Naqvi urges 'all political parties' to settle issue of more provinces, says current 'system' has collapsed

[El Sidd]

Not really .....

India established diplomatic relations with the Soviet Union on 13 April 1947. Four months before independence, under the interim government, while the British were still in charge.....

Nehru pressed for the Moscow embassy to open before independence and obtained the Viceroy's consent.... It was the interim government's first diplomatic mission anywhere in the world, and his sister landed in Moscow on 9 August, a week before the flag changed....


Now the part that answers you directly....... British intelligence had K.P.S. Menon and Krishna Menon under surveillance and was intercepting their correspondence with Nehru.... The Foreign Office instructed its ambassador in Moscow to put obstacles in the way, recording that Delhi appeared to want relations with the USSR and that London wanted the process delayed until things became clearer....


That is not a Cold War invention. That is the British, in 1947, in writing, worried about precisely the thing you say nobody was worried about....


As for elaborate theories, I did not say Pakistan was chartered to play the Great Game..... I said interests aligned....

Here is the 1947 Cabinet paper on defence policy against the USSR, held at the National Archives under CAB 21/1800.... It names Russia as the most likely and formidable threat, and lists the best bases for offensive action as the United Kingdom, the Middle East, and if possible North-West India.


North-West India. Written in 1947, by the British, for the British Cabinet. Auchinleck's own assessment was that the North West could serve as a lever to influence the Middle East and block Soviet advance if a united India inside the Commonwealth could not be had.....


Not my theory... Their filing cabinet....

Theory yes but the insinuation that such a theory played significantly in British decision for allowing creation of Pakistan is still not factual history.

That's a misplaced argument, although i can understand your sentiment, and it does have some basis, but ultimately it's a bit twisted.

Can it be assumed that you do not recognise contributions in sports and other legal framework authorities that gets awarded to 'India' before 1947?

How do you see legalities of McMahon line or even Durand line for that matter?

 

[mythbuster]

Theory yes but the insinuation that such a theory played significantly in British decision for allowing creation of Pakistan is still not factual history.


Can it be assumed that you do not recognise contributions in sports and other legal framework authorities that gets awarded to 'India' before 1947?

How do you see legalities of McMahon line or even Durand line for that matter?

You are throwing both sides into the snakes pitt and assign the role of referee for yourself... very devilish of you.

 

[M. Sarmad]

Theory yes but the insinuation that such a theory played significantly in British decision for allowing creation of Pakistan is still not factual history.

Invented stories and romanticized revisionism in your first post, then disingenuous, now a theory... Three posts, three positions, each closer to mine....

And on this version we may not be far apart..... I did not argue that strategic calculation caused Britain to create Pakistan... I said interests aligned... That is what the documents show and all I have claimed.

And that theory rests on declassified British documents, and on declassified American ones showing Jinnah discussing joint resistance to the Russians with US diplomats before the 3 June plan existed.... Both already cited in earler posts...

Not a theory laid over the evidence afterwards.... This did not start as a theory that went looking for evidence.... It started with what the British and Americans were writing down at the time.... Everyone was playing the same board....

 

[El Sidd]

You are throwing both sides into the snakes pitt and assign the role of referee for yourself... very devilish of you.

Its entirely for academic purposes.

Invented stories and romanticized revisionism in your first post, then disingenuous, now a theory... Three posts, three positions, each closer to mine....

And on this version we may not be far apart..... I did not argue that strategic calculation caused Britain to create Pakistan... I said interests aligned... That is what the documents show and all I have claimed.

And that theory rests on declassified British documents, and on declassified American ones showing Jinnah discussing joint resistance to the Russians with US diplomats before the 3 June plan existed.... Both already cited in earler posts...

Not a theory laid over the evidence afterwards.... This did not start as a theory that went looking for evidence.... It started with what the British and Americans were writing down at the time.... Everyone was playing the same board....

If it helps all of this can still be categorised as romaniticised revisionism with years of hindsight, it cannot be classified as historical fact. There would have been better solutions to the Soviet question without Pakistan nor Pakistan guaranteed an option.

In most calculations and theories, Pakistan would not have survived her dominion status and there were agreed arrangements in case that happened.

 

[M. Sarmad]

If it helps all of this can still be categorised as romaniticised revisionism with years of hindsight, it cannot be classified as historical fact. There would have been better solutions to the Soviet question without Pakistan nor Pakistan guaranteed an option.

In most calculations and theories, Pakistan would not have survived her dominion status and there were agreed arrangements in case that happened.

Hindsight requires looking back..... A Cabinet paper written in 1947, by men with no idea how any of it would turn out, is not looking back at anything...

Contemporaneous documents cannot be revisionism..... That is not what the word means....

And quite ironically you dismissed catalogued primary sources as theory, then gave me 2 counterfactuals with no citation....... Better solutions would have existed...... Most calculations said Pakistan would fail.... Whose calculations, in which file? Talk about theories??

Whether a better solution existed does not matter here... I never said the British planners were right... I said they wrote it down.

Your last point is the interesting one..... You say there were agreed arrangements in case Pakistan did not survive.... Show us.... If Britain was planning for Pakistan's collapse, that is Britain managing Pakistan's existence, which is the exact thing you keep saying was invented later !!

 

[Trailer23]

All PTI walley..., there appears to be light at the end of the tunnel afterall.

This vlog relates to you all. I am NOT going to tag anyone...

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

​