Pakistan movement: Freedom struggle: Communalism and Indian partition
This is a collection of articles archived for the excellence of their content. Readers will be able to edit existing articles and post new articles directly |
Communalism and Indian partition
THE All-India Muslim League was founded in Dhaka in 1906. This was exclusively an affair of the Muslims by the Muslims for the Muslims. The circumstances leading to its birth are to be found in the Hindu attitude based on their exclusive tendencies which led them to separation from the Muslims. Since Hindus followed a policy of aloofness in almost every branch of life it ipso facto resulted in their separation.
Now what were the policies pursued by Hindus which caused this separation?
Between 1858, when India came under the alien rule - ruled by a people who were European by race, Christian by faith and British by nationality, and 1906 Hindus who formed a majority in the country, pursued such policies towards Muslims which the latter found greatly harmful to their interests and even living in India.
Take, for instance, the case of Hindu activities in organising themselves politically. In 1876, Surendranath Banerji, a leading Hindu of Bengal, formed the India Association with the aim to unite Indians with the purpose of gaining concessions from the government. But to him Indian meant all but Muslims. Thus Muslims were excluded by him for the purpose of Indians’ unity. Again, when in 1885 an Anglo-Hindu axis led to the formation of Indian National Congres no Muslim leader of position and prestige was invited. Nor they were consulted prior to the formation of the Congres.
The main object of the Congres was to secure a share for the Indians through their elected representatives in the administration of the country. This demand when acted upon was to work to the great detriment of Muslims since Hindus formed the majority there was hardly any possibility of any Muslim to be elected with Hindu votes. The Muslim experience of the past few decades had been bitter in this respect.
In the elections where entry was governed by votes such as the local municipalities and district boards, Hindu voters always voted in favour of a Hindu candidate against the “beef-eating” Mussalman. However when the Congres was founded Muslims raised no objections against it or its policy based on representative system. On the contrary, many Muslims joined it and began their political career by siding with it. But soon they felt frustrated and quit it. A couple of instances would suffice to prove the point.
Hamid Ali Khan, a leading barrister of the United Provinces of Agra and Awadh (U.P.), was much enamoured by the Congres due to its having the name “national” in it. He himself preached cooperation between Hindus and Muslims and placed great emphasis on this so much so that he used to describe the Urdu language word Hum as composed of Hindu and Muslim — Ha for Hindu and Meem for Muslim. But when he tried to contest the election for his local body no Hindu voted him despite his being a member of the Congres.
This situation and of his own was later best described by another Muslim, Haji Musa Khan. He wrote: “As long as I remained aloof and used to hear from afar upto that time I was not only a supporter of the (Indian) National Congres but was one devoted to it. When I entered into it and began to take part in the country’s politics then the reality began to dawn upon me ... Mr Hamid Ali Khan, barrister of Lucknow, was also severely stung by the Congres when in the U.P. right to elect members of the Council was given Hamid Ali Khan tried to get himself elected. But the Congresmen voted against him in favour of an ordinary Hindu though he was anti-Congres. Such examples of anti-Muslim attitude abounded in almost every province under the British rule as it was known.”
Despite the intense bias shown by Hindus, Muslims still wished to remain in close association with them. But the Hindu response was one of denial almost in every branch of life. For instance, take the case of Hindu institutions of learning and education. Muslim parents while unwilling to send their children to public and Christian managed schools were ready to get them admitted to Hindu schools and colleges. But no Hindu institution would admit them. Even in the matter of sports Hindus discriminated Muslims and established Hindu cricket, football and other clubs where admission to Muslims was strictly prohibited.
The Hindu Gymkhana, still existing in Karachi is a living example which bespeaks for itself. It was not but natural that Muslim grievances arose against the Hindu attitude based on their separatist and exclusive tendency. But Muslims did not agitate. Nor did they complain. On the contrary, they tried to meet the Hindu challenge by trying to find substitutes for them.
So, if Hindus would not admit Muslim children into their institutions of education Muslims decided to open their own schools and colleges. If no Muslim was allowed to enter Hindu Gymkhanas they established Muslim clubs to make up their loss. If Hindu was adamant to organise Hindu cricket and football clubs Muslims did not take long to inaugurate such clubs of their own. All this was done by Muslims without grumbling and complaining against the Hindu attitude and policies.
The fact is that Muslims understood Hindus in much better way than Hindus did in respect of Muslims. On the face of it Muslim consideration was based on greater understanding of Hindu social and religious customs which prohibited them from socialization with them. But modern European education had erased many of the social evils existing in Hindu society yet they maintained their bias against Muslims particularly.
Notwithstanding the attitude in respect of educational, social and sport institutions, Muslims decided not to compromise over an issue which was purely Indian in nature and character but Hindus dubbed it as purely Muslim and thus foreign to them, and they demanded the banishment of both from India. This was the language issue which revolved round Urdu.
In the early 1900, Hindu antagonists of Urdu succeeded in securing official recognition to Hindi language at the cost of Urdu. It was a great and grave error on the part of Hindus to start an anti-Urdu campaign. This became not only the immediate cause for Muslims to react but also became the very reason to organise themselves politically for what was then described and explained to protect their rights and interests in India.
What had happened in 1900 was, in fact, the continuation of a movement which Hindus had started as early as 1860. At that time the Muslim India had a great leader to serve their interests. This was no other than Syed Ahmad Khan (1817-1898), hailed lovingly and reveredly as the G.O.M. or Grand Old Man and Peer-i-Azam of Muslim politics in India. When Hindus started their opposition to Urdu he successfully blunted their efforts. So long as he lived Hindu antagonists of Urdu had no courage to cross swords with him. But as soon as he died they took up arms again against Urdu.
However, before Syed Ahmad Khan died he had succeeded in welding Muslims into a nation which had gained confidence and courage to meet the challenge to their survival in India. How he did it. He used Urdu as his weapon. The Urdu speaking diaspora was found everywhere in the country. So he appealed to their good sense to pick up courage and work for the cause of Muslims as a nation.
He knew there was no other way to bring his people to cooperate among themselves, because they too were a disintegrated lot divided on the basis of religious belief and cultural differences. Due to his efforts Muslims young and old rallied round him. In his own lifetime his services to bring Muslims closer with the help of Urdu language were lauded and much appreciated.
This was openly admitted that it was absurd to think of nationality with the community of language. Syed Ahmad Khan did both. Muslims belonging to every other culture followed him without demur or complaint or agitation that, no, Urdu was not their language.
This led Hindus to think, and rightly so, that the greatest obstacle on their way had been removed and thus with a new vigour and vision challenged the position of Urdu in the U.P. In this they succeeded. No sooner this happened Muslims called a meeting the very next day and decided in this meeting to form an Urdu Defence Association. But it was too late to act in that direction and their efforts led them nowhere.
Frustrated and drooped as they appeared, Hamid Ali Khan, one time a member of the Congres, called a meeting at his place. This happened on October 1, 1901. It was here on this occasion that Muslims finally opted in favour of organising themselves politically on all India basis.
The October 1, 1901, meeting at Hamid Ali Khan’s place was attended by leading Muslims from several provinces. It was not very long after that the foundation of the All-India Muslim League was laid. Syed Ali Imam, once a leading member of the All India Muslim League, publicly admitted and acknowledged that this meeting at Lucknow was the forerunner of the Muslim League.
In between 1901 and 1906, Viqar-ul-Mulk, an important leader of Syed Ahmad Khan’s group, had established branches of a political organisation known as Social and Political Organisation of Muslims. This was done soon after the October 1901 meeting. As soon as the All India Muslim League was founded the branches of the Social and Political Organisation became part of the Muslim League.
The aim and object in founding the Muslim League was the same which had caused Muslims much concern. It was to seek protection of their political and other rights which they now clearly perceived were at the mercy of Hindus. The major concern was to find a secure and effective way for the entry into the various elective bodies where Muslim representation had remained difficult for them. The Muslim League demanded and successfully obtained the right for Muslims to elect their representatives through their own votes. This concession was legalised by the Councils Act in 1909.
Having secured Muslim representation through Muslim votes Muslims were now in a position to make their presence felt in the various councils. This was a great political concession which was won by the Muslims.
This also, on the face of it, fulfilled the aim of the Muslim League which was “protection of political and other rights of Indian Mussalmans”. It was, therefore, realised that the aims and objects of the organisation needed revision and modification in the light of experience gained so far. However, it was not until late 1912 that the Constitution and rules of the organisation were reviewed. It was finally decided that what was needed was the establishment in India of a self-government which suited it.
After much debates and discussion this was passed by the Lucknow Muslim League meetings in March 1913. The new object at the same time became the creed of the Muslim League. This was added as section D to Clause 2 of the Constitution of the All India Muslim League. Most writers have erred to describe the Muslim League object of self-government as the same as that of Congres. This is far from the fact. The Congres aim was to establish self-government in India on colonial lines. The Muslim League wanted this to be as “suitable to India”. The difference was noticed particularly by officials of the Viceroy’s Executive Council.
A few like Hartcourt Butler, who was Member Education, frowned at this and felt furious at the audacity of Muslim League leaders. Be that as it may many Congres leaders felt that there was no point in keeping the Muslims away from themselves. They also felt and expressed happiness that Muslim League’s objective was also to see the establishment of self-government in India.
They also showed the desire to work together for the attainment of this objective. The leaders of the Muslim League reciprocated these feelings. This led to a mutual understanding of the two people - Hindus and Muslims. Finally, these relations based on goodwill and better understanding led to, now famous, agreement between the two organisations — Muslim League and Congres. This is the well-known Lucknow Pact which indeed proved the Hudaibya as far as Muslim India was concerned. The Pact eventually paved way for the creation of Pakistan. But still there was a long way to reach to fulfil this aim.
As the time moved, the All India Muslim League came under the influence of those Muslims who were somehow enamoured by a Hindu leader, M.K. Gandhi. Between 1919 and 1922 the Muslim League was captured by these Muslims who were known as Khilafatists. The Khilafat question had nothing to do with Indian affairs for which the All India Muslim League was founded. But the Muslim India had religious and spiritual links with Turkey then known as Ottoman Empire. Its Sultan was also Khalifa (Caliph) of the Muslim world.
The Sultan found himself in trouble due to being an ally of Germany which was blamed to have caused the Great War (1914-1918). In the war Germany was defeated. It was decided by the victors to punish her for disturbing peace and causing human losses. Her ally, Turkey, was also not to be spared. The Muslim India got worried and felt great concern for Turkey.
They wanted All India Muslim League to take up the cause of Turkey. But Muslim League leaders were not ready to draw the organisation in an affair which was religious in nature and extra territorial in character. It was not that they had no sympathy with Turkey or had no love and respect for the Khalifa. The mere fact was that the All India Muslim League’s rule did not justify such involvement.
Gandhi had been looking for an opportunity to make a niche for himself in Indian politics for some years but had failed so far despite the fact that he had hijacked the Indian Home Rule League of Mrs Annie Besant and had also renamed it as Swarajya Sabha to his heart’s content. But he had failed so far to make an impact in Indian political world which was full of intricacies.
In the matter of Khilafat issue Gandhi saw an opportunity to boost his position. Khilafat had religious tinge. Gandhi also had great religious bent of mind. Particularly he wanted Muslims to stop the slaughter of cow which was revered by Hindus. He promised Muslims to get Hindu support for the Khilafat and Turkey, provided they stop the killing of cow and follow him in the matter of launching any movement for their purpose.
It was Gandhi’s influence which won and worked as Muslims agreed to his plans. But in 1922 Gandhi suddenly and without consulting his Muslim ally stopped the movement started in favour of Turkey. Muslim India failed to get any favourable results out of their blindly following Gandhi. But before he suddenly stopped the movement Gandhi had done great damage to the Muslim League. Under his influence the pro-Khilafat Muslims, who had come to dominate All India Muslim League and its policies had been successful in bringing about significant changes in the rules of the organisation — significant only from their own point of view.
These changes introduced religion in the Muslim League aims and it also became pan-Islamist. The Section B Clause 2 of the All India Muslim League was amended to include the word “religion” after “political” so as to read “protection of political, religious and other rights of Indian Mussalmans”.
A new Section D was also added to the aims and objects which was meant to establish friendly relations between the Muslims of India and Muslims of other countries which made the All India Muslim League pan-Islamist. In 1921 the Constitution of the All India Muslim League went further changes under Gandhi’s influence when his pet slogan of “Swarajya” was made an important part of it. Section (a) of Clause 2 of the Constitution of the Muslim League now stood for the “establishment of Swarajya in India by all peaceful and legitimate means”.
All this made the All India Muslim League to lose its position in matters Indian. But this situation did not remain in existence for long. Frustrated and furious as they were with Gandhi due to his stopping the movement and withdrawing his support for the Khilafat and Turkey, the Muslim followers of Gandhi soon reverted to their original business that was confined to India and Indian political affairs.
Between 1922 and 1934 the All India Muslim League remained in a weak position. Firstly, the Khilafat Movement had badly afflicted its health and thus affected its ability to work as an effective organisation. Secondly, it suffered from the crisis of leadership which had overtaken it after 1930. Before that it had also suffered from the split which had occurred in its ranks and file in 1927 due to the conflict of opinion between Mohammad Shafi, leader of the Punjab Province Muslim League, and Mohammad Ali Jinnah, leader of the All India Muslim League.
The difference of opinion had taken place over the issue which was related to the reception and cooperation with the Simon Commission which the British Government had decided to send to India to review the political progress India had made during all these past years and give its recommendations for future constitutional reforms.
The internal conditions notwithstanding, Muslim League leaders were not unmindful of the situation and had at times laboured to repair the damage done to their organisation. Between 1922 and 1937 efforts were occasionally made to improve the constitution of the party. But no practical steps could be taken despite several attempts to decide and setting up committees to revise and update the rules. But in 1937 the All India Muslim League’s aims and object underwent a significant change. Politically speaking, India had leaped forward in the direction of constitutional and political advancements. In 1935, the alien government agreed to grant India a constitution which granted self-rule, for the time being, at provincial level.
For the future India was also to be granted a constitution based on Indian Federation. The leader of the Muslim League, Jinnah, had condemned the Federation in the strongest terms even before the rules were framed for this purpose. The new Act, granted to India in 1935, called India Act 1935, had given concessions at provincial level and withheld the federal part for the time being.
The All India Muslim League did not accept the federal part of the new Act and passed a resolution at its Lucknow meetings in 1937 to the following effect stating that the future policy of the All India Muslim League shall be: “the establishment in India full independence in the form of a federation of free democratic states in which the rights and interests of the Mussalmans and other minorities are adequately and effectively safeguarded in the Constitution.”
The above was also incorporated as the creed of the Muslim League in Clause 2 (a) of the aims and object of the organisation. The demand for Swarajya was totally washed off now.
Within three years the All India Muslim League passed another resolution at its Lahore meetings in March 1940 which sought the establishment of independent Muslim states where the Muslims were in a majority such as the North West and East of India. This too was incorporated as a creed in the Constitution of the All India Muslim League by replacing the earlier creed of 1937 which desired the establishment of a federation of free states.
The creed as adopted in 1937 should be regarded as the forerunner to the Lahore resolution which was only a modified form of this resolution. The demand for the establishment of independent Muslim states in India took the name of Pakistan. In the next seven years the All India Muslim League successfully worked for its achievement. The new States came into being in mid-August 1947. All through its existence the Muslim League worked to obtain its objectives through a chartered course set for it by the members.
It followed a policy that was peaceful and constitutional. During all the years of its existence its aims and objects also went a change. But this only showed the desire of its members who went along with the changes of time.
Seen from the hindsight and even as a final analysis the birth of the All India Muslim League and its accomplishments proved a colossal loss to the Hindus and Congres. By and large both followed a policy to isolate Muslims in India and if possible to seek their eviction from the country to which they had an equal claim. Hindu policy which at most of the times was also followed by the Congres which professed to be “national,” emanated from their intense desire based on separation from the Muslims. Their separation itself was the result of their tendency to exclusiveness.
This attitude which was pursued in relation to Muslims cost them heavily. This was a blunder of first degree which they committed and which led to the partitioning of India. In the process, however, the All India Muslim League itself could not escape the fate of partition. This too was divided into Pakistan and Indian Union Muslim Leagues. But the All India Muslim League did exceedingly well and stood victorious in comparison to the Indian Congres.
The writer is the author of Promise and Fulfilment, a detailed documented history of the All India Muslim League which has just been published to mark its centenary
