Discussion on Jaswant Singh's book on Jinnah

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 21 Aug 2009 03:53

One of the Paki elites shikwa is that Jinnah was sidelined. Its a core myth of their nation view. So when the so called Hindu party leader repudiates this it weakens the hold.

RajeshA · Post by **RajeshA** » 21 Aug 2009 04:35

brihaspati ji,

I am a bit out of my waters, as it has to do with history, so bear with me.

Here is something out of Wikigyan.

His father, Poonja Jinnahbhai (1857–1901), was a prosperous Gujarati merchant who had moved to Sindh from Kathiawar, Gujarat before Jinnah's birth. His mother was Mithibai Jinnahbhai. His grandfather was Poonja Gokuldas Meghji, a Hindu Bhatia Rajput from Paneli village in Gondal state in Kathiawar. Jinnah's ancestors were Hindu Rajput that converted to Islam. Jinnah's family belonged to the Ismaili Khoja branch of Shi'a Islam, though Jinnah may have converted to Twelver Shi'a Islam.

In 1918, Jinnah married his second wife Rattanbai Petit ("Ruttie"), twenty-four years his junior. She was the fashionable young daughter of his personal friend Sir Dinshaw Petit, of an elite Parsi family of Mumbai. Unexpectedly there was great opposition to the marriage from Rattanbai's family and Parsi society, as well as orthodox Muslim leaders. Rattanbai defied her family and nominally converted to Islam, adopting (though never using) the name Maryam Jinnah, resulting in a permanent estrangement from her family and Parsi society. The couple resided in Mumbai, and frequently travelled across India and Europe. In 1919 she bore Jinnah his only child, daughter Dina Jinnah.

IMVHO, Jinnah is a tool to break the hold of the Mullah over the Muslims. Jinnah was a whiskey drinking Shia. No Mullahs would consider him one of their own. But this whiskey-drinking Shi'a still has a huge following and millions of admirers in Pakistan. His relevance to Pakistan, is that he reminds the Pakistanis that they are nominal Muslim of the Indian subcontinent but not necessarily Islamists. In India Jinnah is the epitome of Islam, but in Pakistan he is the epitome of a liberal outlook.

By adopting Jinnah, Jaswant is making him again relevant in a region, where he too is slowly becoming simply a picture on the wall. He is strengthening the Jinnah faction against the Islamist faction in Pakistan. He is telling the Jinnah faction that they are carrying the flag of a man, who is 'universally' acknowledged for his contributions. Raking up Jinnah makes fewer ripples in India than the impact it makes in Pakistan. The battle between Jinnah and Islamists is a battle to be fought in Pakistan, not in India.

Jaswant is telling Pakistanis that their hero is an Indian hero. He is putting the war between Jinnah and India to rest, thereby suggesting an end of war between Jinnah's children in Pakistan and India. Only if there is peace between India and Jinnah's children, can India take their side in a war between Jinnah's children and Islamists about to be waged even more fiercely. When it gets going would Jinnah's children side with those who consider Pakistan's hero as their hero, or would they side with those who would consider Jinnah an apostate serial-drinker and loathe him? By adopting Jinnah, Jaswant is nailing Jinnah's persona in the liberal Muslim corner, making it difficult for the Islamists to adopt him and to hijack him for their purposes. Any Muslim who has been marked as having a soft-corner for Hindus, cannot be adopted by Islamists as he becomes tainted good, so the only avenue that is left for the Islamists is to denigrate Jinnah, pissing off many in Pakistan who love him. This is a good psy-ops.

Secondly Jaswant is destroying the two-nation theory. He is saying that Jinnah opted for Pakistan not because he thought that Muslims were a different nation, but rather because he was worried that there would not be sufficient autonomy for Muslims in a very centralized state like India, and secondly Muslim League would never come to power by defeating INC. Jaswant is telling the Pakistanis that Muslim regions being autonomous regions in India was Jinnah's first option. The Two-Nation Theory was only second choice. With that Jaswant is telling the Pakis that the doors of being autonomously associated with India is still a possibility, possibly paving way for a split in Pakistan. This is a good psy-ops.

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 21 Aug 2009 04:39

JS appears to have supported this "sideline" theory, ins't it? He indirectly says that it was the Congress which failed to assure Jinnah of the status of Muslims under the "threat" of a "Hindu" raj? JS raises the question of pondering, why Jinnah had to move from being hailed as the symbol of Hindu-Muslim unity, post-holder of the Congress and ML both, and from there to Partition.

Can JS finally reverse the supposed "damage" by simply saying that Jinnah was sidelined then, but now he can be rehabilitated. But posthumous rehabilitation of which part of Jinnah? The apparently earlier part where Jinna was okay with staying within an Indian framework but which from the earliest part insisted on the Muslim right to lead its own "life" separate from the non-Muslim society? This remains the fundamental core issue of difficulty. When people try to prove the secularism/beyond religion/modernity of Jinnah they have to fall back on his personal habits and preferences in lifestyle. They cannot show any evidence of this in his public policy or in the policy of the group he gathered around in the ML. Any revival of that part of Jinnah, retains the fundamental problem before us. For any merger on such expectations retains the ultimate ambition of a two-nation - a separate entity that retains its rights of immunity from modernization and penetration by the Indic.

The divergence in personal lifestyle and public policy of Islamists are well known. IMO this is something that should have been brought forward. The divergence of public projection and the reality of their lives is something that has to be established. We cannot digest a militant ideology by reinforcing the status of its leader in its eyes, but by subtly and slowly discrediting that leader.

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 21 Aug 2009 04:44

RajeshAji,
Is there really a fight between "Jinnah's children" and "Islamists"? There was a little bit in the late 40's. But now? Isnt JS in a time warp here?

surinder · Post by **surinder** » 21 Aug 2009 05:31

Brihastpati,

You have said it most eloquently, let me restate some of it in my own words:

The desi mindset makes the mistake again and again that accomodationist approaches will reduce animosity. But the izlamiest mindset interprets these accomodations to be weakness. That is the essence of the matter. They understand the language of force, defeats & humiliations better than the language of detente, peace & accomodation.

Chinese have a national characteristic, they attempt to humiliate an opponent by showering them with contempt. That is their national language of power. Indian national psyche is to kill the other by accepting and assimilating like a Boa Constrictor. But India needs to recognize that this has limits. Assimilating must follow the most ruthless demonstration of power, not a second before.

Taking a leaf out of the chineese, JS should have heaped contempt on Jinnah, which in reality is what he deserves. Jinnah has been reported by those who have had the misfortune of knowing to be psychotic, cold, half-mad, unbending, and unfit for any compromise. Not to mention the sheer hypocriticalness of forming a fanatically mad nation, when he himself did not beleive in that ideology. Then on forming that nation on the platform of he was to declare in his foolish speech "let us cease to be musliams & hindoos ...". Not to mention he is singularly responsible for the carnival of blodshed ... 1-2 million dead, 20 million uprooted in 1947 alone.

I wonder if JS got to say the facts. In fact a book on Jinnah, unbashedly honest about him and descibing him in the most condescending terms would undermine the Pakis faith in themselves the most. For they are in continuous need for Indian approval. JS lost that chance, showing himself & his nation to be a fool.
Perhaps JS should have tried

surinder · Post by **surinder** » 21 Aug 2009 05:32

What is GDF? (the place the banned books are going to be discussed.) Where can I find the discussion?

sivabala · Post by **sivabala** » 21 Aug 2009 05:36

GDF:-General Discussion forum
Link
http://forums.bharat-rakshak.com/viewforum.php?f=24

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 21 Aug 2009 06:20

Has anyone actually read this book?

Muppalla · Post by **Muppalla** » 21 Aug 2009 08:04

kshirin wrote: I have started it but will be too busy to read it fast as I am engaged in another more interesting project. The style is ponderous but if he had not gone overboad to praise Jinnah and lump Patel in the same category as Panditji, he may not have been expelled. I just met a press wallah who had gone to his launch and was preening about it and defending JS' sacred right to free speech. Cannot object to that of course except that everyone is suddenly trotting out this line which makes it unoriginal and uninteresting. I liked very much the post of R Puri's article on another webpage and did you see Jug Suraiya's in TOI on this, made an excellent point that BJP lost a chance to press their point home on who was responsible for Partition.

I like his style and he writes paragraph after paragraph until one understands his point of view. It is never boring at all and I read his book " A Call to Honour: In Service of Emergent India ". He explained beautifully what is Hindutva and the word hinduism to that of Sanathana Dharma. He explained the partition at such a personal level in this book how his paternal side of folks are all in current India and his maternal side (nana etc.) are on the current sindh portion of Pakistan.

For a thinking person his new book may be a great message. Third and fourth generations are born since the partition and how can this be grasped by a common man. They will just think JS is becoming old and gone mad. This may be a project in vain if JS is thinking it as a project to do/achieve something chanakian.

pgbhat · Post by **pgbhat** » 21 Aug 2009 09:08

shiv wrote:Has anyone actually read this book?

Apparently Ambassador B. A Malik has.

We should reward Jaswant Singh

Former Indian foreign minister and a senior leader of the BJP has written a monumental book admiring the statesmanship and leadership qualities of Quaid-e-Azam Mohammad Ali Jinnah. By voicing the language of his conscience Singh has earned the expected ire of his party which promptly expelled him from its ranks .While taking stern action against one of its principal leaders the extremist party has lost and Jaswant Singh has won the moral high ground. Through his book he has tried to demolish the walls of hatred which have kept India and Pakistan at daggers drawn against each other for more than six decades.

Jaswant Singh deserves to be rewarded by the people and the government of Pakistan in a befitting manner for his glowing tribute to the founder of Pakistan. His effort may well change the complexion of South Asia’s distorted history by bringing facts to the knowledge of the hundreds of millions of misinformed people in this part of the world. What he has done is all the more remarkable given that he is not a Muslim himself.

I suggest a Pakistani writer should take a cue from Singh and consider writing a book on Gandhi — an outstanding symbol of non-violence. Let us rather go beyond the confines of inhumanity exhibited by the RSS and the BJP and show that we are capable of looking at the positive aspects of Indian leaders as well. We cannot convince each and every Indian to fall in love with Jinnah just as we cannot expect each and every Pakistani to believe in Gandhi’s philosophy. The leadership provided by Mr Singh is worthy of emulation by all advocates of peace. The effort of this great Indian admirer of Jinnah must not go in vain.

SwamyG · Post by **SwamyG** » 21 Aug 2009 09:22

^^^^
Aakhir woh be Hindustaani. We Indians get so flattered with praise that we do sashtang namsakarams. Looks like Pakistanis are after all Indians onlee....... a soft stand from Indian leaders seem to tug at few Pakistanis out there. Hopefully the same Pakistanis keep their evil elements in check. Only when the violence in India, owing its origins to Pakistan, can we conclude soft stand works. Maybe some of the thoughts expressed by gurus like Rajesh might be in the right direction - absorption of parts of Pakistan eventually into India - ie when Pakistan crumbles. As they say Rome was not built in one day. In a few decades our kids will go about saying "Pakistan was not dissolved in one day".

I don't know if there were 'chankiyan' thoughts from Indian leaders, but the side-effects seem to be interesting and can benefit several - for one Rupa Books seems to be reaping the benefits. Bangalore has sold out the books. New copies have been ordered. Every neta and baba is buying so that they can claim they have the book when a reporter thrusts a mike at their throats.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 21 Aug 2009 09:39

How can TSP absorbed without dealing with its founders?

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 21 Aug 2009 09:42

Ultimately - no matter how sweet Jinnah was - his political ambition killed a lot of Indians and continues to do so. This cannot be forgotten or sidelined.

Having said that there are many culprits and many factors that conspired to allow the two nation theory to take hold and spread its poison until a nation of hate was born out of it. A discussion of all the factors must occur for the threads of history to be unravelled. The book must be read.

SwamyG · Post by **SwamyG** » 21 Aug 2009 09:49

ramana wrote:How can TSP absorbed without dealing with its founders?

Not the entire TSP - but parts of it. When a family adopts a child, the family can not be overly concerned where the biological parents had sex. If they are so much concerned, then should not adopt - because it is going to ruin their and the child's life. Also, the family adopting might have different reasons for adopting.

RajeshA · Post by **RajeshA** » 21 Aug 2009 10:09

brihaspati wrote:RajeshAji,
Is there really a fight between "Jinnah's children" and "Islamists"? There was a little bit in the late 40's. But now? Isnt JS in a time warp here?

Jinnah's children hate India no end. They are willing to do anything to see its demise, including using Islamists & their Jihad for the purpose. They get their inspiration from Jinnah complex of being abandoned by the Mother and being forced to leave the House. The Mother decided to keep the Hindu child and forsake the Muslim child! That the Muslim child was a complete nut, is of course forgotten. Their grudge is ethnic.

Islamists want to intimidate & convert, and if that does not work - to kill the weak! And retaliate against the strong! They get the inspiration from the book. The Islamists use the psychological complex of the Jinnah's children to promote themselves in the latter's minds. It is fertile ground even if it distances the mind from Jinnahism.

Just a Theory!

John Snow · Post by **John Snow** » 21 Aug 2009 10:19

If TS pakistan were not be there I am sure India as we now know it would not be either.

I had in other thread strategic.. had said the same.
Also GOI has the roots of colluding with the enemy from the congress tamasha. While I respect gandhiji's wisdom, I think he was too utopian to be practical with a beimani leader like Jinah.

Anyway there is not much we can glean from this than heartburn. Akhand B is better reamining an utopian goal but let still be a dream just to dream.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 21 Aug 2009 10:49

As Shiv said,how may of us have read the book? I'm waiting for it to appear to review it for my book club.JS on telly said that these days few read and if his (ex) partymen and women had read the book they would see that he had criticised Jnnnah for his stubbornness (in pursuing the goal of Pak) as well as the other leaders in the Congress for not preventing partition by accomodating Jinnah (as PM) as Gandhi wanted.JS also blamed the British too and the role of the British is the foundation for the "divide and rule " policy in their colonies,by which means they were able to keep control overr the natives.As columnist Balbir Punj in the New Indian Express (Partition-an irrlelevant debate) has written today,the British never wanted "Hinu-Muslim unity".As I've said before,the principal criminals of partition were the British in the persona of Lord Mountbatten who could've prevented partition oif he had wanted.Instead of having to deal with one united India in world fora which would have a profound effect on global affairs,the British could happily manipulate two hostile states against each other.

60+ years on,it is past time for the people of both countries to open their eyes and see that they are once again being manipulated by the west,this time by the US,which wants to have two servile subject states under its thumb,behaving like two squabbling children always looking to Uncle Sam to resolve disputes and for the price of a few crumbs from his table.The BJP unfortunately has over-reacted to JS's book and the best answer to JS's book if anyone took offence at his findings was to write another book or booklet refuting his stand.He has now been turned into a martyr and Modi by banning the book is fast becoming India's equilavent of the "Tali-Ban"! We are a free nation and every citizen is entitled to his point view.Moreover,if Jinnah was such a monster as he is being made out to be,why on earth did LKA visit his mausoleum in the first place?

The BJP if it cannot take healthy criticism or introspect objectively without getting subjective,will fast become irrelevant in Indian politics.The youth of this country have no time for "tired old men" whose minds have also atrophied.JS's expulsion is more of hitting out at a convenient scapegoat for the disastrous electoral defeat for which no one in the party is willing to acknowledge openly the reasons for the defeat and the individuals responsible for both planning and conducting the poll capmpaign that led to the defeat.

Rahul Mehta · Post by **Rahul Mehta** » 21 Aug 2009 10:54

This is what I wrote in Leadership thread, one day before JS MithaiPurush was expelled from BJP

---------------

Re : Jaswant Singh's new found fetish for Jinha

Many moons ago, ABV became Haaji and then in around 2004, LKA became Haaji by worshiping Jinha. Back then I had explained the reasons why LKA worshiped Jinha. The reasons are : Saud, Christianists money. And now JS has worshiped Jinha for the SAME reason. Allow me to elaborate.

It is not the case that LKA and JS actually pocketed money to praise Jinha. The cold fact is that Christianists , Saud money plays important role in Indian politics, media, babudom, IPS and Supreme/High Court. The Saud/Christianists tell BJP leaders : see, you better dump Hinduvaad or we will give so much money to your opponents in and outside BJP that you will never ever rise. So these leaders like LKA and JS sell out and declare truce. The Jinha worshiping is a public announcement that "I am kicking away Hinduism along with Nationalism, and I will not oppose Saud, Christianist agenda in India". In return, Saud, Christianis will easen your way to become PM by giving better coverage in ToI, HT, IE and Hindu. LKA, JS can get twice the votes and three times the seats if they follow anti-corruption agenda. But that is something they wont, they cant. So they have no option but to bow down to Saud, Christianists money.

Now what would BJP fans do? Many times, when a hubby beats the wife, some wife would call quit. But some hapless wife would "rationalize" the beatings and show that "my hubby was right". Same way, some BJP fans will demand expulsion of JS, while most poor hapless fans will "rationalize" JS's new found love for Jinha. I really feel pity for these hapless BJP fans.

-----

As per Jinha, he had ordered Muslim League workers to kick all Hindus out of Pak. He has ordered Pakistani policemen not to interfere the ML youth at work. Even before Pak was formed, in Calcutta, Jinha had ordered ML to organize Direct Action Day in which had asked ML youth to kill Hindus. Jinha was the principal factor in getting 10,00,000 Hindus killed and forcing 4 cr to evict within months. Shame on JS , LKA for praising Jinha.

==============================

For a moment, I would request you all to ponder WHY JS decided to spend his previous hours on writing a book on an issue that has been beaten to death, rather than any problem that plagues India such as corruption, weakening of Indian Military Industrial Complex, poverty etc. Time is money, time is life. JS has intense career ambitions (which I welcome) and every muscle he moves, he moves with motive of grabbing "leader of opposition" seat and/or BJP President seat and later PM seat. He is no longer a "truth finder" and some jehadi out to tell the truth to world. And if he was, there are far more important truths in existing administration to talk about than beating dead horses. So why chose to spend days and weeks on this dead issue and not some critical issue?

So choice of topic is one issue. Now lets see contents. I dont mind his JLN bashing. But when he praises Jinha does JS report THE TRUTH that Jinha had ordered murder of 1000s of Hindus on Direct Action Day in Kolkata? Does JS mention that he had asked ML youth in Pakistan to kick every Hindu out of Pakistan? Does JS mention the truth Jinha had ordered Pakistani policemen NOT to interrupt ML youth busy raping, burning, beating, killing and looting Hindus? How many ML murderers were punished by Jinha? Some 10,00,000 Hindus were killed, and Jinha could not find even 10 ML guys to hang. Does JS mention these facts? So if even you say that JS is out to disclose the truth, his hiding Jinha's genocidal tendencies and that proves that JS is only reporting half-truths=lies.

Now lets see the impact the book will cause and impact it will cause is the motive behind his publishing the book. The book will welcome by ToI, HT, IE and Hindu. And who are these newspapers? They are MNC, Christianist fiefdoms. The whole p-sec crowd will now dance like cheerleaders. And we know what these p-sec stand for and who pays them. JS will also get Teesta Setalvad's "best BJP leader of the year" award, which LKA got some years back. IOW, when JS was writing the book, his goal was to win the affection of MNC, Christianists and their agents in India such as HT, IE, ToI, Teesta etc. And why does JS want their affection?

Many inside and outside BJP believe that BJP's vote share has now saturated. Pls note : I dont believe that and I am not stating that as fact, but I am only stating that many do believe so. ABV was first, LKA was next and now JS. So they see support of p-sec leaders necessary to improve their careers. These p-sec leaders are Nitish, Laloo, MY, Mayawati, TDP, Naveen Patnaik, AIDMK, DMK, CPM etc. If not support, hostilities should reduce. All these p-sec leaders are now complete slaves of Saud, MNCs, Christianists. These cahoots will support a BJP leader but ONLY after Saud, MNC, Christianist give a "no-objection certificate" to that BJP leader. IOW, ABV and later LKA became p-sec to gain NoC from Saud, MNCs, Christianists. And now JS is next.

So when in 2004-05, I said that "Saud, MNC, Christianist money made LKA p-sec", I did not mean that LKA took money from them into his account. LKA is power blind and wants no money. But LKA saw that if he does not become p-sec, Saud/Christianists will keep on spending money against him inside and outside BJP and so he will never become PM. He had option of raising BJP's vote share by harnessing anti-corruption pro-poor vote bank, but he chose not to take that hard long cut and decided to take easy short cut. And so he became p-sec. His Jinha worshiping was nothing but sending a mildly encrypted message to Saud-Christianists and also Hinduvaadies that he has kicked away Hinduvaad and is now p-sec. And JS is now on the same road and for the same reason. JS wants Saud/Christianists to spend money for him in media and NGOs they own or at least wants to reduce hostilities from them. So he has openly declared that he is kicking away Hinduvaad and becoming p-sec. The Jinha praising is nothing an encoded message saying "I am not a Hinduvaadi anymore, I am now a p-sec". With this message, Saud-Christianists will start pulling all their levers to make JS next leader of opposition or BJP president or whatever. And what is worse is that now many leaders in BJP will join this rat race, and come with "I a bigger p-sec than JS, so pls give me more ToI coverage" shrills.

JS has made a huge dent in his reputation and worse BJP's reputation in the eyes of BJP voters. JS's chances of becoming leader of opposition has increased, and BJP further lost its committed Hinduvaadi voters. Classic case of leader advancing at the cost of Party. In any case, I was never a BJP fan or enemy (i.e. I hate BJP as much as CPM, Congress and so no extra animosity). So I have no advices for BJP fans.

(Aside : I dont blame JS for Khandhar mishap. He should not have gone, but that was a minor error. I dont blame anyone in BJP in for Khandhar, we all Indians equally share this blame. I do blame JS for not resigning when LKA, ABV released 4 Russian and later British arms suppliers. If he had threatened resignation, ABV would have backtracked. But that is OST and I will stop here).

John Snow · Post by **John Snow** » 21 Aug 2009 11:05

Well what was the point of Jasoo writing the book , make money? He could have done like PVN The Insider almost auto biography, but not entirely.

Jassoo's sensenational MMS could be the mole in PVN cabinet what also a fizzle of epic proportions.

Very few have the stature of retiring quietly with out making waves. Did he not circulate a copy of his draft with top leaders? did he not interview anybody with in the party for their experience during freedom fighting? Or reading of the History?

One does not to read the book, he will tap dance around the issue with out giving an inkling of where he stands, If he did then his diplomatic credentials even more fragile than his handling of IA hijack.

The real folks who farted, the congress wallahs are very quiet but for some reason BJP is apportioning Congress leaders like MG JLN SV.

This is shadow boxing, banning is the best thing that happened , it will boost the sales and jassoo need the money for a good retirement and a Scotch with samosas and biscoot if not at least chai paani.

LKg vs Jasso, round one goes to LKg.

"Like two swords dont fit in a sheath, BJP has more than two leaders to fit in the party"

once agin BJP have confirmed they are jokers...
****
Rahul ji, I was typing my post while you di it.
Very articulate and as good as it gets. keep up the good work, Truth Shall triumph, may be in the longest run

RayC · Post by **RayC** » 21 Aug 2009 11:12

Jinnah is a tool to break the hold of the Mullah over the Muslims. Jinnah was a whiskey drinking Shia.

What is worse is that he was a pork eating Muslim and that is just not cricket!

JS has intense career ambitions (which I welcome) and every muscle he moves, he moves with motive of grabbing "leader of opposition" seat and/or BJP President seat and later PM seat.

I presume that all politicians and budding politicians are not in politics just for a lark or for timepass since they are bored! How many are their because they are there to serve the people?

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 21 Aug 2009 11:19

RajeshA wrote: They get their inspiration from Jinnah complex of being abandoned by the Mother and being forced to leave the House.

Rajesh, two things here.

Firstly, I believe that Jinnah's feeling of abandonment came more from his co-religionists, than Hindus, IMHO. The Muslim League was formed in 1906 encouraged by Viceroy Minto. The top leaders of the Muslim League, like Aga Khan or Fazl-i-Husain, had nothing but contempt for Jinnah. They roundly ridiculed his 14-point programme. Pakistanis are fond of saying that had the Congress 'accepted' his 14-point charter, there would have been no Partition. But, his own top co-religionists such as Aga Khan, Ansari, Fazl-i-Husain & Mohammed Ali ridiculed it. He was so distraught at their unremitting vitriol that he decided to leave politics and practise law by retreating to London. The First Round Table Conference in London was used as a fine opportunity by the Muslim League leaders to denigrate Jinnah even further. Fazl-i-Husain's protege at the Conference, Sir Mohammed Shafi, disputed Jinnah's claim to be the sole representative of the Muslims and shot down everything he said. Jinnah offered a community-wise allocation of seats in the Legislature which the Muslim League totally repudiated. Jinnah, in turn, called Aga Khan 'the fellow' and Fazl-i-Husain's followers as 'dogs'. He confided to the legendary journalist and friend, Shri Durga Das, that the 'Muslims do not accept my views' and there was therefore no point in returning to India. When Jinnah was included in the Second Round Table Conference, Sir Fazl-i-Husain opposed it. Jinnah returned to India permanently only in c. 1935. But, now he was determined to show the Muslim league leaders who he was and he thought it fit to play their own communal card several times bigger. Of course, he had irreconcilable differences with Gandhi & Nehru but, IMHO, the sidelining and ridicule by ML leaders spurred him into action now.

The Mother decided to keep the Hindu child and forsake the Muslim child! That the Muslim child was a complete nut, is of course forgotten. Their grudge is ethnic.

Again, IMHO, it was not the forsaking of the Muslim child. It was the certainty of not being rulers of an Independent India and the thought of Hindus regaining power and position that was disliked by them.

Rahul Mehta · Post by **Rahul Mehta** » 21 Aug 2009 11:23

From another thread, from post posted by Surinder

http://www.tribuneindia.com/2009/20090819/edit.htm#4

Narinder Singh Sarila, the writer of the book “The Shadow of the Great Game: The Untold Story of India’s Partition.” gives his views on Jaswant Singh's book.

If even after his massive research and hard work, he did not get to the bottom of his subject, there is a reason for it. It is because he has ignored the most important element that was responsible for Partition, namely British strategic interests that required the creation of Pakistan. ...

His Pakistan scheme, launching Direct Action — the precursor of today’s terrorism — and mobilising Muslims against the Hindus, were all in the persuit of power and glory. ... I also feel sympathy for Jinnah, for his humiliation and suffering. But at the end of his life he did many bad things, and inflicted incalculable harm. To believe that he was great just because he fought the mighty Congress party is nonsence. Do we call Hitler great because he fought the mighty Allies?

IOW, why is Jassu MithaiPurush (now Jassu Mithaiwala, not MithaiPurush ) did NOT write about the FACT that Patel, JLN, Jinha and also Gandhi had no option but to dance on the British tune, because British had formal control over Army, Police and these cowardly Congress/ML did not have stomach to loose their lives or limbs and give a sucker punch to fleeing British? Why is JS silent about the British role?

Guessing this reason is TRIVIAL. JS is now an MNC/Christianist agent. He does NOT want to upset his British/US masters by pointing out the fact that military impotence of Congress (i.e. gunlessness or weapon-less-ness) was key reason why British were able to have their way. Because such an interpretation of History would make Indian youth think towards importance of guns and weapons.

Always see what one choses NOT to talk about rather than what one talks. People keep silence ONLY because they are supporter of some evil. And the fact that Jassu Mithaiwala is silent on many aspects of freedom and partition shows where his loyalties lie.

His Jinha worshiping was an open though encoded message to Saud/Christianists that he is now anti-Hindu , is a p-sec and willing to work for Saud/Christianists agenda. He rightly hoped that Saud/Christianists would promote his career, but the intense hatred it evoked in committed Hinduvaadies resulted into his expulsion.

HT, IE, ToI and Hindu (all MNC/Christianist/Saud agents) are not mentioning it, but LKA, Rajnath etc got over 10000 calls, emails, SMS etc from BJP workers demanding immediate expulsion of JS. The local Ahmedabad RSS units had threatened that is JS is not expelled, they would burn effigies of ALL BJP leaders. All in all, BJP workers have shown some spine, and this is a welcome change. But chances are high that Saud/Christianists will throw huge money inside BJP and work for rehabilitation of JS back into BJP. I think they will be successful, as workers inside BJP do not have levers to stop JS from entering again.

John Snow · Post by **John Snow** » 21 Aug 2009 11:29

on serious note, this massive defection by jassoo mithaiwala, will
1) negate the very existence of BRF because now "the nationalist party of india" itself bursting at the seams.

2) B Raman garu has to retire from writing anything negative about Pakistan

3) No rush to get justice for 26/11 as we have new tamashha shedding tears about millions who died 60 plus years ago, what of few thousands in adecade of terror attacks.

tsk tsk
We love the past more than today, and future any way is compromise.

So after all sharam isnot new to us...

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 21 Aug 2009 12:14

Brihspati, et al -- based on the interviews with JS so far, JS praised Jinaah is a spin that CNN_IBN sort of channel have given.

In his interviews JS has said or done nothing which you people here have not said before -- the only thing is that he does not take an obvious hardline towards Islam such as saying "Brits used the latent Islamism to partition India"

Instead of saying that in so many words he seems to be alluding to those reasons and dancing around the topic -- which is both obvious and understandable.

Please note he has compared himself with Rushdie -- He is sending out a message as clearly as he can questioning the very basis of partition on the basis of religion, and the role of so called secularists in that.

He has called Jinaah and ML direct author of Bengal massacre -- on public TV

I am amazed, JS has gone and said things publicly, much less for which the Islamic hound dogs have ripped others apart, however they cant go after him now since he is supposedly anti-saffron suddenly.

Oh the delicious irony.

----------------------------------------

Oh and how do you ban a book only in "Gujarat", just like you ban the booze there no doubt.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 21 Aug 2009 13:34

Further to my above post,the stark fact is that the British quickly realised that the ties between Hindu and Muslim rulers fighting for Indian Independence/Home Rule,could be weakened by exploiting religious and cultural differences.During the Round Table conference,they asked a question,"which independent India?" Hndu India,Muslim India,etc.,or words to that effect.Having sowed the seeds of ethnic and religious division,the British,more correctly,the English,past masters at dividing and ruling,exploited these divisions achieved their diabolic end! They are still controlling the sub-continent when we still fight amongst ourselves refusing to see how we were hoodwinked into Partition.NSS's book on the "Great Game",mentioned above,perfectly underlines the true reason for Prattion,British and US strategic interests.They hold good today with the British island-grab of Diego Garcia from Mauritius by blackmailing Ramgoolam ("no Diego Garcia,no independence"),at the request of the US.We see today how significant that island-grab has been with the two Gulf Wars and now the latest Afghan War.

We cannot also demonise too much our freedom foghters and leaders of that time who had innumerable odds stacked against them.They had their own weaknesses and failings,well exploited by Mountbatten.Perhaps only Gandhi,personally not ambitious,but ambitious for India,saw through the insidious plan of the Raj and tried his best to advise the Congress leaders of the day to prevent Parttion fom happening.But,Jinnah's obstinacy and the equal ambitions of Nehru were perhaps irreconciliable and the rest was history.As the book states,both of them were staunch Congressmen first!

The task of the rulers and people of India today is to see that the sub-continent does not yet again fall into the hands of our erstwhile rulers and latter-day arch-imperialists by our petty squabbling over triviliaties.A sound principle of non-interference in each other's affairs is the only way for the nations today of once historic undivided India to live with each other in peace.This is what India must tell Pak in no uncertain terms.We are large enough to resist foreign interference and a "Return of the Raj".But can Pak without genuine friendship with India? One thinks not judging from current events,where Pak is doing Uncle Sam's dirty work in Afghanistan.

PS:Mountabatten the villain of Partition,well knew the price of both Nehru and Jinnah.He knew he could not "bribe" Gandhi,so he seduced both men who pushed Gandhi into the background.A fastidious ideologue Jinnah with the idea and dream of Pakistan,where he would be the architect of a new Islamic nation,and Nehru seduced by his wife Edwina! Sardar Patel was far less personally ambitious than Nehru-he was a pragmatist,and had he or Bose made a concerted effort at winning the Congress leadership,they could've sidelined both Nehru and Jinnah and sent Mountbatten back to Blighty defeated in his machiavellian purpose.

Rishi · Post by **Rishi** » 21 Aug 2009 14:02

http://www.flipkart.com/jinnah-jaswant- ... ru23f2impf

One can buy the hardcover in India (with free delivery) for Rs 549 from Flipkart. Any other/cheaper sources?

John Snow · Post by **John Snow** » 21 Aug 2009 15:00

How can it be cheap?
It is costing BJP dearly and nealy BRF, go to the other thread on the same subject. Sparks are flying and sniping, heavy mortar firing, people dug in positions, Its very dear as it is to some.

Rahul Mehta · Post by **Rahul Mehta** » 21 Aug 2009 15:27

Rishi wrote:http://www.flipkart.com/jinnah-jaswant- ... ru23f2impf

One can buy the hardcover in India (with free delivery) for Rs 549 from Flipkart. Any other/cheaper sources?

My local xero guy makes a copy for 25 paise a page. So he will charge you only Rs 175.

And if two page sof the book fit in one page, then he will charge you only Rs 80.

Add say Rs 20 for spiral binding.

Dont give your money to Jinha fan. Pls read from a xerox copy of th book.

RayC · Post by **RayC** » 21 Aug 2009 15:52

My local xero guy makes a copy for 25 paise a page. So he will charge you only Rs 175.

Aren't you the person who joined politics to clean the evils of India?

And the person hectoring us how we are all corrupt and useless?

Correct me if I am wrong.

Let me give you an honest advice.

It is cheaper to borrow the book and read it than copy and steal.

But then we are all Indians and so who am I to hector on morality?!

John Snow · Post by **John Snow** » 21 Aug 2009 15:59

I think Rahul Mehta is right

He clearly read on the book Copy Right
Hence he rightly copies it.

Rahul is squeeky clean as per terms and conditions. He should be comended for literally following the author. His fidelity can not be questioned and so is the patriotism of jasso Mithaiwala who ran escort services for Azar masood. Some news agencies even say Jasooopened the doors to an new world for Azar and company.

RajeshA · Post by **RajeshA** » 21 Aug 2009 16:56

SSridhar wrote:
RajeshA wrote: They get their inspiration from Jinnah complex of being abandoned by the Mother and being forced to leave the House.
Rajesh, two things here.

Firstly, I believe that Jinnah's feeling of abandonment came more from his co-religionists, than Hindus, IMHO. The Muslim League was formed in 1906 encouraged by Viceroy Minto. The top leaders of the Muslim League, like Aga Khan or Fazl-i-Husain, had nothing but contempt for Jinnah. They roundly ridiculed his 14-point programme. Pakistanis are fond of saying that had the Congress 'accepted' his 14-point charter, there would have been no Partition. But, his own top co-religionists such as Aga Khan, Ansari, Fazl-i-Husain & Mohammed Ali ridiculed it. He was so distraught at their unremitting vitriol that he decided to leave politics and practise law by retreating to London. The First Round Table Conference in London was used as a fine opportunity by the Muslim League leaders to denigrate Jinnah even further. Fazl-i-Husain's protege at the Conference, Sir Mohammed Shafi, disputed Jinnah's claim to be the sole representative of the Muslims and shot down everything he said. Jinnah offered a community-wise allocation of seats in the Legislature which the Muslim League totally repudiated. Jinnah, in turn, called Aga Khan 'the fellow' and Fazl-i-Husain's followers as 'dogs'. He confided to the legendary journalist and friend, Shri Durga Das, that the 'Muslims do not accept my views' and there was therefore no point in returning to India. When Jinnah was included in the Second Round Table Conference, Sir Fazl-i-Husain opposed it. Jinnah returned to India permanently only in c. 1935. But, now he was determined to show the Muslim league leaders who he was and he thought it fit to play their own communal card several times bigger. Of course, he had irreconcilable differences with Gandhi & Nehru but, IMHO, the sidelining and ridicule by ML leaders spurred him into action now.

SSridhar wrote:
RajeshA wrote:The Mother decided to keep the Hindu child and forsake the Muslim child! That the Muslim child was a complete nut, is of course forgotten. Their grudge is ethnic.
Again, IMHO, it was not the forsaking of the Muslim child. It was the certainty of not being rulers of an Independent India and the thought of Hindus regaining power and position that was disliked by them.

SSridhar garu,
this is exactly what I am trying to say, albeit with different wording. There is a reason for different wording. We'll now be venturing somewhat in the world of analogies, where the clothes never fit properly, so please bear with me.

Mother here can refer to Hindustan, the Tareekh-e-Hindustan, the Zameen-e-Hindustan, Taqdeer, Khuda, the People of Hindustan. The Muslims were not able to retake Takht-e-Hindustan, as defined by the Mughals. Hindustan rejected the Muslim vision.

The reason I represent it like this is to show that Pakistan has shown all the symptoms of a son who thinks he is the rightful heir to the power of the father or the love of a mother, he is the heir because of history, because he is better suited, better qualified. As the parent does not entertain this claim and nominates another son to be the torch bearer, then the first son feels scorned, angry and vengeful at both the brother and the parent.

Such dramas take place all over the world and is in fact a classical narrative, and I claim here that Jinnah's children in Pakistan suffer from exactly that, the complex of a scorned child.

That is why Pakistanis have always tried to show that they are better than Indians, they have tried to match Indians in prowess, ithiyadi. In the long run after 62 years, it has become amply clear to Jinnah's children that they were not qualified to sit on the throne of Delhi, they could not create a Pakistan, a model worth emulating, a country worth some respect. Whereas India has marched onwards, Pakistan has in its pursuit to match India collapsed completely, become a 'failed state'.

The Mother, Hindustan, History, has proven in retrospect that her decision to put Hindus on the throne of Delhi was the right decision. The Muslims, as represented by the Muslim League, did not deserve to get the ultimate power of the throne. As the years go by, this truth will sink in even deeper.

The last 60 odd years, Pakistanis, Jinnah's children, have lived off this narrative, that they were wronged, that they did not get their rightful inheritance. Now that it becomes clear, that the Hindus who got this inheritance also deserved it, that they were indeed the rightful heirs, Jinnah's children would need to move on, and leave this narrative behind for Jinnah's legacy is collapsing with the state. Their psyche would require some compensatory replacement, some other narrative which allows them to feel strong.

The only narrative on the shelf right now, is that of Maududi's successors - the Jihadis, the Wahabbis.

Jaswant Singh is offering another narrative. He is reminding Jinnah's children that Hindustan did not not just have only two sons - Nehru and Jinnah, Congress and Muslim League, Secular Macaulayism and Muslim Chauvinism. There is still the third son, and the third son, in the name of the Mother, is willing to rethink Jinnah's place in history. Bharat Mata, Hindustan is willing to embrace the long lost son, to rehabilitate Jinnah in the pantheon of her heroes.

Jaswant Singh is telling Jinnah's children, that just because Jinnah's legacy lies in smithereens, it does not mean that they should despair and only have Islamism left as an avenue, but rather Jinnah's children should remember that Jinnah also left for his children an earlier inheritance, his pre-Pakistan Inheritance, and they could find shelter in that Inheritance. His first Inheritance as a stalwart of Congress and Freedom Struggle is still there, still intact, and should also be embraced.

Jaswant Singh is telling Jinnah's children, that they do not need to kill themselves and Indians, or sell their soul to the Devil in order to prove that Jinnah was right. Indians accept him. Indians cannot accept that the reins of power should have been handed over to the Muslims after Independence, as posterity is witness to the rightness of the decision, but Indians accept that Jinnah had the right to stake his claim, and by staking his claim, he does not lose his place in the Indian Pantheon.

Jaswant Singh is telling Jinnah's children, that just like Jinnah has a rightful place in the Indian Pantheon, so too do his children have a place in the Indian Nation (variously interpretable).

Jaswant Singh is reminding Jinnah's children, that just like Jinnah was a great man without having had a lineage from the Prophet, Arabs, Turks, Persians, ithiyadi, so too they too can be great without having to declare that they all are descendants of the Arabs, Turks, and Persians. They can be great being what they are, as descendants of Hindus. As such Jinnah's lineage is probably not discussed in Pakistan, but with a member of a Hindu party in India coming out in favor of Jinnah, that fact cannot be ignored and suppressed completely.

Revisiting Jinnah today, has nothing to do with rectifying the past, but everything to do with finding Jinnah's children a new home, before the Islamists in Pakistan rob all of them of their souls.

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 21 Aug 2009 17:13

He is also telling Indians that if Idea of Pakistan is not demolished it stays as a constant dagger pointed at the heart of Indians (as told on TV)

He is doing a good cop/bad cop in the same book.

negi · Post by **negi** » 21 Aug 2009 17:14

Rahul Mehta wrote: Dont give your money to Jinha fan. Pls read from a xerox copy of th book.

RM bhai even the unwashed and downtrodden UTY students take care and xerox only the required pages from an expensive foreign publication; you are talking about photocopying an entire book released a few days back which costs only 695/- rupees .

Rishi · Post by **Rishi** » 21 Aug 2009 17:19

RajeshA

Very well written. Doesn't it need more than a book to pass this message across to the Paks? This controversy is 400% chankian onlee

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 21 Aug 2009 17:36

In those days, circa 1948 to be precise, The Hindu was a neutral and dependable newspaper. Below is an excerpt from the editorialit published upon the death of Jinnah

Obviously, having been written at that time, it should accurately describe the characteristics of the man and the events that shaped him and those he helped shape.

Excerpts

. . . And not only among his fellow-Muslims but among members of all communities there was great admiration for his sterling personal qualities even while the goal which he pursued with increasing fanaticism was deplored. . . . in an era of rampant secularism this Muslim, who had never been known to be very austere in his religion, began to dally with the notion that that Empire should be an Islamic State. . . no man was more surprised at his success than Mr. Jinnah himself.

. . . And his success was largely due to the fact that he was quick to seize the tactical implications of any development. . . . Pakistan began with Iqbal as a poetic fancy. Rahmat Ali and his English allies at Cambridge provided it with ideology and dogma. Britain’s Divide and Rule diplomacy over a period of half a century was driving blindly towards this goal. What Mr. Jinnah did was to build up a political organisation, out of the moribund Muslim League, which gave coherence to the inchoate longings of the mass by yoking it to the realisation of the doctrinaires’ dream.

At the time of the Minto-Morley Reforms, he set his face sternly against the British attempts to entice the Muslims away from their allegiance to the Congress. For long he kept aloof from the Muslim League. And when at last he joined it his aim was to utilise it for promoting amity between the two communities and not for widening the gulf. But Mr. Jinnah was a man of ambition. He had a very high opinion of his own abilities and the success, professional and political, that had come to him early in life, seemed fully to justify it. It irked him to play second fiddle. . . It was not a mere accident that Mr. Jinnah came to formulate the safeguards which he deemed necessary for the Muslim minority in his famous Fourteen Points so reminiscent of the Wilsonian formula {The reference here is to the 14-Point plan by US President Woodrow Wilson on how to demarcate lands in Europe following the conclusion of WW I}.

. . . Satyagraha with its jail-going and other hardships could not appeal to a hedonist like him; but the main reason for his avoiding the Gandhian Congress was the same nervousness about the consequences of rousing mass enthusiasm. . . .He came to see that a backward community like the Muslims could be roused to action only by an appeal, simplified almost to the point of crudeness, to what touched it most deeply, its religious faith. And a close study of the arts by which the European dictators, Mussolini, Hitler and a host of lesser men rose to power led him to perfect a technique of propaganda and mass instigation to which ‘atrocity’-mongering was central. . . . He was a prudent man to whom by nature and training anarchy was repellant. At the first Round Table Conference he took a lone stand in favour of a unitary Government for India because he felt that Federation in a country made up of such diverse elements would strengthen fissiparous tendencies. It was an irony that such a man should have become the instrument of a policy which, by imposing an unnatural division on a country meant by Nature to be one, has started a fatal course the end of which no man may foresee. Mr. Jinnah was too weak to withstand the momentum of the forces that he had helped to unleash. And the megalomania which unfortunately he came to develop would hardly allow him to admit that he was wrong.

. . . But during the last months of his life he must have been visited by anxious thoughts about the future of the State which he had carved. . . . Mr. Jinnah at his bitterest never forgot that firm friendship between the two States was not only feasible but indispensable if freedom was to be no Dead-Sea apple.

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 21 Aug 2009 17:45

@ SSridhar, at least on TV. These have been the precise word of Shri Jaswant Singh.

RajeshA · Post by **RajeshA** » 21 Aug 2009 19:51

Singh’s book and its repercussions by Najmuddin A Shaikh: Daily Times

It is in Pakistan, however, that one hopes this book should have greater impact. If Jaswant Singh, long perceived as an adversary, has the intellectual honesty to acknowledge that the Quaid and his colleagues were seeking an equitable power sharing arrangement and a measure of autonomy for the provinces from strangling centralised control, then perhaps our less tolerant politicians should also recognise that Pakistan ka “matlab” was not “La ilah’a illalah” but rather “a separate homeland in which the Muslims could realise their full economic potential”. They should also recognise that the devolution of power or autonomy of the provinces was the centrepiece of the Quaid’s manifesto.

Our political leaders are virtually all in agreement that it was the single-minded efforts of the Quaid that secured this homeland for us. They should now also agree that this came about because the Congress leadership was not prepared to share the Quaid’s vision of an undivided India in which the provinces were largely autonomous and in which the minority community had its rightful share of power in the centre. If we are to be true to the vision of the Quaid and his colleagues, we must think in terms of autonomous provinces and an equitable share of power for each federating partner in all the central power structures. We must find our security not in a militarised state but in creating the perception of a commonality based on shared interests rather than shared enmities.

As we contend with our current internal problems we must recognise that false sloganeering and the mindset thus created have brought us to this sorry pass and that our salvation lies in returning to the original vision of our founding fathers. We must not allow ourselves to be held hostage by false or mistaken notions about the part our religion played in the creation of our country and the consequent assertion that we have to see ourselves as a centralised state under theocratic rule.

munna · Post by **munna** » 21 Aug 2009 20:05

^^ Jassuji seems to be hitting a sweet spot here! Kudos for the excellent write up Rajesh veere, good job.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 21 Aug 2009 20:59

Jaswant Singh's book on Jinnah is the primary that will result in the Peaceful Implosion of Pakistan (PIP). It will have its own secondary effects beyond BJP etc.

samuel · Post by **samuel** » 21 Aug 2009 21:01

Yup, that's just how I see it, too.