If Chandragupta lived up to the expectations of Chanakya, Nehru carried forward the ideals of Mahatma Gandhi in a substantive manner. B.R. Nanda has aptly described him as rebel and statesman (Jawaharlal Nehru: Rebel and Statesman by B.R. Nanda, Oxford University Press, New Delhi, 312 pages, Rs 425).
Nehru was a rebel as he fought against British colonialism and moulded his temper as an instrument for fighting against social injustices as Prime Minister of India. He went on to build and nurture institutions of democracy in India. He also manifested a vision for developing its economy, besides working for the spread of scientific temper and cultural values among the younger generation.
A valuable addition to modern Indian history, Nanda's book gives a description of Nehru's role and his contribution to the freedom struggle, his ideas on religion, economic planning, non-alignment and his relationship with Gandhi, Motilal Nehru, Subhash Chandra Bose, Maulana Azad and others.
It is true that India gained her freedom but lost her unity. In his chapter Jawaharlal Nehru and the Partition of India, Nanda provides a detailed narration of events, conversations among national leaders and dialogues within the Indian National Congress, the Muslim League and the British administrative and political system. He gives an account of the negotiations with the Cabinet Mission and how the Constituent Assembly could later debate upon the suggestions contained in the Cabinet Mission Plan.
Various explanations have been offered regarding India's Partition. Gandhiji refused to accept it and while his colleagues in India and Pakistan were celebrating Independence, he was touring the riot-torn areas of Bengal with his message of love, non-violence and brotherhood. There is no denying that Nehru, Sardar Patel and his other colleagues reluctantly accepted the Partition of India.
The Partition was a negation of India's age-old cultural and civilisational unity. Nanda's analysis helps us to understand the events leading to it and make one appreciate the factors uniting the people of India, Pakistan and Bangladesh.
These days, the converts to market economy have developed a tendency to belittle Nehru and his work. They hardly care to read Nehru carefully, but such uninformed statements give them publicity. These uninformed critics also fail to understand that it was Nehru's Basic Plan of 1945 and his building of infrastructure simultaneously that helped India to have institutions of economic governance. The interventionist role of the state is the only guarantor for both economic growth and social justice.
A well-known historian and biographer, Nanda gives us a timely re-assessment of Nehru, which will prove valuable to laymen and scholars alike.
