Explain why Britain was so successful in extending its control of the sub-continent between 1750 and 1850. [7] (Past Paper, June 2011: Q1/b)

[Military Superiority] The British were successful in gaining control over India because of their military superiority. They fought a series of bloody wars and defeated a number of strong local rulers like Siraj-ud-Daulah in the battle of Plassy, Tipu Sultan in the battle of Maysure, the Marathas and the Sikhs. They had latest warfare tools, efficient communication for quick deployment of troops and sound financial resources for fighting costly wars in the far-flung areas. They had well-trained army and good planners of war strategies. They were also expert in bribing and conspiring with the key persons like Mir Jafar and Mir Sadiq with the help of whom they defeated their strong rivals in the battlefields.

[Dealing Skills] The British were very skilled diplomatic experts. They gained the support of a number of local rulers. They were shrewd in purchasing the loyalties of influential Indians. They signed “subsidiary alliances” with local rulers under which the rulers were granted protection by the British troops. In return, they paid the salaries of the soldiers and provided residence to a British advisor. These were lucrative deals and control on the affairs!

[Indian Disunity] Indians were not united as a single nation. They were divided along religious, linguistic and ethnic lines. Local rulers were interested only to their own territories. Some princely states even supplied troops to the British when they were fighting against their countrymen. It was very easy for the strong British army to conquer them one after the other. Majority of the well-off Indians stayed away from the wars. They were making profits by trading with the English merchants. They were also happy with the infrastructure the British were developing including schools, hospitals, roads, railway networks and irrigation systems. 

[Doctrine of Lapse] The doctrine of lapse, introduced in 1852, was a land-grabbing law. If the ruler of a princely state would pass away without having a direct heir, his kingdom would become property of the British. A number of states were seized  under this law.

How successful have governments been in the Islamisation of Pakistan between 1947 and 1988? Explain your answer. [14] (Past Paper, November 2009: Q5/c)

The Objectives Resolution, passed in March 1949, made it clear that the constitution of Pakistan would be based on Islamic laws of social justice, equality and religious freedom. These provisions were not enough to satisfy the religious wings of the country. They wanted complete implementation of the Shariah Laws. Together with other reasons, the resolution was withdrawn in November 1950 for further considerations.

 When the first constitution of Pakistan was prepared in 1956, it changed the name of Pakistan to Islamic Republic of Pakistan. The Religious Advisory Board was retained for monitoring the legislation. The religious scholars would ensure conformity of new laws with the Quran and Sunnah.

Ayub Khan was a bit liberal. He introduced Muslim Family Laws Ordinance according to which marriages and divorces were to be registered and minimum age limits were defined for marriage. In spite of opposition from religious wings, these laws were imposed. He established Advisory Council of Islamic Ideology to advise him the religious aspects of policies. He also founded Islamic Research Institute. But these institutes were just symbolic; he never welcomed their proposals.

In the 1973 constitution, Islam was declared to be state religion. The president and the prime minister were to be Muslims and they must believe in the finality of Prophet Muhammad (PBUH). But no consideration was given to full implementation of Shariah Laws. After the 1977 elections when Pakistan National Alliance was protesting on the roads against rigging, he tried to appease the religious factions by banning gambling, restricting sale of alcohol and declaring Friday to be the weekly holiday. These were just desperate actions.

General Zia ul Haq tried to be a pro-Islamic leader. He established Federal Shariat Court in 1979 to consider conformity of existing laws and judgments with Islamic laws. He introduced Hudood Ordinances giving Islamic punishments to people involved in drinking, gambling, theft and adultery. He also introduced the Council of Islamic Ideology to suggest ways for bringing the legal system closer to Islamic ideology. Zakat and Ushr Ordinance was introduced imposing 2.5% wealth tax and 5% tax on agricultural income respectively. To give an Islamic color to Pakistan’s society, Islamiyat and Pakistan Studies were made compulsory subjects in the schools and colleges. Memorizers of the Holy Quran were given extra marks in the Civil Service examinations. Arabic language was promoted through TV and Radio programs. No woman was allowed to appear on the TV without scarf.

But there were a number of weak sides of Zia’s Islamisation program. Only a small part of Islamic Legal System was enforced. There were misappropriations of Zakat fund, the Federal Shariat Court could not replace the Pakistan Penal Code, Ushr was not taken from landowners and Islamic punishments were rarely exercised.

When it comes to conclusion, it can be said that the governments have not been successful in the Islamisation of Pakistan between 1947 and 1988. Some laws seem to be implemented under pressure from certain circles, and once announced, no serious efforts have been made to implement them in true sense. 

Why did the Cripps Mission of 1942 fail? [7] (Past Paper, November 2004: Q3/b)

[Congress wanted immediate self-rule] Cripps proposals conceded complete independence at the end of the war. During the war, Indian political leaders could join the Executive Council with control of all government departments except the armed forces. Congress rejected the offer because it wanted immediate power and independence. Gandhi described the proposals as “a post-dated cheque on a bank that was failing.”

[Congress didn’t want India’s disintegration] According to Cripps proposals, provinces could opt out of the Indian Union, which was definitely not acceptable to Congress Nationalists. They considered this option a lethal blow to Indian land. They could not see disintegration of Mother India, and therefore rejected the Cripps Offer.

[Jinnah wanted firm assurance] Cripps Mission conceded the right of self-determination to provincial units i.e. the provinces were free to remain within India or opt out of Indian Union. Mr. Jinnah was pleased with this clause because the provinces with Muslim majority could form their own federation i.e. Pakistan. But there was another clause stating that constitution of free India would be drawn up by the Indian political leaders. Jinnah feared that the constitution-making body would be dominated by Hindus who will deny the rights of Muslims. He wanted solid assurance for independent Pakistan, and therefore didn’t agree with the Cripps Mission of 1942.

[Britain’s Crucial Position] Congress wanted to exploit Britain’s critical position. Many Congress leaders thought that wartime was the best opportunity to pressurize the British for immediate withdrawal from India. Therefore, instead of accepting Cripps Offer, they started the Quit India Movement on massive scale, which was an attempt to drive the British out of India through protests and demonstrations. If this strategy succeeds, Congress would deal with all other parties on its own terms.

Why was the partition of Bengal reversed in 1911? [7] (Past Paper, June 2001: Q3/b)

[Protests and Violence] The partition of Bengal created a Muslim-majority province, the East Bengal. The elite Hindus of West Bengal, who were collecting taxes from Muslim peasants in east Bengal, would now lose their influence in the new province. They, therefore, rejected the decision and launched a series of violent protests and demonstrations against the partition. The tide of anger rapidly spread to other parts of India. The reaction was so strong that it gave birth to the development of extremism. A number of small extremist groups came into existence that launched attacks on the British officials. They succeeded in killing a few ones. Lord Minto, the future viceroy, escaped an assassination attempt. Many extremists were imprisoned for long time, but the situation was alarming to the British. Finally, they had to bow down before the Hindu agitation and thus revoked the Bengal partition.

[Economic Reasons] The British reversed the partition of Bengal due to economic reasons also. The Hindus of West Bengal started Swadeshi Movement, which also spread to other parts of India. It was a massive campaign for boycotting the British goods and using home-made products. The Hindus responded to the movement enthusiastically. The use of local products became a matter of pride. Foreign clothes were thrown on bonfires. By 1908, imports from Britain had fallen off significantly and sales of British goods in Indian markets dropped drastically. So the British had to reverse the decision.

[British Measures Failed] The British took several measures to bring the situation under control but political unrest kept on growing. Restrictions were imposed on newspapers and public gatherings. Editors were imprisoned. The prisons were filled with revolutionary activists. Tilak was also arrested in June 1908 and put behind the bars for 6 years. Apart from repressive measures, the British turned to reconciliation also by introducing Morley-Minto reforms in 1909 to win support of the Hindus, but the reforms also could not pacify them. The situation was becoming difficult for peaceful administration and ultimately the British had to move towards annulment of the partition.

Why did the East India Company become involved in the subcontinent? [7] (Past Paper, June 2001: Q1/b)

[Economic Reasons] There was enormous wealth in the subcontinent. Trade, profit and power were the real motives that East India Company (EIC) was looking at. Indian goods including spices, silk, yarn, cloth, cotton and goods of metalworkers were very demanding in the European markets. British factories needed raw materials while British merchants needed big markets like India to sell their industrial products. Cotton was the main raw material for the textile industries in Britain. EIC made huge profits and the company flourished very rapidly. By 1620, the company operated about 40 ships for trade with India. The company was having a very profitable future in trade with India. Indian soldiers at very cheap wages were available to protect their trade and profits.

[Political Reasons] East India Company had no political motives at first. It came to India primarily for trade. But the decline of Mughal Empire and the demolition of Maratha Power in 1761 by Ahmad Shah Abdali prepared the gateway for the British to take over India. Lack of a strong central government attracted the British attention for interfering with Indian political affairs. By that time, they had already got the skills of dealing with Indian rulers and merchants. Now they started thinking about establishing British Raj in the subcontinent.

[Regional Influence] India had strategic position on the globe. It would give regional supremacy to the British and Royal Navy. They would control the sea routes and hence trade with the East. The company also wanted to westernize the Indians. The British believed that western culture is superior and must be spread in the world. They thought themselves the most civilized nation of the world.