Tuesday, January 26, 2010

Jaswant Singh's Book Review Page 341-353

Book Reference: Page 341 – 353 Simla Conference of June 1945

Author’s Views: Page 341:  It came to light later that Jinnah had expressed it as a grievance Gandhi’s withdrawal from the conference.

Comments: Compare (from page 313) when Gandhi, after obtaining Jinnah’s concurrence, went to meet him in Bombay on 9 September 1944 at his residence. At the very beginning Jinnah questioned the representative capacity of Gandhi. Where is the grievance now (in 1945) for Jinnah for Gandhi’s non-participation in the Simla Conference, when Gandhi’s status has not changed politically? As the author narrates from the interview of Gandhi with Preston Grover, Gandhi had said that if Jinnah had wanted, he could take him there? Did that happen? Is there any record to show that Jinnah wrote / spoke to Gandhi to change his stand and attend the Conference? What is the point in projecting the so-called grievance? 

Page 343: The author narrates that the Viceroy asked all the delegates representing varied interests to hand over a list of persons they would like to be included in the national government. Jinnah posed a lot of conditions. When the Viceroy asked him (Jinnah) whether the League would submit the list of names or not, Jinnah answered that he was there only in his individual capacity. He wanted the Viceroy’s proposal in writing to place before the Working Committee of the League.

Comments: All along Jinnah had been proclaiming that he was the undisputed and sole spokesman for the League. Here he says he has come on his individual capacity. Nevertheless, in his reply to Viceroy, he goes back to what happened during Lord Linlithgow’s time (page 344). Linlithgow’s alternative proposal accepted that the panel of names from the Muslim League would be based on the discussion of the Leader of the party and Viceroy and not on the formal panel of names submitted by the party! He concludes his letter regretting his inability (to forward the names), as desired by the Executive Committee of the League, as the Viceroy could not give the assurance that all the Muslim Members of the proposed Executive Council will be selected from the Muslim League only. The points to ponder are:
1. The Viceroy had clarified during his face-to-face talk that he can give no such assurance.


2. Jinnah quotes Linlithgow’s acceptance that the list will be based what the Viceroy and the leader of the Party (himself) decide and not what the party sends formally. (The leader of the party wields more authority than the Committee)

3. He regrets his inability to send the list of names as desired by the Executive Committee of the League. (Here the Committee wields more authority)

Now the reader can come to his own conclusion as to who was responsible for the failure of Simla Conference, even though the Viceroy was gracious enough to apportion the blame on himself

Page 346: Jinnah, who earlier proclaimed that the Muslim League was the champion and protector of all minorities and the Congress did not even represent all Hindus, says in a statement that the representatives of all minorities have the same goal as and ideology of a united India as that of Congress and they are knitted closely to Hindu society. The root cause of the failure was doubtless Jinnah’s intransigence about Muslim representation and equality of the Muslim vote with all others combined.


Comments: Elsewhere in many places in the book the author has blamed Congress and its leaders for delaying the attainment of colonial status, freedom, forming of provisional government etc. How Jinnah played the minorities card is amply explained by the author himself in this page. Jinnah’s demand that League alone would nominate any Muslim member to the Council, in spite of the fact that in only Assam and Sindh had League ministries proves another fact that Jinnah had made up his mind for the partition of India as the price for freedom for the subcontinent. If it has to be delayed indefinitely it mattered nothing to him. The analysis of Dr. Jayakar is very apt. (Page 346)

Page 352: On the announcement of fresh elections in late 1945, the author states that the Congress lost another opportunity by its President not meeting or writing to the Viceroy their wish to return to the office in the provinces from where they were dismissed. The author further concludes that the Viceroy would not have found it easy to refuse; rather he would have welcomed it.


Comments: Yes! If they were today’s politicians they would have even begged the Viceroy . But the principles exhibited by the Congress Party of those days precluded any such effort by its leadership. Also what would have the League done. They would have decried the Congress as hankering after power and with a supportive press in England brought the image of the Congress down. How the author has come to the conclusion that the Viceroy would have welcomed such a request has not been substantiated.

(However, what the results of the elections demonstrated, is vividly described by the author in pages 354 and 355. In a nutshell, their failure added further resolve for the League’s demand for Pakistan as they found to their dismay, in a democratic undivided India, they will find themselves only in opposition irrespective of reservations)


No comments: