Muslim, Sikh and Hindu Death Toll in the 1947 Partition

From Materia Islamica
Jump to: navigation, search

Working Title: The Death of Toll of Muslims, Sikhs and Hindus During the 1947 Partition | Original Publisher: Materia Islamica | Publication Date: August 17th, 2019. | Written by: Canadian786 | Artricle No. 91.

The following is a brief history of the aftermath of the declaration of the 1947 Indian partition which resulted in the creation of both Pakistan and India. It examines how and where the violence started, how far back it was planned, who was involved and the overall death toll by group. This, in essence, is the tragic history of what happened in the Muslim-majority regions of the Punjab and Kashmir. Total Death Toll: 2,817,000—4,617,000
Pakistan belongs to a vast geographical landmass known as the "Indian subcontinent", also known as "India" (not to be confused with the "Republic of India" who's true name is actually "Hindustan"[1] or "Bharat"[1] formed in 1947[2]). Independent Pakistan was also formed in 1947;[3] first alluded to in a speech by M. Iqbal (1877—1938[4]) in 1930.[5] It was originally to comprise of some of the Muslim-majority regions of the British Raj (1858—1947[6]).[5] This inspired C. R. Ali (1897—1951[7]), an Oxbridge student to also add in Muslim-majority Kashmir (ruled by the Hindu[8] despot[9] Hari Singh; 1895—1961[10]) to coin the word "Pakistan" (Punjab, Afghania, Kashmir, Sindh, Balochistan).[5] However, the majority of Sikhs and Hindus were opposed to it's creation, and were "determined to strangle [it] at birth".[n. 1] In the Punjab, the Sikhs formed organised death squads, triggering[n. 2][n. 3] widespread brutality and counter-violence.[11] Between 200,000—2,000,000 were killed; with 1,260,000 Muslims, and 840,000 Sikhs and Hindus, missing.[12] Additionally 29,000—50,000 Muslim women were kidnapped[n. 4]—taken as sex-slave brides to be raped (only 20,728 were ever rescued[13]). Muslims retaliated by taking 33,000 of theirs.[n. 5] In Kashmir 237,000—250,000 Muslims suffered a one-sided mass genocide at the hands of Hindus and Sikhs[14] (fortunately, 60% of Kashmir was liberated by Pakistan in 1948;[15] however 20% of it was ceded to China in 1962[15][16] in order to cement an alliance between the two[16][17]). Prior to the eruption of this mass violence, the Sikhs did have the choice to join Pakistan but refused claiming that the Muslims would "oppress them" (thus siding with the Hindus—planning their massacres as early as 1940[18]).[19] Ironically however, the Sikhs would actually end up being oppressed by Hindus in India, and still are to this day.[20][21][22]
Muhammad Ali Jinnah (1876—1948), founder of Pakistan.
The distribution of Sikhs in united Punjab.[23]
This then begs the question; why were the Sikhs so violent towards Muslims in particular, and not Hindus? The shear brutality experienced by both Kashmir and the Punjab at the hands of the Sikhs can chiefly be attributed to Sikh political instability;[19] their goals, behaviours and aims were based entirely on greed[n. 6] and historical animosity rather than reason, resulting in the Sikh leadership behaving grossly incompetently when it came to matters of negotiation (for instance they repeatedly instigated fears amongst themselves of the Mughal Empires (1526—1858[24]) "atrocities" against them that had allegedly occurred centuries prior, and then applied this against their fellow ethnic Punjabis who just happened to be Muslims—as if the latter would somehow "eliminate them and Sikhism from the earth" in an independent Muslim homeland).[19] The Sikhs were also heavily influenced by the "Hindu Congress Party" (1885—Present[25]) who courted their allegiance by pandering to them and using a policy of appeasement to trick them into siding with them (for instance by making an empty promise in 1929 of forming a homeland for them—"the glow of freedom" as the Indian side put it[26]—after India gained independence; assumed by the Sikh leadership to mean an "ethnically cleansed" East Punjab[n. 7]). Thus, when it actually came to negotiating with Muslims (and even the British) the Sikhs outright ignored these stakeholders.[n. 8] They refused to accept any offers, concessions, bargains or advice made to them. This ultimately backfired on the Sikhs as they were then ignored themselves; their policy of "bluster and agitation" failed, as the other parties became fed up with them,[n. 9] who were instead using constitutional negotiation in order to reach an agreement. The end result was the Sikhs lashing out.[19]
Ironically the fate of the Sikhs was predicted by Muhammad Ali Jinnah (1876—1948) himself who warned them "that by joining Hindus, they would repent one day but it would be too late to revise their decision". Upon joining India, the Sikhs began demanding independence, and a mere three decades later the Sikh portion of the Punjab underwent a second partition in 1966,[27] agitatating them further,[n. 10] eventually resulting in an insurgency (causing the deaths of 20,000[28][29]—250,000 Sikhs[30][n. 11] and a small genocide against them by Hindus (3,000[31]—17,000 dead[32][n. 12]) as well as the widespread flood of hard drugs across this "breadbasket of India".[33] The entirity of the Indian Punjab has a population of 27.98 million people,[34] spread across 5.51 million households.[35] As of 2017, at least 65.5% of Sikhs abuse drugs or alcohol; broken down by category, 41.8% are addicted to alcohol, 21.3% addicted to tobacco, 20.8% addicted to heroin, and non-alcohol and non-tobacco based drugs at 34.8%.[36] Additionally, other sources state that two-thirds of Indian Punjabs households have at least one addict per family.[37] Some 860,000 men between the ages of 15 and 35 take some form of drugs.[37] Drugs such as opium and crystal methamphetamine are common.[37] LSD is often sold at prices between ₹2,000—₹10,000 rupees per dose ($27.88—$139.38 dollars as of December 14th, 2018).[38] Harder drugs such as opium cost between ₹300—₹400 rupees per day ($4.18—$5.58 dollars), whereas Heroin, Alprazone and sedating drugs cost between ₹1,200—₹2,000 rupees per day ($16.73—$27.88 dollars).[39] Other sources have said that heroin alone costs ₹4,000—₹6,000 rupees daily ($55.75—$83.63 dollars).[40] Thus, costing an addict $20,348.75—$30,524.95 annually to buy heroin.
Distribution of Muslims in united Punjab.[23]
Muhammad Ali Jinnah (1876—1948), founder of Pakistan.
Pakistan belongs to a vast geographical landmass known as the "Indian subcontinent", also known as "India" (not to be confused with the "Republic of India" who's true name is actually "Hindustan"[1] or "Bharat"[1] formed in 1947[2]). Independent Pakistan was also formed in 1947;[3] first alluded to in a speech by M. Iqbal (1877—1938[4]) in 1930.[5] It was originally to comprise of some of the Muslim-majority regions of the British Raj (1858—1947[6]).[5] This inspired C. R. Ali (1897—1951[7]), an Oxbridge student to also add in Muslim-majority Kashmir (ruled by the Hindu[8] despot[9] Hari Singh; 1895—1961[10]) to coin the word "Pakistan" (Punjab, Afghania, Kashmir, Sindh, Balochistan).[5] However, the majority of Sikhs and Hindus were opposed to it's creation, and were "determined to strangle [it] at birth".[n. 13] In the Punjab, the Sikhs formed organised death squads, triggering[n. 14][n. 15] widespread brutality and counter-violence.[11] Between 200,000—2,000,000 were killed; with 1,260,000 Muslims, and 840,000 Sikhs and Hindus, missing.[12] Additionally 29,000—50,000 Muslim women were kidnapped[n. 16]—taken as sex-slave brides to be raped (only 20,728 were ever rescued[13]). Muslims retaliated by taking 33,000 of theirs.[n. 17] In Kashmir 237,000—250,000 Muslims suffered a one-sided mass genocide at the hands of Hindus and Sikhs[14] (fortunately, 60% of Kashmir was liberated by Pakistan in 1948;[15] however 20% of it was ceded to China in 1962[15][16] in order to cement an alliance between the two[16][17]). Prior to the eruption of this mass violence, the Sikhs did have the choice to join Pakistan but refused claiming that the Muslims would "oppress them" (thus siding with the Hindus—planning their massacres as early as 1940[18]).[19] Ironically however, the Sikhs would actually end up being oppressed by Hindus in India, and still are to this day.[20][21][22]
The distribution of Sikhs in united Punjab.[23]
This then begs the question; why were the Sikhs so violent towards Muslims in particular, and not Hindus? The shear brutality experienced by both Kashmir and the Punjab at the hands of the Sikhs can chiefly be attributed to Sikh political instability;[19] their goals, behaviours and aims were based entirely on greed[n. 18] and historical animosity rather than reason, resulting in the Sikh leadership behaving grossly incompetently when it came to matters of negotiation (for instance they repeatedly instigated fears amongst themselves of the Mughal Empires (1526—1858[24]) "atrocities" against them that had allegedly occurred centuries prior, and then applied this against their fellow ethnic Punjabis who just happened to be Muslims—as if the latter would somehow "eliminate them and Sikhism from the earth" in an independent Muslim homeland).[19] The Sikhs were also heavily influenced by the "Hindu Congress Party" (1885—Present[25]) who courted their allegiance by pandering to them and using a policy of appeasement to trick them into siding with them (for instance by making an empty promise in 1929 of forming a homeland for them—"the glow of freedom" as the Indian side put it[26]—after India gained independence; assumed by the Sikh leadership to mean an "ethnically cleansed" East Punjab[n. 19]). Thus, when it actually came to negotiating with Muslims (and even the British) the Sikhs outright ignored these stakeholders.[n. 20] They refused to accept any offers, concessions, bargains or advice made to them. This ultimately backfired on the Sikhs as they were then ignored themselves; their policy of "bluster and agitation" failed, as the other parties became fed up with them,[n. 21] who were instead using constitutional negotiation in order to reach an agreement. The end result was the Sikhs lashing out.[19]
Distribution of Muslims in united Punjab.[23]
Ironically the fate of the Sikhs was predicted by Muhammad Ali Jinnah (1876—1948) himself who warned them "that by joining Hindus, they would repent one day but it would be too late to revise their decision". Upon joining India, the Sikhs began demanding independence, and a mere three decades later the Sikh portion of the Punjab underwent a second partition in 1966,[27] agitatating them further,[n. 22] eventually resulting in an insurgency (causing the deaths of 20,000[28][29]—250,000 Sikhs[30][n. 23] and a small genocide against them by Hindus (3,000[31]—17,000 dead[32][n. 24]) as well as the widespread flood of hard drugs across this "breadbasket of India".[33] The entirity of the Indian Punjab has a population of 27.98 million people,[34] spread across 5.51 million households.[35] As of 2017, at least 65.5% of Sikhs abuse drugs or alcohol; broken down by category, 41.8% are addicted to alcohol, 21.3% addicted to tobacco, 20.8% addicted to heroin, and non-alcohol and non-tobacco based drugs at 34.8%.[36] Additionally, other sources state that two-thirds of Indian Punjabs households have at least one addict per family.[37] Some 860,000 men between the ages of 15 and 35 take some form of drugs.[37] Drugs such as opium and crystal methamphetamine are common.[37] LSD is often sold at prices between ₹2,000—₹10,000 rupees per dose ($27.88—$139.38 dollars as of December 14th, 2018).[38] Harder drugs such as opium cost between ₹300—₹400 rupees per day ($4.18—$5.58 dollars), whereas Heroin, Alprazone and sedating drugs cost between ₹1,200—₹2,000 rupees per day ($16.73—$27.88 dollars).[39] Other sources have said that heroin alone costs ₹4,000—₹6,000 rupees daily ($55.75—$83.63 dollars).[40] Thus, costing an addict $20,348.75—$30,524.95 annually to buy heroin.

Sources

Footnotes

  1. ^ Pakistan realised within a month of it's independence that the Indians "were determined to strangle Pakistan at birth", and that had no choice but to wait out the fighting, helping the refugees as best they could. The violence was so intense against Muslims that "[v]ultures feasted so extravagantly that they could no longer fly".
    1. Nisid Hajari (June 9th, 2015). Separated at Birth. How a few days in 1947 turned India and Pakistan into sworn enemies. Slate. Retrieved March 29th, 2016.
  2. ^ The fact that the Sikhs were the ones who triggered the mass violence that followed after the declaration of Pakistan on August 14th, 1947 was confirmed by the American historian Paul R. Brass (1936—Present), when he interviewed the Sikh leader at the time of partition who admitted to his role in initiating the violence.
    Quote: "In February 1967, however, Master Tara Singh, whom I interviewed then and who was the principal political leader of the Sikh community 20 years earlier, said to me in words I have never forgotten: “We took the decision to turn the Muslims out.” By this, he meant the decision to attack violently the Muslim population in East Punjab to force them to migrate west so that the entire Sikh population in West Punjab would be able to migrate east to replace them and take their lands and property in exchange for what they would lose in the west".
    1. Brass, Paul R. (2003). "The partition of India and retributive genocide in the Punjab, 1946-47: Means, methods, and purposes 1". Journal of Genocide Research. 5 (1): 71–101. doi:10.1080/14623520305657. ISSN 1462-3528.
  3. ^ "The Sikhs, who not only stood to lose their lands, livelihoods and shrines but faced the risk of their community being split by partition, had been threatening reprisals if the [Boundary] award was not to their liking. It was no coincidence, therefore, that Sikh violence escalated after the announcement of the Boundary Award. When the violence began it started in the central districts of Punjab: Lahore, Amritsar, Ferozepur, Ludhiana, Sheikhupura, Gurdaspur, Sialkot, Montgomery, Lyallpur, Gujranwala, and the Jullundur Doab, where the Sikhs were spread out."
    1. Aiyar, Swarna (2007). 'August anarchy': The partition massacres in Punjab, 1947*. South Asia: Journal of South Asian Studies. 18 (sup001): 13–36. doi:10.1080/00856409508723242. ISSN 0085-6401.
  4. ^ In addition a large number of Muslim women, 50,000, were also abducted by Sikhs and Hindu men (Pg. 139). However by December 1948 at least 12,000 Muslim women had been recovered and brought back safely to their families in Pakistan through governmental intervention (specifically with the signing of the Inter-Dominion Agreement). Between April 1951 to January 1952 an additional 1,703 Muslim women were rescued. (Pg. 146).
    1. Taisha Abraham (2002). Women and the Politics of Violence. Har-Anand Publications. ISBN 978-81-241-0847-5.
    According to Peter Gatrell between 1947 and 1956 22,000 Muslim women had been rescued, and any who had been taken by Muslims had converted over to the faith of Islam, abandoning Hinduism and "by all accounts making a reasonable life" for themselves. Some even settled happily in Pakistan, and few went back to India. This is likely explained by the fact that Hinduism regards women as inferior religiously and women to this day are treated horrendously in Hindu-dominated India.
    1. Peter Gatrell (12 September 2013). The Making of the Modern Refugee. Oxford University Press. p. 168. ISBN 0-19-967416-7.
    According to Sukehsi Karma, 16,545 Muslim women and children were rescued from India, between December 6, 1947 and March 31, 1952.
    1. Sukeshi Kamra (January 2002). Bearing Witness: Partition, Independence, End of the Raj. University of Calgary Press. p. 316. ISBN 978-1-55238-041-3.
    "M.A. Khan", Anti-Muslim author, who claims he is a "former Muslim", in his book "Islamic Jihad: A Legacy of Forced Conversion, Imperialism, and Slavery" fraudulently litotes (that is the opposite of hyperbolizing Muslim suffering; which itself is a gross exaggeration of words) claims that there were "some" incidences of "kidnapping of Muslim women", but refuses to give figures or indeed verifiable referenced figures, and then again blatantly litotes claiming "authorities, who tried their best to protect Muslims, recovered most of the kidnapped Muslim women and returned them to most of their famillies". This latter statement is in direct contradiction to data that show only 24% of Muslim women were ever returned to their Muslim families, as evidenced above with Oxford University publication and study by Peter Gatrell.
    1. M. A. Khan (1 January 2009). Islamic Jihad: A Legacy of Forced Conversion, Imperialism, and Slavery. iUniverse. p. 238. ISBN 978-1-4401-1846-3.
  5. ^ *According to other sources, it is claimed that up to 125,000 Hindu and Sikh women were taken to Pakistan. Quote: "In 1950, Menon and Bhasin write, the “official estimate” for numbers of abducted women stood at 50,000 Muslims in India and 33,000 Hindus and Sikhs in Pakistan. But rehabilitation workers place these figures higher. Mridula Sarabhai, they write, a director of rehabilitation projects for abducted women, believed that as many as 125,000 Hindu and Sikh women were abducted in Pakistan."
    1. Meera Patel (June 26th, 2013). Rape accounts still surface from India’s partition 65 years on. Women Under Siege Project. Retrieved March 31st, 2016.
  6. ^ The fact that the Sikhs were the ones who triggered the mass violence that followed after the declaration of Pakistan on August 14th, 1947 was confirmed by the American historian Paul R. Brass (1936—Present), when he interviewed the Sikh leader at the time of partition who admitted to his role in initiating the violence.
    Quote: "In February 1967, however, Master Tara Singh, whom I interviewed then and who was the principal political leader of the Sikh community 20 years earlier, said to me in words I have never forgotten: “We took the decision to turn the Muslims out.” By this, he meant the decision to attack violently the Muslim population in East Punjab to force them to migrate west so that the entire Sikh population in West Punjab would be able to migrate east to replace them and take their lands and property in exchange for what they would lose in the west".
    1. Brass, Paul R. (2003). "The partition of India and retributive genocide in the Punjab, 1946-47: Means, methods, and purposes 1". Journal of Genocide Research. 5 (1): 71–101. doi:10.1080/14623520305657. ISSN 1462-3528.
  7. ^ The Sikhs were already thinking of ethnically cleansing Punjab as early as 1929, when the Indians hinted at giving the Sikhs their own homeland. It turned out, that after partition, the Indians never meant any such thing, and the Sikhs had just assumed this on their own.
    Quote: "In 1929, in the face of Akali [Sikh] opposition to the Nehru report, Congress had passed a resolution assuring 'the Sikhs, Muslims, and other minorities that no solution thereof in any future constitution will be acceptable to the Congress that does not give full satisfaction to the parties concerned...In return for remaining within India, the Sikhs were promised by Nehru that they too could 'experience the glow of freedom'...Although what this promise entailed was never specified, the Sikh leadership took this to mean a 'homeland' within independent, federal India once the Sikh community had 'regrouped'...in an East Punjab 'ethnically cleansed' of Muslims".
    This was seen by Sikhs as the Indians having reneged on their promise; Quote: "Second, by refusing to organise state boundaries on the basis of religious identities, Nehru and the nationalist movement had reneged on their alleged 'promise' to the pre-independence Sikh leadership...".
    1. Giorgio Shani (6 December 2007). Sikh Nationalism and Identity in a Global Age. Routledge. p. 43. ISBN 978-1-134-10189-4.
  8. ^ Quote: "The Sikhs erroneously depended on the British Governor of Punjab and the Viceroy, particularly in the last decade of the British raj, who advised them again and again to negotiate with either party to bargain on their strength in the Punjab. No party, whether the League or the Congress, could neglect them in the political sphere but they kept on approaching the Governor and Viceroy with requests to ‘do something for the Sikhs.’ The clear picture of the political developments could be dealt with frequent discussions with the League and the Congress which were the direct stakeholders but the Sikh dependence on the goodwill of the British was surprising at this critical juncture. They kept on moving such requests to Lord Mountbatten who conveyed the same to Jawaharlal Nehru who turned them down on some specific reasons.34 Ignoring the real stakeholders and continual pursuance of the British could not produce any useful solution for the Sikhs and ultimately they had to endure the catastrophe."
    1. Akhtar Hussain Sandhu (2012). Sikh Failure on the Partition of Punjab in 1947. Journal of Punjab Studies. Volume: 19 Issue. No: 2. University of Gujrat, Pakistan. p. 215-232. WayBackMachine Link. Retrieved December 19th, 2018.
  9. ^ Indeed, the Sikhs virtually fought with everyone, including the side that was negotiating India's independence (a side they were already on).
    Quote: "They intermittently got into conflict not only with the League but also with the British, Congress and the Unionists. They launched a war on all fronts at this crucial time".
    1. Akhtar Hussain Sandhu (2012). Sikh Failure on the Partition of Punjab in 1947. Journal of Punjab Studies. Volume: 19 Issue. No: 2. University of Gujrat, Pakistan. p. 215-232. WayBackMachine Link. Retrieved December 19th, 2018.
  10. ^ Even though the Indian Punjab was further split in 1966 and gave the Sikhs a majority, repeated interference to intimidate the Sikhs further into submitting to Hindu rule was launched by the government of India between 1966 and 1983, just before the Sikh insurgency erupted.
    1. USA International Business Publications (May 2001). India: Foreign Policy & Government Guide. Int'l Business Publications. p. 82. ISBN 978-0-7397-8298-9.
    2. W. H. McLeod (24 July 2009). The A to Z of Sikhism. Scarecrow Press. p. 163. ISBN 978-0-8108-6344-6.
  11. ^ Other sources claim that the number is difficult to quantify with an estimation put between 30,000—80,000.
    1. Allon Gal; Athena S. Leoussi; Anthony David Smith (2010). The Call of the Homeland: Diaspora Nationalisms, Past and Present. BRILL. p. 241. ISBN 90-04-18210-1.
  12. ^ The Indian government maintains only 2,700 Sikhs died during the 1984 anti-Sikh riots.
    1. Paul Robert Bartrop (2012). A Biographical Encyclopedia of Contemporary Genocide: Portraits of Evil and Good. ABC-CLIO. p. 318. ISBN 978-0-313-38678-7.
  13. ^ Pakistan realised within a month of it's independence that the Indians "were determined to strangle Pakistan at birth", and that had no choice but to wait out the fighting, helping the refugees as best they could. The violence was so intense against Muslims that "[v]ultures feasted so extravagantly that they could no longer fly".
    1. Nisid Hajari (June 9th, 2015). Separated at Birth. How a few days in 1947 turned India and Pakistan into sworn enemies. Slate. Retrieved March 29th, 2016.
  14. ^ The fact that the Sikhs were the ones who triggered the mass violence that followed after the declaration of Pakistan on August 14th, 1947 was confirmed by the American historian Paul R. Brass (1936—Present), when he interviewed the Sikh leader at the time of partition who admitted to his role in initiating the violence.
    Quote: "In February 1967, however, Master Tara Singh, whom I interviewed then and who was the principal political leader of the Sikh community 20 years earlier, said to me in words I have never forgotten: “We took the decision to turn the Muslims out.” By this, he meant the decision to attack violently the Muslim population in East Punjab to force them to migrate west so that the entire Sikh population in West Punjab would be able to migrate east to replace them and take their lands and property in exchange for what they would lose in the west".
    1. Brass, Paul R. (2003). "The partition of India and retributive genocide in the Punjab, 1946-47: Means, methods, and purposes 1". Journal of Genocide Research. 5 (1): 71–101. doi:10.1080/14623520305657. ISSN 1462-3528.
  15. ^ "The Sikhs, who not only stood to lose their lands, livelihoods and shrines but faced the risk of their community being split by partition, had been threatening reprisals if the [Boundary] award was not to their liking. It was no coincidence, therefore, that Sikh violence escalated after the announcement of the Boundary Award. When the violence began it started in the central districts of Punjab: Lahore, Amritsar, Ferozepur, Ludhiana, Sheikhupura, Gurdaspur, Sialkot, Montgomery, Lyallpur, Gujranwala, and the Jullundur Doab, where the Sikhs were spread out."
    1. Aiyar, Swarna (2007). 'August anarchy': The partition massacres in Punjab, 1947*. South Asia: Journal of South Asian Studies. 18 (sup001): 13–36. doi:10.1080/00856409508723242. ISSN 0085-6401.
  16. ^ In addition a large number of Muslim women, 50,000, were also abducted by Sikhs and Hindu men (Pg. 139). However by December 1948 at least 12,000 Muslim women had been recovered and brought back safely to their families in Pakistan through governmental intervention (specifically with the signing of the Inter-Dominion Agreement). Between April 1951 to January 1952 an additional 1,703 Muslim women were rescued. (Pg. 146).
    1. Taisha Abraham (2002). Women and the Politics of Violence. Har-Anand Publications. ISBN 978-81-241-0847-5.
    According to Peter Gatrell between 1947 and 1956 22,000 Muslim women had been rescued, and any who had been taken by Muslims had converted over to the faith of Islam, abandoning Hinduism and "by all accounts making a reasonable life" for themselves. Some even settled happily in Pakistan, and few went back to India. This is likely explained by the fact that Hinduism regards women as inferior religiously and women to this day are treated horrendously in Hindu-dominated India.
    1. Peter Gatrell (12 September 2013). The Making of the Modern Refugee. Oxford University Press. p. 168. ISBN 0-19-967416-7.
    According to Sukehsi Karma, 16,545 Muslim women and children were rescued from India, between December 6, 1947 and March 31, 1952.
    1. Sukeshi Kamra (January 2002). Bearing Witness: Partition, Independence, End of the Raj. University of Calgary Press. p. 316. ISBN 978-1-55238-041-3.
    "M.A. Khan", Anti-Muslim author, who claims he is a "former Muslim", in his book "Islamic Jihad: A Legacy of Forced Conversion, Imperialism, and Slavery" fraudulently litotes (that is the opposite of hyperbolizing Muslim suffering; which itself is a gross exaggeration of words) claims that there were "some" incidences of "kidnapping of Muslim women", but refuses to give figures or indeed verifiable referenced figures, and then again blatantly litotes claiming "authorities, who tried their best to protect Muslims, recovered most of the kidnapped Muslim women and returned them to most of their famillies". This latter statement is in direct contradiction to data that show only 24% of Muslim women were ever returned to their Muslim families, as evidenced above with Oxford University publication and study by Peter Gatrell.
    1. M. A. Khan (1 January 2009). Islamic Jihad: A Legacy of Forced Conversion, Imperialism, and Slavery. iUniverse. p. 238. ISBN 978-1-4401-1846-3.
  17. ^ *According to other sources, it is claimed that up to 125,000 Hindu and Sikh women were taken to Pakistan. Quote: "In 1950, Menon and Bhasin write, the “official estimate” for numbers of abducted women stood at 50,000 Muslims in India and 33,000 Hindus and Sikhs in Pakistan. But rehabilitation workers place these figures higher. Mridula Sarabhai, they write, a director of rehabilitation projects for abducted women, believed that as many as 125,000 Hindu and Sikh women were abducted in Pakistan."
    1. Meera Patel (June 26th, 2013). Rape accounts still surface from India’s partition 65 years on. Women Under Siege Project. Retrieved March 31st, 2016.
  18. ^ The fact that the Sikhs were the ones who triggered the mass violence that followed after the declaration of Pakistan on August 14th, 1947 was confirmed by the American historian Paul R. Brass (1936—Present), when he interviewed the Sikh leader at the time of partition who admitted to his role in initiating the violence.
    Quote: "In February 1967, however, Master Tara Singh, whom I interviewed then and who was the principal political leader of the Sikh community 20 years earlier, said to me in words I have never forgotten: “We took the decision to turn the Muslims out.” By this, he meant the decision to attack violently the Muslim population in East Punjab to force them to migrate west so that the entire Sikh population in West Punjab would be able to migrate east to replace them and take their lands and property in exchange for what they would lose in the west".
    1. Brass, Paul R. (2003). "The partition of India and retributive genocide in the Punjab, 1946-47: Means, methods, and purposes 1". Journal of Genocide Research. 5 (1): 71–101. doi:10.1080/14623520305657. ISSN 1462-3528.
  19. ^ The Sikhs were already thinking of ethnically cleansing Punjab as early as 1929, when the Indians hinted at giving the Sikhs their own homeland. It turned out, that after partition, the Indians never meant any such thing, and the Sikhs had just assumed this on their own.
    Quote: "In 1929, in the face of Akali [Sikh] opposition to the Nehru report, Congress had passed a resolution assuring 'the Sikhs, Muslims, and other minorities that no solution thereof in any future constitution will be acceptable to the Congress that does not give full satisfaction to the parties concerned...In return for remaining within India, the Sikhs were promised by Nehru that they too could 'experience the glow of freedom'...Although what this promise entailed was never specified, the Sikh leadership took this to mean a 'homeland' within independent, federal India once the Sikh community had 'regrouped'...in an East Punjab 'ethnically cleansed' of Muslims".
    This was seen by Sikhs as the Indians having reneged on their promise; Quote: "Second, by refusing to organise state boundaries on the basis of religious identities, Nehru and the nationalist movement had reneged on their alleged 'promise' to the pre-independence Sikh leadership...".
    1. Giorgio Shani (6 December 2007). Sikh Nationalism and Identity in a Global Age. Routledge. p. 43. ISBN 978-1-134-10189-4.
  20. ^ Quote: "The Sikhs erroneously depended on the British Governor of Punjab and the Viceroy, particularly in the last decade of the British raj, who advised them again and again to negotiate with either party to bargain on their strength in the Punjab. No party, whether the League or the Congress, could neglect them in the political sphere but they kept on approaching the Governor and Viceroy with requests to ‘do something for the Sikhs.’ The clear picture of the political developments could be dealt with frequent discussions with the League and the Congress which were the direct stakeholders but the Sikh dependence on the goodwill of the British was surprising at this critical juncture. They kept on moving such requests to Lord Mountbatten who conveyed the same to Jawaharlal Nehru who turned them down on some specific reasons.34 Ignoring the real stakeholders and continual pursuance of the British could not produce any useful solution for the Sikhs and ultimately they had to endure the catastrophe."
    1. Akhtar Hussain Sandhu (2012). Sikh Failure on the Partition of Punjab in 1947. Journal of Punjab Studies. Volume: 19 Issue. No: 2. University of Gujrat, Pakistan. p. 215-232. WayBackMachine Link. Retrieved December 19th, 2018.
  21. ^ Indeed, the Sikhs virtually fought with everyone, including the side that was negotiating India's independence (a side they were already on).
    Quote: "They intermittently got into conflict not only with the League but also with the British, Congress and the Unionists. They launched a war on all fronts at this crucial time".
    1. Akhtar Hussain Sandhu (2012). Sikh Failure on the Partition of Punjab in 1947. Journal of Punjab Studies. Volume: 19 Issue. No: 2. University of Gujrat, Pakistan. p. 215-232. WayBackMachine Link. Retrieved December 19th, 2018.
  22. ^ Even though the Indian Punjab was further split in 1966 and gave the Sikhs a majority, repeated interference to intimidate the Sikhs further into submitting to Hindu rule was launched by the government of India between 1966 and 1983, just before the Sikh insurgency erupted.
    1. USA International Business Publications (May 2001). India: Foreign Policy & Government Guide. Int'l Business Publications. p. 82. ISBN 978-0-7397-8298-9.
    2. W. H. McLeod (24 July 2009). The A to Z of Sikhism. Scarecrow Press. p. 163. ISBN 978-0-8108-6344-6.
  23. ^ Other sources claim that the number is difficult to quantify with an estimation put between 30,000—80,000.
    1. Allon Gal; Athena S. Leoussi; Anthony David Smith (2010). The Call of the Homeland: Diaspora Nationalisms, Past and Present. BRILL. p. 241. ISBN 90-04-18210-1.
  24. ^ The Indian government maintains only 2,700 Sikhs died during the 1984 anti-Sikh riots.
    1. Paul Robert Bartrop (2012). A Biographical Encyclopedia of Contemporary Genocide: Portraits of Evil and Good. ABC-CLIO. p. 318. ISBN 978-0-313-38678-7.

References

  1. ^ a b c d India in Translation, Translation in India. Bloomsbury Publishing. 20 July 2019. pp. 10–. ISBN 978-93-88414-21-0.
  2. ^ a b John Powers; David Templeman (18 May 2012). Historical Dictionary of Tibet. Scarecrow Press. p. 311. ISBN 978-0-8108-7984-3.
  3. ^ a b Robert T. Moran; Philip Robert Harris; Sarah Virgilia Moran (2007). Managing Cultural Differences: Global Leadership Strategies for the 21st Century. Routledge. p. 457. ISBN 978-0-7506-8247-3.
  4. ^ a b Jocelyne Cesari (14 April 2014). The Awakening of Muslim Democracy: Religion, Modernity, and the State. Cambridge University Press. p. 25. ISBN 978-1-107-51329-7.
  5. ^ a b c d e f Jalal, Ayesha (2017). The Creation of Pakistan. Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Asian History. Department of History, Tufts University. doi:10.1093/acrefore/9780190277727.013.114.
  6. ^ a b Michael Mann (24 October 2014). South Asia's Modern History: Thematic Perspectives. Routledge. p. 90. ISBN 978-1-317-62446-2.
  7. ^ a b Mohammad Ayub Khan (2007). Diaries of Field Marshal Mohammad Ayub Khan, 1966-1972. Oxford University Press. p. 575. ISBN 978-0-19-547442-8.
  8. ^ a b Cynthia Keppley Mahmood (15 August 2012). One More Voice!: Perspectives on South Asia. Xlibris Corporation. p. 35. ISBN 978-1-4771-0566-5.
  9. ^ a b Azaan Javaid (26th April 2019). Hari Singh — the last Dogra king who gave J&K its special status was an ‘autocrat’ too. The Print. Archive.is Link. Retrieved August 11th, 2019.
  10. ^ a b Peter Lyon (2008). Conflict Between India and Pakistan: An Encyclopedia. ABC-CLIO. p. 150. ISBN 978-1-57607-712-2.
  11. ^ a b Nisid Hajari (June 30th, 2015). Did Sikh Squads Participate In An Organised Attempt To Cleanse East Punjab During Partition?. Caravan Magazine. WayBackMachine Link. Retrieved October 14th, 2018.
  12. ^ a b Prashant Bharadwaj, Asim Khwaja, Atif Mian (August 30th, 2008). The Big March: Migratory Flows After The Partition Of India. p. 43 (pp. 39-pp. 49). Economic & Political Weekly. WayBackMachine Link. Retrieved March 31st, 2016.
  13. ^ a b Ritu Menon; Kamla Bhasin (1998). Borders & Boundaries: Women in India's Partition. Rutgers University Press. p. 99. ISBN 978-0-8135-2552-5.
  14. ^ a b Saeed Naqvi (July 10th, 2016). The killing fields of Jammu: How Muslims become a minority in the region. Scroll.in. WayBackMachine Link. Retrieved August 11th, 2019.
  15. ^ a b c d Bruce O. Riedel (29 January 2013). Avoiding Armageddon: America, India, and Pakistan to the Brink and Back. Brookings Institution Press. p. 49. ISBN 0-8157-2409-8.
  16. ^ a b c d Hilary Synnott (6 December 2012). Transforming Pakistan: Ways Out of Instability. Routledge. p. 149. ISBN 978-1-135-87295-3.
  17. ^ a b Saul Bernard Cohen (17 July 2008). Geopolitics: The Geography of International Relations. Rowman & Littlefield Publishers. p. 333. ISBN 978-0-7425-8154-8.
  18. ^ a b S.M. Ikram (1995). Indian Muslims and Partition of India. Atlantic Publishers & Dist. p. 425. ISBN 978-81-7156-374-6.
  19. ^ a b c d e f g h Akhtar Hussain Sandhu (2012). Sikh Failure on the Partition of Punjab in 1947. Journal of Punjab Studies. Volume: 19 Issue. No: 2. University of Gujrat, Pakistan. p. 215-232. WayBackMachine Link. Retrieved December 19th, 2018.
  20. ^ a b Nikita Azad (November 2015). The Sikhs Continue To Be Oppressed, But Is Khalistan The Solution To Counter This?. Youth Ki Awaaz. WayBackMachine Link. Retrieved August 10th, 2019.
  21. ^ a b Michael Lerner (1 March 1992). Tikkun: to heal, repair, and transform the world: an anthology. Tikkun Books. p. 326. ISBN 978-0-935933-04-8.
  22. ^ a b MacchiwareDaJungle (30 September 2016). FINAL ASSAULT | Punjabi Documentary Film | Save Punjab Waters (1:00:00). YouTube. Another Copy From Another YouTube Channel. Retrieved August 10th, 2019.
  23. ^ a b c d Brass, Paul R. (2003). "The partition of India and retributive genocide in the Punjab, 1946-47: Means, methods, and purposes 1". Journal of Genocide Research. 5 (1): 71–101. doi:10.1080/14623520305657. ISSN 1462-3528.
  24. ^ a b Anjana Motihar Chandra (2007). India Condensed: 5000 Years of History & Culture. Marshall Cavendish. p. 49. ISBN 978-981-261-350-9.
  25. ^ a b Michael G. Mason; Mike Mason (1997). Development and Disorder: A History of the Third World Since 1945. UPNE. p. 253. ISBN 978-0-87451-829-0.
  26. ^ a b Giorgio Shani (6 December 2007). Sikh Nationalism and Identity in a Global Age. Routledge. p. 43. ISBN 978-1-134-10189-4.
  27. ^ a b James Ciment (10 March 2015). World Terrorism: An Encyclopedia of Political Violence from Ancient Times to the Post-9/11 Era: An Encyclopedia of Political Violence from Ancient Times to the Post-9/11 Era. Routledge. p. 255. ISBN 978-1-317-45152-5.
  28. ^ a b Telford, Hamish (2001). Counter-Insurgency in India: Observations from Punjab and Kashmir. Journal of Conflict Studies. WayBackMachine Link. ISSN 1715-5673.
  29. ^ a b Micheal Clodfelter (24 April 2017). Warfare and Armed Conflicts: A Statistical Encyclopedia of Casualty and Other Figures, 1492–2015, 4th ed. McFarland. p. 608. ISBN 978-1-4766-2585-0.
  30. ^ a b United States. Congress (1874; September 15th, 2004). Congressional Record. Government Printing Office. Volumes 1-53. p. 18640. GGKEY:4U9KL5RCJHZ.
  31. ^ a b Gurharpal Singh; Darsham Singh Tatla (3 October 2006). Sikhs in Britain: The Making of a Community. Zed Books. p. 106. ISBN 978-1-84277-717-6.
  32. ^ a b Paul Robert Bartrop (2012). A Biographical Encyclopedia of Contemporary Genocide: Portraits of Evil and Good. ABC-CLIO. p. 318. ISBN 978-0-313-38678-7.
  33. ^ a b Pal, Rajan (2017). Political economy of drugs and insurgency: the case of Punjab. Dudley Knox Library. Naval Post Graduate School. Retrieved December 19th, 2018.
  34. ^ a b Aditi Gyanesh (March 28th, 2015). Even NGOs can work on palliative care for terminally ill patients. Times of India. WayBackMachine Link. Retrieved December 14th, 2018.
  35. ^ a b Punjab - Number of households. 2011. Knoema. WayBackMachine Link. Retrieved December 14th, 2018.
  36. ^ a b Sharma, Bhuwan; Arora, Anjali; Singh, Kanwaljit; Singh, Harinder; Kaur, Prabhjot (2017). Drug abuse: Uncovering the burden in rural Punjab. Journal of Family Medicine and Primary Care. 6 (3): 558. doi:10.4103/2249-4863.222037. ISSN 2249-4863.
  37. ^ a b c d e f Why has India's Punjab fallen into the grip of drug abuse?. February 2nd, 2017. BBC News. WayBackMachine Link. Retrieved December 14th, 2018.
  38. ^ a b 101reporters (June 2016). With Addicts As Young As 11, How Bengaluru Became South India’s ‘Drug Capital’. Youth Ki Awaaz. WayBackMachine Link. Retrieved December 14th, 2018.
  39. ^ a b Dev Ankur Wadhawan (December 17th, 2016). Why is no one talking about Udta Rajasthan?. Daily O. WayBackMachine Link. Retrieved December 14th, 2018.
  40. ^ a b Punjab's drug menace: 'I wanted my son to die. November 23rd, 2018. BBC News. WayBackMachine Link. Retrieved December 14th, 2018.

External Links