Revision as of 10:21, 10 November 2013

Quaid-i-Azam Jinnah

Quaid-i-Azam Jinnah

April 15, 2007

Judging Jinnah

Dawn

Quaid-i-Azam Jinnah

Quaid-i-Azam Jinnah

A compilation of previously unpublished portions of Jinnah: Creator of Pakistan, the Quaid-i-Azam’s first biography by Hector Bolitho. The book also includes the author’s notes, correspondence and interviews with those who knew the founder of Pakistan.

Jinnah the man was very different from the stereotyped cardboard portrait that has been fed to us over the years, writes Prof Sharif al Mujahid.

THE portrait of Jinnah that emerges from Bolitho’s interviews is rather a mixed one, with several interviewees contradicting each other. However, the bare bones of the Jinnah story, backed by solid evidence, are as follows:

Jinnah was born into a reasonably affluent family for the time, his father being engaged in profitable business. The story about his studying school texts under the light of a street lamp, current for a long while, is utter nonsense. Nanji Jafar, six years his junior, tells us that he “went to school in a carriage while the other boys walked”. Jinnah’s father gave him a cricket set while he was in school, which Jinnah gifted away to Jafar on the eve of his departure for England in 1892. Not only did Jinnah shun playing marbles, then in vogue throughout the subcontinent, but he also urged other boys in the neighbourhood to “stand-up out of the dust and play cricket”. So passionately was he possessed of this idea that he even taught other boys to play cricket, but without being a bully.

His father had the foresight and the resources to send him to England to study law, recalls Dina Wadia, Jinnah’s only child. Actually, he was sent to study business management but he developed a penchant for politics after listening to the great British Liberal stalwarts in the House of Commons during the initial months of his four-year stay (1892-96) in London, and got himself bathed in the Liberalism of Lord Morley which was then in full sway. The Liberals had come into power under Gladstone in August 1892, and as Jinnah told Dr Ashraf, “I grasped that Liberalism, which became part of my life and thrilled me very much”. That penchant, which stayed with him till the end, led him to opt for law, abandoning his initial business-training plans. This, inter alia, highlights his independence and decision-making power, even at this initial stage.

When Jinnah began his professional life in Bombay, he had three or four years of struggle without briefs, but would not give up on his predetermined ambition. By about 1900, he was, however, a success, and a member of the prestigious Orient Club in Bombay where Sir Cowasjee Jehangir met him in 1901. “He was even more pompous and independent during those lean years,” recalls Sir Cowasjee. A good many of his friends and acquaintances thought that Jinnah was “no lawyer [but] a brilliant advocate,” but Major Haji, Secretary to the Aga Khan III, dismissed this assertion, arguing that:... he was the only Mohammedan lawyer of consequence in his time. There were one or two other Muslims practicing [law] but they were insignificant. It is not fair to say that Jinnah was merely a good advocate. This opinion is held by Hindus, who will not credit a Muslim with the facility to ‘know’ law, and how to interpret law. As an advocate, Jinnah outshone his fellows. His appeal to the judge and jury was dynamic, but he certainly also knew the law.

Others have also testified that Jinnah outshone everyone else as an advocate, and they usually attribute this to his remarkable clear headedness.

One of his prime ambitions was to become the highest paid lawyer in India, and this he achieved: his daily fee in 1936 was Rs1,500, computed from the day he left Bombay to the day he returned. His stockbroker, Shantilal L. Thar, puts his fortune at Rs6-7 million in 1947 (equivalent to Rs120 million today), a fabulous sum he had earned mostly through his practice, with his investments yielding but a fraction of it.

Jinnah was a political animal from the very beginning. He talked of nothing but politics, all the time, but “with all the differences and bitterness of political life, he was never malicious. Hard may be, but never malicious,” says Sir Cowasjee. Jinnah talked of politics even with his stockbroker, but there was no bitterness in his tone and tenor. Thar recalls that “he propounded his faith in Pakistan, but without ever being bitter against the Hindus. By nature, he was not anti-Hindu ...” This aspect of his politics is confirmed by Jamshed Nusserwanjee, former Mayor of Karachi. Nor was there any “ill-feeling” between Jinnah and Gandhi, or any dislike for each other. Thar also recalls Jinnah’s estimate of the Indian princes in 1946: he extolled the late ruler of Baroda as being “head and shoulders above all the other rulers”, the late Maharaja of Mysore as a “great gentleman” the late ruler of Gondal as “all head and no heart” and the Nawab of Bhopal as having “both head and heart”. It is rather interesting (and surprising) that the Nizam, the nawabs of Rampur and Bahawalpur, the major Muslim princes, or even the Khan of Kalat, with whom he had personal relations, do not figure in his list, and that when it comes to evaluation, Jinnah’s choice cuts across the Hindu-Muslim divide. This is because, in raising the Pakistan banner, he was not launching a crusade against the Hindus as such, but proclaiming Hindus and Muslims as separate nations, so that they could acquire power in their respective demographically dominant regions. To claim substantial or absolute power for Muslims in their regions by no means entailed antagonism or enmity towards the Hindus. Unfortunately, however, this was precisely what the Congres protagonists, propagandists and publicists harped upon, ad nauseum, damning and decrying Jinnah as the arch villain in the Indian political drama.

Jinnah has often been accused of being vain, arrogant and cold. He was hard, but not harsh. What some people considered arrogance was essentially his aggressive self-confidence.

Inter alia, this also highlights his overriding sense of impartiality, attested to by Major Haji, on the basis of his personal experience. His father took him to Jinnah, in Bombay, in 1920, and said, “Make him as brilliant as you are.” Jinnah replied, “He can come and work in my chambers but he must shine with his own brilliance.” Jinnah never used his influence to gain him a favourable position. He “was impartial, and did not give favours”, recalls Haji.

Jinnah has often been accused of being vain, arrogant and cold. He was hard, but not harsh. What some people considered arrogance was essentially his aggressive self-confidence, since he believed in himself all the way. Also, as a politician he kept his distance especially with his equals, lest he should be obliged to give in on some point or another. Yet incredibly perhaps, he talked freely with his stockbroker, his physician (Dr D.K. Mehta), and even with Sir Cowasjee. Actually, one had to come close to Jinnah, both to gain his confidence and to discover his virtues, as Sir Francis Mudie, former governor of Sindh and the Punjab — who “probably knew Jinnah better than any other British Officer in India” and who was “certainly the only British civilian who knew him at all well” — found out after August 1947. “I always found him very pleasant socially ... Officially until near the end ... I found him open to reason or at least to argument. In the end I got to know that I could trust him completely”, recalls Mudie.

Nor was Jinnah cold to all. He “loved talking to people who were not Muslims”, says Thar. Mazhar Ahmad, his naval ADC, adds a new dimension: as he “grew old, he liked to have young men about [around] him. His secretaries and ADCs were all young. He came to enjoy the stimulus of young people and seldom refused to speak to them in audiences, no matter how busy he was.” Hashimi found that he “relaxed with younger people who were not directly related to him and who had no political axes to grind”; he also loved them. That is precisely what a 14-year-old Tahira Hayat Khan (later Tahira Mazhar Ali Khan), though not a Muslim Leaguer, discovered when she cycled her way to Mamdot Villa, where Jinnah was staying, sometime around 1940 and asked the chowkidar to inform Jinnah that she was there. “He was very nice to me and told me that he knew the stance of the Communist Party. I showed him a pamphlet I was carrying in which the Communist Party had declared its support for an independent country. He said we did not need to fear because he would be able to see our friends just as he was going to visit Bombay regularly ...”

According to Mudie, Jinnah was not really cold, and he gives a capital instance of the great emotional strain under which he had been living under the cold exterior:

In judging Jinnah, we must remember what he was up against. He had against him, not only the wealth and brains of the Hindus, but also nearly the whole of British officialdom and most of the Home politicians, who made the great mistake of refusing to take Pakistan seriously. Never was his position really examined ... No man who had not the iron control of himself that Jinnah had could have done what he did. But it does not follow that he was really cold. In fact no one who did not feel as Jinnah did, could have done what he did.

To this may be added Nusserwanjee’s remark: “He was emotional and affectionate, but he was unable to demonstrate it. All was control, control!”

“He kept his thoughts, his emotions, to himself,” recalls Rabbani, his Air ADC, but his gardener testified that he was always kind to servants.

Jinnah also cared for those who worked for him. When he was staying at Sir Cowasjee’s country house, K.H. Khurshid (Secretary to Jinnah, 1944-47) recalls:

Jinnah [was] worried lest I was bored. He asked, “Do you read Shakespeare?” I confessed, “Not since school”. He went into town and brought back a whole set of Shakespeare, Shelley and Keats, for me to read.

He was also loyal and faithful to friends and colleagues who stood by him through thick and thin, despite what Habibullah says. Jinnah told Ahsan, his naval ADC, in Fatima Jinnah’s presence at the Amir of Bahawalpur’s palace, in Malir:

“Nobody had faith in me, everyone thought I was mad — except Miss Jinnah”. He then paused and added, “But, of course, if she hadn’t believed in me all along she would not be sitting here now.”

Excerpted with permission from In Quest of Jinnah: Diary, Notes, and Correspondence of Hector Bolitho Edited by Sharif al Mujahid Oxford University Press Plot # 38, Sector 15, Korangi Industrial Area, Karachi Tel: 111-693-673 ouppak@theoffice.net www.oup.com.pk ISBN 978-0-19-597901-5 221pp. Rs495

Prof Sharif al Mujahid, a scholar of the Pakistan Movement and the Quaid-i-Azam, is Distinguished National Professor, Higher Education Commission, Pakistan. His other books include Ideology of Pakistan and Quaid-i-Azam and His Times: A Compendium.

Quaid-i-Azam Jinnah and Javid Iqbal

The Quaid and I’

By Shehar Bano Khan

Dawn

Mr Javid Iqbal

It was in the summer of 1936 that Allama Mohammad Iqbal asked his 12-year-old son Javid to have a word with him. He was told by his father to keep his autograph book ready as a very important person was coming to visit them. Javid took one look at his father’s expression to realise that the visitor must be someone very special to have made him think of imprinting the guest’s signature on his son’s autograph book.

“I asked Abba Jan who it was. His only reply was, musalmanon kay leader a rahay hain (leader of the Muslims is coming),” grants Justice (retd) Javid Iqbal, son of Allama Mohammad Iqbal. “It was then I thought to myself that my father must respect this person very much. He knew I kept an autograph book but had never asked me specifically to take down anyone’s autograph. I really didn’t know what to say and couldn’t probe any further.”

With his autograph book in one hand, the 12-year-old Javid Iqbal rushed into the drawing room of his home, Javid Manzil, at 4pm on Allama Iqbal Road in Lahore to see the person who merited signature on his autograph book. He stopped in his tracks, unable to hide his surprise.

The guest dressed in a cream-coloured, silk suit, seated beside his sister in a white sari, was the omnipresent Mr Mohammad Ali Jinnah — the man he had been brought up or rather ‘conditioned’, as Mr Javid Iqbal puts it, to idolise. “I could barely conceal my surprise. I was face to face with the one man whom my father believed could change the fate of the Muslims of India. I don’t recall the colour of his tie but can vividly remember staring at his dual-coloured brown and white shoes. It was very fashionable to wear shoes with two colours and among other attributes Jinnah was always partial to impeccable fashion awareness,” says Mr Javid Iqbal amusingly.

Mr Jinnah took out a pen from his pocket and after signing asked the young boy if he too wrote poetry. “I answered, no sir. His next question came like a cross examiner. He asked me what I was going to do when I grew up. I stood there tongue tied, not knowing what to say.”

The young boy’s silence prompted Mohammad Ali Jinnah to turn towards Allama Iqbal. “He said laughingly that ‘the boy doesn’t answer’. I remember my father replying that ‘he won’t answer and is waiting for you to tell him what to do’,” says Mr Javid Iqbal.

Years later, when Javid Iqbal took up Master’s in English Literature, he wrote two articles in the daily English newspaper, Dawn, in 1946, translating his fascination for the leader of the Muslims by ascribing to Mr Jinnah Johnson’s concept of the ‘over man’ in them. “I was also studying Islamic philosophy and imagined Jinnah to be the ‘perfect man’, the ‘unique man’ and Nietzsche’s ‘superman’. I compared all the qualities those characters had and put them on the scale next to Mr Jinnah. His side would always turn heavier because I believed that he was much higher than all of them put together,” chuckles Mr Javid Iqbal while rationalising his admiration for Mr Jinnah.

The admiration did not go unnoticed. A few days after the articles’ publication, Javid Iqbal received a letter from Mr Matloobul Hassan, Mr Jinnah’s secretary, to inform him that the Quaid-i-Azam had read and appreciated them.

The next time Javid Iqbal saw Mr Jinnah was on September 11, 1948 to participate in his funeral. “I was at the Karachi Gymkhana when news of his death came. Lights were switched off and suddenly the entire club was plunged into darkness,” recalls Javid Iqbal.

Quaid-i-Azam Jinnah: The other side of Jinnah

Reviewed by Ashfak Bokhari

Dawn

Once Jinnah had himself frowned upon the efforts by some zealots to deify his person and told Ispahani: ‘I am an ordinary person, full of sin’.

TO most of us Mohammad Ali Jinnah is the Quaid-i-Azam. We have been tutored to look at him as the most revered icon of our country’s short history, which he is, but also as a paragon of virtue and someone not prone to faults that ordinary mortals usually suffer from.

That he could be as much a human being as anybody else with certain weaknesses has been difficult to swallow for the establishment and hence not allowed to be publicly projected. That was one reason why Stanley Wolpert’s biography of him, rated the best so far, had to suffer a ban in 1980s during the Zia regime.

That taboo seems to have been broken in a subtle way by this volume titled In Quest of Jinnah. It is a collection of a myriad of anecdotes and opinions, both amusing and provocative, most of which tend to present the other side of the Quaid’s person — the human side. And it falls perfectly in the scheme of things that nowhere in the book Jinnah has been addressed as the Quaid-i-Azam. Jinnah remains Jinnah, even in the introduction. Once Jinnah had himself frowned upon the efforts by some zealots to deify his person and told Ispahani: ‘I am an ordinary person, full of sin’.

This project became possible because of a changed environment, freer media and a gradual shift in Pakistani society towards glasnost and rationalism. Credit goes to its editor Sharif al Mujahid, who, although in possession of Hector Bolitho’s papers since 1984, waited for what he calls ‘arrival of a fair weather’ to get them published. Bolitho, one may recall, was commissioned by the government of Pakistan to write the first biography of Jinnah (Jinnah: Creator of Pakistan, 1954). He was an Auckland-born British journalist, novelist and historian and by the time he took this task he had already authored some 46 books. That he was a difficult person to deal with, had a colonial mindset and harboured contempt towards Pakistanis is another story. Ms Fatima Jinnah didn’t like his writing the biography of her brother.

The book consists of papers left behind by Bolitho after the biography project was over. These included the original manuscript, its expunged passages, correspondence between him and the then principal information officer Majeed Malik over what was to be deleted, retained or changed, the author’s confidential diary and notes relating to the period November 1951 to May 1953, conversations with important figures regarding their opinion of Jinnah and contemporary reviews of the biography. The notes were made by the author during his search for information about the father of the nation but they could not be used for certain reasons. The papers have been published in the form of a book because they constitute a rare treasure of oral history about the Quaid and need to be preserved. The book reveals that a good number of Bolitho’s respondents considered Jinnah arrogant, proud and aloof but not really rude. When he was really rude, he meant to send out a message loud and clear. For instance, while attending a luncheon hosted by the Governor of Bombay Lord Willington, he noted that the governor’s wife was trying to play smart with Mrs Jinnah who was dressed very daringly with a low neckline and all. Lady Willington asked an ADC to bring a shawl for Mrs Jinnah ‘for she must be feeling cold’. Jinnah rose in anger from the table and said that if his wife felt cold she would ask for a wrap herself. Then he stormed out of the party and never went to the Government House again.

The Aga Khan, himself an aristocrat, considered Jinnah ‘instinctively and essentially an aristocrat.’ The fact remains that for most of his life Jinnah had lived in fabulous, spacious, high-walled houses with tidy gardens. In 1916, when Jinnah arrived in Lucknow to preside over an important meeting of the Muslim League, the party secretary saw him stepping off the train wearing an English suit, an English hat and a malacca stick. He told Jinnah that he could not possibly face the crowd in such apparel. He kept Jinnah waiting while he hurried to the market and brought a tarbush for him to wear.

A note dated January 5, 1952 quotes Jinnah’s naval ADC Mazhar Ahmed as saying that the usual Hindu criticism of Jinnah has been that he was ruthless, intolerant and not a good Muslim. Ahmed says he soon learnt that this was not true: ‘Jinnah did not say his prayers, but I never saw him drink socially. All I ever saw him drink was one double whisky at night; I believe that his doctor ordered this.’

Sir Robert Francis Mudie, the former governor of Sindh and Punjab, told Bolitho in a letter that ‘Jinnah was cold — at least that is the impression he gave — but he never found him harsh. He was, of course, hard.’ His impression of Jinnah was that he was vain, arrogant, cold though he always found him very pleasant socially. Mudie, referring to ‘attempts to trap Jinnah into some difficult position’ says, ‘no man who had not the iron control of himself that Jinnah had could have done what he did. But it does not follow that he was really cold… there was another side to Jinnah’s character than that generally presented.’

In Quest of Jinnah: Dairy, notes, and correspondence of Hector Bolitho Edited by Sharif al Mujahid Oxford University Press, Karachi ISBN 978-0-19-597901-5 221pp. Rs495

Quaid-i-Azam Jinnah: on World Affairs

October 28, 2007

Sincerely,

Reviewed by Muhammad Ali Siddiqi

Dawn

JINNAH’s political career spanned a cataclysmic era not just for South Asia but for the world. He saw World War I, the inter-war period, the rise of fascism in Europe and Japan, World War II and its aftermath that included the epic struggle of the people of South Asia for freedom. As the recognised leader of the subcontinent’s Muslims, his concerns were confined not to the Muslims of South Asia but Muslims worldwide. This aspect of his political career has not received due attention for the obvious reason that the focus of scholars has been on his struggle for Pakistan.

That explains why Z.H. Zaidi’s Jinnah Papers and W. Ahmad’s The Nation’s Voice dwell largely on those aspects of Jinnah’s speeches, statements, press conferences, interviews and letters which mostly relate to the constitutional and political battles he waged for carving out a sovereign Muslim state in South Asia. The utility of the book under review, however, is that it focuses solely on the Quaid’s views on world affairs.

A glance through the book, compiled with painstaking efforts by Prof Mehrunnisa Ali, reveals the stunning variety of international issues on which Jinnah articulated his position, first as the undisputed leader of the Muslims of South Asia and later as Pakistan’s head of state.

The letters he wrote range from protests on the condition of Indians in South Africa, Kenya and Congo to ‘Prussian militarism’, Turkey and the Caliphate issue, the Palestinian question in its various phases, leading finally to its partition, the Indonesian people’s struggle for freedom, the situation in Malaya, Egypt’s fight for full statehood, the French atrocities in post-war Syria, the use of Indian Muslim troops against Islamic countries, the British-Russian occupation of Iran, his cautious attitude toward Russia during the war and a host of other issues which he thought would affect Pakistan when it would finally emerge on the world map.

The variety of statesman and leaders he corresponded with is amazing both before and after independence. They included Palestinian leader Amin al-Hussaini, Ahmad Sukarno, Attlee, Chiang Kai-shek Churchill, Harold Macmillan, Ibne Saud, Nihas Pasha, President Truman and others. These letters were not merely of a formal nature, say, thanking world leaders who greeted him when Pakistan came into being and he became governor general; the greater part of his letters, statements, telegrams and the interviews he gave to a variety of foreign journalists before and after partition relates to issues vital to Pakistan’s security. In some cases the letters touched upon Pakistan’s defence problems even when it had not yet emerged on the world map.

Going by the contents of the letters and their sheer numbers, one is overwhelmed by the fact that this task should have been undertaken by a man who was so close to death. No one in that state of health could perhaps have undertaken the task he did without having the kind of will-power Jinnah possessed. The documents, arranged in chronological order, show on the one hand the determined attempts that Congres leaders, especially Nehru, made with full support from Mountbatten to destroy Pakistan at its very inception and, on the other, the moves Jinnah made to frustrate those conspiracies.

Visualise this scenario: the Maharajah of Kashmir is conspiring with New Delhi with a view to managing the Muslim-majority state’s accession to India, Afghanistan votes against Pakistan for a UN membership and expresses reservations about the NWFP becoming part of Pakistan, Radcliffe and Mountbatten steal Ferozpur from Pakistan, New Delhi refuses to abide by the terms of the transfer of power agreement and declines to hand over Pakistan’s share of ordnance to it, India is massing troops on Junagadh’s borders and preparing for military action in Kashmir, the Khan of Kalat dithers over accession to Pakistan, Burma expresses concern over Pakistan’s possible claim to a piece of territory adjacent to East Pakistan, while millions of refugees pour into the country as religious frenzy engulfs the subcontinent. It was then that Jinnah, his health falling, proved himself to be a man of indomitable courage and energy, for without the presence of this ‘giant’ — Beverly Nichols’s word — it is doubtful Pakistan would have survived the conspiracies launched by its enemies to destroy the newly created state in the first few weeks or months of independence.

The book amply shows that saving Pakistan from collapse during the 13 months that he lived after 1947, building the new state’s administrative infrastructure and placing Pakistan on the world’s diplomatic map constituted as great an achievement on his part as that of creating Pakistan. This aspect of Jinnah’s life has not received the attention it deserves.

Prof Mehrunnisa Ali, who compiled and edited the 521 documents, and Dr Syed Jaffer Ahmed, Director of the Pakistan Study Centre of the University of Karachi, deserve compliments for making a valuable contribution to the Jinnah studies by publishing this book.

________________________________________ Jinnah on World Affairs (Select documents: 1908-1948) Edited by Mehrunnisa Ali Pakistan Study Centre, University of Karachi ISBN 969-8791-11-6 728pp. Rs800

Quaid-i-Azam Jinnah: on World Affairs II

October 28, 2007

EXCERPT: Jinnah’s correspondence

Dawn

Quaid-i-Azam Jinnah

Quaid-i-Azam Jinnah

Quaid-i-Azam Jinnah

Quaid-i-Azam Jinnah

Quaid-i-Azam Jinnah

Quaid-i-Azam Jinnah

The work brings to light Quaid-i-Azam’s perspectives on the issues confronting the world in general and India and Indian Muslims in particular, reflecting the convictions he held and the principles he followed and fought for.

Memorandum presented by the All-India Muslim League delegation led by M. A. Jinnah to British Prime Minister Lloyd George expressing the Indian Muslims’ concern over the occupation of Turkish territories and the position of Turkish Sultan, August 27, 1919.

Sir, We the undersigned Members of the All-India Muslim League Deputation, beg to place before you the following representation on behalf of the Musalmans of India.

Many memorials and representations from various bodies have already been sent to you, we will not therefore so far as possible, repeat the same grounds but confine ourselves to the feelings and sentiments of Muslims in India, regarding the future of the Ottoman Empire.

For generations past the Muslims of India generally have recognised the Khilafat of the House of Osman and Constantinople as Darul-Islam and Khilafat (the seat of Islam and the Khalifa). For many centuries the Sultan of Turkey has been recognised as the Servant of the Holy Places of Islam and their custodian by all the Muslims of the world, including the Shareef of Mecca. Whenever Turkey has been in trouble a reaction of it has been felt in India, and the Muslims have done all to help the Sultan of Turkey as the head of Islam to maintain his spiritual and temporal honour and position. More than once the Government of India itself encouraged the Muslims in that sympathy. The greater the danger for Turkey the more concerned Muslims have felt. So much so that in modern times during the Balkan Wars, Muslims of India organised the Red Crescent fund for Turkey at a very great cost...

We have the honour to be Sir, Your most obedient servents, M. A. Jinnah, Hasan Imam, E.M. Bhurgari, Yaqub Hasan

Press statement of M. A. Jinnah condemning brutality committed by De Gaulle and his associates against Muslims in Algeria, Syria and Lebanon and calling for the withdrawal of French, British and other foreign forces from the areas, June 3, 1945.

I am glad that Great Britain and America have intervened and given an ultimatum to General De Gaulle to ceasefire and withdraw the troops to their barracks. But this is not enough, although the intervention might have been earlier and more timely and in that case the loss of life and property would have been saved. France must be asked to withdraw completely and so must Britain and other foreign forces from Syria. According to the solemn principles for which this war has been fought, negotiations and understanding may be brought about between Syria and Lebanon and other powers on a footing of equality and freedom. If might is going to be right, then this war is fought for nothing and millions have died in vain. It seems that General De Gaulle and his associates have learnt nothing although not long ago France was lying prostrate with gaping wounds under the Nazi regime for nearly four years and in spite of its boasted motto of Equality, Fraternity and Liberty, has not yet dropped the vice of imperialistic republic and lust to exploit other countries and other people, and forgotten their own Christian Commandment ‘Do unto others what you would have done to you.’

On behalf of the Musalmans of India, I wholeheartedly and deeply sympathise with the people of Syria and Lebanon and those who have fallen and have suffered for their nations.

Extracts from M. A. Jinnah’s speech at a public meeting in Bombay denouncing the British and American policy of allowing the entry of 1,000,000 Jews into Palestine in violation of the pledges given to the Palestinian Arabs, November 8, 1945.

‘We, Mussalmans of India, are one with the Arab world and the Arabs all over the world on this issue. It is not a question of national home for Jews in Palestine. It is a question of Jews re-conquering Palestine, which they had lost 2,000 years ago, with the help of British bayonets and American money.

I have no enmity against Jews I know they were treated very badly in some parts of civilised Europe. But why should Palestine be dumped with such a large number of Jews? Why should the Arabs be given a threat which will wipe them out of Palestine? If the Jews want to reconquer Palestine, let them face the Arabs without British or American help.’

Mr Jinnah said, ‘Here comes the President of a great country thinking entirely of Jewry and the interest of Jews. President Truman had the effrontery to put pressure on the British Government to allow 1,000,000 Jews into Palestine, while he has agreed after a long period of vacillations to allow only 100 Indians to migrate in United States of America.’

When a section of the audience shouted ‘shame, shame’, Mr Jinnah turned round and exclaimed ‘It is not shame, it is criminal. There is no justice, no principle for fair play. It is monstrous and criminal.’

Why does not President Truman take 1,000,000 Jews in the United States, asked Mr Jinnah ‘why not send these Jews to Canada or Australia, if they want to treat them with charity and generosity? The reason is that the Jews do not want a national home in Palestine. What they want is to reconquer Palestine which they lost 2,000 years ago, with the help of British bayonets and American money.’

Letter from Pethick-Lawrence to Wavell concerning the American requirements for military bases in British-controlled territory particularly at Karachi and Calcutta, December 14, 1945.

Private and top secret India Office, My dear Wavell,

I think I should let you know for your personal information that an approach has recently been made to us by the United States Secretary of State for assistance in obtaining American requirements regarding military bases in British and other territory. The approach primarily concerns various islands in the Pacific some of which are our own or under Empire mandate and other[s] of which the sovereignty is disputed between us and the American. It also concerns Iceland and the Portuguese Atlantic Islands, but in addition they have included a request that the United Kingdom should keep herself or get under United Kingdom control two existing bases in India, one at Karachi and the other outside Calcutta.

The Americans consider that these two bases are strategically important and apparently contemplate concluding arrangements in advance of the establishment of an International system of security under the United Nations Charter, though all bases acquired would be available to the Security Council on its call.

There are grave objections both political and military to any action taken now which would tend to prejudice the establishment or success of the World Organisation and we have expressed our apprehensions to the Americans on that score and are awaiting their reply.

Extracts from the statement made by the Afghan Representative before the UN General Assembly on the question of Pakistan’s admission to the United Nations, September 30, 1947.

Mr Hosayn Aziz (Afghanistan): Afghanistan heartily shares in the rejoicing of the peoples of Pakistan in their freedom. We have profound respect for Pakistan. May Pakistan prosper.

The Afghanistan delegation does not wish to oppose the membership of Pakistan in this great Organisation, but it is with the deepest regret that we are unable at this time to vote for Pakistan. This unhappy circumstance is due to the fact that we cannot recognise the North-West Frontier as part of Pakistan so long as the people of the North-West Frontier have not been given an opportunity free from any kind of influence and I repeat, free from any kind of influence to determine for themselves whether they wish to be independent or to become a part of Pakistan.

The reasons which compel our present action will be given in a statement which I shall make at a later date to the General Assembly.

As the position of my delegation is different with respect to Yemen and to Pakistan, I propose that the application of each be voted upon separately.

M. A. Jinnah’s letter to Attlee regarding the Congres leaders’ efforts to bring about the collapse of Pakistan, October 1, 1947.

Dear Mr Attlee,

Many thanks for your letter of September 25 which I received yesterday, and I am extremely grateful to you for your sympathy and good wishes. Let me assure you that the Dominion of Pakistan has no other objective but they fervently hope and pray that they may be allowed to live their lives in security and peace, and build up the new Dominion, although we are starting from scratch, in a manner which will lead to the prosperity and the happiness of all the inhabitants of Pakistan irrespective of the question of caste, creed or colour. But I regret to have to say that every effort is being made to put difficulties in our way by our enemies in order to paralyse or cripple our State and bring about its collapse. It is the case of the wolf and the lamb. I know that it may be a foolish dream and a futile objective of those who are pursuing this policy of disrupting Pakistan, and I also feel that ultimately it is impossible to break Pakistan, but if things are allowed to go on as they are and the situation is not immediately taken in hand, the results we are now witnessing will pale into insignificance…

Yours sincerely, M. A. Jinnah Right Honourable Mr Clement Attlee, Prime Minister, 10 Downing Street, Whitehall, London.

Letter from M. A. Jinnah to Nizam of Hyderabad thanking for his donation, 15 October 1947.

Your Exalted Highness,

Many thanks for your telegram dated October 11. I was very pleased indeed that you have been good enough to send another handsome donation of two lakhs maintaining equality between Hindustan and Pakistan.

Your Exalted Highness knows that the resources of the Dominion of India are very vast whereas Pakistan is starting from scratch and is certainly poorer in finance and economic resources. Besides Pakistan has a special claim on Hyderabad as after all Your Exalted Highness is a Muslim Ruler and Muslims therefore naturally expect more from Hyderabad having regard to your historic position. It seems that you are trying to hold the scales even without due regard and consideration to the special factors which constitute a strong tie between you and Musalmans particularly those of Pakistan which now stands as an independent sovereign State of great magnitude and power among the nations of the world. Don’t you therefore think that this meticulous holding of scales so strictly even is calculated to proclaim your neutrality whereas there are special ties and affinities which exist between Your Exalted Highness and the Muslims. Please do not think that I am trying to get more money. God is great, and we shall go through this dire calamity which has overtaken us. But I have drawn your attention to the position taken up by you which seems to me somewhat unnatural.

Thanking you again for your generous donation.

Yours sincerely, M. A. Jinnah His Exalted Highness Nawab Sir Mir Usman Ali Khan, Bahadur, GCSI, GBE Nizam of Hyderabad & Berar.

M.A.H. Ispahani’s letter to M. A. Jinnah concerning his meeting with the US President and Mir Laiq Ali’s negotiations with US officials, October 15, 1947.

My dear Quaid-i-Azam,

In continuation of my letter of yesterday, I have to inform you that the steering of the Cadillac cannot be changed. As for the colour, the factory at Detroit has been contacted telephonically and if the painting has not been finished, the change will be effected.

The Secretary of our Delegation to the United Nations sends to the Foreign Office summaries generally, and also full reports on questions in which we are interested or we figure.

Sir Zafrullah has made a big hit over the Palestine case and has put Pakistan in the front row. He is wanted back, to represent Pakistan before the Assets and Liabilities Tribunal. He shall have to leave long before the UN session ends. His work has just begun. We shall miss his company and his guidance. We are very short staffed both in the UN and in Washington. Unless proper provision is made soon for Washington and a proper secretariat is sent out with the next delegation, our work cannot but suffer. One Secretary is grossly inadequate.

Everyone is working himself to a standstill only to find that large portion remains still unfinished.

The newspapers are not flashing for the last four days any ‘killing’ news from East and West Pakistan and Delhi. Does silence mean good news? When I saw the President, I utilised my 12 minutes fully in giving him a picture of Pakistan. He wanted it. I told him how anxious we were to balance our economy, to industrialise our country, to improve our health and education and to raise the standard of living. He replied very sympathetically saying that it was the aim and desire of the United States to render every assistance possible to countries who had noble aims like ours. The negotiations for which Laik Ali has come have advanced somewhat. They will, I hope, proceed further when he meets Mr Clayton of the Finance Section of the State Department. We are hopeful of results.

With kind regards, Very sincerely yours, HASSAN

Letter from M. A. Jinnah to M.A.H. Ispahani about Mir Laiq Ali’s activities abroad and refugee relief fund, October 22, 1947.

My dear Hassan,

I have received your letter of October 14, and two letters of the 15th and thank you very much for them.

With reference to your letter of the 14th, I do not mind the leftdrive, but please try as to the colour and get me the sample I have sent you, namely the picture of the Cadillac 60 Special.

I note that you are pursuing your efforts about the aeroplane and Lincoln.

I was really very happy to hear from you, although I had very good reports of the way in which our delegation not only acquitted itself, but distinguished itself

I have noted your difficulties about the staff, and I can quite understand how hard you must all be pressed, but I hope that you do realise that we are starting from scratch. I will, however, forward your request to the Foreign Office.

I am very glad that you are making effort to help us in our refugee relief fund. That is an enormous problem and we need all the help that is possible for us to get.

As regards Zafrullah, we do not mean that he should leave his work so long as it is necessary for him to stay there, and I think he has already been informed to that effect, but naturally we are very short here of capable men, and especially of his calibre, and every now and then our eyes naturally turn to him for various problems that we have to solve.

With regard to the situation in India, there is a lull but we are not out of the woods yet.

I have noted what you say about Laik Ali. He is keeping us in touch with his activities.

I was very pleased indeed to read your speech and the reply of Truman, when you presented your credentials to him as the Ambassador of Pakistan. So far so good, but the real thing is how America will, in fact, react for the benefit and the mutual advantage of both.

Thanking you, Yours sincerely, M. A. JINNAH

Excerpted with permission from Jinnah on World Affairs (Select Documents: 1908-1948) Edited by Mehrunnisa Ali Pakistan Study Centre, University of Karachi, Karachi ISBN 969-8791-11-6 728pp. Rs800

Mehrunnisa Ali, a professor of Political Science at the University of Karachi, has contributed numerous research papers to national and international journals and is the author of Politics of Federalism In Pakistan, which was published in 1996.