What's new

What If Bengal emerged as a unified nation post 1947 ?

Following the dissolution of the British Raj, Should Bengal have emerged as an independent nation ?

  • Yes, Bengal should have emerged as an independent nation held together by Bengali Culture.

    Votes: 19 63.3%
  • No, as history has shown, Muslims & Dalits couldn't have lived with the abusive landowning brahmins.

    Votes: 11 36.7%

  • Total voters
    30
  • Poll closed .
But, Bengal Congress and Nazimuddin opposed this. Nazimuddin opposed mainly because it would deny Dhaka as the new Capital of the eastern wing of Pakistan. After all, he was a native of Dhaka.
Self-centric Khawja Nazimuddin did a lot of damage to the interests of East Bengal. He not only did not take any initiative to invite Tripura to join East Bengal even ignored the Tripura queen's envoys sent to Dhaka to discuss about the terms of merger, he also prematurely in June, 1947 declared Dhaka as the capital of future East Pakistan. It greatly damaged the Muslim league's claim on Calcutta or any compensation for it in case it goes to India.

Compare this to the Punjabi Sikh and Hindus, they steadfastly refused to consider any capital other than Lahore to the end and bitterly fought over it. It did not win them Lahore, but Radcliffe was generous to them in other sectors. Indian Punjab was awarded a number of Muslim majority Tehsils.

As Khawja Nazimudding was from Dhaka nawab family, he did not want Calcutta to be included in East Bengal or even use it as bargaining chip to gain from other sectors. A fake rumour was circulated in that time as 'East Bengal govt. will receive 33 crore Rupees as a compensation for loss of Calcutta' which was totally baseless but Nazimudding group used this rumour to assuage the feeling. HS Suhrawardy was not even interested about the Radcliffe's boundary commission and he totally ignored it's proceeding. He was still dreaming about 'united Bengal' . Their internal squabble greatly damaged the Muslim position in Bengal boundary commission.
 
Last edited:
.
A United Bengal would have become a Lebanon or Bosnia style state in my opinion i.e. religious communities having fixed roles and a bureaucracy heavily impacted by the corruption that follows such stagnation. A religiously homogenous albeit smaller Bengali state is actually a much better scenario, at least for the Bengali Muslims. Otherwise some Hindus influenced by Pan-Indianism would have been used by India as a fifth column to impose its will on Bangladesh.

An ideal situation would have been for Bangladesh to emerge as independent of but with close ties to Pakistan in 1947 (some kind of defensive alliance).
 
.
p7-lead-1598018003299.jpg



Imagining what could have a been a strong, vibrant, democratic state

In 1947, the Partition of British India was essentially the partition of the presidencies of Bengal and Punjab and people of these two provinces suffered the most due to the bifurcation.

In the run-up to the dates of independence with the suspense of the pending disclosure of Redcliffe line, mass riots broke out across Punjab forcing 1.5 million people from east to west and vice versa within the province before, during and immediately after August 14 and 15.

A kind of violent population exchange took place, and almost all the Muslims were dispatched to Pakistan from Indian Punjab, and similar things happened to Sikhs and Hindus from Pakistani Punjab in the reverse direction.

Punjab or, at least the Western part of it, was central to the idea of Pakistan; whereas Bengal, or the eastern part of it, a much bigger area by population, wasn’t.

Punjab was also a core issue for the Sikhs -- almost all of whom lived in that one province where they had the heartland of their short-lived, independent empire, before the British colonial occupation of it in mid-19th century.

Also, not much violence took place in Bengal, at least during the actual Partition. But because of the partition, the Hindus of East Bengal who were sizeable and economically well-off suffered a lot.

A momentum to migrate from their ancestral homes in the East Bengal for West Bengal, Assam, and Tripura developed gradually, induced by both pull and push factors of migration over the next two decades.

A vast and relatively well-off settled population slowly and quietly got uprooted from the land, where their forefathers lived since time immemorial.

But it was the majority of the Bengali-Hindu leadership of the then Bengal who pitched for the Partition of Bengal to salvage a smaller than half-Bengali Hindudom in the western part of the province for the community.

A flawed understanding

But their assessment of Bengali Hindu interests had been highly flawed. The vast Hindu population of the bigger part of Bengal gradually became a refuge after 1947 in neighbouring parts of India, including West Bengal itself. In neither of the places were these mostly penniless refugees welcomed.

A new and almost everlasting social cleavage emerged between the natives and the refugees. Generations went through big struggles and were tormented mentally. In Assam, the Axomiya treated them like unwanted intruders and second class citizens.

As time passed, West Bengal turned from the richest province of India into an insignificant one. The supply of raw materials for jute mills from the east dried up as East Bengal set up its own jute mills.

Before 1947, Kolkata was the capital of the vast province of Bengal and the rich across the presidency had commercial, property, investment, employment, and many other interests and ties in Kolkata. After 1947, not anymore.

What happened to West Bengal?

Now, West Bengal, once the birthplace of the rich modern Bengali culture, has become a state in India increasingly dominated by Hindi culture backed by north and western Indian corporate interests. Unlike Bangladesh, hardly any major capitalist in West Bengal is Bengali, and the loyalty of dominant capitalists in the state of western and north India, mostly of Bania origin, lies elsewhere.

Also, unlike Bangladesh, the market of West Bengal isn’t protected, and West Bengalis aren’t in charge of that. Hasn’t it become more like a colony of north and western India, the way East Bengal was of West Pakistan between 1947 and 1971 ?

In hindsight, one has to ask the question of what the West Bengali Hindu gained by their decision to bifurcate Bengal, especially when there was a hasty yet concrete proposal for an independent United Bengal by important leaders like Suhrawardy, Sarat Bose, Abul Hashim, and Kiran Shankar Roy?

Why did the Bengali Hindu leadership get so carried away by the words of Mountbatten, Nehru, Kripalini, Kalipada Mukherjee, Syamaprashad, and so on, who never had either a genuine insight of the intricacies of Bengal or who had a default agenda in contradiction with the interest of all Bengalis?

On part of the Muslim League, some important leaders like Khawaja Nazimuddin and Maulana Akram Khan opposed the idea of United Bengal fearing the perpetuation of Hindu domination in Bengal, and with the prospect of Dhaka’s not becoming the political nerve centre replacing Kolkata.

But in the end, it was an emotion swayed Bengali Hindu call that resulted in the division of the presidency. The All India Congress leadership never understood the uniqueness of Bengal as Kripalini brutely put it, that they have to get as many territories as possible for India. The interest of the common people, and a better future for a big presidency were never on their focus.

Jinnah initially supported the idea of United Bengal, but as he saw no progress, he backtracked later. Gandhi gave it a patient hearing, but was powerless to do anything.

Inclusivity and fairness

The United Bengal proposal had a few important points which indicated a move towards inclusivity and fairness. Proportional representation and a confessional system with rotational premiership and presidency were implied. Parliamentary representation would have been proportional to the population, and government jobs were to be half for the Muslims and half for the non-Muslims, comprising general Hindus, schedule castes, and other minorities.

Within the Hindu pie, a fair chunk was kept for the scheduled caste. For Bengal’s constituent assembly, 16 Muslims and 14 Hindu members were proposed. The interim government would have had a Muslim prime minister and Hindu home minister. Had the negotiation got a real start with all the major Congress and Muslim League factions of Bengal on board, further details would have come out in this promising five points line.

Ironically, the Bengali Hindus vehemently opposed the 1905 division of Bengal and their mobilization, agitation, and revolutionary acts forced the British to annul the first partition of Bengal in 1911. In 1947, the same group went ahead for the partition of the presidency. Many Bengali Hindus tried to justify the 1947 division of Bengal with Kolkata and Noakhali riots of 1946.

There were a few thousands deaths, and in these two places and perhaps in some other places too, people were worried for some time. But these were no way even near to the bloodbath of Punjab or Jammu massacre.

Bengalis could have lived with the memories of these isolated incidents, and time would have healed that. There would have been a gradual shift towards a fair Hindu-Muslim equation in Bengal without much hardship for any community. A joint Bengali Hindu-Muslim society and culture would have flourished. But that was not to be.

A great prospect for the people

A United Bengal would actually have encouraged the entire northeast to join the independent state and make something like the third grouping of Cabinet Mission plan.

The Bengali and Assamese language and cultures are very close anyway, and Assam, a faraway place from Delhi, would not have any direct land connection to northern India due to the presence of big Bengal in between. Neither did it have any direct access to the sea.

Overall, an independent United Bengal would have been a great prospect for the people of the presidency, or even the entire eastern part of the sub-continent. It would have combined the energy of the rising Muslims with the knowledge and expertise of already advanced Hindus to a great effect.

It also would have reduced the suffering of people who migrated, by retaining them in their native places. It would have allowed the growth of a very promising independent democratic state in the eastern part of the sub-continent and, by now, that state would probably have been a major continental power in Asia.

But that one emotional call to divide Bengal in a historically watershed moment has jeopardized a lot of things of immense prospect.



Source



To help put this into perspective :

Population :

WB : 91 Million
BD : 164 Million

GDP (Nominal) :

WB : 180 Billion USD (19 - 20)
BD : 347.9 Billion USD (19 - 20)

GDP per Capita :

WB : 1500 USD
BD : 2065 USD


Bear in mind, West Bengal was historically the more well developed part of Bengal and had a more affluent and educated upper and middle class.


lol what a india hater thread .
 
. . .
A United Bengal would have become a Lebanon or Bosnia style state in my opinion i.e. religious communities having fixed roles and a bureaucracy heavily impacted by the corruption that follows such stagnation. A religiously homogenous albeit smaller Bengali state is actually a much better scenario, at least for the Bengali Muslims. Otherwise some Hindus influenced by Pan-Indianism would have been used by India as a fifth column to impose its will on Bangladesh.

An ideal situation would have been for Bangladesh to emerge as independent of but with close ties to Pakistan in 1947 (some kind of defensive alliance).
You are correct about an united Bengal, it would not have been workable in 1947. However, Kolkata or a part of it should have been awarded to east Pakistan. Nazimuddin did not want Kolkata because he wanted his native Dhaka to be the Capital of the eastern wing of Pakistan. He had a very narrow mind though he became the Governor General of Pakistan after the death of Quaid-i-Azam.

During all this time he was propagating against Suhrawardy, telling he was working for India. It was difficult for Suhrawardy to come to Pakistan because of this propaganda. Finally, he came probably with the help of other notable Muslim League leaders. At one time, he also became the PM of Pakistan.
 
.
An ideal situation would have been for Bangladesh to emerge as independent of but with close ties to Pakistan in 1947 (some kind of defensive alliance).
I do not know your age. But, I have never heard one person telling against an united Pakistan even in late 60s. People just went mad in 1947 for achieving the status of free citizens of an united Pakistan. Never in my life, I have heard one Bengali saying, "Pakistan Murdabad". This may be the reason why Hasina always plays hate game against Pakistan by saying so many lies so that people in BD really start hating Pakistan.
 
.
we liberated them that is all . let them stay there .
 
.
we liberated them that is all . let them stay there .
Who are the "We"? Soon you will be official second class citizen of your country if you are a Muslim. So don't feel like a bigdada because you are Indian.

Bottom line is your country didn't liberate us. Your country wanted to devour us. Sheikh Mujib made your country withdraw your troops and later you successfully managed to murder him with his family.
 
Last edited:
. .
Who are the "We"? Soon you will be official second class citizen of your country if you are a Muslim. So don't feel like a bigdada because you are Indian.

Bottom line is your country didn't liberate us. Your country wanted to devour us. Sheikh Mujib made your country withdraw your troops and later you successfully managed to murder him with his family.

we are happy where we are because we are indians from last five thousand years .
we helped you because you were in trouble . rest is your imagination .
 
. .
we are happy where we are because we are indians from last five thousand years .
we helped you because you were in trouble . rest is your imagination .

Indian Govt. fed you a line of reasoning and you swallowed it hook, line and sinker. If by 'We' you mean Indian Govt.

No one does anything out of charity. I am tired of explaining this to every new Indian poster in PDF but here goes.

India gained four things out of sending its army to fight Pakistan Army in East Pakistan and finishing the war.
  1. Neutralized the military threat from the Eastern front and to the seven sisters.
  2. Created a new market for exclusively Indian products and services worth USD 15 Billion a year.
  3. Created new tourism and medical tourism market for India from Bangladeshi citizens. Again about USD 15 Billion worth a year.
  4. Created the fourth (probably third) largest remittance source for India worth at least USD 10 Billion a year.
These gains have been running forty-fifty years by now. Multiply fifty by on average 30 Billion a year and you have your answer why India fought that war.

You talk about Hindutva and Go Mata. We in Bangladesh are bigger in value than any Go Mata ever was to Indians.

We are the 'Gavi' that kept on giving....for fifty damn years.

But enough is enough.

One might ask what we got in return in the last fifty years.

  • Our citizens being killed at the border by trigger-happy BSF.
  • Being derided even though we spend more money in India than at home.
  • Constant interference in our internal politics and foreign affairs.
  • Rohingya problem foisted on us by Myanmarese with express Indian approval and support.
  • Proxy wars in our hill tracts by Shanti Bahini trained by RAW.
  • Our citizens called as 'ghuspetias' when they don't even go to India, much less apply for Aadhar card or whatever.

I could go on but I rest my case.

This is not for you - but for the rest of PDF to see.
 
Last edited:
.
we are happy where we are because we are indians from last five thousand years .
Please stop dreaming . There was no country before 1947 named India . At best you can claim that you are happy from last 70 years as Indians. Now please do not project mythology to prove history . I am not inspired by Ramayan , where Human race and and Monkey race fought together against Rakshasha race to rescue someone's wife , neither with Mahabharata where Human race and god race copulate and make heroes that are just copy from Greek mythology. So please do not show me such history of 5000 ( dwapar yuga ) and 1 million years ( treta yuga ) .

we helped you because you were in trouble . rest is your imagination .

Sure sir , you are very helpful . So now please help the rohingyas , they are also in too much trouble , and still waiting to return to their homeland . Why your helpful govt does not send troop to help the poor Rohingyas ? Because they are not living In Pakistan ?

However I do not blame you honestly speaking .So if I were you , I also would do the same as you are doing .. Muslims are the only minority in your worthless country India .
 
Last edited:
.
Indian Govt. fed you a line of reasoning and you swallowed it hook, line and sinker. If by 'We' you mean Indian Govt.

No one does anything out of charity. I am tired of explaining this to every new Indian poster in PDF but here goes.

India gained four things out of sending its army to fight Pakistan Army in East Pakistan and finishing the war.
  1. Neutralized the military threat from the Eastern front and to the seven sisters.
  2. Created a new market for exclusively Indian products and services worth USD 15 Billion a year.
  3. Created new tourism and medical tourism market for India from Bangladeshi citizens. Again about USD 15 Billion worth a year.
  4. Created the fourth (probably third) largest remittance source for India worth at least USD 10 Billion a year.
These gains have been running forty-fifty years by now. Multiply fifty by on average 30 Billion a year and you have your answer why India fought that war.

You talk about Hindutva and Go Mata. We in Bangladesh are bigger in value than any Go Mata ever was to Indians.

We are the 'Gavi' that kept on giving....for fifty damn years.

But enough is enough.

One might ask what we got in return in the last fifty years.

  • Our citizens being killed at the border by trigger-happy BSF.
  • Being derided even though we spend more money in India than at home.
  • Constant interference in our internal politics and foreign affairs.
  • Rohingya problem foisted on us by Myanmarese with express Indian approval and support.
  • Proxy wars in our hill tracts by Shanti Bahini trained by RAW.
  • Our citizens called as 'ghuspetias' when they don't even go to India, much less apply for Aadhar card or whatever.

I could go on but I rest my case.

This is not for you - but for the rest of PDF to see.
Oh man , they are just victims . If they do not praise their terrorist country India , they will be in concentration camp by new era Hitler ( chawala ) . I truly feel for India Muslims . They are helpless . Who try to fight back are labelled as terrorists.
 
.

Latest posts

Country Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom