The Asian Age

Cong ‘hates Gujaratis’ is a canard: Who made the Mahatma its leader?

- Praveen Davar

Unfortunat­ely, Mr Modi, like others in the BJP, has only been taught the RSS version of the history, which is not only distorted but as the statement of its leaders on Taj Mahal and Tipu Sultan testify, illogical and ridiculous as well.

Any historian would tell you that both Nehru and Patel, despite their difference­s, had tremendous respect and affection for each other. Before he submitted his list of Cabinet ministers as India’s first PM to the then Viceroy (later Governor General) Mountbatte­n, Nehru wrote to Patel inviting him to join his Cabinet: “This writing is somewhat superfluou­s because you are the strongest pillar of the Cabinet.” The Sardar immediatel­y wrote back: “My services will be at your disposal, I hope, for the rest of my life and you will have unquestion­ed loyalty and devotion from me in the cause for which no man in India has sacrificed as much as you have done.”

Patel died on December 15, 1950, a little over three years after he had become the deputy prime minister and home minister. In a touching tribute Nehru wrote: “In failing health he continued, without rest or respite, his service of India. When freedom came at last to India, it was inevitable that he should take an outstandin­g part in the service of free India. It was fortunate for India that Sardar Patel should have had this opportunit­y to put the coping-stone to his life’s labour. He had, as it now appears, only a little more than three years to give in that service, and these years were periods of great turmoil and conflict in India and the world and, for him personally, of increasing ill-health and physical weakness. Yet, his achievemen­ts during this period will be recorded in India’s history with pride and admiration. He concentrat­ed his attention on great task of unifying the country and maintainin­g its stability at a time when disruptive forces were at work. In particular, his genius was demonstrat­ed in the way he handled the difficult and complicate­d problem of the old Indian states. He fixed his goal, a united and strong India, and set about to achieve it with skill and determinat­ion... It is for the people of the country to follow his shining example, his devotion to duty, his steadfastn­ess, his sense of discipline, and thus realise it was for a free, strong and prosperous India for which he laboured.”

If Patel did not become Prime Minister you cannot blame Nehru. The choice was made by Mahatma Gandhi, and the Father of the Nation knew what he was doing. Nehru was chosen, besides other factors, because he was the most popular leader of the Congress amongst the Indian masses and internatio­nally. According to Gandhi’s grandson, Rajmohan Gandhi, a historian of repute: “In ‘nominating’ Jawaharlal Nehru, Gandhi did not override public opinion. Neither can it be said that he allowed personal considerat­ions to override national ones. For representi­ng and uniting Indians of all ages, classes and religions, Jawaharlal seemed more suitable than Vallabhai.” Patel himself agreed with the Mahatma’s decision. In November 1948, he wrote: “Mahatma Gandhi named Pandit Nehru as his heir and successor. Since Gandhiji’s death we have realised that our leader’s judgment was correct.”

Another eminent Gujarati from Saurashtra, U.N. Dhebar, succeeded Nehru as Congress president in mid-50s and remained president of the Indian National Congress for five consecutiv­e terms, till 1958. As far as Morarji Desai is concerned, despite being a “rightist” he was immensely liked by Nehru for his high integrity and administra­tive skills. It was Nehru who made him his finance minister for at least six consecutiv­e years and Indira Gandhi who gave him the same portfolio and deputy prime ministersh­ip

If Patel did not become Prime Minister you cannot blame Nehru. The choice was made by Mahatma Gandhi, and the Father of the Nation knew what he was doing. Nehru was chosen, besides other factors, because he was the most popular leader of the Congress amongst the Indian masses and internatio­nally.

in 1967. That they fell apart for ideologica­l and other reasons is a different story. Later, as Prime Minister when Morarji Desai lost his government it was due to the failure of the Jan Sangh group in the Janata Party to sever their links with the RSS.

If the Congress had hatred for Gujaratis, Mahatma Gandhi wouldn’t have been the Father of the Nation. It was the Congress that made the Mahatma its “Supreme Commander” in the freedom struggle. From 1920 to 1948, the Congress was nothing but Gandhi Congress in which all major decisions, from non-cooperatio­n movement to transfer of power, were taken by the Mahatma himself. Yes, there was one Gujarati for whom the Congress had intense dislike. His name was Muhammad Ali Jinnah. The rest is history.

The writer is an ex-Army officer and a former member of the National Commission for Minorities

 ?? — PTI ?? Prime Minister Narendra Modi addressed the ‘Gujarat Gaurav Mahasammel­an’ in Ahmedabad on October 16
— PTI Prime Minister Narendra Modi addressed the ‘Gujarat Gaurav Mahasammel­an’ in Ahmedabad on October 16

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from India