It can tell one what happened to the minorities population share during and after partition though.
And one can also look at the trajectory of minority population after that.
One can also see which country almost completely ethnically cleansed itself during partition and thereafter.
The mass migrations were not always voluntary. They tell a tale by themselves.
Numbers don't lie.
From 20% to 1.5% is a decade surely would be called "prima facie evidence for ethnic cleansing".
But as I said, there is a pattern. It was not unique at all.
OK, but I will just provide a start. In such issues, self drive with an open mind helps best. Anyone else leading you all the way (and spoon feeding) can be called biased or worse.
Let's just take a look at what happened to Zoroastrians in Iran, something a little distant from us both and so not very personal.
After the Muslim conquest of Persia, Zoroastrians were given dhimmi status and subjected to persecutions; discrimination and harassment began in the form of sparse violence.
Zoroastrians were made to pay an extra tax called Jizya, failing which they were either killed, enslaved or imprisoned. Those paying Jizya were subjected to insults and humiliation by the tax collectors.
Zoroastrians who were captured as slaves in wars were given their freedom if they converted to Islam.
You can read the whole thing here and look up references if you want to. You can also talk to a few Parsis.
Persecution of Zoroastrians - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
And this "dhimmi" thing was not unique to them at all. You can be sure of that.
Sure does.
