Why was large amount of muslim majority areas given to india when the Partition of Punjab happened?

[PakistaniNawab]

Why did india get them?
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-aR6f4s7SO.../MIip3TbY10k/s1600/Punjab+1947+-+Main+Map.PNG

 

[PakistaniNawab]

@WAJsal @Arsalan @Zibago @save_ghenda

 

[Indus Pakistan]

Nehru outsmarted Jinnah. He managed to weazel (through his wife) into Mountbattens good books and leveraged a better deal. In doing so they even changed the Radcliffe Line in India's favour.

 

[Samrat420]

Nehru outsmarted Jinnah. He managed to weazel (through his wife) into Mountbattens good books and leveraged a better deal. In doing so they even changed the Radcliffe Line in India's favour.

Sir, Would you please throw some light on the reasons for giving CHT region to Pakistan despite it having a Buddhist majority in 1947?

 

[Indus Pakistan]

CHT

I don't want to look ignorant but which region is "CHT"? And I regard Nehru the greatest South Asian leader of the last 200 years, if not longer. You in India have much to thank him. He towers over Jinnah like giant toward a dwarf. Nehru outdid Jinnah almost on every score. You have him to thank for:-

* Kashmir
* Hyderabad
* Junagadh
* Secular identity that by the year is cementing your country.
* Laid instititions which nourish your country
* This can be seen how India, despite being far more diverse, far more disparate, far more complex then Pakistan is at ease and forward looking.

 

[Samrat420]

I don't want to look ignorant but which region is "CHT"? And I regard Nehru the greatest South Asian leader of the last 200 years, if not longer. You in India have much to thank him. He towers over Jinnah like giant toward a dwarf. Nehru outdid Jinnah almost on every score. You have him to thank for:-

* Kashmir
* Hyderabad
* Junagadh
* Secular identity that by the year is cementing your country.
* Laid instititions which nourish your country
* This can be seen how India, despite being far more diverse, far more disparate, far more complex then Pakistan is at ease and forward looking.

CHT is Chittagong Hill Tracts.. currently a part of Bangladesh

 

[PakistaniNawab]

CHT is Chittagong Hill Tracts.. currently a part of Bangladesh

In Bengal Muslim majority areas of Murshidabad and Malda were given to India.

 

[Indus Pakistan]

CHT is Chittagong Hill Tracts.. currently a part of Bangladesh

Frankly who the hell cares about that sliver of land. Gurdaspur, Kashmir were the real deal. You think either India or Pak would have kept up 70 year hostility over that sliver of land? Gurdaspur was vital - it gave India access to Kashmir. And you know rest of the story.

And my dad used to say years ago that Jinnah was over rated. Over the years after having done my own reading I have come to same conclusion.I know this is sacrilegious to say that in PDF but there is lot of truth to this. Pakistani's have habit personality cult worship. It's a national trait I am afraid and prevents us from really taking stock of things.

Look at Churchill in UK. He was perhaps the saviour of Great Britain in war. Soon that was over he lost to Labour government. In Pakistan they made even his sister into cult, then they even made his friend Liaqatinto cult.

 

[Samrat420]

I don't want to look ignorant but which region is "CHT"? And I regard Nehru the greatest South Asian leader of the last 200 years, if not longer. You in India have much to thank him. He towers over Jinnah like giant toward a dwarf. Nehru outdid Jinnah almost on every score. You have him to thank for:-

* Kashmir
* Hyderabad
* Junagadh
* Secular identity that by the year is cementing your country.
* Laid instititions which nourish your country
* This can be seen how India, despite being far more diverse, far more disparate, far more complex then Pakistan is at ease and forward looking.

Sir I disagree on many of the points here.. I might be wrong, and I'd like to be corrected in such a scenario...

★ Kashmir --- No, Nehru didn't give us Kashmir.. I'd rather thank Jinnah for that.. Sardar Patel had offered him J&K on a silver plate in exchange for withdrawing his claims on Hyderabad. Mr Jinnah rejected. He was confident that both Kashmir and Hyderabad were coming Pakistan's way. Of course, as fate would have it, he lost both..

★ Hyderabad -- Again, it wasn't Nehru, but Sardar Patel who played the dominant role in Hyderabad's annexation.. Remember operation Polo?

★ Secular Identity -- Nehru was secular.. yes! But he didn't instill secularism in other Indians.. that job was done by many other great personalities of that time, particularly Mahatma Gandhi..

★ Laid Institutions --- Yes. here I completely agree.. Nehru has a grand vision for India and he did lay the framework for India's future.. from IITs to dams. He tried to instill the scientific temper in a highly backward, rural and superstitious society.

★ What I actually feel as his biggest contribution to India, was that he cemented democracy and democratic institutions in India. He had no worthwhile political rivals in all the elections that he fought.. he had so much popular support that he could've easily declared himself a “Prime-minister for life" and hardly anyone would've batted an eyelid.. But he didn't. He stuck to democracy.. And that's why, despite his thousand blunders, I respect him..

In Bengal Muslim majority areas of Murshidabad and Malda were given to India.

Perhaps because without Malda and Murshidabad, WB would've been cut into two seperate parts, and contiguity was an important criteria for the Radcliffe line. But what couldve been the reasons for giving CHT to Pakistan, when it would've made much more sense to give it to India, so that the north-east can be connected to bay of bengal..

 

[WaLeEdK2]

I don't want to look ignorant but which region is "CHT"? And I regard Nehru the greatest South Asian leader of the last 200 years, if not longer. You in India have much to thank him. He towers over Jinnah like giant toward a dwarf. Nehru outdid Jinnah almost on every score. You have him to thank for:-

* Kashmir
* Hyderabad
* Junagadh
* Secular identity that by the year is cementing your country.
* Laid instititions which nourish your country
* This can be seen how India, despite being far more diverse, far more disparate, far more complex then Pakistan is at ease and forward looking.

Wasn't Amritsar also a Muslim majority back then?

 

[Indus Pakistan]

Sir I disagree on many of the points here.. I might be wrong, and I'd like to be corrected in such a scenario...

★ Kashmir --- No, Nehru didn't give us Kashmir.. I'd rather thank Jinnah for that.. Sardar Patel had offered him J&K on a silver plate in exchange for withdrawing his claims on Hyderabad. Mr Jinnah rejected. He was confident that both Kashmir and Hyderabad were coming Pakistan's way. Of course, as fate would have it, he lost both..

★ Hyderabad -- Again, it wasn't Nehru, but Sardar Patel who played the dominant role in Hyderabad's annexation.. Remember operation Polo?

★ Secular Identity -- Nehru was secular.. yes! But he didn't instill secularism in other Indians.. that job was done by many other great personalities of that time, particularly Mahatma Gandhi..

★ Laid Institutions --- Yes. here I completely agree.. Nehru has a grand vision for India and he did lay the framework for India's future.. from IITs to dams. He tried to instill the scientific temper in a highly backward, rural and superstitious society.

★ What I actually feel as his biggest contribution to India, was that he cemented democracy and democratic institutions in India. He had no worthwhile political rivals in all the elections that he fought.. he had so much popular support that he could've easily declared himself a “Prime-minister for life" and hardly anyone would've batted an eyelid.. But he didn't. He stuck to democracy.. And that's why, despite his thousand blunders, I respect him..

Very well laid argument. Of course you are 100% correct but who was "steering the ship"? Nehru. I am sure you have heard the saying "the buck stops here". A team a man gathers around him is reflection of himself. If things had gone wrong Nehru would have been blamed.

As I said Jinnah failed at the critical points in the process. Jinnah lacked strength of character and stamina. Maybe his health might have had something to do with this. But for example when General Gracey refused Jinnah's orders to move PA into Kashmir (like Polo in Hyderabad) he should have sacked him. This was the first example of PA C in C refusing political head and looks like that set a trend.

One brigade, just one brigade dispatched from Rawalpindi, which was the HQ of British Indian Army Northern Command would have grabbed Srinagar within 30 hours. Since the only road (paved all weather) to Srinagar in those days was from Rawalpindi. Jinnah prevaricated and we know what happened. 70 years of trouble and still going strong.

 

[Samrat420]

Frankly who the hell cares about that sliver of land. Gurdaspur, Kashmir were the real deal. You think either India or Pak would have kept up 70 year hostility over that sliver of land? Gurdaspur was vital - it gave India access to Kashmir. And you know rest of the story.

And my dad used to say years ago that Jinnah was over rated. Over the years after having done my own reading I have come to same conclusion.I know this is sacrilegious to say that in PDF but there is lot of truth to this. Pakistani's have habit personality cult worship. It's a national trait I am afraid and prevents us from really taking stock of things.

Look at Churchill in UK. He was perhaps the saviour of Great Britain in war. Soon that was over he lost to Labour government. In Pakistan they made even his sister into cult, then they even made his friend Liaqatinto cult.

Think about it from the perspective of a north-east Indian. which area would you rather have? Gurdaspur? or CHT? Remember that CHT would give you access to the sea.. Ask Afghanistan how important that is.

Not only, Pakistanis, but Indians also have this trait of personality cult worship.. And I think it's deliberately cultivated by our respective govts. In the chaos and turmoil that both the nations were born, personality cults were a convenient tool to give the people role models to emulate, leaders to follow, and ethos to embrace. Nationalism was needed to keep the new infant nations from falling apart, and nationalism needs symbols.. it needs heroes... icons.. The nation coalesces around them..

 

[somebozo]

Because Muslims are not homogenized group of people and even among Muslims the opinion of partition varied but there were two major groups.. One wanting to live in India and one wanting separation. The key differentiation was economic mentality and most of the landlord and capitalist minded wanted Pakistan and the others wanted India..for some People like Jinnah the opinion changed over time from unity to separation..If you roll back 1930's the difference of opinion between Jinnah and Nehru was purely economic and gradually it transformed into communal and their religious..

 

[third eye]

Sardar Patel had offered him J&K on a silver plate in exchange for withdrawing his claims on Hyderabad. Mr Jinnah rejected. He was confident that both Kashmir and Hyderabad were coming Pakistan's way. Of course, as fate would have

Very well explained post. Can we have a link to this part please.

As I said Jinnah failed at the critical points in the process. Jinnah lacked strength of character and stamina. Maybe his health might have had something to do with this.

You possibly are the first Pakistani poster I have come across here who has raised such things.

National consolidation was Sardar Patels baby. Dispatching 1st Sikh to Srinagar too was on his insistence. Nehru was wavering as brought out in Sam's memoirs.

Nehru's best point was possibly allowing the Sardar to do what he did.

 

[Indus Pakistan]

Nehru's best point was possibly allowing the Sardar to do what he did.

No leader can do everything themselves. In fact true leadershipm is not about doing things yourself. It is about gathering good team, then optimizing or getting the best out of the talent pool you have around you. You act as the focal point that enables things to happen. By that measure Nehru did was good leader. India bagged Kashmir under his watch. Every nation has talent. it's all about aligning that talent in furtherance of your goals.

On the Pakistani side read the frustration of Gen. Akbar Khan later of the Rawalpindi Conspiracy case. And such was the terrible political leadership in formative stages of Pakistan that had Pakistan not had Pakistan Army - which was gift from the British, Pakistan would have fallen apart like a deck of cards.

It's no surprise that PA took over. It was the only instutution with sufficent backbone to hold Pakistan together.