Skip to main content

Sardar made up his mind on Pakistan in Dec 1946 "before" Mountbatten's Partition Plan

By Hari Desai*
One has to be extra cautious while dealing with the history of towering personalities of the Indian freedom struggle, especially that of Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel (October 31, 1875 - December 15, 1950). Present-day politicians prefer to "pronounce” on his life and quote him according to their convenience like a blind person describing an elephant.
During his life time the Sardar used to caution Muslims about some of his opponents calling him “an enemy of Muslims”, whereas he has always been a true friend of Muslims. None can dispute the fact that the trinity of the freedom movement, i.e. Mahatma Gandhi, Pandit Nehru and Sardar Patel, differed in their approach, but all the three were unanimous on implementing decisions to achieve their goal to gain freedom from the British.
Even today, the Congress is being abused from public platforms as one responsible for Partition without bothering to understand that the first Prime Minister, Nehru, was not the only person responsible for it, and such abuses target Patel and the Mahatma as well. The era of towering personalities is gone, and dwarfs have taken over. They judge towering personalities of yesteryears with their own yardsticks.
Even during the freedom struggle era, persons like Maulana Azad, who was Congress President, commented in his autobiographical book “India Wins Freedom”, “(Mohammad Ali) Jinnah may have raised the flag of Partition but now the real flag bearer was Patel”. Indeed, Patel accepted the responsibility of Partition under certain circumstances along with Nehru. Both had to concede Pakistan.
Patel disclosed ‘the inner history’ in the Constituent Assembly:
“I give this inner history which nobody knows. I agreed to Partition as a last resort, when we had reached a stage when we could have lost all. We had five or six members in the Government, the Muslim League members. They had already established themselves as members who had come to partition the country. At that stage we agreed to Partition; we decided that Partition could be agreed upon the terms that the Punjab should be partitioned -- they wanted the whole of it -- that Bengal should be partitioned -- they wanted Calcutta and whole of it.
"Mr Jinnah did not want a truncated Pakistan, but he had to swallow it. We said that these two provinces should be partitioned. I made a further condition that in two months’ time power should be transferred and an Act should be passed by Parliament in that time, if it guaranteed that the British Government would not interfere with the question of the Indian states.”

Patel continued:
“We said, ‘We will deal with that question; leave it to us; you take no sides. Let paramountcy be dead; you do not directly or indirectly try to revive it in any manner. You do not interfere. We shall settle our problem. The Princes are ours and we shall deal with them.’ On these conditions we agreed to Partition and on those conditions the Bill in Parliament was passed in two months, agreed to by all the three parties. Show me any instance in the history of the British Parliament when such a Bill was passed in two months. But this was done. It gave birth to this Parliament” (CAD Vol X, October 10, 1949). 
Rajmohan Gandhi, the biographer of Patel, reveals about the Sardar making up mind for conceding Pakistan almost in December 1946, much before Viceroy Lord Mountbatten announced the Partition Plan on June 3, 1947.
Sardar Patel never needed certificate from anybody that he was a secular leader despite efforts by a section of people to brand him a Hindu leader. Patel supported the Mahatma’s efforts for Hindu-Muslim unity throughout his life, including the Khilafat movement and resisting India being made theocratic state even after independence. He considered “the Hindu Rashtra as a concept of madmen.”
In his speech on January 6, 1948 at Lucknow, Patel said:
“I am a true friend of Muslims although I have been described as their greatest enemy. I believe in plain speaking. I do not know how to mince matters. I want to tell them frankly that mere declarations of loyalty to the Indian Union will not help them at this critical juncture. They must give practical proof of their declarations. I ask them why they do not unequivocally denounce Pakistan for attacking Indian territory with the connivance of Frontier tribesmen. Is it not their duty to condemn all acts of aggression against India?”
There was so much hue and cry on what Patel told Muslims in Lucknow, and the Mahatma had to defend him. It did hurt the Sardar. In a January 1948 letter, Gandhi wrote to Patel saying:
"Many Muslim friends had complained to me of the Sardar's so-called anti-Muslim attitude. I was able to assure the critics that they were wrong in isolating him from Nehru and me, whom they gratuitously raise to the sky. The Sardar had a bluntness of speech which sometimes unintentionally hurt, though his heart was expansive enough to accommodate all."
Writes Moin Shakir in “Vallabhbhai Patel: A Biography of his Vision and Ideas”, edited by Verinder Grover:
“The Sardar also believed that the Muslims should be given legitimate safeguards as they were not foreigners in India…Patel expected a change of outlook on the part of the Muslim community. They should forget their past and should involve themselves in the processes of nation-building”.
The Sardar was never apologetic about his decision of Partition. In one of his public lectures on August 11, 1947, Patel said:
“People say that Congress partitioned India. It is true. We have taken this responsibility after proper thinking and not because of any fear or pressure. I was strong opponent of partition of India. But when I sat in the Central Government I saw that from a peon to high officers are infested with communal hatred. In such conditions instead of fighting and tolerating the interference of the third party, it is better to separate.”
Patel was the person who presented the unanimous report of the minorities in the Constituent Assembly. He said:
“It is up to the majority community, by its generosity, to create a sense of confidence in the minorities, and so also it will be the duty of the minority community to forget the past and to reflect on what the country has suffered owing to the ‘sense of fairness’, which the foreign rulers thought was necessary to keep balance between community and community.”
Patel was never shy of speaking out truth.
---
*Socio-political historian and senior journalist based in Gujarat. Contact: haridesai@gmail.com. A version of this article first appeared in Asian Voice

Comments

Uma said…
ONE DOESN'T KNOW WHAT TO BELIEVE ABOUT PATEL BUT THE FACT REMAINS THAT DURING THE STRUGGLE FOR INDEPENDENCE HE WAS AS INVOLVED AS NEHRU
Anonymous said…
It was Rajaji who first insisted on Partion. On fact it was 1944 he formulated the famous C R plan..

Jinnah wanted 2 votes for muslins for one vote of Hindus for equality between Muslims and Hindus. Rajaji would have none of the nonsense

TRENDING

Top upper caste judges 'biased' towards Dalit colleagues: US Bar Association report

By Rajiv Shah  A high profile report prepared by the influential  American Bar Association (ABA) Center for Human Rights , taking note of the fact that “in the 70-year history of the Indian Republic, only six Dalit judges have been appointed to the Supreme Court”, has taken strong exception to what it calls “lack of representation of Dalits” in the legal profession and the judiciary.

Unlike other revolutionaries, Hindutva icon wrote 5 mercy petitions to British masters

By Shamsul Islam*  The Hindutva icon VD Savarkar of the RSS-BJP rulers of India submitted not one, two,or three but five mercy petitions to the British masters! Savarkarites argue: “There are no evidences to prove that Savarkar collaborated with the British for his release from jail. In fact, his appeal for release was a ruse. He was well aware of the political developments outside and wanted to be part of it. So he kept requesting for his release. But the British authorities did not trust him a bit” (YD Phadke, ‘A complex Hero’, "The Indian Expres"s, August 31, 2004)

Savarkar 'criminally betrayed' Netaji and his INA by siding with the British rulers

By Shamsul Islam* RSS-BJP rulers of India have been trying to show off as great fans of Netaji. But Indians must know what role ideological parents of today's RSS/BJP played against Netaji and Indian National Army (INA). The Hindu Mahasabha and RSS which always had prominent lawyers on their rolls made no attempt to defend the INA accused at Red Fort trials.

Whither SDG goal? India's maternal mortality rate fall target 5.5% per yr, actual 4.5%

By Srinivas Goli, Parul Puri* The maternal mortality ratio (number of maternal deaths per one lakh live births) is a key and sensitive parameter used by health policymakers to monitor maternal health conditions in particular and women's status in general in a country.

Fresh efforts to subsume Buddhism within Hindu fold 'undermining' Ambedkar

By Aviral Anand*  From Yeola in 1935, when Dr Ambedkar announced that he would not die a Hindu, to Nagpur in 1956 when he converted to Buddhism, is a considerable distance in time. But, there was in him a need to make a public announcement in 1935 about moving away from Hinduism. 

Employment loss vis-a-vis pre-Covid situation 'neutralized', claim Govt of India data

By Arup Mitra, DPS Negi, Puneet Kumar Shrivastav* The Labour Bureau, an attached office of the Ministry of Labour & Employment, has been entrusted with the task of conducting the All-India Quarterly Establishment based Employment Survey (AQEES) which has two components namely Quarterly Employment Survey (QES) in respect of establishments employing 10 or more workers (mostly constituting ‘organised’ segment) and Area Frame Establishment Survey (AFES) to build up a frame in respect of establishments employing nine or less workers.

How green revolution led to 'deterioration' of Punjab economy, land, air and water

By Dr Gian Singh*  A recent research paper, based on a survey of 320 farming families in four districts of Punjab, has tried to show that high crop densities and the use of inputs have led to degradation of land, air, water and humans through a rich agricultural structure. Although mechanization has increased agricultural productivity, it has also caused environmental degradation.

Buddhist shrines were 'massively destroyed' by Brahmanical rulers: Historian DN Jha

Nalanda mahavihara By Our Representative Prominent historian DN Jha, an expert in India's ancient and medieval past, in his new book , "Against the Grain: Notes on Identity, Intolerance and History", in a sharp critique of "Hindutva ideologues", who look at the ancient period of Indian history as "a golden age marked by social harmony, devoid of any religious violence", has said, "Demolition and desecration of rival religious establishments, and the appropriation of their idols, was not uncommon in India before the advent of Islam".

Savarkar 'opposed' Bhagat Singh's, Netaji's dream of India, supported British war efforts

By Shamsul Islam* In a shocking development, the student wing of the RSS put the busts of martyrs Bhagat Singh and Subhash Chandra Bose with Savarkar's on one pedestal at the University of Delhi late in the night on August 20, 2019. Bhagat Singh sacrificed his life for a socialist-democratic-secular republic and Netaji raised Azad Hind Fauj (INA) consisting of people of all religions and regions for armed liberation of India.

Reverse progress in fight against hunger? 15.3% of India undernourished: GHI

By Harchand Ram*  Every year October 16 is observed as World Food Day to celebrate the date of the founding of the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) of the United Nations. In the year 2021, the theme for World Food Day is “Our actions are our Future-Better Production, better nutrition, a better environment, and a better life”.