GANDHIJI’S LEAD
With Mahatma Gandhi, practice is identical with precept; his reported decision to spend the rest of his lifetime in Pakistan and the more recent determination to reside in the riot-affected area of Calcutta till normalcy is restored must be put down as his soulful reaction to the needs of the situation. He has realised the patent insincerity of the advice tendered to minorities in Pakistan to stick to their hearths and homes irrespective of the consequences and has taken upon himself the task of not only instilling confidence in them amidst the panic created by resurgent communalism but of enforcing a certain amount of rectitude in the administration. For, there is little doubt that all the professed goodwill of the Pakistan authorities towards the minorities in their charge has failed either to restore peace or to reassure the minorities; large-scale migration of non-Muslims have taken place or continue to take place. Gandhi’s decision is therefore a challenge to the theory of hostages as much as the tendency, if any, to communal hegemony. Since allegations of aggression have emanated from Muslim quarters in Calcutta, the priority given to that city in the Mahatma’s itinerary has a special significance not lost on Hindus no less than on Muslims. They should both understand that the situation today constitutes a challenge to the majority community in each case, in as much as if the majority ignores the susceptibilities of the minorities, it would only be driving fears overground instead of harnessing loyalty for building a great nation.
Governments in India and in Pakistan, have, in their own interest, the obligation to dissipate fear and suspicion among the minorities. Gandhi’s mission on the present occasion is to bring home to them the urgency of the situation. He has taken upon himself the duty of proving by example that the only way to achieve a working compromise is by living in the riot-affected localities and taking all the attendant risks upon himself. The task is hazardous indeed; there never was more need for caution in the utterances for leaders, but Gandhiji’s gesture would have served half its purpose if it would stimulate the right sense of responsibility among them. As we see it, one of the first results of Gandhiji’s decision should be the immediate cessation of non-Muslim influx from Pakistan and vice-versa which, unless arrested promptly, would affect trade, industry, commerce, agriculture—in fact the entire economy of both India and Pakistan. Gandhiji will also be able to affect the policy and ideals of Pakistan if he resides in it, more than he would had he continued in his original abode in India. Since “Islam in Danger” and other slogans have lost their validity with the emergence of Pakistan, people and governments must realise that what is henceforward more important is social justice which is equally important for the well-being of Muslims as much as to Hindus. Anything calculated to ensure this consummation, ultimately to be realised in a joint endeavour by both India and Pakistan, must be promoted. Emphasis on this community of interest is bound to bring the Hindus and Muslims closer to each other, and the reunion of India and Pakistan will be brought nearer. Gandhiji’s mission is intended to hasten the day of this reunion. The least that the people of India and Pakistan must do under the circumstances is to wish him success and render assistance in every manner possible.