বাংলাদেশের স্বাধীনতা যুদ্ধ দলিলপত্র (প্রথম খণ্ড)/১০
| শিরোনাম | সূত্র | তারিখ |
| হিন্দু মহাসভা কর্তৃক স্বাধীন সার্বভৌম বাংলার বিরুদ্ধাচারণের জবাবে হোসেন শহীদ সোহরাওয়ার্দী | লুক ইণ্টু দি মিরর: সিরাজুদ্দীন হোসেন পৃষ্ঠা- ৯৫ |
৮ মে, ১৯৪৭ |
[Text of H.S. Shurawardy's rejoinder to criticism of his move for United Independent Bengal by Hindu Mahasabhites and others. Published in the press 011 May 8,1947]
Mr. Shyama Prasad Mukherjee and various other leaders have come out with rejoinders to my plea for a united sovereign Bengal. In the rejoinders one senses a great deal of suspicion and distrust of Muslims and a great deal of hope that in. one portion at least of Bengal the Hindus will be 50 overwhelmingly large in number that they will be able to dominate over Muslim minority.
Petty Show
This dream appears to have dazzled them into driving away all sane logic, all desire for compromise and co-operation with Muslims. They seem unable to realise how their Bengal will be a petty little show that will be accorded a backseat in the councils of their divided India.
Mr. Shyama Prasad Mukherjee has in particular unburdened himself in violent language and hyperbolic abuses. By constant reiteration of what he designates as to helpless position of the Hindus in Bengal, Mr. Mukherjee will like to convince the world at large and not the least himself that the Hindus in Bengal are really unfortunates if Bengal remains united.
He even likens the position of the Hindus in Bengal to a hell, a hell, however, so privileged, so replete with wealth, power and influence, that the Muslims consider it their aims and ambition and would deem themselves unfortunate if they could but dwell in a semblance of it.
Hard words
What is the use of hard words and vituperations? What is the use of vilifying me, attacking my bonafides, expatiating on my sins of omission and commission and holding me responsible for all the ills in Bengal? They cannot after the nature of things, but merely excite the passions of persons who have been taught to imbibe readily abuse and hatred of the Muslims and to believe the worst of every Muslim.
He and those who think like him have absolutely overlooked the irrefutable fact that the future independent Bengal which will not rely either on the 1935 Act or on any extraneous power but will have to rely on the willing co-operation of the people, particularly of a people so dominantly situated as the Hindus are the province cannot but have different politics. What have the alleged shortcomings of the present government or ministry, what have even my own position and individuality to do with what the people of Bengal can achieve if they remain united and co-operate with each other?Short-sighted View
It is not I who am offering them anything; it is for the people of Bengal to make and transmute their destiny by remaining together. It is a very short sighted view to adopt the present, with its tremendous limitations, as a guide to the shape of things to come in Independent Bengal.
Further, cannot Mr. Mukherjee visualize that there is a vast difference between the problem of Bengal and of India; that because Bengalees are one race and have one language and have many points in common and are capable of understanding each other, and working for the common good, it does not follow that persons living within the subcontinent of India also belong to one race, speak the same language, have the same interests or even have the same history? In India, as well as in most of the provinces the Hindus are in a considerable majority, whereas in Bengal the majority margin of the Muslims is narrow and will be narrower still in greater Bengal.
The Hindus of Bengal by virtue of their position and their status and their numbers hardly stand in need of any protection or safeguards, whereas in India the Muslims with their inferiority in numbers and resources do stand in need of such protection as is given by a partition. In Bengal the Hindus have their own language, their culture, their system of education and a free exercise of their religion. In India the language of the Muslims it being tampered with, their literature is being distorted, their education is being affected and in place after place laws have been framed which prohibit the full and free exercise of their religion.
Big Share For Hindus
In India and in most of the provinces the Muslims will have a negligible share if any at all, in the administration but in Bengal the share of the Hindus is bound to be considerable and about equal to the share of the Muslims. Hence if there is a partition of India for the purpose of giving protection to the Muslims of India, it does not follow that there should be a partition of Bengal for the purpose of giving protection to the Hindus of Bengal.
I need not stress these obvious differences any further. Mr. Mukherjee is of opinion that two areas predominantly Hindu on the one hand and predominantly Muslim on the other are a solution. Far from being a solution this overwhelming predominance will give rise to a sense of submission, which will retard the growth of the moral stature of the minority and affect their very culture and mode of life.
Is not the alternative which I propose, namely, complete co-operation which is bound to exist where the majority and minority communities are almost equal in number and where the influence of the minority community balances its minority status, as in an undivided Bengal, is not this far better than a sense of repression brought about in the minorities of the two sections? There can be no one party rule under the scheme which I propose. The desire that the Bengal state should be linked to the centre seems to have been prompted by the belief that if it is linked to the centre, which will be predominantly Hindu, the life and liberty and culture of the Hindus of Bengal will be saved, otherwise they will perish in a united Bengal.Moral Weakness
Is this not a doctrine of defeatism and a confession of a terrible moral Weakness that the Hindus of Bengal should stand in need of protection from a loose centre?
I ask them, is domination possible any more anywhere, and what have the Hindus to fear in Bengal of all places on earth? The idea of domination has to disappear and is disappearing. The British that have dominated India so long have had to confess that domination is outmoded and no one race or party can dominate over the other in the face of determination and a will to assert. Where the British have failed, is it possible that any other people in India can succeed?
Once more I find that some Hindu leaders of Bengal are succumbing lo the pressure of the Hindus of India and are playing their game that the Hindu leaders, although they know fully well that a partition of Bengal means the doom of Hindus and Muslims alike, have subscribed to this partition under pressure from Hindu leaders of other parts of India who want to utilise Bengal as a pawn in their game and who do not care what happens to the people of Bengal.
Indeed they know fully well that Bengal divided will mean Bengal a prey to the people of other parts of India, a Bengal waiting to be exploited for their benefit.
After everything is said and done I am charged with having issued threats in the concluding paragraph of my statement where I have referred to Calcutta merely because I have pointed out the dangers. I have only been realistic. I have merely stressed what is well recognised that the cry for partition of Bengal was nothing but an attempt to get the rich prize of Calcutta and they deprive the Muslims of trade and commerce.
But I have equally attempted to point out that a rich prize like this is not easily attained merely by brow-beating statements and if Calcutta becomes a bone of contention what will remain of it? In order that it should be the hub of the economic life of Bengal, it is necessary to have peace and security.
Somewhere I have read it remarked that I have parried questions regarding adult franchise and joint electorate. I have never assumed the role of an autocrat with power enough to bind the people of Bengal. I have suggested that the future shape of Bengal will be a matter for negotiation between the Hindu and Muslim leaders to sit down together at a conference to give concrete form to their hopes and aims.
I still extend that invitation to all. I beg of them not to destroy Bengal, not to be blinded by wrath and prejudice, or consumed by their hatred for their fellow Bengalees but to look ahead and grasp this wonderful opportunity to make Bengal free and independent, master of its own destiny and its own wealth, capable of a free will to form unions and treaties and alliances with whomsoever it will, respected amongst the nations of the world, rich, powerful and a heaven for the common man.