JINNAH’S OPPOSITION TO GANDHI

IN THE QUIT INDIA MOVEMENT

 

Dr. Ch. M. Naidu

 

            Just a few years before Gandhi decided to launch Quit India movement, Jinnah wrote an article in the Time and Tide expressing his strong views on ‘Two Nation Theory’, He says that constitution should be drawn to permit two nations to exist in India and he added further as support a piece from the Report of the Joint select Committee on Indian Constitutional Reforms 1933-34, Vol. I, Part I. Though two nations could not be formed since then, yet when elections were held in Bengal, Punjab, Sindh, NWEF, Assam provinces on the basis of the report, where Muslims were densely populated, to his contentment the Congress was defeated. Inspired by this, he went on provoking more and more communal feelings saying that the Congress had no claim to be called national party in those areas and that Gandhi could not be called the national leader. Thus he became an arch rival to both the Congress and Gandhi and gave no scope to them for compromise in the settlement of national affairs but worked solely for the formation of separate nation for Muslims.

 

            But an insight into his early personal life reveals that he was a strange person, who in 1910s strove for national unity but later, within a span of just three decades became a totally changed person. By 1937 he was a staunch anti Hindu and this is evident in his address to the All India Muslim League at Lucknow conference in October in that year when he openly demanded a separate nation to be carved for Muslims: “Hindustan is for Hindus; only the Congress masquerades under the name of nationalism. The result of the present Congress party will be calm bitterness, communal war, and strengthening of the imperialistic hold.” But he did not realise that under Gandhi’s leadership in the Congress there was fairly a good number of Muslims like Maulana Abul Kalam Azad, Muhammad Ali brothers, Ghaffar Khan who did not reveal at any time his type of piece of mind for a separate nation. So his opposition reflected some personal bias but not the views of the majority of Muslims. He was quite open and used to say that he was dedicated for the creation of a separate nation for Muslims, and the Congress under no circumstances should succeed the British in case the latter withdrew from India.

 

            Not contented, he intensified his tirade against Gandhi with his writings and speeches most of which were apathetic and splenetic a year before Quit India movement broke out. His main forte was that Muslims were in danger and that democracy was not workable because they constituted a minority community. Sometimes he twisted Gandhi’s words in a way that the latter took to heart and aguishly said once, “Not a week passes but these weeklies contain what to me appear to be distortion of truth and vilification of the Congress and Congressmen and Hindus.” Thus he tried to draw public’s attention to his viewpoint that the Indian leader’s aim was to poison the Hindu mind against Muslims and himself and thereby suppress the latter.

 

            As he thus began rebelling against Gandhi openly, indirectly he got some benefit of personal popularity and leadership over Muslims. But why he thus was changed and reacted indifferently, it is difficult to say. At one time as everybody knows, he was amicable with the Congress and Gandhi. But from 1930 onwards he began to change. Perhaps the reason was that new leaders like Nehru, Patel, Azad, Rajagoplachari with high potential began to emerge in Congress and they even threatened to capture leadership from Gandhi, in as much as they commanded much respect over millions of people all over the country. On the other hand; in the Muslims’ side Sikandar Hayat Khan and Omar Allah Bakshi died and with their deaths a gap was created and there was no strong leader to challenge him. Hence it seems he wished to capture all India leadership from Gandhi to himself with constant criticism and opposition to Gandhi.

 

            But many wondered how he, who at one time, was a staunch nationalist and worked for Hindu Muslim unity in the Bombay Congress of 1915 became suddenly so irascible, anti-Hindu, and even went to the extent of dictating terms to Gandhi for a separate nation at least in Muslim majority areas. How this drastic change came from such a person a staunch nationalist to obstinate anti-Hindu, and what made him to pursue the Muslim cause thus only on communal grounds-all these are difficult questions to answer. But in trying to capture all India leadership he tried to provoke the elite and the masses with deep religious sentiments. But from the Hindu side the only person who supported him for a separate Muslim nation was C. Rajagopalachari. But Jinnah did not understand C. R.’s logic and diplomacy in asking the British to go out of India and seeking to set up national government. Internally he was a better integrationist than the Muslim leader expected.

 

            So Jinnah couldn’t understand him. The former developed only animosity towards Gandhi. When the politician saint moved his draft on Quit India in the Allahabad and Wardha sessions, the Muslim leader too parallely convened All India Muslim League’s meetings at Allahabad in April 1942 and took support form Liaqut Ali Khan. When he entered, the delegates gave a rousing reception to him with stentorian slogans ‘Jinnah Zindabad’. Of the delegates some Muslim leaders like Mohammed Yusuf did not like his views on separate nation or that he should become a parallel leader to Gandhi. But he provoked the Muslim masses with sharp racial and religious sentiments and in his speeches he used to say that India could never be one nation because of the obvious differences in race, language and religion which could never be concealed and Muslim self-determination was the only thing that was required in the existing circumstances. “We cannot barter away”, as Jinnah said, “with our consent the future for the present while fully realising the danger of foreign aggression and not with standing all our anxieties to defend India to help the prosecution of the war.”

 

            Thus while at Allahabad and Wardha sessions the CWC gave Gandhi full powers to launch Quit India movement, similarly the Muslim League’s Working Committee also endorsed Jinnah to puruse for the cause of Pakistan’s creation or for formation of two nations in all negotiations with the Congress or the Congress or the Government, Hence the Muslim League under Jinnah’s influence and imposing person­ality took parallel decisions that the Muslims should have equal share either in mobilising military support to the country or in the control over Central and provincial Governments or in the expansion of the Viceroy’s, Executive ConciL. It is queer that he, who was fighting for separate nation thus, was not in fact an original Muslim but hailed from a converted Muslim stock and most of his fellow members of the Muslim League too were sons of the soil and got egotistic under religious sentiments provoked by him.

 

            Thus he gained some superiority over Sikandar, his senior leader, who had just died before the Quit India movement started. So to attract the Muslim masses some more, the former rejected Cripps’ negotiations for the simple reason that the British statesman did not come out with a clear cut plan for the creation of Pakistan. But the truth is that the British leader showed some favour to the Muslims to opt out of the union so that Muslim provinces could be formed in course of time into a separate dominion. Under the existing circumstances this was the best solution to the Muslims but the Muslim leader was not satisfied. He wanted to capture all India leadership from Gandhi and for this he demanded equal parity with Congress on every political issue so that the Congress would be bound to recognise the Muslims’ right to form Pakistan in any future settlement. But this was not feasible as no body appreciated his demand and so he took the other way round misinterpreting Gandhi’s writings just before the AICC Bombay Congress session that the latter could not achieve Swaraj all these years though with Himdu Muslim unity and that he was a total failure. As he said, “I am glad that Gandhi has declared openly that unity and Hindu Muslim settlement can only come after the achievement of India’s independence and has thereby thrown off the cloak that he had worn for the last 22 years.”

 

            But the Indian leader had no time to refute Jinnah’s such specious arguments. By that time the AICC had passed the Quit India resolution at Bombay and he was arrested soon after and this created a vacuum of political leadership in the country. Not only Gandhi but others like Nehru and Patel were also arrested and so there was none to represent Indian cause properly and effectively before the Government. Jinnah seized this opportunity and harangued more and more with his verbal attacks on Gandhi unscruplously. He went on blaming him that the latter launched Quit India movement without Muslim League’s support at his own risk. Not contented, he criticised him further that the latter built up a conspiracy to establish Hindu hegemony over the Muslims and thus tried to strike a blow to the evolving awakening in the country.

 

            Even the Muslim League’s working Committee members too lost their objectivity and fell under Jinnah’s influence. Instead of showing sympathy over Gandhi’s arrest, they criticised him in their meeting held on 11th August and Gandhi for having resolved to launch the Quit India movement and the Congress for having passed Quit India resolution. The Committee members said that the Congress resolution was ill motivated and thus they encouraged everything that could be done to weaken Gandhi’s movement and to assist the British in their war effort., hence they in a resolution said, “This movement is directed not only to coerce the British Government into handing over power to a Hindu oligarchy but this enabled themselves from carrying out their moral obligations and pledges to Muslims from time to time. The Congress policy is to cajole or coerce the British Government into surrendering power to Congress-a Hindu body with microscopic following of other communities in utter suppression of one hundred millions of Mussalmans.” This they indirectly blamed the AICC and Gandhi that it was they who closed the doors for negotiations with the Government and themselves. But the fact is such internal squabbles between Hindus and Muslims helped the British to stay in India.

 

            But in making those allegations through the Working Committee members, Jinnah tried to enlist British sympathy and to create an impression that it was the Muslims who refrained the Axis powers from entering into India and getting internal help. So they should get due recognition and be enabled to form pakistan in future. So while Gandhi said ‘Quit India’, Jinnah ‘Divide and Quit’. Further, he also used to show some paper cuttings from Gandhi’s Harijan, misinterpret them in a way: that the latter advocated Hindu Muslim separation and it was difficult to attain independence till the communal problem was solved. He went further and blamed Gandhi’s movement as one to coarse the British to hand over power to the Congress party that was dominated by the Hindus and to place the Muslims at a subordinate level and get them dominated by the traditional tyrannical Hindu majority.

 

            But in these circumstances the only Hindu leader who shared with Jinnah’s feelings and dared to differ with Gandhi was C. Rajagopalachari. But his approach was too shrewd to be understood by Jinnah. C. R. said that the Muslim leader spoke plainly what he wanted and he would have succeeded, had Cripps entertained the idea of setting up national government with Viceregal rule at the Centre. But the British representa­tive recommended dominion government at the end of war and it created all deadlock., So C, R. suggested intelligently why not the national government be set up in a way that it should be answerable to the Viceroy. Hindus would lose nothing by this but Muslim cooperation would be obtained. Then Hindu Muslim unity would prevail and the Congress would join with the Muslim League and one day the British would grant freedom. In the meanwhile every Muslim would forget the concept of Pakistan and it would be shelved. So his theory was, “Let us give to the Musalmans what they are asking. They will themselves say that they do not want if you do not keep it in your pocket but throw it on the table.”

 

            So to move the country in this direction he raised the issue at the Wardha CWC meeting. But he was not properly understood. He was heckled with cries ‘Rajaji Moradabad’ and somebody even hit a missile at him. Nehru also said that the Tamil leader was trying to break to pieces Gandhi’s weapon of Satyagraha which had been fashioned for the last 22 years with many sacrifices. As the tension thus increased, inside the Congress Gandhi advised C. R. to resign from the Congress, which the latter dutifully did. But the Tamil leader wrote to Gandhi that in case the whole civil and military power was to be withdrawn according to the latter’s wish the British Government would certainly be in a worse form. But Gandhi did not mind his advice. He took it lightly and said that better he should go the other side of Jinnah and Muslim League friends.

 

            Taking advantage of the ideological differences existing in the Congress, Jinnah tried to hit Gandhi’s popularity as much as he could. When the latter was arrested, he did not worry about the consequences or the fate of the country. He felt that let the British play their own game; “This is one of those cases where neutrality is the most effective policy on our part. “ He further added that if he was allowed a free hand, he would set up the Muslim League Committee, keep it in touch with the Muslims of the affected areas, and explain the programme of civil defence. At Aligarh he said, “Even the combined forces of China and America cannot, impose on us a constitution which will sacrifice Muslim India.” But he could not go ahead or was successful in this divisive activity except getting some sympathy from C. R. Further he could not yet understand the latter’s deep lime of thinking which was diplomatic, meant to appease him or sidetrack the whole idea of the formation of Pakistan into cold storage.

 

            But Jinnah blurted over Gandhi often. When the latter did fast, the former did not care but tried to incite Bengali Muslims not to press any resolution in the latter’s favour to release him. But his protests did not carry any weight. On the other hand, waves of unrest mounted against the Government through out the country over Gandhi’s health. At one stage Sapru, a Moderate, to cutdown the size of Jinnah, insisted the latter to come to Delhi and settle the matters amicably so that Gandhi’s life could be saved. But the Muslim leader refused and showed extreme indifference.

 

            Yet Gandhi from the jail hoped that a day “will certainly dawn when Jinnah will realise that I have never wronged him or the Muslims.” He knew Jinnah’s fixed notion of Pakistan, which was at one time considered philosophical but became a living voice in the throats of Muslims. Whether it was done provokingly or not, it became communal issue and Jinnah’s critical expression, single mindedness, and fussilade against the Hindus were evident. But it goes to Jinnah’s credit that it was due to this propaganda the membership of the Muslim League rose from 1330 in 1925 to two millions in 1942 and this increase was achieved in a span of seventeen years though at the cost of national unity.

 

            So Jinnah’s two nation theory became a strong political issue in 1940s but it was still premature because differences between Hindus and Muslims had been existing for the last several centuries, but Jinnah made an issue out of them only from religious viewpoint. His angle of assessment was only from one side. Unlike Gandhi, he did not take into account the interests of the nation or teeming millions of Hindus on the other side. Religion cannot be said to be the only one factor but more than one for the creation of a nation. Yet he strove for it as a camouflage to cover up the humiliation he and his admirers felt in the political field. He, forgot that at one time in 1915 he was a fervent nationalist but then was turned into an anti-Hindu due to the ramifications of circumstances which he faced or over which he had no control. He was not really an original Muslim to hailing from Muslim countries to put up such lofty claim but a son of the soil. But yet his claim for Pakistan created problems and complexities not only to the nation and Gandhi but also to himself and fellow Muslims.

 

Back