the partition of india took place in 1940.
the partition of india took place in 1940.
when did the partition of india take place?
1940
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
the decision about where the birth is to take place is made by the woman's father or brother. according to the world health organization (who), 61 percent of births in india take place at home, and the majority of these are not attended by a skilled birthing assistant. seventy-six percent of mothers reported using the sitting or squatting position for their last birth. the remaining 24 percent birthed in the supine position. eating and drinking customs, as well as rest, activity, and movement during labor, are determined by the mother-in-law or other older maternal figure in the family.
childbirth in india