{"title":"Muslim Minority Against Islamic Nation: The Shias of British India and the Demand for Pakistan, 1940–45","authors":"Rajit K. Mazumder","doi":"10.1177/02576430221120312","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article analyses the relationship between British colonialism and Islamic sectarianism, and its consequent impact on the Shias, the largest Muslim minority in British India. In the critical decade leading up to independence and partition in 1947, politics in British India were dominated by the Muslim League’s demand for Pakistan. However, leading Shia organizations were opposed to the League’s idea of an Islamic nation and supported India’s independence without partition. Instead, they demanded that the British recognize the Shia as a Muslim minority, and thereby confer statutory protections from Sunni domination. The British government arbitrarily and unjustly ignored Shia entreaties for constitutional protections. Imperial realpolitik required the colonial state to acknowledge the Muslim League as the sole political representative of all Muslims, thus, rendering Pakistan a fait accompli. The intersection of the colonial government’s political calculations with the League’s political ambitions compelled both to discard the Shias. This study of the complex issue of minorities and their uncertain position in the nation promised for all Muslims has relevance for current debates on the nation and nationalism, on minorities and their rights, on sectarianism and majoritarianism, and on the politics of identity.","PeriodicalId":44179,"journal":{"name":"Studies in History","volume":"59 1","pages":"133 - 161"},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2022-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Studies in History","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/02576430221120312","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HISTORY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
This article analyses the relationship between British colonialism and Islamic sectarianism, and its consequent impact on the Shias, the largest Muslim minority in British India. In the critical decade leading up to independence and partition in 1947, politics in British India were dominated by the Muslim League’s demand for Pakistan. However, leading Shia organizations were opposed to the League’s idea of an Islamic nation and supported India’s independence without partition. Instead, they demanded that the British recognize the Shia as a Muslim minority, and thereby confer statutory protections from Sunni domination. The British government arbitrarily and unjustly ignored Shia entreaties for constitutional protections. Imperial realpolitik required the colonial state to acknowledge the Muslim League as the sole political representative of all Muslims, thus, rendering Pakistan a fait accompli. The intersection of the colonial government’s political calculations with the League’s political ambitions compelled both to discard the Shias. This study of the complex issue of minorities and their uncertain position in the nation promised for all Muslims has relevance for current debates on the nation and nationalism, on minorities and their rights, on sectarianism and majoritarianism, and on the politics of identity.
期刊介绍:
Studies in History reflects the considerable expansion and diversification that has occurred in historical research in India in recent years. The old preoccupation with political history has been integrated into a broader framework which places equal emphasis on social, economic and cultural history. Studies in History examines regional problems and pays attention to some of the neglected periods of India"s past. The journal also publishes articles concerning countries other than India. It provides a forum for articles on the writing of different varieties of history, and contributions challenging received wisdom on long standing issues.