Archive for May 26th, 2008

India as a Neutral Power

May 26, 2008




Monday, May 26, 2008



India as a Neutral Power



As this juncture of a virtual flux and realignment of different power sectors around the world in the dying days of Bush presidency, mainly caused by Bush acts of commission and omission, damaging his own country, its world power and grudging world acceptance of the US as the sole super power status, India is at the threshold of assuming a very crucial and positive role in world politics, especially when matters focus around ‘foreign interventions in the internal affairs’ of troubled nations. India’s credentials as a big country, when compared to US, UK, NATO, UN’s present low ratings in world acceptability as honest brokers in areas of world conflicts, opens for India an important window to dug deep into its own peace ethos and use the trust of smaller countries around the world, to help in maintaining world peace.




It is heartening, that even without Indian leadership’s any conscious overt or covert attempt to take up such a role of an honest broker or unbiased mediator, India’s name is cropping up at various junctures, as a country worthy of trust and goodwill.


Indian leadership should take this natural phenomenon with humility and dedication and built on it to carve for India a role that is the most anguished cry of the beleaguered world.





Ghulam Muhammed, Mumbai





May 26, 2008







Tuesday, May 20, 2008


The Editor, Afternoon Despatch and Courier, Mumbai


This refers to V. Sundaram’s views ( as reported in Arup K. Isaacs’s 10/5 letter) on Aga Khan’s role in Muslim and Indian politics in general and the freedom struggle and British conspiracy in dividing India before they hand over the country to the natives. It is time, we study the whole saga in a non-partisan and matter of fact way and do not get carried away by popular myths about who was the main culprit in dividing our country.


Sundaram’s account to a great extant is very correct and the collusion between the British and Aga Khan is corroborated by several official documents including the secret correspondence between several actors in the play of the great game as released by the British government. It will show that in the end, Aga Khan and company were less serving the Muslims as the Muslims foolishly believed, than their old benefactors, the British with whom they had been collaborating over a century before India was divided, especially in the great game scenarios in central Asia. Narendera Singh Sarila, a Indian diplomat, has extensively researched the British archival documents and in his book has correctly put the whole onus on the British and especially on Churchill who had advised Viceroy Wavell to ‘keep some part for us’ —- that part was Pakistan.


It was sold to gullible Muslims as a haven for them, while in fact; it was cleverly carved as a military outpost by British with full understanding with the US, and there is reason to believe that all top Indian leaders were fully aware of the British game and went along, first as they were getting a piece of land, with full and uncontested power to rule, and they were more relieved that the Muslim component of British Indian armed forces could be shipped out of their boundaries.


On this count, Nehru, Jinnah, Bhutto, Mujibur Rehman, all have one thing in common. All of them were ready, willingly or unwillingly, to let go of a part of their own country, across the table, as long as they got the residue part, for them to rule exclusively with all opposition out of way. For all of them unbridle monopoly power at the top was more important than the country they were to inherit in a quark of history, where the outside factor of the WWII and bankruptcy of the colonial British was the more decisive factor in India coming out of its bondage than any agitation by Indian freedom fighters.


As an Indian Muslim, who is victim of the popular mythmaking from motivated Indian Brahmins, I feel the role of British, Aga Khan and Indian National Congress, if correctly and dispassionately analyzed, will prove that Muslims were more sinned than sinning.


And the role of Aga Khan and Jinnah, an Aga Khani Khoja, should be reexamined to clear the stigma of partition on Muslim masses.



Ghulam Muhammed, Mumbai