I personally felt what Jinnah had gone through: LK Advani

Discussion in 'Politics & Society' started by SpArK, Jan 12, 2011.

  1. SpArK

    SpArK SORCERER Senior Member

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2010
    Messages:
    2,093
    Likes Received:
    1,104
    Location:
    KINGDOM OF TRAVANCORE
    I personally felt what Jinnah had gone through: LK Advani


    [​IMG]

    Five years after courting controversy for praising Muhammad Ali Jinnah, senior BJP leader LK Advani still seems to be haunted by it as he remarked that he had "personally" experienced what the Pakistan founder would have gone through by advocating for a secular State.

    "I personally have experienced what referring to Jinnah as a person who basically wanted a secular state with a Muslim majority....," Advani said, leaving his statement incomplete but giving enough hint as to what he meant to say.

    Advani, who had to resign as BJP president after making the controversial remarks about Jinnah during his visit to Pakistan in 2005, referred to the episode at the launch of book 'Tinderbox - The Past and Future of Pakistan' authored by eminent journalist MJ Akbar here last evening.

    He was forced to quit after RSS and several leaders within the BJP openly slammed him and demanded his resignation.

    However, RSS and BJP finally softened their stand against Advani who was reinstated when in December 2007 the party declared him as its prime ministerial candidate.

    At the book launch yesterday, Advani again described Jinnah again as a secular person and sought to put the blame for the political instability in Pakistan on others like Maulana Abul Ala Maududi, who propounded the two-nation theory, and dictator Zia-ul-Haq.

    Endorsing Akbar's views in his book, Advani said, "He (author) rightly says that Pakistan can become a stable, modern nation only if the children of the Father of Pakistan, Jinnah, can defeat the ideological heirs of the Godfather Maududi."

    Advani further concurs with the author, saying, "Jinnah maybe the father of Pakistan but the Godfather was Maududi and the impact was so wide, so big".

    Further arguing his case for Jinnah, the senior BJP leader said, "His very first observation in the Constituent Assembly was something that many in India particularly those who subscribe to my viewpoint say- what's this? You think of Jinnah as a person who wanted Pakistan to be a secular state."

    The former deputy prime minister maintained that the instability in Pakistan is "certainly a matter of concern" for India but disagreed that it could disintegrate.

    "Those who think the state is about to disintegrate... it is not true. It is not going to explode," he said.

    I personally felt what Jinnah had gone through: LK Advani - India - DNA
     
  2.  
  3. Yusuf

    Yusuf GUARDIAN Administrator

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2009
    Messages:
    24,274
    Likes Received:
    11,287
    Location:
    BANGalore
    Why does he think pak not disintegrate? I certainly disagree that Jinnah was a secular person. If he indeed was why he played the two nation card? Why he didn't disassociate himself from it's proponents? Or else he was just another devious politician who used the religious card to get what he want to rule and wood not mind anyone thereafter loving in his state.
     
  4. Oracle

    Oracle New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2010
    Messages:
    8,120
    Likes Received:
    1,541
    Location:
    Bangalore, India
    BJP has started to woo Indian Muslims for the next general elections. Nothing else but vote bank politics.
     
  5. Yusuf

    Yusuf GUARDIAN Administrator

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2009
    Messages:
    24,274
    Likes Received:
    11,287
    Location:
    BANGalore
    Indian Muslims have nothing to do with Jinnah so how is that wooing Indian Muslims?
     
  6. SHASH2K2

    SHASH2K2 New Member

    Joined:
    May 10, 2010
    Messages:
    5,711
    Likes Received:
    723
    Location:
    Bihar, BanGalore , India
    Oracle if you follow statements of Advani he has some special feelings for him. I dont know reason behind this but he has issued many pro Jinnah statements earlier as well.Infact his pro jinnah statement might have harmed BJP in last election.
     
    Last edited: Jan 12, 2011
  7. Oracle

    Oracle New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2010
    Messages:
    8,120
    Likes Received:
    1,541
    Location:
    Bangalore, India
    Trying to portray BJP as a National party with secular credentials. Rubbing off the wounds of Godhra, trying to!
     
  8. Daredevil

    Daredevil On Vacation! Administrator

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2009
    Messages:
    11,613
    Likes Received:
    5,670
    There is this bug among the Indians who were born in undivided Indian region (now called Pakistan) to praise Jinnah and Pakistan. Mani Shanker Aiyar, Manmohan Singh, LK Advani, Kuldip Nayar, Kushwant Singh etc are all part of this group.
     
  9. Yusuf

    Yusuf GUARDIAN Administrator

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2009
    Messages:
    24,274
    Likes Received:
    11,287
    Location:
    BANGalore
    Praising Jinnah proves nothing. Nothing to Indian Muslims or Hindus. But as Indian I detest him praising Jinnah. Crap Jinnah wasn't even a good muslim. He would have been killed by today's pakistanis if he was alive for the kind of "Muslim" he was.
     
    Singh likes this.
  10. Oracle

    Oracle New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2010
    Messages:
    8,120
    Likes Received:
    1,541
    Location:
    Bangalore, India
    Yusuf, I was not speaking on behalf of the Indian Muslims. I said what I felt was going through Advani's mind after subsequent defeats in elections. Btw, how do you define a good Muslim?

    DD, what is that group called? Liberals?
     
  11. Singh

    Singh Phat Cat Administrator

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2009
    Messages:
    20,305
    Likes Received:
    8,270
    Location:
    011
    and these are the same people who lost the most because of Jinnah and partition..
     
  12. Yusuf

    Yusuf GUARDIAN Administrator

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2009
    Messages:
    24,274
    Likes Received:
    11,287
    Location:
    BANGalore
    A pork eater is sure not a good Muslim.
     
  13. ejazr

    ejazr Stars and Ambassadors Stars and Ambassadors

    Joined:
    Oct 8, 2009
    Messages:
    4,518
    Likes Received:
    1,378
    Location:
    Hyderabad and Sydney
    Jinnah was a secular person, and an Indian nationalist as well until the 1930s. Its not secret about that. But the rhetoric employed post 1937 election defeat was neither nationalist nor secular.


    If the BJP after the NDA win in Bihar still thinks that praising Jinnah will get Muslim votes, then they have learn t nothing. What they want is plain for everyone to see, security and respect and then education and development of their town/village
     
  14. ejazr

    ejazr Stars and Ambassadors Stars and Ambassadors

    Joined:
    Oct 8, 2009
    Messages:
    4,518
    Likes Received:
    1,378
    Location:
    Hyderabad and Sydney
    Advani made these statements as part of a Book launch. My latest blog post is a book review of the book from TOI Tinderbox: The Past and Future of Pakistan

    MJ Akbar's book on Pakistan launched

    "The Partition did Indian Muslims, and Muslims everywhere "enormous harm", Vice- President Hamid Ansari said in the Capital on Tuesday, even as he reiterated that India has vested interest in the stability of Pakistan and its people.

    In a rare admission by a constitutional figure on the cataclysmic watershed of the country's history, Ansari described Partition as "the result of a political adjustment at the elite level, rather than of a mass desire to separate." He was launching India Today and Headlines Today editorial director M. J. Akbar's eighth book, Tinderbox: The Past and Future of Pakistan (HarperCollins India).

    Quoting M. A. Jinnah's supporter and Muslim League leader Choudhry Khaliquzzaman, Ansari said: "(He) observed that the two nation theory never paid any dividends to us and proved positively injurious to the Muslims of India, and on a longer term basis for Muslims everywhere." He was addressing a star- studded audience comprising leaders across the political spectrum, from finance minister Pranab Mukherjee to National Democratic Alliance chairman L. K. Advani, Leader of the Opposition in the Rajya Sabha Arun Jaitley, civil aviation minister Praful Patel, BJP notables Yashwant Sinha, Jaswant Singh, Ravi Shankar Prasad and Shatrughan Sinha, and Congress Rajya Sabha MP Mani Shankar Aiyar.

    The evening, however, was dominated by the politics of Pakistan, or what Akbar describes in his book as the "jelly state" that can neither "achieve stability, nor disintegrate." Pointing to the recent assassination of Pakistan's Punjab governor Salman Taseer, National Democratic Alliance chairman L. K. Advani said: "More disturbing than the killing was the fact that no cleric wanted to come forward and perform his last rites." He was referring to Akbar's comment that "if Salman Taseer had been an Indian Muslim, he would still have been alive." Advani, as was expected, could not help referring to his "experience" when he had referred to "Jinnah as a person who basically wanted a secular state with a Muslim majority." His remark drew knowing laughter from the audience.

    Mukherjee, who has also served as the external affairs minister, said: "We cannot wish away our neighbour. We have a vested interest in the stability and wellbeing of Pakistan because we cannot develop in isolation but together." Of course, he was quick to add that his office imposed "natural restraints" on him to proceed further on the subject.

    Opening the discussion, Akbar (it was also his 60th birthday) said the difference between the two neighbours was that the idea of India is stronger than the Indian, and the idea of Pakistan is weaker than the Pakistani.

    "Pakistan is an idea that is regressive, India is an idea that is progressive," Akbar said, reminding the audience of Maulana Abul Kalam Azad's prediction that Pakistan would eventually become "the playground of foreign powers." He added that Pakistan's civil society should relocate to Delhi because there won't be space for "brilliant book on India's Siamese twin with a faulty valve", Rajya Sabha MP (and one- time high commissioner to Pakistan) Mani Shankar Aiyar said: "The difference between Akbar and me is that he sees Pakistan as a 'tinderbox'. I see it as a ' tenderbox'." Jaitley, who was queuing up to buy the book, said: "I am interested in MJ's analysis of how he perceives the state to be, particularly how he perceives its future." His party colleague, Yashwant Sinha, who was in Karachi on the day Salman Taseer was assassinated in Lahore, added: "The past is well known. But I want to find out how MJ sees the future of Pakistan and South Asia." it in the neighbouring country for long.

    Earlier, introducing the book, India Today Group chairman and editor-in-chief Aroon Purie recalled what a friend from Pakistan had said to him. "You don't understand we are like your younger brother," the friend had said: "who is an alcoholic, drug addict and goon.

    You can't throw us out, so help us to change." Purie, who's also HarperCollins India director, said: "Pakistan has been called many things - failed state, frontier state, Islamic state but I think from now on the definition that is going to stick is the one contained in MJ's book. He describes it as a ' jelly state'." He added that Taseer's assassination was "the latest reminder of the timeliness of this book". On a lighter note, Purie said: "I am much older than MJ but he's lost more hair than I have. And I have a theory of why this has happened. That head of his is full of knowledge of an incredible range of subjects - philosophy, religion, mythology, politics and of course, history not only of India but of the world. ... So I guess the hair could not take the heat generated by all this information which just keeps on accumulating." The book, predictably, evoked much discussion on the sidelines.
     
    hit&run likes this.
  15. Oracle

    Oracle New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2010
    Messages:
    8,120
    Likes Received:
    1,541
    Location:
    Bangalore, India
    Exactly my point Ejaz. Development should be the only measurement key to success for our political parties.
     
  16. S.A.T.A

    S.A.T.A Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2009
    Messages:
    1,804
    Likes Received:
    453
    Another classic case of media cleverly misjudging the yawning space between quote and unquote,perhaps deliberately.L.K Advani is referring to the media storm his comment on 'Jinnah being secular' comment raised both in political and apolitical circles,he was not referring to a 'Jinnah like experiences',which the headlines seem to project.

    Advani in perspective is right,Jinnah was not a fundamentalist,rather he was a constitutionalist,a by the book person,he even objected to Gandhi mixing Hindu rhetoric and spiritual jargon's in his speeches and writings,not because the Muslim in him was offended,rather the secularist in him had objected.M A Jinnah's case was not for a theocratic state,rather a nation for Muslims of India,who he believed constituted a nation distinct from Hindus.However Jinnah's state for Muslims was to governed under the same principles and practise which constituted the Raj's administration of India,completely on secular terms.Jinnah's political theory of a nation state existed almost cheek and jowl to Nehru's,which explains why Pt Nehru was eager to be done with the partition and move on.

    There is misconception that exists among our people,esp those who would like to sustain this misconception,that the Pakistan movement was propounded by uneducated and conservative India Muslims,with a massive ego complex.This is far from the truth,it was among the educated classes of the Muslims of India where the idea of nation from Muslims first took root and which during the fag end of the Indian independence movement,when it became certian that an Independent India was only a matter of 'when', rather 'If',became a vociferous subtext to the freedom struggle.The Pakistan movement and the subsequent establishment of that state,was not a question between secular Vs non secular ideologies,its actual premise was inspite of the principle,that indian Muslims could not subsist in nation,even one governed on secular and democratic principle,that would be dominated by a overwhelming Hindu demographic.

    L.K Advani's call on Jinnah's is spot on.
     
  17. ejazr

    ejazr Stars and Ambassadors Stars and Ambassadors

    Joined:
    Oct 8, 2009
    Messages:
    4,518
    Likes Received:
    1,378
    Location:
    Hyderabad and Sydney
    @SATA

    All the points you refer to about Jinnah, being secular, a constitutionalist e.t.c. are before the 1930s. And the section of the Muslims that were the backbone of the Pakistan movement were basically Feudals and Landlords who because of their wealth were also educated but could hardly be considered progressive in thought.

    On the other hand you had the religious scholars of various hues who opposed the two nation theory and stood for composite nationalism. You also had western educated scholars like Saifuddin Kitchlew, Hakim Ajmal Khan, Abbas Tyabji, Rafi Ahmed Kidwai and many others who were part of the Indian National Congress even in the face of communal polarisation in the 40s.

    Infact, the idea that Muslim League eve proposed Pakistan as a seperate state was unknown until the late 40s. And the boundaried were unknown even months after independance. The 1945 elections must be seen in the perspective that the franchise was restricted to between 10-12% of the population, mainly landlords. Post 1937 debacle were ML did not even win 5%of the Muslim only seats, the idea of saving the landlords from the Congress which was proposing landreforms helped in pushing these powerful feudals to back Muslim League.

    The result in the 1946 elections was Bengal was the only place were ML won a straight majority. In Sindh, they formed a majority only because a European member of the parliament was asked to join the ML. In Punjab, the ML although the largest party was nowhere near majority. And NWFP, which had 95% muslim as well as the most "conservative" muslim was won hands down by the Congress because the "Islam in danger" slogan just did not work there.

    The Pakistan ideology is the Two Nation theory that Muslims and Hindus are different nations, this particular notion itself is UnIslamic first of all. And because Jinnah had propounded it, there is no escapre from this fundamental idelogical problem that he helped create. Advani should understand that.
     
  18. S.A.T.A

    S.A.T.A Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2009
    Messages:
    1,804
    Likes Received:
    453
    A majority of the India's leading nationalists who led the freedom movement,Hindus and Muslims,came from educated and the landed classes,this was not exclusive to any community,this cannot take away from Jinnah or his Muslim league its representative character.After the disappointing performance in the provincial election of 1937,before the world and when independence seemed still distant,Muslim league's performance in the 1945 election for the provincial and central legislature was remarkable(even though seats were reserved for Muslims,nationalist Muslim candidates contested and still couldn't put a dent on the Muslim league,which swept the all seats it contested)

    Clearly Muslims league's message to form a Muslim homeland for indian Muslims,began to resonate in all its earnestness among India's Muslim masses.lets be honest the indian national congress would not have agreed to the partition plan or the British even propose one,if there was not sizable urge among the Indian Muslim masses and their leader for this idea.We will be merely obfuscation historical acts for our contemporary convenience by indulging in one.

    There is no doubt that Muslim league's demand for Muslim homeland was a flawed one and one that had no rational, historical or even a Islamic basis,neither did Jinnah believe it did it,but nevertheless for unprecedented reasons Jinnah and a large section of the Thinking Muslims were convinced,on the eve of Independence,that Muslims as a community could not coexist with the majority Muslims.Jinnah did not see his demand for his Muslim homeland in anyway conflicting with his declared secular outlook on principles of governance.To quote Jinnah on the same didn't he declare "Hindus would cease to be Hindus and Muslims would cease to be Muslims, not in the religious sense, because that is the personal faith of each individual, but in the political sense as citizens of the State"

    M.A Jinnah's secular credentials were right up Pt Nehru's alley.
     
    Last edited: Jan 13, 2011
  19. johnee

    johnee Elite Member Elite Member

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2009
    Messages:
    3,474
    Likes Received:
    467
    Yep, completely agree. Infact, much of our early babus must have also suffered from it. Not just those who were born undivided India, in pak region, but also those who had relations living in the pak region...etc etc. That may be one of the reasons for not punishing the paks for all their antics. They may be seeing the Paks as 'misguided' ignoring the evil that paks have come to be.

    Remember, how gilani tried to smooth-talk MMS with punjabi love-shove?!!

    Once this older generation is replaced, there will be better clarity in policy towards pak.
     
  20. johnee

    johnee Elite Member Elite Member

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2009
    Messages:
    3,474
    Likes Received:
    467
    Jinnah is a successful model of using a communal card to create a country for himself. Did his views resonate throughout Indian muslims? One cannot gauge it now, but surely many(if not the majority) muslims would have been swayed by a promise of paradise where they would not have to share their resources with 'kafirs'. Its not such a big deal to sway the Indian masses by playing the communal/regional/lingual/cultural/caste...etc cards. It was done in the past and it can be done even today.

    Jinnah was successful with it and ended up with a vast land and many people to rule. Maybe he gave a few token 'secular' speeches. At the end of the day, he comes across as a selfish politician. And if he be compared to Nehru, one cant see much difference except that they were on the opposite sides of the political spectrum. Jinnah's lack of morals is quite akin to Nehru's lack of morals. Jinnah who gave calls of seperation based on Islam while blatantly flouting the islamic tenets by eating pork and drinking alcohol. Nehru was fighting for the independence of India while sleeping with Governor General's wife.

    But Nehru did a better job with India then Jinnah did with Pak...
     
  21. Tshering22

    Tshering22 Sikkimese Saber Senior Member

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2010
    Messages:
    4,404
    Likes Received:
    2,783
    Location:
    Gangtok, Sikkim, India
    This is called abusing of democratic freedoms and insulting the Jawan. I think the punishment for such people should be expulsion and permanent ban from politics or a public career such as media, press or anything of such so that they cannot spread spineless bigotry among India's now sleeping people and impact the minds of small kids.
     

Share This Page