Welcome Guest! You are here: Home » Views & Analysis
Allah Baksh: Unsung Hero Of India's Freedom Struggle
Thursday May 16, 2013 10:07 AM, Shamsul Islam

On this May 14, 2013 falls the 70th anniversary of the martyrdom of one of the greatest freedom fighters of India, Allah Baksh. He lived and sacrificed his life for a free and all inclusive India. Allah Baksh was the Premier (those days chief minister was known by this designation) of Sind during the eventful days of 'Quit India' Movement of 1942 as head of the 'Ittehad Party' (Unity Party) which represented all sections of Sind and did not allow Muslim League to have any foothold in the Muslim majority province of Sind. Allah Baksh and his Party were not part of the Indian National Congress but when British Prime Minister Winston Churchill made a derogatory reference to the Indian freedom struggle and the 'Quit India' Movement in a speech in the British Parliament, Allah Baksh renounced in protest all titles conferred by the British Government.

While announcing this renouncement he stated, "It is the cumulative result of the feeling that the British Government does not want to part with power. Mr. Churchill's speech shattered all hopes." The British administration could not digest this dissent of Allah Baksh and he was removed from office by the Governor, Sir Hugh Dow, on October 10, 1942.

The fact that Nathu Ram Godse, closely associated with Hindu Mahasabha, VD Savarkar and the RSS killed Gandhi on January 30, 1948 is known by all but how many of us know that Allah Baksh a great fighter for the independence of a united India and prolific opponent of the idea of Pakistan was murdered on May 14, 1943, in Sind by professional killers hired by Muslim League. Allah Baksh needed to be liquidated because he was able to muster massive support of common Muslim masses throughout India against Pakistan. Moreover, Allah Baksh as a great secularist with massive support in Sind and opposed to the formation of Pakistan could prove to be the greatest stumbling block in the physical formation of Pakistan as without Sind, the 'Islamic State' in the west of the country just could not have materialized.

It is a well-known fact that dismissal of Allah Baksh Government in 1942 and his murder in 1943 paved the way for entry of Muslim League in Sind. Many may not be familiar with the shocking fact that after the dismissal of Allah Baksh government in 1942 in Sind, the British Governor appointed a coalition of Muslim League and Hindu Mahasabha (led by VD Savarkar) as new government in Sind. In fact, Muslim League and Hindu Mahasabha ran coalition governments in Bengal and NWFP also in the same period. In Sind one could see the open ganging up of the British rulers, Muslim League and Hindu Mahasabha in achieving the political and physical liquidation of Allah Baksh and his kind of anti-communal politics.

Perhaps the greatest contribution of Allah Baksh against communal and two-nation politics was when he joined hands with Muslim leaders like Mohammed Ibrahim, Hifzur Rehman, MA Ansari and Ishaque Sambhali in organizing lower and backward caste Muslim organisations on one platform named as Azad Muslims' Conference (Independent Muslims' Conference). It held its session in Delhi from April 27-30, 1940 with 1400 delegates from almost all parts of India attending it. The then British press which was mainly pro-Muslim League had to admit that it was the most representative gathering of Indian Muslims. This highly significant conference was presided over by Allah Baksh and passed the resolutions affirming that "India would have geographical and political boundaries of an indivisible whole land and, as such, was the common whole land of all the citizens irrespective of race or religion."

The conference also resolved that Pakistan scheme was, "impracticable and harmful to the country's interest generally, and of Muslims in particular." The conference called upon Muslims of India, "to own equal responsibilities with other Indians for striving and making sacrifices to achieve the country's independence."

Muslims like Allah Baksh who opposed the Muslim League and challenged its communal politics had done thorough home work as will be clear from the contents of presidential address delivered by Allah Baksh in 1940 Delhi Conference. He advanced historical facts to counter postulations of Muslim League and invited its leadership to respond to the ideological issues raised.

While decrying the concept of a theocratic state itself he said that "it was based on a false understanding that India is inhabited by two nations, Hindu and Muslim. It is much more to the point to say that all Indian Mussalmans are proud to be Indian Nationals and they are equally proud that their spiritual level and creedal realm is Islam. As Indian nationals-Muslims and Hindus and others, inhabit the land and share every inch of the motherland and all its material and cultural treasures alike according to the measure of their just and fair rights and requirements as the proud sons of the soil…It is a vicious fallacy for Hindus, Muslims and other inhabitants of India to arrogate to themselves and exclusively proprietary rights over either the whole or any particular part of India. The country as an indivisible whole and as one federated and composite unit belongs to all the inhabitants of the country alike, and is as much the inalienable and imprescriptible heritage of the Indian Muslims as of other Indians. No segregated or isolated regions, but the whole of India is the Homeland of all the Indian Muslims and no Hindu or Muslim or any other has the right to deprive them of one inch of this Homeland."

He made it clear that communalism was the creation of ruling classes among Muslims and Hindus. "These feelings and ambitions among those who hope to constitute the ruling caste among Hindus or Muslims, as successors of the present Imperial Rulers, revive and invent excuses for popular consumption from historical or other sources, and by securing the support of groups, manoeuver themselves into a position to play the political chess, which promises a possible prospect of success in their aim of becoming the rulers of the masses either integrally of the entire country or of a delimited region."

He asked Muslim Leagures, "Had the imperialistic structure of society been a guarantee of the prosperity of the Muslim masses and had empires not carried the germs of their own decay in them, then the mighty Omaiyad, Abbasid, Sarasenic, Fatimide, Sassanic, Moghal and Turkish empires would never have crumbled, leaving 1/5th of the human race, who live by Islamic faith in the condition in which they find themselves today-disinterested, and destitute in the bulk. Similarly those Hindus who entertain similar dreams, and who out of tendentiously written pages of history or out of the stimulating examples of the modern imperialists select ingredients for the nourishment of their imperial dreams, or dreams of exploitation, imposition and domination will be well advised to discard such ideals." He reminded both the protagonists of Hindu Rashtra and Islamic Nation that if all Muslims were one nation then why they were divided in so many countries and if all Hindus were one nation why India and Nepal were two countries.

He was right in complaining to Congress that, "Indian Mussalmans have a legitimate cause of complaint against the Congress on the ground that it has not found it possible so far to confer with them [Azad Muslims] for a settlement of the communal issue." It is true that Congress like the British rulers believed that Muslim League represented all Muslims. Congress led by Gandhi was cold to the idea of listening and accommodating anti-two-nation theory Muslims lest it offend the Muslim League.

Allah Baksh in his address defended greatly the composite Indian culture, "When they talk of Muslim culture they forget the composite culture which the impact of Hindus and Muslims has been shaping for the last 1000 years or more and in which is born a type of culture and civilisation in India in the production of which Muslims have been proud and active partners. It cannot now merely by creating artificial States be withdrawn to segregated areas. To art and literature, architecture and music, history and philosophy and to the administrative system of India, the Mussalmans have been contributing for a thousand years, their share of coordinated, composite and syncretic culture which occupies a distinctly distinguished place in the types of civilisations which hold a prominent place in the world. It would be a disastrous loss to civilisation if it was proposed to withdraw all this to two corners of India and leave nothing behind the ruins and debris of this contribution. Such a proposal can only emanate from defeatist mentality. No, gentleman, the whole of India is our motherland and in every possible walk of life we are co-sharers with other inhabitants of the country as brothers in the same cause, viz., the freedom of the country, and no false or defeatist sentiment can possibly persuade us to give up our proud position of being the equal sons of this great country."

Allah Baksh, while calling upon to guard against communalism, declared that the goal of the anti-communal movement must be, "to build up a vigorous, healthy, progressive and honoured India enjoying its well-deserved freedom." These prophetic words of Allah Baksh hold key to the salvation of India even today. But from people in corridors of power to people on the street nobody remembers Allah Baksh or bothers about his concerns.

It really needs a serious inquiry that why political trends like led by Allah Baksh among Muslims got pushed to oblivion. It suited the British masters and Hindu-Muslim communalists fine. They saw India as a land of perpetual conflicts among religions specially Hindus and Muslims. It is natural that in Pakistan Allah Baksh is treated as pariah and enemy of Islam. But the Indian secular state, which has the name of Sind in its National Anthem, remains totally unmindful to this legacy which stood for a secular, united and democratic India. Allah Baksh spent all his life countering communal politics of Muslim League and its two-nation theory. In fact he laid down his life for this cause. This great sacrifice of a Muslim leader for the freedom of the country remains unknown even today.

On the contrary it is really shocking that we have Savarkar's picture in Parliament who was an ideological pal of Muslim League; they ran coalition governments in post 1942 period. Savarkar who begged for mercy from British rulers and came out from Cellular Jail only after completing 1/5th of his sentence, who championed Hindutva politics which wanted to replace the Indian Constitution with Codes of Manu, who believed in Casteism and Racism, who organized killing of Gandhi has been elevated to the pantheon of great freedom fighters, but no place for Allah Baksh. It is only a living testimony to the communal political structure which secular India is forced to live today.

Shamsul Islam is Associate Professor, Department of Political Science, Satyawati College, University of Delhi. Email: notoinjustice@gmail.com. The above article first appeared on countercurrents.org.





Share this page
 Comments
Note: By posting your comments here you agree to the terms and conditions of www.ummid.com

Comments powered by DISQUS

Advertisement
| Quick links
About ummid.com
Contact us
Feedback
Subscribe to: RSS » Facebook » Twitter » Newsletter
Ummid.com: Disclaimer | Terms of Use | Advertise with us | Link Exchange
Ummid.com is part of the Awaz Multimedia & Publications providing World News, News Analysis and Feature Articles on Education, Health. Politics, Technology, Sports, Entertainment, Industry etc. The articles or the views displayed on this website are for public information and in no way describe the editorial views. The users are entitled to use this site subject to the terms and conditions mentioned.
© 2012 Awaz Multimedia & Publications. All rights reserved.