That’s been done too.
Not true. The erstwhile NWFP (now KPK) had a sea change in opinion between the 1946 elections and the 1947. I am from the region, and my own family in Peshawar were big followers of Ghaffar Khan and Khan Sahib in 1946. Come 1947, the were all campaigning for Jinnah and the Pakistan, my great aunts were actually election agents for Congress in 1946, they in 1947 spent most of their time campaigning for Pakistan. Many actual and percieved acts of Congress in 1946 and early 1947 caused a sea change of opinion, which blindsided Congress, and caused most people to turn to the Pakistan option. Indians such as yourself and RNATB and indeed most Indians I have met don’t appreciate this fact.
Mr clueless is in the house!!!
- Pashtuns have more in common with Afghans? Oh let’s see, besides the fact that the language is different and that you have had large Pakhtun (note the K) settlements in every major city of Pakistan, I guess Afghanistan should be the natural home of Pakhtuns eh?
Your map is inaccurate and misleading as well as incomplete.
- Punjab. The north of Punjab, labelled Punjabi in that map, is not Punjabi at all, it’s Potohari, which is a different language altogether. The north east is Kashmiri and the West is a big mix of Pakhto and Pujabi speakers.The South west of the Punjab is Balochi speaking while the South Center is Seriaki speaking and was until 1970 a different province.
2)NWFP KPK. The East of the province is mostly Hindko, Potohari, Kashmiri and Balti speaking. Peshawar and the extreme north west are Persian speaking.
3)Sindh. The north of Sindh is especially Seriaki speaking, which the West is mostly Baloch speakers. The coastal belt is outside of Karachi very Makarani (another language) the center and the south ar Sindhi, while the urban areas are Urdu speaking.
- Balochistan, the north of the province has Pashto speaker (note the different spelling) as well as Persian speaking Hazaras. The center has Baloch speakers , as well as a large minority of Brahui speakers. The south coast is makarani.
I have only given the major languages in each region, I have not commented on the various permutations (Pakhto speaking Punjabis in DI Khan district for instance) or even considered minor languages and ethnicitys, Paharis in Muree for instance.
You forgot reason no. 4: big fucking mountains.
Interestingly, Switzerland has managed to stay independent for so long for essentially the same reasons.
I’m not sure what this means, but I assume it’s some sort of Pakistani attempt to deny the connection between the people who make up the largest ethnic group in Afghanistan and the second largest ethnic group in Pakistan.
Then you assume wrong. The point is that the ethnic group yon talk about is different in both countries, the ones in Pakistan speak a different and near unintelligible dialect to the ones in Afghanistan. The different ways of pronouncing Pashtun is one example, in Pakistan it’s Pakhtun. Indeed, one of the many reasons why Afghan refugees managed to be so unpopular in KPK. As opposed to say in Lahore.
I’m actually getting my opinion partly from Wali Khan’s book. He seems biased against the Muslim League and particularly against the British, but he does provide a number of cites and sources for the things he claims. Holds more water with me than anecdotal evidence. I wonder if you’ve been through it? He claims that the referendum in NWFP was unnecessary because an elected legislative assembly was in place, it was engineered by the British and the Muslim League, and then voting in the referendum, which was boycotted by the Khudai Khidmatgars only barely made it past the 50% mark of a non universal suffrage. Not an Indian viewpoint, although it is definitely in closer alignment with Indian viewpoints. Please try and consider that this does not automatically make it wrong.
This is the case post independence. Were Pakhtuns spread all over Lahore and Karachi (Am I missing any major cities?) in large numbers circa 1947?
I have been through Wali Khans book. He talks bullshit when he is being good and pulls things out of thin air when he is Being bad. I’ll admit that I have never been a fan of the party, but Wali Khan generally had an agenda in writing that book, and most if it as he admits was to exonerate his father. By 1987 when the book came out, Ghaffar Khan was about the most disliked man in the province. He had bet wrong in 1947, then lost a lot of support in the 1960’s for supporting Afghan irredentist claims and then compounded it by being pro Soviet after 1979.The party had been wiped out in the 1970’s and 1980’s, Wali Khan could not even win his own seat.
In the 1970’s, Wali Khan himself became a politician of some national standing, when he joined the combined opposition parties (despite his own part suffering continuous defeats in elections to Bhutto) and was briefly and seriously thought of as a possible PM. He spent most of that time repudiating the what ge would write in the 1987 and then turned out differently when elections came in 1990.
[QUOTE=bldysabba;
This is the case post independence. Were Pakhtuns spread all over Lahore and Karachi (Am I missing any major cities?) in large numbers circa 1947?[/QUOTE]
He misses major points in his book as well. IIRC, the referendum turnout in the Frontier was slightly higher then the average and was higher then the 1946 election.
Yes, not in Karachi, but in Lahore, in Multan, in Bahawalpur.
Returning to the OP, I’d want to go back another half-century, and derail Lord Curzon’s stupid atempt to cultivate what he considered the aristorcatic leadership of India (in reality a bunch of fat, ignorant and bigoted rajahs), while marginalizing the meritocracy of the Indian/Anglo-Indian intelligentsia & civil service.
This left India’s natural modern leadership with no path of development besides agitation for full independence; and, since all revolutions devour their own children, set the banquet table for that, too.
Ah but the pieces of anecdotal evidence available with you and I are no less coloured by agendas and enmities that have little to do historical fact. Done is done though I guess. Little point in dwelling so far in the past. Fuck it.
True. Wali Khan died a bitter and defeated, though still proud man, Which is a pity, as there was a lot about hid agenda I could have gotten behind.
[QUOTE=AK84]
Indians such as yourself and **RNATB **and indeed most Indians I have met don’t appreciate this fact.
[/QUOTE]
I’m not really sure what you’re getting at here. Are you saying a independent Muslim state was the only option because Muslims had good reasons not to trust the Congress?
Even if that was their point of view, I’m still not sure it was the right move. My stepfather is from Multan, and he walked to Gurdaspur with his grandmother on his back.
As far as I can recall, no other post-imperial partition or divestiture went quite as badly as this one (though admittedly there were none on this scale) and it seems obvious that the reason for that is you can’t move 15 million people.
The point is that Congress failed to realize that autonomy was the minimum that the ML was willing to accept in order to stay in India and that it was the opinion of most muslims at the time. When the Cabinet mission plan was rejected, it was clear that the nothing but separation could be acceptable, from the muslim POV, they had given the maximum and that had been rejected. I also disagree that the Cabinet mission plan was flawed, it just added another layer of Government between t he people and the center, previously it had been District, Division, Province, Center, now it would be District, Division, Province, Group of provinces and Center, all subjects reserved to the center in earlier proposals remained, the new groups of provinces powers would have been on issues that the provinces held competence on British India.
I agree it was badly managed,but not due to the scale, but the timing, announced on 3 June, in effect 15 August. Greater time should have been allocated, say a year or two. Would have made it easier. And less deadly.
Yo! thanks for the shout-out, bro
It’s not a question of them being identical, it’s a question of whether they are more similar to Afghans or other Pakistanis. I say they are more similar to Afghans, even with their slightly different dialect.
The ‘settlements’ mean nothing, the majority of them are near Afghanistan, besides, the partition of Greater India involved the relocation of millions of people, so helping a few hundred thousand more people move is nothing.
Actually being one of the “they”, I would disagree.