Discover why Quaid-e-Azam Muhammad Ali Jinnah refused to accept Lord Mountbatten as Pakistan’s Governor-General and the consequences this decision had for Pakistan. A deep dive into key historical events and losses during the 1947 partition.
Between 1858 and 1947, 20 Viceroys governed British India, but none became as famous as Lord Mountbatten. The reason for his fame is clear: during his tenure, the partition of India and Pakistan occurred, reshaping the subcontinent forever (Johnson, 1951).
Mountbatten, a member of the British royal family and a second cousin to King George VI, was tasked with overseeing the end of British rule in India. His legacy remains controversial, especially in Pakistan, where historians remember him with mixed feelings due to his evident bias toward India. This bias was particularly clear in his handling of princely states like Hyderabad, Junagadh, and Kashmir, all of which became sources of long-standing disputes (Hayat, 1997).
Mountbatten’s Desire to Become Governor-General of Both Nations
Mountbatten’s involvement in the partition wasn’t limited to his role as the final Viceroy. He aspired to serve as the Governor-General of both India and Pakistan during the crucial transitional period following independence. Alan Campbell Johnson, Mountbatten’s press attaché, described in his book The Viceroyalty of Lord Mountbatten how Mountbatten wanted to oversee the division of assets and mediate potential disputes between the two countries (Johnson, 1951). Mountbatten feared that leaving on August 15, 1947, without ensuring a smooth transition would leave the newly-formed nations in chaos.
His ambition to remain Governor-General was also supported by British Prime Minister Clement Attlee, and his plan was praised during the discussions in the British Parliament on the Indian Independence Act.
However, Mountbatten’s proposal was met with mixed reactions. While Indian leaders, including Jawaharlal Nehru, accepted Mountbatten’s suggestion, Quaid-e-Azam Muhammad Ali Jinnah firmly rejected it, a decision that would have profound consequences for Pakistan (Aziz, 1997).
Why Did Quaid-e-Azam Reject Mountbatten as Governor-General?
On July 2, 1947, a meeting was held in New Delhi, attended by the top leadership of both the Muslim League and Congress. During this meeting, Congress agreed to Mountbatten’s offer to serve as Governor-General of both India and Pakistan during the transitional period. Jinnah, too, appreciated the idea but raised concerns that his associates strongly opposed the proposal (Aziz, 1997).
According to the Transfer of Power documents, Mountbatten cautioned Jinnah, warning him of the possible repercussions of refusing his leadership, stating, “Do you realize how much you stand to lose by refusing?” (Aziz, 1997).
Jinnah’s response revealed his deep concerns about the potential economic fallout: “Perhaps we will lose millions in assets” (Aziz, 1997).
Mountbatten, with frustration, replied, “Perhaps this decision will cost you so much that it will impact Pakistan’s future” (Aziz, 1997).
The Consequences of Refusing Mountbatten as Governor-General
The impact of refusing Lord Mountbatten as Governor-General became evident soon after the partition. Indian leaders, particularly Nehru and Vallabhbhai Patel, used their close relationship with Mountbatten to secure the accession of over 560 princely states to India (Hodson, 1969). H.V. Hodson’s book The Great Divide describes how Patel told Mountbatten, “I am waiting for your basket full of apples,” referring to the princely states that were yet to decide their future.
Mountbatten worked tirelessly to secure the accession of these states to India. As a result, Pakistan lost the princely state of Kashmir, a region that remains a flashpoint between the two countries even today (Hayat, 1997).
Sardar Shaukat Hayat, a prominent leader of the Pakistan Movement, wrote in his autobiography The Nation That Lost Its Soul about the losses Pakistan suffered due to rejecting Mountbatten as Governor-General. He argued that Pakistan’s refusal allowed India to benefit from Mountbatten’s influence. Consequently, Pakistan faced significant setbacks in the division of military equipment and assets. Moreover, Mountbatten’s inaction during the violent communal riots that followed partition contributed to the deaths of millions of Muslims at the hands of armed Sikh groups (Hayat, 1997).
One of the most critical losses was that of the Gurdaspur district, which was initially supposed to be part of Pakistan, as outlined by Radcliffe’s original map. However, under Mountbatten’s influence, this Muslim-majority district was awarded to India, providing India a direct route to Kashmir. This decision played a pivotal role in the ongoing Kashmir conflict (Aziz, 1997).
A Decision That Changed Pakistan’s Future
If Mountbatten had been accepted as Governor-General of both nations, some historians argue that the partition might have been less costly for Pakistan. In his autobiography, Chaudhry Muhammad Ali, who later became Pakistan’s Prime Minister, reflected on this decision. He believed that Jinnah’s constitutional mindset made it difficult for him to accept Mountbatten’s dual role, fearing that conflicting advice from the two nations would undermine his ability to govern effectively (Ali, 1973).
Yet, the cost of this decision was immense. Pakistan lost valuable assets, territory, and the ability to influence decisions regarding the princely states. Mountbatten’s close ties with Nehru’s family also played a role in shaping post-partition India’s territorial advantages, while Pakistan struggled with the aftermath (Hayat, 1997).
Shaukat Hayat believed that Nawabzada Liaquat Ali Khan misled Jinnah in this decision, as he sought the Prime Ministership for himself. Pakistan’s refusal to accept Mountbatten as Governor-General allowed India to solidify its position, and the consequences of that choice continue to affect the region today (Hayat, 1997).
The decision to reject Lord Mountbatten as Governor-General remains one of the most significant turning points in Pakistan’s early history. Seventy-seven years after independence, the wounds inflicted by the partition and the unresolved disputes between India and Pakistan continue to bleed. Mountbatten, who was assassinated by the Irish Republican Army in 1979, may be gone, but the repercussions of his actions and the decisions made during his tenure still shape the destinies of millions in South Asia (Hodson, 1969).
History often exacts a heavy toll for decisions that seem minor at the time. Quaid-e-Azam Muhammad Ali Jinnah, in his final days, was battling illness and was distant from public affairs. Unfortunately, some of his closest associates exploited this, and Jinnah himself was forced to call them “counterfeit coins” (Hayat, 1997).
References
Ali, C. M. (1973). The Emergence of Pakistan. Columbia University Press.
Aziz, Q. (1997). Jinnah and the Battle for Pakistan. Sang-e-Meel Publications.
Hayat, S. S. (1997). The Nation That Lost Its Soul. Sang-e-Meel Publications.
Hodson, H. V. (1969). The Great Divide: Britain-India-Pakistan. Hutchinson.
Johnson, A. C. (1951). The Viceroyalty of Lord Mountbatten. Odhams Press.