PC: Pakistan gets Kashmir but not Jammu and Ladakh upon independence?

Yes, Kashmir being majority Muslim is plausible in Pakistan, but they would not try to get Ladakh, Jammu, and no Indian government would allow them to.

But could Pakistan taking Kashmir but not Ladakh or Jammu lead to better relations with India? I think so, but how could Pakistan take Kashmir while not pissing India off?
 
Have Kashmir be actually talked about during longer Partition agreements ?

I doubt it. Jammu and Kashmir was a princely state, ruled by one of the few stupid princes who tried to go independent. Princely states weren't talked about in the Partition agreements.

The only way I can imagine Pakistan getting Kashmir but not Jammu and Ladakh is through invasion, but even there it's hard because of the numerical imbalance between India and Pakistan. Maybe if you have India fall into a civil war?
 
Have Kashmir be actually talked about during longer Partition agreements ? Get a longer withdrawal so that more areas are marked out.

Mountbatten admitted he made up the date of partition on the spot when asked by a journalist, just so he could look like he was on top of everything.

Get all the players in a room, set a sensible target like 1st January 1950 and take a bit more time about it.
 

longsword14

Banned
I doubt it. Jammu and Kashmir was a princely state, ruled by one of the few stupid princes who tried to go independent.
There is your POD, try and tangle the future of that state into talks. What is needed is that it should always be on everyone's mind.
 
There is your POD, try and tangle the future of that state into talks. What is needed is that it should always be on everyone's mind.

But then the issue is that independence leaders would need to compromise with princely states. As far as many independence leaders were concerned, the princely states' rulers were quislings, collaborating with the "Britishers". That will provide a barrier to any talks between the princely states and the INC and Muslim League.
 

longsword14

Banned
But then the issue is that independence leaders would need to compromise with princely states. As far as many independence leaders were concerned, the princely states' rulers were quislings, collaborating with the "Britishers". That will provide a barrier to any talks between the princely states and the INC and Muslim League.
Not my point, by that time Britain had decided to go, both INC and the League were trying to gain advantages by the same British. The fate of states would be bleak but that is not what I wrote. All you need is for the area of Kashmir be always be present as an issue; it will not get taken away immediately but in a hypothetical scenario where princely control is dissolved Kashmir could already be seen as another Muslim area becoming part of Pakistan.
 
Maybe Prince Hari Singh of Jammu and Kashmir remains stubborn and refuses to accede to India, and when Pakistan sends troops to help the Muslim rebels a peace treaty is signed shortly after which gives Kashmir to Pakistan. After the peace treaty, Hari Singh gives in and decides to accede to India.
 
Maybe Prince Hari Singh of Jammu and Kashmir remains stubborn and refuses to accede to India, and when Pakistan sends troops to help the Muslim rebels a peace treaty is signed shortly after which gives Kashmir to Pakistan. After the peace treaty, Hari Singh gives in and decides to accede to India.

Is this plausible?
 
Is this plausible?

No. Hari Singh was one of the most stubborn princes, but I doubt he'd be that stubborn.

I also doubt Pakistan would just stop as Kashmir. Remember, Pakistan continues to claim all of Jammu and Kashmir on the basis that the region is majority-Muslim, even though obviously Hindu-majority Jammu, the "City of a Thousand Temples", is obviously Hindu-majority. They wouldn't sign a peace treaty, and instead they would just march on, probably resulting in India invading the kingdom to protect the Hindu population.
 
But could Pakistan taking Kashmir but not Ladakh or Jammu lead to better relations with India? I think so, but how could Pakistan take Kashmir while not pissing India off?
Pre-Partition have the British explain the facts of life to the Prince that his state would be too small to hold out against the schemes of nationalist politicians in either country, and that if he accedes to one side then the other will more than likely try to intervene and bring a world of hurt to his country. Then offer him a very large financial inducement - paid for with Indian government money, which from the British standpoint is fine as the debts will shortly be inherited by an independent India - to at least cede Kashmir to Pakistan.
 

CaliGuy

Banned
Is it plausible that Pakistan gets Kashmir but not Jammu and Ladakh upon independence?
Sure--specifically if either Britain makes this decision for Hari Singh or if Pakistan avoids invading Kashmir in 1948 and instead waits it out. That way, if it is discovered that Kashmir isn't really viable as an independent state, India and Pakistan could perhaps come to a clean resolution of this issue with a religion-based partition of Kashmir.

Also, though, as a side note, while Indo-Pakistani relations will undoubtedly be better in this TL, the eventual genocide and war in Bangladesh might nevertheless significantly ruin Indo-Pakistani relations for a very long time to come. After all, if India still eventually helps Bangladesh acquire its independence from Pakistan, Pakistan might very well--just like in our TL--fear that India wants to dismember it in order to facilitate Hindu domination of all of Pakistan.
 
Top