In fact, the failed attempts of reconciliation in the forms of Indian National Pact (1923) and the CRDas Pact (1923) had already forecasted the emergence of virulent communal organization. SumitSarkar remarks that a development of the ultimate significance during this period was the foundationof the Rashtriya Swayam Sevak Sangh at Nagpur in 1925 under K B Hedgewar. Thus, despite theirtheoretical secularism, No-changers and Swarajists alike failed to adequately counter Hinducommunalism or even often to clearly disassociate themselves from its organization and ideology.Responsively, many old Khilafatists surprisingly including the Ali brothers turned communal.However, Ayesha Jalal argues that only after the Nehru Report in 1928 that Mohammad Ali’scommunal colours began to be spotted. Shaukat Ali ruefully observed in 1929 that “Congress hadbecome an adjunct of Hindu Mahasabha”. According to Sumit Sarkar, link between elite and popular communalism is important understand thepolitics of the period. As Jaffrelot points out, Muslim mobilization under the banner of Khilafatgenerated a sense of inferiority and insecurity among the Hindus, who in emulation of theiraggressive ‘Other’ started counter-mobilization. The Arya Samaj started a militant Suddhicampaignin UP and Punjab, while Hindu Mahasabha launched Hindu Sangathanprogramme. Sumit Sarkarnotes that indeed, Tabligh and tanzim, including the murder of Swami Shraddhanandwere initiatedin response to Suddhi and Sangathanmovements. Gyan Pandey observes that the inevitable result ofsuch mobilization along community lines was the outbreak of a series of riots between the Hindus
and Muslims in the 1920s, affecting practically all parts of India. Similarly, Bipan Chandra remarksthat the communal riots of major North Indian cities in 1923-24 were most vicious expressions ofcommunalism. According to the Simon Commission Report, nearly 112 major communal riotsoccurred between 1922 and 1927. In 1928, the ineffectiveness of the Congress came to fore with the proposition of Nehru Report. SinceJinnah’s demand for weak political centre was unacceptable to the Congress, the Report could not beapproved unanimously at the Calcutta Convention. Instead, Jinnah’s Fourteen Points were to formthe basis of communal propaganda in the subsequent years. While encapsulating the undesirableimpact of the Nehru Report, Shekhar Bandyopadhyay writes that “‘Muslim alienation’ from Congresspolitics was then boldly inscribed in their large-scale abstention from the Civil Disobedience and theQuit India Movements.”While bringing out the dilemma of the late-1920s and early 1930s, Bipan Chandra states that so longas the socio-political conditions favouring communal politics persisted, it was difficult to appease orconciliate communal leaders either temporally or permanently. He further states that an intensepolitical-ideological struggle had to be waged against communalism and communal political forces.