How Moscow Lost Riyadh

When Sultan Ibn Sa'ud was fighting to expel the Sharif of Makkah from his position, it was proposed that a representative gathering of Muslims from all over the world take place. Thus a conference was planned for 1926 C.E. (26 Dhil-Qa'dah 1344) under the chairmanship of Sharif Sharf 'Adnan. It was to be attended by selected delegates of all Muslim countries. The members of the delegation sent by Jamiatul-Ulama-e-Hind were Hadrat Mufti Kifayatullah (head of delegation), Maulana 'Abdul-HakTm Siddiqi (private secretary), Maulana Muhammad 'Irfan (secretary), Allamah ShabbTr Ahmad 'Uthmani, Maulana Ahmad Sa'eed, and Maulana Nishar Ahmad. Mufti Kifayatullah demanded of Sultan Ibn Sa'ud that the conference also address the formation of the Hijaz government and this issue was subsequently added to the agenda.

In May 1926 the delegation of Jamiatul-Ulama-e-Hind left from Bombay on the ship 'Akbaf along with delegates from the Khilafat Committee, who included Maulana Sayyid Sulaiman Nadwi (head of delegation), Shoaib Qureshi, Maulana Shawkat 'AN, and Maulana Muhammad 'AN.

One of the delegates, Shucayb Qurashi, had been present in the Hijazas representative of the Indian Khilafat Committee when Ibn Sacud hadbeen proclaimed king. In his wounded reaction to this sudden devel-opment, confided to an Indian friend in an intercepted letter, Qurashi vented the resentment which later animated the Committee's delegation:"Ibne Saud got himself proclaimed King of Hedjaz yesterday. Ofcourse it was at the repeated request of Hejazis. There was a bayat, a promise to act according to the book and the Sunnah. There may also be created a Legislative Assembly for Hedjaz. But all this is bunkum.The whole show was got up. It was a prearranged plan. The Hejazis donot want him. I have ascertained their views first hand. Of coursewe can protest, but the real decision will have to be taken by theCommittee in India."

The Khilafat Committee eventually agreed to join the congress despite the failure of Ibn Sacud to respond to their concerns, but the delegation was determined to cause a stir and perhaps win the Khilafat Committee some say in the administration of the Hijaz.

The course of these seventy-eight hours of debates can be followed through sources long available, but a few new points suggest themselves. It has not been appreciated how the opposing parties first clashed overcontrol of the congress itself, before substantive issues were raised fordebate. At the outset, the officers were elected by a straight vote of those participants present in the hall; and right away the Indian Khilafat Committee delegation challenged this procedure. First they questioned the credentials of certain other delegations "Before any work, we must know which members have the right to vote." Then they favored aproportional form of representation, and demanded that each delegation enjoy voting power roughly commensurate with the size of the population it purported to represent. As the election of officers was necessary even before such issues could be decided, these objections were temporarily put aside

At the same time, certain delegates made a concerted effort to insert political items in the agenda. In private meetings held during the first stage of the congress, the 'Ali brothers and Rashid Rida had pressed Ibn Sacud to consent to a collective oath of congress delegates in the Kacba. There they would pledge to do everything possible to rid theArabian peninsula of all foreign influence

In a subtler manner, Muhammed cAli suggested in the proposals com-mittee that a resolution be passed calling upon Muslims not to spill Muslim blood. According to Nuwayhid, the real motive behind this seemingly right-spirited resolution was to influence West African Mus-lim soldiers in French service. These Muslim forces had played a prom-inent role in the suppression of Syrian unrest over the past several years

An Indian delegate, with the support of other participants from Indiaand Russia and the official Egyptian, Yemeni, and Afghan delegations, introduced a resolution that led to a heated exchange. He essentially proposed non interference by the Hijazi authorities in the pilgrimage rites.

The first days of the congress passed, and the organizers were in sweetdreams (ahlam ladhidha), and they imagined that everything was going intheir favor. But this did not last long. The congress especially took upissues of their pretended leadership, like the question of religious toler-ance, and the question of criticism of the government's administrationand organization. It became clear that the congress was moving towardthe creation of an international body which would oversee the governmentof the Hijaz and hold it to account. At the same time, they were not getting from the congress a single dirham, nor recognition of the legality of their rule in the Hijaz. To the contrary, they heard debate which held that they were not fit to rule the Hijaz. Not one of the Indians called Ibn Sacud anything but sultan [of Najd, i.e., not king of the Hijaz], to the point where one of their speakers—brother Shawkat 'Ali—said: I am not ready to bear good witness to the government of this country

Perhaps the most important disincentive to the reconvening of the congress was the behavior of the Indian Khilafat Committee delegation upon their return home. Muhammad cAli opened an unrestrained campaign of speeches and articles severely critical of Saudi policy and the conduct of the congress

When  Ibn  Saud  himself  brought  international  politics  into  the  Congress  with the exposition of his politique for the Hejaz, the Congress debated the issue at length and then displayed its wisdom, integrity and faithfulness to authentic Islam by denying the King the recognition he was seeking.  The Congress decided to simply `note' the statement of the King. And this was, perhaps, the single most important decision taken by a representative body of the Ummah over the last sixty years. It  was  a  bitter  blow  indeed  for  Ibn  Saud  and  the  result  was  that  the  Congress remained dormant for the next twenty years and was never again to meet in Makkah where, it was agreed, it would be meeting annually at the time of the Hajj.

The issue had struck at the heart of Wahhabis and although it had not been allowed  to  develop  into  a  crisis,  the  delegates  exercising  the  greatest  prudence  in  not  pressing  Ibn  Saud  too  hard,  all  the  same  the  Indian  delegates left with bitter feelings.  This, in part, explains why the Congress did not meet again in Makkah, as had been agreed upon.

In fact it was the Indian Muslim leader, Maulana Shaukat Ali, who played the leading role in organizing the third major Islamic conference, in 1931, after  the  two  conferences  in  1926.    And  he  had  no  hesitation  whatsoever  and bypassing Makkah and agreeing upon Jerusalem as its venue.