— George Santayana
A few years ago, before my maternal grandmother was overwhelmed by her long, slow slide into forgetfulness, I had the idea of taping our conversations. I would visit her nearly every weekend at her home in Islamabad. We would settle down with a hot cup of tea and then I would ask her questions, usually about her childhood and her life as a young adult in Amritsar.
It was in the course of one such conversation that, nudged perhaps by the memory of a number of my Indian friends at college, I asked my grandmother if she had any Hindu friends as a child. “Of course I did,” she said. “I used to go to school with them. They would come to our house and we would go to theirs.” Encouraged by such a positive response, I pressed on, “So, if Hindus and Muslims got along quite so well with each other, what was the point of Partition?”
It was then that she explained, “Well, they only really came into our courtyards, you see, and that is how far inside their houses we were allowed to go.” As she paused, I found myself wondering about the significance of the courtyard. Almost as if on cue, she continued, “Their parents did not allow them to eat or drink at our houses, you see. Not even a glass of water. Perhaps, they thought us unclean.” Determined to be fair, I asked, “And is that what you thought of them too?” “Perhaps we did,” she said, and lapsed into silence.
The story stayed with me long after our recording sessions came to an end. However, it was not because I believed that every Muslim living in pre-Partition India would have had a similar experience with Hindu friends. In fact, I was sure that for every story of Hindu prejudice towards Muslims, there would be one of Muslim prejudice towards Hindus. I was also convinced there would be an equal number of stories in which both rose above their different religious affiliations to come together purely on the basis of humanity. For me, the point of the story was somewhat different: that, despite the seeming similarities between them, a large number of Hindus and Muslims remained aliens for each other. It seemed to me that even though they had occupied the same political space for generations, Hindus and Muslims had essentially remained locked in separate and distinct cultural and personal spaces. It seemed that this deep-seated spatial division needed only a trigger for it to erupt into violence, which, if it had not been provided by the waning power of the British empire, would have come through another source.
You may argue, however, that nearly 70 years on, the situation has surely changed, so why bring this up now? I suggest two reasons for doing so: firstly, so that we may remember that Partition was not merely a political solution but that the majority of Hindus and Muslims willingly parted from each other because they believed that they were too inherently different to integrate; also, an important reason why the situation seems different today is because we actually have a separate country, and to bear these thoughts in mind when we interact with our friends across the border, so that we may strike a balance between engagement and assimilation.
Secondly, and more importantly, I bring up this story so that we may make all efforts at individual levels to identify as Pakistanis rather than as persons of a specific ethnicity or religion. For each time we isolate different ethnic or religious groups from others within Pakistan, so that they no longer interact with one another at a cultural or social level, we sow the seeds of alienation and separatism, which unless actively checked can lead to our disintegration into parts so small that ultimately, each individual may need his or her own country.
Published in The Express Tribune, August 14th, 2014.
Like Opinion & Editorial on Facebook, follow @ETOpEd on Twitter to receive all updates on all our daily pieces.
COMMENTS (79)
Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.
For more information, please see our Comments FAQ
Dear all friends
Let us accept that Pakistan is reality on ground.We should forget differences and live like good neighbours (This is must for Pakistanis, India and Afghanistan).We share the borders and can make very prosperous region in the world.Our country is still in turmoil and we are facing worst kind of circumstances created by religious leaders and politicians.I have been meeting many Indians in middle eats and noted that they are still having the sentiments that we were separated forcibly(I agree with them )but now the reality is that there is country Pakistan in the region and we want to live like good neighbours not as country and we do not want to correct the mistakes (as called by Indians ) Let us move on and work together
Partition is done and dusted. Modern Indian and Pakistani nation states have been here for more than six decades. And on this independence day all you could find was a simplistic story about how social interaction between some hindu and muslim families led to partition?
Partiition of India and creation of Pakistan was a decision made by our ancestors and this was a wise decision at that time and under those circumstance. Both the nations should accept that reality. Indian who dream and think that ever India will be again UNITED and ONE should forget that dream. Pakistan is a reality on this earth to live and servive. Our younger generation is fully capable of take care of Pakistan, protect its borders and intgrity of our beloved country. Long live Pakistan. Both counteries should built good relationship based on mutal respect and non interference in each other internal matters That is the key for survival and progress for our part of the world.
While the Indians are so grateful to Jinnah sb for Partition, we'll be really grateful if they stop posting comments on ET. Enough of your hate mongering! And for those who don't want to reverse Partition, I am sure you guys are quite angry with Mr. Dina Nath for his atrocious idea of Bharat. However, it turns out that your favourite ultra rightwing RSS loves the guy and I am sure your demigod Modi too must be his big fan.
@author,
"Partition was not merely a political solution but that the majority of Hindus and Muslims willingly parted from each other because they believed that they were too inherently different to integrate"
This statement is not correct. It was the Muslims who said "they were inherently different and didn't want to live with Hindus". The Hindus never said that. Please do not twist facts.
Dear Ms. Amber, You have raised very good point. It is more related to extra stress maintained in Hindu /Brahminical Society for cleanliness. You would wonder when I was young, I was not allowed to enter in my home-kitchen, unless my grand parents finish lunch. Otherwise they would refuse to have food that day. I used have similar feelings as yours those days. But, I didn't break my home, but tried to find reason :)
Both india and pakistan became nuclear nations with powerful military and military industry only because of enimity and competition. If pakistan control its religious ,terrorist mullas it can compete with india economically also....In India pakistan case, enmity only nourished both countries to improve their inherent potential.............It is my belief that if there were no division ,undivided india would have been worse than somalia.
@IndianBrother: Majority of Indians are staunch Vegetarian This is an incorrect statement and a false notion. Majority of Indians are meat-eaters. This has been established in a number of surveys. In fact by a wide margin. Over 70% of Indians are meat-eaters. So that means that even the majority of those who profess the Hindu faith are meat-eaters. Of course there is a largely vocal fundamentalist and self-righteous vegetarian lobby.
@Saad: How is it then India has 200 million muslims.? Can u also explain why the minorities numbers are reaching zero in Pakistan? I am shocked at 84 yrs you are spewing venom instead of wisdom!
@Aysha M: This article seems to be based on the premise of a grandmothers idea of Hindus not drinking water in her house and so partition tokk place.such a simple explantion and no need for Jinnah's or Gandhis to fight for independance.
Thats all history.....Pakistan and India are two separate countries...thats the reality.....lets move ahead n forget why they separated.
@H.Singh. Your write-up is really appreciated. Thank you for your accurate,truthful, concise presentation.
Dear Indian trollers. Get a life! even today Shahrukh khan can't get an apartment in New Dehli. Read the Sachar Report on the condition of Muslims in India. We Pakistanis may have many problems, are the least racist country in the world (India is the most!). Pakistan has had serious issues to settle in our 68 years, but India has been part of the problem, throughout. You Indian have a small heart and are selfish by nature, thats why muslims have ruled over you for centuries. Just image what would happen when Pakistan settles down (ultimately). P.S. Don't obsess about Pakistan and find a date for yourself
Until the the later half of the 20th Century and for hundreds of years before that blacks and whites in America had hardly any integration at all and lived as alien communities on the same land. But instead of parting ways and dividing up a country to survive they choose to integrate and build tolerance and understanding for each other. It took a long time and many gave up their lives in the struggle but the end result is far more admirable and successful then the plight of the minority communities that choose to stay within Pakistan/India and today suffer for their family's inaction 67 years ago.
We parted, because we are a intolerant nation, before 1947, and after 1947. History has proved this. In 1971 East Pakistan parted because we were intolerant towards them. Some 50,000 to 60,000 people have been killed because of war on terror, by intolerant extremists. Thousands of non-Muslims have been killed because of intolerance by the majority community. Thousands of Shia's have been killed because of the same reason, intolerance. Intolerance was the main and perhaps the only real reason for partition between India and Pakistan. People who are tolerant towards each other have a better life, better future, better mind-set, better understanding of other people, have empathy towards others, Pakistani's by and large do not, and they suffer and will keep on suffering. Because they are bigoted, indoctrinated, hypocrites, illiterate, and will so for a long time. So what ever your grand mother had to say, was her opinion, what my grand mother thought differently, and so do I, thru experiencing intolerance first hand.
@H. Singh Jains and Some Brahmin dont eat anything grown inside soil, not because that it is unclean, but because of non violence factor. To get Oninon, Garlic etc one have to uproot the plant so plant dies as a whole and also many small living beings are also get killed. This is considered violence in Dharmic religions.
division of India was a mistake,division of Pakistan was blunder and further division of Pakistan will be disastrous...
India gave "gifts" of the dead bodies of unarmed Pakistani civilians who had inadvertently crossed unmarked border prior to 14th August also as their gratitude for shamelessly returning an armed Indian soldier intruding in Pakistani territory. Yet our shameless government and pseudo intellectuals keep crying friendship with our enemies..
Why we parted ? Pakistanis should ask Mr Jinnah, Hindustanis must thank mr. Jinnah.
I thank Mr Jinnah for partition. Had there been no partition, by now, we would have been Islamic Republic of India.
There are more muslims in India today ( about 175 million ) than there were muslims in India ( 35 million ) + W Pakistan ( 35 million ) + East Pakistan ( 40 million ) in 1947 !!!!
So its muslims of Pakistan who parted ways with Hindus and Sikhs , while muslims continued to live in India with Hindus, who did not expel them or make laws that forced them to eithe leave or convert. The difference is of Himalayan proportions. Please appreciate the diffference.
The premise is right, the substance is ok but then the conclusion goes haywire! 1. How would you explain Bangladesh? 2. How would you explain Muslim population in India at 18 % level? 3. Does less than few thousand Hindu families in current Pakistan explain you anything?
My suggestion, quit rationalizing a mistake and move on. Live and let live.
It was the distance which lead and Iniaian intervention too. Yet Bangalore is as elevate country.
@Humza: clearly your history of the sub continent goes back only until British time or Mughal time. You think before mughal invasion on this sub continent this was unihibitated piece of land with no civilisation ? Hinduism and Hindus walked from Afghan to Far east before Mughals Invaded and then followed by British empires. They invaded cause they wanted to loot and plunder the wealth of Hindus. And they did. And its just always troubling to hear from people like you who claims that you dont buy British India ???? For clarification nor do we Indians buy that. Cause our India was far more bigger than what Britishers made out of it. If my government had as much courage as China then it would have started reclaiming its land one after other like China is still doing in South east Chinese Ocean.
I hope Ms. Amber Darr will respond and reply to several well written readers' comments that are based on sub continent's history and culture. These comments mercilessly destroyed her viewpoints that I believed are also based on biased history lessons she may have learned in school.
Does it really matter why we parted? What matters is that - We parted!
And that's final !! No one on the Indian side desires to 'join' back the split lands, so hope that puts paid to your feelings of mistrust of Indian 'hegemony'. Now if you on your side could do the same, and leave us be, it would be greatly appreciated.
We are neighbours and share a land border - a fact we cannot change. We would like to drive forward looking through the front windscreen; rather than looking at the rearview mirror!
We need not be friends, but we can tolerate each other - live, and let live!!
I think instead of rationalizing a mistake it is time to move on.
India and Pakistan are two countries now and I think we should make best out of present situation.
@Vikram: A most thoughtfully written comment. My compliments for keeping it lucid, truthful and free of rancour and hyperbole
@Strategic Asset: Major flaw anyway. we are talking about misinformation about Religion here !!!
@H. Singh:Also let's not forget the Referendum held in NWFP.where in the Winners won by .02% in favour of joining PK.with the Congress boycotting.But let's also remember that Jinnah Sahib was convinced of the hindu hegemony only after 1937-39 Congress lead govt.Uptil then he was happy with provincial autonomy-Jinnah's 14 Pts.and his agreeing to the Cabinet Mission Plan makes the whole situation quite clear.@ MurthySo the solution to most pronlems lie in devolution of power-this can be one lesson that the present day Pakistan may glean.
@Murthy: History is never static therefore not stagnant.The very purpose of understanding Today cannot be achieved unless yesterday is understood well,so tomorrow can be harnessed
@kdp: You are nitpicking what may be the only flaw in an otherwise brilliant post.
@Amber Darr: Partition was not merely a political solution but that the majority of Hindus and Muslims willingly parted from each other because they believed that they were
No person can willingly leave his home/property willingly. People are being forced to leave their homes by new Islamic Caliphate. Islamic Caliphate is making choosing non-Muslims between Islam and death.
Not really it was a political thing? Some people wanted to rule and it was not possible for them to do that in united India. Why did majority of Muslims decide to stay in India. Most Muslims in India can get along better with non-Muslims than different sects of Muslims can get along in Pakistan, land of pure. Muslims have very little in common with Jews and Christians, but still a whole lot of Muslims move to countries ruled by Jews and Christians and live among them for better secure life.
Some people in Pakistan had decided in advance to slaughter Hindus and Sikhs in Pakistan. Just go and see youtube videos of Pakistanis who have talked to Pakistanis who were alive at the time of partition. Watch Hassan Nissar videos on you tube. You may find the video where he talks about Sikhs near his village were told to choose Islam or die. Most Sikhs refused and were killed. Watch more Pakistani videos made on the subject
Thank you for this wonderful article. I am 84 years old and remember vividly how much the Hindus disliked the Muslims and how they had vowed to teach them a 'thousand year lesson' for the 1000 year subjugation of Hindus by Muslims in South Asia. Our independence was not from the British but from Hindu majority rule.
@H. Singh: Jains are not Hindus It is a separate religion At the same time its followers do marry Hindus and mix with them socially
Most of the readers commenting on this article seem to be more analytic and thoughtfulthan the author!!!
Interesting observation. Other than veg. and non-vegetarian divide, Muslims as rulers, prior to the British rule, also preferred to stay in enclosed areas or Mohallas very much like ex-pat colonies in present times. Americans stayed in the same areas as the British did in 1839 in Kabul, Afghanistan, ex-pat colonies in Shangai and Beijing. How much do Pakistanis and Indian interact with the locals in England. So social interaction was limited. Secondly, when undivided India was considered as home by many Muslims, why partition! Even Bahadur Shah Zafar want to be buried in Rangoon, Burma, nor did he want to go back to his ancestral Central Asia. And, if the sole reason for partition is lack of social interaction then Pakistan has created enough fissures within (Ahmadis, Balochis, Pathans, Shias and so on)!!!!
Why this fruitless and aimless analysis 67 years after independence? Is the opposition trying to bring down the govt or replace the present PM in Pakistan? If they suspect rigging in elections there should be courts and other independent bodies to go to to resolve such issues. It is unfortunate that when there is a semblance of democracy taking route in Pakistan, the opposition is trying to weaken it. The constitution is something the military has been toying with all these years and all that the writer is analysing is the useless theories of why there was partition! When are you going to look ahead and march on instead harping on the past and partition?
@uzma: ur brilliant analysis has given me a new sight to the debacle of partition
Pakistan was NOT created on the basis of ‘Religion’ but on ‘Psychology’. Muslim elites of the day just couldn’t forget their past glory when ‘they’ were the rulers. They also considered themselves belonging to a ‘Martial Race’ having a ‘Martial Credo’ and just couldn’t reconcile to a prospect, under a new dispensation, of being subjected to ‘Rule’ by a majority whom they considered to be effeminate and inferior. Religion was only an excuse for their yearning for separation. Quaid-e- Azm, MA Jinnah, is on record having asked the then Viceroy, Lord Linlithgow , that since the British had taken (over) the country from the Mughals , they should hand it back to the Muslims. (He conveniently forgot that by the same logic the Sikhs would claim most of the (projected) West Pakistan ruled by them before the British take over). Also, it is very interesting that the people of present Pakistan were not very keen for it, till much later. The champions of Pakistan, the Muslim League, had hardly any presence in the present day Pakistan till about 1945-46. Punjab was ruled by the Unionist Party (having an excellent equation with the Hindus and Sikhs), NWFP (now K-P) by the Congress, under Khan Abdul Ghafar Khan (Badshah Khan) and was opposed to the partition , Sindh and Balochistan were indifferent to the idea of Pakistan. Pakistan was de-facto ideologically ‘manufactured’ by the feudal elites , mostly from the present day U.P. (in India) and Bombay (now Mumbai). Surprisingly, most of these ‘elites’ stayed back in India and some even flourished there . Even the Quaid-e- Azm was not very keen for partition and was amenable to the country remaining united so long the Muslims’ interests were well safeguarded and the centre only looked after subjects like the defence, foreign policy, currency and communications. He had accepted Cripps Plan which unfortunately immediately got sabotaged. It was not the ‘Masses’ but the ‘Elites’ who wanted Pakistan. The ‘Masses’ got involved much later, just before the great ‘ Direct Action’ wherein about 6000 persons were killed in Calcutta (now Kolkatta). It is a travesty of fate that what Mr Jinnah wanted, is generally being practised in India. Many states and union territories have been created to accommodate the peoples’ aspirations. Even an anglicized name ‘Naga Land’ (giving illusion of an ‘independent country’) is given to a state to meet the aspiration of the Naga people. Initially, even the Indian Constitution had provision for a state to secede. Due to the ‘churning and melting’ process, accompanied by relatively better economic progress as compared to the neighbours, no state would like to secede now , whatever be the circumstances. Given a chance, despite the rhetorics, even J&K would not secede, knowing what fate would await them outside India. Despite their religion, vast numbers of the Bangladeshis are flooding (migrating / infiltrating to) India . It would not be surprising if the border between India and Pakistan is opened and de-fenced, there may be more flow of people from the West to East than other way round. Partition mainly may have taken place due to clash of personal egos and the British exploiting the same to meet their imperial needs of having a buffer between a communist Soviet Union and an India, likely to be led by Nehru who was more of a ‘socialist’ and whose sympathies with the Soviet Union were well known. It also gave the Westerners a potential friend , inimical to India, who would align with them against the ‘Godless’ communists , fitting in their larger design and world view . Predictably , to have ‘parity with India’, Pakistan quickly became member of the Baghdad Pact , Seato and Cento. Rest as they say is history. As regards the Hindus not eating at the homes of others , as brought out earlier by some one, they don’t even eat at the homes of very good Hindus who are non vegetarians. Some Jains (who are also Hindus) don’t eat at the homes of those Hindus who eat onions and garlic for they treat anything grown below the surface as ‘unclean’, besides the odour of these vegetables being offensive to them. But all this is changing if not already changed.
@amoghavarsha.ii: Well, even now around 30-40% of Hindus in India are vegeterians. So I am sure 70 years back it must have been an even higher number.. And strict vegeterians even now avoid eating in plates which has been used to serve meat earlier. So that explains to certain extent why Hindus back then were reluctant eating in Muslis households. I am a non-vegeterian, but even I do have a seperate stock of utensils to cook and serve to my strictly vegeterian friends.
India and Pakistan: remembering why we parted...!!
I am 27 year old now - and till now have not read any such kind of above article in India during our Independence day or any other occasion in Indian news paper be it regional or national news papers - people are not living in the past or they don't want to convince any one that why we are parted, that shows people in India have their priority and focus some where else and they don't want to remind the people of old stories...!! as far as I know I am living in a predominant Hindu locality and few Muslim families are living among us with out any issues and they are no way discriminated by society or government for being minority - in fact my neighbor runs a school aided by Indian government on minority quota and also have seen my neighbors going to Haj pilgrims on Indian government aid...!!
On 68th Independence day we need to ask ourselves what our future holds. There is no point in looking for answers within India or Pakistan because they would be biased. Best way is to look for hidden answers elsewhere like in the West. This link gives a very good insight into how Muslims and Hindus have progressed: http://www.theguardian.com/uk/2002/feb/20/race.immigrationpolicy Note some of the conclusions: · Hindus are four times less likely to be unemployed than Pakistani and Bangladeshi Muslims · One in 20 Indian men is a doctor compared with one in 200 white men . Pakistani Muslims are three times more likely to be jobless than Hindus are. Indian Muslims are twice as likely to be unemployed than Indian Hindus are.
The findings prove that Pakistani muslims have fallen behind Indian Muslims and are way behind Hindus. Should we all thank MAJ for that? Is this the beginning of the end of Pakistan? I honestly believe that it will we will not see the centinary of Pakistan.
@Kolsat: "Haven’t the Islamists issued threats that either convert to Islam or die? "
If they have done so then they have abrogated Allah's Fundamental Command: Freedom of Religion [Sura2 and 109] in the Noble Qur'an...thus they are among the hypocrites and unbelievers and the Kafreen. Not Muslims, by definition.
@Islooboy: "economic injustice to Muslim was the biggest reason" You must be kidding. Muslim Nawabs spread all over India and running Mughal empire were poor Muslims you mean ? Ever heard of a Hindu Nawab? Muslims had large tracts of best cultivable land in India. Only during British period because of their hard work and education, Hindus started getting jobs and economically better off. Even during British period Muslims were big landlords. Accept the facts. Muslims were indulging in "ayyasi" and were kept away from modern education. Muslims continued living beyond their means and lost in the process everything slowly.
Jinnah argued that the glass was half empty. Gandhi argued that it was half full.
Also, remember that only the rich people could afford to leave proactively and voluntarily. The poor bore the brunt of violence and eviction.
If Pakistan had adapted a secular constitution just like India did, there would be hope for the countries to live like European neighbors. But unfortunately, Pakistan has taken a road which drifts further apart from India with time.
@Aysha M: for the Muslims of India that were in minority for they lost their home and hearth. Muslims of majority provinces for they were catapulted into high administrative positions without the required training hence the current situation of Pakistan,and the ' pious priest' who got an arena for religious wrangling. @ Bahrat:Thanks of course Mr.Jinnah,but special gratitude to J L Nehru and Sarda Wal Bhai Patel who pushed Jinnah so hard against the wall that his bones were crushed into changing his stance from ambassador of hindu-muslim unity to a call for a separate country! History provides evidence that Jinnah Sahib had accepted the Cabinet Mission Plan 1946! It was Nehru Sahib who back tracked ,perhaps the same logic worked behind the stance as Israel todaywhen they are going after the Palestenians-the game of numbers! The total Muslim population of the sub-continent explains it beyond doubt that within that from 1947 to 2014 the ratio of Hindu -Muslim population has changed from 4:1 to 2:1. @Virkul:There is evidence in the delivering of Gilgit by a British major to Pakistan government after the Independence that the British strategy of trying to hold USSR at bay and not let them reach the warm waters of the Arabian Sea could be at work because a united India would be strong enough to lay down its own policies.In 1979 it was far easier to deal with a small country like Pakistan and arm twist it into running the 'Jihad' @ Naren:India also did not benefit from the Partition totally ,for a country which is a sub-continent has not been able to acquire a permanent seat in the UN security council,because of the unfinished agenda of Partition -Kashmir!
Dear Author - Whatever could be the reasons that there could be a milion of them , please try to treat them as history , learn from them and move on. Live to solve todays issues and not yesterdays reasons. In India , we do not waste time and energy writing about topics that do not add value for tomorrow ! Partition happened and both of our nations are a reality. Please use the media to write about the issues facing the nation today and what could be done to solve issues of tomorrow. Write about education, poverty, social balance, economy etc.
Good luck !
wish you a happy independence day to you we should remember that we got independence from Britishers and not from each other
What crap. You write - "Partition was not merely a political solution but that the majority of Hindus and Muslims willingly parted from each other because they believed that they were too inherently different to integrate."
That's misleading. Majority of Muslims who lived in what became India did not leave India. Hindus did not want a separate country, it was Muslims, primarily in the north and east who wanted it.
Is it any wonder that our country founded on the idea that we cannot imagine being a minority in India is having such a hard time keeping its minorities alive and safe?
@IndianBrother, majority of Indians are NOT vegetarians.
While it is true that partition was a painful and sad event for all of us. Creation of Pakistan opened a whole new avenues of progress for the Muslims. While we still have a long way to go let's not forget the Quaid's saying that Pakistan is a bounty from Allah for the Muslims. Long Live Pakistan!
Thanks Mr Jinnah !
I bring up this story so that we may make all efforts at individual levels to identify as Pakistanis rather than as persons of a specific ethnicity or religion.
It would be easier to forget all of this, if only
A. One could become President/PM irrespective of Religion.
B. One could have a 'Domed' place of worship without getting punished for it.
C. Cleaning and Janitorial jobs were not advertised as reserved for a community.
The State may try and make it easier, that is, if the State so wishes.
@Sun Tzu:
"majority in India now live in Urban India"
Are you serious???
I think its more like 70% of Indians live in Rural areas while 30% live in Urban areas... At least according to the 2011 census.
(http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/about-70-per-cent-indians-live-in-rural-areas-census-report/article2230211.ece)
@Aysha M:
It's a blessing in disguise.......
Alas, this piece is from the heart not from the head!
@Author, Madam, Partition is now history and we take it as history only. Rarely partition is talked in the Indian Media. As more constructive works are waiting for us. We have moved on. Please get out of this sectarian problem or you are going to face many more partition. Wish you good luck and Happy Independence day.
Author Amber Darr...Hmmm...Darr what a nice Hindu name. Do you really mean that modern Pakistani Muslims all of whose preislamic ancestors were Hindus or some dharmic variant thereof (Buddhist, Jain, etc) where so alienated from each other? Not really. Partition was caused by a few self serving politicians (call them J and N) and a gullible public who fell for the scaremongering.
Pakistan is not a country +++++++++++++++++++++++++ Its merely an agglomeration of 4 provinces. Proof? Kalabagh Dam.
Apart from the reasons stated by readers, I consider partition as a plan of the Anglo-American enterprise. This assumed greater importance especially when WW II drained the British economy to almost bankruptcy. Anglo-Americans saw the Soviets as a future threat in the region and therefore wanted to have a foothold in India in the form of air bases. Nehru refused this proposal but Jinnah readily accepted and that accelerated the 'divide & rule' policy.
When formed, Muslim Leagues charter was to be 'loyal' to the Queen/King. "It also would work for the betterment of Muslims" was another area defined in it's charter. Remember, no Muslim League or RSS member ever went to jail in freedom struggle. Muslim League was a party of Nawabs and Jagirdars who funded it, which it still remains.
Jinnah, who boasted of adhering to legal course of action, called for 'Direct Action' that incited violence of unprecedented scale. What followed is known to everybody. Even he was rattled the way a million human lives were lost and centuries largest migration took place. Jinnah's opportunism was visible when he gave interview to Life Magazine's correspondent Margaret Bourke-White in September, 1947 in which he said,""America needs Pakistan more than Pakistan needs America," was Jinnah's reply. "Pakistan is the pivot of the world, as we are placed" -- he revolved his long forefinger in bony circles -- "the frontier on which the future position of the world revolves." He leaned toward me, dropping his voice to a confidential note. "Russia," confided Mr. Jinnah, "is not so very far away." So, there were more compelling reasons than what the author has listed.
Countries have an Army but in case of Pakistan the Army.... +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Thats the reason Pakistan was separated from India.
Tomorrow if the author were to tape her mother's recount of her memories tomorrow, her mother would speak of how 'different' the Bengalis were from the west Pakistanis and how the Bengalis used to complain of being treated as inferior people. Further in the future when the author's daughter records the author's memories it would be how the Ahmedias were different from muslims and were not allowed into their mosques and were designated as non muslims by a new law of the land and later how Shias were different from Sunnis and were systematically persecuted. If a nation is based on differences among its people there will be no nation left at this rate. Successful nations are built on finding the commoness among its people, factors that unite them and thriving on the rich diversity the nation's mosaic offers. The prejudices the author narrates in her piece can be picked on in every country around the world the mistake would be to let them drive our actions and decide our futures. Time is a great leveler and those prejudices are on the wane at a rapid pace here in India with the winds of socio-economic changes. Even now things are not perfect but let us choose to be optimistic and look towards the future thats unravelling
Everything should be made as simple as possible ... but not simpler - Albert Einstein.
Simplicity should not be taken too far. India with a 15 per cent literacy rate had a huge number of prejudices; there were many Hindus who would not be allowed in each other's courtyard either - should they have all got different countries?We parted ways because the Muslim elite felt that they would be kept outside the new dispensation after the British left the scene, since almost all of the mass leaders and freedom fighters were Hindus. These people successfully carved out a fiefdom for themselves (after getting an eminent lawyer to represent their case to their target audience) and have hung on to it while former tea-sellers get elected in India. Happy Independence Day.
@Aysha M: Sorry, No! It was the best thing for India ! As Painful as amputating a gangrenous limb, but in the end saved the 'life' of India. Thank you Mr.Jinnah!
A most unsatisfying answer to an extremely important question. Why was British India partitioned ? At the heart of it, it comes down to how the British Empire defined demographic groups in India, and the arrival of mass politics and democratic governance in the 1900s. The politicians in India were unable to check the growing communalism unleashed by these factors. Even the sincere attempts they made to try and stop this communalism often ended up in widening the divide. All this culminated in the massacres in Punjab and Bengal which will remain an enduringly shameful and grotesque episode of the otherwise rich history of subcontinental India.
One must not forget that Gandhi, Jinnah, Nehru and many others, all made valiant efforts to end this communalism after partition emerged as the only acceptable solution. Gandhi was shot for opposing Hindu communalism, Jinnah literally worked himself to death trying to establish law and order in newly independent Pakistan and gave a brave address to Pakistan's first Assembly and Nehru, together with others in India's Constituent Assembly laid a secular, democratic foundation for the largest country in post-colonial South Asia.
Really speaking, partition was a combination of bad luck and bad politics, it wasnt inevitable. This does not mean that Pakistanis should not be proud of their independence and their nationality, but unlike Indians it is more difficult for them to find that national pride in their independence movement. All the more reason for them to look at the past and the future, and realize their potential as a great nation connecting India, Central Asia and the Middle East.
@Aysha M: Your simplistic article ignores the reality that a good chunk of Pakistan's people never identified with British India anyways. Pashtuns, Baluchis, Northern Area people and even Sindis do not even see themselves as part of the subcontinent. My family never bought into the idea of British India and said it was all just a British made up entity. It's not like the area would become Mughal Empire again after British left. Anyhow, Pakistanis don't question partition of a British colony but many Indians always talk about it with nostalgia for British Empire which gave them freedom.
Partition a monumental mistake
Very simplistic analysis. Drinking or not drinking water in each other's house and similar other issues were not the reasons enough for partition. How does it matter till we are respectful in our dealings otherwise. Creation of Pakistan was purely a power sharing problem for Muslim leaders and getting rid of violent Muslims for the Hindu leaders. Early speeches of Sardar Patel prove that he was very keen that partition takes place. His reason was mainly the violent and non-cooperative nature of Muslim politics. Now most Indians feel that Patel was right. Let us accept it, democracy and power sharing is not in Muslim blood. Muslims had no problem till they were the ruling class in India. How come suddenly they realized that they can not live Hindus in a democratic India?
Don't Muslims think that every other religion is less than ideal and that is why they want to make every one Muslim? Haven't the Islamists issued threats that either convert to Islam or die? This aggressive attitude stops mixing even today. So don't give us the story of how Hindus discriminated against Muslims in erstwhile India because that is hypocrisy.
"they were too inherently different to integrate" ... if that was the reason for Muslims to have a separate country, then how come 200 million Muslims do not have any problems living in India today ... and they do not even consider moving to Pakistan ... ?? ... and secondly, why did Pakistan and Bangladesh failed to stay together, although the rationale for breaking away from India was the same for both ... ??
This feeling of un-clean has pretty much vanished in India --especially urban India. Religion and Caste barriers are falling faster than the Berlin Wall in Urban India. Not so much in rural though....But note that majority in India now live in Urban India. Restaurants are crowded - now one asks about religion there. A so caled 'higher' caste guy may be sweeping the floor of a Shopping Mall owned by a 'lower' caste guy -- instances abound...and for good. Economic development has faded these lines...
Majority of Indians are staunch Vegetarian..so they will never even eat in non-veg restaurant also..they will also not eat at homes of even hindu people who eat non veg....I hope u get some logic of this and moreover....every body knows..muslims are a bit stern in nature when it comes to religion....while they will go on accusing and it will never end..please live in your beautiful world and let us live peacefully in ours without any terrorism