WHY THE EFFORTS OF THE MUSLIMS FAILED?

Research & Review: “History of Khaksar Movement in India” Thoroughly research and written by Prof. Amalendu De.

Analysing the points stated above Inayatullah boldly asserted that capacities of the Muslims are clear as day light and they possessed all potentialities to constitute a big nation. There is no need to argue with it. It is also clear that there is a religious feeling in a large section of the Muslims. In spite of their poverty they are brave, ready to sacrifice wealth, accustomed to hard labour and possess the qualities of a Karigar.
When required they are ready to sacrifice themselves, to perform hijrat for the glory of religion, to take interest in politics and to participate in the liberation struggle Unfortunately all these efforts failed for want of self-reform within the Muslim nation. There were no religion, no hijrat, no jihad, no politics, no workers, no leaders and no unity generated by previous self-reform movements. These did not inculcate any sense of obedience to an Amir, had no connection with a proper centre, no unity on the basis of a common programme, discipline and cohesion. Moreover, the leaders were not clean-hearted, the generals were bad and the Sepahis ill-motivated. All were engaged in mutual quarrels. They cherished hatred against the Hindus and the English people. As a result the Muslims gained nothing though they sacrificed enough for the causes of Khilafat, hijrat and civil disobedience movements. Other nations profited from these. Thus the Muslim nation became a loser and grew weak In these circumstances, the main object of the Muslim nation should be to direct religion and politics along the proper path.

12. MAIN FEATURES OF THE POLITICS OF THE HINDUS

Referring to the politics of his Hindu brethren in this connection Inayatullah held that for a long time nothing had been done for the Hindu community on the basis of religion and there was nothing left in their religion which could stimulate the hearts of the people. What they are doing today depends on the strength of politics. Only a slight mixture of self-reform to their politics had made it so strong that even the Lalaji who was generally sitting the whole day in his shop and was busy in counting every paisa is now telling his companions ‘Maharaj, close the shops, it is the order of Mahatmaji’. Thus it is the result of true politics. Inayatullah observed thus: “I cannot visualize what will happen when true religion and true politics will be amalgamated”.

13. LACK OF REAL PROPAGANDA AMONG THE MUSLIMS

As the Muslims possess the spirit of sacrifice and the capacity to bear trouble, there will be nothing new for them in the proposed self-reform movement. ‘When the Muslims will understand the logic of real religion they will be sure of pleasing God and doing beneficial works for the world. At the same time they will be in a position to raise the slogan Alla-ho-Akbar. A nation capable of sacrificing life and property and bearing trouble has no need to go anywhere in search of interesting things. True, the leaders are a part and parcel of a nation. They should know the pulse of the nation and bear trouble along with it. In spite of these qualities if the nation fails to keep faith on him then it would reveal the fact that there is lack of real propaganda among the Muslims.

PARTICIPATION OF THE MUSLIMS IN THE CIVIL DISOBEDIENCE MOVEMENT

Besides their participation in the Khaddar movement the Muslims also played a vital part in the civil disobedience movement which was purely political. But a big section of Muslim leaders was hesitating to join it and they were telling the Muslims that it is the personal movement of the Hindus, and, therefore, it will be harmful to the Muslims. Almost all the big Muslim Papers were against the civil disobedience movement. The influential Muslim leaders and the dalals (agents) of the Government were busy in vilifying this movement in different ways . The result was the Hindus and the Muslims clashed with each other and communal riots broke out. In short, everything has been done to keep the Muslims away from this movement. Nevertheless, the Muslims have made a great sacrifice for this movement and disregarded the advice of those who tried to dissuade them from it. The historians, who do not know the pulse of the Muslim nation, are surprised to see that though half of the eight crores of Muslims were pardanashin ladies, 12,000 of them had courted imprisonment raising the slogan Alla-ho-Akbar. But the Hindu brothers only offered 40,000 prisoners out of twenty-two crates. Inayatullah stated that it is an open estimate made by the Hindus and published in the papers.
In this connection Inayatullah analysed the role of the people of North-western parts of India. Beyond the frontiers there was a territory named Azad Kabael (free zone) lying between British India and Afghanistan inhabited by rowdy tribes. The Pathans of the region and adjacent areas were greatly influenced by the Congress. They took part in the civil disobedience movement. Several Pathans were killed by the police at Qissakhani Bazaar in April, 1930. After this massacre the Afridis launched two attacks on Peshawar without the consent of the Amir of Kabul. The Muhammaudi tribes formed a morcha at Shabeqader and the Waziris, another tribe also made a separate morcha in different places to oppose the British. Thus these people have fomented an atmosphere of war on the frontier to give moral support to the liberation movement of India. In some places the frontier leaders gave red dress to their supporters and the British were alarmed to see it. Thus they put the real red danger towards the British. Inayatullah wrote that it was due to the sacrifices of the frontier people that this civil disobedience movement became famous. The Government scented real danger in it. Now, what the Muslims have received for their participation in the national struggle or brotherly service? It is a fact that if the Muslims, especially the tribes of Azad Kabael, did not participate in this movement with all their resources, the results of the politics of the Hindus would have been different The British would not have endeavoured to settle the matter with the leaders by sending their own representatives to jails. Had there been no such pressure on the British they could have given a blow to the unarmed political movement (i.e., non-violent C.D. Movement) of India and could have protracted this conflict. Inayatullah observed that the politics of the Charkha was so weak and ineffective that no one in military, police and government services went against the government. In spite of raising the slogans ‘Inqilab Zindabad’ the government machinery was least affected. The government was really frightened to see the support of the people of the frontier and they came forward to settle the matter. Inayatullah remarked:
I have no quarrel with the Hindus and the Muslims. I have expressed what was true in my opinion. It goes without saying that to snatch away independence from an organized and well- informed enemy is beyond the power of the Charkha.