Some extracts in defense of narrative from the book Mian Iftikarud Din: Selected Speeches &

Statements edited by Abdullah Malik, published by ArifIftikar of Nigrashat 1971, Anarkali,

Lahore, West Pakistan 1971. This valuable work is a record of history from peoples perspective
since 1930s till late 1950s. (Selected by Aamir Riaz)
Support for Muslim self-determination
The strength and democratic validity of the Muslim League's demand for the self-determination of
Muslims was realized fairly early by a small minority of liberal and progressive Congressmen. In 1942,
at the meeting of the All India Congress Committee, Shri Rajgopalacharia moved a resolution requiring
the Congress to accept this Muslim League demand for the sakeof the formation of National
Government. The operative part of the resolution was as follows:
"It is absolutely and urgently necessary in the best interests of the country at this hour of peril to do
all that Congress can possibly do to remove every obstacle in the way of establishment of a national
administration to face the present situation; and, therefore, inasmuch as the Muslim League has
insisted on the recognition of the right of separation of certain areas, as a condition precedent for
united national action at this moment of grave national danger, the All India Congress Committee is
of the opinion that to sacrifice the chances of the formation of a National Government at this grave
crisis for the doubtful advantage of maintaining a controversy over the unity of India is a most
unwise policy and that it has become necessary to choose the lesser evil and acknowledge the Muslim
League's claim for separation." (Allahbad Session AINC April 1942)
Mian Iftikhar-ud-Din was one of the fifteen members out of a total of 135 members of the All India
Congress Committee who supported the resolution.This provoked a very sharp reaction from orthodox
Congressmen in the Punjab,and the right wing Congress Press demanded his resignation from the
Presidentship of the Punjab Congress. Explaining the motives which led him tosupport Rajgopalacharia's
resolution, Mian Sahib issued the following statement.
Civil & Military Gazette May 10, 1942
Explaining the stand taken by him in supporting Mr. Rajgopalacharia's resolution on Pakistan at the
Allahabad session of the All India Congress committee, Main Iftikhar-ud-Din emphasized that his
confidence andbelief in the basic unity of India had alone prompted him to adopt this attitude. He was
convinced that the good of all communities, including Muslims, lay in preserving the unity of India.
"But," he added, "that the unity of India can only be maintained through the consent of various elements
that constitute the national life of this country1."
Continuing, he said: "The more we talk of holding India together even against the wishes of the various
elements concerned, the more do we stiffen the separatist tendencies. The best way for starting the work
for unity is by conceding the right of secession."

1 It is what Mian Shafi and Hakim Ajmal Khan said after infamous Lucknow Pact of 1916, C R
Das said in C R Formula of 1924, Mollana Ubaid Ullah Sindhi said in his proposed manifesto
released from Istanbul 1924, Allama Iqbal said in his historic Allahbad session of AIML with
immense clarity and vision as compared with his contemporaries in 1930 and endorsed by 23rd
March 1940 AIML session held at Lahore. So the resolution and statement of Mian Sahib and
Raja ji were in continuity of a political vision yet court historians of Bharat and Pakistan failed to
acknowledge it due to some obvious biases. (A.R)

"The reason why a bold step for the unity of India is particularly necessary now is that we have never
passed through a more critical time in our history. We must act immediately. We must compel the British
Government to part with power and yield to our demand for a National Government. We must prepare
ourselves to offer, as a united people, resistance to the new invader. Active unity of the Indian people
alone can accomplish this.
"We must create the right atmosphere for the Muslim masses to understand our position. And this can
only be done by taking the wind out of the sails of the separatist opponents by granting the right of
secession.
"It is often asked 'how do we propose to deal with the demand of other communities such as the
Sikhs?' It is clear that if the right of secession is to be conceded to the Muslims, it must likewise be
conceded to any other community such as the Sikhs, even though they be only one per cent of the total
population of India, and may not constitute a majority in any single district. There will have to be great
many changes in the present provincial boundaries and consistency will require that the same right which
Muslims demand for themselves be conceded by them to others."

THE RIGHT WING PRESS AND IFTIKHAR-UD-DIN

OnceIftikhar-ud-Din had taken up the cause of the Right of Self-Determination for Muslims, the orthodox
Hindu Press in the Punjab started acampaign against him. Apart from demanding his resignation
Presidentship o f the Provincial Congress, they also attributed incorrect statements to him. Iftikhar-udDin issued contradictions but these newspapers did not care to publish them2. Consequently, he issued
this statement regarding the situation prevailing in the Hindu Press.
The Civil&MilitaryGazette June 21, 1942
I have noticed that most incorrect and misleading reports of my public speeches and private discussions
with Congress workers during my recent political tour of the province, in which I visited about twenty
districts, have appeared in the Press. I sent contradictions but with one or two exceptions they were not
published. At last I gave this up as a hopeless job because reports began to appear of public meetings
when actually no meeting was held or speech delivered. At times completely contradictory reports
appeared about the same meeting on the same day. In one or two cases the reporters themselves admitted
that they did not even bother to attend the so-called meeting.
I am making another attempt through this statement to declare that the reports referred to above were not
only incorrect but in some instances were completely the creations of the imagination of various reporters
who feel stronglyone way or the other about my support to Mr. Rajgopalachariaat Allahbadand my method
of maintaining the unity of India. Actually I have not spoken a word about it in public during my recent
tour, but if anyone wishes to understand my stand on this matter, about the correctness of which I am
more convinced than ever before, I refer him to my statement on the question at the Press Conference in
Lahore on May9, 1942.
(Mian Iftikarud Din: Selected Speeches & Statements Page 3 to 5)
RESIGNATION FROM THE PUNJAB CONGRESS RESIDENTSHIP
Soon after he had supported Rajgopalacharia's resolution for Muslim Self-Determination, Iftikhar-ud-Din
became aware that because of his espousal of this cause he was in a minority in the Punjab Congress. He

2 Media was biased even in 1940s (A.R)

seriously considered resignation from his office at the time but postponed it because of the ''Quit India'
resolution and the impending struggle that the Congress was launching. He feared that his resignation
might be interpreted as a desire not to take part in the country-wide movement. After his release from jail
in 1945, he immediately resigned from the Presidentship of the Punjab Congress and issued the
following statement.
"I take the first opportunity after the legalisation of the Congress to place my resignation
from the Presidentship of the Punjab Congress before the Provincial Congress Working
Committee, which is meeting today after three and a quarter years. I do so with the belief that I
shall be able to serve as an ordinary worker more effectively than as an office holder.
It is well known to my colleagues that for the last five years or so I have been an ardent
advocate of Congress-League Unity. It has been my firm belief that the coming together of
these two organisations alone can create conditions essential for the achievement of freedom.
In April, 1942, I supported Shri Rajgopalacharia on the question of conceding the right of selfdetermination to the Muslims at the All India Congress Committee meeting held in Allahabad.
It was clear to me then, and has become clearer since, that in taking this stand; I was sailing
against the wind in my own organisation. I felt that on account of these views I did not
command the confidence of the majority of my colleagues in the Provincial Congress
Committee, and as such it was not proper for me to remain their President. With this point in
view, and with an idea to render myself free of all official responsibilities which were a
hindrance in the way of pursuing this policy openly, I approached my all India Congress
leaders on the question of my resignation from the Presidentship of the Punjab Congress. I was
advised, that, since a fight against the Government was impending, these and such other
questions must recede to the background. I too felt that, whatever my views, resignation at that
stage could be misconstrued by some as my withdrawal from the Congress struggle. I, therefore, refrained
from taking this step and went to jail along with my colleagues.
The events of the last three years, and the frustration with which we have met at every stage, have
further strengthened my conviction in the correctness of my views. We have been helpless spectators to
death, disease and famine that have ravaged our land. Our failure to rise to the occasion has resulted in
disruptive and factional tendencies gaining the upper hand in the Congress ranks. Instead of all antiImperialist forces rallying together for freedom we are heading in for mutual bickering and forming of
rival organisations. The campaign against the Communists, for instance, is a typical example of this trend.
Unless these tendencies are checked the Congress cannot play its role of unifying all anti-Imperialist
forces in the country.
The world situation is such that a proper lead at this juncture not only can save the country from
many pitfalls but can take us in the very near future to our cherished goal of freedom. I am confident that
the Congress leadership will react to the pressure of events and historic needs of the times, and will, as the
premier political organisation of our land, take the initiative in bringing about unity on the basis of the
right of full self-determination. I further hope that the League leadership will also not be found wanting in
giving a correct response to the exigencies of the situation and that before long Congress-League Unity
will be an accomplished fact. To bring that day nearer, however, it is necessary that every one of us who
feels strongly on these issues, should speak up his mind freely and frankly. In order, therefore, to do so
without restraint I am placing my resignation from my office in the hands of Punjab Provincial Congress
Working Committee at the first opportunity that has come to me."
Lahore: August 25, 1945.
(Mian Iftikarud Din: Selected Speeches & Statements Page 29 & 30)

ON RESIGNATION FROM INDIAN CONGRESS

On coming back from the Bombay session of the All India Congress Committee, 1945, Iftikharud-Din decided to resign his primary membership of the Congress. He also decided to join the Muslim
League. He issued a statement on his resignation and followed it up by an explanatory note for the
Press. In both he gave detailed reasons for this important decision.
The proceedings of the All India Congress Committee and the references in the speeches
of certain Congress leaders in regard to the question of Congress-League understanding
have come as a great shock to me. I have always believed that Hindu-Muslim Unity is the
foundation of Indian freedom. It was for this great ideal that Indian National Congress has
striven throughout its history. Its great leaders, including Mahatma Gandhi, have always
given it the primary importance in their programme of nation-building. In the present
circumstances Hindu-Muslim Unity means settlement between Congress and League.
It is clear to all who care to face realities that the basic demand of Musalmans today is selfdetermination for areas in the North-West and East where they live in great majorities. It is
a perfectly democratic demand in its essence and by conceding it Congress could build such
an irresistible national unity that imperialist plans of national degradation could be foiled
and the sovereign right of our people to frame their constitution recognised and won.
Mahatma Gandhi when he met Mr. Jinnah last year moved a long way towards such a
consummation and so did Maulana Azad in his Kashmir statement.
Unfortunately at the Poona meeting of the Working Committee this line of Unity has not
only been abandoned, the resolution of the ex-Mahasabhite BabuJagat Narainlal has been
reaffirmed with but slight changes; eminent Congress leaders like Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru
and SardarVallabhai Patel have made statements which I consider not only wrong but which
do violence to the democratic traditions of Congress. Sardar Patel's main charge against me
was that for the last ten years, ever since I have been in Congress, I have striven after
Congress-League Unity by explaining to Congress leaders the real and legitimate demands
of the Muslims. I could understand if he disagreed with me in regard to the nature of these
demands. What he objected to, however, was that I, a Muslim Congressman, should at all have
worked for Congress-League Unity. He not only denounced these efforts but also declared that I was
disloyal to Congress all along and should get out of it. He made silly personal attacks on me which it
is not worth my while to reply to.
The operative part of Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru's speech was that Congress will fight the Muslim
League. He accepted the principle of self-determination but added that its application would lead to
trouble. He declared that Congress is never going to approach the League for settlement of the HinduMuslim question.
All this means that at least for the time being, the Congress leadership will not only not pursue its
historic policy of Hindu-Muslim Unity but that all such people, like myself, who advocate such a policy
and democratically strive after it in the Congress have no place in it.
I have therefore decided to resign from Congress membership. I shall henceforth work in the Muslim
League, an organisation which stands for the recognition of the just principle of self-determination for
Muslim majority areas and for the independence of India.
I believe that the ultimate interest of the common Hindu and Muslim people of our land are one and
that the ideal of self-determination and independence of one part of our country i.e., Pakistan, is bound
with the freedom of all.
(Mian Iftikarud Din: Selected Speeches & Statements Page 34 to35)

RESIGNATION FROM MINISTERSHIP FOR REFUGEE REHABILITATION

Mian Iftikhar-ud-Din joined the Punjab Cabinet on September 18, 1947 and was given the portfolio
of Refugee Evacuation and Rehabilitation. But he did not stay in the Ministry and resigned after just two
months. This resignation was his first major encounter in the long-drawn out battle that he fought with
rulers of Pakistan from 1947-1958.
To his mind the two issues of refugee rehabilitation and socioeconomic change were inter-linked. Firstly,
the refugees could not be happily rehabilitated unless the propertied classes were prepared to make
considerable sacrifices of their own here, and secondly the distribution of evacuee property according to
the principle of how much property a particular refugee had left behind in India was, to his mind, unfair.
The criterion for the allotment of evacuee property should have been the needs of a particular refugee or
family and not his past wealth, i.e. that the socio-economic difference that existed among the refugees in
India before coming to Pakistan should not be reproduced by an unreal distribution of evacuee property in
Pakistan, but each case should be considered according to its circumstances. The rich who were rich
across the border should not be made rich here and those who were poor across the border should not
similarly be treated as poor here. Needless to say, the feudal leadership of the League was hardly likely to
agree to this, especially when the Chief Minister was himself one of the big refugee landlords from the
East Punjab. Mian Sahib's somewhat revolutionary proposals were immediately labelled as un-Islamic
and a tirade was started against him. Iftikhar-ud-Din ultimately gave the details of his resignation along
with his proposals for socio-economic changes to the press. He held a Press Conference to explain his
proposals and defended him-against charges that many a radical politician has subsequently had to face.
After his resignation he toured the Province as President of the Punjab Muslim League advocating those
socio-economic changes that he had been unable to persuade his cabinet colleagues to adopt.
(Mian Iftikarud Din: Selected Speeches & Statements Page 57)

REPUBLICAN PARTY MEETINGS IN PRESIDENT'S HOUSE

In early months of 1957, a new political organisation known as the Republican Party came into being. This
organisation was reputed to be the brain child of Major-General Iskander Mirza, the President of Pakistan
and Nawab Mushtaq Ahmad Gurmani, the Governor of the Province of West Pakistan. An adjournment
motion was moved to discuss the relationship between Government dignitaries and political parties.
The National Assembly of Pakistan, April 15, 1957
Mr. Yusuf A. Haroon: (West Pakistan: Muslim): Sir, I have another motion. I hereby give notice to move
that:
The House do now adjourn to discuss a definite matter of urgent public importance, namely the failure of
the Government to advise President of Pakistan against the use of the President's House for the holding of
meetings of a political party styled the Republican Party."
Sardar Amir Azam Khan: (Minister for Information, Broadcasting, Law and Parliamentary Affairs): It will
be recorded.
Mian Mumtaz Muhammad Khan Daultana: We do not say that the President has done anything wrong but
we say that the Government have failed to advise the President correctly.
Mian Muhammad Iftikhar-ud-Din: It is very clear, Sir. Let us look at it from the common-sense point of
view. As in the previous case of the President saying certain things, it was the duty of a strong and selfrespecting Government to take full responsibility for all that the President might say. Of course, even at

times they themselves say things which they do not want to carry out. Likewise in this case it is
Government which is to blame because in this case the parties mentioned have got together by some
chance in the President's House and started discussing things there. It is very difficult for the President to
ask his guard to remove them from the precincts of his House. Therefore, I say that they should have kept
in mind the dignity and symbolic position of the President and that is why I think that it is the
Government which is to blame and none else.
Mr. Farid Ahmad: The objection is far-fetched. Here, may I quote from Herbert Morrison
the Leader of the House of Commons for a number of years. You have met him:
Once the position is conceded, after all, when the next General Elections take place, a new
President will be elected, even though he may have best of intentions to keep the
impartiality attached to the dignity of the high office, he will be guided by these rulings
from the Chair, as decisions taken in this House whether the President was allowed a
freehand or was to follow certain accepted principles.
Sardar Amir Azam Khan: On a point of order,
Mian Muhammad Iftikhar-ud-Din: Mr. Speaker, Sir, I want to clarify one point.
Mr. Speaker: You have had your say in the matter.
Mian Muhammad Ifflkhar-ud-Din: I just want to utter one sentence; I just want to put a
question. If we are not going to discuss this matter, because we cannot criticise the President,
then what is the way out for having a discussion on such vital matters? Probably, the mover
may have worded the motion more happily, or, apart from the wording, if we are not allowed to
discuss the motion, then how on earth we can ever get an occasion to criticise an action of this
type if the Government members were ever to do it. I say, Sir, actually and it has really
affectedit must be in your mind toothe Government members. If the Ministers, respectable
as they are, respected as they are, decided one day to do a certain thing and are guided with
hangers on to the rooms of the President's House and there they start discussing, surely they
cannot be turned out from there. Now, imagine under the strain of fasting, the Minister for
Communication being carried out of the President's House by two six-feet-two-inch guards
probably the guards and the staff would not like to do itbut I am just saying this that if these
people were really to bear in mind that that House is to be respected and they should not use it,
in fact, I do not blame Mr. Yusuf Haroon for his paper coming out with the news
Mr. Yusuf A. Haroon: It appeared in all the papers.
Mian Muhammad Iftikhar-ud-Din: I would not be surprised that the Government members
themselves quietly gave out the news so that in the country the impression may go that the
President is behind it. It is a very serious matter and therefore it should be allowed to be
discussed.
Mr. Speaker: Now, I have heard both the sides. Therefore, on these points also, the motion is
out of order.
(Mian Iftikarud Din: Selected Speeches & Statements Page 241-2)

PAK-CHINA FRIENDSHIP
Mian Iftiqar-ud-Din was the first political leader of Pakistan who realized the importance Pakistan's
relations with the Socialist countries, particularly with Soviet Russia and the People's Republic of China.
Though the government of Pakistan had recognised the People's Republic of China yet it did not show
any warmth in its relations. Iftikhar-ud-Din made his non-official contribution in the development of the
Pak-China relations. He accepted an invitation to attend the Asian Peace Conference in Peking and also
to attend the celebrations of the Second Anniversary of the founding of the Peoples Republic of China.
He went to China on September 29, 1951, where he was warmly received and toured China for a full
month later. At the end of his tour Peking Radio asked him to broadcast his impressions regarding the
New China.
The Pakistan Times October 29, 1951
I speak to you with the full consciousness of the fact that you do not need advice or suggestions from
outside. You gave in great abundance all that a people require in a period of reconstructionthe spirit
of self-sacrifice, discipline, enthusiasm, a creative urge, and the desire to live and let liveeach one
of these qualities you possess in incredibly large measure. And to crown it all you are blessed with an
inspiring leadershipthe ripeness of whose experience is the envy of all progressive peoples of the
world.
All that you expect of others is peace. That you yearn to live in peace with others is proved beyond
contradiction or doubt by the zeal with which you are building up the shattered economy of your
country and tending wounds of long strife. Seeing your achievements of the first two years one is
forced to say: "Let there be peace if not for any other reason, at least to see the records set up in speed
of reconstruction which would be an example to other people engaged in, or about to be engaged in,
similar tasks.
It is a grand, unforgettable spectacle to see five hundred million humanity on the march. May the fresh
fire that you have lit on the rich remain of your ancient civilization, burn more brightly! May its light
enkindle not only the hearts, homes and hearths of your own people but also with its life-giving sparks
enliven the subdued spirits of other Asiatic people! May we all become proud builders of a new Asia
as you are of a New China today! All this requires but one thingpeace. So from my heart, I wish
you success in struggling for everlasting peace.
(Mian Iftikarud Din: Selected Speeches & Statements Page275-6)