Jaswant Singh – the reluctant fundamentalist
Jaswant Singh’s right-wing worldview can be partially pardoned for he has made an attempt to set the record straight. The vilification of Jinnah to the extent of presenting him as a demon in mainstream Indian discourse has received a severe blow. Singh also blames the stalwarts of Congress for Partition and this has been the independent view held by many historians. It is shameful that a right winger had to condone Jinnah but then someone had to take the first step in the popular domain. The earlier voice of H M Seervai was drowned in the cacaphony of nation-state jingoism and because he was from a fringe community, his dispassionate views did not receive much attention. In fact many in India and Pakistan have no clue about Seervai.
So much for historiography and history in the bitterly divided and acrimonious South Asia. But things will change. As we move away from the horrors and traumas of Partition, many more voices will emerge that will look at the way history should be recorded – with evidence, dispassionate analysis and sobriety.
A reluctant fundamentalist in India has spoken. Good job that he was expelled. His tears were rather shocking for he should have known better for the thirty years he tagged along the Hindutva ideology.
But for us Pakistanis we need to take things with a pinch of salt – praises from BJP-RSS wallahs are at best double-edged.
The very first thought that did hit my cerebral neurons in the associative cortex, was that this good man might just have a knife
(hmm or may be the one of the more original type , did I not read his name: singh…..?????), in the sleeve…
-no before I engage in any phobia-talk or konspiration-theory,
my second thought is ; may be I ought to give this good man a chance, he might perhaps surprise…, and bring some mithai instead … hmmm do invite me
[...] [...]
It is also opportunity for us in Pakistan to place Jinnah in true historical perspectives……..Can someone publish in Urdu what is written in Freedom at Midnight and contine in public service?
Definitley, it was not his type wrtiter which created Pakistan.
Pakistans were before him for centuries……………
Can’t agree more Raza!
It is indeed surprising that this re- evaluation of MA Jinnah had to come from a right wing politician. Even more surprising is that his arguments are not in terms of religious discourse but woven around the question of distribution of power- whether India should have followed a centralized model as advocated by Nehru or a decentralized model as advocated (according to Jaswant Singh) by Jinnah.
See:
Source: Transcript of JS’s intervier:
http://beta.thehindu.com/news/national/article5594.ece
One thing is clear History and Political religion are two different things. I truly appreciate Jaswant Singh for justifying the facts about the partition history. Every single child in India knows that Jinnah wanted one united India but it was our great late Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru and other power hungry politicians who wanted to create two different countries based on the religion. In fact Jinnah was supported by Mahtma Gandhi himself because their visions were same. Had Nehru would have been a little more rational , today the things would have been completely different.
The acrimony against Jaswant Singh was not so much that he criticized Jawahar Lal Nehru …..that the RSS, BJP and other Right wing followers have criticized no end for the Partition of 1947 ……..
hitherto it is the inclusion of Vallabh Bhai Patel in his book who is clubbed amongst the creed of those alleged power hungry politicians …that ruffled the feathers of his party members the most
…..Histories have anyways been known to be written “subjectively’ in accordance with the writer, situation and most of all …based on which side of the dividing line the writer belongs to ….
..India and Pakistan have a common history yet its interpretations having gaping differences .
RR
Though i appreciate the word of caution, but its very problematic notion if we start pardoning people who have blood on their hands for mere words, unsubstantiated by any action.
A man who after being kicked out of a party which acted on orders of a fascist group of thugs [RSS] feels sad!
A liberal secular progressive man would have not only been happy but would have spoken against the naked communalism but he is sad!
Dont you find it irnoic that a man who has championed cause of secularism couldnt find words to express himself other than “Hanuman” and “Ravan”?
He called himself “founding member” of this party which just proved to be a “popular front” for RSS
Wasnt it time to show regret for being part of a party which is virtually in control of ppl who burn humans only bcz they have other faith?
It has nothing to do with history, its all part of internal politics of India, trying to destroy the legacy of their political rivals, the party which these thugs fail to defeat. The real target of this book is Sonia Gandhi and her party.
SA
I agree with you to the extent that JS even when fired was using communal lingo and that instead of crying he might have considered it to recognise BJP’s fascism.
However, I do not agree that the book is to target Sonia Gandhi. There is a hegemony by Congress over the partition discourse for it was in power for decades and the official history glorifies Nehru and Patel while demonises Jinnah.
There are many voices in India that are challenging this monopoly over the truth.
JS is an odd choice and we do not take him on his face value but what he says makes sense
I’d say ‘Jinnah of Pakistan’ by Stanley Wolpert is a rather dispassionate account as well.
I think that the credit or blame for the partition of India (depending upon the way one looks at it), has to be shared largely by Jawaharlal Nehru and Mohammad Ali Jinnah, perhaps to a greater degree, though, by Nehru.
BTW, Jaswant Singh’s expulsion from the BJP has reportedly done a lot of good to the sales figures of his book on Jinnah, in India. In some places, it is said to be selling faster than face-masks for protection against Swine Flu.
I sincerely hope that the selective interpretation of history will diminish progressively in India and Pakistan, so that, ultimately, nothing but the truth will remain.
RR
While i agree that Congress remained in power, i dont agree it enjoys a “hegemony” on historical discourse. if you go back in time you will see this phrase was coined by BJP for their project to “saffronize” Indian History.
Using this very pretext of congress destroying the history BJP humiliated historians like Romila Thapar and Irfan Habib.
I know that you know Musheer-ul-Hassan, in his latest BBC Urdu article Dr Hassan has set the record str8 that, its not correct to state that Mr Jinnah has been “demonized” in Indian History writing. Indian Historiography has always held variant multiple views about Mr Jinnah.
Molana Azad , himself a Congress man pointed finger at Nehru and Patel and praised Jinnah, Majumdar, a communal but influential historian shared the picture.
These were the example which Dr Hassan quoted, i can quote many more, Irfan Habib, who was like Pope of Indian history [ppl like him allegedly hegemonized the discourse, they claim], he is on record multiple times for a favorable assessment on Mr Jinnah. Habib wrote about Jinnah support of Bhagat Singh and Gandhi’s controversial role.
Thaper has addressed many good sides of Jinnah
I will agree with Musheer-ul-Hassan that its not right to claim that Indian Historiography has a monolithic view of Jinnah as a demon. Bcz Its academically not correct. Jinnah may be a demon in popular discourse in India, in popular media etc but there always existed views in Indian Historiography which were putting Jinnah in more favorable light.
Unfortunately same cannot be said about demonization of Gandhi and Nehru in Pakistan, this unfortunately has been a monolithic trend in Pakistani historiography as main target of Pakistani progressive historians have always been the congress [due to communist-socialist split].
Sherry…I agree to your view of all part of internal politics…
and BJP quest for an Anti-Nehru figure to damage Nehru Legacy…..
In the words of Ashok Malik
“Is it contrariaism for the sake of contrarianism”
Today I was watching TV reports that Jaswant book has arrived to Lahore and is warmly welcomed…..
Though Sara Humayun in his article published in Dwan has commented that Singh’s ‘research’ is bound to be equally discomfiting to the great Pakistani historical narrative. Indian nationalist parliamentarian Jinnah? Turning demagogue to beat Gandhi at his own game? Surely not good news for the portrait that hangs in every government office…
Jaswant’s book has contributed nothing to the history except an uncritical absorption of the ideas of Ayesha Jalal or the unquenched desire to be recognised as the thinking man’s politician…..
Jaswant was acclaimed here at our side of the border for appreciating Jinnah not for a balance account of the partition events as we have treated our historians like K K Aziz and Dr. Mubarak Ali not better than them…..