Why did East Pakistan keep much more of its Hindus than West Pakistan did after the partition of India?

Futurist

Ad Honoris
May 2014
21,728
SoCal
Why did East Pakistan (later Bangladesh) keep much more of its Hindus than West Pakistan (later just Pakistan) did after the partition of India? In this article, it says this:

https://econweb.ucsd.edu/~prbharadwaj/index/Papers_files/Partition of India - Demographic Impacts June 2009.pdf

"The percentage of Hindus and Sikhs in Pakistan dropped from 17% in 1931 to 2% in 1951. The minority numbers for India and Bangladesh are 12% to 9% and 29% to 21%."

Even today, Bangladesh's Hindu % is much greater than Pakistan's. Anyway, why did much more of East Pakistan's/Bangladesh's Hindus stay after partition than (West) Pakistan's Hindus and Sikhs did? Any thoughts on this?
 

Devdas

Ad Honorem
Apr 2015
4,856
India
Percentage of Hindus was quite high in East Bengal and it didn't face violence like Punjab but still migration pressure from Islamist was always there not just for Hindus but even for Buddhists and Christian tribes of East Bengal. Actually, more than 10 million Hindus had left Bangladesh, in initial years of Pakistan, the Christian Garo tribe also faced acute violence and forced to migrate to India.
 

Futurist

Ad Honoris
May 2014
21,728
SoCal
Percentage of Hindus was quite high in East Bengal and it didn't face violence like Punjab but still migration pressure from Islamist was always there not just for Hindus but even for Buddhists and Christian tribes of East Bengal. Actually, more than 10 million Hindus had left Bangladesh, in initial years of Pakistan, the Christian Garo tribe also faced acute violence and forced to migrate to India.
10 million Hindus sounds like a real stretch. It's possible that this is the figure for the entirety of 1947-2019 but certainly not for only the early years of Bangladesh. Also, were things in Bengal relatively calm after the end of Direct Action Day?
 

Devdas

Ad Honorem
Apr 2015
4,856
India
10 million Hindus sounds like a real stretch. It's possible that this is the figure for the entirety of 1947-2019 but certainly not for only the early years of Bangladesh. Also, were things in Bengal relatively calm after the end of Direct Action Day?
Actually not. Direct Action Day triggered a Pan India riots and revenge riots. Direct Action Day lead to Great Calcutta killing, this was followed by widespread massacre and forced conversion of Hindus in Noakhali in Eastern Bengal. This was followed by anti-Muslim riots in Bihar.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Futurist

Futurist

Ad Honoris
May 2014
21,728
SoCal
Actually not. Direct Action Day triggered a Pan India riots and revenge riots. Direct Action Day lead to Great Calcutta killing, this was followed by widespread massacre and forced conversion of Hindus in Noakhali in Eastern Bengal. This was followed by anti-Muslim riots in Bihar.
Interesting. Was the scale of the violence at least smaller in Bengal than in Punjab, though?
 

Futurist

Ad Honoris
May 2014
21,728
SoCal
Both sides of Punjab were cleansed extremely thoroughly of "enemy" elements in 1947 (with there now being virtually no Hindus and Sikhs living in western Punjab and virtually no Muslims living in eastern Punjab), but the cleansing in Bengal in 1947 was certainly much, much less thorough. Even today, India still has some heavily Muslim areas near its border with Bangladesh:



As for Bangladesh, the data on Wikipedia show that while Bangladesh's Hindu percentage fell from 33% to 9% between 1901 and 2011, in terms of total numbers, there are actually slightly more Hindus in Bangladesh right now than there were in the early 20th century:

Hinduism in Bangladesh - Wikipedia

It's just that the Bengali Muslim population in Bangladesh grew much, much more during the same time period.
 
  • Like
Reactions: prashanth

Devdas

Ad Honorem
Apr 2015
4,856
India
Bengal saw lesser violence compared to Punjab. The Muslims wanted whole of Punjab for themselves while Sikhs and Hindus were adamant not to let this happen. There was too much suspense about the fate of partitioning of Punjab, it was announced 2 days after independence. Sikhs were quite wary that whole of Punjab will become part of an Islamic country.

The partition was made such a way that both East Bengal and West Bengal have 1/3rd population of minority. The Bengali Hindu members were given choice to join India by partitioning Bengal or remain the part of Bengal and join Pakistan. However, post independence era, there was huge influx of Hindus, Christians, Buddhist population into India from East Bengal during 1950-70s period. Hindus, and North-East tribesmen were regularly targeted by Islamists.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Futurist

Futurist

Ad Honoris
May 2014
21,728
SoCal
Bengal saw lesser violence compared to Punjab. The Muslims wanted whole of Punjab for themselves while Sikhs and Hindus were adamant not to let this happen. There was too much suspense about the fate of partitioning of Punjab, it was announced 2 days after independence. Sikhs were quite wary that whole of Punjab will become part of an Islamic country.
Wasn't the same also true in regards to Bengal, though--as in, the Muslims wanting all of it?

The partition was made such a way that both East Bengal and West Bengal have 1/3rd population of minority. The Bengali Hindu members were given choice to join India by partitioning Bengal or remain the part of Bengal and join Pakistan. However, post independence era, there was huge influx of Hindus, Christians, Buddhist population into India from East Bengal during 1950-70s period. Hindus, and North-East tribesmen were regularly targeted by Islamists.
I'm pretty sure that the Bengali Hindu exodus continued after the 1970s as well. At least, that's what I would suspect given the continuing decline in Bangladesh's Hindu percentage since the 1970s.
 
  • Like
Reactions: prashanth

Devdas

Ad Honorem
Apr 2015
4,856
India
Wasn't the same also true in regards to Bengal, though--as in, the Muslims wanting all of it?



I'm pretty sure that the Bengali Hindu exodus continued after the 1970s as well. At least, that's what I would suspect given the continuing decline in Bangladesh's Hindu percentage since the 1970s.
Yes, Muslims wanted all of Bengal, Punjab and Assam, their plan was to get Pakistan until Delhi, some were even dreaming about a trans Gangetic corridor to connect East Pakistan and West Pakistan. Bengal was partitioned earlier also in 1905.

Hindus had been a target of Islamist parties, they are in alliance with Khaleda Zia BNP. last time when Khaleda Zia was elected, there was widespread attacks on Hindus in Bangladesh.
 

Futurist

Ad Honoris
May 2014
21,728
SoCal
Yes, Muslims wanted all of Bengal, Punjab and Assam, their plan was to get Pakistan until Delhi, some were even dreaming about a trans Gangetic corridor to connect East Pakistan and West Pakistan. Bengal was partitioned earlier also in 1905.
Wasn't Delhi something like one-third Muslim before 1947? I wonder what Delhi's Muslim percentage is today. A quick Google search gave me 13% Muslim for Delhi, though I'm unsure if this information is accurate. It does sound realistic, though.

Hindus had been a target of Islamist parties, they are in alliance with Khaleda Zia BNP. last time when Khaleda Zia was elected, there was widespread attacks on Hindus in Bangladesh.
Does Bangladesh actually want to encourage all of its Hindus to emigrate?