According to Jinnah,
Punjab was the
cornerstone of . The Unionist Party's rule and Khzir Hayat Tiwana played a key
role in the increase of Muslim League's influence in the Pakistan Punjab from 1942-47.
Jinnah had some clashes with the leaders of Punjab. Khzir Hayat
Tiwana had a different mandate with his own vision of a United Punjab within a
decentralized federal . In 1944, Khizr frequently clashed with Jinnah. India
Khizr Hayat's role in 1947 raises a number of questions for the Muslims of Continent. What cultural and political constraints lay behind his much-flaunted cry of '
Punjab for the Punjabis?' Why did he not display the traditional Tiwana
buccaneering and accommodate himself to the Muslim league advance?
Khizr was undoubtedly influenced by his times, his education and his social upbringing. He has opened up the possibility of political power and influence. Land ownership held the key to power in
Punjab and Tiwana held
the most land in its western regions. Punjab's communal
confirmation also decreed that only a Muslim could hold office as premier. That
is why it was Khizr, not Chhotu Ram who succeeded Sikander.
Khizr assumed that partition would split the stuff of Punjabi society and extinguish a whole way of life. He observed the Muslim League's demand as based on the hatred of the Non- Muslim. He maintained that there was nothing in the Quran that made the creation of
a sacred act. On the contrary, the demand of the partition was
profoundly Un-Islamic in the true sense of words of Khizer's personal distaste
for Jinnah arose from what he saw as the latter's hypocrisy in using religion
for his own political interests, when he possessed only a fundamental knowledge
of Islam himself and did not practice it in a sacramental wisdom. Pakistan
Khizer's supplement to political lodging was inverted in the agitated days of the end of empire. But this approach remains highly noteworthy for the present-day Indian subcontinent which has perceived a recurrence of communal hatred and violence.
In cross Communal
From October 1937 onwards, Sikander had exacted a high price for his upholding Jinnah at the center. This was nothing less than the complete subordination of the Muslim League within
Jinnah and Khizr Hayat Tiwana relations troubled had been disinfecting between the unionist party and the Muslim League ever since the
The suppositions appeared to stalk from an outwardly in offensive disagreement over the detail of the pact which Jinnah had signed with Khizr's successor, Sikander in 1937. The Muslim League grouped was established under its own terms, in Punjab assembly, should in future adopt the Muslim League tag with the result that the government should be named the Muslim League alliance ministry instead of Unionist ministry.
In 1943, the Governor of
The beliefs and up bring of Khizr were crucial at this point. He has a lack of political ambition; cross-communal family relationships all inclined him towards a 'foolhardy' course of opposing Jinnah. Jinnah ordered to his Secretary that every member of the Muslim League Party in Punjab assembly should declare that he owes his allegiance solely to the Muslim League in the Assembly and not to the Unionist party or any other party, whilst
The diplomacy, the tactics, leadership, and planning of M. A. Jinnah provided strength and motivation to
The Imperialist and Cambridge historians, Marxist and Nationalist historians of India and even the nationalist historians of Pakistan are of the opinion that Jinnah and Punjab Muslim League at first organized the strong support of the urban elite, rural landed aristocracy, Pirs, and Sajjada-Nashins who subsequently won over the Muslims of Punjab for the cause of the Muslim League and Pakistan. It has been suggested by these scholars that the demand of
The historians and researchers like Penderel Moon, Peter Hardy, David Page, Anita Inder Singh, Ayesha Jalal, Stanley Wolpert, Hector Bolitho, Ian B. Wells and Ajeet Jawed gave views that Jinnah as such a leader who followed cross political agenda. However, the Shamsul Hasan Collection exposes such an opinion about Jinnah, the Quaid-i-Azam, particularly in standings of his part in the politics of
Penderel Moon, Peter Hardy, Hector Bolitho, Stanley Wolpert, Ayesha Jalal and Asim Roy have all depicted that Jinnah as a shrewd bargainer of the high politics of the partition of
. These scholars have projected Jinnah as a leader with
aristocratic and taciturn personality who always moved and interacted within
the elite corridors and sometimes would avoid even trembling hands with the
people, especially with the common man. Jinnah has been anticipated by these
scholars such a masterful leader who would always marshal his powers while
tightening his hold on the sword arm of his primary nation India . He has been viewed as claiming sole spokesman of the All Pakistan Muslim League who was always worried to strife his customary
prattle of tongues. These historians have perceived Jinnah as an obstinate, self-interested,
and ambitious politician and far-sighted statesman who was always concerned
with his personal political achievements and victories and was less concern
with the real interests and ambitions of the Muslim masses. India