The Man Who Divided India: With a New Chapter on Musharraf's Leadership [Paperback]

Rafiq Zakaria (Author)

Book Description

Publication Date: December 31, 2004

The author traces the chequered career of Jinnah from his birth to death, probes every aspect of hispolitical life, and gives a lucid and penetrating insight into his relentlesspursuit of power which eventually resulted in the division of India and thebloody and disastrous aftermath that followed in its wake and which hascontinued to destabilise South Asia ever since.

Product Details

• Paperback: 306 pages
• Publisher: Popular Prakashan (December 31, 2004)
• Language: English
• ISBN-10: 8179911454
• ISBN-13: 978-8179911457
• Product Dimensions: 8.6 x 5.5 x 0.7 inches
• Shipping Weight: 14.4 ounces (View shipping rates and policies)
• Average Customer Review: 2.3 out of 5 stars  See all reviews (3 customer reviews)
• Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #2,678,229 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)

More About the Author

Discover books, learn about writers, read author blogs, and more.

Customer Reviews

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

1 of 2 people found the following review helpful:

1.0 out of 5 stars Zakaria should have listened to his wife, July 24, 2011

By 

Muhammad Irfan Hameed "irfan" (canada) - See all my reviews
(REAL NAME)   

This review is from: The Man Who Divided India: With a New Chapter on Musharraf's Leadership (Paperback)

Mr Zakaria said in introduction that his wife told him not to write book on Jinnah. She was right because the book with which he came is totally not based on facts but fiction. The fiction which is of the author's mind. He is just trying to prove that Jinnah was wrong and not the so called perfect Muslim. Does that mean Mr Zakaria is Perfect Muslim? Mr Zakaria has made this book only to show personal hatred against Jinnah and some of his negative sayings of jinnah you will find no where. His personal hate is obvious and he picked only the things interpreting to prove that Jinnah was wrong. The purspose of this book is to defame jinnah, pakistan. It was one of the most negative book i have read in my life. He didnt do much research on the topics, its just his personal biases and hatred and just trying to prove he is right. This is pathetic one sided book Mr Zakaria is dead now may god bless his soul but i m really disgusted by his interpretation as there are many Indian authors who have wrote good history books on Jinnah. The neutral books on Jinnah would be written by non-Indian foreign writers especially Stanley Wolpert.
It proves that Indian Muslims are intellectually still below the Hindu or Western Scholars.

2 of 4 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars Good work, January 29, 2009

By 

A. Nihal "Jinn" (Canada) - See all my reviews
(REAL NAME)   

This review is from: The Man Who Divided India: An Insight into Jinnah's Leadership and Its Aftermath (Hardcover)

A well researched and a fair analysis of the man who was not only used by the British for their ploy of Divide and Rule but also succeeded in convincing millions of Muslims to lead to his 'right' path. The author does a brilliant job in exposing his Muslim rheoteric used in speeches "If you are with congress, you are not a True Muslim" - this is coming from a guy who enjoyed his liquor and one would be surprised to find him praying.

This book is very important for anyone who wants to understand the so called 'complexity' of what led this man to become Qaid-e-Azam and what led millions of avg men to massacre and rape one another.

6 of 18 people found the following review helpful:

1.0 out of 5 stars Prejudiced, March 9, 2004

By A Customer

This review is from: The Man Who Divided India: An Insight into Jinnah's Leadership and Its Aftermath (Hardcover)

Sadly the book has no substance to offer. Not only has the author relied mainly on anecdotal evidence, but has failed to appreciate the complexities of the issues.

There is absolutely nothing new in this book.. we know Jinnah was westernized, not much of a muslim, and surprisingly he led the muslims to a separate state... but the explanation given by Mr. Zakaria is weak to say the least. He lets his own prejudice come in the way of what could have been an excellent academic work. The result is a mediocre book, more representative of Mr.Zakaria's own biases.