Indrani
BANNED
- Joined
- Apr 23, 2014
- Messages
- 3,379
- Reaction score
- -13
- Country
- Location
Muslims staying on in newly created Dominion of India and non Muslims staying in the nascent Dominion of Pakistan had NO relevance to their allegiance to the States just created. They stayed or left as per convenience. Rich people on both sides of the border, especially those with a lot of land (non transferrable) preferred to to stay.
That is plain rubbish. Given that India keeps citing the moving of the rich and the elites among Indian Muslims to Pakistan as a reason for the lack of leadership among the Muslims of India to this date, that reason does not hold. Those who stayed back in India did so because of economic compulsions, plus there was an extended timeframe given to move, they were just bidding their time until they could wrap up their business in India and move. By then stories of Mohajir treatment started to trickle in.
For example many non Muslims in Pakistan had no idea about the intolerance they would be witness to. The idea was similar here as well. The people were the same - they had seen numerous conflicts between and among each other. There was a feeling that they will go back to living together again soon. There were many Muslims who stayed during the partition itself but left in the following years. The trickle of non Muslims from Pakistan to India is still happening even today!
The excuses you give just do not hold. The partition witnessed one of the most severe genocide both leading to it and after it and yet you claim people had no idea about the intolerance they would witness? Then you go to say that they had seen numerous conflicts. If numerous conflicts do not give an idea of what future holds, then pray what does?
So the idea that Hindus or Sikhs living in Pakistan stayed because they supported the Two Nation Theory is absurd, just like Muslim staying in India rejecting it. Wherever people felt safe, they escaped. A substantial Hindu population stayed on in East Pakistan. Not because they necessarily chose Pakistan over India, but because they chose a future of security as opposed to one of insecurity, uncertainty and lack of identity. In the South both communities were largely untouched because there was little incentive to leave everything and start from scratch. In Punjab and Sindh on the other hand there were plenty of reason to cross the border to respective safeties.
No the same reason cannot be applied to the Hindus because they were not the ones demanding an independent Pakistan. Please try logic at least sometimes. The Muslims voted 97% for Muslim League in the run up to partition knowing fully well what that entailed. The Hindus were not asked. The Hindus stayed on in Pakistan because that land is intrinsically connected to their history. Majority still left. You cannot make a case that majority of Hindus felt unsecure but minority of them did not.