What's new

Pakistan Claim Junagadh in the Indian State of Gujarat. A Disputed Land

Asian.Century

ELITE MEMBER
Joined
Nov 1, 2010
Messages
10,754
Reaction score
-2
Country
Pakistan
Location
United States
Does Pakistan Claim Junagadh in the Indian State of Gujarat?

India and Pakistan’s territorial conflict over Kashmir (“Jammu and Kashmir” officially) is well known, as are the complications that it creates for cartographers. Maps produced in India must portray all of the disputed area as Indian land, while Pakistani maps show it as part of Pakistan. Outside observers who try to remain impartial usually divide these two countries at the actual line of control, depicting the areas under Indian administration as part of India and those under Pakistani administration as part of Pakistan. Careful maps note that the boundary line is disputed. If one does not indicate the conflicted nature of the division, controversy can ensue. As we have discovered at GeoCurrents, maps that do not include Pakistani-controlled Gilgit-Baltistan and Azad Kashmir as parts of India can arouse the ire of Indian readers.



The new edition (2012) of the Atlas of Islamic Republic of Pakistan is an interesting source to examine the Pakistani position on this issue. The atlas has official status; its copyright is marked as “Government of Pakistan,” it was printed by the Survey of Pakistan, and it was published under the direction of Surveyor-General of Pakistan. Not surprisingly, its maps portray Kashmir as part of Pakistan, but they do mark most of this area as “Disputed Territory,” further specifying that its eastern border with China remains “undefined.” The Atlas does, however, oddly exclude Gilgit from the disputed zone. It also never marks the actual line of control that separates Indian-administered from Pakistani-administered territory.

The truly peculiar feature of the atlas, however, is not its portrayal of Kashmir, but rather that of the Indian state of Gujarat. All maps of Pakistan in the atlas depict a sizable section of western Gujarat as an integral, non-disputed part of Pakistan, whereas its world political map seemingly classifies this same region as if it were an independent country. The area in question is the former princely state of Junagadh. In the imagination of the cartographer, “Junagadh and Manavadar” retains its former complex territory, with numerous exclaves and enclaves, that in actuality vanished shortly after the end of British India. Such fractionated territoriality reflects its heritage as an autonomous statelet that had been under the suzerainty of the British Raj during colonial time. After partition, Junagadh became part of the Republic of India, but evidently that incorporation is still viewed as illegitimate in somePakistani governmental circles. The map in question also portrays the city of Diu as remaining under Portuguese control, whereas in actuality it was annexed by India in 1961.

The Junagadh controversy goes back to 1947-1948 and the emergence of India and Pakistan as independent states. At the time, the rulers of the “princely states” were given some leeway in regard to which country their territories would join. Problems emerged in several princely states, especially those in which the ruler followed a different religion from that followed by the minority of his subjects. Whereas Kashmir at the time was ruled by a Hindu but had a clear Muslim majority, the situation in Junagadh was reversed. During the partition process, the Nawab of Junagadh tied to join his state to Pakistan, much to the displeasure of both his subjects and the British viceroy, Lord Mountbatten. India was also infuriated, and responded with a blockade of the territory. As explained in the Wikipedia:

Eventually, [India’s Deputy Prime Minister Vallabhbhai] Patel ordered the forcible annexation of Junagadh’s three principalities. Junagadh’s state government, facing financial collapse and lacking forces with which to resist Indian force, invited the Government of India to take control. A plebiscite was conducted in December, in which approximately 99% of the people chose India over Pakistan.

…..

Nehru [subsequently] sent a telegram to Liaquat Ali Khan about the Indian take-over of Junagadh. Khan sent a return telegram to Nehru stating that Junagadh was Pakistani territory, and nobody except the Pakistan government was authorised to invite anybody to Junagadh. He also accused the Indian Government of naked aggression on Pakistan’s territory and of violating international law. The Government of Pakistan strongly opposed the Indian occupation.

As evidenced by the Atlas of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, the government of Pakistan has never accepted India’s annexation of the territory, which did proceed in a highly irregular manner. (In fact, as reported to me by by Munis Faruqui, “the Pakistan government still issues a very limited number of car license plates emblazoned with the name “Junagadh,(presumably to members of the former royal family.”) But its also seems clear that a sizable majority of Junagadh’s people wanted union with India, although the 99-percent pro-India vote does make me rather suspicious of the plebiscite.

Another complicating factor was the extraordinarily complex and essentially feudal nature of the political geography of India’s princely states, especially those in Gujarat (see http://www.indiastaterevenues.com/Templates/kathiaw.html for a superb map, reproduced here at a reduced scale). Manavadar, for example, formed a separate territory under the vassalage Junagadh, which in turn was something of a vassal of the much more populous state of Baroda, which had been ruled by a Hindu Maharaja. According to some sources, such subordination meant that their rulers had no right to choose between India and Pakistan. As outlined in a different Wikipedia article:

On 14 September 1947, following the independence of the new Dominions of India and Pakistan, the Khan Sahib Ghulam Moinuddin Khanji acceded the state of Manavadar to the Dominion of Pakistan though the state had no such right to do so being a vassal of Junagarh. This act was done at the same time as his master, the Nawab of Junagadh who himself had no right, being a vassal of Baroda State. Indian police forces were subsequently sent into Manavadar on 22 October 1947, and the Khan Sahib was placed under house arrest at Songadh.

In a fascinating and informative article, Sandeep Bhardwaj refers to the accession of Junagadh to India as a “farce of history.” As he notes:

Junagadh itself contained dozens of petty estates and sheikhdoms within it. In fact the situation was so confusing that it took the Government of India several weeks just to figure out the correct borders before they could formulate a military plan. Moreover, the government lawyers couldn’t figure out whether these tiny sheikhdoms were legally independent or under the suzerainty of Junagadh even after the accession. But Junagadh was an important state, with a population of 700,000, 80% of them Hindus and, predictably, ruled by a Muslim prince.

The Nawab of Junagadh was an eccentric character, famously obsessed with dogs. He was said to have owned 800 of them, each with its individual human attendant. When two of his favourite dogs mated, he is said to have spent Rs. 20-30 lakhs in “wedding” celebrations, and proclaimed the day as State holiday. It is no surprise that the actual governing of the Junagadh was carried out by his dewan (Chief Minister). In the last months of British India his dewan was a Muslim League politician named Shah Nawaz Bhutto (father of future Pakistani Prime Minister Zulfikar and grandfather to Benazir Bhutto).

Farce or not, the accession of Junagadh to India apparently remains a highly contentious issue in Pakistan, at least from the evidence found in the Atlas of Islamic Republic of Pakistan. But as we shall see in a later post, this atlas is itself an extremely problematic work at a number of different levels.

(Note: I am indebted to Chris Kremer for bringing this atlas, and its depiction of Junagadh, to my attention)

Source: http://www.geocurrents.info/geopoli...m-junagadh-indian-state-gujarat#ixzz4Hpofn8xJ
 
.
No point talking about it.

http://www.frontline.in/static/html/fl1821/18210760.htm
The Government of India held a plebiscite in Junagadh as well as five of its erstwhile feudatories on February 20, 1948. It was conducted by an ICS officer C.B. Nagarkar. Out of an electorate of 2,01,457, 1,90,870 cast their votes. Only 91 voted for Pakistan. Of the 31,434 votes cast in the five princeling areas, only 39 voted for accession to Pakistan (Menon; page 142). The result would not have been different even if the U.N. had conducted this plebiscite.

Even the Muslims of Junagadh voted to stay in India.
 
.
No point talking about it.

http://www.frontline.in/static/html/fl1821/18210760.htm
The Government of India held a plebiscite in Junagadh as well as five of its erstwhile feudatories on February 20, 1948. It was conducted by an ICS officer C.B. Nagarkar. Out of an electorate of 2,01,457, 1,90,870 cast their votes. Only 91 voted for Pakistan. Of the 31,434 votes cast in the five princeling areas, only 39 voted for accession to Pakistan (Menon; page 142). The result would not have been different even if the U.N. had conducted this plebiscite.

Even the Muslims of Junagadh voted to stay in India.

What about plebiscite in Kashmir then?
 
.
No point talking about it.

http://www.frontline.in/static/html/fl1821/18210760.htm
The Government of India held a plebiscite in Junagadh as well as five of its erstwhile feudatories on February 20, 1948. It was conducted by an ICS officer C.B. Nagarkar. Out of an electorate of 2,01,457, 1,90,870 cast their votes. Only 91 voted for Pakistan. Of the 31,434 votes cast in the five princeling areas, only 39 voted for accession to Pakistan (Menon; page 142). The result would not have been different even if the U.N. had conducted this plebiscite.

Even the Muslims of Junagadh voted to stay in India.
While i do not disagree that Junagardh is a senseless cause that is now a good ploy to troll India, the plebiscite being conducted by the GoI removes ANY and ALL credibility to it.
 
. .
Sir it gives a feel that all talks and interactions between India and Pakistan are nothing more then trolling each other at even highest level :D :D and wastage of tax payers money on both side

I am sure of one thing even illiterate Pakistanis must know the word PLEBESITE :D , it seems like its your national word
While i do not disagree that Junagardh is a senseless cause that is now a good ploy to troll India, the plebiscite being conducted by the GoI removes ANY and ALL credibility to it.
 
. .
While i do not disagree that Junagardh is a senseless cause that is now a good ploy to troll India, the plebiscite being conducted by the GoI removes ANY and ALL credibility to it.

No one is going to take that argument seriously.

If Pak starts trolling India on such things, then India will reciprocate. For example, if Pak starts talking about Khalistan, we will talk about making Lahore the capital of Khalistan by saying, "Why should the Sikhs be happy with only 1/3rd of Punjab?"

For 'trolling' to have an effect, even the people involved in those territories should have the motive to 'troll' too. There are warlords in Balochistan, Afghanistan and Iran who want to see a country for Balochs. That's where the threat to the Pak establishment will come from. Whereas there is no one in Gujarat who is interested in a free country for the Gujaratis let alone joining with Pak, there is no political or armed threat to India from within West India. Bringing it up will have no effect.

Modi bringing Balochistan into the Indo-Pak equation was an extremely clever move. It put Pak on the back-foot. And if that worked, how long before India talks about redrawing the Durand Line for the Pashtuns?

Trolling should put the establishment in a tizzy, not simply amuse them.

With India having achieved more global diplomatic power than Pakistan, playing the trolling game will obviously become more dangerous for Pakistan.
 
.
Since before the advent of Islam whole of present day Pakistan belonged to Hindus. Lets start claiming whole of Pakistan. :partay:

Pakistanis in majority are more of arab descent. They can move back to their fatherland. :taz:
 
. .
The results will be opposite, and statement will end like : Even the Hindus of valley voted for Pakistan. :pakistan:
can you please enlighten what pakistan has to offer?
economy?
career?
literacy?
Social upliftment?
wife beating?
Ohh yes you forgot Hindus love to live under draconion laws?

So if one wants to go to Pakistan from India either one has to be crazy or should have been propaganda. I fail to see any other reason why one in his sane mind would wanna go to Pakistan. If yes i would love to hear the reasons?
 
.
can you please enlighten what pakistan has to offer?
economy?
career?
literacy?
Social upliftment?
wife beating?
Ohh yes you forgot Hindus love to live under draconion laws?

So if one wants to go to Pakistan from India either one has to be crazy or should have been propaganda. I fail to see any other reason why one in his sane mind would wanna go to Pakistan. If yes i would love to hear the reasons?
:) As if India is offering all these to their inhabitants. There are atleast 6 separatist moments in India. Either they all are crazy in their decision to leave India, or ...... so keep calm.
 
Last edited:
.
:) As if India is offering all these to their inhabitants. There are atleast 6 separatist moments in India. Either they all are crazy to in their decision to leave India, or ...... so keep calm.
Hope you know the gdp of mumbai one city is greater than that of whole of pakistan? None of the above in terms of percentage Pakistan has any advantage unless terrorism is considered a career alternative.

Coming to separatist movements with a country as diverse and as vast as India such kind of things are bound to happen. No geography has ever been changed for India in past 70 years. Some of what you term as separatist movement are more inclined towards the change in government structure.

Now coming to your pipe dream of other movement half of them are either defunct or no longer have prominence.
 
.
What about plebiscite in Kashmir then?

SURE we will :whistle::whistle:
But for mentioned plebiscite, there is procedure for that according to UN (3 step)
Number one step, Removal of military personal from Azad Kashmir.
Second step, Removal of Military from INDIAN KASHMIR.
Third step, Appointment of UN observer in full J&K.

So please tell when is your country going for first step. :drag::whistle::blink:

The results will be opposite, and statement will end like : Even the Hindus of valley voted for Pakistan. :pakistan:

Chacha jaan time to smell some strong coffee :coffee::coffee::coffee::coffee::coffee::coffee::coffee:
 
.
If you are going to talk about Balochistan we will discuss some other places in India :D
 
.

Country Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom