news details |
|
|
| Khilafat in Kashmir | | It's the same story of separatism once more | | Prafull Goradia
The imbroglio in the Kashmir Valley represents a turning point in the country's history. The Nehruvian era believed that while Muslim communalism was permissible, even the slightest hint of Hindu assertion was dangerous. That secularism is dead and its body is stinking; if we persevere with it we would foul our future. It was a secularism conjured up by a few people from Uttar Pradesh to consolidate their dominance over India.
In 1955, as a member of the States Reorganisation Commission, Sardar KM Panikkar had to write a note of dissent, saying that the consequence of the dominance of Uttar Pradesh would be a 'danger to our unity' (page 245 of the SRC Report). He favoured the bifurcation of the State by forming a separate Agra comprising the western areas plus the districts of Jhansi, Datia, Bhind, Morena, Gird and Shivpuri of what is now Madhya Pradesh. His endeavour might have been to secure communities which are more balanced. Western Uttar Pradesh had large sections of Muslims dedicated to the desire for a dar-ul Islam. The Dar-ul-Uloom of Deoband and the Aligarh Muslim University were also situated there. But Jawaharlal Nehru's other two nominees from Uttar Pradesh -- Justice Syed Fazal Ali and Pandit Hriday Nath Kunzru -- did not support Panikkar. Instead, to justify the largeness of Uttar Pradesh, they combined all the Marathi and Gujarati-speaking areas into a composite Bombay which broke up in 1960.
Justice MC Chagla and Rafique Zakaria have primarily blamed the Muslims of Uttar Pradesh for voting unitedly in the 1945-46 election to support the Muslim League's single-point programme of Partition. To skip some decades and check on the recent events, Mufti Abdul Rashid, who masterminded the Ahmedabad serial blasts in July this year, hails from Azamgarh. His parallel for the Jaipur blasts in May was Shahbaz Hussain from Lucknow. Incidentally, Dawood Ibrahim and Abu Salem are also from Azamgarh. Nehru's strategy of keeping Uttar Pradesh large and its numerous Muslims appeased was vindicated. Since Independence, the Prime Ministers have been from Uttar Pradesh for 42 years. In all, a reorganisation of the large state is needed; with Chief Minister Mayawati willing to trifurcate it, the task should not be difficult.
There is no doubt that many in the Kashmir Valley want azadi because they are Muslims. Had 'Kashmiriyat' not been only an alibi, Syed Geelani of the Hurriyat would have no great following. Mohammed Ali Jinnah knew this well and therefore demanded an exchange of populations between Hindustan and Pakistan. Nehruvian India ignored Jinnah's appeal. Even today most Muslims in the Valley are not bothered that the demand of separation discounts their own patriotic credibility. At the best of times, the community is first and foremost loyal to the ummah. It is supra-nationalist, as eloquently declared by Maulana Muhammad Ali of the Khilafat movement fame at the Round Table Conference at London in 1930-32.
Those Muslims, who after due consideration, wish to stay in India, must be seen to hitch their wagon to Hindustan. If only they were to swear that they would have only one wife at a time, they would rise above the Hindu suspicion that Muslims are allowed to marry several wives in order to produce more children. The one wife formula prevails in Muslim dominated countries like Pakistan, Egypt, Syria, Tunisia and Turkey. Evidently, monogamy does not violate the shari'a.
Second, Muslims should not oppose the introduction of identity cards for all which would include an affidavit that the holder of the card will oppose and help to fight any enemy of the country regardless of his or her religion. This would seem all the more relevant if one recalls that the leaders of the Khilafat movement in the 1920s had issued a fatwa to the effect that no Muslim soldier should fight a Muslim invader. At the time, they had in mind Afghanistan. Subsequently, the Muslim League had endorsed the rule that a Muslim soldier cannot be expected to fight against a Muslim invader. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
