History
is replete with stories of off-springs used in order to seize and wield power.
One such story has been narrated by Abdul Haleem Sharar in his excellent Urdu
book, “Guzishta Lucknow” (Lucknow of the past). In its chapter on “Jang-e-Azadi
aur Lucknow” (War of Independence and Lucknow), he writes: “The King, Wajid Ali
Shah himself was in Calcutta, his family was in London, and . . . the conflict
over the cartridges and government’s insistence suddenly caused a mutiny and
from Merrut to Bengal such revolt flared up that the homes of every friend and
foe were burnt and such a strife broke out that the foundations of British
government in India appeared to be shaking.
“The
way rebels of Merrut etc came to be converged in Delhi and made Zafar Shah
Emperor of India, likewise the rebels of Allahabad and Faizabad reached Lucknow
in May 1857. The moment they reached here many of the loiterers found a cause
and girded up their loins and when they failed to find any other member of the
royal family of Oudh, they enthroned Wajid Ali Shah’s 10 year old minor child
Mirza Birjees Qadr and her mother Nawab Mahal became the sovereign-custodian of
the Kingdom. A limited number of English army was posted here, and all the
European officials of the Kingdom who could save their lives from the hands of
the rebels fortified in Bailey Guard around which trenches were dug and
sufficient arrangements for a safe living made. It proved good and fortunate
that Wajid Ali Shah had already left Lucknow otherwise he would have been made
the King, willy-nilly. His death would have been far worse than that of Zafar
Shah and the ruined and the doomed of Oudh would not have found that ephemeral
flourish in the court of Matiya Burj that they happily enjoyed.”
The
only reason Mirza Birjees Qadr was enthroned was that he belonged to the royal
family and could be treated as the legitimate claimant of the throne; he could
win the assent of the subjects also. Another reason could be that in case of a
controversy he could be presented before the English as the legitimate heir to
the throne. At that time royalty’s right to kingship was considered valid; it
is in accord with this right that the English used to make provision for
stipend, pension, etc, to the members of royal families. He was made King for
the reason also that he belonged to the reigning family and that was why he had
to act as supreme commander of the army also. The same was the case with
Bahadur Shah Zafar.
What
made such enthronements of minors problematic is that those poor souls were
quite oblivious of the fact of their responsibility; their age naturally
required them to be living playfully and in carelessness; how come that they
would possess such wisdom which is necessary to understand and resolve the
intricate and complex issues and affairs of the Kingdom and the politics woven
around the seat of power; for the same reason when the rebels of Lucknow
burdened Birjees Qadr with the crown of the Kingdom his mother was made sovereign-custodian
and it was she who in fact saw to the affairs of the Kingdom. That means
Birjees Qadr who was made the King was merely a showpiece; the real power to
rule rested with his mother Nawab Mahal. Apparently it was a necessary
arrangement and involved no political trickery. However, if this arrangement
was not put in place, the throne may have been lost.
Sharar
relates that this was Birjees Qadr’s “rule” in Lucknow but Hazrat Mahal’s
“government.” However, the coinage was issued in the name of Birjees Qadr;
officials of the Kingdom appointed; and revenue started coming in from all over
the country. In the November of the same year just six or seven months after
the enthronement of Birjees Qadr the English army reached Lucknow to recover
it. The English army was composed of Sikhs of Punjab and mountaineer people of
Nepal, and it is said that it were they who committed more of the cruelties.
The impression that the new Kingdom produced disappeared in the face of
bombardment of two or three days as a cobweb perishes. Nawab Mahal herself and
Birjees Qadr had to flee towards Nepal along with other escapees. Since it was
a crowd of about hundred thousand people hence consultation decided to take
shelter in the valleys of Himalayas and attack the English army when
opportunity facilitates; in case of victory go back to the homeland and take up
the charge of the Kingdom, and in case of defeat continue living in the
mountains. That was difficult to happen, no doubt!
That’s
a political story of 19th century. We are living in the 2nd
decade of the 21st century. But the news about the rolling out of
Bilawal Bhutto Zardari recalled to my mind that more than 150 year old story
and made me think: Is Pakistan of today no more different from the Kingdom of
Oudh of 1857? Actually Bilawal’s coronation had already been accomplished when
his mother Benazir Bhutto was killed in 2007. Then his father Asif Ali Zardarin
himself occupied the co-chairmanship of the Peoples Party while Bilawal was
enthroned as its chairman. Aren’t Bilawal, Mirza Birjees Qadr and his father
Asif Ali Zardari, Nawab Mahal of today’s Pakistan? Doesn’t real power of the
PPPP and its politics rest with Asif Ali Zardari, who is like Nawab Mahal,
sovereign-custodian of the Party? As a king at the time of his coronation was
honored with various titles; in the same manner when Bilawal was made chairman
of the PPPP, he was given the title of Bhutto Zardari. That proves his
political hereditary lineage, or political-cum-royal lineage! But that raises
certain pertinent questions: Is PPPP a
party like the royal family of Wajid Ali Shah? Is Pakistan like the Kingdom of
Oudh? Are its leaders Aitzaz Ahsan, Raza Rabbani and others merely courtiers
paying homage to the new Crow Prince? Are the workers and voters of PPPP
nothing but subjects of its Political Kingdom wherein Bilawal has been made a
Political Crown Prince?
Note: This article was completed on July 30 and was originally posted in October 2014.
No comments:
Post a Comment