Jinnah insisted on partition, declined offer to become India PM

[INDIAPOSITIVE]

JAMMU: Union Minister Dr Jitendra Singh said here on Sunday that a large majority of the Indian population, including Muslims, were against the partition in 1947 and it was primarily motivated by the political ambition of a handful of political leaders.

The Progressive Writers’ Forum comprising Kaifi Azmi, Ismat Chugtai, Mohsin Bhopali and several other respectable Muslim intellectuals had vehemently opposed partition, he added.
Speaking to media persons on the sidelines of a function at Jammu University here, Dr Jitendra Singh, without naming Farooq Abdullah, brushed aside the “unsubstantiated” statement that Jinnah was against the partition of India and said there is a need to re-read the history.

The facts of history, Dr Jitendra said, are quite the contrary and there are several references to indicate that Mahatma Gandhi was deeply anguished by the prospect of partition of India and in desperation, Gandhi had gone to the extent of making an offer to Mohammad Ali Jinnah that if Jinnah agreed to withdraw the demand for creation of Pakistan, Gandhi would persuade Congress Party to accept Jinnah as Prime Minister of India. However, he said, Jinnah was not impressed by this offer because he knew that it may not be easy for him to gain acceptability as Prime Minister of India and therefore he (Jinnah) insisted on the creation of Pakistan.

Referring to the role of Sardar Patel, Dr Jitendra said, it is a miscarriage of history that while as Home Minister, Patel had a free hand to deal with all the other states of the Indian Union, the then Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru did not give a free hand to Patel as far as Jammu and Kashmir was concerned because Nehru believed that he knew Kashmir better than others.
If only Patel was allowed a free hand to handle Jammu and Kashmir in the same manner as he was handling other states of the Indian Union, the history of the Indian sub-continent would have been different and the part of Jammu and Kashmir presently under illegal occupation of Pakistan would also have been with India, he said.


When asked about the role of Sheikh Abdullah and National Conference in the years following Independence, Dr Jitendra said, there were a number of opportunistic adjustments made, the climax of which was noticed during the finalisation of Indira-Sheikh accord of 1975. The present situation in Kashmir, Dr Singh said, is a cumulative outcome of a series of blunders and misguided experiments conducted by Congress and its allies who were at the helm of power, both at the Centre as well as in the State for over half a century.


http://news.statetimes.in/jinnah-insisted-on-partition-declined-offer-to-become-india-pm-jitendra/

 

[American Pakistani]

Someone tell this dumb bharti propagandist that Jinnah was aware of his health condition and knew he was only going to be alive for few months or weeks. If he wished for Prime minister ship, he would've taken it. But his goal was to have free republic for the prosecuted Muslims, else indian terrorists would be hacking and burning them alive just for eating beaf.

Unfortunately nowadays we see many bhartis posting propaganda be it on electronic or social media. It might be a new trait there.

 

[PAKISTANFOREVER]

JAMMU: Union Minister Dr Jitendra Singh said here on Sunday that a large majority of the Indian population, including Muslims, were against the partition in 1947 and it was primarily motivated by the political ambition of a handful of political leaders.

The Progressive Writers’ Forum comprising Kaifi Azmi, Ismat Chugtai, Mohsin Bhopali and several other respectable Muslim intellectuals had vehemently opposed partition, he added.
Speaking to media persons on the sidelines of a function at Jammu University here, Dr Jitendra Singh, without naming Farooq Abdullah, brushed aside the “unsubstantiated” statement that Jinnah was against the partition of India and said there is a need to re-read the history.

The facts of history, Dr Jitendra said, are quite the contrary and there are several references to indicate that Mahatma Gandhi was deeply anguished by the prospect of partition of India and in desperation, Gandhi had gone to the extent of making an offer to Mohammad Ali Jinnah that if Jinnah agreed to withdraw the demand for creation of Pakistan, Gandhi would persuade Congress Party to accept Jinnah as Prime Minister of India. However, he said, Jinnah was not impressed by this offer because he knew that it may not be easy for him to gain acceptability as Prime Minister of India and therefore he (Jinnah) insisted on the creation of Pakistan.

Referring to the role of Sardar Patel, Dr Jitendra said, it is a miscarriage of history that while as Home Minister, Patel had a free hand to deal with all the other states of the Indian Union, the then Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru did not give a free hand to Patel as far as Jammu and Kashmir was concerned because Nehru believed that he knew Kashmir better than others.
If only Patel was allowed a free hand to handle Jammu and Kashmir in the same manner as he was handling other states of the Indian Union, the history of the Indian sub-continent would have been different and the part of Jammu and Kashmir presently under illegal occupation of Pakistan would also have been with India, he said.


When asked about the role of Sheikh Abdullah and National Conference in the years following Independence, Dr Jitendra said, there were a number of opportunistic adjustments made, the climax of which was noticed during the finalisation of Indira-Sheikh accord of 1975. The present situation in Kashmir, Dr Singh said, is a cumulative outcome of a series of blunders and misguided experiments conducted by Congress and its allies who were at the helm of power, both at the Centre as well as in the State for over half a century.


http://news.statetimes.in/jinnah-insisted-on-partition-declined-offer-to-become-india-pm-jitendra/

The source of this article is indian as is the author. Therefore it is fake news and propaganda. Please ignore it and get on with your lives.

 

[Taygibay]

See here big kahona, I'm just a stoopid non-desi so
I don't know if I should trust your politician ( sic ) but
I was struck by something he understatedly alleged.

If Jinnah had said yes and served all terms allowed
by law with dignity, someone would have eventually
replaced him losing representation for Indian muslims.

So unless you can prove that Pakistanis are worse off
forever that the average Indian Muslim, he chose wisely?

And if we think of that Dalit woman that was elected
a couple days back in Pakistan, one can think so?

BTW, are there no partitionists at all in Bharat today?
Seriously, not the slightest little autonomist movement?
I mean, Goa could split and become a new Monaco ...

Anyhow, read you later, good evening, Tay.

 

[Hamza913]

JAMMU: Union Minister Dr Jitendra Singh said here on Sunday that a large majority of the Indian population, including Muslims, were against the partition in 1947 and it was primarily motivated by the political ambition of a handful of political leaders.

So then why does Pakistan have more Muslims than Hindustan? Or better yet, why are there so many Muhajirs in Pakistan?

Anyway, Muslims and non-Muslims of the region are simply different people. We simply cannot coexist without one of us making major compromises.

 

[MultaniGuy]

Now that is true, Jinnah was offered Prime Ministership of a United India, but Jinnah declined that.
Nehru took the Prime Minister job instead.

Jinnah was more concerned about the political rights of the Muslim community than than political power. lol.

Another slap on the Indian people.

Good thing Indians have admitted it now.

By the way it is India which is illegally occupying Kashmir. Pakistan has all the right in the world to be in Kashmir.

 

[Indus Pakistan]

The source of this article is indian as is the author. Therefore it is fake news and propaganda. Please ignore it and get on with your lives.

That is true but it is important to note that Jinnah's primary motive was safeguarding the rights of minority Muslims in what is now India by leveraging the Muslim majority provinces in what is now Pakistan. He wanted to do this by creating constitutional structures that would create parity. This is evident in how Jinnah accepted the British Cabinet Mission Plan of 1946 only a dozen months before Pakistan became a reality.

Jinnah was a sick man and I pretty sure he knew he was not going to be around for long. However his political career had been marked by trying to secure protection to Muslim minority - ironically this minority Muslim community is in India today and even more compromised then it was before 1947. Pakistan had never been Jinnah's primary or intended goal. He threatened with 'Pakistan' to try to get his parity. When Nehru turned down the Cabinet Mission Plan Pakistan became a reality by default. Pakistan you could say came about as a accident and Nehru's intransigence.

The real people who from the outset had intended for and worked to Pakistan were Sir Allama Iqbal who had called for a independent Muslim country in the north west [read Pakistan] in 1930 Allahbad Address. Also Rehmat Ali who had coined the name 'Pakistan' in his 'Now or Never' pamphlet in 1933. This is very important to understand.

The Cabinet Mission Plan that Jinnah agreed to or "Plan of 16th May 1946" divided British India into three blocks. Muslim Majority West [1] or what is today Pakistan, Hindu majority Centre [2] or what is India today and Muslim majority East [3] or what is today Bangladesh. All these three blocks would be confederated at New Delhi where defence, taxation, foreign relations would be reserved. The idea was these three blocks would negate any majority and create a parity. Jinnah agreed to this. Nehru refused which left the British with only one choice. Partition of 1947.


Plan of 16 May

1. A united Dominion of India would be given independence.
2. The Muslim-majority provinces would be grouped, with Sind, Punjab, Baluchistan and North-West Frontier Province forming one group, and Bengal and Assam would form another.
3. The Hindu-majority provinces in central and southern India would form another group.
4. The central government, stationed in Delhi, would be empowered to handle nationwide affairs, such as defence, currency, and diplomacy, and the rest of powers and responsibility would belong to the provinces,coordinated by groups.

An interim Government at the Centre representing all communities would be installed on the basis of parity between the representatives of the Hindus and the Muslims.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1946_Cabinet_Mission_to_India#Plan_of_16_June

 

[Samlee]

Now that is true, Jinnah was offered Prime Ministership of a United India, but Jinnah declined that.
Nehru took the Prime Minister job instead.

Jinnah was more concerned about the political rights of the Muslim community than than political power. lol.

Another slap on the Indian people.

Good thing Indians have admitted it now.

By the way it is India which is illegally occupying Kashmir. Pakistan has all the right in the world to be in Kashmir.

The Man Is An Idiot He Is Saying That Most Muslims Were Against Partition And He Gave The Reference Only A Few Known Communists Like Ismat Chughtai etc.Conveniently Forgetting That The 1945 Elections Were A Referendum As All India Muslims League Swept All Muslims Seats In The Centre and Also Formed Governments In Sindh and Bengal

 

[SQ8]

Lets just agree that the level of intellectual capacity in Indian leadership has declined rapidly in the past ten years.

From brilliant and well educated (not just a paper degree) men such as Jaswant Singh and Abdul Kalam to buffoons like this chap.

As far as Jinnah as concerned, any man who walked out of being offerred the post of lieutenant governor was likely never to care for prime ministership.

 

[Indus Pakistan]

The Progressive Writers’ Forum comprising Kaifi Azmi, Ismat Chugtai, Mohsin Bhopali and several other respectable Muslim intellectuals had vehemently opposed partition, he added.

I wonder if the antecedents of these gentlemen had also opposed vehemently the forced integration of British India in 1849? I mean the integrated 'British India' was a status quo created by British military firepower. What is now Pakistan had existed as 'partitioned' from British India before 1849 when the British invaded what was then the Sikh Empire on the Indus and then integrated it with British India. The so called partition in 1847only undid what the British had done 98 years before in 1849. It was merely status quo ante.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Gujrat

 

[MultaniGuy]

The Man Is An Idiot He Is Saying That Most Muslims Were Against Partition And He Gave The Reference Only A Few Known Communists Like Ismat Chughtai etc.Conveniently Forgetting That The 1945 Elections Were A Referendum As All India Muslims League Swept All Muslims Seats In The Centre and Also Formed Governments In Sindh and Bengal

lol in 1946 It was clear that the Muslims of the subcontinent wanted a Pakistan.

 

[Osiris]

See here big kahona, I'm just a stoopid non-desi so
I don't know if I should trust your politician ( sic ) but
I was struck by something he understatedly alleged.

If Jinnah had said yes and served all terms allowed
by law with dignity, someone would have eventually
replaced him losing representation for Indian muslims.

So unless you can prove that Pakistanis are worse off
forever that the average Indian Muslim, he chose wisely?

And if we think of that Dalit woman that was elected
a couple days back in Pakistan, one can think so?

BTW, are there no partitionists at all in Bharat today?
Seriously, not the slightest little autonomist movement?
I mean, Goa could split and become a new Monaco ...

Anyhow, read you later, good evening, Tay.

Question should not be are Pakistani Muslims worse off than Indian Muslims, Question should be, "are they any better off"?

If not, then why get 1 million people killed and 10 million homeless?

Why create a permanent neighbor and an enemy, which is several times stronger than you and will always overshadow you ?

 

[Sal12]

I wonder if the antecedents of these gentlemen had also opposed vehemently the forced integration of British India in 1849? I mean the integrated 'British India' was a status quo created by British military firepower. What is now Pakistan had existed as 'partitioned' from British India before 1849 when the British invaded what was then the Sikh Empire on the Indus and then integrated it with British India. The so called partition in 1847only undid what the British had done 98 years before in 1849. It was merely status quo ante.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Gujrat

I think Cabinet mission Plan was about 10 years. In this plan, there would be block of muslim provinces under weak center india for 10 years and they were semi autonomous. After 10 years, this block of muslim provinces had right to be totally independent if they choose to. Nehru, Patel & Congress predicted it and they realized after 10 years, they will lose Sikhs Areas of Punjab, West Bengal etc. This is why they refused Cabinet Mission Plan.

Jinnah wanted Pakistan and he thought through Cabinet Mission Plan, Pakistan would be bigger in 1957 than today's pakistan though he also knew he would not live longer to see that Pakistan.

 

[MultaniGuy]

The Man Is An Idiot He Is Saying That Most Muslims Were Against Partition And He Gave The Reference Only A Few Known Communists Like Ismat Chughtai etc.Conveniently Forgetting That The 1945 Elections Were A Referendum As All India Muslims League Swept All Muslims Seats In The Centre and Also Formed Governments In Sindh and Bengal

Muslims in the United Provinces and the Bombay Presidency voted for Pakistan. lol.

Another slap on the Indians.

Question should not be are Pakistani Muslims worse off than Indian Muslims, Question should be are they any better off?

If not, then why get 1 million people killed and 10 million homeless?

Why create a permanent neighbor and an enemy, which is several times stronger than you and will always overshadow you ?

Pakistani Muslims are definitely better off than Indian Muslims.

The Indian Muslim condition is even worse than Dalits. lol.

Don't even compare.

Pakistani Muslims have much better freedom and advancement in career and economics than in India.

 

[Osiris]

Muslims in the United Provinces and the Bombay Presidency voted for Pakistan. lol.

Another slap on the Indians.


Pakistani Muslims are definitely better off than Indian Muslims.

The Indian Muslim condition is even worse than Dalits. lol.

Don't even compare.

Pakistani Muslims have much better freedom and advancement in career and economics than in India.

That is what you want to believe..to prove the existence of your nation is not pointless.

Name one right Pakistan's majority Muslim community receives from its constitution, that India's minority Muslim community does not from its constitution.