Partition & Reunification

[thakur_ritesh]

the suggestion of a union on lines of eu comes across as the most viable solution to move ahead with the way the things are today, which more or less takes care of all the concerns of pakistan, bangladesh, nepal, sri lanka, india, etc who all want to maintain their individual identity the way it is but still be a part of an economic activity in the region from where all are to benefit, which i believe is a win-win for all.

if we are to observe the way the things are moving ahead by allowing transit of goods through india, through b'desh, and through p'stan, things are certainly moving in that direction. the next stepping stone in that direction will have to be the implementation of safta and saeu. the economic benefits are immense to be had, costing would take a big dip, prifits would zoom, employment opportunities would increase many fold, we all will become stakeholders in each others development which would remove a lot of hostility that exists in the region.

another opportunity i see here is that india presents it self as a destination for regional education. soon the foreign varsity bill is to be introduced in the parliament (in the winter session), and in all likelihood the bill will pass through . if we are to make india a destination of excellence then we most certainly have to attract the finest of the talent from the region and give them opportunities in here rather than them looking for those opportunities else where in the western world. i take heart from the fact that if pakistani artists, sports stars can earn their living in india then so can their and other countries educationists and their brightest of the students. we certainly need to be a source of nectar for the biggest and the brightest in the region, and when i say biggest i mean the best of the companies in the region.

my one concern here is the movement of labor across the border from any side since there are millions in india who live in abject poverty, who struggle to even make a dollar a day or have a meal a day, and if movement is allowed a lot of job opportunities for these people would go for begging and people of other nationalities would end up benefiting. in here the way the politics gets played on the domestic front, this could well be a political disaster especially in india since india would end up being a magnet of most economic activity when officially india alone contributes 80% of the regions gdp, and some figures where the black economy is accounted for the same comes out to a whopping 90%, so eventually most of the economic activity would revolve around india.

the political cost will be of utmost importance for all nationalities, since no one would like to see any kind of interference in their internal matters and as and when there is integration to happen, there will for sure be some kind of a dilution in the powers that are presently exerted by all the national governments. will the hawks in all our countries be open to it, or seize to the opportunity to push their hate based agendas and sadly here india could again be made the fall guy because of the sheer size of the economy, geographical size and population which most love to label as a “big brother”.

at stake is a market of 1.6billion people, with a gpd of around 1.5t usd, with a potential to reach 3-3.5t usd by 2020, think of it for a moment!

 

[S.A.T.A]

Pakistan and other countries of the region have attempted to forge a national identity in its most narrowest sense,fortunately India has not succumbed to such easy temptation.India has consistently refused to tie down its fledgling nationhood on the moth eaten premise of religion,ethnic or any ethno-linguistic classification.

This is extremely important,because by doing so we have made it certain to ourselves and to the rest, that we don't identify with the idea of nation state that came into being in 1947.It would be an even greater tragedy to condone such a premise for the sake of political expedience.The idea of reunification(more than in its political sense)for me is not a chauvinists dream,its a duty that all Indians,by blood and of the soil,united by one civilization must continue to persevere.

To stop talking about or ignoring it because its ridiculous in the present context(even if its right)will be a greater travesty.We forget when we constantly don't think.If my forefathers had not constantly thought and persevered with it,i would still be saluting the Union jack.

I may be in the minority,but let me assure everyone I'm not alone in thinking so(and i'm not just talking about this side of the border).Students of history are constant dreamers,that's because we can only imagine our past.But trust me our past often foretells our future.

I completely understand the idea might stand out Utopian with all the riots ,rhetoric and political standoff's in this time and place.I even agree that India's socio-economic-political failure or success might act as a catalyst to the eventual success or failure of the endeavor.I also agree that the idea must be well received and acted upon by all its key constituents......But let's not stop thinking about just because we think it might be non starter.

P.S:dear Energon just a clarification,i did not start the thread but was the result of a hotchpotching of posts with unclear intent,much like our partition

 

[Energon]

Pakistan and other countries of the region have attempted to forge a national identity in its most narrowest sense,fortunately India has not succumbed to such easy temptation.India has consistently refused to tie down its fledgling nationhood on the moth eaten premise of religion,ethnic or any ethno-linguistic classification.

This is extremely important,because by doing so we have made it certain to ourselves and to the rest, that we don't identify with the idea of nation state that came into being in 1947.It would be an even greater tragedy to condone such a premise for the sake of political expedience.The idea of reunification(more than in its political sense)for me is not a chauvinists dream,its a duty that all Indians,by blood and of the soil,united by one civilization must continue to persevere.

To stop talking about or ignoring it because its ridiculous in the present context(even if its right)will be a greater travesty.We forget when we constantly don't think.If my forefathers had not constantly thought and persevered with it,i would still be saluting the Union jack.

I may be in the minority,but let me assure everyone I'm not alone in thinking so(and i'm not just talking about this side of the border).Students of history are constant dreamers,that's because we can only imagine our past.But trust me our past often foretells our future.

I completely understand the idea might stand out Utopian with all the riots ,rhetoric and political standoff's in this time and place.I even agree that India's socio-economic-political failure or success might act as a catalyst to the eventual success or failure of the endeavor.I also agree that the idea must be well received and acted upon by all its key constituents......But let's not stop thinking about just because we think it might be non starter.

P.S:dear Energon just a clarification,i did not start the thread but was the result of a hotchpotching of posts with unclear intent,much like our partition

SATA, I too think this topic is extremely interesting, one that has been around for ages, and most of all I enjoy reading your posts and debating with you . Also agree with the caution of falling into the trap of perceiving history within the confines of one's own lifespan.

Having said that, I still think the parameters of this issue are no longer defined as they were before. A common culture, or an allegiance to it (it merely takes one generation of social engineering to negate this) isn't enough to solidify the identity of a nation state. The schisms arising from a weak and unmanageable society tend to evolve into permanent change mostly because they are social indicators that something very critical isn't working.

Leaving aside the issue of Pakistan's inability to forge an identity, the other very important point you have raised is that of the Indian identity (which I still maintain is unrelated). The identity of the nation state is not what the people of the Indian subcontinent chose, because by the time it was forced upon them they were no longer in control of their own destiny. It is however what they have now, and so they have to work very, very hard to develop and cultivate it. Even in the long run, there can truly be no credible discussion around an identity of the Indian subcontinent if it's primary component (by virtue of it's size, cultural and economic influence) does not establish and solidify its own identity and consciousness in the current context.

 

[mehwish92]

There are issues for all Indians not just Muslims. And even if Muslims have a problem here, it's not pakistans resposibility. They have more problems between Muslims itself which they need to resolve.

it's true; all indians face problems in india, not only muslims.

Pakistan, however, does not think this way, and likes to exaggerate any problem that Muslims face in India, which is a result of their anti-India stand. After all this is what justifies the existence of "Pak"istan.

What we as a country need to do is bring equality for all our citizens, and eradicate discrimination based on religion/ethnicity/caste etc for all people. And this we don't have to do to show Pakistan that their existence is based on lies. But rather we need to do this to improve our own selves.

Ultimately, what Pakistan thinks about us doesn't matter, as long as they don't meddle in our affairs.

 

[tarunraju]

Yes, that's the point. Despite everything Pakistan wants to allege, Muslims in India, and the Indian state of Jammu and Kashmir, are better off than Muslims in Pakistan and the Kashmir it controls. So instead, India has an argument which it hasn't used yet - "under the statehood of Pakistan, the people there are worse off, and face more problems."

 

[ppgj]

people like musharraf have the guts to rake up such propaganda in india!! in the last conclave of india today group he did that. he was soundly rebutted and was asked to mind his business by an UP mp who is good muslim leader too. i forget his name. having said that that propaganda still works magic in pakistan. why you see so many muslim youth under the aegis of let, jem infiltrating india?

 

[Yusuf]

Madani was his name.

 

[ppgj]

Madani was his name.

that is right. it was nice to see him take on the general.

 

[Yusuf]

Yes and he had no answer to that. He was given a good time there.

 

[Flint]

Nice discussion, and I'll be frank here, but India would first need to lend greater legitimacy to its own federal structure by giving its citizens an excellent standard of living, so much so that people in its neighbours look upto it as a leader. Secondly, India would have to prove beyond doubt, that its military strength and capabilities are second to none. Only then can we think of a potential future reunification.

 

[tarunraju]

Nice discussion, and I'll be frank here, but India would first need to lend greater legitimacy to its own federal structure by giving its citizens an excellent standard of living, so much so that people in its neighbours look upto it as a leader. Secondly, India would have to prove beyond doubt, that its military strength and capabilities are second to none. Only then can we think of a potential future reunification.

India does give its citizens superior standards of living to Pakistan's, and it does have a stronger military. To be able to overwhelm Pakistan's military is not possible. We will never be able to invade and capture Pakistan. So India's leadership (in military and economic fronts) cannot be used to win Pakistanis using either fear or incentives. The point is, the sentiment of reunification should be mutual, and not unilateral.

The only situation I see where the Pakistanis (and Indians) get this sentiment, is when they give up all their disputes, even if they cannot be resolved, so they could ponder over this. Procrastinating things, thinking that some fine day in the future, all outstanding issues between India and Pakistan will be magically resolved, and both end up satisfied with the resolution is foolhardy. That day is not going to come. So it's best that we both give up our disputes. In a game of Chess, you stop playing when a stalemate is reached (unless you decide to give your King away, and lose).

 

[Flint]

India does give its citizens superior standards of living to Pakistan's, and it does have a stronger military. To be able to overwhelm Pakistan's military is not possible. We will never be able to invade and capture Pakistan. So India's leadership (in military and economic fronts) cannot be used to win Pakistanis using either fear or incentives. The point is, the sentiment of reunification should be mutual, and not unilateral.

The only situation I see where the Pakistanis (and Indians) get this sentiment, is when they give up all their disputes, even if they cannot be resolved, so they could ponder over this. Procrastinating things, thinking that some fine day in the future, all outstanding issues between India and Pakistan will be magically resolved, and both end up satisfied with the resolution is foolhardy. That day is not going to come. So it's best that we both give up our disputes. In a game of Chess, you stop playing when a stalemate is reached (unless you decide to give your King away, and lose).

tarun you have completely misunderstood my post. I never suggested that India should invade Pakistan, and neither did I suggest that Indians had a worse standard of living than her neighbours. Now please re-read my post in this light.

 

[tarunraju]

tarun you have completely misunderstood my post. I never suggested that India should invade Pakistan, and neither did I suggest that Indians had a worse standard of living than her neighbours. Now please re-read my post in this light.

No, I did read and understand your post. Your suggestion that reunification can be thought about after establishing ourselves as a leader wouldn't really work. Today Pakistan does not look up to India as a regional leader, and probably never will, in the forseeable future. Elements in Pakistan carry out covert operations against India. Pakistan's military is also growing at its own pace. To think that some day our military and economy will lead that of Pakistan's, with a big enough margin to them peacefully accepting us as a leader, is probably looking very far into the future. Having a much stronger country next to you doesn't really give Pakistan the confidence to talk peace.

In another view, Indians will never agree to reunite with a state that is very far behind economically, or far different, socially. Reunification can happen in the next month, if people on both sides decide they've had enough of living as two conflicting states. Sadly the idea is currently not popular on either sides. Looking at the way Pakistan's economy is headed, these are perhaps some of the last days when the gap between our economies and military is close enough, and reunification can have little economic and cultural impact on the two countries. Perhaps the gaps are only going to widen from here, and perhaps India and Pakistan would have gone too far apart their ways, for any hope of a reunification. The sooner the better.

For Pakistanis, the incentives of reuniting with India are short-term (short-term wherein, the economy will probably stabilize, and put back on track, and India will probably crush all anti-state elements in Pakistan emanating from Pakistan's west. For Indians however, the incentives are so long terms that probably we in this generation won't see much of. It will establish India (or the reunited state), as larger territorially, militarily, and resource-wise. With a big chunk of our headache gone (Pakistan for Indians, and India for Pakistanis), we can finally settle down with bettering ourselves, and chase our dream of becoming a leader with a military strength next to none.

So in short: If we ever want to reunite, the time is now. Cannot use regional leadership as a confidence building measure to lure Pakistan into anything, not now, not ever. The sentiment should be bilateral and mutual. Sadly it's impractical right now.

 

[peacecracker]

Pakistan is not related to India.India is the Country where People are Considered Equal and Religions are Not Looked Upon(Ideally).India is the Country where Democracy is the Rule.
current pakistan is too much obsessed with radical islam.most of the citizen cannot escape heavy indoctrination.that country exists on the hate for India(Which is presumed as a Hindu state ,although the truth is not known to them) and it's Democracy.Agrees that Indian Culture is Somewhat Still found in parts of pakistan.Pakistan will regret once they learn culture is more important for them although they swear in the name of religion.

So ,To Bangladesh and pakistan - these countries stands for religion.how can India ever think about these countries whose citizen are filled with the hate for non-muslims(Although generalized ,it is true) be merged with India?No!Just imagine the riot and intolerance once these religiously minded moves onto peaceful Indian cities!An Example is What English City of Birmingham Witnesses from Pakistani and Bangladeshi immigrants there.

Pakistan be peaceful ,when that nation develops itself into a moderate Islamic nation where proper Education is given importance.currently ,I very well know what judges more than science,humanity.

Sorry to Akhand Bharat supporters.Pakistan is now a Islamic Nation .Even afghan too is .for 1000 years.their Basic Culture is not really Indian or Sanatan Dharma based(Even Those punjabi region of pakistan included).Like Most muslim countries(except moderates) ,Pakistan and Bangladesh will remain as a Threat to India by the Pan Arabization and Islamofascism these Countries and their People shows.the Question is ,How Much Time India Can Defend itself from these aggressions?Pan Arabization and Radical Islamized Society wants to get Excited Over Subjugation of Non-Muslims.thankfully ,Our Country's Muslims learns themselves much much more Secular and Proud of India.This is How a Nation progresses.Not Based on Hate for Another Country or Other Religions.

Truth has to be told.
~~ PC

 

[F-14]

PC in your case i suppouse Ignorance is bliss the Indian subcontinet has belonged to India this had been proved time and again by the Grate Lake called History which has no bearing on the current trejectory that is taken by the countries in the region which can be classified artifical countries and History has shown that Artifical nations always mealt away the biggest example for the connection that the countries of the subcontinent share to India is their languages you conviently forget that islam is a latter Ingredent in the Indian cultural mix we call for the re unification of the Indian subcontinent not on religion but on shared history and cluture For you India might be a piece of land a peninsula but for a student of History India is a cultural continent which is continous in nature your assumption that pakistan is not related to India is a historical farce that has been conviently dismissed by historical evidince

and PS: Please do accept others POV's to

 

[Bhadra]

am exhausted from this debate, and maybe I got the answer I was looking for. Before I leave, here's some food for thought.

• Did 62 years of sovereign nationhood yield anything constructive?

• 
  
  yes, It has given rise to Pakistani nationhood and Nationalism. Existance and behaviour of Pakistan is also a good and cementing factor for Indian Nationalism and Indian cultural ideas.Due to Pakistan, India is relatively safer from the onslaughts of rabid Muslim Fundamantalist activities. The administration in India can take adequate measures to contain those fundamentalist viruses as those can in the present be localised and sanitised.
  
  [i
• Wasn't partition a clever ploy to make sure there isn't a powerful nation and a potential superpower in South Asia?[/i]
  
  yes it was. However ingredients to be superpower for 21st century have changed drastically.
  But it was more so to secure a front for great games inside Afghanistan and CAR and secure British (subsequently American) imperial and colonial interests. History subsequently proved that right. India has been spared the agony of being a frontline state.
  
  [*]Under democracy, wouldn't Muslims have ended up with their share of the power, since the very principle of democracy is people's rule?
  
  Yes they would have and may be the first or second PM of free India would have been Jinha or Yahya Khan or Ayub Khan !
  
  [*]Won't reunification make us a much stronger nation that cannot be bullied around by the Americans and Chinese?
  
  You mean to say size is the strength. It is not even where it matters. United India [Pakistan, Bangldesh and India] is the trove of poverty and resourcelessness.
  
  [*]Wouldn't we then have to make bigger expenditures on things that really matter (infrastructure, industry, education, and opportunity) than spending billions (more) on pointless military expenditure?
  
  Imagine India spending much more in perrenial wars of Afghan frontiers and securing borders against Iran and extended frontiers against China.
  
  [*]Wouldn't we then be more powerful on the world stage?
  
  Power of what - destitute and poors, floods and natural calamities, power of poverty ?
  
  [*]Aren't Islamic radicalization, the Taliban problem, and economic dilution that results from reunification trivial, and short-term problems that are manageable and make the long-term incentives worth the trouble?
  
  
  
  If those problems which hit at the fundamentals of the existance of a nation state are trivial then what are the real problems. The richest agrerian parts of India were given to Pakistan and the femine riven dry land was waht constituted India. India has worked hard to make ourselves fertile and prosperious and now you want to hand it over to the Khans, Pathans and Mullahs and bring in another Muglia to be controlled either from Iran or Saudi Arabia? That is not a good argument. Islam will always be controlled either from Iran or Saudi Arabia ! Any doubt about it. Indian state will be organising Khilafats and Jihads to cater for the requirements of its 30 -40 percent Muslim population.
  
  That will make India a great power or a untouchable hated state like Pakistan is taken to be today.
  
  What is the ultimate aim of power? To deliver peace for development and betterment. Pakistan and Bangladesh as a states are not a threat to India's existance so let them be alone and develop their one way under Saudi Arabia or Iran or their imported Islamic delusions.
  
  
  Maybe it's Utopian, ridiculous, and audacious, and maybe you detest the idea. But if we don't start being long-sighted, we will never end up the kind of nation our founding fathers envisaged in 1947, and will always be contained and limited by our belligerent neighbors. Today's India and Pakistan are like palm-trees growing in flower-pots. A palm tree will remain stunted when it's in a flower-pot. Give it a larger pot, it will give you a bigger tree. Thank you for your time, and apologies if I wasted it.
  
  you are merely fentacising. No one has stopped India's growth but ourselves. Paksistan or Bengladesh have never been factors for India's economic ctivities, growth, poverty or expenditure. What have you spent of India's defence? A mere less than 2 perenet of GDP? One of the lowest in the world. Your fears are witout grounds.

 

[Bhadra]

India and Pakistan can not survive together in a forum like SAARC and people are delusioned here talking of their unification ??

Not in your life time at least, so spend youe energeis somewhere else.

One may concentrate on development of Indian Muslims rather than worry about those in Bangladesh or Pakistan !

 

[mikhail]

India and Pakistan can not survive together in a forum like SAARC and people are delusioned here talking of their unification ??

Not in your life time at least, so spend youe energeis somewhere else.

One may concentrate on development of Indian Muslims rather than worry about those in Bangladesh or Pakistan !

man you just opened a 3 and a half year old thread!but seriously do we need to re-unify with the pakis and the bangladeshis:shocked:?i,for one, believe that the partition was a necessary evil as it has enabled us Indians to move forward without carrying those liabilites with us(readakistanis and bangladeshis).just imagine what would have been the condition of our country if there had not been a partition:yuck:!but on a lighter note i am in favor of getting back our land which rightfully belong to us without their inhabitants

 

[Daredevil]

India is in a unique position/situation of telling "I told you so" on two-nation theory failure but also being happy and lucky that the partition happened based on this theory. India had the luck to have the cake and eat it too.

 

[Ray]

Partition is permanent and irrevocable.

Let them sleep in peace and despondency as a total failure. They are a people who thrive on strife, instability, chaos and mayhem. They are too full of wanting 'supremacy' without realising who should be 'supreme'.

If people who feel 'liberated' of oppression of the Hindus by having a separate country and then fight amongst themselves and kill each other, then so be it.

Let them not bring their internecine hassle and have another target the Hindus to wreck up all the happiness that we have as India.

Peace be Upon them and their Prophet!