the plan to transfer of power to the indian and partition of country was laid down in the 3 june plan.
the plan to transfer of power to the indian and partition of country was laid down in the 3 june plan.
the plan to transfer of power to the indian and partition of country was laid down in the?
3 june plan
vallabhbhai patel was one of the first congress leaders to accept the partition of india as a solution to the rising muslim separatist movement led by muhammad ali jinnah. he had been outraged by jinnah's direct action campaign, which had provoked communal violence across india and by the viceroy's vetoes of his home department's plans to stop the violence on the grounds of constitutionality. patel severely criticised the viceroy's induction of league ministers into the government and the revalidation of the grouping scheme by the british without congress approval. although further outraged at the league's boycott of the assembly and non-acceptance of the plan of 16 may despite entering government, he was also aware that jinnah did enjoy popular support amongst muslims, and that an open conflict between him and the nationalists could degenerate into a hindu-muslim civil war of disastrous consequences. the continuation of a divided and weak central government would in patel's mind, result in the wider fragmentation of india by encouraging more than 600 princely states towards independence. between the months of december 1946 and january 1947, patel worked with civil servant v. p. menon on the latter's suggestion for a separate dominion of pakistan created out of muslim-majority provinces. communal violence in bengal and punjab in january and march 1947 further convinced patel of the soundness of partition. patel, a fierce critic of jinnah's demand that the hindu-majority areas of punjab and bengal be included in a muslim state, obtained the partition of those provinces, thus blocking any possibility of their inclusion in pakistan. patel's decisiveness on the partition of punjab and bengal had won him many supporters and admirers amongst the indian public, which had been tired of the league's tactics, but he was criticised by gandhi, nehru, secular muslims and socialists for a perceived eagerness to do so. when lord louis mountbatten formally proposed the plan on 3 june 1947, patel gave his approval and lobbied nehru and other congress leaders to accept the proposal. knowing gandhi's deep anguish regarding proposals of partition, patel engaged him in frank discussion in private meetings over the perceived practical unworkability of any congress-league coalition, the rising violence and the threat of civil war. at the all india congress committee meeting called to vote on the proposal, patel said:i fully appreciate the fears of our brothers from [the muslim-majority areas]. nobody likes the division of india and my heart is heavy. but the choice is between one division and many divisions. we must face facts. we cannot give way to emotionalism and sentimentality. the working committee has not acted out of fear. but i am afraid of one thing, that all our toil and hard work of these many years might go waste or prove unfruitful. my nine months in office has completely disillusioned me regarding the supposed merits of the cabinet mission plan. except for a few honorable exceptions, muslim officials from the top down to the chaprasis (peons or servants) are working for the league. the communal veto given to the league in the mission plan would have blocked india's progress at every stage. whether we like it or not, de facto pakistan already exists in the punjab and bengal. under the circumstances i would prefer a de jure pakistan, which may make the league more responsible. freedom is coming. we have 75 to 80 percent of india, which we can make strong with our own genius. the league can develop the rest of the country.following gandhi's denial but congress' approval of the plan, patel represented india on the partition council, where he oversaw the division of public assets, and selected the indian council of ministers with nehru. however, neither he nor any other indian leader had foreseen the intense violence and population transfer that would take place with partition.
partition of india
bullet::::- under the 1947 united nations partition plan for palestine , the city of jerusalem was supposed to become an international zone. this was never implemented; the city was the scene of fierce fighting in 1948 which culminated in its partition between israel and jordan. nineteen years later in 1967 the jordanian-occupied part was captured and unilaterally annexed by israel. however, the idea of an international zone in jerusalem, encompassing at least the highly sensitive old city of jerusalem , continues to be floated by various would-be mediators. whilst it is often asserted that the zionist community favoured this plan, scholars such as simha flapan have determined that it is a myth that zionists accepted the partition as a compromise by which the jewish community abandoned ambitions for the whole of palestine and recognised the rights of the arab palestinians to their own state. rather, flapan argued, acceptance was only a tactical move that aimed to thwart the creation of an arab palestinian state and, concomitantly, expand the territory that had been assigned by the un to the jewish state. baruch kimmerling has said that zionists "officially accepted the partition plan, but invested all their efforts towards improving its terms and maximally expanding their boundaries while reducing the number of arabs in them." arab leaders and governments, for their part, rejected the plan of partition in the resolution and indicated that they would reject any other plan of partition. the arab states' delegations declared immediately after the vote for partition that they would not be bound by the decision, and walked out accompanied by the indian and pakistani delegates. the plan was, however, not realised in the days following the 29 november 1947 resolution as envisaged by the general assembly. it was followed by outbreaks of violence in mandatory palestine between palestinian jews and arabs known as the 1947–48 civil war. in 2011, mahmoud abbas stated that the 1947 arab rejection of united nations partition plan for palestine was a mistake he hoped to rectify. western european nations by and large voted for the resolution, with the exception of the united kingdom (the mandate holder), turkey and greece. elsewhere in europe, middle eastern nations primarily voted against the partition, whilst the soviet bloc voted, with the exception of yugoslavia, in favour. the majority of latin american nations voted for partition, with a sizeable minority abstaining. asian countries voted against partition, with the exception of the philippines.
border control