Maharashtra's Sugar Lobby - The entrenched Jaagirdari system

s
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 2.5 India License.

Here are few links which form the background of the story elucidated in this essay.

1. Evolution of Raj and Bal Thackeray's ideology
2. Historical Analysis of Maharashtra politics
3. Critique on some events in life of Veer Savarkar

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The story of Maharashtrian Jaagirdari is a fascinating story (and a murky one). Murky because although it has been antithetical towards nationalistic forces, it was not exactly anti-Indic forces as well. It conveniently occupies the shades of grey in ongoing battle of AIF Vs Nationalists. 

NCP and INC were as Hindutva-vadis as SS or BJP or RSS walas. Even today, the ground cadre is practically indistinguishable. INC (and NCP which is its offshoot only) in MH is an elaborate system of Jaagirdari designed by Yashwantrao Chavan to please and and yet maintain a separate existence from Nehru. 

This began after death of Lokmanya Tilak. Large number of brahmin, marathas and OBC youth who were inclined towards Tilak and violent means were systematically liquidated by British post MKG suddenly calling off Non-cooperation movement after Chauri-Chaura incident.

The culling of 1920s ensured that from MH (as was with Punjab and Bengal) only pygmies will remain in the national discourse of Indian freedom movement. Only Dr. B R Ambedkar was the leader worth a salt who managed to emerge and escape from this pogrom of 1920s, that too because of his Dalit cause. Even he was sidelined by JLN for his pragmatic stances. He and to certain extent Savarkar (with his wings severely clipped). Similarly, only Subhash babu managed to emerge from Bengal post 1920s pogrom. And after Lalaji and hanging of Bhagat Singh, not a single national leader has emerged from Punjab. The fate of Punjab has always brought tears to my eyes. Muslims were overcome by Sikhs and just as they were rising British took over. Lalaji, Arya samajis etc were again making Punjab rise but Lalaji was eliminated and brilliant young men like Bhagat Singh were sacrificed. 

Same thing happened in MH. RSS, Hindu Mahasabha shielded a large bulk of youth from Mh and central India and western UP (basically all those territories which were once under stable Maratha occupation prior to 1818) suffering that fate from 1925-45. This gave rise to many stalwarts which later went on to shine in non-INC platforms like jansangh, BJP and various subsidiaries of RSS. 

But the die was already cast in 1940s. HMS and RSS (which in turn meant nationalistic youth from erstwhile maratha territories)were beginning to be vocal and active with partition related violence increasing in tenor. Role of cadres from these organizations in saving Bengal and Punjab and even Kashmir (as far as I know, the runway of Srinagar airport was prepared by RSS guys in 1948 so that IA planes could land). 

With JLN has head of GOI, nathuram godse's action gave the establishment a chance to cull this budding nationalist forces. The Brahmin-Maratha dispute has been going on in MH since 1741 (began with Peshwa-Bhonsale feud over chauth of Bengal which resulted in infamous Maratha raids on Bengal). This was systematically used to drive out MH-brahmins from villages where they had mass-base. This was done by INC under premiership of Yashwantrao Chavan and S K Patil. After exodus of brahmins from villages, the Marathas got to place their fingers right on the pulse of power. This is where we see the rise of 96-clan lobby in MH (more precisely western MH).

It is not sufficient that person should belong to 96-clan Maratha community to rule over MH. Heck, MH-brahmins have been severely deracinated since their eviction from politics (post 1920s). It is OBCs and the 96-clan Marathas who are more Hindutvavadis than many of the MH-brahmins and form bulk of cadre of BJP-RSS-SS in Maharashtra. It is not only about caste. One should belong to right family. 

This is the reason why BJP cannot win (so far) in western MH. BJP and RSS have stalwart Maratha and OBC leaders. Shelar, Tavde, Fundkar are dedicated BJP leaders belonging to 96-clan Maratha community who have strong following in Mumbai and urban MH. But they are outsiders to the lobby of Maratha jaagirdars.

In 1955, when the demand for Telugu language based AP was beginning to take root, similar demand started in MH - this is called Sanyukta Maharashtra samiti. All the non-INC parties, the communists the Hinduvadi people (who were flying low due to MKG assassination) joined in. The convener of this movement was father of Balasaheb Thakre - Keshav Thakre, aka "Prabodhankaar". It became obvious that unless something was done INC would be eradicated from MH. In 1957 state assembly polls, SMS won large number of seats and INC could barely win a majority. If left unchecked, by 1962 INC would have been finished from MH for ever. 

This is when Yashwantrao Chavan started Cooperative sugar factory movement in MH. This movement, although yielded rich economic dividends to MH, propelling MH to the position of wealthiest state in India (I think despite of last 15 years of misgovernance, MH still holds that position due to this movement by YC). Fantastic movement and full credit to Yashwantrao. However, closer scrutiny of what this movement really was, shows an interesting story. Like Raja Todarmal introduced Mansabdari system for Akbar in north India, thereby stabilizing Mughal rule in Ganga valley for three centuries, Yashwantrao introduced Mansabdari system for his Nehru. Each district of western MH (and fertile parts of marathwada, Khandesh and Vidarbha) is given to family of 96-clanner Maratha to look after. That district was the Jaagir of that family. 

Now, who is in this lobby - The requirements are that one has to be a 96-clanner person who owed allegiance to Yashwantrao (later usurped by Sharad Pawar) and who is NOT from Konkan. 96-clanner Konkani Marathas (like Narayan Rane, for example) can never be part of this Sugar-lobby. It has to be Deshastha Marathas only. But not all 96-clanner Marathas from the Ghat. Those who owe their allegiance to yashwantrao and who will go after him either with OR against Nehru and who were big farmers with great political clout and following AFTER having displaced brahmin leadership (and farmers) from those particular district. Quite a tall order. Like the Delhi's dilli-billi circuit, this Maratha jaagirdar lobby has been calling shots in MH and rest of KG basin since fall of yadava empire in general. 

The opponents of this Sugar-lobby were the usual suspects - RSS, HMS, communists, Dalits and farmer-worker party (Shetkari Kaamgaar Paksha). This Shekaapa was a formidable non-INC, non-RSS force (kind of like Janta Dal of Lohia). Mr. Govindrao Pawar (father of Sharad Pawar) was promising leader of this party. Many say, he was an idealist. He was murdered, (some sources say at the behest of certain prominent Sugar-lobby members). After the murder of Govindrao, the Shekaapa lingered but toothlessly. Sharad Pawar, however, received great care and affection from Yashwantrao. SP was his protege. 

In this jaagirdari model of Chavan, Nanded was given to Chavan (another), Satara to Chavan (yashwantarao), Sangli to Patil (the current RR patil comes from same Patil clan of Sangli), latur to Chakurkar and Deshmukh (Shivraj Patil-Chakurkar and Vilasrao Deshmukh), Kolhapur to Desai, Pune-Baramati to Pawars, so on and so forth. These families formed the first iteration of 96-clan Sugar-lobby of western MH which held tight to each other. Like Pre-Shivaji Maratha feudal lords, they may change parties, they may even fight one-other occasionally but they never eliminate each other. When the appear fighting, it is more often than not, Maya only.. Most importantly, in all this fighting and rabble-rousing, the territory and its resources remains with this lobby, no matter which master they serve.

The raison d'etre of Sanyukta Maharashtra Samiti vanished when state of Maharashtra came into existence. The power of this new state went squarely to this lobby headed by Yashwantrao Chavan. The remaining social groupings (dalits, Brahmins, OBCs and the rejected 96-clanner Marathas) were leaderless and started meandering towards Communism. This is where rise of Shivsena happened. SS and communists were eyeing these exact social groups and in the process (at times with active support of Sugar-lobby), Sena defeated and threw out communists from MH. This included a series of political murders which will be digression here. 

With Communists weakened, the natural gravitas of MH society started manifesting again by slowly moving towards anti-Delhi bias with strong hindutva undercurrent. This is late 1970s I am talking about. The emergency and crackdown of RSS was visible to everyone. After 1920s, the emergency era saw deaths of so many RSS volunteers who were promising. Thankfully Sena did not allow the youth of MH to go anti-national as it happened in Bengal and Punjab (Naxalism and Khalistani movement respectively). The public sentiment remained anti-delhi, but staunchly nationalistic (at times hindu-nationalistic). This undercurrent began to grow vocal as the great strikes of early 80s brought Mumbai to standstill. Sena (helped by businessmen and Sugar lobby) was overpowering communists. But fueling Shivsena also meant fueling and funding Hindutva ethos. 

Meanwhile Pawar had split from INC for the first time to form Progressive democratic party (Purogaami Lokshahi dal) in alliance with Morarji's Janta Party against Indira in 1978. Riding the JP wave, he became MH CM in 1978. But when Indira came back to power, first thing she did was dismissing this non-INC government from MH. Antulay sahab being a man from "peaceful community" has his own links and baggages. But he was first person from outside Sugar lobby (He was a konkani muslim) to become MH-CM. Hence he was in touch with various Bhais (Haji mastan, Karim lala ityadi). He was convicted in extortion case and was forced to resign in 1982 after two years. He, being loyal to IG, was then shipped to Delhi to become minorities affairs minister. He was never heard from again, until 26/11 when he crapped out some Zaid-Hamid like stuff. 

Babasaheb Bhonsale became MH-CM thereafter and seeing the power safely in hands of Sugar-lobby, our Pawar Saheb returned to INC in 1987 as if nothing happened and within matter of few months packed off Shankarrao Chavan to dilli and became CM of MH and president of MH-INC. Beautiful politics. He ensured power of MH remains in hand of Sugar lobby and not anybody else (including Nehrus and Gandhis). But in the process he cultivated his personal image of unreliable politician in minds of Dilli-billi. Meanwhile SS had allied with BJP (in 1985), Shahbano incident had happened and RJB was beginning to gear up.

All this politicking requires loads of money. Kind of money which stable jaagir cannot churn up, hence requires dirty money. It is not easy challenging Delhi (and Indira) and survive. This is where Pawar's alleged connections arise with Haji Mastan and later Dawood. The transfer of money started from 1978 (when he first broke off from INC). Various names like Choksi (the famous Hawala trader) along with owner of a well known Gutkha company were part of all this. All this information is available in public domain. Plus lot has been said about Dawood, Pawar and 1993 blasts and Vohra report, so no point in repeating it. It is slightly tangential to our story.

After death of Rajiv, Pawar was closest to the top-job since Bajirao-1 conquered delhi in 1737. He was undone by his past, machinations of Dynasty-sympathizing lobby who wanted to prop up Sonia, ND Tiwari and Arjun Singh - who like Pawar were also vying for top job. The unlikely winner of this quadrangular match who screwed (although temporarily, but resoundingly) to all four contestants was PVNR who packed off Tiwari, Arjunsingh, Pawar and Sonia-backers. He used all his luck in this (and bomb and liberalization). 

His mishandling of name-change of Aurangabad's Marathwada University, series of protests by Anna Hazare, series of demolitions of illegal constructions in Mumbai (mostly funded by builder lobby backed by the "bhai") by G R Khairnar, BMC's deputy commissioner, coupled with Mumbai Bomb-blasts and RJB wave prevalent throughout the country, had severely eroded the INC. 

All these factors and this history, combined caused the aberration of SS-BJP coming to power in 1995. They did fantastic job when in power, just like CBN in AP. Yet in 1999, INC (which means Western MH based Sugar lobby) was back to power. How?

This too is fascinating story. The anti-delhi sentiment has always been popular in MH-public imagination. This is connected to Maratha-Mughal antagonism. Delhi, subconsciously, symbolizes enemy seat which rightfully belongs to Marathas. The terms like "Dillishwara" or "Dilli-pati" means Sultanate and to be precise Aurangzeb. The "rebellion" of Pawar against Sonia prior to 1999 assembly and general elections diverted public attention. 1999 elections are really fascinating. The state and general polls happened simultaneously in MH. Public chose SS-BJP in Loksabha and INC-NCP in state - within matter of 5 minutes, public chose two different poles of political spectrum. 

I could not understand how INC-NCP (later UPA) could come to power in MH after people witnessed whirlwind progress under SS-BJP. The reason that I now understand is, SS-BJP were not meant to be in power. They did not "win". Sugar-lobby let them win while they set their houses in order meanwhile and reorient themselves in accordance to changing polity and realities of India. SS-BJP did progress, but they did not (could not have) destroy the mass-base and dense network of industrialists, farmers, traders, politicians, police and bankers which form the back-bone of Sugar-lobby. The large network of cooperative banks, societies, factories, farms spread across villages of MH are the real strength of Sugar-lobby. 

Last of the banks which were holding out against this lobby were sacrificed at the alter of INC (the new Sonia-MMS-Chidambaram's INC). The stories of United Western bank and Ganesh Bank of Kurundwad and their mergers by Chiddu in IDBI and Federal Bank (originally an Evangelical-funded bank from Kerala) respectively was the last nail in the coffin. SP again hoped to be PM in 2004 when he allied yet opposed Sonia to be PM. Sonia, via Chiddu, screwed him by forcing Ganesh Bank to merge in Federal Bank. United Western Bank was a very strong and robust bank since 1907 (they funded, covertly of course) to many of the Tilak's proteges. With Tilak's demise, the bank although dominated by brahmins, stayed on very good terms with Sugar Lobby. Almost entire Sugar-belt was dominated by this bank. Chiddu decided to screw this bank up to teach Pawar a lesson. I do not know what Pawar did, but he saved UWB from merging into Federal bank. People say the relations between Chiddu and Pawar soured greatly after Pawar played some game and did not allow Federal bank to make inroads in MH. 

An interesting trivia here, but the hindi word for Insurance is WIMA (Not Vima). It is an acronym for Western India Mutual Assurance which is the parent company established by Anna Chirmule (The founder of United Western bank) in 1907. This just shows how popular and deep-rooted this institution was. There was a director of United western Bank who refused to give shady loan to Sugar-lobby. Furthermore, he had the audacity to claim the pending loans too. He actually made Pawar pay up. This caused much furor in MH. It is here that the fate of UWB was sealed. The bogey of Brahmin-Maratha dispute was brought up and UWB suddenly became "Brahminical Bank". Its comical, really. 

This was a lengthy essay. I have been wanting to write this for long time. This is the source of Sugar Lobby's power. In all my previous articles I have praised Sharad Pawar for keeping the nose of "Delhi" (which meant Nehru/Indira/Sonia) out of MH. He went to great lengths (unethical lengths) to do so. But he has so far ensured that power of Deccan stays in Deccan and Delhi only gets a nominal Chauth in exchange of staying away. He is one of the reasons. why there was hardly any Evangelical conversion activity in 1980s and early 90s in MH. Of course the chief being the natural tendency of Maharashtrians which periodically gravitates towards Hindutva.

Historical Analysis of Maharashtra politics

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 2.5 India License.

Things have been in flux in Maharashtra and western India off-late. I will not speak much about this region, things are happening on ground which I won't like to be spilled on english domain. Instead, I will talk of history. 

Uddhav Thakré is much more than what people give him credit. Yes, he totally lacks the charisma of his father and his cousin, but the word is, he is very good at armchair politics and also considered a good "organizer" (of same "jaati" as Ahmad Patel). The rebuilding of Amar Jawan jyoti was one small gesture by Shivsena the day after, which won accolades throughout Maharashtra and beyond. Raj Thakré spoke in his rally what BJP spoke in a recent press conference - That, all rioters in the 11th August Azad maidan riots were Bangladeshis and Pakistanis living in Mumbai. Now this is a dual edged sword. This is where I will remain silent for next few years.

RT is compelled to look "secular" because Hindutva is taken. Hence he rants about "maharashtra-dharma". Ironically this term "Maharashtra-Dharma" is coined by Ramdas Swami lauding work of Shivaji Maharaj of establishing a Hindavi Swarajya (Indian/Hindu self rule). Ramdas Swami askes Shivaji Maharaj to establish "maharashtra-dharma" all over the nation. It is also a word-play of Maha-raashtra (greater nation = Indian dharma). All the previous interpretations of this term by all the scholars from any perspective (there have been commie attempts to analyze this term and give it a parochial context) leads to one and only conclusion - that it is synonymous to modern term - hindutva.

As the readers of this blog might have noticed, I like to view India in terms of river-basins. The difference in upper Krishna-Godavari (KG) basin and lower KG basin, since demise of Vijaynagar, is that upper KG basin (modern MH) is essentially much less parochial and casteist than lower KG (modern Andhra Pradesh and to some extent northern Karnataka). The ancestral clans which made up "reddy" is same as those who make up "Maratha". Both these names originate from Rathod rajput clan. But this clan-identity and caste-identity has been very loose in upper KG (in comparison to Rajputana and lower KG). Hence a brahmin could become a peshwa (there was resistance, but not that big). That brahmin peshwa in turn created alternate power centers from lower nomadic and agrarian castes (Holkars and Shindes). This Manthana although caused resentment in 96-clan Maratha power-centers, the model remained and even today remains "workable" to an extent. It is this loose caste identity, which helped them pour out of their native land and spread all over subcontinent. 

The reason I am telling this is to explain the raison d'être of NCP. The loss of power to brahmin Peshwa was not accepted graciously by a section of 96-clan Maratha. However, there was and is another equally vocal and perhaps larger 96-clan Maratha section which does not care about "brahmin" background of Peshwa and cared/s only for MH-dharma of Shivaji and Ramdas. The more recent product of this ongoing manthana is emergence of neo-buddhist lobby. The idea of Shivaji links them all, but due to Phule's work they detest brahmins. The feet of Mahatma Phule are muddied about financial benefits he received from Brits. Perhaps even he figured that out and after a while, he simply stopped talking out this anger. His earlier works have been selectively used (akin to something that happened in Tamil Nadu as described by Rajiv Malhotra in his book, Breaking India) to bash brahmins and hence Hinduism. 

Same goes for Babasaheb Ambedkar. Babasaheb's most vitriolic book "Riddles in hinduism" was mischievously published after his death. Perhaps it was something he did not want. I do not know whether becoming Buddhist was a good choice for MH based dalits, it would certainly have been a great move if dalits in AP and TN followed. Instead, they fell to Christian Missionaries. This convoluted logic of bashing an imaginary enemy (brahmin) began to take root in "96-clan" Maratha lobby backed by Pawar since mid 90s (when INC lost power in MH). The reason to bash brahmins is that, once one bashes Brahmin, one automatically becomes backward caste. "96-clan lobby" within NCP has been asking for reservations for 96-clan caste, because after 1992 this section of society, like 300 years ago started becoming militantly anti-muslim and hence anti-congress. One should talk to grass-root cadre of NCP, INC, RSS, Shivsena, MNS. Unless told which party they belong to, you won't know the difference. 

However, the characters used for flogging are and were peshwas and other ministers of Shivaji and his successors. Add to that all the freedom fighters who happened to be brahmin. Then of course RSS. This resulted in formation of few NCP backed organizations - Maratha Seva Sangh (MSS), Sambhaji Brigade (SB) and Moolnivasi Sanghatana (MS). All their antics of desecrating and removing statues of brahmin ministers from museum in Pune, vandalizing BORI library and bashing brahmin professors who helped an Englishman James Laine to write a book on Shivaji and filty propaganda against brahmins in public forums). Overall, these guys haven't received public support on ground.

Although given birth by NCP, these orgs started becoming increasingly vocal and independent as they attracted numerous "Kancha Ilaiha" types. One thing led to another and suddenly we found these same orgs, supporting Mushrif's theory that IB-brahmins killed Karkare in 26/11, that Brahmin IB+CIA+Mossad doing all sorts of nasty things. Basically our home grown Paki conspiracy theorist - Zaid Hamid. We also find head of MSS, Lakshman Maané attending World council of Churches (WCC) conference and letting out his angst against brahminical hindus.

All the hatred towards Brahmins (either genuine arguments and pure motives like that of Phule and Ambedkar OR Paki logic like Sambhaji Brigade et al) eventually in fullness of time and inevitably results in them dancing on the tunes of Missionary or Mullah. The genuine non-brahminization of religion has been happening in upper KG and rest of Maratha controlled India for atleast past 1000 years. Curious readers may search for Varkari movement and Bhakti movement. This is a dharmik mobilization which brahmins too are integral part of. And I have never heard anything bad about any caste from people like these. It is only deracinated commies, who wish to have all changes in one-life (because rebirth is brahminical hoax), who support this blind hatred. 

Shiv Sena symbolized that section of INC which was nationalist in 1960s and which could see through soviet infiltration happening in western coast.  Here the word "Nationalist" needs to be read with caution. I basically mean centrist INC section which wishes to preserve the rule of Delhi based dynasty's version of Republic of India. The first thing which Shivsena did was eradication of communism which was taking root in Bengal, MH (two of the three armed revolutionary epicenters of freedom struggle, Punjab was already truncated after 47. In case of akhand bharat, HSRA et al would have sowed third seed in PN). Similar attempts were done by nationalist sections of INC in WB but in vain. In MH, however they were successful. Now, while commies maintain presence in mumbai in form of some trade unions, electorally they have been extinct for past 30 years. Once this achieved, Shivsena slowly jumped the bandwagon of Hindutva. The shift started in mid 80s after Shahbano incident and diplomacy of Pramod Mahajan. Bal Thakre is a Kaayasth by caste. His father was a staunch reformer and anti-brahminist, but from ideological school of Savarkar, not in lines of missionary influenced bashers. He played important role in creation of MH-state (and Gujarat) from Bombay presidency. 

Shivsena, like earlier Marathas, is one of the few parties in India where caste is irrelevant. Promotion is given solely on clout and merit. At times here merit is determined by degree of nuisance value, but that is again regardless of caste. Hence it predominantly remained urban party. Dawood Ibrahim's one wrong move (of supporting ISI and Tiger Meman in 1993 bomb-blast) pushed him permanently in hands of ISI and associated higher forces which ensure Paki-existence. Things were relatively nice and dandy until then. There was slow rise of Hindu criminal networks which began competing with Islamic gangs (amar naik, pujari, gavli, manchekar, chhota rajan, bada rajan and many others). 

Something forced the incumbent GoMH post 1993 to selectively eliminate non-Islamic criminal gangs. Many tips were openly given by Dawood to police and police obliged. What that thing was, cannot be pinpointed, only speculated - which I will desist doing. Now, Dawood is important part of legitimate businesses in city of dreams. Much like Michael Corleone slowly managed to enter and establish himself in legitimate business in Godfather trilogy. Yes, he maintains his clout in traditional businesses of smuggling, he is big player now in Bollywood, Shares, real estate, media and politics. Many accusations against Chiddu and his wife about participatory notes and BSE plunges need to be looked from this perspective as well. In short, it has now truly become multinational. This is what is really meant by the oft-repeated phrase "India is now much more integrated with global economic system, than China". 

Meanwhile lets return to Indic forces in lower ranks of society and polity. They are scattered. Even NCP has now begun to abandon the monsters they created (MSS et al). The prominent dalit thinkers have started criticizing these orgs which has snatched the ideological backbone of these orgs. When dalits say, "the problem they have with brahmins is mostly ideological and not politico-socio-economical", the very basis of brahmin bashing falls apart. This happened after Shivsena pulled RPI (republican party of India) into alliance with BJP. Uddhav Thakré played a central role in this. While RPI does not win that many seats and is fragmented (like janta dal), many rural ambedkaraite dalits have become relatively more sympathetic towards RSS. Urban dalits, like others, have been in Shivsena camp for decades. In Maharashtrian urban scenario, caste does not matter at all. 

With help (?) of Shivsena-BJP, Pawar has eliminated the preeminence of Delhi Sultan in MH politics. I do not know whether to thank him for this one thing OR curse him for many other things, because he did this at great cost. But he did not take MH on YSR path and kept the ties with mullah and missionary as "strictly business". So I decided to call him Nizamshah of Ahmednagar OR Adilshah of Bijapur who helped resist the Mughal juggernaut with help of Pre-Shivaji and post Shivaji Maratha chieftains respectively. Ultimately, both Nizamshah and Adilshah were enemies of Vijaynagar (the ideal Hindu promised land), but also were enemies of Mughals of Delhi. What were Maratha power centers doing then? constantly changing sides and ensuring that Nizamshah of Ahmednagar, Adilshah of Bijapur, Qutubshah of Hyderabad (Golkonda), Mughal of Delhi keep fighting and none of them get to establish stable base in upper KG.

As I said, I will be silent about things happening in present and trends ahead. In hurry of being "ahead of curve" we at times forget to study the curve itself. 

Instead, I will write about single greatest achievement of Shivaji as an administrator. Shivaji successfully eliminated the "mansabdari" system created by Akbar to divide Indic power. Nobody else showed this courage. It crept back largely due to pressures from Aurangzeb's Deccan invasion. But in his lifetime, he successfully implemented the model wherein officers and administrators were given salary and pension, did land reforms, eliminated feudalism. The fighting warlords which ensured the attrition of foreign ROP states, preserve the dharma in adversarial conditions, serve their purpose when "dharma" is established. 

Indraaya Svaaha, Takshakaaya Svaaha....

Political Treason - Part 3 - Famous instances of treason in Indian history

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 2.5 India License.

Continued from part two.

After going through the examples of Dawood Ibrahim and Paritala Ravi in previous parts of this series, the next part of our journey entails looking at various instances of treason, which led to major change in political equilibrium of India. As stated in this article about addiction of power and treachery, while we can categorize with every instance of treason due to some selfish interests, more often than not, these acts lead to a whole range of butterfly effects which were either unintended or intended by the conspirator or were ignored. Some of such instances that I can think of are following. Readers are welcome to add on to the list, along with justification of course.

1. Sugriva against Vaali: This treachery had following far reaching effects on contemporary Indian geopolity. First is entry of a Ganga Valley based power (Sri Raama) in the politics of Krishna-Godavari basin, which Vaali had guarded jealously. Secondly, it resulted in decline in deccan's prominence. It also led to creation of pan-Indian common market which was subservient to Ganga Valley based power. For more details of this please read this series of articles on political history of Ramayana.

2. Vibhishana against Raavana - This treachery had following effects on contemporary Indian geopolity. To be taken combined with first example. First is the entry of Ganga-Krishna-Godavari alliance in politics of deep south and Kaveri basin and Sri Lanka. It also led to the access of sea trade routes and port cities to Ganga based power. Technology (bridge building, pushpaka etc) gained by Ganga based power. Like in example 2, this led to creation of pan subcontinental common market. For more details of this please read this series of articles on political history of Ramayana.

3. Shakuni against Kuru clan:  This betrayal of Shakuni brought about downfall of Kurus by instigating civil war between Kauravas and Pandavas - results well known. Mutually assured destruction in kurukshetra war. For more details please read this series of articles on political history of Mahabharata.

4. Jarasandha against India: Shursena yadavas of Mathura rebelled against authority of magadha under the intigation krishna-balarama. Kamsa was killed in an internal strife of Mathura Yadavas, thereby upsetting the plan of Jarasandha of pan-India domination. Jarasandha invaded Mathura repeatedly while on one occasion he extended an invitation to Kaal-Yavana, an adharmik outsider in the polity of India. This did not cause much ill effect, thanks to timely valor and presence of mind shown by Sri Krishna. However, Jarasandha became an example and progenitor of a form of treachery which repeatedly hurt India the most in years to come. For more details please read this series of articles on political history of Mahabharata.

5. Mahapadmananda against Mahanandi Shishunaaga - This resulted in beginning of Varna-ashrama system's collapse in India.

6. Aambhi against India - He committed a folly akin to Jarasandha by allying with foreigner yavana Alexander to defeat a native ruler of Punjab and Kekay.

7. Buddhist kings against India:  Again folly akin to Jarasandha by allying with Bactrian-Greek Demetrius and later Menander.

8. Pushyamitra against Briahdratha - This treachery destroyed Mauryan rule (which was limited to patna city and surroundings), defended India from Menander, the Greek. Also resulted in partial persecution of Buddhists. 

9. Chandragupta-2 against Raamagupta: This was a good treachery. This resulted in India having her "Vikramaditya" as emperor. Nothing needs to be said here. Emperor Chandragupta Vikramaditya's record speaks for itself. Read this article to know more about conquests of Emperor Vikramaditya.

10. Purugupta against Skandagupta - This treachery pushed India in civil war. Indian army under guptas were forced to fight on two fronts (against invading hunas in gandhara and against purugupta and pushyamitras along upper narmada valley). This resulted in capitulation of India under increasing pressure from the central asian hordes of Huns.

11. Baladitya against India: Baladitya achieved this goal by foolishly forcing Yashodharma, king of Malwa and leader of Indian federation which defeated Huns in successive battles in Punjab while capturing the invader king "Mihiragula" alive. Baladitya Gupta forced Yashodharma to give clemency to captured huna king Mihiragula.

12. Chach against predecessor king - This treason by Chaach caused the rule of Sindh to be passed on to brahmin dynasty from a Buddhist Rai Dynasty. Chach fought well and defended Sindh against Arabs. His son, dahir in his later life fell to qasim's invasion giving first stronghold of Arabs in Indian subcontinent.

13. Sabuktijin against Shiladitya of Gazni - This resulted in first political entry of Islam in politics of India. Sabuktijin's son the infamous Mehmood Gaznavi went on to destroy Somnath temple and massacre millions. More strategically this coup resulted in fall of India's outpost - Gandhara province which we today know as Afghanistan. Afghanistan, has been alien to Indian way of life, since this coup.

14. Jaychandra against Prithviraja - Jaychandra invited Muhammad Ghori to invade India against to settle personal vendetta against king of Delhi and Ajmer - Prithviraj Chauhan.  While this act of treason is not verfied as completely true in terms of historical veracity, it is immensely popular nonetheless. This was a folly akin to that of Jarasandha.

15. Plenty of such mistakes in Islamic sultanate period - But the system in this era was foreign anyways. Hence in either case, Dharma and India suffered.

16. Najib inviting Abdali - This was a folly akin to Jarasandha. To know more, read this series of articles on Panipat Campaign of Marathas.

17. Peshwa Bajirao-2 against India - Foolish peshwa surrendered himself to British due to his fight against Holkar and Shinde. He single handedly doomed the pan indian maratha empire in matter of 6 years. This has no parallel in annals of history, IMHO.

18. Various collaborators against Indian army of 1857: They helped British in bringing down the efforts of those fighting for India's independence in Anglo-Indian war of 1857.

19. Establishment of INC in 1885: Infiltration of Indian National Congress by the people with interests and agenda which were sympathetic towards British was the main reason why India's freedom movement was compromised and resulted in partition of motherland along with throngs of other problems facing the nation in modern day. Perhaps, this will demand a separate article.


The Red Thread of Continuity



One has to remember that the list of "treacheries" is interim. There are many complex factors which let to this decision by every single player either mentioned or not. But, the common denominator of that list necessitates acceptance of hypothesis that India has been a Saanskritik Rashtra (a self sustaining political unit) based on dharmik traditions. some action of some player which goes against the ethos of "dharma" is treachery. For him, that action might be a temporary compromise which he would take back from position of strength. And indeed there are many such instances where people did take back what was given away.


It is usually a preference of Ganga Valley people, that the rule should slowly change the shoulders. This is what was intended by both Marathas and INC during independence(from Mughals and British respectively). The inimical forces of similar background and nature prevented this smooth transition by means of Panipat and Partition respectively. 


Change of regime is bloody. One faction of X rebels and if successful, grows with time. If not, withers away. It involves culling of a large network of economic interests of predecessor system. There were three occasions when such culling take place in past millennium.


1. After ghori and later khilji
2. After babur and later akbar
3. 1857 and later 1947


On all three instances, those who culled an entire vaishya network (figures in millions on all three accounts) supporting predecessor system were foreigners. Was it possible for Indian and dharmik Marathas to indulge in massacre of that scale? Marathas were not just in sense of being labelled as Ramavatara. But Shahu could not do it. Heck, even Bajirao-1 could not pull it off. Sadashivrao Bhau could have, remotely, if he had converted Panipat into another Bahraich.. 


Opposing forces have to align properly, all snakes must be out in open, no fence sitters at least from enemy side. And, if bahraich follows, then and only than can some Bajirao-1 can sit on Delhi. Else no.. This is a very simple and easy to understand fact. The art lies in how to engineer such scenario at time and place of one's choice. 


A large nexus of Vaishya lobby has parked plenty of money in safe-havens today. Until that money exists, no meritorious man can win the election on his own. In other words we may call this "the baniya-neta-babu-judge-media pentacle". This network will try its best to save the incumbent system. If the force gets too much to resist, they will switch sides and help those who are opposing the system. 


But that support will come with riders which say that the opposers, when in power, will not touch their money. Thus in time, Marathas who left deccan as bitter enemies of Mughals, became their protectors.  Classic bollywood tale, but is a repetitive motif in history. This is also what happened to invaders like Mughals under Akbar. One who tried to reverse this effect was Aurangzeb, and look what happened to him.


Remedy


To ensure no compromise happens, entire network either has to be relieved of their assets in short time, while the buddhi is stable like Parashuraama, british, mughals did and what Ramdev baba demands to do. Else this can be achieved when substantial network would be trained to indulge in nishkaama daana yoga, perhaps like Sri Raama or what MKG wished for.

Political Treason - Part 2 - Paritala Ravindra's bloody story - Rakta Charitra

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 2.5 India License.

*In collaboration with Shri. Devesh Garu.

Variants of Organized Crime

1. Crime arising out of necessity and poverty is easily taken care of by good governance and effective utilization of carrot and stick. 

2. Ccrime arising out of mentality which derives pleasure from "doing something different" or "breaking rules" cannot be tackled by good governance. 

3. Crime arising out of faulty laws can be corrected by means of changing laws and social counselling. 

To elucidate with an example, smuggling of gold was illegal in independent India. But people have been trading and importing gold for ages in India. Due to policy decisions by govt, certain networks and their routes were deemed illegal and the import was branded as smuggling. This gave them incentive to continue trading while avoiding taxes. While they grew powerful and wealthy, they found new commodities to trade[like drugs and weapons] using the already perfected means and routes of smuggling less harmful product. 

The drug traderoute of kabul-karachi-mumbai-vizag-SE asia has been existent for centuries now. One cannot stop it merely by making it illegal. What is law, but a mere sentence, if state isn't in position to enforce it. The biggest and only "gunda" in nation-state has to be the state. But there is no such compulsion on a civilizational state, as long as these fringe elements are kept under the hold of Sanskriti so that their services be used when the time arises, in lieu of certain price. 

The significance of the tale of Paritala Ravindra.

With respect to Hyderabad-Secunderabad, the 80's and 90's did see the emergence of politicos in the "right direction". However, before the action could get into the den of the entrenched Islamist networks, one such MLA (not native to Hyderabad) was put down due to a Jaichand like character. You will get a clear picture by watching a Ram Gopal Verma biopic - Raktacharitra.

Paritala Ravindra (depicted as Prathap Ravi in the film by Vivek Oberoi) is a good case study. The man had much potential but YS Reddy, after coming to power in 2004, allegedly had him killed in a shootout. From 2004 to 2005, about 1000 active and resourceful members of Telugu Desam Party were killed off in various operations.

The slow infiltration of Andhra Pradesh by various interests began right after NDA came to power in 1999. The first victim was Alimineti Madhava Reddy. He was a powerful man from Telangana and commanded lot of respect from all over AP. He was Chandrababu Naidu's right hand man. It was said that Naidu's success was only possible because of Madhava's steadying hand by his side.

Madhava Reddy was killed off in a Naxalite attack. It was for the first time in history that a sitting Home Minister and Deputy CM of any state was murdered in this way in spite of having Z-security. Back then and even now, many people consider his death as the work of his political opponents. Madhava Reddy's death was a tragedy for many reasons. Firstly, he was a Hindu with strong affiliation to the religion. Ssecondly, he wasn't in bed with the mining and drug mafia which supposedly has close connections with INC network. Thirdly, he was a shrewd politician who knew how to get his way without being dictatorial. And finally, he wasn't afraid to get his hands dirty or have others do it for him. 


He didn't care for the "established" regime in Hyd. That is the entrenched Islamist mafia of Hyderabad since days of Nizam and Razakars and now with alleged political backing of few pro-Islamist political parties and leaders. The situation is further complicated with boiling Telangana issue. In many ways, Madhava Reddy's political savvy exceeded Naidu's and could have rivaled that of YSR's, had he lived to steer the hand of TDP. 

As stated earlier, the timing of Paritala Ravindra's death should be kept in mind. From July 2004 to August 2005, close to a 1000 "rising stars" with strong potential at the organization level of the Telugu Desam were killed. This is usually covered by the media as "factionism"/"family feuds"/etc. But what is hidden or is conveniently ignored is that all of the deaths happened to those belonging to a certain orientation politically. Usually the deaths are covered up as "revenge" from "old enemies". 

Let's take the case of Paritala Ravi himself.  He is shown, in the film, to be killed by a guy who is thirsting for vengeance. Howsoever true this may be, but how come this guy, Surya Narayana Reddy aka Maddelacheruvu Suri, who was wronged in the 90's, took him so long to get his revenge. I mean in the end, all he had to do was attack Paritala Ravi when he was traveling in a car. How come it was only after INC/YSR came to power that the Suri became so emboldened and found the means to take out Ravi?

The real life Suri, as opposed to filmy one, was a felon. His family wasn't that better off either. The acts committed SN Reddy 'Suri' are some of the worst atrocities by any political family in India. Paritala Ravi, believe it or not, was a relief to the people there. He gave them security that the goons under INC-network couldn't care to give.

The Role of Intelligence Bureau in the episode of Paritala Ravi

The last scene of film Rakta-Charitra 2, when the IB officer confronts 'Suri' says a lot. It is implied that IB allowed the assassination of Ravi to happen. It is both disconcerting and disturbing since there is a pattern here. Ravi's background would give people too much of "power" by setting a precedent. To be clear, Paritala Ravi's career was not the usual one for the reason that he was the first guy in AP (perhaps in India), since 1947, who actually waged guerrilla warfare on an entrenched network of criminal-politico gangsters, defeated or at least dented their power base enough to make inroads for himself and the agriculturalist interests that backed him. For several years in the 80's he really did go into the hills and jungles and waged war on the local Congress networks and eventually earned enough of a reputation and attracted enough business and labor networks to get himself elected and also create a base for Telugu Desam.

Ravi did not have the right "foundational background" to transform his fight into something bigger. His father and him were both Left-leaning. their careers started on the social justice plank. His father was instrumental is curbing the powers of the local land-owning mafia. His son carried forward his work and established his own political space.

To truly give the "social justice" issue a much wider base and bigger fight, Ravi's ideological background was not enough. His radicalism was fueled by personal grievance based on the "pro-poor" activities of his father. But for a "first phase" of rebellion against INC in the region, it was a good start. 

For about 10 years, he was basically waging asymmetric warfare. during all this time, the major antagonists - INC elites of the region - were in power and continued to make his life miserable. IB did not really "help" in Ravi's power. Perhaps, they just ignored him as another "naxalite" and left it at that. It was only after he became a long-term thorn in INC's side because of his charismatic personality and the ability to persuade and cajole certain important networks, especially the Leftist unionist/agriculturalist type people, that INC and their helpers started targeting him. In this phase, it is alleged that Jagan Reddy and his followers provided Ravi's killers with info and equipment while they were in jail. This is not easily covered up without having the local police-wallahs and intelligence inputs in their pockets.

When probed diligently beyond the surface, even voters of INC in recent times remember Paritala Ravi, Alimineti Madhava Reddy, and few others like them, whose lives were basically a story of commitment against INC and who ultimately all were murdered.

Relevance of Paritala Ravindra in this narrative of political treason and organized crime

Paritala Ravindra was perhaps first non-Hyderabad based "tough man" who after coming to power, rounded up the mafia based in Hyderabad. This mafia is the important link in the trade route mentioned in opening section. No other political party showed the balls to take on the interests of the politician-gangster nexus operating in this trade-route anywhere. Be it in kabul,  Karachi, Mumbai or Hyderabad, those in power dare not touch this network heads on. 

Paritala Ravindra will pay for all his bad deeds in next birth, according to Indian theory of Karma. But he sets one important precedent of daring to perform a deed which Vijaynagar empire, Marathas did not. That is attempting to bring the Hyderabad node under civilizational influence of Pro-India and pro-Dharma forces.


Paritala Ravi cannot be called "Dharmik" in truest sense. But he surely level the playground for the time he was in power. Our narrative learns many important lessons from the example of Paritala Ravi.

Political Treason - Part 1 - The curious case of Dawood Ibrahim

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 2.5 India License.

Organized Crime and Civilization

Crime is one crucial aspect of a "Rashtra". Indian Sate should have had facilitated the emergence of nationalist crime-networks. More efficient would be religious crime networks. sometimes, I see the point of thugs and chandaals in ancient India controlled by the tantrika school. This might be antithetical to India as a "nation-state" but is it really antithetical to India as a "civilizational state" which exists for protection and expansion of Indic Sanskriti?

Remember role of Gopal Paatha in kolkata riots of 1947? Perhaps Chhota Rajan was one such experiment. However, talking about western coast and Mumbai, the Indic ganga never grew big enough to rival or hinder the emergence of Karim Lala, Haji Mastan continued as Dawood Ibrahim. The Pujari gang, Amar Naik, Rajendra Nikalje (Chhota Rajan), Arun Gawli, Sadamama Pawle could never outfight and outgrow Lala-Mastan-Dawood nexus. In her current form, Mumbai is an epitome of India's mercantile mentality where everything is for sale. The city forms a critical part of the   Kabul-Karachi-Mumbai-Hyderabad-Vizag-SE Asia opium trade route extent for centuries now. Almost everything big in Mumbai is illegal. There is too much of dirty money coming in through that route.

The only indic criminal who gave The Lala-Mastan-Dawood nexus a tough fight was Varadraajan Mudaliar (aka Varada bhai OR Bada Raajan). While he was around, the Lala-Mastan network did not gain complete control over the crime networks and routes. Unfortunately, no indic continued the "legacy" of varadabhai on India's western coast (i.e. controlling Mumbai). One interesting counter-factual question to ponder upon is that if Varadabhai would have been calling shots today instead of Dawood would the black money rolling in and out of India through bollywood would have still been used as blatantly against India as it is being done now? 

It becomes more difficult for pious Islamists to carry out Jihad against kafirs when it is the kafir criminals who are controlling the sea-routes of smuggling. 

The curious case of Dawood Ibrahim (DI).

If we look at the rise of Dawood Ibrahim and his life of crime and compare to Cali cartel and other criminal gangs we find that India will not be able to bring down DI as the powers that be are too intertwined in the gang's fortunes. We need to get other nations involved. However, the right question to ask here is - what does "bringing down" mean to Indian establishment? 

The phrase is usually used in a sense - X brought Y down..

X brings Y down because - 

1. it is in the interest of X to do so 

OR

2. Y was trying to bring X down as well 

OR 

3. X is an agent of chaos.

In case 1 and 2, the prerequisite assumption is that X is a rational player. There are few things that I know and many things that do not know. But what we all know for sure is that the certain section of Indian power-centres (lets call them X) which ensured rise of DI (lets call him Y) in 1980's do not think that it is necessary to "bring Dawood Ibrahim down". 

DI operates in mostly Sunni states which either control trade-routes or control oil-supply. He himself stays openly in Karachi, perhaps under nuclear umbrella of Pakistan. The fact that he operates from Karachi with brazen openness means that -  

1. Either Pak has conveyed to "X" in India that taking out DI means war with Pakistan.

OR 

2. If India makes an attempt on his life and fails, they will make DI sing and X will be in trouble as many old scandals and skeletons will tumble down the cupboard. 

OR 

3. Perhaps, his life is insured by the founding fathers of Pakistan (UK-PRC-USA-Saudi), perhaps upon the insistence OR silent agreement of X. 

In either of the above three cases, the elimination of Y does not seem to be in rational interest of X. Otherwise, India has the capability of knocking down one individual.

Revisiting old Power-Treason equation

Thus, going back to my subject of exploring treachery and defection, its a question of which values the person holds dear and that brings us back to civilizational learning or Sanskriti. Also are tales of treachery even with a modicum of truth are basically 'blaming the other' type of deflecting accountability/responsibility?


Previous articles of mine on similar lines-


1. Addiction of Power and Treachery
2. Power and Permanence

If X is agreeing (albeit silently) upon safety of Y, is "X" committing treason against "India"? Can the actions of X be called as treason at all?

Modelling this in context above, keeping the information from this unusual and rare article at the back of our mind, we arrive at following three questions. Asking right questions is always the key.

1. Who is X in Indian establishment?

2. Which values does X hold dear? 

•   Are those values in sync with Indic values?
  
  
•   Are they not? 
  
  
   (a) If they are in sync, then no problem, material solution exists
   (b) If they aren't in sync, then one has to answer one of the harshest question - Are we Sajjana people or not?

3. What if X happens to be dominant faction of central power of India? or one of the dominant factions? 

•  If yes, then perhaps that is the "Yuga-dharma" one has to abide to.
  
  
•  If no, then the challenge given by time can be answered by time alone. Every instance X is lenient towards Y, shows (assuming X is non-compassionate, rational player) somebody has balls of X tightly in the grasp, thereby forcing X to behave the way X actually behaves. One can say that X is under the influence of Imperius curse.

To be continued...

North Indian Polity - Lack of Permanence in Power Projection

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 2.5 India License.

The course of history changes when the power shifts from the hands of one beholder to next. After all, history is indeed a report of events from the point of view of survivor, who most of the times is also a victor in the conflict for power-inheritance. If the change in power-centre of a particular region is sudden and drastic, so is the change in Geo-Political and Socio-Economic outlook of individuals, societies, nations and civilizations. Thus, we see that the flow of power determines the course of history. Softer the transition of power, smoother is the change in the course

In India, usually it is just a sequence of small insignificant chain of events which brings about a change in the history, sociology of a civilization over the period of time, rather than big events which rarely influence the course of history as much. Moreover, a vast country like India in term of space, time, population and diversity, trait of accepting the changes rather slowly is typically observed when viewed from neutral perspective.

As stated earlier, the shift of power-centre is a result of complex web of forces which are acting in tandem. The net direction of the forces decides the inheritor of power. The method in which power transition occurs successively, largely depends upon the inherent power-structure of the region. The inherent power-structure of a region largely depends upon climate, geography, social and religious customs and world-view of the power-holders. It also depends upon the outlook and the world-view of the rival meme intending to shift the equilibrium in its favour.

Buffering of power transition by local power-centres.

The power structure of Indo-Gangetic plains is primarily feudal in nature. The Zamindari OR feudal lords of the region have vested power-interests of self-preservation in spite of all the global changes. Thus, it rarely mattered to a peasant who the king in Delhi was because his immediate ruler, the feudal lord and his system, remained unchanged in average life-span of an ordinary citizen. The feudal set-up is deeply entrenched within the social hierarchy and power-structure of Indo-Gangetic plains.

This deeply entrenched feudal system had a very favourable impact on preservation of Indic identity during 800 long Islamic onslaught on North Indian plains. Every conqueror OR invader from central asia who succeeded in displacing the incumbent ruler of Delhi Sultanate, had to enter into some sort of power-sharing agreement with these local power centres (who were primarily Indic) which possessed very high degree of mercantile and mercenary character. For example, Mughals had to initiate Mansabdari system (by Raja Mansingh under Emperor Akbar) to accommodate and share power with these very feudal lords. In fact, this system was encouraged and strengthened in order to enlist the help of feudal lords in imperial conquests of Mughals.

This tremendously dilutes the ability of the conqueror/invader to flawlessly project his power. The chain of local power-centres throughout Indo-Gangetic plains made the progress of invader (in terms of implementing drastic change in existing socio-economic and political system) rather slow.

Thus, India was saved from suffering the fate of Zoroastrian Persia and was able to retain the Indic identity in spite of all the onslaughts.

Emergence of North Indian local Satraps - A Historical Perspective

The region of Magadha (modern Bihar, eastern UP and West Bengal) has been the traditional powerhouse of India since the dawn of civilization. This region is blessed with all natural resources, fertile land, amicable climate and above all, its a very large reservoir of extremely talented human resource. This remained (and to certain extent, still remains) the core and the heartland of India. The zeal with with Bimbisara, Nanda, Maurya, Sunga, Gupta, Vardhan, Pratiharas consolidated the power over entire swathe from Khyber to Assam time and again, shows the character of Indian polity. The mercenary and Mercantile character which we see today in this region was by and large minimal in Indic rulers of ancient and early-medieval times.

Something happened over the course of history. After defeat of Harshavardhan of Kannauj at the hands of Chalukya king Pulikeshi in 640 AD, the tendency to consolidate the power for longer and farther started evaporating from Gangetic plains. Even though Gurjara-Pratiharas consolidated much of North and entered into tripartite struggle for control of India with Paal dynasty of Bengal and Rashtrakoot dynasty of Deccan, this evaporation did not stop. Pratihara dynasty had to invest lot of energy in consolidating the feudals of gangetic plains and could not strike back at Rashtrakutas when Dhruva Dharavarsh and later Govind-3rd, defeated Pratiharas and conquered Varanasi and Kannauj.

The decentralization that set in Indo-Gangetic plains since defeat of Harsha could not be undone. The local feudal lords started garnering more power than any central authority. Thus, power became dispersed and impermanent. The last effort of successful consolidation of power in Indo-Gangetic plains was during Battle of Bahraich (1033 AD) when confederacy of all the kings from Punjab and Ganga plains united to defeat Masood Gazni decisively. Since then there has not been a single instance of an Indic power from Indo-Gangetic plains which successfully tried to consolidate entire North Indian plains from Attock to Guwahati. All the subsequent consolidations of this region (until 1947) were achieved by foreign invaders.

The mercantile mentality of buying off temporary peace and power at all costs without complete consolidation power set in and became deeply ingrained in the psyche of people from Indo-Gangetic plains.

Brief comparison with South Indian Power-Structure

If we carefully study the politics of Uttar Pradesh and Bihar of modern Republic of India, we see the tendency of pampering to the local dissipative forces by all the political parties to sustain in power at all costs. On the contrary, the South Indian politics strives for consolidation of power. Irrespective of political party, the ruler tries to consolidate the power centrally while correcting all the local anomalies. Certain regions were under rule of one dynasty for as long as 5 to 6 centuries. Compared to north, the south Indian politicians tend to consolidate absolute power in their hands. The local nuclei or the power centres tend to coalesce to form a larger power-droplet in South, where as in north, they tend to remain segregated.

When government consolidates total power of the state in its hand and provides an environment of stability, prosperity sets in no time. The region which was ravaged by Tughlaqs, Khiljis and Bahmanis, became the most prosperous region of India within 30 years when Vijaynagar kings consolidated the power. Same goes for Mughal Consolidation of Indo-gangetic plains brought about by Akbar. Permanent power encourages trade. Trade brings in prosperity and resources to protect and expand the power over space and time.

What was it that led to the loss of consolidating tendency of North Indic polity? Perhaps it was the flight of intellectuals to the south during Islamic onslaught. But then, the decay was set in long before advent of Islam. Was it because of too much of prosperity for too long? The uprising of 1857 showed a momentary promise, but soon it died out as well.

What is the reason for all this brain-storming??

The Gangetic plains still is the largest reservoir of talented human resource. Most of the IAS come from this very region. The issues of this region still are very relevant while thinking of rise of India in coming times. Without consolidation of Gangetic plains and eradication of this mercantile mentality which dissipates and discourages the consolidation of power, India cannot rise. This mercantile mentality is still seen in policies of Indian government which in turn comes partially due to mental shackles on the minds of bureaucrats and people from this region. The enormous zeal for political consolidation of entire subcontinent shown by Chanakya, Chandragupta, Samudragupta and Vikramaditya has to return in this region.

Unless this happens, India's rise on India's terms will continue to remain a distant possibility.

* Discussions with Mr. Kartik Srinivasan and Mr. Niraj Patel sparked the basic idea for this article.