26 SOCIAL SCIENTIST It has been a peculiar feature of Indian history that most of the ascendant groups in their initial assertiveness sought the cooperation and protection of the British. It has not been very different with Hindus and Muslims too except for one contextual difference which made the Muslim collaboration divisive and disruptive ; it came, unlike earlier Hindu cooperation, when the struggle for independence had already commenced. Sikh assertion through Singh Sabhas and Chief Khalsa Diwan falls into the same category. But the Akali agitation during the Guru-dwara Movement was different. The Akali activists drove out the collaborating feudal elements out of the Akali Dal and adopted unambiguous postures towards the freedom movement. Moreover, the divide and rule tactics involved efforts at weaning away whole communities but it succeeded with only sections of these communities and not the whole of them. More often only a small minority out of these communities became a tool for disruptive politics of the British. Such tactics undoubtedly aggravated political divisions but they were not the basis of differentiations. The success of divide and rule also varied enormously at different phases of our national struggle. 1920s, implied in the quote above, was not one ihe success of divide and rule tactics. In fact, radical mass mobilizations were also bringing people together. Later half of the 1930s witnessed the success of these policies as in some earlier periods. These types of judgements, of which Girilal Jain's piece is an example of undiffe-rentiated history, are instances of surreptitious communal understanding we must guard against if we wish to re-establish understanding and bonds among communities. Similar creeping communal postures can also be detected in an editorial which he, probably, wrote. The killing of of Hindus and subjecting them to terror is undoubtedly something horrible and must be unitedly fought by one and all. But this editorial gives to the issue a communal twist. Doing the "duty of Hindus" is made into a peculiar kind of "litmus test" for Akali's under Barnala^s leadership. It goes on : "If they prevaricate, they can have no title to stay in office ; they will have to be dismissed . . . "Editorial," Times of India, June 26-27.1986).