Some facts about Resolution of Muslim Conference, 19 July
1947
Dr Shabir Choudhry
Muslim Conference makes
much of its Resolution passed on 19 July 1947; and deliberately twists facts to
suit their agenda. Sad thing is that they want to impose that resolution fraudulently
passed by around hundred people motivated by religious zealots. The following
is from my Mphil research: Kashmir and the Partition of India.
Although
the Muslim Conference was considered as a puppet political organization of the
Muslim League, it was not, ideologically, a united party, Choudhry Ghulam Abbas
and his followers wanted the State to become part of Pakistan, whereas,
Choudhry Hameedullah and his influential friends wanted it to become a
sovereign state.
After
the arrest of Choudhry Ghulam Abbas the party was involved in internal
politics; both Choudhry Hameedullah and Mir Waiz claimed the position of Acting
President. These internal squabbles further weakened the already meagre and
disorganized party. Later, in his autobiography, Choudhry Ghulam Abbas
confirmed that he had appointed Choudhry Hameedullah as his successor.
At
the time when Choudhry Ghulam Abbas was behind the walls of the Kathua prison,
Choudhry Hameedullah Khan as the acting President of the Muslim Conference,
addressing a press Conference in a leading hotel in Jammu on 28th
May 1947 declared:
‘Accession to Pakistan would be unpleasant to Hindus
while accession to India will disturb Muslims. Therefore, we have decided not
to enter into any controversy either with India or Pakistan. The second thing
we have decided in that we should try to acquire independence for the State.
The third question now before us is, what would be the position of the
Maharaja? We have never been lacking in showing loyalty and resects for him and
it is because of this attachment that we did not support the Quit Kashmir
Movement, although in one way it was a natural movement. We, therefore, felt
that we should try to find out a solution which will maintain the position of
the Maharaja Bahadur, while at the same time; it should also satisfy the praja.
The best solution that we have found is that the Maharaja should become a
constitutional King, as is the position in many other countries. The fourth
thing that we have decided is that we should have a Constituent Assembly of our
own to draft our constitution. The Muslim League has already boycotted the
Constituent Assembly (British Assembly). Therefore its proposed constitution
cannot satisfy Muslims because it must have been prepared by hundred per cent
Hindus. If our four representatives sat in this Assembly, they would just be
wasting their time.'
The statement further said: ‘I have the support of all
important leaders of the Muslim Conference and Choudhry Ghulam Abbass Khan has
himself expressed agreement with this proposal. A representative convention of
the Muslim Conference will be called within a month, where the proposal will be
unanimously adopted. This solution, therefore, should be considered as the
official policy of the Muslim Conference. The Muslim League has not given us
this solution, nor are we presenting it to deceive the Hindus. We have arrived
at this solution in all honesty and after taking into account the local
situation. The only connection that the Muslim league has with it is that its
past and present policy of non-intervention in Indian States has strengthened
us. I would like to say in all honesty that we have had no talks in this
connection with any leader or worker of the Muslim League, and that Hindus
should also give up being led by the Congress. The best thing for us all is
that the League and the Congress should leave us undisturbed and that we should
give up both the parties. When we say that we want to separate ourselves from
Hindustan and Pakistan, we mean that we want to be friends with both of them,
but we do not want to be influenced by either of them. We should have political
as well as economic relations with both. We think that we will have good
relations with Pakistan and, in the presence of the ruling Hindu dynasty; we
will also have good relations with India.’1
The
leadership summoned a meeting of the Working Committee on 18th July
1947. The meeting was to be followed by a Convention next day in Srinagar. The
Working Committee unanimously endorsed the Statement made by the Acting
President and adopted a resolution calling upon the Maharaja to declare the
state’s independence, and assuring him of the party’s whole- hearted support
and co-operation.
It
must be noted that a Working Committee (or Executive Committee in some
organizations) is the cream of any political party and it normally consists of
the party’s most senior and dedicated members. The Working Committee of the
Muslim conference unanimously adopted a resolution of the State’s complete
independence.
It
becomes apparent that the senior-most members of the Muslim Conference, who
worked their way up to become members of the working committee and who had
political awareness, carefully considered the future of the state and came to
the conclusion that complete independence was the most honourable and
acceptable solution for all communities.
As
expected, this resolution was to cause bitterness in some quarters, especially
among those rights – wing factions led by Mir Waiz Yousaf Shah. On the
following day, 19th July 1947, the party’s Convention was to take place. It was
not a Convention in the sense where political parties selects delegates and
invite them. There were no invitations sent, nor delegates selected; news of
the Convention was published in a newspaper. Since there were no invitations,
virtually anyone could have walked in.
According
to Yousaf Saraf, who was also a member of the Muslim Conference; ‘without Mir
Waiz the party hardly existed in srignar.’2
Mir
Waiz was a religious leader and had some religious following. Since the so-
called Convention was held in Srinagar, the nerve centre of politics, it was no
problems for Mir Waiz to muster fifty or sixty people. When the so-called
‘Convention’ began, according to Yousaf Saraf, who was present, there were
about one hundred people in attendance. They were not necessarily all
politically conscious or even members of the Muslim Conference, because there
were no invitations given out. Most of the people were called by Mir Waiz
Yousaf Shah and were his religious followers, rather than political followers.
Anyway,
when the resolution for ‘Independence’ was put forward, Yousaf Saraf moved a
counter – resolution for accession to Pakistan. Highly exciting and religiously
motivated speeches were made in favour of accession to Pakistan and the
majority of those present had more religious influence than political
consciousness. As a result, the counter – resolution won the day.
It
would be wrong to criticize these people for doing what they did; the whole
Sub- Continent of India was at that time under the influence of religious
fanaticism. Social life and political strategies were determined by religious
beliefs. Hindus and Muslims were cutting each other’s throats in the name of
religion. And politics was based on religion. Anyhow, the Independence
resolution was defeated and this so-called ‘convention’ passed an Accession to
Pakistan resolution; it was on the basis of this resolution that the Muslim
Conference wanted to accede to Pakistan. The text of the resolution is as
follows:
‘The inhabitants
of the Princely States of the Sub-Continent had hoped that they would achieve
the objectives of national freedom shoulder to shoulder with the inhabitants of
British India, But unfortunately, whereas the inhabitants of British India
achieved freedom with the partition of the Sub-Continent, the Third June Plan
has strengthened the hands of the rulers of the Princely States. So long as
these autocrats do not bow before the demands of time, the future of the
inhabitants of Indian States will remain bleak. Under these circumstances only
three alternatives are open to the inhabitants of Jammu and Kashmir State-
namely, accession to India, accession to Pakistan, or the establishment of a
free and independent state. After carefully considering the position, this
Convention of the Muslim Conference has reached the conclusion that accession
of the state to Pakistan is absolutely necessary in view of the geographic,
economic, linguistic, cultural and religious considerations –because Muslims
constitute 80% of the State’s population. All the major rivers of Pakistan have
their source in the State, whose inhabitants are strongly connected with the
people of Pakistan through religious, cultural and economic relations. The
Convention strongly demands of the Maharaja that the people of Kashmir should
be given complete internal autonomy and that he should treat himself as
constitutional Head of State and set up a representative Legislative Assembly while
handing over the portfolios of defence, foreign affairs and communications to
the Constituent Assembly of Pakistan’.3
Whatever
the motives behind it, the resolution was passed by this so-called
‘Convention’. The future history of the State was destined to be influenced by
it. It not only showed the weak discipline of he Muslim Conference, and its
internal splits, but it also further divided the Muslims of the State.
It
is claimed that the Muslim League High Command wished this to happen and this
is why, contrary to the official party line, this resolution was put forward.
It is also claimed (by the then Acting President, Choudry Hameedullah Khan)
that he adopted the independence policy after consulting Mr. Jinnah.
These
are two conflicting claims. Circumstantial evidence indicates that Choudry
Hameedullah’s claim was true. It is strengthened by a statement made by Mr. Jinnah
on 11th July 1947, that the Maharaja had three options open to him:
accession to Pakistan, accession to India or independence. Mr. Jinnah, rather
than asking the Maharaja to accede to Pakistan, acknowledged his right to
become a sovereign ruler.
This
indicates that Mr. Jinnah personally had no objection to the State’s
independence, and he encouraged Choudry Hameedullah Khan and Professor Ishaque
when they visited him. On the other hand, Mr. Jinnah refused to have a meeting
with Sardar Ibrahim (the Chief Whip of the Muslim Conference, and a staunch
supporter of the proposal to Pakistan) despite the fact that Ghazanfar Ali
Khan, the Central Minister, and Mian Amir-ud-Din, the mayor of Lahore,
endeavoured to bring about the meeting. If Mr. Jinnah wanted the State to
accede to Pakistan, he surely would have granted a visit to Sardar Ibrahim, who
was pro-Pakistan, and a rising star in the party, especially after the
resolution was passed.
All
this suggests that Mr. Jinnah, rather than oppose an independent Kashmir, lent
it his support to it. His far-sighted eyes looked upon it as an emerging buffer
State which could have an important role in this strategically important
region. But there were other influential people who wanted the State’s
accession to Pakistan at all costs. Their quest, malicious activities and
imperialist designs need careful examination and thorough research.
References
1. Al-Islah 5th June, 1947;
Saraf, op. cit., Vol. 1, p.707.
2. Saraf,
Justice Y., op. cit., Vol. 1, p.679.
3. Ibid., Vol. 1, p.711.
No comments:
Post a Comment