The Partition Of Indi India

“India has never been a symbol of unity of Hindu-Muslim civilization. It is not possible for the British Government to create homogeneity between Hindu and Muslim culture and civilization as the two systems are distinctively opposed to each other. There is no way other than the partition of India”

Disputes over land seem to be a catalyst for almost every hostility and war since the dawn of time. The addition of politics and religion into the matter only serves to aggravate an already tense situation. Kashmir knows this all too well. The conflict between Hindus and Muslims seems to be an ever reoccurring battle. This is also evidenced in population battles. Hindus make up the social majority of the population of India by almost eighty percent. Feelings of tension and uneasiness are a natural reaction to being dominated by a majority and are a problem unto itself.

In 1939 World War II broke out in Europe. Britain proclaimed India’s involvement in the war without consulting the Indian people. This led to increased protest and volatility. In 1942 India established a national army and proposed the Quit India Movement. This movement promised to lend Indian military support to Britain in return for complete independence. If they refused this treaty the Indian people promised civil disobedience. In 1947 India was granted its independence and became self governing (Luscombe, 2012). On January 26, 1950 the Republic of India was proclaimed and it drafted a constitution. The first democratic elections were held in 1952. However the Hindus and Muslims were not united and colonial India was divided into Muslim Pakistan and Hindu India (History, 2010).

There was a high food shortage in 1946 and this caused many to ration. World War II left a deep wound in India as two and a half million Indian soldiers were sent to aid the allies and 24,000 killed. Many were unemployed as they lost their jobs after the war since there was no need for war production. Gandhi’s party, Indian national congress, created in 1885 seemed it would be the power that ruled after Britain left. This changed, however, as the All Muslim league became popular during World War II. Muslims were a minority compared to the Hindus. The Partition of 1947 created Pakistan, where the Muslims would live, and India, where the Hindus would live.

Many people believe that in the 1940’s most of India’s problems involving independence was to do with divisions within India rather than British imperialism. In this essay I will be looking at both points of view and finally giving my opinion. I will be using three sources also to help me show both sides of the story. I will also be using my further knowledge to add a wider range of knowledge.

The ongoing conflict between India and Pakistan has been the subject of speculation and study by political scientists and historians for a number of years. The ethnic conflict seems to have been sparked at the very beginning in 1947, when the British used Muslim and Hindu mercenaries against each other before the area finally split into today’s countries of India and Pakistan (Spiegel et al. 2015, 185). The timeline since then has been full of conflicts, both major and minor. Brutal tactics used by security forces and a high rate of unemployment have added to the issue (BBC News 2016).

Although it could be argued that Britain unified India 500 million diverse Indians, and built a strong Indian army, they had an extremely strict cruel government that eliminated Indians freedom and used their own army against them as punishment. According to Dr. Lalvani imperialism in India resulted in “the bringing together of several different states into one unified India” However before the British came to India Hindus and Muslims lived together in peace for centuries. And while Britain was present and after they left the two religious groups were extremely divided and violently fought. Including wars that resulted in “5,000 people dead and 12,000 people hurt” (Gandhi). Britain encouraged separation and division of Muslims and HIndus because of the attack strategy, “divide and conquer” upon the idea that it would be easier to take over and govern a country that was fighting among

This can be put down primarily to the harsh treatment of Hindus and Sikhs by Emperor Aurangzeb, despite the fact he made attempts to reconcile, especially towards the Sikhs, in the last few days of his life. This underlying hatred continued for hundreds of years and it was perhaps the first cause of hatred between Muslims and Hindus which made them believe they could not live together. This was an important first cause for the partition as it instilled hatred between Hindus and Muslims. The East India Company, or EIC was also the longest term cause, this time relating to independence by causing a rift between the British and Indians.

One thing that the world does not always acknowledge, is that many countries have actually been demanding for independence ever since the 1800’s. The partition that created Pakistan was a long and tedious process before it got approved. Before World War II, Great Britain had full control over the country of India and its resources, even though the people were demanding for self-rule for several years. At the time, India consisted of both Muslim and Hindu cultures, and the tensions between the two

The British’s goal to separate the Muslims, Hindus and Sikhs was a total disaster. “The trouble was that Muslims, Hindus, and Sikhs were an integrated population so that it was impossible to make a border without widespread dislocation.” This quote states that making a border was impossible because the groups aren’t meant to be spread apart. “By the end of 1947 there were virtually no Hindus or Sikhs living in west India - now part of Pakistan - and no Muslims in the Indian east.” This explains how the British made Pakistan because of the partition. “The British government and Mountbatten must bear a large part of the blame for this tragedy." Therefore, the British caused religious violence and disagreement against each

In the documentary “ The Story of India: Beginnings” takes place in India in the 50,000 B.C.E.-1,000 B.C.E. It takes about the early beginnings of India our ancestors first walked out of Africa only 70,000 years ago, around the shores of the arabian sea and down into South India. The first indians that stayed left there trial, and some of them were beachcombers, barefoot hunter-gathers driven by chance and necessity. They performed a special ritual for their god of fire. They also practice the traditional way of marriage from the ancient that is to marry the first cousin. In the documentary it also said that the invention of agriculture started in the stone age in the Near East, Dr. Reeves also taught us that in class. That way they could

Sikhism transformed after the eighteenth century. The entitlement of war had made a big impact on power within regions in India. The Early nineteenth century, Sikhs dominated most of the territory in Punjab due to their ruler, Ranjit Singh. The nineteenth century was a time for Sikhs to understand their identity again. A few years later, imperialism appeared in India from British companies. The British controlled Punjab in 1840s. Corruption and oppression raised because British looked at Sikh as enemies. The British colony started creating policies to suppress Sikhs and started instigating tension with other dominant religions in India. In 1947, the partition of India and Pakistan began from India Independence Act. The Sikhs were promised self

In this essay I hope to look at the issues of conflict in South Asia focusing on India and in particular the continuing Hindu-Muslim tensions, and look at possible reasons for the continuing conflict which appears to have escalated since the withdrawal of British Rule from India. Multiple events had shaped the Indian subcontinent with

The Partition of India in August, 1947 was a significant event in history that accounted for the separation of one of the world’s oldest civilization into two, independent nations – Pakistan and India. Like many other wars in history, The Partition of India was instigated by religious, political and social conflict. This resulted in violence, discrimination and the largest human displacement in contemporary history. While the Partition was well-studied, much of our understanding was focused on the political side of history, not the human side of it. This was why oral history played an important role in manifesting the complexity of a historical event. Our focus here is Maya Rani’s testimony from Butalia’s book, The Other Side of Silence:

Before the Partition of India, in 1947, India was considered a country with a reasonably peaceful history. However, during and after the Partition, sexual violence, both towards men and women, escalated, resulting in the rape and abduction of over 80,000 women. Cracking India, by Bapsi Sidhwa, tells a story that highlights these violent acts by both Muslims and Hindus, through the eyes of a disabled young Parsi girl named Lenny, who witnesses first hand the violence of Partition when she mistakenly participates in the abduction of her ayah, Shanta. Throughout Cracking India, Lenny observes as the religions involved in Partition become increasingly violent towards both men and women, within their own religions and against others.