The US-based academic Nyla Ali Khan is bringing out a book about her grandfather entitled Sheikh Mohammad Abdullah's Reflections on Kashmir. It's being published by Palgrave Macmillan this month and consists of a selection of the Kashmiri leader's political writings.
One of these has been published in Kashmir Ink as an appetiser to the volume - it's the translation of an interview Sheikh Abdullah gave in 1968 to an Urdu publication in Delhi. In it he touches on the issue of Partition - here's an extract:
One of these has been published in Kashmir Ink as an appetiser to the volume - it's the translation of an interview Sheikh Abdullah gave in 1968 to an Urdu publication in Delhi. In it he touches on the issue of Partition - here's an extract:
 |  Sheikh Abdullah in 1965 |
'The demand for the establishment of Pakistan was based on the erroneous view that Hindus and Muslims were separate nationalists. I hold that they do not belong to two different nationalities. They may indeed have individual problems but that need not separate them once and forever.
On this matter, I had long discussions with Mr. Jinnah, and since I was then President of the State People’s Congress, I tried to put before him the problems of the people of Kashmir. Of course, I agreed with him in regard to the ills of the Muslim community in general but I disagreed with him about the cure for those ills. Muslims inhabited the whole continent of India and their places of worship, educational institutions, and properties were all over the country. If the partition of the country into Hindustan and Pakistan was accepted, what would happen to Muslims and their property if they fell outside the new Pakistan?
I was actively involved in seeking a solution to these matters when the Cripps Mission arrived in India. They presented another formula: according to their suggestion, India’s unity would be safeguarded by allotting special representation to minorities, including Muslims. Mr. Jinnah accepted the Cripps Mission proposals, which meant, in effect, that he had rescinded his demand for Pakistan. But, I was most taken aback when Pandit Nehru rejected Cripps proposals. The result was that the demand for Pakistan was renewed.
Pakistan was not a creation of Mr. Jinnah’s. Pakistan was brought into being by Maulana Azad, Pandit Nehru, and Sardar Patel. These people were responsible for the division of the country. If they had accepted Cripps proposals, there would have been no Pakistan and no bloodshed in the Indian subcontinent later.
I had also met the Cabinet Mission and had put my views before them, but at the time of partition, I was in jail and in no position to prevent the unnecessary division of the people.'
On this matter, I had long discussions with Mr. Jinnah, and since I was then President of the State People’s Congress, I tried to put before him the problems of the people of Kashmir. Of course, I agreed with him in regard to the ills of the Muslim community in general but I disagreed with him about the cure for those ills. Muslims inhabited the whole continent of India and their places of worship, educational institutions, and properties were all over the country. If the partition of the country into Hindustan and Pakistan was accepted, what would happen to Muslims and their property if they fell outside the new Pakistan?
I was actively involved in seeking a solution to these matters when the Cripps Mission arrived in India. They presented another formula: according to their suggestion, India’s unity would be safeguarded by allotting special representation to minorities, including Muslims. Mr. Jinnah accepted the Cripps Mission proposals, which meant, in effect, that he had rescinded his demand for Pakistan. But, I was most taken aback when Pandit Nehru rejected Cripps proposals. The result was that the demand for Pakistan was renewed.
Pakistan was not a creation of Mr. Jinnah’s. Pakistan was brought into being by Maulana Azad, Pandit Nehru, and Sardar Patel. These people were responsible for the division of the country. If they had accepted Cripps proposals, there would have been no Pakistan and no bloodshed in the Indian subcontinent later.
I had also met the Cabinet Mission and had put my views before them, but at the time of partition, I was in jail and in no position to prevent the unnecessary division of the people.'
RSS Feed