Indian delusion for power

Indian delusion for power 

Present day ‘Indians’ suffer with a pathetic obsession for recognition as a political and military power. They are the only people who talk it rather loudly and with so little to justify it. Greatness does not come through bragging or begging nor at the cost of others. Unfortunately, however, in this obsessive quest they have and continue to employ the most unscrupulous tradecraft in true Kautiliyan traditions to glorify their nebulous past and build-up an image of dubious greatness through deceit, falsities and distortions. That in applying these Kautiliyan virtues, the Indian rulers not only misguide and brain-wash the ignorant and simple minded people but also indulge in bluff and intimidation through cheap propaganda and rumour mongering. 

It is a pity that many including quite a few amongst educated Pakistanis fall victim to this deception and charade. Our failure to promote education and spread of knowledge, particularly our lack of interest in history have been the main cause of our weak national confidence and made us vulnerable to false and distorted propaganda. Though it seems ironical but factually every crisis or problem, however, petty tends to shake our very existence and bring us at the very brink. It is a sad reflection on our national leadership and their inability to discern truth from history whose evaluation and application continue to suffer with dogmatic reservations. Its time that we put our feet on ground. 

Recently in a spurt of national fervour,  the Indians changed the names of two of their great cities; Bombay and Madras, both exclusive British contributions. The new names are those of two obscure and insignificant fishing villages on whose foundations the two mega cities had supposedly sprung. But their national pride does not get hurt by identifying their country as ‘India’ or calling themselves as ‘Indians’, both being British in origin and usage. They would not like to call their country ‘Hindustan’ or themselves ‘Hindustanis’ though this was the mark of identity for a thousand years (including the early British period), because this identity was given by and is associated with the Muslim rulers! But sadly still and much against their heart’s desire, it could not be replaced with the vedic ‘Bharata’, because historically it constituted so little of India (Jamuna-Ganges Doab) which cuts at the very root of their elusive dream of greatness. It is, therefore, so expedient to accept the well-known and widely glorified colonial identity, even though its creation resulted from the British swords and guns. Happily for the Indians, the British had gone and the inheritance of British colonial identity and power became a justifiable ground for imperial pretence, even impertinence. 

Now, the seemingly ordinary and nebulous Hindu history and its culture could be built in a sub-continental mould by clever borrowing and mixing to create “Indian Culture and Civilization” and to project Hindu greatness. Buddhism became a mere deviation from Hinduism and its great contributions and glories were impounded to propagate and build-up the image of Hindu India and its cultural influence from Oxus to Mekong. Hindu writers freely plagiarized Buddhist philosophy and architecture, decrying it as India’s contribution to world culture. Buddhism which rose as a social rebellion in the very Hindu heartland, miserably failed there but spread through Gandhara to Central Asia and China and eventually embraced half of known humanity with its own distinct philosophy, social attitude and culture. Despite the unpleasant causes of its demise amongst the Hindus of Northern India whose cruel practices drove the Great Gautama to ethereal revelations and discoveries, Buddhist achievements are impudently appropriated as Indian (Hindu) achievements. With so little to show of their own in the Indian heartland, the Indian writers stretch themselves over-board to find Hindu influence in the numerous great Buddhist temples and viharas throughout Asia. And all this with the strict religious sanctions against crossing the two flanking rivers and the ‘black’ water! But nearer home, Hindu prejudice and animosity exclude equally great contributions made by the Muslim and British rulers to Indian culture during the last thousand years. To many Hindu writers this constitutes the ‘darkest period’ of Indian History! These are too peculiar and distinct to be called Hindu or Indian and, therefore, consistently undermined, insinuated and even ignored being taunting displays of alien arrogance from the hated invaders. 

To the radical Hindus (and their strength is increasing rapidly —think of the BJP’s rise to political power), India is for the ‘indigenous Indians; all others are aliens and invaders (singling out the Muslims since the British have gone). In emphasizing it, they assume of course that the invading Aryans, the proud ancestors of the high-cast Hindus, sprung out of the bowels of Gangetic Valley! In their highly selective presentation of Indian History, they do not correctly account for the successive waves of Aryan invasion spread over a millennium, in which considerably large and powerful Aryan tribes actually settled down in the areas referred to in the oldest vedic scriptures as ‘Septa Sindhu’ meaning the land of the seven rivers (including Kabul and the Indus with the five rivers of Punjab) and who still constitute the bulk of the people of this region. They were the ‘Rig-vedic Aryans’ who fought the great legendary ‘Battle of the Ten Kings’ around 1100 B.C. with the conglomerate of the Gangetic tribes a few miles east of Beas and decided the earliest division of India. They were the rebels and the earliest political rivals who would not accept the tribal hegemony of the heartland India. It is, therefore, no surprise to find these proud and freedom loving Aryans being hurled with abuses and frequently referred to as ‘outlandish, barbaric and arrogant’ in the later vedas and declared outcasts from Mano’s Dharma. Since the descendants of Bharata have regained political power in India in 1947, they have revived the old traditions! And what about the original inhabitants, the truly indigenous Indians, the Dravidians - the Sudras and the untouchables of the vedas? Never mind, their social status was divinely fixed. They did not exist; they were created and absorbed as a part of Brahmanic order to suffer their ‘karma’ miserably and infinitely (notwithstanding some social improvements brought about under the Muslim and British rule). In the wake of resurgent Hindu nationalism in form of ‘Hindutva’, it should not be difficult to discern the fate that awaits these unfortunate ‘aliens and invaders’, the degraded and condemned. 

‘Harijans’ and the emancipated ‘converts’ to Islam and Christianity. The recurrent communal violence against the Indian Muslims and the growing spurt of barbaric assaults on the Indian Christians are sombre reminders. The Hindu writers and propagandists who talk so loudly of secularism, non-violence and Indian ‘humanness’ and show it to the world in the dead and frozen engravings of the temples and the amorous gaiety of dancing women should look for it in the sad faces of these unfortunates. 

As the struggle for independence from the British colonial rule in India started, the Hindu mindset steeped in unbridled lust for absolute power was starkly obvious. There was no compromise in their attitude against Muslims’ just demands. There leadership would rather have the British India plunged into ‘anarchy’ and ‘blood bath’, ‘see every village in flames’ and even accept its partition than agree to basic democratic tenets of accommodation and sharing. Because in their conniving mind they felt confident that partition could yet be undone through dishonest machination and for which fate had so favourably placed Mountbatten to supervise the dishonourable dissolution of British India. The Congress Hindu leaders exploited everything with full support of the Viceroy to achieve their unholy political goals; false and fabricated propaganda through a highly unscrupulous Hindu press, communal riots, arsons, large scale killings and brutalities, unprecedented uprooting of population, usurpation of Pakistan’s rightful share of British assets, immoral tampering of the Boundary Commission Award and aggression into and unlawful occupation of the State of Jammu and Kashmir. The list and its details are inexhaustible. Not to mention Nehru’s pride of performance in cultivating Edwina Mountbatten through a relationship which went beyond amorous embraces for political favours and which the Indians are so proud of! No wonder they go along so well with the Liberals, whether British or American! The charade of ‘non-violence’ and the most vaunted claims of ‘Indian Humanness and Civilization’ were thrown to the wind. But for all these cruel and hypocritical activities, the Indian gains were pretty little and Pakistan braved the onslaught even more firmly. Panini, the great ancient scholar of Slatura (present day Lahore on the bank of Indus, a few miles south of Topi) had made a proverbial statement as early as 900 B.C. and not without reason that ‘Udycyia’ (upper land - Upper Indus Valley) could never be overtaken by or merged into ‘Prascyia’ (lower or midland — Gangetic Plains) but ‘Prascyia’ could. History has proved him right repeatedly. 

Quaid-e-Azam, Muhammad Ali Jinnah is much blamed for the partition of India, Did he or the Muslim League really want the partition or merely used it as a strategic lever of last resort? A lot of now available documentary evidence reveals that till March 1947, the Muslim League was still amenable to a united dispensation which ensured equitable distribution and sharing of political power and was opposed to the partition of Punjab and Bengal. But the Hindu Congress was in no mood to give in. They wanted total control and absolute powers to themselves. Forced by their obsession, the inner logic of India’s geo-historical truth reasserted itself. Today the Indians talk of a confederation of South Asian states but they never pause to ask themselves as to why their political leadership rejected the agreed Cabinet Mission Plan in 1946 which was much more than a mere confederation. 

The post-independence decades had been a continuous period of belligerence between India and Pakistan. During this period, Pakistan has been subjected to three full-scale wars, at least two limited confrontations, unlimited border ingresses, skirmishes and physical violations, continuously growing scale of sabotage and subversion, uninterrupted stream of virulent propaganda, cheap threats and intimidation, combined with a vicious diplomacy. Indians have constantly increased their military power ostensibly to counter imaginary threats, but really to support their coercive policy in the region. Those who nag all the time against Pakistan’s defence budget should ask a question or two on India’s military spending. Admittedly they have more resources, but should they be wasting it without cogent reason? 

An objective analysis leads to three main conclusions. Firstly, for all the propagated democratic dispensations for national integration, the Indian leadership had been fully conscious of the difficulties posed by India’s staggering physical vastness and racial and social diversity. It is interesting to read views of persons like K.M. Panikar and Radhakishnan who admitted the absence of most basic organic attributes essential for converting the Hindus into a nation and that the uncompromising Brahmanic caste system made India’s social structure permanently inequitable and divisive. Therefore, while the democratic process continued, it was essential to maintain strong military power at the centre to ensure unity. The imperial solution — which was followed by the ruling dynasties and the colonial British before them. It was put to test immediately after partition —Junagadh, Hyderabad and Kashmir and, thereafter, has been continuously used in the NEFA, Assam and East Punjab and now again in Kashmir. Based on historical experiences, there may be some justification but do the Indians need such a large military force with those highly modern and destructive weaponaries to keep in line the poorly armed and organized rebels and dissidents? They must also know that such military extravagance in the past cost the dynasties their empires! Secondly, they perceive external threats to their national security. While claiming the status of a big power in the region, do the Indians really believe that any country in South Asia could pose a serious threat to them? Then what is this clamour of greatness about? They are quick to throw the dart across the Great Himalayas to China. Surely they have a recent experience of bitter humiliation though not new in their political history, but do they also imagine a naval confrontation with the Chinese in the Indian Ocean? Or is it the fear of yet another colonial invasion that forces them to maintain such a strong, high profile, blue water navy? In the rapidly changing geo-political environment, with new developments overtaking China and her dogmatic traditional attitude, the possibility of open war with India has progressively receded. And despite their irresponsible and provocative utterances, the Indians should thank the Chinese for it. 

The third conclusion is both interesting as well as relevant to Pakistan. Indian leadership has never given up their ultimate political objective — unification (or subjugation) of the entire sub-continent under the Hindu banner. It is built on the vengeful impulses and of the fear of recurrent invasions, enslavement and domination by other races which through the centuries has become a part of Hindu psyche. Not withstanding that these invasions ended up in their assimilation into the Indian milieu, a few like the Huns even becoming Hindus, Indians’ bitterness has remained deep and painful and their inferiority complex permanent. There urge for prominence and recognition, their pretence to power and their misrepresentation of historical facts to glorify themselves are basically the result of this complex and ‘soul sickness’. Along with it, is also the stark awareness of their abject inability to defend their kingdoms, their country and themselves from these invasions through the millennia except with one solitary example of the First Battle of Tarain against Ghori, which to their continuing misfortune was won in the following year and became the landmark for the beginning of rule by the Muslim dynasties for the next thousand years. Also for their tall claims to the entire sub-continent (an Akhand Bharat), Indian historians know that never during the better known and recorded Indian history, covering a period of nearly 2500 years, any of the major ruling Hindu dynasties could unify or subjugate even one-third of the sub-continent. The Guptas and Harsha, the great Hindu empire builders could not cross Bhagirthi in the east or extend beyond Ravi in the west. 

The Indians make a great deal of the Mauryas and their illustrious emperor Ashoka. Despite Indian distortions of facts, the historical truth cannot be concealed. Chandergupta, the first Mauryan king and truly a conqueror, was a son of the Potohar and a prince of Taxila, who having defeated the Greek satrap in the Khyber mountains around 303 B.C. was crowned King at Taxila. It was from here that he assembled an army largely constituted from the frontier hill tribes and those from the river valleys that he marched into the Gangetic plains, defeated the Hindu Nanda ruler and established his empire in Magadha (present Bihar). He was not a Gangetic Indian, nor a Brahmin and his conquest of the seat of power in heartland India was indeed, after Alexander, the first invasion from the north-west. Ashoka was his grandson and inherited Chandergupta’s empire on the north-west (much of it including portion of upper Kabul valleys were ceded by the Greek satrap after his defeat and was never conquered by Ashoka). Ashoka’s edicts in the north-western region of Mauryan empire reveal his continuing affection and link with people of this region whom he always regarded as his own. Then what makes Ashoka so different from Akbar, both grandsons of the great conquerors from the north-west and in their own rights great empire builders? Besides that the Indians just don’t have any Ashoka in their entire history, there is one crucial difference. Akbar was a Muslim and Ashoka’s religion is shrouded in mystery and, therefore, easy to manipulate. It was made easier by Pakistan’s dogmatic fixation who would not go beyond the invasion of Muhammad bin Qasim, although in their veneration of the young conqueror, they continue to ignore the first Muslim invasion of India under Muhammad ibn Abu Suffrah, whose army operating from Afghanistan had penetrated as deep as Bannu, more than half a century before. 

So, where lie the glories and greatness of Hindu India that the Indians talk so much about? A Hindu India, mostly fragmented and fighting for petty gains through the first millennium! It was brought to a semblance of unification by the Mauryans, the Muslim dynasties and the British with the imperial sword. What is their historical contribution in the making of India that they inherited on partition? Then what is the actual purpose of all the military buildup and overbearance? Do they really perceive a recontinuation of invasion from the north-west? It seems absurd but the simple reason is too obvious — their deep hatred for the Muslims of the north-west; Pakistan and Afghanistan whom they consider as the sole cause of all degradation and soul sickness. Remember Indira Gandhi’s emotion choked exultation before the combined Indian Parliament thumping their hearts out in joy after the surrender of Pakistani forces in former East Pakistan in December 1971, ‘Today we have avenged the thousand years of our dark history’. But in her haste, Indira, so typical of Hindu Brahmins could not help herself to empty boasting on self-assumed victory which could have never come by without the support and immense sacrifices of the Muslim Bengali fighters. Would some India lovers amongst us analyse Indira’s statement in a different light? Today we have a far more rabid Hindu government in India. 

Hindu India’s Muslim hating emanates from bitterness of the past as well as a persisting fear complex. All their connivance to enslave this region at the time of partition failed but the efforts have continued and Kashmir is vital to these efforts. During his recent visit to Laddakh, Vajpayee in a rare display of compassion scooped water from the Indus and throwing it back shouted, ‘Here, we give water to Pakistan’. In an apparently simple gesture he revealed the key and sent the subtle warning — water, and the control of all its sources. Did someone in Pakistan take notice of it? 

In the partition of Punjab we lost two rivers — Sutlej and Beas. The manipulated Boundary Commission Award gave India control of Ravi and in the illegal occupation of Kashmir, the headwaters of Chenab and Jhelum have come under her possession. Subsequent developments to control these rivers clearly indicate the long-term Indian intentions. And now the Indus has been inducted into the project. Our existence is so completely dependent on the waters of these rivers that a mere threat, leave alone their control in the hands of an avowed enemy should jolt us into action. Would the international laws on the subject help? We have concluded an Indus Basin Water Treaty with India but did it stop the Indians from constructing the Salal Dam on the Chenab or could prevent them from constructing a barrage on the Jhelum? And Farrakha Barrage continues to haunt the Bangladeshis even with an India-friendly government. This is precisely where the Indians are at their best. Having lost the control of the five rivers, the age-old identity of Punjab seems so hollow and empty. If our lack of interest persists in the prevailing wilderness of ignorance, the Punjab could assume a new identity — Beyaab. Would our Moulanas and self-styled religious leaders care to understand a few basic imperatives of territorial security of the state? 

Since partition India’s deep concern over what happened in the past echoes in every national undertaking (in contrast to our dogmatic fixations and progressive decline in research and inquiry). Their slogan is, ‘Never Again’. Against their persistent aggressive posturing, it is Pakistan who has maintained a positive attitude for peaceful coexistence and has never taken advantage of India’s predicament, whether during the closing bouts in the First Kashmir War, Indian debacle in 1962 or more recently Kargil. Pakistan has never threatened to recapture Delhi but India’s declared intentions and continuous efforts to subjugate Pakistan are too loud to miss. They never get tired of Pakistan bashing. India’s continuing interest in Afghanistan first through the decadent ruling elite and now the renegade Northern Alliance is also a corollary to their animosity with Pakistan and a futile effort to assert the colonial claims with British air and pretence but without their wisdom. 

In their present mental and emotional state, the Indians are highly prone to vindictive and mean behaviour. Their threat does not lie as much in their military might which has a dismal record of successes and glories in the past but in their cunning and deception which work like a hydra-headed monster. They are masters in this field and have the best traditions and records. From the old vedic legends to less mythical historical events, the proverbial Hindu deceit runs like a scarlet thread as the most preferred strategy and tradecraft. Recall Shivaji, the most revered of the Hindu military leaders and how he earned his name and laurels. For their excellence in deception and lies they have frequently made gains through bluff and propaganda. We are often bombarded with all kinds of falsities and distortions to cause confusion and doubts and simple and poorly educated minds are easily affected. It is mainly through bluff, boasting and display that they spread fear of their military might but only a fool will believe their threat of using nuclear weapons, which they know would end in mutual annihilation. But unfortunately their bluff and propaganda have brought them success in the field of diplomacy, not so much due to their brilliance but rather for want of effective counter responses. Our internal chaos, lack of national confidence and faith, incompetence and ignorance and greed for monetary gains have been their main targets for exploitation and results are visible. This is the most dangerous threat that the Indians pose to Pakistan and it is here that we need to concentrate all our energies to counter and defeat it. 

In the final analysis, however, India has learnt no lesson from history. Her past bitterness and persisting complexes have become an obsessive delusion for recognition and power. Although, she has cleverly managed to create an image of some importance, she must know that deceit cannot endure. The greatness that she seeks cannot be bought through bluffs and deceptions, show of force, advertisements or lobbying. One can understand the Jewish influence in moulding American policy in their favour but it would be wiser for the Americans not to get jaded by the false lure of economic benefits. They should take a lesson or two from their British kins who have a better knowledge and experience of the ‘Hindu banias’ and see through the charade of this ‘largest’ democracy and how it oppresses the Christians and deprives the Muslim minority of its representation rights even from areas where it has proven majority, the massive brutalities and human rights violations it perpetrates in Kashmir and the unscrupulous means it employs to denigrate Pakistan. Economic greed must not stain American greatness with dishonour. The present Indians need to reflect on what Panini said a long time ago and must not exult on temporary gains. India’s Hindu elite would do better to overcome their futile soul sickness as a part of ‘karma’ which they so wisely apply to their poor and unprivileged. Reconciliation and adjustment to the reality had been a known attribute of Hindu character which helped the Indian Hindus to survive their thousand years of ‘dark period’ and ‘ignominy’. They should rather rely on it than chase the dark shapeless shadows of the past