I have found out that the formation of Pakistan has direct relation to the formation of Orissa, Assam and Bihar in 1936. This also synonymous to what the British followed in Pre-Independence India namely the 'divide and rule' policy. British knew that the province of Bengal was a 'hotbed of Indian nationalism'.Assam, Bihar and Orissa were provinces of Bengal. Way back, if we refer to the history textbooks we know that policy to divide Bengal began in 1905.
The British wanted to "punish Bengal" for being a 'hotbed of Indian nationalism' and hence the divisions and sub-divisions again and again. Also there is the case of neglect during floods and famines which resulted in millions of deaths in pre-independence Bengal province.
Though in 1905, the division was due to administrative reasons. Entire present day North East and Bangladesh as well as West Bengal, Bihar, Jharkhand and Orissa was part of Bengal in 1905.
British divided it into 'West Bengal' and 'East Bengal' in 1905. Subsequently in 1936-1937 they separated Assam, Bihar and Orissa from Bengal. Remember that this was before India got independence.
These were separated on 'linguistic lines'. Subsequently from this 'separation' the Muslim League got 'its inspiration' and raised its demand for a separate 'Pakistan for Muslims' based on religious lines. Subsequently, the states of Maharashtra, Gujarat and Andhra Pradesh as well as Tamil Nadu, Karnataka and Kerala were formed in 1956 and that was 'post independence'. This further proved to Pakistanis that M.A.Jinnah was right in demanding Pakistan from India as Indians were 'a divided lot' and there is no harm in asking for "Sadda Haq" or 'my/our own right' so to speak.
But here was a catch, Pakistan also felt into this trap and that was East Pakistan, they also wanted their own 'land' and so they revolted against their 'rulers' from 'West' i.e. West Pakistan. Again the division or the sub-division (division post division) was on the basis of 'language and race' and after a conflict which was "partly orchestrated and fully executed" by India, East Pakistan became Bangladesh.
Thus my line is that the formation of Pakistan has its origins within India itself where other regional movements provided the impetus for it to get formed. Still those partition was not enough. Jharkhand was formed from Bihar in 2000. Several states were formed from Assam post Independence over decades which have given rise to so called "sister states of North East". In South India, Telangana is already declared to be formed from Andhra Pradesh. Even now there are movements in Assam proper for further division of the state as well as movement in West Bengal for Gorkhaland as well as in Western Orissa for a smaller state.
The British wanted to "punish Bengal" for being a 'hotbed of Indian nationalism' and hence the divisions and sub-divisions again and again. Also there is the case of neglect during floods and famines which resulted in millions of deaths in pre-independence Bengal province.
Though in 1905, the division was due to administrative reasons. Entire present day North East and Bangladesh as well as West Bengal, Bihar, Jharkhand and Orissa was part of Bengal in 1905.
British divided it into 'West Bengal' and 'East Bengal' in 1905. Subsequently in 1936-1937 they separated Assam, Bihar and Orissa from Bengal. Remember that this was before India got independence.
These were separated on 'linguistic lines'. Subsequently from this 'separation' the Muslim League got 'its inspiration' and raised its demand for a separate 'Pakistan for Muslims' based on religious lines. Subsequently, the states of Maharashtra, Gujarat and Andhra Pradesh as well as Tamil Nadu, Karnataka and Kerala were formed in 1956 and that was 'post independence'. This further proved to Pakistanis that M.A.Jinnah was right in demanding Pakistan from India as Indians were 'a divided lot' and there is no harm in asking for "Sadda Haq" or 'my/our own right' so to speak.
But here was a catch, Pakistan also felt into this trap and that was East Pakistan, they also wanted their own 'land' and so they revolted against their 'rulers' from 'West' i.e. West Pakistan. Again the division or the sub-division (division post division) was on the basis of 'language and race' and after a conflict which was "partly orchestrated and fully executed" by India, East Pakistan became Bangladesh.
Thus my line is that the formation of Pakistan has its origins within India itself where other regional movements provided the impetus for it to get formed. Still those partition was not enough. Jharkhand was formed from Bihar in 2000. Several states were formed from Assam post Independence over decades which have given rise to so called "sister states of North East". In South India, Telangana is already declared to be formed from Andhra Pradesh. Even now there are movements in Assam proper for further division of the state as well as movement in West Bengal for Gorkhaland as well as in Western Orissa for a smaller state.
No comments:
Post a Comment