A look back at the partition

[SBajwa]

Surinder!

That's so true that it hurts.

[Prem]

Congessi think of Bhagat Singh, Rajguru and Sukhdev as terrorist. The epitome of all virtues rest in the blessed name of Gandhi/Nehru .

Can any leraned one here sum up the lessons learned from the loss of 47 partition? This will help BRItes in beating any PSer running Psyop here or in desh.

[brihaspati]

Prem ji,
the real lessons cannot be spelt out. Two observations only
(1) Where-ever any institution for practising the theology and maintaining a steady production of the theologians exists, that population will ultimately radicalize with the sole aim of destruction of the kaffir.
(2) Any area where there is a concentration of the particular faith population, even if it appears peaceful for generations and with excellent understanding and interaction with the surrounding kaffir, when there is a perception of opportunities to gain by jihad, that population will not prevent "jihad" from being carried out on the "kaffir". Only when the surrounding kaffir population is militant and shows the potential of severe retaliation, does the population takes steps to prevent jihadis from operating.

There is a catch here of course, that (2) may be used by those who think of themselves as purer than their brethren in the concerned population. They may then deliberately incite "jihad" knowing that surrounding non-Muslim will retaliate. This retaliation then serves two purposes - (a) justification for more intense and ruthless jihad (b) clearing away of brethren of "dubious" "purity".

All this happens because the theologians constantly prepare the ground within the population. I am speaking here from collating experiences of several areas I had access to, one through ancestral link. The area "dominated" by the clan in ref was kept strictly clear of the "maulanas", and anyone who wanted to get such education was not allowed to settle back in. For marriage etc, one was brought in from a neighbouring province and he was kept 24/7 under "freindly" escort. In my childhood I saw several villages of Muslims with no alims or maulanas among them. In fact it was seen to that the "Haji"s really behaved as "Hajis" (those aware would know the restrictions they have to adhere to afterwards by their faith).

I heard directly from the elders in these villages that during the preparations to the 47 riots, the theologians and others had come in from Calcutta, but the then "elders" had escorted them out to the rail-station that very same night. THey were quite frank even in my childhood - they referred to my ancestors and said that those "kind" gentlemen would have made the "maulanas" vanish in the extensive jungles of the region. And the village would be no more. While if they "collaborated" with the kaffirs - implying no fiddling with Arabian demonstrative social practises like the Burqa+mehendi+attar, and compulsory enrolment in the schools setup, no madrassahs etc - all sorts of benefits. I have seen them prominently take part in Hindu festivals - including worship of the local goddess. No beef went in there. Moreover I got some of the best indigenous martial arts training from them. Give me an appropriate length bamboo stick - I can still probably do a lot of damage.

I mentioned this particular personal experience because it appears to confirm what I have seen in many other places. Whereas another branch of mine experienced the other example - where the factors I mentioned above were not taken care of. And just like in many other places in India - (1)+(2) was also confirmed.

[brihaspati]

A firend on BRF has emailed me just now protesting the light in which I have blanketly shown the "forward castes" as being ultimately responsible for the attitudes that maintain the Partition. I accept his criticism. I would like to clarify that I am stressing the "that portion of the older Hindu elite" in

"Is it because they derive from that portion of the older Hindu elite who felt superior by birth from the "lower castes" and therefore never thought of the majority common pre-Islamic Indian masses as their fellow countrymen?"

I do not think that all in the forward castes thought so, but only a portion. I have seen both the attitude being present as well as absence of it.

[surinder]

There is a catch here of course, that (2) may be used by those who think of themselves as purer than their brethren in the concerned population. They may then deliberately incite "jihad" knowing that surrounding non-Muslim will retaliate. This retaliation then serves two purposes - (a) justification for more intense and ruthless jihad (b) clearing away of brethren of "dubious" "purity".



B,

Any example of the above you can give? I am curious to see how it plays out?

[surinder]

"Is it because they derive from that portion of the older Hindu elite who felt superior by birth from the "lower castes" and therefore never thought of the majority common pre-Islamic Indian masses as their fellow countrymen?"

This appears as a dichotomy, contradictory behaviour, but humans display in ample amounts. These are usually "liberals" who do. In the US, the middle class white liberals, also in 1940's UK developed the liberals who championed Indian causes, but were at the core were still condescending. These people are comfortable with charity, than justice.

The opposite is also true. People who display open hostility to RoP and the practices of the followers of RoP. They can be very accomodative in real life. They are often very grounded in soil, and not the philosophical cerebral liberal. Many Sikhs fall in that category, they carry on non-self-conscous friendships with RoP followers, while being staunchly opposed the voilance displayed by them.

[Prem]

Bsir Ji,
Hakim Shiv Ji has made the chart showing the committed Islamist temporarily using less pious in interacting with kaffirs while the protect the "Sinkhole" deep inside the oil droplets. He has articulated their methods of preservence and expansion. About theologicans , as i mentioned in one of my early post, Maulvis were were one of the main organizers of Mayhem. They lead the faithfools against neigborhood H/S. This is why few of my elders have to go back in Sep , hid themselves for few days as they knew the territory and personally deliver the reply to a known Maulvi who was not expecting any kaffir returning back to say adios. These were proud people who never begged or expected anything from N/G cabal and almost all of them turned out to be successful. No idea from where/ how the living Dhimmis WKK came to take birth on Indian soil.
It is necessary to openly discuss the lessons of partition to lessen the emotional burden and reduce the chances of happening again . The PSers must be exposed to the naked truth so they open their eyes and come home. IMHO, the first lesson is to remove the theological insitituions from the scenery as they go against the ethos/people of the land.

[Prem]

Surinder,
Simple truth is Sikhs routed the islamists on every occasion they tried fasad. This small fact is sadly missing in the misplaced "core" of Congressi/N/G lore. They try to pass on the most bloody period of Indian History as proof of co-existence and refuse to acknowledge that thieves and policemen also coexist in jail and this dont make them companion or cotravellers. Good news is that South is rising again and hopefully put leash on this"psuedo core" for good.

[svinayak]

"Is it because they derive from that portion of the older Hindu elite who felt superior by birth from the "lower castes" and therefore never thought of the majority common pre-Islamic Indian masses as their fellow countrymen?"

This appears as a dichotomy, contradictory behaviour, but humans display in ample amounts.

This is due to the colonized mind of the Indian elite during that era. That mind has dicotomy

[Atri]

The question to ask oneself is when did the partition of Bharat begin?
There are tomes written on the partition of British India in 1947.
While theories are all interesting, it is still about the latter not the former.

I would say partition was proposed when Najib invited Abdali in 1757 and the process actually began on 14th January 1761 on the plains of Panipat.. I think we really need to understand the Mughal-Maratha dynamics for complete grasp of the phenomenon of partition.

The key figures here are

1. Mughals (and last of them, Aurangzeb).
2. Pathan lobby from upper gangetic plains, Punjab, AFG and Iran)
3. Mullahs like Shah Wali and Sirhindi
4. Marathas
5. other Hindus in the region (Jats, Sikhs, Rajputs etc).

The antagonism between Pashtoons and Central Asians is legendary. Even today, the local saying goes like,"where anger and revenge of pathan ends, love of a tajik begins". This says a lot about their interactions. Central asians are the true "Bete Noir" of Indian civlization throughout the history's current. There are three blocks of populations which we must understand here.

a. Outer tier - Central asian block - Turks, Tajiks, Mongols, Kazaks etc. I like to talk in terms of river basins, hence the region beyond the Bakshu river (Oxus/Amu darya).
b. second tier - Pathans (southern afghanistan and NWFP - the lands between Sindhu and Kubha (Kabul) rivers (Or some times Amudarya).
c. Third tier - Punjab - Attock to Delhi and Jammu to Multan.
d. Fourth tier - Gangetic plains (the historical core - geographical and for considerable amount of time, civilizational)

When we speak of foreign invasions on India, it refers to people from Outer tiers (Iran and trans Oxus regions) invading India. That means, the attack of central asians on pathans is considered as foreign invasion. Hence Greeks, Bactrians, Scythians, Kushans, Huns, Arabs, Mongols, Mughals, Persians, British were undoubtedly "foreign in origin" and so was their incursion of subsequent tiers of India.

But when we count the total time the geographical core (Not the civilizational one which shifts) was under occupation "ethnic foreign people", it turns out to be not more than 800 years in the course of documented 5000 years of Indian history since times of IVC (not considering MBH as history just for sake of argument). Out of those 800 years, 500 are in past millennium. That is, only 18% of time, Indic core was under foreign domination.

The problem arose with Islamization of Afghanistan. Afghanistan resisted islamization for 250 years after fall of Iran. It was within 20 years of fall of Gazni (which was being ruled by Raja Shiladitya), Mehmood invaded the core and consolidated frontier of India along with outer regions. However, it is the trait of power-centre of frontiers to periodically seek expansion into Sindhu basin and vice-versa. Following that trait, Mehmood of Gazni, Muhammad Ghori, subsequent sultans of Delhi until Babar followed that tradition. The rule of the "core" was in hands of people who were ethnically Indians but culturally alienated. This is popularly known as "The Pathan Lobby".

The game-changer was first battle of panipat when an outsider displaced this entrenched Pathan lobby and consolidated the power of the core. The lobby of Pathans and Rajputs struck back and overthrew this foreign domination. There was internal dynamics to this struggle as well. Pathans (of Babur and Humayun's era) were alienated Hindus. Rajputs were defenders of Indic culture. Just as Rajput-Pathan lobby threw out ethnic outsider (Mughal/Mongol), Rajputs later overthrew the cultural outsiders too (Hemu Vikramaditya taming Lodis). Here we see the power-dynamics between Indians and foreigners and amongst Indians themselves (Indics and alienated Indics).

The Mongols/Mughals struck back in second battle of Panipat, this time successfully acquiring the throne and consolidating vast stretches of lands for long time period keeping the traditional aspirants of the power, away from the power. The Pathan lobby and Rajput lobby is beautifully handled by Akbar, Jahangir, Shahjahan and Aurangzeb and played against each other, keeping them preoccupied.

In 1681, when Aurangzeb descended on Deccan with full might of Mughal empire, the entrenched lobby of Pathans saw their chance to win what was rightfully theirs. Rajputs were deracinated by then and were out of power-struggle. It is here when the dynamics of "Islam" comes into picture. The traditional habit of Ulema to stay close to power-centre of region paid off when the regions of Awadh, Rohilkhand and Braj started making tremendous profits out of Deccan war of 27 years, when rest of India was suffering and revenues plummeting. The revenue and produce of Bengal and Odisha dropped by sharp 70% from 1690 to 1700, that is within 10 years. In same 10 years, the war-profits of western UP and Awadh (mostly dominated by Pathan lobby) increased by 67%.

Thus, after death of Aurangzeb in 1707, within few years of confusion, the chance begins to appear before Pathan lobby to usurp the long lost power. Ulema was quite and indifferent as they do not care who the ruler is, as long as he is Islamic and is patronizing them and their quest of conversion. The first move was made by Sayyid Brothers to dethrone the Mughal successor of Aurangzeb to much more pliable successor. These brothers were the working towards restoration of Mughal (and their own) domination on north India. They managed to quell the discontent in Rajputana and rest of India, they had to give entry to an unlikely player in the game - The Marathas.

The events of similar to those prior to second battle of Panipat - just like Rajput-Pathan lobby tried to overthrow Mongol influence out of India, Maratha-Pathan lobby did actually manage that. After Mughals were overthrown, the internal Maratha-Pathan dynamics unravelled just like Rajput-Pathan dynamics of Hemu era. If Hemu were victorious at Panipat, he would have had to fight off Pathans just like Marathas did.

Almost all the regions which was previously under Mughal empire smoothly passed on to Marathas as protectorate. This however does not include the Braj, Awadh and eastern Bengal and Punjab, Sindh and NWFP. This is when Shah Wali started making noises about the danger that Islam will be in.

While Marathas were waiting to establish their legitimacy as natural successors to Mughals, the Pathan lobby was busy organizing their own revival. The opportunity came in 1740 when Nadir Shah invaded India. Bajirao-1 was in south, hence no army which was big enough to stop Nadir shah, was stationed in Punjab. Ahmadshah Abdali was one of the commanders of Nadir Shah in this campaign. After Nadir's assassination, and Abdali's ascension, pathans of gangetic plains contacted abdali to invade and occupy the land so as to create a continuous pathan ruled state. By Shah wali, this was given a religious overtone as "jihad" against kafir marathas.

One has to understand the global perspective of the decade of 1750's to see the roots of partition of India. The kingdom of Pathans from Caspian sea to Bengal was in making. The kingdom from Punjab to Tamil-nadu of Marathas was in making. EIC was a small force then. This chance of establishment of Pathan kingdom was antagonistic to India and marathas and viceversa.

Panipat ended in stalemate. All the dreams of Pathan lobby and Ulema were vanished. Marathas continued to expand but not with earlier zeal and power. Sikhs rose but could not give a sustainable dynasty to consolidate Punjab and NWFP. Eventually british took over the administration of India in 1818 and after 150 years, India was partitioned.

To fill the gaps in between, one has to understand this lost dream of Ulema (primarily based in westen UP) which was using Pathan lobby's political ambition to establish earlier Islamic dominance of Mughal era. This dejected Ulema mobilized the funds, influence, private armies and support of zamindars and local power-satraps of Indo-Gangetic plains under Muslim league, when chips were down. The dream was truly shattered on plains of Panipat and ironically, that heart-break came in form of victory. Hence the need to reclaim this victory and establish islamic state so fondly cherished by many people from this region. This need of alienated Indics and foreign ideology using them to find a incubator to relaunch their efforts which were stalled at Panipat, marks the beginning of partition. The man who established Darul Ulum Deoband was grandson of Shah Waliullah himself.

Figures say that since Islamization of Afghanistan, Pathans and later Pakjabis (which are ethnically Indians) were more detrimental to India and Indic civilization than foreign rulers (Mughals except Aurangzeb and British). The inner vibhishana has been more detrimental to India than outer Vaanaras.

Successor of Hemu's India and Maratha's India is modern Republic of India. The aim which Hemu (Rajputs) and Marathas tried to achieve was five-fold.

1. to overthrow the influence of a visible foreign power (with or without the help of alienated Indians (Pathans, Pakjabis)
2. to defeat alienated Indians and overthrow their influence on policies of India and her core.
3. To reconquer the territory currently occupied by alienated Indians
4. To establish Indic system of socio-political and economics in reconquered/consolidated territory.
5. To bring alienated Indians back to Indian fold.

The fourth and fifth point has to happen simultaneously along with first three, which happen in the given order.

Hemu succeeded in overthrowing foreign power temporarily.

Marathas succeeded in overthrowing the foreign power permanently and overthrow the influence of alienated Indians on the territories and policies of India. Marathas tried to win back territory (Attock campaign) but not for long (only 19 months). They tried to implement Indic system of governance and remove foreign influence but not uniformly.

INC (with help of other nationalists) overthrew a visible foreign power. ROI overthrew the influence of alienated Indians from core territory and policy-making of ROI. ROI has established a system of governance which is largely Indic and Partially western (Similar to Marathas). ROI has partially quarantined the alienated Indian lobby in its western and north-western regions like Marathas had it quarantined in Western UP. So, ROI stands at position where Marathas were in 1760. Thankfully, owing to democracy, the early deaths of good leaders won't harm ROI in a way it harmed Maratha-India.

Just like the global politics then, the internal lobby of alienated Indians trying to establish a continuous state. That lobby is being used by a foreign ideology which aims for uniform society without state and class. ROI is the only player which stands in its way.

[Yayavar]

Surinder, if UP-Bihar is the core, what also has to be seen that this is the core that led the movement to destroy the British in 1857. 1857, what ever be the merits demerits, the Sikhs escaped the burnt since they went with the British.

Not accounting the effect of 1857 on the next 100 years is what is causing all the what if type of questions here.

Let is be very clear, the CORE the purbaia's of India were THE force which won not only India for East India company but also the entire BRITISH empire in ASIA.

It would be most inappropriate to pass to the mistakes of one of the folks from the Allahabad as the view of Core.

Core not fighting is the BS that has been peddled by the British post 1857 -- dont fall for it.

I agree. And this BS gets repeated in this forum more often than not. I'm surprised at this dissing of countrymen ('core') under guise of analysis. If one is fond of illustrating Bhagat Singh, then they would know of Azad, Bismil, Ashfaquallah. And if one could communicate with them, they would hold their heads at this regionalism. .

[Yayavar]

...
Do we know names of the defiant, the courageous, and the unbending? They are either lying 6 feet below, or living in slums.

This simple idea does not, and cannot escape any normal intelligent and sane person. Do you know of any airport or national monument named after Rajguru or Sukhdev?
...

Scindia vs Rani Laxmibai ? .

[ramana]

Atri, Awesome summary and new way of looking at things. It explains the Pathan tug for heartland India even now. BTW, Rekha Misra in her book Aurangazeb also says that it it was his rein that sowed the hiving of Afghanistan from India orbit.

Another marker is the support of the Indo-Greeks to Asoka (governor of Takshashila) in getting the Magadha throne.

[Yayavar]

I would say partition was proposed when Najib invited Abdali in 1757 and the process actually began on 14th January 1761 on the plains of Panipat.. I think we really need to understand the Mughal-Maratha dynamics for complete grasp of the phenomenon of partition.

....
....

INC (with help of other nationalists) overthrew a visible foreign power. ROI overthrew the influence of alienated Indians from core territory and policy-making of ROI. ROI has established a system of governance which is largely Indic and Partially western (Similar to Marathas). ROI has partially quarantined the alienated Indian lobby in its western and north-western regions like Marathas had it quarantined in Western UP. So, ROI stands at position where Marathas were in 1760. Thankfully, owing to democracy, the early deaths of good leaders won't harm ROI in a way it harmed Maratha-India.

Just like the global politics then, the internal lobby of alienated Indians trying to establish a continuous state. That lobby is being used by a foreign ideology which aims for uniform society without state and class. ROI is the only player which stands in its way.

Atri , fantastic. A lot of food for thought. thanks.

[Sanku]

Awesome Atri, truly Awesome.

This leads to another point, a Bji was making, keeping the geographical core of India stable (From the land of five rivers to hoogly basin) is Critical in keeping the entire Indian subcontinent stable. Today we have lost control over two of its critical parts.

This needs to be reversed.

[Pulikeshi]

The question to ask oneself is when did the partition of Bharat begin?
There are tomes written on the partition of British India in 1947.
While theories are all interesting, it is still about the latter not the former.

I would say partition was proposed when Najib invited Abdali in 1757 and the process actually began on 14th January 1761 on the plains of Panipat.. I think we really need to understand the Mughal-Maratha dynamics for complete grasp of the phenomenon of partition.

Atri,

Very well reasoned write up... You could take it up a notch, by looking at post Asoka (Mauryan age ends approximately 200 BCE) patronage or persecution of the Buddhist proselytization. The Sunga dynasty, inheritors of the Mauryas, right into CE drive Buddhism outward into Afghanistan, other stans (Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, etc) up North, to the East - Burma, Tibet, etc. This meant that the civilizational base became too stretched out to defend. We always jump next to the Gupta dynasty (300 - 500 CE), but really we are forgetting the Kushans (60 - 375 CE). Whether the Kushan were Indo-European Yuezhi/Tocharians (from today's China) or from Mongolia or were just hanging out in Central Asia is an academic question. What is relevant is that they were the first "non-Bharatiya" people to conquer and enter into Bharat. One impact was the shift Eastward of the core. One point, I am ignoring the Greeks previously in the BCE as they ironically ended up only solidifying Bharat into the nation-state of the Maurayas and had no holding power into the core.

Even if you disagree with my reading of history, the key to all this is that Bharat the civilization was partitioned long before the advent of the Islamic hordes. In some sense ethnically and politically, the stock of people invading many nation-states that existed prior to modern-India have come in many forms from the West, their religion is often irrelevant as it does not add much to the understanding of forces at work, it is only one dimension of several other equally important factors. The key to understanding the partition is therefore the understanding of the shifting power centers not only in historic nation-states cradled by the Bharathiya civilization, but also in understanding the shifting power centers outside that region, especially to the West. Unfortunately, it is all but easy to see that one of the conclusions that arises is that the nation-states (including the present one - India) built on the Bharathiya civilization have all been reactionary, in that they have never felt the need to mold the power center to the West to better suit the needs of the civilization and nation-state. Heck, one could start off with the Deva-Ashura (Bharat vs. Iran) conflict and see that there is a continuum of ill-defined political structure and desire to project ones idea as superior to the other. Even the Devas were a reaction to the Ashuras and not that other way around. Hopefully, reader you see that there is a difference in narrative - the Western historians have always characterized India as a nation of nation-states. What really happened is that the Gana-Rajya system did not care who the ruler or the contour of the state was, it was optimizing civilization. The Mauryan empire was a reaction to the Greek invasions - it gave Bharat its first nation-state. Similarly, the Guptas were a reaction to the Kushans, etc. Thus nation-states have come about on the Bharatiya civilization only as reactions. You can fill in the gaps (as Atri so correctly has in the middle)....

Yes, even more recently, India was born as a reaction to British rule (misrule) and incidentally occupies a portion of the Raj.
One can tie up the threads to the present day and very easily show that even the modern nation-state of India, given that its birth was reactionary, has never been able to define a core set of values that is necessarily unique to her - a Unique Selling Proposition - as an idea or a meme. Indeed even the attempt to be an Eastern Secular, Democratic state is feeble.
Finally, given Pakistan's desire to become the anti-India power base, we can conclude that 1) India and Pakistan are really at a slow-motion-civil-war and 2) India does not as yet have the ability to define herself and Pakistan cannot complete the process of defining herself as the anti-something and hence the stalemate continues. All other actors and influences are really chai-biskoot to this game.

more ramblings later

[Atri]

Pulikeshi ji,

The problem with Pre-Ghori considerations is that, before that, every resident of third tier (NWFP) and second tier (Punjab) was thoroughly Indianized, although ethnically alien. Kanishka, for example, was as much "Indian" as Ashoka was. Of course, he was alien and was perceived as alien by our people and he ruled exactly the territories which were ruled by Gaznavi and Ghori and more. But I don't think he ended up partitioning the civilization.

Firstly, I can't believe that a civilization can be partitioned. Its like flowing water, one can't cut it. It floods or recedes, shrinks and dries up. Indian civilization is like river. Any meme or idea which gives even a tiny scope to the fact that "the other point of view" could also be right, is readily assimilated in it.

Secondly, under the age of Guptas, the NWFP was so thoroughly Indianized that they fought resisted Muslims for 250 years as outpost of Indian civilization. That is a very huge time-span. The fight which Indic Pathans (Shahis) put forth to armies of Iran and central asia which were converted has no parallels in history of mankind. Sadly, they were infighting with kings of Punjab too. Ironically, nobody except Maharaja Ranjit Singh ever thought of establishing an Indic empire there.

The river of sanskriti shrunk with conquest of Islam. The reason of that shrinking was "insufferable know-it-all" nature of Islam. Hence unless this attribute of islam is "fixed", the river can't flow again with her inherent and usual magnificence.

Continuing from my previous post, ROI stands at place where Maratha-India stood in 1760, one year before Panipat. As it is needless to elaborate, Panipat will be happening once again. The job of ROI seems to be more "Complete" than the job of Marathas which was sort of dispersed mess. However, democracy makes it difficult to establish the aims of a political unit clearly, unlike Marathas. Hence, Marathas had no qualms in ravaging Rohilkhand as revenge of Panipat, whereas ROI won't be ravaging Pakjab as revenge of 1947.

I reiterate what I said about expansion policy. Marathas succeeded because they were able to overthrow the qazi-mullahs on village level. The mullah used to flee when he heard the taps of approaching maratha cavalry (metaphorically, of course). There are many advantages which ROI wields over Marathas, one being the declared ruler of India rather than a protector of India. Secondly, stability and hence prosperity and hence availability of resources to fulfil stages 3-4-5.

I sincerely hope that ROI (in one form or another) finishes this job.

Ramana ji,

Even Chandragupta Maurya was funded and assisted by armies and kingdoms of NWFP (he was nominated king of Aratta) and Punjab (Parvateshwara of Kekay). Harshavardhana too expanded towards gangetic plains from Punjab region.

[brihaspati]

Atri wrote
The problem with Pre-Ghori considerations is that, before that, every resident of third tier (NWFP) and second tier (Punjab) was thoroughly Indianized, although ethnically alien. Kanishka, for example, was as much "Indian" as Ashoka was. Of course, he was alien and was perceived as alien by our people and he ruled exactly the territories which were ruled by Gaznavi and Ghori and more. But I don't think he ended up partitioning the civilization.

Firstly, I can't believe that a civilization can be partitioned. Its like flowing water, one can't cut it. It floods or recedes, shrinks and dries up. Indian civilization is like river. Any meme or idea which gives even a tiny scope to the fact that "the other point of view" could also be right, is readily assimilated in it.

Secondly, under the age of Guptas, the NWFP was so thoroughly Indianized that they fought resisted Muslims for 250 years as outpost of Indian civilization. That is a very huge time-span. The fight which Indic Pathans (Shahis) put forth to armies of Iran and central asia which were converted has no parallels in history of mankind. Sadly, they were infighting with kings of Punjab too. Ironically, nobody except Maharaja Ranjit Singh ever thought of establishing an Indic empire there.

The river of sanskriti shrunk with conquest of Islam. The reason of that shrinking was "insufferable know-it-all" nature of Islam. Hence unless this attribute of islam is "fixed", the river can't flow again with her inherent and usual magnificence.

Atri, you are leading the discussion into channels where issues will come up that we will not be able to discuss.
You have raised important issues. I support your observation that before the advent of Islamics, cultural destruction was not seriously attempted. Actually from the time of Cyrus I, ME was partly subscribing to an idea of "multi-culturalism" that infected even Alexander [we have indications of severe differences that he had with Macedonian aristo's in his entourage over tolerance of practises/culture/religions of the "conquered"]. Ashoka, or Kanishka, by all evidence were not really trying to destroy the underlying civilizational culture but at the same time the tendency of creating an "imperial religion" was developing. This was not really a problem for Indian civilization because the "imperial religion" was a form derived from Indic roots.

Civilization on the other hand is a much more complex entity than just the rashtryia "faith". Civilization is inseparable from the practise, memory, and philosophy of living people. We have traces of past civilizations, which we can only incompletely reconstruct simply becuase they are no longer practised in a living continuity through history. I think this is something that Indian civilization got too confident about and like all previous civilizations who got too confident - suffered. There was a tendency in many forms of Indian belief systems at this time, that de-emphasized "life" and began to explore "beyond mortal life" too much. I do associate the Buddhists with this tendency. Once you begin to do this, you will start neglecting the reality of human practise - the fact that biology is never going to really go away from guiding a lot of human action (unless we have sci-fi extensions of consciousness).

What Pulikeshi ji sees as the seeds of "separation" and "Partition", I would like to point out as - a drift and corruption from within the "civilization" itself. This is not a "separation/Partition" but a drift and a fundamental corruption in creating a false understanding of the basis of human interactions. If this was correctly understood, then Indians would have realized the importance of maintaining an eagle eye on political and military developments in their neighbourhood, the importance of maintaining a grip on social processes in foreign lands which could generate attacks on India, the importance of protecting the Indian people who would be actual vessels of Indian civilization - and protect the means by which civilization reproduces - human reproduction and knowledge reproduction through education. Any civilization that neglects to do this cannot simply rely on its feeling of being the inexorable flow of water - which can never "be cut"!

The infighting and all that also stems from this corruption of civilization. Because the real direction and focus of the civilization is lost - and the real priorities are not seen. In the setup of the times, there was an obvious choice before the Indians - to elect or select a Chakravartin, and bring all the regions into a single rashtryia framework. The time of Islamic advance was on the backdrop of a global climate and productivity catastrophe - but a single India wide rashtra would have been able to pool its resources better and coordinate better to sustain defence in parts which were reeling from the general crunch. If the civilization failed to see this - it was its weakness, a drift and corruption for which it had tp pay dearly [its flowing water nature did not save it] - but this was not a seed for "Partition" from within the civilization.

We have good evidence that Indian merchant princes shifted to pure financial profiteering based on their bases "at home" using the capital extracted and inflow in the period of Imperial expansion - exactly at the period the Arabs begin to take over ME. The Indian navy basically shrinks its area of operations in the western IOR, Indian empires cease to intervene outside, and certain sects begin to include texts justifying "sitting at home". This is a key observation pointing towards corruption in the civilizational viewpoint - and is reflected even in the modern period in exactly the same background - that is when there is concrete econocmic growth and prosperity, withdraw from any potential or preparation for confrontation to project power. Oh, it is risky - for I may not be able to enjoy my wealth then!

Continuing from my previous post, ROI stands at place where Maratha-India stood in 1760, one year before Panipat. As it is needless to elaborate, Panipat will be happening once again. The job of ROI seems to be more "Complete" than the job of Marathas which was sort of dispersed mess. However, democracy makes it difficult to establish the aims of a political unit clearly, unlike Marathas. Hence, Marathas had no qualms in ravaging Rohilkhand as revenge of Panipat, whereas ROI won't be ravaging Pakjab as revenge of 1947.

A system for a rashtra is just a tool. What form the executive structure of the rashtra takes is determined by the necessities of its immedite and long term objectives. This is recognized even in the Constitution - since it transfers supreme power to a single indivdual in emergencies. Democracy is no barrier to suitable modification of the executive form of the rashtra, as needed by specific conditions facing the nation. Moreover, ravaging Pakjab should not be seen as revenge - but a tactical and strategic necessity to break and destroy the backbone of Islamist aggression on India on the subcontinent. That society has to be "cleaned" of its theologians, networks to generate and reproduce theologians, and erasure of all aspects and icons in that society around which Islamism may appear again in the future. This is not revenge, justa tactical necessity for India.

I reiterate what I said about expansion policy. Marathas succeeded because they were able to overthrow the qazi-mullahs on village level. The mullah used to flee when he heard the taps of approaching maratha cavalry (metaphorically, of course). There are many advantages which ROI wields over Marathas, one being the declared ruler of India rather than a protector of India. Secondly, stability and hence prosperity and hence availability of resources to fulfil stages 3-4-5.

Agreed - but it can also give rise to a small problem. A Protector of a region does not have the obligation to "protect" everyone in that region or the luxury of identifying with only one subgroup in that region. A ruler however may feel the overwhelming need to identify and protect only one subgroup.

[Pranav]

The "core" of India sits comfortably secure, letting the periphery fight it out for its very survival. Then while sitting comfortably find faults in them for not fighting the enemies properly. That is why they label the love fest indulgers as either Punjabis, Bengalis, or IM's. Heaven forbid if anyone from the core is to be blamed.

INC core was from the "core" of India. They were not terribly comfortable with either the Punjabis or the Bengalis, and as a matter of fact, nor with the IM's. They never understood their dilemmas, compulsions and issues. Nor did they sumpathsize with them and their plight. These provinces had their leaders side lined, and their apprach to dealing with Briish and M's stigmatized (ahimsa rules). Gandhi conveniently got himself in the senseless Khalifat movement, INC gave birth to Jinnah (not the Punjabis or Bengalis, who the bore the brunt of this man's output). The ease with which "core" leadership agreed to partition, the secrecy in which they carried out their capitulation. In the fall of 47, these leaders really had no advice to the Punjabis & Bengalis, except to say that please stay put and get massacred.

When partietion did happen, Indian Punjab was cleansed in retaliation, and RoP presences erased. But who were the main planners and intellectual brains behind the 2 nation theory? They were the elite of UP. Where are these elites now? They are still living quite nicely in UP, thank you very much. Which institutions played a role? AMU & Deoband, they are still functioning as though nothing happened. Why were they not leveled to the ground? Hyderabi Owaisis are all still there. Why did UP, Bihar etc. not go in arms against partition? How much countering was done by them for fostering this disease on us? Would UP have been as comfortable if (say) Lucknow and Benaras had become foreign countries? Why did they not cause counter trauma for partiton on those individuals and institutions that were operating out of its soil? Are they not functioning as before and are a legitimate part of the national political horse-trading? From which states does isalaimic parties exert the biggest influence on India and its policies?

Incidently, we forget that J&K is also part of the partition drama. While Kashmir is gasping for its vey life, hanging by a thread in the 1947-48 war, Gandhi goes on fast so that TSP can have more money to better fight the war? Why did JLN cause the forces to stop and not recover territory fully? What haste was there to sign the Runn of Kutch and IWT accords? Which area of India is the most adamant that history be re-written to erase certain inconveniences of a certain faith? Who has become an intellectual pawn in the hands of certain faith? Which "core" area gave us article 370 & personal law? Who sends the most number of MP's to form the govt? What did India do when it captured Lahore in 1965?

Most of all, why is Radcliffe line sacrosanct? Why did we not openly question it? Who were the leaders who hold that line more holy than anything?

After having asked the Punjabis and Bengalis to suck it up, why resent the fact that they are sucking it up?

Surinder ji, I feel your anguish.

But it is not correct to blame the core as a whole for what has happened in the colonial era. It is the elite collaborators cultivated by the colonial powers who are to blame.

We are still in the same situation, with the same elites collaborating with the same colonial powers.

The only solution is for the common people to wake up. This is not easy, because the collaborators have a vice-like grip on the media and the educational system. But we must do what we can.

The decolonization process had started and had made some significant progress. But has been interrupted since we began using EVMs in elections. If we want to restart the decolonization process, the first step, IMHO, is to get rid of EVMs.

[Sanku]

Pranav, one thing that everyone needs to realize is

But it is not correct to blame the core as a whole for what has happened in the colonial era. It is the elite collaborators cultivated by the colonial powers who are to blame.

Not all elite DIE, are collaborators, at least willingly or knowingly. It is true (I have insight in their world) -- many are just uprooted, clueless and going along with the flow.

This has happened because many local elite looked up to Pandit Nehru -- but did not realize that he was a "Hindu by accident" (in his own words) -- they followed him into wastelands some times at great personal costs.

What people do not realize is that Congress license quota permit sarkar actually destroyed the backbone of many elites who had actually pushed the Nationalist movements. A lot of these were close to Gandhi and his moneybags but detested by Nehru. As well as old, really old pre british elites linked to the land. He destroyed them all.

He did a through job on us. Made sure anything he personally touched turned to ashes. Thankfully many things he was happy taking credit for by standing next to a plaque and did not actually touch himself or not too deeply -- those things are the Indian institutions which still serve us (such as the Armed forces)

[Pulikeshi]

Atri,

No complaints with what you have responded... In the interest of time and space:

1. On can build a dam or see a civilizations (like rivers) branch off and go dry.
Call it partition, separation or whatever the barriers are there, it occurred to the West economically and politically.
This happened way prior to Mughals, indeed one can understand this better if one focuses on the ethnicity of the Mughals
more than the focus on the religion. Bottom line, the Western branch off starting with the Ashuras has reached new
levels of bankruptcy, however it has not lost steam. Buddhism and Islam are just tools in this game of power centers.

2. India (the latest nation-state) on the Bharat civilization base, is yet another reactive construct.
It is not bound ethnically, religiously, ideologically, etc. The natural entropy of the system kicks in soon enough.
Failing to recognize this and taking corrective actions is fraught with danger.

3. Civilizations can be mentally separated by driving pikes and dams over them. All mental and meme constructs perhaps.
Nation-states are different in that they are physically partitioned. British history would have us believe that partition was
an imperial act of responsibility to prevent the warring nation-states of the Raj from turning loose on each other along
religious lines. Nothing is further from the truth.

4. Partition was and is a reaction of the North-Central power structure of Bharat, as much as it is a Western (Pakistan)
power structure that sold itself to outside forces since the time of Alexander. One could even argue that it was really
a break off Central Indian core that sought this move to the West even more. The British merely used it, as they did
elsewhere around the world and they were not the first to partition states either historically. That they did all this to
keep the Indian state down for as long as they could is old history.

5. Even to date, there is no clear civilizational or ideological core that holds the Indian nation-state together.
Being yet another reaction, India of today suffers from no notion of destiny or purpose other than the minimalist
intent in providing for its citizens, if even that! So, the only place we perhaps disagree is the optimism or lack thereof
with the present construct to find a way to decisively seek an end goal to the challenge of the power center to the West.
The slo-mo civil war is unlikely to end, unless and until, this wisdom dawns on citizens of the Indian state.

[Pranav]

Even to date, there is no clear civilizational
or ideological core that holds the Indian nation-state together. Being yet another reaction, it suffers from no notion of
destiny or purpose other than the minimalist intent in providing for its citizens, if even that!

This is a deliberately enforced "ideological vacuum".

[AjayKK]

http://sindhireflections.blogspot.com/2 ... tions.html
I am one of those, who always wanted to do the exact same thing this author has done. Document the stories of the partition time of Sindhis, especially in Mumbai, being raised there and a Hindu Sindhi myself. But like many others, with good intentions, life takes over and never made it a priority.

ShauryaTji, when i got my copy, i came to know that the book shops had pulled out the book due to distribution issues. As a result the author was stranded with a lot of copies. I would request you to publicise it with your acquaintances. This could be the best way to appreciate the author. Thanks.

[Brad Goodman]

There are two ways to expand your reach. One is islamic way of sword where you brutally terrorize the population into submission (islam in arabic) which lots of right wing people feel is the way to deal with porkies. We need to use our muscle power to pulverise all these artifical nation states that were created in past and fulfil Akhand Bharat that was our rightful. This they feel wil create a safe Bharat varsha that will then prosper.

The other school of thought is to take what we have at the moment and built it strong. Make it so powerful that it becomes a magnet to attract the fringes that have broken away to come back and beg to be merged. Use the soft power to influence the people not the brute military power. Follow the US model where they rule the world with their hollywood pepsi and mcdonads and if only required as last report use their dronacharya's and F35 to project their hard power.

I feel to reverse partition or to fulfil dream of natural India (in terms of geography aka akhand bharat) we need to follow the later model. We have barely discarded the begging bowl that we once carried to IMF & WB. What we need to do is to make the core strong. Economically, Socially & Politically. If we can be absolutely certain that we can defend our core then we can think of expansion. Right now We have Maoist troubles. We have this new post mandal equations where OBC have become the new forward caste with rampant nepotism. We need to be identifying our weakness and trying to work on them rather than pretending we have already become the civilizational superpower like US EU or now to an extent China so we can start expanding. Remember Unkil won the cold war without firing a single bullet. All it did was to play their expendible pieces on the chessboard of great game. They used their pawn (porkies) to kill the knight (soviets) that is ultimate chanakya neeti. Not that they did it in the most efficient manner because they created another frankenstein but who knows perhaps this was designed for future to fulfill some grand strategic objectives that brezenski and company have in mind.

[Sanku]

Remember Unkil won the cold war without firing a single bullet.

Remember Vietnam? US has paid with blood for what it is today. Only blood pays for some things.

[Brad Goodman]

Remember Unkil won the cold war without firing a single bullet.

Remember Vietnam? US has paid with blood for what it is today. Only blood pays for some things.

Unkil did not invade Vietnam in 1780's when it was barely getting out of civil war. When Unkil went to Vietnam in 60's it was already THE Superpower and even then it knew when to call off from the war. Remember when fighting use your brain not your heart. Look at the cost you can pay and dividends you can reap.

Remember Bangladesh we used our brains did not fight in rainy season waited till winter and with surgical precision acheived our objectives in 7 days. We did not fight every porkie post that was stationed we focussed on dhakha and end of day the result is in front of you.

[Sri]

Excellent series of Posts.

S Ji, In one of your earlier posts you have suggested that partition should be reversed on *Indian Terms*. Could shed some more light on what these Indian terms are or could be? When you say Indian Terms, which India are you referring to? The current Nation state, Akhand Bharat Mata's collective psyche or the the now famous 'Core' of India?

[Sanku]

>>Remember Unkil won the cold war without firing a single bullet.

Remember Vietnam? US has paid with blood for what it is today. Only blood pays for some things.

Unkil did not invade Vietnam in 1780's when it was barely getting out of civil war. When Unkil went to Vietnam in 60's it was already THE Superpower and even then it knew when to call off from the war. Remember when fighting use your brain not your heart. Look at the cost you can pay and dividends you can reap.

Remember Bangladesh we used our brains did not fight in rainy season waited till winter and with surgical precision acheived our objectives in 7 days. We did not fight every porkie post that was stationed we focussed on dhakha and end of day the result is in front of you.

Unkil fought the war of Indpendence
Unkil fought the war of civil
Unkil fought the first world war
Unkil fought the second world war
Unkil fought the korean war.
Unkil fought the vietnam war

Unkil is fighting in Afg and Iraq. (And many many other wars in less than 300 year period)

Please count the number of deaths in each.

Unkil's power is based on its readiness to spill blood, and if it calls for spilling its own blood so be it. All powers are built that way. That is the ONLY way. Including the so called COLD WAR.
(Which by no means is fighting like a fool)

[sanjeevpunj]

In 1965, the prelude to 1971 was enacted in Eastern India, along the border with East Pakistan(now Bangladesh) and was in school, class 3, as I watched battalions after battalions roll past on the Barrackpore-Barasat road heading towards the border with East Pakistan. I also recall visuals of a Pakistani plane (probably a Sabre) screaming overhead and eventually destroyed by ack ack guns as it tried to reach IAF's Barrackpore station. Next day I saw its carcass carried away by an 18 wheeler Queen Mary truck.Mom made woollen pullovers for the jawans.We just listened to the Radio for the news.What was the result of the 1965 skirmish? There wasn't much action on the eastern front anyway in 1965, though it paved way for the 71 Bangladesh liberation.A lot of action however happend on the western front which I missed....

[surinder]

Remember Unkil won the cold war without firing a single bullet. All it did was to play their expendible pieces on the chessboard of great game.

Cough cough ... are you sure? Vietnam? Korea? Cuba? Small central american wars? Unkil's bullets were being fired in A'stan, if I may say so. Setting up and operationg a Huge army in bases scattered all around the world, ready to fight. In every friendship that Unncle made, every treaty it signed, every international alignment it entered into, it kept a razor sharp focus on SU.

Cold war is a bad analogy, when Unlce faced division of the country, a huge civil war resulted, killing something like 10% of its population (and they had ties to the land for only a century or two, not 7000 years in our case when we were faced partition ... we simply foled up and relocated.)

[svinayak]

Cold war is a bad analogy, when Unlce faced division of the country, a huge civil war resulted, killing something like 10% of its population (and they had ties to the land for only a century or two, not 7000 years in our case when we were faced partition ... we simply foled up and relocated.)

The question is if there was ties to the land and culture for 7000 years how come such a large population converted to a foreign religion which is anti thesis to the mother religion.
The area of the Indus is the center of the Indian civilization and should have been preserved no matter what for Hindus. Even at independence the leadership should have shown the acumen to get access to the Indus land as the civilization heritage. Geography is very important in the Indian context. That is what which will keep the people going for centuries.

[Brad Goodman]

Unkil fought the war of Indpendence
Unkil fought the war of civil
Unkil fought the first world war
Unkil fought the second world war
Unkil fought the korean war.
Unkil fought the vietnam war

Unkil is fighting in Afg and Iraq. (And many many other wars in less than 300 year period)

Please count the number of deaths in each.

Unkil's power is based on its readiness to spill blood, and if it calls for spilling its own blood so be it. All powers are built that way. That is the ONLY way. Including the so called COLD WAR.
(Which by no means is fighting like a fool)

Its not just ability to sacrifice for goals that counts you need to factor how others can take advantage of your situation to further their own geo strategic goals. Unkil was lucky in its infancy that it was sheilded by two huge oceans on both sides. Plus Brits were more interested at that time in securing their crown jwel than consolidating new world colonies. In India's case we have to factor China equation before we miscalculate and do a reckless kargil like mushy. Make no mistake if China EU Unkil spot any chink in our armour they will make us pay a very dear price for it, So we need to be much more stronger than what we are. Our armed forces are just barely OK to defeat porkies for a sustained occupation for porkie lands and to fend of Chinese we need to be at completely different level of preparedness that is both at training / planning level in delhi as well as in our Military Industrial Complex. WE cannot become a superpower with toys bought off the shelf from some country we need to build the technology to be able to make planes tanks artilerry as well as other hardware. We are still 50 - 100 years away from to develop the capablity that will allows us the luxory to think like you.

[Sanku]

Unkil was lucky in its infancy that it was sheilded by two huge oceans on both sides.

Lucky eh?

Plus Brits were more interested at that time in securing their crown jwel than consolidating new world colonies

On the contrary, the Brits were forced out and then focussed on east.

. In India's case we have to factor.......

I am not sure what that is supposed to mean. Yes there are issues, yes we have to be careful and not foolhardy. But guess what? These are generic truth. They will always be true. You deal with it.

Otherwise its just a bunch of excuses.

[Brad Goodman]

Remember Unkil won the cold war without firing a single bullet. All it did was to play their expendible pieces on the chessboard of great game.

Cough cough ... are you sure? Vietnam? Korea? Cuba? Small central american wars? Unkil's bullets were being fired in A'stan, if I may say so. Setting up and operationg a Huge army in bases scattered all around the world, ready to fight. In every friendship that Unncle made, every treaty it signed, every international alignment it entered into, it kept a razor sharp focus on SU.

Cold war is a bad analogy, when Unlce faced division of the country, a huge civil war resulted, killing something like 10% of its population (and they had ties to the land for only a century or two, not 7000 years in our case when we were faced partition ... we simply foled up and relocated.)

I am not denying that Unkil did not fight. Yes they did but they were smart enough to accept defeat and cut their losses and move away from conflict. Unkil had tough time taming vietnam Iraq and now Afpak how do you think we will fare with porkies a country of 16 crores and that too with limited toys half of which are outdated. What if the spares for which get delayed or denied?

[Prem]

Even to date, there is no clear civilizational
or ideological core that holds the Indian nation-state together. Being yet another reaction, it suffers from no notion of
destiny or purpose other than the minimalist intent in providing for its citizens, if even that!

This is a deliberately enforced "ideological vacuum".

Ideological vaccum caused by enetities like Congress, Nehruvian PSism and above all educational system as weel control of media. DIE must die its ideological death for India to survive: They are the weakest civilizational link yet causing the maximum harm.

[svinayak]

Even to date, there is no clear civilizational or ideological core that holds the Indian nation-state together.
Being yet another reaction, it suffers from no notion of destiny or purpose other than the minimalist intent in providing for its citizens, if even that!

This is a deliberately enforced "ideological vacuum".

Ideological vaccum caused by enetities like Congress, Nehruvian PSism and above all educational system as weel control of media.
DIE must die its ideological death for India to survive:
They are the weakest civilizational link yet causing the maximum harm.

In simple words Indians are being brainwashed with education and media.
First this awareness has to sweep in within the educated literate class.

[ramana]

One has to understand the West and the Islamists are in state of eternal war with periods of piece. All the so called wars are really battles and mis-labelled as wars. The war is for world dominance in ideas, economics and military power.

Atri and Pulekeshi thanks for the insights. Can you both work off line and make it presentable for you give a unified force of history for the Indics which is in contrast to the JNU school. And note that Darius had extended his kingdom into Punjab way before Alexander.

[brihaspati]

There is a problem in comparing incomparables. Both the Brits as well as the Americans did not tolerate "separative" tendencies in their own heartland. Come to think of it - little soft power is visible either in the American civil War or the British "peaceful" measures against Wales, or Scotland. These are the people who are of course most loud in urging India to giev in to "separatists".

The Vietnam "cutting losses" is deceptive. USA's main target was isolating Russia. China under Mao was playing around since the early 60's pushing in here and there outside his borders to prick the Americans. He was basically crying out loud that he had independent of Russia - nuisance value - and the Americans must give his nuisance value a profitable recognition. The whole politics around Vietnam intensifies with Mao's own attempt at re-consolidating all power into his own hands. Secret negotiations between the Americans and Mao start in the late 60's exactly when Vietnam war is intensifying. The Americans are assured that Mao will walk independently of Russia and collaborate with USA. That is the end of communist struggles in Asia. Vietnam is given up by USA, and Mao promises collaboration. Those Maoists who were not at a strong posituon by that time in various regions outside China - were also sacrificed at the same go. Hence went the Naxals in India in that phase.

For the USA its basic purpose was served. It was never really in favour of old style direct colonies - and Vietnam for them was not rich in resoucres they wanted. Both USA and Britain have never given up any chance of fomenting war directly or indirectly in order to gain strategically from them. Even in the formative period of USA, in the early days - they were constantly fighting, or encouraging secession, or outright buying up territories - whenever they saw a chance. Exopansion and getting more land - was a primary objective.

[Prem]

The one lesson we keep forgetting , has not learned and most probably in urgent need to learn is that we did not take the battle to enemy's home weather they were Ropewalas or imperialistwala or current retards . IMHO ,its natural insinct that once someone knows that own house will be subject to all sort of war calamities he/she will think million time before venturing into such risky behaviour. Capabilty, intention and will to take the battle into enemyland must be shoved down the throat of any one ruling /governing India , even by force. Again, idelogically driven, spritually knitted, culturally united ,soil rooted India and Indian with largest standing army, armed with startegic weapons and vison is the onlee solution to correct past millenia mistakes and charter new distiny. Achieve this and we dont have to look back at all.

[brihaspati]

Pulikeshi wrote
5. Even to date, there is no clear civilizational or ideological core that holds the Indian nation-state together.
Being yet another reaction, India of today suffers from no notion of destiny or purpose other than the minimalist
intent in providing for its citizens, if even that! So, the only place we perhaps disagree is the optimism or lack thereof
with the present construct to find a way to decisively seek an end goal to the challenge of the power center to the West.
The slo-mo civil war is unlikely to end, unless and until, this wisdom dawns on citizens of the Indian state.

Pulikeshi ji, slight disagreement.

(1) Yes it does not seem to be apparent at the ruling regime level. So it implies that if such awareness of a civilizational core exists it does not have vocal represnetatives in the corridors of power. But ist apparent non-existence in the highest levels of rashtryia power does not necessarily imply that such an ideological core does not exist. I will again draw upon the Israelo example. Obviously, after the sack by the Romans, Jews basically scatterd all over mediterranean world and also came into IOR, but there were remnants still living back in "Israel". Some of them got into power sharing or dependent "ruling" administrative positions with the shifting power structures of the region. Jews were scattered, with no independent rashtra, and infighting. Would you say there were no clear ideological core that was holding them together? If it was so, how could they revive even while in diaspora and still wait for the historical opportunity to refound their "nation". The mere absence of expression of a national core in the instantaneous regime - does not imply the absence of such an ideological core.

(2) The peoples of India could be acting on a vague and subconscious awareness of the "core", where not everything of that core manifested in their electoral choices or political actions. But still aspects of the core did not allow them to drift too much from the idea of the core - so that when many factors coincided favourably they did support the pushes towards re-consolidation. The Independence movement was one such. A revolution proceeds in stages and not always in an unilinear schema. The "nation refounding" move was started through the religious and political uprising that led to Independence but was incomplete in 47. Opportunists and personal-power seekers won out by posing as intermediaries between the people and the "enemy of the people". But a stage was crossed. There are many stages left. But is also indicates that a core most probably exists that guides people in crucial choices and in critical situations.

Partition was a compromise, not a permanent feature it is now being sought to be imposed as. The core is moving more and more towards an awarenes sof the need for the subsequent stages. It is only a matter of time and provocation - both internal and external.