[Reader-list] Jaswant’s Jinnah -view across the border

[Ram Prasad Sharma]

Dear Asad & Kshamendra,

I am writing my first post in discussion, so be kind enough to excuse if I
make mistakes and point them out in a gentle manner. It's a request.

The two people whose legacy in India is present in almost every stretch of
life are Nehru & Indira. Gandhi did try to help, but only now is he coming
back (through his talisman) in the idea of 'inclusive' growth and 'pro-poor'
politics. As for Jinnah, one can't forget the Direct Action Day he announced
on 16th August 1946, which led to riots and which also laid the foundations
of what can be termed the hostility in India and Pakistan, at least among
the elites.

Gandhi, lost a lot of sympathy and following when he pressurized the Indian
govt. to give Rs. 100 million (hope that's correct), to Pakistan. Which is
why when Godse killed him and the trial of Godse was going on, people were
actually having sympathies (and not just the RSS members) with him. The
reason is simple. Gandhi was anarchic, pro-village and believed in
decentralized authority. Godse wanted order, centralization and a base of
self-interest upon which the nation would be based. Godse's only mission was
death of Gandhi, and the day he achieved it, he had nothing more in his life
to fulfill. Giving a life-term to him would have left him mentally
vulnerable in his own mind, so he wanted death sentence, which he got.

What however we forget, is that Patel & Nehru based their foreign policy
upon the values which made Godse kill Gandhi. Gandhi never agreed with
Nehru, but had faith in him and so decided not to protest against all moves
by the then Indian govt. which indulged in this.  Nehru, on the other hand,
by the last few months, had been ignoring Gandhi's comments. Gandhi had
already lost most of respect from those who suffered during riots, and those
who migrated from the West & the East.

So, in my words, Jinnah & Nehru ensured that in a way, the states and the
elites would never be able to trust each other very much, and would instead
be actively plotting against each other. And the state also becomes an
important mechanism to ensure that the people of both states are asked to be
suspicious of each other, in very implicit ways or sometimes even explicit.

And today, the legacy we do follow in a sense, is the Gandhi-Nehru dynasty
(not Mahatma Gandhi). Nehru broadly gave us the legacy of democracy, poor
education levels, trickle-down effect (the most useless term in Indian
scenario which still exists today), dams (a disaster) and in some measure
(not completely though) dynastic politics. Indira Gandhi (the Gandhi factor)
brought the legacies of mass corruption (at all levels), dictatorial
politics (with only one family or a set of people having the power. Modi,
Raman Singh, Shivraj & Advani in one way or the other are dictatorial, if
not dictators completely. The only reason BJP seems to be democratic is that
they have too many factions. Where they don't, as in Gujarat, it's a
dictatorial kind of rule), Emergency, a highly atrocious family-planning
programme (the gift of Emergency), licence-raj (another disaster) and so on.


Hence, the past does have an impact on the present. If the country had never
been partitioned, perhaps Gandhi (& Jinnah's federal notions, supposing they
were there) would have come to light & Nehru would never have been in
complete control. And who knows, the entire country population would have
been members of the Congress (as Gandhi wanted), rather than India being a
multi-party democracy. (multiple factions notwithstanding) And probably, the
Al-Qaeda may never have come into existence.

Regards

Ram