M.A Jinnah on weeky time magazine cover April 22 1946

[scorpionx]

From its acceptance upto its rejection , a lot remains unanswered . and sincerity of all three participants is doubtful

Maulana Azad saab had said " Looking back after ten years, I concede that there was force in what Mr.Jinnah said. The Congress and the League were both parties to the agreement, and it was on the basis of distribution among the center, the provinces and the groups that the League had accepted the plan. Congress was neither wise nor right in raising doubts. It should have accepted the Plan unequivocally if it stood for the unity of India. Vacillation would give Mr.Jinnah the opportunity to divide India."

 

[M. Sarmad]

The notion that Quaid, M.A. Jinnah, was the sole harbinger, along with the ML, of the partition of South Asia is just another stone in the revisionist history that we are just beginning to make. In actuality, the partition was caused by the culmination of our historical forces

Spot on !!
Pakistan was surely not made by Jinnah and his type-writer alone !!!

 

[SarthakGanguly]

Are you a NaMo fan ?

Fan? Not exactly. But I support him and do believe him capable of leading India to higher heights.

The notion that Quaid, M.A. Jinnah, was the sole harbinger, along with the ML, of the partition of South Asia is just another stone in the revisionist history that we are just beginning to make. In actuality, the partition was caused by the culmination of our historical forces (South Asia has seldom seen unity and did not effectively evolve nationalism prior to British rule in her political philosophy). The British more or less moulded our situation to their advantage and we Asians still refuse to see that, and that, btw, also spills in to this day: Sino-India relations can improve in both nations realise and effectively curb the third player: US.

We were all duped. That's that.

True - that

 

[M. Sarmad]

Congress was neither wise nor right in raising doubts. It should have accepted the Plan unequivocally if it stood for the unity of India

In that case :
That depends upon how you look at it
Congress was not wise enough
Congress was not sincere to the cause of United India

I think second point is much more plausible

There were a lot of factors involved . ML agreed to the proposals only when they were assured that congress wont accept them . And congress never accepted them in the true sense . They just showed the people that they wanted united india . ML & Congress , both played (to some extent at least) in the hands of British

 

[karan.1970]

What do you want to say ? 90 % of your people do not watch tv ?? Pakistan , ISI and Hafiz Saeed are surely discussed more than once in a year on your news

Dude, they may be watching TV, but news ?? Nah !!!

 

[jaibi]

If you follow the 'realist' argument then the latter makes more sense.

In that case :
That depends upon how you look at it
Congress was not wise enough
Congress was not sincere to the cause of United India

I think second point is much more plausible

But there were a lot of other factors involved . ML agreed to the proposals only when they were assured that congress wont accept them . And congress never accepted them in the true sense . They just showed the people that they wanted united india . ML & Congress , both played (to some extent at least) in the British hands

 

[scorpionx]

There were a lot of factors involved . ML agreed to the proposals only when they were assured that congress wont accept them . And congress never accepted them in the true sense . They just showed the people that they wanted united india . ML & Congress , both played (to some extent at least) in the hands of British

Looking at AICC's overwhelming support all over the subcontinent, I believe we could have ended up in doing something better. One or two more leaders like Motilal Nehru or C R Dash were earnestly necessary right from the beginning. We made blunders, not one but many. But that generation is long gone.Now we have to live with what we have got to make the future tenable for our successors.

 

[FaujHistorian]

Does that sound secular to you.

In your haste, you ignore the last sentence in @Aslan Haider 's quotation.

What's new with Hindu nationalists.

Same old $hit

Same old same old.

 

[FaujHistorian]

Maulana Azad saab had said " Looking back after ten years, I concede that there was force in what Mr.Jinnah said. The Congress and the League were both parties to the agreement, and it was on the basis of distribution among the center, the provinces and the groups that the League had accepted the plan. Congress was neither wise nor right in raising doubts. It should have accepted the Plan unequivocally if it stood for the unity of India. Vacillation would give Mr.Jinnah the opportunity to divide India."

Mission plan (that Azad wanted Congress to accept) was kind of 2 edgned sword.

This sword would have slain the partition giant for the moment.

However I understand why Gandhi and co were vacillating, one step forward two step back thingy.


Jinnah's federation did not make sense for Gandhi when he could secure Ganga Valley while keeping Jinnah's constant watch on (and perhaps bickering by) him,. Gandhi had the support of teaming central Indian masses behind him

So it was politically convenient nay expedient to consolidate Ganga valley control

And then quickly bifurcate the Sindh valley.

A 1947 statement by Patel hints towards grand plan.


peace

 

[scorpionx]

So it was politically convenient nay expedient to consolidate Ganga valley control

And then quickly bifurcate the Sindh valley.

A 1947 statement by Patel hints towards grand plan.


peace

Sadly, I am not aware of it. Need more reading...

 

[INDIC]

In your haste, you ignore the last sentence in @Aslan Haider 's quotation.

What's new with Hindu nationalists.

Same old $hit

Same old same old.

Why you always ignore to give direct answer.

 

[FaujHistorian]

Sadly, I am not aware of it. Need more reading...

Something along the lines (and I paraphrase)

-- Now that the poison is out of Indian body (partition has happened) I hope soon the people will rejoin us.


His proclamation was based on a widely held belief back then,
that

Pakistan will not survive for more than 2 years (that even Jinnah considered it "moth eaten").

Why you always ignore to give direct answer.

Learn to discuss from the greats like @scorpionx.

Right now your posts are empty 5th grader boy level.

Sorry to say

 

[M. Sarmad]

Something along the lines (and I paraphrase)
-- Now that the poison is out of Indian body (partition has happened) I hope soon the people will rejoin us.
His proclamation was based on a widely held belief back then,
that
Pakistan will not survive for more than 2 years (that even Jinnah considered it "moth eaten").

This "Congress Optimism" was more a result of partition itself , than being the reason behind accepting partition .

Congress had accepted partition prior to any hints of future "truncation" of Pakistan ,

Congress accepted 3rd june plan with a official "hope" of future re union

This hope was strengthened only when ML took some "wise" decisions

"Moth eaten" Pakistan was a direct consequence of Jinnah`s refusal to accept Lord Mountbatten as the first governor general of Pakistan . This decision by Jinnah greatly effected the future of the sub-continent . Congress was wise enough to reject the dominion status but accept Mountbatten as the (ceremonial) governor general

ML itself , not Congress was responsible for division of Punjab and Bengal . Sadly , game of numbers & power

Had ML acted more responsibly & sincerely , things would have been much better

Liaquat Ali said we will be happy even if a desert of Sindh is given to us !!

that explains a lot !!!

 

[INDIC]

Learn to discuss from the greats like @scorpionx.

Right now your posts are empty 5th grader boy level.

Sorry to say

Personal attack?. I have my own views because kaamchalau mixed government of both Congress and ML was not going to succeed was going to bring disaster for India. I see you are attacking me since I am criticizing your history revisionism. After reading comments of many Pakistanis I feel they are telling us as if it was between Secular Muslim League vs Hindu Congress of Gandhi.

 

[FaujHistorian]

.....I see you are attacking me since I am criticizing your history revisionism. :

people who ignore important points in a post before replying
are either attacking or attacked

.....

ML itself , not Congress was responsible for division of Punjab and Bengal . ....

wow. So Congress was ready to give Punjab / Bengal in full

but ML insisted on half?

wow. Those Muslas were always weak in maths.

poor thangs didn't even realize that full is more than half (sometimes even 2 times)