Bharat Rakshak

Nationalism is anti-thesis to pure Islam. Pure Islam is on rise (and will be on rise for few decades). The very existence of "Pakistani nationalism" is the last "indic element" remaining in that otherwise deracinated society.

Pakistani nationalism is growing "increasingly irrelevant" with growing clout of wahabis and deobandis. In a way, it is like homeopathy.. Islam being the answer to Paki-nationalism. As I said in previous post, all parts of India (== subcontinent including AFG and Myanmar) are interconnected like a neural network. diminishing nationalism in "idea of pakistan" might pave way to caliphate and what would the response of IM, then?

for that, we need to know, what do we stand for?

RajeshA ji,

The question that you have asked will take some time for me to answer, kindly allow me some time to answer your question.
But if i may shorten the answer then the "imperialist ideology" that i am refering to is Islam(ism).

Atriji,
The core message for the model is to allow WB to take the centre stage to tackle the problems facing all over the East because of separatist Eastern fringe of Bangladesh.
The Buildup phase of the plan is specifically for the WB to gain enough strategic strength to deal with the separatists without any involvement of the

Rest of India

and because the internal dynamics of the centre is creating a situation where the entire region of East is going in the hands of the Islamists.
I was a little bit hesitant to use the proper words in the open forum hence used certain words which seems to be meaningless, but let me try to explain.

1. Significant restructuring of the Education System. - How?

The education system in WB is in complete shambles, it is needless to say that the present situation is the result of systematic state policies to destroy the education system so that the system does not produce enough talent to challenge the state itself and specially state could not afford to take the risk of another civil war as in the 60's and 70's. The result of the policies created a situation where the entire education sector is politicised and the flow of ideas was crippled in the bud itself. Without any innovative social upliftment ideas the society gradually deepened into repressive measures and became remarkably similar to the society of the Pakjab.
In both the spcieties it is the landed class that is providing the strength to the regime, only in the case of WB land reformation created a steady flow of men for the eventual control of state power though any means. Needless to say that the society is slowly moving towards dhimmitude. As is in Pakjab where greater puritan Islam is thought to be the answer to all the evils, here more puritan Maoism is steadily replacing the lesser Reds.

This needs to be changed.
1. Ban all student politics in educational institutions at least for 15 years.
2. Complete overhaul of the Education systems with Gurukul systems where inquisitiveness, risk taking,initiatives, mental/physical alertness and discipline becomes much more important than knowledge.
3. Completely erase the mentality of submission to hostile ideologies.

2. Breathneck speed in economy $50B by 2015, Internal and overt resource is not enough for this. - Happening.. What are acceptable compromises for the same?

According to the current stats the economy of WB stands at $22B, in order to achieve the $50B by 2015 which is more than 100% growth it requires more than just economics and simultaneous roll back of some of the Indian laws specially the labour laws.
The huge demographic dividend specially the unnecessary part can be tapped to its fullest extent to provide almost free labour for the rapid industrialisation and with its labour problems the Eastern Textile industry can easily be hijacked to the Western part. This initiative have the petential to stop the flow of goods from the Panda land if the land of Shogun invests some of its technology to this region.

Well for all this to happen you need something more than democratically elected leader and i am not talking of Central Rule.

3. Significant change in the ideological charater. - Did not understand this.. Do you refer to India rescinding to pre-1975 preamble?

I am thinking of Fredrick the Great's conservatism modified for the new century.

4. Set up large amount of Vyam Samities all around so that people look "beautiful when working". - Please elaborate.. What's the issue about "looking beautiful"?

Well a warrior looks most beautiful when he fights and Vyam (Anusilan) Samity model has already been tried and tested in Bengal. Alreadt talks of Samity is in the air after Deganga.

5. Grooming of Strategic leaders in the filed of Spirituality, Cinema, Literature, law, buisness and most important military skills. - How about grooming mango Hindus/Indics for civil-war situation (the one you refer to in Tandava phase ahead)

Above quoted leaders are necessary to manage the pre and post Tandava phase and grooming of Mango Indics is the basic reason why Samities are necessary

May be Ot, but this remind me of my old dream of making a video in which lakho indics doing doing martial dance/s of india wearing kesri bana. The dance practice is perfect way to teach tandav for danav daman. Music and dane can stir the soul.

Atriji,

Akhanda Vanga Bhumi is the stage towards Akhanda Bharat Bhumi, because of the presence of the 800 pound Gorilla of "Bengali Ntionalism" in the room. BN is the real reason why i came up with the model, and i will try to explain that.
It is important to understand the idea of BN was first propunded after the partition of the province of Bengal in 1905 and was glorified by the personalities like Tagore at the time. It was started completely as a subset of Indian Nationalism and is camouflaged in the name of BN to sustian the movement in the face of British deception to destroy the devoloping socio-political resistance in the politically hotbed province of Bengal
But BN has been given a complete different turn with Tagore himself is being quoted to justify the separatism. Its not a coincidence that the seeds tof the separatism was shown right next year in this very part of the region. So what is so dangerous about this BN?
If you google the term you will come up with POV which is coming out from the Land of Padma and not the Land of Ganga and it is likely to reach a stage where identity of Bengali becomes synonymous with the identity of Bangladesh. The faultline is the identity of the Bengali and the identity of the BN, currently which has been hijacked by the Eastern Fringe and is successfully used by the Islamists to promote Separatism. This faultline has been successfullu utilized by the British in the past and is going to be used again in the subcontinent in the future mostly by the Islamists and the Chinese.

The model propounded by both AkalamJi and RajeshA Ji will actually provide the Islamists the necessary platform to expand the resources of the Ummah from the present 140M to 260M using the Bridgehead of BN. It is needless to say that the dhimified Bengali Indics will not be able to undermine the determined push of the Islamists.

Samudragupta ji,

Please complete your thesis.. Will address your PoV once you are done... It is an interesting idea, but please give a thought to repercussions of encouragement to BN on rest of India. It won't be taken very sportingly elsewhere, especially Deccan... Punjab-Bengal-Deccan were the three power-centres. Punjab and bengal were partitioned and that pissed off people not only from these two regions, but also deccan.. the precise reason for MKG's demise was this very rage felt in far south..

Punjab has produced Sikh Pantha which have worked before and can work again as civilizational glue to bring back deracinated people back to indic fold. Bengal has (so far) no such answer to deal with deracinated people. Any type of Nationalism is antithetical to Islam in its pure form. But Islam even in customised form has been detrimental to Indics. For BN to be effective, it has to emerge as stark contrast to Wahabi Islam and for that contrast, one will have to encourage Wahabi-deobandi Islam to become full-blown epidemic. Keep in mind the geography of India too. For Wahabi islam in its full glory to reach Bengal, it will have to traverse entire Ganga Valley. Is it acceptable?

Not only culturally, even geographically, Bengal (entire thing) is integral part of India. Even if cultural assimilation of Bengal into Indian civilization is achieved by this means after 200 years, what about political fall-outs of this federal structure. For this to happen, there has to be a "united states India" which must include entire region of modern Sapta-Sindhu.

This is just a preliminary response.. Please address the questions (especially the one with reference to Pala-Pratihara-rashtrakuta tripartite struggle and en masse migrations within Bengal and beyond). The migrations from BD won't happen in Bengal alone, it will spillover into deccan. Imagine pain in the ass that people like Raj Thakre, Karunanidhi et al will cause if that happens.. How to deal with similar demands for autonomy arising in the third power-centre of India (deccan) then?

Please give a thought to these parameters while you expand your thesis.. But please carry on, it is rather interesting idea...

Samudragupta ji,

Now I know where you are going!

I wholeheartedly agree with you.

In my model, I was taking for granted that over time the Bangladeshi once part of India would start identifying himself with Indian nationhood. I did give some reasons why that would be so, even as we observe that this concept has not trickled down to the Gangetic Valley Muslims and some other Indian Muslims to such an extent, not to speak of Kashmiri Muslims. One of the reasons is that the somewhat cosmopolitanized middle class of any country identifies with the citizenship and nationhood built around the state, and so would be the case of Bangladeshis. Second reason is that Bangladeshis have an intact leadership or elite apart from the Ulema. They have their own ways of determining this leadership (e.g. elections, bureaucracy, military, businessmen, community leaders, etc.).

In a piece, I was writing, I too mentioned that India and Bangladesh should hold Bengal Pride Festivals in all major cities of WB and BD and that India should generously sponsor such an undertaking. Moreover, I wrote, all BD artists of some renown can be given long-term multiple entry visas to India.

I did not go so far as to say, that Kolkata should become the cultural capital of both Bengals, which I find to be a good idea. The general line of thinking, that Indic Bengalis should monopolize Bengali Nationalism, is, I find, an important point that you make.

I also think, your idea of boosting WB's economy in comparison to that of BD, is another important point, which I hadn't as yet gone into.

As far as autonomy for WB is concerned, I would go so far, as to say, that West Bengal can be allowed to have an Joint Economic and Cultural Development Council with Bangladesh until a merger takes place, or rather as long as a final merger is on the cards. This Council can be a part of the Central Govt. possibly within MEA but can be manned by WB Bengalis, some of whom are proposed by the State Govt..

These are just my first impressions, and I look forward to your ideas.

In India we don't really have any means of determining Muslim leadership, except may be in a few Muslim majority areas where Muslims get elected - Muslim League Kerala State Committee(MLKSC), All India Majlis-E-Ittehadul Muslimeen(AIMIM), National Conference, PDP, etc. These represent Muslim ethnicities from Kerala, Hyderabad, J&K. In the Gangetic Valley, the Muslims are represented by Muslim politicians belonging to parties being led by a non-Muslim leadership, with ethnicity not really being an issue there. For all purposes, these Muslim politicians from the Gangetic Valley can only be used by their respective parties as an interface to the Muslim in their constituencies, but their value as Muslim representatives decrease when India wants to interface with Indian Muslims, as they are either often considered as imposed on the Muslims by the various national parties or are considered as tainted by crime. For the rest of the world, especially the Islamic World, these Indian Muslim politicians are hardly taken seriously as Muslim leaders or as representing some Muslim ethnicity.

Often the Indian state then has to deal with the Muslim Ulema in order to negotiate with the Indian Muslims, and that means India would be pandering to Islamism and not the real interests of the Indian Muslims.

What India needs is to have Muslim leaders who can be considered as representing ethnicities, which are mostly Muslim, but are not part of the Ulema or simply want to pander to religious interests of their constituencies.

RajeshA wrote: What India needs is to have Muslim leaders who can be considered as representing ethnicities, which are mostly Muslim, but are not part of the Ulema or simply want to pander to religious interests of their constituencies.

RajeshA-ji, there are no Indian ethnicities which are mostly Muslim.

None. Muslims are not ethnically (or for that matter in any other way) distinguishable from avg other Indian apart from his religion.

----------

PS> I have read a lot of your statements with interest, and have not chosen to discuss a lot of them (for various reasons) but I would just like to put on record one point, I do believe that B-ji's understanding of the specific issues of Islamism in Indian context are much closer to reality than what you have outlined.

Have not been able to login for some time! Very interesting discussion. But a H-bomb has been dropped here it seems.

Have we not really learned from history what happens when we have these "regional" "nationalisms" foisted as a tool to mobilize some existing regional identity in the hope of somehow transmuting it in the future to become a comprehensive "national" identity? The blunder and burden of history it seems. Once the north-west declared the south-east as "Vratya", perhaps with good reasons from their viewpoint - but so did the south-east and showed who was the boss through Magadha and Pataliputra, which in turn was deeply resented by the north-west - and this went on and on and on. So much so that even the joint ventures or collaborations between the possibly Bengali (or Bihari which did not exist that time except in Islamist imagination - and in all possibility the region of modern Bihar as separate from the Vanga and Pala domains came out only because of Turko-Afghan inability to push further east for almost a century) Uday - one of the military commanders under Prithviraja III - is almost forgotten now! "Bangali" is almost a swear word or curse in many areas as you push up through the GV.

On top of that we want a "Bengali nationalism"? Another extension of the driving engine under whose cover the Islamists in BD skillfully carved out a second independent base so that even if Pak went down - the theologians will have a base to carry on playing mischief and keep the whole region distabilized? Almost surely this will be the aspect seized upon by those elements in the north who do not want a single ideological-cultural identity to develop as the foundation of the nation which at the same time is not Islamist or Christianist!

It was the regional Pradesh Congress committes setup pre-Independence that later led to states re-organization on linguistic basis afterwards.

Sanku wrote:

RajeshA wrote: What India needs is to have Muslim leaders who can be considered as representing ethnicities, which are mostly Muslim, but are not part of the Ulema or simply want to pander to religious interests of their constituencies.

RajeshA-ji, there are no Indian ethnicities which are mostly Muslim.

None. Muslims are not ethnically (or for that matter in any other way) distinguishable from avg other Indian apart from his religion.

When I speak of Muslim ethnicities, I speak of Indian (extended) ethnicities, which are majority Muslim - Bangladeshi (Bengali), Sindhi, Baluchi, Gilgitian, Baltistani, Hindkowan, Pakjabi, Seraiki, Kashmiri, Pushtuni, etc. However in the above context, of the integrationist model I proposed, I probably meant just Bangladeshi initially. These have leaderships who are Muslim (as the ethnicity is majority Muslim) but are not part of Ulema, nor can be seen as imposed by others like Hindus.

Sanku wrote:PS> I have read a lot of your statements with interest, and have not chosen to discuss a lot of them (for various reasons) but I would just like to put on record one point, I do believe that B-ji's understanding of the specific issues of Islamism in Indian context are much closer to reality than what you have outlined.

I am sure brihaspati garu is correct in his analysis of Islamism, and he has also given very good proposals with which I agree.

I am using two extra variables in my treatise - China, and the China-Islam Axis. If these two variable were not there, I would be agreeing with much of what bji says.

X-Posting from under-burkha edition

RamaY wrote: We have talked about the dangers that India faces from China, and how our neighborhood is vulnerable to China's advances.

What is a better strategy for India?

A. China having influence over the Muslim/Islamic nations of the sub-continent and reaping the benefits that come with such a alliance/occupation? OR

B. India submitting to sub-continental muslims and bear the associated costs in the faint hope to preempt Chinese? Are the costs (following are a small taste of it)
• Associated social costs (Change of constitution, muslim majority parliament etc)
• Associated law-and-order costs (convincing the populations of Pakistan, Afghanistan, and BD populations on rule of law)
• Associated economic costs (cost of retraining and rebuilding the industrial infrastructure – Refer my calculations on the $2+T costs to train and employ Indian agri-labor. Now we are looking at a minimum of $5T costs for retraining and urbanization of subcontinent. What time frame we are looking at to achieve this feat?
• Associated civic infrastructure costs -

The more important question is what additional geopolitical influence a Hindu-majority India can achieve by strategically spending these same amounts (say $5T)

"Bengal"and Bengali needs to be placed into its proper context when we talk of its strategic future significance for India.

I see two extreme POV's : one one side, it is the dhimmified deracinated Bengali so weak that it cannot resist Islamics, and on the other extreme, it is a supposed potent "nationalism" so powerful that it can dissolve Islamism in ist loving acid. Both are just that - extreme pov's.

Atriji is a competent analyzer of the Rashtrakuta-Pala-Deccan triangle - so I will leave that to him. I will come closer to home - after the adevnt and "fall" of the north to Islamism and the Delhi Sultanate. We know that three regional centres of cultural "revolution" started the first ideological resurgence against the "fall" - two of these are the two extremes of GV - Punjab under Nanak and Bengal under Nimai Chaitanya. The third was Deccan, Karnat, Maharashtra. What is the most obvious distinction ? The two end points of GV had to start without any Hindu regime to provide even occasional protection, and they had to do it right under the nose of Islamic military establishment. In the south, some degree of refuge was still possible.

Neither Punjab, nor Bengal could recover its entire region. But they did try, and they were backstabbed as usual by those who captured power in UP. The story remains the same whether it is the Delhi Sultanate, or the Mughals or the Congress.

Betrayal, inter-regional regional rivalries are not my point here, but the reality of the situation is much more complex than the extreme POV's. In many senses the ideological dynamism of the two ends of the GV has time and again provided the seeds of radicalism and seeds of revivalism against invasive and antagonistic incursions. Some of the earliest revolutionaries - and the most hardcore ones - against the Brits came from these ends. Some of the earliest providers and explorers of "Hindu nationalism" come from Bengal. Some of the strongest visionaries of an unified SD based India came from Bengal.

Perhaps the best imagery is to think of remnant "Hindu" Bengal (a controversial concept, and I am using it loosely) as the proverbial "Brahmin" in modern Indian official viewpoint. A much abused, bashed, reconstructed image - suiting the jealousies and political-ideological needs of those who have had reasons to be scared of the Bengali or the Punjabi as competitors for political power (and perhaps therefore a shared feeling with the British masters against these dangerous "radicals" who could upset future apple-carts and therefore to be constantly weakened or delegetimized). Just as the modern Indian category of "Brahmin", an ideal mythologically evil source of all troubles, the eternally intriguing and conspiratorial, opportunist, weak, who is constantly seeking to undermine "honest simple bhumiputras" - can be conveniently used to mobilize collective inferiority complexes for personal power, bashing of Punjabi Sikhs and Bengali Hindus is a good way of delegitimizing the radicalizing and revivalist traditions of these two communities/regions. We should explore whether such criticisms do not have ulterior motives just as the British had! Whether such criticisms come most strongly from quarters and areas that have benefited from collaborating with hostile and foreign invading forces like the Sultanate, Islamists or the Brits!

The two ends of GV provide weakness, cowardice, betrayal on one hand and selflessness, revivalism, radicalism on the other, both in ample measure. But which part of GV does not provide ample measures of both? Or for that matter which part of India is free of the dichotomy?

But making them distinct - fringe - "nationalisms" - plays in to the hands of exactly those who pushed these two out in historical periods for their own personal power ambitions, because such ambitious forces do not want or fear a greater Indian identity which they may not be able to control for personal benefits.

Obviously the middle elite didn't hold and under many guises worked to delegitmize the two ends of the GV. Are the non-elite middle also of the same mind set? I dont think so. Maybe these are the ones that need to be revived.

The non-elite middle perhaps is decimated - migrated, and "second-class" shadows in more prosperous west coast dream merchant cities washed by the Arabian Sea - literally and figuratively. The only commonality that can revive all three - is the SD, emphasizing that as the focus and fulcrum. Hence perhaps the continuous battering from usual suspects.

Forcing the Bengali and the Punjabi - into distinct identities - have forced their inherent radicalism into channels that express their essential historical trauma at the hands of post-"Hindu" Delhi, and therefore a potential antagonism to "Delhite" control. There is no doubt that feelings are mutual, but it need not have been so. These have solid cultural and philosophical ties and are part and parcel of Bharat. Granting them a basis for an independent "nationalism" is malicious. It simply confirms those among them who seek to become exclusive [the standard technique by which we have enhanced, protected, and hardened Islamist or Christianist exclusivist claims] and disjoints them further and further from their Bharatyia and SD roots.

It helps reduce competition for "kayemi's" [entrenched] but weakens the rashtra and SD. Pushing out and recognizing exclusive claims have resulted in the Partition - should not allow a repeat of that tactic!

Atri,
As I keep saying, Punjab, Maharashtra and Bengal need to be together in this. Chandrasekhar Azad is waiting for this only. Pre-Gandhi politics show that in modern times. Even the Pala and Rashtrakuta were in together most of the time (nothing against Pratihara - remembering Bappaditya Rawal after all).

Samudragupta,
It has to be more on this line:

Bharat amar Bharatvarsha
Swadesh amar swapna go
Tomate amra lahiya janma
Dhanya hoyechi Dhanya go

rather than just:

Banglar maati Banglar jol
Banglar vayu Banglar phol
Punya houk Punya houk
Punya houk he Bhagavan.

To all Gurus,

Kindly let me try to gist down some of the points that came up:

1. What is the ultimate objective?

To bring the landmass from Hindukush to the Eastern Jungles and from the northern pleatue to the southern sea under the central authority and guided by the law set forward by the Founding fathers "Saptarshi".

2. Destroying all forms of subnationalism within the region.

3. What is stopping this aim?

Slew of factors both internal and external

4. The eternal battle between the Purva/Paschim/Dakshin.

5.Taking opportunity of the battle fifth columnist have taken the pole.

6. The pole/core/centre is effectively balancing out the three axis with collaboration from the external forces.

7. All the axis is trying to balance out the other to get the core.

8. Evidently it is the external force that controls this land as the core is weak to deal with the external forces and it is not willing to allow any of the axis to take control.

9. What shud be the ideal approach to be adapted so that the external forces can be decimated?

10. First approach, the core gets strength enough to deal with the external forces and with the individual axis. But the external Forces will not allow the core to strenghten enough so that it can take on the responsibility itself.

11. Axis gets proactive and sorts out both the core and the external force.Assumption in this case is that all the three axis will move in sync.

12. Another approach for the Axis, directly strike at the external enemy and weaken its hold on the core.

13. It is the last approach that i have proposed and i expect the greatest opposition to come from the external enemy and the subjugated core, instead the opposiotion is coming out from the axis.

14. This is prompthing me to ask the question on how relevant the axis really are in the present context when we have a single politico-military unit?

15. How can we stand on the basic assumption that the tri axis is so immature that they cannot solve the internal problem when each of them is facing an existentional threat from the same external force?

16. Why should we base our assumption that the curent setup of core is the binding factor that holds the nation together and there are no strong force of socio-cultural undercurrent that have a powerful antidote to the core. Its expected the initial part of the rise of the BN will be whole heartedly opposed by this force, but once the scheme of things move forward it is the core that will be decimated in the rising tide of the socio-cultural force.

RamaY wrote:B. India submitting to sub-continental muslims and bear the associated costs in the faint hope to preempt Chinese? Are the costs (following are a small taste of it)
• Associated social costs (Change of constitution, muslim majority parliament etc)
• Associated law-and-order costs (convincing the populations of Pakistan, Afghanistan, and BD populations on rule of law)
• Associated economic costs (cost of retraining and rebuilding the industrial infrastructure – Refer my calculations on the $2+T costs to train and employ Indian agri-labor. Now we are looking at a minimum of $5T costs for retraining and urbanization of subcontinent. What time frame we are looking at to achieve this feat?
• Associated civic infrastructure costs -

The more important question is what additional geopolitical influence a Hindu-majority India can achieve by strategically spending these same amounts (say $5T)

Just some remarks about the above assumptions:

1. Going by today's numbers, if Bangladesh, Nepal, Sri Lanka, Bhutan, Sindh, Baluchistan and Gilgit-Baltistan are brought into a United India, then the number of Muslims in a United India of 1444 million, would be 353 million. So we are not talking about any majority Muslim population, just the world's biggest Muslim population.
2. The Law & Order problems would not necessarily increase, but could also decrease, because right now the Maoist insurgency, the Northeast separatism, the Kashmir 'Azadi' movement could be brought under control. The imposition of a state on Muslims, with which the Muslims can identify with, rather as is the case right now, where Indian Muslims are not and do not really want to be a part of the mainstream, can lead to an eventual push back of Islamism from the Indian Subcontinent, so the Islamism law & order aspect can also be dealt with much more easily. The security agencies of the country would have a much freer hand throughout the Indian Subcontinent, making it difficult for separatists, insurgents, guerrillas, jihadists, to hide.
3. As India tries to attract manufacturing from around the world to India, just like China has done, cheap labor can be a definite plus. It is on the back of these sweatshops that the Chinese have built their cities. Also for building infrastructure one needs cheap labor. Cheap labor can lead to productivity boom also.

Just some thoughts!

Thoughts of BipinChandra Pal from "Nationality and Empire" published in 1923 - Guys, this book is delight to read... highly recommended...

"This Pan-European combination [that we now call the West] will be a very serious menace to the non-European world. It will be bound to come into serious conflict with both Pan-Islamism and Pan-Mongolianism [metaphor for Expansionist China]. If Europe can settle her internal jealousies betimes, she will be able to dominate easily both the Islamic and the Mongolian world. Nothing will prevent in that case the parceling out of the Muslim lands on the one side, and of China on the other. But that is not very likely. It will take, at least, as long a time for the European chancelleries to forget their past jealousies and present rivalries, as it will take for China, now that she has awakened from the sleep of ages, to put her own house in order and organize her leviathan strength to hold her own against the entire world.

"The same thing is likely to happen in the Islamic world also; and the fall of Turkey in Europe will hasten this combination. It will not be an organized confederacy like that of China and Japan, but a far more dangerous, because more subtle, combination of the hearts of countless hordes who hold nothing so dear, neither land nor life, as their religion. And the real strength of this Pan- Islamic outburst will come from Egypt and India [which then included present-day Pakistan and Bangladesh], where it will be safe from the crushing weight of the Pan-European confederacy. England will not allow her European confederates to interfere with her own domestic affairs; such interference would break up the confederation at once. She will have to settle this Pan-Islamic problem, so far as it may affect her own dominions, herself."

Then describing where the danger for India will come from, Pal writes under the title "Our Real Danger". "And it is just here that our safety from this possible Pan-European combination also lies. Because of the British connection, India will have nothing to fear from any possible combination of the European powers. The same is also true of Egypt, though perhaps in a lesser degree. Our real menace will come not from Europe but from Asia, not from Pan-Europeanism but from Pan-Islamism and Pan-Mongolianism. These dangers are, however, common, both to India and Egypt and Great Britain. To provide against it, Great Britain will have to find and work out a satisfactory and permanent settlement of the Indian and the Egyptian problem, and we, on our part, will have also to come to some rational compromise with her. British statesmanship must recognize the urgent and absolute need of fully satisfying the demands of Indian and Egyptian nationalism, and India and Egypt will have to frankly accept the British connection - which is different from British subjection - as a necessary condition of their national life and freedom. To wantonly seek to break up this connection, while it will only hurt Great Britain, may positively kill every chance and possibility of either Indian or Egyptian nationalism ever realizing itself."

Predicting and pleading the need for the alliance of the West and India, Pal writes under the sub-head "Our True Safety": "Indian nationalism in any case, has, I think, really no fear of being permanently opposed or crippled by Great Britain. On the contrary, the british connection can alone offer its effective protection against both the Pan-Islamic and the Pan-Mongolianism menace. As long as we had to consider Great Britain alone or any other European Power for the matter of that, while thinking of the future of Indian nationalism, the problem was comparatively simple and easy. But now we have to think if China on the one hand, and of the new Pan-Islamic danger on the other. The 60 millions of Mohammedans in India, if inspired with Pan-Islamic aspirations, joined to the Islamic principalities and powers that stand both to our West and our northwest, may easily put an end to all our nationalist aspirations, almost at any moment, if the present British connection be severed.

"The four-hundred millions of the Chinese empire can, not only gain an easy footing in India, but once that footing is gained, they are the only people under the sun who can hold us down by sheer superior physical force. There are no other people who can do this. This awakening of China is, therefore, a very serious menace - in the present condition of our country, without an organized and trained army and a powerful navy of our own - to the maintenance of any isolated, though sovereign, independence of the Indian people. Even if we are able to gain it, we shall never be able to keep it, in the face of this Pan-Islamic and Pan-Mongolian menace. And when one considers these terrible possibilities of the world situation as it is slowly evolving before one's eyes, one is forced to recognize the absolute need of keeping up the British connection in the interest of Indian nationalism itself, for the very simple and sufficient reason that there is absolutely much greater chance of this nationalism fully realizing itself with rather than without this connection."

1923-1928 seems to be a fantastic time in India's cycle, so far as visionaries and their compositions are concerned. Veer Savarkar wrote "hindutva", Bipinda Pal wrote most of his books, Lalaji wrote his letters.. the clarity of thought present in 1910's seems to have carried over in 1920's resulting in "theoretical composition" of ideologies and visions..

Atri wrote:"... Our real menace will come not from Europe but from Asia, not from Pan-Europeanism but from Pan-Islamism and Pan-Mongolianism..."

And now consider them both acting in concert to take down India!

6. NRB called in masse to participate for "The Future of Bengal". - you mean something similar to NRG (non resident Gujaratis) help pouring in.. but is Indian nationalism or allegiance to Indic civilization strong enough in Bengal (as compared to western half of India)? Furthermore, is NRB section that affluent?

The idea is to use the professional experience of NRB's to build the economy and to use this opportunity to recall back some of the toxic elements like "Argana Devi" to deal with them at the proper time. NRB's are definitely not affluent enough to have a major say but the acdemic circles can be tapped to change the educational sector.Non Resident Bangladeshis if found steady opportunity in WB and integration of the NRB in the scheme will give the needed thrust for the elites on the other side to look for the integration. Its more of a psychological impact than real hard economic-political impact.

10.Bangladeshi film industry moved enmasse to Kolkata, more money, quality films. - Why move here? migrations of business are followed by migrations of people.. en masse migrations of people are always troublesome.. why not develop Dhaka?

The idea is to control and manipulate the populace through entertainment, the word ‘en-masse’ is probably wrong, but the idea is to move important talents of the cultural world to Kolkata and in the process destroying the parallel view points to reach the people.

11. Bangladeshi Richs preferring to stay more in clean Kolkata than in Dirty Dhaka. - Why will Dhaka remain "dirty" if Bengali conscience is stroked so high that NRB start pouring money in "aamar Sonar bangla"? how will Kolkata remain clean (like every metro, kolkata has clean parts and shittty parts) after your proposed "en masse" migration?

There won’t be any ‘en-masse ‘ migration only migration of rich and elite who actually funds the political decisions in Bangladesh and general persons who matters in the society of Bangladesh . The point is not ‘Money’ but the psychology of the people who matters, if they feel that living in Kolkata does not make any difference than Dhaka, this feeling will be reflected in the political decisions back in their country which in turn will be helpful in moving Bangladesh towards integration.

12. Monetary Union. - did not understand this.. please elaborate...

This is the most important of the scheme required for the planned integration which in fact means the adoption of the Indian Rupee by Bangladesh.It is needless to say that the currency union will increase the Bangladeshi economy with RBI act as a liason between the Bangladeshi Gov and IGOV.
Currency union will be a huge motivational factor for the integration.

RajeshA wrote: Just some remarks about the above assumptions:

1. Going by today's numbers, if Bangladesh, Nepal, Sri Lanka, Bhutan, Sindh, Baluchistan and Gilgit-Baltistan are brought into a United India, then the number of Muslims in a United India of 1444 million, would be 353 million. So we are not talking about any majority Muslim population, just the world's biggest Muslim population.
2. The Law & Order problems would not necessarily increase, but could also decrease, because right now the Maoist insurgency, the Northeast separatism, the Kashmir 'Azadi' movement could be brought under control. The imposition of a state on Muslims, with which the Muslims can identify with, rather as is the case right now, where Indian Muslims are not and do not really want to be a part of the mainstream, can lead to an eventual push back of Islamism from the Indian Subcontinent, so the Islamism law & order aspect can also be dealt with much more easily. The security agencies of the country would have a much freer hand throughout the Indian Subcontinent, making it difficult for separatists, insurgents, guerrillas, jihadists, to hide.
3. As India tries to attract manufacturing from around the world to India, just like China has done, cheap labor can be a definite plus. It is on the back of these sweatshops that the Chinese have built their cities. Also for building infrastructure one needs cheap labor. Cheap labor can lead to productivity boom also.

Just some thoughts!

Following are the population figures from CIA factbook


Law and order issues
[*]I am not sure of solving JK issue, but United India will inherit Pakistan's internal security issues. How United India resolve Islam's Sunni/Shia/Ahmedi etc issues? We will then have Iran and KSA having non-state actors instead of Pakistan.

[*]How will United India handle a scenario where current Paki and BD internal issues mutate into something we see between JK and Benglore, Kerala?

[*]Which sub-continental nations support Maoist issue in India (other than Nepal?). Will Nepal's unification solve Indian Maoist issue?

Cheap Labor
[*] What will be the economic cost of addressing the basic needs of this cheap labor before they become productive?
[*] What will be the economic cost of training and industrializing this cheap labor before they can become productive for an export oriented market?
[*] Does the world have the "demand" for the manufacturing capacity of two Chinas? (Please note that China is yet to industrialize more than 50% of its population)
[*] Does the world have enough "natural resources" to support the "supply side" industrial infrastructure?

Atri ji , What do you mean by Pan mongolianism?Do you mean Pan Sinicism 'cause Mongolia doesn't seem to be involved in global politics in any major way.

Yes.. Pan-Mongolianism refers to expansion of China.. Yuan dynasty which was in fact offshoot of Mongols is the role-model for expansionist China...

Atri ji, just a word of caution.When we use Pan mongolianism , the occupation of inner mongolia might get justification in the eyes of many people.So my suggestion is to use Pan sinicism itself.Why equate Mongolia with China today even if the current model of chinese expansionism mirrors that of Yuan dynasty?Sometimes words do matter.

darshhan wrote:Atri ji, just a word of caution.When we use Pan mongolianism , the occupation of inner mongolia might get justification in the eyes of many people.So my suggestion is to use Pan sinicism itself.Why equate Mongolia with China today even if the current model of chinese expansionism mirrors that of Yuan dynasty?Sometimes words do matter.

true, but these words have been used in 1923 itself..

Fixed the original post though... just to make sure message is clear..

Samudragupta wrote

9. What shud be the ideal approach to be adapted so that the external forces can be decimated?

10. First approach, the core gets strength enough to deal with the external forces and with the individual axis. But the external Forces will not allow the core to strenghten enough so that it can take on the responsibility itself.

11. Axis gets proactive and sorts out both the core and the external force.Assumption in this case is that all the three axis will move in sync.

12. Another approach for the Axis, directly strike at the external enemy and weaken its hold on the core.

13. It is the last approach that i have proposed and i expect the greatest opposition to come from the external enemy and the subjugated core, instead the opposiotion is coming out from the axis.

14. This is prompthing me to ask the question on how relevant the axis really are in the present context when we have a single politico-military unit?

15. How can we stand on the basic assumption that the tri axis is so immature that they cannot solve the internal problem when each of them is facing an existentional threat from the same external force?

16. Why should we base our assumption that the curent setup of core is the binding factor that holds the nation together and there are no strong force of socio-cultural undercurrent that have a powerful antidote to the core. Its expected the initial part of the rise of the BN will be whole heartedly opposed by this force, but once the scheme of things move forward it is the core that will be decimated in the rising tide of the socio-cultural force.

The idea that a single core exists that is separate from three different separate axes - is a model and an oversimplification. None of these three separate so-called axes and the core appear to be strong enough - because they can never be strong enough each on their own. They can only become strong enough if they recognize themselves as part and parcel of a single force.

So all the more reason not to use any sub-identity to try and hope for a supposed overwhelming fundamental transmutation of that subidentity into a superidentity.

Any subidentity once recognized and defined as distinct from other co-existing and space sharing subidentities - that also somehow manages to establish "dominance" - is a surefire way of throwing the whole project flush down the drain. Every subidentity that we have carefully nurtured in India that also gives the holders of that identity some advantages over their fellows - some excuse to be lazy enough to get a guaranteed share of the social surplus and ensuring the right to claim that extra share and pass it on to descendants as a right of inheritance by birth.

I am all for a revolution (if it can also keep its head on its shoulders and level - and not devour its own children and the best brains). But do we know what a social-wave of revolutionary "upsurge" actually needs to gain momentum? Any revolution needs a "constituency", an overwhelming sense of anomie and frustration in that constituency (not necessarily linked to poverty or deprivation, in fact perhaps rather opposite), almost complete de-integration from the existing rashtra, a "new" idea and identity that "ennobles" all who join in it.

This makes the ideas of BN or any sub-regional identities as the basis for a future "revolutionary" wave as a non-starter. The idea that can inspire and fire the imagination and ennobles cannot carry the baggage of what is still in recent memory, and therefore has shown its uglier sides. (I am assuming you are familiar with the nuances of the "east" - surely then you must know of the expression "pratimar khar beryie jaoa" - the straw under-skeleton of the clay idol has come out from rubbing and close "contact").

It needs to be an idea simple and abstract enough, yet distant enough so that people have no traumatic memory of the abuse that was once associated with it if it did exist in some form in the distant past. (Communists at first had the benefit of that "freshness" and all the points I mentioned - and gained the confidence of large numbers of people sin Russia and China - because it could shape their dreams and they had no idea what would come afterwards).

It is better to look for that revolution in some idea of a SD based nationalism - since we have not had it for a long long time.

As I have pointed out before in a post, I am against the bashing of the Bengali and the Punjabi identities. Neither do I favour maintaining the recognition of the split that had weakened and destroyed the GV. A very simple criteria can do : that no other distinction is recognized as long as they follow certain basic rituals and traditions and agree to be identified by the name they have now been commonly assigned by "outsiders" or call themselves as SD. Bhagat Singh had the right idea while forming his team, but his methods were too emotional and romantic. He needed to be a MKG in methods while retaining the acute and accurate understanding of the problem in GV.

I cannot win over someone by highlighting my differences with him, or thrusting my oh-so-superior-identity like a half-burnt brick on his nose. I personally only do this with people I have come to the conclusion that I can never be friends with or who should never be made friends with - and this is the attitude I carry over to a certain ideology but not its followers. (So I will never compromise in accepting bits and pieces of that ideology - but I have the confidence that with the right thickness of velvet on the glove covering the steel hand, the followers of that ideology can be made to abandon their ideology to a large extent). But for the rest - the so-called axes, the pseduo-and pretentious core - they have to be the primary recruits, and must be ready to compromise on their identity distinctions to get that brotherhood re-established. It is from this viewpoint I am criticizing the BN-model.

Karzai appears to have had some backing to continue to fight "western" hesitation about a quick withdrawal. It is difficult to pinpoint the source of this strength but could lie in more than one.

Obama Rebukes Karzai Over Demands to Curb Raids

Disagreements between Afghan President Hamid Karzai and the U.S.-led allies over how the war should be pursued burst into the open at a coalition summit this weekend, with U.S. President Barack Obama rejecting Afghan demands to curtail raids and air strikes, and telling the Afghan leader he must listen to American concerns.

Mr. Obama's unusually blunt remarks came after talks with Mr. Karzai in Lisbon, where the leaders of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization endorsed a plan to hand over security responsibilities to Afghan forces across the country over the next four years.

On Sunday, the Taliban hailed the summit's decision, expected to lead to the pullout of most international forces by late 2014, as "good news for the Afghan people" and "a sign of failure for the American government." The Taliban statement urged a speedier pullout, saying coalition members "should not postpone the withdrawal of their forces even by one day."

An interesting tactical move - a testing of the waters?

http://in.news.yahoo.com/20/20101121/14 ... for_1.html

Cong leader to donate Rs 10 lakh for construction of cow-shed

Sun, Nov 21 11:05 PM

Vadodara, Nov 21 (PTI) Senior Congress leader Ahmed Patel has decided to donate Rs 10 lakh for the construction of a cow-shed near a centuries-old dargah in the district. Patel, the political secretary to Congress president Sonia Gandhi, announced his decision at a convention held tonight to commemorate the death anniversary Hazrat Shah Quayamuddin Dada at Ekkalbara village, about 18 kms from here.

Besides the Congress leader, well-known preacher Morari Bapu also announced a donation of Rs 11,000 for the same. The announcement of Patel and Morari Bapu followed soon after village-head Kailashben Rajendrasinh Rathod spoke about the panchayat''s resolution to construct a cow-shed.

The cow-shed will be constructed near the 325-year-old dargah in the village, which was built in the memory of Hazrat Quayamuddin Dada. Speaking at the event, Patel underlined the need to organise such conventions across the country for building a healthy society and a powerful nation.

The convention also demanded ban on cow-slaughter and decided to take up fight against terrorism.

Now all they need to do do is build a biogas plant to deal with the cow dung the Cows will generate.

This will lead to clean and healthy cooking fuel for the community women.

JMT

Pan Mongolianism meaning Pan Sinicism is well understood, but there is a little known movement among different Mongol tribes called Pan Mongolism that involves, Khalkha, Buryat, Kalmyk/Oirat etc. who are spread out in many countries in and around Mongolia and neighboring Siberia, some such as the Buddhist Kalmyk migrants are found in far flung Kalmykia, in European part of Russia. This movement is probably a subset of Pan Turanism which was an off shoot of Pan Turkism. This Pan Mongolism is virulently anti Han Chinese.

http://www.asianresearch.org/articles/2644.html

My parents are from rural Comilla region of Bangladesh, near Tripura of Indian NE (around 30 miles from the border). I asked them about a future unification of Bengal under a possible SAARC union, as was discussed earlier. Their reaction was generally positive about working together with West Bengal as they feel sympathetic towards West Bengal and Kolkata. Many of our older family members (uncles) used to live in Kolkata, before Partition. But they still cannot accept the idea of a complete political union, although monetary, customs, economic union is definitely desirable. Creating jobs within Bangladesh will definitely reduce migration pressure of Bangladeshi's to rest of the world, including India. During a visit to India in 1976, their impression was that Kolkata was lagging far behind Delhi or Mumbai back then, but that was 3.5 decades in the past, I am sure things have changed a lot since then. At least Kolkata has a underground subway now, Dhaka badly needs one, not sure when there will be one.

Speaking of the Chinese threat, I often talk to my Korean other half about it. Judging from her feeling and knowing a bit of history of Japan, Korea and South East Asia and North Asia, Pan Sinicism or Han Imperialism will always hit a brick wall against other surviving non-Han cultures surrounding the middle kingdom, as it did in the past 3000 years or so. The Tibetan, Uighur and Inner Mongolia cases are the most recent incarnations. The Han current approach is to inundate an area with majority Han under a colonial rule, so that model will be resisted by any neighbors, as it simply means end of their ethnic and linguistic cultures.

Apparently Koreans (even the younger politically conscious generation) vaguely know that India is the only country that can stand up to the Han Chinese menace, because of sheer size of population, and a possible consolidation in the subcontinent is feared by the Chinese and they will probably try to stop this from happening in any way possible.

About Islamist and Pan Islamic threat, as I have mentioned many times, for a credible threat to emerge in the global geopolitical scene for status quo powers like the West and emerging powers like PRC or India, there needs to be a viable central core country with sizable majority Muslim population. Indonesia is out in the periphery, Iran is too small and belong to minority Shia, Turkey is too small, Pakistan is a failed state, Egypt is not industrialized and Bangladesh is overpopulated and poor. As for this Bangladeshi, I would rather be a rich Indian-first Muslim, than being a poor Muslim-first Bangladeshi, and would much prefer to be at the top of Muslim totem-pole, rather than being at the bottom. Last but not least India's rise will change the self-perception and external perception of SDRE population on global stage and that alone will do a lot for Bangladeshi's to get ahead in this Gora-Haldi dominated world, SAARC or no-SAARC. At work, we have Iranians, Arabs, Indians and I always seem to feel more comfortable with some of the Indians, probably because of the culture we share. My closest friend at work used to be one person from around Banglore, now it is one Gujarati. I communicated with both in English, as I cannot speak much Hindi, but even for a Bengali like myself, I can easily understand many of his Gujrati words, as they probably share a common root in Sanskrit and Prakrit.

I know there are some in BRF already who are raising the issue of Taqqiya, to answer that accusation, I would simply say that I probably represent a forward thinking and probably a very small part of the population in question, namely subcontinental Muslim and its subset Bangladeshi or Bengali Muslim. Over time, I believe, this POV will get more solidified, as more and more people become more aware and as changing world situations reveal the geopolitical tectonic plates, which also I believe, points towards this direction. Future is unpredictable mostly, but major trends can be predicted according to the theory/hypothesis I had presented earlier in the Harmonization thread of GDF. More than anything else, that is the basis for my POV.

I would like some economists here in BRF to revisit Angus Maddison and his projections, I am sure it came up somewhere in BRF before:

http://www.ggdc.net/MADDISON/oriindex.htm

please note the last two articles that deal with India & Pakistan in the above home page.

http://www2.goldmansachs.com/ideas/glob ... middle.pdf
http://www.visualizingeconomics.com/200 ... world-gdp/
http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2010/08/hi ... world-gdp/
http://www.chicagobooth.edu/alumni/club ... nsachs.pdf
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_co ... _estimates

On the last link, please go to the bottom of the page and double click the sort button next to 2050 and this will show a list of countries sorted by total projected GDP. Please note here that according to this projection by 2050, PRC reaches a GDP of about 70.7T, USA reaches 38.5T, India reaches 37.7T, Pakistan reaches 2T and Bangladesh reaches 1.5T (both at the bottom of the table).

We need to do an analysis about possible changes in these projections in case of a possible SAARC union as we discussed earlier. My feeling is that a SAARC union where the smaller countries merge with India (excluding Pakistan and Afghanistan) will tilt the competitive edge to India's favor due to change in geopolitical scene and make it possible for India to grab a little more share of the world GDP, mainly at the expense of PRC, bringing it closer to PRC and thus exceed the US GDP by a large margin.

The most important part for any Bangladeshi or Pakistani would be to look at their future GDP's (per capita and total) within a SAARC union, which has the potential to increase it manifold, while at the same time giving a boost to India's GDP (per capita and total) as well.

Someday, I will make an attempt to study Maddison's analysis and projection and see how relevant they are to the theory I had presented, as competitive edge is one of his important themes and also the main theme in my theory as well. In brief my theory deals with the relationship of competitive edge of population groups with two factors:

1. historical continuity and
2. relative size of economic systems

AKalam wrote:Many of our older family members (uncles) used to live in Kolkata, before Partition. But they still cannot accept the idea of a complete political union, although monetary, customs, economic union is definitely desirable.

AKalam ji,
nice to hear from you.

I am still not finished with my ebook. It has become somewhat larger and treats more dimensions of the project. Will let you know, when I am there.

A political union with another country means often a loss of identity, somehow not being able to call yourself that what one has been calling oneself for such a long time. A bigger fear is the loss of control over one's own lands and destiny to others.

A political union between India and Bangladesh does have consequences for both countries, and to a large extent the above would also be true, BUT not in the way most of us would expect. In order to overcome the fear, one needs to understand the nature of India and how politics in India functions.

India prides herself on the fact that India is a conglomeration of multiple ethnic subnationalities, all bound together in a compact of common history and faith in a common destiny. In contrast to many other countries, Indian nation ensures that the subnationalities have a strong sense of their subnational identity precisely because there are so many of them together. Even those who would like to throw their subnational identity out of the window, cannot do it because everybody else in the room define themselves by the subnational identity and refer to you too by your subnational identity. On top of that, there is no homogenization project underway to make people forget those identities. Those identities have never come in the way of expressing oneself as Indian in parallel. The pride in the role one's own ethnicity has played in defining and enriching the whole of India or Bharat, entices one to claim that contribution and hence to claim the Indian identity as well.

So even as Bangladesh at one level would submerge within India, as each of Bangladesh's administrative divisions become an Indian State, not only would an echo of Bangladesh remain within the hearts of Bangladeshis, as happens to be the case with many East Germans, but there would be a concrete administrative procedure to keep Bangladesh 'alive' - the Bangladeshi Electoral Zone. The Bangladesh Electoral Zone means that only Bangladeshis can vote in any elections in Bangladeshi states and only Bangladeshis can stand as candidates in elections in Bangladeshi states.

As far as political power is concerned, the political power say a region wields in India is not much different than what a region wields in EU, only the mechanism is different. In the EU there is an EU Council where all the heads of state meet and depending on their influence decide some policy, and if the context is a particular country, then the others state how much the others can be helpful to that country. In the Indian Parliament, the same thing happens. On the responsibilities that the Central Government have in the federation, decisions are taken for the whole country, and if it is something that has to do with a particular region, then all sit together to see how the whole country can help.

In one model (Confederation) the Prime Minister would be negotiating for the 'region' in a council, while in the other direct representatives of the people would be negotiating in a Parliament.

The Bangladeshis would be deciding whom to send as their representative to the Parliament, and they have to have the confidence in their representatives that they would be able to express the sentiments of the people appropriately and ably negotiate for the interests of the Bangladeshi people.

Somehow the people just think somewhat simplistically that India is the bigger country, and if Bangladesh joins it, then rest of India would be lording over Bangladesh. They somehow forget that the rest of India has an opinion or a statement about Bangladesh, only as long as Bangladesh is a separate country, but once Bangladesh is part of the union, the rest have no homogeneous opinion on Bangladesh or have their own statement to make or their own policy to formulate. Bangladesh is then part of the whole and the Bangladeshi representatives decide along with the rest, what opinion the nation holds, what statements it makes and what policies it pursues. Considering how big Bangladesh is, it is quite possible that Bangladeshis would be playing the major part in steering the course of the whole union.

Do people think there is need for an economics thread in the strategic issues forum.

For example, India-China trade policy must take into account China's military relationships.

RajeshA ji,

I am always here, staying updated from time to time, but lately a little occupied with personal life, hence my limited participation.

Thanks for the detailed explanation of a meaningful role of Bangladeshi people within Indian Union, I am personally sold on this idea from long back, since I started developing my little theory.

There are always people with different ideas and opinions, such as my parents. There are extremes such as fear mongers on both sides - but borders and nation states that were not there in the past and were artificially created out of thin air will only hinder progress and development of human potential for their inhabitants.

Some of us dream of undoing the Partition (excluding Pakjab), a legacy of around 63 years and there are others who dream of a Spanish reconquista, and thus undo the legacy of a millennium. I think all of us have our roles to play as some of these dreams can enable us to reach a common ground (as b ji pointed out) which can give us the base to work together and bring practical and tangible benefits for the masses. When we find ourselves working together, I am sure some of these dreams will go away as tire hits the pavement as they say and will be replaced with more realistic and achievable goals.

Bangladesh and Pakistan did not exist 63 years ago, for that matter India in its current form also did not exist 63 years ago, the creation of these new nation states produced their own internal dynamics and all of us are products of these dynamics to some extent. I believe in a world with less and less corporate ideologies and if we can eliminate Pakistani nationalism and Bangladeshi nationalism and replace that with sub-national Indian nationalism within the borders of a united subcontinent (excluding Pakjab for the time being), then that would be a service to humanity.

I think we should try to reach common ground and go for smaller more achievable steps and thus sow the seed for future generations to complete the task. Of course it would be nice to see things happen in our own life time, but I would be happier to get the ball rolling as soon as possible with a more limited workable goal and thus show tangible benefits to remove doubts from naysayers and doubters. I believe it will take time and effort for people to get used to these ideas and then make them ready for additional steps. But there is no harm in spelling out the ultimate goal of a complete political union and engage people in debate to bring out their doubts and questions, while the work proceeds on the ground to update the political elite and create public opinion base among the masses for a more workable smaller first step.

Eagerly awaiting the completion of your e-book.

Pranav wrote:Do people think there is need for an economics thread in the strategic issues forum.

For example, India-China trade policy must take into account China's military relationships.

We can start the economic linkages with strat and military bindings here. If it appears to go out of hand then we can go for a separate thread? We may not have too much open-source information on the linkages.