Skip to main content

Hiding failures, targeting Nehru, BJP "refuses" to blame Muslim League for Partition

By Ram Puniyani*
In the recently-released BJP manifesto, what strikes one is absence of any mention of what their previous promises achieved, as same promises are being repeated with stronger dose of ultra-nationalism. In public speeches its leaders are attributing the failures of their government to Jawaharlal Nehru, the first prime minster of India.
While speaking in one of the public meetings, Congress general secretary Priyanka Gandhi, criticizing Narendra Modi said, “He has an obsession with our family. He says Nehru did this, Indira Gandhi did this, but Modiji what did you do, you must say what you did in five years?" In addition even in the matters of failure of their diplomacy and policy in relation to other countries, blame is squarely put on Nehru in some or the other way.
In the aftermath of Pulwama and Balakot strike, the UN condemned the act of terror and there was a move to put international sanctions against Jaish-e-Mohammad chief Masood Azar. China blocked the move. In response Rahul Gandhi went in to critique Modi for his failure to take the matters with China so that they could support the sanctions against this Pakistan based terrorist organization.
Retaliating to this simple criticism, BJP spokespersons Arun Jaitley and Ravishakar Prasad asserted that it is due to Nehru that China is in United Nations Security Council (UNSC). Prasad tweeted, “China wouldn’t be in UNSC had your great-grandfather not ‘gifted’ it to them at India’s cost,” and that that India’s first Prime Minister had offered the United Nations Security Council seat to China.
He quoted Shashi Tharoor’s book, ‘Nehru: The Invention of India’. This was a distorted presentation of what Tharoor has argued in the book.
This is one of the methods of BJP and affiliates; to distort the facts of history, even the recent one to make their political point. One knows how they have distorted the medieval history to demonize today's Muslims; one knows how they have twisted history of early India to show that Aryans were the original natives of this land.
Now one sees even the contemporary history; hardly that of last few decades, stands mauled in their hands. It is not out of ignorance, it is out of deliberate designs that they indulge in these distortions.
We know that when the United Nations was formed at the end of the Second World War, five big nations of the World, United States, Britain, Russia, France and China, were to be the permanent members of the Security Council of UN, endowed with veto power. China was that time ruled by Chiang Kai Shek and was called Republic of China (RoC).
With the success of the revolution of Mao Tse Tung, Chiang Kai Shek escaped to Taiwan and continued to call his regime as RoC. Meanwhile, the Communist Party established People’s Republic of China (PRC) on the mainland with all the population, barring the one in Taiwan occupied by Chian Kai Shek.
Shashi Tharoor in a series of tweets clarified the real chronology of the events. He pointed out, due to change of regime in China, Nehru called on the other permanent members to admit Communist-ruled People's Republic of China (PRC) to UN and give it the permanent seat held by Taiwan.
US understood the objection to RoC but was unwilling to admit PRC. In this context it was suggested that India take over the Chinese permanent seat. Nehru felt this was wrong and would compound one injustice to China with another.
He said the RoC seat should be given to PRC & India should one day get a permanent seat in its own right. As per Tharoor, and as facts bear, out India could not have occupied this seat as it would require an amendment to UN Charter and US would not permit any such modification.
It was much later that Communist China was accorded the permanent membership, replacing Chaing Kai Shek regime. The main issue for Nehru was to see that the Communist China becomes part of the world body. Also, he knew of the diverse interests of US, on one hand, and USSR, on the other. Nehru was no one to offer the seat to PRC.
The latest on the scene of such distortions is Modi is saying that India’s partition took place due to Congress. This is the most preposterous lie in many a decade. It not only shows the lack of knowledge of the dynamics of the partition tragedy of India on the part of Modi, it also shows how Modi associates are sharpening their biases to suit their world view.
The tragedy of India’s partition was mainly due to the British policy of divide and rule, well assisted by Savarkar’s two nation theory, which regarded that there are two nations in India, the Muslim nation and the Hindu nation. This got its mirror image support from the ideology of the Muslim League, who regarded that the Muslim elite have been a Muslim nation for last many centuries.
The malicious propaganda against Nehru-Congress may strike cord with few unsuspecting elements, but even a cursory glance at the contemporary history will tell us the massive all round progress achieved during last several decades.
It may be in the field of education, science, technology, health, laying the foundations of modern industries or modern irrigation, Nehru’s leadership was a major point in transformation of India from a predominantly agricultural economy to the present industrial and Information technology era.
All the Indian Institute of Technologies, All-India Institute of Medical Sciences, Council of Scientific & Industrial Research, Bhabha Atomic Research Centre and a series of public sector industries are a testimony of the vision for the builder of modern India, Jawaharlal Nehru, who not only succeeded in locating our place in the global chessboard but also saw that modernization in various fields is the key to uplift of the country from the abysmal condition in which British had left us after their plunder project drained us of our valuable resources and riches.
Since BJP knows Nehru is the axis of modern democratic India, as opposed to their agenda of sectarianism, they are out to criticize him by distorting the facts.

Comments

TRENDING

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.

CFA flags ‘welfare retreat’ in Union Budget 2026–27, alleges corporate bias

By Jag Jivan  The advocacy group Centre for Financial Accountability (CFA) has sharply criticised the Union Budget 2026–27 , calling it a “budget sans kartavya” that weakens public welfare while favouring private corporations, even as inequality, climate risks and social distress deepen across the country.

From water scarcity to sustainable livelihoods: The turnaround of Salaiya Maaf

By Bharat Dogra   We were sitting at a central place in Salaiya Maaf village, located in Mahoba district of Uttar Pradesh, for a group discussion when an elderly woman said in an emotional voice, “It is so good that you people came. Land on which nothing grew can now produce good crops.”

'Big blow to crores of farmers’: Opposition mounts against US–India trade deal

By A Representative   Farmers’ organisations and political groups have sharply criticised the emerging contours of the US–India trade agreement, warning that it could severely undermine Indian agriculture, depress farm incomes and open the doors to genetically modified (GM) food imports in violation of domestic regulatory safeguards.

When free trade meets unequal fields: The India–US agriculture question

By Vikas Meshram   The proposed trade agreement between India and the United States has triggered intense debate across the country. This agreement is not merely an attempt to expand bilateral trade; it is directly linked to Indian agriculture, the rural economy, democratic processes, and global geopolitics. Free trade agreements (FTAs) may appear attractive on the surface, but the political economy and social consequences behind them are often unequal and controversial. Once again, a fundamental question has surfaced: who will benefit from this agreement, and who will pay its price?

Why Russian oil has emerged as the flashpoint in India–US trade talks

By N.S. Venkataraman*  In recent years, India has entered into trade agreements with several countries, the latest being agreements with the European Union and the United States. While the India–EU trade agreement has been widely viewed in India as mutually beneficial and balanced, the trade agreement with the United States has generated comparatively greater debate and scrutiny.

Trade pacts with EU, US raise alarms over farmers, MSMEs and policy space

By A Representative   A broad coalition of farmers’ organisations, trade unions, traders, public health advocates and environmental groups has raised serious concerns over India’s recently concluded trade agreements with the European Union and the United States, warning that the deals could have far-reaching implications for livelihoods, policy autonomy and the country’s long-term development trajectory. In a public statement issued, the Forum for Trade Justice described the two agreements as marking a “tectonic shift” in India’s trade policy and cautioned that the projected gains in exports may come at a significant social and economic cost.

From Puri to the State: How Odisha turned the dream of drinkable tap water into policy

By Hans Harelimana Hirwa, Mansee Bal Bhargava   Drinking water directly from the tap is generally associated with developed countries where it is considered safe and potable. Only about 50 countries around the world offer drinkable tap water, with the majority located in Europe and North America, and a few in Asia and Oceania. Iceland, Switzerland, Finland, Germany, and Singapore have the highest-quality tap water, followed by Canada, New Zealand, Japan, the USA, Australia, the UK, Costa Rica, and Chile.

Michael Parenti: Scholar known for critiques of capitalism and U.S. foreign policy

By Harsh Thakor*  Michael Parenti, an American political scientist, historian, and author known for his Marxist and anti-imperialist perspectives, died on January 24 at the age of 92. Over several decades, Parenti wrote and lectured extensively on issues of capitalism, imperialism, democracy, media, and U.S. foreign policy. His work consistently challenged dominant political and economic narratives, particularly those associated with Western liberal democracies and global capitalism.