Most Hindus don’t realize that the most rabid and genocidal Muslim leaders from UP, Bihar, Bengal and Tamil Nadu who worked to partition India, never actually went to Pakistan — they stayed put in India under the protection of their patron saint Nehru. No one has done more damage to Hindus in the entire history of India than this Nehru charlatan. Why did Hindus support such a man to represent their interests in place of Veer Savarkar? Had they gone mad? When Aurobindo Ghosh saw the blind support of Hindus for Gandhi and Nehru, both of whom were actually promoting Muslim interests, he famously said: “Hindus have lost the capacity to think!” This must have been the reason why Hindus kept supporting this Nehru jackass.
A Dialogue With Prime Minister Nehru
Yuvraj Krishan was one of the first officers to be selected for the IAS in 1948. While on probation at Metcalfe House in Delhi, the new recruits hosted Jawaharlal Nehru. Krishan cornered the prime minister and questioned him.
Background to the Dialogue
It was a hot summer evening in 1948. The Indian Administrative Service (LA.S.) Probationers of the first batch recruited through the competitive examination and undergoing training in the I.A.S. Training School, in what was then known as the Metcalfe House in Old Delhi, were playing host to the Prime Minister invited to meet the Probationer Officers were waiting expectantly on the open grassy lawns of the Metcalfe House grounds.
The Prime Minister arrived at about 6.30 P.M. accompanied by his Secretary K. Ram, I.C.S.
After exchange of greetings, the Prime Minister expressed anguish at the bloodshed and the mass migration that had attended Partition and Independence of India. A war was going on between India and Pakistan over Kashmir. The two Governments were struggling with the problems of refugees and their rehabilitation. Even though the migration of population by that time had become a trickle, there was acute tension between India and Pakistan and there was absence of cordial relations between the Muslim and the non-Muslim population of the two countries. The Indian nation was still in the throes of the trauma that accompanied Partition.
Having been uprooted from my home in Lahore, Pakistan, I had been pondering a lot on what the nation and I had gone through. My mind was particularly exercised by the continued stay in India of the leaders of the Muslim League who had brought about Partition and had worked for the establishment of Pakistan. This made me react to the observations made by the Prime Minister and provoked a dialogue.
Y. KRISHAN (Y.K.) Probationer : Well sir, those who have brought about Partition have been left behind in the partitioned India. The Muslim League had declared that the Hindus and Muslims were two nations and had asked for partition because they feared that the Muslims, being a minority, would suffer oppression and atrocities at the hands of the Hindu majority. Pakistan was to be their homeland where they could live in freedom from tne tyranny of the non-Muslim majority. But lo! and behold! the vast majority of the Muslims of U.P., Bihar, Central Provinces, Bombay, etc. remained behind in India and did not migrate to the homeland (Pakistan) created for them.
P.M.: We never accepted the two-nation theory though we were driven to accept Partition to avoid bloodshed and to achieve independence. We are not a communal State. The Muslims, who have decided to stay in India, are as much honourable citizens of the country as the members of the majority community. They cannot be victimised in the riew situation for their actions and conduct before and at the time of Partition.
We connot and must not live in the past.
Y.K.: True sir, but the immense suffering the people have undergone and the problems the country is facing are the direct result of the past, of the two-nation theory. In fact, Partition has solved no problems; only it has created new ones.
P.M. : You are too young to understand.
The overwhelming majority of the Indian Muslims are politically backward and have been misled by the pernicious and poisonous propaganda of the Muslim League. So it will be wrong to treat the vast majority of Indian Muslims as being responsible for the ills of our country.
Y.K.: True sir, the vast majority has been misled by the two-nation theory. But this does not absolve the Muslim League leadership: they are the authors* of Partition. And yet, the majority of this leadership has also stayed back in India. The Muslims of Pakistan, West Punjab, N.W.F.P.,Sind and Baluchistan, as such, never wanted or asked for Pakistan. In fact, they did not need to.
There was a pause and silence for a couple of, minutes.
Y.K.: The Raja of Mahamudabad, Begum Aizaz Rasul, Raja of Pirpur, Maulana Hasrat Mohani, etc. from U.P., Syed Hossain Imam from Bihar, M. Mohd. Ismail from Madras, etc., to name a few of the host of Muslim League leaders, have stayed back in India though they had actively worked for the creation of Pakistan as the homeland for the Indian Muslims. There is not an iota of justification for such leaders being allowed to stay in India after having got the country partitioned on the basis of the two-nation theory. They ought to have gone to the homeland they asked for and obtained.
There was again a pause.
P.M. Nehru’s face was flushed. After a brief silence, he resumed.
P.M. : We cannot abandon the nationalist Muslims who had fought and sacrificed for India’s Independence.
Y.K. : But the Congress has already abandoned the true nationalist Muslims, the Khudai Khidmatgars led by the Frontier Gandhi.
P.M. : This was a most painful decision forced on us by the geo-political realities.
Y.K. : I am not sure of the loyalty of the so-called nationalist Muslims after the creation of Pakistan, considering the speeches, (‘mischievous and rabble rousing) of the nationalist Muslim leaders (those who were opposed to Partition) like Dr. Syed Mahmud, Maulana Hafizur Rahman (of Jamiat-ul-ulema-e-Hind) etc. at the Lucknow conference of Mussalman.i.Hind’l (Dec. 1947).
P.M. : This is false, mischievous, a canard intended to defame and denigrate the nationalist Muslims who have played a glorious role in India’s Independence.
Y.K. : The P.M. must be correct on this point. I have perhaps been wrongly informed. But the basic fact remains that the Muslim League leaders and workers from Western U.P.-Meerut, Moradabad, Aligarh, Saharanpur, etc. organised the riots in Rawalpindi in March, 1947 which set the Punjab ablaze. It was not the work of the local Muslims of Rawalpindi in the initial stages but of the Muslim League leaders from U.P. Is it also not shocking that the Muslim League leaders of Rampur State in U.P. should have launched a violent agitation by setting on fire several Government buildings demanding accession of the Rampur State to Pakistan?
The face of the Prime Minister turned red in anger. He started puffing at his silver cigarette-holder.
At this point I had a very strong urge to recall the advice P.M. Nehru had given to the Kashmiri Pandits in 1945 at a meeting in Sopore in the Kashmir Valley that if non-Muslims wanted to live in Kashmir, they should join the National Conference (which was overwhelmingly a Muslim party) or bid good-bye to the country (Kashmir). But sensing the mood of the Prime Minister I was sullen and kept quiet.
The Principal of the Training School M.J. Desai, I.C.S. was visibly feeling uncomfortable and edgy. As there was palpable tension in the atmosphere and Prime Minister Nehru was silent and red faced, the Principal asked for the dinner bell to be rung. This relieved the tension in all of us. We collected our plates and made a bee-line for the dining table.
In retrospect the author believes that if those Muslim League leaders, who had actively worked for the division of the country and the creation of Pakistan on the basis of the two-nation theory and who did not migrate to Pakistan, had publicly denounced the two-nation theory, admitted that the Pirpur Report was false and that the creation of Pakistan was against the interests of the Indian Muslims, this would have gone a long way to heal the wounds of Partition, and promoted reconciliation between the Hindus and Muslims. This would also have softened the hostile Hindu Muslim relations which, unfortunately, continue to be haunted by the ghost of Partition.