Mentors Comment:

The question has two parts and they are crystal clear in their demands. First you have to discuss what were the challenges that Indian leadership faced while integrating these princely states into Union of India. Secondly what were the mechanisms and steps used to overcome this challenge.

In the intro, discuss the role of princely states in British India.

Then come to the first part of the question and discuss what were the challenges in integrating these states. Religion of rulers and common people, political nature of these states, non clarity from the British while framing rules for these states during independence, sense of independence for the rulers, interference of Pakistan, challenges of Junagadh, Kashmir and Hyderabad will form the key arguments of this part.

Then discuss how Sardar Patel and other leaders moved forward to tackle these challenges. Persuasion, patriotism, tactical diplomacy and force was used to get these states with independent India.

Towards the end, show how all these steps helped forming an unified India with distinct political identity which has held its own even after 73 years of independence.

Model Answer:

While British were leaving India after almost 200 years of ruling, Indian leadership had a large task in their hands: Uniting and Integrating a large of India into a single political unit. This problem was tremendous while dealing with Princely States. Though major part of British India was ruled by British directly still there were many princely states who were ruled by the British indirectly. With partition of India and Pakistan, India still had more than 500 smaller princely states which were not part of the two nations.

The problem in front of Indian leaders was twofold.

• Of transforming the states into viable administrative units;
• Of absorbing them into the constitutional units.

Challenges with Princely States were:

• During the time of proclamation of India’s independence, Britain took a stand that princely states can either join with India or Pakistan or they can remain independent.
• This clause created much confusion.
• For the rulers of princely states they cannot even imagine of ceding their power under Indian constituent Assembly.
• These states followed different administrative methods; some were aristocratic, strong differences between the states themselves, people with different opinions, mindsets and culture to name a few reasons.
• Princely states started demanding independence after lapse of British paramountcy.
• It was argued that after British withdrawal the situation in the Princely states would turn into lawlessness and anarchy and it is important to be associated with a centre of power to handle the situation.
• Emergence of hundreds of independent states would made the struggle of Indian independence futile.
• Therefore integration of princely states became a major agenda for Indian leaders.
• Eventually, rulers of all the 652 states with exception of Junagarh, Kashmir and Hyderabad had signed the instrument of Accession by 15 August, 1947.
• Junagadh Nawab wanted to join Pakistan but his people wanted to join Indian dominion.
• Hyderabad wanted a sovereign status.
• Kashmir had a Hindu prince and a Muslim majority population. The prince envisaged a sovereign status for the state and was reluctant to accede to either India or Pakistan.
• The 3 major issues that impeded the integration process were, firstly their demand for independence, secondly the demand to integrate with Pakistan and finally the problems of administrative integration after political integration.
• Also Pakistan was influencing the decisions of these states by offering financial as well political tools to these states if they acceded in Pakistan. This was a headache for Indian leadership.

How these challenges were overcome:

• To ensure that princely states did not succeed in their bid for independence, Viceroy Lord Mountbatten and Congress leaders initiated deliberations with the rulers.
• Sardar Patel, chief architect of creating Union of India, appealed to the patriotic feeling of rulers to join the Indian dominion in matters of defence, communication and external affairs.
• An Instrument of Accession (IoA) was drafted according to which the rulers agreed to transfer the control of Defence, External Affairs and Communication.
• Various states had joined the Indian Union but other remained precariously outside.
• In case of Hyderabad force was used, in Junagadh plebiscite was conducted and the Maharaja of J&K signed IoA after threat of attack from Pakistan.
• Accession itself did not mean integration. After British withdrawal popular protest grew in the princely states under the States Peoples Congress demanding full democratic representation.
• Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel used this opportunity to negotiate for full integration into India and in exchange he offered to the rulers a tax free privy purses guaranteed under Constitution, the right to retain their titles and their property and palaces.
• Incorporating smaller states into contiguous provinces listed in Part A-Chhattisgarh, Gujarat.
• At the same time making some states as centrally, administered for strategic or special reason listed in Part C-Himachal Pradesh, Manipur, etc.
• In two years from independence full integration was achieved. Apart from the diplomatic tactics of Congress leaders, it was the popular protest and demands that drove the integration process.

Conclusion:

Overall with skillful diplomacy, persuasion and timely use of force, India was able to integrate all the princely states in its territory to integrate with India within few years of Independence. India was able to use better mechanisms through democratic centralized credentials of Indian state for better integration of states thereby bringing in a sense of unity among various states which is everstrong after all these years since independence.