Why did British PM Attlee think Bengal was going to be an independent country in 1947?

[Kambojaric]

Either West Bengal, Bangladesh, Assam & Tripura were one country or it would have been better had Bangladesh been a state of India named East Bengal and avoided genocide by Pakistani army in 1971 war. Millions of Bangladeshis got martyred in that war.

It is not that Bangladeshis are 'sooooo' different from Indians. Same people. Foreigners even mistake us as Indians. So it would have been much better if Bengal was united under Indian union.

@Bangladeshi members:

Is this a common opinion in Bangladesh? That East Bengal would have been better of being an Indian state if an independent union with West Bengal was not possible?

 

[Placemat]

The Mughal rule would have devolved into a representative rule.

What is happening now? Democracy is representing

 

[VikingRaider]

@Bangladeshi members:

Is this a common opinion in Bangladesh? That East Bengal would have been better of being an Indian state if an independent union with West Bengal was not possible?

Here many peoples even do not consider him a Bangladeshi , or if Bangladeshi then a fifth columnist who want to give Bangladesh a bad name.
This poster used to post useless threads to show Bangladesh as laughing stock ! Just check his threads, you will find those BS . Some of his message are critical though . A Bangladeshi would like to be a part of United Bengal proposed by Sohrowardi , but a Bangladeshi will never desire to be a province of India , you have to take this matter in consideration . So since the poster wanted to be a part of India, so surely it can not be a voice of a Bangladeshi , or if by any chance his identity is true , he is one of the dirtiest fifth columnists, who are hated by all Bangladeshi peoples !
@Kambojaric

 

[itsanufy]

It was basically the Marwari baniya community in Kolkata who funded the Hindu Mahasabha to agitate against the Independent Bengal plan. These Marwaris didn't care about the Bengali Hindu cause but knew that in an independent Bengali nation-state, Marwari influence would be considerably weakened. Congress didn't want further divisions of India so they were also in the same page as the Hindu Mahasabha.

Obviously the Marwaris came out as the winners but the real losers are the Bengali Hindus - Kolkata has lost its glory while West Bengal has been reduced to a mere marginalized province.

For Bangladesh, we ultimately achieved what we envisioned earlier, an independent Bengali nation-state, going forward and growing stronger.

Marwari communities has a strong business interest in East Bengal, in fact they opposed partition and wanted whole of Bengal in India, but that's history.
Concept of united Bengal was conceived by Suhrawardy on 24th July 1947. Great Calcutta killing happened on 1946 due to him (though @Joe Shearer has given him a benefit of doubt, but I have my sources). Hindus thought this as an conspiracy against them and overwhelmingly opposed the move .
Calcutta riot along with riots in Noakhali/Bhagalpur created a massive mistrust between the communities. Together with Leagues demand of new country for Muslims just didn't have united Bengal takers among the common masses.
Now about the leaders, Suhrawardy only got Sarat Chandra Bose and Kiran Shankar Roy from Congress who supported the demand. Congress high command strongly opposed it. They even parted with Suhrawardy when he revealed plan of separate seats for Hindus and Muslims.
Popular leaders like S.P. Mukherjee opposed the move which got lot of support from masses.
Finally the Bengal assembly never passed a resolution of separate country, either it wanted to be part of India or Pakistan.

 

[Joe Shearer]

Marwari communities has a strong business interest in East Bengal, in fact they opposed partition and wanted whole of Bengal in India, but that's history.

My impression and my information is that the Marwari was kept out of East Bengal by the Saha bene community almost entirely.

Concept of united Bengal was conceived by Suhrawardy on 24th July 1947. Great Calcutta killing happened on 1946 due to him (though @Joe Shearer has given him a benefit of doubt, but I have my sources).

1. He, and his brother, Hussain Shaheed, were the kingpins of Calcutta gangland society, certainly those from the central Calcutta areas ranging up to Baghbazar in the north, and in the pockets of Watgunge and Khidirpur. There were Hindu gangs elsewhere. My grandfather, the professor, had his pocket picked and lost his watch, the loss of which was a heavy blow for a not lavishly paid professor. He presented himself to Hussain Saheb, and the watch was restored the next morning.
2. He delivered that threatening speech on the day, during the first half, at a meeting in the Maidan, near the Monument. While he was winding up his speech, weapons were being handed out. There was definitely a demonstration of some sort intended.
3. The first violence broke out soon after the crowd started dispersing. For about three hours, there was a one-sided slaughter of Hindus.
4. Suhrawardy went to the control room at Lalbazar. This was the part that was controversial. He says that he went there to gain an appreciation of the situation; there were dark stories that he obstructed the actions of the police. The Police Commissioner of the time did not distinguish himself by his actions.
5. The Sikhs, who were present in much, much larger numbers then than today, had gathered themselves by then. They joined the Bihari milkmen and Bengali Hindu gangsters, and began retaliation by around six in the evening.
6. The tide was definitely against the Muslims. Some of the most horrific slaughter happened at this stage.
7. When the Army was called out, there had been a great deal of slaughter already. At the earlier stages, the soldiers were nowhere to be seen. As has been pointed out, in any British administration, and in the succeeding Indian administration, the Army is not entitled to even take notice of civil disturbance until it is asked to intervene, through a chain of command very clearly defined and that cannot be short-circuited.
8. Who was responsible for their late calling out is not known very clearly. Did Suhrawardy oppose it or delay it? There is no evidence to that effect. Did Suhrawardy expedite it? Again, nothing.
9. Tuker himself gives a strange account. He claims to have seen Sikhs being transported into the city on lorries. That is a ridiculous story, to imply that they were imported from elsewhere; those familiar with Calcutta will ask where that distant location was, as Calcutta is next to Howrah, and then there is nothing for miles, until Burnpur, Durgapur (a post-independence development) and Asansol. On the other hand, Sikhs lived all over the city, in large numbers; they only left after the 1984 riots, that did not affect their physical security in Bengal, but that weakened their confidence outside the Punjab because of the ghastly goings on in north India.

I don't think your sources could have said anything more than to say that he delivered the lecture, he was the Prime Minister (of Bengal), and he was therefore responsible. The chain of evidence is not conclusive. Afterwards, one year later, he supported Gandhi fully. If you have more than this, do share it with us.

Hindus thought this as an conspiracy against them and overwhelmingly opposed the move .
Calcutta riot along with riots in Noakhali/Bhagalpur created a massive mistrust between the communities. Together with Leagues demand of new country for Muslims just didn't have united Bengal takers among the common masses.
Now about the leaders, Suhrawardy only got Sarat Chandra Bose and Kiran Shankar Roy from Congress who supported the demand. Congress high command strongly opposed it. They even parted with Suhrawardy when he revealed plan of separate seats for Hindus and Muslims.
Popular leaders like S.P. Mukherjee opposed the move which got lot of support from masses.

Since when was Shyama Prasad Mukherjee a 'popular' leader? Other than the Hindu Mahasabha, not rooted in Bengal, whom did he lead? Second, do you know his record in the Assembly against Fazlul Huq? And what he was plotting, and the wording of the resolution that he moved against Huq Sahib?

Finally the Bengal assembly never passed a resolution of separate country, either it wanted to be part of India or Pakistan.

Very, VERY misleading.

I request you to read the account of the arrangement that was made for the determination of the wishes of the people, by polling the elected representatives. Please read how the assembly was divided into two, and how the votes were taken separately. Please check for yourself the wording of the resolutions to be voted on. There is a lot of interesting detail; it is appropriate that you learn about it before coming to a conclusion.

Yes, it could have been a solution to let India remain united. But, no one ever talked of such a solution. The leaders were busy only to portray themselves as the saviors.

However, about the main topic of this thread, it was probably Dr. Shyama Prasad Mukherjee or Dr. Profullo Chandra Ghosh who demanded a divided Bengal by saying, "India is divided or not, Bengal must be partitioned". The Hindu leaders of Hindu Mahasava and other organizations started this even before the Calcutta riot.

Prafulla Ghosh had nothing to do with the Hindu Mahasabha; it was Shyama Prasad.

I am glad that Bengal was partitioned. We gained so much by getting rid of minor part of our border. But Murshidabad and Some part of Assam should had been included in Bangladesh.

By that line of thinking, the Chittagong Hill Tracts should have been excluded.

these are fantasies of bangladeshis ,they know they got raw deal out of partition , and encompassed by all sides by India ,british also thought republic of india will collapse in less than decade ,no one cares about ramblings of british ,bengali hindus as well as republic of india is very grateful to Dr Syama prasad Mukherjee for its stuggle for state of west bengal in india

Thank you for your expert comments telling us what we were grateful for.

 

[Kandari-Hushiyaar]

these are fantasies of bangladeshis ,they know they got raw deal out of partition , and encompassed by all sides by India ,british also thought republic of india will collapse in less than decade ,no one cares about ramblings of british ,bengali hindus as well as republic of india is very grateful to Dr Syama prasad Mukherjee for its stuggle for state of west bengal in india View attachment 531549

Apart from the BJP, very few Bengali Indians respect this man and we all know the share of BJP support in Bengal. Negligible.

1. The first violence broke out soon after the crowd started dispersing. For about three hours, there was a one-sided slaughter of Hindus.

unfortunately this contradicts Sheikh Mujib's account. In his biography he clearly wrote Muslims were in the receiving side on the first day and Hindus were in the second day amd cited hospital records as source. I guess You have a better source than Mujib. could you please share?

 

[Joe Shearer]

Apart from the BJP, very few Bengali Indians respect this man and we all know the share of BJP support in Bengal. Negligible.



unfortunately this contradicts Sheikh Mujib's account. In his biography he clearly wrote Muslims were in the receiving side on the first day and Hindus were in the second day amd cited hospital records as source. I guess You have a better source than Mujib. could you please share?

Yes.

My father was a serving policeman. A friend of Suhrawardy, incidentally. You have a better source than that?

Considering that it was a Muslim League call, and considering that there was preparation on one side and not on the other, do you think that the Muslims would have been at the receiving end on the first day, and retaliated on the second day? Does that make sense even to you?

 

[Md Akmal]

I am glad that Bengal was partitioned. We gained so much by getting rid of minor part of our border. But Murshidabad and Some part of Assam should had been included in Bangladesh.

@ May be for that reason Chittagong Hill Tracts was given to East Bengal.
@ Second reason was if Maldah was given to East Bengal than West Bengal cannot exist even.

Either West Bengal, Bangladesh, Assam & Tripura were one country or it would have been better had Bangladesh been a state of India named East Bengal and avoided genocide by Pakistani army in 1971 war. Millions of Bangladeshis got martyred in that war.

It is not that Bangladeshis are 'sooooo' different from Indians. Same people. Foreigners even mistake us as Indians. So it would have been much better if Bengal was united under Indian union.

@ @Riyad go and ask your grand father provided if you are a muslim.
@ Do you know how many Muslims were killed in Calcutta ? Why riot was spread only in Noakhali ?

 

[Hakikat ve Hikmet]

Either West Bengal, Bangladesh, Assam & Tripura were one country or it would have been better had Bangladesh been a state of India named East Bengal and avoided genocide by Pakistani army in 1971 war. Millions of Bangladeshis got martyred in that war.

It is not that Bangladeshis are 'sooooo' different from Indians. Same people. Foreigners even mistake us as Indians. So it would have been much better if Bengal was united under Indian union.

Better late than never!!! Your dreams have come true!!!! Now, you're 100% by/of/for India without any strings attached!!!! Like any good thing it also requires some sacrifice, so that you can taste the fruit even better....

Allah-u Azimushshan has saved Pak from the Bengal folks, so that the Pak Ordu become the defenders of the Haremain and be the leading Muslim force at the wars earmarked for the End of the Day....

@Bangladeshi members:

Is this a common opinion in Bangladesh? That East Bengal would have been better of being an Indian state if an independent union with West Bengal was not possible?

"They are the friends of our enemies" - Rahmet-li Jinnah at the Dhaka University in 1948 when students openly rebelled against him

"I led the RSS procession from Ahmedabad to Delhi for the support of BD in 1971" - Indian PM Modi at the Dhaka University in 2015 when the roof and widows got shattered at the thundering applause of the students

"We are neither Muslims nor Hindus" - BD ruling party ex general secretary Ashraful Islam

"We have had a good harvest for Goddess Durga came to the Earth riding on an elephant this year" - BD PM Hasina inside a Temple

[For the Ehl-i Iman only; others have got nothing to do about it since it's a matter of Faith]
And when they meet those who believe, they say, "We believe"; but when they are alone with their evil ones, they say, "Indeed, we are with you; we were only mockers." [Sura El Bakara Ayet#14]

[Mention] when [Abraham]said to his father, "O my father, why do you worship that which does not hear and does not see and will not benefit you at all?"

[His father] said, "Have you no desire for my gods, O Abraham? If you do not desist, I will surely stone you, so avoid me a prolonged time."

[Abraham said] "O my father, do not worship Satan. Indeed Satan has ever been, to the Most Merciful, disobedient".

[Sura El Mereyem Ayet#42-46]


As for the Aklman, no further Isharet is required, this much should be Ka'fi...

 

[HariSinghNalwa]

Thank you for your expert comments telling us what we were grateful for.

Don't claim to represent bengali hindus even trinamool congress started paying respect to dr s.p.m
In A First, Bengal Government To Observe Death Anniversary Of Syama Prasad Mookerjee
বাংলায় পড়ুন
The CPI-M saw this as yet another instance of the "collusion" between the Trinamool Congress and the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP).
Kolkata | Indo-Asian News Service | Updated: June 23, 2018 04:51 IST
by Taboola
Sponsored Links
Sponsored
Leave Food & Prasad Behind When Travelling to New Zealand (Biosecurity New Zealand)
These German hearing aids will change your life! (hear.com)


SHARE
EMAIL
PRINT
0COMMENTS

The move by the Mamata Banerjee government has triggered a political storm (File)


KOLKATA: For the first time, West Bengal's Mamata Banerjee government has decided to observe the death anniversary of Bharatiya Jana Sangh founder Syama Prasad Mookerjee on Saturday, triggering a political storm in the state.

While the Communist Party of India-Marxist (CPI-M) saw this as yet another instance of the "collusion" between the Trinamool Congress and the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), the latter said the Mamata Banerjee government was seeing the ghost of BJP everywhere.

The Jana Sangh is regarded as the precursor of the BJP.

West Bengal ministers Firhad Hakim and Sovandeb Chattopadhyay would attend the programme before Syama Prasad Mookerjee's bust at south Kolkata's Keoratala crematorium, according to the formal invite issued by the Information and Cultural Affairs Department.

"It is our tradition to pay respect to great personalities. We believe in that culture," said Trinamool leader and Kolkata Municipal Corporation chairperson Mala Roy.

The bust was vandalised by a group of Left radicals in March in protest against the pulling down of two statues of Russian communist revolutionary Vladimir Lenin in Tripura, allegedly by BJP-RSS activists.

The state government arrested the Left radicals and installed a new bronze bust of the late leader.

"The bronze bust will be unveiled on Saturday. We will pay our respects then," said Ms Roy.

Sovandeb Chattopadhyay said Mookerjee would never have approved the BJP's communal agenda for the sake of getting political mileage.

"The way BJP is bringing religion into the political arena, and indulging in the politics of polarisation to create an atmosphere of hatred, and gain political mileage, I don't think Syama Prasad would have approved all this," he said.

BJP leader Pratap Banerjee was sarcastic. "Mamata Banerjee is seeing the ghost of BJP everywhere. This is the reason they have suddenly turned big admirers of Syama Prasad," he said.

CPI-M leader Chayan Bhattacharya slammed the Trinamool. "We never had any doubt about some understanding between the BJP and the Trinamool. The state government indirectly fans communalism. This has come into the open now."

Since when was Shyama Prasad Mukherjee a 'popular' leader? Other than the Hindu Mahasabha, not rooted in Bengal, whom did he lead? Second, do you know his record in the Assembly against Fazlul Huq? And what he was plotting, and the wording of the resolution that he moved against Huq Sahib?

you seem to think too highly of govt formed under govt of india 1935 act which nehru called "charter of slavery" ,it was done to ensure that congress can never rule under the autonomy granted or win enough seats to overthrow the govt because of separate electorates.

 

[Nilgiri]

@Slav Defence same guy with same ole verbiage post #24 ...things gonna getting derailed

 

[Joe Shearer]

Don't claim to represent bengali hindus even trinamool congress started paying respect to dr s.p.m

And that says what precisely, about the situation in 1946-47? Are you determined to make an *** of yourself?

you seem to think too highly of govt formed under govt of india 1935 act which nehru called "charter of slavery" ,it was done to ensure that congress can never rule under the autonomy granted or win enough seats to overthrow the govt because of separate electorates.

At least I "seemed to think". May I offer you my best wishes for getting to that stage? The man did not do what he was doing in support of the Congress.

This kind of illiterate intervention is really saddening. If you wish to comment on a situation, please do so; by all means. But get the background and the context first, and don't start rushing to the Internet for on line references that you don't understand, when it becomes clear that you have only a shallow understanding.

 

[HariSinghNalwa]

And that says what precisely, about the situation in 1946-47? Are you determined to make an *** of yourself?



At least I "seemed to think". May I offer you my best wishes for getting to that stage? The man did not do what he was doing in support of the Congress.

This kind of illiterate intervention is really saddening. If you wish to comment on a situation, please do so; by all means. But get the background and the context first, and don't start rushing to the Internet for on line references that you don't understand, when it becomes clear that you have only a shallow understanding.

your deep understanding is not required by me ,your crass replies are enough to point to that.

 

[Joe Shearer]

your deep understanding is not required by me ,your crass replies are enough to point to that.

No, that was evident from your first post.

 

[Mage]

Is this a common opinion in Bangladesh? That East Bengal would have been better of being an Indian state if an independent union with West Bengal was not possible?

I am a simple man. I look at the cards I have in my hand and try to play my best with whatever hand I am given.

I am happy with Bangladesh as it is. A united Bengal could have worked as well. And if Bangladesh remained a part of India, I would have tried my best as an Indian citizen. My paternal grandfather moved from Calcutta in his twenties leaving his relatives, his house and his job behind and relocated to Dhaka in 1947. I respect his decision. And I love Bangladesh as it is.