BJP and Jaswanth.

To the fact I have not read the book by Mr Jaswanth Singh on the partition of India, still the reviews in media provide enough air to speak of this. So I dare to write this blog.

Jaswanth Singh has raised the controversy of partition of the country again by claiming Nehru and Patel to have caused the partition of India than Jinnah. He opines, it was the reluctance of Nehru to share power with Jinnah that brought about the creation of Pakistan. Singh also has praised Jinnah to be an ambassador of Hindu- Muslim unity in early days of freedom struggle, only on his alienation in Congress has he moved into Muslim League. Jinnah no doubt was a great freedom fighter along with Gandhi and Nehru, and also an ambassador as termed by Jaswanth, to Hindu- Muslim unity in early days. But the fact still remains, that only on his call to Muslim League workers was the huge scale of communal violence instigated during partition.

Pakistan was no brain child of Mr Jinnah, but still to the end he was the leader who caused the difference by advocating the need of Pakistan. To be clear in words he made use of the opposition in Muslims towards a democratically elected Hindu Prime Minister to create Pakistan. He was the one who, to meet his own political desires brought about partition of India. Jinnah being senior to Nehru in Indian politics could not bare the dominance of Nehru during and after freedom struggle, also feared his political future. There by he went about with creation of Pakistan to sustain his political domination and supremacy. The means he used to attain his goals were definitely communal and he was the one behind the human slaughter during partition. Its a pity that leaders of BJP are taking turns to praise him secular. I fear the word secular may commit suicide for the way being attributed to communal people by modern politicians to meet their own ends.

Mr Singh also needs to be reminded of the basic principle of democracy, the one with majority backing can be called a leader and can hold the post such as Prime Minister. Nehru was the one who had the backing of masses than Jinnah during independence and he by no means can be blamed for not sharing power. Democracy is run by majority masses, but not by communities and communal leaders. Jinnah apart from creation of Pakistan, has left a long communal gulf in India that has ever lasted since Independence. So in no terms he deserves to be called secular.

The next controversy put forward by Mr Singh is the alienation of Muslims in India. I shall ask Mr Singh if he could list one right that Muslims have less than rest communities in India. When the world is learning rocket science and advancing to new shores of technology and living comforts with a progressive thought of liberty, whom does Mr Singh want to blame for the growing demand for Madarsas than Schools. Government has always tried for the upliftment of Muslims by recognising education in Madarsa equivalent to CBSE. I shall take the opportunity to ask which secular country in world funds all money for a religious tour like Haj. If he wants to speak of socio economic conditions, then i shall remind him the number of Hindus and Christians with similar conditions are more. I shall only term the claim another minority appeasement scheme in lines of Congress.

To conclude, Mr Singh has every right to publish his thoughts and do all the minority appeasement he whishes to as a citizen of India. But before hand he should have voluntarily resigned to BJP, when he found his ideas in contradiction to party's core principles. The media is only tyring to demonise BJP more than Jinnah and there by trying to project BJP as anti Muslim to gain its own TRP. The fuss raised is Media is not worth watching for the fact Mr Singh good or bad penned down his thoughts, which when found contradicting to party's ideology was expelled.