Power level of an un-partioned India?

Honestly, India probably becomes a much larger geopolitical player because modern Indian geopolitics are so Pakistan-focused. Which makes sense, hostile neighbors with nuclear weapons tend to take your mind off of other things. No matter how much of an internal ****show India is, Indian diplomacy is going to look very different with essentially no major geopolitical threats.

A common AH trope is a Sino-Indian war, but it's hard to see a sustained conflict just because India and China don't really border each other. The Himalayas are very difficult to pass and the vast majority of deaths in the Sino-Indian War were from frostbite. Historically, Sino-Indian cultural contact has taken place through Central Asia or Southeast Asia. So yeah, India's only real neighbors are Burma, Afghanistan, Iran, and Sri Lanka.
 
Well, historically Indians never really focused on naval strength, so I imagine their power would be confined to the area around India until the Indians develop a proper navy. But definitely more of a power than OTL, not able to be pushed around by China for example.
Well, now they'd inherit the Raj's navy, which is a decent starting point to build from.
 
My advice for united india would be to ally closely with USSR and maintain friendly relations with USA but on the condition of being very hostile to all European colonial powers esp UK until they pass reparations [ even if just symbolic and nominal ] and withdraw from ALL their overseas possessions.
Honestly, India probably becomes a much larger geopolitical player because modern Indian geopolitics are so Pakistan-focused. Which makes sense, hostile neighbors with nuclear weapons tend to take your mind off of other things. No matter how much of an internal ****show India is, Indian diplomacy is going to look very different with essentially no major geopolitical threats.
My question is what would a United independent India do with its de-facto control of the Indian ocean, would it not claim the other parts of the Raj as legitimate its as well?
Sri Lanka, Burma, Aden....and then with all the workers working in the Gulf would it not want to maybe support them gaining perfectly legitimate voting rights (nothing like British in ZAR/OVS but with oil not gold at all...)?
 
I'm shocked, shocked, that no-one has made a DBZ reference here. :winkytongue:

Seriously, it would have significant diplomatic power, and fewer external threats (but possibly more internal ones). Might the Soviet Union court India directly following the Sino-Soviet split?

Here you go:
itsover1000.jpg


Now, to get back on topic. I'd imagine to keep everything together, India would be doing much of the stuff it's already doing: Special Tribes, Special Castes and that sort of thing. Don't know if they have quota for religious minorities as well, but they should. Muslims constitute a much larger proportion of the population and won't content themselves with Hindu domination of politics. The government will have to let them participate in ruling the country, or there could be civil war. Hindu nationalism is untenable in a united India. Beyond that, I think united India would be better off than today's India, Pakistan and Bangladesh, for lack of a couple of wars and the countless lives lost in the population transfers in 1947-'48.

As to its foreign policy, after the Sino-Soviet Split it'll probably be mildly pro-Soviet. That would also depend on the manner in which it becomes independent: if the Empire of India becomes a full dominion and later a member of the Commonwealth, it could stay pro-Western, though that would make relations between China and the West a bit complicated.
 
I can see India letting them loose in the 1960s as protectorates or separate nations, with the Pashtuns probably getting absorbed by Afghanistan. This annexation would strengthen the Pashtuns in that country, perhaps keeping the monarchy in power there and staving off the Communist coup and Soviet invasion there.
Yeah, no. Even otl, most Pakistani Pashtuns want to stay with Pakistan. I don't see why it would be different here.
 

manav95

Banned
Yeah, no. Even otl, most Pakistani Pashtuns want to stay with Pakistan. I don't see why it would be different here.

Bc in TTL they would be part of India which would be Hindu majority overall. This would weaken the ties they feel whereas with Pakistan they share a predominant Islamic identity.
 
Bc in TTL they would be part of India which would be Hindu majority overall. This would weaken the ties they feel whereas with Pakistan they share a predominant Islamic identity.
Well, India here would likely have much higher living standards than Afghanistan. Plus, without the partition India would likely do a much better job of being secular
 
Bc in TTL they would be part of India which would be Hindu majority overall. This would weaken the ties they feel whereas with Pakistan they share a predominant Islamic identity.
IOTL, Pashtun majority areas tended to support Congress, not Muslim League, in pre-partition elections, more so than most other areas in what would become West Pakistan. They long tended to oppose partition, even if in the end they went along with it for obvious reasons.
 
Top