Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 02:01, 8 July 2017

British Empire Unassessed

This article is within the scope of WikiProject British Empire, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of British Empire on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.British EmpireWikipedia:WikiProject British EmpireTemplate:WikiProject British EmpireBritish Empire ??? This article has not yet received a rating on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

India: History Start‑class High‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject India, which aims to improve Misplaced Pages's coverage of India-related topics. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.IndiaWikipedia:WikiProject IndiaTemplate:WikiProject IndiaIndia Start This article has been rated as Start-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by the Indian history workgroup (assessed as High-importance). More information: /  This article has been marked as needing an infobox. This article was last assessed in May 2012. An editor has requested that an image or photograph be added to this article.

Pakistan Start‑class High‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Pakistan, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Pakistan on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PakistanWikipedia:WikiProject PakistanTemplate:WikiProject PakistanPakistan Start This article has been rated as Start-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Untitled

I've left a note at User talk:118.103.239.68 to say that I've tidied up what was recently added to this article, most of which seems to me to be more or less factual, but asking for the sources of the information to be added. Umar Zulfikar Khan (talk) 13:56, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Military Conflict

This article is quite lacking in the details of what was actually a military conflict between the Junagadh State Forces and the Republic of India (along with indian proxy insurgents). The Junagadh State Forces resisted the Indian invasion of their state, for example see here ]XavierGreen (talk) 17:31, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

Junagadh vs Kashmir

An IP has added a claim on Kashmir here, which was recently reverted. In any case, the claim looked fishy. So I checked. There is no such statement in Rajmohan Gandhi's book. The p. 438 has the following quote: Pakistan attempted to set off Kashmir against Junagadh. When we raised the question of settlement in a democratic way, they (Pakistan) at once told us they would consider it if we applied that policy to Kashmir. Our reply was that we would agree to Kashmir if they agreed to Hyderabad. (The quote is from a speech of Patel at Junagadh, after its surrender.)

The equivalence was between Kashmir and Hyderabad, which Jinnah did not agree to. (A formal proposal was made by Mountbatten to Jinnah on 1 November 1947 in Lahore.) - Kautilya3 (talk) 19:43, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

Invaded it

The lead states

India did not accept the accession, blockaded Junagadh and then invaded it.

and cites a book by Owen Bennett Jones, a journalist. I didn't find any supporting evidence in the book for the claim that India "invaded" Junagadh. Most other sources, e.g., Hodson, The Great Divide (1969) and Raghavan, War and Peace in Modern India (2010), do not support such a claim. I am tagging this as dubious. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 20:18, 6 July 2017 (UTC)

• Hodson, H. V. (1969), The Great Divide: Britain, India, Pakistan, London: Hutchinson
• Raghavan, Srinath (2010), War and Peace in Modern India, Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 101–, ISBN 978-1-137-00737-7

:Rejoinder: Your first edit: Ian Talbot an authority on South Asian history describes India’s political integration of princely states with reference to Junagadh this way

Accession was made more difficult in cases like Hyderabad, Junagadh, isolated on the tip of the Kathiawar peninsula, and Jammu and Kashmir, where the ruler came from a different religious community from the majority of his subjects. These states' eventual incorporation in India resulted in bitter recriminations. There was armed conflict between India and Pakistan in the case of Jammu and Kashmir. Mountbatten charmed, while Patel and V.P. Menon bullied rulers to accede

So how can you claim that the source does not support what I wrote? Bullying comes under force and rulers (in plural) shows it as wide Indian state practice. Sicilianbro2 (talk) 09:08, 7 July 2017 (UTC) CU blocked sock of User:Faizan

Rejoinder: Your second edit: dubious tag

WP:HISTRS sources describe India’s deed in Junagadh as an invasion. . There is no dispute on this. Even Encyclopædia Britannica has termed India’s action in Junagadh as ‘invasion’. It is an encyclopediac fact. Sicilianbro2 (talk) 09:08, 7 July 2017 (UTC) CU blocked sock of User:Faizan

@Sicilianbro2: Which of these sources discuss the Junagadh affair in depth, rather than making passing mentions? -- Kautilya3 (talk) 12:00, 7 July 2017 (UTC)

That is besides the point. The point is that Ian Talbot, Victoria Schofield and Brittannica encyclopedia are authoritative sources the former two who have studied such matters as partition (of which junagadh was part) in-depth. Scholarly consensus and dominant scholarly opinions is determined in from works of major authorities, major histories, tertiary textbooks and encyclopedias. Sicilianbro2 (talk) 12:12, 7 July 2017 (UTC) CU blocked sock of User:Faizan

My question has been dodged. Presumably because it has no decent answer.

• Ian Talbot never talked about any invasion. The editor was just name-dropping.
• Encyclopedia Britannica says "India sent in the army", which is not exactly invasion. (It sent in the army after it has been invited to take over the government, according to Hodson and Raghavan sources mentioned above.)
• Victoria Schofield does say invasion, but provides no evidence. No such evidence is there because it never happened.

All this is make-believe hallucination. Either an invasion happened or it did not. It is question of fact, not a matter of "opinion" of scholars or whoever.

Anybody that wants to take responsibility for the sock edits better address this issue first. Or risk getting blocked themselves. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 02:00, 8 July 2017 (UTC)

References

1. Crispin Bates; Senior Lecturer Modern South Asian History Centre for South Asian Studies Crispin Bates (16 September 2013). Subalterns and Raj: South Asia Since 1600. Routledge. pp. 213–. ISBN 978-1-134-51375-8. This occurred after a similar invasion by India of the princely state of Junagadh.
2. Francis Pike (28 February 2011). Empires at War: A Short History of Modern Asia Since World War II. I.B.Tauris. pp. 347–. ISBN 978-0-85773-029-9.
3. Victoria Schofield (30 May 2010). Kashmir in Conflict: India, Pakistan and the Unending War. I.B.Tauris. pp. 78–. ISBN 978-0-85773-078-7.
4. P. M. Holt; Peter Malcolm Holt; Ann K. S. Lambton (21 April 1977). The Cambridge History of Islam: Volume 2A, The Indian Sub-Continent, South-East Asia, Africa and the Muslim West. Cambridge University Press. pp. 115–. ISBN 978-0-521-29137-8. {{cite book}}: Unknown parameter |coauthors= ignored (|author= suggested) (help)
5. Robert F. Gorman (2001). Great Debates at the United Nations: An Encyclopedia of Fifty Key Issues 1945-2000. Greenwood Publishing Group. pp. 87–. ISBN 978-0-313-31386-8.
6. Andrew Roberts (16 December 2010). Eminent Churchillians. Orion. pp. 127–. ISBN 978-0-297-86527-8.
7. Philip Oldenburg (13 September 2010). India, Pakistan, and Democracy: Solving the Puzzle of Divergent Paths. Routledge. pp. 205–. ISBN 978-1-136-93929-7.
8. Jean Reeder Smith; Lacey Baldwin Smith (1980). Essentials of World History. Barron's Educational Series. pp. 306–. ISBN 978-0-8120-0637-7.
9. "India - The transfer of power and the birth of two countries | history - geography". Encyclopedia Britannica. Retrieved 2017-07-07. Junagadh, however, faced Pakistan on the Arabian Sea, and when its nawab followed Jinnah's lead in opting to join that Muslim nation, India's army moved in and took control of the territory. The nizam of Hyderabad was more cautious, hoping for independence for his vast domain in the heart of southern India, but India refused to give him much more than one year and sent troops into the state in September 1948. Both invasions met little, if any, resistance, and both states were swiftly integrated into India's union. {{cite news}}: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |dead-url= (help)

• Unassessed British Empire articles
• Unknown-importance British Empire articles
• All WikiProject British Empire pages
• Start-Class India articles
• High-importance India articles
• Start-Class India articles of High-importance
• Start-Class Indian history articles
• High-importance Indian history articles
• Start-Class Indian history articles of High-importance
• WikiProject Indian history articles
• India articles without infoboxes
• Misplaced Pages requested photographs in India
• WikiProject India articles
• Start-Class Pakistan articles
• High-importance Pakistan articles
• WikiProject Pakistan articles