason. It is strategy ; it is mobilization. But even
if it is viewed as the sinking of Mr. Jinnah from reason to
superstition, he is sinking with his ideology which by his very
sinking is spreading into all the different strata of Muslim
society and is becoming part and parcel of its mental makeup. This is as clear as anything could be. The only basis for
Mr. Gandhi’s extraordinary view is the existence of what are
called Nationlist Musalmans. It is difficult to see any real
difference between the communal Muslims who form the
Muslim League and the Nationalist Muslims. It is extremely
doubtful whether the Nationalist Musalmans have any real
community of sentiment, aim and policy with the Congress
which marks them off from the Muslim League. Indeed many
Congressmen are alleged to hold the view that there is no
different between the two and that the Nationalist Muslim
inside the Congress are only an outpost of the communal
Muslims. This view does not seem to be quite devoid of truth
when one recalls that the late Dr. Ansari, the leader of the
Nationalist Musalmans, refused to oppose the Communal
Award although it gave the Muslims separate electorates
in teeth of the resolution passed by the Congress and the
Nationalist Musalmans. Nay, so great has been the increase
in the influence of the League among the Musalmans that
many Musalmans who were opposed to the League have been
compelled to seek for a place in the League or make peace
with it. Anyone who takes account of the turns and twists of
the late Sir Sikandar Hyat Khan and Mr. Fazlul Huq, the late
Premier of Bengal, must admit the truth of this fact. Both Sir
Sikandar and Mr. Fazlul Huq were opposed to the formation
of branches of the Muslim League in their Provinces when
Mr. Jinnah tried to revive it in 1937. Notwithstanding their
opposition, when the branches of the League were formed
in the Punjab and in Bengal within one year both were
compelled to join them. It is a case of those coming to scoff
PDF page 434
409
PAKISTAN : EPILOGUE
remaining to pray. No more cogent proof seems to be necessary
to prove the victory of the League.
Notwithstanding this Mr. Gandhi instead of negotiating
with Mr. Jinnah and the Muslim League with a view to a
settlement, took a different turn. He got the Congress to
pass the famous Quit India Resolution on the 8th August
1942. This Quit India Resolution was primarily a challenge
to the British Government. But it was also an attempt to do
away with the intervention of the British Government in the
discussion of the Minority question and thereby securing for
the Congress a free hand to settle it on its own terms and
according to its own lights. It was in effect, if not in intention,
an attempt to win independence by bypassing the Muslims
and the other minorities. The Quit India Campaign turned
out to be a complete failure. It was a mad venture and took
the most diabolical form. It was a scorch-earth campaign in
which the victims of looting, arson and murder were Indians
and the perpetrators were Congressmen. Beaten, he started
a fast for twenty-one days in March 1943 while he was in
gaol with the object of getting out of it. He failed. Thereafter
he fell ill. As he was reported to be sinking the British
Government released him for fear that he might die on their
hand and bring them ignominy. On coming out of gaol, he
found that he and the Congress had not only missed the bus
but had also lost the road. To retrieve the position and win
for the Congress the respect of the British Government as a
premier party in the country which it had lost by reason of
the failure of the campaign that followed up the Quit India
Resolution, and the violence which accompanied it, he started
negotiating with the Viceroy. Thwarted in that attempt, Mr.
Gandhi turned to Mr. Jinnah. On the 17th July 1944 Mr.
Gandhi wrote to Mr. Jinnah expressing his desire to meet
him and discuss with him the communal question. Mr. Jinnah
agreed to receive Mr. Gandhi in his house in Bombay. They
met on the 9th September 1944. It was good that at long
last wisdom dawned on Mr. Gandhi and he agreed to see the
light which was staring him in the face and which he had
so far refused to see.
The basis of their talks was the offer made by Mr. Rajagopalachariar to Mr. Jinnah in April 1944 which, according to the
PDF page 435 (printed page 410)
410 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES
somewhat incredible* story told by Mr. Rajagopalachariar,
was discussed by him with Mr. Gandhi in March 1943 when
he (Mr. Gandhi) was fasting in gaol and to which Mr. Gandhi
had given his full approval. The following is the text of Mr.
Rajagopalachariar’s formula popularly spoken of as the C.
R. Formula:—
(1) Subject to the terms set out below as regards the
constitution for Free India, the Muslim League
endorses the Indian demand for Independence and
will co-operate with the Congress in the formation of
a provisional interim government for the transitional
period.
(2) After the termination of the war, a commission shall
be appointed for demarcating contiguous districts in
the north-west and east of India, wherein the Muslim
population is in absolute majority. In the areas thus
demarcated, a plebiscite of all the inhabitants held
on the basis of adult suffrage or other practicable
franchise shall ultimately decide the issue of separation
from Hindustan. If the majority decide in favour of
forming a sovereign State separate from Hindustan,
such decision shall be given effect to, without prejudice
to the right of districts on the border to choose to join
either State.
(3) It will be open to all parties to advocate their points
of view before the plebiscite is held.
(4) In the event of separation, mutual agreements shall be
entered into for safeguarding defence, and commerce
and communications and for other essential purposes.
(5) Any transfer of population shall only be on an
absolutely voluntary basis.
(6) These terms shall be binding only in case of transfer
by Britain of full power and responsibility for the
governance of India.
The talks which began on the 9th September were carried
on over a period of 18 days till 27th September when it was
announced that the talks had failed. The failure of the talks
*The formula was discussed with Mr. Gandhi in March 1943 but was not
communicated to Mr. Jinnah till April 1944.