What's new

'Ranjeet Singh's rise led to creation of Pakistan'

Veeru

BANNED
Joined
Oct 12, 2010
Messages
2,609
Reaction score
0
'Ranjeet Singh's rise led to creation of Pakistan'

CHANDIGARH: Maharaja Ranjeet Singh's rise was one of the factors for creation of Pakistan, which was a product of Muslims' fear after the fall of Mughal Empire. This was disclosed here on Sunday by the author of the recently released book, 'Tinderbox: The Past and Future of Pakistan', MJ Akbar, while talking to the intelligentsia of the city, which he rates high in intellectual circles.

Akbar quoted a Taliban commander saying, 'Jihad is not very recent, we have been fighting for 200 years', indicating the regime of Ranjeet Singh that stretched up to Afghanistan.

Pakistan was a product of the fear of Muslims, who could not forget the glory of Mughals and years of their rule over India. The author said due to the accommodative culture of Punjab, which had Hindus, Sikhs and Muslims, the Muslim League had to taste defeat, but the same region became the bloodiest place when Pakistan's founder Mohmmed Ali Jinnah exploited these fears.

Akbar said his book quotes letters of Jinnah to Muslim clerics of Punjab expressing fear for community, which earlier gave just 10% votes in the 1936 election and supported a pro-peasant and secular Unionist party with 101 seats out of a total of 175 seats in the Punjab assembly.

The Muslim League won just two seats and Akalis won only 10 seats. Akbar accepted the role of the Unionist Party when an IAS officer HIS Garewal pointed it out showing a gazette notification of the election. The author said Mahatma Gandhi was so sure of Punjab's cultural harmony that he chose to stay put in East Bengal to stop any communal flare up. Because of his influence there was no communal violence in the region in the East. Gandhi miscalculated the scene in Punjab, vitiated after Jinnah turned communal from secular, when he rejected a separate vote for Muslims in 1936 polls.

'Creation of Pakistan was the most stupid decision a section of Muslims could have taken for even the growth of the community,' he said. He explained that due to fear factor, Pakistanis behave in the manner they do at the negotiations with India.

Expressing happiness over the developments unfolding in the world with Gandhian non-violent protest becoming a tool in the recent Arab world uprisings, he said the ideology of India was stronger and that of Pakistan self-defeating.

When asked how to deal with Pakistan, he said there was no answer to this. 'One of the lessons that we can learn from this is how America dealt with the Communist Soviet Union, they economically isolated USSR for the Left ideology to die its own death. We can leave Pakistan in the same state, but as we share borders, this option may not be viable,' he remarked.

Former Punjab chief minister Amarinder Singh said Pakistan seems to have become a hopeless case since the Islamization of Army in Pakistan during the period of General Zia Ul Haq.

'Ranjeet Singh's rise led to creation of Pakistan' - The Times of India
 
The Pioneer :: Home : >> Not just a Jinnah show

Prafull Goradia and KR Phanda wonder why MJ Akbar, while dealing with the creation of Pakistan, ignores the separatist tendencies inherent in Islam

The book under review is a masterly exposition by a journalist distinguished for his knowledge. He is also perceived to be objective in his views on communal issues. With his high credibility, he has tried to put the weight of the blame for Partition on the Congress, especially Jawaharlal Nehru. By implication, he has attempted to free Indian Muslims of all responsibility. If he has blamed any Muslim, it is Mohammed Ali Jinnah.

Like other Muslim authors of the past, MJ Akbar’s book, Tinderbox: The Past and Future of Pakistan, puts the entire blame for Partition on the Congress leadership. Akbar writes: “There were five swivel moments in the relations between the Congress and the Muslims before the formation of Pakistan. The pact negotiated by Jinnah in 1916, in which the Congress accepted separate electorates, was widely described as the basis on which the two communities could unite against the British. The second moment, Gandhi’s Khilafat struggle, promised liberation but ended in despair. Jinnah crafted the third opportunity, in 1927 and 1928, when an all-party effort was made to create a constitution for India by Indians; he failed to bridge the League-Congress gap. In 1937, the two parties could have cemented an ongoing understanding with a post-election coalition, but an ascendant Congress underestimated the potential of a disappointed Jinnah. The fifth and the most tantalising chance appeared at the very last minute, in 1946, when the Congress and the League accepted the British Cabinet Mission Plan to retain a united India, but the Congress, fearful of balkanisation, reversed its decision. After this, their separate paths became irreversible.”

The fact is that Jinnah did not lead, but was led by the Muslim consensus. His role was that of a sincere and clear-headed lawyer who could formulate and articulate in precise terms what his client really wanted (Studies in Islamic Culture by Aziz Ahmad). This is further reinforced by the election results of 1945-46. Prof M Mujeeb writes: “The party which demanded the creation of Pakistan, a separate homeland for Indian Muslims, was the Muslim League. In the elections held early in 1946, which proved decisive, it secured 425 out of 492 seats reserved for Muslims in the central and different provincial legislatures. It could be said, therefore, that Muslims were overwhelmingly in favour of Pakistan. It insisted that the right to a separate homeland should be conceded first (Islamic Influence on Indian Society).

Partition, therefore, took place because Indian Muslims felt themselves to be Muslims first and Indians later. Given this background leading to the creation of Pakistan, it is surprising that the Congress leadership — Mahatma Gandhi, Nehru and Vallabhbhai Patel — did not ask Muslims to leave for their dar-ul-Islam. Jinnah, on the contrary, was clear. He along with other seven League leaders had asked for an exchange of population. The Congress did not agree. It seems the Indian leadership deluded itself that Partition was territorial and not a religious division!
 
MODS should start looking into all these BS Anti-Pakistan articles posted by indians. They are posting this shyt almost everyday.
 
Realy offensive thread. Why the hell indian always have to tell us that we have done a mistake to get separated from them?? Who the hell gave this right to india??
Secondly If india is democracy then why the hell they cann't digest the Muslims right to choose their future as they did in 1945/46 elections??
Im sick of reading these so called intelectuals articles.
Could you indian please leave us alone. we are more than happy to be Pakistani and mark my words 99% would like to go to hell rather be indian.


please do read history why MA jinnah choose to leave congress and lead muslims.
 
To clarify things Ranjeet Singh did not lead to the creation of Pakistan. It was created because we didn't want to live on the same soil as those who worshipped animals and to those who think inanimate objects are their higher being. We didn't want to live on the same land with those who bathed, pooped, buried their dead and used this very same water too brush their teeth and cook food. We didn't want to live on the same land where 600 million live below the poverty line. We didn't want to live on the same land where half a billion do not care to buy a toilet. I can keep on going on.

Oops.. i thought Indus valley was in Pakistan. my bad.
 
And this was disclosed by author MJ Akbar bwahahahahahahahahahahahahhahahahahahahahahah


all five fingers for his another moronic bakwas
 
Realy offensive thread. Why the hell indian always have to tell us that we have done a mistake to get separated from them?? Who the hell gave this right to india??
Secondly If india is democracy then why the hell they cann't digest the Muslims right to choose their future as they did in 1945/46 elections??
Im sick of reading these so called intelectuals articles.
Could you indian please leave us alone. we are more than happy to be Pakistani and mark my words 99% would like to go to hell rather be indian.


please do read history why MA jinnah choose to leave congress and lead muslims.

:) because they are still licking their wounds they got in shape of hundred of years rule by outsider Muslims .

Because they cant believe they are still having nightmares due to tiny Pakistan despite they being a country with double digit growth


Because they still are confined to competing with Pakistan when they should have been competing with US ;)

Because They still cant believe Pakistan is a reality despite Indian State terrorism against it.

phew so many because to mention
 
What i dont understand is why these dravdians are obsessed about the creation of Pakistan. We Pakistanis don't give a damn for the creation of india.

india was created on 15th august 1947. india was created a day after Pakistan.

When do we see Pakistanis BSing against the creation of india???

Atleast Sindhis, Pashtuns, Balochis and Punjabi Muslims CHOSE to be apart of Pkaistan.

Most indians didn't choose to be apart of india when india was created by the British in 1947. They were forced to be apart of india.
 
BS as usual, this stupid posting trend should end now-
and Prism do not take offense- its a two way street- you start one you'll get one-
 
Blame this one ,then blame that one , the fact of the matter is India was partitioned and Pakistan & Bangladesh today is Independence country.

Beside that what irritate me is the inherent tendency among Akhanda bharat gang on the side and the bleeding heart secular leberal candle light wala on the side to constantly look for who to blame for partition and inability to accept of inevitably nature of partition due to horrendous diversity of the subcontinent.

If Pakistan hadn't seceded than somebody else ,say south india or Bengal & North east would have their own way.If not ,at the minimum pulls of different competitive regions in different directiosn would be too difficult manage and still make progress a one country.

All in all, Partition is blessing in disguise for India,especially Hindus now who are majority of indian population and so whoever is responsible for partiton of india ,i say thank you.
 
Blame this one ,then blame that one , the fact of the matter is India was partitioned and Pakistan & Bangladesh today is Independence country.

Beside that what irritate me is the inherent tendency among Akhanda bharat gang on the side and the bleeding heart secular leberal candle light wala on the side to constantly look for who to blame for partition and inability to accept of inevitably nature of partition due to horrendous diversity of the subcontinent.

If Pakistan hadn't seceded than somebody else ,say south india or Bengal & North east would have their own way.If not ,at the minimum pulls of different competitive regions in different directiosn would be too difficult manage and still make progress a one country.

All in all, Partition is blessing in disguise for India,especially Hindus now who are majority of indian population and so whoever is responsible for partiton of india ,i say thank you.


dil ka behlanay ko yeh khyal acha ha ghalib.

Partition ??? there was NO partition of India. rather India and Pakistan were carved out of different princely states and thats it.
 
My only complain about this thread is that a great Punjabi warrior's name is being needlessly dragged into something that happened 130 years after his death.

But please carry on with the debate about race and inferiority complexes.
 

Back
Top Bottom