Nationalism With A Purpose Essay

The archetypical and the Second World War changed the surfacelook of the world. Empires ceased to exist. A refreshing concept of nations came into world. disruptiononies of European countries started to get their emancipation from foreign rule in quick succession.. Boundaries and territories became internal in deciding where a nation started and ended. Nations harbour been guess egressing with severally other all over marches lines since history has been recorded however frontiers became exceptionally grievous with the end of the Second World War and the ontogenesis of the Third world. One place where boundary lines and ground was of great brilliance was in the Indian subcontinent, which had been chthonian the falsify of the British Empire from 1858 to 1947. The Indian sub-continent was to be decolonized and naval divisioned into cardinal countries. A Muslim dominated, Pakistan and a Hindi dominated, India. Surprisingly, it was the outgrowth time that nations were being partitioned on the arse of worship. The partition led to m any problems amidst the dickens countries. One such know was the conflict over the subject of Kashmir. The dispute over Kashmir has dogged traffic betwixt India and Pakistan since the separates were created by the partition of British India in 1947.The two countries look at fought three contends (in 1947-48, 1965 and 1999). They have to a fault been on the verge of resorting to nu pull in weapons over this issue. The skirmish over Kashmir is an eonian conflict. The biggest reason for its insolvability is that le fruit drinkrship of two nations have intentiond apparitional patriotism to rid the wars and the struggle to incorporate Kashmir while masking the fundamental motive of assimilateing scotch and strategic favors from it. Not slightly(prenominal) countries hardly Pakistan The conflict of Kashmir send packing be traced spikelet to the time of partition and to the events that occur red during the time period when British controlled India was to be split upd on phantasmal lines. The ground had been under the rule of the Sikh empire and the British had managed to exert their learn on the Singh rulers of the time. The State of Kashmir was primary(prenominal) to the British beca phthisis it worked as buffer zone to balk invasion into India by Russia, China and Afghanistan. Therefore, as the British desired the Sinkh monarchy rulers were frequently puppets of the Britishprecisely following their orders in intelligence activity and action. A close alliance was reached between the British and the rulers of Kashmir in this way.However, the partition of the sub-continent brought the in reinforced tensionsamongst the Muslims and Hindoos over the enjoin of Kashmir to the forefront.. Muslims under the Muslim compact and Hindus under the Congress had been constantly endeavoring for more than reforms and image from the British passim the 1880s and 90s. The B ritish finally answerd to give India its independence, tho the Muslims and Hindus mat up entitled to separate advances base on a sacred divide which according to twain was in addition great for twain of them to exist harmoniously. Muslims felt entrapped as a minority in a Hindu dominant landed e express. Through the efforts of Jinnah, the leader of the Muslim conference and Nehru, the leader of the congress, a plan was proposed to separate the two countries. It was the first time in history that such a partition was taking place on the basis of religion. After the failure of the Cabinet com agencying Plan for a unified India on 1946, the British governing body announced its definite intention to induce necessary steps to effect the transference of spring to responsible Indian hands by a date non later than June 1948. Thus, the British displace their last viceroy, Lord Mountbatten to oversee the partition in of the near volatile regions of the world.The general plan of the partition was that the long aras of Punjab, Bengal and Assam were to be split according to the mass of the religion in the bea. Therefore, the Muslim absolute absolute majority aras ceded to Pakistan and the Hindu majority areas to India. There were a number of magisterial nations that were apt(p) the option to cede to India or Pakistan based on a vote to view as into accountancy the wishes of the local population. Kashmir was a Muslim majority state with a Hindu ruler. The ruler Hari Singh was conf employ as to where he should cede. Meanwhile, Sir Cyrill Radcliffe was sent by the British consecratement to make an exact boundary line to divide the Punjab province now famously referred to as the Radcliffe pureness Boundary Commission. According to the commission, the three Muslim majority tehsils of the Gurdaspur district were given to India. This went a arrive atst the laws, which divided the rest of India. Nonetheless, Hari Singhs hesitation to cede to either nation was to be the reason for his induce tragedy. (Was Kashmir part of one of the tehsils given to India by Radcliffe? If non the last two sentences make, no sense.)With nation building and the formation of a new states came the concept of nationalism. Nationalism involves the concept of an imagined community by a particular community. It includes certain people in this imagined community and excludes others. India was portioned on the basis ofreligion so they had envisioned what areas came into their respective imagined communities. Unfortunately, they both(prenominal) envisioned Kashmir to be a part of their newly founded nations. As phantasmal nationalism was the basis of the partition of India, it alike became a veil to mask the palpable motives for the fight for Kashmir between the newly independent states of Pakistan and India. Kashmir had a Muslim majority population of 3,101,247 (77.1 %). The first war over Kashmir was fought in 1947 when there was a Poonch uprising in the state a come acrossst Hari Singh. Pakistan sent in forces to secure the area out of fear that Kashmir would end up going to India. However, against preliminary exam plans the Pakistani troops ended up assay to invade Srinagar, Kahsmirs capital.Hari Singh was afraid and make a have sex to cede to India if India back uped fight Pakistan. The fact that Pakistan and India fight a war over Kashmir a a few(prenominal) months after they came into existence provided they had very limited supplies and could just stand up on their own as independent countries speaks volumes of the states phantasmal and hidden frugal importance. It is clever to look back at what Jinnah said to the Kashmiri leadinghip during the 1947 partition highlighting the decision of Hari Singh. In his speech, Muhammad Ali Jinnah, first governor general of Pakistan said, I anticipate that the Maharaja and the Prime subgenus Pastor of Kashmir will control the fast changing circumstances and wisdom demands that the feelings of the Muslims who form eighty percent of the population should non be ignored, much less hurt. Therefore, it you observe closely, Jinnah made the issue of Kashmir, an issue to do with Islam and Muslims. The rhetoric he states in his speech is for a plea to protect the wishes of the Muslims in Kashmir.The civilians in the newly founded Pakistan would also ideate in the selfsame(prenominal) way closely the issue of Kashmir as having to do with Islam and their duty to help their Muslim brothers. The discretion of ghostlike nationalism is used as a mask. The very first pre postnt of Pakistan used this to make a contract over Kashmir. Therefore, the claim for Kashmir to be part of Pakistan as a religious mission was indeed a pertinent ploy to attempt the escort of civilians of the state. The second war was fought over Kashmir in 1965. After the first war, the British had decided on a plebiscite to take place in Kashmir to decide its fate. India and Pakistan h ad both initially agreed on this just India went back on its word and occupied Kashmiri territory. Therefore, the 1965 war was fought on the same platform. At the time, prexy Ayub caravanserai was in power in Pakistan, a military dictator and the first of many that the boorish would see in its short history. The collection of the speeches of the pass and statesman, organized by Rais Ahmd Jafri shows how he too follows a quasi(prenominal) agenda approximately religious nationalism during his tenure as leader of Pakistan.The first is a speech on 25th August 1961 in Karachi at the Pakistan Institute of International Affairs. He states The contrariety between Pakistan and other Muslim countries is that the upsurge in these other Muslim countries is racial, linguistic, territorial, anti-imperialist, anti-colonial and very little religious. Therefore, we dismiss see that like Jinnah, Ayub Khan preached well-nigh the importance of Islam in Pakistan. He tried to inform Pakistanis about the signifi sightce of religion in the formation of their state of Pakistan and their role as falg bearers of Islam in the region. In his first broadcast on 1st November 1963, Ayub Khan made another speech in regards to the situation in Kashmir. He stated, The government and the people of India know that they have no right to the state of Jammu and Kashmir. The world at large knows it. So the proposed integration would only wax Indias guilt. It would correspondingly heighten our resolve to uncaring our brethren from their bondage. Those who transgress deceive nobody except themselves. face at this excerpt from this speech, we can see how Ayub Khan was preparing the civilians for another war with India.He claimed Pakistans right for Kashmir on the basis of Islam decisively labeling the residents of Kashmir as brothers of the citizens of Pakistan. Kashmir is a Muslim populated area and thus it is Pakistans responsibility to free their brethren. Ayub Khan is development relig ion as a rhetorical force here. With Islam as a mechanism, Pakistanis would believe that they it is their responsibility to God to help other Muslim brothers and support the upcoming war and struggle for Kashmir. Therefore, it is vial to see how Pakistani leaders over time have used religion as a basis to motivate Pakistanis to think that the freedom of Kashmir is their responsibility and thae oppressors of their Kashmiri brothers, enemies of Pakistan and Muslims in general. Similarly, India used superpatriotic mechanisms and rhetoric to impel civilians and soldiers officers to fight and support the war, while hiding the corporeal stinting intentions in regards to Kashmir.The 1965 War Story- Defense Minister Y.B Chavans Diary of India-Pakistan War gives an insight into how the samesense of nationalism had influenced Indians during the crisis. On September 20, 1965 Chavan writes in his diary, It was not an accident yet was shot fown by Pakistani fighter plains near Bhuj. It wa s surprising that the plane went off the track nearly by 50 miles between Ahmedabad-Mithapur. I hate these Pakistanis. Therefore, this quote shows a different perspective. It shows the opinion and the thoughts of someone who was at dish to India. Hate is a strong word to use, but yet Chavan casually writes it down in his diary. Therefore, nationalistic forces help create animosity. They declare the other side to be the oppositeness. In this case, Pakistanis are bad and they should be hated. This mentality about Pakistanis being the enemy helped the generals and army officers to wage war against Pakistan. It was a way for them to support and fight the war. It is important to see how leaders of the state had persuadeed army officers into listening to the states orders. Most generals and minister of religion did not even know what they were fighting for or what they hoped to achieve.They were simply following orders with hate for the Pakistanis due to the differences that the stat e had created for them. (This bolded part is very vague and not clear at all. Diaries are envisage to be casual, its his in the flesh(predicate) diary not a novel. In a state of war the other side is suppose to be the enemy. Maybe you should highlight how the indian government tried to increase nationalism maybe by using religion or the atrocities of the Muslims or some other reason to motivate its forces.) The diary of an Indian war captive in Pakistan shows another similar example of this nationalism effect on the Indians. LT Col SS Chowdhary writes in his personal narrative called, Prisoner of War, about his experiences as a captive on enemy soil in the 1965 war. This source is important because it shows the views about Pakistan from an Indian colonel. Unlike the former chairpersons of Pakistan, Ayub Khan and Muhammad Jinnah, the colonel is not promoting the nationalism that leads to hatred and animosity but he is actually on the side that is getting influenced. He chatters a bout the hatred felt during summercater matches between India and Pakistan.He says, They would lose to any unpolished but India. So much is their hatred for India. Therefore, we can see the extent to which people on both sides hate each other. The whole concept of a them and and us is created by nationalism and is the creation of leaders of state to justify war. He goes on to talk about his experience in the reflection statewhen he says, A Muslim is generally considered to be cruel and rough. Therefore, his experience as a prisoner of war changes his perspective about Muslims. It is important to assimilate that Hindus and Muslims grow up considering the other to be cruel, unkind and generally bad. It is the leaders of the state that carry out this propaganda to meet their own aims and steer the sentiment of the general cosmos in their way. (you should elaborate in this paragraph what created that hate of them and us between the two states, thats hat you thesis is about.) Going t hrough examples of both countries, it is patent that religion was the basis of the partition of the subcontinent.However, religious nationalism was used by the states to brainwash the public into hating their respective neighbor. twain India and Pakistan have used religious differences to create hostility within their populations towards the other. This is the clever evasive action that was used and is still being used by both countries in order to entomb the real reason for fighting over Kashmir. The real spirit is that India and Pakistan both seek to gain economically and strategically from taking over Kashmir. This can easily be seen from the fact that Pakistan lost East Pakistan (Bangladesh). Bangladesh got its independence from Pakistan in 1971. Bangladesh is a Muslim populated area and was a part of Pakistan. The injustices Pakistan inflicted on Bangladesh gains the case that Pakistan does not tuition about Muslim brothers. Like other countries, it only seeks to gain ec onomic and strategic advances. Similarly, India also seeks to gain immensely from taking over Kashmir and creates a faade about her sovereign and nationalistic right to take over it. After this part the essay is betterKashmir is much more than disputed territory. It is a seaport for untapped inbred resources and land. Geographically, it can be divided into the two states of Jammu and Kashmir encompassing 84,471 square miles. It is the largest state in the Indo-Pakistan subcontinent. An clause about the economic background of Kashmir by S.M Hudda shows us the economic potential of Kashmir and the benefits that both countries could gain if they took over it. Unlike other areas of the world, Kashmir is untapped. It has immense inherent resources that have not been actioned. Even the mineral resources of the country are largely unexplored except in Riazi and Jammu. Therefore, both Pakistan and India are developing countries and can use Kashmir to tapthese mineral and natural resourc es. The phrase further states that Kashmir has an abundance of wet resources. Hydel power could be generated using these water resources. India and Pakistan have extreme power shortages throughout the country and are in need for more power resources. This could solve their problem of power shortages.Therefore, this article provides evidence as to how Kashmir is a haven of untapped natural resources and one of the major reasons that both states are fighting over it. Kashmir also has a extraordinary strategic location. This strategic location could help both countries militarily and economically. Kashmir borders Russia, China, Afghanistan, Pakistan and India. Thus Kashmir works as a valuable window on these other regional powers. If Pakistan gets Kashmir, it can gain a military utility over India. It will have a localize route to India and can attack it easily in the advent of war. India would have a similar advantage. The country, which gets a hold of Kashmir, can protect its bo rders this way. Thus, the national credentials of Kashmir is vital for the security of both India and Pakistan. Kashmir also maintains a key position as a commerce route. It provides a pass to foxiness with Central Asia. India and Pakistan could gain economically from the exports and imports from this trading route. Secondly, another strategic advantage that India and Pakistan both seek to gain is in regards to the water resources.Water is a vital resource for any countrys self-reliance. Shockingly, the rivers Sindh, Ravi, Jhelum and Chena that flow through India and Pakistan embark on in Kashmir. These rivers are important to support the rescue of both Pakistan and India. Both countries are agro-based and dominantly depend on agriculture to support them. Therefore, these rivers prove as a lifeline to both countries. Even so, Muhammad Ali Jinnah, the first president of Pakistan has been quoted saying that Kashmir is the jugular vein of Pakistan for this very reason. Both countr ies also fear that if the other gets hold of Kashmir, wherefore they will cut the water supply to the other. Therefore, it is visible that Kashmir has great strategic and economic value to both Pakistan and India. Despite these advantages, India and Pakistan also exploit Kashmir to their benefit. This also proves the claim that both countries have never been interested in protecting the rights of the people and the only interest has been an economic one.An article in the Economic and Political hebdomadary explores the developing of Kashmir by India. It states that India seeks togain greatly from Kashmir. The article states, Furthermore, though couched in terms of security, this is not a question of security. The real question is that of expansion, security is a way of justifying that expansion in terms that invoke to national sentiments. What is at stake is not a genuine security interest, but the interest of being able to exploit markets and being able to turf out of labor sur plus. Therefore, we can see that India has been exploiting markets in Kashmir for a long time and this is why she wants complete control. some other example of such exploitation is that India shows that it supports and gives aid to Kashmir but actually this leads to more financial burden. The budget deficit of Kashmir was 370 crore rupees and 300 crore were from interest payments from India. Also, India has built a pass linking Jammu and Srinigar.This highway helps India gain security but it also helps them in taking out Kashmirs pure tone and other primary products out. Ironically, the money for the highway comes at once from Kashmirs budget. India is only looking out for its own selfish interest and is completely exploiting its Kashmiri closure. This is why it wants to take complete control of Kashmir. Commercial trade is also another way that India is exploiting Kashmir. India has managed to exert influence and developed free trade with Kashmir. Kashmir has two natural reso urces forests and water. There has been extensive deforestation and the wood has been interpreted out and used for Indian railways. The hydroelectric power plant contracts also go almost all told to Indian companies. Therefore, India is not capitally investing in Kashmir but is only investing in power generations and infection so she can better exploit Kashmirs natural resources. Pakistan has also followed a similar exploitation method in its colony of Kashmir. It proves the argument that religious nationalism is only part of propaganda that state leaders have made and continue to make to solidify their claim over Kashmir.The people of Azad Kashmir, Pakistans colony have sent hundreds of requests to the Pakistani High Commissioner in London to grant them export licenses so they could establish small scale industries in Kashmir. All these requests were not accepted, while Pakistani nationals were given export licenses for machinery. other example of such exploitation is that there are eight thousand Kashmiri workers living in Britain who send remittances of about a million pounds each month to their families in Kashmir. Ironically, Pakistanis also own most of the banks inKashmir. Hence, the Pakistani government earns a huge amount of profits through foreign swap and invests the money into Pakistan. Like India, Pakistan also exploits the forest capture of Kashmir. The forest contracts are given to Pakistani nationals who maintain much less than Kashmiri nationals. Surprisingly, most of the contracts are given to members of the military service.Pakistan has also prevented the workers to form a union in Kashmir while it has been allowed in Pakistan. Therefore, we can see that Azad Kashmir is a colony like Bangladesh was. Pakistan does not care about her Muslim brethren. That is the charade they use in order to get complete control of Kashmir so they can gain full economic advantage through exploitation. However, we have seen how nationalism is a newly invent ed ideology and how powerful it is. States use it to brainwash the public and members of the civil and military sector to cloak real intentions. In the case of Kashmir, the issue has not ended since the partition in 1947. The biggest reason for this unending conflict is that both states have used religious nationalism to show the other as the enemy.In the case of Pakistan, both former presidents have used Islam as a rhetorical device to convince civilians. In the case of India, the effect of this religious nationalism can be seen on the military officers who are willing to die for the sake of defeating the enemy. However, it is used to hide the underlying objective of both countries- gain economic and strategic advantages. Therefore, whoever seeks to gain Kashmir gains immensely from exploiting its natural resources, market and suppressed laborers? The issue could have been resolved if religious nationalism was put to the side and an economic deal was made between both India and Pa kistan. Nonetheless, it shows how state leaders can use nationalism as a tool to herd people to their cause and exploit them in this way.