|
Scholarly
works on the partition of India are legion, but those focusing on the
partition of the Punjab are very few. Ian Talbot and Kirpal Singh indeed
have pioneering works on the Punjab partition to their credit, but much
more research needs to be done to shed light on the dynamics of that
cataclysmal event. After all the greatest forced migration in history
with its gory tales of massacres, looting, arson, rape, abduction of
women and children and other acts of savagery were essentially facets of
a Punjabi tragedy.
Why and how this happened will be elaborated in my forthcoming book. On
the 60th anniversary of the partition of the Punjab it is appropriate
that a sketch of the main events is shared with the public. I shall in a
series of articles trace the main events that culminated in the bloody
division of that province.
Although ideas of partitioning Punjab had existed since at least the
beginning of the twentieth century it was only in the wake of the March
23, 1940 Lahore Resolution adopted by the Muslim League that the Sikhs
began to demand that the Punjab should also be partitioned on a
religious basis.
Sikh religion, culture and history were inextricably linked to the
Punjab -- the founder of the Sikh faith, Baba Guru Nanak (1469-1539) and
his spiritual successors were Punjabis, the only great kingdom ruled a
Sikh, the Kingdom of Lahore under Maharaja Ranjit Singh (1799-1839), was
essentially a Punjabi state, most of the holy shrines of the Sikhs and
the vast majority of their community were based in the Punjab. Therefore
the Sikhs demanding partition appears to be a contradiction in terms.
But they did and the question is: why? Certainly the clues are not to be
found in their demographic complexion.
Unlike the Muslims who were in majority in the northwestern and
northeastern zones of the subcontinent, the Sikh were not in a majority
anywhere in the Punjab, not even in the central districts where they
were mainly located or in their holy city of Amritsar. According to the
1941 census their overall proportion of the total Punjab population was
13.2 per cent in the British-administered areas and it increased to 14.
9 per cent if the Sikh states were also included. The Muslims had an
overwhelming majority of 57.1 per cent in the British areas, which
decreased to 53.2 per cent if the Sikh states were included. The Hindu
population was 29.1 per cent in British districts and it declined to
26.6 if the Sikh states were included. The Sikhs were not in a majority
in any of the major Sikh states either.
The Sikh argument was that India should not be partitioned, but if it
became inevitable then the Punjab should be divided and the borders
between a predominantly Muslim Punjab in the West and a Hindu-Sikh
majority East Punjab should be drawn on the Chenab, so that East Punjab
would include their holy places as well as the majority of the
community. The Sikh leadership feared persecution in a predominantly
Muslim Pakistan, just as the Muslim leadership argued that permanent
Hindu Raj based on caste prejudices will be established if India
remained united.
On February 20, 1947 Prime Minister Clement Attlee announced that His
Majesty's Government intended to transfer power to Indian hands, in a
united or partitioned India, by June 1948. The Sikhs reacted angrily to
that declaration because no mention of a Sikh right to a separate
homeland was included in it.
In the meantime, the Muslim League had launched on January 24 1947
direct action in the Punjab against the coalition government headed by
Sir Khizr Hayat Tiwana, which it alleged was not representative of the
Muslims of Punjab. The main supporters of Punjab Unionist Party, the
Muslim landlords, had decamped and were now members of the Punjab Muslim
League. The Muslim League won 75 out of the 83 seats fixed for Muslims.
Two Unionists crossed the floor and joined it but it was still short of
a majority by 10 seats in a house of 175.
On the other hand, the Unionist Party led by Tiwana was routed in the
election. It won only 18 seats. Tiwana managed to put together a
coalition government, which included the Akalis and other Panthic Sikhs
who won 23 seats and the Congress which did very well by winning 50
general seats. The coalition government also included some scheduled
caste members of the Punjab Assembly.
Direct action or a civil disobedience movement as the Muslim League
preferred to call it lasted from January 24 to February 26. Its mass
character multiplied every day and the jails were filled with leaders
and cadres who defied Section 144 and were arrested. Although it
remained peaceful, each day the slogans the crowds shouted became more
and more menacing and threatening, striking fear and terror in the
hearts of the non-Muslims.
Slogans such as, 'Pakistan ka nara kiya? La illahah illillah (what is
the slogan of Pakistan? It is, there is no God but Allah), 'Assey lein
gey Pakistan jaisey liya tha Hindustan' (we will take Pakistan the way
we took India) were raised all over the Punjab. Some slogans directly
insulted the Punjab premier in a most abusive and shallow manner.
Towards the end of the agitation the demonstrators began to harass
Hindus and Sikhs and made them fly the Muslim League flag on their cars
and shops.
The government and the Muslim League, however, reached an agreement on
February 26 according to which the agitation was called off and the
Muslim League leaders and cadres were released. But those several weeks
of mass agitation provoked a determined reaction from the Hindu and Sikh
leaders in the Punjab who vowed not to let a Muslim League minority
government come to power. On March 2 Khizr resigned. He had been badly
shaken and demoralised by the abuse directed at him and by the fact that
the landlords had abandoned him.
The Punjab Governor, Sir Evan Jenkins, invited the Muslim League leader
Nawab Iftikhar Hussain Khan Mamdot to prove that he had a majority in
the house. Although he claimed that he could muster a majority with the
help of some scheduled castes members of the Punjab Assembly Mamdot
failed to do so. That created a political impasse. Governor Jenkins
therefore imposed governor rule on March 5 under Section 93 of the India
Act of 1935. Punjab continued to remain under governor's rule until
partition in mid-August 1947.
The author is a visiting senior research fellow at the Institute of
South Asian Studies (ISAS), National University of Singapore on leave
from the University of Stockholm, Sweden. Email: isasia@nus.edu.sg
BACK TO APNA WEB PAGE
|
|