We Need a Gandhi Indeed! It has been reported that journalist Syed Abul Maksud in a very poorly attended discussion meet in a week-end in New York opined that Bhasani can be compared with Mahatma Gandhi. I understand his problem: he is looking for a Muslim Gandhi in the bygone days and trying to substitute Gandhi by a very poor replacement. In this endeavour, I want to point out his communal approach: A Muslim Gandhi. A Hindu Gandhi would not do. Abul Maksud try hard to conceal his communal self, but in a moment of indiscretion it has come out. In history, it is difficult to find out a substitute. One person can act like another person in identical situations provided they come from identical backgrounds. The two personalities by presented here by Maksud are completely different in both paradigms. Gandhi went to London to become a barrister. His family background was such and he followed it so devotedly that he did not fit into the common run of barristers as Jinnah was after him. Jinnah tried to become a pucca Sahib. Gandhi was determined to retain all his traditions intact and also become a barrister. He accomplished both the goals perfectly. He imbibed trends and traditions from all sources that was possible from a internationally central place like London. He took full advantage to glean from every faith what he thought to be good as a philosophy of life. He was not a conservative about accepting ideas from different sources. After that he went to South Africa. Here, he was employed by a Muslim businessmsn from India to carry out a legal battle in a long lasting suit in business deals. This was draining money from both the contestants. He negotiated a compromise which went against his professional interests. Then he fought for the rights of the Indians working in South Africa. He came back from South Africa and joined Congress, not the bar. This was an anti-colonial, anti-imperilaisrt, democratic and nationalistic secular organization fighting in battles aganist the most powerful regime of the world of that time. He was determined to conduct this in true spirtit of non-violence. That was something new in the history of the world: the implementaqtion of the ideas of Buddha in political arena. He succeeded in it. India achieved freedom though his relentless struggles. We find in history a phenomenon that is regular and recurrent in similar situations. When a country can repose in peace, there is prosperity. There is the release of the creative instinct of the people. This is the prosperity of happy times. But if there is an adverse situation, and people fight back against it, there is also release of creativity among the people. This happy time creativity happened once in the Gupta period in India. In the British period what came to happen was adverse-time creativity. Very imposing personalities were seen on the scene of politics, social reforms and religious reforms. All these generated against the background of a struggle against the usurpers of power. This period was a creative one, in which likes of Bankim and Rabindranath and Vidyasagar were born and contributed to social development. The political struggle was carried out by the Congress. Large section of Muslims kept themselves carefully away from this. They were self-congratulatory opportunists. But that made them pay a severe price to be paid. There was no social and cultural development among them. Gandhi was a nationalist, secular, democratic and anti-colonial and anti-imperialistic leader of the Indian subcontinent. In comparison with him: Bhasani was all throughout his life, a communal anti-nationalist leader who had close relationship with the military autocrats of Pakistan and Bangladesh. How can a sensible man compare one with the other? Muslim League was not against the British. They were against the Congress. They were the Trojan Horse of the Indian independence struggle. Bhasani was exactly that when the people of East Pakistan were fighting against the Ayub regime. He had close relationship with Ayub. This led to his being a given a guard of honour by a contingent of East Bengal Regiment on the western front during the 1965 Indo-Pak war. After partition was accomplished, communalism took a new form: anti-Indianism. India was the beacon for the Third World countries fighting against the domination of the imperialsits and the colonialists. The Pakistani leaders constantly waged a campaign against India. This was a worst possible disservice to the cause of the anti-imperilaist and anti-colonialist struggles of the world. Bhasani was in the fore front of that. After the liberation war was completed with the help of India, he started a smear campaign against India that has no parallel and that does not fit into the common taste of our people: to campaign against a benefactor. He did that.That proved that he had been a die-hard communalist all through his life. He was an out and out anti-nationalist. When six point was launched, he had a deal with Ayub that four pro-Chinese communists warrant orders would be withdrawn so that they could camppaign aganist the six point. Just before the 1970 elections, he raised the slogan: Bhoter age Bhat chai/ food before vote. His idea was to disrupt the elections. How could this gentleman, Maksud, venture into it is the question. One thing is consoling in his endeavours: he has realized that we needed a Gandhi in Bangladesh. But alas the bus has been missed. The age of Gandhi is over. And Gandhis are not born in places like Pakistan. The ideologuy of communalism cannot produce a personality of his dimensions. Alas, alas, alas!
Posted on: Fri, 15 Nov 2013 14:31:26 +0000
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015