Separation of East Pakistan (Bangladesh)

Introduction:-
Bangladesh is the east part of Pakistan. Its population is
171.2 Million and 148,460 km² total area. It was the
province of India but due to majority of Muslims, it
concluded as a part of Pakistan. Everything was going
peacefully but suddenly some disputes existed between
East & West Pakistan that based on Political,
Economical, language and trading matters. The
political leader tried to control the circumstances but
situation got uncontrolled either Hindus or British tried
to separate Bangladesh from Pakistan.

Separation of Bangladesh:-
The first Partition of Bengal (1905) was a territorial
reorganization of the Bengal Presidency implemented
by the authorities of the British Raj. The reorganization
separated the largely Muslim eastern areas from the
largely Hindu western areas. Announced on 16 July
1905 by Lord Curzon, then Viceroy of India, and
implemented West Bengal for Hindus and East Bengal
for Muslims, it was undone a mere six years later. The
nationalists saw the partition as a challenge to Indian
nationalism and as a deliberate attempt to divide
the Bengal Presidency on religious grounds, with
a Muslim majority in the east and a Hindu majority in
the west. The Hindus of West Bengal complained that
the division would make them a minority in a province
that would incorporate the province of Bihar and
Orissa. Hindus were outraged at what they saw as a
"divide and rule" policy,: 248–249 even though Curzon
stressed it would produce administrative efficiency.
The partition animated the Muslims to form their own
national organization along communal lines. To
appease Bengali sentiment, Bengal was reunited
by King George V in 1911, in response to the Swadeshi
movement's riots in protest against the policy.

Causes of separation of Bengal:

 Lack of communicational facilities
 High rate of crimes
 Political disputes
 Monopoly of Hindus in trade
 Presidential form of Government
 Geographical location
  Role of International community
 Language issues
 Six point of Majeeb-ul-Rehman
 Unity of Bengali Muslims and Hindus
 Failure of Muslim league in East Pakistan
 Educational differences
 Too big size made it difficult for one Lt. General to
administrate the province
 Anti-Pakistan literature

Political crisis
The partition triggered radical nationalism and nationalists all over
India supported the Bengali cause, and were shocked at the British
disregard for public opinion and what they perceived as a "divide and
rule" policy. The protests spread to Bombay, Pune, and Punjab. Lord
Curzon had believed that the Congress was no longer an effective
force but provided it with a cause to rally the public around and gain
fresh strength from the partition also caused embarrassment to the
Indian National Congress. Gokhale had earlier met prominent British
liberals, hoping to obtain constitutional reforms for India. The
radicalization of Indian nationalism because of the partition would
drastically lower the chances for the reforms. However, Gokhale
successfully steered the more moderate approach in a Congress
meeting and gained support for continuing talks with the government.
In 1906 Gokhale again went to London to hold talks with Morley
about the potential constitutional reforms. While the anticipation of
the liberal nationalists increased in 1906 so did tensions in India. The
moderates were challenged by the Congress meeting in Calcutta,
which was in the middle of the radicalised Bengal. The moderates
countered this problem by bringing Dadabhai Naoroji to the meeting.
He defended the moderates in the Calcutta session and thus the unity
of the Congress was maintained. The 1907 Congress was to be held
at Nagpur. The moderates were worried that the extremists would
dominate the Nagpur session. The venue was shifted to the extremist
free Surat. The resentful extremists flocked to the Surat meeting.
There was an uproar and both factions held separate meetings. The
extremists had Aurobindo and Tilak as leaders. They were isolated
while the Congress was under the control of the moderates. The 1908
Congress Constitution formed the All-India Congress Committee,
made up of elected members and therefore thronging the meetings
would no longer work for the extremists.

Conclusions:
The inwardness of Partition cannot be fully understood
through a study of the motives of those in Delhi and in
London who put the priorities of India and empire
above the interests of Bengal. Nor do investigations
into Muslim separatism tell the whole story. Partition,
at least in one important province, was the considered
choice of large and powerful sections of the Hindu
population. When push came to shove, bhadralok
Hindus preferred to carve up Bengal rather than to
accept the indignity of being ruled by Muslims.
This book has attempted to challenge the prevailing
wisdom about Partition on a number of counts.
Partition is generally believed to have been a
consequence of the separatist politics of Muslim
minorities, but in the case of Bengal, Hindus evolved a
Command is widely (but wrongly) believed to have
acquiesced only reluctantly to Partition. This study
suggests that, on the contrary, not only was the
Congress High Command ready to pay the price of
Partition in order to strengthen its hold over an unitary
India, but that the Bengal Congress campaigned
successfully for the vivisection of its province on
communal lines.
Many Bengalis believe that their province was a
hapless pawn in the endgames of empire: that Bengal's
aspirations were destroyed and her cultural integrity
was sacrificed upon the altar of all-India imperatives.
The United Bengal Plan is given as evidence that
Bengalis actively fought against a second partition.