The Real Iron Man: An Earnest Attempt to Recast Patel's Anti-Muslim Image.

Asghar Ali Engineer

Book Review: Sardar Patel and Indian Muslims

By Rafiq Zakaria 

Bharatiya Vidya Bhavan

Pages: 118

Price: Rs 125

Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel, the Iron Man of India, has, rightly or wrongly, always been viewed with suspicion not only by Muslims-for his ambiguous attitude towards them-but also by secularists and leftists, for similar reasons.

Even today, 50 years after Independence, his image has hardly changed. A number of books have been written to assess his contribution to the freedom struggle, but no one has focused on Patel's attitude towards the Muslims. Rafiq Zakaria, a noted scholar, has made an earnest attempt in this book to refurbish Patel's image.

Whatever one's view, Patel was certainly not as generous towards the Muslims as Mahatma Gandhi was. An episode from the diary of Gandhi's secretary Mahadev Desai, quoted by Zakaria, should suffice to prove this: "This morning we happened to talk about a certain Muslim leader. Vallabhbhai said, 'He also took a narrow communal view in the time of crisis and asked for a separate fund for Muslims and a separate appeal for it.' Bapu said: 'He is not at fault on that score. What amenities do we offer Muslims? They are mostly treated like untouchables. If I wished to send Amtus Salam to Deolali, could I ask ... (the diary doesn't give the name) to put her up? Indeed it is up to the Hindus to take a step forward. The bitterness can be mitigated only if the Hindus wake up and break down the barriers they have erected.' Vallabhbhai said, 'But the manner and customs of Muslims are different. They take meat while we are vegetarians. How are we to live with them in the same place?' Bapu replied, 'No sir. Hindus as a body are vegetarians nowhere except in Gujarat. Almost every Hindu takes meat in the Punjab, Uttar Pradesh and Sind.'"

This needs hardly any comment and shows the narrow view which Patel took of Muslims. But having said this, it is also unfair, as Zakaria points out, to conclude that Patel was an inveterate opponent of Muslims. Quoting numerous sources to prove his point, Zakaria shows that while Patel may not have been like Gandhi or Jawaharlal Nehru in his attitude towards Muslims, he was far from being their enemy.

But there can be no argument that Patel was a good administrator, and when it came to enforcing administrative measures, he spared neither Hindu nor Muslim. Besides, Patel did not remove Muslim officers from key posts. One of his confidants was the inspector general of the special police force, who was a Muslim. The first chief commissioner of Delhi he appointed was Khurshid Alam Khan.

Excerpt

Patel felt that Muslims by following the League were digging their own graves ... Patel's understanding of Islam was also limited; I don't think he ever read any book to acquaint himself properly with its tenets. He learnt about it from his contact with Muslims, many of whom were hardly the true representatives or even followers of its teachings ... His knowledge about Hinduism was also not too deep. One day (he) asked Mahadev Desai who Swami Vivekananda was. 

There are a number of reasons, however, why Patel came to acquire an anti-Muslim image. In the beginning of his political career he was a great supporter of the Khilafat movement, even when many Hindus viewed it as obscurantist. He also had great respect for the Ali brothers.

But as Zakaria shows, his attitude changed with Jinnah's obduracy and with the Muslim League's playing the communal card. Patel's anger over the Pakistani authorities' failure to protect the lives and property of Hindus, and the plight of Muslims due to communal riots in north India to a great extent strengthened his anti-Muslim image.

The difference between Gandhi's attitude towards Muslims and that of Patel was like the difference between Akbar and Aurangzeb's attitude towards Hindus. Patel sometimes took a tit-for-tat view of the communal problem.

In a letter of June 22, 1947, he wrote, "We may also be able to afford some protection on the basis of reciprocity in regard to treatment of minorities.'' This is definitely the language of an administrator, not of a statesman. Mahatma Gandhi in his place would have said it is our sacred duty to protect our minorities, irrespective of whether Pakistan does it or not.