The pre-independence map of 570 states of the Subcontinent. Why would the separation of Pakistan be considered "Partition"? What gave Nehru the right to forcibly absorb Hyberabad, Junagarh, Manvadar and Goa into the Indian Union? Can Bharat also claim Nepal as part of the union? Can Bharat also claim Lanka as part of Bharat, or Burma?

Jaswant Singh is going from pillar to post in an endeavor to sell his books, but also to propagate his vision of “Akhand Bharat” (Greater India). By personifying the glorious struggle of for independence into the body of Mohammad Ali Jinnah, he is trying to convert the ideology of Pakistan into a Greek tragedy–complete with heroes and villains. Mr. Janawant Singh self aggrandisingtours are profitable to his personal ambitions and political career, but the creation of Pakistan (re-birth of the Indus Valley as a Muslim state) is not a page out of Shakuntala. The blunders of Nehru and Gandhi precipitated the constitutional crisis and made the proposals of the Indian National Congress untenable. However reducing the self of loss of the Muslims in a post 1857 world to a personality is the height of arrogance. While Jaswant Singh scores points against the Indian National Congress, he defends the original proponents of the Two Nation theory, Lala Rai, Sarvarkar, Haldiram and Gowalkar.

Mr. Singh asks a lot of questions about the ideology of Pakistan. His sole purpose is to denigrate the entire leadership of the Muslims of South Asia. He eulogizes Jinnah, but he also defends the racism of Rai and the bigotry of Haldiram. This dichotomy in Mr. Singh’sthinking makes one wonder about his true motives about writing the book with a focus on what he calls “partition”.

South Asia was a conglomeration of 570 states. Why isn’t the independence of Burma from the British considered “partition”? Why isn’t the liberation of Lanka also considered “partition”? What about Nepal? At one time the British empire included Nepal. Why isn’t the separation of Hindu Nepal from Bharat considered “partition”? At one point Aden and Iraq were part of the same British “Indian Empire”. Was the independence of Iraq also a cataclysmic “partition” event? What about the French “Indian Empire”? For the French “India” included parts of present day “India”, but it also included Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia. Why isn’t the independence of Vietnam considered “partition” of India. The Dutch “India” included parts of present day “India” and the country of Indonesia. If we are to go by the logic of Jaswant Singh, the independence of Indonesia would also be considered “partition”.

This map shows the vision for Pakistan and Bangistan. Quaid e Azam struggled and the Muslims struggles for this solution. Chaudhry Rehmat Ali described the Continent of "Dinia" and dependencies. Ch. Rehmat Ali's map depicted Muslim rule in South Asia after the British left. The Muslim homelands would be carved out of "Dinia". This was the struggle for independence. Rehmat Ali and the Muslims wanted the region returned to Muslim rule as it was before the British arrived

NEW DELHI: One has to understand MohammedAli Jinnah – bothas a man and as a statesman – to understand India’s relationship with Pakistan and Bangladesh, veteran politician and author Jaswant Singh said here Saturday.

“Unless we understand MohammedAli Jinnah as a man and as a statesman, we cannot understand Bangladesh, Pakistan and our relations with the two countries. Nobody has written about Jinnah – whom Mahatma Gandhi described as a great man – the way I have,” Singh told a packed audience comprising writers, journalists, publishers and bureaucrats at the Pragati Maidan here on the inaugural day of the 15th Delhi Book Fair.

Singh, a former defence and finance minister, was expelled from the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) earlier this month over his appraisal of the Pakistan founder in his controversial book “Jinnah: India-Partition-Independence”.

The book, which defends Jinnah’s role in the partition of the subcontinent and says he had been “unnecessarily demonised”, has been banned by the BJP government in Gujarat.

At the book fair, Singh was addressing a panel discussion, “Ban on Jaswant Singh’s Book – Jinnah: India-Partition-Independence”.

The panelists included Tushar A Gandhi, grandson of Mahatma Gandhi and head of the Mahatma Gandhi Foundation, Minister of State for Minority Affairs Salman Khursheed, former Karnataka governor TN Chaturvedi and retired Delhi High Court judge CM Nayar. The discussion was moderated by academic and writer Yogesh Atal.

“I have no intention of speaking at a discussion promoting my book at a book fair. It could be construed as self-promotion. Instead, I will speak on the fallout of partition, which prompted me to research the book.Times of India. One has to understand Jinnah to know Pakistan: Jaswant 29 Aug 2009, 2102 hrs IST, IANS

Pre Independence map of British "India". This is the political map of South Asia. The Muslims always saw South Asia as a conglomeration of 570 states--they never saw it as one country. "Akhand Bharat" never existed except in the minds of the Hindu mhasabah bigots. There was no partition. The states on the banks of the Indus decided to continue to live together.

By reducing Jawaharlal Nehru, Jaswant Singh increases the value of the RSS type of thinking. He uses Jinnah as a leverage to downgrade Nehru, however he does not accept any of the things that Mohammad Ali Jinnah stood for. Mr. Jaswant Singh talks about understanding Pakistan, but his book is but a polemic on the Pakistan ideology. Jaswant Singh constantly talks about “partition” as a cataclysmic event, as if “Mother India” ever existed a nation state. South Asia never exsited as a nation state. When the British came to Kokota, there were 570 states in South Asia. When the British left South Asia, there were 570 states plus the dominions of Bharat and Paksitan. In 1947 the states on the Indus decided to continue to live together, just like they had lived together for 5000 years. There was no bond between Mehergarh and Goa. Moenjadarohad no links with Benearas. Harappa was intricatelyliked to Kashmir, but has no connection with Ayudiya. South Asia is as big as Western Europe. Why would Luxembourghook up with Italy, or Liechtenstein be part of Spain. Why would Switzerland be part of Greece?

The journey of Mohammad Ali Jinnah from “the Ambassador of Hindu Muslim Unity to the Quaid e Azam of Pakistan” is a journey of the Muslims of South Asia. Alama Iqbal also went through the same journey. Alama Iqbal typified the Muslim experience–from a “Indian patriot” to a “Pan Islamic thinker” to a “Pakistani”. Today’s Muslims in South Asia have all gone through the same transition.

The British Empire does not even show half of Pakistan. In 1850 this was the British map of South Asia. Only the purple areas belgonged to the East India Company. This map reflects back to the Indus policy of Lord Curzon A previous map would show Afghanistan as part of the empire. This map shows Nepal and parts of Burma as part of "India". Another map also shows Aden and Iraq as part of "India". Why is the independence of Pakistan called "partition" and the independence of Neap, Burma, Lanka, Afghanistan, Iraq from the British Empire not called "partition"

“The original title of my book was very long, ‘Mohammed Ali Jinnah: Journey from an Ambassador of Hindu-Muslim Unity in India to Quaid-e-Azamin Pakistan’. My American publishers did not like it. They are ignorant about Jinnah or India’s partition. They don’t understand Indian history unless you compare it with the American civil war,” Singh maintained.

 

“Partition has been the most damaging event in modern India. Though I was born in a village far away from Lahore and Sindh, I always wondered how could they ever become foreign lands… and (how) the man (Jinnah) who had so assiduously worked for the 1916 Lucknow Pact could divide the country,” he said.

The 1916 Lucknow Pact between the Muslim League and the Indian National Congress had pressured the British government to give Indians more authority to run the country.

“The takeoff point for my research was 1857 – the mutiny which brought the Hindus and Muslims in the subcontinent together and finally uprooted the British after 90 years, in 1947. The 1857 revolt continued to haunt the British,” Singh said.

“Jinnah set another milestone in communal amity in 1916 with the Lucknow Pact. A man who had lived all his life in India barring the last 13 months and who had been insulted by the British did not have to be demonised by us,” he said.

“India cannot be shackled by its neighbours and unless we become one country, it will be difficult to realise our dreams. We have to cultivate a mindset that allows us to think freely.

“I am grateful that the intellectuals and the publishing world are standing by me to support freedom of thought, that is, the freedom to write. Where the mind is without fear… will heads be held high and there will be freedom,” Singh said, taking a cue from Rabindranath Tagore’s famous lines.Times of India. One has to understand Jinnah to know Pakistan: Jaswant 29 Aug 2009, 2102 hrs IST, IANS

Constables 1893 British map showing Pakistan, Afghanistan, Burma, Ceylon, Nepal, Bhutan, Sikkim as part of "Indian Empire". Lord Curzon and Britain's On to the Oxus policy was short lived. Churchill said it best "India is as ephimeral as the equator"

If Mr. Jaswant Singh and Bharat want to understand “Paksitan”, the need to understand the writings of Rai, Haldiram, Sarvarkar, and Gowalkar. They need to comprehend the wrongs done to the Dalits and the mistreatment of the Indian Muslims in present day Bhrat. Eulogizing Jinnah won’t help them comprehend Pakistan–reading the Saachaar report and taking corrective action will help them understand Pakistan. Writing a book on Jinnah as a great man may be a first step in comprehending the Muslim psyche, but if Bharat wants to find solutions, it has to dump the farce of a fake article of accession in Kashmir. If Bharat wants peace, then it has to overcome the paranoia about Pakistan. The current government in Dehithinks that peace with Pakistan is a reard for good behaviour. It needs to comprehend the fact that peace is the interest of all parties, and Bhratcan never be a regional power ’till it makes peace with Nepal, Bhutan, Sikkim, Lanka, Bangladesh, Mayanmar, Pakistan and China.