Pakistan Historian

October 29, 2008

Mohandas K. Gandhi: Why was the Nobel prize denied to him?

Filed under: British Raj — Moin Ansari @ 4:33 am
Tags: ,

Noticias de Rupia | Nouvelles de Roupie | Rupiennachrichten | новости рупии | 卢比新闻 | Roepienieuws | Rupi Nyheter | ルピーニュース | Notizie di Rupia | PAKISTAN LEDGER | پاکستاني کھاتا | Moin Ansari | معین آنصآرّی | DefensebriefsIntellibriefs Translate to: Page copy protected against web site content infringement by Copyscape Bookmark and Share Add to Technorati RSS feed: | RUPEE NEWS | October 29th, 2008 | Moin Ansari | معین آنصآرّی | اخبار روپیہ |

Many ask, why Gandhi didn’t win the Nobel Peace Prize? What if Dr. Martin Luther had known about Gandhi’s racism?

  • If Dr. King had known about about the Zulus (African tribe) and the Kaffirs (African tribe), he surely would have voiced his concern.Gandhi condones Zulu massacres and defends the British. Aug 4 1906
    Dr. King may not have read Time Magazine and the explosive stories about Mr. Gandhi’s personal life. The sex life of Mr. Gandhi, and his failures as a politician.
  • Dr. King probably knew only about the propoganda clips of Mr. Gandhi and never really new the man. The myth of Mohandas K. Gandhi debunked. He gets an “F” on South Africa, Salt Match, Non-Violence, and independence
  • Dr. King on moral high ground condemned wars. He would have been shocked to find out that Gandhi supported the British wars extending the British empire.Which war did Mohandas Gandhi support. All of them. There wasn’t a war that the prophet of Non-Violence did not support. He was Sergeant Major in the British Army and won a medal for his war duties
  • Dr. King was probably unaware about Gandhi’s open racism.Gandhi’s racism. The truth behind the mask. Behold Sergeant Major Gandhi who supported the British during the Boer war, Zulu rebellion. Behold the prophet of peace who worked to stratify the South African society.
  • Dr. King did not know that Gandhi did not bring the British Empire down.
  • Dr. King would have been appalled if he knew that Gandhi insisted on calling Hitler his “friend” and that his advice to the Jews was horribe piece of Anti-SemitismGandhi’s letter to his friend Hitler.
  • Dr. King would have been horrified if he had known about Mr. Gandhi’s personal fetishes.Sex life of Mohandas Gandhi, his failures and sexual perversion
    Martin Luther probably would be appalled if he knew about what Gandhi said about Africans and blacks in South Africa

Mr. Gandhi was nominated twice. The first time his efforts in South Africa were considered benefiting the Indians only.

In his report, Professor Worm-Müller expressed his own doubts as to whether Gandhi’s ideals were meant to be universal or primarily Indian: “One might say that it is significant that his well-known struggle in South Africa was on behalf of the Indians only, and not of the blacks whose living conditions were even worse.

The 2nd time his name was disqualified for proposing war against Pakistan. Based on a telegram from Reuters, The Times, on September 27, 1947, under the headline “Mr. Gandhi on ‘war’ with Pakistan” reported:

“Mr. Gandhi told his prayer meeting to-night that, though he had always opposed all warfare, if there was no other way of securing justice from Pakistan and if Pakistan persistently refused to see its proved error and continued to minimise it, the Indian Union Government would have to go to war against it. … (Mohandas K. Gandhi, Spetember 27th, 1947)

Here is an excerpt from the Nobel peace prize web site. (http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/peace/articles/gandhi/index.html)

In 1937 a member of the Norwegian Storting (Parliament), Ole Colbjørnsen (Labour Party), nominated Gandhi for that year’s Nobel Peace Prize, and he was duly selected as one of thirteen candidates on the Norwegian Nobel Committee’s short list. Colbjørnsen did not himself write the motivation for Gandhi’s nomination; it was written by leading women of the Norwegian branch of “Friends of India”, and its wording was of course as positive as could be expected.

An ordinary politician or a Christ? In this photo Gandhi listens to Muslims during the height of the warfare which followed the partition of India in 1947.
Photo: Copyright © Scanpix

The committee’s adviser, professor Jacob Worm-Müller, who wrote a report on Gandhi, was much more critical. On the one hand, he fully understood the general admiration for Gandhi as a person: “He is, undoubtedly, a good, noble and ascetic person – a prominent man who is deservedly honoured and loved by the masses of India.” On the other hand, when considering Gandhi as a political leader, the Norwegian professor’s description was less favourable. There are, he wrote, “sharp turns in his policies, which can hardly be satisfactorily explained by his followers. (…) He is a freedom fighter and a dictator, an idealist and a nationalist. He is frequently a Christ, but then, suddenly, an ordinary politician.”

Gandhi had many critics in the international peace movement. The Nobel Committee adviser referred to these critics in maintaining that he was not consistently pacifist, that he should have known that some of his non-violent campaigns towards the British would degenerate into violence and terror. This was something that had happened during the first Non-Cooperation Campaign in 1920-1921, e.g. when a crowd in Chauri Chaura, the United Provinces, attacked a police station, killed many of the policemen and then set fire to the police station.

A frequent criticism from non-Indians was also that Gandhi was too much of an Indian nationalist. In his report, Professor Worm-Müller expressed his own doubts as to whether Gandhi’s ideals were meant to be universal or primarily Indian: “One might say that it is significant that his well-known struggle in South Africa was on behalf of the Indians only, and not of the blacks whose living conditions were even worse.”

The name of the 1937 Nobel Peace Prize Laureate was to be Lord Cecil of Chelwood. We do not know whether the Norwegian Nobel Committee seriously considered awarding the Peace Prize to Gandhi that year, but it seems rather unlikely. Ole Colbjørnsen renominated him both in 1938 and in 1939, but ten years were to pass before Gandhi made the committee’s short list again.

A frequent criticism from non-Indians was also that Gandhi was too much of an Indian nationalist. In his report, Professor Worm-Müller expressed his own doubts as to whether Gandhi’s ideals were meant to be universal or primarily Indian: “One might say that it is significant that his well-known struggle in South Africa was on behalf of the Indians only, and not of the blacks whose living conditions were even worse.

Without that millstone Gandhiji around its neck, India would be a Great Power today and not just a vector for disease and late night appeals from missionary groups seeking to deculturalize Indians.

Gandhi’s limitations as a family man. Where the world sees a saint, Rajmohan Gandhi sees a cruel husband and a mostly absent father, paying scant attention to his children’s schooling and dragging wife Kasturba across continents at will, belittling her desire for the simplest of material possessions, then expecting her to comply when he turns from amorous husband to platonic companion to apparent adulterer. Gandhi took on a magnetic personality in the presence of young women, and was able to persuade them to join him in peculiar experiments of sleeping and bathing naked together, without touching, all apparently to strengthen his chastity. (Whether these experiments were always successful is anyone’s guess.) It is also revealed that Gandhi began a romantic liaison with Saraladevi Chaudhurani, niece of the great poet Rabindranath Tagore—a disclosure that has created a buzz in the Indian press. The author tells us that Gandhi, perhaps disingenuously, called it a “spiritual marriage,” a “partnership between two persons of the opposite sex where the physical is wholly absent.”
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1609478,00.html

1. Mohandas K. Gandhi hated blacks http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2003/10/17/1066364486503.html?from=storyrhs ” But, when forced to share a cell with black people, Gandhi wrote: “Many of the native prisoners are only one degree removed from the animal.” ” Mar. 7, 1908 (Reference: CWMG, Vol VIII, pp. 135-136) Mohandas Gandhi’s description of black inmates. [Kaffirs are a tribe in South Africa]

2. Gandhi enjoyed enemas in a sexual way: “Gandhi would do enemas twice a day and if he liked you allowed you to enter the piece up his rectum. ” http://rupeenews.com/2007/12/25/six-stories-of-mohandas…s-sexual-perversion/

3. Gandhi slept with young girls to test if he was still a man: “Each night he slept naked between two young girls to prove his sanctity” http://www.ralphmag.org/AJ/gandhi.html

4. Gandhi advised the jews to commit mass suicide: “The Jews should have offered themselves to the butcher’s knife,” he said. “They should have thrown themselves into the sea from cliffs.” http://www.sepiamutiny.com/sepia/archives/004247.html

5. Gandhi praised hitler: In a letter to Hitler in 1941, Gandhi wrote: “Nor do I believe that you are the monster described by your opponents.”

6. Gandhi did nothing for blacks in south africa, only indian: “In 1906 Gandhi had participated in a war against Blacks. The Gandhian literature either keeps quiet on the subject or tries to paint him as a great humanitarian who actually helped Blacks by rendering to them urgent medical care. Had he not done so, we are told, many Blacks would have died. While researching the historical documents, however, I found that Gandhi’s participation had nothing to do with “humanitarian concerns” for Black people. He was more concerned with “allying relationships” with the colonial Whites living in Natal colony. Driven by his racial outlook, he went out of his way to enlist Indians to join the army under him to fight for his cause against the Blacks. He also considered Indians living in South Africa to be “fellow colonists” along with the White colonists, over the indigenous Blacks.” http://www.secularhumanism.org/library/aah/singh_12_3.htm

7. Gandhi scorned blacks so much that he successfully changed legislation to give indians a separate door from blacks at the post office. Gandhi wrote: “In the Durban Post and telegraph offices there were separate entrances for natives and Asiatics and Europeans. We felt the indignity too much and many respectable Indians were insulted and called all sorts of names by the clerks at the counter. We petitioned the authorities to do away with the invidious distinction and they have now provided three separate entrances for natives, Asiatics and Europeans.”

http://www.thoughtleader.co.za/sentletsediakanyo/2008/1…ion-of-black-people/
8. gandhi was a wife beater : “Despite his pacifist philosophy, he was a wife-beater.” http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0003987/bio

GANDHI ON BLACKS AND RACE RELATIONS (Zulus and Kaffirs were African tribes in South Africa)
“A general belief seems to prevail in the colony that the Indians are little better, if at all, than the savages or natives of Africa. Even the children are taught to believe in that manner, with the result that the Indian is being dragged down to the position of a raw Kaffir.” (Reference: The Collected Works of Mahatma Gandhi, Government of India (CWMG), Vol I, p. 150)

Regarding forcible registration with the state of blacks: “One can understand the necessity for registration of Kaffirs who will not work.” (Reference: CWMG, Vol I, p. 105)

“Why, of all places in Johannesburg, the Indian Location should be chosen for dumping down all the Kaffirs of the town passes my comprehension…the Town Council must withdraw the Kaffirs from the Location.” (Reference: CWMG, Vol I, pp. 244-245)

His description of black inmates: “Only a degree removed from the animal.” Also, “Kaffirs are as a rule uncivilized – the convicts even more so. They are troublesome, very dirty and live almost like animals.” – Mar. 7, 1908 (Reference: CWMG, Vol VIII, pp. 135-136)

1947: Victory and Defeat

In 1947 the nominations of Gandhi came by telegram from India, via the Norwegian Foreign Office. The nominators were B.G. Kher, Prime Minister of Bombay, Govindh Bhallabh Panth, Premier of United Provinces, and Mavalankar, the President of the Indian Legislative Assembly. Their arguments in support of his candidacy were written in telegram style, like the one from Govind Bhallabh Panth: “Recommend for this year Nobel Prize Mahatma Gandhi architect of the Indian nation the greatest living exponent of the moral order and the most effective champion of world peace today.” There were to be six names on the Nobel Committee’s short list, Mohandas Gandhi was one of them.

The Nobel Committee’s adviser, the historian Jens Arup Seip, wrote a new report which is primarily an account of Gandhi’s role in Indian political history after 1937. “The following ten years,” Seip wrote, “from 1937 up to 1947, led to the event which for Gandhi and his movement was at the same time the greatest victory and the worst defeat – India’s independence and India’s partition.” The report describes how Gandhi acted in the three different, but mutually related conflicts which the Indian National Congress had to handle in the last decade before independence: the struggle between the Indians and the British; the question of India’s participation in the Second World War; and, finally, the conflict between Hindu and Muslim communities. In all these matters, Gandhi had consistently followed his own principles of non-violence.

The Seip report was not critical towards Gandhi in the same way as the report written by Worm-Müller ten years earlier. It was rather favourable, yet not explicitly supportive. Seip also wrote briefly on the ongoing separation of India and the new Muslim state, Pakistan, and concluded – rather prematurely it would seem today: “It is generally considered, as expressed for example in The Times of 15 August 1947, that if ‘the gigantic surgical operation’ constituted by the partition of India, has not led to bloodshed of much larger dimensions, Gandhi’s teachings, the efforts of his followers and his own presence, should get a substantial part of the credit.”

crowd

The partition of India in 1947 led to a process which we today probably would describe as “ethnic cleansing”. Hundreds of thousands of people were massacred and millions had to move; Muslims from India to Pakistan, Hindus in the opposite direction. Photo shows part of the crowds of refugees which poured into the city of New Delhi.

Having read the report, the members of the Norwegian Nobel Committee must have felt rather updated on the last phase of the Indian struggle for independence. However, the Nobel Peace Prize had never been awarded for that sort of struggle. The committee members also had to consider the following issues: Should Gandhi be selected for being a symbol of non-violence, and what political effects could be expected if the Peace Prize was awarded to the most prominent Indian leader – relations between India and Pakistan were far from developing peacefully during the autumn of 1947?

From the diary of committee chairman Gunnar Jahn, we now know that when the members were to make their decision on October 30, 1947, two acting committee members, the Christian conservative Herman Smitt Ingebretsen and the Christian liberal Christian Oftedal spoke in favour of Gandhi. One year earlier, they had strongly favoured John Mott, the YMCA leader. It seems that they generally preferred candidates who could serve as moral and religious symbols in a world threatened by social and ideological conflicts. However, in 1947 they were not able to convince the three other members. The Labour politician Martin Tranmæl was very reluctant to award the Prize to Gandhi in the midst of the Indian-Pakistani conflict, and former Foreign Minister Birger Braadland agreed with Tranmæl. Gandhi was, they thought, too strongly committed to one of the belligerents. In addition both Tranmæl and Jahn had learnt that, one month earlier, at a prayer-meeting, Gandhi had made a statement which indicated that he had given up his consistent rejection of war. Based on a telegram from Reuters, The Times, on September 27, 1947, under the headline

“Mr. Gandhi on ‘war’ with Pakistan” reported:
“Mr. Gandhi told his prayer meeting to-night that, though he had always opposed all warfare, if there was no other way of securing justice from Pakistan and if Pakistan persistently refused to see its proved error and continued to minimise it, the Indian Union Government would have to go to war against it. No one wanted war, but he could never advise anyone to put up with injustice. If all Hindus were annihilated for a just cause he would not mind. If there was war, the Hindus in Pakistan could not be fifth columnists. If their loyalty lay not with Pakistan they should leave it. Similarly Muslims whose loyalty was with Pakistan should not stay in the Indian Union.”

Nehru

Gandhi saw “no place for him in a new order where they wanted an army, a navy, an air force and what not”. In the picture, Gandhi’s spiritual heir, Prime Minister Pandit Nehru, Defense Minister Sardar Baldev Singh, and the Commanders-in-Chief of the three Services, are inspecting a Guard of Honour at the Red Fort, Delhi, in August, 1948. Fifty years later, both India and Pakistan had developed and tested their own nuclear weapons.
Photo: Copyright © Scanpix

Gandhi had immediately stated that the report was correct, but incomplete. At the meeting he had added that he himself had not changed his mind and that “he had no place in a new order where they wanted an army, a navy, an air force and what not”.

Both Jahn and Tranmæl knew that the first report had not been complete, but they had become very doubtful. Jahn in his diary quoted himself as saying: “While it is true that he (Gandhi) is the greatest personality among the nominees – plenty of good things could be said about him – we should remember that he is not only an apostle for peace; he is first and foremost a patriot. (…) Moreover, we have to bear in mind that Gandhi is not naive. He is an excellent jurist and a lawyer.” It seems that the Committee Chairman suspected Gandhi’s statement one month earlier to be a deliberate step to deter Pakistani aggression. Three of five members thus being against awarding the 1947 Prize to Gandhi, the Committee unanimously decided to award it to the Quakers.

Noticias de Rupia | Nouvelles de Roupie | Rupiennachrichten | новости рупии | 卢比新闻 | Roepienieuws | Rupi Nyheter | ルピーニュース | Notizie di Rupia | PAKISTAN LEDGER | پاکستاني کھاتا | Moin Ansari | معین آنصآرّی | DefensebriefsIntellibriefs Translate to: Page copy protected against web site content infringement by Copyscape Bookmark and Share Add to Technorati RSS feed: | RUPEE NEWS | October 29th, 2008 | Moin Ansari | معین آنصآرّی | اخبار روپیہ |

October 18, 2008

History of Paksitan China relationship

Filed under: Post independence — Moin Ansari @ 10:17 pm
Tags:

Noticias de Rupia | Nouvelles de Roupie | Rupiennachrichten | новости рупии | 卢比新闻 | Roepienieuws | Rupi Nyheter | ルピーニュース | Notizie di Rupia | PAKISTAN LEDGER | پاکستاني کھاتا | Moin Ansari | معین آنصآرّی | DefensebriefsIntellibriefs Translate to: Page copy protected against web site content infringement by Copyscape Bookmark and Share Add to Technorati RSS feed: | RUPEE NEWS | October 18th, 2008 | Moin Ansari | معین آنصآرّی | اخبار روپیہ | By all accounts President Zardari’s trip to China was successful. However, every Pakistani leader’s tip to China is successful. Everytime the friendship brings new and long lasting business and technological deals. The relationship is not transactional, does not come with strings and does not come with “do more” mantras. Both countries have helped each other and continue to assist each other.

The trade between Pakistan and China is nothing new. The trade has been going on for thousands of years.

The trade between Pakistan and China is nothing new. The trade has been going on for thousands of years.

If friendship is coming to the help of an ally in times of need, then China has proved it several times over and through the decades. The friendship is a two way relationship. In the 50s Pakistan organized its border with China to the benifit of the Chinese allowing its access to Tibet. This chunk of territory given to China allowed it to not only consolidate the national unity of the country but also allowed it to give India a thrashing in 1962. This brilliant negotiation with China gave Pakistan long lasting peace with China. India was unable to and has been unable to resolve any border disputes with China or any of its neighbors. Pakistan’s historic boundary deal with China allowed the Chinese to consolidate their country.

In the 70s Pakistan was the bridge that enabled the US to create a relationship with Beijing. The American diplomats used Pakistani airports and planes to reach China and were accompanied by Pakistani diplomats. At the time Beijing was totally isolated and recognized by two countries int he world, Pakistan and Albania.

Chinese Pakistani Nexus map. The Trade between China and Pakistan consolidates a friendship as old as the Himalayas

Chinese Pakistani Nexus map. The Trade between China and Pakistan consolidates a friendship as old as the Himalayas

Pakistan broke China’s isolation and was instrumental is ensuring the China got its rightful place as part of the Security Council of the United Nations.

China's Mao Zedong's

China

In the 80s China was began its journey at manufacturing excellence. It was under sanctions by most Western nations, and Pakistan was used as a bridge to build some of the factories in China.

In the 90s China was totally dependent on Russian armaments. China did not have any access to Western technology. Pakistan and China began developing the JF-17 Thunder. Pakistan was one of the few Non-Western countries that had access to the latest American technology; from the F-86 Sabers to the F-104s to the F-16s. This experience was invaluable to the Chinese, who could not have gotten this knowledge and experience from anywhere else. Pakistan provided the technical knowledge, information, and requirements to build a new plane. By this time China had acquired the design of the failed Lavi Israeli fighter, but it did not provide the Chinese the know how to develop new technologies. Pakistan provided the Chinese with this help. Reverse Engineering was used to build a new aircraft tin record speed. The JF-17 Thunder was born. The US is so curious about this plane that it has asked Pakistan to participate in a joint exercise with Pakistan.

  • Pakistan is Chinese “Israel”
  • External forces trying to subvert Pakistan-China ties
  • The China Nexus with Pakistan grows
  • Chinese technology exports to Pakistan: JF-17 Thunder, J-10s, J-11s
  • China and Pakistan
  • China exporting Y-89 AWAC technology to Pakistan
  • IAF offensive actions agasinst China and Pakistan
  • In the new century China needs two things–energy and access to the warm waters of the Arabian sea. Pakistan is the crucial link that provides and will provide both to China.

    There is absolute consensus in Pakistan–across the the political spectrum on friendship with China. If there is anything the Pakistanis agree on, it is friendship with China. This is evident by the hospitality and the reception given to Chinese, any Chinese in Pakistan. When a Chinese leader visits Pakistan, he is accorded a royal and grand welcome accorded to only one other country in the world–Saudi Arabia. The receptions for the Chinese are not a government affair, they are welcome accorded by the Pakistani nation to the Chinese nation. This record of friendship is unprecedented in this history of nations.

    Pakistan's All Weather AllyThe relationship between China and Pakistan is of course a two way street. Pakistan is the only country in the world with which China has a Free Trade Agrement (FTA). The deals signed are not for the world pres, but for a long lasting relationship. Pakistani Gwador to China links threaten Indian Chahbahar links to Kabul via Iran

    China has privately agreed to follow a “step-by-step” approach to fulfilling Pakistan’s aspiration for an expanded nuclear energy program, rather than sign an ambitious civil nuclear program of the kind recently struck between the U.S. and India, senior Pakistani and Western officials said on Thursday.

    Private discussions are believed to have been held on expanded nuclear cooperation between Pakistan’s president Asif Ali Zardari and Chinese leaders during Zardari’s four-day visit to China, which began Tuesday.

    A senior Pakistani government official, familiar with discussions between Zardari and Chinese officials, claimed Thursday that China had agreed to “consider further nuclear power reactors to fulfill our needs. The relationship (on the nuclear issue) remains intact”. Speaking to CBS News on condition of anonymity, the official added, “there is now a complete understanding on our future cooperation”. (CBS) The following was written by CBS News’ Farhan Bokhari, reporting from Islamabad.

    Pakistan already has a Nuclear deal with China: It goes way beyond any other nuclear deal in the world. Indian media in a pre-orchestrated scheme is trying to portend failure by raising expectation on a Beijing-Islamabad deal

    China helped Pakistan in developing its Nuclear program. though Pakistan’s program is Uranium based–different that that of China. Pakistan already has a nuclear deal. China already has setup two nuclear power plants Chasnupp 1 (300 MW) and Chasnupp 2 (300 MW). The Chashma Nuclear Power Plant is located at Chashma, Punjab, Pakistan. It consists of Chashma Nuclear Power Plant I (CHASNUPP-1) and Chashma Nuclear Power Plant II (CHASNUPP-2). CHASNUPP-3 (600MW under construction) and CHASNUPP-4 (2000 MW planned to be completed before 2030) are in the planning stages. China does not make any 1000 MW plants, so the Chasnupp 4 and Chasnupp 5 etc will be much larger plants beginning in 2010. A series of these will be constructed within the next five years. However this will not done be done under floodlights and hoopla. Pakistan’s Nuclear deal with the USA is like the American Nuclear deal with Israel. The Chinese help to the Pakistanis is like the assistance the US provided to Britain and then to France to help their Nuclear programs. Pakistan is not the proliferator of Nuclear weapons, it takes the brunt of the blame for nonsensical and vindictive blame game.

    Pakistani official who spoke to CBS News on condition of anonymity said China is eager to avoid a direct confrontation with the West on its nuclear energy cooperation with Pakistan. “China is not seeking a head-on clash with anyone. It wants to broaden its relations with Pakistan but without the risk of a stiff U.S. reaction,” said the official.(CBS) The following was written by CBS News’ Farhan Bokhari, reporting from Islamabad.

    China and Pakistan flag

    China and Pakistan flag

    Indian Nuclear deal and Jimmy Carters words of wisdom The US Nuclear deal with India is a way of entrapping the Indians and making them feel good. By denying the Nuclear technology to Pakistan, the US knows that Pakistan already has access to much of it through China. Ameirican 123 vice trap for India: The jaw keeps getting tighter

    China has helped Pakistan is some of the basic models of the missiles by establishing the Heavy Mechanical Complex. Pakistan also used Korean technology to build its basic missiles. Its cruse missile uses ingredients of the US cruise missile. The Today Pakistan’s Nuclear and missile program has reached a maturity of technological independence propelled by self reliance and indigenous production.

    Now Pakistan is using Turkish and Chinese Technology to build its space exploration and Satellite navigation programs. Compared to its neighbor the Indian missile program is a total fiasco with Trishul, Agni Nag all being scrapped. Indian’s Arjun tanks is also a bust while Pakistan’s Al Khalid a a roaring success. The Al Khalid Tank is abased upon Ukranian and Russian prototypes. However the Al Khalid has gone way beyond basic Ukranian designs. Pakistan’s missile program Hataf, Shaheen, Abdali are a conglomeration of various older technologies , Russian, Chinese, Korean and American. All put together by Pakistani entrepreneurship. While the LCA is still in the design phase, Pakistan is now developing the J-10 and the J-11 which are built on the basic Mig 29 designs.

    Indian mechanations against Pakistan and China

    Chinese companies offer $5bn investment
    BEIJING, Oct 17: Chinese entrepreneurs have offered to invest $5 billion in Pakistan’s defence, banking, oil exploration and mining sectors, develop Thar coal, build Bhasha and Kohala dams and launch PakSat-1R in 2011. The offers were made during meetings with President Asif Ali Zardari, who concluded his four-day official visit and left for Pakistan on Friday.

    Heads of the business delegations said they were ready to intensify cooperation in defence production, oil and gas, energy, poly-technologies, electronics, hydropower generation and other sectors.

    They took deep interest in business, trade and investment opportunities in Pakistan.

    Among leading industrialists and business tycoons who called on President Zardari at the State Guest House included chairman of Northern Industries Ma Zhigeng, chairman of Poly Technologies Zhang Liansheng, chairman of the CETC Yan Lijin, president of Sinohydro Fan Jixiang and Liu Minkang of the Chinese Banking and Regulatory Authority.

    A delegation of China International Water and Electricity Corporation (CWE) met President Zardari and offered to invest $1.7 billion in Bhasha and Kohala dams.

  • An historic relaignment
  • China links to Pakistan Railways and to the Arabian Sea/
  • The CIA connection….
  • The CIA Connection…continues…in China
  • Chinese H-8 Stealth bomber
  • “We just met President Zardari and the talks focused on Bhasha and Kohala dams,” the deputy general manager of CWE, Jin Zheping, told the media after the meeting. Mr Jin said CWE was involved in “conceptual development” of Bhasha dam with Chinese hydroelectric power generating groups and also with Wapda, adding that an MoU had already been signed.

    Mr Jin said the president had told the delegation that the government wanted Chinese entrepreneurs to visit Pakistan to acquaint themselves with the investment climate. Ma Zhigeng, the chairman of Norinco, offered cooperation of his company in oil exploration and defence production sectors.

    He said that new ventures in oil and gas sectors were also discussed during the meeting with the president.He said that the company had already invested $30 million in oil exploration which would be further increased. The Chairman of Poly Technologies, Zhang Liansheng, offered technical assistance and investment in oil exploration and generation of electricity from coal-fired power plants.

    He said his company could also play an important role in expanding bilateral cooperation in media and education. The business leaders said Chinese banks would set up branches in Pakistan to take advantage of the country’s economic growth potential. Chinese technology exports to Pakistan: JF-17 Thunder, J-10s, J-11s

    SATELLITE LAUNCH: Earlier a spokesman of the China Great Wall Industry Corporation (CGWIC), the space industry concern, said that a Long March 3B rocket would be used to put the satellite into orbit. It will be launched from the Xichang satellite launch centre in China’s southwestern Sichuan province.

    The company said ground control facilities for the satellite would be delivered to Pakistan’s Space and Upper Atmosphere Research Commission (Suparco) after it entered into orbit.

    The satellite will have a lifespan of 15 years and Pakistan will use it for domestic telecommunication and broadcast services.The president was seen off at the airport by Chinese Assistant Foreign Minister Hu Zhengyue.

    During his four-day stay, President Zardari held talks with President Hu Jintao and Premier Wen Jiabao on issues of regional and international concern.

    The talks focused on strengthening Pakistan-China strategic partnership and cooperation in trade, investment, defense, banking sector and science and technology.The president also met the Chairman of the National People’s Congress, Wu Bangguo, and the Chairman of the Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference, Jia Qingling.

    Business executives, heads of financial institutions and corporate leaders called on Mr Zardari.

    October 16, 2008

    Bose’s War of Liberation against the British Empire in South Asia

    Filed under: British Raj, Independence movement — Moin Ansari @ 12:26 am
    Tags: , ,

    Noticias de Rupia | Nouvelles de Roupie | Rupiennachrichten | новости рупии | 卢比新闻 | Roepienieuws | Rupi Nyheter | ルピーニュース | Notizie di Rupia | PAKISTAN LEDGER | پاکستاني کھاتا | Moin Ansari | معین آنصآرّی | DefensebriefsIntellibriefs Translate to: Page copy protected against web site content infringement by Copyscape Bookmark and Share Add to Technorati RSS feed: | RUPEE NEWS | October 16th, 2008 | Moin Ansari | معین آنصآرّی | اخبار روپیہ |

    Subhas Chandra Bose, the Indian National Army, and the War of India’s Liberation – Ranjan Borra, Journal of Historical Review, no. 3, 4 (Winter 1982)

    “The arrival of Subhas Chandra Bose in Germany in 1941 (during the turbulent period of World War II) and his anti-British activities in that country in co-operation with the German government, culminated in the formation of an Indian legion.

    This marks perhaps the most significant event in the annals of India’s fight for independence. This event not only can be regarded as a historical link-up with what Bose himself chose to describe as “The Great Revolution of 1857,” and which (in his words) “has been incorrectly called by English historians ‘the Sepoy Mutiny,’ but which is regarded by the Indian people as the First War of Independence.”[1]

    It also represents the historical fact that, by that time persuasive methods conducted through a non-violent struggle under the leadership of Gandhi, had failed. An armed assault on the citadel of the British Empire in India was the only alternative left to deliver the country from bondage.

    While other leaders of the Indian National Congress fell short of realizing this fact and thus betrayed a lack of pragmatic approach to the turn of world events that provided India with a golden opportunity to strike at the British by a force of arms, Bose rose to the needs of the hour and was quick to seize that opportunity.

    While Bose’s compatriots in India remained totally wedded to an ideological creed (non-violence), which at that time could only serve the British and postpone the advent of independence, and while their ideological interpretations of the new revolutionary regimes in Europe-again largely influenced by British propaganda-prevented them from even harboring any thought of seeking their alliance and co-operation in the struggle against a common enemy, Subhas Chandra Bose alone had the courage to take the great plunge, thus risking his own life and reputation, solely in the interest and cause of his country. In January 1941, while under both house arrest, and strict British surveillance, he escaped.

    After an arduous trek through the rugged terrains of several countries, with an Italian passport under the assumed name of Orlando Mazzota – (in which he was aided by underground revolutionaries and foreign diplomatic agents) — Bose appeared in Berlin, via Moscow, on 28 March 1941.

    Bose was welcome in Germany, although the news of his arrival there was kept a secret for some time for political reasons. The German Foreign Office, which was assigned the primary responsibility of dealing with Bose and taking care of him, had been well informed of the background and political status of the Indian leader through its pre-war Consulate-General at Calcutta and also by its representative in Kabul.

    Bose himself, naturally some what impatient for getting into action soon after his arrival in Berlin, submitted a memorandum to the German government on 9 April 1941 which outlined a plan for co-operation between the Axis powers and India.

    Among other things, it called for the setting up of a “Free India Government” in Europe, preferably in Berlin; establishment of a Free India broadcasting station calling upon the Indian people to assert their independence and rise up in revolt against the British authorities; underground work in Afghanistan (Kabul) involving independent tribal territories lying between Afghanistan and India and within India itself for fostering and aiding the revolution; provision of finances by Germany in the form of a loan to the Free India government-in-exile; and deployment of German military contingents to smash the British army in India.

    In a supplementary memorandum bearing the same date, Bose requested that an early pronouncement be made regarding the freedom of India and the Arab countries.[2]

    It is significant to note that the memorandum did not mention the need for formation of an Indian legion. Evidently the idea of recruiting the Indian prisoners of war for the purpose of establishing a nucleus of an Indian national army did not occur to him during his early days in Berlin.

    At that time the German government was in the process of formulating its own plan for dealing with Subhas Chandra Bose in the best possible manner.

    The Foreign Office felt itself inadequate to discharge this awesome responsibility without referring the whole matter to Hitler. While this issue was being considered at the highest level of the government, Bose’s own requests as set forth in the submitted memorandum, made it far too complicated and involved to be resolved at an early date.

    There was a long wait for Bose, during which period he often tended to become frustrated. Nevertheless, through several sympathetic officers of the Foreign Office, he continued to press his requests and put forth new ideas.

    Finally, after months of waiting and many moments of disappointment often bordering on despair for Bose, Germany agreed to give him unconditional and all-out help.

    The two immediate results of this decision were the establishment of a Free India Center and inauguration of a Free India Radio, both beginning their operations in November 1941.

    These two organizations played vital and significant roles in projecting Bose’s increasing activities in Germany, but a detailed account of their operation lies outside the purview of this paper. It should suffice to say that the German government put at Bose’s disposal adequate funds to run these two organizations, and he was allowed complete freedom to run them the way he liked at his own discretion.

    In its first official meeting on 2 November 1941, the Free India Center adopted four historical resolutions that would serve as guidelines for the entire movement in subsequent months and years in Europe and Asia.

    First, Jai Hind or Victory to India, would be the official form of salutation; secondly, Nobel laureate poet Rabindranath Tagore’s famous patriotic song Jana Gana Mona was to be the national anthem for the free India Bose was fighting for; thirdly, in a multi-lingual state like India, the most widely-spoken language, Hindustani, was to be the national language; and fourthly, Subhas Chandra Bose would hereafter be known and addressed as Netaji, the Indian equivalent of the “leader” or the “Führer.”

    In November 1941, Azad Hind Radio (or the Free India Radio) opened its program with an announcing speech by Netaji himself, which, in fact, was a disclosure of his identity that had been kept officially secret for so long. The radio programs were broadcast in several Indian languages on a regular basis.

    During this long period of “hibernation,” the period between Netaji’s arrival in Berlin and the beginning of operations of the two organizations, it can be reasonably assumed that the idea of forming an Indian legion that could be developed into an Indian Army of Liberation in the West, crossed Bose’s mind.

    He might even have discussed this matter with his colleagues-the Indian compatriots in Germany who had joined him-as to how best to implement the idea. However, as mentioned earlier, his first memorandum submitted to the German Government did not include any such plan. According to N.G. Ganpuley, who was his associate in Berlin,

    Netaji himself, when he left India, could not have, by any stretch of imagination, thought of forming a national army unit outside the country, and therefore he had no definite plans chalked out for its realization. Even while in Berlin, he could not think of it during the first few months of his stay there.[3]

    When and how, therefore, did he come to conceive such a plan? Mr. Ganpuley relates an interesting episode in this regard. To quote again from his book:

    It was all due to a brain wave of Netaji which started working by a simple incident. He read one day about some half a dozen Indian prisoners-of-war who were brought to Berlin by the Radio Department to listen to the BBC and other stations which sent out their programmes in Hindustani. He saw them there going about, not as free Indians, but as prisoners-of-war. They were brought to the Radio Office every day to listen to and translate the Hindustani programmes, and were sent back to their quarters escorted by a sentry … After he had a talk with them about war, about their captivity and their present life, his active mind started working… He pondered over it for some time and decided to form a small national military unit … No sooner was this decision taken by him … he started negotiating with that section of the German Foreign Office with which he was in constant touch. He put before them his plans for training Indian youths from the prisoners’ camps for a national militia.[4]

    Although somewhat skeptical and hesitant at the beginning, the German response to the plans was encouraging. It was a time psychologically well-chosen by Netaji.

    The allied forces had been defeated on the Continent, and the Wehrmacht was marching ahead successfully in the Soviet Union. It was also a historical coincidence that a large number of British Indian prisoners-ofwar, captured during Rommel’s blitzkrieg in North Africa, lay in German hands.

    Netaji’s first idea was to form small parachute parties to spread propaganda in, and transmit intelligence from, the North-West Frontier in India. The reaction of some selected prisoners who were brought to Berlin from the camp of Lamsdorf in Germany and Cyrenaica was so encouraging that he asked for all Indian prisoners held in North Africa to be brought over to Germany at once.

    The Germans complied with this request, and the prisoners began to be concentrated at Annaburg camp near Dresden. The recruitment efforts, however, at the onset met with some opposition from the prisoners, who evidently had misgivings about Netaji’s intentions and motivations. In this regard Hugh Toye writes:

    When Bose himself visited the camp in December there was still marked hostility. His speech was interrupted, and much of what he had to say went unheard. But private interviews were more encouraging; the men’s questions showed interest-what rank would they receive? What credit would be given for Indian Army seniority? How would the Legionary stand in relation to the German soldier? Bose refused to bargain, and some who might have been influential recruits were turned away. On the other hand, many of the men paid him homage as a distinguished Indian, several professed themselves ready to join the Legion unconditionally.[5]

    Netaji sought and got agreement from the Germans that the Wehrmacht would train the Indians in the strictest military discipline, and they were to be trained in all branches of infantry in using weapons and motorized units the same way a German formation is trained; the Indian legionaries were not to be mixed up with any of the German formations; that they were not to be sent to any front other than in India for fighting against the British, but would be allowed to fight in self defense at any other place if surprised by any enemy formation; that in all other respects the Legion members would enjoy the same facilities and amenities regarding pay, clothing, food, leave, etc., as a German unit.

    By December 1941 all arrangements were complete and the next important task was to persuade men to come forward and form the nucleus. It appeared that the POWs needed to be convinced that there were civilian Indian youth as well, studying, well placed in life and responsible to their families at home, who were ready to give up everything to join the Legion.

    Ten of the forty young Indians then residing in Berlin, came forward. They were quickly joined by five POWs who were already in Berlin in connection with the German radio propaganda, and the first group of fifteen people was thus formed.

    On 25 December 1941 a meeting of Indian residents in Berlin was called in the office of the Free India Center, to give a send-off to the first fifteen who were to leave the following day for Frankenburg, the first training camp and headquarters for the Legion. The brief ceremony was simple and solemn. Netaji blessed the Legion, the first of its kind in the history of the struggle for Indian independence. He christened it Azad Hind Fauj (Indian National Army). The Indian Army of Liberation in the West thus had a humble and modest birth.

    The strength of the Legion grew steadily, as the task of recruitment continued unabated. Once trained to a certain level and discipline, the members of the first batch were assigned the additional responsibility of visiting the Annaberg camp and aiding in the recruitment process. While the Legion was sent to Frankenburg in Saxony, another group was taken to Meseritz in Brandenburg to be trained in tactical warfare. Abid Hasan and N.G. Swamy, the two original recruiters whom Netaji had sent to the Annaberg camp in 1941, had become de-facto foundermembers of the Legion at Frankenburg and the irregular Company at Meseritz respectively.

    At Meseritz, the Indians were placed under the command of Hauptmarm Harbig, whose first object was to make them forget that they had been prisoners. There were Tajiks, Uzbeks and Persians as well under training for operational roles similar to that envisaged for the Indians.

    In due course the trainees went on to tactical operational training, such as wireless operating, demolitions and riding, and also undertook special mountain and parachute courses. According to Toye, “Morale, discipline and Indo-German relations were excellent, the German officers first-rate.”[6]

    Netaji visited the camps from time to time and watched progress of the trainees. Since he himself was inclined toward military training and discipline, he followed the German training methods with great interest. It is understood that while in Germany Netaji himself underwent the rigors of such training, although authoritative documents on this subject are yet to be located by this writer.

    While in India, he was a member of the University Training Corps at school and commanded the volunteers at an annual session of the Indian National Congress, but he never had a formal military education prior to his arrival in Germany in 1941. As Joyce Lebra writes: “Though Bose was without any previous military experience, he got his training and discipline German-style, along with the soldiers of the Indian Legion.” 7

    To him, formation of a legion was more positive, more nationalistic and more gratifying than mere radio propaganda. Unlike his ex-compatriots in the Indian National Congress, including Gandhi, Nehru and Patel, he would rather seek confrontation with the British-with an army-than to work out a compromise with them on a conference table, on the issue of India’s freedom.

    A firm believer in discipline and organization, nothing perhaps could be more satisfying to him than to see his men being trained by the German Command, with officers of the highest calibre. In four months, the number of trainees rose to three hundred. In another six months a further three hundred were added. By December 1942, exactly a year after the recruitment of the Legion was inaugurated, it attained the strength of four battalions. At the beginning of 1943 the Legion would be 2000 strong, well on its way up to the culminating point of 3500 men. But let us step back to early 1942, almost a year after Netaji’s arrival in Berlin.

    After the inauguration of the Free India Center, Free India Radio, and the sending of the first fifteen legionaries to the Frankenburg training camp, Netaji’s activities in Germany began in full swing. His presence in Germany was not yet officially admitted-he was still being referred to as Signor Orlando Mazzota or His Excellency Mazzota-but he began to be known to more and more people in Berlin. Josef Goebbels wrote in his diary on 1 March:

    We have succeeded in prevailing upon the Indian nationalist leader, Bose, to issue an imposing declaration of war against England. It will be published most prominently in the German press and commented upon. In that way we shall now begin our official fight on behalf of India, even though we don’t as yet admit it openly.[8]

    On 14 March, he remarked of Bose, “He is an excellent worker.”[9] The fall of Singapore was a signal for Netaji to broadcast his first official speech over the Free India Radio, repeating his vow to fight British imperialism until the end. This he followed with a declaration of war against England, although at that stage such a pronouncement could only be symbolic. Netaji had not yet obtained an Axis declaration in support of the freedom of India that he pressed for in the supplement of his first memorandum to the German government. That government was of the opinion that the time was not ripe yet for such a declaration and unless a pronouncement of this nature could be supported by military action, it would not be of much value.

    Meanwhile, Japan proposed a tripartite declaration on India. Encouraged by this, Bose met Mussolini in Rome on 5 May, and persuaded him to obtain such a declaration in favor of Indian independence. Mussolini telegraphed the Germans, proposing proceeding at once with the declaration. To back his new proposal Mussolini told the Germans that he had urged Bose to set up a “counter-government” and to appear more conspicuously. The German reaction, which still remained guarded, is recorded by Dr. Goebbels in his diary on 11 May:

    We don’t like this idea very much, since we do not think the time has yet come for such a political manoeuvre. It does appear though that the Japanese are very eager for some such step. However, emigre governments must not live too long in a vacuum. Unless they have some actuality to support them, they only exist in the realm of theory.[10]

    Netaji apparently was of the opinion that a tripartite declaration on Indian independence, followed up by a government-in-exile, would give some credibility to his declaration of war on England, push over the brink the imminent revolution in India, and legitimize the Indian legion. However, Hitler held a different view. During an interview at the Führer’s field headquarters on 29 May, he told Netaii that a well-equipped army of a few thousand could control millions of unarmed revolutionaries, and there could be no political change in India until an external power knocked at her door. Germany could not yet do this.

    To convince Netaji, he took him to a wall map, pointed to the German positions in Russia and to India. The immense distances were yet to be bridged before such a declaration could be made. The world would consider it premature, even coming from him, at this stage. Hitler was perhaps being realistic, but nevertheless it must have come as some sort of disappointment for Netaji.

    In July 1942, the Germans suggested that a contingent of the Irregular Company be sent for front-line propaganda against Indian troops at El Alamein; but Rommel, who did not like battlefields turned into proving grounds for Foreign Office ideas, opposed the move. However, at the Lehrregiment manoeuvers in September, and on field exercises in October, the Indian performance won high praise.

    By January 1943, it was realized that maintenance of the irregulars as a separate entity was not of much practical use, and the ninety Indian men, (excepting four under N.G. Swamy who were being trained for work within Indiaj were absorbed into the Legion. Since the supply of recruits from the Annaburg camp was fast being depleted, it was decided to hasten the shipment of prisoners of war from Italy.

    According to an agreement between Italy and Germany, all Indian POWs were to be sent directly to Germany without being held in Italian camps. But, in the meanwhile, an unforseen impediment stood in the way. A long-time Indian resident in Rome, Iqbal Shedai, formed an Indian unit under the Italians, and began broadcasting from Rome with the aid of a few Indian prisoners.

    It is understood that he had conferred with Netaji a few times, but obviously had no intention of co-operating with him. From radio broadcasting, he advanced into forming an Indian military unit, although it was in clear violation of the Italo-German agreement. The unit was named the Centro Militare India, but existed only from April to November 1942.

    During its brief period of existence, however, Shedai succeeded in diverting several hundred volunteers to Italian camps, who would normally have gone to Germany. In November the unit was three hundred and fifty strong, having been trained by Italian officers. On 9 November, after the Allied landing in North Africa, it was learnt that the men were being sent to fight in Libya, contrary to Shedai’s promises. When they refused to go and mutinied, Shedai refused to intervene. Consequently, the Centro Militare India was disbanded. It was never revived, and thus a barrier that stood in Netaji’s way toward recruitment was removed.

    In August 1942, the Legion was moved to Koenigsbrueck, a large military training center in Saxony. This had been a regular training ground for the German infantry and motorized units for decades. Here the first contingents paraded before Netaji’s eyes in October, and the growth was rapid. However, the rapid expansion of the Legion also posed the problem of finances.

    Hitherto, payment to soldiers was being made from the monthly grants to the Free India Center and its office. As the number of Legionaries grew, that source became insufficient. For this problem there could be but one solution: direct payment to the Legion b~ the Germans.

    This would mean hereafter that the Legionaries would receive promotions and precedence as soldiers of national socialist Germany, and would become, in fact, a regiment of the German army, while retaining its separate name and distinction. This was agreed upon between Netaji and the German government, necessitating the taking of a formal oath of loyalty to Adolph Hitler on the part of the Legionaries. Describing the ceremony, Hugh Toye writes:

    Five hundred Legionaries were assembled. Their German commander, Lieutenant-Colonel Krappe, addressed them, and the oath was administered by German officers to six men at a time. All was done with solemnity, the soldiers touching their officer’s sword as they spoke the German words: ‘I swear by God this holy oath, that I will obey the leader of the German State and people, Adolph Hitler, as commander of the German Armed Forces, in the fight for freedom of India, in which fight the leader is Subhas Chandra Bose, and that as a brave soldier, I am willing to lay down my life for this oath.’ Bose presented to the Legion its standard, a tricolor in the green, white and saffron of the Indian National Congress, superimposed with the figure of a springing tiger in place of the Congress spinning wheel. “Our names,” he said, “will be written in gold letters in the history of free India; every martyr in this holy war will have a monument there.” It was a brave, colorful show, and for Bose, a moment of pride and emotion. “I shall lead the army,” he said, “when we march to India together.” The Legionaries looked well in their new uniforms, the silken banner gleaming in their midst; their drill did them credit.[11]

    What was Netaji’s plan for leading this army to India? When the Germans launched out beyond Stalingrad into Central Asia, the Indian irregulars, trained at Messeritz, would accompany their Tajik and Uzbek counterparts along with the German Troops.

    After Uzbekistan and Afghanistan were reached the Indian Company would leap ahead of the German advance to disrupt the British-Indian defenses in northwestern India. Netaji spoke of dropping parachute brigades, calling on the Indian peasantry to assist them. Through radio he issued warnings to British Indian soldiers and police to the effect that unless they assisted the liberation forces they would one day have to answer to the free Indian government for their criminal support of the British.

    The effect of the Indian army of liberation marching into India along with the German forces would be such that the entire British Indian Army morale would collapse, coinciding with a revolutionary uprising against the British. The Legion would then be the nucleus of an expanding army of free India.

    Netaji’s plan, largely dependent on German Military successes in the Soviet Union, undoubtedly had a setback when the Wehrmacht was halted at Stalingrad. After the German retreat from that city, the plan for marching into India from the West had to be abandoned. The tide of war was turning swiftly, calling for devising new strategies on the part of Netaji.

    While the German army’s second thrust into Russia encountered an unexpected counter-offensive at Stalingrad and thus was forced to turn back, in another part of the world the forces of another Axis partner were forging ahead, nearer and nearer to India.

    Japan was achieving spectacular successes in the Far East and was ready to welcome Netaji as the leader of millions of Indians who lived in the countries of East and Southeast Asia. To Netaji, the Japanese attitude was extremely encouraging. Tolo, the Prime Minister, had issued statements in the Diet about Indian freedom early in 1942, and by March there was a Japanese proposal for a tripartite declaration on India.

    A small band of Indian National Army legionaires had already been in existence in the Southeast under Japanese patronage, although a few of its leaders, including Mohan Singh, had fallen out with the Japanese. Netaji would have no difficulty in reorganizing and expanding this organization.

    He would get the active support of millions of overseas Indians, and the many thousands of British Indian prisoners-of-war would provide him a greater opportunity for recruitment, and for thus organizing a formidable army of liberation that could immediately be deployed in forward positions as the Imperial Japanese Army kept on advancing through the steaming jungles of the Malayan peninsula and Burma. During his meeting with Hitler on 29 May, the Führer had also suggested that in view of the prevalent world situation, Netaji should shift the center of his activities from Germany to the Far East.

    Netaji could look back at his two years work in Germany with a sense of pride and accomplishment. Broadcasting, publications and propaganda were all extended. Azad Hind Radio had extended programs in several languages, and reports indicated that they were being listened to with interest in target areas; Azad Hind, a bilingual journal, was being published regularly.

    There were other papers for the Legion besides; the Free India Center had attained an acknowledged status in Germany. It was treated as a foreign mission, entitling its members to a higher scale of rations, and exemption from some of the Aliens’ regulations. Netaji himself was given a good villa, a car and special rations for entertainment purposes. His personal allowance amounted to about eight hundred pounds a month.

    The monthly grant for the Free India Center rose from 1,200 pounds in 1941 to 3,200 pounds in 1944. All these Netaji stipulated as a loan from the German government, to be returned after India gained independence with the Axis assistance. However, the turn of events now demanded his presence in a different theater-of-war.

    What would happen to the Legion in Netaji’s absence? It was now 3,500 strong, well trained and equipped, ready for action. Netaii consulted with his aides in Berlin. A.C.N. Nambiar, an Indian journalist who had been in Europe for some eighteen years prior to Netaji’s arrival in Germany, was his right-hand man. While preparing for his journey to the Asian theater-of-war, Netaji passed on to Nambiar his policy and instructions. As Hugh Toye writes:

    There were plans for new branches of the Free India Center, for broadcasting, for Indians to study German police methods, and for the training of Indian seamen and airmen. As for the legion, it must be used actively as soon as possible, the German officers and NCOs must be quickly replaced by Indians, there must be no communalism. Legionaries were to be trained on all the most modern German equipment, including heavy artillery and tanks; Bose would send further instructions as opportunity offered.[12]

    A few words must be added regarding the Indo-German cooperation and comradeship during the critical days of World War II when the Legion was formed. None could describe it better than Adalbert Seifriz, who was a German Officer in the training camp of the Legionaries. He writes,

    Agreeing to the proposal of Bose was a magnificient concession and consideration shown to the great personality of Bose by the German Government in those critical times when all German efforts were concentrated on the war … The mutual understanding and respect between Indians and Germans and the increasing contact between them in the interest of the common task made it possible for the Indian Legion to sustain and keep up discipline right up to the German capitulation in 1945. During the period of training and even afterwards the comradeship between Indians and Germans could not be destroyed … A meeting with Subhas Bose was a special event for the German training staff.-We spent many evenings with him, discussing the future of India. He lives in the minds of the training staff members as an idealistic and fighting personality, never sparing himself in the service of his people and his country … The most rewarding fact was the real comradeship which grew between Indians and Germans, which proved true in dangerous hours, and exists still today in numerous cases. The Indian Legion was a precious instrument in strengthening and consolidating Indo-German friendship.[13]

    A report of Hitler’s visit to the Indian Legion headquarters in Dresden was given by Shantaram Vishnu Samanta (one of the Legionaries) during a press interview in India, after his release from an internment camp. According to his statement, Hitler addressed the soldiers of the Legion after Netaji had left for East Asia. He spoke in German and his speech was translated into Hindustani by an interpreter. He said:

    You are fortunate having been born in a country of glorious cultural traditions and a colossal manpower. I am impressed by the burning passion with which you and your Netaji seek to liberate your country from foreign domination. Your Netaji’s status is even greater than mine. While I am the leader of eighty million Germans, he is the leader of 400 million Indians. In all respects he is a greater leader and a greater general than myself. I salute him, and Germany salutes him. It is the duty of all Indians to accept him as their führer and obey him implicitly. I have no doubt that if you do this, his guidance will lead India very soon to freedom.

    A statement by another soldier of the Indian Legion, who remains anonymous, has a somewhat different version. It stated that both Netaji and Hitler took a joint salute of the Indian Legion and a German infantry. In addition to comments cited earlier, Hitler was reported to have made these remarks as well:

    German civilians, soldiers and free Indians! I take this opportunity to welcome your acting Führer, Herr Subhas Chandra Bose. He has come here to guide all those free Indians who love their country and are determined to free it from foreign yoke. It is too much for me to dare to give you any instructions or advice because you are sons of a free country, and you would naturally like to obey implicitly the accredited leader of your own land. [14]

    However, reports of Hitler’s visit and address to the Indian Legionaries are not confirmed from any other source.

    Netaji would be leaving Germany on 8 February 1943. On 26 January, “Independence Day for India,” there was a great party in Berlin where hundreds of guests drank his health. On 28 January, which was set aside for observance as the “Legion Day” in honor of the Indian Legion, he addressed the Legion for the last time. It is believed that his departure was kept secret from his army.

    So, there were no visible emotions among the men; no gesture of a farewell. The impression Netaji was leaving at the Free India Center, was that he was going on a prolonged tour. So there were no signs of any anxiety. Except for a few top-ranking German officers and his closest aides, hardly anybody was aware that within a week-and-a-half he would be embarking on the most perilous journey ever undertaken by man; a submarine voyage through mine-infested waters to the other side of the world. In his absence, Nambiar settled down in his job as his successor and soon gained respect of the Legionaries.

    Two months after Netaii’s departure, as a result of discussion between the German Army Command and the Free India Center, it was decided to transfer the Legion from Koenigsbrueck to a coastal region in Holland, to involve it in a practical coastal defense training. It was also in accordance with Netaji’s Wishes. He had often expressed a desire to give his troops, whenever possible, some training in coastal defense.

    After the first battalion was given a hearty send-off, an untoward incident happened within the legion; two companies of the second battalion refused to move. It was soon found out that there were three main reasons for staging this minor rebellion.

    Some Legionaries were unhappy that they were not promoted, but their names had to be put on the waiting list; some simply did not want to leave Koenigsbrueck; some were influenced by a rumor that Netaji had abandoned them and had gone off leaving them entirely in German hands, who were now going to use them in the Western Front, instead of sending them to the East to fight for India’s liberation.

    However, the rebellion was soon quelled after a team of NCOs visited the officials of the Free India Center in Berlin and obtained clarification regarding the rebel Legionaries’ grievances.

    The team went back to the camp and assured the men that they were not being sent to fight a war but were there purely for practical training purposes according to Netaji’s wishes; that the promotions were not being passed up, they would follow in due course; and that Netaji had not abandoned them, and they would be informed about his whereabouts and plans as soon as possible. In pursuance of military discipline, the ringleaders of this act of insubordination were sent to prison camps for a specified period.

    The Legion was stationed in the coastal areas of Holland for five months. Afterwards, there was a decision to move it to the coastal area of Bordeaux in France from the mouth of the Girond, opposite the fortification of Foyan to the Bay of Arcachon.

    The Legion was taking charge here. The stay in France was utilized to give the Legionaries a thorough training in the weaponry required for the defense of the Atlantic Wall. In the spring of 1944, the first batch of twelve Indians were promoted to officers. Field Marshal Rommel, who took charge of the Atlantic Wall, once visited the area where the Indian contingent was located. Ganpulay writes:

    … after having seen the work carried out by the Indians,, he exclaimed: “I am pleasantly surprised to find that in spite of very little training in coastal defense, the work done here is fairly satisfactory.” While departing, he said to the Indian soldiers: “I am glad to see you have done good work; I wish you and your leader all the good luck!”[15]

    In the spring of 1944, one company of the Legion was sent to North Italy at the request of some officers who were seeking an opportunity to confront the British forces. After the Normandy invasion by the Allied forces in June 1944, the military situation in Europe began to deteriorate. It eventually became so critical that the German High Command decided to order the Indian Legion to return to Germany.

    So after about ten months of stay in the coastal region of Lacanau in France, the Indian Legion started its road back. It is to be understood at this point that with the landing of the Allied troops in France and their gradual advance through the French countryside, the French Maquis (underground) guerrillas had become very active, and along with the German troops they made the Legionaries as well the target of their attacks.

    After travelling a certain distance, the first battalion of the Legion was temporarily located in the area of Mansle near Poitiers, while the second and the third battalion were stationed in Angouleme and Poitiers respectively. After a rest for ten days in this region, during which period they had to ward off sporadic attacks by the French underground, the Legionaries took to the road once again. In this long march back to Germany, the Legion demonstrated exemplary courage and fortitude, and underwent rigors and hardships of battlefield with equanimity.

    At this time, British propaganda was directed to these men which was full of empty promises; some material was dropped from the air, while agents infiltrated into the ranks to persuade the men to desert. The propaganda promised the would-be deserters reinstatement in the British Indian army with full retroactive pay and pension, but the British hypocrisy was once again manifest in the fact that a few of the soldiers who had fallen victim to this bait were shot later by the French publicly in a market place in Poitiers without any trial, along with some German prisoners-of-war.

    In following the saga of the Indian Army of Liberation in the West, one has to remember that its fate was indissolubly linked with that of the Axis powers in Europe, especially Germany. The overpowering of the new revolutionary regimes of Europe by forces representing an alliance of capitalism and Marxism was an international tragedy which engulfed the Indian Legion in Europe as well.

    During its retreat into Germany, it encountered the enemy forces on several occasions and fought rearguard action with British and French forces, displaying exemplary bravery. The German military training had converted the regiment not only into a highly disciplined body, but a hard-core fighting unit as well.

    It is indeed a historical irony that this superb force could not be utilized for the purpose and way its creator and leader, Subhas Chandra Bose, had dreamt of. Nevertheless, the 950th Indian Regiment, as the Legion was officially designated, left its footprints in the battlefields of France and Germany, as their many other gallant comrades of the German Army.

    In the fall of 1944 until Christmas, the Indian Legion spent its time in the quiet villages of southern Germany. Between Christmas and the New Year 1945, the unit was ordered to move into the military camp at the garrison town of Heuberg. In the spring of 1945 the Allied forces crossed the Rhine. The Russians entered the East German provinces murdering and plundering cities, townships and villages. Heavy bomber formations began destroying German cities.

    Transport systems became completely disorganized and paralyzed. The end was near, and there was no point in remaining in the barracks. The Legion, therefore, left its winter quarters at Heuberg in March 1945, and headed for the Alpine passes. By that time all communications with the Free India Center in Berlin had been cut off. The Legion commanders took decisions independently.

    The Legion had already reached the Alpine regions east of Bodensee. However, with the surrender of the German forces on 7 May, all hopes also ended for the Free India Army. While attempting to cross over to Switzerland, the legionaries were overwhelmed by American and French units and were made prisoners. Those who fell into the hands of the French had to suffer very cruel treatment. Several were shot, while others died in prison camps in miserable conditions. The rest were eventually handed over to the British.

    Although thus swept into the maelstrom of the Axis disintegration in Europe, Netaji’s army of liberation in the west had carved for itself a niche in history; for, indeed, it was a nucleus which would eventually precipitate a much larger fighting force elsewhere.

    Inspired by its leader, that force would march into India to set in motion a process that would eventually deliver the country from an alien bondage. One, therefore, must not regard the saga of the Indian National Army in Europe as an isolated event that ended tragically.

    While its dream of crossing the Caucasus along with its allies, the German Armed Forces, and entering India from the Northwest, did not materialize in reality, its extension and successor, India’s army of liberation in the east, did enter the country from the opposite direction, thus fulfilling the cherished dream of Netaji and his soldiers. Not only that, as we shall see subsequently, but that army made the mightiest contribution toward finally ending an imperialist rule in India.

    During his interview with Netaji, Hitler had suggested to him that since it would take at least another one or two years before Germany could gain direct influence in India, and while Japan’s influence, in view of its spectacular successes in Southeast Asia, could come in a few months, Bose should negotiate with the Japanese.

    The Führer warned Bose against an air journey which could compel him to a forced landing in British territory. He thought Bose was too important a personality to let his life be endangered by such an experiment. Hitler suggested that he could place a German submarine at his disposal which would take him to Bangkok on a journey around the Cape of Good Hope.[16]

    However, despite Hitler’s suggestions, it is believed that the German Foreign Office showed some reluctance in the matter of Netaji’s leaving Germany and going to Japan. Col. Yamamoto Bin, Japanese military attache in Berlin (and a good personal friend of Netaji) along with the Japanese ambassador Lieutenant-General Oshima Hiroshi, had met Netaji as early as October 1941 when the latter expressed hopes for enlisting Japanese aid in his plan for wresting Indian independence. This was the beginning of a series of such meetings.

    After the entry of Japan in World War II in December, Netaji was more eager to go as soon as possible to East Asia and fight beside Japan for India’s liberation. He reportedly urged Oshima to use his good offices to secure his passage to Asia. It was about at this point that both Oshima and Yamamoto encountered a feeling of reluctance in the matter on the part of the German Foreign Office.

    They had the feeling that Germany was not to willing to let Japan lead India to independence. Bose was already a useful ally as an Indian patriot, and his propaganda broadcasts were effective in both India and Britain. The Indian Legion was already having a psychological impact in India and worrying the Allies. For these reasons, “they were guarding Bose like a tiger cub.”[17]

    In the meantime, Ambassador Oshima had also met with Hitler and explained Bose’s plan to him. According to Japanese records,

    The Führer readily agreed with Oshima that it was better for Bose to shift his activities to Southeast Asia now that his country’s (Japan’s) armies had overrun the area. The second problem was whether Bose would get enough support in Tokyo for his activities. On this, Oshima had contacted Tokyo many times but had not received any firm answer. Finally, Tokyo replied to Oshima that in principle it had no objection to Bose’s visit to Japan. The third problem was to provide Bose with a safe means of transport to Japan. Communication between Germany and Japan was impossible during those days. Passage by boat was ruled out; and it was decided to use a plane belonging to the Lufthansa Company to airlift Bose from Germany to Japan via the Soviet Union. Tojo (Japanese Prime Minister) objected to this on the grounds that this would amount to a breach of trust with the Soviet Union. An attempt was made by both Yamamoto and Bose to get an Italian plane, but this also did not work. Finally the choice fell on a submarine. Germany agreed to carry Bose up to a certain unknown point in the east and asked that a Japanese submarine be pressed into service thence forward. After a series of exchanges with his government, Oshima finally obtained Tokyo’s approval of the plan and communicated it to Bose.[18]

    Alexander Werth writes:

    An interesting anecdote related to this historic journey may perhaps be mentioned here. Shortly before Bose’s departure the Japanese Naval Command raised objections because of an internal Japanese regulation not permitting civilians to travel on a warship in wartime. When Adam von Trott (of the German Foreign Office) received this message by cable from the German Ambassador in Tokyo, he sent the following reply: “Subhas Chandra Bose is by no means a private person, but Commander-in-Chief of the Indian Liberation Army.” Thus the bureaucratic interference was overcome.[19]

    On 8 February 1943, accompanied by Keppler, Nambiar and Werth, Netaji arrived at the port of Kiel where a German submarine under the command of Werner Musenberg was waiting for him. His would-be sole companion on this perilous voyage, Abid Hasan had travelled separately to Kiel in a special compartment without knowing his destination. Only after commencement of the journey was he to be informed of the itinerary. Netaji was leaving behind his chosen 3,500 soldiers of the Indian Legion, the 950th regiment of the German Army, specially trained and equipped for the task of liberating an India held in bondage by the British. We have already followed the history and fate of the Legion. Now let us turn to the East.

    Indian National Army of Liberation in the East

    On 15 February 1942, Singapore fell to the Japanese army advancing southward from the Malayan peninsula. Two days later, in an impressive ceremony held at Farrar Park in the heart of the town, Indian troops were handed over to the Japanese as prisoners-of-war by their commanding officer, Colonel Hunt.

    Major Fujiwara took them over on behalf of the victorious Japanese, and then announced that he was handing them over to Captain Mohan Singh of the Indian contingents, who should be obeyed by them as their Supreme Commander. Mohan Singh then spoke to the Indian POWs, expressing his intention of raising an Indian national army out of them to fight for India’s freedom.

    He held a preliminary discussion with some prominent Indians in Malay and Burma in a meeting in Singapore on 9 and 10 March, which was attended by Rashbehari Bose, a veteran Indian revolutionary exile living in Japan for the last quarter of a century. Bose then called a conference in Tokyo, which was held 28-30 March.

    The delegates representing several East and Southeast Asian countries present at the conference, decided to form the Indian Independence League to organize an Indian independence movement in East Asia. Bose was recognized as head of the organization.

    The conference further resolved that “militay action against the British in India will be taken only by the INA and under Indian command, together with such military, naval and air cooperation and assistance as may be requested from the Japanese by the Council of Action” and further, “after the liberation of India, the framing of the future constitution of India will be left entirely to the representatives of the people of India.”[20]

    On 15 June 1942, a conference opened in Bangkok with over a hundred delegates of the IIL attending from all over Asia. By the close of the nine-day conference a resolution was unanimously adopted setting forth the policies of the independence movement in East Asia. The III, was proclaimed the organization to work for India’s freedom; the Indian National Army was declared the military arm of the movement with Mohan Singh as the Commander-in-chief and Rashbehari Bose was elected president of the Council of Action.

    It was further decided that Singapore would be the headquarters of the IIL. Netaji had stated in a message to the conference that his personal experience had convinced him that Japan, Italy and Germany were sworn enemies of British imperialism; yet, independence could come only through the efforts of Indians themselves. India’s freedom would mean the rout of British imperialism. The Indian National Army was officially inaugurated in September 1942.

    Unfortunately, at this point a distrust began to grow within the Indian group against Rashbehari Bose’s leadership. Some thought that having been long associated with Japan, he gave precedence to the Japanese interests over Indian interests. According to Japanese records:

    Some even thought that he was just the protege of the Japanese, and that the latter was exploiting Indians for their own ends. Such resentment finally resulted in a revolt of a group of leaders headed by Captain Mohan Singh within the INA in November 1942. As a consequence, Mohan Singh and his associate, Colonel Gill were both arrested by the Japanese and the Indian Army was disbanded. However, in 1943 a new Indian Army was organized, put under the command of Lt. Col. Bhonsle, who held this post until the final dissolution of the army. [21]

    Describing the revived INA. Joyce Lebra writes:

    On 15 February 1943, the INA was reorganized and former ranks and badges revived. The Director of the Military Bureau, Lieutenant-Colonel Bhonsle, was clearly placed under the authority of the III. to avoid any repetition of IIIANA rivalry. Under Bhonsle was Lt. Col. Shah Nawaz Khan as Chief of General Staff-, Major P.K. Sahgal as Military Secretary; Major Habibur Rahman as commandant of the Officers’ Training School; and Lt. Col. A.C. Chatterji, and later Major A.D. Jahangir, as head of enlightenment and culture. Apart from this policy-forming body was the Army itself, under the command of Lt. Col. M.Z. Kiani. This was the organization which held the INA together until the arrival of Subhas Chandra Bose from Berlin, six months later.[22]

    In February, the Japanese military officer Iwakuro had called a meeting of about three hundred officers of the INA at Bidadri camp in Singapore and spoke to them about the advisability of joining the army, but with no effect. According to Ghosh, “Later on, in a ‘Heart to heart talk’ with some officers, it emerged that a large number of officers and men would be willing to continue in the INA on the express condition that Netaji would be coming to Singapore.”[23]

    The story of Netaji’s exploits in Germany and the history of the Indian Legion was known to Indian revolutionaries of the IIL in East Asia for some time now, and they awaited his arrival eagerly. As the first INA wavered, faltered and was finally disbanded, and as its successor merely continued to exist, the need for Netaji’s leadership began to be felt more keenly. Mohan Singh had mentioned his name to General Fujiwara as early as 1941. In all conferences the need of his guidance had been emphasized by the delegates.

    While Netaji and Abid Hasan continued to push toward the East making a wide sweep out into the Atlantic, by pre-arrangement, a Japanese submarine left Penang Island on 20 April for the tip of Africa, under strict orders not to attack or risk detection. The two submarines had a rendevous four hundred miles south-southwest of Madagascar on 26 April. After sighting each other and confirming their identity, the submarines waited for a day for the sea to become calm.

    Then on 28 April, in what was known to be the only known submarine-to-submarine transfer of passengers (in the annals of World War II) in an area dominated by the enemy’s air and naval strength, Netaji and Abid Hasan were transhipped into the Japanese submarine via a rubber raft. Travelling across the ocean, the Japanese 1-29 reached Sabang on 6 May, 1943. It was an isolated offshore islet north of Sumatra.

    There, Netaji was welcomed by Colonel Yamamoto, who was the head of the Hikari Kikan, the Japanese-Indian liaison group. From Sabang, Netaji and Yamamoto left for Tokyo by plane, stopping en route at Penang, Manila, Saigon and Taiwan.

    The plane landed in Tokyo on 16 May. All throughout his submarine voyage from Germany and for about a month after his arrival in Tokyo, Netaji’s identity and presence was kept a secret. He was supposed to be a Japanese VIP named Matsuda.

    Although he remained incognito during the first few weeks in Japan, Netaji did not waste any time by just waiting. From 17 May onwards, he met Japanese Army and Navy Chiefs-of-Staff, Navy Minister and Foreign Minister in rapid succession. However, he had to wait for nearly three weeks before Japanese PrimeMinister Tojo granted him an interview.

    But Tojo was so impressed with Netaji’s personality that he offered to meet him again after four days. Two days later, on 16 June, Netaji was invited to visit the Diet (the Japanese Parliament) where Tojo surprised him with his historic declaration on India:

    We are indignant about the fact that India is still under the ruthless suppression of Britain and are in full sympathy with her desperate struggle for independence. We are determined to extend every possible assistance to the cause of India’s independence. It is our belief that the day is not far off when India will enjoy freedom and prosperity after winning independence.[24]

    It was not until 18 June that Tokyo Radio announced Netaji’s arrival. The news was reported in the Tokyo press the following day. At this announcement, the atmosphere was electrified overnight. The Axis press and radio stressed the significance of the event.

    The INA and the Indian independence movement suddenly assumed far greater importance in the eyes of all. On 19 June, Netaji held a press conference. This was followed by two broadcasts to publicize further his presence in East Asia, and during the course of these he unfolded his plan of action.

    As Ghosh describes, Bose’s plan stood for the co-ordination of the nationalist forces within India and abroad to make it a gigantic movement powerful enough to overthrow the British rulers of India. The assumption on which Bose seemed to have based his grand scheme was that the internal conditions in India were ripe for a revolt. The no-cooperation movement must turn into an active revolt.[25]

    And to quote Netaji’s own words during the press conference: “Civil disobedience must develop into armed struggle. And only when the Indian people have received the baptism of fire on a large scale would they be qualified to achieve freedom.”[26] Netaji then embarked upon a series of meetings, press conferences. radio broadcasts and lectures in order to explain his immediate task to the people concerned, and the world.

    Accompanied by Rashbehari Bose, Netaji arrived at Singapore from Tokyo on 27 June. He was given a tumultuous welcome by the resident Indians and was profusely ‘garlanded’ wherever he went. His speeches kept the listeners spellbound. By now, a legend had grown around him, and its magic infected his audiences. Addressing representatives of the Indian communities in East Asia on 4 July he said:

    Not content with a civil disobedience campaign, Indian people are now morally prepared to employ other means for achieving their liberation. The time has therefore come to pass on to the next stage of our campaign. All organizations whether inside India or outside, must now transform themselves into a disciplined fighting organization under one leadership. The aim and purpose of this organization should be to take up arms against British imperialism when the time is ripe and signal is given.[27]

    At a public meeting where Netaji spoke these words, Rashbehari Bose formally handed over to Subhas Chandra Bose the leadership of the III, and command of the INA. The hall was packed to capacity. In his last speech as leader of the movement Rashbehari Bose said:

    Friends! This is one of the happiest moments in my life. I have brought you one of the most outstanding personalities of our great Motherland to participate in our campaign. In your presence today, I resign my office as president of the Indian Independence League in East Asia. From now on, Subhas Chandra Bose is your president, your leader in the fight for India’s independence, and I am confident that under his leadership, you will march on to battle and to victory.[28]

    In that meeting Netaji announced his plan to organize a Provisional Government of Free India.

    It will be the task of this provisional government to lead the Indian Revolution to its successful conclusion … The Provisional Government will have to prepare the Indian people, inside and outside India, for an armed struggle which will be the culmination of all our national efforts since 1883. We have a grim fight ahead of us. In this final march to freedom, you will have to face danger, thirst, privation, forced marches-and death. Only when you pass this test will freedom be yours.[29]

    The next day, on 5 July, Netaji took over the command of the Indian National Army, now christened Azad Hind Fauj (Free India Army). Tojo arrived from Manila in time to review the parade of troops standing alongside with Bose. Addressing the soldiers, Netaji said:

    Throughout my pubic career, I have always felt that, though India is otherwise ripe for independence in every way, she has lacked one thing, namely, an army of liberation. George Washington of America could fight and win freedom, because he had his army. Garibaldi could liberate Italy because he had his armed volunteers behind him. It is your privilege and honor to be the first to come forward and organize India’s national army.

    By doing so you have removed the last obstacle in our path to freedom… When France declared war on Germany in 1939 and the campaign began, there was but one cry which rose from the lips of German soldiers- “To Paris! To Paris!” When the brave soldiers of Nippon set out on their march in December 1941, there was but one cry which rose from their lips-”To Singapore! To Singapore!” Comrades! My soldiers! Let your battle-cry be-”To Delhi! To Delhil”

    How many of us will individually survive this war of freedom, I do not know. But I do know this, that we shall ultimately win and our task will not end until our surviving heroes hold the victory parade on another graveyard of the British Empire-Lal Kila or the Red Fortress of ancient Delhi.[30]

    On 27 July, Netaji left Singapore for a 17-day,tour of the East Asian and Southeast Asian countries. The prime objective of this tour was to enlist moral and monetary support for his movement from other countries, as well as the resident Indian communities. He was given a rousing reception in Rangoon, where he attended the Burmese independence on 1 August; from Rangoon Netaji went to Bangkok and met Thai Prime Minister Pilbulsongram.

    He won the moral support of Thailand and tumultuous ovation from the Indian community. He then flew to Saigon and addressed Indians there. Returning to Singapore for a brief rest, he flew to Penang to address a rally of 15,000 Indians. Everywhere, he held his audience spellbound for hours with his superb oratory, and at the conclusion of his speech the people raced to reach the platform and pile up all they had before him-a total of two million dollars.

    This scene was repeated over and over in towns and cities all over Southeast Asia, when Netaji stood before thousands of people like a prophet, addressing them for the cause of India’s freedom. Merchants, traders, businessmen and women came forward everywhere and donated their wealth and ornaments in abundance, to enable their leader to fulfill his mission. In his plan for total mobilization, Netaji had outlined a grandiose scheme for an army of three million men. However, the immediate target was set at 50,000. The Major part of this number would be from the Indian POWs and the rest from civilian volunteers.

    According to Bose’s plan there would be three divisions from thirty thousand regulars and another unit of twenty thousand mainly from civilian volunteers. The Japanese authorities informea Netaji at that time that it could provide arms for thirty thousand men only. However, by 1945, it was authoritatively known that the actual strength of the INA rose to not less than 45,000 men.

    After completing the task of reorganizing the Indian Independence League and launching preparations for revolutionizing the army, and after conducting a successful campaign to mobilize the support of the Indian communities throughout Southeast Asia-a phase which lasted from July to OctoberNetaji turned toward formation of the Provisional Government of Azad Hind (Free India).

    This had to be done before the army could be sent for action in the battlefield. This government was officially proclaimed in Singapore at a mass rally on 21 October 1943 where Netaji was unanimously elected as the Head of the State and The Supreme Commander of the Indian National Army. While taking the oath he said:

    In the name of God, I take this sacred oath that to liberate India and the three hundred eighty million of my countrymen, L Subhas Chandra Bose, will continue the sacred war of freedom till the last breath of my life. I shall remain always a servant of India, and to look after the welfare of three hundred eighty million of Indian brothers and sisters shall be for me my highest duty. Even after winning freedom, I will always be prepared to shed even the last drop of my blood for the preservation of India’s freedom.[31]

    The Provisional Government of Free India had five Ministers with Netaji as the Head of the State, Prime Minister and Minister for War and advisers representing the Indian communities in East Asia.

    The first momentous decision which the new government took was its declaration of war on Britain and the United States, which was decided on the night of 22-23 October. Toye writes: “The Cabinet had not been unanimous about the inclusion of the U.S.A. Bose had shown impatience and displeasure- there was never any question then or later of his absolute authority: the Cabinet had no responsibility and could only tender advice.,,32

    Recognition of the Provisional Government came quickly from nine countries-the Axis powers and their allies. They were: Japan, Burma, Croatia, Germany, the Philippines, Nanking China, Manchuto, Italy and Siam (Thailand), but for some unknown reasons, Vichy France withheld its recognition. The Japanese Army promised all-out support for the provisional government.

    Toward the end of October, Netaji flew to Tokyo again to meet Tojo and to attend the greater East Asia Conference. Since India technically did not fall within this sphere, he attended as an observer. He made an impressive speech at the conference, stressing the creation of a new Asia where all vestiges of colonialism and imperialism would be eliminated.

    The Japanese navy had captured the Andaman and Nicober islands in the Bay of Bengal during the early months of war. As a result of Netaji’s requests, Prime Minister Tojo announced at the conference that Japan had decided to place the two islands under the jurisdiction of the Provisional Government of Free India, thereby giving it its first sovereignty over a territory.

    The ceremonial transfer took place in December, and Netaji named Lieutenant-Colonel Loganathan, an officer in the Medical Services, as the chief commissioner in charge of the civil administration of the islands. Soon thereafter, preparations began for sending the army to the front and moving the provisional government headquarters to Rangoon, in Burma. In the meantime, Netaji announced the formation of a women’s brigade within the INA, and named it “Rani of Jhansi Regiment,” after the celebrated queen of Jhansi, Laxmibai, who had led her soldiers against the British in an uprising during the First War of Independence in 1857.

    Coincidentially, another Laxmi, Lieutenant-Col. Laxmi, was placed in charge of this regiment by Netaji. In November it was agreed between Netaji and the Japanese militay headquarters, that the INA first division and the civil and military headquarters would move to Burma in January 1944.

    The Imphal Campaign

    The Imphal Campaign, including the battle of Kohima — the first major town to be captured by the INA inside India — will perhaps go down as one of the most daring and disastrous campaigns in the annals of world military history. General Mutaguchi, commander of the Japanese forces in North Burma since 1943, had been convinced that Imphal should be attacked.

    The objects of such an offensive were to forestall any invasion of Burma in 1944 and to establish the Japanese defenses on the frontier mountains. The idea would be first to overwhelm the British in Arakan, involving all their reserves in battle for Chittagong and the gateway to eastern Bengal.

    Then, by April, Kohima and Imphal could be conquered at leisure, without danger of their being reinforced. The monsoon, beginning in May, would postpone operations, and after the rains were over, in the absence of a new British defense posture east of the river Brahmaputra, the entire Assam and East Bengal would lie open to the Indian National Army and the Japanese.

    Imphal, the capital of the state of Manipur, lay on a flat, nearly treeless plateau just inside the Indian border. Its elevation was about 3,000 feet, surrounded on all sides by impassable mountains.

    The mountain range in the east with 2,000-4,000 foot peaks above the plateau stretches some five hundred miles. To the West and South are the Chin hills of the Arakan range, a formidable stretch of inhospitable terrain.

    The jungle surrounding this basin is hostile to human habitation. The northern access to the plain from India and Assam lay through Dimapur and the steep Kohima Road. From Dimapur, a single track railway swept through Assam and Bengal and was an important military objective to both armies.

    For the INA the importance of the Imphal campaign was that it was the only major battle in which it would participate with the object of achieving freedom for India. As Salto and Hayashida writes:

    The Imphal Operation was the final offensive of the East Asia War, mounted by three Burma-based Japanese divisions, and one INA division. The campaign lasted from 15 March to 9 July 1944. The operation has often been compared to the operation Wacht am Rhein or the Battle of the Bulge, which was the final all-out drive launched by Germany towards Ardennes on the Western Front, from December 1944 to January 1945. Both operations al most succeeded and both are termed “gambles” by historians today. If the German push towards Ardennes was Wacht am Rhein, the Japanese-Indian thrust against Imphal might be called “Wacht am Chindwin” although the official Japanese code-name for the action was most prosaic: Operation “U”.[33]

    River Chindwin lay across the Indo-Burmese border, and its crossing from the east by an army would signal an invasion of India.

    Execution orders for Operation U became operative on 7 January 1944, coinciding with completion of the shifting of the Provisional Government headquarters in Rangoon. In the evening of the same day, Lt. General Masakazy Kawabe, commanding the overall Burma headquarters, held a welcome party in honor of Netaji and his staff officers.

    Netaji spoke, and concluded his speech with these words. “My only prayer to the Almighty at this moment is that we may be given the earliest opportunity to pay for our freedom with our own blood.’,34 One INA Division, named after Netaji as Subhas Regiment, was readied for action at the front with the Japanese. Toye writes.

    … He spent the whole days… with the Subhas Regiment, reviewing, watching it at exercises and on parade, talking to its officers, exerting his magic on it in a way that he had not attempted before. These were his comrades, the men by whose means he would uphold the rights and honour of India. Everything depended on their achievement in battle; they must absorb all his feelings of confidence, feel the whole of his personal force. On 3 February he bade them farewell: “Blood is calling for blood. Arise! We have no time to lose. Take up your arms. There in front of you is the road. our pioneers have built. We shall march along that road. We shall carve our way through enemy’s ranks, or, if God wills, we shall die a martyr’s death. And in our last sleep we shall kiss the road which will bring our Army to Delhi. The road to Delhi is the road to Freedom. On to Delhi!”[35]

    Mutaguchi set 15 March as the D-day for the beginning of the Imphal campaign. The deployment of well over 120,000 troops along the Chindwin river, a front of some 200 kilometers, went on smoothly and undetected by British spies planted in the area. In the meantime, Netaji received some good news. The Arakan offensive, launched on 4 February, had cut off the 7th Indian Division of the British Army in Mayu valley.

    Contributing to this success was the reconnaissance and subversion of an Indian outpost position by Major Misra, the INA Commander in Arakan. At the same time, he received messages from the underground network working inside India under his direction, whose selected trained spies had been sent by submarine.

    On D-day, Mutaguchi assembled the war correspondents at his headquarters in central Burma and declared: “I am firmly convinced that my three divisions will reduce Imphal in one month. In order that they can march fast, they carry the lightest possible equipment and food enough for three weeks. Ali, they will get everything from the British supplies and dumps. Boys! See you again in Imphal at the celebration of the Emperor’s birthday on 29 April.”[36]

    The Japanese-Indian offensive took the British by complete surprise. The Japanese and INA troops literally galloped through mountains and jungles routing the enemy on the way. Prior to the Imphal offensive, an INA detachment under Colonel Saligal had created a breach through the British lines in the Arakan sector. Now the INA’s deployment was extended to the Imphal sector.

    As the INA under Netaji’s command set foot on the Indian soil, the main Japanese force also defeated the obstinate resistance of the enemy on 22 March, broke through the India-Burma border, and advanced from the north and west to encircle Imphal. The initial success of the INA at the Arakan front generated much enthusiasm. In a Special Order of the Day, Netaji referred to the “Glorious and brilliant actions of the brave forces of the Azad Hind Fauj.”[37]

    On 8 April, Japanese Imperial Headquarters issued a communique which said: “Japanese troops, fighting side by side with the Indian National Army, captured Kohima early on 6 April.[38] A jubilant Netaji at this time started talking with the Japanese about the administration of the liberated and soon-to-be-liberated territories in India.

    In response to a call by Netaji, Prime Minister Tojo made an announcement clarifying that all areas of India occupied as a result of Japanese advance would be placed under the jurisdiction of the Provisional Government. This was followed by Netaji’s announcement that he was appointing the Finance Minister of his cabinet, Major-General A.C. Chatterjee, as the governor of the newly liberated areas. Netaji described the march of the INA into India as the event of the century.

    He had also just declared the Legion in Europe to be part of the INA and had appointed Nambiar to be a Minister in the Provisional Government; his Chief Commissioner had been installed in the Andamans, his first heroes from the Arakan front had been decorated, and the, INA troops had raised the national standard of free India in Kohima; and now, the fall of Imphal seemed very near.

    Did the Imphal Campaign come almost two years too late? What would have happened if Netaji had arrived in East Asia a year earlier? by the end of 1942, the Axis had scored successes everywhere.

    Rommel was in Egypt, the German invasion of Russia had gone smoothly, Nationalist China was on her knees, and India and Australia were expecting a Japanese invasion. Prospects for the Allies were dark in the Pacific and the Rising Sun was at its zenith from Japan to the Bay of Bengal … Britain was unable to dispute with the Japanese Navy, and there were not enough British and Indian troops in India to assure its defense. Even air protection was inadequte … Japanese forces had not pursued retreating British troops beyond the Chindwin river in Burma in May 1942, allegedly because “an invasion was likely to arouse ill-feelings amongst the Indian masses.” … So the Japanese remained east of the Chindwin river, leaving British Indian forces to build up their strength in the Imphal plain.[39]

    But above all, in that moment of a golden opportunity, the towering leadership of Netaji, a provisional government, and an Indian national army worthy of its name — all these were non-existent in East Asia. Japan by itself simply lacked the motivation for extending war into India, let alone think of its independence. The fact remains, however, that the Imphal campaign was indeed first conceived in 1942, right after the conquest of Burma. According to the official history of the British Armed Forces in the Second World War,

    Soon after the completion of the Japanese conquest of Burma in June 1942, a certain Lt. Col. Hayashi had advocated an attack on Imphal. He considered that the Japanese should strike against India without giving time to the defenders to recuperate from their disastrous retreat, and Imphal’s capture would rob them of the best base for launching a counter-offensive against Burma … 18th division argued that the jungles of Burma were impassable for large bodies of operational troops and that any attack on Indian territory would provoke anti-Japanese feelings in India. About December 1942, therefore, the plan was abandoned.[40]

    Lieutenant-General Kuroda Shigetoku, Southern Army Chief of Staff, stated later that if the operation had been carried out in 1942 when first conceived, rather than in 1944, it would have succeeded. According to Lebra, “General Tojo stated in the spring of 1945 that he regretted Japan had missed the opportunity in 1942.”[41]

    As the INA and the Japanese forces continued to lay siege on Imphal, the Allied air superiority gained strength and the enemy was preparing for counterattack. Shah Nawaz, commanding two battalions of the Subhas Regiment in the Chin Hills, told of the hardships his men were suffering as a result of disease and of supply and transport difficulties. However, owing to communication problems, the news of difficulties his men were undergoing at the front did not reach Netaji in detail.

    While there was a stalemate in the front and the offensive came to a halt, there were meetings and jubilations at Rangoon where Netaji collected money and donations in other forms for the conduct of his campaign. He offered to send additional INA regiments to the Front and more troops were despatched. For about a month Operation U went according to plan. Enemy forces were successfully encircled in the Imphal area.

    Suddenly, in the middle of April, the military balance began to shift against Japan and the INA. Wingate’s airborne unit had already been attacking from air over Burma supply routes. British forces were being supplied by airlift into the besieged Imphal, and reinforcements began to flow in. British forces were being sent to Kohima to the north by both rail and air. Japan had no matching air power to strike back at enemy air operations.

    By the end of April the battle strength of Japanese and INA divisions was decreased forty percent. Time for success by surprise attack had already passed and gradually the offensive turned into a defensive battle. The monsoon that followed, brought the ultimate disaster.

    As roads became impassable, all supply routes were cut off. Muddy streams flooded roads and valleys, and rivers swelled to sweep away tanks and ammunition. In the wake of the monsoon, disease became rampant. Cholera, malaria, dysentery, beriberi and jungle sores began to take their toll.

    The INA and the Japanese started living on rations consisting of rice mixed with jungle grass. The 33rd Division had fought desperately for forty days without being able to penetrate the British lines at Imphal. And now that vast amounts of military supplies were reaching the beleaguered garrison at Imphal, there was virtually no hope for a renewed offensive. On 8 July, on the recommendation of top-ranking Generals including Kawabe and Mutaguchi, Prime Minister Tajo issued the order to halt the operation.

    The story of retreat from Imphal is one of the greatest tragedies of World War II. It is a story of misery, hunger and death. Japanese and INA troops, bottled up in the Kawab valley between the Chin Hills in the west and the Chindwin river in the west, began their long trek back through jungles and mountains, headed by division commanders and guards in jeeps and horses.

    Officers, supply, communication and medical units followed. Behind them marched thousands of stragglers: rain-soaked, emaciated with fever and malnutrition. Soon, corpses began accumulating along the trek, and they had to be left unburied. Of the 220,000 Japanese troops who began the Imphal Campaign, only 130,000 survived, and of these only 70,000 remained at the front to retreat. INA casualties were over fifty percent. It was a disaster equal in magnitude to Dunkirk and Stalingrad. Lebra writes:

    When Bose heard the order to retreat he was stunned. He drew himself up and said to Kawabe in ringing tones: “Though the Japanese Army has given up the operation, we will continue it. We will not repent even if the advance of our revolutionary army to attain independence of our homeland is completely defeated. Increase in casualties, cessation of supplies, and famine are not reasons enough to stop marching.

    Even if the whole army becomes only spirit we will not stop advancing toward our homeland. This is the spirit of our revolutionary army.” In an article in Azad Hind on 6 November 1944, after the retreat from Imphal, Bose was reported to have “reiterated his firm conviction that final victory in this war would belong to Japan and Germany … that a new phase of war was approaching in which the initiative would again lie in the hands of the Japanese.-”[42]

    Each Japanese commander gave his own analysis of the causes of the failure of Operation U, like the problem of the chain of command, lack of air power, on dispersal rather than concentration of forces. However, Netaji thought it was timing, with respect to the monsoon.

    He felt that the only chance to take Imphal was before the rains came, and most strategists agreed on this point. From the historic perspective, however, Fujiwara perhaps was the most correct. According to him, the Imphal disaster could have been avoided had the operation been undertaken a year earlier, at a time when the British power in the region was weak.

    The delay in launching the Imphal offensive was no doubt due to Netaji’s late arrival from Europe to East Asia. The Imphal campaign should have been undertaken at a time when the Axis victories had reached their zenith and the Allied forces were on retreat everywhere.

    During the last three months of 1944, Japanese forces had withdrawn to the banks of the Irrawaddy in Burma, where they intended to make a stand. Netaji enthusiastically offered the reorganized INA First Division, when the Japanese 15th division was ordered to oppose the British. Subsquently, the 2nd Division was also readied for action. In February 1945, the INA held some positions in the region of Mandalay in Burma, giving battle to the advancing enemy.

    This was the second campaign of Netaji’s army, and it held out tenaciously at Nyaungu for some time. However, allied troops later crossed the Irrawaddy at several points and the Japanese and INA units were surrounded. There were some desertions.

    Despite unique examples of heroism and Netaji’s presence in the battlefields, risking his own life in the face of enemy attacks, the second campaign of the INA (which was purely a defensive one) finally had to give way to the gradual reconquest of Burma by the British.

    The end of this campaign was followed by a chain of events that included the final Japanese defeat, an alleged plane crash in Formosa in which Netaji reportedly perished, the surrender of the INA to the allied forces and the trial of their leaders at the Red Fort in Delhi, staged by the British. However, all these fateful events, occurring during the final phase of World War II and its aftermath, should be considered parts of an altogether different episode relating to Subhas Chandra Bose and the Indian National Army.

    In the present episode we have examined the historical tasks fulfilled by Netaji and his army in Europe and Asia during World War II, and their significance. In recognition of Netaji’s historically significant role as a war leader, Guy Wint pays him a rare tribute with these words: “He played … an extraordinarily decisive part. By accident, and by seizing an exceptional opportunity, he was able to cut a figure which made him outstanding among the comparatively small number of men who influenced the course of the war by their individual qualities.”[43]

    The Myth of “Freedom through Non-violence under Gandhi’s Leadership”

    Modern historians in India are taking a second look at the way the country’s freedom was achieved, and in that process are demolishing a number of theories, assumptions and myths preached by the “court historians.”

    However, in order to grasp the magnitude of the issue, with its many ramifications, it is essential to understand first the concept of freedom as envisaged by Netaji — the ideal which motivated him to wrest it from the hands of the British by the force of arms.

    In his entire political career, Subhas Chandra Bose was guided by two cardinal principles in his quest for his country’s emancipation: that there could be no compromise with alien colonialists on the issue, and that on no account would the country be partitioned. The Indian geographical unity was to be maintained at all costs.

    As we have already seen, the unfortunate turn of events during World War II prevented Netaji’s dream of his victorious march to Delhi at the head of his Indian National Army from becoming a reality.

    In his and his army’s absence in a post-war India, politicians under the leadership of Gandhi and Nehru did exactly what Netaji never wanted: they negotiated and compromised with the British on the issue of freedom, and in their haste to get into power, agreed to a formula of partitioning India presented to them by the British.

    The transfer of power was followed by two more developments that were alien to Netaji’s philosophy and his blueprint for a free India: introduction of a parliamentary democratic system by Nehru and his decision to keep India in the British Commonwealth of Nations.

    It was a truncated freedom, achieved over the bloodbath of millions who had perished in fratricidal religious rioting during the process of partition, as the erstwhile India emerged on the world map as the two nations of India and Pakistan.

    Even so, the fragmented freedom that fell as India’s share after the British had skilfully played their age-old game of divide and rule came not as a result of Gandhi’s civil disobedience and non-violent movement as the court historians would have us believe; nor was it due to persistent negotiations by Nehru and other Indian National Congress leaders on the conference table, which the British found so easy to keep stalling. The British finally quit when they began to feel the foundations of loyalty being shaken among the British Indian soldiers-the mainstay of the colonial power-as a result of the INA exploits that became known to the world after the cessation of hostilities in East Asia.

    Ramesh Chandra Majumdar, the eminent Indian historian who passed away recently, and who by virtue of his challenges to several historical myths can rightly be called the Dean of new historians in India, observed in his book Three Phases of India’s Struggle for Freedom:

    There is, however, no basis for the claim that the Civil Disobedience Movement directly led to independence. The campaigns of Gandhi … came to an ignoble end about fourteen years before India achieved independence … During the First World War the Indian revolutionaries sought to take advantage of German help in the shape of war materials to free the country by armed revolt. But the attempt did not succeed. During the Second World War Subhas Bose followed the same method and created the INA. In spite of brilliant planning and initial success, the violent campaigns of Subhas Bose failed … The Battles for India’s freedom were also being fought against Britain, though indirectly, by Hitler in Europe and Japan in Asia. None of these scored direct success, but few would deny that it was the cumulative effect of all the three that brought freedom to India. In particular, the revelations made by the INA trial, and the reaction it produced in India, made it quite plain to the British, already exhausted by the war, that they could no longer depend upon the loyalty of the seapoys for maintaining their authority in India. This had probably the greatest influence upon their final decision to quit India.[44]

    Despite Japan’s defeat and the consequent withering away of the Indian National Army on the India-Burma front, both Subhas Chandra Bose and his INA became household names throughout the country as the returning soldiers were sought to be prosecuted by the British. By then, the Congress leadership under Gandhi and Nehru had pre-empted itself, and the year 1945 seemed relatively calm and uneventful. However, Netaji and his legend worked up a movement all over the country which even a Gandhi could never produce. Echoing this mass upsurge Michael Edwardes wrote in his Last Years of British India:

    The Government of India had hoped, by prosecuting members of the INA, to reinforce the morale of the Indian army. It succeeded only in creating unease, in making the soldiers feel slightly ashamed that they themselves had supported the British. If Bose and his men had been on the right side-and all India now confirmed that they were-then Indians in the Indian army must have been on the wrong side. It slowly dawned upon the Government of India that the backbone of the British rule, the Indian army, might now no longer be trustworthy. The ghost of Subhas Bose, like Hamlet’s father, walked the battlements of the Red Fort (where the INA soldiers were being tried), and his suddenly amplified figure overawed the conference that was to lead to independence.[45]

    Apart from revisionist historians, it was none other than Lord Clement Atlee himself, the British Prime Minster responsible for conceding independence to India, who gave a shattering blow to the myth sought to be perpetuated by court historians, that Gandhi and his movement had led the country to freedom. Chief justice P.B. Chakrabarty of Calcutta High Court, who had also served as the acting Governor of West Bengal in India, disclosed the following in a letter addressed to the publisher of Dr. R.C. Majumdar’s book A History of Bengal. The Chief Justice wrote:

    You have fulfilled a noble task by persuading Dr. Majumdar to write this history of Bengal and publishing it … In the preface of the book Dr. Majumdar has written that he could not accept the thesis that Indian independence was brought about solely, or predominantly by the non-violent civil disobedience movement of Gandhi. When I was the acting Governor, Lord Atlee, who had given us independence by withdrawing the British rule from India, spent two days in the Governor’s palace at Calcutta during his tour of India. At that time I had a prolonged discussion with him regarding the real factors that had led the British to quit India. My direct question to him was that since Gandhi’s “Quit India” movement had tapered off quite some time ago and in 1947 no such new compelling situation had arisen that would necessitate a hasty British departure, why did they have to leave? In his reply Atlee cited several reasons, the principal among them being the erosion of loyalty to the British Crown among the Indian army and navy personnel as a result of the military activities of Netaji. Toward the end of our discussion I asked Atlee what was the extent of Gandhi’s influence upon the British decision to quit India. Hearing this question, Atlee’s lips became twisted in a sarcastic smile as he slowly chewed out the word, “m-i-n-i-m-a-l!”[46]

    When the new version of the history of the Twentieth Century India, and especially the episode of the country’s unique struggle for independence comes to be written, it will no doubt single out but one person who made the most significant and outstanding contribution among all his compatriots toward the emancipation of his motherland from the shackles of an alien bondage. During World War II this man strode across two continents like a colossus, and the footsteps of his army of liberation reverberated through the forests and plains of Europe and the jungles and mountains of Asia. His armed assaults shook the very foundations of the British Empire. His name was Subhas Chandra Bose.


    Notes

    1. Bose, Subhas Chandra, The Indian Struggle 1920-1942, New York: Asia Publishing House, 1964, p. 318.
    2. Ibid., pp. 419-422, 431-432.
    3. Ganpuley, N.G., Netaji in Germany: A Little-known Chapter, Bombay, Bharatiya Vidya Bhavan, 1959, p. 63
    4. Ibid., pp. 63-64.
    5. Toye, Hugh, The Springing Tiger, London, Cassell, 1959, p. 63.
    6. Ibid., p. 70.
    7. Lebra, Joyce C., Jungle Alliance: Japan and the Indian National Army. Singapore, Asia Pacific Library, p. 110.
    8. The Goebbles Diaries, 1942-1943, Edited, translated and with an introd. by Louis P. Lochner, Westport, Conn., Greenwood Press, 1970, p. 107.
    9. Ibid., P. 123.
    10. Ibid., p. 211.
    11. Toys, Hugh, op. cit., pp. 72-73.
    12. Ibid., p. 75.
    13. Seifriz, Adalbert, In Preface to Ganpuley’s Netaji in Germany.
    14. Sopan, pseud., Ed., Netaji Subhas Chandra Bose. His Life and Work. Bombay, Azad Bhandar, 1946, pp. 281-282, 284.
    15. Ganpuley, N.G., op. cit., p. 153.
    16. Staatsmaenner und Diplomaten bei Hitler, Part Two, Edited by Andreas Hillgrueber, Frankfurt am Main, Bernard & Graefe fuer Wehrwesen, 1970.
    17. Maryama Shizuo, Nakano Gakko, Tokyo, 1948, p. 120
    18. Subhas Chandra Bose and Japan, 4th section, Asian Bureau, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Govt. of Japan, 1956.
    19. A Beacon Across Asia: A Biography of Subhas Chandra Bose. Ed.in-chief: Sisir K. Bose, New Delhi, Orient Longman, 1973, p. 143.
    20. Lebra, Joyce C., op. cit., p. 51.
    21. Subhas Chandra Bose and Japan, op. cit.
    22. [??? Not included in original, the webmaster]
    23. Ghosh, K. K., The Indian National Army: Second Front of the Indian Independence Movement, Meerut, Meenakshi Prakashan, 1969, pp. 127-128.
    24. A Beacon Across Asia, op. cit., p. 167.
    25. Ghosh, K. K., op. Cit., p. 135.
    26. Press Statement, 19 June 1943.
    27. Sopan, op. cit., p. 313.
    28. Sivaram, M., The Road to Delhi, Rutland, Vt., C.E. Tuttle Co., 1967, pp. 122-123.
    29. Ibid., pp. 123-124.
    30. A Beacon Across Asia, op. cit., p. 178.
    31. Toyle, Hugh, op. cit., p. go.
    32. Ibid., p. 91.
    33. A Beacon Across Asia, op. cit., p. 196.
    34. Ibid., p. 200.
    35. Toye, Hugh, op. cit., p. 103.
    36. A Beacon Across Asia, op. cit., p. 203.
    37. Arun, pseud., Ed., Testament of Subhas Bose, Delhi, Rajkamal Pub., 1946, p. 170.
    38. A Beacon Across Asia, op. cit., p. 205.
    39. Lebra, Joyce C., op. cit., p. 150.
    40. British Armed Forces in the Second World War, Combined Interservices Historical Section, 1958.
    41. Lebra, Joyce C., op. cit., p. 158.
    42. Ibid., pp. 190-191.
    43. Calvocoressi, Peter, and Guy Wint, The Total War: the Story of World War II, New York, Pantheon Books, 1972, pp. 801-802.
    44. Majumdar, R.C., Three Phases of India’s Struggle for Freedom, Bombay, Bharatiya Vidya Bhavan, 1967, pp. 58-59.
    45. Edwardes, Michael, The Last Years of British India, Cleveland, World Pub. Co., 1964, p. 93.
    46. Majumdar, R. C., Jibanera Smritideepe, Calcutta, General Printers and Publishers, 1978, pp. 229-230, (quotation translated from original Bengali).

    Short history of Suicide attacks

    Filed under: Uncategorized — Moin Ansari @ 12:07 am
    Tags:

    Noticias de Rupia | Nouvelles de Roupie | Rupiennachrichten | новости рупии | 卢比新闻 | Roepienieuws | Rupi Nyheter | ルピーニュース | Notizie di Rupia | PAKISTAN LEDGER | پاکستاني کھاتا | Moin Ansari | معین آنصآرّی | DefensebriefsIntellibriefs Translate to: Page copy protected against web site content infringement by Copyscape Bookmark and Share Add to Technorati RSS feed: | RUPEE NEWS | October 16th, 2008 | Moin Ansari | معین آنصآرّی | اخبار روپیہ |

    Suicide attacks — a short history Wednesday, October 15, 2008 Mir Jamilur Rahman

    Suicide attack, or suicide bombing, in which the attacker has no hope to survive after accomplishing his mission, is not a new phenomenon. It has been with us since WWII. It is a type of warfare which is adopted by disgruntled people. The present and the second half of the last century have seen it developing into an efficient killing machine. The motivation for such attacks could be nationalist, religious or idealism. This type of warfare was also used by Japanese military in WWII against the US navy when Japan had almost lost the war.

    The present wave of suicide bombing is sometimes attributed to despair and deprivation. It was assumed that the bombers came from a poor, neglected segment of society. This view was once expressed by US President Bush. JI chief Qazi Hussain Ahmed also holds the same view. The results of at least one study are consistent with despair being a cause of the attacks. A 2007 study in Afghanistan found that 80 per cent of the suicide attackers had some kind of physical or mental disability. A study of the remains of 110 suicide bombers for the first part of 2007 found 80 per cent were missing limbs, suffered from cancer, leprosy, or some other ailments.

    The tradition of suicide instead of defeat and perceived shame was deeply entrenched in the Japanese military culture. For instance, loyalty and honour unto death was one of the main traditions in the samurai life. Taking advantage of this strong belief in the Japanese soldier, the Japanese military had adopted suicide attacks as an extension of its defence tactic against the advancing US forces. These suicide attacks were carried out by kamikaze pilots beginning in October 1944. Japan had suffered several critical military defeats and had lost the industrial and military capacity to stop the advancing Americans.

    Kamikaze pilots, especially trained for the job, would attempt to crash their aircrafts — laden with explosives, bombs, torpedoes and full fuel tanks – into American ships. The goal of crippling as many American ships as possible was considered critical enough to warrant the sacrifice of an aviator and his aircraft. The best-known kamikaze attack was carried out on US carrier Bunker Hill on May 11, 1945. It killed 372 personnel out of a crew of 2,600.

    The earliest reference of a suicide attack could be found in the Biblical story of ‘Samson and Delilah’. Samson (probably 11th century BC) possessed incredible strength which lay in his hair. He was a leader of the Israelites and could defeat an army single-handedly. Delilah his beloved betrayed him to the Philistines that his strength lay in his hair. Samson was drugged to sleep. The soldiers cut off his hair while he slept and captured and blinded him, making him feeble and helpless. But when his hair grew again he regained his strength. He pulled down the pillars of the temple where a large number of Philistines had gathered to worship. Samson said: ‘Let me die with the Philistines!’ Down came the temple on the rulers and all the people in it. Thus he killed many more as he died than while he lived.
    The first modern suicide bombing–involving explosives deliberately carried to the target either on the person or in a civilian vehicle and delivered by surprise — was in 1981; perfected by the factions of the Lebanese Civil War and especially by the Tamil Tigers of Sri Lanka, the tactic had spread to dozens of countries by now . Those hardest-hit are Sri Lanka during its prolonged ethnic conflict, Lebanon during its civil war, Israel and the Palestinian Territories since 1994 , and Iraq since the US-led invasion in 2003. According to an estimate as of early 2008, 1,121 Muslim suicide bombes have blown themselves up in Iraq alone.

    Pakistan is now the main target of suicide bombers who are trained and activated by some unknown Islamic groups. These groups most probably are working out from FATA. The Afghan government with the help of NATO force has sharply brought down the incidents of suicide bombings. But Pakistan so far has not been as successful as Afghanistan in curbing terrorism. Almost every day there is an attack on some government building or a crowded place resulting in heavy casualties.

    The people blame America for terrorism in this region. They strongly, though wrongly, believe that Pakistan is fighting an American war. They do not trust the government when it says that Pakistan has joined the war against terrorism in its own national interest. The war against terrorism is winnable if only people were to realize that it is their war and nobody else’s.  The writer is a freelance columnist.   mirjrahman@hotmail.com

    Noticias de Rupia | Nouvelles de Roupie | Rupiennachrichten | новости рупии | 卢比新闻 | Roepienieuws | Rupi Nyheter | ルピーニュース | Notizie di Rupia | PAKISTAN LEDGER | پاکستاني کھاتا | Moin Ansari | معین آنصآرّی | DefensebriefsIntellibriefs Translate to: Page copy protected against web site content infringement by Copyscape Bookmark and Share Add to Technorati RSS feed: | RUPEE NEWS | October 16th, 2008 | Moin Ansari | معین آنصآرّی | اخبار روپیہ |

    October 15, 2008

    Post WW2 British PM Clement Atlee called Gandhi’s role "minimal" in decision to leave South Asia

    Filed under: British Raj — Moin Ansari @ 12:35 am
    Tags: ,

    Noticias de Rupia | Nouvelles de Roupie | Rupiennachrichten | новости рупии | 卢比新闻 | Roepienieuws | Rupi Nyheter | ルピーニュース | Notizie di Rupia | PAKISTAN LEDGER | پاکستاني کھاتا | Moin Ansari | معین آنصآرّی | DefensebriefsIntellibriefs Translate to: Page copy protected against web site content infringement by Copyscape Bookmark and Share Add to Technorati RSS feed: | RUPEE NEWS | October 15th, 2008 | Moin Ansari | معین آنصآرّی | اخبار روپیہ |

    “..Apart from revisionist historians, it was none other than Lord Clement Atlee himself, the British Prime Minister responsible for conceding independence to India, who gave a shattering blow to the myth sought to be perpetuated by court historians, that Gandhi and his movement had led the country to freedom. Chief Justice P.B. Chakrabarty of Calcutta High Court, who had also served as the acting Governor of West Bengal in India, disclosed the following in a letter addressed to the publisher of Dr. R.C. Majumdar’s book A History of Bengal.

    The Chief Justice wrote:

    You have fulfilled a noble task by persuading Dr. Majumdar to write this history of Bengal and publishing it … In the preface of the book Dr. Majumdar has written that he could not accept the thesis that Indian independence was brought about solely, or predominantly, by the non-violent civil disobedience movement of Gandhi. When I was the acting Governor, Lord Atlee, who had given us independence by withdrawing the British rule from India, spent two days in the Governor’s palace at Calcutta during his tour of India. At that time I had a prolonged discussion with him regarding the real factors that had led the British to quit India.

    My direct question to him was that since Gandhi’s “Quit India” movement had tapered off quite some time ago and in 1947 no such new compelling situation had arisen that would necessitate a hasty British departure, why did they have to leave? In his reply Atlee cited several reasons, the principal among them being the erosion of loyalty to the British Crown among the Indian army and navy personnel as a result of the military activities of Netaji [Bose]. Toward the end of our discussion I asked Atlee what was the extent of Gandhi’s influence upon the British decision to quit India. Hearing this question, Atlee’s lips became twisted in a sarcastic smile as he slowly chewed out the word, “m-i-n-i-m-a-l!” ” Ranjan Borra, “Subhas Chandra Bose, the Indian National Army, and the War of India’s Liberation,” Journal of Historical Review, no. 3, 4 (Winter 1982)

    Noticias de Rupia | Nouvelles de Roupie | Rupiennachrichten | новости рупии | 卢比新闻 | Roepienieuws | Rupi Nyheter | ルピーニュース | Notizie di Rupia | PAKISTAN LEDGER | پاکستاني کھاتا | Moin Ansari | معین آنصآرّی | DefensebriefsIntellibriefs Translate to: Page copy protected against web site content infringement by Copyscape Bookmark and Share Add to Technorati RSS feed: | RUPEE NEWS | October 15th, 2008 | Moin Ansari | معین آنصآرّی | اخبار روپیہ |

    The demise of the British Empire in South Asia: Bose’s War of Liberation

    Filed under: British Raj, History of Pakistan — Moin Ansari @ 12:28 am
    Tags: , , ,

    Noticias de Rupia | Nouvelles de Roupie | Rupiennachrichten | новости рупии | 卢比新闻 | Roepienieuws | Rupi Nyheter | ルピーニュース | Notizie di Rupia | PAKISTAN LEDGER | پاکستاني کھاتا | Moin Ansari | معین آنصآرّی | DefensebriefsIntellibriefs Translate to: Page copy protected against web site content infringement by Copyscape Bookmark and Share Add to Technorati RSS feed: | RUPEE NEWS | October 15th, 2008 | Moin Ansari | معین آنصآرّی | اخبار روپیہ |

    Subhas Chandra Bose, the Indian National Army, and the War of India’s Liberation – Ranjan Borra, Journal of Historical Review, no. 3, 4 (Winter 1982)

    “The arrival of

    in Germany in 1941 (during the turbulent period of World War II) and his anti-British activities in that country in co-operation with the German government, culminated in the formation of an Indian legion.

    This marks perhaps the most significant event in the annals of India’s fight for independence. This event not only can be regarded as a historical link-up with what Bose himself chose to describe as “The Great Revolution of 1857,” and which (in his words) “has been incorrectly called by English historians ‘the Sepoy Mutiny,’ but which is regarded by the Indian people as the First War of Independence.”[1]

    It also represents the historical fact that, by that time persuasive methods conducted through a non-violent struggle under the leadership of Gandhi, had failed. An armed assault on the citadel of the British Empire in India was the only alternative left to deliver the country from bondage.

    While other leaders of the Indian National Congress fell short of realizing this fact and thus betrayed a lack of pragmatic approach to the turn of world events that provided India with a golden opportunity to strike at the British by a force of arms, Bose rose to the needs of the hour and was quick to seize that opportunity.

    While Bose’s compatriots in India remained totally wedded to an ideological creed (non-violence), which at that time could only serve the British and postpone the advent of independence, and while their ideological interpretations of the new revolutionary regimes in Europe-again largely influenced by British propaganda-prevented them from even harboring any thought of seeking their alliance and co-operation in the struggle against a common enemy, Subhas Chandra Bose alone had the courage to take the great plunge, thus risking his own life and reputation, solely in the interest and cause of his country. In January 1941, while under both house arrest, and strict British surveillance, he escaped.

    After an arduous trek through the rugged terrains of several countries, with an Italian passport under the assumed name of Orlando Mazzota – (in which he was aided by underground revolutionaries and foreign diplomatic agents) — Bose appeared in Berlin, via Moscow, on 28 March 1941.

    Bose was welcome in Germany, although the news of his arrival there was kept a secret for some time for political reasons. The German Foreign Office, which was assigned the primary responsibility of dealing with Bose and taking care of him, had been well informed of the background and political status of the Indian leader through its pre-war Consulate-General at Calcutta and also by its representative in Kabul.

    Bose himself, naturally some what impatient for getting into action soon after his arrival in Berlin, submitted a memorandum to the German government on 9 April 1941 which outlined a plan for co-operation between the Axis powers and India.

    Among other things, it called for the setting up of a “Free India Government” in Europe, preferably in Berlin; establishment of a Free India broadcasting station calling upon the Indian people to assert their independence and rise up in revolt against the British authorities; underground work in Afghanistan (Kabul) involving independent tribal territories lying between Afghanistan and India and within India itself for fostering and aiding the revolution; provision of finances by Germany in the form of a loan to the Free India government-in-exile; and deployment of German military contingents to smash the British army in India.

    In a supplementary memorandum bearing the same date, Bose requested that an early pronouncement be made regarding the freedom of India and the Arab countries.[2]

    It is significant to note that the memorandum did not mention the need for formation of an Indian legion. Evidently the idea of recruiting the Indian prisoners of war for the purpose of establishing a nucleus of an Indian national army did not occur to him during his early days in Berlin.

    At that time the German government was in the process of formulating its own plan for dealing with Subhas Chandra Bose in the best possible manner.

    The Foreign Office felt itself inadequate to discharge this awesome responsibility without referring the whole matter to Hitler. While this issue was being considered at the highest level of the government, Bose’s own requests as set forth in the submitted memorandum, made it far too complicated and involved to be resolved at an early date.

    There was a long wait for Bose, during which period he often tended to become frustrated. Nevertheless, through several sympathetic officers of the Foreign Office, he continued to press his requests and put forth new ideas.

    Finally, after months of waiting and many moments of disappointment often bordering on despair for Bose, Germany agreed to give him unconditional and all-out help.

    The two immediate results of this decision were the establishment of a Free India Center and inauguration of a Free India Radio, both beginning their operations in November 1941.

    These two organizations played vital and significant roles in projecting Bose’s increasing activities in Germany, but a detailed account of their operation lies outside the purview of this paper. It should suffice to say that the German government put at Bose’s disposal adequate funds to run these two organizations, and he was allowed complete freedom to run them the way he liked at his own discretion.

    In its first official meeting on 2 November 1941, the Free India Center adopted four historical resolutions that would serve as guidelines for the entire movement in subsequent months and years in Europe and Asia.

    First, Jai Hind or Victory to India, would be the official form of salutation; secondly, Nobel laureate poet Rabindranath Tagore’s famous patriotic song Jana Gana Mona was to be the national anthem for the free India Bose was fighting for; thirdly, in a multi-lingual state like India, the most widely-spoken language, Hindustani, was to be the national language; and fourthly, Subhas Chandra Bose would hereafter be known and addressed as Netaji, the Indian equivalent of the “leader” or the “Führer.”

    In November 1941, Azad Hind Radio (or the Free India Radio) opened its program with an announcing speech by Netaji himself, which, in fact, was a disclosure of his identity that had been kept officially secret for so long. The radio programs were broadcast in several Indian languages on a regular basis.

    During this long period of “hibernation,” the period between Netaji’s arrival in Berlin and the beginning of operations of the two organizations, it can be reasonably assumed that the idea of forming an Indian legion that could be developed into an Indian Army of Liberation in the West, crossed Bose’s mind.

    He might even have discussed this matter with his colleagues-the Indian compatriots in Germany who had joined him-as to how best to implement the idea. However, as mentioned earlier, his first memorandum submitted to the German Government did not include any such plan. According to N.G. Ganpuley, who was his associate in Berlin,

    Netaji himself, when he left India, could not have, by any stretch of imagination, thought of forming a national army unit outside the country, and therefore he had no definite plans chalked out for its realization. Even while in Berlin, he could not think of it during the first few months of his stay there.[3]

    When and how, therefore, did he come to conceive such a plan? Mr. Ganpuley relates an interesting episode in this regard. To quote again from his book:

    It was all due to a brain wave of Netaji which started working by a simple incident. He read one day about some half a dozen Indian prisoners-of-war who were brought to Berlin by the Radio Department to listen to the BBC and other stations which sent out their programmes in Hindustani. He saw them there going about, not as free Indians, but as prisoners-of-war. They were brought to the Radio Office every day to listen to and translate the Hindustani programmes, and were sent back to their quarters escorted by a sentry … After he had a talk with them about war, about their captivity and their present life, his active mind started working… He pondered over it for some time and decided to form a small national military unit … No sooner was this decision taken by him … he started negotiating with that section of the German Foreign Office with which he was in constant touch. He put before them his plans for training Indian youths from the prisoners’ camps for a national militia.[4]

    Although somewhat skeptical and hesitant at the beginning, the German response to the plans was encouraging. It was a time psychologically well-chosen by Netaji.

    The allied forces had been defeated on the Continent, and the Wehrmacht was marching ahead successfully in the Soviet Union. It was also a historical coincidence that a large number of British Indian prisoners-ofwar, captured during Rommel’s blitzkrieg in North Africa, lay in German hands.

    Netaji’s first idea was to form small parachute parties to spread propaganda in, and transmit intelligence from, the North-West Frontier in India. The reaction of some selected prisoners who were brought to Berlin from the camp of Lamsdorf in Germany and Cyrenaica was so encouraging that he asked for all Indian prisoners held in North Africa to be brought over to Germany at once.

    The Germans complied with this request, and the prisoners began to be concentrated at Annaburg camp near Dresden. The recruitment efforts, however, at the onset met with some opposition from the prisoners, who evidently had misgivings about Netaji’s intentions and motivations. In this regard Hugh Toye writes:

    When Bose himself visited the camp in December there was still marked hostility. His speech was interrupted, and much of what he had to say went unheard. But private interviews were more encouraging; the men’s questions showed interest-what rank would they receive? What credit would be given for Indian Army seniority? How would the Legionary stand in relation to the German soldier? Bose refused to bargain, and some who might have been influential recruits were turned away. On the other hand, many of the men paid him homage as a distinguished Indian, several professed themselves ready to join the Legion unconditionally.[5]

    Netaji sought and got agreement from the Germans that the Wehrmacht would train the Indians in the strictest military discipline, and they were to be trained in all branches of infantry in using weapons and motorized units the same way a German formation is trained; the Indian legionaries were not to be mixed up with any of the German formations; that they were not to be sent to any front other than in India for fighting against the British, but would be allowed to fight in self defense at any other place if surprised by any enemy formation; that in all other respects the Legion members would enjoy the same facilities and amenities regarding pay, clothing, food, leave, etc., as a German unit.

    By December 1941 all arrangements were complete and the next important task was to persuade men to come forward and form the nucleus. It appeared that the POWs needed to be convinced that there were civilian Indian youth as well, studying, well placed in life and responsible to their families at home, who were ready to give up everything to join the Legion.

    Ten of the forty young Indians then residing in Berlin, came forward. They were quickly joined by five POWs who were already in Berlin in connection with the German radio propaganda, and the first group of fifteen people was thus formed.

    On 25 December 1941 a meeting of Indian residents in Berlin was called in the office of the Free India Center, to give a send-off to the first fifteen who were to leave the following day for Frankenburg, the first training camp and headquarters for the Legion. The brief ceremony was simple and solemn. Netaji blessed the Legion, the first of its kind in the history of the struggle for Indian independence. He christened it Azad Hind Fauj (Indian National Army). The Indian Army of Liberation in the West thus had a humble and modest birth.

    The strength of the Legion grew steadily, as the task of recruitment continued unabated. Once trained to a certain level and discipline, the members of the first batch were assigned the additional responsibility of visiting the Annaberg camp and aiding in the recruitment process. While the Legion was sent to Frankenburg in Saxony, another group was taken to Meseritz in Brandenburg to be trained in tactical warfare. Abid Hasan and N.G. Swamy, the two original recruiters whom Netaji had sent to the Annaberg camp in 1941, had become de-facto foundermembers of the Legion at Frankenburg and the irregular Company at Meseritz respectively.

    At Meseritz, the Indians were placed under the command of Hauptmarm Harbig, whose first object was to make them forget that they had been prisoners. There were Tajiks, Uzbeks and Persians as well under training for operational roles similar to that envisaged for the Indians.

    In due course the trainees went on to tactical operational training, such as wireless operating, demolitions and riding, and also undertook special mountain and parachute courses. According to Toye, “Morale, discipline and Indo-German relations were excellent, the German officers first-rate.”[6]

    Netaji visited the camps from time to time and watched progress of the trainees. Since he himself was inclined toward military training and discipline, he followed the German training methods with great interest. It is understood that while in Germany Netaji himself underwent the rigors of such training, although authoritative documents on this subject are yet to be located by this writer.

    While in India, he was a member of the University Training Corps at school and commanded the volunteers at an annual session of the Indian National Congress, but he never had a formal military education prior to his arrival in Germany in 1941. As Joyce Lebra writes: “Though Bose was without any previous military experience, he got his training and discipline German-style, along with the soldiers of the Indian Legion.” 7

    To him, formation of a legion was more positive, more nationalistic and more gratifying than mere radio propaganda. Unlike his ex-compatriots in the Indian National Congress, including Gandhi, Nehru and Patel, he would rather seek confrontation with the British-with an army-than to work out a compromise with them on a conference table, on the issue of India’s freedom.

    A firm believer in discipline and organization, nothing perhaps could be more satisfying to him than to see his men being trained by the German Command, with officers of the highest calibre. In four months, the number of trainees rose to three hundred. In another six months a further three hundred were added. By December 1942, exactly a year after the recruitment of the Legion was inaugurated, it attained the strength of four battalions. At the beginning of 1943 the Legion would be 2000 strong, well on its way up to the culminating point of 3500 men. But let us step back to early 1942, almost a year after Netaji’s arrival in Berlin.

    After the inauguration of the Free India Center, Free India Radio, and the sending of the first fifteen legionaries to the Frankenburg training camp, Netaji’s activities in Germany began in full swing. His presence in Germany was not yet officially admitted-he was still being referred to as Signor Orlando Mazzota or His Excellency Mazzota-but he began to be known to more and more people in Berlin. Josef Goebbels wrote in his diary on 1 March:

    We have succeeded in prevailing upon the Indian nationalist leader, Bose, to issue an imposing declaration of war against England. It will be published most prominently in the German press and commented upon. In that way we shall now begin our official fight on behalf of India, even though we don’t as yet admit it openly.[8]

    On 14 March, he remarked of Bose, “He is an excellent worker.”[9] The fall of Singapore was a signal for Netaji to broadcast his first official speech over the Free India Radio, repeating his vow to fight British imperialism until the end. This he followed with a declaration of war against England, although at that stage such a pronouncement could only be symbolic. Netaji had not yet obtained an Axis declaration in support of the freedom of India that he pressed for in the supplement of his first memorandum to the German government. That government was of the opinion that the time was not ripe yet for such a declaration and unless a pronouncement of this nature could be supported by military action, it would not be of much value.

    Meanwhile, Japan proposed a tripartite declaration on India. Encouraged by this, Bose met Mussolini in Rome on 5 May, and persuaded him to obtain such a declaration in favor of Indian independence. Mussolini telegraphed the Germans, proposing proceeding at once with the declaration. To back his new proposal Mussolini told the Germans that he had urged Bose to set up a “counter-government” and to appear more conspicuously. The German reaction, which still remained guarded, is recorded by Dr. Goebbels in his diary on 11 May:

    We don’t like this idea very much, since we do not think the time has yet come for such a political manoeuvre. It does appear though that the Japanese are very eager for some such step. However, emigre governments must not live too long in a vacuum. Unless they have some actuality to support them, they only exist in the realm of theory.[10]

    Netaji apparently was of the opinion that a tripartite declaration on Indian independence, followed up by a government-in-exile, would give some credibility to his declaration of war on England, push over the brink the imminent revolution in India, and legitimize the Indian legion. However, Hitler held a different view. During an interview at the Führer’s field headquarters on 29 May, he told Netaii that a well-equipped army of a few thousand could control millions of unarmed revolutionaries, and there could be no political change in India until an external power knocked at her door. Germany could not yet do this.

    To convince Netaji, he took him to a wall map, pointed to the German positions in Russia and to India. The immense distances were yet to be bridged before such a declaration could be made. The world would consider it premature, even coming from him, at this stage. Hitler was perhaps being realistic, but nevertheless it must have come as some sort of disappointment for Netaji.

    In July 1942, the Germans suggested that a contingent of the Irregular Company be sent for front-line propaganda against Indian troops at El Alamein; but Rommel, who did not like battlefields turned into proving grounds for Foreign Office ideas, opposed the move. However, at the Lehrregiment manoeuvers in September, and on field exercises in October, the Indian performance won high praise.

    By January 1943, it was realized that maintenance of the irregulars as a separate entity was not of much practical use, and the ninety Indian men, (excepting four under N.G. Swamy who were being trained for work within Indiaj were absorbed into the Legion. Since the supply of recruits from the Annaburg camp was fast being depleted, it was decided to hasten the shipment of prisoners of war from Italy.

    According to an agreement between Italy and Germany, all Indian POWs were to be sent directly to Germany without being held in Italian camps. But, in the meanwhile, an unforseen impediment stood in the way. A long-time Indian resident in Rome, Iqbal Shedai, formed an Indian unit under the Italians, and began broadcasting from Rome with the aid of a few Indian prisoners.

    It is understood that he had conferred with Netaji a few times, but obviously had no intention of co-operating with him. From radio broadcasting, he advanced into forming an Indian military unit, although it was in clear violation of the Italo-German agreement. The unit was named the Centro Militare India, but existed only from April to November 1942.

    During its brief period of existence, however, Shedai succeeded in diverting several hundred volunteers to Italian camps, who would normally have gone to Germany. In November the unit was three hundred and fifty strong, having been trained by Italian officers. On 9 November, after the Allied landing in North Africa, it was learnt that the men were being sent to fight in Libya, contrary to Shedai’s promises. When they refused to go and mutinied, Shedai refused to intervene. Consequently, the Centro Militare India was disbanded. It was never revived, and thus a barrier that stood in Netaji’s way toward recruitment was removed.

    In August 1942, the Legion was moved to Koenigsbrueck, a large military training center in Saxony. This had been a regular training ground for the German infantry and motorized units for decades. Here the first contingents paraded before Netaji’s eyes in October, and the growth was rapid. However, the rapid expansion of the Legion also posed the problem of finances.

    Hitherto, payment to soldiers was being made from the monthly grants to the Free India Center and its office. As the number of Legionaries grew, that source became insufficient. For this problem there could be but one solution: direct payment to the Legion b~ the Germans.

    This would mean hereafter that the Legionaries would receive promotions and precedence as soldiers of national socialist Germany, and would become, in fact, a regiment of the German army, while retaining its separate name and distinction. This was agreed upon between Netaji and the German government, necessitating the taking of a formal oath of loyalty to Adolph Hitler on the part of the Legionaries. Describing the ceremony, Hugh Toye writes:

    Five hundred Legionaries were assembled. Their German commander, Lieutenant-Colonel Krappe, addressed them, and the oath was administered by German officers to six men at a time. All was done with solemnity, the soldiers touching their officer’s sword as they spoke the German words: ‘I swear by God this holy oath, that I will obey the leader of the German State and people, Adolph Hitler, as commander of the German Armed Forces, in the fight for freedom of India, in which fight the leader is Subhas Chandra Bose, and that as a brave soldier, I am willing to lay down my life for this oath.’ Bose presented to the Legion its standard, a tricolor in the green, white and saffron of the Indian National Congress, superimposed with the figure of a springing tiger in place of the Congress spinning wheel. “Our names,” he said, “will be written in gold letters in the history of free India; every martyr in this holy war will have a monument there.” It was a brave, colorful show, and for Bose, a moment of pride and emotion. “I shall lead the army,” he said, “when we march to India together.” The Legionaries looked well in their new uniforms, the silken banner gleaming in their midst; their drill did them credit.[11]

    What was Netaji’s plan for leading this army to India? When the Germans launched out beyond Stalingrad into Central Asia, the Indian irregulars, trained at Messeritz, would accompany their Tajik and Uzbek counterparts along with the German Troops.

    After Uzbekistan and Afghanistan were reached the Indian Company would leap ahead of the German advance to disrupt the British-Indian defenses in northwestern India. Netaji spoke of dropping parachute brigades, calling on the Indian peasantry to assist them. Through radio he issued warnings to British Indian soldiers and police to the effect that unless they assisted the liberation forces they would one day have to answer to the free Indian government for their criminal support of the British.

    The effect of the Indian army of liberation marching into India along with the German forces would be such that the entire British Indian Army morale would collapse, coinciding with a revolutionary uprising against the British. The Legion would then be the nucleus of an expanding army of free India.

    Netaji’s plan, largely dependent on German Military successes in the Soviet Union, undoubtedly had a setback when the Wehrmacht was halted at Stalingrad. After the German retreat from that city, the plan for marching into India from the West had to be abandoned. The tide of war was turning swiftly, calling for devising new strategies on the part of Netaji.

    While the German army’s second thrust into Russia encountered an unexpected counter-offensive at Stalingrad and thus was forced to turn back, in another part of the world the forces of another Axis partner were forging ahead, nearer and nearer to India.

    Japan was achieving spectacular successes in the Far East and was ready to welcome Netaji as the leader of millions of Indians who lived in the countries of East and Southeast Asia. To Netaji, the Japanese attitude was extremely encouraging. Tolo, the Prime Minister, had issued statements in the Diet about Indian freedom early in 1942, and by March there was a Japanese proposal for a tripartite declaration on India.

    A small band of Indian National Army legionaires had already been in existence in the Southeast under Japanese patronage, although a few of its leaders, including Mohan Singh, had fallen out with the Japanese. Netaji would have no difficulty in reorganizing and expanding this organization.

    He would get the active support of millions of overseas Indians, and the many thousands of British Indian prisoners-of-war would provide him a greater opportunity for recruitment, and for thus organizing a formidable army of liberation that could immediately be deployed in forward positions as the Imperial Japanese Army kept on advancing through the steaming jungles of the Malayan peninsula and Burma. During his meeting with Hitler on 29 May, the Führer had also suggested that in view of the prevalent world situation, Netaji should shift the center of his activities from Germany to the Far East.

    Netaji could look back at his two years work in Germany with a sense of pride and accomplishment. Broadcasting, publications and propaganda were all extended. Azad Hind Radio had extended programs in several languages, and reports indicated that they were being listened to with interest in target areas; Azad Hind, a bilingual journal, was being published regularly.

    There were other papers for the Legion besides; the Free India Center had attained an acknowledged status in Germany. It was treated as a foreign mission, entitling its members to a higher scale of rations, and exemption from some of the Aliens’ regulations. Netaji himself was given a good villa, a car and special rations for entertainment purposes. His personal allowance amounted to about eight hundred pounds a month.

    The monthly grant for the Free India Center rose from 1,200 pounds in 1941 to 3,200 pounds in 1944. All these Netaji stipulated as a loan from the German government, to be returned after India gained independence with the Axis assistance. However, the turn of events now demanded his presence in a different theater-of-war.

    What would happen to the Legion in Netaji’s absence? It was now 3,500 strong, well trained and equipped, ready for action. Netaii consulted with his aides in Berlin. A.C.N. Nambiar, an Indian journalist who had been in Europe for some eighteen years prior to Netaji’s arrival in Germany, was his right-hand man. While preparing for his journey to the Asian theater-of-war, Netaji passed on to Nambiar his policy and instructions. As Hugh Toye writes:

    There were plans for new branches of the Free India Center, for broadcasting, for Indians to study German police methods, and for the training of Indian seamen and airmen. As for the legion, it must be used actively as soon as possible, the German officers and NCOs must be quickly replaced by Indians, there must be no communalism. Legionaries were to be trained on all the most modern German equipment, including heavy artillery and tanks; Bose would send further instructions as opportunity offered.[12]

    A few words must be added regarding the Indo-German cooperation and comradeship during the critical days of World War II when the Legion was formed. None could describe it better than Adalbert Seifriz, who was a German Officer in the training camp of the Legionaries. He writes,

    Agreeing to the proposal of Bose was a magnificient concession and consideration shown to the great personality of Bose by the German Government in those critical times when all German efforts were concentrated on the war … The mutual understanding and respect between Indians and Germans and the increasing contact between them in the interest of the common task made it possible for the Indian Legion to sustain and keep up discipline right up to the German capitulation in 1945. During the period of training and even afterwards the comradeship between Indians and Germans could not be destroyed … A meeting with Subhas Bose was a special event for the German training staff.-We spent many evenings with him, discussing the future of India. He lives in the minds of the training staff members as an idealistic and fighting personality, never sparing himself in the service of his people and his country … The most rewarding fact was the real comradeship which grew between Indians and Germans, which proved true in dangerous hours, and exists still today in numerous cases. The Indian Legion was a precious instrument in strengthening and consolidating Indo-German friendship.[13]

    A report of Hitler’s visit to the Indian Legion headquarters in Dresden was given by Shantaram Vishnu Samanta (one of the Legionaries) during a press interview in India, after his release from an internment camp. According to his statement, Hitler addressed the soldiers of the Legion after Netaji had left for East Asia. He spoke in German and his speech was translated into Hindustani by an interpreter. He said:

    You are fortunate having been born in a country of glorious cultural traditions and a colossal manpower. I am impressed by the burning passion with which you and your Netaji seek to liberate your country from foreign domination. Your Netaji’s status is even greater than mine. While I am the leader of eighty million Germans, he is the leader of 400 million Indians. In all respects he is a greater leader and a greater general than myself. I salute him, and Germany salutes him. It is the duty of all Indians to accept him as their führer and obey him implicitly. I have no doubt that if you do this, his guidance will lead India very soon to freedom.

    A statement by another soldier of the Indian Legion, who remains anonymous, has a somewhat different version. It stated that both Netaji and Hitler took a joint salute of the Indian Legion and a German infantry. In addition to comments cited earlier, Hitler was reported to have made these remarks as well:

    German civilians, soldiers and free Indians! I take this opportunity to welcome your acting Führer, Herr Subhas Chandra Bose. He has come here to guide all those free Indians who love their country and are determined to free it from foreign yoke. It is too much for me to dare to give you any instructions or advice because you are sons of a free country, and you would naturally like to obey implicitly the accredited leader of your own land. [14]

    However, reports of Hitler’s visit and address to the Indian Legionaries are not confirmed from any other source.

    Netaji would be leaving Germany on 8 February 1943. On 26 January, “Independence Day for India,” there was a great party in Berlin where hundreds of guests drank his health. On 28 January, which was set aside for observance as the “Legion Day” in honor of the Indian Legion, he addressed the Legion for the last time. It is believed that his departure was kept secret from his army.

    So, there were no visible emotions among the men; no gesture of a farewell. The impression Netaji was leaving at the Free India Center, was that he was going on a prolonged tour. So there were no signs of any anxiety. Except for a few top-ranking German officers and his closest aides, hardly anybody was aware that within a week-and-a-half he would be embarking on the most perilous journey ever undertaken by man; a submarine voyage through mine-infested waters to the other side of the world. In his absence, Nambiar settled down in his job as his successor and soon gained respect of the Legionaries.

    Two months after Netaii’s departure, as a result of discussion between the German Army Command and the Free India Center, it was decided to transfer the Legion from Koenigsbrueck to a coastal region in Holland, to involve it in a practical coastal defense training. It was also in accordance with Netaji’s Wishes. He had often expressed a desire to give his troops, whenever possible, some training in coastal defense.

    After the first battalion was given a hearty send-off, an untoward incident happened within the legion; two companies of the second battalion refused to move. It was soon found out that there were three main reasons for staging this minor rebellion.

    Some Legionaries were unhappy that they were not promoted, but their names had to be put on the waiting list; some simply did not want to leave Koenigsbrueck; some were influenced by a rumor that Netaji had abandoned them and had gone off leaving them entirely in German hands, who were now going to use them in the Western Front, instead of sending them to the East to fight for India’s liberation.

    However, the rebellion was soon quelled after a team of NCOs visited the officials of the Free India Center in Berlin and obtained clarification regarding the rebel Legionaries’ grievances.

    The team went back to the camp and assured the men that they were not being sent to fight a war but were there purely for practical training purposes according to Netaji’s wishes; that the promotions were not being passed up, they would follow in due course; and that Netaji had not abandoned them, and they would be informed about his whereabouts and plans as soon as possible. In pursuance of military discipline, the ringleaders of this act of insubordination were sent to prison camps for a specified period.

    The Legion was stationed in the coastal areas of Holland for five months. Afterwards, there was a decision to move it to the coastal area of Bordeaux in France from the mouth of the Girond, opposite the fortification of Foyan to the Bay of Arcachon.

    The Legion was taking charge here. The stay in France was utilized to give the Legionaries a thorough training in the weaponry required for the defense of the Atlantic Wall. In the spring of 1944, the first batch of twelve Indians were promoted to officers. Field Marshal Rommel, who took charge of the Atlantic Wall, once visited the area where the Indian contingent was located. Ganpulay writes:

    … after having seen the work carried out by the Indians,, he exclaimed: “I am pleasantly surprised to find that in spite of very little training in coastal defense, the work done here is fairly satisfactory.” While departing, he said to the Indian soldiers: “I am glad to see you have done good work; I wish you and your leader all the good luck!”[15]

    In the spring of 1944, one company of the Legion was sent to North Italy at the request of some officers who were seeking an opportunity to confront the British forces. After the Normandy invasion by the Allied forces in June 1944, the military situation in Europe began to deteriorate. It eventually became so critical that the German High Command decided to order the Indian Legion to return to Germany.

    So after about ten months of stay in the coastal region of Lacanau in France, the Indian Legion started its road back. It is to be understood at this point that with the landing of the Allied troops in France and their gradual advance through the French countryside, the French Maquis (underground) guerrillas had become very active, and along with the German troops they made the Legionaries as well the target of their attacks.

    After travelling a certain distance, the first battalion of the Legion was temporarily located in the area of Mansle near Poitiers, while the second and the third battalion were stationed in Angouleme and Poitiers respectively. After a rest for ten days in this region, during which period they had to ward off sporadic attacks by the French underground, the Legionaries took to the road once again. In this long march back to Germany, the Legion demonstrated exemplary courage and fortitude, and underwent rigors and hardships of battlefield with equanimity.

    At this time, British propaganda was directed to these men which was full of empty promises; some material was dropped from the air, while agents infiltrated into the ranks to persuade the men to desert. The propaganda promised the would-be deserters reinstatement in the British Indian army with full retroactive pay and pension, but the British hypocrisy was once again manifest in the fact that a few of the soldiers who had fallen victim to this bait were shot later by the French publicly in a market place in Poitiers without any trial, along with some German prisoners-of-war.

    In following the saga of the Indian Army of Liberation in the West, one has to remember that its fate was indissolubly linked with that of the Axis powers in Europe, especially Germany. The overpowering of the new revolutionary regimes of Europe by forces representing an alliance of capitalism and Marxism was an international tragedy which engulfed the Indian Legion in Europe as well.

    During its retreat into Germany, it encountered the enemy forces on several occasions and fought rearguard action with British and French forces, displaying exemplary bravery. The German military training had converted the regiment not only into a highly disciplined body, but a hard-core fighting unit as well.

    It is indeed a historical irony that this superb force could not be utilized for the purpose and way its creator and leader, Subhas Chandra Bose, had dreamt of. Nevertheless, the 950th Indian Regiment, as the Legion was officially designated, left its footprints in the battlefields of France and Germany, as their many other gallant comrades of the German Army.

    In the fall of 1944 until Christmas, the Indian Legion spent its time in the quiet villages of southern Germany. Between Christmas and the New Year 1945, the unit was ordered to move into the military camp at the garrison town of Heuberg. In the spring of 1945 the Allied forces crossed the Rhine. The Russians entered the East German provinces murdering and plundering cities, townships and villages. Heavy bomber formations began destroying German cities.

    Transport systems became completely disorganized and paralyzed. The end was near, and there was no point in remaining in the barracks. The Legion, therefore, left its winter quarters at Heuberg in March 1945, and headed for the Alpine passes. By that time all communications with the Free India Center in Berlin had been cut off. The Legion commanders took decisions independently.

    The Legion had already reached the Alpine regions east of Bodensee. However, with the surrender of the German forces on 7 May, all hopes also ended for the Free India Army. While attempting to cross over to Switzerland, the legionaries were overwhelmed by American and French units and were made prisoners. Those who fell into the hands of the French had to suffer very cruel treatment. Several were shot, while others died in prison camps in miserable conditions. The rest were eventually handed over to the British.

    Although thus swept into the maelstrom of the Axis disintegration in Europe, Netaji’s army of liberation in the west had carved for itself a niche in history; for, indeed, it was a nucleus which would eventually precipitate a much larger fighting force elsewhere.

    Inspired by its leader, that force would march into India to set in motion a process that would eventually deliver the country from an alien bondage. One, therefore, must not regard the saga of the Indian National Army in Europe as an isolated event that ended tragically.

    While its dream of crossing the Caucasus along with its allies, the German Armed Forces, and entering India from the Northwest, did not materialize in reality, its extension and successor, India’s army of liberation in the east, did enter the country from the opposite direction, thus fulfilling the cherished dream of Netaji and his soldiers. Not only that, as we shall see subsequently, but that army made the mightiest contribution toward finally ending an imperialist rule in India.

    During his interview with Netaji, Hitler had suggested to him that since it would take at least another one or two years before Germany could gain direct influence in India, and while Japan’s influence, in view of its spectacular successes in Southeast Asia, could come in a few months, Bose should negotiate with the Japanese.

    The Führer warned Bose against an air journey which could compel him to a forced landing in British territory. He thought Bose was too important a personality to let his life be endangered by such an experiment. Hitler suggested that he could place a German submarine at his disposal which would take him to Bangkok on a journey around the Cape of Good Hope.[16]

    However, despite Hitler’s suggestions, it is believed that the German Foreign Office showed some reluctance in the matter of Netaji’s leaving Germany and going to Japan. Col. Yamamoto Bin, Japanese military attache in Berlin (and a good personal friend of Netaji) along with the Japanese ambassador Lieutenant-General Oshima Hiroshi, had met Netaji as early as October 1941 when the latter expressed hopes for enlisting Japanese aid in his plan for wresting Indian independence. This was the beginning of a series of such meetings.

    After the entry of Japan in World War II in December, Netaji was more eager to go as soon as possible to East Asia and fight beside Japan for India’s liberation. He reportedly urged Oshima to use his good offices to secure his passage to Asia. It was about at this point that both Oshima and Yamamoto encountered a feeling of reluctance in the matter on the part of the German Foreign Office.

    They had the feeling that Germany was not to willing to let Japan lead India to independence. Bose was already a useful ally as an Indian patriot, and his propaganda broadcasts were effective in both India and Britain. The Indian Legion was already having a psychological impact in India and worrying the Allies. For these reasons, “they were guarding Bose like a tiger cub.”[17]

    In the meantime, Ambassador Oshima had also met with Hitler and explained Bose’s plan to him. According to Japanese records,

    The Führer readily agreed with Oshima that it was better for Bose to shift his activities to Southeast Asia now that his country’s (Japan’s) armies had overrun the area. The second problem was whether Bose would get enough support in Tokyo for his activities. On this, Oshima had contacted Tokyo many times but had not received any firm answer. Finally, Tokyo replied to Oshima that in principle it had no objection to Bose’s visit to Japan. The third problem was to provide Bose with a safe means of transport to Japan. Communication between Germany and Japan was impossible during those days. Passage by boat was ruled out; and it was decided to use a plane belonging to the Lufthansa Company to airlift Bose from Germany to Japan via the Soviet Union. Tojo (Japanese Prime Minister) objected to this on the grounds that this would amount to a breach of trust with the Soviet Union. An attempt was made by both Yamamoto and Bose to get an Italian plane, but this also did not work. Finally the choice fell on a submarine. Germany agreed to carry Bose up to a certain unknown point in the east and asked that a Japanese submarine be pressed into service thence forward. After a series of exchanges with his government, Oshima finally obtained Tokyo’s approval of the plan and communicated it to Bose.[18]

    Alexander Werth writes:

    An interesting anecdote related to this historic journey may perhaps be mentioned here. Shortly before Bose’s departure the Japanese Naval Command raised objections because of an internal Japanese regulation not permitting civilians to travel on a warship in wartime. When Adam von Trott (of the German Foreign Office) received this message by cable from the German Ambassador in Tokyo, he sent the following reply: “Subhas Chandra Bose is by no means a private person, but Commander-in-Chief of the Indian Liberation Army.” Thus the bureaucratic interference was overcome.[19]

    On 8 February 1943, accompanied by Keppler, Nambiar and Werth, Netaji arrived at the port of Kiel where a German submarine under the command of Werner Musenberg was waiting for him. His would-be sole companion on this perilous voyage, Abid Hasan had travelled separately to Kiel in a special compartment without knowing his destination. Only after commencement of the journey was he to be informed of the itinerary. Netaji was leaving behind his chosen 3,500 soldiers of the Indian Legion, the 950th regiment of the German Army, specially trained and equipped for the task of liberating an India held in bondage by the British. We have already followed the history and fate of the Legion. Now let us turn to the East.

    Indian National Army of Liberation in the East

    On 15 February 1942, Singapore fell to the Japanese army advancing southward from the Malayan peninsula. Two days later, in an impressive ceremony held at Farrar Park in the heart of the town, Indian troops were handed over to the Japanese as prisoners-of-war by their commanding officer, Colonel Hunt.

    Major Fujiwara took them over on behalf of the victorious Japanese, and then announced that he was handing them over to Captain Mohan Singh of the Indian contingents, who should be obeyed by them as their Supreme Commander. Mohan Singh then spoke to the Indian POWs, expressing his intention of raising an Indian national army out of them to fight for India’s freedom.

    He held a preliminary discussion with some prominent Indians in Malay and Burma in a meeting in Singapore on 9 and 10 March, which was attended by Rashbehari Bose, a veteran Indian revolutionary exile living in Japan for the last quarter of a century. Bose then called a conference in Tokyo, which was held 28-30 March.

    The delegates representing several East and Southeast Asian countries present at the conference, decided to form the Indian Independence League to organize an Indian independence movement in East Asia. Bose was recognized as head of the organization.

    The conference further resolved that “militay action against the British in India will be taken only by the INA and under Indian command, together with such military, naval and air cooperation and assistance as may be requested from the Japanese by the Council of Action” and further, “after the liberation of India, the framing of the future constitution of India will be left entirely to the representatives of the people of India.”[20]

    On 15 June 1942, a conference opened in Bangkok with over a hundred delegates of the IIL attending from all over Asia. By the close of the nine-day conference a resolution was unanimously adopted setting forth the policies of the independence movement in East Asia. The III, was proclaimed the organization to work for India’s freedom; the Indian National Army was declared the military arm of the movement with Mohan Singh as the Commander-in-chief and Rashbehari Bose was elected president of the Council of Action.

    It was further decided that Singapore would be the headquarters of the IIL. Netaji had stated in a message to the conference that his personal experience had convinced him that Japan, Italy and Germany were sworn enemies of British imperialism; yet, independence could come only through the efforts of Indians themselves. India’s freedom would mean the rout of British imperialism. The Indian National Army was officially inaugurated in September 1942.

    Unfortunately, at this point a distrust began to grow within the Indian group against Rashbehari Bose’s leadership. Some thought that having been long associated with Japan, he gave precedence to the Japanese interests over Indian interests. According to Japanese records:

    Some even thought that he was just the protege of the Japanese, and that the latter was exploiting Indians for their own ends. Such resentment finally resulted in a revolt of a group of leaders headed by Captain Mohan Singh within the INA in November 1942. As a consequence, Mohan Singh and his associate, Colonel Gill were both arrested by the Japanese and the Indian Army was disbanded. However, in 1943 a new Indian Army was organized, put under the command of Lt. Col. Bhonsle, who held this post until the final dissolution of the army. [21]

    Describing the revived INA. Joyce Lebra writes:

    On 15 February 1943, the INA was reorganized and former ranks and badges revived. The Director of the Military Bureau, Lieutenant-Colonel Bhonsle, was clearly placed under the authority of the III. to avoid any repetition of IIIANA rivalry. Under Bhonsle was Lt. Col. Shah Nawaz Khan as Chief of General Staff-, Major P.K. Sahgal as Military Secretary; Major Habibur Rahman as commandant of the Officers’ Training School; and Lt. Col. A.C. Chatterji, and later Major A.D. Jahangir, as head of enlightenment and culture. Apart from this policy-forming body was the Army itself, under the command of Lt. Col. M.Z. Kiani. This was the organization which held the INA together until the arrival of Subhas Chandra Bose from Berlin, six months later.[22]

    In February, the Japanese military officer Iwakuro had called a meeting of about three hundred officers of the INA at Bidadri camp in Singapore and spoke to them about the advisability of joining the army, but with no effect. According to Ghosh, “Later on, in a ‘Heart to heart talk’ with some officers, it emerged that a large number of officers and men would be willing to continue in the INA on the express condition that Netaji would be coming to Singapore.”[23]

    The story of Netaji’s exploits in Germany and the history of the Indian Legion was known to Indian revolutionaries of the IIL in East Asia for some time now, and they awaited his arrival eagerly. As the first INA wavered, faltered and was finally disbanded, and as its successor merely continued to exist, the need for Netaji’s leadership began to be felt more keenly. Mohan Singh had mentioned his name to General Fujiwara as early as 1941. In all conferences the need of his guidance had been emphasized by the delegates.

    While Netaji and Abid Hasan continued to push toward the East making a wide sweep out into the Atlantic, by pre-arrangement, a Japanese submarine left Penang Island on 20 April for the tip of Africa, under strict orders not to attack or risk detection. The two submarines had a rendevous four hundred miles south-southwest of Madagascar on 26 April. After sighting each other and confirming their identity, the submarines waited for a day for the sea to become calm.

    Then on 28 April, in what was known to be the only known submarine-to-submarine transfer of passengers (in the annals of World War II) in an area dominated by the enemy’s air and naval strength, Netaji and Abid Hasan were transhipped into the Japanese submarine via a rubber raft. Travelling across the ocean, the Japanese 1-29 reached Sabang on 6 May, 1943. It was an isolated offshore islet north of Sumatra.

    There, Netaji was welcomed by Colonel Yamamoto, who was the head of the Hikari Kikan, the Japanese-Indian liaison group. From Sabang, Netaji and Yamamoto left for Tokyo by plane, stopping en route at Penang, Manila, Saigon and Taiwan.

    The plane landed in Tokyo on 16 May. All throughout his submarine voyage from Germany and for about a month after his arrival in Tokyo, Netaji’s identity and presence was kept a secret. He was supposed to be a Japanese VIP named Matsuda.

    Although he remained incognito during the first few weeks in Japan, Netaji did not waste any time by just waiting. From 17 May onwards, he met Japanese Army and Navy Chiefs-of-Staff, Navy Minister and Foreign Minister in rapid succession. However, he had to wait for nearly three weeks before Japanese PrimeMinister Tojo granted him an interview.

    But Tojo was so impressed with Netaji’s personality that he offered to meet him again after four days. Two days later, on 16 June, Netaji was invited to visit the Diet (the Japanese Parliament) where Tojo surprised him with his historic declaration on India:

    We are indignant about the fact that India is still under the ruthless suppression of Britain and are in full sympathy with her desperate struggle for independence. We are determined to extend every possible assistance to the cause of India’s independence. It is our belief that the day is not far off when India will enjoy freedom and prosperity after winning independence.[24]

    It was not until 18 June that Tokyo Radio announced Netaji’s arrival. The news was reported in the Tokyo press the following day. At this announcement, the atmosphere was electrified overnight. The Axis press and radio stressed the significance of the event.

    The INA and the Indian independence movement suddenly assumed far greater importance in the eyes of all. On 19 June, Netaji held a press conference. This was followed by two broadcasts to publicize further his presence in East Asia, and during the course of these he unfolded his plan of action.

    As Ghosh describes, Bose’s plan stood for the co-ordination of the nationalist forces within India and abroad to make it a gigantic movement powerful enough to overthrow the British rulers of India. The assumption on which Bose seemed to have based his grand scheme was that the internal conditions in India were ripe for a revolt. The no-cooperation movement must turn into an active revolt.[25]

    And to quote Netaji’s own words during the press conference: “Civil disobedience must develop into armed struggle. And only when the Indian people have received the baptism of fire on a large scale would they be qualified to achieve freedom.”[26] Netaji then embarked upon a series of meetings, press conferences. radio broadcasts and lectures in order to explain his immediate task to the people concerned, and the world.

    Accompanied by Rashbehari Bose, Netaji arrived at Singapore from Tokyo on 27 June. He was given a tumultuous welcome by the resident Indians and was profusely ‘garlanded’ wherever he went. His speeches kept the listeners spellbound. By now, a legend had grown around him, and its magic infected his audiences. Addressing representatives of the Indian communities in East Asia on 4 July he said:

    Not content with a civil disobedience campaign, Indian people are now morally prepared to employ other means for achieving their liberation. The time has therefore come to pass on to the next stage of our campaign. All organizations whether inside India or outside, must now transform themselves into a disciplined fighting organization under one leadership. The aim and purpose of this organization should be to take up arms against British imperialism when the time is ripe and signal is given.[27]

    At a public meeting where Netaji spoke these words, Rashbehari Bose formally handed over to Subhas Chandra Bose the leadership of the III, and command of the INA. The hall was packed to capacity. In his last speech as leader of the movement Rashbehari Bose said:

    Friends! This is one of the happiest moments in my life. I have brought you one of the most outstanding personalities of our great Motherland to participate in our campaign. In your presence today, I resign my office as president of the Indian Independence League in East Asia. From now on, Subhas Chandra Bose is your president, your leader in the fight for India’s independence, and I am confident that under his leadership, you will march on to battle and to victory.[28]

    In that meeting Netaji announced his plan to organize a Provisional Government of Free India.

    It will be the task of this provisional government to lead the Indian Revolution to its successful conclusion … The Provisional Government will have to prepare the Indian people, inside and outside India, for an armed struggle which will be the culmination of all our national efforts since 1883. We have a grim fight ahead of us. In this final march to freedom, you will have to face danger, thirst, privation, forced marches-and death. Only when you pass this test will freedom be yours.[29]

    The next day, on 5 July, Netaji took over the command of the Indian National Army, now christened Azad Hind Fauj (Free India Army). Tojo arrived from Manila in time to review the parade of troops standing alongside with Bose. Addressing the soldiers, Netaji said:

    Throughout my pubic career, I have always felt that, though India is otherwise ripe for independence in every way, she has lacked one thing, namely, an army of liberation. George Washington of America could fight and win freedom, because he had his army. Garibaldi could liberate Italy because he had his armed volunteers behind him. It is your privilege and honor to be the first to come forward and organize India’s national army.

    By doing so you have removed the last obstacle in our path to freedom… When France declared war on Germany in 1939 and the campaign began, there was but one cry which rose from the lips of German soldiers- “To Paris! To Paris!” When the brave soldiers of Nippon set out on their march in December 1941, there was but one cry which rose from their lips-”To Singapore! To Singapore!” Comrades! My soldiers! Let your battle-cry be-”To Delhi! To Delhil”

    How many of us will individually survive this war of freedom, I do not know. But I do know this, that we shall ultimately win and our task will not end until our surviving heroes hold the victory parade on another graveyard of the British Empire-Lal Kila or the Red Fortress of ancient Delhi.[30]

    On 27 July, Netaji left Singapore for a 17-day,tour of the East Asian and Southeast Asian countries. The prime objective of this tour was to enlist moral and monetary support for his movement from other countries, as well as the resident Indian communities. He was given a rousing reception in Rangoon, where he attended the Burmese independence on 1 August; from Rangoon Netaji went to Bangkok and met Thai Prime Minister Pilbulsongram.

    He won the moral support of Thailand and tumultuous ovation from the Indian community. He then flew to Saigon and addressed Indians there. Returning to Singapore for a brief rest, he flew to Penang to address a rally of 15,000 Indians. Everywhere, he held his audience spellbound for hours with his superb oratory, and at the conclusion of his speech the people raced to reach the platform and pile up all they had before him-a total of two million dollars.

    This scene was repeated over and over in towns and cities all over Southeast Asia, when Netaji stood before thousands of people like a prophet, addressing them for the cause of India’s freedom. Merchants, traders, businessmen and women came forward everywhere and donated their wealth and ornaments in abundance, to enable their leader to fulfill his mission. In his plan for total mobilization, Netaji had outlined a grandiose scheme for an army of three million men. However, the immediate target was set at 50,000. The Major part of this number would be from the Indian POWs and the rest from civilian volunteers.

    According to Bose’s plan there would be three divisions from thirty thousand regulars and another unit of twenty thousand mainly from civilian volunteers. The Japanese authorities informea Netaji at that time that it could provide arms for thirty thousand men only. However, by 1945, it was authoritatively known that the actual strength of the INA rose to not less than 45,000 men.

    After completing the task of reorganizing the Indian Independence League and launching preparations for revolutionizing the army, and after conducting a successful campaign to mobilize the support of the Indian communities throughout Southeast Asia-a phase which lasted from July to OctoberNetaji turned toward formation of the Provisional Government of Azad Hind (Free India).

    This had to be done before the army could be sent for action in the battlefield. This government was officially proclaimed in Singapore at a mass rally on 21 October 1943 where Netaji was unanimously elected as the Head of the State and The Supreme Commander of the Indian National Army. While taking the oath he said:

    In the name of God, I take this sacred oath that to liberate India and the three hundred eighty million of my countrymen, L Subhas Chandra Bose, will continue the sacred war of freedom till the last breath of my life. I shall remain always a servant of India, and to look after the welfare of three hundred eighty million of Indian brothers and sisters shall be for me my highest duty. Even after winning freedom, I will always be prepared to shed even the last drop of my blood for the preservation of India’s freedom.[31]

    The Provisional Government of Free India had five Ministers with Netaji as the Head of the State, Prime Minister and Minister for War and advisers representing the Indian communities in East Asia.

    The first momentous decision which the new government took was its declaration of war on Britain and the United States, which was decided on the night of 22-23 October. Toye writes: “The Cabinet had not been unanimous about the inclusion of the U.S.A. Bose had shown impatience and displeasure- there was never any question then or later of his absolute authority: the Cabinet had no responsibility and could only tender advice.,,32

    Recognition of the Provisional Government came quickly from nine countries-the Axis powers and their allies. They were: Japan, Burma, Croatia, Germany, the Philippines, Nanking China, Manchuto, Italy and Siam (Thailand), but for some unknown reasons, Vichy France withheld its recognition. The Japanese Army promised all-out support for the provisional government.

    Toward the end of October, Netaji flew to Tokyo again to meet Tojo and to attend the greater East Asia Conference. Since India technically did not fall within this sphere, he attended as an observer. He made an impressive speech at the conference, stressing the creation of a new Asia where all vestiges of colonialism and imperialism would be eliminated.

    The Japanese navy had captured the Andaman and Nicober islands in the Bay of Bengal during the early months of war. As a result of Netaji’s requests, Prime Minister Tojo announced at the conference that Japan had decided to place the two islands under the jurisdiction of the Provisional Government of Free India, thereby giving it its first sovereignty over a territory.

    The ceremonial transfer took place in December, and Netaji named Lieutenant-Colonel Loganathan, an officer in the Medical Services, as the chief commissioner in charge of the civil administration of the islands. Soon thereafter, preparations began for sending the army to the front and moving the provisional government headquarters to Rangoon, in Burma. In the meantime, Netaji announced the formation of a women’s brigade within the INA, and named it “Rani of Jhansi Regiment,” after the celebrated queen of Jhansi, Laxmibai, who had led her soldiers against the British in an uprising during the First War of Independence in 1857.

    Coincidentially, another Laxmi, Lieutenant-Col. Laxmi, was placed in charge of this regiment by Netaji. In November it was agreed between Netaji and the Japanese militay headquarters, that the INA first division and the civil and military headquarters would move to Burma in January 1944.

    The Imphal Campaign

    The Imphal Campaign, including the battle of Kohima — the first major town to be captured by the INA inside India — will perhaps go down as one of the most daring and disastrous campaigns in the annals of world military history. General Mutaguchi, commander of the Japanese forces in North Burma since 1943, had been convinced that Imphal should be attacked.

    The objects of such an offensive were to forestall any invasion of Burma in 1944 and to establish the Japanese defenses on the frontier mountains. The idea would be first to overwhelm the British in Arakan, involving all their reserves in battle for Chittagong and the gateway to eastern Bengal.

    Then, by April, Kohima and Imphal could be conquered at leisure, without danger of their being reinforced. The monsoon, beginning in May, would postpone operations, and after the rains were over, in the absence of a new British defense posture east of the river Brahmaputra, the entire Assam and East Bengal would lie open to the Indian National Army and the Japanese.

    Imphal, the capital of the state of Manipur, lay on a flat, nearly treeless plateau just inside the Indian border. Its elevation was about 3,000 feet, surrounded on all sides by impassable mountains.

    The mountain range in the east with 2,000-4,000 foot peaks above the plateau stretches some five hundred miles. To the West and South are the Chin hills of the Arakan range, a formidable stretch of inhospitable terrain.

    The jungle surrounding this basin is hostile to human habitation. The northern access to the plain from India and Assam lay through Dimapur and the steep Kohima Road. From Dimapur, a single track railway swept through Assam and Bengal and was an important military objective to both armies.

    For the INA the importance of the Imphal campaign was that it was the only major battle in which it would participate with the object of achieving freedom for India. As Salto and Hayashida writes:

    The Imphal Operation was the final offensive of the East Asia War, mounted by three Burma-based Japanese divisions, and one INA division. The campaign lasted from 15 March to 9 July 1944. The operation has often been compared to the operation Wacht am Rhein or the Battle of the Bulge, which was the final all-out drive launched by Germany towards Ardennes on the Western Front, from December 1944 to January 1945. Both operations al most succeeded and both are termed “gambles” by historians today. If the German push towards Ardennes was Wacht am Rhein, the Japanese-Indian thrust against Imphal might be called “Wacht am Chindwin” although the official Japanese code-name for the action was most prosaic: Operation “U”.[33]

    River Chindwin lay across the Indo-Burmese border, and its crossing from the east by an army would signal an invasion of India.

    Execution orders for Operation U became operative on 7 January 1944, coinciding with completion of the shifting of the Provisional Government headquarters in Rangoon. In the evening of the same day, Lt. General Masakazy Kawabe, commanding the overall Burma headquarters, held a welcome party in honor of Netaji and his staff officers.

    Netaji spoke, and concluded his speech with these words. “My only prayer to the Almighty at this moment is that we may be given the earliest opportunity to pay for our freedom with our own blood.’,34 One INA Division, named after Netaji as Subhas Regiment, was readied for action at the front with the Japanese. Toye writes.

    … He spent the whole days… with the Subhas Regiment, reviewing, watching it at exercises and on parade, talking to its officers, exerting his magic on it in a way that he had not attempted before. These were his comrades, the men by whose means he would uphold the rights and honour of India. Everything depended on their achievement in battle; they must absorb all his feelings of confidence, feel the whole of his personal force. On 3 February he bade them farewell: “Blood is calling for blood. Arise! We have no time to lose. Take up your arms. There in front of you is the road. our pioneers have built. We shall march along that road. We shall carve our way through enemy’s ranks, or, if God wills, we shall die a martyr’s death. And in our last sleep we shall kiss the road which will bring our Army to Delhi. The road to Delhi is the road to Freedom. On to Delhi!”[35]

    Mutaguchi set 15 March as the D-day for the beginning of the Imphal campaign. The deployment of well over 120,000 troops along the Chindwin river, a front of some 200 kilometers, went on smoothly and undetected by British spies planted in the area. In the meantime, Netaji received some good news. The Arakan offensive, launched on 4 February, had cut off the 7th Indian Division of the British Army in Mayu valley.

    Contributing to this success was the reconnaissance and subversion of an Indian outpost position by Major Misra, the INA Commander in Arakan. At the same time, he received messages from the underground network working inside India under his direction, whose selected trained spies had been sent by submarine.

    On D-day, Mutaguchi assembled the war correspondents at his headquarters in central Burma and declared: “I am firmly convinced that my three divisions will reduce Imphal in one month. In order that they can march fast, they carry the lightest possible equipment and food enough for three weeks. Ali, they will get everything from the British supplies and dumps. Boys! See you again in Imphal at the celebration of the Emperor’s birthday on 29 April.”[36]

    The Japanese-Indian offensive took the British by complete surprise. The Japanese and INA troops literally galloped through mountains and jungles routing the enemy on the way. Prior to the Imphal offensive, an INA detachment under Colonel Saligal had created a breach through the British lines in the Arakan sector. Now the INA’s deployment was extended to the Imphal sector.

    As the INA under Netaji’s command set foot on the Indian soil, the main Japanese force also defeated the obstinate resistance of the enemy on 22 March, broke through the India-Burma border, and advanced from the north and west to encircle Imphal. The initial success of the INA at the Arakan front generated much enthusiasm. In a Special Order of the Day, Netaji referred to the “Glorious and brilliant actions of the brave forces of the Azad Hind Fauj.”[37]

    On 8 April, Japanese Imperial Headquarters issued a communique which said: “Japanese troops, fighting side by side with the Indian National Army, captured Kohima early on 6 April.[38] A jubilant Netaji at this time started talking with the Japanese about the administration of the liberated and soon-to-be-liberated territories in India.

    In response to a call by Netaji, Prime Minister Tojo made an announcement clarifying that all areas of India occupied as a result of Japanese advance would be placed under the jurisdiction of the Provisional Government. This was followed by Netaji’s announcement that he was appointing the Finance Minister of his cabinet, Major-General A.C. Chatterjee, as the governor of the newly liberated areas. Netaji described the march of the INA into India as the event of the century.

    He had also just declared the Legion in Europe to be part of the INA and had appointed Nambiar to be a Minister in the Provisional Government; his Chief Commissioner had been installed in the Andamans, his first heroes from the Arakan front had been decorated, and the, INA troops had raised the national standard of free India in Kohima; and now, the fall of Imphal seemed very near.

    Did the Imphal Campaign come almost two years too late? What would have happened if Netaji had arrived in East Asia a year earlier? by the end of 1942, the Axis had scored successes everywhere.

    Rommel was in Egypt, the German invasion of Russia had gone smoothly, Nationalist China was on her knees, and India and Australia were expecting a Japanese invasion. Prospects for the Allies were dark in the Pacific and the Rising Sun was at its zenith from Japan to the Bay of Bengal … Britain was unable to dispute with the Japanese Navy, and there were not enough British and Indian troops in India to assure its defense. Even air protection was inadequte … Japanese forces had not pursued retreating British troops beyond the Chindwin river in Burma in May 1942, allegedly because “an invasion was likely to arouse ill-feelings amongst the Indian masses.” … So the Japanese remained east of the Chindwin river, leaving British Indian forces to build up their strength in the Imphal plain.[39]

    But above all, in that moment of a golden opportunity, the towering leadership of Netaji, a provisional government, and an Indian national army worthy of its name — all these were non-existent in East Asia. Japan by itself simply lacked the motivation for extending war into India, let alone think of its independence. The fact remains, however, that the Imphal campaign was indeed first conceived in 1942, right after the conquest of Burma. According to the official history of the British Armed Forces in the Second World War,

    Soon after the completion of the Japanese conquest of Burma in June 1942, a certain Lt. Col. Hayashi had advocated an attack on Imphal. He considered that the Japanese should strike against India without giving time to the defenders to recuperate from their disastrous retreat, and Imphal’s capture would rob them of the best base for launching a counter-offensive against Burma … 18th division argued that the jungles of Burma were impassable for large bodies of operational troops and that any attack on Indian territory would provoke anti-Japanese feelings in India. About December 1942, therefore, the plan was abandoned.[40]

    Lieutenant-General Kuroda Shigetoku, Southern Army Chief of Staff, stated later that if the operation had been carried out in 1942 when first conceived, rather than in 1944, it would have succeeded. According to Lebra, “General Tojo stated in the spring of 1945 that he regretted Japan had missed the opportunity in 1942.”[41]

    As the INA and the Japanese forces continued to lay siege on Imphal, the Allied air superiority gained strength and the enemy was preparing for counterattack. Shah Nawaz, commanding two battalions of the Subhas Regiment in the Chin Hills, told of the hardships his men were suffering as a result of disease and of supply and transport difficulties. However, owing to communication problems, the news of difficulties his men were undergoing at the front did not reach Netaji in detail.

    While there was a stalemate in the front and the offensive came to a halt, there were meetings and jubilations at Rangoon where Netaji collected money and donations in other forms for the conduct of his campaign. He offered to send additional INA regiments to the Front and more troops were despatched. For about a month Operation U went according to plan. Enemy forces were successfully encircled in the Imphal area.

    Suddenly, in the middle of April, the military balance began to shift against Japan and the INA. Wingate’s airborne unit had already been attacking from air over Burma supply routes. British forces were being supplied by airlift into the besieged Imphal, and reinforcements began to flow in. British forces were being sent to Kohima to the north by both rail and air. Japan had no matching air power to strike back at enemy air operations.

    By the end of April the battle strength of Japanese and INA divisions was decreased forty percent. Time for success by surprise attack had already passed and gradually the offensive turned into a defensive battle. The monsoon that followed, brought the ultimate disaster.

    As roads became impassable, all supply routes were cut off. Muddy streams flooded roads and valleys, and rivers swelled to sweep away tanks and ammunition. In the wake of the monsoon, disease became rampant. Cholera, malaria, dysentery, beriberi and jungle sores began to take their toll.

    The INA and the Japanese started living on rations consisting of rice mixed with jungle grass. The 33rd Division had fought desperately for forty days without being able to penetrate the British lines at Imphal. And now that vast amounts of military supplies were reaching the beleaguered garrison at Imphal, there was virtually no hope for a renewed offensive. On 8 July, on the recommendation of top-ranking Generals including Kawabe and Mutaguchi, Prime Minister Tajo issued the order to halt the operation.

    The story of retreat from Imphal is one of the greatest tragedies of World War II. It is a story of misery, hunger and death. Japanese and INA troops, bottled up in the Kawab valley between the Chin Hills in the west and the Chindwin river in the west, began their long trek back through jungles and mountains, headed by division commanders and guards in jeeps and horses.

    Officers, supply, communication and medical units followed. Behind them marched thousands of stragglers: rain-soaked, emaciated with fever and malnutrition. Soon, corpses began accumulating along the trek, and they had to be left unburied. Of the 220,000 Japanese troops who began the Imphal Campaign, only 130,000 survived, and of these only 70,000 remained at the front to retreat. INA casualties were over fifty percent. It was a disaster equal in magnitude to Dunkirk and Stalingrad. Lebra writes:

    When Bose heard the order to retreat he was stunned. He drew himself up and said to Kawabe in ringing tones: “Though the Japanese Army has given up the operation, we will continue it. We will not repent even if the advance of our revolutionary army to attain independence of our homeland is completely defeated. Increase in casualties, cessation of supplies, and famine are not reasons enough to stop marching.

    Even if the whole army becomes only spirit we will not stop advancing toward our homeland. This is the spirit of our revolutionary army.” In an article in Azad Hind on 6 November 1944, after the retreat from Imphal, Bose was reported to have “reiterated his firm conviction that final victory in this war would belong to Japan and Germany … that a new phase of war was approaching in which the initiative would again lie in the hands of the Japanese.-”[42]

    Each Japanese commander gave his own analysis of the causes of the failure of Operation U, like the problem of the chain of command, lack of air power, on dispersal rather than concentration of forces. However, Netaji thought it was timing, with respect to the monsoon.

    He felt that the only chance to take Imphal was before the rains came, and most strategists agreed on this point. From the historic perspective, however, Fujiwara perhaps was the most correct. According to him, the Imphal disaster could have been avoided had the operation been undertaken a year earlier, at a time when the British power in the region was weak.

    The delay in launching the Imphal offensive was no doubt due to Netaji’s late arrival from Europe to East Asia. The Imphal campaign should have been undertaken at a time when the Axis victories had reached their zenith and the Allied forces were on retreat everywhere.

    During the last three months of 1944, Japanese forces had withdrawn to the banks of the Irrawaddy in Burma, where they intended to make a stand. Netaji enthusiastically offered the reorganized INA First Division, when the Japanese 15th division was ordered to oppose the British. Subsquently, the 2nd Division was also readied for action. In February 1945, the INA held some positions in the region of Mandalay in Burma, giving battle to the advancing enemy.

    This was the second campaign of Netaji’s army, and it held out tenaciously at Nyaungu for some time. However, allied troops later crossed the Irrawaddy at several points and the Japanese and INA units were surrounded. There were some desertions.

    Despite unique examples of heroism and Netaji’s presence in the battlefields, risking his own life in the face of enemy attacks, the second campaign of the INA (which was purely a defensive one) finally had to give way to the gradual reconquest of Burma by the British.

    The end of this campaign was followed by a chain of events that included the final Japanese defeat, an alleged plane crash in Formosa in which Netaji reportedly perished, the surrender of the INA to the allied forces and the trial of their leaders at the Red Fort in Delhi, staged by the British. However, all these fateful events, occurring during the final phase of World War II and its aftermath, should be considered parts of an altogether different episode relating to Subhas Chandra Bose and the Indian National Army.

    In the present episode we have examined the historical tasks fulfilled by Netaji and his army in Europe and Asia during World War II, and their significance. In recognition of Netaji’s historically significant role as a war leader, Guy Wint pays him a rare tribute with these words: “He played … an extraordinarily decisive part. By accident, and by seizing an exceptional opportunity, he was able to cut a figure which made him outstanding among the comparatively small number of men who influenced the course of the war by their individual qualities.”[43]

    The Myth of “Freedom through Non-violence under Gandhi’s Leadership”

    Modern historians in India are taking a second look at the way the country’s freedom was achieved, and in that process are demolishing a number of theories, assumptions and myths preached by the “court historians.”

    However, in order to grasp the magnitude of the issue, with its many ramifications, it is essential to understand first the concept of freedom as envisaged by Netaji — the ideal which motivated him to wrest it from the hands of the British by the force of arms.

    In his entire political career, Subhas Chandra Bose was guided by two cardinal principles in his quest for his country’s emancipation: that there could be no compromise with alien colonialists on the issue, and that on no account would the country be partitioned. The Indian geographical unity was to be maintained at all costs.

    As we have already seen, the unfortunate turn of events during World War II prevented Netaji’s dream of his victorious march to Delhi at the head of his Indian National Army from becoming a reality.

    In his and his army’s absence in a post-war India, politicians under the leadership of Gandhi and Nehru did exactly what Netaji never wanted: they negotiated and compromised with the British on the issue of freedom, and in their haste to get into power, agreed to a formula of partitioning India presented to them by the British.

    The transfer of power was followed by two more developments that were alien to Netaji’s philosophy and his blueprint for a free India: introduction of a parliamentary democratic system by Nehru and his decision to keep India in the British Commonwealth of Nations.

    It was a truncated freedom, achieved over the bloodbath of millions who had perished in fratricidal religious rioting during the process of partition, as the erstwhile India emerged on the world map as the two nations of India and Pakistan.

    Even so, the fragmented freedom that fell as India’s share after the British had skilfully played their age-old game of divide and rule came not as a result of Gandhi’s civil disobedience and non-violent movement as the court historians would have us believe; nor was it due to persistent negotiations by Nehru and other Indian National Congress leaders on the conference table, which the British found so easy to keep stalling. The British finally quit when they began to feel the foundations of loyalty being shaken among the British Indian soldiers-the mainstay of the colonial power-as a result of the INA exploits that became known to the world after the cessation of hostilities in East Asia.

    Ramesh Chandra Majumdar, the eminent Indian historian who passed away recently, and who by virtue of his challenges to several historical myths can rightly be called the Dean of new historians in India, observed in his book Three Phases of India’s Struggle for Freedom:

    There is, however, no basis for the claim that the Civil Disobedience Movement directly led to independence. The campaigns of Gandhi … came to an ignoble end about fourteen years before India achieved independence … During the First World War the Indian revolutionaries sought to take advantage of German help in the shape of war materials to free the country by armed revolt. But the attempt did not succeed. During the Second World War Subhas Bose followed the same method and created the INA. In spite of brilliant planning and initial success, the violent campaigns of Subhas Bose failed … The Battles for India’s freedom were also being fought against Britain, though indirectly, by Hitler in Europe and Japan in Asia. None of these scored direct success, but few would deny that it was the cumulative effect of all the three that brought freedom to India. In particular, the revelations made by the INA trial, and the reaction it produced in India, made it quite plain to the British, already exhausted by the war, that they could no longer depend upon the loyalty of the seapoys for maintaining their authority in India. This had probably the greatest influence upon their final decision to quit India.[44]

    Despite Japan’s defeat and the consequent withering away of the Indian National Army on the India-Burma front, both Subhas Chandra Bose and his INA became household names throughout the country as the returning soldiers were sought to be prosecuted by the British. By then, the Congress leadership under Gandhi and Nehru had pre-empted itself, and the year 1945 seemed relatively calm and uneventful. However, Netaji and his legend worked up a movement all over the country which even a Gandhi could never produce. Echoing this mass upsurge Michael Edwardes wrote in his Last Years of British India:

    The Government of India had hoped, by prosecuting members of the INA, to reinforce the morale of the Indian army. It succeeded only in creating unease, in making the soldiers feel slightly ashamed that they themselves had supported the British. If Bose and his men had been on the right side-and all India now confirmed that they were-then Indians in the Indian army must have been on the wrong side. It slowly dawned upon the Government of India that the backbone of the British rule, the Indian army, might now no longer be trustworthy. The ghost of Subhas Bose, like Hamlet’s father, walked the battlements of the Red Fort (where the INA soldiers were being tried), and his suddenly amplified figure overawed the conference that was to lead to independence.[45]

    Apart from revisionist historians, it was none other than Lord Clement Atlee himself, the British Prime Minster responsible for conceding independence to India, who gave a shattering blow to the myth sought to be perpetuated by court historians, that Gandhi and his movement had led the country to freedom. Chief justice P.B. Chakrabarty of Calcutta High Court, who had also served as the acting Governor of West Bengal in India, disclosed the following in a letter addressed to the publisher of Dr. R.C. Majumdar’s book A History of Bengal. The Chief Justice wrote:

    You have fulfilled a noble task by persuading Dr. Majumdar to write this history of Bengal and publishing it … In the preface of the book Dr. Majumdar has written that he could not accept the thesis that Indian independence was brought about solely, or predominantly by the non-violent civil disobedience movement of Gandhi. When I was the acting Governor, Lord Atlee, who had given us independence by withdrawing the British rule from India, spent two days in the Governor’s palace at Calcutta during his tour of India. At that time I had a prolonged discussion with him regarding the real factors that had led the British to quit India. My direct question to him was that since Gandhi’s “Quit India” movement had tapered off quite some time ago and in 1947 no such new compelling situation had arisen that would necessitate a hasty British departure, why did they have to leave? In his reply Atlee cited several reasons, the principal among them being the erosion of loyalty to the British Crown among the Indian army and navy personnel as a result of the military activities of Netaji. Toward the end of our discussion I asked Atlee what was the extent of Gandhi’s influence upon the British decision to quit India. Hearing this question, Atlee’s lips became twisted in a sarcastic smile as he slowly chewed out the word, “m-i-n-i-m-a-l!”[46]

    When the new version of the history of the Twentieth Century India, and especially the episode of the country’s unique struggle for independence comes to be written, it will no doubt single out but one person who made the most significant and outstanding contribution among all his compatriots toward the emancipation of his motherland from the shackles of an alien bondage. During World War II this man strode across two continents like a colossus, and the footsteps of his army of liberation reverberated through the forests and plains of Europe and the jungles and mountains of Asia. His armed assaults shook the very foundations of the British Empire. His name was Subhas Chandra Bose.


    Notes

    1. Bose, Subhas Chandra, The Indian Struggle 1920-1942, New York: Asia Publishing House, 1964, p. 318.
    2. Ibid., pp. 419-422, 431-432.
    3. Ganpuley, N.G., Netaji in Germany: A Little-known Chapter, Bombay, Bharatiya Vidya Bhavan, 1959, p. 63
    4. Ibid., pp. 63-64.
    5. Toye, Hugh, The Springing Tiger, London, Cassell, 1959, p. 63.
    6. Ibid., p. 70.
    7. Lebra, Joyce C., Jungle Alliance: Japan and the Indian National Army. Singapore, Asia Pacific Library, p. 110.
    8. The Goebbles Diaries, 1942-1943, Edited, translated and with an introd. by Louis P. Lochner, Westport, Conn., Greenwood Press, 1970, p. 107.
    9. Ibid., P. 123.
    10. Ibid., p. 211.
    11. Toys, Hugh, op. cit., pp. 72-73.
    12. Ibid., p. 75.
    13. Seifriz, Adalbert, In Preface to Ganpuley’s Netaji in Germany.
    14. Sopan, pseud., Ed., Netaji Subhas Chandra Bose. His Life and Work. Bombay, Azad Bhandar, 1946, pp. 281-282, 284.
    15. Ganpuley, N.G., op. cit., p. 153.
    16. Staatsmaenner und Diplomaten bei Hitler, Part Two, Edited by Andreas Hillgrueber, Frankfurt am Main, Bernard & Graefe fuer Wehrwesen, 1970.
    17. Maryama Shizuo, Nakano Gakko, Tokyo, 1948, p. 120
    18. Subhas Chandra Bose and Japan, 4th section, Asian Bureau, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Govt. of Japan, 1956.
    19. A Beacon Across Asia: A Biography of Subhas Chandra Bose. Ed.in-chief: Sisir K. Bose, New Delhi, Orient Longman, 1973, p. 143.
    20. Lebra, Joyce C., op. cit., p. 51.
    21. Subhas Chandra Bose and Japan, op. cit.
    22. [??? Not included in original, the webmaster]
    23. Ghosh, K. K., The Indian National Army: Second Front of the Indian Independence Movement, Meerut, Meenakshi Prakashan, 1969, pp. 127-128.
    24. A Beacon Across Asia, op. cit., p. 167.
    25. Ghosh, K. K., op. Cit., p. 135.
    26. Press Statement, 19 June 1943.
    27. Sopan, op. cit., p. 313.
    28. Sivaram, M., The Road to Delhi, Rutland, Vt., C.E. Tuttle Co., 1967, pp. 122-123.
    29. Ibid., pp. 123-124.
    30. A Beacon Across Asia, op. cit., p. 178.
    31. Toyle, Hugh, op. cit., p. go.
    32. Ibid., p. 91.
    33. A Beacon Across Asia, op. cit., p. 196.
    34. Ibid., p. 200.
    35. Toye, Hugh, op. cit., p. 103.
    36. A Beacon Across Asia, op. cit., p. 203.
    37. Arun, pseud., Ed., Testament of Subhas Bose, Delhi, Rajkamal Pub., 1946, p. 170.
    38. A Beacon Across Asia, op. cit., p. 205.
    39. Lebra, Joyce C., op. cit., p. 150.
    40. British Armed Forces in the Second World War, Combined Interservices Historical Section, 1958.
    41. Lebra, Joyce C., op. cit., p. 158.
    42. Ibid., pp. 190-191.
    43. Calvocoressi, Peter, and Guy Wint, The Total War: the Story of World War II, New York, Pantheon Books, 1972, pp. 801-802.
    44. Majumdar, R.C., Three Phases of India’s Struggle for Freedom, Bombay, Bharatiya Vidya Bhavan, 1967, pp. 58-59.
    45. Edwardes, Michael, The Last Years of British India, Cleveland, World Pub. Co., 1964, p. 93.
    46. Majumdar, R. C., Jibanera Smritideepe, Calcutta, General Printers and Publishers, 1978, pp. 229-230, (quotation translated from original Bengali).

    Noticias de Rupia | Nouvelles de Roupie | Rupiennachrichten | новости рупии | 卢比新闻 | Roepienieuws | Rupi Nyheter | ルピーニュース | Notizie di Rupia | PAKISTAN LEDGER | پاکستاني کھاتا | Moin Ansari | معین آنصآرّی | DefensebriefsIntellibriefs Translate to: Page copy protected against web site content infringement by Copyscape Bookmark and Share Add to Technorati RSS feed: | RUPEE NEWS | October 15th, 2008 | Moin Ansari | معین آنصآرّی | اخبار روپیہ |

    October 14, 2008

    Why we created Pakistan? One Nation Theory vs Two Nation Theory:

    WHY WE CREATED PAKISTAN?

    The Indus Valley Civilization now known as Paksitan

    Pakistan existed 5000 years ago as the IVC

    Pakistan exsited 5000 Years ago as the IVCOn 16th of October, the Turkish Prime Minster went to the Turkish nation and asked them “when we needed them, the Pakistani Muslims were there for the Ottoman “khilafat”, today your brothers and sisters need you in their hour or need”. From across the great nation of Turkey, school girls, and old men, student and professionals gave and gave and gave. Turkey became the largest donor for the Earthquake relief.The 5000 year old ancient trade routes between Pakistan and China are being revived with modern freeways that were ocnstructed 20 years ago. 5000 years ago the Harrappan Pakistanis were trading with the Chinese
    The Pakistan Ideology

    “Pakistan” existed 5000 years ago. It was not called “Pakistan”. China 5000 years ago was also called something else. Egypt 5000 years ago was called something else.Pakistan//www.moinansari.wordpress.com

    by
    Moin-Ansari
    Original March 16th, 1996 and Updated February 7th, 2009

    | NEW YORK | RUPEE NEWS | March 16th, 1996 | Moin Ansari |

    Lest we forget the ideology of the Hinduvata Mahasab, let us quote it right here. Lest some dismiss it as a relic of the past, let us remind them that the BJP was in power in in Delhi and holds a major vote in the Lok and Rajha Saba. For those who may say that this quote is a historical anomoly belonging to the hsitory books, let us remind them that Mr. Narendar Modi, Mr. Adhvani and Mr. Bal Thackery have cloned themselves by the millions and this very same thinking was used to burn, rape and massacre more than 2000 Muslims in Gujarat just a few months ago.

    I declare that the future of the Hindu race, of Hindustan and of the Punjab, rests on these four pillars: (1) Hindu Sangathan, (2) Hindu Raj, (3) Shuddhi of Moslems, and (4) Conquest and Shuddhi of Afghanistan and the Frontiers. So long as the Hindu nation does not accomplish these four things, the safely of our children and great-grandchildren will be ever in danger, and the safety of the Hindu race will be impossible. The Hindu race has but one history, and its institutions are homogeneous. But the Musalmans and Christians are far removed from the confines of Hindustan, for their religions are alien and they love Persian, Arab and European institutions. Thus, just as one removes foreign matter from the eye, Shuddhi must be made of these two religions. Afghanistan and the hilly regions of the frontier were formerly part of India, but are at present under the domination of Islam. . . .Just as there is Hindu religion in Nepal, so there must be Hindu institutions in Afghanistan and the frontier territory; otherwise it is useless to win Swaraj. For mountain tribes are always warlike and hungry. If they become our enemies, the age of Nadirshah and Zamanshah will begin anew. At present English officers are protecting the frontiers; but it cannot always be. . . .If Hindus want to protect themselves, they must conquer Afghanistan and the frontiers and convert all the mountain tribes.” Pratap of Lahore, Lala Hardayal in 1925. Quoted by Dr. Ambedkar in his book “Pakistan”

    When there are problems in Pakistan many look at the government and think of the present administration in power as the state. While the head of every government boldly declares “Le etat c’est moi” (I am the state), all of us who are disenfranchised, suppressed, and repressed need to take a cold hard look at the government. We should understand the difference between he government and the state. The government could be evil but the state of Pakistan does not belong to the government, the state of Pakistan belongs to the people of Pakistan, it belongs to us. 5561st re-birthday! Congratualations to Indus Pakistanis

    Noticias de Rupia | Nouvelles de Roupie | Rupiennachrichten | новости рупии | 卢比新闻  | Roepienieuws | Rupi Nyheter | ルピーニュース  | Notizie di Rupia |  PAKISTAN LEDGERپاکستاني کھاتا | Moin Ansari | معین آنصآرّی | DefensebriefsIntellibriefs Translate to: Page copy protected against web site content infringement by Copyscape Bookmark and Share Add to Technorati RSS feed: | RUPEE NEWS | October 13th, 2008 | Moin Ansari |  معین آنصآرّی | اخبار روپیہ  |

    Neither the strife in FATA, nor the assassination of Benazir Bhutto, nor the  externally sponsored hooliganism and  killings in Swat that have become the hallmark of today’s news, nor the band of marauders and mercenaries that infiltrate our borders to create malaise and mayhem in our land, can detract us from remembering the anniversary of the day that we decided to create a land for the Muslims of the subcontinent—a land we later named Pakistan. Pakistan: Another Indian prophecy of doom. Here we go again. The first one came in 1947.

    THE PAKISTANI RESILIENCE IN THE FACE OF THREATS: Mountbatten, Nehru, Indira, Kruschev, Johnson, Carter, Kissinger (Nixon), Gobachov, Clinton, Armitage (Bush), Karzia (Bush and Vajpayee/Sing) have all threatened Pakistan: The Pakistanis are used to it…so what else is new?!! Pakistan’s Nuclear Program should be seen in the backdrop of these threats.The capacity of Pakistan to sustain some fifteen major disarticulations in polity, power, and structure and still preserve a national identity is a phenomenon one is tempted to explain by recourse to the supernatural.

    Pakistan which has been pummelled by external events (three wars with India, secession of Bangladesh, 3.5 million Afghan refugees) and disrupted by internal fissures (4 periods of martial law totalling 27 years and ethnic violence in Sindh) to a degree which no other state established since 1945 has suffered. In this respect it stands as an exemplar of a nation whose adversities “common sense” might suggest make its viability impossible.

    Yet its continued existence defies the reality induced by such speculation. The enormity and persistence of these difficulties and the resilience of the nation in absorbing and somehow surviving them must be regarded with awe if not admiration.” RALPH BRAIBANTI

    This salute is dedicated to the 1200 men and women who died defending our borders as well as the thousands who were innocent victims of aggression on our shores. In-spite of the murders, and in-spite of the bombs, life in Pakistan goes on, and the Crescent and the Star flutters  high on our sky scrapers and pulsates proud in our hearts. Let this  anniversary of our Lahore resolution be a lesson to our enemies, that we remember our dedication to our cause, and promise to keep the dream of our fathers of our nation, Jinnah, Liaqat-Ali Khan and Iqbal alive.

    Trail of freedom from the bowels of hell in Bharat to freedom in Pakistan

    Trail of freedom from the bowels of hell in Bharat to freedom in Pakistan

    We remember the 1 million lives lost in creating a country, and also rededicate ourselves to the fact that “Pakistan manzil nahin, Nishan e Manzil hai”. Thatmanzil was defined by Iqbal, Liaqat, Jinnah and many others who carry the banner in the land of the Crescent and Star. Despite some impediments we have not lost track of the “manzil“. Pakistan as it existed 5000 years ago

    \'India is no more a country than the Equator\'.Winston Churchill
    ‘India is no more a country than the Equator’.Winston Churchill

    British Empire The British Indian Empire included Iraq, Aden, Somalia, Burma, and more than 500 states of the Subcontinent

    British Indian EmpireThe British Empire spanning continentsSubcontinent in 1857Pre Sepeartion map of the Subcontinent

    The Muslim majority areas of the Subcontinent should have been part of Pakistan. Many Muslims wanted to stay and fight in the “Darul Harb” ’till it was changed to “Darul islam“. (notice islam with lower case “i” which depicts islam=peace). The Quaid’s vision was to separate based on demographics. Separation should have been based on this map

    Patel and others cheated us out of a real separation.

    The more than 500 states in the SubcontinentThe more then 500 independent princely states of the Subcontinent

    Princely statesHydrabad state wanted to stay independentThe State of Hyderabad wanted to stay independent after 1948 but was run over by Patel

    Baroda stateThe Princely state of Bombay Presidency

    Bombay PresidencyThe Princely state of Baroda

    chaudhy-rehmat-alis-pakistan-plan-1940.jpgBefore separation

    Map of India and Pakistan After separation

    After the Muslims won the right for separate electorates, Jinnah supported the Dalits to get the same right. This was wholeheartedly opposed by Mr. Mohandas Gandhi. In the Round Table Conferences in 1930-32, the concept of separate electorates for the Untouchables  and Dalits was raised by Dr. B. R. Ambedkar, as a way to ensure sufficient representation for the minority Dalits, in government.

    … Gandhi was a so-called “high caste”. High castes represent at small minority in India, some 10-15 percent of the population, yet dominate Indian society in much the same way whites ruled South Africa during the official period of Apartheid. Dalits often use the phrase Apartheid in India when speaking about their problems.

    .. Gandhi’s main critic and political opponent, Dr. Ambedkar, for whom our journal is named and the first Dalit in history to receive an education ..

     

    AIML session 1936The All India Muslim League session of 1936

    1938 RESOLUTION ASKED FOR SEPARATION:Even earlier in 1938 Sir Abdullah Haroon moved a resolution for establishing independent Muslim states in the north-west and eastern zones. The word states continued to be used in subsequent sessions of the All India Muslim League till about 1943. Originally the two zones were meant to be autonomous and sovereign and it was only when the British and the Hindus insisted that Punjab and Bengal were to be partitioned that Pakistan began to be talked about as one state.

    Pakistani flagTHE PAKISTAN RESOLUTION OF 1940: The Lahore Resolution (later known as the Pakistan Resolution) The Lahore resolution moved by Fazlul Haq at the 27th Session of the All India Muslim League, at Lahore on March 23, 1940 stated:

    Lahore Resolution Minar e Pakistan or Yaadgar e Qarardad e pakistan“that geographically contagious units are demarcated into regions which should be so constituted, with such territorial adjustments as may be necessary, that the areas in which the Muslims are in a majority, as in the north-west and eastern zones of India, should be grouped to constitute independent states in which the constituent units shall be autonomous and sovereign.”

    What is the Two Nation Theory exactly? The moniker “‘two’ ‘nation’ ‘theory’” is a misnomer. The theory of nationalities states that “India does not have a homogeneous population”.  There are many racial, ethnic and linguistic groups in India. India is not a national state, India is not a country, but a  sub-continent composed of “nationalities”. The two nation theory clearly states that that there are several nationalities in the subcontinent, and the Hindus and the Muslims are the largest of the two nations.  Hindus and Muslims are different therefore Muslim majority areas must exist separately. Chaudry Rehmat Ali’s “Pakistan proposal asked for SEVERAL MUSLIM STATES  in the subcontinent.”

    Continent of Dinia and dependencies

    In this document a map of India has also been published showing India split into different states, named as Pakistan, Guruistan, Usmanistan, Bangsamispan, Hindoostan comprising Rajistan, Kathiwar, Maharashtra, Rajistan and Dravidia. This pamphlet was reproduced in 1934  (Ref: The Great Divide by H. V. Hodson page 81). Karakal Pakistan’ existed as autonomous region of USSR.

    He claimed that the destiny of whole Millat in the continent of “Dinia” (changed name of India) and its dependencies lies in the integration of Muslims into 10 countries: Pakistan, Bangistan, Usmanistan, Siddiqistan, Faruqistan, Haideristan, Muistan, Maplistan, Saristan, Nasarastan and than to be coordinated into Pak. Common Wealth of Nations.

    • Hanoodia:243 principalities or Rajwaras
    • Hindoostan: Rajistan, Kathiwar, Mahrashtra, Rajistan and Dravidia
    • Saristan
    • Nasarastan
    • Haideristan
    • Siddiqistan
    • “Pakistan” (P=Punjab, A=Afghania, K=Kashmir, I=Islam, TAN=Baluchistan) in the Northwest including Kashmir, Delhi and Agra: “
    • Bangistan” in Bengal:
    • “Osmanistan” in Hyderabad; “Siddiquistan” in Bundelhand and Malwa; “
    • Faruqistan” in Bihar and Orissa: “
    • Haideristan” in UP: “
    • Muinistan” in Rajasthan: “
    • Maplistan” in Kerala:
    • “Safiistan” in “Western Ceylon” and “Nasaristan” in “Eastern Ceylon”, etc.

    The map was published by Rahmat Ali in 1934 and came to be widely circulated in his pamphlet called “Now or Never” among the Muslims of the Subcontinent.

    Rahmat Ali was disgusted at the bias of the British and referred the “British-Banya alliance” presumably in  He even declined to refer to an “India” as having ever existed at all and instead called the subcontinent  “Dinia”, and the oceans and the seas around India as the “Pakian Sea”, the “Osmanian Sea” etc. He urged the Dalits, Sikhs, Buddhists to rise up against the Hindus. In in  “Sikhistan” he asked them to be independent. He urged all of the supressed peoples  to rise up against supression.

    Chaudhry rehmat Ali asked for the Muslim majority areas to be seperated from the rest of states.Chaudhry rehmat Ali Now or NeverThis is what we asked for.

    The two nation theory enunciates that the subcontinent is made of several nationalities, the Hindus and the Muslims being the largest of the two. India is as big as Western Europe and contains many many racial, religious, linguistic, and ethnic groups. The Hindus and the Muslims are two separate nations, in terms of diet, attitude, social behavior, economic tendencies, social interaction, behaviors, and attitude.We were cheated out of this.

    ANALYSIS OF THE TWO NATION THEORY:
    The two nation theory enunciates that the subcontinent is made of several nationalities, the Hindus and the Muslims being the largest of the two. India is as big as Western Europe and contains many many racial, religious, linguistic, and ethnic groups. The Hindus and the Muslims are two separate nations, in terms of diet, attitude, social behavior, economic tendencies, social interaction, behaviors, and attitude.

    According to many Pakistanis “The two nation theory did not solve all the problems of the subcontinent. However it did save 200 million Muslims (those emancipated in Pakistan and Bangladesh) from social economic and political servitude. The servitude is proven by the decadent condition of Indian Muslims in a “secular” Indian state. Perhaps it sacrifices 150 million Indian Muslims. But the alternative was 450 million Muslims in servitude.” “Secularism” in “India” means “Hinduism Light.

    Nationhood is defined as the tendency of a nation to exist. No two nations have the same reason to exist. USA and Canada exist separately, though you may think that both nations have English speaking population, with similar accents, similar religions, similar culture, similar economic structures, and similar racial and ethnic backgrounds. Do you hear America question the validity of Canada to exist. I believe that the USA has the power to take over Canada, if it really wanted to. BUT the USA recognizes the right of the Canadians to exist separately.

    Pakistan before separationTHE TWO NATION THEORY & THREE STATES: The Two Nation theory cannot be debunked because there are more then one Muslim country in the subcontinent. The Hindu nation lives in more than one country (India, Nepal, Sikkim, Bhutan, Burma, Sri Lanka, Laos, Cambodia, Malaysia, Indonesia, Singapore, Bangladesh). The Chinese nation lives in several states (Taiwan, China, Singapore, Malaysia, Indonesia). Similarly the Muslim nation (transcending all racial, ethnic, caste and linguistic boundaries) can live in several states. There are several Arab Muslim countries too. The country of Pakistan as a unified Muslim country in the subcontinent was actually asked for the Bengali nationalists. Jinnah acquiesced.

    The “Nationalistic” Indian attitude towards the TNT: Many modern Indians have a what Pakistanis consider a “strange” attitude. Pakistan should not exist, because it would be better for Indian Muslims, better for Indian Hindus, better for Pakistanis. Pakistanis ask “How do they know it would be better for us?” And who are they to judge our feelings, and tell us what is better for our nation?” If a nation is defined “as a tendency of a people to seek a country”then the Muslims of the Subcontinent are a nation. They point out to one insignificant point or the other in Pakistan to devalue the “raisan d’etre” of Pakistani nationhood. This attitude spell perpetual warfare.

    PAKISTANI NATIONHOOD: Pakistanis justify the existence of the country by explaining that “India was never ONE NATION. India is as big as Western Europe and has more nationalities than Europe. The subcontinent has always been a conglomeration of states and nationalities. If one looks at the “Indian” map during the Mughal era, or during Vikramadatya’s era, one will see dozens, sometimes hundreds of STATES. Pakistanis believe that “Akhand Bharat” was a figment of the imagination of Gandhi and the Jan Sangh. Just because the British called it India, does not mean that it was one nation ever or will be one nation ever.”

    Plutarch expressed this sentiment well some centuries ago: “A conqueror is always a lover of peace. He would like to make his entry into your cities unopposed.” Does India talk peace in the Plutarchian sense?

    SUMMARY AND ABSTRACT ON SOUTH ASIAN SCHISMS
    This article presents the arguments of political stratification and nation forming that were in the air in the Forties. The arguments against the Subcontinental nationhood are discussed at length. The arguments for a Pakistani nation are analyzed in depth. Arguments from both sides are presented and refuted.

    The history of the creation of India and Pakistan is not always in teleological progression. We have lost a lot of history by tracing our history by traveling through chronological diaries and self aggrandizing biographies. Neither Pakistani  nor Indian history books have done an adequate job of tracing our roots. Neither explain “partition” properly.

    The Pakistani text books ignore Hindu contributions to our common struggle against colonialism, and seem ashamed of the common lineage with Hindus—(Indus Valley, Buddhism), Pakistani historical narratives underplay the role of the nationalist Indian Muslim leadership, Jauhar, Azad and Suhrawardi, and over emphasize the importance of the RSS and Jan Sangh. Pakistani textbooks ignore the Sufi contributions to our struggle of independence and restrict discussion of Sufiism to Shah Waliullah and a few others.

    The Indian textbooks fail to see the Pakistan movement as a provincial and minority rebellion against the Nehruite Marxist-Leninist Federalism that was the hall mark of the INC. The Indian textbooks fail to mention the three wings of Congress, the Nehruite secular wing led by Nehru, the fundamentalist and communal wing led by Rai, the religious wing led by Gandhi, and the extreme nationalist wing led by Patel. The Bharat text books fail to recognize that fact that Gandhi was and was seen as a religious leader by  the minorities and by a large section of the Hindu populace. The Indian text books over glorify many Hindu periods, fail to mention the Hindu Buddhist wars, diminish Brahamanism and Brahamanic cruelties towards non-Brahmans, relegate the Mughal era to the greatness of Akbar, ignore the Hindu communal organizations, demonize Muslim leaders who differed with Gandhi, brand secular and moderate Muslim leadership of the Muslim League as communal leaders, overlook the frailties of the INC leadership that led to the Hindu-Muslim schism, and fail to recognize the radical non-secular part of the Congress that scared the minorities.

    The Indian textbooks neglect to mention the accomplishments of the Muslim League Muslim leadership that tried to safeguard the interests of the Indian Muslim minorities by fighting for separate electorates for the Muslims, and tried to guarantee the rights of the minorities through the Cabinet Mission Plan and by demanding one third of the representation in parliament. This ingenious plan would have guaranteed a fair and equitable settlement. However vested interests in the INC would not allow this.

    The article has some in-bred biases towards the Pakistani point of view. No apologies are given for this slant. The purpose of the article is not convince people, simply to present facts and analysis.

    THE FORTIES: THE THEORIES IN AIR
    Freedom is in the air. The Union Jack is to come down. How do wedeal with independence? Are we mature enough to behave as civilized nations? The years preceding our independence was an intense time. The Freedom Movement created many leaders and many movements. Neither the Muslims nor the Hindus nor the Sikhs were monolithic groups. Each political group had many leaders. Many times the leadership seemed to head in different directions. The Harrow-Eaton Oxbridge led INC under the leadership of Motilal Nehru was a very different Congress. The INC led by his son Jawaharlal Nehru was a very different INC.

    The INC had several factions that split and made up. Similarly the Muslim Movement had factions and grouping in it. Disgruntled elements in each of  the major parties went and formed their own political parties and contested the elections. Each group had sub-groupings and subdivisions. There were more than 550 states in the Subcontinent. The Forties gave us the opportunity to forge a country in the Subcontinent or create many nations. As a people we failed to remain at peace. As countries we failed to keep the peace. As nations we failed to usher in an era of prosperity into the Subcontinent. Today let history teach us some lessons.

    Most readers are familiar withGandhi’s great hunger strike against the so called Poona Pact in 1933. The matter which Gandhi was protesting, nearly unto death at that, was the inclusion in the draft Indian Constitution, proposed by the British, that reserved the right of Dalits to elect their own leaders. Dr. Ambedkar, with his degree in law from Cambridge, had been chosen by the British to write the new constitution for India. Having spent his life overcoming caste-based discrimination, Dr. Ambedkar had come to the conclusion that the only way Dalits could improve their lives is if they had the exclusive right to vote for their leaders, that a portion or reserved section of all elected positions were only for Dalits and only Dalitscould vote for these reserved positions.

    Separate electorate was vehemently opposed by Mahatma Gandhi on the grounds that the move would disintegrate Hindu society. If the Dalits had gotten a separate electorate, this would have ensured certain constituencies which would have been reserved for them. Only the Dalits would have been able to vote for the candidates contesting those seats. This would have given them real leaders and real participation in the elections.

    Gandhi was determined to prevent this and went on hunger strike to change this article in the draft constitution. After many communal riots, where tens of thousands of Dalitswere slaughtered, and with a leap in such violence predicted if Gandhi died, Dr. Ambedkaragreed, withGandhi on his death bed, to give up the Dalits right to exclusively elect their own leaders and Gandhi ended his hunger strike.

    Later, on his own death bed, Dr. Ambedkar would say this was the biggest mistake in his life, that if he had to do it all over again, he would refuse to give up Dalitonly representation, even if it meant Gandhi’s death.

    ONT VS. TNT:
    The Two Nation Theory is in direct contradiction of the One Nation Theory. There were proponents of the One Nation Theory in the Indian National Congress and many Muslims believed in the One Nation Theory. Similarly there were many Congressional Leaders that believed in the Two Nation Theory. There were many variations of the TNT and there were many variations of the ONT . On the one hand the TNT espoused many countries in the Subcontinent, on the other is espoused two countries.

    Rama Rajha vs Darul Islam:
    The ONT had many variations too. There were fundamentalist minority of Muslims who also supported the ONT and had declared India as “Darul Harb” (Area of war) with a view to convert it to “Darul Islam” (Area of peace).  The religious right espoused  a religious Brahman theocracy based on the dharma. “Ram Rajha” were proposed with forced eviction and/or conversion of all Non-Hindus by some of the fundamentalist parties on the right.

    United States of India vs. Mahabharta vs India and Pakistan
    There were the secular versions of the ONT and there were many that propagated a United States of India. The secular and moderate wings of the Congress and the Muslims won the day, and the fundamentalist on both sides lost the elections.

    POST TRAUMATIC STRESS DISORDER: India had 400 million people. The Muslims were a minority, and because of colonialism had lost the political power in the Subcontinent. The British had taken actions to snatch the control from the Muslims at all echelons of power. The Muslims were demoralized, penury-stricken and were unable to compete with the the more affluent and more educated Hindus. Separate electorates allowed them to elect their own representatives, but the fear of “majoratarianism” scared the minority. Indian “democracy” still does not have any safeguards to prevent “majoratarianism” from dictating to the minority. Requests for one third seats in parliament were not acceptable to the Indian National Congress, and though on many occasions agreements were reached, pressures within the Congress did not allow the agreements to materialize.

    The Cabinet Mission Planwas the closest the INC came to an agreement with the Muslim League. It was under these circumstances that they marched for freedom. The following narrative helps us remember the historical chronology and the ideological battles that were waged then and are being waged now over the internet.

    The supporters of  the TNT won the elections and won the arguments, and the believers of the ONT lost the elections. The INC and the Jamat e Islami were rejected by the Muslims. The TNT became fact and the ONT remains a fascination by many. These pages will distinguish the origins of the ONT and the TNT.

    POST INDEPENDENCE PRESSURES VALIDATE THE TNT: Post-independence chronologies have shown us that religious pressures in both India and Pakistan have forced the moderate parties to take religious decisions. Today in India moderate Pakistani parties like the Muslims League characterized as communal. Today in Pakistan and moderate parties like the Congress are characterized as religious parties.

    THE 360 VIEW: STATES FORMED ON THE BASIS OF RELIGION
    Pakistan of course is not the only sate formed on the basis of religion.

    Throughout history there have been states formed on the basis of religion. The Holy Roman Empire, The Turkish Ottoman Empire, Lebanon, Israel, the Federated/ Confederated Republic of Cypriot Turks, and more recently Bosnia have all been formed on the basis of religion. Many of these states survived for centuries and indeed thrived. The basis of many “states” in the Indian Republic is indeed based on religion (though this is usually disguised). Haryana is one prime example of a state that was separated from the Punjab on the basis of religion. Sindh, was divided on the basis of religion with the cognizance and approval of the Indian National Congress.

    BANGLADESH AS THIRD COUNTRY IN THE TWO NATIONS The creation of Bangladesh is the fulfilled prophecy of the Lahore Resolution. The TNT  is not affected by the creation of Bangladesh. Pakistanis claim that “The Two Nation theory cannot be debunked because there are more then one Muslim country in the subcontinent.”  The Hindu nation lives in more than one country (India, Nepal, Sikkim, Bhutan, Burma, Sri Lanka, Laos, Cambodia, Malaysia, Indonesia, Singapore, Bangladesh). The Chinese nation lives in several states (Taiwan, China, Singapore, Malaysia, Indonesia). Similarly  the Muslim nation (transcending all racial, ethnic, caste and linguistic boundaries) can live in several states. There are several Arab Muslim countries too.

    The country of Pakistan as a unified Muslim country in the subcontinent was actually asked for the Bengali nationalists. Jinnah acquiesced Bangladesh faces the same religious pressures as Pakistan with regard to religion. The separation from Pakistan was cognizance of a geo-political reality and the development of minority and regional rights, the same rights that Jinnah tired to guarantee in his famous Fourteen Points. The TNT and Jinnah sought a weak center and strong provincial rights. Neither India which bases it provinces and states on linguistics AND RELIGION, nor Pakistan,  nor Bangladesh nor Sri Lanka have been able to resolve the question of religious and ethnic minorities. The creation of Banglasdesh, the de facto division of Sri Lanka and the “special status” accorded to Kashmiris within India are indeed recognition of the TNT in its various forms. Jamaat wants BD to be declared an Islamic state :

    01 May 1997, Thursday,  23, Zilhaj 141720 DHAKA, April 30: Bangladesh’s Jamaat-i-Islam party on Wednesday renewed its demand for the country to be declared an Islamic state.20 “The constitution must recognize the sovereignty of God through declaring  the country an Islamic Republic,” Jamaat’s secretary general Matiur Rahman Nizami told reporters .20 Nizami said the 10-month-old government of Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina Wajed had failed to play a “positive role” in political and socio-economic areas and said law and order had severely deteriorated over the past few months.20 “We think everybody is worried at the present situation of the country,”he said and announced a two-month campaign beginning on Thursday to drum up support for Jamaat’s demands for an Islamic state. Jamaat backed Awami League during its campaign against the BNP government of former prime minister Khaleda Zia, who resigned in May last year.97AFP20

    GANDHI ON CREATION OF PAKISTAN
    In an interesting book called “Birds of a feather flock together” by Anwar Shaikh the author says the following:

    “The fact that the Indians did not have to fight the British for freedom, absolves them of the usually leveled charge of divide and rule. The British ruled several communities and they were politically and morally obliged to give a fair healing to all of them. It was the attitudes of mutual hatred, which contributed to the communal divisions, but came to be ascribed to the British. This is the truth that Gandhi described when he said:

    ….but if both of us – Hindus and Muslims – cannot agree on anything else the Viceroy is left with no choice .

    It was not the British, who divided India: it is the Congress and the League that had agreed to partition as the solution and Mountbatten was not to blame”.Gandhi assured .

    THE ONT PROPONENTS: THE NATIONALISTIC INDIAN ATTITUDE TOWARDS THE TNT:
    Many modern Indians have a what Pakistanis consider a “strange” attitude. Pakistan should not exist, because it would be better for Indian Muslims, better for Indian Hindus, better for Pakistanis. Pakistanis retort 93How  do they know it would be better for us? And who are they to judge our feelings, and tell us what is better for our nation? If a nation is defined as a tendency of a people to seek a country then the Muslims of the Subcontinent are a nation. Pakistanis justify the existence of the country by explaining that 93India was never ONE NATION. India is as big as Western Europe and has more nationalities than Europe. The subcontinent has always been a conglomeration of states and nationalities. If one looks at the ‘Indian’ map during the Mughal era, or during Vikramadatya’s era, one will see dozens, sometimes hundreds of STATES. Pakistanis believe that “Akhand Bharat” was a figment of the imagination of Gandhi and the Jan Sangh. Just because the British called it India, does not mean that it was one nation ever or will be one nation ever.

    “THE PAKISTAN IDEOLOGY”  EXPLAINS “WHY PAKISTAN?: For those who TRULY want to understand Pakistanis, let us go over the excerpts from: Ideology of Pakistan by Prof. Saeeduddin Ahmad Dar

    The Muslims of South Asia are  a  nation  in  the modern sense of the  word; The basis of their nationhood  is  neither  territorial, nor racial, nor linguistic nor ethnic; They are a nation because they profess the same faith Islam; They are entitled to self-determination. The areas where they (Muslims) are in dominant majority should be constituted into sovereign states/state; Wherein they should be enabled to order their lives in individual and collective spheres in accord with  the teachings and requirements of Islam asset out in Holy Quran and Sunna; and The state should endeavour to strengthen the bonds of unity among Muslim countries. The Ideology of Pakistan stems from the instinct of the Muslim Community of South Asia to maintain its individuality by resisting all attempts to absorb it by the Hindu society. They  believe that Islam is incompatible with Hinduism. Historical experience  has shown that Islam and Hinduism have two different social orders and given birth to two distinct cultures and that there is no meeting point between the two.

    TNT: WHY PAKISTAN
    Let us give you a skeleton argument of WHY Pakistan was needed. The creation of Pakistan can be explained in the following sentences:

    • a) The Lahore Resolution proposed 2 Muslim states in the subcontinent and India in the middle in accordance with the Two Nation Theory.  Pakistanis believe that TNT is alive, EVEN After 1971 or else BD would have folded into India. Many nations live in more than ONE country. The Arabs (Libya and Egypt etc.) live in more than one country. The Hindu nation lives in more than one country (Nepal, Bhutan) etc., etc. Etc. The creation of Bangladesh does not negate the Nationalities Theory of the Subcontinent.
    • b) In 1947 Hindus in India controlled almost all parts of life in the Subcontinent. To emancipate the Muslims a SEPARATE quarantine (Green house where the economically depressed Muslims could be nurtured) area had to be created to allow MORE opportunity to the Muslims.
    • c)The Muslim League wanted a Muslim majority land because they feared that the Hindus would totally subjugate their Islamic entity. Most Pakistanis  feel that this has actually happened to the 100 million Muslims who were left  in India today.
    • d) The Muslim League did not want/plan a population transfer. However this did happen. Both sides blame each other. The population transfer took place.
    • e) If the population transfer had not taken place (and Pakistan still had  a 30% Hindu population), would Muslims have achieved something in Pakistan? Would Muslims have gotten a  free ride in business with Hindus  dominating  the businesses in Pakistan? The answer to these questions are not simple. If the Hindu majority towns in Pakistani Sind are any indication, there would have been no problem.
    • f) In 1945 the Congress accepted the Cabinet Mission Plan. So did the Muslim League. Then the Congress led by Jawaharlal Nehru made a volte face and rejected it. So then did the Muslim League. It was clear that Nehru did not want to risk the chance of the leadership of India going out of his hands. Nehru was as much responsible for Pakistan as Jinnah. If Pakistan had been created a multi-cultural multi-communal entity,  with the entire Punjab and the entire Bengal (as envisaged by Quaid-e-Azam) then we would have a very very different Subcontinent. We got what Quad-e-Azam called a 93moth-eaten-Pakistan94 (it was this moth-eaten Pakistan or nothing). It was very difficult for  this moth eaten Pakistan to survive (without any infra-structure, industries etc.). If a multi-cultural, multi-communal Pakistan had been allowed to evolve perhaps we would NOT have had three wars!

    THE ORIGINS OF THE TWO NATION THEORY AND THE TRANSITION TO THE NATIONALITIES FACT
    What started as the Nationalities theory was labeled “The two nation theory” and ended up as the SEVERAL NATIONALITIES FACT. The TNT has been around for centuries. Quaid-e-Azam,Mohammad Ali Jinnah on one occasion said that the struggle for Pakistan started when the first Muslim set foot on the shores of Sindh. This is what Al Beruni in his treatise Kitab-Ul-Hind about the differences he observed between the two communities: “The Hindus entirely differ from the Muslims in every respect. One might think that they had intentionally changed them into the opposite, for our customs do not resemble theirs”.

    Al Beruni enumerates the following reasons for the complete and entire isolation of the Muslims as a community from the Hindus: “All their (Hindu) fanaticism is directed against those who do  not belong to them. They (Hindus) call them (Muslims and others) impure, and forbid having any connection with them, be it inter-marriage, or by any other kind of relationship, or by sitting, eating, and drinking with them, because thereby they think why would be polluted”. In early eleventh century Al-Biruni observed:

    “In all matters and usages they (Hindus) differ from us (Muslims).

    He wrote:

    “They are totally differ from us in religion, as we believe in  nothing in which they believe and vice versa.”

    According  to Beruni:

    the  Hindus  considered  the  Muslim “Malachha” i.e. impure and for bid having  any connection with them, be it intermarriage or any bond  of  relations hip,  or  by sitting, eating and drinking with them, because thereby, they think they be polluted.

    Expressing his  views on Hindu-Muslim  relations in the twentieth century Quaid-i-Azam Muhammad  Ali  Jinnah  observed:

    The  Hindus  and Muslims belong to two  different  religious  philosophies,  social  customs  and literature. They neither intermarry,  nor interdine together, and indeed they  belong  to  two  different  civilizations   which   are  based  on conflicting ideas and conceptions. Their aspects on life  and of life are different.”

    TNT: DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE HINDUS AND MUSLIMS
    Here is a Pakistani patriot arguing about the differences between the two nations:

    “Dress codes between Hindus and Non-Hindus are apparent in any gathering, specially among women. Standards of modesty for women are very very different. We speak Urdu, you cleansed Urdu of all Persian and Arabic words and speak Hindi. Your literature consists of Tagore and others, ours of the later stages of Iqbal. Our heroes are your enemies (Auranzeb and Mahmud of Gazni). Our scoundrels are your heroes (Shivajee). Our  architecture is Moghal in nature- symmetrical with domes and minars. Yours is stupa shaped  and temple-like. Our temples are decorated with writings, yours are pictographic representations abhorrent to Muslims. Our civilization is traced from the deserts of Arabia, the sands of Persia and the fertile valley of the Indus.

    Yours is traced from  the depths of Somnath, and the war plains of the Ganges. Our names are different than yours. Our value systems are based on Judeo-Christian monothieism and the ten commandments. Yours are based on  a conglomerations of books that originated in Hindu mythology. Your laws are based on the Hindu Rashtra (or secularism), ours  on the ten commandments . We eat meat and relish beef. For you Sex is religious and requires display and celebration, for us sex is private and a duty for procreation. You are vegetarian and abhor beef . On religious holidays we pray and scrifice animals, you celebrate fire. We pray five times a day and want the aazaan to monitor our day, you go to temples every week. We pray towards Mecca, you go to pilgrimage to the Ganges. We bury our dead, you cremate them. We are all equal, you have a caste system. We share our foods, you cannot share between castes. We revere the widows, you used to burn them.We are required to slap back, you believe in ahmisa. We believe in heaven and hell, you believe in re-incarnation.”

    “Remember that ….we shall fight ,and we shall fight for 1,000 years as we have fought for 1,000 years in the past….we can continue ! ” (ZAB at the United Nations )

    HINDU ORIGINS OF THE TNT: The ” Two Nation Theory” had been in the Hindu pot since the 8th century and was formally enunciated by many in the Hindu Mahasab. Here is Mr. Sarvakar.

    Several infantile politicians commit the serious mistake in supposing that India is already welded into a harmonious nation, or that it could be welded thus for the mere wish to do so. These our well-meaning but unthinking friends take their dreams for realities. That is why they are impatient of communal tangles and attribute them to communal organizations. But the solid fact is that the so-called communal questions are but a legacy handed down to us by centuries of a cultural, religious and national antagonism between the Hindus and the Muslims. When the time is ripe you can solve them; but you cannot suppress them by merely refusing recognition of them. It is safer to diagnose and treat deep-seated disease than to ignore it. Let us bravely face unpleasant facts as they are. India cannot be assumed today to be a unitarian and homogeneous nation, but on the contrary these are two nations in the main, the Hindus and the Muslims in India.” Speaking at the Hindu Maha Sabha Session held at Ahmedabad in 1937, Mr. Savarkar. Quoted by Dr. Ambedkar in his book “Pakistan”

    I declare that the future of the Hindu race, of Hindustan and of the Punjab, rests on these four pillars: (1) Hindu Sangathan, (2) Hindu Raj, (3) Shuddhi of Moslems, and (4) Conquest and Shuddhi of Afghanistan and the Frontiers. So long as the Hindu nation does not accomplish these four things, the safely of our children and great-grandchildren will be ever in danger, and the safety of the Hindu race will be impossible. The Hindu race has but one history, and its institutions are homogeneous. But the Musalmans and Christians are far removed from the confines of Hindustan, for their religions are alien and they love Persian, Arab and European institutions. Thus, just as one removes foreign matter from the eye, Shuddhi must be made of these two religions. Afghanistan and the hilly regions of the frontier were formerly part of India, but are at present under the domination of Islam. . . .Just as there is Hindu religion in Nepal, so there must be Hindu institutions in Afghanistan and the frontier territory; otherwise it is useless to win Swaraj. For mountain tribes are always warlike and hungry. If they become our enemies, the age of Nadirshah and Zamanshah will begin anew. At present English officers are protecting the frontiers; but it cannot always be. . . .If Hindus want to protect themselves, they must conquer Afghanistan and the frontiers and convert all the mountain tribes.” Pratap of Lahore, Lala Hardayal in 1925. Quoted by Dr. Ambedkar in his book “Pakistan”

    Critics that accused Golwalkar of fascism have often pointed to his extreme right-wing and Anti-Muslim bigotry. In his 1939 book, “We, Our Nationhood Defined”, Golwalkar expressed praise of Hitler, saying:

    “To keep up the purity of the Race and its culture, Germany shocked the world by her purging the country of the semitic Races — the Jews. Race pride at its highest has been manifested here. Germany has also shown how well nigh impossible it is for Races and cultures, having differences going to the root, to be assimilated into one united whole, a good lesson for us in Hindusthan to learn and profit by.”

    “The Christians committed all sorts of atrocities on the Jews by giving them the label “Killers of Christ”. Hitler is not an exception but a culmination of the 2000-year long oppression of the Jews by the Christians.”MS Golwalkar, Bunch of Thoughts, Jagarana Prakashana, Bangalore, 1966, p.210

    As listed above it is Ironic that the TNT originated as a result of the parochial writings of major Hindu leaders like Mr. Savarkar, Haldi Ram, Golwaker, Lal Lajpat Rai who were proclaiming that Hindus and Muslims were separate nations and the Muslims should be expunged from the land of the Hindus. When the Muslims saw that the Hindus were targeting them, the Muslims decided to act.

    Contrary to the common belief that Jinnah originated the two-nation theory, actually it was Savarkar who propounded the theory years before the Muslim League embraced the idea. Savarkar had commanded all the Muslims to leave ‘Bharat’ to pave the way for the establishment of Hindu Rashtra. When Jinnah introduced his two-nation theory, Savarkar announced, “I have no quarrel with Mr. Jinnah’s two-nation theory… It is a historical fact that Hindus and Muslims are two nations.”

    “His (Savarkar’s) doctrine was Hindutva, the doctrine of Hindu racial supremacy, and his dream was of rebuilding a great Hindu empire from the sources of the Indus to those of the Brahmaputra. He hated Muslims. There was no place for them in the Hindu society he envisioned.” (Freedom at Midnight, by Dominique Lapierre and Larry Collins).

    So the hate campaign against Muslims was well in place even before the partition of erstwhile British India. This and many other significant factors forced Jinnah to demand a separate nation for Muslims as he believed that Muslims would not be safe in India — a prophetic declaration indeed! There is no denying the fact that Jinnah was secular to the marrow and would never have wished to cut ties with India, but circumstances compelled him to do so. However, he had not harbored grudges against India or its leaders. He had kept his house on Malabar Hill, thinking he could weekend there, while running his country from Karachi on weekdays, but destiny had something else in store for the estranged neighbors of the Asia Partition.

    When Nathuram Godse pumped three bullets into Gandhi, a section of the Hindu community compared him with Judas. The writing was on the wall. The divide was evident. In some areas people mourned the death of Gandhi, and in other areas they distributed sweets, held celebrations, and demanded the release of Godse. Gandhi’s crime was that he had demanded security for Muslims. Syed Alvi Teheran Times August 17th, 2008

    The seeds of partition were actually sown by the stalwarts of Hindu Mahasabha, primarily the quartet of Savarkar, Gawarikar, Apte, and Nathuram Godse. Independent India’s history is testimony to the fact that in a conflict between the forces of secular nationalism and religious communalism, the latter has always ruled the roost. Secular forces have more often than not ended up playing into the hands of communal forces. Such has been the history of independent India, and it is again on display in Jammu.

    The actual chronology was  not so simple. Most Leaguers realized the fact that initial the Congress had been a moderate and liberal party, but could the fate of the Muslims be trusted on the Nehru dynasty. Could other religious movements not overtake the INC secular ideology. Would majoritarianism not destroy the Muslim ethnicity? The result of their action was Pakistan. The historical basis of the TNT can be traced back to Shivajee. The TNT was proposed by Lala Rai. The TNT was formally articulated from the Muslim side by Sir Syed Ahmad Khan, then announced by the president of the Muslim Leagues Mohammad Iqbal in 1930. It was preached by Quaid-e-Azam and adopted by the  entire Muslim League. The TNT demanded the end of the artificial state called “India” that had been forced upon the people of the subcontinent by the British.

    BRITISH ORIGINS OF THE TNT: The division of Sub-Continent into different Federating Units has an old history. It was a British MP, John Bright, who immediately after mutiny in 1857 suggested that the Empire be broken up into several smaller states (Ref: Liberty or Death by Patiriek French P. 88) with complete autonomy, ultimately becoming independent states.

    MUSLIM ORIGINS OF THE TNT: Sir Sayyed Ahmed Khan and other reacted. John Bright again in 1877 clearly said ‘that after British withdrawal India will have five or six great independent sovereign states like those of Europe (Ref: Rahmat Ali by K. K. Aziz P.51 1987 Ed.).

    The TNT wanted the subcontinent to be returned to its pre-British status that existed through the centuries, the status that  had allowed many states to exist in the subcontinent. India had more than five hundred independent states even during the British colonial era. The Lahore Resolution demanded the partition of the subcontinent (and the creation of TWO Muslim states in the subcontinent) on the basis of the TNT in 1940. The TNT was proven in 1947 when India was “partitioned” and “India” returned to its natural and normal state, which consisted on many nation states. In 1947 the TNT  became the The Nationalities Law.

    BECAUSE OF THE FAULTY BOUNDARY COMMISSION MUSLIM LANDS WERE TRUNCATED AND MUSLIMS WERE ETHNICALLY CLEANSED OUT OF THEIR HOMES.

    “The greatest migration in history was the exchange of 11.5 million people between India and Pakistan in 1947 accompanied by the massacre of another half a million. The migration of 3.5 million Afghan refugees into Pakistan from 1979 to 1987 was almost as disruptive. The separation of Bangladesh was, until the dismemberment of the Soviet empire in 1991, the only successful secession of the post World War II era. Three wars with India over what is essentially a boundary dispute bloodied with ethnic cleansing in Kashmir, and now continued turbulence and terrorism based in part on drug distribution and in part on the presumption of the development of nuclear weapons capacity. Ralph Braiabnti

    PAKISTANI STABILITY:

    “The critical role of Pakistan as a factor in international stability and global politics can only be appreciated when it is placed in the context of a global resurgence of Islamic identity. The pre-eminent characteristic of Pakistan is its Muslim episteme. When established in 1947 in the name of Islam it was the most populous Muslim nation in the world. While the secession of Bangladesh in 1971 reduced it to second place after Indonesia, it remains one of the most conspicuously fervent of the fifty-four member states of the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC) that declare themselves constitutively Islamic. The invocation of Islam as its raison d’etre places Pakistan as one of the few nations, along with the United States, Israel and Saudi Arabia founded explicitly on religious doctrine rather than by historical accident or colonial invention. A realistic assessment of its role in the world requires a survey of its ideological universe – Ummah – the global commonwealth of Muslims.Ralph Braibanti.

    THREATS TO “INDIA”

    “Yet it is the India of Gandhi which remains in the American imagination and distorts at every angle our impressions of India and hence our view of Pakistan. Modern India unambiguously regards itself as the dominant power in the region. It has waged war with China, three wars with Pakistan, occupied the disputed territory of Jammu and Kashmir, annexed the Portuguese enclave of Goa, seized the princely Muslim state of Junagadh, annexed the Himalayan state of Sikkim, exerts political control over Nepal and Bhutan, intervened militarily in Pakistan’s civil war which established Bangladesh, intervenes in the Tamil-Sinhalese violence in Sri Lanka, continues to conflict with Pakistan over the boundary of the Siachen glacier and is adamant in its refusal to implement a series of United Nations resolutions starting in 1948 calling for a plebiscite in Kashmir. In view of these well-defined instances of hegemonic impulse there can be little wonder about Pakistan’s concern that its security technology should match India’s. In his autobiography, Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, analyzed the strategy of the United States to bring India and Pakistan together as a buffer against China. He deftly characterized the Pakistani view of India, “The idea of becoming subservient to India is abhorrent and that of cooperation with India, with the object of promoting tension with China, equally repugnant.”

    THREATS TO PAKISTAN ARE ALWAYS EXAGGERATED:

    “The capacity of Pakistan to sustain some fifteen major disarticulations in polity, power, and structure and still preserve a national identity is a phenomenon one is tempted to explain by recourse to the supernatural Pakistan which has been pummelled by external events (three wars with India, secession of Bangladesh, 3.5 million Afghan refugees) and disrupted by internal fissures (4 periods of martial law totalling 27 years and ethnic violence in Sindh) to a degree which no other state established since 1945 has suffered. In this respect it stands as an exemplar of a nation whose adversities “common sense” might suggest make its viability impossible. Yet its continued existence defies the reality induced by such speculation. The enormity and persistence of these difficulties and the resilience of the nation in absorbing and somehow surviving them must be regarded with awe if not admiration.”

    PAKISTAN MANZIL NAHIN NISHAN E MANZIL HAI: Alama Iqbal showed us the “manzil”. We don’t want a  caliphate nor a religious theocracy; Not a means to wage war or expansion; Not through conquest or capturing capitals; not to threaten anyone, but just so that we can all live together in peace.

    “Unlike any other Muslim nation, Pakistan has a complicated web of relationships with the entire world of Islam (Ummah). It is a mistaken notion to think of Pakistan exclusively in the context of South Asia or the South Asian subcontinent. Having fragmented from that subcontinent with no exclusionary topographical boundaries separating it from the Indian states of Punjab and Rajasthan and the disputed area of Kashmir, that assumption is easy to make. But it is erroneous. The topographical barriers separating Pakistan from its western and northern neighbours – Afghanistan, Iran and China – are much more formidable, but the cultural affinities are greater still. Afghan-Pushtu culture oversteps the Durand Line. Baluch-Brahui tribal culture is found in the Baluchistan of Pakistan and in the Baluchistan of Iran.

    These links with its western neighbours existed long before pre-partition India. Indeed all the boundaries in the area, such as the Durand Line, the Radcliffe Boundary and the McMahon Line were drawn to satisfy colonial interests; not to delineate ethnic/linguistic/cultural identities. The relationship with Afghanistan, always fraught with difficulties, has been woven into a denser web in consequence of Pakistan’s pivotal role in the Soviet-Afghan War. The links with Turkey and Central Asia have historical roots. The Muslims of the subcontinent absorbed, as Ishtiaq Husain Qureshi has so poignantly written, “layers of immigrants from Arabia, Iran, Central Asia and the Afghan mountains; the greatest impact was made by the Central Asians, because they seem to have been the most numerous and also because the ruling dynasties were overwhelmingly Turkish.” Qureshi states that the painting of such artists as Chugtai and poets such as Hali, Iqbal and Ghalib all have an Iranian flavour. He quotes the “great thinker” Shah Waliu’llah who suggests that the Muslims of India were travellers in a strange land dreaming of the roses, nightingales, cypress forests and running springs of Iran and Central Asia. This romanticized view of the wellsprings of Pakistani culture was reinforced by the separation of Bangladesh in 1971 and the emergence of strengthened bonds with the Islamic states to the West.

    “Tu shaaheen hai, basaira kar pharaon kee chatanon pur”

    ..”Jhapatna palatna, palat kar jhapatna;

    Lahu garm rakhne ka hai ik bahana”…..Alama Iqbal

    (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VcmQHaoLrW0&feature=related)

    Pakistan has a great future.

    DIL ZINDA-O-BEDAAR AGAR HO TO BA-TADREEJ

    BANDE KO ATA KARTA HAI CHASHME-NIGRAA(N) AUR

    ALFAZ-O-MAANI MEIN TAFAWAT NAHI LEKIN

    MULLAH KI AZAA(N) AUR, MUJAHID KI AZAA(N) AUR

    PARWAAZ HAI DONO KI ISI EK FIZAA MEIN

    KARGAZ KA JAHA(N) AUR HAI, SHAHEEN KA JAHA AUR

    1. If your heart is alive and alert then gradually Allah gives his banda different way to look at things.

    2. Both Mulla and Mujahid say Allah-O-Akbar, Although words and meaning are same, but there is a difference in purpose

    3. Although both Vulture and Falcon fly in the same sky, both have different way of living, vulture flies low and lives on dead bodies, where as falcon flies high and lives on preys.

    “The economic and political facet of this cultural affinity takes form in the Economic Cooperation Organization established in 1993 by ten contiguous states – Pakistan, Iran, Turkey, Afghanistan and the six Central Asian Islamic Republics. It supersedes the entity known as Regional Cooperation Development (RCD) formed in 1964 by Turkey, Iran and Pakistan which was never very effective. This new organization (ECO) holds greater promise than the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation of 1983 (SAARC). The latter has been crippled by the relatively overwhelming size of India and fear that India’s conduct defines a hegemonic propensity of ultimate danger to Pakistan. The relative success of the Economic Cooperation Organization and the failure of SAARC are institutional reflections of the tighter linkage of Pakistan with Central Asia than with the subcontinent. The connections with the Arabian Peninsula are also significant. Changing the name of the industrial city of Lyallpur to Faisalabad after Saudi Arabia’s late monarch, Saudi Arabia’s financing the International Islamic University in Islamabad and the King Faisal Mosque, one of the largest in the world, are but a few symbols of the Arabian connections.

    The training of large numbers of Mujahideen (freedom fighters for religion) in Pakistan to fight in the Afghan-Soviet war, and the participation in that war of Saudi Arabian fighters has had a curious aftermath. Many of these warriors, left without a cause, are now in Bosnia along with Iranian mercenaries. Some are said to be in an underground resistance movement against the Saudi regime. If this is so, it thrusts Pakistan ever more deeply into the maelstrom of international Muslim political activities.” Ralph Baiganti

    The two nation theory enunciates that the subcontinent is made of several nationalities, the Hindus and the Muslims being the largest of the two. India is as big as Western Europe and contains many many racial, religious, linguistic, and ethnic groups. The Hindus and the Muslims are two separate nations, in terms of diet, attitude, social behavior, economic tendencies, social interaction, behaviors, and attitude.Step one: Current day Pakistan

    Not a caliphate or a religious theocracy; Not a means to wage war or expansion; Not through conquest or caputuring captials; not to threaten anyone, but just so that we can all live together in peace.Step two: Take control of Pashtun areas

    Not a caliphate or a religious theocracy; Not a means to wage war or expansion; Not through conquest or caputuring captials; not to threaten anyone, but just so that we can all live together in peace.Step 3: Confederation of Afghanistan and Pakistan.

    Nishan e Manzilnishan-e-manzil-2.jpgThis is Central Asia

    Step 4: Work with the Muslim world

    The two nation theory enunciates that the subcontinent is made of several nationalities, the Hindus and the Muslims being the largest of the two. India is as big as Western Europe and contains many many racial, religious, linguistic, and ethnic groups. The Hindus and the Muslims are two separate nations, in terms of diet, attitude, social behavior, economic tendencies, social interaction, behaviors, and attitude.Step 5: Grow the Muslim world

    STRATEGIC POSITION OF PAKISTAN:

    “The critical geopolitical position of Pakistan recalls the views of Sir Halford J. Mackinder, Professor Karl Hausholer and Admiral Alfred Thomas Mahan. It was Mackinder. writing in 1904 who first used the expression “geographical pivots of history. He advanced the idea of the “heartland” i.e. that whoever controls a central strategic or pivotal area, controls the surrounding, area, the range of control expanding in concentric circles. These ideas profoundly influenced Karl Haushofer, an army major general then professor of geography at Munich University. Haushofer was introduced to Adolf Hitler by Rudolf Hess. Haushofer’s theories influenced Hitler but eventually Hitler ignored his advice and sent him to a concentration camp. Haushofer’s son, Albrecht, an art historian who had also written on geopolitics, was imprisoned participation in a conspiracy to overthrow Hitler and was executed by a firing squad. Shortly thereafter, his father committed suicide. Admiral Mahan advanced the same notion in terms of seapower – whoever controls the sea has influence if not control over adjacent landmasses.

    The precipitous decline in the respectability of geopolitics during and after the Second World War was due in part to the repugnance toward anything associated with Nazi doctrine or behaviour. Haushofer’s early influence on Hitler was widely regarded as the ideological paradigm for Hitler’s grand design of conquest. The fact that Haushofer was banished for advising against the German invasion of the Soviet Union did not lift the stigma. Later, nuclear warfare with the possibility of long-range destruction seemed to minimize the need for actual control of areas of land or sea. The geopolitical explanation of global strategy can be carried too far. The Mackinder-Haushofer paradigm was extremist in the sense that it did not take other factors such as climate and human behaviour into account. Ellsworth Huntington, a pioneer in analyzing geographical influences on human development, labels the Mackinder-Haushofer theories “fallacious”.

    The blemish of their association with Nazi policy is evident in Huntington’s criticism. Writing during the height of Hitler’s power, he groups the Mackinder-Haushofer paradigm with the racist theories of Houston S. Chamberlain and Count Joseph A. deGobineau. In recent years there has been a marginal renewal of interest in the influence of geography on politics. The awareness of the criticality of “chokepoints” or “flashpoints” has contributed to this new interest. It is neither prudent nor accurate to label this development as geopolitics. The simple term “political geography” as developed by Isaiah Bowman as early as 1921 is a more useful and accurate designation. In the past decade a growing number of analysts of international politics such as Paul Kennedy, Ewan Anderson, William Pfaff, Saul Cohen, Jack Child have turned to classical geography for some explanation of contemporary issues. The rising incidence of low intensity non-nuclear conflicts in which control of pivotal areas of land and sea is critical also contributes to a reassessment of geography. Pakistan fits perfectly into a politico geographic paradigm. The geographic arc embracing Iran, Iraq, and Afghanistan to the west and Kashmir to the east may well be the next source serious of conflict in the world. It may originate in the west, in the east or in both places at once.

    The disintegration of the Soviet Union created a geopolitical vacuum in Central Asia. The invasion and occupation of Afghanistan has created new allies. The rise of China creates new realities in West Asia. The resurgence of Islam in the six Central Asian republics and in Xinjiang has provoked competing ambitions of Iran, Iraq, Turkey, Pakistan and Saudi Arabia for influence in the area.

    All the superpowers are staking out their territory in the rich lands of Central Asia. The continued instability of Afghanistan and  increase the danger. Pakistani- Chinese nexus and the growing Pakistani-Russian entente places Pakistan in a pivotal position. All of India’s neighbors share a distrust of India. Pakistan is at the epicentre not only by virtue of geography, but also because of its history, religion, culture and ethnicity. Whatever fire may emerge from this tinderbox, Pakistan will be a pivot. Pakistan can turn the spigot off or on. Bharat if it ever wants to be a local or regional player must recognize Pakistan, in letter and spirit and embrace it as a friend. Without India’s acceptance of Pakistan, its regional ambitions will never come to fruition.

    In 2009, the Dalit, Muslim and Communist again tried to form alliance against the Indian National Congress. The alliance did not win. The 450 million, Dalits, Untouchables and Scheduled castes are Bharat have been left out. This is the unfinished business of 1947. The liberated Dalits will one day once again write the history of South Asia.

    Noticias de Rupia | Nouvelles de Roupie | Rupiennachrichten | новости рупии | 卢比新闻  | Roepienieuws | Rupi Nyheter | ルピーニュース  | Notizie di Rupia |  PAKISTAN LEDGERپاکستاني کھاتا | Moin Ansari | معین آنصآرّی | DefensebriefsIntellibriefs Translate to: Page copy protected against web site content infringement by Copyscape Bookmark and Share Add to Technorati RSS feed: | RUPEE NEWS | October 13th, 2008 | Moin Ansari |  معین آنصآرّی | اخبار روپیہ  |

    Quaid-e-Azam, Mohammed Ali Jinnah said that:

    ” the differences in India, between the two major nations, the Hindus and the Muslims are a thousand times greater when compared with the continent of Europe.

    India is not a national state, India is not a country, but a sub-continent composed of nationalities, the two nations being Hindus and Muslims whose culture and civilization, language and literature, art and architecture, name and nomenclature, sense of value and proportion, laws and jurisprudence, social and moral codes, customs and calendar, history and traditions, aptitudes and ambitions, outlook on life and of life are fundamentally different nay in many respects antagonistic. Mohammad Ali Jinnah

    History of Indian prophecies of doom for Pakistan

    Filed under: Post independence — Moin Ansari @ 11:17 pm
    Tags:

    Noticias de Rupia | Nouvelles de Roupie | Rupiennachrichten | новости рупии | 卢比新闻  | Roepienieuws | Rupi Nyheter | ルピーニュース  | Notizie di Rupia |  PAKISTAN LEDGERپاکستاني کھاتا | Moin Ansari | معین آنصآرّی | DefensebriefsIntellibriefs Translate to: Page copy protected against web site content infringement by Copyscape Bookmark and Share Add to Technorati RSS feed: | RUPEE NEWS | October 13th, 2008 | Moin Ansari |  معین آنصآرّی | اخبار روپیہ  |

    THIS TOO SHALL PASS! WE SHALL OVERCOME!

    Pakistan Day Celebrations are unparalled anywhere in the worldPakistan Day Celebrations are unparalled anywhere in the worldPakistan Day Celebrations are unparalled anywhere in the world

    Pakistan Zindabad!

    THE PAKISTANI RESILIENCE IN THE FACE OF THREATS: Mountbatten, Nehru, Indira, Kruschev, Johnson, Carter, Kissinger (Nixon), Gobachov, Clinton, Armitage (Bush), Karzia (Bush and Vajpayee/Sing) have all threatened Pakistan: The Pakistanis are used to it…so what else is new?!! Pakistan’s Nuclear Program should be seen in the backdrop of these threats.The capacity of Pakistan to sustain some fifteen major disarticulations in polity, power, and structure and still preserve a national identity is a phenomenon one is tempted to explain by recourse to the supernatural. Pakistan which has been pummelled by external events (three wars with India, secession of Bangladesh, 3.5 million Afghan refugees) and disrupted by internal fissures (4 periods of martial law totalling 27 years and ethnic violence in Sindh) to a degree which no other state established since 1945 has suffered. In this respect it stands as an exemplar of a nation whose adversities “common sense” might suggest make its viability impossible. Yet its continued existence defies the reality induced by such speculation. The enormity and persistence of these difficulties and the resilience of the nation in absorbing and somehow surviving them must be regarded with awe if not admiration.” RALPH BRAIBANTI

    Pakistan has now become immune to “prophecies of doom”. Pakistanis are sick of “do more” lectures from a 3rd rate country that piggy-backs on superpowers to get a kick out of beating up vulnerable populations. 2 million Muslim kids died destroying the USSR. Today, Pakistan is suffering because of the failed policies of Britain and the USA. The blowback faced by many is because of the short sighted policies of London and Washington.The selective  amnesia is amazing. Pakistan was used by the USA in the First Afghan War against the USSR. India at the time was on the losing side of the battle and the USSR was not only defeated, it imploded.Analysts see major cavities.  Today there is an overwhelming body of evidence that a similar fate faces “India.”

    India’s major problem is not a nuclear armed Pakistan, or 160 million belligerent Pakistanis or even 160 million Bangledeshis or the 160 million Indian Muslims. India’s problem is the 40 million Hindu White widows, and the Dalits and Naxalite insurrection that threatens to destroy the heart of midland. While the urban penury competes with rural poverty the plutocratic, dynastic democrats, the extremist rightists, and the megalomaniacs (Nero’s) dream of a global power, the heart of India is in pain and destitution.

     

     

    THEN: Hindu leaders agreed on partition of the subcontinent, as they thought and hoped that the dismemberment of India would be a temporary arrangement and reunification of India was a matter of time. History says that the riot of 1947 was masterminded to divide Bengal and Punjab, which were Muslim majority provinces at that time. Riots would not have occurred if they were not politically motivated. Neither innocent people would have been displaced or massacred; if Nehru, India’s first Prime Minister and his preceptor Gandhi would not had set a pre-condition that division of India “must mean a division also of Bengal and Punjab.” (See Nehru’s letter written on May 23, 1947, to Ashraffuddin Ahmad Chowdhury, the Congress President of Tripura, now Comilla, and district.) Nehru also did not keep secret the goal of his demand.
    He in the same letter informed Ashraffuddin,
    That is the only way to have a United India soon after. If we have a United India straightway, without such division that will, of course be very welcome.”
    Pakistan Day Celebrations are unparalled anywhere in the world

     

     

    NOW: Here we go again. Another Indian prophecy of doom. The first one came in 1947. Today Pakistan is a nuclear state growing robustly with 7% growth rate and foreign investment coming in which India could only envy. 
    Pakistan Day Celebrations are unparalled anywhere in the worldPakistan Day Celebrations are unparalled anywhere in the world 

     

     

    They had thought that 2007 would be a bad year. 2007 was one of the best years for the Pakistani economy. It takes more than a few mercenaries traind by RAW and KHAD to derail the “Mian bhais” of Pakistan. Alama Iqbal said it best “Qari nazar aat a hakeekat main hai Quran”. 

    The resilience of the Pakistani economy is akin to that of Israel and India. The Israeli economy is immune to political shocks. Similarly India has more than 89 active insurgencies. However both economies are growing. Similarly Thaliand despite a coup and active insurgencies continues to growl as an Asia Tiger.

    Pakistan Day Celebrations are unparalled anywhere in the worldPakistan Day Celebrations are unparalled anywhere in the worldPakistan Day Celebrations are unparalled anywhere in the world

     

    Pakistan’s political unrest may delay, but not deter Canada’s rapidly expanding trade with the South Asian nation, Canadian business leaders say.

    Yet Pakistani-Canadians with ties to their homeland continue to open doors for Canadian companies across the Pacific and, at the same time, create more demand here for products and services from Pakistan.

    Questions also remain about his handling of the Bhutto assassination and whether or not his agents were perhaps even behind her death, charges that his government has rejected.

    But Merchant, who emigrated to Canada in 1959, believes commerce will continue to thrive in Pakistan. He points to rapid increases in cellphone purchases, automobile manufacturing and foreign-currency reserves as signs that Pakistan’s middle class is becoming more affluent and able to afford higher-priced items.

    Canadian companies have an important role to play as Pakistan tries to meet rising demand for information technology, oil and gas, hydroelectric power, new homes and other products and services, he adds.

    SNC-Lavalin, Bombardier, Borealis Infrastructure and CAE are among major companies that have set up shop in Pakistan or gone on federal trade missions there.

    Jean-Michel Laurin, vice-president of global business policy for the Canadian Manufacturers and Exporters Association (CME), says small to medium-sized companies have fuelled most of the rapid trade growth in Pakistan.

    …large firms such as Bombardier and CAE, which can benefit from large military contracts, have no concerns because they operate globally and are willing to go anywhere.

    Citing Statistics Canada figures, Laurin says Canadian exports to Pakistan have increased almost fourfold since 2001. Last year, Canadian firms shipped $397 million worth of goods, compared to a modest $73 million in 2001.

    Between 2002-03, Canadian exports to Pakistan more than tripled from $85 million to $302 million.

    “Our exports have increased quite dramatically – I’ve never seen something like that,” says Laurin.

    Carey Healey, president and CEO of Coquitlam, B.C.-based Infosat Communications Inc., predicts Canadian companies doing business in Pakistan are unlikely to increase their investments there until the turmoil subsides. But Healey has no qualms about continuing Infosat’s relationship with its Pakistani partner, Comstar.ISA Ltd.

    Infosat supplied a satellite hub and engineering services as part of the contract that will see Comstar provide network links and closed-circuit TV services for Pakistani police stations and other organizations in remote locations. The two companies aim to provide satellite and network services to Pakistani banks as they install more automated-teller machines around the country.

    Doing business in Pakistan appealed to Infosat, because many executives in that country have trained in Canada or the U.S. and English is widely spoken.

    “… “In India, it’s very competitive. There are tons of companies doing this. If you go over to Pakistan, people are falling all over themselves to be your partner. It’s because they’re just craving the ability to take on some of this new technology and new products.”

    Comstar president Sami Bajwa is a McGill University MBA graduate who lived in Canada for two decades.

    Healey says he felt little fear for his safety while travelling to Islamabad, Karachi and Lahore in 2006. Monte Stewart of Business Edge of Canada

     Pakistan Day Celebrations are unparalled anywhere in the worldPakistan Day Celebrations are unparalled anywhere in the worldPakistan Day Celebrations are unparalled anywhere in the world

    Congress has taken notice, and last month passed a resolution calling for the United States to work with India to address the problem of untouchability by “encouraging US businesses and other US organisations working in India to take every possible measure to ensure Dalits are included and are not discriminated against in their programming”.

    “It is now time for this Congress to speak out about this ancient and particularly abhorrent form of persecution and segregation – even if it is occurring in a country considered to be one of America’s closest allies,” Rep Trent Franks, R-Ariz., said during a speech last spring on the House floor. Franks went on to call Dalits “one of the most oppressed peoples on Earth.”

    The 2006 study found that public health workers refuse to visit 33 per cent of Dalit villages, while mail is not delivered to the homes of 24 per cent of Dalits. The reason for the neglect, the study said, is that some in the upper castes believe lower-caste people are dirty and lack dignity in their labor as latrine cleaners, rickshaw drivers, butchers, herders and barbers.

    The debate on affirmative action in India is similar to the one in the United States in terms of discrimination and ways to end it. But in India, those who experience discrimination, especially in rural areas, are the majority and are ruled by an elite. The issue here is complicated by India’s turbulent history of race, class and caste. Centuries-old customs of arranged marriages and inherited professions perpetuate caste divisions, which are further reinforced by some interpretations of Hinduism, India’s dominant religion, which sanctions the caste system.


    The country’s education system also hardens caste. Lower castes largely attend public schools, which teach local languages, while private schools attended by upper castes teach English – the most important criterion to be hired at a call center, where young employees spend their nights helping customers phoning from the United States.

    Sitting in a circle as they waited to hear whether they would get jobs, Kamble and the other students talked about the often harrowing discrimination they faced. “I knew there was hatred in the world and in India, when as a child I watched some upper castes refuse to sell my mother lentils and rice in the nicer part of the market because we were `dirty,’ and from a backward caste,” said Vivek Kumar Katara, 22, who has a master’s degree in social work focusing on helping the mentally ill. Without quotas, Katara said, “I honestly don’t know if professors would have even let me sit in the same class as upper castes”. http://www.thepeninsulaqatar.com/features/featuredetail.asp?file=augustfeatures302007.xml  

     
    The world is sick of Indian prophecies of doom for all states surrounding Bharat. By triggering unrest in Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Sikkiim, Bhutan and Bangladesh and by labeling them as “failed states” India wants to legitimize its own existence. 
     
     

     

     

    With 50 million White widows, Dalits in anger, 150 million Muslims in servitude, Naxilte insurrection, Mizuram and Tamil secession and Kashmiri rebellion, isn’t India a failed sate? Yes it is. And it has kept South Asia in penury because of its bad policies and tactics. Forget about Lal Masjid, the Crescent and Star will by flying atop Lal Qila AGAIN!

     Pakistan Day Celebrations are unparalled anywhere in the world

     

    Noticias de Rupia | Nouvelles de Roupie | Rupiennachrichten | новости рупии | 卢比新闻  | Roepienieuws | Rupi Nyheter | ルピーニュース  | Notizie di Rupia |  PAKISTAN LEDGERپاکستاني کھاتا | Moin Ansari | معین آنصآرّی | DefensebriefsIntellibriefs Translate to: Page copy protected against web site content infringement by Copyscape Bookmark and Share Add to Technorati RSS feed: | RUPEE NEWS | October 13th, 2008 | Moin Ansari |  معین آنصآرّی | اخبار روپیہ  |

    Who murdered Pakistan’s 1st PM? Why was Liaqat Ali Khan killed?

    Filed under: Post independence — Moin Ansari @ 11:13 pm
    Tags: , ,

    Noticias de Rupia | Nouvelles de Roupie | Rupiennachrichten | новости рупии | 卢比新闻  | Roepienieuws | Rupi Nyheter | ルピーニュース  | Notizie di Rupia |  PAKISTAN LEDGERپاکستاني کھاتا | Moin Ansari | معین آنصآرّی | DefensebriefsIntellibriefs Translate to: Page copy protected against web site content infringement by Copyscape Bookmark and Share Add to Technorati RSS feed: | RUPEE NEWS | October 13th, 2008 | Moin Ansari |  معین آنصآرّی | اخبار روپیہ  |

    Why was Liaqat Ali Khan Assassinated? Who murdered Shaheed e Millat?  

    Liaqat Ali Khan

    RUPEE NEWS | February 20th, 1997 | Moin Ansari |  معین آنصآرّی |  Published Feb. 26th 1997. Updated Feb. 20th, 2008 with recently declassified US documentation which raise the question of CIA involvement in the death of LAK.  (http://www.icdc.com/~paulwolf/pakistan/pakintrigue.htm#liaquat).  The events of December 27th 2007 when the 3rd Pakistani Prime Minister was assasinated in Rawalpindi makes this research very poignant. Two decades ago we have read more about who shot JR and a lot less about who shot one of our greatest freedom fighters of Pakistan. We all wondered who shot Khan Liaqat Ali Khan? The American press is always trying to discover who actually planned the assassination of President John Fritzgerald Kennedy. The media is obsessed with JFKs murder even though the murderer was captured. The Pakistani media is silent about Liaqat Ali Khan. The same forces that were responsible for the death of Benazir Bhutto are responsible for the death of Shahed Millat.

    Liaqat Ali Khan was the liberator of Kashmir. In 1947, Liaqat Ali Khan raised a fist at India warning it of staying away from Pakistan. As long as the fist was alive no neighboring country could dare lift a finger at Pakistan.

    Jinnah and Liaqat at the 1940 Lahore Resolution (Pakistan Reolution)

    Jinnah and Liaqat at the 1940 Lahore Resolution (Pakistan Reolution)

    SUMMARY OF THE ARTICLE.

    We have researched this issue at length. In the abscence of an on the spot autopsy, the cicumstancial and political evidence points to the political enemies of Khan Liaqat Ali Khana and Mohammad Ali Jinnah. The feudlas of many areas did not support the creation of Pakistan. Urban voters were free to vote, and the wholehearted supported, Iqbal, Jinnah and Liaqat. If we look at the plitical landscape of the Subcontinetal politics, we see the following:

    1. Jinnah, Iqbal, and Liaqat were at odds with the anti-Pakistan, pro-Congress elements who wre supported by the likes of Sir Chottu Ram and the Unionist party. Iqbal and Liquat were responsible for the creation of Muslim League in every town and village of the Subcontinent, and had transformed the League from an eletist group to a national party.
    2. Jinnah, Liaqat. Iqbal,  and the Muslim Leageu won the day, and destroyed the Hyatt-Tiwana conspiracies led by their cohorts the Congress and SIr Choutta Rams Zamindara party
    3. Hyatt and Tiwana lost to the Muslim League but kept the vengence in thier harts.
    4. Liaqat Ali Khan did not allow the UK and the US Pakistani facilities to attack Iran. There is a lot of suspicion on the CIA on this matter. Recent declassified documents shed light on a lot of information on this. 
    5. Both Jinnah and Liaqat faced numerous asassination attempts on thier lives by the same Unionist party or their fascist supports the Khaksars.
    6. Jinnah escaped the attempts, and Liaqat did not

     

     

     

    Liaqat Ali KhanLiaqat Ali Khan presented the Crescent and Star for approval to the National Assemby of Pakistan in 1947. The Khan obatined unanimous  appproval and the Cresecent and Star bacme the national flag of Pakistan.Mutiny to Mountbatten by Zeba Zubair   

    Allah Pakistan ko apni amaan mai~n rakhay “(God save Pakistan). Last words of Shaheed-e-Millat, Prime Minister Liaqat Ali Khan right before his asassination-death in Rawalpindi.

     Shaheed-millat tum to golee lageeHum ko sudmaa hoDunya rotee raheeDusman hastay rahay

     Liaqat Ali Khan

    LIAQAT ALI KHAN  

     

     

     

     

    THE DAY DEMOCRACY DIED IN RAWALPINDI: Liaqat Ali Khan was the able lieutenant of the father of our nation. He was the first Prime Minister of our nation. He sowed the seeds of democracy and died fighting for democary. Liaqat Ali Khan matched the sprit of Nehru and the tenacity of Patel. Liaqat Ali Khan had the vitality of George Washington, and the vision of Lincoln. He and Jinnah did for Pakistan what Kemal Ataturk had done for Turkey. Like Mao Tse Tung Liaqat and Jinnah led the countrymen to nationhood. For a brief shining moment, our nation glimpsed “Camelot”, where we were led by honest leaders, who’s only consideration was the task of building the nation. These uncorruptable leaders had character, strength, and the mandate of the people. Like JFK, Liaqat Ali Khan was a young, popular and charismatic leader who had led the nation ‘across the read” sea and was immersed in the task of builidng an infrastructure for the new country. But forces opposed to democracy cut him in half.

    WHO SHOT LAK?..CIA CONNECTION

    Under headline reading “Is Liaquat Ali Khan’s assassination result of a deep-laid American conspiracy?”, leftist Urdu daily Bhopal named Nadeem published article October 24 charging US with responsibility. Summary article follows:

     

     

     

    [...]It was learned within Pakistani Foreign Office that while UK pressing Pakistan for support re Iran, US demanded Pakistan exploit influence with Iran and support Iran transfer oil fields to US. Liaquat declined request. US threatened annul secret pact re Kashmir. Liaquat replied Pakistan had annexed half Kashmir without American support and would be able to take other half. Liaquat also asked US evacuate air bases under pact. Liaquat demand was bombshell in Washington. American rulers who had been dreaming conquering Soviet Russia from Pakistan air bases were flabbergasted. American minds set thinking re plot assassinate Liaquat. US wanted Muslim assassin to obviate international complications. US could not find traitor in Pakistan as had been managed Iran, Iraq, Jordan. Washington rulers sounded US Embassy Kabul. American Embassy contacted Pashtoonistan leaders, observing Liaquat their only hurdle; assured them if some of them could kill Liaquat, US would undertake establish Pashtoonistan by 1952. Pashtoon leaders induced Akbar undertake job and also made arrangements kill him to conceal conspiracy. USG-Liaquat differences recently revealed by Graham report to SC; Graham had suddenly opposed Pakistan although he had never given such indication. [...] Cartridges recovered from Liaquat body were American-made, especially for use high-ranking American officers, usually not available in market. All these factors prove real culprit behind assassin is US Government, which committed similar acts in mid-East. “Snakes” of Washington’s dollar imperialism adopted these mean tactics long time ago. Confidential Telegram No. 1532 from New Delhi Embassy, Oct. 30, 1951

     

     

     

     

     

     

    Recommend Department ignore article summarized in Delhi’s 1532. It is compilation of utter falsehoods whose vituperation is some degree worse than articles that appear from time to time in Bombay’s Commie-line “Blitz”. To issue any statement labeling the facts in the article as lies will only give Nadeem an importance it does not merit. The investigation into background of Liaquat’s assassination is being conducted with extreme care and well guarded secrecy. Gurmani tells me an intercept has been obtained which if backed up by further material may reveal the assassination had some inspiration and followed the pattern of Razmara’s assassination in Teheran. Confidential Telegram from Karachi Embasssy, Oct. 31, 1951

    Since article apparently not rpt not widely circulated, Department believes preferable not rpt not issue public denial. In its discretion, however, Embassy might informally mention case MEA with comment story so preposterous no rpt no public denial intended. Would be interesting to know whether this story of character which led adoption recent press law. Ownership management NADEEM should be discreetly be investigated. Confidential Telegram from State Dept., Nov. 1, 1951

    Soviet Press today carried Prague Despatch reporting Rude Pravo article based Afghan press agency “Bahtar” information re assassination Liaquat Ali. Despatch states after escaping Afghanistan due murders and other crimes “Said Akbar ran to India and there under protection British authorities which gave him refuge in Abbotabad and provided him money. After partition India Akbar remained in Pakistan where he continued make use protection of certain British circles.” “These facts adduced by Afghan press supporting position that murder Liaquat Ali was result intrigue of imperialists in Asian countries.” Secret Telegram from Moscow Embassy, Nov. 3, 1951 [only first page located]

    The Embassy questions the premise stated in the first sentence of the Airgram under reference (”Lack of spontaneous anti-Indian and anti-Afghan popular outburst over both July war scare and Liaquat’s assassination suggests feeling on Kashmir and Afghan disputes mostly government inspired.”) … The anti-Afghan agigation that spontaneously sprang up on October 16-17 was effectively stopped by the GOP’s prompt exercise of its official and unofficial powers of censorship over the press, even to the extent of preventing reference after October 17 to the assassin’s Afghan origin. Popular Feeling in Pakistan on Kashmir and Afghan Issues, Nov. 10, 1951

    One almost never hears about the culprits in the assassination of Khan Liaqat Ali Khan…. the first victim of our nascent nation. After his death democracy was forced to fail and dictators ruled the Pakistani landscape.

    Since the autopsies done on the body of the Khan has NOT revealed much, let us do an autopsy of the politics of our time. There have been several books written on the man, and a wealth of information is revealed in them.

    LIAQAT ALI KHAN, THE MAN, ONE OF THE FOUNDING FATHERS, THE FREEDOM FIGHTER, THE LIBERATOR OF KASHMIR & THE FIRST PRIME MINISTER

    Liaqat Ali Khan was a born in a rich family, but he gave up his lands for freedom and for Pakistan.

    All through the forties, Quaid-e-Azam Mohammed Ali Jinnah had picked patriots who would lead the nation to freedom. These men were loyal not only to Quaid-e-Azam and the Muslim League, these men were loyal to the cause of Pakistan. Both created and led the Muslim League and battled the British and engaged the Congress for the independent nation of Pakistan. Throughout the trials and tribulations, Liaqat Ali Khan and Jinnah went through one constitutional crises after the other and faced the elections. From the Khilafat movement, to the cause of the separate electorate, through the Cabinet Mission Plan, through the pre-partition governments, the Khan and Jinnah led the Muslim League and the nation towards Pakistan.

    In little towns and in big villages, the All India Muslim League opened offices and built a grass roots movement that was supported by the Mussalmans of Bharat. Jinnah and Liaqat Ali Khan were painfully aware that the Muslims had no voice in the press. In order to combat the propoganda of its enemies, the Muslim League needed a voice. The created from scratch newspapers that would carry the Muslim League message. In 1945, the created the newspaper called ‘Dawn’. They also created the paper called “Pakistan Times’ and they created other papers called Patriots etc.

    Here is a message from the Honorable Liaqat Ali Khan, Premier of Pakistan. Dated Delhi, 5th August, 1947:

     ” Now that the great day has come when we have not only achieved freedom from foreign domination but also regained our long lost opportunity for national development. I wish to convey to our people a message of goodwill and good cheer on this day when the Muslim state of our dreams has become a reality. Let us not forget that his has been achieved not by the efforts of Muslims in Pakistan alone, but even more by the sufferings of millions living in Muslim minority provinces. I hope that although henceforth the frontiers of the two states will divide the Muslims of this Subcontinent, the ties of brotherhood will endure, because the Islamic fraternity knows no political or geographical barriers. I have no doubt that the Muslims of Pakistan will ever regard the Muslims of Hindustan as part of themsleves and give them equal opportunities in their own state. I am confident also that the Muslims in Hindustan will be loyal citizens of their state and paly an important and honorable role in the progress and prosperity.” Sd. Liaqat Ali Khan. 

    Liaqat Ali Khan was uncorrptable. Here is an editorial printed in the Nation on Friday, February 28, 1997, Lahore, “Banish the factotums, sir”, written by Khalid Hasan :

     “In the early years of Pakistan, the leaders lived with simplicity. Mr Liaquat AliKhan, who used to be rich in his own right before independence, lived simply. He was accessibleand there were hardly any barriers between him and those who considered him the Quaid-i-Azam’s heir and his most trusted deputy. We all know that when the Nawabzada died, he had no money in the bank. That is the example our present-day leaders need to follow and not that of oriental potentates, colonial overlords and slave plantation kings.”  

    As Prime Minster of Pakistan Liaqat Ali secured the borders of Pakistan, LIBERATED one third of Kashmir (and would have liberated ALL of it if HIS plan had worked), and internationalized (through agreements with the USA) the boundaries of Pakistan by ensuring that the USSR through its proxies (India or Afghanistan) could not cross them.

     LIAQAT TAKES OVER A  PRECARIOUS POLITICAL LANDSCAPE

    1947,  was a precarious time for Pakistan. The newly won freedom was in jeopardy. The flame of Pakistani Muslim liberty was in danger of being extinguished. Liaqat Ali Khan became prime minister of Pakistan when the anti-Pakistan Unionist loyalists (who had been in cahoots with the Indian National Congress) landlords and the anti-Muslim League feudals were waiting in the wings to take over the political machinery of the new country. This was an accident waiting to happen.

    In Sindh the landlords were mostly Hindu and these landlords fled to India. In the Punjab and Sarhad they were the Badshah Khans and the Khizar Hyatts who had opposed the Quaid-e-Azam.

    After the death of Quaid-e-Azam the feudals wanted to take over the nascent country. The feudals had opposed Pakistan. For the feudals the only roadblocks to power were the patriots who had led the Pakistan movement.  I.I. Chundrigarh, Feroze Khan Noon and Khan Liaqat Ali Khan. Once the Bengali leadership of the Muslim League was harassed and removed, then it was necessary to begin removing the political infra-structure of Pakistan that had been built by the Quaid-e-Azam himself. The Muslim League leaders faced the wrath of the feudals. The Quaid and Khan Liaqat Ali Khan had defeated the feudals in their Unionist party which was in an alliance with the Indian National Congress (INC). Now the feudals were out to take revenge from the leadership of the Muslim that had shepherded the nation to freedom.

    Mohammad Ali Jinnah had terminal cancer and he died an early death. The actual circumstances of the death of the Quaid are shrouded in mystery, confusion and perhaps even conspiracy.

    Several Pakistani prime ministers tried to illegally take over the reigns of government through extra-constitutinal means, but the machinations of the feudals did not allow them to rule. These machinations were the earliest seed of discontent sown into the minds of the Bengalis because they saw the Bengali leadership of the Muslim League harassed and shunted out of the Muslim League.

    Pakistan was born under the Mountbatten-Indian premise that the country would last a few weeks and the Muslims would learn their lesson and then come begging back to India to take them back. In fact Lord Mountbatten had offered and insisted on becoming the joint Governor General of both India and Pakistan. This unique head of both the states would have facilitated the early demise of the state of Pakistan. Quaid-e-Azam and Liaqat Ali Khan saw through the ruse and asked Lord Mountbatten whose anti Pakistan and anti-Muslim stand had already been proven several times over not to become the governor general of Pakistan.

    EXTERNAL THREAT TO PAKISTAN NULLIFIED THROUGH STRATEGIC ALLIANCES

    Many Hindus and Gandhi did not oppose Pakistan. Some like Patel did. The opponents were fierce vitriolic and vociferous. Right after Pakistan was created, some of the radical Hindus considered this a temporary situation and called it a temporary partition of the country of India. When the new country lasted for a few months, India began flexing its muscles. One of the first test of Pakistani sovereignty came when India devalued her currency and wanted Pakistan to do the same. Liaqat Ali Khan refused, and angry India tightened the screws and imposed a trade embargo against Pakistan. All cross border trade came to a halt. This was the initiation of cessation of trade that has still not been really revived, even in modern times.

    With China still embroiled in its communist struggle, Asia was recognized as India. In British eyes, India was the major power in the India. In the early nineteenth century, America proudly proclaimed that “it was manifest destiny that the USA should span from the Atlantic to the Pacific.” The Soviet Union extended from the Pacific to the Atlantic. With British imperial might, and India the crown jewel of the empire, India too saw her destiny as great as the superpowers.

    THE NEHRU DOCTRINE FACES LIAQAT ALI KHANS PATRIOTIC FIST

    The Nehru doctrine was a natural extension of Indian nationalism. Nehrus dreams of India as one of hte major nations of the world are elequently quoted in his letters to his daughter “Glimpses of World History”, a very welll written book on the history of the world. The stature of Nehrus intelleigence can be judged from the fact that Nehru wrote the book from memory while he was in jail.

    To many Indians religion was a personal matter and did not want the state to interfere in it. Riightly or wrongly they saw Jinnah using the ruse of religion to gain power. Some Indians felt that Indian nationalism and dreams had run aground by the creation of Pakistan. “Partition”  had stopped the land routes to Europe and divided the focus of its attntion. Had she been cut down to size? Reeling from partiton, Patel started to consolidate the rest of the “nation”. Nehru would not allow 550 Indias.  Nehru and Patel wanted to create the Indian nationality by creating a contiguous Subcontinent. She had taken over Kashmir, Junagarh and had taken over Hydrabad.  India was threatening Pakistan. Pakistani nationalism now tested the limits of Indian consolidation. Liaqat Ali Khan looked for cracks in the consolidation. Liaqat Ali Khan saw what was coming and used the tribesmen to take advantage of the rebellion in Kashmir and liberate the state. All Kashmiris remember Liaqat Ali Khan with fondness because he is the real liberator of Azad Kashmir. Were it not for Liaqat Ali Khan ALL of Kashmir would today be part of India.

    Like Nehru, Khan was also embroiled in the task of nation building. Like Nehru, Khan also faced daunting odds. Unlike Nehru, Khan was the ruler of a state with very powerful feudal enemies. These enemies had sworn the destruction of the country. These feudals saw Khan between them and their allies and friends the Indian National Congress. Khan Liaqat Ali Khan began to create a sovereign nation. He saw the vision to create natural and artifical boundaries around the country. He ordered the digging of the BRB canal along the Wagah border. The Indians were to learn the importance of what they call “Khawjal Canal” during the 1965 war because this canal provided Pakistan a natural defense barrier against the advancing Indian army. When things got too hot for India in Kashmir and Pakistani troops under Tikka Khan and the freedom fighters were only 35 miles away from Srinagar, India wanted to cross the international border at Batapur and Run of Katch. The Americans in 1965 had guaranteed to Pakistan that Kashmir was disputed territory and India would not cross the international border. India tired to but the rangers kept them at bay along the BRB canal that was designed and built during the reign of Khan Liaqat Ali Khan

    It was under these circumstances that Khan Liaqat Ali Khan took the reigns of office. He struggled to do the following:

    1)       Guard Pakistan against  a belligerent India which wanted to reintegrate Pakistan into India

    2)       Watch the back of Pakistan against the Indian ally Zahir Shah of Afghanistan

    3)       Tried to create an external strategic alliance with the USA and sold the idea to the West that Pakistan would be a reliable bulwark against the socialistic India-USSR nexus

    LIAQAT ALI KHAN NEGATES THE SOVIET THREAT

    Liaqat Ali Khan saw the growing menace of the Soviet threat. He had been monitoring the expansion of the Russian empire into the six Muslim states, and he had watched the integration of independent Muslim republics into the USSR. He has also seen the forced deportation of the Chechnians and Tartars to Siberia as reprisals for resisting the Sovietization of the Muslim peoples.

    Liaqat Ali Khan saw the growing relations of the USSR with Afghanistan as a clear threat to Pakistans sovereignty. Khan went to the US and laid the foundation of a very log term alliance with the USA. This alliance immediately opened up the flood gates of American aid to Pakistan. The initial aid came in the form of German war crime reparation that were given to Pakistan. This put money in the treasury. The next step was UN and Direct USAID to Pakistan. With American protection the existence of Pakistan was guaranteed, or else the nascent nation may have succumbed to the twin USSR-Indian and Sino-Indain threat.

    INTERNAL THREAT SUPPRESSED THROUGH STRATEGIC COALITIONS

    Jinnah and Khan had generated a cadre of loyal politicians that supported the Muslim League. Liaqat Ali Khan wanted to bank on the traditional allies that both he and Mohammad Ali Jinnah had created across the land of Pakistan. However these were hard to come by because many of the Aligarh led student movement leaders were now back to the grind earning a living. Liaqat Ali Khan was in the process of forming alliances in the Punjab and the NWFP. He trusted the leaders that had supported the Muslim League and he trusted the leaders that had supported Pakistan. Liaqat Ali Khan did not trust the leaders that had opposed Pakistan. Liaqat Ali Khan did not trust the leadership of the Unionist party that was in alliance with the Indian National Congress.

    Khan through a series of steps tried to create consensus within the boundaries of Pakistan:

    1)       Tried to germinate local pro-Muslim leadership in Bengal by supporting the pro-Pakistani Bengali leaders against the pro-Indian and United Bengal nationalist leaders who wanted an independent Bengal.

    2)       Watched the antics of G.M. Syed whose off again and on again loyalties to the Muslim League and/or Gandhi rendered him un-trusworthy.

    3)       Tried create Muslim League alliances in two provinces where there was the anti-Muslim League parties playing on the sentiments of the people. Namely it was the Khizar Hyatt led Unionist government in the Punjab and a Ghaffar Khan led government in NWFP.

    Liaqat Ali Khan formed the constituent assemby and set upon the task of creting serious structures which would assist the country in the future. All Pakistani constitueions were based on the work of the first constitution. The original 1953 constitution was the basis of the 1973 constituion that is preserved more or less by our courts today.

    FORTIES: THE FEUDAL UNIONISTS HAD OPPOSED PAKISTAN AND THE MUSLIM LEAGUE

    The Unionist Party had opposed Pakistan, had opposed the Muslim League, had opposed the Quaid-e-Azam Mohammed Ali Jinnah and had opposed Liaqat Ali Khan. After the death of Jinnah their wrath turned to Khan Liaqat Ali Khan. How could the Unionist oppose a trusted lieutenant of the Quaid? How could they oppose one of the greatest freedom fighters of the struggle for Pakistan? How could the Unionists oppose the leader of the Muslim League—the party that created Pakistan and opposed the Unionists in the Punjab? The Khan had many friends and supporters in the Punjab. The Khan was responsible for creating and nourishing the Muslim League in the Punjab. He had counted on and got the support of the people of Punjab. The Muslim League had defeated the Unionsist in the polls.

    Here is a quote from the book “HAD THERE BEEN NO JINNAH” (@1989 by Salahuddin Khan Printed by: PanGraphics (Pvt) Ltd. Islamabad. Pages 14-15.

     “From this stage, conflict between the Congress and theMuslim League became increasingly sharp. The MuslimLeague under the skilful leadership of Jinnah set itselfto strengthen its organization, extend its basis of supportamong the Muslim masses, and consolidate the variousMuslim groups and organizations so as to make the Muslim League the main Organization of the Muslims inIndia. During the period 1937-45 a decisive change took placein the position and relative strength of the Muslim League, as it won increasing mass support among the Muslims. The 1946 elections reveal the changed position.In the Central and Provincial Legislative Assembly elections the Muslim League won 460 out of 533 Muslimseats. There can be no doubt, that during this periodthe Muslim League had established its position as the major political organization among Muslims in India. It had been the original aim of the Congress to includeequally Hindus and Muslims. But, in practice, this aimwas never realised in the proportions of membership won.In January 1938, according to a press statement issuedby Nehru, out of 3.1 millions members of Congress, only1,00,000, that is 3.2% were Muslims; overwhelmingmajority of the newly awakened sections of the Muslimsturned to the Muslim League as their political organization.” 

    The victories in 1946 were at the expense of the pro-Congress Unionists in the Punjab. In the face of very strong popular grass-roots political support for Pakistan, the Muslim League and Liaqat Ali Khan the Hyattis were trying to figure to how to oppose Quaid-e-Azam and the Muslim League. The Khizar Hyatt political machinery could not find anything against Liaqat Ali Khan, so they used the race card. The Khizar Hyatt Unionist Party propaganda had painted Liaqat Ali Khan as an opponent of Punjabis. Nothing could be further from the truth. Liaqat Ali Khan opposed the feudal Unionist leaders like Khizar Hyatt  who had opposed Pakistan. Liaqat Ali Khan had many friends in the Punjab who had helped him defeat the Unionists at the polls. It is little known that L.A Khan was born in Karnal East Punjab. Here are some notes on the origins of Liaqat Ali Khan. I quote from p.27 of book by Prof. Ziauddin Ahmad , Liaquat Ali Khan: builder of Pakistan.

      ”The family, Before settling down in Karnal in thePunjab in the 19th century, lived on the other side of the Jamna in Muzaffarnagar (U.P., India) for some generations, where they owned bigestates.  Even after he settled down in Delhi, he took keen interestin the amelioratin and betterment of the Muslims of Muzaffarnagar.” 

    The Unionist element tried to rally support against Khan Liaqat Ali Khan by playing up the ethnic race card.  Liaqat Ali Khan was born in Karnal East Punjab with friends and relatives on both sides of the border. The Khan had very strong ties to East Punjab. However this fact was concealed and many Khizar Hyatt Khan supporters falsly labeled him.

    THE ASSASSINATION OF DEMOCRACY IN RAWALPINDI—A CIA PLOT?

    Liaqat Ali Khan was killed in broad daylight in Rawalpindi. This is what Zeba Zubair in Mutiny to Mountbatten says about the assassination:

     “On 16 October 1951 at a Public Meeting in Rawalpindi, ‘a blind shot from the blue’ silenced the voice of Quaid-e-Millat, Nawabzadah Liaqat Ali Khan. Another epoch of history was at an end. On a sad day for this new nation it was as if a mighty powe in heaven was also reacting in anger at the cowardly act of mankind. The sky of Karachi had a peculiar and ominous orange-yellow colouring and the people felt resltell at the starnge weather…” 

    This is what the Daily dawn of October 17th, 1951 said:

     ‘With the kalima on his lips, Liaqat , Successor of the Quaid-e-Azam Prime Minister. Leader unparalleled, is dead. The man who killed him was not just an individual he was the symbol of that deadly enmity of the enemies of Islam who have always wanted to destroy Pakistan. We name only one but we feel this in our heart with the certain flash and convinced truth. We grieve for Liaqat–martyr to Pakistan and Islam; but we proclaim over Liaqat’s still unburied body: Pakistan shall live, and whoever of her servants may fall in her service, this citadel of Islam guarded by 70 million worshippers of Allah will never fall. Begum Liaqat, Ashraf and Akbar, we shall not try to console you in your grief in consolable, but know this, that you beloved husband and father had died in glory and as comes only to the chosen of God. Pakistan Zindabad (Dawn Editorial, 17 October, 1951)” 

    Even in his last moments he was thinking of his nation. Other then remembering God and reciting the kalima, his last words were “Allah Pakistan ko apni amaan mai~n rakhay “(God save Pakistan). Every Pakistani of that generation absolutely remembers where he was and what he was doing when that fatal shot was announced on Radio Pakistan. Every patriotic Pakistani cried that day.

     ” A few yards away for the body of the founder of the Pakistan now rests its eternal sleep the body of the builder of Pakistan. Both died in harness and both died for Pakistan. The Quaid-e-Azam worked his body way to waste; the Quaid-e-Millat fearlessly exposed his body to danger for his love of duty and country. The master and the disciple, the twin servants of Islam who in this century added perhaps the most glorious chapter to Islam’s temporal history, now meet heaven. Like twin stars, unseen but their presence always felt, their blessings will be continually showered on the land which the one founded, and the other built up to a state of stability and strength form which progress forward is inevitable because of its own momentum. It is now for the nation which they served so well, to carry on their work, and in particular make the blood of martyred Liaqat blossom to all of us. But upon the new leader who has been chosen by the team left behind by Liaqat the main burned if it will fall, the choice has been will and wisely made.. 

    Khawaja Nazimuddin, our new Prime Minister and Liaqat’s successor as leader of this nation……”(Dawn editorial October 1951)

    This is what Javed Jabbar says about the assassination in Rawalpindi in an article in the Nation (Feb 26th, 1997) entitled  Accountability: history and truth.

     “Distortions in our relationship with accountability have an even more historic dimension. During the lifetime of the Quaid-i-Azam himself, within weeks and months of the creation of Pakistan, reports began to emerge about corruption at high levels in government. One of the major figures who despaired at this early neglect of accountability was Khan Abdul Ghaffar Khan. Then came the assassination of our first Prime Minister Quaid-i-Millat Liaquat Ali Khan. A man who was so financially incorruptible as to leave only a paltry sum in his bank account deserved to have his killers held to account for their heinous crime.  Over the past forty-five years, speculative interpretations name prominent individuals as suspects in the Liaquat assassination. The official inquiry was not received as a credible analysis. In addition tothe original stain of financial corruption on the white and spotlessly clean garment of accountabilitywere now added the red stains of blood: people could actually get away with murder.” 

    The Shaheed-e-Millat was so scrupulously honest that when he died, he had holes in his socks. This was the man that presented the Crescent and Star “Khanjar hilal ka hai qaumi nitaa~n hamaara” to the constituent National Assembly of Pakistan. His famous closed fist remained a symbol of defiance to India, and it remained a symbol of our sovereignity.

    Right after the assassination of Khan Liaqat Ali Khan, the patsy—actual murderer (the man who pulled the trigger) was caught and killed immediately (lest he spill the beans). Lee Harvey Oswald suffered the same fate when he actually started talking. However the real murderers the people who ordered the death of a the first prime minister of Pakistan not only remained at large, they actually benefited from his death. As a final insult to the slain freedom-fighter Liaqat Bagh (the site of his assassination) was turned into a bus stop and the promised garden to this date remains a commercial cess pot.

    The day Liaqat Ali Khan died , democracy died in Pakistan. Dictators took over the reigns of the government and abrogated the constituent assembly. On 23rd October, Ghulam Mohammad dissilved the Constituent Assembly and with it, any semblence of constitutiona legitmacy. Altaf. This is what the Daily Dawn said in one of its editorials, and it gives a brief synopsis of the events leading to and the levents that occured right after the death of the Shaheed-e-Millat:

    “Since birth Pakistan has had four major nights of crisis. On the night of Spetember 11. The Father of the nationdied. On the night of October 16, 1951, the nation held its breath, dazed by the murder of its builder, Liaqat. On the night of April 17, 1953,a Governmetn headed by the President of the Muslim League was flicked off the ash from a cigar-tip. On the night of October 23, 1954 (because it was then, we think that the decision was taken) the constituent Assembly of Pakistan was beleived to be soverign body, was wiped off the country’s political map like one wipes spilt milk form a table….(Dawn: 27 October, 1954)”

    This abrogation kept Pakistan without a real constitution till 1973 The 1956 and 1963 constitutions were abrogated and martial laws imposed in 1958 and 1969. A lack of constitutional protection to the Bengalis and other citizens of Pakistan led to the creation of deep suspicions in the minds of the common Pakistanis, specially the Bengalis.

     THE BENEFICIARIES FROM LIAQAT ALI KHANS DEATH

    It is obvious that the assassins of Khan Liaqat Ali Khan were the parties and leaders who benefited from his death. After remmoving the elected prime minister from office through murder, the feudals tried to marginalize the Bengalis. As a result of the conspiracy the constitution was abrogated and the military feudal complex took over Pakistan. The feudals and their sentries the army took over the reins of the country and never let go.

    It is based on these grains of truth that Ayesha Jalal and the Indian text books claim that the Muslim League was supported by the landlords. Before the creation of Pakistan these feudals opposed the Muslim League tooth and nail. It is unfortunate for our country that these feudals became the rulers of Pakistan after Liaqat Ali Khan. The rest as they say is history. For a list of Muslim League enemies, one does not have to go far. A directory of officers of the Unionist Party along with the list of the Khaksars (who actually did make many attempts on Muslim League leaders). For details on the Muslim League-Unionist animosity please see my article called “The Fifth Column” posted on soc.culture.pakistan.history.

    This is what Javed Jabbar says about the assassination in Rawalpindi in an article in the Nation (Feb 26th, 1997) entitled  Accountability: history and truth.

     “When the black gowns of the superior judiciary joined the blood-stained garb of accountability, a decisive turning point was passed. The legitimisation of the dissolution of the Constituent Assembly by Governor-General Ghulam Muhammad and his dismissal of Prime Minister Khawaja Nazimuddin established a new ground norm that went beyond the justified and unavoidable dismissal of Dr Khan Sahib’s NWFP government in August 1948, when the provincial regime declined to accept even the symbolic elements of the new state of Pakistan.”

    THE KHAKSARS FASCISTS ATTEMPTED MANY ASSASSINATIONS ON THE QUAID-E-AZAM. DID THE UNIONISTS-KHAKSARS ASASSINATE LIAQAT ALI KHAN?

    Vacuity of ideas did not prevent losers from forming parties. There are many inconsequential movements in the Subcontinent, whose mention is but a footnote in the historical records. The Khaksars are but one of the failed movements that achieved nothing. Being proud of the Khaksars is like being proud of the KKK or being proud of the Nazis of German or the Fascists of Italy. The only difference is that the Nazis and the Fascist caught the imagination of the Italians and the Germans. The Khaksars only caught the imagination of the demented few in the Punjab. Their claim to fame was repeated assassination attempts on the Quaid-e-Azam, Mohammad Ali Jinnah.

    The fundamentalist militia group calling itself the Khaksars were led by their mouse-hearted salar Agha Zaigham in 1938-40. They got their inspiration from the brown shirts of Italy. They patterned their uniforms and their marching style from Mousolinni and his Fascist Party. They were anarchists who wanted total control over everything.

    I quote Stanley Wolpert (Jinnah of Pakistan, Page 180):

     ” Paramilitary Muslim Khaksars were as hostile towards the Muslim League as they were anti-Hindu and anti-Sikh……..As a whole however, the Khaksars never reconciled to Jinnah’s leadership and tried more than once in the next few years to assassinate him”  

    The Muslim League led by the Quaid-e-Azam and their march towards Pakistan was an impediment to their fascist dreams. I quote the incident from Jinnah of Pakistan by Stanley Wolpert: Page 224.

     “Jinnah returned to Bombay from his tour of Baluchistan on Friday, July 23. Three days later, on the afternoon of Monday, July 26, a fanatical young Muslim Khaksar from Lahore, Rafique Sabir Mazangavi, entered the Quaid-i-Azam’s Mount Pleasant Road house and appealed to Jinnah’s secretary, Mr. M.H.Saiyed for an interview with the great leader. Just then Jinnah entered his secretary’s office and asken who Tafiq was and what he wanted ‘I was very busy’, Jinnah testified later in Bombay’s high court. My whole mind was on my correspondence and I was trying to get out of the room. Just as I was about to leave the room, in the twinkling of an eye, the accused sprang on me and gave me a blow with his clenched fist on my left jaw. I naturally reeled back a bit when he pulled out a knife from his wrist….It was an open knife….Instinct of self-defence made me put out my hand and catch his wrist, with the result that the momentum of the blow was broken but in spite of this the knife touched the left side of my jaw. I got a cut near my chin and my coat near the left-shoulder…I also got a wound on my left finger.

    The last meeting of the All India Muslim League was held on June 10, 1947…..Here is another incident narrated by Wolpert in Jinnah of Pakistan on Page 329:

     “Khaksars rushed in through the once-tranquil garden, entering the hotel lounge ‘brandishing belchas, or sharpened spades…shouting get Jinnah!’ half way up the staircase leading to the ballroom where Jinnah and the Council were ….in session before…League National Guards could grapple with them and turn them back. It took police with tear gas to bring the disturbance to an end. Some fifty Khaksar would-be assassins were arrested…. 

    The movement ended without achieving any results. The Muslim League routed them at the polls and eliminated their attempts at arson and carnage. Their assassination attempts on the Quaid-e-Azam were unsuccessful. Liaqat Ali Khan however did get asassinated.

     CRITICISM OF KHAN LIAQAT ALI KHAN

    No Pakistani leader can be put on a pedastal and worshipped. Liaqat Ali Khan was a politician, and he faced the political wrath of his opponents. The purpose of persenting his criticism is to learn from history. Could he have formed better alliances with the Unitionists? Could he have curried favor with the Hyatts? Could he have practised more inclusion? Could he have have created more consensus politics? The answer to all the questions is yes. But he lived under enormous pressure. He was a freedom fighter. He was unable to enjoy the fruits of his victories like Fidel Castro. He was unlucky for he did not have the life of Boumediene who was able to lead Algeria to victory, and then was able to give stability and direction to the new nation. Like the Indonesian Sukarno, Liaqat did not survive to enjoy his victories. Like Hazrat Usman, Liaqat Ali Khan faced the charge of nepotism, and like Usman, he too was murdered by his opponents. If a man is known by the stature of his opponents, then Liaqat Ali Khan indeed was a great man.

    The Khan was brutally honest, and he was a patriot till his last breath. He had no bank accounts and he built no empires for himself. After his death, his wife Rana Liaqat Ali Khan, had to work as government servant to support the family till she died. The ahtishab commission would have absolved him, for he was never charged with any personal crime of corruption. His struggle with the feudals was the struggle for Pakistan. Sahukat Hyatt has criticized the Quaid and the Muslim League in his ‘memoirs”. Hyatts agenda is clear. Demonize the Khan and demonize Jinnah. Rock the foundations of the leadership of the Muslim League and this will crumble the history on which the country stands. The opponents point of view has to be understood and rebutted. Here is the criticism of the Khan by his greatest enemy.

    Sardar Shaukat Hayat Khan, the last of the prominent Muslim League leaders, has this to say in his Memoirs, “The nationa that lost its soul”,  p. 178.

     “He (Liaqat Ali Khan) delayed the completion of the Constitution to avoid elections which he could not win because he had no seat in Pakistan and had to be elected by East Pakistan. He, on the advice of officers belonging to the United Provinces, broke the Liaqat-Nehru Pact about the agreed areas for migration from India to Pakistan, requiring the record of property to be exchanged officially. He, quite against the agreement permitted inhabitants of UP and Rajasthan to enter via Khokhrapar – thus opening floodgates endangering the stability of the already overloaded boat of Pakistan. I objected to this in the assembly. This action of Liaqat was quite partial allowing only people from his old Province and the adjoining areas to migrate unfairly into Pakistan in rder to create a seat for himself in Karachi. The people of the rest of the India were left to stew in their own juice. This act of his created a lot of confusion with people getting allotments in Sindh, without records on each other’s dubious evidence. This led to the problems of MQM and their hatred by Sindhis. These refugees got a monopoly of jobs in the cities and deprived local Pakistanis of their rightful share. The political instability still persists.”(source: Page 178 from the “Nation that lost its soul”, enclosed as Vol 2.5 in the document) 

    Unable to find any flaws with the character and strategy of the freedom fighting Khan, Hyatt uses the race card to discredit the Shaeed-e-Millat. The above criticism of the Khan is invalid due to the following reasons:

    1. In 1947 Forty percent of Pakistan was Hindu and Sikh, and more than 60% of Lahore was Hindu and Sikh. If Pakistan had remained a state with these population ratios, the vialbility of the fledgling state was at stake. A Pakistani nation with 40% Hindus and Sikh could hardly be called Islamic and could hardly have any laws that would allow the propogation of Islam.
    2. The bulk of migration into Pakistan occured across the Punjab border and involved the Muslim Panjabis headed West to West Punjab, and the Hindu and Sikh Punjabis headed East to East Punjab (and Haryana). Lahore, Rawalpindi, Sargodha and Sialkot and other major cities of the Punjab were actually all Hindu or Hindu dominated cities.
    3. Most of the Muslim migration was not into Sindh and it was not out of the UP. In the period right after independence, five Million East Punjabis were exchanged with five million West Punjabi Hindus and Sikhs. About 1.5 million Kashmiris migrated to Lahore. The families of Muslim Leaguers like Nawaz Sharif are progenies of that Kashmiri Muslim migration.
    4. The Nehru-Liaqat pact was not adhered to. The Nehru-Liaqat pact died the day, India refused the transfer of the assets to the government of Pakistan–planes, cars, chairs, gold and bullion. It also died the day, Patel sent his police action into Hydrabad. It died the day Junagarh was denied its right to accede to Pakistan. It died long before Hari Singh acceeded to India.
    5. 5)       Gurdspur was a Muslim majority area in East Punjab. Gurdaspur was in the natural line of demarcation to be in Pakistan. It was on the Pakistani side of the river. The Radcliff commission gave away Gurdaspur to India because it provided an Indian road  link to Kashmir. Gurdaspur had Pakistani flags fluttering everwhere. It was given to India. Read Minto to see the details of the massacre and the rape Muslims in Gurdaspur. The majority of the Muslim majority Punjabi inhabitants were now set on the “Pakistan specials” bound for Lahore and Pakistan. The same story went on in many many town and villages. For details please see Collins (Freedom at Midnight). The Nehru-Liaqat pact faced these types of human tragedies.
    6. The Hyatt criticism fails to mention the alliances Liaqat Ali  Khan had with many other non-Unioninst, iddependent andMuslim League Punjabi leaders. Liaqat Ali Khan founded the Punjab Muslim League, nurtured it and used it to defeat the Unionists. The League struggle against  the Congress allied with the Unionists is not mentioned by the Hyatt memoirs.  The Khan and the League were popular in the Punjab, he had electoral victories in the Punjab to prove this fact. The creation of Pakistan was indeed possible because the Congress-Unionist alliance was defeated in the Punjab.
    7. The Khan formed alliances and chose pro-Pakistani elements. It is obvious that he did not promote the likes of Hyatt because he did not want pro-Congress sympathizers in his government. Many/most of the early Muslim Leagers from the Punjabwere the allies of the Khan. These very leaders formed the intelligencia of the Punjab and Pakistan today.
    8. The instability in Sindh is a complex issue created by many mistakes. Some of these mistakes are bing rectified by the PML-MQM government in power.
    9. The battles in the streets of Karachi are ethnic and religious in nature, all conflicts have that element, but the main cause of friction is Karachi and Urban Sindh is ECONOMIC. To brand the problems as ethnic is dismissing a phenomenon that has to do with the evolution of South Asian society.

    Here is a more credible historian who paints us a realistic picture of the events of Pakistani freedom. The book is “HAD THERE BEEN NO JINNAH” (@1989 by Salahuddin Khan Printed by: PanGraphics (Pvt) Ltd. Islamabad.pages 14-15

    In a letter to Jinnah, in January 1937, Nehru declared,

     “In the final analysis, there are only two forces in Indiatoday- British Imperialism, and the Congress representing Indian Nationalism, the Muslim Leaguerepresents a group of Muslims, having no contact withthe Muslim masses.” 

    This statement was indeed a great victory for the League for Jinnah and for Liaqat Ali Khan. It defeated the Unionist-Congress alliance in the Punjab and the Badsha Khan-Congress alliance in Sarhad. Both alliances would have defeated Pakistan if allowed to flourish.

    I quote from Reference which is very anti-Liaqat, but this gives us a very deep insight into the politics of the time: 

     “Punjabi chauvinism and Liaqat Ali Khan’s favoritism was at each others throat. The fight was furious and Mr. Khan was not a gentleman either.  Mr. Khan was desperate to build his political base in the newly formed state.  He could go to any length to achieve his personal goals” . 

    Political History of Pakistan, Vol. 4, edited by Hasan Jafar Zaidi, Idara-Mutala-i-Tarikh.  pp 185-187

    Liqat Ali Khan was a philanthropist, who took keen interest in developing the Muslims of East Punjab the place of his birth. He supported many instituions in Karnal and assisted as many Muslims as he could. Details of his philanthropy are clearly listed in Professor Ziauddin’s book Liaqat Ali Khan: Builder of Pakistan. He chose the old Muslim Leaguers who had supported the Quaid and had fought for Pakistan. It did not matter where the supporters originated—–the test was loyalty to Pakistan.

    Charging Liaqat Ali Khan with nepotism, and commenting on the appointments Liaqat Ali Khan had made, here is another quote from the Political History of Pakistan:

     Hashim Raza, administrator Karachi; his brother Kazim Raza, IG police; Aal-e-Raza, also brother of Hashim, Public Prosecutor; Superintendent CID; Home Secretary Punjab, all of them from UP.  Liaqat Ali Khan did all this to secure his political success from Karachi at least.

    Here is Hasan Jafar Zaidi defending Liaqat Ali Khan:

    It doesn’t mean that Punjab was being suppressed. The then chief secretary East Bengal, Aziz Ahmad was from Punjab.  The commander of army in Bengal was (you guessed it right) Maj. General Ayub Khan was from Hazar….  They never gave the respect to political leadership of Bengal either.

    This incorrect sentiment against Liaqat Ali Khan (planted by the antagonist of the Muslim League, the great feudal Mr. Khizar Hyatt and the pro-Congress, and anti-Pakistan, Unionist Party ) has been uprooted in our historical records and died in the feudal stronghold of Rawalpindi and the Potowar region (the Hyatt-Tiwans stronghold). After the creation of Pakistan the pro-Congress/Gandhi Unionist Party of Punjab went extinct but the remnants of the old political guard still oppose the Muslim League or what it stood for. Shaheed-e-Millats anniversary cannot be ignored. It is the anniversary of the victory for Pakistan. Liaqat Ali Khan has been given his rightful place in history. The ablest lieutenants of the Quaid has his place next to the the Quaid. The nation calls him shahed-e-millat. Pakistani patriots call him shaheed-e-millat. If Quaid-e- Azam was the founder of nation, Quaid-e-Millat, Liaqat Ali Khan was the builder of the state.

    Preservation of our history is our sacred duty. This site would be a very boring place without the interactive dialogue and the criticism of our leadershsip.  Criticism of our leaders is an essential part of the dialogue. More criticism of the Khan and of the Muslim League will be rebutted in the columns. 

       THE END

    APPEENDIX A

    Recently declassified doucments regarding Liaqat Ali Khan’s assassination

      return to Paul Wolf’s home page

    Pakistan: Partition and Military Succession

    Documents from the U.S. National Archives

     

     

     

    POLITICAL INTRIGUE

    Assassination of Liaquat Ali Khan
    Ghulam Mohammed
    Iskander Mirza
    April 1953 Coup
    Constititional Coup of September 21, 1954
    Mohammed Ayub Khan
    Zulfikar Ali Bhutto
    Jamaat-e-Islami
    Muslim Brotherhood
    Matta Riot
    Anti-Communist Program in East Pakistan
    misc political

    Assassination of Liaquat Ali Khan

    G-2 BID Report No. R-91-48, June 15, 1948

    Subjects Touched on by Liaquat Ali Khan in Speeches During His Tour of Western Pakistan, Oct. 5, 1948

    Congen Lahore reports Liaquat shot this afternoon while attending meeting of Muslim City League at Rawalpindi. Operated on due two shots in chest. Hospital reports wound serious but not rpt not necessarily fatal. Assailant killed by crowd not rpt not yet identified. Information not rpt not yet confirmed by GOP Karachi. Confidential Telegram from Karachi Embasssy, Oct. 16, 1951

    Prime Minister killed at Rawalpindi by Islam League fanatic. No rpt no internal disturbances reported. … Embassy informed Cabinet meeting tomorrow to be presided over by Governor Gen. who will probably step down as GG and take over temporarily as PM. Reference EmbDesp 409 October 4. Confidential Telegram from Karachi Embassy, Oct. 16, 1951

    Although popular information attributes assassination to Khaksars, high authority in Government informs Embassy that killer Syed Akhbar, was an Afghan national and was motivated by (1) Pukhtoonistan sentiment and anger over political detention of his brother and (2) resentment over Pak Govts cautious attitude toward Kashmir. Killer had participated in Kashmir war. Source says connection with Pukhtoonistan will not rpt not be released to press. Killer left his home in Abbotabad for Rawalpindi on 14th. Emergency meeting of available Cabinet Ministers with Secy Gen Mohamed Ali presiding just concluded. No rpt no indication successor; decision probably not rpt not made. Confidential Telegram from Karachi Embasssy, Oct. 16, 1951

    Government press information department is now telling press that assassin was Afghan national. Press information officer now says identity established as member of Jagran tribe. Present state of public opinion indicates strong possibility of public demand for war if this information accepted by public. Confidential Telegram from Karachi Embasssy, Oct. 17, 1951

    The Situation in Pakistan, Oct. 17, 1951

    Comment on the Assassination of the Pakistani Prime Minister, Oct. 17, 1951

    The Assassination of the Prime Minister of Pakistan, Oct. 18, 1951

    Special Note: The Assassination of the Prime Minister of Pakistan, Oct. 18, 1951 (11 pages; William Langer’s name appears on report)

    I have just talked with Ghulam Mohd who asked me to send you his affectionate greetings. He said he is bearing up very well under shock of Liaquat’s death and necessity for taking immediate decisions that have resulted in his appointment and Nazimuddin’s Premiership. They are being sworn in tomorrow afternoon at four. Confidential Telegram from Karachi Embasssy, Oct. 18, 1951

    This p.m. I had tea with Ghulam Mohammed following his arrival from Rawalpindi by train. He stood journey without undue fatigue and his convalescence does not appear to have been retarded by shocks of last 2 days. He will take oath of office as Governor General tomorrow at 4 p.m. and will immediately swear in Nazimuddin as PM. Announcement of new Cabinet will not be made immediately. Liaquat’s cabinet will continue in their various port-folios for time being. Secret Telegram from Karachi Embassy, Oct. 18, 1951

    The Pakistan government has identified the assassin of Liaquat Ali Khan, late Prime Minister of Pakistan, as being Sayed Akber, son of Babrak Khan. If that assertion is true, the above mentioned Sayed Akber, together with his brother, [Za]marak, insurged against the government of Afghanistan in 1944 at a place named Elmara in Jadran, situated in the southern province of Afghanistan. The government forces defeated the insurrection and the two brothers escaped. After wandering for some time, they surrendered themselves to the British frontier authorities who interned them in Abot Abad, and granted them regular salaries. After the partition of India, the said Sayed Akber was given asylum by the Pakistan government. It is clear, therefore, that the said Sayed Akber had no connection whatsoever with Afghanistan, which looks upon such activities with great indignation. Official Afghan Reaction to Press Implications of Afghan Complicity in Assassination of Pakistan Prime Minister, Oct. 18, 1951

    Iskander Mirza Defense Secretary called on me yesterday morning before cabinet meeting and asked my advice regarding Pak Govt attitude on publicity as to Afghan nationality of Primins assassin, money found in his possession, etc. I asked if facts were true and he said they were. I said that further publicity on this line would have bad effect on popular mind and he apparently agreed. Confidential Telegram from Karachi Embasssy, Oct. 19, 1951

    Reliable source in Pak Intelligence Bureau reports that Pak Govt has been aware intelligence activities of Afghan Consul in Peshawar for some time and that he is known to have had recent and frequent contacts with Syed Akhbar, Assassin of Primin. Secret Telegram from Karachi Embasssy, Oct. 19, 1951

    Press reaction including Bengali to assassination Liaquat Ali Khan: papers repeat GOI official’s remarks and expand expressions sympathy and condemnation of violence in editorials. Moderation is keynote throughout with exception extreme leftist press including Communist “Swadhinata” which states “Liaquat’s death only reflects inevidable disaster that overtakes policy of playing lackey to Anglo-American Powers,” also accuses Nazimuddin of “Western bias” and of planning prevention improvement position Suhrawardy. … Speculation in Calcutta tends emphasize probability assassination resulted same group (military) whose planned coup March 1951 nipped by GOP. Sources think military extremists hands strengthened. Restricted Telegram from Consulate General, Calcutta, Oct. 19, 1951

    Afghan Charge handed Department October 18 translated communique from Kabul for local press, stating in summary if GOP identification Liaquat’s assassin Syed Akhbar as Afghan national correct, it was clear Akhbar and brother involved in unsuccessful insurrection against GOA 1944 southern province following which they interned India. Communique indicated GOA revulsion assassination. … Embassy Kabul should seek occasion soonest convey substance above remarks Foreign Office. While Department recognizes necessity Afghan pronouncement in answer implications press reports, believes best interest both countries served by limiting public discussion. Request earliest transmission fullest information and Embassy comments re alleged 1944 insurrection and possibility Commie instigation assassination. Secret Telegram from Secretary of State, Oct. 20, 1951

    [] reports Afghan Consul Peshawar presently in Kabul. This confirmed by British Embassy clerk who when on October 16 asked for transport in Egyptian Embassy vehicle from Peshawar to Kabul was told seat was unavailable because Afghan Consul had been promised transport to Kabul. Embassy feels Afghan Consul’s departure not rpt not necessarily connected with assassination as no rpt no information established connection available this time. Afghan press today admits Liaquat assassin may have been one Syed Akbar from Khost Province in Afghan but stated that he and brother Zamarak had fled to South Waziristan in 1945 after inciting unsuccessful rebellion and were later resettled in Abbotabad and given pensions by British thus losing Afghan nationality. Consequently, press maintains Afghan cannot rpt not be held in any way responsible. Other source states assassin and two brothers (one named Izmair) were members leading family Hjadran tribe in Khost Province and fled to South Waziristan when tribe was defeated in 1945 uprising against Khost Provincial Government. Also states assassin was member “Red Shirt” organization but affiliation two surviving brothers, now residing Pakistan, unknown. Secret Telegram from Kabul Embassy, Oct. 21, 1951

    It seems generally accepted in [Rawalpindi and Peshawar] that Afghan Consul was paymaster of assassin PAK PRIMIN. According to one story Consul made trip to Afghan frontier in own car and upon arrival paid off his Pak chauffeur. Chauffeur allegedly had no previous knowledge of trip or fact he was to be dismissed and on return Peshawar spole of matter to friends and to Pak Intelligence. In conversations with various non-official persons, including Pashtuns, it was stated as self-evident fact that Pashtuns as group have always provided assassins for suitable price. Pashtun racial background of assassin SEYED AKBAR was accepted as wholly natural. Confidential Telegram from Karachi Embasssy, Oct. 22, 1951

    The Current Outlook in Pakistan, Oct. 22, 1951

    In accordance GOP request Pakistan Press has refrained since October 19 from referring to Afghan connections of assassin. Government has not released to public information that assassin was in contact with Afghan Consul at Peshawar. GOP has no information indicating any commie connection with assassination. Secret Telegram from Karachi Embasssy, Oct. 23, 1951

    Secret Telegram from Kabul Embassy, Oct. 23, 1951

    Embassy today received Circular from Afghan Embassy containing following remarks: Assassin said Akhbar and brother revolted against Afghan government 1944. After defeat rebellion they fled over border and finally gave up selves to British authorities. For some unknown reason British gave them shelter in Abbottabad, center of Hazara district, and also gave them money to live on. After division Pakistan and India, Pakistan government, unconcerned about international law or acknowledged neighborly behavior, have been investigating against government of Afghanistan and, among other activities, have sought services of this assassin. His late crime proves that assassin was not only enemy of present regime Afghanistan but, through some other mysterious machinations in Pakistan itself, he also became enemy of Pakistan government. Government and people Afghanistan who could have possibly no connection with assassin look upon such base and mean crime with abhorrence and disdain. Secret Telegram from Moscow Embassy, Oct. 26, 1951

    Under headline reading “Is Liaquat Ali Khan’s assassination result of a deep-laid American conspiracy?”, leftist Urdu daily Bhopal named Nadeem published article October 24 charging US with responsibility. Summary article follows:

     

     

     

    [...]It was learned within Pakistani Foreign Office that while UK pressing Pakistan for support re Iran, US demanded Pakistan exploit influence with Iran and support Iran transfer oil fields to US. Liaquat declined request. US threatened annul secret pact re Kashmir. Liaquat replied Pakistan had annexed half Kashmir without American support and would be able to take other half. Liaquat also asked US evacuate air bases under pact. Liaquat demand was bombshell in Washington. American rulers who had been dreaming conquering Soviet Russia from Pakistan air bases were flabbergasted. American minds set thinking re plot assassinate Liaquat. US wanted Muslim assassin to obviate international complications. US could not find traitor in Pakistan as had been managed Iran, Iraq, Jordan. Washington rulers sounded US Embassy Kabul. American Embassy contacted Pashtoonistan leaders, observing Liaquat their only hurdle; assured them if some of them could kill Liaquat, US would undertake establish Pashtoonistan by 1952. Pashtoon leaders induced Akbar undertake job and also made arrangements kill him to conceal conspiracy. USG-Liaquat differences recently revealed by Graham report to SC; Graham had suddenly opposed Pakistan although he had never given such indication. [...] Cartridges recovered from Liaquat body were American-made, especially for use high-ranking American officers, usually not available in market. All these factors prove real culprit behind assassin is US Government, which committed similar acts in mid-East. “Snakes” of Washington’s dollar imperialism adopted these mean tactics long time ago. Confidential Telegram No. 1532 from New Delhi Embassy, Oct. 30, 1951

     

     

     

     

     

     

    Recommend Department ignore article summarized in Delhi’s 1532. It is compilation of utter falsehoods whose vituperation is some degree worse than articles that appear from time to time in Bombay’s Commie-line “Blitz”. To issue any statement labeling the facts in the article as lies will only give Nadeem an importance it does not merit. The investigation into background of Liaquat’s assassination is being conducted with extreme care and well guarded secrecy. Gurmani tells me an intercept has been obtained which if backed up by further material may reveal the assassination had some inspiration and followed the pattern of Razmara’s assassination in Teheran. Confidential Telegram from Karachi Embasssy, Oct. 31, 1951

    Since article apparently not rpt not widely circulated, Department believes preferable not rpt not issue public denial. In its discretion, however, Embassy might informally mention case MEA with comment story so preposterous no rpt no public denial intended. Would be interesting to know whether this story of character which led adoption recent press law. Ownership management NADEEM should be discreetly be investigated. Confidential Telegram from State Dept., Nov. 1, 1951

    Soviet Press today carried Prague Despatch reporting Rude Pravo article based Afghan press agency “Bahtar” information re assassination Liaquat Ali. Despatch states after escaping Afghanistan due murders and other crimes “Said Akbar ran to India and there under protection British authorities which gave him refuge in Abbotabad and provided him money. After partition India Akbar remained in Pakistan where he continued make use protection of certain British circles.” “These facts adduced by Afghan press supporting position that murder Liaquat Ali was result intrigue of imperialists in Asian countries.” Secret Telegram from Moscow Embassy, Nov. 3, 1951 [only first page located]

    The Embassy questions the premise stated in the first sentence of the Airgram under reference (”Lack of spontaneous anti-Indian and anti-Afghan popular outburst over both July war scare and Liaquat’s assassination suggests feeling on Kashmir and Afghan disputes mostly government inspired.”) … The anti-Afghan agigation that spontaneously sprang up on October 16-17 was effectively stopped by the GOP’s prompt exercise of its official and unofficial powers of censorship over the press, even to the extent of preventing reference after October 17 to the assassin’s Afghan origin. Popular Feeling in Pakistan on Kashmir and Afghan Issues, Nov. 10, 1951

    With regard to the assassination of the Prime Minister in Rawalpindi, Colonel Massart stated that he had not attended the meeting because of his UN position. He stated that part of the public reaction was a great surprise to him, since he found some of the non-commissioned officers nto expressing horror, but making remarks, “He should have known better to come to Rawalpindi, where he should have known that he would be shot.” The Colonel considers that Rawalpindi was a center of “anti-Liaquat feeling.” Confidential Telegram from Lahore Consulate, Nov. 14, 1951

    Acting Foreign Minister Hussain informed me tonight in conversation called at his request that Paks had recd information over past two-three weeks that Afghan authorities rpt Afghan authorities had recently surreptitiously released from incarceration over 120 known killers with orders infiltrate Pak and eliminate Pak public men. At first Paks did not believe but Hussain states that information has now reached Paks causing them consider reports beyond doubt. He would not reveal sources of latter information beyond admitting that some came from Pak Embassy Kabul but with most from many other sources. Added that if other public men assassinated by suspected Afghan nationals government will be unable hold people in check. Secret Telegram from Karachi Embassy, Nov. 15, 1951

    Liaquat Ali Khan was buried in the same manner (tomb) as Jinnah. In order to accomplish this, a wall behind Jinnah’s grave was torn down and access to the grave for the funeral procession was across a raised marble floor surrounding Jinnah’s mazar to Liaquat’s grave in the rear. This has continued to be the primary avenue to the grave of Liaquat used by the many mourners who still visit there every day. It is reliably reported, however, that Fatima Jinnah ordered the caretaker of Quaid-i-Azam’s mazar to rebuild the wall. She later repeated the request to the Secretary of the Ministry of Works. The matter was put before the Minister and on the same day orders were given to raise up the wall again. However, shortly afterwards the new wall was torn down by what was variously described in the press as a “bevy of All-Pakistan Women’s Association amazons” to a “mob from Quaiddbad.” M.A. Zuberi, Editor of the Evening Star told an officer of the Embassy that, in fact, two officers of the All-Pakistan Women’s Association, of which Begum Liaquat Ali Khan is President, incited a group of people at the mazar to tear down the wall. Public Role of Ms. Fatima Jinnah Since Assassination of Liaquat, Nov. 17, 1951

    The Commission inquiring into the security precautions taken at time of Liaquat’s assassination reconvened Lahore Jan. 3. Among witnesses examined since convening are Khan Najaf Khan, Special Police, and Anwar Ali, Deputy Inspector General of Police, CIA (in “camera”). No conclusive findings made or announced thus far. Political and Economic Developments for the Week Ending Jan. 8, 1952, Jan. 8, 1952

    Political Developments in Pakistan, Sept.-Dec. 1951, Jan. 30, 1952

    The most significant internal development during the quarter, bearing on US interests and objectives, was Liaquat’s assassination. Aside from being an avowed friend of the US, Liaquat was a constructive factor of decision and strength, both in government and party leadership. … It seems clear that Prime Minister Nazimuddin, though basically friendly to the West, lacks the stubborn firmness that served Liaquat, the Muslim League and the country as a whole in its early formative years. Confidential Telegram A-251 from Karachi Embassy, Feb. 11, 1952

    Political Developments in Pakistan, January 1952, Feb. 25, 1952

    Summary of report Liaquat assassination enquiry commission, released by GOP yesterday, being sent in clear Embtel following. Emb believes commission report which is vague and inconclusive leaves cabinet in more vulnerable position than before enquiry started. Motive not established, according to released summary, and GOP now wide open to accusations by its critics of suppression of info and of not satisfying public demand, accusationswhich were made before release. It seems possible that summary is much watered-down version of full report in hands of GOP and that full facts will not be made public. Cabinet particularly vulnerable on enquiry commission’s announcement that info would not be divulged on three conspiracies uncovered. Confidential Telegram from Karachi Embassy, Aug. 18, 1952

    Siddiq Wahab, one of speakers at public meeting August 14 addressed by Larachi Muslim League dissidents, arrested by police Aug 18 for “promoting hatred against Govt.” Emb local employees who attended meeting state that in addition to demanding publication Liaquat assassination enquiry report Wahab accused Nazimuddin and some of his cabinet of complicity in Liaquat assassination. Wahab is a director of large Karachi Urdu daily Anjam. Begum Liaquat in statement issued to press Aug 18 has strongly criticized published enquiry report. She stated “anybody reading report will be impressed particularly by wise reserve with which Commission left open the all important qusetion … that is, whether or not act of assassin was individiaul act of Said Akbar or perpetrated by him in pursuance of conspiracy,” and added “it is for nation now they have seen report to judge for themselves whether they satisfied with steps so far taken to track down hidden hand behind tragedy.” Confidential Telegram from Karachi Embassy, Aug. 19, 1952

    Speculation is wide that the assassination was part of a conspiracy involving persons high in provincial or Central Govt. Khan Najaf Khan seems to be the convenient scapegoat. In fact careful reading of report shows there was negligent handling of security measures all down the line and at the inquiry both the Punjab Govt. and the North West Frontier Province Govt. seemed far more interested in passing the blame to each other and in covering up for their own officials than in getting at the truth. NWFP is involved because the assassin was under local detention in Abbotabad, NWFP, and was not supposed to make a move without police permission. Political and Economic Developments for the Week Aug 17-23, Aug. 25, 1952

    Sudden death in air crash of GOP Inspector General of Police brought forth revelation that he was to be officially assigned to case. Press sources claimed he was already secretly working on it. H.S. Suhrawardy, head of opposition Junnah Awami League called on GOP to compel Punjab Government to do its duty in getting to the bottom of the assassination conspiracy. Political and Economic Summary for Week Aug. 24-29, 1952, Aug. 30, 1952

    The Inquiry Committee investigating the recent plane crash in which GOP Inspector General of Police was killed has revealed that all the principal documents relating to the Liaquat assassination investigation were on the plane and had been received safely. It is believed here by some that this is another link in the chain of suspicious events surrounding the assassination. Had the plane burned on crashing, as tehre was good reason to expect, all the documents would have conveniently disappeared and the investigation would have practically come to an end. This of course has served to increase the rumors that high officials are implicated in the assassination and are making every effort to prevent an honest and efficient investigation. Political and Economic Summary for Week August 30 – September 5, 1952, Sept. 9, 1952

    The release of the report which hinted at dark conspiracies and accused several police officials of derelication of duty in failing to take proper security precautions, opened the dam for a flood of rumors, suppositions and speculations. The most popularly accepted theory was that the assassination was the result of a conspiracy in which high officials were involved and that efforts had been, and were being made, to suppress an impartial and thorough inquiry. The Inquiry Commission was appointed by the Punjab government and much criticism was heaped on its head as a result of the report. Many demands were made for the Central Government to take up the investigation. Soon after the report was published, the Inspector General of Police of Pakistan was killed in a freak air crash. In the plane wreckage were found all the documents pertaining to the investigation. It thus leaked out that the central government had in fact been working on the case through a few days earlier the Prime Minister had stated that it was a purely provincial matter. The rumor factories at once linked the air crash with alleged attempts at suppression of evidence and concluded that it was all part of a well laid plan. However, after a few days of sensational reporting of the case the press did a black out and popular curiosity seems to have died down. Bi-Monthly Political Report – July and August, 1952, Sept. 12, 1952

    Khan Najaf Khan, Police Official accused of negligence in failing to take proper security precautions for the safety of Liaquat has reportedly answered the charge sheet served on him. The burden of his answer is not yet revealed but it is assumed by all he will plead not guilty to the charges. Begum Liaquat has again charged that the government is dragging its feet in pressing the investigation of the assassination. COMMENT: It is widely rumored here that the charges against Najaf Khan are merely a cover for the parties really responsible for the assassination. Bazaar rumors are to the effect that he will be temporarily suspended but taken care of either financially or otherwise. Begum Liaquat has not failed to point out the inconsistency of the claim made by the GOP Prime Minister that the investigation was a purely provincial matter with the later revelation that the GOP Inspector General of Police was investigating the matter on behalf of the Central Govt and was conveniently killed in a recent plane crash. It has also been stated soto voce that the true instigators of the assassination are the same persons behind the Rawalpindi conspiracy to overthrow the government. A connection of some sort was hinted at in the official report of the assassination investigation. The link, it is rumored, lies in the fact that Liaquat was insisting on the death penalty for the conspirators and it was therefore necessary to eliminate him. Whether this connection is true or not, it is a fact that after Liaquat’s death the charges against the conspirators seem to have reached a stalemate and there are recent consistent reports of their impending release. ConGen officer was told by Finlay’s representative in Lahore that his company had received a letter signed by “ex-Major General Akbar Khan, Hyderabad Central Jail” inquiring as to prices of tractors and other agricultural equipment and stating that the writer expected to engage in large scale cultivation “within six months.” General Akbar Khan was the ringleader of the Rawalpindi conspiracy, and this communication if true would seem to indicate that at least the chief protagonist expects to be released in the near future. Political and Economic Summary, September 29-October 6, 1952, Oct. 6, 1952

    Unnamed spokesman for GOP answered Begum Liaquat’s charges that investigation not pursued as actively as possible. He explained position of central govt. vis a vis provincial govt as being limited by Constitution to that of providing coordination and advice, but repeated that Law and Order are provincial subjects under Constitution. Punjab govt appointed Justice Abu Akram of the Federal Court of Pak to inquire into charges proferred against Khan Najaf Khan, police official accused of negligence in assassination. Weekly Political and Economic Summary, Oct. 6-12, 1952, Oct. 13, 1952

    The formal inquiry before Mr. Justice Abu Saleh Mohammed Akram of the Federal Court, against Khan Najaf Khan, police official accused of negligence, started this week. It is being held in camera. Comment: It should be noted that a Federal court judge has been selected to conduct the inquiry in order to avoid the charges of provincialism which were levelled at the Assassination Commission itself. Nevertheless confidential reports reaching ConGen are to the effect that the present inquiry will be a whitewash and that Justice Akram is under the influence of Chief Min. Daultana and was selected for this very reason. Weekly Summary of Political and Economic Events, Oct. 20-26, 1952, Oct. 27, 1952

    An unconfirmed news item appearing in the local press stated that the Punjab Govt is considering taking action against Khan Najaf Khan, Police Official, who has been accused of negligence in the Liaquat Assassination Commission Report. … According to the report if Mr. Najaf Khan is found to have been guilty of negligence he may appeal his case to the Central Govt as he in fact belongs to the Pak Police Service and is only on loan to the Punjab. Weekly Summary of Political and Economic Events, 18-25 January 1953, Jan. 26, 1953

    The Punjab police have completed the inquiry into the assassiantion of the late Prime Minister, Mr. Liaquat Ali Khan, and now the scene of inquiry has been shifted to the Frontier Province where the Inquiry Board consisting of Director of the Intelligence Bureau and the Inspector-General of police of the Punjab and the Frontier, will continue further investigations. Weekly Summary of Political and Economic Events, Feb 23-3/1, 1953, March 2, 1953

    According to a press report Khan Najaf Khan has been exonerated by the Pakistan Public Service Commission. At the time of Liaquat Ali Khan’s assassination Najaf Khan was Senior Superintendent of Police at Rawalpindi and was also acting as the Deputy Inspector-General of Police in that area. Mr. Justice Abu Saleh Mohammad Akram, a Judge of the Federal Court, had conducted an inquiry against Khan Najaf Khan in connection with Liaquat Ali’s murder. Weekly Summary of Political and Economic Events, June 18-24, 1953, June 25, 1953

    The agitation to force the Government to publish the report of the commission investigating former Prime Minister Liaquat Ali Khan’s assassination and to induce the Government to adopt more stringent measures to apprehend the guilty parties was continued during the reporting period. A DAWN suggestion that Scotland Yard be called in to solve the murder elicited strong pro and con feelings. Weekly Summary of Political Developments for the Week Ending October 30, 1953, Oct. 31, 1953

    With considerable emotion, Begum Liaquat spoke about the assassination of her husband, the late Prime Minister. She said it was fantastic that two years after a murder in broad daylight before thousands of peopel, not one arrest had been made. What harm could come from a thorough investigation? Witnesses had not been questioned, no real attempt at investigation had been made, and yet when a demand for this was made, the Government not only refused but “hired” the editor of a paper who himself had been in jail under a previous Cabinet (Suleri of the Times of Karachi) to campaign against Dawn and the people demanding an investigation. Memorandum of Conversation with Begum Liaquat Ali Khan, Nov. 21, 1953

    No, repeat no, objection Prime Minister announcing he intends request US aid in obtaining services private, repeat private, investigator. You should make clear to Prime Minister this assent does not guarantee success in finding satisfactory person in US and that US Government participation would extend only to informal aid in search for investigator as it has offered such aid to Pakistan on previous occasions for technical experts. Secret Telegram from State Dept., Dec. 29, 1953

    Nur Ahmed … urged that the appointment of a “foreign expert” to investigate the murder of Liaquat Ali Khan be made before October 16, the anniversary of Liaquat’s death. Nogum Nahie [?], Karachi Municipal Councillor, whose press statements, like those of Nur Ahmed, appear with rather astonishing frequency, asked on October 5th why the promised “foreign expert” had not appeared. “The Prime Minister’s broadcasts say nothing about the matter nearest to every Pakistani’s heart. Maybe foreign detectives are here and are at work.” Summary of Political Events for Week Ending October 8, 1954, Oct. 9, 1954

    Anniversary of the death of Liaquat Ali Khan - Begum Liaquat Ali Khan, newly appointed Ambassador to the Netherlands and widow of the former Prime Minister, assassinated on October 16, 1951, issued a 500 word statement from the Hague calling for a solution to the crime and asking six leading questions: 1) “Why” was Liaquat murdered at the height of his popularity, “on the eve of … important policy decisions”; 2) “Why” was the assassin shot after he had already been overpowered; 3) “Why” was the police official responsible (for shooting the assassin) promoted instead of punished; 4) “Why” were “certain interested and influential persons within the country … anxious to remove Liaquat”; 5) “Why” is the Quad-i-Azam’s name “being subtly and unjustly ignored”; 6) “Why” are these questions not answered. Liaquat’s son, Wilayat Ali Khan, also issued a statement in which he pointed to the political and economic deterioration of Pakistan in the past three years and called upon the Central and Provincial Governments to cooperate with the newly appointed foreign expert, C.P. U’ren in his investigation. The Karachi Muslim League organized a public meeting at Jehangir Park, Karachi, to commemorate the anniversary. The principal speaker, Sardar Abdur Rab Nishtar, spoke generally on the “economic deterioration” of the country, provincialism, and eulogized the former Prime Minister. He claimed that Liaquat had been pressing for certain reforms at the time of his assassination. Nishtar was followed on the platform by Mohsin Siddiqi, General Secretary of the Karachi Muslim League adn by S. M. Taufique, President of the Karachi Muslim League. Weekly Summary of Political Events for Week Ending October 23, 1954, Oct. 23, 1954

    Ghulam Mohammed

    Ghulam Mohammed says he has no intention of dying before his work of building Pak has been reinforced and more progress made in organizing the Muslim world against Communism. He wants you to know that Zafrulla, Gurmani and he have no intention of allowing “India’s pin-pricks” to lead to an evolvement of war. Secret Telegram from Karachi Embassy, Sept. 7, 1951

    Ghulam Mohammed emphatically repudiated the insinuation in some sections of the press that the help received by Pakistan from foreign countries had any political strings. He stated that “Pakistan’s freedom and independence were not for barter – but that it was an Islamic obligation to acknowledge kindness with gratitude.” Weekly Summary of Political and Economic Events – May 14-20, May 21, 1953

    The subject of the Eyes Only telegram No. 341 of November 2 from Karachi on the question of the dangers of Pakistan constitutional development along theocratic lines was handled in the following manner. … The President did not refer directly to the question of religious influence referred to above but by his questions let it be known that we in the United States had an interest in seeing Pakistan work out her problems so that she would have an effective constitution. Discussion with Ghulam Mohammed, Nov. 13, 1953

    Regarding Kashmir, I apprehended trouble from Nehru and he is now trying to use the American aid to us as an excuse for going back on international stipulations and obligations. We took a calculated risk in these two matters depending on your word and promise. I do hope you will stand by us so that Nehru is not allowed to get out of international obligations and is not able to throw dust in the eyes of the world over Kashmir on the excuse of American aid. I appreciate the delecacy of the situation, but I feel that my country can rely on your promise to ensure justice for us. Letter from Ghulam Mohammed to John Foster Dulles, March 23, 1954

    The Embassy desires to emphasize again that these documents were given to the Ambassador in the strictest confidence and any revelation of the source would seriously damage relationships with the Governor General. … “I have in the course of my discussions regarding Arab countries joining USA and other countries in a plan for mutual defense, felt that there is a wave of opposition in some Arab countries and that others are lukewarm. My discussions have shown that this opposition proceeds from the causes set out below which need early attention … Transmittal of Revised Document Received from the Governor General, May 21, 1954

    I told the Governor General that he was being credited by the U.S. with having been helpful in bettering relations between Saudi Arabia and the United States during the Haj visit, whereupon the Governor General said the King was just like a nephew to him. Memorandum of Conversation with Governor General Ghulam Mohammed, Nov. 4, 1954

    Pakistan’s Leaders Face Difficulties in Achieving Political Stability, Feb. 4, 1955

    Ghulam Mohammed has in fact assumed virtual dictatorial powers. Embassy convinced however Department’s assumption correct that immediate motive is to serve administrative convenience. … Re Callahan’s predictions concerning indefinite deferral democracy, Embassy considers these observations indicate failure understand real nature of problem here. Fact of matter is Pakistan lacks most of essential elements which provide basis for democratic government in Western countries and effort to judge developments here by degree which they approximate standards appropriate these countries altogether unrealistic and almost totally irrelevant. Secret Telgram from Karachi Embassy, March 30, 1955

    According to a usually reliable source in the Governor-General’s household, Ghulam Mohammed kept General Mirza and Chaudhri Mohammad Ali on tenterhooks for several days as he refused to sign the resignation prepared for him. He was rational for several days preceding the ceremonial ten described in the referenced despatch but “childishly” stubborn about signing away the last vestige of his rule. His daughter’s and son-in-law’s entreaties failed, but an aide finally persuaded him to sign by promising him a trip to his favorite Muslim shrine near Lucknow, India. The source, a layman, described Ghulam Mohammed’s mental affliction as a failure of blood supply to one portion of the brain. This condition is permanent; Ghulam Mohammed’s health continues to improve but he will never again have the full use of his faculties. For almost two months after his stroke on June 27 Ghulam Mohammed’s utterances were 90 percent irrational; the proportion is now reversed. Ghulam Mohammed’s Resignation, Sept. 23, 1955

    Iskander Mirza

    Lt. Col Iskander Mirza, Secy of Defense Ministry, today asked Emb Army Attache pass following to me: Major General Akbar Khan “is 100 percent Communist” and has been in contact with Communists since he recently took up his job as Chief of Staff at Rawalpindi. In personal opinion Col Mirza, conspirators motivated by dissatisfaction with GOP handling of Kashmir issue and feeling that Pak should turn away from Western powers and toward Soviet Union. In addition to those whose arrest has been announced, Air Commodore Janjua, senior Pak airman recently returned from school in UK is under house arrest. Janjua is known to have been in contact with conspiring army officers. Two unnamed communists, presumably civilian, are being sought but have gone underground. Brigadier Hussain, Director Interservices Intelligence, expressed opinion to Army Attache that there is some unrest in Pak Army especially among junior officers and enlisted men, because of failure to settle Kashmir issue. Some members of Army strongly believe a change in Govt is only solution. Secret Telegram from Karachi Embassy, March 10, 1951

    When I called upon Sec Def (Mirza) this date on the MDAP matter he volunteered the following information which he asked me to pass on to the American Ambassador: a. Major General Akhbar Khan, senior military man involved in the conspiracy, is 100% communist. When he came to Rawalpindi as Chief of General Staff he contacted the communists of the Punjab. b. In addition to the people mentioned in the paper as having been arrested, the senior Pakistani Air Officer, Air Commodore Jinjua, recently returned from UK is in “house arrest.” He had conferred with the defecting army officers. c. In the opinion of Colonel Mirza, dissatisfaction with the handling of the Kashmir affair is probably behind this affair. He thinks that these officers wish to change their governments orientation from the West to Russia. d. He thinks that the Russian Embassy to Pakistan had something to do with the plot. He said that the Embassy had spent considerable money in the Punjab, to the extent of giving cameras to people. Secret Memorandum for the Record, March 10, 1951

    Colonel Mirza, GOP Defense Secretary, stated to ConGen while visiting Lahore that Martial Law should be continued for a considerable period, in order that the politicians woudl understand that they had a duty of patriotism toward the country and could not act for their own selfish purposes. He did not indicate what period of time Martial Law would remain in force. He also stated that it was necessary that the civilian authorities did not revoke any of the Court Martial sentences. Without making a statement to that effect, he gave the impression that he was of the opinion that Daultana should be removed. Weekly Summary of Political and Economic Events, March 12-18, 1953, March 19, 1953 [emphasis in original]

    I am convinced that at the present time the Government of Pakistan is being influenced strongly by a group of civil servants who have the backing, if not the actual participation, of the Pakistan Army. As far as I can determine, the definite members of this clique are Iskander Mirza, Akhtar Husain, and Agha Hilaly. Inasmuch as it is almost impossible for anything to happen at the secretarial level without the knowledge of the Cabinet Secretary, Aziz Ahmad, and inasmuch as he attended the Cabinet meeting on the night of February 26 at which the decision was taken to act firmly in the religious agitation, it is more than probably that Aziz is a participant. More than likely his brother, Ghulam Ahmad, the Interior Secretary and Intelligence Chief, is also involved. … I do not believe the group has influence or power enough yet to dictate political decisions to the Prime Minister. … AS you will recall from my conversation with General Ayub, I was told by Ayub that while he was reluctant to enter politics, he would take “no nonsense from the Center.” That, of course, was before the declaration of martial law in Lahore. Iskander Mirza subsequently told Col. Ashworth that as long as the Central Government proceeded in the right direction it would have Army support. He, too, implied that they would step in if there were signs of deviation from the present firm policy. Top Secret Office Memorandum of Karachi Embassy, April 6, 1953

    Gen. Iskander Mirza leaves tonight midnight for Dacca to assume Governorship East Bengal tomorrow. … Impossible predict reaction East Bengal; violence certainly may occur. Mirza emphasizes has no desire rule by military force alone recognizes necessity establish clean administration. At same time he may be ruthless toward Communists. Secret Telegram from Karachi Embassy, May 29, 1954

    PriMin asked me to see him this morning. He said in view close relationships our two countries he was telling me in greatest confidence that decision had been taken impose Governor’s rule East Pakistan. Governor would be Iskander Mirza who was summoned from London and who will leave for Dacca tomorrow. … PriMin stated first act of Governor would be to arrest known communists. … PriMin stated intensified activity would proceed two fronts, psychological and economic. GOP plan establish two new radio stations East Bengal, step up informational program to high degree. On economic front Governor would see that peopel received cheap necessities of life, namely food, cloth, kerosene, mustard oil and salt. Secret Telegram from Karachi Embassy, May 29, 1954

    Iskander Mirza sworn in as Governor East Bengal 1800 hours. N.M. Khan Chief Secretary GOEB. Section 92-A (Governor’s rule) effective 1800 hours. IG police states District Magistrates to be given free hand for arrest “subversives”. Minister Sheikh Mujibir Rahman will be arrested immediately. Confidential Telegram from Dacca Consulate, May 31, 1954

    “The present Governor of East Bengal has for private and personal reasons expressed a desire to be relieved of his office. It has therefore been decided to replace him by Major General Iskander Mirza who will be sworn in today.” Telgram from Karachi Embassy, June 1, 1954

    Mirza said the only way for the US to stiffen Ali’s spine was to tighten the windscrew of economic and military assistance, making such assistance clearly dependent upon assurances of sane govt in Karachi. Mirza strongly recommended this course of action to US and stated his belief that Ali would respond favorably. Secret Telegram from London Embassy, Oct. 4, 1954

    Mirza says he refused urgent calls return Karachi from London to await Primin. Believes Sunday’s action in best interests country, especially retaining Primin. Asked whether he expected trouble Mirza replied “We will make trouble,” meaning guilty would be punished. Said much to be cleaned up; for example Primin now finally recognized Mirza right in asking punishment corrupt Bengalis. Secret Telegram from Karachi Embassy, Oct. 26, 1954

    Major General Mirza has said that democracy ran riot during the last seven years. It was not democracy but the denial of democratic rights that was responsible for the harm that has been done to our dear country. Had democracy a fair play, the evils would have been corrected long ago. UF Statement on General Mirza, Nov. 19, 1954

    Comment on future form of government in Pakistan, Dec. 24, 1954

    According to the Gazette of Pakistan dated January 21, 1955, Major General Iskander Mirza, C.S.P., retired from Government Service with effect from October 24, 1954. In effect this post-dated action removes from General Mirza the onus of having been appointed to a Cabinet post while still a member of the Civil Service. Telegram from Karachi Embassy, Jan. 25, 1955

    Pakistani government will ignore challenge to its legality, Feb. 12, 1955

    Iskander Mirza speaking February 15 to newly-organized West Pakistan Brotherhood praised Armed Forces highly and denied they taking active interest politics, and said “they have never taken part in politics nor is there any danyer that they will do so.” Telegram from Karachi Embassy, Feb. 17, 1955

    Secret Telegram from Karachi Embassy, March 11, 1955

    NSC Briefing: Background — Estimated Balances in Pakistan Politics, June 12, 1956

    Secret Letter from Ambassador Hildreth to John Foster Dulles, Sept. 20, 1956

    April 1953 Coup

    Secret Telegram from Karachi Embassy, April 18, 1953

    Confidential Telegram from Karachi Embassy, April 19, 1953

    It becomes clear that Nazimuddin dismissal was planned and accomplished through combined efforts of Army leadership (specifically Def Secy Iskander Mirza and C-in-C Gen Ayub) and Gov Gen himself. Frustration which EMB has reported over past few months grew to exasperation at weakness and vascillation of Nazimuddin. Without doubt action by Iskander Mirza to declare martial law in Lahore Mar 6 in spite of PRIMIN objections saved country from what might have become national disaster. Mirza has apparently been in close touch with Gov Gen. Decision was taken by Gov Gen himself that PRIMIN could not be successfully managed and dismissal was planned. EMB believes very few people in Govt were privy to this decision – perhaps no one except Mirza and Ayub. … EMB believes unity now exists in country which has not prevailed since assassination Liaquat. Army is in firm position and will brook no nonsense. Whether Mohammad Ali will be able rise to demands of situation is not entirely certain and it is possible stronger leader such as Qayyum may take over at later date. EMB believes that in this favorable situation, US faces great opportunities develop closer relations with Pakistan and influence PAK policy toward settlement outstanding issues and toward firmer commitments to free world. Secret Telegram from Karachi Embassy, April 20, 1953

    Perhaps this is the true picture: the Governor-General, Mr. Ghulam Mohammed could never have dared to dismiss a Ministry which had appointed him, had he not have had the support of the Army. The Army would take its cue from the Defense Secretariat. Therefore this is in fact a coup d’etat by Mr. Iskander Mirza and the Army, which has nominated Mr. Mohammed Ali as its agent. The Army (which includes Mr. Iskander Mirza) would not have been encouraged to do this, if it was not certain that the new dispensation would have the support of the Americans, on whom today Pakistan is almost wholly dependent for its food requirements, and to carry on the ordinary expenses of the Administration. We can give this credit to the Army that it, like other common citizens, saw that the country was going to the dogs, that the prevailing regime had lost the confidence of the people, that it had not the capacity to remedy the existing state of affairs, and that at the same time it could not carry the people with it in any of its measures. The Army, too, may have started getting ideas after its contact with the people and the civil administration in Lahore. The Americans must have been in contact with the Army, and the coup d’etat must have had their blessings. The Americans must have found (i) That there was no point in butressing an unpopular Ministry. (ii) There there was no point in giving supplies to an incompetent Ministry which would dissipate those supplies. (iii) That there was no hope of getting appropriation from Congress unless it was satisfied that the Ministry in Pakistan had popular support and Army support. (iv) That an unpopular Ministry cannot succeed in inducing the people to accept its policy in international affairs, and hence such a Ministry is useless to the Americans if they want Pakistan to accept the international policy of America. That is to say an unpopular Ministry in Pakistan cannot deliver the goods and is therefore useless for the American global strategy. The change in the Administration is therefore a result of American plus Army maneuvers, born of the conviction, for which there is every justification, that Nazimuddin’s regime was thoroughly unpopular and incompetent. Letter from H.S. Suhrawardy, April 21, 1953

    Reversing their earlier critical attitude toward Nazimuddin, [the Awami League] are now shedding crocodile tears over his removal from the Prime Ministership, asserting that GHULAM MUHAMMED and his cronies from the Punjab had determined to eliminate Nazimuddin because he supported the provision in the BPC Report for “parity” between East Bengal and the rest of Pakistan in representation in the National Legislature. Political, Press and Economic Developments for the Week Ending June 24, 1953, June 25, 1953

    Constititional Coup of September 21, 1954

    Confidential Telegram from Karachi Embassy, Sept. 22, 1954

    Secret Telegram from Karachi Embassy, Sept. 25, 1954

    Pakistan Political Crisis, Sept. 25, 1954

    Unsigned Top Secret Telegram #74, Sept. 25, 1954

    Top Secret Telegram from Karachi Embassy, Sept. 27, 1954

    The “Constitutional Coup” in the Constituent Assembly, Oct. 2, 1954

    Divestment of Governor General’s Powers by Constituent Assembly, Oct. 3, 1954

    Reftel and other recent Karachi messages seem clearly imply new group may well try seize control GOP within next few months. Motives and character Consembly rebellious element indicate new govt would be more to right than current clique with conservative “old Moslem leaguers” in dominant position but with little chance of communist or other leftist influence. Dept concedes good possibility such group might be less cooperative, less friendly to United States than present PriMin. Secret Telegram from John Foster Dulles, Oct. 6, 1954

    While agree change Govt would not increase Communist leftist influence, situation East Bengal different from that West Pakistan. Commies stronger East Bengal would exploit instability which might result. Secret Telegram from Karachi Embassy, Oct. 7, 1954

    Mohammed Ayub Khan

    The Department of Defense has reported that the Military Attache in Karachi has recently recommended the award of the Legion of Merit to the Commander-in-Chief of the Pakistan Army, General Mohammed AYUB Khan, stating that this recommendation is strongly supported by the Ambassador. Secret Telegram from Department of State, July 10, 1951

    General Ayub stated that he had been talking to the leading politicians of Pakistan, and had told them that they must make up their mind to go whole-heartedly with the West. … He stated that the Pakistan Army will not allow the political leaders to get out of hand,and the same is true regarding the people of Pakistan. He stated that he realized that the Army was taking on a large responsibility, but that the Army’s duty was to protect the country. Secret Telegram from Lahore Consulate, Dec. 23, 1952

    The Commander-in-Chief stated that he felt that there was no danger, from either politicians or the public, to overthrow the present Government, but in case there was such an attempt the Pakistan Army would immediately declare martial law and take charge of the situation. If the situation was critical, the Army would declare a Military Government in order to secure stability for Pakistan. He stated the Pakistan Army would not allow either politicians or the public to ruin the country. Top Secret Despatch from Lahore Consulate, Feb. 13, 1953

    He said that the army was not interested in going into politics but that he had no intention of letting things get out of control. He said the army was a stabilizing force in Pakistan and that he would take no nonsense from the politicians. … I got the distinct impression from Ayub and from subsequent conversations with his senior officers who were in Lahore at the same time, that the Pakistan Army is definitely ready to take control should Civil Government break down, although they would be reluctant to do so. Memorandum of Conversation with General Mohammad Ayub Khan, Feb. 28, 1953

    I took General Ayub for cocktails last evening and he is very much discouraged with our Number One guest who arrives in Washington this afternoon. He thinks there may be repercussions along the lines of your recent cables but expresses no alarm as far as the country as a whole is concerned. He is terribly confident of the ability of the Armed Services to step in any time as, if and when necessary. Secret Telegram from State Department, Oct. 14, 1954

    NSC Briefing: Pakistan, Oct. 29, 1958

    Zulfikar Ali Bhutto

    It will be noted that he was accused inter alia of incitement of the masses to violate law and create disorder, violation of Secton 144, speaking so as to excite disaffection with the GOP, and disclosures of state affairs regarding weapons supply. Grounds for Detention of Bhutto, Dec. 4, 1968

    MI officer told him that 24 officers arrested had been plotting to assassinate President Bhutto at Lahore People’s festival (revival of old Lahore horse show) when he attended as chief guest on March 31. Report of Military Assassination Plot Against President Bhutto, April 2, 1970

    Central Intelligence Bulletin, Dec. 24, 1971

    On February 7, I made a routine call on Rao Rashid, Deputy Director of Intelligence. … It was tragic, mused Rao, to have a man at the helm who despite all the blunders he committed, refused to step aside to the end, even though the nation was being destroyed. Political Notes, Feb. 17, 1972

    Level of political violence and shrillness of political rhetoric has been on increase recently. Apart from Sind language riots, there have been disorderly political incidents in Lahore, Rawalpindi and elsewhere. Heightened political atmosphere has coincided with Bhutto’s greater involvement in grass-roots politics in wake Sind riots. While regime’s miscalculations and oppostion irresponsibility have contributed to new atmosphere, it seems also to reflect degree of return to pre-1971 “politics as usual.” Although disquieting, trend toward violence does not yet threaten Bhutto regime. Main present danger is that regime will be goaded into more repressive measures which could feed still more violence. Domestic Political Violence on Increase Aftermath Sind Disturbances, Aug. 4, 1972

    Pakistan: Factionalism in Bhutto’s Party, July 1, 1975

    Jamaat-e-Islami

    Jamaat-e-Islami, which translated literally means “Islamic Organization,” is a Mullah-led, reactionary Islamic political party. Prior to partition the Jamaat, founded in 1941, was an inactive religious group without major interest in politics. However, since partition it has assumed an active part in politics and has gained strength, although it still plays a minor part in Pakistan politics. … At the annual meeting of Jamaat-e-Islami held on November 10 through 13, party leaders displayed an interesting combination of reactionary religious ideology, communist line propaganda and ideas of the welfare state. The meeting was attended by delegates from all over Pakistan. … Certainly not a powerful force in Pakistan politics today … the party is significant as an example of reactionary Islam in Pakistan politics. Annual Meeting of Jamaat-e-Islami, Pakistan, Nov. 28, 1951

    The information contained in this report is from Ghulam Mohammed, Secty. Karachi Jamaat-i-Islami. He was anxious to get information on this organization into the hands of the American Embassy, he stated, because the organization “is misunderstood by foreign embassies and is the target of false propaganda from the Muslim League.” Jamaat-i-Islami (Islamic Party) was established in pre-partitioned India in 1941. Its main object is “revival of Islam, in both letter and spirit. We believe Islam is a complete code of life. We believe in democracy, with some changes regarding the limits of legislation. We believe that the government should be run by the people, but that the representatives are duty-bound to fulfill the laws written in the H.Q. Confidential Embassy notes, author unknown, circa 1951

    Thirteen members of the Jamaat-e-Islami have been taken into custody by the Martial Law Authorities in Lahore including Maulana Maudoodi, Mian Tufail Mohammad and Maulana Amin Ahsan Islahi. Eighteen other Jamaat-e-Islami members were arrested outside the Lahore Martial Law area under the Provincial Public Safety Act. Comment: Maulana Maudoodi was one of the few prominent religious leaders who had escaped arrest during the general round-up of extremist Mullahs. He has now been arrested on the strength of a pamphlet which was just published in which Maudoodi tried to attack the Ahmadiyas by clever implications without indulging in open incitation. Martial Law authorities howwever felt that he had overstepped and thereupon arrested him. Weekly Summary of Political and Economic Events, March 26-April 1, 1953, April 2, 1953

    Maulana Maudoodi, leader of Jamaat-i-Islami, arrested Mar 28 during anti-Ahmadiya agitation in Lahore, found guilty of complicity in riots by military tribunal May 11, and sentenced to death. Confidential Telegram from Karachi Embassy, May 12, 1953

    Following the protest meeting and strike on the 14th occasioned by the sentence of Maulana Maudoodi reported in the Consulate’s despatch 96 dated May 14, 1953, an effort was made to organize a Maudoodi Day on May 22. Whereas the first demonstration was organized by Ulemas, the one scheduled for the 22nd was sparked by political opposition groups headed by the Awami League. Political, Press, and Economic Developments for the Week Ending May 27, 1953, May 28, 1953

    Congen has no rpt no information to confirm GOI intelligence report that Jamaat-i-Islami (JI) groups planning attacks on Indian diplomats. Although prior to partition, JI supported Congress Party and opposed creation of Pakistan, JI has adopted anti-Indian position since partition. Its leaders, including recently retired Maulana Maudoodi, have advocated both moral and secular legality. Report of Planned Terrorist Attacks on Indian Diplomats, Nov. 7, 1972

    Muslim Brotherhood

    The Embassy’s confidential source stated that the organization was almost still-born, with no activities and few members. It is believed, however, that a recent conference of world Muslim divines held in Karachi may have given a fillip to the branch. In addition to Mahmoud Sawwaf there were several Middle Eastern Akhwan leaders at the conference. Hassan-ul-Hudeibi, the president of the Brotherhood did not come from Cairo but sent as his deputy Allama Mahmood-uz-Zubairi of Yemen. As-Syed Baha El-Amiri, the erstwhile Syrian Ambassador to Pakistan, fired from his job as a result of differences with Colonel Shishakly, was at the conference as Syrian delegate. Before his diplomatic appointment, El-Amiri was an officer in the Syrian Brotherhood. Another Akhwan leader, Sheikh Syed Ramazan of Egypt was also in attendence.

     

     

     

    The World Muslim Conference (Motamar-e-Alam-e-Islam) in Karachi sponsored a meeting on February 23 in observance of “Hasan-el-Banna Day” which was presided over by the ex-Mufti of Jerusalem and addressed by El-Amiri and Syed Ramazan; the latter was termed the son-in-law of Hasan-el-Banna, the founder of the Muslim Brotherhood. Although the Secretary of the World Muslim Conference in conversation with officers of the Embassy evinced little interest in the formation of the Brotherhood, it is possible that the Motamar will support the embryonic organization. Formation of Muslim Brotherhood Branch in Pakistan, Feb. 28, 1952

    Matta Riot

     

     

     

     

     

     

    The Anti-Christian Riot at Matta, Aug. 28, 1951

    Memorandum of Conversation with Rev. Frank Llewellen, Aug. 16, 1951

    Of the 22 defendants, two were sentenced to death and 10 were sentenced to 19 years. The drafting officer has spoken to a few lawyers in Lahoer regarding these sentences. All were of the opinion that the two sentenced to death would have their sentence commuted to 15 years, and the others to 5-8 years by the reviewing court. The Christian missionaries with whom the drafting officer has spoken in regards to the trial all feel satisfied that justice was done – even if the sentences are commuted. Confidential Despatch from Lahore Consulate, Dec. 21, 1951

    Anti-Communist Program in East Pakistan

    PURPOSE: To destroy Communist influence and develop a positive (counter) program based on the new national ideals of Pakistan. … Collaboration between the USIS and the Government of East Bengal is to be kept secret. To this end every attempt will be made to keep knowledge of the program confined to the three officers of the American Consulate and the three officers of the Government of East Bengal whose concerted effort is necesssary to the formulation of plans and policies.

     

     

     

    OPERATIONAL THEMES: … To link communism with imperialism by demonstrating that the original meaning of the word is being used as a cloak for planned conquest. … To show the communists as anti-God and therefore a threat to the continued existence of the Muslim world as a free and independent religio-political entity. … To promote the Islamic socio-economic concept under which there will be freedom and dignity for the individual and which will provide for the elimination of economic disparities and inequities. Coordinated Program for Combatting Communism in East Bengal, Aug. 7, 1951

     

     

     

     

     

     

    Developments in Iran and Egypt are seriously affecting Pakistan popular position reference United States and we should now expect period of critical attitudes. This change may imperil parts of information program. Clearly any revelation of my private understanding with top GOP officials will create greatest embarrassment to them. … View GOP changing position it is most imperative that all discussion be halted bringing GOEB personnel to Washington for discussion this highly delicate operation. If information officer GOEB is later sent to US as Leader Specialist, he should be given leader itinerary treatment and should not repeat not be consulted about policy matters affecting cooperation East Pakistan. We must assume he does not know of my overall understanding. Secret Telegram from Karachi Embassy, Nov. 5, 1951

    Re Leader-Grant for either GOP or GOEB official, Department merely indicated availability of Grant in relation to request contained in Dacca Despatch 13; with assumption Embassy retaining actual perogative of nominating whomever desirable. If Embassy does desire send any official as straight leader-grantee, special project will not be discussed in Washington as you recommend. Secret Telegram from State Department, Nov. 16, 1951

    Department will not invite GOEB official for purpose discussing subject your Despatch 13. However, ordinary leader-grant can at some future date be offered a Dacca journalist or even GOEB official, under normal Embassy selection processes. Secret Telegram from Secretary of State, Nov. 17, 1951

    Secret Telegram from Karachi Embassy, Feb. 23, 1952

    Confidential Telegram from Dacca Consulate, Feb. 28, 1952

    Chief Minister Nurul Amin attended a meeting of the Mymensingh District Muslim League workers on June 14 and addressed the conference at some length. He reviewed the origins of, and government action during the Dacca riots in February, and announced that he had conclusive proof that these groups of people, viz. communists, other foreign agents, and political mal-contents had conspired to subvert the state from within. As for the communists, he quoted from a Calcutta communist paper which boasted of the party’s assisting the Language Movement in the right direction. As to the foreign agents, he dramatically flourished a secret document which he said was a circular of February 12 of an organization with headquarters outside Pakistan calling upon its members in East Pakistan to exploit the Language Movement. The name of the organization he withheld in the public interest. As for the disgruntled politicians, he observed that they are well known, and their motive in mising into the Language Movement and the riots was to split East and West Pakistan (he did not refer to the United Bengalers as such, but he evidently had them in mind). Confidential Telegram from Dacca Consulate, June 21, 1952

    Confidential Telegram from New Delhi Embassy, Feb. 27, 1953

    Telegram from New Delhi Embassy, May 6, 1954

    Political, Press and Economic Developments for the Week Ended May 21, 1953, May 22, 1953

    Telegram from Karachi Embassy, May 26, 1954

    Political Developments for the Two Weeks Ending December 16, 1953, Dec. 17, 1953

    Meanwhile there remains somewhat uncomfortably in my mind real concern over the Governor General’s attitude and approach to affairs these days. … I certainly do not see how running around East Bengal smashing Commies has much relation to what happened to the League in that province. Of course I see where a good Commie campaign might help disrupt the UF — but then what? Governor’s Rule? Martial law? The League has some hard lessons to learn. I hope the price won’t be too high or the instruction period too long. Secret Telegram from State Department, April 27, 1954

     

    Agitation in East Bengal Schools and Colleges, Sept. 29, 1955

    Political Attitudes and Opinions, East Pakistan, April 28, 1955

    Gov. told me today will outlaw commie party East Bengal tomorrow. Said requested authorization from Center mid-June but only answer to date is under consideration. Thus, following abortive commie attempt few days ago blow up main bridge into Dacca he has decided to proceed [unilaterally]. Center as yet uninformed but will receive telegram from Gov. simultaneously with announcement of demarche. Confidential Telegram from Dacca Consulate, July 6, 1954

     

     

    Overt Activities by Communists and Other Former Security Prisoners, Nov. 16, 1955

    Misc Political

    Political, Press and Economic Developments for the Period Ending April 29, 1953, May 1, 1953

    Political, Press and Economic Developments for the Period Ending April 21, 1953, April 22, 1953

    The subject of U.S. military aid to Pakistan remained the dominant political theme during the week. On December 19, 1953, the Government of Pakistan presented a note to the Soviet Embassy in Karachi replying to the Soviet note of November 30 which demanded “clarification” of the press reported on the subject of “American military air bases” in Pakistan. … The Indian National Congress party’s drive to arouse public opinion in India against US military aid to Pakistan evoked a bitter reaction in Pakistan. Public opinion media referred to it as a “hate campaign” and held it to be particularly significant as it was government sponsored. Weekly Summary of Political Events for Week Ending December 24, 1953, Dec. 24, 1953

    Weekly Summary of Political Developments for Week Ending December 19, 1953, Dec. 19, 1953

    Summary of Political Developments for the Week Ending June 19, 1953, June 20, 1953

    Weekly Summary, Political and Economic Events 29 October thru 4 November 1953, Nov. 5, 1953

    Weekly Summary of Political and Economic Events, Sept. 24 through Sept. 30, 1953, Oct. 1, 1953

    Weekly Political and Economic Report, Jan. 25 – Feb. 1, 1953, Feb. 2, 1953

    Political and Economic Developments for the Week August 10-16, 1952

    Political and Economic Developments July 15-21, 1952, July 21, 1952

    Political and Economic Developments July 8-14, 1952, July 14, 1952

    Political and Economic Developments for the Week Ending April 3, 1952, April 3, 1952

    Political and Economic Developments for the Week Ending, March 20, 1952, March 20, 1952

    Anti-Ahmadiya Agitation in Lahore, March 10, 1953

    Confidential Telegram from Karachi Embassy, Feb. 28, 1953

    Political and Economic Developments in East Pakistan During Week Ending March 14, 1952, March 15, 1952

    Political and Economic Developments in East Pakistan During Two Weeks Ending March 7, 1952, March 8, 1952

    Weekly Summary Dec 15-21, 1952, Dec. 22, 1952

    Weekly Summary, Dec. 1-16, 1952, Dec. 8, 1952

    Secret Telegram from Karachi Embassy, Jan. 16, 1953

    Confidential Telegram from Karachi Embassy, Feb. 18, 1953

    The Islamic Constitution of Pakistan, Jan. 11, 1954

    Brief resume of talks between the Honourable Prime Minister and the Vice-President of U.S.A., held on 7-12-53, July 12, 1953

    Memorandum of Conversation with Yusuf Haroon, April 3, 1954

     

     

     

     

     

    Secret Telegram from Karachi Embassy, Sept. 19, 1955

    Secret Telegram from Karachi Embassy, Aug. 12, 1955

    Current Position of Communism in Pakistan, July 10, 1953

    The Pakistan National Alliance: Participants and Prospects, circa Aug. 1977

    Pakistan’s Problems, Jan. 8, 1979

    Suhrawardy Scores Victory Over Leftist Opponents in East Pakistan, June 16, 1957

    Resignation of Pakistani Prime Minister Suhrawardy, Oct. 12, 1957

    Copyright Paul Wolf, 2003-2004. No copyright to original government works. For educational use only.

    APPENDIX B 

    Sunday, December 5, 2004off the shelf
    Jinnah, Liaquat Ali Khan and Partition
    V. N. DattaDear Mr Jinnah: Selected Correspondence and Speeches of Liaquat Ali Khan, 1937-1947edited by Professor Roger D. Long with a foreword by Stanely Wolpert. Oxford University Press, Karachi. Pages 328. Price not stated.

    This compilation of selected correspondence and speeches of Liaquat Ali Khan, that comes with a foreword by Stanely Wolpert, well-known Jinnah biographer, focuses on highly significant issues and events which proved crucial in the creation of Pakistan. Of special interest to the reader is the author’s prefatory notes.

     

     

     

    The period (1937-1947) chosen by Professor Long is momentous in the making of Pakistan. In the pre-1937 period, the Muslim League was a weak and inert organisation, destitute of leadership, funds and the press. It was seen as a coterie of toadies and sycophants basking in the sunshine of British patronage, passing stereotyped, mild resolutions for the protection of Muslims interests and making speeches in the Assemblies and at the Muslim League annual sessions. Mohammad Ali Jinnah then counted nowhere. He was rebuffed by the stalwart Muslim leader, Fazl-I-Husain in Punjab, and distrusted by the Congress. The British ignored him.

    By 1939, the Muslim League became a strong and spirited organisation,

    and in March 1940, it demanded a separate homeland, an independent, sovereign Pakistan State, and by 1945, Jinnah emerged as the sole spokesman of the Muslims, who made high bids and vetoed all constitutional proposals suggested by the Congress and the British government. He scuttled the Simla conference in June-July 1945 and asked for parity with the Congress in the Viceroy’s executive council.

    Jinnah met Mahatma Gandhi on equal terms for negotiation to resolve the political stalemate at home on Malabar Hill in Bombay from September 9 to 29, 1945, and rejected his formula. He took to task the three Premieres, Sikander Hayat Khan of Punjab, Fazl-ul-Haq of Bengal, and Saadullah of Assam, for joining the National Defence Council by subverting the Muslim League resolution of September 29, 1940.

    By 1945, the Muslim League succeeded in setting up its party ministry in four of the provinces, and in the fifth, it held a strong position by putting pressure on the dispirited and shrinking Unionists party in Punjab.

    This work is more an exchange between Jinnah and Liaquat Ali Khan on matters

    relating to the radicalisation of Muslim politics when both were engaged in a life-and-death struggle for the creation of Pakistan. It throws more light on Jinnah than on Liaquat Ali Khan.

    There is nothing personal in these letters, despite Liaquat Ali Khan’s efforts to engage Jinnah in it. Jinnah was a hard nut to crack, icy cold, reserved, taciturn, who praised or complimented none, and yet showed no tension. He was secretive. Even though he drew up his will in 1939 and appointed Liaquat Ali Khan his trustee for it, he never told him so, and it was only after his death that the latter learnt of it.

    An utterly lonely man, Jinnah was incapable of maintaining a loving relationship with anyone. It would have been a treasure trove to read Jinnah’s love letters to his wife Rattenbai Petet or to anyone, but such a document nowhere exits.

    Jinnah’s relationship with his colleagues was not the kind that the Mahatma shared with his party workers. He chose no heir, though he regarded Liaquat Ali Khan as his right hand. The correspondence shows that Jinnah lived like an Englishman.

    He was fabulously rich and invested a great deal of money in shares and property. On several occasions, the Muslim Legaue borrowed money from his personal coffers. It is incredible that by addressing his huge audience in English who did not understand what he was saying, he captured their hearts and imagination and fired them with a passion to throw in their lot with him.

    Belonging to the well-known aristocratic family of Punjab and being son of the Nawab of Karnal, Liaquat Ali Khan inherited a huge property in Meerut. After taking BA from Oxford and Bar-at-law, he returned to India at the end of 1922 and joined the Muslim League in 1923. As an Independent, he served as Deputy Speaker in the UP Council in 1931. As a member of the United Provinces National Agricultural Party, he represented the landed interests and opposed the separate electorate before the Joint Statutory Commission which came out of the Round Table Conference in the early 1930s.

    He became the General-Secretary of the Muslim League in 1936 and held this office till 1947 and slaved for the success of its mission. He became the Finance Member of the Viceroy’s Executive Council in 1946 and the first Prime Minister of Pakistan in 1947. Scrupulously honest, he refused to accept property in Pakistan in exchange for his land holdings in India, and after his death, his son and his wife, a Christian, Ranana Sheila Irene Pant, had to live in a house donated by the government.

    This work projects Liaquat Ali Khan as a mild, well-meaning man of moderate disposition who shunned controversies. Mediocre in intellect, his sincerity of purpose and dedication made it easier for him to inspire confidence among his party workers. This work shows how the Muslims felt threatened by Hindu majoritarianism and feared that the Federation as envisaged under the Government of India Act (1935) would complete their disaster.

    By mobilising the Muslim mass support, Jinnah widened his political base to fight the Congress. One is tempted to conclude from this work that the Congress was outmanoeuvred by Jinnah’s brilliant strategy and leadership, and Liaquat Ali Khan’s famous budget speech on February 28, 1947, in the Legislative Assembly, which hit the business magnets supporting the Congress, turned the tide in the Congress in favour of Partition. On March 3, 1947, Khizar Hayat Khan was forced to resign as Chief Minister due to Muslim League pressure, and the way was clear for the creation of Pakistan.

    The editing and annotation of Long’s work is superb and the explanatory notes are suavely perceptive. However, Long’s praise of Stanely Wolport’s studies of Nehru and Jinnah is unjustified; he completely ignores S. Gopal’s comprehensive biography of Nehru. He also tends to ignore the Congress viewpoint on important political situations.

     The period (1937-1947) chosen by Professor Long is momentous in the making of Pakistan. In the pre-1937 period, the Muslim League was a weak and inert organisation, destitute of leadership, funds and the press. It was seen as a coterie of toadies and sycophants basking in the sunshine of British patronage, passing stereotyped, mild resolutions for the protection of Muslims interests and making speeches in the Assemblies and at the Muslim League annual sessions. Mohammad Ali Jinnah then counted nowhere. He was rebuffed by the stalwart Muslim leader, Fazl-I-Husain in Punjab, and distrusted by the Congress. The British ignored him.

    By 1939, the Muslim League became a strong and spirited organisation, and in March 1940, it demanded a separate homeland, an independent, sovereign Pakistan State, and by 1945, Jinnah emerged as the sole spokesman of the Muslims, who made high bids and vetoed all constitutional proposals suggested by the Congress and the British government. He scuttled the Simla conference in June-July 1945 and asked for parity with the Congress in the Viceroy’s executive council.

    Jinnah met Mahatma Gandhi on equal terms for negotiation to resolve the political stalemate at home on Malabar Hill in Bombay from September 9 to 29, 1945, and rejected his formula. He took to task the three Premieres, Sikander Hayat Khan of Punjab, Fazl-ul-Haq of Bengal, and Saadullah of Assam, for joining the National Defence Council by subverting the Muslim League resolution of September 29, 1940.

    ..Belonging to the well-known aristocratic family of Punjab and being son of the Nawab of Karnal, Liaquat Ali Khan inherited a huge property in Meerut. After taking BA from Oxford and Bar-at-law, he returned to India at the end of 1922 and joined the Muslim League in 1923. As an Independent, he served as Deputy Speaker in the UP Council in 1931. As a member of the United Provinces National Agricultural Party, he represented the landed interests and opposed the separate electorate before the Joint Statutory Commission which came out of the Round Table Conference in the early 1930s.

    He became the General-Secretary of the Muslim League in 1936 and held this office till 1947 and slaved for the success of its mission. He became the Finance Member of the Viceroy’s Executive Council in 1946 and the first Prime Minister of Pakistan in 1947. Scrupulously honest, he refused to accept property in Pakistan in exchange for his land holdings in India, and after his death, his son and his wife, a Christian, Ranana Sheila Irene Pant, had to live in a house donated by the government.

    This work projects Liaquat Ali Khan as a mild, well-meaning man of moderate disposition who shunned controversies. Mediocre in intellect, his sincerity of purpose and dedication made it easier for him to inspire confidence among his party workers. This work shows how the Muslims felt threatened by Hindu majoritarianism and feared that the Federation as envisaged under the Government of India Act (1935) would complete their disaster.

    By mobilising the Muslim mass support, Jinnah widened his political base to fight the Congress. One is tempted to conclude from this work that the Congress was outmanoeuvred by Jinnah’s brilliant strategy and leadership, and Liaquat Ali Khan’s famous budget speech on February 28, 1947, in the Legislative Assembly, which hit the business magnets supporting the Congress, turned the tide in the Congress in favour of Partition. On March 3, 1947, Khizar Hayat Khan was forced to resign as Chief Minister due to Muslim League pressure, and the way was clear for the creation of Pakistan.

    By 1945, the Muslim League succeeded in setting up its party ministry in four of the provinces, and in the fifth, it held a strong position by putting pressure on the dispirited and shrinking Unionists party

    Professor Roger D. Long with a foreword by Stanely Wolpert. Oxford University Press, Karachi. Pages 328. V.N. Datta

    This fantastic transformation of the Muslim League would not be possible without Liaqat Ali Khan–the forgotten hero of Pakistan. Today PTV does not show the Liaqat fist, and there is no national holiday for this hero. All this is based on pre-independence politics when Liaqat rubbed many the wrong way. It had not, there would have been no Pakistan.

     

     

    History of Threats against Pakistan

    Filed under: History of Pakistan — Moin Ansari @ 11:05 pm
    Tags:

    Noticias de Rupia | Nouvelles de Roupie | Rupiennachrichten | новости рупии | 卢比新闻  | Roepienieuws | Rupi Nyheter | ルピーニュース  | Notizie di Rupia |  PAKISTAN LEDGERپاکستاني کھاتا | Moin Ansari | معین آنصآرّی | DefensebriefsIntellibriefs Translate to: Page copy protected against web site content infringement by Copyscape Bookmark and Share Add to Technorati RSS feed: | RUPEE NEWS | October 13th, 2008 | Moin Ansari |  معین آنصآرّی | اخبار روپیہ  |

    THE PAKISTANI RESILIENCE IN THE FACE OF THREATS: Mountbatten, Nehru, Indira, Kruschev, Johnson, Carter, Kissinger (Nixon), Gobachov, Clinton, Armitage (Bush), Karzia (Bush and Vajpayee/Sing) have all threatened Pakistan: The Pakistanis are used to it…so what else is new?!! Pakistan’s Nuclear Program should be seen in the backdrop of these threats.

    Many world leaders have threatened the existance of Pakistan

    Mountbatten, Nehru, Indira, Kruschev, Johnson, Carter, Kissinger (Nixon), Gobachov, Clinton, Armitage (Bush) have all threatened Pakistan:

     

    The Pakistanis are used to it…so what else is knew

    Pakistan is used to threats from US Politicians

    The original Great Game was between Curson’s Imperial Britian and Tzarist Russia

    The original Great Game was between Curson’s Imperial Britian and Tzarist Russion The original Great Game was between Curson’s Imperial Britian and Tzarist RussionThe original Great Game was between Curson’s Imperial Britian and Tzarist Russion

     

    PAKISTANI RESILIENCE IN THE FACE OF THREATS:

    http://www.webmaster-tool.co.uk/The capacity of Pakistan to sustain some fifteen major disarticulations in polity, power, and structure and still preserve a national identity is a phenomenon one is tempted to explain by recourse to the supernatural Pakistan which has been pummelled by external events (three wars with India, secession of Bangladesh, 3.5 million Afghan refugees) and disrupted by internal fissures (4 periods of martial law totalling 27 years and ethnic violence in Sindh) to a degree which no other state established since 1945 has suffered. In this respect it stands as an exemplar of a nation whose adversities “common sense” might suggest make its viability impossible. Yet its continued existence defies the reality induced by such speculation. The enormity and persistence of these difficulties and the resilience of the nation in absorbing and somehow surviving them must be regarded with awe if not admiration.” RALPH BRAIBANTI

    Kissinger Threatened Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto

    THE KISSINGER THREAT: Kissinger Threatened Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto: That threat and his judicial murder has repurcussions today on Pakistan US relations Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto understood the geo political realities of the region. As an alumni of Berkley he also understood the lack fortitude and staying power of American commitments to her “friends”. He wanted an independent foreign policy for Pakistan. He wanted to change Pakistani policy and closely ally Pakistan with China. As foreign minister under Ayub Khan he wanted to attack India in 1962 when India was embroigled in a war with China and liberate Kashmir. Nehru made all sorts of promises to Ayub Khan and Pakistan did not attack India and liberate Kashmir in 1962. By 1965 it was too late. America had repaced the weapons to India and China did not want to intervene again. Bhutto rankled the feathers of the Americans who disliked him to the core 

     

    Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto  That threat and his judicial murder has repurcussions today on Pakistan US relationsThat threat and his judicial murder has repurcussions today on Pakistan US relationsHenry Kissinger

    “Remember that … we shall fight, and we shall fight for 1,000 years as we have fought for 1,000 years in the past … we can continue!”  Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto’s Speech at the United Nations.

    That threat and his judicial murder has repurcussions today on Pakistan US relationsThat threat and his judicial murder has repurcussions today on Pakistan US relations THE CHOICE BETWEEN RUSSIA, CHINA AND THE US:  The youngest Foreign Minister of Pakistan, the mercurial Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto was building Pakistani bridges with China. He wanted to close the US base in Pakistan, which he succeed in doing. President Johnson told President Ayub Khan  ”Bhutto must Go! Bhutto must Go!”. Soon thereafter Bhutto resigned a created the Pakistan Peoples Party. 

     

    The favourite slogan, the one that caught on during the May 1968 fête in France was “it is forbidden to forbid”. There is nothing to forbid the youth of Europe to reject both communism and capitalism. What will they build in the absence of both systems? Will their concept of building a new structure with a new philosophy mean willful self-destruction? This sounds insane but the youth of Europe is not insane. Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto A letter from the Death Cell (2007)] p. 15  p. 20

    THE JOHNSON THREAT:Bhutto  was left leaning and a Socialist. President Johnson wanted President Ayub Khan to fire Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto. Bhutto launced a movement and forced Ayub Khan to resign. disappointed with the Americans after 1965, President Ayub Khan wrote a book called “Friends Not Masters” for America. Bhutto wrote a book called “Myth of Indpendence” in which he wanted to eliminate American influences on Pakistan.After 1971 Bhutto was elected Prime Minister and started Pakistan’s nuclear program.

    “We badly need to gather our thoughts and clear our minds. We need a political ceasefire without conceding ideological territory.We need a ceasefire to bury dead thoughts and to overcome fatigue. The modus vivendi has to be honourable and above board. Both sides have lost or, should I say, neither side can win. During the ceasefire a combination of existing forces might create a new order or a new equation between existing forces. Whatever the formula, it cannot be evolved on the battlefield of the old or new cold wars. The new international order has to emerge through the demands of a Third World summit conference. The answer to the North-South conflict, which is more serious than the East-West conflict, has to be found honestly and with unimpeachable integrity. Genuine disarmament will not come on its own or by platitudes at special sessions of the United Nations on disarmament, although, I was among the first to propose such a conference eighteen years ago. Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto A letter from the Death Cell (2007)] p. 15  p. 28

    KISSINGER THREAT CHANGED THE SUBCONTINENT: Pakistan was dismembered in 1971 at the time the only nation In May 1974 India exploded a Nuclear device which it called “peaceful”. Following India’s explosion, Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto pledged to press ahead with Pakistan’s nuclear program. The US pressured him not to build a bomb. However ZAB he did not bend. He stood his ground in the fact of tremendous Americans pressure. In 1976 he was threatened by Henry Kissinger with “horrible” consequences for pursuing a nuclear program. (Kissinger’s exact words: “We will make a horrible example out of you.” Ironically Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto was hanged by General Zia ul Haq, a General supported by the USA for more than a decade.

    (See the following for some detail: www.pakistanspace.tripod.com/1976.htm; www.middleeast.org/forum

     Mohammad Shehzad’s article, “Revival of Pak-US defense ties: A double-edged sword?” published in Pakistan’s daily The News on March 2, 2003 as well as in Issue No. 11 of SikhSpectrum.com. ). (Mahir Ali in Dawn (11 December 2002 writes, “As far as Pakistan is concerned, he [i.e., Kissinger] threatened Z.A. Bhutto with dire consequences for pursuing a nuclear programme.” )

    “We will eat grass… “Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto’s Referring to financing the Pakistani Nuclear program.

    The USA supported the coup leader General Zia against the elected Prime Minister of Pakistan Z.A. Bhutto. Z.A. Bhutto was a victim of judicial murder.

     

    “in Western estimation it is preferable to be a communist leader of a communist state, than to be a non-communist leader of a non-communist state having friendly relations with communist states. The anomaly does not cease here. It is even more dangerous to be pro-West. One disagreement in defence of a national cause, and out goes that civilian leader by a coup d’etat. He gets replaced by a tin-pot military dictator who would not dare to disagree about anything, including the vital national interests of his country   Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto A letter from the Death Cell (2007)p. 69

    THE REMOVAL OF LIAQAT ALI KHAN:Pakistan’s first elected Prime Minister.

    Liaqat Ali Khan refused to join the Soviet Asian Security Pact and rejoin India.

     The same thing had happened in 1958 when General Ayub eventually replaced the elected Prime Minister who was assissinated-Liaqat Ali Khan. The US supported General Ayub Khan for a decade. Paksitan lives in a tough neigborhood! The USSR also threatened the existance of Pakistan twice, once during the cold war (60s) when they discovered that the American spyplanes (U2s) used to take off from Badabare Airforce base near Peshawar Pakistan. The 2nd threat was during the USSR-Afghan war (80s) when Pakistan with the help of 52 other countries was helping the Afghan Freedom fighters. Pakistan survived.

    “A military junta is the herald of munism. The failure to realize this axiomatic fact is the cause of the confusion in Africa, Asia and Latin America. Military rule turns the people totally and irrevocably against the bemedalled generals and their patrons. Where else can the people turn? If freedom, democracy and the rights of man are to be put on the counter to see whether copper and coffee is to cost ten cents more or ten cents less and bargained away with so little consideration, then freedom is a very cheap commodity and the rights of man are not worth a nickel.” Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto A letter from the Death Cell (2007)p. 68

    Many now have selective amnesia and complain about the lack of democracy in Pakistan. It is amazing that the same Henry Kissinger who threatened Benazir’s Bhutto’s father now supports Benazir Bhutto and the rule of democracy. Just goes to show that there is no commitment to democracy, only to personalities and interests.

     

    Pakistan was once called the most allied ally of the United States. We are now the most non-allied.Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto (As quoted in The New York Times(6 July 1973)

    THE THREAT TO ZIA: -ZIA UL HAQ WAS BLOWN UP IN STRANGE CIRCUMSTANCES:Zia ul Haq had promised the Americans that he would not build a Nuclear bomb. Hower he did. For deatating the USSR, he was rewarded with a crate of mangos loaded on this American made C-130. The crate of mangos exploded the plane in the air. Ms. Benazir’s Bhutto was waiting inthe wings and became the Prime Minsiter. The distrustful Army did not allow here near the Nuclear facilities. last two prior stints as Prime Minister were a fiasco with rampant corruption, a total lack of governance and the years were full of political vendetta against opponents. She transferred Billions to bank accounts in Switzerland and bought Surray Palace in England. Benazir Bhutto did repeat her mistakes and paid for it with her life. May God Bless her soul!

    Today the youth turn to extremism but Bhutto’s thesis is still accurate.

    Tin-pot dictators have ravaged Asia, Latin America and Africa. In the aftermath, they have done more to promote communism than the works of Marxand Engels, Leninand Mao. They are the worst tyrants of the post-colonial period. They have destroyed time-honoured institutions and treated their people like animals. They have caused internal divisions and external confusion. The dictator is the one animal who needs to be caged. He betrays his profession and his constitution. He betrays the people and destroys human values. He destroys culture. He binds the youth. He makes the structure collapse. He rules by fluke and freak. He is the scourge and the ogre. He is a leper. Anyone who touches him also becomes a leper. He is the upstart who is devoid of ideals and ideology. Not a single one of them has made a moment’s contribution to history. Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto A letter from the Death Cell (2007)p. 63 

    Bhuttos message from the grave to all Pakistanis:  

    What gift can I give you from this cell out of which my hand cannot pass? I give you the hand of the people. What celebration can I hold for you? I give you the celebration of a celebrated memory and a celebrated name. You are the heir to and inheritor of the most ancient civilization. Please make your full contribution to making this ancient civilization the most progressive and the most powerful. By progressive and powerful I do not mean the most dreaded. A dreaded society is not a civilized society. The most progressive and powerful society in the civilized sense, is a society which has recognized its ethos, and come to terms with the past and the present, with religion and science, with modernism and mysticism, with materialism and spirituality; a society free of tension, a society rich in culture. Such a society cannot come with hocus-pocus formulas and with fraud. It has to flow from the depth of a divine search. In other words, a classless society has to emerge but not necessarily a Marxist society. The Marxist society has created its own class structure. Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto A letter from the Death Cell (2007)] p. 15

    On How History will remember Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto.

    “When the history of this country is written it will be admitted by our people and by the world outside that no individual has rendered so much service to the cause of socialism in Pakistan as I have done.” Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto

    The writings of Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto should be mandatory reading for all Pakistanis.

    THE PAKISTANI RESILIENCE IN THE FACE OF THREATS: Mountbatten, Nehru, Indira, Kruschev, Johnson, Carter, Kissinger (Nixon), Gobachov, Clinton, Armitage (Bush), Karzia (Bush and Vajpayee/Sing) have all threatened Pakistan: The Pakistanis are used to it…so what else is new?!! Pakistan’s Nuclear Program should be seen in the backdrop of these threats.

     

    Noticias de Rupia | Nouvelles de Roupie | Rupiennachrichten | новости рупии | 卢比新闻  | Roepienieuws | Rupi Nyheter | ルピーニュース  | Notizie di Rupia |  PAKISTAN LEDGERپاکستاني کھاتا | Moin Ansari | معین آنصآرّی | DefensebriefsIntellibriefs Translate to: Page copy protected against web site content infringement by Copyscape Bookmark and Share Add to Technorati RSS feed: | RUPEE NEWS | October 13th, 2008 | Moin Ansari |  معین آنصآرّی | اخبار روپیہ  |

    • Peace-Keeping by the United Nations. Pakistan Publishing House, Karachi. – 1967
    • Political Situation in Pakistan, Veshasher Prakashan, New Dehli. – 1968
    • The Myth of Independence, Oxford University Press, Karachi and Lahore. - 1969
    • The Great Tragedy, Pakistan People’s Party, Karachi. - 1971
    • Politics of the People (speeches, statements and articles), edited by Hamid Jalal and Khalid Hasan: Pakistan Publications, Rawalpindi. - 1948-1971
    • Speeches and Statements, Government of Pakistan, Karachi. – 1971-75
    • Bilateralism: New Directions. Government of Pakistan, Islamabad – 1976 The Third World: New Directions. Quartet Books, London. – 1977
    • My Pakistan. Biswin Sadi Publications, New Dehli. – 1979
    • If I am Assassinated, Vikas, New Dehli. – 1979
    • My Execution. Musawaat Weekly International, London – 1980
    • New Directions. Narmara Publishers, London. – 1980

    CLINTON THREATENED PAKISTAN:President Clinton had warned Pakistan that it stood on the brink of being included in the terrorist watch list for harbouring Islamic extremists. He also enforced Pressler sanctions on Pakistan, which drastically reduced aid.

    BUSH THREATENED PAKISTAN:In September 11, 2001 Richard Armitage on behalf of the President Bush threatened to send Pakistan to the stone ages if it did not assist the USAs war against Afghanistan. India was ready to provide air bases to the USA so that it could commence arpet bombing of Pakistan and Islamabad. President Musharraf “In the Line of Fire”. 

     

    The New Great Game was between the USA and Russia

    The latest Great Game is between the USA and China

    In all three Great Games the people of Paksitan and Afghanistan suffered

    In all the Great Games the intruders were defeated by the people of Pakistan-Afghanistan 

    Next Page »

    Blog at WordPress.com.