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

TRENDING

Buddhist shrines massively destroyed by Brahmanical rulers in "pre-Islamic" era: Historian DN Jha's survey

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".

RSS' 25,000 Shishu Mandirs 'follow' factory school model of Christian missionaries

By Bhabani Shankar Nayak*
The executive committee of the International Union of Anthropological and Ethnological Sciences (IUAES) recently decided to drop the KISS University in Odisha as the co-host of the World Anthropology Congress-2023. The decision is driven by the argument that KISS University is a factory school.

India must recognise: 4,085 km Himalayan borders are with Tibet, not China

By Tenzin Tsundue, Sandeep Pandey*
There has as been a cancerous wound around India’s Himalayan neck ever since India's humiliating defeat during the Chinese invasion of India in 1962. The recent Galwan Valley massacre has only added salt to the wound. It has come to this because, when China invaded the neighbouring country Tibet in 1950, India was in high romance with the newly-established communist regime under Mao Zedong after a bloody revolution.

Swami Vivekananda's views on caste and sexuality were 'painfully' regressive

By Bhaskar Sur*
Swami Vivekananda now belongs more to the modern Hindu mythology than reality. It makes a daunting job to discover the real human being who knew unemployment, humiliation of losing a teaching job for 'incompetence', longed in vain for the bliss of a happy conjugal life only to suffer the consequent frustration.

Time to give Covid burial, not suspend, World Bank's 'flawed' Doing Business ranking

By Maju Varghese*
On August 27, the World Bank came out with a statement suspending the Doing Business Report. The statement said that a number of irregularities have been reported regarding changes to the data in the Doing Business 2018 and Doing Business 2020 reports, published in October 2017 and 2019. The changes in the data were inconsistent with the Doing Business methodology.

Delhi riots: Cops summoning, grilling, intimidating young to give 'false' evidence

Counterview Desk
More than 440 concerned citizens have supported the statement issued by well-known bureaucrat-turned-human rights activist Harsh Mander ‘We will not be silenced’ which said that the communal riots in Delhi in February 2020 have not been caused by any conspiracy, as alleged by the Delhi Police, but by “hate speech and provocative statements made by a number of political leaders of the ruling party.”

WHO chief ignores India, cites Pak as one of 7 top examples in fight against Covid-19

By Our Representative
In a move that would cause consternation in India’s top policy makers in the Modi government, Dr Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, World Health Organization (WHO) director-general, has singled out Pakistan among seven countries that have set “examples” in investing in a healthier and safer future in order to fight the Covid-19 pandemic.

Tata Mundra: NGOs worry as US court rules World Bank can't be sued for 'damages'

By Kate Fried, Mir Jalal*
On August 24 evening, a federal court ruled that the World Bank Group cannot be sued for any damage caused by its lending, despite last year’s Supreme Court ruling in the same case that these institutions can be sued for their “commercial activity” in the United States.

Black sheep in industry 'tarnishing' banks' image, why should pensioners suffer?

By Moin Qazi* Public banks have played a historically stellar role in financial inclusion and the development of the underserved sector. These banks have been the backbone of the government’s socio-economic agenda. State-owned banks in developing countries have to shoulder the main burden of the government’s development policies -- from rural lending to infrastructure development.