Junagadh State
former princely state in India From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Remove ads
Junagadh was a princely state in Gujarat ruled by Muslim rulers in British India until it became part of India in 1948.[1]
Remove ads
History
Mohammad Sher Khan Babi, a Babi Khel Pathan who owed allegiance to the Mughal governor of Gujarat subah, founded the state of Junagadh. It declared independence in 1730 after the Marathas Gaikwad invasion. Muhammad Sher Khan Babi, was the founder of the Babi Dynasty of Junagadh State dynasty. His descendants, the Babi Nawabs of Junagadh, took large territories in southern Saurashtra and ruled over the state for the next two centuries. First they were a tributary state of Marathas. Later they were under the rule of the British Raj.
In 1807 the Junagadh State became a British protectorate. The East India Company took control of the state by 1818. The Saurashtra area, with other princely states of Kathiawar, were separately administered under Kathiawar Agency by British India.
On 15 August 1947 upon the independence of India, the Nawab of Junagarh decided to merge it into newly formed Pakistan.[1] The Indian government maintained the people of Junagadh should decide. Pakistan waited until 13 September to respond saying they accepted Junagarh's acceptance of Pakistani rule.[1] This caused a general revolt among the Hindu majority of Junagadh as well as protest movements in the surrounding states that had acceded to join India.[1] The Nawab then occupied territory in several of those states claiming he had rule over them. When the Indian government sent a small force to restore order, the Nawab fled to Pakistan. His Dewan (Prime minister) agreed to rule by India.[1] This resulted in the integration of Junagadh into India.[2]
Rulers
The Nawabs of Junagadh belonged to Pathan Babi khel tribe. They were granted a 13 gun salute by the British authorities:[3]
- 1730 - 1758 : Mohammad Bahadur Khanji or Mohammad Sher Khan Babi[4]
- 1758 - 1774 : Mohammad Mahabat Khanji I
- 1774 - 1811 : Mohammad Hamid Khanji I
- 1811 - 1840 : Mohammad Bahadur Khanji I
- 1840 - 1851 : Mohammad Hamid Khanji II
- 1851 - 1882 : Mohammad Mahabat Khanji II
- 1882 - 1892 : Mohammad Bahadur Khanji II
- 1892 - 1911 : Mohammad Rasul Khanji
- 1911 - 1948 : Mohammad Mahabat Khanji III (last de facto ruler)
 |
 |
 |
 |
Remove ads
Dispute
Many in Pakistan still maintains the 1948 plebiscite and rule by India was an illegitimate action.[5] One of the reasons is because Kashmir at the time was ruled by a Hindu but had a clear Muslim majority.[5] By acceding to India it was the opposite of the situation in Junagadh.[5]
For its part India knew Junagadh was the premier state in the western Kathiawar region. It was bound on three sides by states that acceded to India.[6] On the fourth side was bounded by the Arabian Sea. This gave it great strategic importance to both countries. India was not prepared to accept Junagadh's acceding to Pakistan.[6] This would create a Pakistan state in the middle of Indian states. India's taking administrative control of Junagadh to restore order is seen as a pretext by Pakistan.[6] The referendum taken by the people of Junagadh, under the control of the Indian army, was overwhelmingly in favor of Indian rule.[6] Pakistan has never accepted this vote by the people there and believes Junagadh rightly belongs to them.[6]
Pakistan's legitimacy claim
Pakistan's government has maintained its territorial claim on Junagadh, along with Manavadar and Sir Creek in Gujarat, on its official political map issued on 4th August 2020.[7][8]
- Ethnic group: Kutchis
- Proposed state:
Junagadh state - Junagadh Rajya Mukti Morcha (JRMM), Saurashtra sovereign Movement, Junagadh People's Liberation Front (JPLF), Junagadh Muslim League (JML), Junagadh Socialist Collective, plus the Porbandar Republic Movement; Wants a coastal microstate breakaway (mini separatist!)
International reactions
Pakistan: Islamabad would be in a bind, might morally support the breakaway rhetorically — Junagadh is part of their Official map reviving historical claims, but now the locals want Independence instead of Re-joining Pakistan respectively. But limited capacity to act and thereafter it issues a diplomatic mission there.
EU: Brussels is cautious about supporting Junagadh's secession without broad International consensus, and would be legally inconsistent and diplomatically reckless; Catalonia, Scotland, Kosovo, Crimea—all examples where the EU has struggled to balance Self-determination vs. Territorial integrity in it's own sphere of influence.
USA: Washington D.C.; The Americans was new to South Asian affairs post-WWII and generally followed British leads. It supported non-intervention, respecting the Decolonisation process, it also saw India's move as logical but avoided taking a formal stance, urging bilateral resolution possibly via dialogue or courts also monitoring for Human rights abuses and foreign interference (from Pakistan and countering P.R. China), it would be reluctant to pressure the Indians heavily in this regard.
UK: London; The British were nominally neutral in 1947 post-Independence but privately sympathised with the Dominion of India's position, seeing it's formal accession to Pakistan (West) as impractical, especially given Junagadh's geography, as they were winding down their colonial role, recognized the pragmatism of India's actions. It further likely to dismiss the legitimacy of any breakaway attempt, citing International Law (Montevideo Convention); criteria not met, absence of Indian consent, expressing concern over Human rights if India's response is heavy-handed but would not back secession or its aspirations.
United Nations: New York; Recognition is Debated. No full recognition but UN Human Rights Council opens observer mission.
Remove ads
References
Other websites
Wikiwand - on
Seamless Wikipedia browsing. On steroids.
Remove ads