In the winter of 1956, British correspondent David Holden found himself among the remnants of British colonial legacy on Bahrain, a protectorate at the time. While he anticipated the intricacies of his Arabian assignment, the reality was a curious tapestry of British India woven through the region, particularly evident in cities like Dubai and Abu Dhabi. Holden's vivid descriptions painted the period cloaked in nostalgia; he noted the presence of Indian customs in daily life and remarked on the lingering influence of the Raj, suggesting it operated like a ghostly presence. With servants often referred to as bearers and the culinary norm featuring hearty curry lunches on Sundays, the memories of British India lingered.
Despite the disconnect with the Indian subcontinent, many figures in the Arabian Peninsula, including the Sultan of Oman—more fluent in Urdu than Arabic—exemplified the cultural bonds that existed. The dynamics of identity were such that even in 1931, when Mahatma Gandhi visited Aden, he encountered young Arabs expressing sentiments of Indian nationalism.
Yet, the intricacies of Indian administration in the Arabian territories were kept shrouded in secrecy by the British. Maps delineating the full expanse of the Indian Empire would carefully omit these Gulf protectorates as a strategy against provoking regional powers, and a notable joke from the Royal Asiatic Society perfectly encapsulated the enigmatic approach.
However, a significant political shift began in the 1920s as Indian nationalists started to reshape their vision of India away from its imperial roots, prompting broader discussions in London about territorial administration. On April 1, 1937, the first partition of British Indian territories occurred with the removal of Aden from India. King George VI's telegram marked the formal severing of ties, an event that dwindled the once-integral connection of the Arabian states with the Indian Empire, though the Gulf remained under Indian jurisdiction until 1947—right before the formation of India and Pakistan.
Despite early discussions on whether the newly independent nations might assume administrative duties over the Gulf, sentiments quickly shifted. The prevailing attitude dismissed the Gulf as not worth the effort for India or Pakistan, leading to the formal division of these Arabian states from indirect rule by April 1, 1947. British Prime Minister Clement Attlee's proposal to withdraw from Arabian territories met with opposition and was overshadowed by the complexities of decolonization, allowing Britain to hold on for another 24 years.
It wasn't until 1971, as Britain scaled back its colonial commitments, that it finally exited the Gulf region completely, removing an anachronistic remnant of its once-sprawling empire. What followed was a remarkable transformation for the Gulf states, which quickly distanced themselves from their British Indian roots and crafted narratives of sovereignty that defined their modern identities. Many Arab states have since cloaked their historical ties to Indian governance, instead fostering a narrative of ancient autonomy.
Yet remnants of this shared history linger. Elder locals in the region still recount stories of their interactions with Indian officials from a bygone era, and the very social dynamics have flipped, with many Indians now forming a substantial portion of the Gulf's workforce.
As Dubai rises as a modern economic powerhouse, it becomes increasingly easy to overlook its past as a small enclave within British India. The decision made in the twilight of colonialism altered the trajectory of the region—where the Gulf states might have been fused to India or Pakistan in post-colonial administration. Today, while their oil-rich prosperity draws multitudes from the subcontinent, the historical echoes of their former ties to India serve as a reminder of a different world that might have been.
