It is said that the truth
always comes out inadvertently. In a rare slip of the pen, the Congress party’s
inhouse magazine “Congress Darshan” turned into “Congress Darpan” by showing it
the mirror. In its latest issue published on the occasion
of 131st Foundation Day of the Congress party, the mouthpiece wrote articles
criticizing Nehru for his "inept" handling of the Kashmir problem,
adding that India would not have faced so many problems if the first PM had
listened to Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel. On Sardar Patel, the article said from
the correspondence between him and Nehru, it was clear that on major policies,
there were strong differences between them. Had Nehru listened to Patel, the
situation in Kashmir, China, Tibet and Nepal would have been better, the
write-up said. In 1950, Patel had sent a letter to Nehru alerting him on his
policies on China and Tibet, and had specifically stated that China's policy lacked
credibility. Patel also opposed Nehru’s move of taking the Kashmir issue
to the UNO. It also added that Patel was
instrumental in reconstructing the historic Somnath temple despite opposition
of Nehru. On
the Congress chief Sonia Gandhi, the write-up elaborated on her education and
career. It said she was born in a small village in Italy and her father Stefano
Maino was a member of the Italian fascist
forces that fought against the Russian army. In another article, it said that Sonia became a
primary member of the party in 1997 and became its chief in less than 62 days.
Subsequently, it said Sonia made an unsuccessful attempt to form the government
at the Centre.
It has always been the
characteristic of Congress party to call the historical truths as lies and distort history to projects lies as
facts. The article actually exposed the well-researched historical truths as to
how Nehru handled the economic and political affairs of the country after
independence just to promote himself and the cause of his dynasty. But for the
current Congress people, Congress’s history starts from Nehru and ends with
Rahul Gandhi via Indira Gandhi, Rajiv Gandhi and Sonia Gandhi.
By 1946, it had become quite clear
that India’s independence was only a matter of time. An interim government was to be formed,
headed by the Congress president as Congress had won the maximum number of
seats in the 1946 elections. All of a sudden, the post of Congress president
became very crucial as it was this very person who was going to become the
first Prime Minister of independent India. The last date for the nominations
for the post of the President of Congress, and thereby the first Prime Minister
of India, was April 29, 1946. And the
nominations were to be made by 15 state/regional Congress committees of that
time. In that process, 12 out of 15 Congress committees nominated Sardar
Vallabh Bhai Patel but not a single one
nominated Nehru's name. So Gandhi
conveyed this to Nehru and tried to make him understand the reality. A
shell-shocked Nehru was defiant and made it clear that he would not play second
fiddle to anybody. Nehru coerced Gandhi into supporting him by saying that if
he splits the Congress, the entire independence plan would go awry as the
British would get an excuse in delaying independence by raising the question as
to who should be handed over the reins of power, Congress with Nehru or
Congress minus Nehru. So Gandhi thought that it would be safe to ask Sardar
Patel for making the sacrifice than to reason with a power-smitten Nehru. In
fact, he had commented that Nehru had gone power-mad. Gandhi always knew that
Sardar Patel would never defy him. So, he instructed Acharya J B Kriplani to
get some proposers for Nehru from the Congress Working Committee (CWC) members
despite knowing fully well that only Pradesh Congress Committees were
authorized to nominate the president. When Gandhi told Patel to voluntarily
step aside from the race for Congress president, he readily agreed. When Dr
Rajendra Prasad heard of Sardar Patel’s withdrawal of nomination, he was
disappointed and remarked that “Gandhi had once again sacrificed his trusted
lieutenant in favour of the glamorous Nehru”. Gandhi’s this decision proved too
costly for the nation as thereby Gandhi
introduced the concept of forced decisions by the so-called
‘high-command’ in Congress, which is now being followed by this political party
for every decision making. If Congress
today says that nobody should doubt the wisdom of Gandhi in making Nehru the PM
over Patel, then can they also explain why they forget the wisdom of same
Gandhi who said that Congress should have been disbanded after India’s
independence?
Yes, it’s a fact that had Patel been
our first PM, Kashmir and other such problems would have never existed today
alongwith a particular minority community appeasement policy. Patel opposed
Nehru’s plan for reservation for Muslims in the parliament which resulted in
the then Govt. withdrawing such a proposal. He wanted all communities to forget
their religion & first become Indian with their undivided loyalty to the
nation. Patel was brutally honest and said that people belonging to the
minority community in the country should not try to ride on two horses. Patel also thought that the onus was on Muslims to defeat
suspicions about the actions of some of their co-religionists in the
pre-partition days. It is well known how Nehru had treated a senior
leader like Patel during his tenure, which has been documented by the people
who worked with both Nehru and Patel at that time. It was the exemplary skills of Sardar
Patel, which forced all the 550 Princely
States to merge with Independent India. But still Sardar Patel, the then Deputy
Prime Minister and Home Minister of India, was insulted, humiliated and
disgraced by the then Prime Minister, Nehru, during a Cabinet meeting. “You are
a complete communalist and I’ll never be a party to your suggestions and
proposals,” Nehru shouted at Patel during a crucial Cabinet meeting to discuss
the liberation of Hyderabad by the Army from the tyranny of the Razakkars, the
then Nizam’s private army. “A shocked Sardar Patel collected his papers from
the table and slowly walked out of the Cabinet room. That was the last time
Patel attended a Cabinet meeting. He also stopped speaking to Nehru since then”,
writes MKK Nair, a 1947 batch IAS officer who worked closely with Sardar and VP
Menon his secy., in his memoirs “With No Ill Feeling to Anybody”. Nehru was against sending Indian forces to
liberate Hyderabad and tried to scuttle Patels plan and instead wanted to take
this issue to UN. Had Patel not acted tough and inspite of Nehru’s objection
liberated Hyderabad during the “Operation Polo”, we would have been having
another Kashmir right in the heart of India today. The formation of North East
Frontier Service under the Ministry of External Affairs by Nehru and the
removal of the affairs of the Jammu & Kashmir from the Ministry of Home
Affairs are the major reasons behind the turmoil in both the regions. This was
done by Nehru to curtail the wings of Sardar Patel. We would not have the Kashmir problem if
Nehru had listened to the advice of
Patel and the then Army Chief General Kariappa to delay taking his
complaint to the UN for three days so that the Indian Army could drive out the
Pakistani invaders from Kashmir. Despite this Nehru referred Kashmir issue to
UN, Patel totally opposed this and said "it is purely an internal matter
and why should we refer this to UN". Patel also said, "if only Nehru
had listened to my advice, not a single Pakistani would have been allowed to
stay inside Kashmir even for a single day. Patel raised this issue in the
Congress Working committee and Nehru & Patel were at loggerheads. History has proved it beyond doubt that had
Patel been the PM in place of Nehru, the country would not have faced the
humiliation of 1962 war. Days before his death, Patel had written a letter to
Nehru warning him about China’s nefarious designs but Nehru didn’t pay any
attention to that letter.
Sardar Patel reconstructed the famous
Somnath temple against the wish of Nehru without any state funding and when
Rajendra Prasad, the then President wished to attended inauguration of the
renovated temple, Nehru objected. But still Rajendra Prasad went ahead but
Nehru was absent. However, later on Nehru
wanted to renovate the Babri Masjid at
Government expense, a proposal Sardar had turned down as the Home Minister. Sardar told Nehru that the
Babri Masjid’s renovation was different from reconstruction of the Somnath
Temple for which a trust was set up that raised nearly 30 lakh for the purpose.
Government money was not spent - following which Nehru had to drop the idea
(Patel’s daughter Maniben’s diary notes on September 20, 1950).
The consequences of Nehru becoming the
first PM of India and the mess he created in India social, economic and
political spheres have been tragic and the muddle he created still remains far
from being sorted out. The nexus between the Congress led, self-proclaimed
liberal-leftist-jihadi sympathiser-secular class, supported by the caste based
political parties and the plethora of foreign funded NGOs, who play one
community against another in the name of
protection of human rights and poverty alleviation to ensure Congress
continues to retain the power to rule India as it suits their interests.
Historically, they have together tricked, suppressed, discredited any voice
that tried to challenge them - Subhash Bose disappeared, Sardar Patel side lined, RSS became Gandhi's killer, Shastri
mysteriously died in Tashkent, Jaya Prakash Narayan apparently poisoned in the
hospital and now they are running the “intolerance-beef promotion-hindutava
bashing Campaign”. They can stoop to any low to retain their stranglehold on
power and their not allowing the parliament to functioning for last 2 sessions
on one or the other pretext is not coincidental. These forces can do anything
to harm Modi as he has risen as the greatest challenger to the rotten dynastic
rule, politics of caste & religious
divide, corruption & mis governance and everything else in the name
of "secularism" and "pluralism". The congress trickster
would do anything to continue the legacy of the dynasty to remain in power. Whoever has written the article has only stated the
historical facts and reminded the nation about those true facts. Unfortunately,
for the Sonia-Rahul sycophants, it is a sacrilege that the truth has been
exposed about their dear leaders.
No comments:
Post a Comment