Religion is the simple answer, but it's a little more complicated than that. Basically, Britain said that Pakistan would be for Muslims, while India would be for Hindus, but in areas where there was still some nominal indepedant leadership, it would be up to the leader of the individual province (Rajah, Sultan, etc...) to decide which one he would join. They went by their personal preference, rather than that of their people. Therefore there were a lot of Hindus stuck in Pakistan, a lot of Muslims in India, and of course Bangladesh (East Pakistan, at the time) was a totally unresolved issue.
2006-12-09 15:41:24
·
answer #1
·
answered by kevin2760 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
Simply put, religion. Muslims would be in Pakistan, Hindus would in India.
Both remain engaged in a military conflict over the Himalayan kingdom of Kashmir. Both nations control significant territories of the disputed state, and the issue remains unresolved.
2006-12-09 23:25:23
·
answer #2
·
answered by Carl 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
religion.. the two nation theory was the actual moving force there.. this theory essentially laid down that muslims and hindus are two different civilizations and can not live in harmony
the war of 1857 was where the cracks started appearing and the withdrawal of congress from lucknow pact was the final blow that was proved in gandhi-jinnah talks of 1944 after which partition was the only key
the british also played the role of separating both the communities under the 'divide and rule' strategy
it was decided that muslim majority areas shud go to pakistan and hindu majority to india under the indian independence act 1947. it is interesting to note that the demarcation commission made several critical injustices... in West Pakistan (current Pakistan) they gave the critical areas of gurdaspur and ferozpur (including ferozpur headworks) to india that later led to an easy access route for indian army into kashmir and the headworks caused india to stop irrigation water to pakistan resulting in the canal water dispute of 1961. in East Pakistan (current Bangladesh) the commission gave away calcutta to india which meant giving away an integral and essential part of bengal to india making both halves totally useless since they both depended on each other.
the regions undecided at independence were kashmir, junagadh and manavadar, hyderabad-deccan
junagadh and manavadar were coastal areas that were under the control of princes at independence (princely states) that decided to go with pakistan... the decision was challenged and india challenged the accession by deploying its navy at the shores of the two small regions and gained control of the region.. pakistan made a complaint to the UN Security Council which is still pending
hyderabad-deccan was the 2nd largest and probably the richest of all princely states situated within the demarcated india.. its ruler (Nizam) was Muslim and decided initially to stay independent this decision was challenged by india and many int'l critics too were of the opinion that since geographically it was a difficult situation, hyderabad wont be able to retain sovereignty since the indians could attack the state any time. the nizam, in protests, announced accession to pakistan following which indian forces took over the state and overthrew the nizam.
the state of jammu and kashmir was the largest of princely states and very rich. the british had sold the state to a hindu dogra ruler who was cruel to the kashmiris. at the time of independence, the ppl of kashmir (90% Muslims in Kashmir, 70% Muslims in Jammu) which formed a majority of muslims wanted to go for pakistan. under severe pressure, he asked indian army to come for his help. this triggered a war between india and pakistan in 1948 in which the kashmiris were able to liberate some of the western part from the indians that is now called Azad Kashmir (Indpendent Kashmir) and lies in the north of pakistan as a semi-autonomous region of pakistan. in response, india filed a complaint with the UNSC which ordered plebiscite in kashmir to find the will of the kashmiris. tired and frustrated, the kashmiris in the Indian Occupied Kashmir are yet to see a referendum for 59 long years.
2006-12-10 16:07:29
·
answer #3
·
answered by Shariq M 5
·
0⤊
0⤋