From: budaraju@cae.wisc.edu (Srinivas Budaraju)
Subject: Babri Mosque - some background - 9/10
Organization: U of Wisconsin-Madison College of Engineering
Date: 11 Dec 92 15:23:30 CST

The following are excerpts from an interview of Asghar Ali Engineer by Sridhar
D. Damle, a free-lance reporter for India Tribune (Chicago) and co-author with
Walter K. Anderson of the book "The Brotherhood in Saffron: The Rashtriya
Swayamsevak Sangh and Hindu Revivalism", Vistaar Publications, New Delhi,
1987.  Some extraneous or redundant material has been deleted; a few
grammatical errors have been corrected; subheads have been put in for clarity.
 
The interview took place on Dec 2, 1990, in Chicago.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
9. WHO WAS RESPONSIBLE FOR PARTITION?
 
D: About Partition, you mentioned Hindu Mahasabha, Sardar Patel,
and other Hindu leaders. Let us set aside HMS because we know
their role. Can you explain the role of Sardar Patel? What are
the crimes of Patel? You hold him responsible for Partition.
 
A: You know, Sardar Patel was interested in a very strong center.
Now, according to the Cabinet Mission Plan (CMP), which was
accepted by all parties including the Muslim League and Jinnah,
India was to be divided into different categories of States (A,
B, C, etc). Now, all these categories of States were given
autonomy and [the] Center was given only 3 subjects - Foreign
Policy, Defence and Communication. All other subjects were left
to the States. Now, Patel was not interested in a weak center, he
was interested in a strong center. So, there were 2 alternatives
before Congress, either to accept a weak center and a united
India or a strong center and a divided India. They opted for a
strong center and divided India. In that sense, I hold even
Sardar Patel responsible.
 
If they had accepted CMP honestly, India would have remained
united and even State-center disputes, which are emerging now and
causing so much conflict (Punjab problem is partly a result of
that), would not have arisen.  Because all states would have
enjoyed perfect autonomy and India would have remained a united
country. I mean, it has already fallen apart into 3 parts.  Just,
imagine, such a huge nation, what impact it would have had on
international politics. In that sense, I hold some Congress
leaders also responsible for Partition.
 
D: Which Congress leaders?
 
A: Even Jawaharlal Nehru. Gandhi was opposed to it, but in the
last minute, he also yielded to the pressures of Nehru & Patel.
 
D: What I read from Gandhi's letter in 1942, he said, 'if the
Muslim majority wants to be separate from India, we cannot keep
it'. So, in 1942, Gandhiji accepted Partition.
 
A: I don't think he accepted Partition as such. He may have
mentioned, I do not know which letter you are referring to, but
he may have said something that here is a difficult problem, the
Muslim majority areas want to separate. But, it does not mean
that he finally accepted Partition. Because, among Congress
leaders, he was the last to accept it. Until '46, he was saying
Partition will be over my dead body.  Its only afterwards that he
yielded to Patel's and Nehru's pressures.
 
D: Two questions. One: Just like Hindus, there are strong
communal forces among Muslims also. How will you look to
stregthen the secular forces among the Muslims?
 
A: We expose those Muslim leaders who are communal. We hold
meetings among Muslims. I do write and disseminate it among
Muslims. The intelligentia reads it in English. I also write in
Urdu so that I can reach lower middle class Muslims. Whether it
is Shah Bano issue, whether it is muslim personal law issue.
Everywhere I try to explain to the Muslim masses and
intelligentsia that let us be critical of our own leaders, what
politics they are playing, what games they are playing, how they
are harming the cause of Muslims, and what should be done to
resolve genuine grievances of Muslims. I have been writing
extensively on these.
 
D: Among the Hindus, a new perception is coming up, this is a
Hamid Dalwai quote, that Muslims are an intolerant majority and a
turbulent minority.
 
A: I am afraid I do not agree with this point of view, beacuse
the more Hindus talk of their tolerance, more and more Muslims
are getting killed.  How would one explain this? This tolerance
is there in the scriptures, it is there in the theology, but not
in practice.
-------------------------------------------------------------------- 
-Srinivas				budaraju@cae.wisc.edu

Newsgroups: soc.culture.pakistan