Partition as a Tool for Western Economic Rebuilding: A Detailed Analysis

 

Partition as a Tool for Western Economic Rebuilding: 

A Detailed Analysis

Before we continue blaming Gandhi, Nehru, and Jinnah for the division of India, one must look at all the factors that led to the partitioning of India. This strategy was initiated during the early part of the 20th century, as we can see here, but we need to understand the totality of the Western strategy and how it was executed.

The partition of India in 1947 was not merely a result of local communal tensions or the failure of Indian leadership but a deliberate and calculated strategy orchestrated by the British and supported by Western powers. It reshaped the Indian subcontinent, creating two nations—India and Pakistan—while leaving an indelible mark on millions of lives. Though often attributed to events surrounding the Second World War, the roots of this division run much deeper, embedded in colonial policies, geopolitical calculations, and economic agendas designed to weaken the region and benefit the West.

The All-India Muslim League, formed in 1906, played a pivotal role in the partition narrative. Initially established to protect Muslim rights under British rule, it evolved into a powerful voice for self-governance by 1913. Its leadership, particularly Mohammed Ali Jinnah, strongly advocated Hindu-Muslim unity for decades. However, growing disillusionment with the Congress Party's approach to power-sharing and increasing communal tensions gradually pushed the League toward a separatist stance. The Lahore Resolution of 1940 marked a critical turning point, with the League formally demanding a separate Muslim state, fearing Hindu domination in an independent India. This demand ultimately paved the way for the creation of Pakistan.

In parallel, the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS), established in 1925 by K.B. Hedgewar, advanced a Hindu-centric ideology that contributed to the communal polarization of the time. Hedgewar envisioned the RSS as a cultural organization uniting Hindus under a single ideological framework. Under M.S. Golwalkar’s leadership, the RSS focused on instilling discipline and cultural pride among Hindus, deliberately avoiding direct participation in anti-British movements. Golwalkar's belief that "cultural work" was more critical than political agitation distanced the RSS from the Congress-led independence struggle and laid the foundation for a vision of Hindu nationalism that continues to influence Indian politics.

However, this narrative of Indian political rivalries and leadership failures cannot be fully understood without examining the overarching role of Western powers in shaping these dynamics. From the deliberate deepening of communal divisions through policies like the Morley-Minto Reforms of 1909 to the encouragement of communal electorates and the exploitation of growing mistrust between communities, the British engineered a landscape ripe for division. Partition was not just a tragedy for the people of India and Pakistan but also a tool for the West to secure its geopolitical and economic dominance while weakening a unified subcontinent that could challenge its global influence.

The partition of India in 1947 was not only a humanitarian disaster but also a calculated move by colonial powers to safeguard their economic and geopolitical interests. The division of the subcontinent ensured prolonged instability in the region, which allowed Europe and America to extract resources, talent, and influence while rebuilding their economies in the aftermath of the Second World War. The evidence of this deliberate strategy can be traced through economic policies, labor migration patterns, and the strategic alliances that emerged in the years following partition.

1. Economic Disruption and Western Control

Before partition, India was a highly integrated economic unit, with industries, agricultural systems, and transportation networks functioning cohesively across the region. The division disrupted this system in several ways:

1. Agricultural Fragmentation: Punjab and Bengal, the breadbaskets of India, were split between India and Pakistan. Punjab's fertile lands and irrigation systems, which were critical for food production, became divided, leaving both nations struggling to meet their food security needs. This agricultural disruption forced them to rely on food aid from the West, particularly the United States under the PL-480 Food for Peace Program, which established a dependency on American agricultural exports.
2. Industrial Fragmentation: Key industries like textiles, jute, and railways were fragmented. For instance:
• Jute Production: Over 80% of the jute mills remained in India, but the majority of jute-producing regions went to Pakistan. This severed supply chains and crippled one of the most profitable export industries in both nations.
• Railways: India inherited most of the railway infrastructure, but critical rail links that traversed the newly created borders were disrupted. This slowed trade and commerce, benefitting British and Western shipping companies that stepped in to facilitate long-distance trade.
3. Sterling Balances: India held approximately £1.3 billion in Sterling Balances at the end of World War II—money owed to India for its wartime contributions. These funds were meant to finance post-war recovery, but Britain delayed their release, using them to stabilize its economy instead. The partition weakened India’s ability to negotiate and allowed Britain to impose unfavorable terms, ensuring its economic interests were protected.

2. Skilled Labor Migration and Western Economies

Partition displaced millions of skilled and semi-skilled workers who became a vital resource for rebuilding Western economies. Some specific examples include:

1. Medical Professionals in Britain:
• After the establishment of the National Health Service (NHS) in 1948, Britain faced a severe shortage of doctors. Between 1948 and 1965, thousands of Indian and Pakistani doctors, many of whom were displaced by partition, migrated to Britain. By the 1960s, nearly 10% of Britain’s medical workforce consisted of doctors from the Indian subcontinent, particularly from Punjab and Bengal, regions ravaged by partition.
2. Engineering and Infrastructure in Europe:
• Indian and Pakistani engineers, trained under the British education system, contributed significantly to rebuilding European infrastructure after the war. For example, railway engineers from India were instrumental in modernizing British railways during the 1950s and 1960s. Similarly, hydrological engineers from India contributed to the construction of dams and irrigation projects in both Europe and America.
3. Scientific Expertise in the United States:
• The United States benefitted from an influx of scientists and technical experts, especially in the fields of physics, engineering, and medicine. This migration peaked during the Cold War as the US sought to outpace the Soviet Union in technological advancements. Partition-induced displacement created a pool of highly educated professionals who contributed to American industries and research institutions.

3. Partition’s Geopolitical Implications

Partition allowed Western powers to maintain a foothold in South Asia during the early Cold War era. Pakistan, created as a separate state, became a critical ally for the West due to its strategic location bordering the Soviet Union and the Middle East. The implications of this strategy were far-reaching:

1. Military Alliances:
• The United States quickly established military ties with Pakistan, including its inclusion in alliances like the Central Treaty Organization (CENTO) and Southeast Asia Treaty Organization (SEATO). These alliances positioned Pakistan as a buffer against Soviet influence while ensuring the West retained leverage in the region.
2. Economic Aid and Dependency:
• Western nations provided significant economic and military aid to Pakistan, strengthening its reliance on Western support. Between 1947 and 1965, the United States provided Pakistan with approximately $2.5 billion in economic and military aid, much of which came with strings attached, ensuring continued Western influence in South Asia.
3. Weakened Regional Powers:
• By dividing India and Pakistan, the British ensured that the subcontinent could not emerge as a unified economic and military power capable of challenging Western dominance. The persistent hostility between India and Pakistan diverted resources away from development and toward defense, keeping both nations economically dependent on the West.

4. Media and Propaganda

Partition also disrupted the intellectual and media networks of the subcontinent, which had been critical in mobilizing anti-colonial sentiment. Many journalists, academics, and writers who fled to the West contributed to shaping global narratives about partition and South Asia. Western media often portrayed the partition as a necessary solution to irreconcilable communal differences, deflecting attention from the colonial policies that had created those divisions. This narrative justified continued Western intervention in South Asia under the guise of "maintaining peace and stability."

5. The Aftermath: A Divided Subcontinent

Partition left India and Pakistan in a state of mutual hostility that benefitted Western arms manufacturers and geopolitical strategists. The Kashmir conflict, a direct consequence of partition, became a flashpoint for wars between India and Pakistan, further destabilizing the region. Western nations capitalized on this instability by selling arms to both sides while maintaining their influence as "mediators."

Meanwhile, the displaced workforce continued to fuel Western economies. By the 1970s, professionals of Indian and Pakistani origin had become integral to key sectors in Britain, Europe, and the United States, contributing to their post-war recovery and long-term growth.

Conclusion

The partition of India was not merely a tragic consequence of communal tensions but a calculated strategy by Western powers to maintain economic and geopolitical dominance. By dividing one of the world's most populous and resource-rich regions, the British ensured a weakened subcontinent that remained dependent on Western aid, technology, and markets. Simultaneously, Europe and America reaped the benefits of a trained and displaced workforce, rebuilding their economies on the foundations of partition-induced migration.

Understanding this dimension of partition is critical not only for acknowledging its historical consequences but also for addressing the lingering inequalities and dependencies that stem from this deliberate act of colonial strategy. Revisiting this history underscores the importance of unity, resilience, and self-reliance in the face of external exploitation.