Was India's partition a historical fluke?

This scenario explores the possibilty that Jinnah does not demand Pakistan instead remains in the congress, it would mean Pakistan demand is nothing more than a fringe theory in this time line
Having large borderland which is distinct and poorer then rest of the nation is likely to spawn a secessionist movement
 

The Avenger

Banned
Unlike Pakistan, India can afford to have an Afghan state in its borders, speaking of which, I think the KPK Pakistan province would be better or marginally due to much more cooperation, keep in minf, the voted for Congress and not the Muslim league during the last elections of British India
Minf?
 
What you guys don't understand is that partition happened for a reason, and you can't just wave a magic wand and have it go away. There is a chance that even if India was not partitioned in 1947 it might be partitioned in the future, and this time it will be more bloody and the Muslim leaders will be more extreme. India faces many separatist movements so having Pakistan which also has there fair share of separatism (albeit less so) become a part of it is just going to cause more problems.
 
Having large borderland which is distinct and poorer then rest of the nation is likely to spawn a secessionist movement
Which movement? pashto, baloch?
If afghanistan goes up in flames i doubt it, and for balochis, if the indian state is not as chauvinistic as the pakistani one (the way they treated bengalis comes to mind a lot) i don't see much traction, specially since historically the baloch clans were busy hating eachother.
 

The Avenger

Banned
What you guys don't understand is that partition happened for a reason, and you can't just wave a magic wand and have it go away. There is a chance that even if India was not partitioned in 1947 it might be partitioned in the future, and this time it will be more bloody and the Muslim leaders will be more extreme. India faces many separatist movements so having Pakistan which also has there fair share of separatism (albeit less so) become a part of it is just going to cause more problems.
India could be smart enough to play off Bengali Muslims against Punjabi Muslims, though. After all, the Muslim League wanted a unified Muslim state with its capital in Karachi. Would that forever appeal to the Bengali Muslims?
 
India could be smart enough to play off Bengali Muslims against Punjabi Muslims, though. After all, the Muslim League wanted a unified Muslim state with its capital in Karachi. Would that forever appeal to the Bengali Muslims?

Many Muslim League leaders wanted an independent, unpartitioned Bengal to coexist with Pakistan and India from the beginning in 1947. Hell, even Jinnah supported an independent Bengal, and it was only until the late 1960s that West Pakistan showed an interest into holding on into its eastern wing. Has E Pakistan wanted independence before then, W Pakistan would say OK but at the same time try to come up with a defense pact against India with this independent E Pakistan.
 
What you guys don't understand is th happened for a reason, and you can't just wave a magic wand and have it go away. There is a chance that even if India was not partitioned in 1947 it might be partitioned in the future, and this time it will be more bloody and the Muslim leaders will be more extreme. India faces many separatist movements so having Pakistan which also has there fair share of separatism (albeit less so) become a part of it is just going to cause more problems.

What reason?
Many Muslim League leaders wanted an independent, unpartitioned Bengal to coexist with Pakistan and India from the beginning in 1947. Hell, even Jinnah supported an independent Bengal, and it was only until the late 1960s that West Pakistan showed an interest into holding on into its eastern wing. Has E Pakistan wanted independence before then, W Pakistan would say OK but at the same time try to come up with a defense pact against India with this independent E Pakistan.
Jinnah's idea of pakistan is a very far cry from what ended up happening, sadly.
 

Srihari14

Banned
So could Pakistan but it refused . Unpartitioned India has inherited Britain's position in the great game.


Would it or would it be worst as it is now a backwater in much larger nation


Could change

Regarding great game, Google Khan Abdul gaffar Khan , known as the frontier Gandhi and highly respected in kpk , was against partition, Afghanistan would also completely depend on India for their trade and ocean access, also India allow them to have local leaders through elections , and KPK 's main problem is open border allowing for people to conduct insurgent activity, a united India can literally seal the border as it India has done with Pakistan and Bangladesh
 

The Avenger

Banned
Many Muslim League leaders wanted an independent, unpartitioned Bengal to coexist with Pakistan and India from the beginning in 1947. Hell, even Jinnah supported an independent Bengal, and it was only until the late 1960s that West Pakistan showed an interest into holding on into its eastern wing. Has E Pakistan wanted independence before then, W Pakistan would say OK but at the same time try to come up with a defense pact against India with this independent E Pakistan.
It's strange how Pakistan was so determined to hold onto East Pakistan that it committed a genocide there, though.

Also, an un-partitioned might not work if sectarian tensions will be high. If Punjabi Muslims want to be separate from Punjabi Hindus, wouldn't Bengali Muslims also want to be separate from Bengali Hindus?
 
What reason?

Hindu Nationalism is a big reason, and I don't see that going away in a non-partitioned India. Even without Hindu Nationalism Congress was pretty apathetic to Muslim demands even before the call for an independent Pakistan took place, and again I don't see that changing. Eventually something will happen that will convince Muslim separatists to engage in a war against the Indian government instead of going for a peaceful solution.
 

Srihari14

Banned
Hindu Nationalism is a big reason, and I don't see that going away in a non-partitioned India. Even without Hindu Nationalism Congress was pretty apathetic to Muslim demands even before the call for an independent Pakistan took place, and again I don't see that changing. Eventually something will happen that will convince Muslim separatists to engage in a war against the Indian government instead of going for a peaceful solution.
With a pod after 1900, anything is possible
 
It's strange how Pakistan was so determined to hold onto East Pakistan that it committed a genocide there, though.

Again, it wasn't until the late 1960s that West Pakistan actually wanted to hold on to East Pakistan, and this apathy is what made East Pakistan feel more and more disconnected from the West. The racism many W Pakistanis felt against Bengalis didn't help either.

Also, an un-partitioned might not work if sectarian tensions will be high. If Punjabi Muslims want to be separate from Punjabi Hindus, wouldn't Bengali Muslims also want to be separate from Bengali Hindus?

Those are two different things, just look at the outrage Bengalis had towards the British when Lord Curzon partitioned Bengal on religious lines in 1906.
 
Which movement? pashto, baloch?
All of them and you could just have one based on Islam similar to otl Pakistan. Insurgency generally aren't unified.

Google Khan Abdul gaffar Khan , known as the frontier Gandhi and highly respected in kpk , was against partition,
Comes off as Pashtun nationalist especially with the Bannu Resolution. Sounds more like he thought that New Delhi would give more autonomy than closer Pakistan.

Afghanistan would also completely depend on India for their trade and ocean access,
Afghanistan is depend on Pakistan and they could look North
.
 
Top