Thank you. Very ably put.
In a message dated 27/09/2014 23:11:17 GMT Daylight Time, xxxxxxxxxxxxx writes:
"Looks are Nice, but What's Inside Really Counts":
How Lord Mountbatten Preserved Britain's Reputation at the Cost of Thousands of Lives.
"By the end of World War II, Great Britain was up to its eyeballs in debt. The debt was so
astronomical, in fact, that Britain had to part with the crown jewel of its empire, India, just so
that it could save some money. "
Mr.Copps then goes into details of career of Louis Mountbatten distinguished by spectacular failures as a Naval officer in losing ships in his command. But all such were nothing when compared to his role in dividing India. Not just Pakistan but he parceled out and sliced India into 562 pieces, yet he gets much undeserved credit for presiding at difficult time of transition of power.
Mountbatten, Nehru, Gandhi and Jinnah made a mess of the whole process, for their own interests they did not hesitate to play with lives of millions of people of India. All this could have been avoided. Often as an excuse or apologia for their disastrous role in inflicting partition on India, Nehru and Gandhi remain excused on basis of , 'TINA' factor.( There Is No Alternative)
Of course there was. It was open for truly a nationalist leader to just say NO to any partition plan , Ist or IInd brought by Mountbatten.
Nehru prides himself as an astute reader of international situation. If indeed he was, he would have noted that Britain bankrupt, though won the II war, so battered it was in no position to hold on to India let alone demand any partition, Jinnah and his henchmen like Suhravardi notwithstanding. Netaji instead made a correct appraisal. He observed, even during II war Churchill had to go and knock at the door of Stalin to open another front to save England from Herr Hitler. Such England could not hold on to the empire. Jinnah respected Subhash Bose whose Indian Naitonal army after capturing Manipur and Imphal gave a call 'chalo Delhi'. Jinnah said had Subash prevailed he would have given up his demand for partition. Not that Bose will permit any such insanity.
The situation in England at the end of II war was also described in yet another book like the one by Kenneth Copps alluded above.
Freedom at Midnight (1975) is a book by Larry Collins and Dominique Lapierre. It describes the events in the Indian independence movement in 1947-48,
In this the authors quote John Maynard Keynes who said "English in London could not even make tea at the end of II war because there was no hot water.
England is now a poor country and British should learn to live like poor people."
Such a devastated England was in no position to hold on to her crown jewel, and Netaji Subhash Bose already demonstrated how they would incur further expenses if they tried. Following Netaji's example there was a revolt by British Indian Navy personnel in Bombay. The memories of 1857 uprising during which the empire came almost to the brink of collapse in India were still fresh among British even if the monumental contributions made by true freedom fighters of 1857 , then were ignored by Gandhian Congress. And then there was Netaji who took away the major plank, British raj rested on, ie the loyalty of Indian soldier to her or his majesty.
A leader like Nelson Mandela even without so many advantages, still stood firm when White racist regime in S Africa sought to divide it through creating a 'Zulu Land'. And he prevailed.
That much Nehru or Gandhi could have done and people implicitly trusted them and their assurances proved to be bogus later. Gandhi said partition over his dead body. Believing many Hindus stayed back in what was to be Pakistan. They lost not just lives, but much worse, honor of women. Nehru said 'Pakistan was fantastic nonsense' . Just 3 weeks later he signed partition deed that made fantastic nonsense an Islamic State out of India's ageless territory. And then millions more lost their lives and honor. Islamic State of Pakistan then could teach Islamic State aka Caliphate now, how to carve out , extract territories out of ancient nations.
Anyway last word on history has not been said. End of history is a myth. History is continuing to evolve with truth emerging. Despite massive propaganda or cover up Himalayan blunders or monumental crimes against humanity, the truth came out, the statues of Lenin, Stalin, Saddam Hussein all came down to dust. People India are very forgiving and gullible . So the desperate attempts to build myths on leaders whose blunders to say the least cost the nation much, are still going on. Instead it is much better to learn from the past and determine never to repeat them again and march ahead. Truth will always triumph. It has endurance. Two nation theory was bogus then and now, regardless of the titles showered on signatories of deed that upheld this pernicious fallacy.So the collapse of state that resulted from this bogus theory is inevitable. Hope some thought is being given and some plans are being made in India when that time comes how to manage the inevitable emerging one nation.