Jump to content
genie

If British Intelligence Mi6 Believed Sikhistan Was Imminent What Went Wrong?

Recommended Posts

On 1/15/2017 at 7:19 PM, chatanga said:

To have blind acceptance of the decision of the Radcliffe line was one of the conditions for an early partition. Both the Muslim League and Congress wanted the British gone as soon as possible, and Mountbatten laid the condition that whatever was decided by the British in terms of partition would have to be accepted by Muslims, Sikhs and Congress. All 3 accepted.

 

But, and this is a really big but. The scheming devilish Brit-scum, told the 3 groups that there would be an appeal panel called teh Boundary Commission to which all 3 groups could appeal to if they felt the award was unfair to them. But this commission was wound up the day after the final boundary was demarcated (in Lahore) and so there was no actual process of being able to appeal to the Boundary Commission. 

The major mistake the Sikhs made was to allow the 'other factors' in  the terms of reference to be vague and open to interpretation. The Sikhs should have held back on accepting the decision in advance unless the other factors were properly defined and equal weightage given to them with population. If equal weightage had been given then given that the Hindus and Sikhs virtually owned the whole of the city of Lahore and had a majority of the businesses, factories, schools, colleges etc and that the Sikhs owned about 58% of the land in Lahore district then it should have gone to East Punjab in 1947. As far as I know the boundary commission never had an appeals process. Because they representatives of all the communities could not agree to anything then Radcliffe was given the final decision and you are right he made a right hash of the partition line. The British chose someone who had never been to India and did not know the ground realities present in Punjab. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, proactive said:

The Sikhs were the ones which had fought for the partition of Punjab.

The Sikh leadership did eventually accept the partition of punjab after failing to persuade jinnah of a united india with muslim league being in power of punjab or having an azad punjab area. However the vast majority of the  Sikh population did not accept partition of punjab under any circumstances, and we all know the sikh leadership was either brought off by the british or inept in political matters. The sikh population mostly who lived in west punjab and whose homes and businesses and land would now come under a proposed pakistan so they violently opposed partition of punjab. The "sikh leadership" could not control the masses whose lives would be uprooted having to move to newly allocated areas in east punjab.

4 hours ago, proactive said:

Master Tara Singh was not a traitor. He became a Sikh out of choice and had he been a traitor as you allege then after 1947 and having in your view betrayed Sikh interests why did he fight for Punjabi Suba? Surely Nehru would have awarded his treachery and Master Tara Singh could have had an easy life. If anything his life was a life of struggle to get the Sikhs their due rights in India.  

I think history has shown he was a traitor, he may have converted to a Sikh but it wasnt in Sikh interests. He drew a Sword and threatened a demonstration for pakistani by PML which turned violent and many Sikhs killed by muslim mobs due to his idiocy. Then he negotiated all of Sikh political interests away to brahmin ruled congress. What part of him made him Sikh? Did he achieve anything for us? He achieved everything for his political masters in delhi. As for punjabi suba, I think his hand was forced to campaign for it as Sikhs were now realising the trap they had fallen into and blamed him for the mess so he had to save his own skin. He even failed to complete a fast unto death for Sikh autonomy he was a total disaster for the Sikh kaum.

What would be interesting to know is how he became to represent the Sikhs in the round table talks for independence. What authority or credentials did this failed high school headmaster have to represent the interests and prestige of the once powerful Sikh nation.

Edited by genie

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, genie said:

He is said to have state this “Without political power, Dharma cannot be practised, and without Dharma, the society would be an admixture of scum. Nobody will offer you sovereignty. It will have to be obtained with the force of arms.” - Guru Gobind Singh Ji

Guru Gobind Singh has not written that anywhere, and there is a chance he may have said it. The quote is also attributed to Sardar Jassa SIngh Alhuwalia, but above all it's a quote from Prachin Panth Parkash.

 

22 hours ago, genie said:

I've read the history of Sikhs by kushwant singh and other sources over the years and I've seen actual secret documents where Nehru communicated he wanted the Sikhs sorted out because they were violently resisting the partition of punjab with armed groups.

Khushwant Singh is a cretin. His books are trading a fine line between sneering and outright contempt at the Sikh faith, the Sikh people, and Sikh future.

As i said before the Sikhs did not resisit partition, they were the ones who called for it in Panjab.

 

22 hours ago, genie said:

What planet you on. He (nehru) did call Sikhs a tribe of criminals go do your research its all over the web.

I'm on planet earth and i will tell you that it was Chandu Lal Trivedi who called the Sikhs a criminal tribe. Now if you are still claiming it was Nehru, please tell us what planet you are from?

 

22 hours ago, genie said:

Master tara singh was an agent of the british and the hindutva orgs he was born as a punjabi hindu who later converted to Sikhism to infiltrate Sikh orgs. How did this unknown failed school headteacher come to represent the prestige of the Sikh community who ruled an empire? you living in la la land if you think he wasnt an agent.

Unknown failed teacher? You show your ignorance of his life. Master Tara Singh was not unknown, and not failed either.

 

22 hours ago, genie said:

I've read actual secret documents from the british authorities of the time that state they were using their PBF troops to prevent Sikh armed groups from preventing partition.

I don't know what you've read, but the partition had already happened and the PBF was there to ensure the peace. How could a body that was created to help with a smooth partition actually prevent, or accelerate partition?

 

22 hours ago, genie said:

And as for the british killing and trying to convert sikhs what do you think they did when they invaded the Sikh empire? They killed Sikh civilians who resisted after capturing lahore and they raped, pillaged and they tried to convert Sikhs to christianity how you think they got their hundred churchs in punjab and a church at harmandir sahib which was later destroyed by the sikhs.

Ok, so now you have moved from 1947 to 1849?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, proactive said:

If the population factor was detrimental to the Sikh cause then the Sikh leadership needed to think outside the box. There were the Sikh states which had a population of 3.5 million of which Sikhs were 39%, Hindus 34% and Muslims 24%. So they would have been the nucleus of a Sikh state. With the Muslims gone from these states the Sikhs would have been a majority. These states had treaties with the British and once the British announced they were leaving then these Sikhs should have reverted to the independent status they had before the British came. 

IN an ideal world the Sikh states and the Panjabi Sikhs wold have joined hands. But the Sikh states, esp Patiala, were more pro-Britihs than pro-Sikh. The Maharaja of Patiala and Master Tara Singh never got on. Patiala always supported the British over the SGPC and Akali Dal.

 

Concerning the Kingdoms/princely states, Mountbatten gave them two ultimatums: join India or Pakistan. None were given a third option. If a huge Kingdom such as Hyderabad couldn't hold out against India, despite being 10 times bigger than all the Sikhs states put together, how could the Sikh Kingdoms?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, proactive said:

The British were quite happy to leave the Punjab as a whole to Pakistan but it was the agitation by the Sikhs that forced them to deny Jinnah the whole of the Punjab.

The British were of the opinion that Panjab should remain undivided and go completely to Pakistan. But <banned word filter activated> was the Congress who using Jinnah's own weapon against him, stating that as the Muslim majority areas cannot be forced to live under India (as part of the two-nation theory) Non-muslim majority areas could not be forced to live under pakistan rule. The British agreed with this and agreed to partition the two states of Panjab and Bengal.

 

So the two main states, Panjab and Bengal were divided in a similair fashion.

 

10 hours ago, proactive said:

The Sikh agitation especially to stop the Muslim League minority government from taking power in Punjab was what convinced the British that the Sikhs would never accept Muslim rule in Punjab

The Sikhs never launched any agitation that I know of against ML minority govt, as the muslim league were denied the opportunity to form a govt by the Panjab Secretary who invoked Governor's law after the muslim league brought down the Unionist govt. The muslim league only had 80 mps out of 178 so they couldn't form a government in Panjab by themselves. Governor Jenkins many times refused them on this basis.

 

10 hours ago, proactive said:

What the Sikhs were violently resisting was a partition line which was splitting the Sikh population in half and placing millions of Sikhs and the Sikh shrines in Pakistan/

 

What the Sikhs were doing in east Panjab was trying to kill as many muslims as they could whilst they had the chance to, and the West Panjab Sikhs were trying to escape with their lives. At that time, the East Panjab Sikhs  should have focused on the border villages of Lahore/Amritsar/Gurdaspur that held important Sikh shrines such as Kartarpur etc. They should have occupied these villages and refused to let them go to pakistan.

We have all seen what a mess the pakistanis have made of Sikh heritage there.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, proactive said:

As far as I know the boundary commission never had an appeals process.

It was supposed to have one. But it was decommissioned on the day, the final partition was announced. So there was no-one to appeal to after partition happened. The criminal british did it on purpose.

 

6 hours ago, genie said:

we all know the sikh leadership was either brought off by the british

First it was hthe Brahmans, now its the British?

 

6 hours ago, genie said:

The sikh population mostly who lived in west punjab and whose homes and businesses and land would now come under a proposed pakistan so they violently opposed partition of punjab.

The Sikhs of West Panjab did little more than defend their own lives and hope to reach East Pakistan.

 

6 hours ago, genie said:

 He drew a Sword and threatened a demonstration for pakistani by PML which turned violent and many Sikhs killed by muslim mobs due to his idiocy.

This was one of his biggest blunders. The Sikhs had to pay a huge price for this. Still I like the way you have said "many Sikhs" when there was around 7000 killed.

 

6 hours ago, genie said:

Then he negotiated all of Sikh political interests away to brahmin ruled congress.

By being the first person to be jailed in a free India for sedition?

 

You worry me. A lot. Your perception of history is based on some kind of paranoia. You can't blame others for everything all the time. we Sikhs made many mistakes over this period. But to say it was down to some conspiracy by the Brahmans or the criminal british is poor.

 

 

6 hours ago, genie said:

What would be interesting to know is how he became to represent the Sikhs in the round table talks for independence. What authority or credentials did this failed high school headmaster have to represent the interests and prestige of the once powerful Sikh nation.

Read about his life and you will find out. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/15/2017 at 7:38 PM, proactive said:

The Maharajas were to concentrate on taking over the districts adjoining their states. Faridkot was to take over Ferozpur district and Patiala was to take over districts to the east of the state. The Jathas reinforced by soldiers from the Sikh states and ex-soldiers from the Indian army were to take over Amritsar and Lahore and the canal colonies.

Good post. I however disagree with the above part in bold. There is no doubt that Maharaja Harinder Singh of Faridkot wanted an autonomous Sikh state as he had put forward this demand to the British, but Patiala has always been a sell out state viz a viz the Sikh Qaum. 

Vallabhbhai Patel used Maharaja  Yadvinder Singh of Patiala to quell the demands for Khalistan or Sikhistan. The Maharaja organized a Panthic smagam in Patiala where he told Sikhs not to ask for an independant state. This fact was mentioned in the Hindustan Times paper at that time.

The Maharaja Patiala was satisfied because he got good posts after independence. It is only after steps were taken such as the derecognition of princely families that the Yadvinder Singh started supporting the idea of an independent Sikh country. This fact is barely known but was shared by Jagjit Singh Chauhan in one of his articles.

Edited by HarfunMaula
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


×