Its just the German Flag with the Prussian eagle on it. Never was very happy with it.
The Union Forever: A TL
- Thread starter Mac Gregor
- Start date
Its just the German Flag with the Prussian eagle on it. Never was very happy with it.
Pakistan as an idea happened in 1931, so it is actually plausible for it to disappear. The driving force here would be the Princely States wanting to remain independent. Baluchistan, Kashmir, Hyderabad, Mysore and Travancore would essentially split off from India, and sign a treaty of peace with them, while the rest of the Princely States fall. India, being more violent and possibly authoritarian in the wake of the war of independence, alienates Bengal and Assam, who become new states on their own. Tamil Republic splits off later, as it is isolated from the rest of the country, and sees little representation in Delhi.
And the existence of a Sikh state is impossible, considering that without partition, the Sikhs won't constitute a majority anywhere.
Very good points. This is very close to my thoughts actually. One question I have is would/could the UK maintain a hold on some areas of British India? What about the UK keeping Ceylon, Burma, and maybe the southern Tamil area of India as Dominions?
Also what about an independent Sindh?
Maybe for a short time, but I can't see Dominion status lasting. Once states in the area start going fully independent, it's hard to imagine others not wanting to do so.
VERY nice!
Does Ceylon own the Maldives?
And who owns the Lakshadweep islands? Finally, what are the small patches inside Bombay?
pearsonwright
Banned
VERY nice!
Does Ceylon own the Maldives?
And who owns the Lakshadweep islands? Finally, what are the small patches inside Bombay?
Yea, I just assigned it to them, because they were close
Travanacore
Portuguese India (I gave it the grey "other country" color)
Map looks nice, but the western areas of Madras State would fall to Mysore and Travancore in the event of war....Hyderabad should also get a port, and my map demonstrates its historic claims.
With Calcutta lost, as well as Madras, Bombay will not go independent. Not at all, and neither will Sindh. Bombay and Karachi are simply too important, and while the idea of an independent Bengal had traction, an independent Bombay had none.
Yea, I just assigned it to them, because they were close
Travanacore
Got it.
Ah, didn't realize they kept their colonies. Cool.
That is a nice looking map, but most of trollhole's points are valid as you seem to agree.
A few questions?
1) Why is an independent Sindh not possible?
2) Shouldn't there be an independent state of the Muslim portions of the Punjab?
3) I think that at the least Britain would keep the areas that it did in OTL such as the Dominion's of Burma and Ceylon. Is this not so?
4) As the Durand-line boundary has never been finalized in this TL, but is probably roughly similar to ours, would it be possible for Afghanistan to acquire (aka be given by Britain in recognition of its puppet states) the Pashtun portions of British India? This does not have to include the Pashtun part of Baluchistan.
1) Because India has too much of an investment in keeping Sindh, and it doesn't have the level of resistance Bengal does. Karachi has after all, become India's second most important port after the loss of Calcutta and Madras
2) Why? Like I said, religion wasn't really a dividing factor until much later in the independence movement. It can easily be butterflied away in your TL. Plus there wouldn't be an incentive, because the Muslims on the subcontinent are not united. Plus Lahore would likely be steamrolled by Indian troops....it had a roughly equal population of Muslims and combined Hindus and Sikhs.
3) It can. For the benefit of the doubt, I simply whited them out to whatever you wish to occur, though I think Burma too should be independent.
4) In my map, Afghanistan did have northern Baluchistan. Peshawar could probably be Afghan as well.
pearsonwright
Banned
Not to rush you or anything Mac Gregor, but it's been 13 Pages without an update, when could we expect one?
Not to rush you or anything Mac Gregor, but it's been 13 Pages without an update, when could we expect one?
Totally valid question. Sorry for the delay guys. Its been getting crazy as we are get ready for our deployment. I will try and get something posted in the next couple of days. Cheers!
1. Ok, I can see that. But I think it is also possible for the British to create an indepedent Sindhi state with some sort of ties to Britian to try and counterbalance the Indian revolutionaries.
2. I totally acknoweldge your point , however I still think that the tens of millions of Punjabi speaking muslims would not necessarily want to end up a state dominated by Hindus?
4. So you did, my mistake.
1. But I was under the impression the British were being violently kicked out...in that effect Sindh would have a large importance.
2. Again, if it isn't played up there's no reason for a religious partition. Full on Indian revolutionaries probably wouldn't even put religion as one of their strong points, therefore it isn't really 'dominated' per se by Hindus.