Midnight's Furies - The Deadly Legacy of India's Partition (Nisid Hajari, 2015)

Interesting, useful.  Seemed like a good follow-on to this novel.

August 15, 1947.  Nehru, Jinnah, Gandhi, Patel.  Mountbatten.  Focuses on the run-up to, and aftermath of, the "Partition" - with enough background to help make sense of this for general readers like me.

Perhaps it's just this author's presentation - but in the un-resolvable discussion about the relative importance of individual leaders and what I'll call larger historical-social movements - as applied to these years, the role of the leaders seems unusually important.

Reactions:

1.  Of course everyone involved here can be subjected to criticism, and the author almost goes out of his way to balance his criticisms of the each "side."

2.  But I keep thinking that the fundamental error here was Jinnah insisting on a separate country for Muslims - even though he perhaps didn't even think it realistic in the early going - but when Britain faded and the opportunity came, he stuck to the "separate state" principle.  By definition, that results in the leadership (ultimately on both "sides") practicing the worst kind of identity politics - educating the public that the two groups can't get along and must be separated; endless opportunities to demonize the "other" - all the bad things about mixing state-and-religion that so much of the rest of the world (though certainly not all!) had largely worked through centuries ago.

3.  And it's a hopeless struggle in any event - as one starts dividing by religion, where does it end?  Among other examples, check out the role of the Sikhs here.  If religions need a state, why not Sikhistan?

4.  Still - had Britain retained any type of staying power - seems that partition likely would have been avoided.  Britain simply out of resources in the immediate aftermath of WWII.  It was obvious to Britain that things were proceeding down a dangerous path, but - in response - Britain accelerated its departure.  Quickest path "out" was to accede to partition despite the dangers.  Such an unusual situation.

5.  Lots of detail about the refugees, the slaughters, etc.  That part gets a little tiresome but helps explain why the two countries remain at odds.

6.  Gandhi past his prime, trying to stop the violence, still capable of swaying public opinion.  Assassination comes from Hindu right-wing.

7.  (Courtesy of KHG), I've been reading big chunks of Steve Coll's Ghost Wars - where among other things he explains Pakistan's role in radicalizing, funding, arming fundamentalist Islamic groups across the Afghan border - including the Taliban and OBL - Pakistan started using these folks for proxy wars against India going all the way back to Kashmir in the first year post-Partition - some very real and very negative consequences.  This author gets into the same subject matter.

8.  So much negative energy between the two countries from Partition down to the present.

Seems a shame that the leadership couldn't find a way to create a federal (or whatever term applies) structure that encouraged folks to work together inside a single country - without demonizing any "other" group or individual.  That should have happened.  No doubt there would have been plenty of growing pains, but it doesn't take much imagination to see what actually happened as far worse.  Now to make the best of it . . .