Could India be successful as a unified state (no Pakistan) if it had got independence in the 1920s? Could it become an expansionist empire?

[Mario]

As the ideas of creating a separate Muslim state mainly flourished in the 1930s, what could have happened if India would have somehow gained independence in the 1920s, maybe as part of the aftermath of the end of WWI?

- Could it have successfully developed as a unified state, including IOTL Pakistan and Bangladesh?
- Coudl it have retained Burma as a part of it (IOTL Burma was seceded in 1937)?
- Could it have developed expansionist ideals (maybe inspired by Japan) in the 1930s in order to acquire peripheral territories like maybe Ceylon, Tibet, Afghanistan..?

 

[walmart]

- Coudl it have retained Burma as a part of it (IOTL Burma was seceded in 1937)?

Yes

- Could it have developed expansionist ideals (maybe inspired by Japan) in the 1930s in order to acquire peripheral territories like maybe Ceylon, Tibet, Afghanistan..?

No, India will be locked into the British sphere until the 1940s at a minimum.

 

[Mario]

No, India will be locked into the British sphere until the 1940s at a minimum.

This does not prevent some expansionist temptations already coveted by the British like Afghanistan or Tibet.

 

[walmart]

This does not prevent some expansionist temptations already coveted by the British like Afghanistan or Tibet.

There was no desire for expansion beyond the Raj for the INC. so I don’t see why India would want any territorial gains.

 

[Hugh Third of Five]

This does not prevent some expansionist temptations already coveted by the British like Afghanistan or Tibet.

India won't have the naval capacity to invade Sri Lanka. The only way they can get it is if Britain decides to make Ceylon part of India. Similarly even if India gets independence, it will still have the growing pains/phase of firmly establishing itself. They're unlikely to be in the condition to annex Afghanistan, Bhutan, or Tibet during that time. If you can get British India to annex those, though, then Independent India would stand a decent chance of holding them.

 

[ArtosStark]

India is a huge, and very populous nation with a lot of ethnic, religious and cultural diversity. Just figuring out how the new nation is going to work and the political balance between the various interest groups are problems plenty big enough to hold India’s attention without trying to conquer areas that being it little benefit.

Additionally there was a reason that the British did not conquer those areas. Afghanistan, in addition to being a nightmare to administer, was mostly useful to the British as a buffer against Russia. Tibet was much the same to a lesser degree. India has little reason to want to hold them directly.

 

[Peg Leg Pom]

- Could it have developed expansionist ideals

India may want to expand but there's nowhere left to expand to.

 

[stevej713]

This does not prevent some expansionist temptations already coveted by the British like Afghanistan or Tibet.

Afghanistan and Tibet are worthless to India and are not considered culturally or historically Indian. Expanding into either country would be a whole lot of trouble for no considerable benefit and for no discernable purpose.

 

[Johnrankins]

India may want to expand but there's nowhere left to expand to.

There is always the beckoning riches of Afghanistan and Tibet.

 

[Aghasverov]

Well... Independent how? (this idea intrigues me, btw...) Fully "independent", as in breaking away from the UK completely (which I don't see as possible in the 1920's), or a Dominion status, still with a Viceroy with ceremonial powers appointed by the British Monarch but otherwise fully autonomous in every way, on par with the "white" Dominions? This seems more feasible, but still a bit of a stretch in the 1920's.... and there's still the matter of the Princely States to take into consideration....

 

[Mikey]

Yeah - India will have enough internal troubles, plus being fairly short on any real possibilities for expansion - especially depending on the circumstances of independence, which would probably make it either friendly to Britain (ruling out some nearby options) or hostile enough to Britain that it would be a conflict that would be guarded against.

You could imagine, maybe, some kind of alliance with Nazi Germany, which might make it diplomatically possible to fight but there's just not a lot of places to go; it's already a huge empire within its own somewhat natural borders. The Himalayas are going to be a tough slog for faint rewards against China; Afghanistan is famously challenging, and the Iranian border would be Balochistan, a conquest which is maybe achievable in military terms, but a practical problem with few rewards.

 

[Hugh Third of Five]

Afghanistan and Tibet are worthless to India and are not considered culturally or historically Indian. Expanding into either country would be a whole lot of trouble for no considerable benefit and for no discernable purpose.

Pakistan has a large Pashto region and Afghanistan is mostly Pashto, particularly in the southeastern part of the country. I agree an independent India is not going to be in a position to annex it (or anything else for that matter), at least not for several decades by which time who knows how the butterflies will have changed things.

 

[Mario]

Afghanistan and Tibet are worthless to India and are not considered culturally or historically Indian. Expanding into either country would be a whole lot of trouble for no considerable benefit and for no discernable purpose.

Maybe not these whole countries, but I think they could get part of them:

- Once the British are gone, Afghanistan could be partitioned with the Soviet Union (and maybe Iran?) at some point.
- Something similar could be done in Tibet with China, even if in this case probable India would get some smaller regions bordering Kashmir and Arunachal Pradesh.
- India could claim Ceylon to the UK based on the Tamil population living there.
- Nepal and Bhutan could be also claimed at some point, as they were already considered to be in the Indian sphere (similar to what happened IOTL to Sikkim).
- Maybe a bit far-fetched, but the Maldives and the Mascarenes could be also claimed based on cultural affinities. India would need to develop a strong navy first, I agree.

 

[Mario]

This would be an approximated idea to my previous post:

 

[ArtosStark]

Pakistan has a large Pashto region and Afghanistan is mostly Pashto, particularly in the southeastern part of the country. I agree an independent India is not going to be in a position to annex it (or anything else for that matter), at least not for several decades by which time who knows how the butterflies will have changed things.

The Pashtun tribes have historically been a severe pain in the neck for basically everyone who has held dominion over them. Even today there are areas of Pakistan that are only nominally under government control.

Something similar could be done in Tibet with China, even if in this case probable India would get some smaller regions bordering Kashmir and Arunachal Pradesh.

India would have to maintain a hostile province right next to China on the far side of the Himalayas.

 

[aaronupright]

The Pashtun tribes have historically been a severe pain in the neck for basically everyone who has held dominion over them. Even today there are areas of Pakistan that are only nominally under government control.

Not anymore. Its fully integrated into Pakistan since 2018.
Of course, it took a very bloody insurgency that killed thousands and required **checks notes** 2 wings of PAF, 5 Army Aviation Groups, and 3 corps of ground troops to do.
I doubt a United India will be willing to put such resources, Pakistan wasn't, until the situation became intolerable (terror campaigns in Pakistani cities, with daily bomb blasts).

 

[ArtosStark]

Not anymore. Its fully integrated into Pakistan since 2018.

Technically, yes. But the balance of power between the provincial government and the tribal leadership is still a little unclear at times.

 

[aaronupright]

Technically, yes. But the balance of power between the provincial government and the tribal leadership is still a little unclear at times.

Oh there is no lack of clarity. Police, judges, provincial tax collector and administration are already in place, operating and reporting to Peshawar. One of the things the Federal Government did was build up a big communication infrastructure in the erstwhile tribal areas in the last few years. Roads, bridges, plus telecom. The ability of the authorities to enforce their will is much more substantial than ever before and they don’t hesitate.

 

[ArtosStark]

Oh there is no lack of clarity. Police, judges, provincial tax collector and administration are already in place, operating and reporting to Peshawar. One of the things the Federal Government did was build up a big communication infrastructure in the erstwhile tribal areas in the last few years. Roads, bridges, plus telecom. The ability of the authorities to enforce their will is much more substantial than ever before and they don’t hesitate.

Fair enough. I will bow to your knowledge of the current situation.

 

[aaronupright]

My point is that it took a lot of blood and treasure for Islamabad to bring the areas to heel.
It’s very unlikely that New Delhi will be willing to do the same. They will do what Pakistan did pre 9/11. Harden the border against enemy armies, smack down a rebellious tribe as and when needed and otherwise, ignore the place. It’s barren rock and the locals are certifiably insane. No rational cost benefit analysis will come down in favour of trying to establish control.
It needed a very violent Pakistan wide insurgency based out of former FATA to get Pakistan to commit to controlling these areas fully, and after they had exhausted all alternatives sometime multiple times.