Non-violent power of Frontier Gandhi

The Gandhi-led anti-colonial national movement had many positive dimensions and that led Rupert Emerson in his classic Empire to Nation to designate it the Gandhian model of national freedom struggle.

Gandhi not only mobilised multiple diverse socio-cultural groups, he made national heroes out of ordinary and unknown leaders from Kashmir to Kanyakumari.

Rajmohan has performed a yeoman's service by writing on Ghaffar Khan (also known as Badshah Khan and Frontier Gandhi), a Pakhtun from the distant North-West Frontier Province of British India, who made heroic sacrifices for the independence of India.

The author has woven the story of the ideas and role of Badshah Khan around major and significant political events of twentieth century India and Pakistan.

Pakhtuns or Pathans were victims of geography and history because the British had divided them into settled and tribal areas of the North West Frontier Province (NWFP) of British India, and on the basis of the Durand Line, a separate Afghanistan was made to keep Pakhtuns divided and separated.

The British colonisers also thought of containing Russia by following a Forward Policy in the divided territories of Pakhtuns, i.e. Afghanistan and Indian NWFP.

This fact of history and geography conditioned the making of the Pakhtun mind and personality and it made this community a believer in "violence" for the defence of freedom and any threat to the "honour and dignity" of Pathans brought a violent response against their oppressors.

Ghaffar Khan created an organisation known as Khudai Khidmatgars (Servants of God), who practised non-violent methods to fight for freedom. Pakhtuns, who lived by the code of Pakhtunwali, obeyed the jirga or assembly (or group) of elders, melmastia or hospitality, and badal or violent revenge, and such believers in violence became a brigade of non-violent fighters for freedom and faced great repression by not taking recourse to violence.

This was the greatest contribution of Badshah Khan, who could tell Mahatma Gandhi that the Quit India Movement of 1942 witnessed violence in UP, Bihar, etc. but no such thing by the Pakhtuns. On this Gandhi remarked, "His non-violence was not for the cowards but for the brave and the courageous"""the reference being to Badshah Khan's movement.

Rajmohan Gandhi's narrative clearly brings out the complex nuances of Frontier Gandhi's nationalism, universalism, love for Pakhtunistan, and his belief in Islam.

This great leader was viewed as "a most dangerous convict" by the British and was moved from prison to prison. It is not only the British colonisers who condemned Badshah Khan to live a rigorous prison life, Pakistan also treated him in the same manner.

The neo-colonial historians of India should realise that national independence was achieved by leaders and masses who made heroic sacrifices and many of them, including Badshah Khan, fought bravely against the colonial oppression facing lathis, bullets, and imprisonments.

Further, not to be forgotten was the inclusive platform of the national movement, as also shown by the Khudai Khidmatgars: "While the vast majority of those joining were Muslims, a Hindu, Sikh, or Christian could also become a Khudai Khidmatgar ... Through this decision, Badshah gave a greater-than-ethnic territorial definition to Pakhtunness and simultaneously, acknowledged that non-Muslims too could serve God."

Rajmohan Gandhi has made a telling comment on Ghaffar Khan's feelings and commitment to the Pakhtuns: "If ever a man lived, sacrificed, suffered and died for his people, Ghaffar Khan was such a man."

Pakistani rulers could not appreciate that Ghaffar Khan was committed to a Pakistan with autonomy and identity for the Pakhtuns. He was punished, imprisoned, and exiled by the Pakistani rulers because he was suspected to be a "separatist" Pathan who wanted to unite with Afghanistan.

On this Rajmohan Gandhi correctly observes: "Even where religion, or Islam in particular, appears to be the central question, closer study may reveal that ethnicity is not less crucial." And this approach led him to offer "humanitarian nationalism".

Ghaffar Khan felt abandoned and betrayed in 1947 by Congressmen, including Nehru. He was also pained because his ideals of freedom for united India and autonomous dignity for the Pakhtuns remained unfulfilled by the way the transfer of power in 1947 was done. While he suffered at the hands of oppressive rulers, he practised non-violence till the end.

Rajmohan Gandhi's assessment is that non-violence was a pragmatic and instrumental belief for Khan, and it was a very powerful weapon to keep the oppressors confused and bewildered.

His study is not only a description of the life, struggles and sacrifices of a great leader, it is also a rich narration of crowded events of colonial policies for India, the responses of Indian leaders towards changing British policies, the tragedy of the partition, and Pakistan's dilemma of nation-building, which very adversely affected Badshah Khan.

He said at the time of the partition in 1946-47 "neither religion nor anything else that is good can flourish in slavery," and he prophetically added "freedom can only flourish in India on a basis of amity and cooperation of all the different communities." Is anyone still loyal to such great legacies of the national movement?

---

GHAFFAR KHAN

Rajmohan Gandhi
Penguin
Price: 325
Pages: 300