The Nehru Report and Muslim Rights — Page 103
[ 103 ] States of America are running on the same lines. They began as separate entities with different cultures and religions. It was, therefore, thought wiser to leave them alone than to break them up in order to build a united Government. The Muslim demand is, therefore, quite reasonable, and arises for the necessity of keeping alive their distinctive culture and national traditions, and of saving their national spirit from extinction. The same necessity, which impels India to seek emancipation from British influence, also impels the Muslim to seek at least partial independence in those provinces where they pre ponderate. If this need is an artificial one in the case of the Muslims, !he same is true in the case of India. But I do not intend to enter here into a detailed discus sion of this question. I propose to do so in the chapter dealing with reservation of seats, where an almost similar line of argument has been taken. MUSLIM DEMAND INFRINGES NO-BODY'S RIGHT. Now the only question, that remains to be considered, is the justice of the demand. To me the claim appears to be just and proper both as a matter of right, and also from the political point of view. As a matter of right, because the demand involves no infringement of others' rights. In withholding representative Government from the N. W. F. Provinces there is, on the contrary, a denial of the rights of the people of that province. As regards Sindh, the Nehru-Report itself has admitted ( 1) that the province has a separate language, (2) that its connection with Bombay is artificial, (3) that the distance from Bom bay is too great, (4) that its separation will infringe no body's rights, and (5) that in the event of its not being granted a separate Government, a great injustice will be done to its people. As regards Baluchistan, it is already a