Cripps Mission

The British government wanted to get the cooperation of the Indian people in order to deal with the war situation. The divergence between the two major representative parties of the country harassed the British government. It found it difficult to make the war a success without the cooperation of both the Hindus and the Muslims.

On March 22, 1942, Britain sent Sir Stafford Cripps with constitutional proposals.

The important points of the declaration were as follows:

• General elections in the provinces would be arranged as soon as the war ended.
• A new Indian dominion, associated with the United Kingdom would be created.
• Those provinces not joining the dominion could form their own separate union.
• Minorities were to be protected.

However, both the Congress and the Muslim League rejected these proposals. Jinnah opposed the plan, as it did not concede Pakistan. Thus the plan came to nothing.

Lahore Resolution

From March 22 to March 24, 1940, the All India Muslim League held its annual session at Minto Park, Lahore. This session proved to be historical.

On the first day of the session, Quaid-i-Azam Muhammad Ali Jinnah narrated the events of the last few months. In an extempore speech he presented his own solution of the Muslim problem. He said that the problem of India was not of an inter-communal nature, but manifestly an international one and must be treated as such. To him the differences between Hindus and the Muslims were so great and so sharp that their union under one central government was full of serious risks. They belonged to two separate and distinct nations and therefore the only chance open was to allow them to have separate states.

In the words of Quaid-i-Azam: “Hindus and the Muslims belong to two different religions, philosophies, social customs and literature. They neither inter-marry nor inter-dine and, indeed, they belong to two different civilizations that are based mainly on conflicting ideas and conceptions. Their concepts on life and of life are different. It is quite clear that Hindus and Muslims derive their inspiration from different sources of history. They have different epics, different heroes and different episodes. Very often the hero of one is a foe of the other, and likewise, their victories and defeats overlap. To yoke together two such nations under a single state, one as a numerical minority and the other as a majority, must lead to growing discontent and final destruction of any fabric that may be so built up for the government of such a state”.

He further said, “Mussalmans are a nation according to any definition of nation. We wish our people to develop to the fullest spiritual, cultural, economic, social and political life in a way that we think best and in consonance with our own ideals and according to the genius of our people”.

On the basis of the above mentioned ideas of the Quaid, A. K. Fazl-ul-Haq, the then Chief Minister of Bengal, moved the historical resolution which has since come to be known as Lahore Resolution or Pakistan Resolution.

The Resolution declared: “No constitutional plan would be workable or acceptable to the Muslims unless geographical contiguous units are demarcated into regions which should be so constituted with such territorial readjustments as may be necessary. That the areas in which the Muslims are numerically in majority as in the North-Western and Eastern zones of India should be grouped to constitute independent states in which the constituent units shall be autonomous and sovereign”.

It further reads, “That adequate, effective and mandatory safeguards shall be specifically provided in the constitution for minorities in the units and in the regions for the protection of their religious, cultural, economic, political, administrative and other rights of the minorities, with their consultation. Arrangements thus should be made for the security of Muslims where they were in a minority”.

The Resolution repudiated the concept of United India and recommended the creation of an independent Muslim state consisting of Punjab, N. W. F. P., Sindh and Baluchistan in the northwest, and Bengal and Assam in the northeast. The Resolution was seconded by Maulana Zafar Ali Khan from Punjab,
Sardar Aurangzeb from the N. W. F. P., Sir Abdullah Haroon from Sindh, and Qazi Esa from Baluchistan, along with many others.

The Resolution was passed on March 24. It laid down only the principles, with the details left to be worked out at a future date. It was made a part of the All India Muslim League’s constitution in 1941. It was on the basis of this resolution that in 1946 the Muslim League decided to go for one state for the Muslims, instead of two.

Having passed the Pakistan Resolution, the Muslims of India changed their ultimate goal. Instead of seeking alliance with the Hindu community, they set out on a path whose destination was a separate homeland for the Muslims of India.

Shaheed Gunj Mosque Incident

he Shahidganj mosque, located in Landa bazaar outside Delhi gate at Lahore, was considered as the holy place for both Muslims and Sikhs. It was occupied by Sikhs in the eighteenth century and was used as a Sikh gurdwara for almost 170 years. Though through out that period Muslims were not allowed to offer prayers in the mosque, yet the building was physically kept intact.

The Muslims kept on protesting against the Sikh occupation of the Mosque for a long time. However, the situation got out of control when, suddenly on 29 June 1935, the Sikh community announced to demolish the Mosque. On the same night, a Muslim crowd of three or four thousand assembled in front of the mosque to protect it. A direct fight between this crowd and the Sikhs inside the gurdwara was averted by the intervention of the government authorities. Later, the British took an undertaking from the Sikhs that they would not further demolish the mosque. But, during the next week, while strenuous efforts were being made to persuade the leaders to reach an amicable settlement, the Sikh leaders, under pressure from the extremist element, again set out to demolish the mosque.

In the beginning, the Muslim leaders reacted in a mild way. Anjuman-i-Tahaffuz-i-Masjid Shahidganj (a committee for the protection of the Shahidganj mosque) was founded by a wide spectrum of Unionist Muslims, lawyers, journalists and biradari leaders to find legal means to protect the mosque and press for peaceful settlement of the issue. However, leaders like Maulana Zafar Ali Khan warned that the issue could lead to a great bloodshed if the matter was not settled immediately for the Muslims would not hesitate to make any sacrifice to preserve the mosque.

Appreciating the importance of the issue, Sir Herbert Emerson, the Governor of the Punjab, encouraged a negotiated
settlement. But, on the night of July 7, the Sikhs demolished the mosque. The news spread like wild fire throughout Lahore, but, before any serious reaction, curfew was enforced in the city and the situation was controlled. When the curfew was lifted, the Muslims, under Maulana Zafar Ali Khan, formed the Majlis Ittehad-i-Millat on July 14, with an object to fight for the mosque. They even planned to recruit volunteers, dressed them in blue shirts, for the purpose of carrying on the agitation. The fact of the matter was that behind the Shahidganj agitation lay the impulse of Lahore’s Muslims to assert the moral sovereignty of the Muslim community of which the mosque itself was a symbol and of which the principle of the supremacy of the Shariat was more than a symbol.

The Muslims held a public meeting on July 19 at the Badshahi mosque, after Friday prayers. The speakers urged the worshippers to march directly on the Shahidganj mosque. Inspired with the religious zeal and shouting religious slogans, the Muslims gathered at the entrance to Landa bazaar in front of the city police station. They did not want to listen to the police. They were ready to die in the way of their mission. When police failed to get control of the situation, and unable to disperse processionist peacefully, they, twice, opened fire on the crowd on July 20. The Muslims finally dispersed when more than a dozen of them died due to heavy firing by the police on the evening of July 21. The situation in Lahore continued to cause anxiety till the close of the year.

The Ideology of Pakistan: Two-Nation Theory

The ideology of Pakistan stems from the instinct of the Muslim community of South Asia to maintain their individuality by resisting all attempts by the Hindu society to absorb it. Muslims of South Asia believe that Islam and Hinduism are not only two religions, but also two social orders that have given birth to two distinct cultures with no similarities. A deep study of the history of this land proves that the differences between Hindus and Muslims were not confined to the struggle for political supremacy, but were also manifested in the clash of two social orders. Despite living together for more than a thousand years, they continued to develop different cultures and traditions. Their eating habits, music, architecture and script, are all poles apart. Even the language they speak and the dresses they wear are entirely different.

The ideology of Pakistan took shape through an evolutionary process. Historical experience provided the base; with Sir Syed Ahmad Khan began the period of Muslim self-awakening; Allama Iqbal provided the philosophical explanation; Quaid-i-Azam translated it into a political reality; and the Constituent Assembly of Pakistan, by passing Objectives Resolution in March 1949, gave it legal sanction. It was due to the realization of Muslims of South Asia that they are different from the Hindus that they demanded separate electorates. When they realized that their future in a ‘Democratic India’ dominated by Hindu majority was not safe; they put forward their demand for a separate state.

The Muslims of South Asia believe that they are a nation in the modern sense of the word. The basis of their nationhood is neither territorial, racial, linguistic nor ethnic; rather they are a nation because they belong to the same faith, Islam. On this basis they consider it their fundamental right to be entitled to self-determination. They demanded that areas where they were in majority should be constituted into a sovereign state, wherein they would be enabled to order their lives in individual and collective spheres in accordance with the teachings of Holy Quran and Sunnah of the Holy Prophet (S. A. W.). They further want their state to strengthen the bonds of unity among Muslim countries.

As early as in the beginning of the 11th century, Al-Biruni observed that Hindus differed from the Muslims in all matters and habits. He further elaborated his argument by writing that the Hindus considered Muslims “Mlachha”, or impure. And they forbid having any connection with them, be it intermarriage or any other bond of relationship. They even avoid sitting, eating and drinking with them, because they feel “polluted”. The speech made by Quaid-i-Azam at Minto Park, Lahore on March 22, 1940 was very similar to Al-Biruni’s thesis in theme and tone. In this speech, he stated that Hindus and Muslims belong to two different religious philosophies, with different social customs and literature. They neither intermarry, nor eat together, and indeed belong to two different civilizations whose very foundations are based on conflicting ideas and concepts. Their outlook on life and of life is different. He emphasized that in spite of the passage of about 1,000 years the relations between the Hindus and Muslims could not attain the level of cordiality. The only difference between the writing of Al-Biruni and the speech of Quaid-i-Azam was that Al-Biruni made calculated predictions, while Quaid-i-Azam had history behind him to support his argument.

The Ideology of Pakistan has its roots deep in history. The history of South Asia is largely a history of rivalry and conflict between the Hindus and Muslims of the region. Both communities have been living together in the same area since the early 8th century, since the advent of Islam in India. Yet, the two have failed to develop harmonious relations. In the beginning, one could find the Muslims and Hindus struggling for supremacy in the battlefield. Starting with the war between Muhammad bin Qasim and Raja Dahir in 712, armed conflicts between Hindus and Muslims run in thousands. Clashes between Mahmud of Ghazni and Jaypal, Muhammad Ghuri and Prithvi Raj, Babur and Rana Sanga and Aurangzeb and Shivaji are cases in point.

When the Hindus of South Asia failed to establish Hindu Padshahi through force, they opted for back door conspiracies. Bhakti Movement with the desire to merge Islam and Hinduism was one of the biggest attacks on the ideology of the Muslims of the region. Akbar’s diversion from the main stream Islamic ideology was one of the Hindus’ greatest success stories. However, due to the immediate counterattack by Mujaddid Alf Sani and his pupils, this era proved to be a short one. Muslims once again proved their separate identity during the regimes of Jehangir, Shah Jehan and particularly Aurangzeb. The attempts to bring the two communities close could not succeed because the differences between the two are fundamental and have no meeting point. At the root of the problem lies the difference between the two religions. So long as the two people want to lead their lives according to their respective faith, they cannot be one.

With the advent of the British rule in India in 1858, Hindu-Muslim relations entered a new phase. The British brought with them a new political philosophy commonly known as ‘territorial nationalism’. Before the coming of the British, there was no concept of a ‘nation’ in South Asia and the region had never been a single political unit. The British attempt to weld the two communities in to a ‘nation’ failed. The British concept of a nation did not fit the religious-social system of South Asia. Similarly, the British political system did not suite the political culture of South Asia. The British political system, commonly known as ‘democracy’, gave majority the right to rule. But unlike Britain, the basis of majority and minority in South Asia was not political but religious and ethnic. The attempt to enforce the British political model in South Asia, instead of solving the political problems, only served to make the situation more complex. The Hindus supported the idea while it was strongly opposed by the Muslims. The Muslims knew that implementation of the new order would mean the end of their separate identity and endless rule of the Hindu majority in the name of nationalism and democracy. The Muslims refused to go the British way. They claimed that they were a separate nation and the basis of their nation was the common religion Islam. They refused to accept a political system that would reduce them to a permanent minority. They first demanded separate electorates and later a separate state. Religious and cultural differences between
Hindus and Muslims increased due to political rivalry under the British rule.

On March 24, 1940, the Muslims finally abandoned the idea of federalism and defined a separate homeland as their target. Quaid-i-Azam considered the creation of Pakistan a means to an end and not the end in itself. He wanted Pakistan to be an Islamic and democratic state. According to his wishes and in accordance with the inspirations of the people of Pakistan, the Constituent Assembly of Pakistan passed the Objectives Resolution. The adoption of Objectives Resolution removed all doubts, if there were any, about the ideology of Pakistan. The Muslims of Pakistan decided once and for all to make Pakistan a state wherein the Muslims shall be enabled to order their lives in their individual and collective spheres, in accordance to the teachings and requirements of Islam as set out in the Holy Quran and Sunnah.

Rule of Congress Ministries

The Government of India Act of 1935 was practically implemented in 1937. The provincial elections were held in the winter of 1936-37. There were two major political parties in the Sub-continent at that time, the Congress and the Muslim League. Both parties did their best to persuade the masses before these elections and put before them their manifesto. The political manifestos of both parties were almost identical, although there were two major differences. Congress stood for joint electorate and the League for separate electorates; Congress wanted Hindi as official language with Deva Nagri script of writing while the League wanted Urdu with Persian script.

Part-1

Part-2

According to the results of the elections, Congress, as the oldest, richest and best-organized political party, emerged as the single largest representative in the Legislative Assembles. Yet it failed to secure even 40 percent of the total number of seats. Out of the 1,771 total seats in the 11 provinces, Congress was only able to win slightly more then 750. Thus the results clearly disapproved Gandhi’s claim that his party represented 95 percent of the population of India. Its success, moreover, was mainly confined to the Hindu constituencies. Out of the 491 Muslim seats, Congress could only capture 26. Muslim Leagues’ condition was also bad as it could only win 106 Muslim seats. The party only managed to win two seats from the Muslim majority province of Punjab.

The final results of the elections were declared in February 1937. The Indian National Congress had a clear majority in Madras, U. P., C. P., Bihar and Orrisa. It was also able to form a coalition government in Bombay and N. W. F. P. Congress was also able to secure political importance in Sindh and Assam, where they joined the ruling coalition. Thus directly or indirectly, Congress was in power in nine out of eleven provinces. The Unionist Party of Sir Fazl-i-Hussain and Praja Krishak Party of Maulvi Fazl-i-Haq were able to form governments in Punjab and Bengal respectively, without the interference of Congress. Muslim League failed to form government in any province. Quaid-i-Azam offered Congress to form a coalition government with the League but the Congress rejected his offer.

The Congress refused to set up its government until the British agreed to their demand that the Governor would not use his powers in legislative affairs. Many discussions took place between the Congress and the British Government and at last the British Government consented, although it was only a verbal commitment and no amendment was made in the Act of 1935. Eventually, after a four-month delay, Congress formed their ministries in July 1937.

The Congress proved to be a pure Hindu party and worked during its reign only for the betterment of the Hindus. Twenty-seven months of the Congress rule were like a nightmare for the Muslims of South Asia. Some of the Congress leaders even stated that they would take revenge from the Muslims for the last 700 years of their slavery. Even before the formation of government, the Congress started a Muslim Mass Contact Movement, with the aim to convince Muslims that there were only two political parties in India, i.e. the British and the Congress. The aim was to decrease the importance of the Muslim League for the Muslims. After taking charge in July 1937, Congress declared Hindi as the national language and Deva Nagri as the official script. The Congress flag was given the status of national flag, slaughtering of cows was prohibited and it was made compulsory for the children to worship the picture of Gandhi at school. Band-i-Mataram, an anti-Muslim song taken from Bankim Chandra Chatterji’s novel Ananda Math, was made the national anthem of the country. Religious intolerance was the order of the day. Muslims were not allowed to construct new mosques. Hindus would play drums in front of mosques when Muslims were praying.

The Congress government introduced a new educational policy in the provinces under their rule known as the Warda Taleemi Scheme. The main plan was to sway Muslim children against their ideology and to tell them that all the people living in India were Indian and thus belonged to one nation. In Bihar and C. P. the Vidya Mandar Scheme was introduced according to which Mandar education was made compulsory at elementary level. The purpose of the scheme was to obliterate the cultural traditions of the Muslims and to inculcate into the minds of Muslim children the superiority of the Hindu culture.

The Congress ministries did their best to weaken the economy of Muslims. They closed the doors of government offices for them, which was one of the main sources of income for the Muslims in the region. They also harmed Muslim trade and agriculture. When Hindu-Muslim riots broke out due to these biased policies of the Congress ministries, the government pressured the judges; decisions were made in favor of Hindus and Muslims were sent behind bars.

To investigate Muslim grievances, the Muslim League formulated the “Pirpur Report” under the chairmanship of Raja Syed Muhammad Mehdi of Pirpur. Other reports concerning Muslim grievances in Congress run provinces were A. K. Fazl-ul-Haq’s “Muslim Sufferings Under Congress Rule”, and “The Sharif Report”.

The allegation that Congress was representing Hindus only was voiced also by eminent British personalities. The Marquees of Lothian in April 1938 termed the Congress rule as a “rising tide of Hindu rule”. Sir William Barton writing in the “National Review” in June 1939 also termed the Congress rule as “the rising tide of political Hinduism”.

At the outbreak of the World War II, the Viceroy proclaimed India’s involvement without prior consultations with the main political parties. When Congress demanded an immediate transfer of power in return for cooperation of the war efforts, the British government refused. As a result Congress resigned from power. Quaid-i-Azam asked the Muslims to celebrate December 22, 1939 as a day of deliverance and thanksgiving in token of relief from the tyranny and oppression of the Congress rule.

Government of India Act 1935

After the failure of the Third Round Table Conference, the British government gave the Joint Select Committee the task of formulating the new Act for India. The Committee comprised of 16 members each from the House of Commons and House of Lords, 20 representatives from British India and seven from the princely states. Lord Linlithgow was appointed as the president of the Committee. After a year and a half of deliberations, the Committee finally came out with a draft Bill on February 5, 1935. The Bill was discussed in the House of Commons for 43 days and in the House of Lords for 13 days and finally, after being signed by the King, was enforced as the Government of India Act, 1935, in July 1935.

The main features of the Act of 1935 were:

• A Federation of India was promised for, comprising both provinces and states. The provisions of the Act establishing the federal central government were not to go into operation until a specified number of rulers of states had signed Instruments of Accession. Since, this did not happen, the central government continued to function in accordance with the 1919 Act and only the part of the 1935 Act dealing with the provincial governments went into operation.
• The Governor General remained the head of the central administration and enjoyed wide powers concerning administration, legislation and finance.
• No finance bill could be placed in the Central Legislature without the consent of the Governor General.
• The Federal Legislature was to consist of two houses, the Council of State (Upper House) and the Federal Assembly (Lower House).
• The Council of State was to consist of 260 members, out of whom 156 were to be elected from the British India and 104 to be nominated by the rulers of princely states.
• The Federal Assembly was to consist of 375 members; out of which 250 were to be elected by the Legislative Assemblies of the British Indian provinces while 125 were to be nominated by the rulers of princely states.
• The Central Legislature had the right to pass any bill, but the bill required the approval of the Governor General before it became Law. On the other hand Governor General had the power to frame ordinances.
• The Indian Council was abolished. In its place, few advisers were nominated to help the Secretary of State for India.
• The Secretary of State was not expected to interfere in matters that the Governor dealt with, with the help of Indian Ministers.
• The provinces were given autonomy with respect to subjects delegated to them.
• Diarchy, which had been established in the provinces by the Act of 1919, was to be established at the Center. However it came to an end in the provinces.
• Two new provinces Sindh and Orissa were created.
• Reforms were introduced in N. W. F. P. as were in the other provinces.
• Separate electorates were continued as before.
• One-third Muslim representation in the Central Legislature was guaranteed.
• Autonomous provincial governments in 11 provinces, under ministries responsible to legislatures, would be setup.
• Burma and Aden were separated from India.
• The Federal Court was established in the Center.
• The Reserve Bank of India was established.

Both the Indian National Congress and the Muslim League opposed the Act, but participated in the provincial elections of winter 1936-37, conducted under stipulations of the Act. At the time of independence, the two dominions of India and Pakistan accepted the Act of 1935, with few amendments, as their provisional constitution.

Quaid-i-Azam and the Reorganization of Muslim League

The Ambassador of Hindu-Muslim Unity, Mohammad Ali Jinnah, was thoroughly disappointed by the anti Muslim attitude of the Indian National Congress in the Nehru report. He considered it as parting of the ways with Congress and with a broken heart decided to leave India for good. After attending the First Round Table Conference in 1931, he decided to settle down permanently in London.

It was because of his correspondence with Allama Iqbal and his meeting with Liaquat Ali Khan in London that made him revise his decision. Quaid-i-Azam came back to India in 1934 but this time he was a totally different person. With no more interest in Hindu Muslim unity, his only aim was then to work for the betterment of the Muslims of South Asia. Probably he was clear in his mind that the only solution of the problem of South Asian Muslims was a separate homeland for them. However, he knew that this idea should not be made public before doing necessary homework.

At the time of his return to South Asia, All India Muslim League was a political party without any grass root support. The party was also divided into Hidayat League and Aziz League. Quaid-i-Azam’s first success on his return was the reunification of the two factions of the party. The united Muslim League had a lot of expectations from Quaid-i-Azam as they elected him as the President of the party. The Quaid responding to the expectations decided to reorganize the League.

To begin with he decided to popularize the League among the ordinary Muslims. He reduced the annual membership fee from Rs. 4 to only two annas (one-eighth of a rupee). Then central and provincial Parliamentary Boards of the party were set up. Moreover, a well-defined constitution was also prepared. A committee comprising Maulana Akram Khan, Husain Imam and Haji Abdus Sattar was set up to increase the membership of the Muslim League.

In 1938 Muslim League started its separate Women Chapter. In the same year in order to maintain discipline during the sessions of the League, Muslim League National Guards was launched. Quaid-i-Azam also appealed from the Muslims community of South Asia to donate one million rupees to strengthen the financial position of the Party.