Strategic leadership for the future of India

[ramana]

Sukhdeo, I understand you frustration with leadership but I urge you not to use impolite language. If you want you can consider this as a warning.

[brihaspati]

Here is a rather open admission of what exactly the Anglo-Saxon wants from India :
http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2 ... ?page=full

All told, Asia's rise should present more opportunities than threats. The region's growth not only has lifted hundreds of millions out of poverty, but also will increase demand for Western products. Its internal fissures will allow the United States to check the geopolitical influence of potential rivals such as China and Russia with manageable costs and risks. And hopefully, Asia's rise will provide the competitive pressures urgently needed for Westerners to get their own houses in order—without succumbing to hype or hysteria.

[ramana]

Sukhdeo Ji the fact that you have used Hindustan times to form a judgement on Jaswant Singh's book is very telling.

Hindustan times today, beats the ToIlet in its bid to be more loyal than the king, unfortunately they will not succeed.

I however love the fact that Jawant's book is being debtated, I heard Jaswant's interview with Karan Thapar on the book, and I am now in the process of reading it.

As I read the full book, let me just say, what Jaswant Singh has said so far is nearly verbatim compilation of what Ramana, Achayra and Brihspati have already said about Nehru-Jinaah-Gandhi dynamics on the topic.

Jaswant Singh is force full, logical and the truth of his statements and research come out clearly.

You could do yourself a favor by actually reading the book and then judging it rather than react instinctively based on the biased report of third rate rag of a newspaper running a US agenda.

He visited Bay Area in 2006 (?) and said he was aware of BRF as he reads it sometimes.

[brihaspati]

Just a reminder, because of the recent passage of the Independence day - Louis Mountbatten was assassinated on 27 th August, 1979 - 32 years after his crowning political achievement of presiding over the Partition of India. Was it fate that chose the date on behalf of PIRA?
(edited by self - corrected date error)

[RamaY]

Just a reminder, because of the recent passage of the Independence day - Louis Mountbatten was assassinated on 15th August, 1979 - 32 years after his crowning political achievement of presiding over the Partition of India. Was it fate that chose the date on behalf of PIRA?

Are you sure B-ji? Wiki-dada says Aug'27-1979.

[brihaspati]

Apologies - it is indeed 27th August!

[brihaspati]

I am increasingly finding it difficult to understand who decides and writes out speeches and statements of the Honbl PM. What was the necessity to declare that TSP based terror groups were targeting India? This has been a well understood and default concept realized by Indians for a long time and no one needs reminders of such vague order. However, if he gave it to act tough, then he shows once again that he is no match in foxyness to the TSP horde. For TSP leadership now has seized the initiative away from GOI hands - and it would be predictable that they would immediately react to this "tough" line, by demanding cooperation and information. If GOI has concrete info, then it loses both ways. If it truthfully gives info, that will be used to "find" no evidence for such terror. If GOI witholds info, then TSP can claim that GOI simply talks nuts.
If GOI gives partial info, that can be used to guess at lines of intelligence gathering from Indian side. If GOI deliberately faslifies info to erase tracks, then such info can e easily discredit to the international gallery.

The situation has arisen simply because the GOI allowed itself to be trapped at S-e-S and now the diplomatic initiative has passed onto TSP and its US handlers.

[John Snow]

now the diplomatic initiative has passed onto TSP and its US handlers.

Is this not his halmark and forte to let others tell him what do?

[shiv]

What was the necessity to declare that TSP based terror groups were targeting India? .

For nearly a decade we on BRF have been demanding that our leaders say just that, out loud in public. I am glad it was said. Perhaps he said it only as a balm to cover earlier errors, but still Indian leaders need to say this and a lot more out in public.

[brihaspati]

Yes he should have shouted it out before S-e-S. I understand the necessity of saying it - but cannot understand the timing. Utter lack of any diplomatic or political sense would do this after the statements at S-e-S.

[Rahul Mehta]

1. The caste-system is a big problem --

2. it leads to divisions in the society and people (even well educated ones) have been voting on the basis of castes to a great extent. .....

1. The real problem is nepotism and poverty, not caste. The present day caste discrimination and caste wars are due to poverty, nepotism and not due to any historical religious reasons. And the reason behind poverty and nepotism are administration codes which promote poverty and nepotism, not culture or past.

2. Caste was NEVER a reason in voting. If so, how come large number of brahmins, bania, patels and all hindus in Gujarat vote for Modi ? Modi comes from ghanchi caste (very small grocers and manufacture edible oil) and every Patel, Brahmin etc in Gujarat knows that he comes from ghanchi caste. There are those who hate Modi (like myself) and thats another story. But given that so many Hindus vote for Modi prove that there is NO caste sentiments.

"People vote on caste line" is a myth invented by JNU and other intellectuals who want to keep Indian democracy to near zero level and want to promote dictatorships under the garb of aristocracy.

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

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.

[Masaru]

Yes he should have shouted it out before S-e-S. I understand the necessity of saying it - but cannot understand the timing. Utter lack of any diplomatic or political sense would do this after the statements at S-e-S.

Congress in general and MMS in particular have no ideology; they just point the umbrella to the direction of wind/rain. The strategy is good in dealing with rational Adam Smith type situations, but MMS is forgetting he has a twisted tail of a dog on his hand, no amount of straightening measures will work on it. This is hopefully course correction in response to the outrage from S-e-S fiasco.

[surinder]

Jaswant Singh is a very honorable man. An act of going to Kandahar is considered a capituation, but few seem to appreciate how much personal risk he took in carrying those terrorists personally. Kandahar airport was a den of terrorists, operated by ISI, the whole area & country controlled by Taliban. JS could have sent the terrorists using some officials, that he did it himself is an act of brazen bravery. Ask yourself, in a similar situation, would Rajmata send Yuvraj to escort terrorists & bring back Indians?

Not to mention, that I find him exceptionally sharp in use of language and imagery. Intellectually stimulating. He comes a military background, something very very few of our politicians have.

Of all the people we criticize, JS should not be the first.

[surinder]

Sukhdeo, Brihaspati:

One interesting phenomena you will notice in the Western acceptance of their past follies: their past folly is accepted and an apology extended only when all the exploitation and blood sucking was finished and nothing more was left to suck. The "realization" that their action was a crime, comes not during the crime or when it could be stopped immediately and the other party recompensed, but it is superbly timed where the apology never leads to any material loss.

The australians now apologize to the natives. But the whole Australia has alredy been taken. Tasmanians are already eliminated. Could have been done half way, and the proces of conquering should have stopped right there. US also apologized in the 80-90's to the native americans. If the realization had come earlier when the crime was in progress, US boundary could have been at Oklahom or something and the rest would have been Indian country, but that was not to be. The apology was not accompanied by restoring any treaty. The British realization (if it came at all) never came when they were actually doing the sucking. Same story in South Africa, where the whites gave up power only when the had to.

This is like a rapist, who knows he is raping, but does not acknowledge the rape until after he ejaculates. Nice timing.

More specifically on the British acknowledgments: You will notice that historians deal with the uncomfortable fact rape of India at British hands with clever turn of phrases. They will acknowledge "mistakes", but will point out that they were done more by their "ignorance" & zeal to spread civiliization, rather than rapacity. According to them the mistakes were the result of their "misguided effort to push their world view." The entire chronicle of barbarity is seldom detailed, and the ones mentioned will usually be of minor character. Their acknowledgment is carefully calibrated to to forestall criticism.

As you Sukhdeo claims, words are cheap, so are the words of the apologists. If Britain truly wants to apologize, a very very simple and elementrary thing should be to return all the historical artefacts they have collected in their museums and their storage rooms. They have refused to return anything. That small step would cause no economic burden on them, but even this small gesture they have refused. Forget about asking them to return all the money with interest to India, which will bankcorrupt them many times over.

[surinder]

Leaders who do not do this, in spite of the promise of their youth, have to be rejected - quietly and with honour if necessary for their past contributions. We want a singleminded feeling of nationhood, of belonging and commitment - of acknowledging the pain of every other Bharatyia as our own - even the historical ones who are no loneger with us. Anyone who compromises on this basic identification is not a Bharatyia, does not belong to us.

No leader has the right to barter the accummulated suffering of millions to appear the "God" who made "peace" without avenging past wrongs and ensuring that future wrongs will never again be committed - ensure this by liquidation of the last roots of motivation for the wrongs that have been and are being perpetrated, if necessary.

Thanks for stating this so eloquently.

[RamaY]

On JS’s statement on Jinnah:

JS’s observes that Muslim League’s objective was to ensure the social, and economic destiny of sub-continental Muslim population with sufficient political autonomy setting the pace for such destiny. I think JS was incorrect in his basic understanding of the situation given the advantage of hindsight that he has.

* ML’s predicament that even if it won all the Muslim seats (which it assumes) it cannot come to power (this is the actual objective) because Congress wouldn’t need its support to form the government. This observation assumes that both Congress and Muslim League remains to be the sole representatives of sub-continental Hindu and Muslim constituencies respectively. This assumption of Jinnah (as JS imposes) is very narrow minded as a multi-party democratic system is bound to create new constituencies of population who would like to have their interests served better. JS could have easily observed with the 60 years of sub-continent history after 1947, United India in 2009 would have at least 7 political parties – Congress, BJP, Communists, at least 2 parties in current BD, at least 2 parties in current Pakistan.

* Jinnah’s and by that logic ML’s vision of having an independent (didn’t get the right word) social and economic destiny for the Indian Muslims. We can clearly see what economic and social destiny the sub-continental Muslim populations preferred when they have sufficient political autonomy in Pakistan, Bangladesh, and Jammu&Kashmir. In all these scenarios Muslims were radicalized and terrorized other religious minorities. If GOI couldn’t protect J&K Hindus in J&K how could it protect sub-continental Hindus in an United India when there are few Pakistans “within” India?

* Finally, about Jinnah’s leadership skills and his ability to create something out of nothing. What did Jinnah create out of nothing? A Pakistan and BD land. And one should be proud of such creation?

At the end of that interview all I could clearly see was
1. Jinnah’s arrogance and Muslim League’s long term strategy to dominate sub-continental politics in the name of independent religious identity.
2. Lack of civilizational vision in Indian/hindu/congress leadership
3. JS’s intellectual hollowness. I respect him for all his service to our great nation as a soldier, parliamentarian, and union minister, but I cannot accept his perspective on Indian destiny. This is what I think Devaguru meant when he says "No leader has the right to barter the accummulated suffering of millions to appear the "God" who made "peace" . They have to be rejected - quietly and with honour if necessary for their past contributions."

[Atri]

Jaswant Singh is a very honorable man. An act of going to Kandahar is considered a capituation, but few seem to appreciate how much personal risk he took in carrying those terrorists personally. Kandahar airport was a den of terrorists, operated by ISI, the whole area & country controlled by Taliban. JS could have sent the terrorists using some officials, that he did it himself is an act of brazen bravery. Ask yourself, in a similar situation, would Rajmata send Yuvraj to escort terrorists & bring back Indians?

Not to mention, that I find him exceptionally sharp in use of language and imagery. Intellectually stimulating. He comes a military background, something very very few of our politicians have.

Of all the people we criticize, JS should not be the first.

Surinder-bin-Mark Antony ji,

Remembered the famous speech from Julius Caesar. "Friends, Romans, Countrymen... Brutus is an honourable man !!!"

[surinder]

Surinder-bin-Mark Antony ji,

Remembered the famous speech from Julius Caesar. "Friends, Romans, Countrymen... Brutus is an honourable man !!!"

[Sanku]

This is what I think Devaguru meant when he says "No leader has the right to barter the accummulated suffering of millions to appear the "God" who made "peace" . They have to be rejected - quietly and with honour if necessary for their past contributions."

But JS is not doing that at all, he is pointedly raking up the pain of partition and asking for what? It is others who have bartered the pain away.

Meanwhile, if you see what JS says about Jinaah PoV is correct in the 40s. JS is not sitting in judgment, he has made it clear many times. He is merely a observational biographer.

In 40s it would be very correct to say that the congress was a 1000 lb gorilla which would stifle ML, Jinaah was not interested in 60 years for sure, similarly true for other observations that he makes.

Also remember, he is not on BRF and he is a parliamentarian. Hence his words have to be measured still.

More comments after reading the book.

[ramana]

JS is thinking of de-Partitioning and hence he needs to create strawman whipping boys- MKG and JLN. He need not have done that. There is a lot of blame to go around with the Brits leading the front. There is also the Ibn-Saud and Roosevelt pact on the destroyer.

The more important thing is that Partition was a wrong thing and the way forward is the Westpahalian way of not assigning blame and move forwardw with eyes open.

[Sanku]

JS is thinking of de-Partitioning and hence he needs to create strawman whipping boys- MKG and JLN. He need not have done that..

He needs to also target the parties which have sanctified partition in Indian eyes. A lot of people are okay with Partition only because in the end Gandhi and Nehru agreed.

He is attacking those who submit to Deobandi thinking.

[Atri]

He is attacking those who submit to Deobandi thinking.

Its too late for that, Sanku ji. Lot's of water has flown since partition. The Muslim-Salariat which proposed and advocated formation of Pakistan has been thoroughly Pakjabized in 60 years. The Pakjabis were the unlikely beneficiaries of efforts put forth by Muslim Salariat of UP. Now, the inertia with which they have entrenched themselves and have been denying space to everybody else is difficult to overcome without their active displacement. I find myself agreeing with views of RM ji, about the timing of this revelation. Darul ulum Deoband is destined to become Wahabized in next couple of decades. Once that course is set, the attacks do not matter.

The understanding that Gandhi dynasty has acted like the Nanda-Dynasty has to seep in psyche of public. But at what cost?

[Sanku]

Chiron ji, please don't refer to RM, any reference to his thinking immediately sets up "aliens are attacking theory, coming" alert.

The fact remains though a lot of water has passed through the Indus, the question of partition and the idea of Pakistan are forever interlinked. You have to hack at the roots of this.

Personally I think only a very naive person would think that JS has praised Jinaah. He has just poured a bucket of sweet tar down Jinaah's roots, a modest effort I agree, but India can use every little bit.

[brihaspati]

The Old Congressites in the second circle around the "core", some of whom I crossed paths with as an adolescent, were almost unianimous in the refrain -"it was an impossible situation. Nothing could be done. There was no option to agreeing to Partition". Historically speaking, there were options. These options were not taken. Mass mobilizations against the Partition could have been called for. It was not done for fear perhaps that it would strengthen the competing strand of nationalism based on "H*****va" as it was the "religious divide" issue. The Indian portion of the army, especially the lowest ranks originating from within the "centre" and not periphery of Bharat, could have been called upon. This was not again done perhaps for fear that it would strengthen the INA type elements.

The Congress had dismantled all indigenous organized militancy against the British, helped or stayed neutral in the sidlining or liquidation of indigenous military resistance, under JLN's completely unstatesmanlike policy had refused to have any truck with the moderate elements within ML and fringe-socialist organizations that had Muslim components to isolate the "right" among the ML, and in JLN's search for personal power had allowed the virtual demotion or removal of leaders like Sardar and Subhasji - leaders who otherwise could have provided alternative centres of resistance to the Partition Plan.

Has MKG acknowledged that Partition was "a blunder" and it should be "reversed"? Has JLN ever acknowledged, that Partition was "a blunder" and it should be "reversed"? Have they acknowledged anywhere, that they were pressurized beyond their capacity to resist by secret British machinations like possible agreements with the Arabs etc? I would be most interested to have such clear statements - even if they were in the form of papers to be disclosed only 50 years after 47 etc.

Here are quotes from MKG :

As a man of non-violence, I cannot forcibly resist the proposed partition if the Muslims of India really insist upon it. But it can never be a willing party to the vivisection. (Harijan, 13-4-1940, p.92)
My life is made up of compromises, but they have been compromises that have brought me nearer the goal.... If God so desires it, I may have to become a helpless witness to the undoing of my dream. (Harijan, 4-5-1940, p.115)
If the million Muslims desire it, no power on earth can prevent it, notwithstanding opposition violent or non-violent. (ibid, p.117)
To undo Pakistan by force will be to undo Swaraj [India's self-rule campaign]. (Harijan, 5-10-1947, p.355)
It is possible to turn Pakistan, which I have declared an evil, into unadulterated good, if all the forebodings are dispelled and enmities are turned into friendship and mutual distrust gives place to trust. (Harijan, 13-7-1947, p.236)

[surinder]

The important thing was that Congress had foreclosed other options themselves. They had first & foremost chosen the idea that peace & non-violence at all costs, even before justice & unity of the nation. Then in 1947 that declaration came back to demand its piece of flesh. They actively collaborated against all methods of violent resistance against British (of the Bhagat Singh type & of the SCB type). They had cut their hands & heads and handed them to the British in faustian & foolish bargains. INC spent an inordinate amount of its energy on defeating Bose+Bhagat, instead of realizing that they love their nation no less.

Furthermore, by the time 1940's had arrived, INC had become just a political party, fighting elections, giving speeches, makinng electoral adjustments & devicing vote-gathering strategies. Its leaders were cosying up to the posh comforts of Lutyens Delhi, along with the other entrapments of power & prestige.

When partition did happen, then they shamelessly and bald-facedly told the Indians that they were intrepid fighters against British rule, but had to capitulate to the Muslims & the British. Never was explained why those who so elegently "experimented with truth" suddenly lost their voice in explaining to the hapless nation, WHAT HAPPENED?

Normal nations go in paroxysms of rage & violence and gladly and willingly descend into civil war to save their nation. United States did that to save the union, China did that, and so do many nations when faced with such forces. Indians, and their leaders, merely packed their bags and said good bye and left.

[ramana]

Yes he should have shouted it out before S-e-S. I understand the necessity of saying it - but cannot understand the timing. Utter lack of any diplomatic or political sense would do this after the statements at S-e-S.

After joint statement he did say in the press conf that India would resume talks if terrorism from TSP stops. I see this latest as a continuation of that press conf. What he is saying is talks cant resume if TSP still supports terrorists. Its India tha decides if terror has stopped. Not TSP professing to do so.

Maybe Hole()brooke was pressurisng from without to resume talks.

[brihaspati]

My outrage at the sense of timing was because, after the loss of initiative to Groper, any such statement will be immediately taken up by TSP to its own advantage. As I have pointed out, GOI will be at the backfoot for every imaginable scenario of reactions from and to TSP.

[ramana]

Has anyone made a study since the French Revolution onwards the numbers of own population killed to achieve their Enlightenement and transition to the modern age and compare to India?

But for the British and ML perfidy in precipitating the Partition the numbers would have been negligible. In one way the Partition massacres were perpetrated or allowed to happen to ensure long lasting rancour.

[svinayak]

Mass mobilizations against the Partition could have been called for. It was not done for fear perhaps that it would strengthen the competing strand of nationalism based on "H*****va" as it was the "religious divide" issue.

SO it was OK to get millions killed with partition so that nationalism based on "Hindutva" would not become dominant. So this is OK since even the British before the partition made sure that Hindu organizations were demonized.
It looks like common interest between the core group in INC and British govt and a higher priority than the lives of millions lost in violence due to partition.

Has MKG acknowledged that Partition was "a blunder" and it should be "reversed"? Has JLN ever acknowledged, that Partition was "a blunder" and it should be "reversed"?
To undo Pakistan by force will be to undo Swaraj [India's self-rule campaign]. (Harijan, 5-10-1947, p.355)

None of them said the partition should be reversed. But JLN made some comments that Pakistan is temporary and it would be back to India

[brihaspati]

At this stage I will only cautiously venture to say, that JSji has revived the Partition as an issue. Thanks for that!

Urvashi Butalia in "The Other Side of Silence" : "In India, there is no institutional memory of Partition: the State has not seen fit to construct any memorials, to mark any particular places - as has been done, say, in the case of holocaust memorials or memorials for the Vietnam war."

In his "historic speech" JLN casually refers to "pains of labour" but declares that the "past is over". Even Sardar conceded in January, 1948 in a speech that "I can tell you that if we had not accepted Partition, India would have broken into bits".

The Congress, especially JLN, repeatedly stresses the reproductive allegory - of a feminized nation giving birth to freedom, and the Partition a necessary "labour pang". This probably cleverly transfers the whole event into a "natural one" even if "traumatic". This is the ultimate criminality of twisting out reality to absolve the self of all responsibility towards monumental trauma over the nation.

This can never be, and should never be forgiven.

[ramana]

And Mrs. G's concession at Shimla were to allow the rise of a non-Pakjab(Bhutto) leader to assert himself and create a mass base. The TSPA and US thought otherwise and let the Zia takeover happen.

[brihaspati]

Russian civil war casualties from wiki :

The results of the civil war were momentous. Russia had been at war for seven years, during which time some 20,000,000 of its people had lost their lives. The civil war had taken an estimated 15,000,000 of them, including at least 1,000,000 soldiers of the Russian Red Army and more than 500,000 White soldiers who died in battle. Semyonov alone killed 100,000 men, women and children in the regions where he held authority (Greg King & Penny Wilson, The Fate of the Romanovs, p. 188). 50,000 Russian Communists were killed by the counter-revolutionary Whites, and 250,000 civilians were killed by the Cheka.[30][31] An estimated 100,000 Jews were killed in the Ukraine, mostly by the White Army.[32] Punitive organs of the "All Great Don Host" sentenced 25,000 people to death between May 1918 to January 1919.[33] Kolchak's Government shot 25,000 people in Ekaterinburg province alone.[34] At the end of the Civil War, the Russian SFSR was exhausted and near ruin. The droughts of 1920 and 1921, as well as the 1921 famine, worsened the disaster still further. Disease had reached pandemic proportions, with 3,000,000 dying of typhus alone in 1920. Millions more were also killed by widespread starvation, wholesale massacres by both sides, and pogroms against Jews in Ukraine and southern Russia. By 1922 there were at least 7,000,000 street children in Russia as a result of nearly a decade of devastation from World War I and the civil war.[35]

Chinese civil war estimates range from half a million to 1 or 2 million.

[Abhi_G]

JLN kept himself above any responsibility. Even today, we the naive Indians parrot how JLN was brought to tears after listening to Lata singing "Aye mere watan ke logon". The song glorifies the supreme sacrifice of our soldiers at the front. JLN is "supposed" to have been moved by the song and was unable to bear the deaths of the soldiers. Yet, sometime back he committed treachery with Gen. Thimayya and wanted to scrap the army. Wow!!!! what a sleight of hand this character has done that to this day, Indians still have not come out of the propaganda of his fake tears and forget "goodbye Assam". JLN's blunders from the partition until 1962 formalized the notion of Indian blood being cheap.

[surinder]

Urvashi Butalia in "The Other Side of Silence" : "In India, there is no institutional memory of Partition: the State has not seen fit to construct any memorials, to mark any particular places - as has been done, say, in the case of holocaust memorials or memorials for the Vietnam war."
...
The Congress, especially JLN, repeatedly stresses the reproductive allegory - of a feminized nation giving birth to freedom, and the Partition a necessary "labour pang". This probably cleverly transfers the whole event into a "natural one" even if "traumatic". This is the ultimate criminality of twisting out reality to absolve the self of all responsibility towards monumental trauma over the nation.

This can never be, and should never be forgiven.

It was left upto N.S. Sarila to give details of what happened behind the scenes during partition. Mountbatten, Radcliffe never opened their mouths. What is interesting is that the otherwise loquacious Mahatma & the eloquent Nehru never bothered to give an account for history. Why the stony silence?

By the way, Butalia's was a book I enjoyed (minus the feminist part, of course). It pointed out something that I had observed, but not acrticulated, in the partition generation: a rather lack of conversation about it, a sort of silence about that event. (it contains a very moving & interesting account of women throwing themselves in the well in mass suicide to avoid being picked up the Muslims. This is the events of village Tho Khalsa, near Rawalpindi.)

[sunnyP]

What is the end game Jaswant Singh has in sight?

Initially I thought it was simply book sales and money but then he's already a reasonably wealthy man so is JS making his move to lead the Bharatiya Jinnah Party post Advani?

[RamaY]

The important thing was that Congress had foreclosed other options themselves. They had first & foremost chosen the idea that peace & non-violence at all costs, even before justice & unity of the nation.

MKG had an elitist approach even to the non-violence and Satyagraha process. If a satyagraha was not initiated/approved by him he forced that movement to cease. I do not remember the exact place and date but he forced a successful satyagraha (non-cooperation movement w.r.t taxing) in Andhra Pradesh on the pretext that he did not oversee the movement and he does not believe that the local leadership can coordinate satyagraha effectively, in addition to a outlandish reason that tax-payment shouldn’t be used to blackmail the British-Raj (or something like that).

Sanku-ji: Sometimes truth is stranger than fiction. That’s why I wouldn’t ridicule RM’s claims.

[svinayak]

What is the end game Jaswant Singh has in sight?

Initially I thought it was simply book sales and money but then he's already a reasonably wealthy man so is JS making his move to lead the Bharatiya Jinnah Party post Advani?

End game take 20 years, 50 years or 100 years. Unless you understand the big picture you get it wrong.
This is not about political party here.

[shaardula]

the topic of his book is old. but i think he has looked at it a different scale. and so his observations are interesting and worth discussing.
i have not read the book. i saw the KT interview a couple of times. from that this is what i gathered.

#1. the left, nehruvian socialist, hindutva have the same expectations of indian muslims. all influenced by the turn of the century european theories.
#1b. contrast to this was opinions of rajaji and azad. but to imagine MAJ as being as sensitive to theory as rajaji and azad were is stretching it a bit far.

#2. indian muslims are/were not amenable to this. and that is where the trouble is.
#2b. for example JS points out that despite winning all muslim constituencies ML could not be the government. that frustrated its leadership and they walked out. there is no credible evidence that they tried to reach out to the rest of the community. they were not interested in it. whether the whisky guzzling pork eating, jinnah was anti hindu or not is secondary. fundamental issue is he had no vision to reach across all the people of india or meet them half way through. this is in direct contrast to gandhi. MAL wanted to be a leader of the muslims who wanted to lord over the rest of the community. he was not interested in being a leader of the community who was also a muslim. However he sold it and with whatever sophistication, MAL basically acted like he was entitled to power as a heir to the Mughal raaj. contrast this with leaders of other communities. who stuck it out. worked for it and have earned power. he wanted it handed over to him on a platter.

bottom line: he was not good enough to build an opposition party to congress in india, so he demanded a pakistan for himself.

[svinayak]

the topic of his book is old. but i think he has looked at it a different scale. and so his observations are interesting and worth discussing.
i have not read the book. i saw the KT interview a couple of times. from that this is what i gathered.

#1. the left, nehruvian socialist, hindutva have the same expectations of indian muslims. all influenced by the turn of the century european theories.
#1b. contrast to this was opinions of rajaji and azad. but to imagine MAJ as being as sensitive to theory as rajaji and azad were is stretching it a bit far.

#2. indian muslims are/were not amenable to this. and that is where the trouble is.
#2b. for example JS points out that despite winning all muslim constituencies ML could not be the government. that frustrated its leadership and they walked out. there is no credible evidence that they tried to reach out to the rest of the community. they were not interested in it.

There was secrets which Jinnah and JLN knew implicitly and knew that other party also knew and this secret was kept away from British and the anglo saxons of that time.

They were fooling the anglo saxon into giving them freedom from British rule and the British thought that these are irreconcilable communities and strife's will continue in the region. Even now Americans cannot understand that Indian muslims stay inside India and Hindus understand the Muslims of India.

[brihaspati]

JSji's Khadakvasla backgorund should be an important clue. Moreover his periodic statements that appear to raise a storm all fall into a certain pattern. He is, consciously or subconsciously, voicing a third school of thought than RSS-BJP, and INC. I would look for the origins of this thought in rashtryia machinery components who are normally not allowed to or expected to open their mouths in politics but are at the receiving end of politicians' antics.

JS was perhaps an attempt to give voice to this segment. But JS's method unfortunately won't work. His attempt at constructing a "left of right" (in between centre and right) alternative may have its ethical or nationalistic justifications. But at this juncture, it is more a distraction to the necessary right consolidation than helpful in the long term interests of the nation. The time for this was if BJP had returned to rashtryia power. Now, it is no longer a strategically viable route.

It is too late to revive the "federal" road to solving the TSP problem, and hence the underlying message in the portrayal of MAJ by JS, is not applicable (if the other members of the same school of thought are thinking of that line ). By allowing the problem to become what it has become, it has now only one solution left - dissolution of TSP by a combination of popular and armed methods. If certain segments of TSP populations come to the border to break it up like the Germans did to their iron-wall, then not many can object, can they? (or should they be allowed to object?) But it needs strong discouragement to those small but shrill voices who woyl try to prevent this - for them some deft application of the stick will be necessary. The JS "school" should ponder this for the longer term.