Was he in favor of a Partition? If so, this could avert the truce between Congress and All-Indian Muslim League, which allowed a more unified independence movementHad Jinnah not suddenly died in 1936 maybe Partition might become a reality.
I think it's referring specifically to the Muslim state advocated by Sir Muhammad Iqbal and others during the early 20th Century.I'm confused about what this "partition" involves. Are we talking about the proposed Muslim state, which I don't think anyone took seriously, or something involving surviving princely states/ and or the provinces just becoming independent, with no all-India institutions?
I don't know that could've worked, given that hypothetical country would been split between two far away regions with completely diifferent cultures and languages.
To be honest, I think it'd be better for everybody involved. The massive amount of corruption and regionalism/tribalism that's settled into India, based on New Dehli's dedication to "national territorial integrity and internal stability" over everything else has transformed the central treasury into little more than a piggy bank for the enrichment of whatever region's or ethno-linguistic group's support is needed to retain the painfully complex coalitions that have (barely) managed to govern the country over the years. They rank below most nations in Sub-Saharan Africa... and that's saying something.
You know, my mother always avoid Western coverage of India, because they tend to exaggerate issues like the ethnic and religious tensions.And better we dont speak about the cyclical ethnic "Clashes" that are making a lot of states in India in tribal lands, It´s almost impossible to find a Muslim in some territories of India, like Hyderabad, that historically have a strong Muslim presence and in the north the ruins of Hindu temples
Abound, especially in Cachemira. The only part in India were the ethnic an religious violence it´s not horrible it´s the Punjab, where it´s only appalling
I should heed her advice.