|
Law in Contemporary Society
|
|
The Culmination of the Partition of India-- By AliAbid - 23 Feb 2024 The partition of British India in 1947 is one of the most pivotal events in the history of South Asia. It resulted in the countries of India, Pakistan and Bangladesh. This event set the stage for the modern rivalry between India and Pakistan, while also sparking religious conflicts between Hindus and Muslims in South Asia. The tensions in the area are a direct result of the British occupation of India. Prior to the arrival of the British, the people of various religions in South Asia lived relatively in cooperation. The British influence started with the arrival of the British East India Company in the 1600s. They were interested in making money from the spices and resources in India. The Mughal Empire was in power during the time the British East India Company arrived. They later started to decline and then the company took the chance to establish more power over India. Since the territory of India was not united at the time, there were many rulers. One of the company’s initial moves was to take over the Bengal region and implement a tax on the region’s people. The British East India Company established deals with different leaders under the reason of protection. The Brits also had a rule where if the leader of a territory died without an heir, the territory would then be British owned. Eventually in 1857, the people of India had enough and revolted. The British stomped the rebellion and then established direct control of India officially. The British Crown then took over for the British East India Company. The British had a large empire at the time. They had control of places such as Nigeria, Australia, Jamaica and the like. They were generally not liked by their subjects as they would turn people against each other. This was part of their strategy of divide and rule. In India, they used this strategy to pin Hindus and Muslims against each other. The British institutionalized divisions between the two religious groups. They established separate electorates for them which created conflict among them. In 1885, the Indian National Congress was formed. They had the intention to represent all Indians but after a while Muslims did not feel represented. They formed the All-India Muslim League in 1906. This group wanted to represent the interests of all the Muslims in India. With the rise Indian nationalism and the weakening of the British Crown from their involvement in World War II, the movement towards independence picked up. The Muslim League thought it was for the betterment of the Muslims in India if they were given independent sovereign territories where they were a majority. This idea was presented in the Lahore Resolution in 1940. The Muslim League wanted to make sure that as religious minorities, Muslims would still have power and representation in India. This effort was led by the eventual founder of Pakistan, Muhammad Ali Jinnah. After World War II had ended, the British did not have the resources and ability to keep India as part of its empire. Great Britain was dealing with enough domestic problems as a result of the war that they could not extend more concern to maintaining rule over India. In 1946, the British proposed the Cabinet Mission Plan where there would be one federal government and then various provinces primarily based on religious majorities. This plan called for one unified India. The Indian National Congress and the Muslim League did not come to a mutual agreement on the plan which led to its failure. A few months later, the Muslim League officially demanded a separate homeland for Muslims. They wanted a separate country independent of India. To move towards their goal, the party called for a labor strike. This would be known as Direct Action Day and was a pivotal point in the partition of India. This event sparked mass riots in the city of Kolkata which spread throughout the territories of British India. The communal violence between Muslims and Hindus caused more than 4,000 deaths and 100,000 people displaced in Kolkata. The conflicts led to the British in 1947 sending Lord Mountbatten to India to finally hand over power and leave the land. The vagueness of the British proposals led to the Indian National Congress and the Muslim League not coming to a mutual agreement. Mountbatten then proposed a partition of two independent countries, India and Pakistan. Pakistan would consist of two territories, West Pakistan, which is modern day Pakistan and East Pakistan, which is modern day Bangladesh. India would consist of the land between West and East Pakistan. The Indian National Congress initially opposed the partition but with the spread of riots and tension throughout the land, they became in favor of it. The Muslim League agreed as well and thus is the birth of both countries. August 14th, 1947 marked the independence of Pakistan and August 15th, 1947 marked the independence of India. The independence of Pakistan and India sparked one of the largest migrations of people in history. Sikhs and Hindus from the area of present-day Pakistan moved to India while many Muslims from present-day India moved to Pakistan. Around 15 million people migrated between both sides. This migration came with mass violence and atrocities committed. Around one million people are estimated to have died during this period and scarred a generation with trauma. Hostility as a result of the partition is still felt by the people of India and Pakistan. If the British was invested in the success of its former colony instead of exploiting it, perhaps the landscape of South Asia would be much different today.This draft identifies the subject and indicates clearly where the learning you want to do would be found, so the next draft can actually build on that basis. It's odd, of course, to read an account of an historical subject as heavily studied as the Partition that proceeds as though no one has ever written about the subject before at a deeper than Wikipedia-inflected level. The best route to improvement is to put the next draft in touch with some small fraction of the truly immense literature, giving the reader a sense of how the historical discussion has evolved, what the issues are, how the writers have approached them, and where the balance of the conversation stands now. To get the basic narrative and this generation's dominant sources in view, I would probably start with the Cambridge Concise History of Modern India, or an equivalent one-volume introduction for beginners. I like the Metcalfs' book best among the recent introductions. The bibliography is basic, as one would in such a work, but helpful. After almost fifty years, Yasmin Khan's The Great Partition: The Making of India and Pakistan is still unsurpassed, I think. A recent historiographic survey by David Gilmartin in the Journal of Asian Studies seems to me to offer some useful perspective on the shape of the current discussion. But we are sitting in a law school on the other side of the world, so perhaps our attention should be at least as directed at what the learning you are doing contributes to your legal education as to the subject itself. How does learning this history, and reading in to the conversation going on among scholars about it, affect your developing lawyer's theory of social action? What does engagement in historical study like this tell you about the sort of lawyer you'd like to become? You are entitled to restrict access to your paper if you want to. But we all derive immense benefit from reading one another's work, and I hope you won't feel the need unless the subject matter is personal and its disclosure would be harmful or undesirable. To restrict access to your paper simply delete the "#" character on the next two lines:
|
|
