if the 1947 Partition had been peaceful.

Society Pakistan & World Affairs
1

we would have both prospered.
When i read about communal violence in India, or the religious targeting/killings in Pakistan, i wonder if our Great leaders(jinnah, nehru, gandhi) had made a mess of things.

All what it acheived was hate, hate and more hate.

2

Re: if the 1947 Partition had been peaceful.

You mean what Bhai is saying:)

3

Re: if the 1947 Partition had been peaceful.

If the partition had been peaceful, Pakistan would still have been stuck with a treacherous to the east neighbor unfortunately.

4

Re: if the 1947 Partition had been peaceful.

It was a result of haste, haste and more haste from Nehru and the British. Jinnah and Gandhi were not in THAT much of a hurry.

I don't know if much can be achieved by discussing hypothetical situations. Communal violence was always there and so was sectarian violence. The difference is that the means of 'news dissemination' and killing machines were not as efficient and effective in those times as they are now.

5

Re: if the 1947 Partition had been peaceful.

How about, "If South Asian leaders weren't corrupt".
I'm sure if we didn't get the likes of Nawaz running things, we wouldn't be in this position.

6

Re: if the 1947 Partition had been peaceful.

Mian Sahib was last spotted cautiously entering Masjid e Nabawi, often looking up for the fear of a Lightning Bolt that might hit him for the hypocrisy named 'Josh e Khitabat'. Speaking of hypocrisy, the slippery characters like Nehru and daughter spared no effort to undermine creation and stability of Pakistan. 'If the Partition had been peaceful, Pakistan would still have been stuck with a treacherous neighbor unfortunately'.

7

Re: if the 1947 Partition had been peaceful.

I would like to know, why did the communal killings start?
and who started it.
what did they gain?

does anyone know the truth?

8

Re: if the 1947 Partition had been peaceful.

When Ravana kidnapped Seetha.

9

Re: if the 1947 Partition had been peaceful.

When creation of a new country was announced, who was the grieving party? Who felt like they had lost a part of their country?
Those who feel loss are the ones who become angry on people responsible for that loss.

It is a pretty simple idea. I don't know why Indians ask this question over and over again. May be something to do with their media.

10

Re: if the 1947 Partition had been peaceful.

Since Punjab and Bengal were being divided, the people on both sides of the border were tense. Sikh, Hindus and Muslims wanted the areas where they were in majority to be incorporated in India and Pakistan respectively. This lead to blood shed on both sides of the borders.

11

Re: if the 1947 Partition had been peaceful.

or maybe this is not the whole truth. a fraction of it, maybe. i don't think most pakistanis have even heard of crucial turning point incidents like direct action day/great calcutta killings, or the week of the long knives months before the actual partition that set the stage for all the animosity.

12

Re: if the 1947 Partition had been peaceful.

well its not like pakistan is the posterchild for perfect neighbour by any stretch. even its own other half couldnt tolerate it for long. afghans think pakistan has stabbed them in the back for three long decades. indians think pakistan's "moral and diplomatic support" for terrorists makes them pretty treacherous as a neighbour. and that is why india has had to fence the border, not pakistan. think about it.

13

Re: if the 1947 Partition had been peaceful.

I am sure the Afghans and Iranians are offended by your statement :)

14

Re: if the 1947 Partition had been peaceful.

Sita was a victim of lust not communal disharmony

15

Re: if the 1947 Partition had been peaceful.

Khoji: If hindus / sikhs had started the killings, then india would have had no muslims in it. Yet the reverse is true. India was declared secular, and also jinnah had a vision of secularism??

So why did the killings start? And who started it. i think i will look in the internet and ask this question.

16

Re: if the 1947 Partition had been peaceful.

but her kidnapping triggered disharmony. :P

17

Re: if the 1947 Partition had been peaceful.

Well, that started the killings. People believed what other people told them about brutality of the 'other side'. Just like when you would ask the question on internet, you'll get diverging answers depending on whom you ask.

18

Re: if the 1947 Partition had been peaceful.

in Bengal … Communal violence started in Aug 46 …when Jinnah sahib announced Direct Action day …
and in Punjab ..

Muslim Leaque Razakars… started it on 3-4 March 47 , in and around Pindi Area ..where they massacred around 5000-7000 non-muslims predominately Sikhs .

Perhaps it all was part of FEAR strategy …instil fear of survival in the muslims of majority provinces … so that they speed up the process of division ..

just another FACT from history … the 1936 Elections..

in Punjab Muslim League bagged 2 out of 84 Seats …
and in Bengal 19 out of 129 Seats…

so much for the claim of being the Sole Representative of Muslims …white washed in the Muslim Majority Provinces…!!
later the criteria for franchise elections was changed and restricted to only those who had some asset …and only 11% in Punjab were allowed to vote in the 46 election

then when I think strategy was changed… and propaganda , rhetoric and communal hatreds were fueled …Religion and Language was brought in as tool …

Ishtiaq Ahmed in his book Punjab: Bloodied and portioned writes… they were sloganeering if you don’t give vote to Muslim league …your Nikkah will be broken … Period.

http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=2012\09\02\story_2-9-2012_pg3_3

.. I am of the firm opinion that Communal violence were engineered …objective was to create FEAR of survival …and hence getting a Land… to safe guard vested interests and privileged positions which were definitely in danger post British withdrawal …

19

Re: if the 1947 Partition had been peaceful.

Ethnic cleansing and genocidal massacres 65 years ago by Ishtiaq Ahmed | AsiaPortal - Infocus

this article by a Pakistani origin writer says that the muslims league used the ‘islam in danger’ card and further jinnah,s Direct Action - was responsible for starting the killings. this started the cycle of killing even before the partition in 1946.

I know this will be hard reading for pakistanis, but this is the majority view of independent views in the internet.

20

Re: if the 1947 Partition had been peaceful.

after reading several articles, in the internet, it seems in general, there was harmony between muslims, hindus, sikhs and Christians during the british rule and even previously under the muslim & hindu rajas employed all religions in high positions, army and administration.

even the 1857 mutiny was fought unitedly by both religions for a common cause of getting rid of the british.

something surely happened to spoil this harmony?
a sucessful british 'divide & rule' ploy? or something else.