Author: Jagmohan
Publication: The Hindustan Times
Date: November 3, 2000
No one in modern India has achieved
so much in so many directions in such a short time as Sardar Patel.
He demonstrated in no uncertain terms that "things are revolutionised,
not by creating revolutions on the streets but by causing practical solution
of the existing problems".
His firm and fair approach to many
complex issues of the day also showed how correct Lord Wavell was when
he remarked: "India can be governed firmly or not at all."
Before departure from India, Lord
Mountbatten wrote to Sardar Patel on June 19, 1948: "There is no doubt
that by far the most important achievement of the present Government is
the unification of the states into the Dominion of India. Had you
failed in this, the results would have been disastrous. But since
you succeeded, no one can see the disastrous consequences that you avoided.
Nothing has added to the prestige of the present Government more than the
brilliant policy you have followed with the states."
Nehru was certainly a great leader
but in 'resolute practicality' he was nowhere near Sardar Patel.
Hudson, the author of Great Divide, quotes Lord Mountbatten as saying that
"I am glad Nehru has not been put in charge of the new states' department,
which would have wrecked everything". Gandhiji also shared this view.
He said: "The task of dealing with the princes was truly formidable, but
I am convinced that the Sardar was the. only person who could have
coped with it."
Our country has no dearth of theoreticians.
But it is woefully deficient in the art of execution. It does not
understand that the great questions of the day are settled not by speeches
and resolutions but by determined and diligent action. Ideas are
important. But it is constructive work alone that can "inject meaning
into the veins of history and civilisation".
Sardar Patel was certainly one of
the greatest constructive geniuses the country has known. He has
often been compared with Chancellor Bismarck who effected German unification
in the late 19th century. But Patel's achievements regarding the
integration of states were far more remarkable.
Bismarck wove only about a dozen
states into German fabric. Patel had to handle 561 states of a wide
variety. While the former resorted to the policy of "blood and iron",
the latter brought about a "bloodless revolution". Patel's amazing
capacity to size up men and moments and to strike when the iron was hot
without splattering blood around, caused about 800,000 square kilometres
of land to be added to the Indian Union, besides a population of 86 million.
Patel first formulated a great design
for a well-knit India and then proceeded to materialise it. He aroused
the patriotic sentiments of the princes and reminded them: "We are at a
momentous stage in the history of India. By a common endeavour, we
can raise the country to a new greatness, while lack of unity will expose
us to fresh calamities."
While Sardar Patel provided an honourable
alternative to all the princes, he made it clear to all concerned that
he would not allow India's hard-earned freedom to be jeopardised by the
numerous 'opt-out plans' of the princely states. He scotched Bhopal's
game of grouping the states and acquiring a separate dominion status.
He dealt firmly with Junagadh and called the bluff of the Nizam of Hyderabad
and his advisors like Sir Monckton and Laik Ali.
When die-hard conservative members
of the British Parliament like R.A. Butler and Churchill tried to
browbeat India by espousing the cause of the Nizam, he firmly told them
not to stand by the old world'. He made it clear: "It is only in
goodwill spirit, and not on the malice and venom of Mr Churchill's tongue,
that an enduring relationship of friendship can be built between India
and Britain and other members of the "Commonwealth". He, thus, successfully
prevented Hyderabad, whom he described as an "ulcer in the abdomen of India"
from becoming cancerous.
At the time of his death, the Manchester
Guardian wrote: "Without Patel, Gandhi's idea would have less practical
influence and Nehru's idealism less scope. He was not only the organiser
of the fight for freedom but also the architect of the new State when the
fight was over. The same man is seldom successful both as rebel and
statesman. Sardar Patel was an exception."
Patel gave an honoured place to
the Civil Services. He inspired them with a new zeal and acknowledged
their great contribution. Speaking in Parliament on October 10, 1949,
he said: "I wish this to he recorded in the House that during the last
two or three years, if most members of the services had not been serving
the country efficiently, practically the Union would have collapsed."
Patel has been accused of being
anti-Muslim, Unfortunately, in present-day India, this accusation has to
be faced by all those who are the re4 benefactors of the Muslims but who
have the courage and commitment of calling a spade 29 spade and making
a distinction between appeasement and fairness, between whetting the appetite
of a trouble-maker and telling him to behave.
Patel, it is often forgotten, was
the Chairman of the Minorities Sub-Committee of the Constituent Assembly.
The liberal provisions which our Constitution contains for the protection
of linguistic and cultural rights of the minorities speak volumes about
his catholicity.
Mahatma Gandhi's unflinching faith
in Sardar Patel's secularism comes out clearly in a letter of October 24,
1924, written to him by Mahadev Desai, during Gandhi's famous 21-day fast
for Hindu-Muslim unity. Mahadev said: "Whatever may happen on the
Hindu-Muslim front in Gujarat, as long as you are there, Bapu is at peace.
If a storm occurs despite your presence, Bapu will assume that it was not
possible to prevent it."
Though little known, Patel's work
in the field of civic administration was no less remarkable. In 1948,
the Bombay Corporation held a civic reception in honour of Patel.
On the occasion, he was asked what he considered to be the 'finest hour'
of his illustrious career. Nobody expected him to say what he said
- inviting attention to his work first as Chairman of the Sanitary Committee
(1917-22) and then as President of the Municipal Board (1924-28).
Patel reflected: "To cleanse the
dirt of the city is quite different from cleansing the dirt of political
From the former you get a good night's rest while the latter keeps you
worried and you lose your sleep."
Patel was an embodiment of probity
in public life. The only property he left comprised a few dhotis
and kurtas and a suitcase. But he bequeathed to the nation a many-splendoured
legacy. Can we, afford to neglect this legacy - particularly its
ethical foundation and its profound commitment to the country's integrity
and stability?
(The writer is Union Minister of
Urban Development and Poverty Alleviation)
