Several Muslim League leaders spoke on the resolution before it was approved on March 24.
The resolution, often described as the Pakistan or Lahore Resolution, proposed that "geographically contiguous units" should be delineated into regions with necessary territorial adjustments so that "the areas in which the Muslims are numerically in a majority, as in the North Western and Eastern zones of India, should be grouped to constitute independent States in which the constituent units shall be autonomous and sovereign."
In April 1941, the Muslim League in its annual session held at Madras incorporated the above resolution in its objectives.
The resolution was a shift from the Muslim League demand for constitutional safeguards and a federal system with provincial autonomy to the notion of a separate homeland for the Muslims of British India.
The mistreatment of the Muslim community by the Congress ministries at the provincial level (1937-39) led the Muslim League leadership to the conclusion that a federal system would not offer a secure future to them. They began to ponder over alternatives.
The Sindh Provincial Muslim League, in its conference at Karachi in October 1938, criticised the Congress refusal to share power with the Muslims in the provinces. It asked the All India Muslim League to prepare a constitutional scheme "under which [the] Muslims may attain full independence.
"In September-October 1939 the All India Muslim League expressed strong dissatisfaction with the working of the federal system in British India, arguing that federalism enabled a permanent majority to rule over a permanent minority. It maintained that no constitution would be acceptable to the Muslims unless it "completely scrapped the 1935 federal constitution and met the approval of the Muslim League."
In an article published in Time and Tide, a British weekly, in March 1940, Quaid-i-Azam Muhammad Ali Jinnah made a forceful case for the separate national identity and political rights of the Muslims in British India.
While addressing the Lahore session of the Muslim League in March 1940, the Quaid argued that the Muslims were a nation by any definition of nation and that "the problem in India [was] not of an inter-communal character but manifestly of an international one, and it must be treated as such."
Emphasising the differences between the Muslims and the Hindus, he argued that they were two different nations. These two nations could not be placed "under a single State," he maintained.
The roots of the Muslim demand for a separate national homeland can be traced back to the socio-cultural identity of the Muslims of British India.
Three major developments shaped their socio-cultural identity.
First, their separate identity was greatly influenced by the teaching and principles of Islam that reached the subcontinent through Arab traders, sufis and religious leaders and Muslim armies.
Second, Muslim rulers, their troops and a host of other migrants from Central Asia, Iran and Turkey brought with them their cuisines, customs, literature and languages.
Third, the migrants from other areas settled down in India and adopted many local Indian customs.
These Muslims developed their own individuality in the Indian context. Culturally, they were no longer like their co-religionists back home in Central Asia as the succeeding generations acquired local Indian habits and practices.
However, they were not absorbed in Hinduism and continued with their Muslim identity.
Their numerical strength increased because a large number of Hindus of India got converted to Islam because of its emphasis on egalitarianism and the establishment of Muslim rule.
These Indian Muslims interacted with other religious groups and influenced each other but the Muslims maintained a distinct Islamic socio-cultural character.
Distinctive socio-cultural identity does not necessarily create a separate nation or state.
There are many Muslim states where Islam does not constitute the basis of the nation-state, although Islam is an integral part of their cultures.
The national identity of many Muslim states like Indonesia, Iraq and Syria, to name a few, is independent of Islam. None of them invoked Islam to justify their nationhood or statehood.
The Islamic socio-cultural identity of the Muslims of the Indian subcontinent acquired political relevance due to its peculiar conditions.
The political experience during the British rule in India suggested that the fact of being a Muslim or otherwise was relevant to politics and society. Political competition and confrontation developed between the Muslims and the Hindus in the last quarter of the 19th Century as the British government introduced open competitive exams for recruitment to services and elective principle for representation.
The Muslims found themselves at a disadvantage because they lacked modern education and were a numerical minority. A lot of pressure was built on them when Hindu revivalist movements of the last decade of the 19th Century targeted the Muslims.
These developments caused insecurity among the Muslim elite who felt that the attitude of the majority community towards them ranged from indifference to hostility.
They decided to concentrate on their community and work for protecting their rights and interests.
Some attempts were made before and after the advent of the British to create an amalgamated Hindu-Muslim entity or down play their differences.
These efforts did not succeed. As competition sharpened between the Hindus and the Muslims in socio-cultural and political fields, they drifted apart and began to pursue divergent political agendas.
The primary objective of the Muslim elite was to protect Muslim identity and interests against what they perceived as the threat of being overwhelmed by an unsympathetic majority in the context of modern politics and economy introduced by the British.
They changed their strategies in the light of their political experience but never lost sight of the objective, ie protection of the rights and interests of the Muslims and a secure political future for them.
THEIR STRATEGIES INCLUDED:
1. Sir Syed Ahmad Khan and his colleagues advised the Muslims to concentrate on getting modern education and davoid involvement in active politics. They also advised the Muslims to stay away from the Congress party that was established in 1885.
2. The demand for separate electorate for the Muslims in 1906 to secure an effective Muslim representation in elected bodies. The Muslim elite established a separate political party (All India Muslim League) in December 1906 for projecting Muslim interests and demands.
3. Constitutional safeguards and guarantees for protection of Muslim identity and interests.
4. A federal system for India that ensured autonomy to provinces.
5. A separate state for the Muslims of British India for ensuring a secure future for the Muslims. This demand was pursued from 1940 onwards.
The above list shows that the Muslim elite tried different strategies for the protection and advancement of Muslim identity and interests, a goal that remained unchanged since the days of Sir Syed Ahmad Khan.
In March 1940, the Muslim League settled with the demand for a separate state for the Muslims of British India, describing them as a separate nation with a "distinct outlook on life and of life."
The notion of separate homeland as enunciated in the Lahore Resolution was fully articulated during 1940-47.
The Muslim League contested the 1946 elections on two major counts: it was the sole representative of the Muslims and it stood for the establishment of an independent and sovereign Pakistan.
The elected representatives of the Muslim League held a convention in Delhi soon after the elections to declare their unanimous support for the establishment of an independent and sovereign state of Pakistan.
The Muslim League was willing to accept the Cabinet Mission Plan, 1946, which envisaged a loose federation with three groupings of the provinces with a provision for opting out of the arrangements after ten years.
Two groupings included Muslim majority provinces of north western and eastern parts of India.
However, the Congress refused to accommodate the Muslim League and insisted on the unity of India as perceived by its leadership.
The Cabinet Mission Plan was set aside and the Muslim League decided to go ahead with its demand for a separate state.
The Lahore Resolution was an important milestone in Pakistan's history.
The Muslim League reached this point after passing through different phases (see above).
The development of the Muslim political disposition and the Pakistan movement did not come to an end with the passage of the Lahore Resolution.
In fact the last 7 years (1940-47) were very crucial in the realisation of the Muslim demand for a separate homeland. It was during this period that the Muslim League became a mass party with strong roots among the Muslim all over British India.
The views expressed in broad terms in 1940 were articulated and given a precise shape during the last three years, especially during and after the 1946 elections, when the Muslim League leadership talked precisely about the establishment of a separate and independent state of Pakistan.
(Dr Hasan-Askari Rizvi, the writer, is Political and Defence Consultant.)