PAKISTAN JOURNAl.!" OFHISTORY AND CULTURE

••Vol.XXVI - July-December 2005~ ~

Contents

No.2

Competing Religious Nationalisms and thePartition of British India

Second Siml~ Conference 1946: An Appraisal

Subaltern Studies or Regional History:Explorations in Nationalist Movement withSpecial Reference to the Majlis-i-Ahrar-i­Islam

Muslim League's Tacit Acceptance ofRadcliffe A ward: A Critical Review

The Culture of Power and Human RightsAbuse in Pakistan

Dr. fshtiaq Ahmad

Muhammad Iqbal Chmvla

Samina Awan

,Sher Muhammad GareH,al

Ilhan Niaz

1-11

13-40

41·54

55-64

65-74

Econo-Political Dynamics of SAARCCountries Muhammad Jamshed Iqbal 75-106

Documents:The Truth About the Agra Summit A. G. Noorani 109-24

Congress and the Muslim League: A CriticalStudy Dr. Riaz Ahmad 125-50

Book Reviews:Howard H. Lentiner, Power and Politics in

Globalization: The Indispensable State;f\,10hammad Yunus, Foreign Policy-ATheoretical Introduction Col (R) Ghulam 5'an1Jar 151-55

Note to Contributors

• Articles, research note~, review articles, comments, rejoinders and bookreviews are welcome from all parts of the world. They should be sent to theEditor, Pakistan Journal of History and Culture, Post aox 1230, Islamabad.

• Articles submitted should contain original and unpublished work.Submission of an article will be taken'1to imply that it is not on offer to anyother publisher.

• Articles are selected on a competitive basis by nationally andinternationally known referees belonging to various fields.

• Manuscripts, typewritten in double spacing with wide margins, must follow- the format outlined in The Chicago Manual of Style.

• The first page of the article should contain the title of the article, the nameof the author, and a footnote giving the current affiliation of the author, andacknowledgments, if any.

• Footnotes should be. numbered consecutively. Each appendix and tableshould have separate set of footnotes.

• Authors will receive one copy of the Journal free and 25 offprints of thearticle contributed.

• The Editor does not accept the responsibility for damage to or loss ofarticle(s) submitted.

• The Editor reserves the right to edit or change the transliteration of allhistorical names, titles and non-English terminology to bring them intoconformity with the Institute's own style.

• Articles written in Urdu may be submitted to the Institute's biannualJournal Majallah-i~Tarikh wa Thaqafat-i Pakistan.

• The major objective of the Pakistan Journal of History and Culture is toprovide a forum for scholars engaged in study of the history and culture ofPakistan and of the Islamic societies in South and Central Asia, the MiddleEast and other parts of the world. Besides promoting research in thesefields, the Journal also seeks to provide a forum for expression of views oncurrent history. It hopes to create a dialogue among specialists and leadersin public affairs in a wide range of areas and disciplines.

• The opinions expressed in articles and accuracy of facts rests solely withthe contributors and should not be construed as representing the views ofthe Editor. Reproduction of contents without permission is forbidden.

• Articles appearing in this Journal are abstracted and indexed inPERIODICA ISLAMICA (Malaysia), HISTORICAL ABSTRACTS andAMERICA: HISTORY AND LIFE.

Competing Religious Nationalisms alld thePartition of British India

Dr. Ishtiaq'Ahmad*

This paper attempts to explain the partition of British India,particularly the Muslim freedom movement and the consequentemergence of Pakistan, within the perspective of competingreligious nationalislns. It argues that Hindu nationalism and~1uslim nationalism-as two' competing religious forces­reinforced each other in sU,cha way that the rise of the former ledto the growth of the latter. The British colonial policy of 'divideand rule' ~ight have contributed to sharpening the Hindu-Muslimnationalist divide, especially during a couple o(decades precedingthe partition. 'However, its principal cause was the emergence ofHindu revivalism ·in the late 19 century and Hindu domination ofthe IndianNational Congress at the start of tbe 20 century, which

" forewarned the Subcontinent's moderate Muslim leaders such asSir Syed Ahmad Khan, Allama Muhammad Iqbal and MuhammadAli Jinnah about the impending threat to Muslim surVivalin a post­colonial India politically dominated by an increasingly chauvinisticHindu· majority. The persecuti~ti of Muslims by chauvinisticHindus in Hindu dominated provinces of British India in the late1930s particularly strengthened the nationalist feelings of Muslims,which played ~ critical role in the creation of Pakistan. Given that,

.the paper addresses two questions: first, was Muslim nationalism. really a consequence of Hindu,' nationalism or Congresscommunalism? Secondly, could the partition of British I.ndia be

* Associate· Professor, Department of International Relations, Quaid-i-AzamUniversity, Islamabad.

2 Pakistan Journal of History & Culture, VolXXVII2 (2005)

avoided, if Hindu nationalist wave had not gripped British India orif Congress had remained a truly Indian nationalist organization? .

While tracing the roots of Hindu nationalism, it is important tomention that Hinduism itself had for centuries .been more of a

culture than a religion. It had a capacity for integration, whichhardly seemed compatible with the expression of a collectiveconsciousness of the sort visible in religions such as Islam,Christianity and Judaism. It was during the British period thatHinduism started to reflect radicalism. Hindu nationalism wasconstructed as an ideology between "1870s and 1920s. It grew outof socio-religious movements initiated by Brahmins.

The Arya Samaj, the first of such movements, was founded bySwami Dayananda in 1875. It sought to lead India "back to Vedas"in an effort to recover and restore the Aryan past. It stronglyreacted to the influences of Islam and Christianity, and itsfundamentalism contributed to the rise of Hindu enmity"towardsthe Muslim community. The Arya Samaj represented a militantstrand from where three Hindu nationalist organizations, HinduMahasabha, Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh' (RSS) and HinduSabha emerged. The Hindu nationalist ideology, like Italianfascism a~d German national socialism, envisaged the organizationof the whole of society as a means of producing a new kind ofpeople.1. ,

The Idiom of Hindutva

In 1923, V.D. Savarkar, the leader of Hindu Mahasabha, wrotethe first ideological account of Hindu I)ationalism titled Hindutva:Who is a Hindu? He argued that the Aryans who settled in India in1,500 BC already formed "a nation now embodied in the Hindus.Their Hindutva rested on three pillars: geographical unity, racialfeatures and a common culture." Savarkar rejected any form ofnation-state based on an abstract social contract and therebycomprising individualized citizen dwelling within the country'sadministrative tiers. He emphasized the ethnic and racial substance

1 Christopher Jaffi'elot, The Hindu Nationalist Movement in India (New York:Colwnbia University Press, 1993), pp.53-64. Also see Robert L. Hardgrave andStanley A. Kochanek, India: Government and Politics in a Deve10ping Nation(New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich College Publishers, 1993), pp.31-35.

Competing Religious Nationalisms and the Partition of British India 3

of the Hindu nation. In his words, "The Hindus are not only anation but race-jati. The word la/i, derived from the root Jan,means a brotherhood, a race determined by a common . origin,p~ssessing a common blood. All Hindus claim to have in theirveins the blood of the mighty race incorporated with anddescended from the Vedic fathers.,,2 ,

In 1925, Dr. K.B. Hedgewar founded the RSS after readingHindutva and meeting Savarkar. The RSS founder had received hispolitical initiation from B.S. Moonje, a leader of Hindu Sabha andaide to its founder 'Bal Gallgadhar Tilak. Savarkar codified' theideology of Hindutva. Hedgewar undertook to implement it byproviding Hindu nationalism with a social model of the Hindunation and an organizational network. He took upon himself thetask of liberating Hindu society from the demoralized anddegraded state and organizing it to assert as exclusivelyconstituting the nation. Dr. Hedgewar di~ not believe that Indianculture was an amalgam of various traditions. The RSS sharedsymbol of 'Swastika with ,the" Nazis-" and. the, principles of t~eprimacy ,of' social organism, the organization above men, andfollowing an all-powerful leader with both· German 'Nazism' andItalian Fascism. RSS founders 'were so much inspired by theEuropean racist and t~talitarian ideologies that not only they choseto write a similar chapter in India~ history but they also travelled toItaly and Ge~many to see what great advances the two nations hadthen made. Dr. Hedgewar and his successor, Guru M.S. Golwalkar,were inspired by the works of racist German writers such asBluntschli, Gettel and Burgers. No surprise that Golwalker'swritings preached racism. 3

"Germany has shown how well-nigh impossible it is for racesand cultures, having differences going to the root, to be assimilatedinto one united whole, a good lesson for us in Hindustan to learnand profit by," wrote Guru M.S. Golwalkar in We of OurNationhood Defined, which was published in 1938: "From thisstandpoint sanctioned by the experience of shrewd old nations (i.e.,Germany), the foreign races in ,Hindustan must either adopt the

..'2 'J.D. Hindutva: Who is a-Hindu? (Bombay: 8.8. Savarkar, 1969), pp.84-85 .

. ,3 Jaffrelot, op.cit., pp.53-64.

4 Pakistan Journal of History & Culture, VoIXXH/2 (2005)

Hindu culture and language; must learn to respect and hold in.reverence Hindu religion, must entertain no ideas but those of theglorification of the Hindu race and culture; i.e., they must not onlygive up their attitude of intolerance and ungratefulness towards'thisland and its age-old traditions, but must also cultivate the positiveattitude of love and devotion instead; iri one word, they must ceaseto be foreigners or .may stay in the country wholly sub­subordinated to the Hindu nation, claiming nothing, deserving noprivileges, far less preferential treatment, not even citizens 'rights.,,4 . ,

The Muslims of British .India became a particular target ofracism preached by leaders of the RSS and Hindu Mahasabha andother Hindu nationalist organizations, and practiced by theirmilitant followers. The .Muslims of the Subcontinent, despite beingin minority, had ruled over the majority Hindus since the eleventhcentury-first under the Sultanate and then under the Mughals­until the ,British colonized the region in 1858. Since Muslims werethe rulers before, and Hindus theft subjects, it was natural on the'part of the British to c.onsider Hindus as their natural ally. TheBritish blamed the Muslims for staging the 'mutiny' of 1857. Thus,the heavy hand of the British fell more upon Muslims than on theHindus.5 Subsequently, the Muslim community suffered setbacksin the social, economic and political fields, which came, underHiIidu domination. It was in this backdrop that Hindu revivalismand nationalism occurred during the British period. The RSS,Hindu Mahasabha and Hindu Sabha as well as Shuddhi andSangathan movements-an offshoot of' the Arya Samaj­specifically targeted Muslims in the Hindu majority provinces. TheSangathan movement aimed to unite .Hindu society bytranscending divisions of caste and sect. Th~ Shuddhi movementproved more threatening for the Muslims, as its' aim was theforcible conversion of Subcontinent's religious minorities into'Hindus. Its founder Swami Shardhanand concentrated onreconverting the Malkana Muslim Rajputs. In short, all of theHindu nationalist movements that started to consolidate in British

, 4 M.S. Golwalker We, or Our Nationhood Defined (Nagpur: Bharat Publications,1939), p.35 ... '

5 JawaharlalNehru~An Autobiography (London:The Bodley Head, 1955),p.460..

Competing Religious Nationalisms and the Partition of British India 5

India from the 1920s were essentially based on the concept of"threatening Others:,,6 their aim was to rejuvenate Hinduism byeliminating relikious minorities, particularly Muslims.

The conflict between Hindus and Muslims engendered by theactivities of the Arya .Samaj served· only to underscore thealienation of the Muslim community in India. The collapse of theMughal rule brought confusion and doubt to the Muslims. TheMuslim reaction to British rule was by no means uniform, but,clinging to traditions of the past arid to memories of their formerglory, many Muslims remained unresponsive to the changesaround them. Because they regarded English as "the highway toinfidelity," the Muslims of British India failed to take advantage ofEnglish education and were soon displaced in the civil services.bythe rising Hindu middle class. It was in this backdrop that theMuslim reformer and educator Sir Syed Ahmad Khan sought toconvince the British of Muslim loyalty. and to bring the comrilunityinto cooperation with British authorities. Jtt the same time,however, .Sir Syed warned lyfuslims ..of the dangers of Hindudomination ~nder democratic' rule. According to him, Hindu rulewould fall more heavily upon Muslims than the neutral authority Qf~B~ili7 '.

Hinduis.ation of the Congress

The Indian National Congress', which was established in 1885as an association for Indian political representation within theBritish India Empire, was initially joined by both Hindu andMuslim political leaders. However, gradually, it started to bedominated by the Hindus- as did the. Indian civil services. From

.1905 until 1920, the Congress remained in the hands of extremistHindu leaders such as Bal Gangadhar Tilak.8 Consequently,

6 Jafifelot, op.cit., pp.II-79.

7 See Ishtiaq Ahmed, The Concept of an Islamic State in Pakistan: An Analysis of,ideological Controversies (Lahore: Vanguards Books Ltd.~ 1991), pp.70-71; andK.K. Aziz,The Making afPakistan: A Study in Nationalism (Lahore: Islamic BookService, 1989), pp.18-28.

8 Tilak, who founded Hindu Sabba in the Punjab, evoked ,the memory of Shivaji,founder of the Maratha kingdom, and of his struggle against the MUslim invaders.Tilak recalled the days of Maratha and Hindu glory and, not without concernamong Muslims sought to stir a revival of Hindu religious consciousness to servehis political ends.

6 Pakistan Journal o/History & Cl!!J~re,.VoIXXVII2 (2005)

I •••••

Muslims' established their own political organizM~on,the All IndiaMuslim League, in 1906. Most of the.leadershjp for the Leaguewas produced by the educational institutions set,up by Sir Syed,especially the Muhammadan Anglo-Oriental College, which laterbecame Aligarh University. As part of what is called the Aligarh .Movement, Sir Syed published his journal Tahzib al-Akhlaq, whichprovided his modernistic Islamic perspective on a broad range of .topics. He 'Yarned Muslims not to join the Congress which hebelieved was a Hindu organization. Sir Syed insisted that Hindusand Muslims were two separate nations:' He denounced allsuperstitious practices among the Indian Muslims, urging them toacquire modem scientific knowledge and Western skills ..

Despite the concerns expressed by Sir Syed, Muhammad AliJinnah joined the Congress. It took the Quaid only a few years torealize the veracity of Sir Syed's argument. In 1913, he joined theAll-India Muslim·' League, -a Muslim i>olitical party born out of

.Hindu. do~ination of the Congress. However, due to his liberalspirit, Jinnah retained his Congress membership. until 1920 in thehope of creating a.tnily Indian nationalist fronf against the colonial

.British. He was.instrumental in bringing the two parties to.a singleplatform in 1916 and conclude the Lucknow 'Pact, in which theCongress accepted the Muslim demand for separate electorates. Itwas ~nly when the Congress .caJtleI under practical Hindudomination under Tilak' s lead~rship;th~t.Jinnah quit the· party. Asthe 1920s started, the wedge between ~Qe.Hindus and Muslims ofIndia further widened. The Khilafai::Movement-which was an

. Indian respons~' to Bntish-Ied EU~dl?eanbid to demolish theOttoman Caliphate-was the onJy·',exception in the sense thatMahatma Gandhi and moderate Hinqu leaders of the Congressjoined hands with Muslim leaders to pressure the British in the

. Subcontinent. However, as far a~ RSS-Ied Hindu nationalism wasconcerned, it was .'reinforced by the ,Khilafat Movement, whichdepicted a collective Muslim .response to an event threatening thecitadel of Muslim power.9 ..

The leaders: arid followers of the RS~, Hindus Mahasabha,Hindu Sabha, Shuddhi abd Sangathan movements were no doubt in

~

9 See ~ohn L. Esposito, blam and Politi~s(New York: Syracuse University Press,1984), pp.88-90.

Competing Religious Nationalisms and the Partition of British India 7

the forefront of Hindu nationalist bid for domination in India,. theIndian National Congress also showed a domineering Hinduoutlook, especially by the end of the 1920s, when it declared itswaraj as its. goal and backed out from its' earlier consent on

. separate electorates for' the Muslims. The Muslim demand forseparate representation-conceded in 1909 by the British andaccepted in 1916 by the Congress-was rejected by the Motilal

. Nehru Report of 1928 and the Congress in unqualified terms. TheMuslims were completely disillusioned, and from then onwards theCongress became all but in name a Hindu body. However, for theMuslims, the Nehru Report proved a blessing in disguise: it helpedthem emerge as a united political force demanding the creation of aseparate Muslim homeland.

Jinnah responded hy announcing his Fourteen Points proposal,which demanded constitutional.: Itut'a.ngements guaranteeingelectoral majorities in the. five ·proVii.p.~~Iwith Muslim-majoritypopulations, a we.ek federal syste~!;)p which the centralgovem~r.pt)~ould have little power oV~Jdtp.eprovinces, as well asone-third· Qf. the seats in the central legis.1C}tureand,..a 75 percentmajority requirement for actio.t:lby ~.he.'~grslature. In fact, since itscreation in 1906, the League."had:~~eQ:Jaemanding constitutionalsafeguards and other political 'privi1eg~s' for the Subcontinent'sMuslim population. The reas6ti for this j cbuld be best explained byunderlining a psychological dilemma fabi'ng a minority populationthat had ruled a country for cerituries'~but in colonial setup hadstarted to perceive a credible 'threat :tdAts very political survivalfrom its former majority subjects .with eXternally-instigatedrevengeful instincts. That .is why .in all the .pre-partitionconstitutional formulas offered and enforced' ·by the British forrepresentative provincial and national goyerJ1!1lentalstructures. inIndia, the Muslim leadership continued to insist on separateelectorates and representation for Muslims and complete autonomyfor the Muslim majority provinces. It w~s only after the consistentrefusal by the Hindu leadership to accept the Muslim dema~d fordue political representation in India that 'the Muslim leadership wasleft with no option but to demand separate state.

8 Pakistan Journal of History & Culture, VoIXXVI/2 (2005)

The Rise of Muslim Nationalism.Allama Muhammad Iqbal conceptualized the idea of Pakistan

at the annual session of the Muslim League at Allahabad in' 1930.He said: "The Muslim demand for the creation of a Muslim Indiawithin India is perfectly justified ... the formation of a consolidatedNorth-West Indian Muslim State appears to me the final destiny ofthe Muslims, at least of North-West India." Fot Iqbal, the creationof a Muslim homeland and, its emergence as a modem statenecessitated an Ishimic state, one whose institutions and lawsshould be based on Islam. 10

As the 193Os started, the British tried to introduce arepresentative structure' in India within 'the British Empire, whichshould be acceptable to both the Congress and Muslim Leagueleadership. For the purpose, a number of Round Table Conferenceswere held in London, which resulted in the enactment of theConstitutional Act of India, 1935. In .1937, provincial electionswere held. The Congress swept the provincial electi~ns, for Hinduseats and formed ministries in,7 of the, 11 provinces. The MuslimLeague fared poorly among the Muslim electorate and failed tosecure majorities in any of the four predominantly Muslimprovinces. Jinnah offered to form coalition ministries with theCongress in each province, but the Congress refused to recognizethe Lea~e as representative of India's 90 million Muslims. "There,are," Nehru remarked" "only two, forces in India today, British'imperialism and Indian nationalism." History, however, bore outJinnah's response: "No, there is a third party, the Mussulmans."The Hindu-controlled Congress provincial governments behavedarrogantly and this caused the 'phenomenal growth' of Muslimnationalism. The Muslims and mosques were targeted bychauvinistic Hindus belonging to the' RSS, Hindu Mahasabha,

,Hindu Sabha, Shuddhi and Sangathan movements. A well­intentioned effort was made by t~e Congress; in collusiQn with theHindu nationalists, to impose Hindu norms, and values uponminority Muslims in Hindu majority provinces. Thus, when in

10 Iqbal argued, "The State according to Islam is only an effort to realize the spiritualin a human organization. It is in this sense alone that the State in Islam. is atheocracy." For details, see Sir Muhammad Iqbal, The Reconstrnction of ReligiousThought in /slam (Lahore: Sh. Muhammad Ashraf, 1960), pp.146-80.

Competing Religious Nationalisms and the Partition oJBritish India 9

1939, the Second World War began and the Congress rule inHindu majority provinces ended, the Muslim League celebratedthe event as the "Day of Deliverance" from the "tyranny,oppression and injustice" of the Congress rule~11 .

On 23 March 1940, Jinnah presented a Two Nation Theory atthe annual session of the Muslim League in Lahore. He declaredthat Hindus and Muslims formed two separate nations, whichcould not live in a single State. He said:

The Hindus and Muslims belong to two different religions, philosophies,social customs and literatures. They neither intermarry nor dine togetherand, indeed, they belong to two different civilizations which are basedmainly on conflicting ideas and conceptions. Their aspects on life and oflife are different. It is quite clear that Hindus and Musalmans derive theirinspiration from different sources of history. They have different epics,different heroes, and different episodes. Very often the hero of one is the.

foe of the other, and, likewise; theft victories and defeats overlap. To yoketogether two such nations under a single State, one as a numerical minorityand the other as a majority, must lead to growing dis~ontent and fmaldestruction of any fabric that may be so built up for the government ofsuch a nation. 1 2

Jinnah's Two Nation Theory ma,intained that the Muslims ofthe shared a common cultural identity and thus constituted aseparate commu~ity from Hindus. Muslim nationalism was basedon the' use of religion to provide a common bond and to moulddisparate ethnic/linguistic communities into a single nation.However, for Jinnah, Islam was simply the common culturalheritage and identity of the Muslims; Pakistan was to be a Muslimhomeland or state in this sense.13

The Lahore ~ession of the Muslim League also adopted as itsgoal the creation of a separate and independent Islamic state,.Pakistan. The Pakistan Resolution stated: "No Constitutional planwould be workable. in this country or acceptable to the Muslimsunless it is designed on the followirig principle, viz., thatgeographically contiguous units are demarcated into regions which

11 Hardgrave and Kochanek, op.cit., p.48.

- 12 Jamil ul-din Alunad (ed.), Speeches and Writings oj Mr Jinnah (Lahore:Sh. Muhammad Ashraf, 1952), p.l??

13 For infonnation on differences in the ideological vision of Jirinah and Iqbal thePakistan, see John L Esposito and John O. Voll, Islam and Democracy (New York:...Oxford University Press, 1995), p.103.

10...•..... Itr'" '- • I' .

Pakistan Journal ofHistory.& Culture, VoIXXVl/2 (2005)

shoulci'be so :constituted with such territ6flkl"adjustments as maybe necessary that the areas in which the Muslims are numericallyin majority, as in the northwestern and noftheastem zones of India,should be grouped to Constitute 'independe~ :states' in which theconstituent units shall be autonomous and sovereign.,,14

In 1942, the British -sent Sir Stafford Cripps to India with anoffer of independence. The offer, however,:pr.ovided the provinces·an opportunity to' secede from federation).~jther separately or ingroups. The Congress rejecte4 the Cripps' pffer and launched the'quit India' movement. By now, the Leagu~'had emerged as a mass

. IJO--'

·Muslim party. The Two Nation Theory' f6urid its first politicalexpression when the Muslim League swep~alrthe Muslim seats inthe 1946 national elections. The same year;':a'Cabinet Mission Planwas offered by the British to the Congress·.and League leadership.The Plan sought to preserve united India andrto allay Muslim fearsof Hindu domination through the proposa!lipf a loose federationbetween two federated states sharing foreign, defence. andcommunication affairs at the Centre. The Muslim League acceptedthe Plan,· while the Congress reject~d:('it.;11ts Hindu leaders,·particularly lawaharlal Nehru, were noe:Willing to accord theMuslim League its claim to 'represent all 'Muslims and therefore tohave the right to fill all seats reserved for Mu~lims in the Cabinet.Despite rejecting the Cabinet Mission Plam,..Nehru took office inSeptember 1946 as de facto Prime Mj~ister of the interimgovernment, which was also joined by thq ,M4s1im League underJinnah's leadership. However, dije to cOB~!~tentHind~-Muslimschism, the government could not wor~ in h~rmony. and theformation of Pakistan emerged as the only solution. In February1947, the British government declared its intention to quit India. InAugust 1947, the Subconfinent was partitioned. IS

.Conclusion

It is clear from the above discussion that had Hindu

nationalism not first emerged as a powerful force, the rise of

14 . G. Allana, Pakistan Movement: Historical Documents (Lahore: Islamic BookService, 1977), pp.226-27.

15 See P. Hardy. The Muslims of British India (London: Cambridge University Press.1'972). pp.222-55. Also see Hirdgrave and Koch~ek. 'op.dt .•pp.50-52 .. ,

./,

, ,I

Competing Religious Natio1Ja/isms and the Partition o/British India, J. ' •

11

Muslim nationalism' as a counter-political force might not haveoccurred 1n British India. Moreover, had Nehru-led Congress fully

.accepted the 1946 ·Cabinet Mission Plan, just as linnah-Ied Leaguedid,"a united India in the form of a loose federation, might haveexisted today. Similarly, had the Congress-led governments inHindu m~jority provinces during 1937-39 not persecuted minorityMuslims, the later might not have developed a sense of inse~urityand a fear of Hindu domination in, a, post-British united India. Infact, the Congress-led 'provincial rule proved to be a turning pointin consolidating Musi'fm perceptions of Hindu' domiiiation. Thispractical manifestation"ofHindu domination at the provincial level.was enough to warn Muslims of British India about the danger ofliving in a post-colonial Hindu-majority country. The rise of Hindunationalism was not 10nly confined to the' creation of Hindu'organizations such, as fhe RSS, Hindu Mahasabha, Hindu Sabha,Shuddhi and Sangathan movements, it also paved the way fordomination of the' Congress by extremist Hindu leaders. Given, I.", .

that, the role of India~ N~tional Congress'leaders, particularly.' Tilak and the t"voNehn:is, increatirig Muslim nationalism' and,

ultimately, Pakistan carumt be underestimated." ..

r,

",