Then why call it the "Islamic Republic of Pakistan" if it was a safe haven for all minorities.....so the way you claim India is a Hindu dominated nation with large minority groups, it can be theorized that Pakistan wanted Muslim dominance....nothing else...once they got this, they were fine with any minorities living with......
How exactly were the Muslim leaders so convinced that Muslims would be discriminated against? Please lend us a few examples to show a trend of Hindu dominance when Hindus had not even taken up administrative positions....I call this hogwash!!!
And mind you it was the Hindu leaders against Partition....so Hindus did not mind living with the muslims, its was the other way around....
I think you stand corrected.
Reality is not black and white. The Fact is that there were some Hindu leaders who were for partition as well i.e. Hindu Mahasabites and RSS leaders for example Sarvarkar and Lala Lajpat Rai were strong advocates of this. Madan Mohan Malviya and Lajpat Rai left the Congress to form the Nationalist Party which advocated the partioning as well.
For example:
The Hindu Mahasabha leader Lala Lajpat Rai gave his feelings in The Tribune of December 14, 1924, some the excerpts are:
"Under my scheme the Muslims will have four Muslim States: (1) The Pathan Province or the North-West Frontier; (2) Western Punjab (3) Sindh and (4) Eastern Bengal.
If there are compact Muslim communities in any other part of India, sufficiently large to form a province, they should be similarly constituted.
But it should be distinctly understood that this is not a united India. It means a clear partition of India into a Muslim India and a non-Muslim India.
"
So this was even before any Muslim leagure resolution had demanded a seperate muslim state. Sure majority Hindu leaders were against partition, but not all.
Similarly, at the same time there were a large number of muslim leaders were against the partition.
Ghaffar Khan's Red shirts or the Khudai Khitmatagar movement, the Ahrar movement, Punjab's Unionists Party muslim leaders, J&K's National Conference, the Sindh Muslim Conference party that formed the Sindh government, Bengals Fazl-ul-Haq of the Peasants' and Tenants' party and ofcourse the Deoband ulema were all representing muslim leaders (and were popular) who were against the partition.
You can see from the fact that almost 50% of the muslim population (looking at both India and Pakistan muslim population only) stayed back showing that saying all or even majority of muslim leaders were for partition is wrong. Infact if you take into account Bangladesh, and that NWFP was a Congress stronghold all the way until 1946 when the elected Assemble was dissolved controversially, that percentage would come down further.
So again, it was'nt just a matter of Hindu leaders against partition and Muslim leaders for it. It was much more complex than that and the role of the British (particularly in light of their declassified documents of that time) can not be discounted in any way.
Unfortunately, neither Indian nor Pakistani History textbooks highlight these facts.
Again, Pakistan was inevitable in those circumstances, it is an independant nation and will remain sovereign. I am not denying that. I am just laying down some historical facts.
Are Taliban not Muslims.....great...
