Pak Tea House » Afghanistan, History, India, Pakistan » Ahmad Shah Durrani: A King of High Rank
Ahmad Shah Durrani: A King of High Rank
Eighteenth Century Ruler of Modern Day Afghanistan & Pakistan
By Pervaiz Munir Alvi
[ We are delighted to publish this essay written exclusively for PTH - Ed.]
Ahmad Shah Durrani was born in 1722 as Ahmad Khan Abdali at the city of Multan. By the age of twenty five he had become ruler of the vast territory stretched from Mashhad in the west to the Punjab in the east; the land mass that today roughly forms the modern twin countries of Afghanistan and Pakistan. He rose to power at a time when the Mughal Empire (1526-1857) based in Delhi and the Safavid Empire (1501-1722) based in Isfahan were disintegrating. Ahmad Shah at the expense of these two neighboring but dwindling empires was skillfully able to carve out an empire of his own. His rule although relatively short (1747-1772), was significant in the sense that it ultimately changed the course of the history of the South-Central Asia.
1707 – 1747
During the half century rule (1658-1707) of Alamgir I (Aurangzeb) all territories now forming Pakistan, Kashmir and most of Afghanistan were part of the great Mughal Empire. Upon death of Alamgir I his son Bahadar Shah I succeeded him but five years later he too died fighting Sikh insurgents in Punjab. Soon after that intrigues took over the Palace. Syeds of Bihar had become the most powerful force in the Mughal Court. Two successive emperors, Jahandar Shah and Farokh Siar were murdered and the empire started to crumble from all directions. In the next quarter century multiple insurgencies of Sikh, Jat, Rajput, Marhatta and Rohila Afghans challenged the Mughal rule.
In year 1719, Sultan Roshan Akhtar, a grandson of Bahadar Shah I and great-grandson of Alamgir I, under the title of Mohammad Shah (1719-1748) was installed as emperor. In order to neutralize the Syeds, Mohammad Shah established two parties of courtiers; a Turkic party under Chin Kulin Khan and a Persian party under Saadat Ali. Over the course of time these two noblemen and their respective descendants will play a significant role in the affairs of the Mughal Empire and would routinely interact with the Persian and Afghan monarchs in the west. In 1738, overwhelmed by the internal and the external troubles, these two courtiers of the Mughal emperor asked Nadir Shah Afshar of Persia to intervene. Nadir Shah attacked Delhi in 1738 and forced Emperor Mohammad Shah, to handover all territories west of the River Indus to the Persians.
Ahmad Khan Abdali at that time was only a young soldier in the Persian army of Nadir Shah who had given precedence to Abdali tribesmen over their rival the Ghilzais. However within a very short time Ahmad Khan Abdali rose from the level of Yasawal (personal servant) to the king to the rank of commander of Abdali regiment. When Nadir Shah died in 1747 at the hands of the Qizalbash (red-turbans) soldiers wary of the growing Abdali influence, Ahmad Khan provided security to the family of the late king. In October 1747 at a location near mausoleum of Muslim saint Sheikh Surkh, adjacent to Fort Nadirabad-Kandahar, Ahmad Khan called a meeting (Jirga) of tribal elders. At the meeting, under his new name Ahmad Shah Abdali, he announced himself as a leader of the Pashtun tribes. Haji Jamal Khan Mohammadzai, the other contender to the leadership withdrew his claim. Pir Sabir Shah, the spiritual guide of Pashtun tribes validated the selection by showering his praise for the young Ahmad Shah Abdali and declared him Durr-e-Durran (pearl of the pearls); hence the beginning of the name Durrani.
1747 – 1754
Following his mentor Nadir Shah, Ahmad Shah took control of Kandahar, Ghazna, Kabul and Peshawar. By December 1747 the provinces of Frontier, Kashmir, Punjab, Sindh and Balochistan – the areas roughly constituting Pakistan – were all under his control. On March 3rd 1748 Durrani and Mughal forces confronted each other near the city of Sirhind in east Punjab. Mughal forces were led by the Crown Prince and various members of the families of Chin Kulin Khan and Saadat Ali. On March 11th 1748 Durrani forces were defeated but at the end of the battle day, the leader of the Mughal forces Grand Vazir Qamar-ud-din, a son of Chin Kulin Khan died by a round shot while praying. Five days later on April 16th 1748 hearing the death of his Grand Vazir, the Mughal emperor Mohammad Shah also died seized by a strong convulsion. Soon after that Chin Kulin Khan, who had become Nizam of Deccan also died. The Crown Prince, a son of Mohammad Shah from his Hindu wife Udam Bai, under the title of Ahmad Shah (not to be confused with Ahmad Shah Abdali) became the new emperor (1748-1754). He appointed Safdar Jang, a nephew of Saadat Ali as Grand Vazir as well as Nawab of Audh and Nasir Jang, a son of Chin Kulin Khan as new Nizam of Deccan.
Abdali meanwhile, after securing eastern territories turned his attention westward and in 1750-51 captured the Persian cities of Herat, Nishapur and Mashhad. However in 1751 he had to return to Lahore to quell Sikh insurgencies. In 1752 he marched on Kashmir to consolidate his control. Soon after that the Mughal emperor made his peace with Abdali and formally ceded to him the provinces of Lahore and Multan. Abdali in return allowed Moin-ud-din (commonly known as Mir Mannu), a son of Qamar-ud-din and grandson of Chin Kulin Khan to be the governor of Punjab as an appointee of the Mughal emperor. This peace deal marks the end of the two and a quarter century long (1524-1748) rule of the Timurids over the land now constituting Pakistan. For the next two centuries (1748-1947) the country will be successively ruled by the Afghans, Sikhs, English and various petty Nawabs, Khans and Maharajas.
After the loss of the north-western part of the empire, the Mughal court once again slipped into internal intrigues and chaos. An open war ensued between the Turkic party and the Persian party in which Turks prevailed and another son of late Qamar-ud-din became the Grand Vazir. In their struggles for supremacy each party on its part sought support of Marhatta, Jat and Rohila Afghan outsiders. Finally Shahab-ud-din, another grandson of Chin Kulin Khan and a cousin of Mir Mannu prevailed over all others. He declared himself as Grand Vazir and on June 5th 1754 deposed and blinded Emperor Ahmad Shah and put him in prison. On July 1754 another great-grandson of Alamgir I and a son of the late Emperor Jahandar Shah at the age of 54 was enthroned as Alamgir II. In Audh, Safdar Jang the nephew of late Saadat Ali too died on October 17th 1754, leaving Shahab-ud-din uncontested. By this time the once mighty Mughal Empire had been reduced just to the areas now called Utter Pradesh in India.
1754 – 1757
Mir Mannu the governor of Punjab had died in November 1753 in a horse fall. Abdali made his minor son Timur Shah governor of Punjab but left the administration in the hands of the widow of Mir Mannu and her Hindu aid known as Adina Baig. Not pleased with this change, Mughal Grand Vazir (Shahab-ud-din) decided to march on Lahore in the company of Crown Prince Mirza Ali Gouhar, took widow and daughter of Mir Mannu (whom he later married) and made Adina Baig commissioner of Lahore. Abdali, obviously furious by these actions, returned to Lahore and then marched on Delhi for the second time. Twenty miles outside Delhi the two armies faced each other; only this time a major segment of the army of Emperor Alamgir II under the command of one Najib Khan, a Rohila Afghan soldier of fortune, moved over to the Abdali side as expected guests.
On September 11, 1757 Abdali entered Delhi and took over the affairs of the government. However before returning to his capital Kandahar, Abdali married a daughter of the late emperor Mohammad Shah and at the same time married his son Timur Shah to a daughter of Crown Prince Mirza Ali Gouhar; thus establishing his own family relations with the Mughal royal family. At the intervention of the widow of Mir Mannu victorious Abdali pardoned the Grand Vazir and the two agreed to join hands against other common enemies. He also made Najib Khan in charge of the Palace while a part of Abdali forces was left behind to safeguard Durrani interests. Timur Shah returned to Lahore as Durrani governor of Punjab. During this period at the orders of Ahmad Shah Abdali a set of two large size cannons were cast at Lahore. Surviving cannon of the pair, by the name of Zamzama now sits in front of the Lahore Museum for the public display.
1757 – 1761
Once Abdali back in Kandahar, the Grand Vazir (Shahab-ud-din) with the help of hired Marhatta mercenaries expelled Najib Khan from the Palace, and conspired against Crown Prince Mirza Ali Gouhar and his son-in-law Timur Shah. Mirza Gouhar was imprisoned from where he escaped. Timur Shah was chased out of Lahore by Adina Baig with the help of Marhattas. At the same time the Emperor Alamgir II was murdered by the men of the Grand Vazir in November 1759 by deceit and another great-grandson of Alamgir I and grandson of Prince Kam Buksh under the title of Shah Jahan II was declared emperor. However in Bihar the fugitive Crown Prince Mirza Ali Gouhar also took the name of Shah Alam and declared himself as the rightful emperor. Abdali had no choice but to return to Delhi for the third time. He cleared Punjab of the Marhattas and then marched on to Delhi. The Grand Vazir fled in time and abandoned the city in advance of Ahmad Shah. When Abdali left the deserted city for his camp at Anup Shahr, to fill in the vacuum, Marhattas with the help of Rajputs and Jats took over Delhi in the December of 1759. The stage was set for another showdown.
The summer of 1760 was used by the two sides in building alliances, war preparation and troop movement. On one side was the Hindu Marhatta Confederacy and on the other side was the Muslim Mughal-Afghan Alliance. On October 17th 1760 combined Muslim army consisting of Rohila Afghans under Najib Khan, Mughals under Nawab Shuja-ud-daula of Audh and Durrani forces, all under the leadership of Ahmad Shah Abdali made its move. First encounter between the advance troops from the both sides took place on October 26th. For the next two months small and large party duels and skirmishes continued, each adding to the Marhatta losses of men, ammunition and provisions. Finally, hungry cold and exhausted, on the night of January 6th 1761 the Marhattas took a desperate decision. One hour before dawn they would take their last meal, paint their faces saffron and meet the enemy head-on ready to die.
Ahmad Shah Abdali was in bed when at 3:00 A.M. his spies broke the news. The Marhattas had opened fire. Throughout the morning hours the Muslim army took fire but stood its ground. By 1:00 P.M. Abdali gave orders to charge forward. By 3 o’clock the Marhatta forces were cut down with their chiefs either slain or on the run. Victorious Muslim allies moved back into Delhi. Fugitive emperor Shah Alam was recognized as the legitimate heir to the Mughal throne. In the absence of Shah Alam, his eldest son Mirza Jawan Bakht under the protection of Najib Khan was made the nominal charge of the affairs. Shuja-ud-daula returned to Audh as new Grand Vazir. Abdali returned to Lahore and then to Kabul and Kandahar. Defeated Marhatta for the next eight years did not make any more attempts on Delhi.
1761-1772
Between 1761 and 1767 Ahmad Shah had to fight off many Sikh insurgencies in Punjab. With Emperor Shah Alam unable to return to Delhi, the capital was managed by Najib as regent of Crown Prince Jawan Bukht. However Najib was continuously being threatened by the Jats. Abdali had to return to Delhi one more time to assist Najib Khan and Prince Jawan Bukht. In April 1767 Durrani forces arrived outside Delhi for the fourth time. However soon after his return, Marhatta started to gain strength. Towards the end of 1768 they made some advancement and by 1769 once again started to threaten Delhi. In 1770 Najib Khan entered into some territorial accommodation with Marhattas soon after which he died at the age of sixty two and his place was taken over by his son Zabita Khan. By 1770-71 Marhattas were able to make a comeback. Only this time Abdali did not return to help Mughals. Zabita Khan fled the capital. Emperor Shah Alam with the help of Marhattas returned to his capital after an absence of eleven years.
Ahmad Shah Abdali, the founder of the Durrani Empire, died at the city of Murghah in 1772 at a relatively young age of fifty. Reportedly in 1764 he had developed a face cancer which ultimately took his life. Upon his death his son Timur Shah became the next Emperor. But soon after that the Durrani Empire started to disintegrate. Punjab, the most precious holding was wrestled away by the Sikhs. Timur Shah died in 1793. For the next thirty years five different but ineffective sons of Timur Shah ruled the much reduced kingdom from Kabul till in 1823, Ayub Shah, the last Durrani king was deposed and possibly killed. Today millions in Afghanistan and Pakistan identify themselves of the Durrani heritage.
Ahmad Shah Abdali, the founder of Durrani Empire is buried in his native city Kandahar where his imposing mausoleum as a testimony to his greatness still stands with an epitaph:
The king of high rank, Ahmad Shah Durrani
_______________________________
Main Source: The Fall of the Mughal Empire By: H.G. Keene, Oxford, 1887.
Filed under: Afghanistan, History, India, Pakistan · Tags: Afghanistan, Ahmed Shah Durrani, India, Jat, Kandahar, Marhatta, Mir Mannu, Mughals, Multan, Nadir Shah, NWFP, Pakistan, pashtun, Punjab, Rohilla, Sikh Uprising, Zamzama
77 Responses to "Ahmad Shah Durrani: A King of High Rank"
Leave a Reply
Recent Comments
- kaalchakra
said Tajender, to their credit, TTP have played not a... - Ex-Paki
said Tajender,
muslim rulers absorb themselve in indian... - Ex-Paki said Maggu,
Only a narrow visioned person like you will...
- Ex-Paki said Maggu,
Only a narrow visioned person like you will...
- Marlene
said I absolutely love your blog and find nearly all of... - tajender
said rex an interesting intructions from london to brit... - Satbir Singh Bedi
said Will the new Pakistan Govt. enforce the following... - tajender
said Rex Minor says:
May 8, 2013 at 9:21 pm
Imran Kh... - sex on webcam said An impressive share! I’ve just forwarded thi...
- MilesToGo
said http://youtu.be/WxBfcusJRP0
@Hayyer
There are just two things that Indians need to do which will change things drastically.
They need to be united the way they never were before.
They need to believe in themselves like they never did before.
India has existed as a single state on two occassions (the British had left 1/3rd to the princely states) Aurenzeb and Ashoka ..otherwise it’s always been fragmented in one way or the other.
history may have been very different if Ahmad Shah had actually replaced the Mughals with a new Afghan dynasty..he may well have lost Afghanistan and Punjab in the process.
@Pma
i think gorki has answered your question for me.
Gorki (November 30, 2009 at 11:15 am):
Thanks for taking time and posting your comments. I agree with some of your points and disagree with other. I agree with you that Abdali was not a Muslim nationalist or a religious holy warrior in the modern sense. He was out to build his own empire at the expense of Isfahan as well as Delhi, both under Muslim control at that time. But it did not loose on him where to find political and military support for his cause.
By 1738 Delhi had already lost all of its territories west of Indus to the Persians. Abdali upon his ascension quickly captured Kashmir, Punjab and Sindh. I believe Abdali was a sharp political and military mind. He made political calculations a century ahead of the Muslim leadership of the post-1857 India. He had successfully forged political consensus among Afghan, Pashtun and Baloch tribes west of Indus to his favor. East of Indus his imperial ambitions did not extend beyond Kashmir, Punjab and Sindh. Why?
By mid eighteenth century demographically ‘east bank’ of Indus was pretty much Muslim dominated and politically still under the control of various Muslim Nawabs, Khans and Mirs. After subjugating them, he expediently made political and military alliances with local Muslim chiefs against Sikhs; one example being Mir Mannu. His biggest challenge within ‘east bank’ west of Sirhind only came from the emerging Sikhs of Punjab.
His attitude towards Mughals beyond ‘east bank’ was different. There he made alliances with the Rohilla Afghans and Mughals and helped the ‘Emperor’ to maintain his throne. He married himself and his son Timur into the royal family. His support for Ahmad Shah (Mughal), Alamgir II, Shah Alam and Prince Jawan Bukht is well documented.
However I disagree with your point that “had there been no Panipat III or even Abdali, the areas that are current day Pakistan would probably not have been much different.”
Had there not been Abdali the history of the sub-continent would have been very very different. Chances are that the Marhattas (with or without Mughal factions) would have been the masters of India. There would have been no Sikh kingdom and most likely no British Indian Empire (as we know it) and certainly no Pakistan.
Therefor I disagree with you that “his role importance to the history of the people of the present day Pakistan is fleeting at the best.” I maintain that for the areas now constituting Pakistan, 1747 is just as important and significant as 1947. The first date marks the end of the Mughal Empire and second the end of the British Empire.
@PMA,
Even if the Marathas had become the masters of India, it is doubtful whether they would have been able to maintain this for long.
They were not very good on people skills and had alienated all the Jats and Rajputs. They were also on hostile terms with the Rohillas and ali Vardi Khan.
In all likelihood, the British would still have conquered India.
Both Majumdar Da and Milind Kher are right.
The Mughals were finished anyway, Panipat III or not.
As I mentioned, Abdali too had only a very peripheral role (even in the medium term) in the affairs of the lands that later on became India and Pakistan.
It is my personal opinion that even as far as the Marathas went, the contribution to their decline by Panipat III is over estimated when one keeps in mind three other battles and dates, Plassey, Buxar and Yorktown in 1757, 1764 and 1781 respectively.
The first two ensured that a new military and political power, far modern than anything seen in India had made up its mind to become a dominant political rather than an economic only power. Once that happened, the native powers (who were still not very different either organisationly or militarily, than what they were during Panipat II) stood no chance and the final outcome was not in doubt.
Looking at it another way, the native powers, (Marathas and Afghans) already out of the semi finals and Panipat III was like playing for the 5th and 6th spot only.
Yorktown surrender in 1781 is important in that it sealed the fate of the British in America and forced them to concentrate on founding colonial empires elsewhere with a renewed vigor.
Incidently Lord Cornawallis (who was later the victorious general over Tipu Sultan) was the very same gentleman who feigned illness on the day his forces surrendered to the Americans under George Washingtion so as not to have to physically hand over his sword in surrender. The Americans let him off far easily than he did Tipu.
Regards.
@Gorki,
I agree with you. Yes, the Brits did not have a choice other than concentrating elsewhere.
To look at another aspect of British rule, people have always talked about how shrewd and savvy they were. The fact remains that they had awesome courage too.
Subjugating the Sikhs and the Marathas and routing Tipu sultan was not the easiest of tasks. And yes, in world War II, the Brits whipped the Nazis.
We can hate them as much as we like, but they had what it takes.
the very same gentleman who feigned illness
he was an employee in the public sector then, and the private sector later.
PMA Sahib:
I saw your remarks after I had posted mine. Did not mean to ignore you in my fist post. My response is there anyway.
BC: As long as mankind is around, some things will never change.
Await any other asides, anecdotes YOU may have on this topic.
Regards.
Gorki (November 30, 2009 at 9:49 pm):
In order to properly understand Abdali, we have to separate his political and military ambitions and roles ‘west’ and ‘east’ of Sirhind. He saw ‘west’ as his rightful empire and wanted to strengthen Mughal-Afghan control in the ‘east’ as long as Mughals did not challenge him in the ‘west’. He understood Marhattas as a major threat to both his Durrani Empire and to the Mughal Empire no mater how diminishing were the Mughals. You will agree with me that after Abdali, Sikhs were able to emerge in the absence of Marhatta threat. You could say that ‘Mughals were finished’, but factions of Mughal Empire, as we see in the case of Abdali Military Alliance of 1760 were still capable of fending off Marhatta Confederacy. If you read my article one more time, you will see that real ‘villain’ of the story is the scheming Mughal Grand Vazir Shahab-ud-din. In writing this piece I had consulted a number of sources. Most Afghans sources tend to glorify and magnify the historical role of Abdali. Similarly most Indian try to minimize his historical importance and cast him in the role of a villain. The truth perhaps lie somewhere in the middle. But now the discussion is entering into personal opinions and in the realm of ‘could have, should have’. So let it be. Thanks for taking part in the discussions.
@mk
last i checked it was the yanks who whipped the nazis — and a very cold and bleak moscow winter…
remember dunkirk!!!
@gv,
Two defining events:
1. The Battle of Britain
2. The landing at Normandy.
This is not to deny what you are talking about.
@mk
fair enough – i’d just like to think it was more of a collective effort then a single handed british victory.. especially normandy..
“His biggest challenge within ‘east bank’ west of Sirhind only came from the emerging Sikhs of Punjab.”
PMA Sahib: You nailed it. Everything else was a side show.
Regards.
“I was trying to approach your idea of an Indian identity on the basis of some commonly accepted markers. You say they are unnecessary. Why and what do we substitute for them?”
Hayyer Sahib:
A belief in secularism, and in the constitution of India that guarantees that would be enough.
Thanks to the media revolution of the closing decade of the 20th century, identity (and ideas)will continue to homogenize across wide zones, political unity or not.
Just look at us on the PTH
Regards.
Gorki (December 1, 2009 at 12:50 am):
Let us say that Abdali saw Sikhs as internal threat to his Durrani Empire and Marhattas as external threat to both his and the remnants of Mughal Empire which he was trying to prop up. His failures are that he had unworthy successors in Kandahar and unworthy partners in Delhi. But if you think that his Delhi expeditions were sideshow, then I am afraid you have missed the gist of the Durrani period altogether.
Hayyer: References have been made here to Ashoka, Alamgir and Brits. Theirs were the empires whereas modern day India and Pakistan are federated republics with written constitutions. Bangladesh is a republic but not a federation whereas Kashmir is an occupied territory.
Hayyer,
“I was trying to approach your idea of an Indian identity on the basis of some commonly accepted markers. You say they are unnecessary. Why and what do we substitute for them?”
Our constitution is a very good marker. As you said, our country is a work in progress and it forever will be. To doubt, to criticize, and then to improve should be our mantra. I guess, one can never go wrong with that. That would also cure the inner rottenness.
Guys one shouldn’t either overestimate or underestimate abdali and Panipat..yes the marathas recovered swiftly afterwards but it still remains a defining event because it marked the end of the myth of their invincibility, much like battles like lepanto or stalingrad.
Similarly, it left a major psychological impact on both the British East India company and the Mughal elite. The EIC acknowledged Durrani as “King of Kings” in correspondence, it led to them sending teams to strike an alliance with the “Kingdom of Kabul” against possible French or Russian advances and when during Shah Zemans time the afghans once again considered invading India ..the British went to extraordinary lengths to forestall the invasion including encouraging the Shah of Iran to attack Afghanistan. (Tipu Sultan and others pleaded with the Afghans to intervene against the British)
Also even as late as 1857 rumours were flying around amongst the rebels of an invasion from east that had routed the EIC..(tragic because it was the Punjab that provided the bulk of the troops to capture delhi)
Dr. Gorki:
“A belief in secularism, and in the constitution of India that guarantees that would be enough.
Thanks to the media revolution of the closing decade of the 20th century, identity (and ideas)will continue to homogenize across wide zones, political unity or not.”
A belief in secularism and the ideas behind the Indian Constitution are enough to make one a citizen of the world. There is nothing specifically Indian about the two.
Homogeneity will eventually come to the whole world as a result of the media, the internet and easier travel, unless visas hold them up. Nothing India specific about that either.
The danger of a homogeneity specific to India is that it will be either be a Bollywood type mongrel, or a deracinated western style found in the metros. I prefer the latter though, if offered a choice.
PMA:
Theirs were the empires whereas modern day India and Pakistan are federated republics with written constitutions. Bangladesh is a republic but not a federation whereas Kashmir is an occupied territory.
I am not convinced that they are not empires posing as republics, except for Bangladesh. Kashmir is not occupied territory. India went in on an invitation from the Maharaja who did not make it conditional on a subsequent plebiscite. That was in the Indian acceptance on Mountbatten’s advice.
Amit:
“Our constitution is a very good marker. As you said, our country is a work in progress and it forever will be. To doubt, to criticize, and then to improve should be our mantra. I guess, one can never go wrong with that. That would also cure the inner rottenness.”
On the constitution my remarks to Gorki explain my point.
I have nothing at all against positivist views on nation building. I had only outlined the normative necessities. It is a work in progress and like any patriotic Indian I wish it success with all my heart, but that does not blind me to the conventional normative requirements.
Hayyer,
“Homogeneity will eventually come to the whole world as a result of the media, the internet and easier travel, unless visas hold them up. Nothing India specific about that either.”
You are right and that should answer your question about the federal vs central structure. It would just follow the utopian ideal that the world is one family. After all, we were the first to say “vasudhev kutumbkum.”
There will always be some problem. The important question is what direction are we taking. The constitution, as I said, is a fabulous document to follow.
whereas modern day India and Pakistan are federated republics with written constitutions
no one has told our soldier emperors or general shahi that. they still think they run an empire. even kayani has shown over the last couple of years that he has great difficulty reading the written constitution.
Amit:
But we are also the first to degrade entire nations to untouchability. That does not sit very well with ‘Vasudev Kutukbkum’ does it?
It took, what, 2000 years from entry through Khyber or Bolan to descent to Tirunelvelli. Over those two millenia nearly everything the invader encountered became untouchable unless it could be absorbed and assimilated. Rather like the Borg, don’t you think?
“A belief in secularism and the ideas behind the “Indian Constitution are enough to make one a citizen of the world. There is nothing specifically Indian about the two.
Homogeneity will eventually come to the whole world as a result of the media, the internet and easier travel, unless visas hold them up. Nothing India specific about that either.”
Dear Hayyer Sahib:
Agree with above and I can happily live with that. In fact, in my reading between the lines of the Indian Constitution, I think that is the ultimate goal. I believe Amit and I are basically saying the same thing, except he stated it more eloquently.
As India and Indians become more self confident, becoming a citizen of the world should not dilute their Indianness or any other identity that they may want to be associated with. It is another thing that not everyone in the world sees things this way.
That is OK with me too, as long as they leave us (Indian\World citizens) alone and not insist that we follow their worldview.
PMA and Hayyer Sahib:
How does one decide what is occupied territory and what is not?
I can understand Palestine but is Kashmir?
Then what about Jammu and Ladakh?
Or Baluchistan?
Or even Tibet and Xinjiang?
Kurdistan?
Is Quebec occupied? or California and Texas; the entire United States?
Or may be I am asking the wrong question.
Is the 20th century nationalism relevant anymore?
Regards.
Hayyer,
“But we are also the first to degrade entire nations to untouchability. That does not sit very well with ‘Vasudev Kutukbkum’ does it?”
That is the inner rottenness that I was talking about.
Thank you Gorki for your comments.
Gorki sahib
In my opinion yes from blochstan to qubec they are all occupied teritorries!
A new pashtun dominated entity encompassing afghanistan, pakhtoonkhwa, balochistan and gilgit-baltistan is about to emerge by 2020.