Was Jinnah a British Raj agent?

Mohammed Ali Jinnah, founder of Pakistan....also a British agent?

1947 and the sad occurrences of that event was unique. To be sure Muslim armies fought Hindu armies led by their respective Rajas, but the full extent of the demographic shift, isolation from Partition for ordinary civilians, and the ensuing dogma in Pakistan especially after 1965, and later under Zia ul Haq never existed between ordinary people in South Asia before.

Pakistan was the megalomaniac creation of Mohammed Jinnah, who knew he would not last very long to fully see his dream being created, but through his egotism he persisted in creating the moth eaten failed state, with the active backing of the British..........It started in 1940 when the Muslim league drafted a constitution, and from there developed a grass roots organization for the first time (before that specific date it was a talking shop for privileged Muslim nobility and notables wholly disconnected with the Muslim masses) As the Muslim League developed, the majority of the top echelon of the Congress were locked up from 1942, with the "Quit India" Movement. The Muslim League thus with covert British Raj guidance became a legitimate force in Indian politics, which could articulate its position with mass appeal............for me all this could not have been done by Jinnah himself or his close cadres like Liaqat Ali Khan, in such a short time (1940--1946). That there must have been some sort of institutional backing from Britain to translate the Muslim League into a reasonably cohesive force by 1946, to the point where Jinnah was negotiating quite confidently with Gandhi and Nehru.

Jinnah was an excellent Barrister, and thus a good speaker, but a political genius like Gandhi, with his vision? I never thought so. He was a stiff starched plodder, not given to inspiration, as most natural freedom leaders of that era. Thus to me he was a functionary for the British Raj, who played out his role to the end.

The British official files related to independence and Partition, and the creation of Pakistan will be released in the year 2022, the longest release date for British state papers. Normally they are released within 30 years. They must contain controversial information for them to be released at such a late date. Obviously when they are released they will be sanitized for public consumption, but one speculates whether Jinnah was a British agent. All those long years in Bilaat, London, during the critical years of the independence movement; His penchant for ham sandwiches, and alcohol; his speeches to his Muslim audiences in immaculate Oxbridge English mostly; his deference to British Raj law, and the need to avoid any sanction, in contrast to the many occasions when Congress leaders were imprisoned by the Raj, in the course of serving the greater cause.

His general demeanor of a man who was quite cold and reserved, who showed no overt fondness for Muslims. ....Do we have any pictures of him mixing with the illiterate Garib Muslim masses from the 1920's through to the 1940's, smiling and relishing the moment and opportunity to fulfill his mission for his people? We have plenty of those for Gandhi and Nehru, and they are genuine. Do we have any pictures of him praying at a Mosque with his fellow Muslim congregation?

This is the man who founded the Islamic Republic of Pakistan ......descendants of Brahman Hindus from Gujarat.

Then lets widen the scenario, without the benefit of the British state papers about Partition to be released in 2022. 75 years after that fateful event.

Why were the British so keen to leave India in August 1947, and hand over power
formally, when most people agreed that 1948 would have been a better date? Why the hurry, when they had been in the region from over 200 years, and the British Raj a full 90 years?

The official explanation being that the government in London wanted to wind things up as far as the empire was concerned, since Britain was an exhausted nation after the war, and generally wanted to bring the boys back home-------the empire simply could not be maintained any longer. Not even for one more year, into 1948, at least in India. (The rest of the empire got its independence in the 1950's, 60's, 70's and in Hong Kongs case 1997). But with the largest British possession, the most profitable, and the "Jewel in the Crown", the British could not stay a year longer to properly supervise the hand over of power, and avoid inevitable civilian casualties.

Lets see if we can refute the most popular assertions why the British left early, in that manner:

(1) First we have got to cut our losses, and leave India to her own destiny argument. India was never a burden to the British, it was always a hefty surplus profit. The British were efficient tax collectors especially in India and ruthless exploiters of the land (Bengal Famine 1769, millions left dead as the East India angled for cash crop profits, Indigo, jute and opium), and Indian revenue maintained the Indian colonial army and administrative system, as well as transferring huge surplus profits into the exchequer of the British government.

The British first and foremost came to India to make money, not to rule. That idea only came much later into the 19th century.In the 18th century alone the surplus of the East India company over Greater Bengal was so enormous it eclipsed any revenue in comparison to most other European powers.................Greater Bengal to a significant extent financed and contributed to the huge 450 million pounds that Britain managed to raise to fight the Napoleonic wars.

So, the Idea that the British were financially exhausted post 1945 (true), and India was a financial liability which could no longer be maintained (not true--self financing.......) which almost makes it sound in terms of colonial propaganda, that Britain funded and maintained India to the detriment of the British Isles, which is wholly incorrect. The British had by 1947 demobbed the Indian army from 2 million to around 460,000. The financing of that army came from India.

(2) Another explanation for the quick transfer of power in India was that the government wanted to bring the boys back home to blighty. The British maintained about 80,000 British troops serving along side native units, and 20,000 Civil servants in India...........the average number from 1860----1940, under the British Raj. A mere 100,000 men was not a great stretch on the manpower resources of post war torn Britain. Its not as if millions of job opportunities were waiting for such highly skilled men steeped in colonial environments, where they had spent most of their lives.

Indeed, the British maintained key officers in South Asia into 1951, 4 years after independence.

(3) The final general explanation, as to why the British left India in such a hurry is that, the Indian nationalists were clambering aggressively for independence, and after the war the British were not sure if they could really keep maintaining control over the Sub-continent any longer........"Lets get out whilst the going is good" theory. Again does not make sense since all the British had to do and did subsequently do is promise on a specific date of departure and keep to that date......e.g for example 1948, which would have given everybody the time to organize and be ready for that eventuality. So the point being since the British had been in South Asia for such a long time, 90 years for the British Raj, one extra year would not have hurt.

So what was the real reason for the British to depart India, in such a hurry after such an illustrious history of conquest and exploitation? It all depends on how you view their decision making; in terms of good faith or bad faith.

Lets view it from the perspective of the British and their agent Jinnah, if you will indulge and consider. The British run him as their agent; slowly propagate him from an obscure business family from Gujarat, recent converts to Islam who migrate to Sind and improve their Islamic credentials; the whole Jinnah siblings adopt more Islamic sounding names Mohammed Ali Jinnah etc for example viz their original Rajput/Gujarati Hindi names........and he eventually proceeds from business into the elite of the legal profession. The British know by 1945 he will not last long at the twilight of his years, into his seventies, and it is from that perspective if we can see, why the British were in a hurry to "leave" and create Pakistan in 1947, and why Mountbatten made assertions and put so much pressure for a quick settlement, as a 'neutral arbiter".

Independence in 1948, would have been too late for Jinnah, his health critical by that time, and death by September 1948. Jinnah needed to be around at least a year for Pakistan to be solidified.

The British grasped and knew this fact.

Then you observe Jinnah's tactics in creating Pakistan, which I credit to his British intelligence handlers........"Direct action day" 16th August 1946 which blackmailed Gandhi into accepting his terms for a separate state, OR ELSE. His unilateral attack against Kashmir, using irregulars........his claim of territory well inside India. Are these the policies of a secular moderate man who just wants to live in peace and harmony with India as a good neighbor, or an agent out to destabilize the region on the orders of his British masters?

And we wonder why Pakistan is failed state.

On similar and yet separate current note.........

There is a popular belief in the elite spectrum of Pakistani society that to gain power in Pakistan one must curry favor with the USA.............this is of course self defeating because once you come to power with America's blessing, they can just as easily remove you.........Musharaf comes to mind, and the USA puts something worse and even more malleable in your place, Zardari.

If we follow Omer Sheikh, the Pakistani recruited by British intelligence, his time in elite British schools and universities (LSE) we can get a glimpse of the recruitment process, and timeline.............one imagines there are thousands of others like him in Pakistani society within the armed forces, intelligence, landed elite (Tamindar/Zamindar) and business and political elite working for Blighty and the USA..............

And yet these privileged idiot/Ullu bacha's do not realise what great traitors they are to their country, and which countries are their real enemy which does long term harm to their country (certainly not India.........).


So the obvious question and the logical question; who are the foreign agents in South Asia now, who are working against the interests of South Asia.

Well you follow the unofficial grand strategy of the UK, USA........and you take educated guesses. You look at the leading personalities, what they say, their general demeanor, how they even dress (no kidding)............and most importantly their actions.........their decisions, and that gives you enough information to seize them up, if you are focused sufficiently in this area.

You don't need actual photo's of them meeting their foreign handlers in some obscure cafe, or hotel exchanging envelopes......its much more subtle these days.

There are two types of foreign agents.

The first types are the ones who we would traditionally term spy's or agent of influence who are directly working for foreign entities. They have been formally recruited and are on the register of a foreign intelligence agency, with a special code number and name. They are usually always paid money, into secret foreign bank accounts, and in certain cases depending on the person they can also be paid through sexual favors (they may be homosexual....or have other peculiar sexual preferences which require satisfaction, and the foreign agency can satisfy them away from their country). Finally and no less significant is the fact that such people are given help in being promoted within organizations, and thus furthering their career, and influence as an individual.

Basic stuff.

Then there is a larger group of agents, who are neither paid, given any overt favors, but are never the less agents because of their position, influence and their opinion/ideology. These people are not breaking the law unlike the above group as they are merely expressing their opinion, which the foreign hostile entity happens to share, favor, and wish to propagate.

.....someone like Ahmed Rashid the Pakistani journalist............their job is to mould public opinion both within South Asia, as an anointed "expert" and around the world, apearing on many Western presentations as the neutral "local" expert on the spot to be consulted. So as an "agent" his perspectives are propagated, because his opinions match those of the foreign entities working against Pakistan.

At a broader level much of Bollywood would be characterized into this category, along with certain TV channels and newspapers, in the whole of South Asia, defining the agenda, debate with their content and playing a crucial role in shaping peoples perceptions of significant issues.

But what of the first kind, the real Mir Jaffars?

In Pakistan it is easier to spot them, and with India ones work is a little bit more cut out.

In Pakistan, obviously given the History of that sad failed country Pervaiz Kiyani is a top candidate; the current head of the Pakistan military.

Suja Pasha head of the ISI.

Asif Zardari.

In India this is more challenging, so I'll keep quiet. Previous investigations of various bodies have discovered significant number of foreign agents within the top echelon of politics, surprise surprise......and in India I believe up to 30% of the elected members of the Lok Sahba face some kind of criminal charge. Politics sadly for far too many around the world, but especially in Third World countries attracts a lot of active duty criminals who are either attempting to run away from the law, or use their new found connections in politics to commit new crime.

For they are easy recruitment fodder for foreign hostile agencies, who then in turn harm the country.

This is the reason why, by way of some examples, why INDIA after 61 years of Independence:

(1) Still has not resolved the Kashmir problem comprehensively.

(2) Why the armed forces are so poorly managed. The armed forces are still essentially replicas of the evil British Raj.....with poor equipment, spending a mere 2% on defense, in the full scenario of where India is now security wise.

(3) Why the infrastructure is so poor.

(4) Why 230 million Indians, the greatest number in the world, is food insecure in the world.

(5) Why 840 million Indians live on just 20 rupees a day. Why so many billionaires? What type of economic progress do you call this where you have a few more billionaires, and a new middle class expanding on borrowed unsecured credit.

(6) Why isn't the population growth of the country not being seriously checked; India will soon have the largest population in the world, with chronic food production problems and a declining water tables in key states. Where 100,000 farmers die due to lack of adequate funding....just so shameful! The calories of the average Indian is about one sixth of first world countries.

(7) The governance is so poor. About 15% of the GDP is represented by the budget, whereas in most countries its around 30-----40%+. Why can't the globally renowned genius Indian accountants help the government introduce a transparent and effective tax system which reinforces the Central and local state budgets?

(8) India is still proudly celebrating the British empire as a member of the Commonwealth. 30 million Indians died under British rule, and they transferred $1 trillion of Indian assets into London mainly. And so that is why India is hosting the Commonwealth Games in 2010??!! India should have left the Commonwealth a long time ago. It is at best irrelevant, and at worst an affront to all the people who died under British Raj rule.

(9) So there isn't an effective tax system, but will still take foreign aid? If India wishes to be taken seriously on the international stage then the country should think about not taking any further foreign aid, cap in hand to Paris annually as a basket case.........hardly. 3/4 largest economy on earth, but its the mentality of the top policy makers.

(10) The Indian police. We essentially still have the same type of police that the British Raj left in India. It also happens to be one of the worst in the world. Congress, the radical Socialist peoples party have in the last 61 years, never undertaken any radical shake up and reform of the police. For many people, but especially in Bengal the first and worst experience of British Raj rule was the POLICE, the colonial tool that the Congress party more than ever met in their daily protests. One would think that given that experience the party would carry out a comprehensive reform of the Indian police system away from its colonial roots. Get more women into the police force; more graduates; fewer better police with more modern equipment and training; more minorities into the police policing within their area; better pay........and we watch Slum Dog, and say thank you saab for the Oscars, thank for showing India in a good light, thank for giving us your approval............A Britisher who does a Bollywood Film and gets an Oscar, thank you thank thank you....we have made us proud.......AND your portrayal of our police was so perfect, so thank sir sahib!.........assholes.

These are the failures of foreign backed agents, and criminals in the Indian policy, and government structure.

At Partition, the British agent Jinnah declares war on India illegally using irregular tribals from the Frontier ( so nothings changed then in 62 years, in terms of Pakistani tactics.), And claims two Hindu majority states to be joined to his Muslim majority states.....Jodhpur, Bhopal and Indore to accede to Pakistan, and Junagadh—a Hindu-majority state with a Muslim ruler. The British whose officers run the Indian and Pakistan army "fix" the two sides in Kashmir.....a conflict with no resolution over 61 years, and the source and legitimation of Pakistani covert attacks into India.

The "Patriotic" mother land loving smart Indian politicians don't seem to be in too much of a hurry to resolve the "problem" either.

The 1965 Indo-Pakistan war.

The 1971 war

1990 near war, over Kashmir.

The 1999, Kashmir war, initiated illegally by Pakistan.

The Americans initiate "Operation Cyclone" and "Operation Greenbelt" and then "Operation al-Qaeda" and "Operation Taliban" and then "Operation anti-Taliban and al-Qaeda", through the Pakistani military. The Americans with UK involvement train, arm, supply various fundamentalist groups----ONLY fundamentalists, so if you are a Afghan Royalist, secularist, constitutionalists.......you will be given NO support.......this is not a Republican policy or Democratic party policy but an American policy.

The Afghan Taliban and the Pakistan Taliban are run by the Pakistani military of course. The Pakistani military takes its orders, and significant section of its finance from America.....so what we have is a security charade....by America, through the Pakistani military.

The BJP party mysteriously appears out of no where, with just 2 seats in the late eighties, into a mass party in the nineties, using contrived communal baiting tactics which are guaranteed to kill thousands and inflame religious sensibilities. ...........kind of "Direct action day" redux copy of Jinnah the British agent.
The British company, Dunlop finances the Mahabarata, a Hindu epic, which gets a good deal of simple Hindus into a kind of religious trance. Bollywood soon follows through with its considerable propaganda machine in aiding the BJP....."Mission Kashmir", among 100's of really crass movies which further inflame the situation. Foreign backed, Anglophone media outlets such as IBN CNN, and NDTV, also follow through on stoking religious tensions, through subtle and not so subtle ways.

Worked up stupid illiterate chamar......worth 2 paisa.

AND MEANWHILE, The East India Company of London is back doing the usual trading running the narcotics.........opium, (remember Bengal, Warren Hastings 1769), in the name of fighting local "extremists".