【摘要】：印巴分治實(shí)際上包含兩方面的領(lǐng)土劃分:一是英屬印度的分割,二是眾多土邦的歸屬。無論《蒙巴頓宣言》,還是《印度獨(dú)立法》都只對前者做出明確規(guī)定,而對后者卻語焉不詳、甚至有意回避。國大黨和穆斯林聯(lián)盟都希望把更多的領(lǐng)土劃歸各自的自治領(lǐng)。英屬印度領(lǐng)土是英國殖民者按照宗教原則進(jìn)行分割的,故兩個(gè)自治領(lǐng)若想爭取更多的領(lǐng)土,就只能在土邦的歸屬上展開爭奪。對于土邦的歸屬問題,學(xué)者們多從國大黨和英國殖民者的角度進(jìn)行分析,而作為這一過程主要參與者之一的穆盟作用卻沒有得到應(yīng)有的重視。本文主要研究穆盟的不干涉土邦政策及對土邦歸屬的影響,從而深化對土邦歸屬原因的認(rèn)知和理解。
[Abstract]:The partition of India and Pakistan actually includes two aspects of territorial division: one is the division of British India and the other is the attribution of many indigenous states. Neither the Montbatton Declaration nor the Indian Independence Act explicitly defined the former, while the latter were vague and even evasive. Both the Congress Party and the Muslim League want more territory to be subsumed into their own dominion. British Indian territory is divided by British colonists according to religious principles, so if the two dominions want to fight for more territory, they can only compete over the attribution of the indigenous states. Scholars analyze the attribution of the indigenous state from the perspective of the Congress Party and the British colonists, but the role of the Muslim League, as one of the main participants in the process, has not received due attention. This paper mainly studies the policy of non-interference and its influence on the attribution of the upland, so as to deepen the cognition and understanding of the reasons for the attribution of the utopia.
【作者單位】： 首都師范大學(xué)歷史學(xué)院;
【基金】：山西大學(xué)人文社會科學(xué)科研基金(項(xiàng)目編號:0709055)的研究成果
【分類號】：D815

【相似文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 田;;蘇拉瓦底[J];世界知識;1956年19期

2 趙磊;;巴基斯坦大選年透視[J];世界經(jīng)濟(jì)與政治;1994年01期

3 袁維學(xué);巴基斯坦的國旗、國歌、國徽、國花[J];東南亞;1987年04期

4 李家聲 ,趙金川;大選后的巴基斯坦政局[J];w蕓，

本文編號：2170732