"Hidden Facts Behind British India’s Freedom: A Scholarly Look into Allama Mashraqi and Quaid-e-Azam’s Political Conflict" Allama Mashraqi (Inayatullah Khan) and Quaid-e-Azam Muhammad Ali Jinnah, two eminent 20th century personalities of the Indian sub-continent, fought for freedom — the former for an undivided and the latter for a divided British India. The political controversy between these two leaders over the partition of the Indian sub-continent is an extremely important topic from the independence movement’s perspective. This work discusses Allama Mashraqi’s rigorous efforts to prevent the Muslims and India from being divided, while Quaid-e-Azam remained focused on the partition of India.
Separation divided the country and the Muslims into three parts, and the majority of 100 million Muslims became second-class citizens in their own homeland. To nationalist leaders of the time (who were anti-partition), Quaid-e-Azam was playing in the hands of the British; and the gilded gentry of All-India Muslim League (AIML) had no history of serving the masses and partition was a short cut to their ambition. Did the British use the AIML, and was a truncated Pakistan a parting kick of the British to weaken the Muslims? And why did the British never imprison AIML leadership, if the AIML was truly fighting to end their rule?
Many other intriguing questions arise that have yet to satisfy a logical mind. For instance, why did the British deny recognition of all Muslim parties, exceptAIML, and never sought their points of view? Why did the AIML insist on division, when Pakistan could not safeguard 100 million Muslims? Why was it necessary to create Pakistan out of Muslim majority provinces where they were already in power? Were nationalists, who were anti-partition, lacking in vision or apathetic to the future of the Muslims? Why has the nationalist point of view of an undivided India been kept concealed (libraries are kept empty of their material), and why has the public only been reading the AIML’s perspective?
This book brings these questions to light and presents Mashraqi’s point of view. The author uncovers facts that are not easy to dispute and unearths the falsehood, the twisting and manipulation of facts and the propaganda surrounding the freedom movement. It reveals the hidden truths behind the creation of Pakistan and shatters misconceptions regarding the history of the Indian sub-continent.
Separation divided the country and the Muslims into three parts, and the majority of 100 million Muslims became second-class citizens in their own homeland. To nationalist leaders of the time (who were anti-partition), Quaid-e-Azam was playing in the hands of the British; and the gilded gentry of All-India Muslim League (AIML) had no history of serving the masses and partition was a short cut to their ambition. Did the British use the AIML, and was a truncated Pakistan a parting kick of the British to weaken the Muslims? And why did the British never imprison AIML leadership, if the AIML was truly fighting to end their rule?
Many other intriguing questions arise that have yet to satisfy a logical mind. For instance, why did the British deny recognition of all Muslim parties, exceptAIML, and never sought their points of view? Why did the AIML insist on division, when Pakistan could not safeguard 100 million Muslims? Why was it necessary to create Pakistan out of Muslim majority provinces where they were already in power? Were nationalists, who were anti-partition, lacking in vision or apathetic to the future of the Muslims? Why has the nationalist point of view of an undivided India been kept concealed (libraries are kept empty of their material), and why has the public only been reading the AIML’s perspective?
This book brings these questions to light and presents Mashraqi’s point of view. The author uncovers facts that are not easy to dispute and unearths the falsehood, the twisting and manipulation of facts and the propaganda surrounding the freedom movement. It reveals the hidden truths behind the creation of Pakistan and shatters misconceptions regarding the history of the Indian sub-continent.
No comments:
Post a Comment