☀️ JOIN SPN MOBILE
Forums
New posts
Guru Granth Sahib
Composition, Arrangement & Layout
ਜਪੁ | Jup
ਸੋ ਦਰੁ | So Dar
ਸੋਹਿਲਾ | Sohilaa
ਰਾਗੁ ਸਿਰੀਰਾਗੁ | Raag Siree-Raag
Gurbani (14-53)
Ashtpadiyan (53-71)
Gurbani (71-74)
Pahre (74-78)
Chhant (78-81)
Vanjara (81-82)
Vaar Siri Raag (83-91)
Bhagat Bani (91-93)
ਰਾਗੁ ਮਾਝ | Raag Maajh
Gurbani (94-109)
Ashtpadi (109)
Ashtpadiyan (110-129)
Ashtpadi (129-130)
Ashtpadiyan (130-133)
Bara Maha (133-136)
Din Raen (136-137)
Vaar Maajh Ki (137-150)
ਰਾਗੁ ਗਉੜੀ | Raag Gauree
Gurbani (151-185)
Quartets/Couplets (185-220)
Ashtpadiyan (220-234)
Karhalei (234-235)
Ashtpadiyan (235-242)
Chhant (242-249)
Baavan Akhari (250-262)
Sukhmani (262-296)
Thittee (296-300)
Gauree kii Vaar (300-323)
Gurbani (323-330)
Ashtpadiyan (330-340)
Baavan Akhari (340-343)
Thintteen (343-344)
Vaar Kabir (344-345)
Bhagat Bani (345-346)
ਰਾਗੁ ਆਸਾ | Raag Aasaa
Gurbani (347-348)
Chaupaday (348-364)
Panchpadde (364-365)
Kaafee (365-409)
Aasaavaree (409-411)
Ashtpadiyan (411-432)
Patee (432-435)
Chhant (435-462)
Vaar Aasaa (462-475)
Bhagat Bani (475-488)
ਰਾਗੁ ਗੂਜਰੀ | Raag Goojaree
Gurbani (489-503)
Ashtpadiyan (503-508)
Vaar Gujari (508-517)
Vaar Gujari (517-526)
ਰਾਗੁ ਦੇਵਗੰਧਾਰੀ | Raag Dayv-Gandhaaree
Gurbani (527-536)
ਰਾਗੁ ਬਿਹਾਗੜਾ | Raag Bihaagraa
Gurbani (537-556)
Chhant (538-548)
Vaar Bihaagraa (548-556)
ਰਾਗੁ ਵਡਹੰਸ | Raag Wadhans
Gurbani (557-564)
Ashtpadiyan (564-565)
Chhant (565-575)
Ghoriaan (575-578)
Alaahaniiaa (578-582)
Vaar Wadhans (582-594)
ਰਾਗੁ ਸੋਰਠਿ | Raag Sorath
Gurbani (595-634)
Asatpadhiya (634-642)
Vaar Sorath (642-659)
ਰਾਗੁ ਧਨਾਸਰੀ | Raag Dhanasaree
Gurbani (660-685)
Astpadhiya (685-687)
Chhant (687-691)
Bhagat Bani (691-695)
ਰਾਗੁ ਜੈਤਸਰੀ | Raag Jaitsree
Gurbani (696-703)
Chhant (703-705)
Vaar Jaitsaree (705-710)
Bhagat Bani (710)
ਰਾਗੁ ਟੋਡੀ | Raag Todee
ਰਾਗੁ ਬੈਰਾੜੀ | Raag Bairaaree
ਰਾਗੁ ਤਿਲੰਗ | Raag Tilang
Gurbani (721-727)
Bhagat Bani (727)
ਰਾਗੁ ਸੂਹੀ | Raag Suhi
Gurbani (728-750)
Ashtpadiyan (750-761)
Kaafee (761-762)
Suchajee (762)
Gunvantee (763)
Chhant (763-785)
Vaar Soohee (785-792)
Bhagat Bani (792-794)
ਰਾਗੁ ਬਿਲਾਵਲੁ | Raag Bilaaval
Gurbani (795-831)
Ashtpadiyan (831-838)
Thitteen (838-840)
Vaar Sat (841-843)
Chhant (843-848)
Vaar Bilaaval (849-855)
Bhagat Bani (855-858)
ਰਾਗੁ ਗੋਂਡ | Raag Gond
Gurbani (859-869)
Ashtpadiyan (869)
Bhagat Bani (870-875)
ਰਾਗੁ ਰਾਮਕਲੀ | Raag Ramkalee
Ashtpadiyan (902-916)
Gurbani (876-902)
Anand (917-922)
Sadd (923-924)
Chhant (924-929)
Dakhnee (929-938)
Sidh Gosat (938-946)
Vaar Ramkalee (947-968)
ਰਾਗੁ ਨਟ ਨਾਰਾਇਨ | Raag Nat Narayan
Gurbani (975-980)
Ashtpadiyan (980-983)
ਰਾਗੁ ਮਾਲੀ ਗਉੜਾ | Raag Maalee Gauraa
Gurbani (984-988)
Bhagat Bani (988)
ਰਾਗੁ ਮਾਰੂ | Raag Maaroo
Gurbani (889-1008)
Ashtpadiyan (1008-1014)
Kaafee (1014-1016)
Ashtpadiyan (1016-1019)
Anjulian (1019-1020)
Solhe (1020-1033)
Dakhni (1033-1043)
ਰਾਗੁ ਤੁਖਾਰੀ | Raag Tukhaari
Bara Maha (1107-1110)
Chhant (1110-1117)
ਰਾਗੁ ਕੇਦਾਰਾ | Raag Kedara
Gurbani (1118-1123)
Bhagat Bani (1123-1124)
ਰਾਗੁ ਭੈਰਉ | Raag Bhairo
Gurbani (1125-1152)
Partaal (1153)
Ashtpadiyan (1153-1167)
ਰਾਗੁ ਬਸੰਤੁ | Raag Basant
Gurbani (1168-1187)
Ashtpadiyan (1187-1193)
Vaar Basant (1193-1196)
ਰਾਗੁ ਸਾਰਗ | Raag Saarag
Gurbani (1197-1200)
Partaal (1200-1231)
Ashtpadiyan (1232-1236)
Chhant (1236-1237)
Vaar Saarang (1237-1253)
ਰਾਗੁ ਮਲਾਰ | Raag Malaar
Gurbani (1254-1293)
Partaal (1265-1273)
Ashtpadiyan (1273-1278)
Chhant (1278)
Vaar Malaar (1278-91)
Bhagat Bani (1292-93)
ਰਾਗੁ ਕਾਨੜਾ | Raag Kaanraa
Gurbani (1294-96)
Partaal (1296-1318)
Ashtpadiyan (1308-1312)
Chhant (1312)
Vaar Kaanraa
Bhagat Bani (1318)
ਰਾਗੁ ਕਲਿਆਨ | Raag Kalyaan
Gurbani (1319-23)
Ashtpadiyan (1323-26)
ਰਾਗੁ ਪ੍ਰਭਾਤੀ | Raag Prabhaatee
Gurbani (1327-1341)
Ashtpadiyan (1342-51)
ਰਾਗੁ ਜੈਜਾਵੰਤੀ | Raag Jaijaiwanti
Gurbani (1352-53)
Salok | Gatha | Phunahe | Chaubole | Swayiye
Sehskritee Mahala 1
Sehskritee Mahala 5
Gaathaa Mahala 5
Phunhay Mahala 5
Chaubolae Mahala 5
Shaloks Bhagat Kabir
Shaloks Sheikh Farid
Swaiyyae Mahala 5
Swaiyyae in Praise of Gurus
Shaloks in Addition To Vaars
Shalok Ninth Mehl
Mundavanee Mehl 5
ਰਾਗ ਮਾਲਾ, Raag Maalaa
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
New resources
Latest activity
Videos
New media
New comments
Library
Latest reviews
Donate
Log in
Register
What's new
New posts
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Welcome to all New Sikh Philosophy Network Forums!
Explore Sikh Sikhi Sikhism...
Sign up
Log in
Discussions
Hard Talk
Interviews
In The Dock Of Ideology - Jaswant Singh And The View From Pakistan
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="spnadmin" data-source="post: 109840" data-attributes="member: 35"><p><strong>[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]<span style="font-size: 18px">In The Dock Of Ideology</span>[/FONT]</strong></p><p><strong>[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]<span style="font-size: 18px"></span></strong></p><p><strong><span style="font-size: 18px"></span>[/FONT]</strong></p><p> <span style="font-size: 10px"><em>[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Jaswant Singh tried to be historically objective, but Partition is still not a distant event. Today’s politics still thrives on the past[/FONT]</em></span></p><p><span style="font-size: 10px"><em>[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]</em></span></p><p><span style="font-size: 10px"><em>[/FONT]</em></span></p><p> [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]<span style="font-size: 10px"><strong>EJAZ HAIDER</strong> <em>Senior Pakistani Journalist</em></span>[/FONT]</p><p>[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][/FONT]</p><p> <img src="http://www.tehelka.com/channels/News/2009/Aug/29/images/dock1.jpg" alt="" class="fr-fic fr-dii fr-draggable " style="" /> [FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]<span style="font-size: 9px"><strong>Across borders</strong> Shahid Malik, Pakistan High Commissioner (left) at the launch of Singh’s book</span></p><p><span style="font-size: 9px"> <strong>Photo: </strong>AP</span>[/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]<span style="font-size: 10px">IF THERE is a moral to the Jaswant Singh story, it is that academic objectivity and politics, especially the exclusivist kind, do not make happy bedfellows. Even so, Singh’s Wednesday expulsion from the BJP at the party’s<em> chintan baithak</em> in Simla is not a simple affair. It also goes beyond the party’s defeat in the May elections, its post-election troubles and leaked letters. It is begotten of the conflict between the BJP’s desire to mainstream itself while being anchored in the Sangh Parivar’s communal ideology.</span>[/FONT]</p><p>[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]<span style="font-size: 10px"></span></p><p><span style="font-size: 10px"></span>[/FONT]</p><p> [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]<span style="font-size: 10px">One reading in Pakistan of Singh’s book and his interview to Karan Thapar was that he had managed to write something that, besides being historically objective and therefore credible, would also help his party. The reason: it showed that the Congress party was largely responsible for India’s partition. Given India’s current political configuration, if the charge could be made to stick, so much the better for the BJP.</span>[/FONT]</p><p>[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]<span style="font-size: 10px"></span></p><p><span style="font-size: 10px"></span>[/FONT]</p><p> [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]<span style="font-size: 10px">But issues are not so simple for the BJP. Hate it might Partition and the Congress party, but it is also bound by the anti-Jinnah, anti-Pakistan ideology that informs its politics. So, how could one of its veterans decide to write a book that showed Pakistan’s Quaid-e Azam as a great, self-made man who resolutely followed the goals he had set himself?</span>[/FONT]</p><p>[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]<span style="font-size: 10px"></span></p><p><span style="font-size: 10px"></span>[/FONT]</p><p> [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]<span style="font-size: 10px">It didn’t help Singh that he was not blaming anybody in the book, simply recording the fact that “we needed to create a demon” and found one in the person of Jinnah. Ideologies are not about facts. And when the process of “othering” is as vicious as it is in the case of India and Pakistan, they quite often are not even about selective facts but plain lies and propaganda. It doesn’t help the BJP to have an account that shows the Muslims were forced to get Pakistan because the Congress (largely Hindu) would not give them constitutional and other guarantees. Muslims are supposed to have got Pakistan because they are perfidious.</span>[/FONT]</p><p>[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]<span style="font-size: 10px"></span></p><p><span style="font-size: 10px"></span>[/FONT]</p><p> <img src="http://www.tehelka.com/channels/News/2009/Aug/29/images/dock2.jpg" alt="" class="fr-fic fr-dii fr-draggable " style="" /><span style="font-size: 10px"><em>[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]‘Jaswant Singh should be commended for his courage. The Quaid-e- Azam’s true leadership has been recognised. I’m disappointed India can’t face up to the truth about him. Is this India's secularism? No Pakistani has lost their job for praising Gandhi’[/FONT]</em></span></p><p> [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]<span style="font-size: 10px"><strong>Mushahid Hussain, </strong><em>senator and chairman, Foreign Affairs Committee</em></span>[/FONT]</p><p> </p><p> [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]<span style="font-size: 10px"><em><img src="http://www.tehelka.com/channels/News/2009/Aug/29/images/dock3.jpg" alt="" class="fr-fic fr-dii fr-draggable " style="" />‘Singh’s expulsion is more about internal politics than about India-Pakistan politics. Indian liberals surprise me – why can’t politicians have freedom of speech and thought? Pakistanis respect Gandhi and Nehru and aren’t penalised for this, so why isn’t it reciprocal?’</em></span>[/FONT]</p><p> [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]<span style="font-size: 10px"><strong>Sartaj Aziz,</strong> <em>former Pakistan foreign minister</em></span>[/FONT]</p><p> </p><p> [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]<span style="font-size: 10px"><em><img src="http://www.tehelka.com/channels/News/2009/Aug/29/images/dock4.jpg" alt="" class="fr-fic fr-dii fr-draggable " style="" />‘The BJP’s reaction of denial and confusion is like the statements by Pakistani religious leaders and right-wing politicians after a deadly suicide attack: “Islam doesn’t teach killing for God.” The BJP can’t accept that a Brahmin (Nehru)’s egoistic political rigidity could divide Bharat’</em></span>[/FONT]</p><p> [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]<span style="font-size: 10px"><strong>Arshed Bhatti,</strong> <em>youth activist</em></span>[/FONT]</p><p> [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]<span style="font-size: 10px">It is funny how collections of people manage the process of exclusion. The Congress party and its large secular pool of Indians have always demonised Jinnah because he was presumably communal and Pakistan was formed on the basis of a religious ideology. The BJP hates Jinnah and his Pakistan because it believes, at its core, in Hindutva – an ideology that first blames the Muslims for communalisation of India and then attacks them on the basis of its own particularistic ideology.</span>[/FONT]</p><p>[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]<span style="font-size: 10px"></span></p><p><span style="font-size: 10px"></span>[/FONT]</p><p> [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]<span style="font-size: 10px">It’s not exactly the kind of atmosphere where a politician, even one of the stature of Jaswant Singh, can put out a book that says Jinnah did not hate the Hindus, that his problem lay with the Congress.</span>[/FONT]</p><p>[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]<span style="font-size: 10px"></span></p><p><span style="font-size: 10px"></span>[/FONT]</p><p> [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]<span style="font-size: 10px">The BJP might hate Partition and Congress, but it’s also bound by an anti-Jinnah, anti-Pakistan ideology</span>[/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]<span style="font-size: 10px">The fact is that Singh has not really broken new ground. Maulana Abul Kalam Azad’s<em> India Wins Freedom</em> said much the same. Azad’s narrative about the Cabinet Mission Plan and what happened thereafter leaves one in no doubt about when, where and how the real movement towards Partition began. Of course, that goes against the grain of what we are taught in Pakistan about the “Pakistan” (Lahore) Resolution. But that is part of the Pakistani meta-narrative!</span>[/FONT]</p><p>[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]<span style="font-size: 10px"></span></p><p><span style="font-size: 10px"></span>[/FONT]</p><p> [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]<span style="font-size: 10px">HISTORIAN AYESHA Jalal has an even more elaborate thesis on this, and Singh’s account, from what has been reported so far and what he said in his twopart interview to Thapar, seems to corroborate it. I rely on that because I have yet to read the book. But Azad has passed on and Jalal is an academic. Both are away from the political controversies that dog Singh and his (perhaps former) party.</span>[/FONT]</p><p>[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]<span style="font-size: 10px"></span></p><p><span style="font-size: 10px"></span>[/FONT]</p><p> [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]<span style="font-size: 10px">When LK Advani came to Pakistan and described Jinnah as a secular leader, even visiting his mausoleum in Karachi, the Sangh Parivar raised Cain and AB Vajpayee himself had to rise to Advani’s defence, and in fact asked for a debate on the issue. But he too had to retreat in the face of the Sangh tail that always wags the BJP dog. As for Advani, he relied on the textbook “I was misquoted” technique to wiggle out of the situation.</span>[/FONT]</p><p>[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]<span style="font-size: 10px"></span></p><p><span style="font-size: 10px"></span>[/FONT]</p><p> [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]<span style="font-size: 10px">Singh can’t use the defence used by Advani previously, since he couldn’t have misquoted himself!</span>[/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]<span style="font-size: 10px">It remains to be seen how Singh will get out of his predicament considering that he could not have misquoted himself! What is deeply ironic, however, is the fact that while he might get good reviews in Pakistan of his book for praising Jinnah, questions will be raised about his attempt to situate his thesis in India’s nationalist discourse – i.e., Partition could be avoided because it was bad. It doesn’t cut much ice to say that Jinnah was a nationalist and, but for the Congress party, he would not have asked for Pakistan.</span>[/FONT]</p><p>[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]<span style="font-size: 10px"></span></p><p><span style="font-size: 10px"></span>[/FONT]</p><p> [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]<span style="font-size: 10px">As Singh said in his interview, Pandit Nehru realised his mistake of emphasising central control post-Partition but by then it was too late.</span>[/FONT]</p><p>[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]<span style="font-size: 10px"></span></p><p><span style="font-size: 10px"></span>[/FONT]</p><p> [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]<span style="font-size: 10px">Is it? From what has happened to Singh, Partition may not be a distant event. It seems that today’s politics still thrives on the past and Singh, by writing what he has, has acted as an equal opportunity offender, that being the necessary condition of ‘objectivity’.</span>[/FONT]</p><p> <p style="text-align: right">[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]<span style="font-size: 10px"><em>The writer is op-ed editor of Daily Times, consulting editor of </em>The Friday Times <em>and hosts a political television show in Pakistan</em></span>[/FONT]</p><p> </p><p> <p style="text-align: right">[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]<span style="font-size: 10px"><em>From Tehelka Magazine, Vol 6, Issue 34, Dated August 29, 2009</em></span>[/FONT]</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="spnadmin, post: 109840, member: 35"] [B][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][SIZE=5]In The Dock Of Ideology[/SIZE][/FONT][/B] [B][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][SIZE=5] [/SIZE][/FONT][/B] [SIZE=2][I][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Jaswant Singh tried to be historically objective, but Partition is still not a distant event. Today’s politics still thrives on the past[/FONT][/I][/SIZE] [SIZE=2][I][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif] [/FONT][/I][/SIZE] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][SIZE=2][B]EJAZ HAIDER[/B] [I]Senior Pakistani Journalist[/I][/SIZE][/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][SIZE=2][/SIZE][/FONT] [IMG]http://www.tehelka.com/channels/News/2009/Aug/29/images/dock1.jpg[/IMG] [FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][SIZE=1][B]Across borders[/B] Shahid Malik, Pakistan High Commissioner (left) at the launch of Singh’s book [B]Photo: [/B]AP[/SIZE][/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][SIZE=2]IF THERE is a moral to the Jaswant Singh story, it is that academic objectivity and politics, especially the exclusivist kind, do not make happy bedfellows. Even so, Singh’s Wednesday expulsion from the BJP at the party’s[I] chintan baithak[/I] in Simla is not a simple affair. It also goes beyond the party’s defeat in the May elections, its post-election troubles and leaked letters. It is begotten of the conflict between the BJP’s desire to mainstream itself while being anchored in the Sangh Parivar’s communal ideology.[/SIZE][/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][SIZE=2] [/SIZE][/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][SIZE=2]One reading in Pakistan of Singh’s book and his interview to Karan Thapar was that he had managed to write something that, besides being historically objective and therefore credible, would also help his party. The reason: it showed that the Congress party was largely responsible for India’s partition. Given India’s current political configuration, if the charge could be made to stick, so much the better for the BJP.[/SIZE][/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][SIZE=2] [/SIZE][/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][SIZE=2]But issues are not so simple for the BJP. Hate it might Partition and the Congress party, but it is also bound by the anti-Jinnah, anti-Pakistan ideology that informs its politics. So, how could one of its veterans decide to write a book that showed Pakistan’s Quaid-e Azam as a great, self-made man who resolutely followed the goals he had set himself?[/SIZE][/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][SIZE=2] [/SIZE][/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][SIZE=2]It didn’t help Singh that he was not blaming anybody in the book, simply recording the fact that “we needed to create a demon” and found one in the person of Jinnah. Ideologies are not about facts. And when the process of “othering” is as vicious as it is in the case of India and Pakistan, they quite often are not even about selective facts but plain lies and propaganda. It doesn’t help the BJP to have an account that shows the Muslims were forced to get Pakistan because the Congress (largely Hindu) would not give them constitutional and other guarantees. Muslims are supposed to have got Pakistan because they are perfidious.[/SIZE][/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][SIZE=2] [/SIZE][/FONT] [IMG]http://www.tehelka.com/channels/News/2009/Aug/29/images/dock2.jpg[/IMG][SIZE=2][I][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]‘Jaswant Singh should be commended for his courage. The Quaid-e- Azam’s true leadership has been recognised. I’m disappointed India can’t face up to the truth about him. Is this India's secularism? No Pakistani has lost their job for praising Gandhi’[/FONT][/I][/SIZE] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][SIZE=2][B]Mushahid Hussain, [/B][I]senator and chairman, Foreign Affairs Committee[/I][/SIZE][/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][SIZE=2][I][IMG]http://www.tehelka.com/channels/News/2009/Aug/29/images/dock3.jpg[/IMG]‘Singh’s expulsion is more about internal politics than about India-Pakistan politics. Indian liberals surprise me – why can’t politicians have freedom of speech and thought? Pakistanis respect Gandhi and Nehru and aren’t penalised for this, so why isn’t it reciprocal?’[/I][/SIZE][/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][SIZE=2][B]Sartaj Aziz,[/B] [I]former Pakistan foreign minister[/I][/SIZE][/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][SIZE=2][I][IMG]http://www.tehelka.com/channels/News/2009/Aug/29/images/dock4.jpg[/IMG]‘The BJP’s reaction of denial and confusion is like the statements by Pakistani religious leaders and right-wing politicians after a deadly suicide attack: “Islam doesn’t teach killing for God.” The BJP can’t accept that a Brahmin (Nehru)’s egoistic political rigidity could divide Bharat’[/I][/SIZE][/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][SIZE=2][B]Arshed Bhatti,[/B] [I]youth activist[/I][/SIZE][/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][SIZE=2]It is funny how collections of people manage the process of exclusion. The Congress party and its large secular pool of Indians have always demonised Jinnah because he was presumably communal and Pakistan was formed on the basis of a religious ideology. The BJP hates Jinnah and his Pakistan because it believes, at its core, in Hindutva – an ideology that first blames the Muslims for communalisation of India and then attacks them on the basis of its own particularistic ideology.[/SIZE][/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][SIZE=2] [/SIZE][/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][SIZE=2]It’s not exactly the kind of atmosphere where a politician, even one of the stature of Jaswant Singh, can put out a book that says Jinnah did not hate the Hindus, that his problem lay with the Congress.[/SIZE][/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][SIZE=2] [/SIZE][/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][SIZE=2]The BJP might hate Partition and Congress, but it’s also bound by an anti-Jinnah, anti-Pakistan ideology[/SIZE][/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][SIZE=2]The fact is that Singh has not really broken new ground. Maulana Abul Kalam Azad’s[I] India Wins Freedom[/I] said much the same. Azad’s narrative about the Cabinet Mission Plan and what happened thereafter leaves one in no doubt about when, where and how the real movement towards Partition began. Of course, that goes against the grain of what we are taught in Pakistan about the “Pakistan” (Lahore) Resolution. But that is part of the Pakistani meta-narrative![/SIZE][/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][SIZE=2] [/SIZE][/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][SIZE=2]HISTORIAN AYESHA Jalal has an even more elaborate thesis on this, and Singh’s account, from what has been reported so far and what he said in his twopart interview to Thapar, seems to corroborate it. I rely on that because I have yet to read the book. But Azad has passed on and Jalal is an academic. Both are away from the political controversies that dog Singh and his (perhaps former) party.[/SIZE][/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][SIZE=2] [/SIZE][/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][SIZE=2]When LK Advani came to Pakistan and described Jinnah as a secular leader, even visiting his mausoleum in Karachi, the Sangh Parivar raised Cain and AB Vajpayee himself had to rise to Advani’s defence, and in fact asked for a debate on the issue. But he too had to retreat in the face of the Sangh tail that always wags the BJP dog. As for Advani, he relied on the textbook “I was misquoted” technique to wiggle out of the situation.[/SIZE][/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][SIZE=2] [/SIZE][/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][SIZE=2]Singh can’t use the defence used by Advani previously, since he couldn’t have misquoted himself![/SIZE][/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][SIZE=2]It remains to be seen how Singh will get out of his predicament considering that he could not have misquoted himself! What is deeply ironic, however, is the fact that while he might get good reviews in Pakistan of his book for praising Jinnah, questions will be raised about his attempt to situate his thesis in India’s nationalist discourse – i.e., Partition could be avoided because it was bad. It doesn’t cut much ice to say that Jinnah was a nationalist and, but for the Congress party, he would not have asked for Pakistan.[/SIZE][/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][SIZE=2] [/SIZE][/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][SIZE=2]As Singh said in his interview, Pandit Nehru realised his mistake of emphasising central control post-Partition but by then it was too late.[/SIZE][/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][SIZE=2] [/SIZE][/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][SIZE=2]Is it? From what has happened to Singh, Partition may not be a distant event. It seems that today’s politics still thrives on the past and Singh, by writing what he has, has acted as an equal opportunity offender, that being the necessary condition of ‘objectivity’.[/SIZE][/FONT] [RIGHT][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][SIZE=2][I]The writer is op-ed editor of Daily Times, consulting editor of [/I]The Friday Times [I]and hosts a political television show in Pakistan[/I][/SIZE][/FONT][SIZE=2][/SIZE][/RIGHT] [RIGHT][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][SIZE=2][I]From Tehelka Magazine, Vol 6, Issue 34, Dated August 29, 2009[/I][/SIZE][/FONT][/RIGHT] [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Discussions
Hard Talk
Interviews
In The Dock Of Ideology - Jaswant Singh And The View From Pakistan
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…
Top