I have just started reading “India after Gandhi” by
Ramachandra Guha and it has transported me in to an emotional 1947. The
detailed insights by the author with reference to thinking prevailing in our
leaders (Gandhi, Nehru and Jinnah), the Governor Generals and Viceroys of
British Raj and series of events that resulted in partition are indeed thought
provoking and emotionally charged.
A more comprehensible reference to this tension is evident
from several personal accounts including one by British Judge Cyril Radcliffe’s
account. Radcliffe was entrusted the task of dividing Punjab and Bengal in five
weeks with the help of four advisers (two Muslims, one Hindu and one Sikh). But
he soon dispensed them as they fought on every point. His correspondence with
his nephew reveals that he was well aware that nobody in India will love him
for award of Punjab and Bengal and that there will be roughly 80 million people
with a grievance who will begin looking for him. Naturally he didn’t want them
to find him. W H Hayden in his poem in a way tries to
describe, what was on Radcliffe’s mind. The other reviews that are more
critical of his role are described here through a doctoral dissertation finding.
There is another interesting reference of Viceroy Archibald
Wavell, who had a comparative phased out plan, which was not approved by
London. His detailed analysis of plan is available here
. For my interest, I draw attention to this Alice in the wonderland parody
he wrote before the end of the Mission.
References similar to these and several other instill an ardent
urge to seek in to further questions like if the partition by any means was
avoidable? And if not who actually could be held responsible for instigating it?
Who could be charged with turning it in to ill planned greatest mass migration
in history with around ten million refugees on move from both sides? There are
no easy answers. However, the author has supported the chapters with extracts
from original speeches of colonialists, Indian leaders, journalists and task
masters who actually designed and implemented the plans for partition. Reading
through these accounts, it seems possible to recreate a virtual account of
compulsions of each side under action and stop at that. Heavy price has been
paid by both sides in terms of life lost and memory scarred.
At this point in 1947,
while reading from the excerpts one feeling is very distinctly echoed from
colonial players, on whether India can remain in one piece or will it fragment
further. The choice of words to echo such sentiments range from “salad of
confusion, of bungle, of mismanagement” to “idea of granting dominion status to
India is not only fantastic in itself but criminally mischievous in itself”.
The pressure of dividing a vast country, its 524 million
people with 15 major languages in use and conflicting religions and races can
be easily sensed, both in their words as well as actions. These conflicts that ran on several axes of
caste, religion and language during 1947 seem to be very much issues being
faced by modern India and Pakistan. Partition, in spite of its claims to carve
out distinct physical territories based on religion and castes has not been
able to bring peace either within the diversities of individual countries or
within the region. The feeling is beautifully reflected in Faiz Ambed Faiz’s poem Subh-e-aazaadii written in 1947
SUBH-E-AZADI (August 1947)
Ye dagh dagh ujala, ye shab-gazida sahar,
Vo intizar tha jis-ka, ye vo sahar to nahin,
Ye vo sahar to nahin jis-ki arzu lekar
Chale the yar ke mel-jaegi kahin na kahin
Ye dagh dagh ujala, ye shab-gazida sahar,
Vo intizar tha jis-ka, ye vo sahar to nahin,
Ye vo sahar to nahin jis-ki arzu lekar
Chale the yar ke mel-jaegi kahin na kahin
