pakistan area british ruled over only less than 80 yrs effectively , mostly garrsion towns like pindi, and some other like lahore ,lyallpur etc are well developed but from the standpoint of their military strategic importance.Karachi was a minor trading town nowhere close to bombay , it was postpartition gujraitis that rejuvinated the economy of that city
It's true that NWFP and Balochistan where rather peripheral areas, werent Sindh and Punjab highly populated, very core integral parts of the Raj?
I dont think hindu nationalism as we know it now was a thing back thenindia.Lets not forget jinnah was a difficult man to work with and muslim landlords were rooting for pak for self-serving interests but hindu nationalist and inflexible attitude of congress is no less to blame for partition. Even jaswant siggh indian FM admits to it in his book.British divide and rule worked brilliantly !
Thank god for nehru and the secular leftist tendencies of congress [ here i give full marks to indians] they truly embraced minority rights despite some ugliness [like sikh uprisings ,kashmir sepratist, gujrat riots etc] overall indian treatment of minorities has been FAR BETTER than paksistans esp after 1980s.
Is there a way to change history to make Pakistan's treatment of minorities better or India's worse?
I didnt know that. Wasn't Jinnah a pretty secular guy? I dont think this is something he would have wanted.Indian religious policy includes a whole separate civil code for Muslims, meanwhile Pakistan's 2nd constitutional amendment declared the Ahmadis apostates because their end-times prophecies deviate from the Sunni standard. I'm oversimplifying, but generally religion was something that Delhi didn't want to muck around in except for purposes of keeping the peace, it wasn't interested in divide/rule. Keeping the peace, unfortunately, includes Punjab in the 80s. And though the BJP's been controversial, its religious or religion-influenced policy is for the most part framed as equalization-- taking Kashmir's privileges away because other Indian states do without, chipping away at the Muslim civil code because Hindus work on the secular civil code just fine, etc. It's kinda hypocritical (for all its former legal privileges, Kashmir still has to put up with extralegal Army-imposed burdens no other state has) but something like Pakistan's 2nd Amendment (explicitly, legally declaring religious group X to be outside the mainstream and sending militias after them) is unlikely.