the partition of 1947 was inevitable
Was the 1947 Partition of India inevitable?
In August of 2012, the nations of India and Pakistan celebrated their 65th year of independence from the British Raj. Although its significance was overshadowed by the Independence Day celebrations, August 2012 also marked 65 years since the tragic and violent partition of India and Pakistan. The newfound independence in 1947 was met with mixed feelings. Although the people of India, through nationalism and self-determination, had finally rid themselves from British Imperialism, they now found themselves divided into two nations. While the predominantly Hindu area remained as India, the Northwestern and Eastern, predominantly Muslim area was separated and turned into an independent nation of Pakistan. Considering the various sides involved with the partition, the various identities, religious and other, as well as political games involved, it is very difficult to find a single, true narrative to the story of partition1. The politicians involved regarded it coolly while the people involved in the partition and the massacre say it cannot be described. The one argument that arises when faced with this issue is the question of whether the partition of India truly was inevitable and the Hindu-Muslim unity impossible. Considering the workings of the congress, the deep seeded Hindu nationalism, the amount of different cultural identities in one place2, as well as the political intentions of the higher powers, the partition was bound to happen at some point.
India under the British Raj was seemingly divided into different areas of Hindu and Muslim majorities. It was the claim of the Muslim League and Muhammad Ali Jinnah, that the more powerful and dominantly Hindu Congress would regard the Muslim population as a minority. The Muslims, under one independent nation run by primarily Hindu government, would lose their rights. An example of this is Tilak’s resolve to blend Hinduism with nationalism, and the outcome of
In August of 2012, the nations of India and Pakistan celebrated their 65th year of independence from the British Raj. Although its significance was overshadowed by the Independence Day celebrations, August 2012 also marked 65 years since the tragic and violent partition of India and Pakistan. The newfound independence in 1947 was met with mixed feelings. Although the people of India, through nationalism and self-determination, had finally rid themselves from British Imperialism, they now found themselves divided into two nations. While the predominantly Hindu area remained as India, the Northwestern and Eastern, predominantly Muslim area was separated and turned into an independent nation of Pakistan. Considering the various sides involved with the partition, the various identities, religious and other, as well as political games involved, it is very difficult to find a single, true narrative to the story of partition1. The politicians involved regarded it coolly while the people involved in the partition and the massacre say it cannot be described. The one argument that arises when faced with this issue is the question of whether the partition of India truly was inevitable and the Hindu-Muslim unity impossible. Considering the workings of the congress, the deep seeded Hindu nationalism, the amount of different cultural identities in one place2, as well as the political intentions of the higher powers, the partition was bound to happen at some point.
India under the British Raj was seemingly divided into different areas of Hindu and Muslim majorities. It was the claim of the Muslim League and Muhammad Ali Jinnah, that the more powerful and dominantly Hindu Congress would regard the Muslim population as a minority. The Muslims, under one independent nation run by primarily Hindu government, would lose their rights. An example of this is Tilak’s resolve to blend Hinduism with nationalism, and the outcome of