PC: No Pan-India movement for independence, all different ethnic independence movements in the Raj

This is something I have thought about for some time. What would had happen that instead of an Indian Independence Movement or a Pakistani Independence Movement in the British Raj, they had been Sindhi, Baloch, Punjabi, Gujarati, Marathi, Rajput, Bengali etc. independence movements in the Indian subcontinent during the era of the Raj? Is that plausible?
 

Zachariah

Banned
This is something I have thought about for some time. What would had happen that instead of an Indian Independence Movement or a Pakistani Independence Movement in the British Raj, they had been Sindhi, Baloch, Punjabi, Gujarati, Marathi, Rajput, Bengali etc. independence movements in the Indian subcontinent during the era of the Raj? Is that plausible?
Perhaps. If they'd all been administered separately, than the viability of pan-Indian and Pakistani movements could have been greatly diminished, reduced to be more comparable to pan-Arab and pan-African movements at the same time. And of course, while the Arab League and African Union exist today, there was no way that a pan-Arab or pan-African independence movement could have ever succeeded IOTL. Unfortunately though, the subsequent post-independence history of all those respective Indian nations would probably wind up being analogous to those of Africa and the Middle East IOTL as well.
 

Redcoat

Banned
I've said it once, I've said it again, I love TL's with balkanized Indias.

Maybe you could get the Tamil Separatist movements more steam or something
 
I've said it once, I've said it again, I love TL's with balkanized Indias.

Maybe you could get the Tamil Separatist movements more steam or something
I’m thinking we can get... maybe 5 nations out of the Indian subcontinent (this is including the land consisting of Pakistan as well obviously)
 
The development of Indian nationalism is a fascinating topic, and one I've actually posted a thread on in this forum before.

For an interesting perspective, I'd point you to this chapter from a book called My Mother India by Dalip Singh Saund, an Indian-American who was the first Asian elected to Congress and a brilliant guy. In the first few pages of the chapter, he lays out that "Indian" identity has existed for much longer than many Europeans at the time believed - and astutely notes that its great flaw is the tendency to get it mixed up with Hindu identity.

The interesting thing about this chapter in particular is its time - written in the midst of the Indian independence movement, he correctly predicts its course, but also believes Hindi will become the language of India, not English (this became a major political issue in India in the '50s and '60s).

To answer your original question: yes, I think it's possible to have multiple Indian independence movements - nationalism stronger among the peoples of India - and result in multiple independent countries in what is now India in the subcontinent. But you would need a POD far earlier than 1900 - by then, the movement was too much on its present course. The POD would need to be in the early 19th or even 18th centuries.

Other forum members who may also be able to provide insight here are @Flocculencio, @Nataraj, and @Badshah. Hope this helps, though.

Cheers,
Ganesha
 
Perhaps. If they'd all been administered separately, than the viability of pan-Indian and Pakistani movements could have been greatly diminished, reduced to be more comparable to pan-Arab and pan-African movements at the same time. And of course, while the Arab League and African Union exist today, there was no way that a pan-Arab or pan-African independence movement could have ever succeeded IOTL. Unfortunately though, the subsequent post-independence history of all those respective Indian nations would probably wind up being analogous to those of Africa and the Middle East IOTL as well.

More and larger Princely States rather than direct Company and later Crown rules would be a great way of getting that sort of situation. Have the British, when the Company collapses, transform the subcontinent into a patchwork of vassal Principalities from local notables of "Loyal' ethnicities under a broader umbrella of Crown administrators that handle trade and external affairs?
 
Have the British divide their territory in India along linguistic lines with their own legislative assemblies. Pressure the princely states to accede into one of the linguistic provinces or form their own legislative assemblies that meets the imperial standard of responsible government. Create an extremely weak central/confederation government in Delhi that manages foreign policy/trade etc and give broad legislative authority to the provinces. Day to day governing in each province will be in the language of English and the local language (Sindhi/Bengali/Punjabi/Gujarati etc). Divide the Indian civil service along the aforementioned provincial lines.

Had the British implemented something like this shortly after WWI, it could have both appeased as well as fragmented the growing nationalist movement. Any moves towards centralization would have been opposed by the Muslim majority provinces as well and possibly the non-Hindi speaking provinces.
 
Top