Despite the wealth of books already written on the partition of the Punjab, Reginald Massey is impressed by Professor Ishtiaq Ahmed's comprehensive and unbiased account of the tragic events of 1947.

By Reginald Massey

Historians, political scientists, propagandists, politicians, poets and writers have for decades churned out books about the partition of the Punjab in 1947. This volume is the latest. Meticulously researched over many years, unbiased, clearly presented and devoid of mudslinging it is, I do not hesitate in saying, a masterpiece. It is essential reading for all those interested in subcontinental affairs, but particularly for Punjabis on both sides of the India-Pakistan border. I also recommend it to members of the Punjabi diaspora in Britain, Canada and other parts of the planet. 

Born in Lahore, Ishtiaq Ahmed is Professor Emeritus at Stockholm University and Honorary Senior Fellow of the National University of Singapore's Institute of South Asian Studies. An authority on subcontinental political history, he is equally respected and regarded in New Delhi and Islamabad. He makes no apologies that he is a confirmed secularist though he appreciates much that is useful in various belief systems. He is also one who strives for Punjabiat, a concept shaped and moulded out of the various rich and nourishing traditions of the Land of the Five Rivers.

Historically, the Punjab was always a melting pot of people and cultures. Aryanic tribes from the region between the Danube and the Volga settled in Mesopotamia, then pushed into Persia and, later, found their way into northern India. When on the attack they had one great advantage: the horse. A single mounted warrior could cut through masses of foot soldiers. Later came the Huns and, much later, Muslims of various ethnic origins. The Punjabi language itself is marked by the imprint of many influences. The Jat tribes are a case in point. There are Hindu Jats, Muslim Jats, Sikh Jats and even Christian Jats. Hence they often share their original clan names such as Mann, Gill, Chaddah, Aulakh, Cheema, Sandhu and Bains. The Punjab enjoyed a liberal interpretation of Islam, Hinduism and Sikhism. Sufi, Bhakti and Sant movements encouraged harmony and discouraged strife. So why the blood-soaked partition?

The thrust of Ahmed's research and investigations provide explanations and, where clear explanations are difficult to come by, he presents plausible explanations. He has unearthed secret British reports and interviewed people on both sides of the India-Pakistan border who witnessed the horrific carnage, rape and slaughter. There emerges tragedy as well as heroism. In one village the women and girls of the Sikh community are killed by their own menfolk in order to spare them being raped by men of the opposing Muslim community. In another case, a man risks his life to smuggle out several people who would have been hacked to death by baying marauders. And then there is the touching story of the Hindu in east Punjab who lent some money to his Muslim friend who had to flee to west Punjab. His Muslim friend had a difficult time finding employment in his new country but scrimped and saved and eventually returned the debt to his friend. Sometime later, when the Hindu was on his deathbed, he called for his Muslim friend. This shows that the flame of humanity, though low and dangerously flickering, somehow managed to stay alive. And yet the Punjab suffered the trauma of the biggest forced migration in history. 

There is evidence that almost before the end of British rule, most Punjabis lived in relative peace with each other in the cities, towns and villages. Ahmed writes: 'A shared sense of common Punjabi identity was prevalent among them, but it did not prove strong enough to withstand the pressure of divisive forces that became active in the twentieth century.' When the war ended demobilization started. Almost a million Sikhs, Punjabi Muslims and Hindu Jats from the eastern Punjab were demobbed. They had been trained in the use of firearms and many of them had managed to get their hands on guns. They had no jobs to return to. Gangs of criminals stalked the Punjab and they had close links with both the police and corrupt politicians. 

The provincial election of February 1946 had catastrophic results. The Muslim League, which wanted a homeland for India's Muslims on the basis of Jinnah's 'Two Nation Theory', got a majority but not an absolute majority. The other parties formed a coalition ministry under the Unionist party leader Sir Khizr Hayat Khan Tiwana, whose own party had been thoroughly routed. The Indian National Congress and the Sikh parties were part of the cobbled coalition. Although the government was technically legal, so far as the majority of Muslims were concerned it lacked legitimacy. The Muslim League started agitating and took to the streets. They particularly targeted Tiwana with the vilest abuse. In utter disgust, Tiwana resigned on March 2, 1947.

The very next day Master Tara Singh, the Sikh leader, stood on the steps of the Punjab Assembly in Lahore and, brandishing his kirpan (sword) in a threatening manner, ominously warned that there would be no Pakistan. The Congress and the Sikh parties now took to the streets and rioting started in the cities and towns. In Lahore the majority of the population was Muslim but most of the best properties, business houses, factories and shops belonged to the Hindus. Hence Muslim mobs looted the rich Hindus whom they regarded as exploiters and burnt their properties with relish. Moreover, the rank and file policemen were largely Muslim. 

Matters worsened when Sikhs in the Rawalpindi district were attacked with particular ferocity. Here, as in Lahore, there seems to have been an underlying economic enmity. The Sikhs of Rawalpindi were relatively well-off since they owned shops and businesses. The reaction to these attacks was almost immediate. In the eastern districts of the province, where Muslims were in a minority, murder and rape became rampant, often encouraged by middle ranking bureaucrats. The Muslims, tenant farmers, weavers, spinners and small tradesmen, were made to suffer for what had happened in Rawalpindi. Also in east Punjab were Sikh states with their own armies. Their rulers massacred their own Muslim subjects. (Throughout history rulers were regarded as the saviours of their subjects). Sources that Ahmed has consulted are agreed that in the final tally, many more Muslims perished than Hindus and Sikhs put together. 

The colonial power, having got cold feet, decided to quit in undue and improper haste. No proper plans were made and those few steps that were decided upon were taken too late and too falteringly. The Muslim League wanted the whole of the Punjab but then had to accept a partition. A British lawyer, Sir Cyril Radcliffe, who had never set foot in India was flown in from London to arbitrate and decide on the demarcation line. Pakistan was created on August 14 and India declared independent on August 15. In other words, Pakistan became an independent country before India, the parent country. But even then the Radcliffe Award was not announced. The Hindus were sure that Lahore would be given to India; the Muslims were similarly sure that the district of Gurdaspur would be allocated to Pakistan. But on August 17, when Radcliffe's infamous award was made public, both Hindus and Muslims were severely disappointed. The Hindus of Lahore woke up that morning to be informed by their Muslim servants that they were in Pakistan; and the Muslims of Gurdaspur district and the two Muslim majority tahsils (sub-districts) of Ferozepur district discovered that they were stranded in India. 

Mountbatten was a vain, ambitious man who greatly desired to be the joint Governor General of India and Pakistan. Jinnah, however, would have none it and reserved the job for himself. Liaquat Ali Khan, who can best be described as Jinnah's lackey, became Prime Minister. Most unusually, the Governor General (the King's titular representative) had more power and influence than the Prime Minister. From day one, therefore, democracy in Pakistan was emasculated.

Mountbatten and, more importantly, his wife Edwina were close to Nehru and there is no doubt that Mountbatten prevailed upon Radcliffe to grant India the two Muslim majority Ferozepur tahsils. Thus India got control of the Ferozepur headworks on the Sutlej river and the head-reach of the Ganga canal, which served Bikaner state in Rajasthan. The Hindu ruler of Bikaner had made it clear to Mountbatten that if the Ferozepur headworks were given to Pakistan he, in the interests of his subjects, would have to accede to Pakistan. 

The FRs (Fortnightly Reports) from the Punjab governors to the Viceroy (which Ahmed has quoted) are revealing. They provide civil service accounts of the state of affairs in the various districts of the province. Sir Evan Jenkins, governor, informed the Viceroy on May 3, 1946: 'All communities are said to be preparing for widespread rioting, and there is much talk about “volunteers” who constitute the “private armies” of the various communities.' Jenkins, a proconsul of the old school like his predecessor Glancy, despised the Congress which was largely composed of upper caste Hindus. These men, brought up on Kipling, particularly distrusted Hindus. For them the word itself spelt craft and deceit. Senior police officers made a point of getting their Muslim policemen to beat up Congress, that is Hindu, demonstrators. This is what happened in 1928 when, on the orders of the Lahore police chief James Scott, the famous Hindu leader Lala Lajpat Rai was severely injured and died of his wounds. 

After the massacres on both sides of the border in 1947, the remnants tried to get out. Trains were attacked and burnt. The hurriedly assembled Punjab Boundary Force led by a British general was too small and too stretched. It was largely ineffectual. Millions of men, women and children were seen trudging the countryside half naked and hungry, As happens in all such cases, it is the women who suffer most. Girls of seven were raped, as were grandmothers of seventy. The Punjab partition showed to what depths men could descend in the name of religion. 

Today, when India and Pakistan have nuclear warheads, which neither can afford, Ahmed's timely book must be taken seriously by policymakers in Delhi and Islamabad. In irrational, insane slaughter, no one party is ever to blame. The guilt lies everywhere.

Asian Affairs: November 2012