• Friday, November 22, 2019

Featured Pakistan's political history-Part 1

Discussion in 'Seniors Cafe' started by WAJsal, Nov 10, 2015.

  1. WAJsal

    WAJsal MODERATOR

    Messages:
    7,767
    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2014
    Ratings:
    +212 / 13,422 / -0
    Country:
    Pakistan
    Location:
    Pakistan
    Nothing better than reading a quality post...:tup:
    :lol: Thank you, experience helps. You remember when i started :hitwall:.
    Truth nonetheless. You have only justified why India didn't pay this sum, not as to how quoted part is half the truth.
    A maestro at work:coffee:, you haven't seen some of his other posts.
    I did not wish to write a book- if you want i me to i will certainly give it a try. There are somethings missing, i agree. Will be sure not to miss anything in coming part.
    Thank you for giving it a read guys, and thank you for the kind words.


    Completely forgot to tag you guys, do give it a read...
    @S.U.R.B. ,@forcetrip ,@Psychic ,@A.M. ....
     
    Last edited: Nov 13, 2015
  2. Levina

    Levina BANNED

    Messages:
    15,289
    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2013
    Ratings:
    +60 / 37,142 / -1
    Country:
    India
    Location:
    United Arab Emirates
    Well, you decided to post merely half of what had transpired between India and Pakistan, as in you did not mention in your article, the reason why India may not have paid the amount to Pakistan. By telling half truth, you're misleading your audience.
    That what I meant.
    yes I remember. It was a mushy teenager's story. :)
    But it's okay, some ppl like me will never learn from their mistake
     
  3. Daneshmand

    Daneshmand ELITE MEMBER

    Messages:
    3,109
    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2014
    Ratings:
    +43 / 7,096 / -0
    Country:
    Iran, Islamic Republic Of
    Location:
    Pakistan
    I am sure Mountbatten was joking. He was instrumental in designing a future wherein Pakistan would remain in perpetual conflict with India.
     
  4. Indus Pakistan

    Indus Pakistan ELITE MEMBER

    Messages:
    16,131
    Joined:
    May 7, 2012
    Ratings:
    +188 / 44,685 / -8
    Country:
    Pakistan
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    (1) Personally, I would like to see the Punjab, North-West Frontier Province, Sindh and

    (2) Baluchistan amalgamated into a single State. Self-government within the British Empire,

    (3) or without the British Empire, the formation of a consolidated North-West Indian Muslim State


    (4) appears to me to be the final destiny of the Muslims, at least of North-West India.


    Allahabad Address 1930 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    Was it destiny ?. Well, look at Pakistan 2015. Is it not a federation of those very provinces Allama mentioned in 1930 - Khyber Paktunkhwa, Punjab, Sindh and Balochistan?

    It was not compensation. India was not giving anything to Pakistan. This was Pakistan share of assets of British India. Both India and Pakistan had equal legal claim on those assets as both were successor states to British India. It so happened that the money was in New Delhi and thus ended up in hands of India.

    And the Kashmir issue happened some time after independance. Why such protracted delay? This was because there was extreme reluctance on part of India to let go of Pakistan assets inherited from British India that ended up in control of India. This reluctance explains the delay until much later the Kashmir issue cropped up which provided the ideal excuse as a cop out.
     
    • Thanks Thanks x 2
  5. Levina

    Levina BANNED

    Messages:
    15,289
    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2013
    Ratings:
    +60 / 37,142 / -1
    Country:
    India
    Location:
    United Arab Emirates
    Equal claim???
    Sorry sir, you've got it wrong. The assests were to be divided proportionately.

    upload_2015-11-17_8-14-35.png upload_2015-11-17_8-19-35.png

    Back then, India wasn't rich enough to have paid Rs75 crores in hard cash and ergo it was decided to be paid in 2-3 installments. And that's when Kashmir incurssion took place and Nehru decided not to pay the rest of the amount.
    For more info you can read my thread
    Partition and the division of assets between India and Pakistan.
     
    Last edited: Nov 17, 2015
    • Thanks Thanks x 1
  6. Indus Pakistan

    Indus Pakistan ELITE MEMBER

    Messages:
    16,131
    Joined:
    May 7, 2012
    Ratings:
    +188 / 44,685 / -8
    Country:
    Pakistan
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    In a claim there are two facets: -

    (i) the right to that claim.
    (ii) the share of that claim.

    I was alluding to (i) that is Pakistan had equal right to that claim in consequence of the fact that it along with India were both the successor states to British India. One or the other did not have a right that superseded the other because both ( notwithstanding that one adopted the name used as a suffix for the colony ) were heirs to the British colony. To put it in another way both were children of the colony.

    The next issue is that how both claims are balanced. That is simple. You uses plain logic and common sense. Where assets can be divided in proportion to population size that ought to be done. Which is what we have here.

    India was indeed not rich enough. However we are NOT talking about India having to give anything. We are talking about "monetary and liquid assets" that belonged to British India.

    I have not done the reading on the subject but it says "monetary and liquid assets" that had to be shared along the percentages given. In order to share something along a percentage the the quantum must have existed as assets of British India.

    Thus all India had to do was hand over the share of that quantum and I can't understand why you mention India was poor or required time. It was quantum of assets already in the kitty of British India at the point of independance.

    What India did was after the all the assets fell into the hands of India simply because of the accident that the administrative structure of British India was based in New Delhi, Nehru became evasive because he did NOT want to give Pakistan's share. Wait long enough and he got his excuse. Kashmir. Cop out.
     
    Last edited: Nov 18, 2015
  7. Raja.Pakistani

    Raja.Pakistani SENIOR MEMBER

    Messages:
    3,048
    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2011
    Ratings:
    +0 / 6,621 / -0
    Country:
    Pakistan
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    Was distribution of resources of colonial government fair? It seem Pakistan won a poor share of the colonial government's financial reserves 17.5 % vs 82.5%? and Pakistan economy was still best performing asian economy until 1965 even without getting their share of colonial government
     
  8. Levina

    Levina BANNED

    Messages:
    15,289
    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2013
    Ratings:
    +60 / 37,142 / -1
    Country:
    India
    Location:
    United Arab Emirates
    I am not going to bang my head against a wall. I have already explained the reasons under which such a decision was taken.
    And if you guys don't know Pakistan still owes a debt of Rs 300 crores to India.
    I have explained all this and more in my thread.
    Partition and the division of assets between India and Pakistan.

    I want you guys to do more research on this subject before quoting me. Do your homework guyz!
     
  9. New

    New PDF THINK TANK: ANALYST

    Messages:
    2,023
    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2012
    Ratings:
    +10 / 4,503 / -1
    Country:
    Iran, Islamic Republic Of
    Location:
    Iran, Islamic Republic Of
    Quite a good read, man. Thanks for the effort.
    It's not a complicated fact, there are just two options, you either learn from history and walk on the pass of progression, or you are just repeating it. And if the improvements seems to be hard and slow, and progression as it's expected is not achieved then shall not be hard to conclude that history is being repeated.
    It's really nice to see you as an individual being so eager to learn from the past, but the more important is the fact that how would you try to educate your society, that progress will not occur anywhere outside, but rather it comes from within, from the hours a nation spend in libraries, learning from the past and history.
     
    • Thanks Thanks x 3
  10. WAJsal

    WAJsal MODERATOR

    Messages:
    7,767
    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2014
    Ratings:
    +212 / 13,422 / -0
    Country:
    Pakistan
    Location:
    Pakistan
    Thank you for the kind words. The worst part is people trying to doctor our history, heroes being presented as villains and vice versa. I have shared it with my friends, shared it with as many people as i can. Have done a proper analysis at the same time. Moving on to military rule, the real problems start for us. It's a shame we had to go through such avoidable conflicts. Our younger generation must know our real history, nothing worse than seeing the likes of Ayub Khan, Yahya Khan being presented as heroes, nothing.
    regards
     
    • Thanks Thanks x 3
  11. Levina

    Levina BANNED

    Messages:
    15,289
    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2013
    Ratings:
    +60 / 37,142 / -1
    Country:
    India
    Location:
    United Arab Emirates
    Thank you for leading me to this thread once again. You've done a good job. :thumbsup:
    Albeit, I must say, you have completely avoided delving into the advantages that Pakistan had over India,immediately after independence. If I were to list a few then those would be:
    1. Pakistan was a smaller territory, making it easier to govern for administrative purposes and development.
    2. Pakistan had just one major religion and the minority population was just too small. India,on the other hand,had a majority which was divided among themselves along the lines of caste, and minorities which were in majority,in different parts of the country.
    3. Being an Islamic country, a number of Muslim countries were its allies. Ex - Saudi Arabia. India at the same time had to cautiously choose its friends and recognise the foes.
    4. Paksitan had connectivity to Middle East.
    5. Pakistan had abundace of minerals and fertile lands.
    India has survived merely on its will to remain united or it would have splintered into tiny countries almost 7 decades back.
     
    • Thanks Thanks x 1
  12. WAJsal

    WAJsal MODERATOR

    Messages:
    7,767
    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2014
    Ratings:
    +212 / 13,422 / -0
    Country:
    Pakistan
    Location:
    Pakistan
    In my personal opinion Pakistan and India faced similar problems, only difference was the magnitude of it and the political smartness of overcoming those problem(call it what you can). Main problems being:
    • Poverty
    • Unrest
    • Administrative challenges.
    Muslim League was a one-man show, with Jinnah passing away in 1948 Muslim league itself was exposed. Jinnah had so many other things to worry about he completely neglected Muslim League(and i don't blame him), there was no other second or third tier leadership which could take over Jinnah. With the party dissolving over time, bureaucrats had an opportunity to steal the show from the politicians. It was later stolen by man in Uniform, you can read more about in Part 2.
    Read the quoted part carefully and i will get back too your post:
    See how bureaucrats gained power, all thanks to the incompetence of politicians:

    I have answered this part of your post. In simpler words, India made a 'foundation', everyone was brought under the constitutional wing. Your magnitude of problems were greater but with our incompetence i'd say we faced similar problems. You just dealt with them in a better manner.
    Doesn't really matter, we haven't even yet taken any real advantage of fertile land or mineral resources. We took some economic advantage in Ayub Khans era, but even then a small section or the 'status quo' really benefited from the economic progress. The poor suffered, and the sense of deprivation grew in Balochistan and East Pakistan. Any resource is useless if the country doesn't take advantage of it.
    @scorpionx ,@Joe Shearer

    Last point, Pakistan faced more administrative problems. With little skill and no structure too, i think not having a structure could have been one of the reasons for all the political instability.
     
    • Thanks Thanks x 5
  13. Joe Shearer

    Joe Shearer PROFESSIONAL

    Messages:
    19,885
    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2009
    Ratings:
    +114 / 32,134 / -4
    Country:
    India
    Location:
    India
    Your analysis is bang on. Unfortunately, we are now ruled by majoritarians, who forget that the essence of democracy is the protection of the rights of the individual, which, incidentally, our Constitution did very well. Now we have a pack of hyenas attacking the Constitution at every level, in letter and in spirit. We stand to lose all the advantages we gained over our chaotic environment, thanks to these mindless and extremely short-sighted ideologues of the right.

    The day will come, if they continue, when the Pakistan military will simply walk into India.
     
    • Thanks Thanks x 4
  14. Levina

    Levina BANNED

    Messages:
    15,289
    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2013
    Ratings:
    +60 / 37,142 / -1
    Country:
    India
    Location:
    United Arab Emirates
    Great post @WAJsal .
    I need to skim through your points once more before I reply to this.
    Give me time.

    Rgds :)
     
  15. dadeechi

    dadeechi BANNED

    Messages:
    4,298
    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2015
    Ratings:
    +2 / 4,543 / -10
    Country:
    India
    Location:
    United States
    That is what happens when one instead of taking the problem head-on (like Indira did with emergency) one starts the policy of appeasement (like Rajiv did with appeasing of Muslims on Shah bano case & give into Sharia and later appease Hindus with Ram Janmabhoomi )

    Rajiv was a such curse on India...He could have done wonders with his 2/3rds majority but alas....