Chapter 5

Role of communal politics

Here, l wants to explain that the Muslim politics in post-independent India, failed to

realize and accept the change in geopolitics and socio-political situation within the

Bharat tremendously altered by the partition. The Muslim leaders carry on their

communal agenda such as demand for a separate electorate or reservations for their

community with in the constituent assembly and in political meetings. At this juncture I

want to convey that the constitutional safeguards inserted by the framers of the

Constitution also created obstacles and feeling of mistrust in the majority community

who was devastated by the horrible partition. With these Constitution safeguards, the

Muslim leadership harmed the Muslim community more than anything else did.

When the constituent assembly debate was about to finish, Dr B. R. Ambedkar, said in

his reply to the debate on November 25, 1949. That, however good a constitution may

be it is sure to turn or bad, because those who are called to work it happened to be a

bad lot. The working of a constitution does not depend wholly upon the nature of the

Constitution. The Constitution can provide only the organs of the state such as the

legislature, the executive, and the judiciary. The factors on which the working of these

organs of the state depends the people and the political parties. They will set up as their

instrument to carry out their wishes and their politics. Who can so say, how the people

of India, and their parties will be in future? He further said that it is futile to pass any

judgment upon the Constitution without reference to the part, which the people and their

parties are likely to play.

In a democratic setup like India the process of social integration, along with political

integration is in between the different communities is the basic requirement.

Unfortunately, the Muslim leadership in India never allows the Muslim masses to start

this process of social and political integration with other mainstream communities or a

majority community. In a democratic process, the best course is always participation in

the political process. Unfortunately, the Muslim leaders did not shoulder this challenge

in positive spirit. This nonparticipation in the mainstream political activism was evident

during the debates in constituent assembly, the Muslim league members demanded

separate electorates for the Muslims in Bharat. In total disregard of its history, and

radically altered situation. They even failed to understand the basic fact that what they

are demanding will paint the remaining Muslim community as antinational, and as a

group preparing for many more partition of this country.

The Muslim leadership of Bharat in pre-independence era, and in post-independence

India whether of Muslim league or Congress or Socialists or Communists, always

guided by the separatist school of thought. The Lucknow pact between the Congress

and the Muslim league in 1916 was acceptance of this separatist political theory, which

ultimately resulted into partition of this country. The Lucknow Pact, after the Hunter

commission report, decided the destiny of the Muslims in Bharatiya Subcontinent. The

creation of separate electorate for the Muslims drastically reduces an important

leverage for them and they started their isolation, form rest of the Bharat.

The report on Indian constitutional reforms, jointly authorized by the Montagu, and

Chelmsford in 1918, observed that a minority, which is given special representation,

owing to its weak and backward state, is positively encouraged to settle down into a

feeling of satisfied security; it is under no inducement to educate and qualify itself. To

make good the ground, which it has lost, compared with the stronger majority. On the

other hand, the latter will be tempted to feel that they have done all they need to do for

their weaker fellow countrymen, and that they are free to use their power for their own

purposes. The give and take, which is the essence of political life, is lacking. There is no

inducement to the one side to forbear or to the other to exert itself. The communal

system stereotypes existing relations. We regard any system of communal electorates,

therefore, is a very serious hindrance to the development of the self-governing principle.

The creation of separate electorate for the Muslims of Bharat created a mechanism to

banish them from power and effectively obstruct the process of social and political

integration and send them into isolation. The Muslim league, failed to understand the

ground realities. So as the different political parties committed the same mistake in the

post independence Bharat. The demand for the separate electorate and reservation for

the Muslims is continuance of the same separate test mindset, which is the biggest

obstacle in integrating the Bharatiya Muslim with the rest of Bharat. This separatist and

destructive mindset of Mohammad Ali Jinnah was continued even after the bloodbath of

millions of innocent Hindus and Muslims. When the all India Muslim league, met for the

last time in Karachi. On November 14-15 1947, Jinnah insisted on the league's

continuation in India, Jinnah said that there must be a Muslim league in Hindustan. If

you are thinking of anything else, you are finished. If you want to wind up the league

you can do so, but I think it would be a great mistake. I know there is an attempt by
Maulana Abul Kalam Azad and others to break the identity of Muslims in India. Do not

allow it, do not do it. Under the directions of the leaders of Muslim league is from

Pakistan. The leaders of Indian Muslims compel the constituent assembly to discuss the

issue of separate electorates and reservation for the Muslims in the legislature and

parliament. On August 27, 1947, when Vallabh Bhai Patel moved that all the elections

will be held on the basis of joint electorates. Then, B. poker (a Muslim representative)

moved amendment that as far as Muslims are concerned, be held on the basis of

separate electorates. Vallabh Bhai Patel was not happy with the demand for separate

electorates. He threatened to withdraw the concession of reservation of seats. Finally, in

May 1949 Patel dropped reservation of seats on a motion. It is true that some of the

Muslim members supported the Patel’s resolution however the damage was done. Even

after witnessing bloodbath of partition, the bulk of Muslim representatives pressed for

reservation of seats and separate electorates. Patel response was not pleasant but the

fact delivered cannot be ignored. Patel said that I do not know whether there has been

any change in their attitude to bring forward such an amendment. Even now, after all

this long reflection and experience of what has happened in this country. But I know this

that they have got a mandate from the Muslim league to move this amendment. I feel

sorry for them. This is not a place today to act on your conscience and to act for the

good of the country. For a community to think that its interests are different from that of

the country in which it live is a great mistake. Assuming that they are agreed today to

the reservation of seats, I would consider myself to be the greatest enemy of the Muslim

community, because of the consequences of the step in a secular and democratic state.

Assume that you have separate electorates on a communal basis. Will you ever find a
place in any of the ministries in the province or in the centre? You have a separate

interest. She had a Ministry or a government based on joint responsibility, where people

do not trust's, or who do not trust the majority, cannot obviously come into the

government itself. Accordingly, you will have no share in the government. You will

exclude yourself and remained perpetually in a minority. Then, what advantage will you

gain. What Mr. Patel said, was in the interest of minority, but the Muslim leadership

failed miserably to understand the import of the analysis presented by Mr. Patel. It is

true that some Muslim leaders supported the views of Patel. However, over the period

of time, these moderate Muslim leaders vanished from the political scene of Bharat and

the space was completely controlled by separatist and fundamentalist Muslim leaders

without having any relation with the suffering of common Muslim masses. The Muslims

of Bharat suffered due to selfish and shortsighted politics of the so-called Muslim

leaders and the politics of Congress Socialist Communist etc. the element of fear

psychosis is settled in the thought process of Indian Muslims due to events of history,

and the Muslim leaders responsible for a concretizing this fear psychosis for their own

selfish benefits. This failure is no doubt, failure of Muslim leadership, but at the same

time, it is a national failure also. Having history of conflict and war since last 1200 years

the Muslims of the subcontinent now onwards, cannot afford this isolation with

separatist goal. We cannot forget the role of Muslim leadership during the colonial

period, and after the independence. The Muslim leadership mostly pursued the

communal agenda, under the falsely created myth that the Muslims are handicapped, in

independent Bharat, they are victim of gross discrimination, and the Muslims are

regarded as second-class citizens. A series of communal riots, effectively, in every part

of India, with periodic blasts, sometimes with petty reasons. Sometimes, even without

reason, or slight procreation, established the fact that the Muslims of Bharat do not

ready to accept this country as their own country. As Patel observed that the Muslim

leaders were guided by Pakistan, this notion is settled down in the psyche of common

Bharatiya that the Bharatiya Muslims are still somehow, either guided or advised by

their Pakistani brothers. With such notion already exists, and is strengthened by series

of communal riots in post independence, Bharat. The problem is now complex and with

many undefined dimensions. In the process of resolving the dispute Most of the time,

we end with more wounds.

Empowerment of Bharatiya Muslims cannot be achieved by communal mobilization. It

will cause more harm, they must disassociate themselves with Pakistan and refrain from

any activity, which strengthened the notion that the Bharatiya Muslims is still crying for

existing Pakistan or trying to form a new Pakistani.