• Saturday, October 20, 2018

After partition: India, Pakistan, Bangladesh

Discussion in 'Social & Current Events' started by Muhammad Yahya, Jul 6, 2009.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Muhammad Yahya

    Muhammad Yahya SENIOR MEMBER

    Nov 3, 2008
    +0 / 1,277 / -0
    After partition: India, Pakistan, Bangladesh

    British India divided into two - Pakistan with Muslim majority and India secular but with Hindu majority
    India's Mahatma Gandhi opposed the idea
    Last Viceroy Lord Louis Mountbatten oversaw talks between India's Jawaharlal Nehru and Mohammed Ali Jinnah head of Muslim League
    Led to largest mass migration in history

    Quick guide: Partition
    India and Pakistan 07

    In 1947, the jewel of the British Empire, India, was granted independence, divided along religious lines and two nations were born - India and Pakistan.

    Partition left 10 million people uprooted and more than half a million Muslims, Sikhs and Hindus dead in riots and massacres.

    Sixty years on, the status of Kashmir remains unresolved despite a tenuous peace process between India and Pakistan, following three wars. Communal unrest continues to surface from time to time in both countries. The good news is that the economies are growing, especially in India.

    Find out more about how India, Pakistan and, since 1971 Bangladesh, have developed since partition.


    1. Dominion of Pakistan created on 14 August 1947. Became world's first Islamic Republic in 1956. New city of Islamabad replaced Karachi as capital in the mid 1960s
    2. British India was made up of provinces, princely states and state agencies. An independent Union of India was created on 15 August 1947 and renamed the Republic of India in 1950
    3. Punjab was split in two. Majority Muslim western part became Pakistan's Punjab province; majority Sikh and Hindu eastern part became India's Punjab state
    4. Bengal divided into Indian state of West Bengal and East Pakistan, which became East Bengal in 1956 and Bangladesh achieved independence after a civil war in 1971


    India, Pakistan and Bangladesh have come a long way since the British left them. Of the three nations, India has seen by far the most dramatic growth.

    In terms of economic resources, India did much better than Pakistan out of partition. It inherited 90% of the subcontinent's industry and the thriving cities of Delhi, Bombay (now Mumbai) and Calcutta.

    It is now one of the world's fastest developing economies with average growth rates of 8% over the past three years. It is also emerging as a serious global player in information technology, telecommunications and pharmaceuticals.

    By contrast, Pakistan's economy which was based on agriculture and controlled by feudal elites, was left with 17.5% of the British colonial government's financial reserves after partition.

    Nevertheless, it has seen sustained growth since the early 1950s despite internal strife, conflict with India, US sanctions, global recession and, more recently, the 2005 earthquake.

    The economy really took off in 2000 after reforms that saw public sector enterprises privatised, relaxation of regulations on external trade and reform of the banking sector.

    Thanks to economic growth and foreign investment, all three states have seen expansion and improvement of health and education services. Life expectancy has increased, infant and maternal death rates have dropped, and literacy rates risen.

    But poverty is still widespread in all three nations, which feature in the top 10 most populous in the world. Almost half the population in Bangladesh lives on less than $1 a day and Pakistan's social indicators still lag behind countries with comparable per capita incomes.

    A substantial number of people living in India's villages remain illiterate and impoverished, raising concerns about the inclusivity of the economic boom.

    Powerful regional and caste-based parties have empowered many poor people whose progress was hampered by the ancient Hindu caste system, but that system still impedes widespread social progress.


    After independence, India and Pakistan had to devise new
    ways of running their countries and creating nation states.

    Pakistan has been led largely by military rulers over the last 60 years. Bangladesh fell under military rule a few years after independence, democracy being restored in 1990, but the political scene there is unpredictable.

    While Pakistan was created as a Muslim state after Jinnah's insistence that Muslims of the former colony needed a separate country of their own, Hindu-majority India was, and formally remains, secular, and also the world's largest democracy.

    The violence between Muslims, Sikhs and Hindus in 1947 was never repeated on such a horrific scale, but the struggle to keep the peace between communal and religious groups is ongoing in both India and Pakistan.

    After the death of India's first prime minister, Jawaharlal Nehru, in 1964 and the rise to power of his daughter Indira Gandhi, tensions grew between the Hindu majority and Sikhs. In 1984, Gandhi was killed by her Sikh bodyguards after ordering troops to flush out Sikh militants from the Golden Temple in Amritsar. And in 1992, widespread Hindu-Muslim violence erupted after Hindu extremists demolished the Babri mosque at Ayodhya.

    More recently, there have been several bombings, such as the attack on Mumbai's train network in July 2006 which police blamed on Pakistani militants and a banned Indian group. Pakistan, whose citizens are mostly Muslim, has seen Sunni and Shia factions killing each other in their thousands in three of the four Pakistani regions since the 1980s.

    After 9/11, Pakistan's government became an ally of Washington by dropping its support for the Taleban regime in Afghanistan.

    Religion has been a divisive force in Pakistan and India

    It took a tougher stance towards Islamic extremists, as highlighted in the bloody siege and suicide bombing at Islamabad's Red Mosque in July.

    Bangladesh has also been affected by internal strife.

    The country has suffered from bomb attacks on secular and cultural organisations and events for more than a decade.

    The near simultaneous bombings across Bangladesh in 2005 were a dramatic pointer to religious extremism and two fringe Islamic organisations have been banned.

    India: $22.10bn;
    2.57% of GDP (2006)
    Pakistan: $4.54bn;
    3.14% of GDP (2007)
    Bangladesh: $687m;
    2.24% of GDP (2006 estimate)


    ARMED FORCES (total strength)
    India: 1,324,000
    Pakistan: 570,000
    Bangladesh: 115,500

    India: 3,978 main battle tanks including 1,133 in reserve
    Pakistan: 2,461 main battle tanks including 1,100 in reserve
    Bangladesh: 180 (claimed)

    India: Air Force: 763, Navy: 34
    Pakistan: Air Force: 352, Navy: 16
    Bangladesh: 62

    India: 16
    Pakistan: 8
    Bangladesh: none

    India: 58
    Pakistan: 12
    Bangladesh: 5 (frigates only - 3 of limited use)
    Source: IISS 2007 Military Balance/ Jane's Country Risk


    NUCLEAR WEAPONS (estimated total warheads)
    India: 50 - 90
    Pakistan: 30-60
    Bangladesh: none
    Sources: SIPRI Yearbook 2006/NRDC

    The military balance between India and Pakistan is difficult to establish as it depends on many factors, such as quality of command, training, discipline and morale.

    Most Indian-Pakistani conflicts have ended in stalemate except the Bangladesh War in 1971, when Pakistan's defeat was complete.

    India backed, sheltered and trained Bangladeshi guerrillas which contributed to Pakistan's defeat.

    Kashmir has been the main flashpoint ever since Partition.

    The two neighbours, now nuclear powers, have twice waged war over the disputed region - in 1947-48 and 1965.

    The region is now divided in two by a Line of Control and often breached by separatist militants.

    In 1999, fighting between Indian and Pakistani-backed forces in Indian Kashmir led to a new conflict, known as the Kargil conflict, but not full-scale war.

    In Depth: Read more about the Kashmir conflict
    In their last confrontation in 2002, India deployed 700,000 troops; Pakistan, 300,000 - three-fourths of their regular forces - either side of the Line of Control in Kashmir and the internationally recognised India-Pakistan border.

    Both readied their armoured, air and naval forces for war. India prepared for offensive operations to destroy militant camps.

    Pakistan's objective was to defend key points against attack.

    Intense Western diplomacy and, perhaps more significantly, mutual nuclear deterrence eventually defused tensions, but it was a close run thing.
    • Thanks Thanks x 4
  2. Patriot

    Patriot ELITE MEMBER

    Sep 8, 2008
    +0 / 6,326 / -0
    India has beaten Pakistan economically.You cannot compare India with Pakistan period.Pakistan is way behind now economically and socially plus India is secular and united where as in Pakistan we have too many internal problems and people are crying for extreme Shria Laws.Pakistan due to coups and political choas failed where as India is very strong today thanks to it's democracy and political stability.Pakistan can recover but the Mullahs needs to be stopped preaching Wahabism all over Pakistan.
    • Thanks Thanks x 5
  3. Muhammad Yahya

    Muhammad Yahya SENIOR MEMBER

    Nov 3, 2008
    +0 / 1,277 / -0
    India is almost three times the size of Pakistan and population is also 5 times , it has more human and land resources .

    I think Pakistan within its resourses and geopolitical conditions performed not bad in last 60 years.

    Pakistan is 5th largest world populated country ,so it should utilize human resourse potential by increasing the education standard and have also advantage of strategic location. Pakistan can become hub of economy for middle east and central asia.

    In short, Pakistan have potential to become economic super power of world in next 20 years if they focus on infrastructure,education and security .
    • Thanks Thanks x 2
  4. Patriot

    Patriot ELITE MEMBER

    Sep 8, 2008
    +0 / 6,326 / -0
    but we have too many internal differences.We need a strong federal government and stable political situation to do that.It cannot be done under the current corp of Leaders.
  5. UmairP


    May 14, 2008
    +0 / 1,125 / -0
    No we dont have too many internal problems. Not more than India, my friend.
    • Thanks Thanks x 2
  6. Muhammad Yahya

    Muhammad Yahya SENIOR MEMBER

    Nov 3, 2008
    +0 / 1,277 / -0
    We need to reverse the corruption ratio , which is arround 80% of our resourses are going into corruption , we need to decrease our corruption level to 20% or below.

    The biggest problem of Pakistan is corruption in miltery and non miltery organisations.

    This problem is common in all developing countries.

    Corruption in Developed and Developing Countries - The International Dimension Of Corruption
    Since the end of the Cold War, policymakers in many countries have recognized the global nature of corruption and are now making efforts to coordinate their control and cleanup efforts. Thus, instead of viewing corruption as a domestic problem caused primarily by the interaction of the bureaucracy with the private sector, many lawmakers, especially those in the developing and transition economies, are now acknowledging the contributions of transnational corporations to the problem.

    Many governmental and nongovernmental organizations—including the United Nations (UN), the Organization of American States (OAS), the International Chamber of Commerce, Transparency International (TI), the World Economic Forum (WEF), World Bank, Interpol, and the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD)—have developed an interest in dealing with corruption.

    Several reasons have been advanced to explain the sudden interest by these organizations. Changes in international political relations during the period from 1989 to 1991 significantly reduced people's tolerance for incompetence, malfeasance, and venality in the public sector. As part of the movement toward improved governance, citizens of many countries demanded the elimination of corrupt practices. Thus, since the late 1980s, the balance of power in many countries has been shifting in favor of more open, transparent, and participatory governance structures.

    Scholars have identified three changes that have contributed to the globalization of corruption. First, greater levels of economic integration have increased chances that corruption in one region of the world will have an impact on economic and political activities in other parts of the world. For example, when the corrupt activities of the Bank of Credit and Commerce International (BCCI) forced it into insolvency in 1991, many economies around the world were affected. In fact, several countries in Africa suffered significant financial losses from the BCCI collapse.

    Second, developments in communication technology have revolutionized the international financial system and enhanced the ability of traders to engage in corruption. The emergence of electronic networks for the transfer of funds has made it quite difficult for countries to deal effectively with corruption. Many anticorruption organizations have argued that the ease with which funds can be transferred to Europe or the Caribbean from different parts of the world implies that corrupt civil servants can effectively hide their extra-legal income from the public, making it virtually impossible for such funds to be recovered in the event of conviction. Fortunately, policing agencies, especially in the West, continue to innovate and come up with technology that can effectively monitor traffic in these electronic networks. Such technology could prove very helpful in the fight against global corruption.

    Third, since the end of the Cold War there has been a significant increase in the number of cooperative alliances between economic units, within countries and across borders. Continued globalization exacerbates the problem of corruption; however, it also offers opportunities for its control.

    Pervasive corruption is a major threat to the maintenance of a free, multilateral trading system. In order for a global competitive economy to function properly and efficiently, participants must play by the rules. Opportunism (e.g., corruption) by some market participants can derail the international trading system since it (i.e., corruption) invariably creates an unlevel playing field. For example, corporations or countries that do not tolerate corruption will be placed at a competitive disadvantage. Those countries that encourage their companies to engage in corruption abroad and offer favorable tax treatment for bribes paid to foreign public officials place these firms at a competitive advantage over those from countries in which corruption (including paying bribes to foreign public officials) has been criminalized. In fact, many American firms, which are prohibited by U.S. law from offering bribes to foreign officials, have complained bitterly of the disadvantage that they suffer since, until recently, many of their European counterparts were allowed and often encouraged by favorable tax treatment by their national governments to engage in corrupt practices abroad.

    Many policymakers around the world, especially in the developed countries, have come to realize that the long-run social, economic, human, and political costs of global corruption are enormous and that it poses a threat to the rule of law. It can also cause citizens to lose confidence in their leaders and distort market incentives and negatively affect the flow of investment and, hence, wealth creation. Perhaps more important is the fact that corruption can prevent the poor from gaining access to welfare-enhancing and even life-saving public goods and services.

    Read more: Corruption in Developed and Developing Countries - The International Dimension Of Corruption

    The Transparency International Corruption Perceptions Index
    The corruption perceptions index (CPI) ranks countries every year in terms of the level of corruption perceived to exist among public officials and politicians. The material used in the index is gathered from 14 different polls and surveys from seven independent institutions carried out on business people, academics and risk analysts, including surveys on both local and expatriate residents. The countries included on the list must have records of at least three TI accepted surveys that year. The first CPI was published in "Der Spiegel" in 1995, and since then it has been published yearly. The least corrupted countries have been pretty much the same over the years; there are 8 countries which have been in the top ten since the beginning of CPI. These countries are: Finland, New Zealand, Denmark, Singapore, Canada, Sweden, Netherlands and Norway.

    The 2001 Corruption Perceptions Index:

    1. Finland 9.9
    2. Denmark 9.5
    3. New Zealand 9.4
    4. Iceland 9.2
    4. Singapore 9.2
    6. Sweden 9.0
    7. Canada 8.9
    8. Netherlands 8.8
    9. Luxembourg 8.7
    10. Norway 8.6
    11. Australia 8.5
    12. Switzerland 8.4
    13. United Kingdom 8.3
    14. Hong Kong 7.9
    15. Austria 7.8
    16. Israel 7.6
    16. USA 7.6
    18. Chile 7.5
    18. Ireland 7.5
    20. Germany 7.4
    21. Japan 7.1
    22. Spain 7.0
    23. France 6.7
    24. Belgium 6.6
    25. Portugal 6.3
    26. Botswana 6.0
    27. Taiwan 5.9
    28. Estonia 5.6
    29. Italy 5.5
    30. Namibia 5.4
    31. Hungary 5.3
    31. Trinidad & Tobago 5.3
    31. Tunisia 5.3
    34. Slovenia 5.2
    35. Uruguay 5.1
    36. Malaysia 5.0
    37. Jordan 4.9
    38. Lithuania 4.8
    38. South Africa 4.8
    40. Costa Rica 4.5
    40. Mauritius 4.5
    42. Greece 4.2
    42. South Korea 4.2
    44. Peru 4.1
    44. Poland 4.1
    46. Brazil 4.0
    47. Bulgaria 3.9
    47. Croatia 3.9
    47. Czech Republic 3.9
    50. Colombia 3.8
    51. Mexico 3.7
    51. Panama 3.7
    51. Slovak Republic 3.7
    54. Egypt 3.6
    54. El Salvador 3.6
    54. Turkey 3.6
    57. Argentina 3.5
    57. China 3.5
    59. Ghana 3.4
    59. Latvia 3.4
    61. Malawi 3.2
    61. Thailand 3.2
    63. Dominican Rep 3.1
    63. Moldova 3.1
    65. Guatemala 2.9
    65. Philippines 2.9
    65. Senegal 2.9
    65. Zimbabwe 2.9
    69. Romania 2.8
    69. Venezuela 2.8
    71. Honduras 2.7
    72. India 2.7
    72. Kazakhstan 2.7
    72. Uzbekistan 2.7
    75. Vietnam 2.6
    75. Zambia 2.6
    77. Cote d´Ivoire 2.4
    77. Nicaragua 2.4
    79. Ecuador 2.3
    79. Pakistan 2.3
    79. Russia 2.3
    82. Tanzania 2.2
    83. Ukraine 2.1
    84. Azerbaijan 2.0
    85. Bolivia 2.0
    85. Cameroon 2.0
    85. Kenya 2.0
    88. Indonesia 1.9
    88. Uganda 1.9
    90. Nigeria 1.0
    91. Bangladesh 0.4

    The score after each country is the average score of all surveys made in the country. The score of 10 is highly clean, while 0 is highly corrupted. For a complete list with more detailed information, check the Transparency International web site at www.transparency.org
    Last edited: Jul 6, 2009
  7. Zob


    Jan 4, 2009
    +0 / 342 / -0

    India has beaten Pakistan economically.You cannot compare India with Pakistan period.Pakistan is way behind now economically and socially plus India is secular and united where as in Pakistan we have too many internal problems and people are crying for extreme Shria Laws.Pakistan due to coups and political choas failed where as India is very strong today thanks to it's democracy and political stability.Pakistan can recover but the Mullahs needs to be stopped preaching Wahabism all over Pakistan.

    india beat us economically because our leaders are not sincere!!

    india is secular in NAME ONLY.....and as for pakistan and its internal problem well my friend the day e won the WORLDCUP where werethose problems?? the thing is our ENEMIES want us to fight each other and like fools we do exactly what they wants us to do!!!

    as for ISLAM....well see we are muslims we should become good mulisms BUT no one should put TALIBAN sharia on us!!! because TALIBAN is not ISLAM....proper sharia well i am never going to object to it because i don't want to be classified as a KAFIR on the day of judgment.....however, the true sharia is not as difficult as OUR MULLAs make it seem like!!!

    islam is a peaceful religion that give right to people when the world was going through dark-ages!!!

    in order to fix things all WE need is a GOOD LEADER!!! give us 1 decade of a good leader and i assure you inshallah we will do stuff that others take 20 years to complete!!
    • Thanks Thanks x 4
  8. Omar1984

    Omar1984 ELITE MEMBER

    Sep 12, 2008
    +0 / 12,607 / -0
    Bharatis can't stand it when people talk anything negative about their country, while our Pakistanis always focus on the negative things about our country. There are also many Pakistanis who are big time sell-outs.

    BTW, there's more separatist movements in India than in Pakistan.
    • Thanks Thanks x 1
  9. notsuperstitious

    notsuperstitious ELITE MEMBER

    Jan 11, 2009
    +4 / 20,273 / -21
    Is that why we have enjoyed relatively free media throughout whereas you got it only recently? You have too many pre conceived notions about the 'other'.
    • Thanks Thanks x 1
  10. BSF


    Jun 21, 2009
    +0 / 58 / -0
    Are you trying to say that Indian leaders are sincere.

    Let me tell you they were as corrupt as your leaders.

    We gave a free press which helped keep a track of them and eventually removing them from the political system if they are involved in corruption

    This is happing in paksitan too.

    I remember seeing this video in this forum which showed how a leader went to America for aid but was snapped attending a mujra arriving in a limousine, living in a fancy hotel or some thing like that and he was heavily criticized in the Pakistani media.

    You guys are making progress.

    These movements are peanuts when compared to the ttp and taliban and the amount of struggle your army is facing in squashing them.

    Before you throw Naxals at me let me remind you that the Indian army is not involved in anti Naxal operations.
    • Thanks Thanks x 1
  11. Gin ka Pakistan

    Gin ka Pakistan SENIOR MEMBER

    Jul 1, 2009
    +0 / 1,036 / -0
    Pakistan can help Bangladesh by giving them our old SUBMARINES Dolphins class (when we will get the new German ones) and all our A5s and F-7 by 2015

    Bangladeshi Army has just 180 Tanks (that's it) , We should give them our T-69s too.

    As a brotherly nation, all for free.
  12. haawk

    haawk BANNED

    Apr 24, 2009
    +0 / 203 / -0

    • Thanks Thanks x 1
  13. Guba


    New Recruit

    Apr 30, 2009
    +0 / 2 / -0
    You will also have to subsidize the cost of keeping that equipment, maybe if you also pitch in like 2 Billion a year for maintenance that would help pay for fuel and training
  14. AgNoStiC MuSliM

    AgNoStiC MuSliM PDF Veteran

    Jul 11, 2007
    +36 / 19,478 / -0
    United States
    Jeez man - take some prozac or something and stop being so depressed and negative.

    Almost everything you pointed out is also an issue in many other multi-ethnic nations, including India.

    In terms of economic growth, had it not been for the rise in terrorism in Pakistan post 2007, Pakistan's economic growth would have continued to remain pretty high and comparable to India.

    In terms of per-capita indicators, Pakistan is still pretty close to India in most sectors, despite the complete slowdown in the economy due to multiple reasons post 2007.

    We may lag behind a bit as we struggle to enforce the GoP's writ across the badlands of FATA, but as the past has shown, once those issues are under control, Pakistan can revert to the high growth years of the not so distant past.
    • Thanks Thanks x 1
  15. Gin ka Pakistan

    Gin ka Pakistan SENIOR MEMBER

    Jul 1, 2009
    +0 / 1,036 / -0
    Good point
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.