Maulana Abul Kalam Azad made a default entry in India’s savagely polarised polls of 2019. Because the irrepressible Shatrughan Sinha made an awful faux pas at an election rally, where he included Jinnah, along with Gandhi, Nehru, Patel, Indira and Rajiv, as “respected members of the Congress family who built our nation”.
This gave the BJP very potent grist for its “Congress is pro-Pakistan” propaganda – after all, if the founder of Pakistan was a cherished Congressman, then their allegation was irrefutable, right? Sinha had to beat a hasty retreat, saying it was a “slip of my tongue”. He had mistakenly said Jinnah, when he meant Maulana Azad.
But it’s almost impossible to confuse Jinnah with Azad, for they were diametrically opposite politicians. Frankly, I’ve often wondered why Maulana Azad figures so little in contemporary political discourse, while his peers like Nehru, Patel and Bose dominate.
Listen to the podcast for the full story!
Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
[00:00:00] Maulana Abul Kalam Azad made a default entry in India's savagely polarized polls of 2019 because the irrepressible Shatrugansena made an awful for-per at an election rally. Sinha had to beat a hasty retreat saying it was a slip of tongue. He had mistakenly said Jinnah
[00:00:38] when he actually meant Maulana Azad. But you know, it's almost impossible to confuse Jinnah with Azad for they were diametrically opposite politicians. In fact, Maulana Azad was so trenchantly anti-Pakistan that Prime Minister Modi should have appropriated him as well.
[00:00:57] But you know, I forget that he was a Muslim and therefore a religious outlaw for the BJP and RSS. However much they may have agreed with him on the folly of creating Pakistan. I came across this fascinating interview Maulana Azad had given to Shorish Kashmiri
[00:01:14] for a Lahore-based Urdu magazine Chattan. Remember, this was in April 1946 before India was partitioned. But even then, Maulana Azad had the almost up, what can I say, brutal prescience to predict ethnic bloodshed, Indo-Pak wars and the eventual creation of Bangladesh.
[00:01:34] Here are his words and that's without any garnishing at my end. And again remember, this was said when West and East Pakistan had not been carved out of United India. We must remember that an entity conceived in hatred will last only as long as that hatred lasts.
[00:01:53] In this situation, it will not be possible for India and Pakistan to become friends and live amicably unless some catastrophic event takes place. The politics of partition itself will act as a barrier between the two countries. It will not be possible for Pakistan to accommodate
[00:02:10] all the Muslims of India, a task beyond her territorial capability. On the other hand, it will not be possible for the Hindus to stay especially in West Pakistan. They will be thrown
[00:02:21] out or leave on their own. The confidence of East Pakistan will not erode as long as Jinnah and Liaqat Ali are alive but after them any small incident will create resentment and disaffection. I feel that it will not be possible for East Pakistan to stay with West
[00:02:40] Pakistan for any considerable period of time. There is nothing common between the two regions except that they call themselves Muslims. But the fact of being Muslim has never created a durable political unity anywhere in the world. The Hindu-Muslim problem that has
[00:02:58] created political tension between Congress and League will become a source of dispute between the two states and with the aid of international powers this may erupt into a full-scale war anytime in future. That was the kind of prescience Mollana Azad had which is why Sarojini
[00:03:17] Naidu using her sharp wit complimented his wisdom and erudition saying Mollana was 50 years old when he was born. Nehru of course added that he has Plato and Aristotle on his fingertips and he is perfectly at home at Cardoba of Arab Spain. But equally historians have often argued
[00:03:38] about Mollana's inexplicable silence on the 3rd of June 1947 when Mount Baton presented his plan to divide India along religious lines and here I will quote a piece by Said Naqwi for INS. The Congress Working Committee, CWC swallowed the plan hook, line and sinker of the two
[00:03:59] Muslim leaders present at the CWC, Frontier Gandhi Khan Abdul Ghafar Khan wailed you have thrown us to the wolves. Mollana Azad smoked a box of cigarettes and said nothing. Although in his autobiography which is India wins freedom, Mollana Azad talks about warning
[00:04:19] Nehru. We were becoming greater supporters of partition than Jinnah. I warned Jawaharlal that the verdict would be that India was divided not by the Muslim League but by the Congress. Mollana Azad also shattered another myth that is artfully being propagated today namely that
[00:04:37] Sardar Patel could have kept India united but Nehru caved in. Here's what Mollana Azad wrote. Sardar Patel was 50% in favor of partition even before Lord Mount Baton appeared on the scene.
[00:04:51] He was convinced that he could not work with the Muslim League. He was prepared to have a part of India if only he could get rid of the Muslim League. It would not perhaps be unfair to say that
[00:05:02] Vallabhai Patel was the founder of Indian partition and the emphasis that you can see has been supplied by me. It's such a pity that leaders like Mollana Abul Kalam Azad have faded from India's political conscience. The country needs the Mollana's wise council today more than ever.