Today's GK question:
Why were only Punjab, Sindh, and Bengal partitioned in 1947?
They were not the only high-Muslim areas of India (UP-Bihar, Gujarat, Maharashtra). They were not geographically together (in fact, 2 ends of the subcontinent)
So, why were they the only ones partitioned?
Think Think..
Don't know?
Here's the next thing. This is a list of major communal disturbances since independence.
What is common to all of them?
1969: Gujarat
1979-84: Punjab
Mid 1980s: Naxal Movement in Andhra Pradesh
1992: Gujarat, Maharashtra, Hyderabad
2002: Gujarat
2014 Onwards: All over India.
If you haven't figured it out, here's a hint for you: (you can stop reading anytime)
1936: The first elections under the modern federal system are held in India. The elections are held in 11 provinces.
These are the results:
The Congress swept the polls. It won absolute majority in 5 provinces viz. Madras, United Provinces, Central provinces, Bihar & Orissa, Bombay. In Assam and North West Frontier Province it emerged at the largest political party and formed the governments. Later Assam and NWFP also came under Congress rule.
In Bengal, Punjab, and Sind, the Congress had no majority.
It is NOT a coincidence that these three places were the seats of the most brutal political mauling in 1947. Sindh was completely cut off, Punjab and Bengal were brutalised.
The Congress does not forget. Or Forgive.
1945/46: In the provincial elections of 1945, The Muslim League won ALL the seats reserved for Muslims. i.e., for all their appeasement, the Congress did not win even ONE seat where Muslims were in majority. These seats were in the same geographies - Sindh, Punjab, Bengal.
Even though UP/Bihar had a lot of Muslim population, the rioting happened in the places where the Congress lost its seats.
Who was blamed for the violence? The Muslim League and the Hindu Mahasabha.
Do you know what a general call for rioting and killing Hindus is called in Indian history? It is called, not The Day of the Great Massacre, or "The Day of Calcutta Riots" , but simply "Direct Action Day". The killing of 5000 people and the burning of homes for 1,00,000 people is called "Direct Action Day"
Result: In 1946, The Congress saw that there was no way to win these territories. These territories were cut out and given to Pakistan. The Congress won.
1977: The Akali Dal becomes powerful in Punjab and the Akali alliance wins 13 out of 13 seats Lok Sabha seats in Punjab.
Out of nowhere, Bhindrawale is brought out and raised as a hero. Over the next few years, Punjab saw what even the British could manage to do - divide Hindus and Sikhs in Punjab. Once Bhindrawale was created, Pakistan used the opportunity completely.
Who was blamed: Only Bhindrawale was blamed for Bhindrawale, and Pakistan provided the money.
We needed to do Operation Bluestar and KPS Gill needed to work for years to uproot the insurgency problem.
Result: After losing the 1977 elections badly, the Congress came back to power in the 1980 elections. Since then, the Congress and Akali Dal have been alternating power in the state.
1967: Gujarat: The Indian National Congress loses foothold to Swatantra Party , and Congress itself splits.
The communal problems start getting bigger and bigger, until, in 1969: The famous 1969 Gujarat riots take place.
Result: 1972: Congress returns to power with 140 out of 168 seats.
There is communal harmony again until 1990, when Janta Dal + BJP form power and Congress loses power once again.
Mid 1980s: Naxal Movement in Andhra Pradesh
In 1983, the Indian National Congress lost to the Telugu Desam Party for the first time in independent India. Within 2 years, by 1985, the Naxalite movement was a major problem in Andhra Pradesh.
Who was blamed: The Naxalites were blamed for the violence.
Result: Congress returned to power in 1989. Now, the 2 parties alternate power in the state. The Naxawl movement was slowly and painfully curtailed. Some people are still scared to venture to those areas.
1992: Rioting iin the wake of Babri Demolition in Dec 1992.
In fact, 1992 saw rioting in many other states - most notably Mumbai in Maharashtra and Hyderabad in Andhra. But you don't even hear about it. Do you know why? Because in 1992-3, the Congress was in power in Andhra Pradesh and in Maharashtra. But you only hear about Gujarat.
Result: In the subsequent elections, the Congress consolidated its position. The Congress has not been able to return to power in Gujarat. Which means that the Gujarat riot cases after 1992 (including the 2002 riots) simply refuse to die from the public's memory, while the 1969 riots are never mentioned.
We see a similar pattern in 1992, when Narsimha Rao was in power at the center. As the Home Minister in 1984, he had wanted to reduce the bloodshed in the rioting. For this, he was never forgiven by the dynasty. Further, the Congress govt in 1992 was a minority govt and the Congress needed to consolidate its position.
So in 1992, there was massive rioting in the country. Instead of treating this like an organised riot, these cases were treated as spontaneous public response.
No one saw a thing. No enquiries were set up into who did these riots, no one was punished for the 1992 riots.
2014: The Congress loses power decisively and at the helm is a leader who is a serious challenge to the dynasty. What's worse, the dynasty has no pm face to show.
Start, the gradual seeding of the communal headlines. (I have a separate post on that one)
The headlines and the Hindu nation (sorry... Hindutva headlines) reach a crescendo by the 2019 elections.
But the electorate has been quiet, and very one-sided. The BJP comes back with 303 seats in the parliament. So the communal hatred stories must continue.
So, what is the point?
The point is NOT that every time the Congress loses, there is a communal riot. The point is that every time there is a communal attack/riot, the Congress has either just lost, or is about to lose an election. In fact, over other instances, i figured it is actually quite specific. When the DYNASTY is out of power, there are communal riots until the dynastic order is restored.
So, if you want a communal riot, all you have to do is rout the Congress in an election. OR, threaten th power of the Congress. And there WILL be massive bloodshed and hatred.
Bibliography:
1. http://www.columbia.edu/itc/mealac/pritchett/00ambedkar/ambedkar_partition/index.html
2. http://danasurdanu.blogspot.com/2014/07/1945-1946-elections-who-voted-for.html
Why were only Punjab, Sindh, and Bengal partitioned in 1947?
They were not the only high-Muslim areas of India (UP-Bihar, Gujarat, Maharashtra). They were not geographically together (in fact, 2 ends of the subcontinent)
So, why were they the only ones partitioned?
Think Think..
Don't know?
Here's the next thing. This is a list of major communal disturbances since independence.
What is common to all of them?
1969: Gujarat
1979-84: Punjab
Mid 1980s: Naxal Movement in Andhra Pradesh
1992: Gujarat, Maharashtra, Hyderabad
2002: Gujarat
2014 Onwards: All over India.
If you haven't figured it out, here's a hint for you: (you can stop reading anytime)
1936: The first elections under the modern federal system are held in India. The elections are held in 11 provinces.
These are the results:
The Congress swept the polls. It won absolute majority in 5 provinces viz. Madras, United Provinces, Central provinces, Bihar & Orissa, Bombay. In Assam and North West Frontier Province it emerged at the largest political party and formed the governments. Later Assam and NWFP also came under Congress rule.
In Bengal, Punjab, and Sind, the Congress had no majority.
It is NOT a coincidence that these three places were the seats of the most brutal political mauling in 1947. Sindh was completely cut off, Punjab and Bengal were brutalised.
The Congress does not forget. Or Forgive.
1945/46: In the provincial elections of 1945, The Muslim League won ALL the seats reserved for Muslims. i.e., for all their appeasement, the Congress did not win even ONE seat where Muslims were in majority. These seats were in the same geographies - Sindh, Punjab, Bengal.
Even though UP/Bihar had a lot of Muslim population, the rioting happened in the places where the Congress lost its seats.
Who was blamed for the violence? The Muslim League and the Hindu Mahasabha.
Do you know what a general call for rioting and killing Hindus is called in Indian history? It is called, not The Day of the Great Massacre, or "The Day of Calcutta Riots" , but simply "Direct Action Day". The killing of 5000 people and the burning of homes for 1,00,000 people is called "Direct Action Day"
Result: In 1946, The Congress saw that there was no way to win these territories. These territories were cut out and given to Pakistan. The Congress won.
1977: The Akali Dal becomes powerful in Punjab and the Akali alliance wins 13 out of 13 seats Lok Sabha seats in Punjab.
Out of nowhere, Bhindrawale is brought out and raised as a hero. Over the next few years, Punjab saw what even the British could manage to do - divide Hindus and Sikhs in Punjab. Once Bhindrawale was created, Pakistan used the opportunity completely.
Who was blamed: Only Bhindrawale was blamed for Bhindrawale, and Pakistan provided the money.
We needed to do Operation Bluestar and KPS Gill needed to work for years to uproot the insurgency problem.
Result: After losing the 1977 elections badly, the Congress came back to power in the 1980 elections. Since then, the Congress and Akali Dal have been alternating power in the state.
1967: Gujarat: The Indian National Congress loses foothold to Swatantra Party , and Congress itself splits.
The communal problems start getting bigger and bigger, until, in 1969: The famous 1969 Gujarat riots take place.
Result: 1972: Congress returns to power with 140 out of 168 seats.
There is communal harmony again until 1990, when Janta Dal + BJP form power and Congress loses power once again.
Mid 1980s: Naxal Movement in Andhra Pradesh
In 1983, the Indian National Congress lost to the Telugu Desam Party for the first time in independent India. Within 2 years, by 1985, the Naxalite movement was a major problem in Andhra Pradesh.
Who was blamed: The Naxalites were blamed for the violence.
Result: Congress returned to power in 1989. Now, the 2 parties alternate power in the state. The Naxawl movement was slowly and painfully curtailed. Some people are still scared to venture to those areas.
1992: Rioting iin the wake of Babri Demolition in Dec 1992.
In fact, 1992 saw rioting in many other states - most notably Mumbai in Maharashtra and Hyderabad in Andhra. But you don't even hear about it. Do you know why? Because in 1992-3, the Congress was in power in Andhra Pradesh and in Maharashtra. But you only hear about Gujarat.
Result: In the subsequent elections, the Congress consolidated its position. The Congress has not been able to return to power in Gujarat. Which means that the Gujarat riot cases after 1992 (including the 2002 riots) simply refuse to die from the public's memory, while the 1969 riots are never mentioned.
We see a similar pattern in 1992, when Narsimha Rao was in power at the center. As the Home Minister in 1984, he had wanted to reduce the bloodshed in the rioting. For this, he was never forgiven by the dynasty. Further, the Congress govt in 1992 was a minority govt and the Congress needed to consolidate its position.
So in 1992, there was massive rioting in the country. Instead of treating this like an organised riot, these cases were treated as spontaneous public response.
No one saw a thing. No enquiries were set up into who did these riots, no one was punished for the 1992 riots.
2014: The Congress loses power decisively and at the helm is a leader who is a serious challenge to the dynasty. What's worse, the dynasty has no pm face to show.
Start, the gradual seeding of the communal headlines. (I have a separate post on that one)
The headlines and the Hindu nation (sorry... Hindutva headlines) reach a crescendo by the 2019 elections.
But the electorate has been quiet, and very one-sided. The BJP comes back with 303 seats in the parliament. So the communal hatred stories must continue.
So, what is the point?
The point is NOT that every time the Congress loses, there is a communal riot. The point is that every time there is a communal attack/riot, the Congress has either just lost, or is about to lose an election. In fact, over other instances, i figured it is actually quite specific. When the DYNASTY is out of power, there are communal riots until the dynastic order is restored.
So, if you want a communal riot, all you have to do is rout the Congress in an election. OR, threaten th power of the Congress. And there WILL be massive bloodshed and hatred.
Bibliography:
1. http://www.columbia.edu/itc/mealac/pritchett/00ambedkar/ambedkar_partition/index.html
2. http://danasurdanu.blogspot.com/2014/07/1945-1946-elections-who-voted-for.html
No comments:
Post a Comment