www.sacw.net | February 2002
Social Roots of Partition Process
by Ram Puniyani(Source: Issues In Secular Politics- No.2, Vol 1,(Jan II 2002))
The partition tragedy has been a multifaceted phenomenon in which lot of
factors played their role. Unmindful of that, various formulations are
popularized to suit the political interests of vested interests. One of
the most common causes for partition, propounded by the RSS and its
progeny (Sangh Parivar, SP), has been that it was Gandhi's appeasement of
Muslims, which emboldened them to demand Pakistan. Also, Jinnah has been
given the 'distinction' of the man who broke up India by some of the
scholars. A new theory comes from Dr. Murli Manohar Joshi. According to
him CPI's resolution on linguistic and religious nationalism provided
Muslim League with the logic of the much-needed 'Two Nation theory'. While
RSS chief Mr. Sudarshan states that as the division of India has been done
into Muslim Pakistan and Hindu India, so the to complete the partition
process Muslims should be packed off to Pakistan and Hindus from Pakistan
should be brought back.
Partition tragedy needs to be related to the complex social roots and the
goals of imperial powers in the region. With the control of India by
British, to plunder its raw materials and to create the market for their
industrial goods, railways, telegraphs and modern education were
introduced. Due to this came up group of Industrialists, educated civil
servants, professionals, modern businessmen and workers. These groups
started forming various citywide and region wide associations, the
culmination of which took place in the formation of Indian National
Congress (INC). This organization started putting forward the demands
related to more provisions for industrialists to set up their industries
here, bigger role in local administration, better facilities for education
and land ceiling. Rising assertion of newly emerging classes put the
Feudal lords and Kings of princely states, belonging to both religions, to
unease, and they came together to form United India Patriotic Association
(UIPA) just a couple of years after the formation of INC. This association
condemned the INC demands and saw this as an indication of disloyalty to
the British crown. They resolved to cultivate the loyalty of local
population for the Queen of England. Incidentally it was the same decade
in which communal riots began for the first time. Over a period of time
mainly due to the British policy of divide and rule this association gave
way to the formation of religion-based bodies like Muslim League (ML) and
Hindu Mahasabha (HM). Remarkably the leadership of these organizations was
coming from the same sections that formed the UIPA.
Later on RSS also joined in as another outfit for the 'building of Hindu
Nation', it had predominant support base from Brahmin and traditional
Bania communities. Most remarkably these both outfits (ML on one side and
HM+RSS on the other) spewing venom against each other shared the common
premise of Nationalism in the name of religion. The only difference being
that HM+RSS said it is a Hindu Nation so people of other faiths have to
remain subordinate to Hindus if they do not accept Hindu culture, while ML
asserted that since Muslims are separate Nation and they should have a
separate country to themselves. They were critical of National movement
led by INC, and most significantly they shared the same class base to a
great extent (Kings, Feudal Lords)
With INC's movement becoming mass movement, people from different
communities irrespective of their religion started joining it. This
movement was the movement for India Nation in the making. For this
nationalism the Nationalism propounded by ML and HM+RSS was like a fly in
the ointment but this fly was given life and blood by the British policies
in a very subtle and overt ways. While Muslim League was overtly
recognized and acted as 'the representative of Muslims', unmindful of the
fact that majority of Muslims were with the INC. The majority Muslims
stalwarts, Maulana Abul Kalam Azad, Khan Abdul Gaffar Khan being the most
well known amongst them, the Olemas of Barelvi and Deoband School, all
supported this Nationalism. The Hindu Nationalists though they were not
'officially' recognized as the representatives of Hindus, they were
merrily operating through the INC itself. The foundation of Two Nation
theory emerged parallel amongst Hindu Nationalists and Islamist
Nationalist. Savarkar articulated it most powerfully in his 'Post Andaman'
book, 'Who is a Hindu', while Chowdhary Rahmat Ali conceptualized Pakistan
(Punjab, Afghans, Kashmir, Sind) around 1930s.
The negotiations for the single united country were bound to fail with
these diverse pulls, pressures and machinations. In the wake of Nehru
committee (1927), Muslim League kept certain demands, which though
accepted initially, had to be backtracked due to the pressure of Hindutva
elements. Again in 1937 elections first the request for joint alliance
with ML was rejected and later the request to accommodate it in the
ministry was rejected by Nehru on the ground that he was keen on land
reforms and alliance with feudal elements of ML will make it impossible to
achieve the same. Similarly after accepting the Cabinet mission plan,
which called for a federation of states, Nehru practically backed out on
the ground that for a proper development of a strong center is a must.
This was like the last straw on the camel's back after which Jinnah became
adamant on his demand for a separate homeland for Muslims.
It is worth noting that the popular support for ML or HM as reflected in
the election results shows that both these parties had a very narrow base,
and both these had abysmal performance at the hustings. The passing of
Pakistan resolution in Lahore in 1940 was met with a march of thousands of
Ansari Muslims to oppose it. As ML used the religious symbolism it
succeeded in raising a bogey of demand for Pakistan, due to the emotional
appeal associated with the propaganda laced in religious idiom. So it gave
the impression as if all Muslims are in support of the Pakistan. The Two
Nation theory was repeatedly proclaimed from the sessions of ML and HM, In
1937 Hindu Mahasabha Session a resolution was passed stating that Hindus
and Muslims are two separate Nations. While a year later Bhai Paramanand
in his Presidential address stated that "Mr. Jinnah argues that there are
two nations in the countryIf Mr. Jinnah is right, and I believe that he is
right then the congress theory of building a common Nationality falls to
the ground. This situation has two solutions, one is the partition of the
country into two and the other is to allow to grow the Muslim state within
the Hindu state."
We can see here that the failure of negotiations had more then what meets
the eye. The goals and perceptions of different actors in this play were
different. Jinnah under the mistaken notion that ML represents all the
Muslims and following the communal vision of politics like its counterpart
HM+RSS, assumed that 'Hindu' INC will subjugate the interests of Muslims
once the British left. Mahatma Gandhi kept brokering peace all through, at
all occasions but here Nehru and Patel's wish to have a strong center
finally broke the possibility of negotiations and compromise. Nehru wanted
a strong center so that the development could be done in a planned manner
and landlordism could be abolished, while Patel wanted a strong center for
an overall strong state. It was a tragedy, which played with lives of
millions and its ghost continues to haunt us till the day. The result of
the partition was a truncated Pakistan, which further broke down into
Bangla Desh and Pakistan, just to prove that religion cannot be the basis
of Nation states, and India, did inherit the mantle of struggle for
independence, the values emerging from the biggest mass movement of
twentieth century, the values of Liberty, Equality, and Fraternity. It
came up as the true representative of the aspirations of the participants
of the freedom struggle for whom their Indian ness bound them in a single
thread. For them religion was not the primary identity. For them a
composite Indian Nationalism rising above the other varieties of narrow
nationalism (Race, Language, Religion) was the primary principle of
society and country. It is precisely these values, which came to be
enshrined in our constitution.
At this point to say that the two Nation theory got boost from the CPI
resolution is nothing but travesty of truth. We have seen the genesis of
Two Nation Theory and its sustenance by ML and HM+RSS had been going on
for decades before CPI resolution came up. About Sudarshan's statement the
less said the better. It is no surprise that this patriarch of Hindu
Rashtra politics can never understand as to what Indian Nationalism is.
His ideology and organization was never a part of Indian National movement
barring few exceptions. The concept of secular democracy is Greek and
Latin to the followers of Hindutva ideology. Could the concept of
Secularism and Indian Nationhood come up and survive without the crucial
contribution of all the communities to the process of Indian Nation
building? India and Indian secularism survive because most of the people
of India choose to be Indians first by rejecting the narrow Nationalism
based on Religion, be it Muslim Nationalism or Hindu Nationalism.
(The writer works for EKTA, Committee for Communal Amity, Mumbai)
Partition of 1947 - India - Pakistan: Some scattered resources