Jaswant Singh's Book Review Page 99

Book Reference: Page 99 Line 8 to 12

Author’s Views: The Author says that Jinnah had kept the Indian political forces together upto and until 1920. He was successful in doing so. Because of Gandhi’s civil disobedience call and Gandhi’s methodology, the pressure that Jinnah could exert on the government dissipated resulting in the British Raj remaining in India till 1947. The learned author implies that, had Gandhi not been there and not pursued his program of non co-operation, Jinnah would have brought freedom for India much earlier.

(Here again I would suggest that the reader goes through the original book  , where the author has concluded to the  above effect)

Comments: The question which comes to mind are : What were the standing of various political forces in India upto and until 1920 which the author claims that Jinnah kept together to exert force on the British Government? What were the achievements gained from the British vis-à-vis the pressures exerted by Jinnah? Were there any radical changes to Montford Report because of Jinnah? To conclude that Gandhi’s methodology resulted in the delay of attaining freedom from British Rule by more than three decades, is patently  illogical.

 It is but natural for the author to glorify Jinnah, because he is basically writing a book on him. No qualms on that. But to condemn Gandhi and his methodology for the delay in attaining independence is totally unjustified.

Here are the other facts.

Calcutta September 7, 1920 Jinnah said, " there is no other course open to the people except to inaugurate the policy of non co-operation, though not necessarily of Mr. Gandhi."  What was Jinnah's alternate plan ? Can the author throw some light on it?

Dec 26, 1920 in the Nagpur Congress, Gandhi proposed the goal of the Congress was the attainment of Swaraj within the British Empire if possible and without it if necessary. Jinnah wanted the goal of attaining Swaraj within the British Empire only. Jinnah said India would never get her independence without blood shed. He wanted Gandhi to cry a halt to the call of Swaraj.

The reason is: Jinnah was getting more and more flustered by the growing mass popularity of Gandhi among all sections of the people of India. He wanted to be the head of the other political centre. As later events show, his prophesy that India would not get her independence without bloodshed proved false, though partition advocated and achieved by Mr. Jinnah did result in enormous bloodshed and wanton destruction of property in the process of creation of Pakistan and its aftermath. Could it be that Mr. Jinnah predicted that independence would not come without partition and the attended bloodshed?