shiv wrote:schinnas wrote:About undoing partition, I am for it for ideological reasons. I firmly do not believe that humanity can develop where models of nationality driven by religious fundamentalism are allowed to succeed.
You are pulling me into an OT debate. The idea of having any type of nation-state with border controls, visas, citizenship etc is equally bad. "Borderless world" is the ultimate extrapolation of the idea that you are letterboxing into a small India-Pakistan space as you support undoing of partition. There were no borders anywhere 5000 years ago. Even 500 years ago there were mostly no borders between nations for anyone who wanted to travel.
Borders are a necessary evil give the fact that nation states like the idea that they are nation states and wish to preserve that status. The US for example has no intention of dissolving its borders for all and sundry to enter - and that is a purely selfish (and "rational") motive.
Since this is OT, I will stop at this last post. Borders are immaterial as long as they are for administrative purposes only. Even within a nation state there would be borders for various administrative regions and that is OK. That said, I agree that in the longer term (over next few centuries) the concept of nation states will slowly lose its purpose with increased globalization.
The logical progress of Indic philosophy of Vasudeiva Kudumbakam would be to move towards larger and larger groupings where nation states can still for the forseeable future have a role and purpose to serve. I see unitary nation states, federalistic larger nation states (such as India, USA), groups of nations with collective administrative, financial and military arrangements and eventually a one world family - governed by an effective UN v2.0 that is not beholden to any P5 entitites but truly democratic in its function and has teeth. EU, SAARC, and similar groupings of African, South American and east Asian countries can evolve into such effective group of nations with common currency, common military and visa free travel while each constituent country still retains its borders for administrative purposes and retains the freedom to move out of the collective entity at any time it wishes to. For SAARC to evolve to that level, Pakistan and Bangladesh stand in the way. I doubt anyone would oppose open border (visa free travel) and common currency, infrastructure links and potentially some aspects of common military with Nepal, Bhutan or Sri Lanka (while they continue to remain as sovereign independent states that on their own will can move out of this set up anytime they want to).
The Islam problem needs to be solved for all of SAARC to fully evolve as one entity as an intermediate step towards an even larger union of States and civilizations. Until then India should look at ways to take rest of SAARC together into such a close functional entity.