Print this page Reasons for partition India and Pakistan won independence in Augustfollowing a nationalist struggle lasting nearly three decades. It set a vital precedent for the negotiated winding up of European empires elsewhere. Unfortunately, it was accompanied by the largest mass migration in human history of some 10 million. As many as one million civilians died in the accompanying riots and local-level fighting, particularly in the western region of Punjab which was cut in two by the border.
Associate Professor of Political Economy, Stanford Graduate School of Business The economic and political consequences of the partition of the Indian subcontinent in Partitioning states into smaller units is a solution that is often suggested to resolve ethnic conflicts around the world.
The appealing elementary school logic of fostering peace by separating groups that are not playing well together continues to be actively discussed by both policymakers and academics, assuming a prominent role in contemporary debates over the continued conflict in Iraq, Syria, and beyond.
Yet, little is known about the conditions under which what appears to be a viable political compromise devolves into a human disaster. Neither are the economic and political consequences of partition well understood.
The partition of South Asia on religious grounds in August has the potential to teach us much about these issues. Seen initially as a viable political compromise, the partition of the Indian subcontinent instead led to one of the largest forced migrations in world history, with an estimated Estimates of the number killed between March and January range fromto one million.
The impact of Partition on the population shares of religious minorities Figure 1 shows the share of affected religious minorities in the population of pre-Partition India according to the census ofand in India and Pakistan three years after the Partition in the censuses.
The shares of Muslim populations in Punjab fell to insignificant levels byas did the shares of Hindu and Sikh populations in West Pakistan.
In contrast, in the east, the disappearance of minority population shares was much more muted. Reproduced from Jha and Wilkinsonbased on Bharadwaj et al. These falls in the share of minorities in the populations reflect two processes: First, there was an outflow of the target minorities due to ethnic cleansing i.
Second, there were inflows — migration from across the border by members of a local religious majority. The extent and patterns of ethnic cleansing that led to the collapse of minority population shares in then western India was not anticipated.
Yet, the patterns of ethnic cleansing were very different Figure 2band the areas that Auchinleck thought would be most susceptible to violence still enjoy sizeable minority populations to this day.
Proportion of minorities missing due to forced migration, conversion, or death. What explains the patterns of ethnic cleansing? As the previous figures show, being close to the border made it easier to leave and also easier to compel others to do so.
But beyond this, our research points to the crucial importance of the distribution of skills and the presence of inter-group complementarity — gains from trade — of those in the affected districts in changing both the intensity of the Partition and its subsequent economic effects.
An important dimension was the local organisational skills available to different groups to mobilise themselves collectively during this period.
Ethnic cleansing meant successfully facing down not just the local police, but the British Indian military presence, such as the Punjab Boundary Force, aimed at maintaining order in these areas. One such resource was drawing on the organisational skills of local demobilised veterans of what had been the largest volunteer army in world history — the 2.
Jha and Wilkinson exploit the fact that Indian infantry battalions were recruited from particular martial races from particular districts, but once in the army were designed to be inter-changeable and deployed in response to enemy action and the needs of the moment — such as the sudden entry of Japan into the war — without regard for their districts of origin.British India Timeline Timeline Description: The British presence in India began in the early seventeenth century, when the British East India Company began trading on the outskirts of the Mughal empire.
The company's influence grew steadily until it seized political control of parts of India, and British leaders continued to spread British control . The Partition of India was the process of dividing the subcontinent along sectarian lines, which took place in as India gained its independence from the British heartoftexashop.com northern, predominantly Muslim sections of India became the nation of Pakistan, while the southern and majority Hindu section became the Republic of India.
Oct 31, · The British withdrawal from India in deprived the Ranas of a vital external source of support and exposed the regime to new dangers. Anti-Rana forces, composed mainly of Nepalese residents in India who had served their political apprenticeship in the Indian nationalist movement, formed an alliance with the.
British India () Crisis Phase (January 1, May 25, ): Indian nationalists rebelled against the British government in the Bengal province beginning in Two British citizens were killed in a terrorist bombing in Muzaffarpur on April 30, , and Khudi Ram Bose was executed for his involvement in the killings.
The history of the British Raj refers to the period of British rule on the Indian subcontinent between and The system of governance was instituted in when the rule of the East India Company was transferred to the Crown in the person of Queen Victoria (who .
Sept. 19, Muslim refugees sit on the roof of an overcrowded coach railway train near New Delhi in trying to flee India. Millions of Muslims migrated from India to Pakistan.