In 1947 two muslim countries should have been created!

[rubyjackass]

Where do you teach brother? Who are those students? I never seen so many ignorant students in Bangladesh.... Thats very very strange

Phew!!!

For sometime I believed him. Thanks iajdani.
Was going to order his book

Nothing personal Mr. Munshi. Just about your comments and for fun.

 

[Vinod2070]

Not really before partition. And it was Bengal which was muslim majority and Calcutta was part of it.

The logic of partition had to cut both ways!

If many Bengali Muslims as a province of India wanted to separate because of their faith, the Bengali Hindus would naturally not want to turn into a minority in a strange new country which they did not want.

It was definitely not Bengali sub-nationalism that drove the partition (no Bengali Hindus wanted it). It was religion that was the driving factor.

Calcutta was vastly Hindu majority before partition too. That was the reason it remained in India.

 

[rubyjackass]

There are no free lunches in international polity ? Enjoy the pudding u have and always wanted . Isn't BD what Mujib wanted ? He got it.

Wow!!
Best post ever...
in terms of wording and effect...

 

[TopCat]

The logic of partition had to cut both ways!

If many Bengali Muslims as a province of India wanted to separate because of their faith, the Bengali Hindus would naturally not want to turn into a minority in a strange new country which they did not want.

It was definitely not Bengali sub-nationalism that drove the partition (no Bengali Hindus wanted it). It was religion that was the driving factor.

Calcutta was vastly Hindu majority before partition too. That was the reason it remained in India.

Well I agree with you on this issue. But still too many Hindus remained in Bangladesh as well as too many Muslim left over in India and all against their own will. So your claim does not really fly here. India was divided on the basis of majority of population on a state by state basis. Also other aspect was looked too like the viability. You mentioned CHT, it was given to Bangladesh on the basis of land sharing as Calcutta was taking away from East Pakistan and they did not consider CHT was not any muslim majority and infact there were not a single muslim there.

 

[TopCat]

It was the money/asset played a key role here. Jinnah did not care about East, so he wanted to consolidate whatever he could get for west pakistan. Indians are smart enough to get hold of Calcutta instead of Lahore...
What is your opinion???
Would you rather take Lahore or Calcutta?

 

[Vinod2070]

Well I agree with you on this issue. But still too many Hindus remained in Bangladesh as well as too many Muslim left over in India and all against their own will. So your claim does not really fly here. India was divided on the basis of majority of population on a state by state basis. Also other aspect was looked too like the viability. You mentioned CHT, it was given to Bangladesh on the basis of land sharing as Calcutta was taking away from East Pakistan and they did not consider CHT was not any muslim majority and infact there were not a single muslim there.

If you see the terms of reference for the Radcliffe commission, majority population by religion and contiguous lands were the main driving factors for the boundary award. Then came other factors like the run of the river, some kind of equitable asset allocation etc.

Punjab and Bengal were the only provinces where there was a very large population of both Hindus and Muslims. Muslims were a majority but not a very large one. In this case the decision was taken to divide the provinces considering the district wise majorities while taking into account the contiguous land aspect.

There was nothing sacred about state by state division. Muslims wanted partition of the country based on religion. The Hindus (and Sikhs) demanded partition of the two provinces based on the same reasoning if the motherland was divided!

Again many Hindus and Muslims remained as a minority in the respective countries but they found themselves a minority in the places where they were. No one went and became a minority in the other country! There was never supposed to be a complete population migration, thought in the Punjab it did happen with massive bloodshed and loss of life.

CHT went to Pakistan as it was not contiguous to the other Indian lands. Though many Indians feel it was unfair.

But let bygones be bygones. Let us move on and build a better future for our countries by co-operation. May be one day the borders will be irrelevant.

 

[TopCat]

If you see the terms of reference for the Radcliffe commission, majority population by religion and contiguous lands were the main driving factors for the boundary award. Then came other factors like the run of the river, some kind of equitable asset allocation etc.

Punjab and Bengal were the only provinces where there was a very large population of both Hindus and Muslims. Muslims were a majority but not a very large one. In this case the decision was taken to divide the provinces considering the district wise majorities while taking into account the contiguous land aspect.

There was nothing sacred about state by state division. Muslims wanted partition of the country based on religion. The Hindus (and Sikhs) demanded partition of the two provinces based on the same reasoning if the motherland was divided!

Again many Hindus and Muslims remained as a minority in the respective countries but they found themselves a minority in the places where they were. No one went and became a minority in the other country! There was never supposed to be a complete population migration, thought in the Punjab it did happen with massive bloodshed and loss of life.

CHT went to Pakistan as it was not contiguous to the other Indian lands. Though many Indians feel it was unfair.

But let bygones be bygones. Let us move on and build a better future for our countries by co-operation. May be one day the borders will be irrelevant.

Yes thats the best we could wish for now... just move on!!!!!

 

[Vinod2070]

It was the money/asset played a key role here. Jinnah did not care about East, so he wanted to consolidate whatever he could get for west pakistan. Indians are smart enough to get hold of Calcutta instead of Lahore...
What is your opinion???
Would you rather take Lahore or Calcutta?

I don't think there was any barter or bargain on that.

Calcutta was Hindu majority, Lahore was Muslim majority. Both of them went to countries with the respective majorities.

Lahore was a big cultural center of the Punjab. Holy to the Sikhs and a major business center for the Hindus. There was major effort till the last moment to get it included in India or Pakistan by all the communities. Calcutta did not come into the picture at all.

Frankly this linkage seems a conspiracy theory with no basis in reality.

 

[TopCat]

I don't think there was any barter or bargain on that.

Calcutta was Hindu majority, Lahore was Muslim majority. Both of them went to countries with the respective majorities.

Lahore was a big cultural center of the Punjab. Holy to the Sikhs and a major business center for the Hindus. There was major effort till the last moment to get it included in India or Pakistan by all the communities. Calcutta did not come into the picture at all.

Frankly this linkage seems a conspiracy theory with no basis in reality.

That was the major discontent in Bengal till date as it did not brought to priority in Delhi. All the decission were taken by the North Inidans and Punjabis and Bengalis were thinking everything will be alright. And people in Bengal were kept blind folded. When it was done, East Pakistan left with nothing, Not even a single city. No industry no business. All were revolved around Calcutta. Inidans fought for Lahore as you said as it was a business center for Hindus, what about East Pakistan? Calcutta was the business center for Bengals right? What happend after it was divided, Even West Bengal which were flourishing under greater bengal gone down huge. Calcutta lost its glory. They gone down so bad, they even dont allow any Bangladeshi TV channell to be broadcast there. We can watch all the channell from India but Bengalis in West Bengal have to watch Bangladeshi channell secretly. What an irony.

 

[Vinod2070]

That was the major discontent in Bengal till date as it did not brought to priority in Delhi. All the decission were taken by the North Inidans and Punjabis and Bengalis were thinking everything will be alright. And people in Bengal were kept blind folded. When it was done, East Pakistan left with nothing, Not even a single city. No industry no business. All were revolved around Calcutta. Inidans fought for Lahore as you said as it was a business center for Hindus, what about East Pakistan? Calcutta was the business center for Bengals right? What happend after it was divided, Even West Bengal which were flourishing under greater bengal gone down huge. Calcutta lost its glory. They gone down so bad, they even dont allow any Bangladeshi TV channell to be broadcast there. We can watch all the channell from India but Bengalis in West Bengal have to watch Bangladeshi channell secretly. What an irony.

Well, I think we have to agree that East Pakistan was a net loser of partition. There seems to be little doubt about that.

Now if we try to find who was to blame for that, it becomes a difficult exercise. Whether it was the partition itself that was to blame, whether the partition was not done correctly, what should have gone to whom and why and so on.

It may be fascinating to discuss and it is easy to come up with the conspiracy theories but may be East Pakistan suffering was made inevitable by the circumstances. It was just a sacrifice that you guys needed to make to get your independent country. That and the sufferings of 1971!

I do feel that Bangladeshis get more than their fair share of sufferings, both natural and man made. My heart goes out to them.

 

[Vinod2070]

Bangladesh still has an excellent chance to turn around and become a leader in some areas in the region and beyond. It just needs to control the many fanatical elements who are a roadblock in the march towards modernity.

These people forget why Bangladesh became a separate country in the first place and where is it's destination. They just want to take it downhill to fulfill their personal ambitions and massage their egos and hatreds.

 

[Al-zakir]

Jinnah's 'two-nation theory' still right: Nizami :: Politics :: bdnews24.com ::


Tue, Dec 16th, 2008 5:15 pm BdST


Dhaka, Dec 16 (bdnews24.com) – Muhammad Ali Jinnah's 'two-nation theory' was quite appropriate for the times prior to creating the two countries—Pakistan and India in 1947 and its applicability did not wear out even in the case of an independent Bangladesh, said Bangladesh Jamaat-e-Islami chief Motiur Rahman Nizami Tuesday.
He made the observation at a discussion organised by the party's Dhaka city chapter at Maghbazar Al-Falah auditorium on the occasion of the Victory Day.

Referring to Pakistan's founding governor general Jinnah, an elitist British-educated lawyer,. as 'Quaid-e-Azam' meaning 'father of the nation', Nizami said, "After December 16, 1971, the Indian radio 'Akashbani' preached that the 'two-nation theory' of Jinnah, the founder of Pakistan, had proved wrong."

"On the other hand, Sheikh Mujibur Rahman, the architect of Bangladesh had declared as soon as he set foot in the newly-emerged independent country on January 10, 1972 that Bangladesh was the second largest Muslim state in the world."

"Though discouraged by India and Russia (then USSR), Mujib joined the OIC (Organisation of Islamic Countries) summit in 1974. These establish that 'Quaid-e-Azam' Jinnah's theory was right and Akashbani was wrong."

He reiterated, "The hostile attitude demonstrated by India towards Bangladesh through the past 37 years also proves that the two-nation theory was absolutely right."

"The Indians do not like us Bangladeshis because we are Muslims."

"The Indian soldiers plundered our country indiscriminately during the liberation war.

" [They] took away not only the arms and ammunition abandoned by the Pakistani troops, but also stripped our factories down to the nuts and bolts and robbed educational institutions of their laboratory equipment and decamped with even bags of blood from the blood banks," Nizami alleged.

Calling Sheikh Mujib 'a crafty politician', Nizami said immediately after declaring the four state principles in India, on return home Mujib had joined ranks with the Muslim ummah.

Mujib had started his political career as a Muslim League volunteer, the Jamaat-e-Islami chief said, and along with his close comrade Tajuddin Ahmed had fought championing the two-nation theory.

He continued, "Sheikh Hasina is now vowing that they will not make any legislation which might contradict the Koran or the Sunnah, which nullifies all their messages on secularism delivered so far!"

"Hasina is also claiming that they will go by the provisions of the 1972 constitution, if voted to power this time, which will mean they will recourse to laws that would contradict the Koran and the Sunnah!"

He said the country had traversed backward during the emergency rule, for which the grand alliance and its leader Hasina had been responsible.

She now has to bear the brunt of the misrule wrought by the caretaker government, Nizami declared.

Calling upon the audience to make the four-party alliance victor in the forthcoming polls, he said, "There is no alternative to the four-party alliance at this critical juncture if you want to see this nation free from all shackles."

 

[TopCat]

Bangladesh still has an excellent chance to turn around and become a leader in some areas in the region and beyond. It just needs to control the many fanatical elements who are a roadblock in the march towards modernity.

These people forget why Bangladesh became a separate country in the first place and where is it's destination. They just want to take it downhill to fulfill their personal ambitions and massage their egos and hatreds.

I AGREE. Bangladesh just started changing its gear. I am very hopeful for the next five years. You should be able to see a different Bangladesh. But one thing I need to note here, there were too much negative propaganda in inidan media which are not helping india anyways rather fuels anti indian sentiment in this country. India and Bangladesh had a lot of common interest which could only be explored if India could show some restraint in that area. I know indian govt does not control media but Bangladesh should make some effort to get some of the Indian media on their side and portray positive image of Bangladesh in India. India should do the same.

 

[BanglaBhoot]

The students I have taught belong to the top class of society so Iajdani would probably appear as the ignorant one compared to them. I have been teaching English and Bengali medium students for 10 years and most really do not care about the past and are more concerned about the future

The problem with Indian media is that it is controlled by RAW which follows the policy of Indian government to malign Bangladesh.

 

[Al-zakir]

I doubt if iajdani is a Bangladeshi national. Most of his post sided with Indian. I smell indian in him.