Tenets of a Dharmic Rashtra

In the last post i had contrasted two systems: the Western Secular system and the Dharmic one in India that worked so well for millenia with a plethora of different Sampradayas (‘religions’) in place. A point of contrast was that the Western secular concept freezes Sampradayas and doesn’t acknowledge the quest for free movement within and experimentation to find newer avenues for spiritual development and growth. Something that has always happened in India. The mental blocks may lie with concepts of final Prophets, Judgement days and the finality of the exclusive message doled out by Abrahmic Prophets.

When Abrahmic religions came into contact with Dharmic overlaid Sampradayic systems (Sikhism, Jainism, Buddhism, Vaishnavism etc) in India, many Sampradayas assumed that the foreign versions would have the same respect for Dharmic traditions and tenets as every Sampradayas in India held. It was not to be so, and friction between the Indian Sampradayas and the Western ones became manifest. These manifestations ultimately resulted in the loss of Afghanistan, Pakistan and Bangladesh. The same reasons for friction are very much present still and the Western version of Secularism (that demands a Uniform Civil Code for all) was converted to one that pandered to Abrahmic minorities many times at the expense of the Indic Sampradayas.

This brand of secularism, now sometimes referred to as Nehruvian Secularism also disengaged from the basics of Dharma. This large scale disengagement created a major vacuum in moral guidance and thought that was filled in by high sounding socialist, communist morality that were sweeping in opposition to colonial capitalism and empires. But disengaging with Dharma also implied moving away from the kinship and abandoning leadership Indics always had towards other Dharmic nations like Tibet, Bhutan, Nepal, SE Asia etc. That moving away meant we had left a vacuum and that started to get filled by China and other ideologies all imported from outside to our neighborhoods. Yet our Dharma blind Nehruvian Secularists looked away as blatant aggression was carried out against our Dharmic friends in the neighborhood and even within the country.

It is in that context we earlier analyzed why Dharmic systems can be superior and fairer than the Secular versions thrust upon our country. The question thus,  if the Western Classical Secularist model doesn’t work in India (not acceptable to Islamists for instance), and neither the Nehruvian Secularist one is acceptable to Islamists, then why should we not try our ancient Dharmic one. But the legitimate question is what is a Dharmic system? What would a Dharmic States premise be? Towards that I will try and raise a simple preamble of a Dharmic Constitution, and see how such a Dharmic Constitution could impact us. This below is a preamble:

To constitute Bharat into a Democratic REPUBLIC inspired by DHARMA, which for the purpose of this document is understood as the core universal ethical principle.

That this Dharma* is eternal and universal, it is the natural order underlying the universe, and it is what each human needs for their ultimate fulfillment.

That this Republic through it’s Institutions will strive to uphold, evolve to and encourage

1. Truth (Satya) and thus Honesty in it’s dealings.
2. Compassion in it’s dealings towards it’s Citizens, Flora, Fauna. 
3. Equality of Opportunity for all it’s citizenry.

In honoring the above the Dharmic Republic of Bharat/ India will strive in 

4. The Pursuit of Happiness for it’s citizenry.
5. The pursuit of Liberty of thought and expression for it’s citizenry.
6. The Pursuit of Justice for it’s citizenry.

In honoring the above the Dharmic Republic of Bharat/ India will strive to

7. Uphold the Prosperity and Enrichment of the Bharatiya Civilization.
8. Promote the unity, integrity, security and environmental health of the nation.

With these Principles the State emphasizes to endeavor to empower ALL its citizens to realize their intrinsic capacity to pursue happiness by facilitating their pursuit with freedom, knowledge, skills, opportunity and conducive environment and by encouraging and recognizing their merit.

The State also endeavours to provide those Dharmics that seek release through Recluse, the security and peace to pursue recluse and merger with with the Supreme.

WE DO HEREBY ADOPT, ENACT AND GIVE TO OURSELVES THIS CONSTITUTION.

Satyameva Jayate!

* Appendix to the Preamble: That this Dharma is to be understood as exemplified in 

1. Dhrti (patience)
2. Ks’ama (forgiveness)
3. Dhama (self-control)
4. Asteya (non-stealing)
5. Shaoca (cleanliness)
6. Indriyanigraha (control)
7. Dhii (intellect)
8. Vidya’ (knowledge)
9. Satyam (Truthfulness)

10. Akrodha (non-anger)

Compared to other preambles this is necessarily a little longer. Many may feel what is so special about this. But it commits the State, it’s Institutions and importantly individuals and Sampradaya’s to evolve to adhere to these basic Tenets.

Many seers comment that, that which Unites is Dharma and that which Divides is Adharma. Manifest in Daivam Manusha Rupena ( Godliness through Humans) This process is Dharma, on the contrary any action that doesn’t uphold the universality of Dharma Prudhaktvam Anyena Anyatvat (Separating one from the other) in to consideration, is Adharma. One cannot commit Adharma if one is aware of the universality of Dharma and upholds its institutionalized constitutionality.

Debating and discussing Dharma itself is a positively evolving venture, for example the Veda’s say Truth is ONE, sages call the Truth by different names: ekam sad vipra bahudha vadanti agnim yamam matariswanam ahuh. Sage Brihadraranyaka says Dharma is Truth and Truth is Dharma. Jains, Sikhs and Buddhists say the same thing. Christianity and the Wests’ liberal evolution is also largely rooted in decreasing the supremacy of the Vatican Sampradaya to Institutionalized respect for some of these Dharmic values enshrined in Indian thought for ages. Much of this happened after Western contact and perusal of ancient Sanskrit texts and literature.

The test of acceptability for such a constitution is simple. Ask oneself how many Humans that profess allegiance to any Sampradaya/ Religion will disagree with the tenets as mentioned above or Institutions that strive towards achieving those tenets. Better still is show them these values and ask if they disagree with these values. Any conflict within the Sampradaya and Dharma is always in favor of Dharma. The Sampradaya is under pressure to change or confirm. Much of that pressure is gentle, non violent and persistent. Yet Dharma is extremely well armed if one sticks to and attempts to uphold its values.

Today for example the sharpest and most potent weapon against Excluvist doctrines like Islamism are being fought with is TRUTH. Whether it is manifested through forums on the net, or comment sections of blogs, FB, Twitter, Ali Sina’s sites wherever, the best and most potent answer from the ‘unbeliever’ is coming through Truth about Islamism. It is shaking it’s doctrinal core like anything that has been attempted ever before. So one cannot underestimate the power that the Truth carries with it. Everyone of the Dharmic values/ tenets is a weapon in it’s own right. Constitutionalizing those Dharmic values arms Institutions, oneself from false doctrine (Adharma) in a way one cannot imagine. That is how a Dharmic Constitution and our commitment to it will arm us against divisive doctrine.

Dharmo rakshati rakshitaha

Is India ready for a Second Partition?

Most people and Strategy Experts are ill equipped at this juncture to be prepared to answer this question. In reality, none has an answer and is not prepared to think why such circumstances may develop. And tragically none is prepared to assume the worst — a necessary ingredient to strategic planning. After the nightmare of 1947, it is possible that this remains a mental block among most of us. Yet we must conjure up the possibility and try to:

1. Analyze why it could happen.

2. What will be the likely Boundaries post a 2nd Partition?

3. What will be the consequent effect on hinterland Nations and areas?

4. Whether we can recover from such a setback?

5. Is there any way to obviate this?

The consequences of another partition will be shattering, may be even fatal for most of India. It will involve a large change in thought, strategy, boundaries, power equations, complete reversal in ownership patterns of prime resources, access to most of our very holy Sansthans and much more, possibly even beyond the scope of what this blog can envision. Yet, a start can be made and broad patterns of what will likely emerge can be visualized. To do so we need to see what kind of forces seek India’s breakup. What kind of forces can India fight against strongly, and what kind they can’t. So while for example Naxalism might be strong in many districts,  the Indian state through development, education and multi-party agreement or punitive action, can deter any major breakup that the Naxals might try and achieve. The Naxal fringe of the Left has emerged partly due to the emergence of the left itself over large swathes of backward territory. Rapid progress and migration itself will make people lean away from violent Marxist doctrines. Yet the possibility of Naxalites and Islamists combining and making assaults on the Indian state always exists and it is well known that both cooperate in many underground activities. So let us delve into the 1st part:

1. Why could a 2nd Partition Happen? 

The simplest answer to that is for the very reason the first one happened. And even before the First! The loss of Afghanistan. The reason was the emergence of large swathes of practitioners of extremist Islamist ideology at complete doctrinal odds with the larger broader populations of the Nation. The trigger was obviously the ability of Islamists to indulge in violence that forced the State’s hand into acceding to their demands for a separate state. Pakistan’s formation was created in UP, and not in the NWFP. Ironically most of the Islamists that voted for Pakistan did not leave. Their descendants are still in Uttar Pradesh. Most of NWFP did not vote for Pakistan, most of their descendants today form the Taliban.

Secularism in India as interpreted by many parties is nothing but pandering to minority Islamist sentiment and demands. Yes it was envisaged to be a complete separation of State and Religion. Something that Indian secularism failed to achieve as separation of civil codes goes to show. The demand of Sharia rule is mandatory in Islam. According to its very doctrine there cannot be a Muslim that does not want governance under Sharia. Many liberal Muslims have many different ideas on Sharia, but unfortunately for these ‘moderates’ in the end the Mullah is right in his interpretations. So as long as our brand of appeasement Secularism is there, the phase of demographic consolidation goes on. But was there some planning as to where the demographic consolidation should happen, where would it manifest? A little research actually clearly indicates that the demographic consolidation is happening very systemically all around and in the neighbourhood of our sacred Dharmic Sthals.

The biggest disappointment to Jinnah at the first partition possibly was a moth-eaten Pakistan. Those that consolidated around Dhramic Sthals could not achieve the aim to make a Mughalistan at those spots. The two majority Muslim areas were separated by a considerable distance. Would a future Jinnah make the same mistake? To see whether there is any truth to consolidation around Dharmic Sthals, I a little research on the Internet would be very revealing. The results may or may not perplex one, but the consequences certainly may confound.

2. What will be the likely Boundaries post a 2nd Partition?

While the population of Muslims in India may be 14% as per last to last census, there are Districts in UP, Bihar, and West Bengal right below Uttarakhand and Nepal that have on the average 55 % Muslims. Darjeeling may have a 5% Muslim population but North Dinajpur is well over 50%. North Dinajpur cuts the rest of India completely from Bhutan, Darjeeling and the entire North East! One must remember also that these are figures for 2001. The districts below these trail a bit to 45% muslim population as of 2001. By 2021 these figures all may be 70% or more. We are talking of a 200-300 Km wide tract of land running below Uttarakhand, Nepal, and Darjeeling right up to Bangladesh with an average Muslim population of around 70 % certainly by 2030, if not 2020!

Here are the maps and one will get an inkling of the corridor of the 2nd partition that may become unavoidable in a few years from now.

Image

This is the picture of Districts of UP bordering with Uttarakhand (% as of 2001 census):

Saharanpur: 50.2 %; Muzzafarnagar: 46.55; Bijnor: 66.8%; Moradabad: 65%; Rampur: 68%; Bareilly: 46.7%; Pilbhit: 43%.

The border Districts above average more than 55% Muslims in the population as of 2001 census. The set of Districts shown below also average 50% and more as of 2001.

 Image

This is the map of UP districts just below Nepal. These districts are (% as of 2001 census):

Kheri: 33.1%; Bahraich: 59.4%; Srasvati:34.5% ; Balrampur: 47%; Sidharth Nagar: 33.9%; Maharganj:20% ; Kushinagar: 24.3%

They average: 36.0%. But surprisingly while Lucknow is 27% odd, the neighbouring districts of Sitapur and Barabanki have 50% plus Muslim populations. We can clearly see a corridor opening up. But let us investigate further the Bihar-Nepal border:

 Image

The Districts of Bihar border The districts shown here are:

West Champaran: 24.5% ; Motihari: 19% ; Sitamarhi:21% ; Madhubani:18% ; Supaul: 17%; Araria:41% ; Kishanganj: 78%; Purnia 37%

The average Muslim population here is again around 32% plus.

Lets look now how the WB part of the Map looks like:

 Image

West Bengal and Bangladesh/ Nepal/ Bihar borders:

This is interesting. That North Dinajpur is 49.7% muslims, Darjeeling is just around 5.3% as of 2001. Maldah is again touching 50%, South Dinajpur bordering Bangladesh is 33%. Between these 3 Districts we have 45% plus Muslims as of 2001. This part is critical. As a 2nd partition here cuts off not only Darjeeling and Bhutan fully but also the entire North Eastern India! Jalpaiguri with 10% Muslims does not matter, neither a Darjeeling with a 5% or Bhutan. They all along with the entire NE sisters would be completely cut off from India. We have no connecting roads in our control, no rails, nothing of proximity.

3. What will be the consequent effect on hinterland nations and areas?

As by now you know the sort of demographics at work and a corridor 200 km or more wide and 850 odd km long emerging and effectively cutting off Sikkim, Darjeeling, Bhutan and the entire North Eastern part of India even as this corridor links up with Bangladesh in the East. The significance of this is that it not only cuts off these above mentioned regions, but it cuts off Uttarakhand, and Nepal completely despite their miniscule demographics with respect to Muslims. Once cut off there is nothing these Dharmic Sthals can do except wait for the Maoist Han Imperialist from up north to swallow the higher reaches and the lower ones being swallowed by a hardening Islamist setup. Kedarnath, Pashupati, Muktheshwar, Haridwar (already 2001: 25 plus %) all will be lost. China will move into the higher reaches and even into Bodh Gaya to take over and consolidate its Buddhist legacy based on its narrow contorted vision, thus completing its unfinished decimation of traditional Tibetan Buddhism. The India that will emerge from this fiasco will not possibly end just south of these above mentioned bordering Districts, it may end up even losing the entire UP, and Bihar stretch, and thus may have to recede to South India.

This kind of formation will not be sustainable for India. Kashmir will be lost too. This is the map of Kashmir’s districts:

Image

If China decides at that juncture to take Leh, there is little we can do except lose the Western part to Pakistan and the Eastern one to China. Leaving us with Himachal, Punjab, Haryana, Delhi and possibly make a military manoeuvre to take over and retain Noida and Greater Noida.

The North Eastern part of India will be then carved by China/Bangladesh and Myanmar. With the head and heart of our Dharmic civilization cut off question arises is can we survive to fight another day? So,

4. Can we recover from such a setback? 

That is a question that is not easily answered till in India we have a consensus of some sort. Once a consensus is there, the simple answer is yes, a fight back is possible. If the consensus does not exist, then it will not be possible. Here is what may be necessary to build the necessary consensus and actions to be taken as of now.

The first will be to make Tibet and Nepal a core strategic part of our policy. For this we require to reverse our recognition of an India-China border and simply say and state the Truth that there is no Indo-Chinese border that has ever existed. It has always been an Indo-IndoTibetan one. When it was Indo-Tibetan we never really bothered if peasants from one side crossed and traded with the other, or pilgrims sat in meditation at Shiv Bhoomi because all of us belonged to the same Dharmic soil. We did not require visa’s because we knew that neither the Tibetans will bomb us, nor we will bomb the Tibetans. None of us coveted the land of the other to have border Armies omnipresent all along. The same situation applied to Nepal and Bhutan and is visible today. The feelings were mutual and border problems did not exist, and therefore certainly was no need of any artillery or war. No Indian minded a Nepali, or a Tibetan working and living here and vice versa. This is not the case today for Pakistanis or Bangladeshis. It will never be so as long as they are indebted to the so called Religions of Peace, Compassion and Mercy — none of which the practitioners know the meaning of and none of which respect the basic tenets of Dharma. But let us not digress here, and ask that if the partition happens what we can hope to do now at this late stage or in future in order to get back our head and heart.

5. The Solution:

1. Make a claim to Kailash and Mansarover/Shiv Bhoomi. This will make people realize that China is an occupier of very sacred Dharmic soil. The claim should not be some demand for Secular rule over the territory by India. It should be demanded that this blessed soil is sacred to Nepal, Tibet, and India, and thus must be jointly managed by these three and not by China. For this an agreement with the Tibetan govt in Exile is a must. For Tibet’s freedom the Tibetan Govt in Exile will be most gracious, and willing for joint management for this most sacred Dharmic Sthal to enable the pilgrims from these 3 nations to go without hassle, and without disturbing the pristine environs. This is also the region where ALL the major river systems for South Asia and SE Asia originate. With the control of this Dharmic Sthal one Power will not be able to arbitrarily control the source of the water systems and destroy the economy of South and South East Asia.

2. Tell China, that any agreement with Nehruvian India on the international border did not work as China did not behave in accordance with what India expected of a friendly nation, which turned out to be very ungrateful by ignoring the support by India for China in the early days in every International Forum. It behaved in a manner unbecoming of a civilized nation, humiliated and tortured fellow Dharmics in Tibet, tried erasing its culture in a most brutal manner, and generally exercise Adharmic control over a Dharmic Sthal like Tibet. So we should refuse to recognize anymore an Indo-China Border, but do recognize only an Indo Tibetan one. So, in essence ask the Han Chinese to  vacate from Kailash-Mansarover/ Shiv Bhoomi (Shiva certainly is not Han Chinese) and also vacate Aksai Chin and giving Tibet back to Tibetans.

Neither of the above China will agree immediately. They will laugh it off, call us names, have Cognitive dissonance, abuse us, cut trade to their own detriment, and yes even try and launch some military manoeuvres in Leh/ Sikkim/ Bhutan and ArP. All I can say is that we must be prepared. If they do so, remember the Chinese mainland is 3000 km from Tibet with only ONE major entry point. If they take a bit here, we must take 3 bits elsewhere and hold. We have Malacca to control and yes we can pack a punch that can cause China major heartburn. Yet China would be pragmatic if we are strong and determined and refrain, while the world takes note and millions of reams are written on Tibetan freedom. This itself will consolidate opinion within China. And if like USSR, China ever opens a wee bit, the gates of freedom will dawn on Tibet again. India has to put its jackboots in Tibet the moment that happens as a protectorate similar to what it does to Bhutan (COAS Bhutanese, Boots Indian, Shiv Bhoomi: Joint Dharmic Sthal Indo-Nepal-Tibet). These minor arrangements can be worked out with Tibet and Nepal so that India again does not have to suffer a totalitarian ideologies whim from China.

If a 2nd partition happens in India after we do all this above, we see we can save Uttaranchal, Nepal, Bhutan, Darjeeling, Sikkim and the Northern regions of NE India! If we don’t achieve this in Tibet and Nepal, we cannot save all the above. We have no chance. We will have to abandon Kailash, Kedarnath, Pashupati, Nalanda, Bodh Gaya, Muktheshwar, Haridwar, Varanasi and hundreds more of our most sacred places to Maoists and Islamists.

We need to draw a line in the Dharmic sand now and understand that a Second partition may also soon emerge. And if it does we have the strategies and options in place to wear it out and regain our lost Dharmic sthals at some point in the future.

Ref:

http://www.censusindia.gov.in/Tables_Published/Basic_Data_Sheet.aspx

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bihari_Muslims

http://www.aicmeu.org/Muslim_Population_Distribution_in_India.htm

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muslim_Population_by_District_in_West_Bengal

Note: Populations quoted here are 2001 Census. Some figures may depict urban center populations as of 2001. 

Coming next Post: My next coming post will be about steps India can take earliest to avoid doctrinal confrontations that would enable an eventuality like the above to occur as has happened in the past.

The Dharmic and Secularist Overlay to Society

Are we all essentially different at the core? Are our definitive ‘Religious’ differences encapsulated by our being Hindu, Buddhist, Sikh, Jain etc? Or is there a higher overall ‘law’ that governs our differences from getting out of control? Let us look at our history of a few millennia and observe why as a rule our different Sampradaya’s got along with each other without bloodshed and a lot of mutual respect, rather than fought with gore for exclusivist supremacy as has happened for hundreds of years in the West.

While as a Bharatiya Sanskriti we produced many Sampradaya’s/ schools of Religious thought, Religious orthodoxies and traditions, all these were strands of one aspect that none as a rule wanted to violate. These basic rules were that of Dharma. While interpreted in many different ways in modern times at least, we do have in ancient texts the fact that there were 10 basic qualities of Dharma. These are listed here:

1. Dhrti (patience)
2. Ks’ama (forgiveness)
3. Dhama (self-control)
4. Asteya (non-stealing)
5. Shaoca (cleanliness)
6. Indriyanigraha (control over organs)
7. Dhii (benevolent intellect)
8. Vidya’ (spiritual knowledge)
9. Satyam (Truthfulness)
10. Akrodha (non-anger)

So while we indeed did have ‘religious’ orthodoxy in many Samapradayic schools of thought, we also did have an overlay of respect to these 10 qualities. People expected compliance from their Rulers ,Society in general and the Guru’s and Rishi’s in particular. Importantly texts like the Mahabharata and Ramayana clearly depict Ram and Krishna fighting and exhorting to uphold Dharma and not some specific Sampradayic lobby of Vaishnavism, Gyaan Yoga, Dvaita or Advaita. Ram even spent time in the forests protecting both Vishwamitra and Vashista who had radically different Sampradayic approaches. Even in Krishna’s message to Arjuna he makes it clear the fight is for upholding Dharma and that many approaches to him exist in ritual and worship, but he at the end is the same Supreme.

Thus Dharma was the overlay holding together different Sampradaya’s religious orthodoxies together without conflict, as also the evolution of various deep Sampradayic thoughts and methods. It was something that India always has had reason to be justifiably proud of possibly more than any other country in the world. It continued to be so even with the advent of Christianity and Islam in India. But there was one danger we did not recognize. That while in India various Sampradaya’s upheld the sanctity of Dharma, the alien religious orthodoxies did not. For them their Sampradaya’s (in this Case Islam and Christianity) were uncompromisingly above all else, and the rules of Dharma did not apply. The alien ideology narrowly interpreted Dharma only with their Sampradaya’s religious orthodoxy, and the besiege of free thought of intellectuals affected in India’s dark ages could not demarcate with clarity the importance of the Dharmic layer over the individual Samradya/ Religious orthodoxy. Thus, the ritual and tradition triumphed over Dharma and this onslaught of making ritual and tradition non negotiable even in violation to the Societal Dharmic norms became acceptable. It was also that sense of ritualistic supremacy over Dharma that enabled hard anti-blasphemy and Apostasy laws in the Abrahmic West and not so in Dharmic India.

Now the same adherence to exclusivist orthodox religious rituals in Europe had come to such a pass, and at a time when Sanskrit texts flowing into Europe were changing thought paradigms of Western intellectuals, concepts to curb Religious orthodoxy like Secularism that separated State and Religion emerged. Thus in Europe, secularism became the overlay that tamed the supremacy of Religious orthodoxy within their geography to a large extent.

Now this convenient Secularist overlay was far inferior to the Dharmic one, for one simple reason. Sampradaya’s born out of respect for the Dharmic core created non controversial flow from one sampradaya to another till a person’s individual nature settled for a sampradaya based on Gyaan, Bhakti, Dvait, Advait etc. That is why even today Westerners are surprised why Hindu’s bow to Buddha, why Vaishnavs pray to Shiva, why Hindu’s rever Sikh Guru’s and bow in the Golden temple and why Jains celebrate Diwali or a Sikh Guru writes a version of the Ramayana. Freedom of Sampradayic change was all pervasive, and many brought up in the West for example, are surprised to know that every Buddhist canon of thought was promulgated  and propagated even to far off lands by Hindu Brahmins and Sages! That freedom of spiritual enquiry and propagation without violence could only happen in a society where the Dharmic overlay existed and not a Secular one. Yet our Western educated elite opted for the inferior latter version for overlay than adapt or rather evolve to our tried and tested Dharmic one to the modern constitution.

While the average Indian felt that all Sampradaya’s must beget same respect, what they failed to understand that some Sampradaya’s, particularly the Middle Eastern varieties, would not compromise on their ritual even if it broke Dharmic tenets and sensitivity outright. A secularism which succeeded in mostly Christian West failed in India, as in India the secularists interpreted it in terms of respecting the ritual and tradition however bizarre and violative of the Dharmic tenets it may be. At the threat of violence, Secularism was twisted to imply special safeguards for minority ritual and tradition even if completely violative of Dharma. That made India with every compromise, sadly Adharmic and the consequence was, as is on display, a directionless, confused nation without a backbone and little respect.

The only course correction at this stage is to get back again to the overlay of Dharmic values and put Ritual and Tradition below the overlay. It is a slow process, but the larger population must be led to discuss the Dharmic overlay necessary to form the Governing structure. At some stage ritual and tradition that violates the core of Dharma will have to be opposed and eliminated to maintain peace and harmony. Else the orthodox cults of ritual and tradition violative of Dharmic principle will inevitably take over Bharat and result in inevitable sorrow and pain .

India 2039: A Scenario

TNN Bangalore: April 5, 2039: The Shahi Imam of the Islamic Republic of Uttar Mughalistan (formerly known as Uttar Pradesh and Bihar) announced the deeper than oceans and taller than mountains relationship with China on the 20th anniversary of Chinese reclamation of Bodh Gaya . The announcement came from the rebuilt ramparts of the Grand Babri Masjid destroyed by Hindu fanatics decades ago at Islampur (formerly Ayodhya) at a function held for the Chinese Ambassador to Uttar Mughalistan (Comprises Bihar minus Bodh Gaya, Uttar Pradesh and former Uttaranchal). 20 subversive Hindu extremist Nepalese leaders were handed to Chinese police at a border checkpost South of Kathmandu, highlighting close anti terrorist cooperation between China and Uttar Mughalistan.

The President of UM endorsed the controversial move of handing over Mukteshwar, Ramgarh and upper reaches of Uttaranchal to the Chinese in a deal done last decade and declared that Nepal has always been a part of China from the principle of extended Sovereignity. India’s aggressive takeover of Noida in a pre-emptive military maneuver prior to formation of Mughalistan and subsequent building of an electrified fencing is one of several major disputes with Uttar Mughalistan. Britain and US have condemned India’s aggression over the NOIDA territory. China endorses a peaceful resolution of the NOIDA dispute. Both countries claim that territory that includes Ghaziabad, Noida and Greater Noida.

The President also opposed the electrified fencing off Jharkhand, Chattisgarh with Mughalistan by India and requested China to supply 200 J 40 fighters to help maintain the balance of power in the region. Many parts of Chattisgarh, MP and Rajasthan borders are disputed. Artillery firing over several sectors has made life for local villagers unbearable. Respected peace Laureate Aruna Roy in Guardian mentions increased defense spending on both sides to be a major cause of poverty in both feuding nations.

Reports also mentioned the Chinese leadership displayed disappointment with Indian leadership over misuse of Chinese myths by Indian citizens, particularly naming people and places after Shiva and Vishnu. Prof Ravichandran Guha, a leading expert in China studies has argued credibly that the Chinese have a point. Just like companies in China are not allowed to brand products of Apple as Appal or Appel, brand equity for Chinese ownership over the legends of Shiva and Vishnu is diluted as Shiva has clearly been proven to reside In Chinese soil at Kailash/ Mansarover, contrary to claims by some Hindu extremists. The Indian Foreign Minister Salman Khurram says constructive talks with Chinese leaders are on this issue. When pressed by reporters on Chinese issuing staple Visas to those whose names are are Vishnu, Shiva, Gautam he was emphatic that India has taken a strong stance and had issued a Demarche to the Chinese Ambassador in the Indian Capital city of Bangalore. He said that despite Shiva, Gautam Buddha and most of Sanskrit literature being Chinese,  it is important we Hindu’s realize that this is a sensitive issue and name children so as to not cause conflict with our giant neighbor in the interests of peace. Meanwhile Farid Mohammed and Mohammed Digvijaya said Islam as a culture welcomes Hindu’s naming Children Mohammed or Nurul or Islam, but insisted that they had strongly conveyed to the Chinese authorities that some time must be given to the people to adjust gently to these nomenclature changes to avoid social conflict. Chinese diplomats have been reported to be extremely understanding in private on this issue, though in public they still exhort faster movement and exhort Indian parents not to name children after Gautam and Shiva. Md Digvijaya feels that understanding shown by China must be appreciated from the Hindu point of view.

Foreign Minister Khurram also urged the visiting Chinese Junior Minister of State to use his good offices to request Uttar Mughalistan to issue visas to pilgrims for the Kumbh Mela at Allahabad, a practice discontinued for 2 decades. Last year Mughalistan executed 7 Indians who crossed illegally to take a dip in the Ganges. The Minister said India had strongly protested the outrage and also then given a 300 page dossier and demarche to the Uttar Mughalistan Ambassador. The Chinese ambassador to India Li Shiu (the Hindu surname Shiv is considered to be a malappropriation of this ancient Chinese surname) remarked to his Bangalore hosts that China believes that religious freedom is important and it will talk to Uttar Mughalistan on the matter, but cautioned this is an internal matter and both India and Uttar Mughalistan are  friendly states.

Mani Swamy Aiyer since has made several trips on track 2 diplomacy and says “the hospitality received in Uttar Mughalistan is over whelming and the people are just like us. We need to engage with the peace lobby in Mughalistan. Religion and politics must not come in the way of brotherly relations between the two nations.”

Meanwhile India has received a loan from IMF to put storage tankers at sea and produce much needed fresh water. Under the Ganges Yamuna Treaty of Mughalistan, India gets 5% of waters which are not enough for it’s need. Even that Indians claim is being violated. Indian Foreign Minister Salman Khurram thanked China for voting in India’s favor and thus helping secure the IMF loan. There were no negative votes for India. Even Mughalistan did not vote against the loan for India, though experts off the record say was due to Chinese pressure. Leading GCC experts have pointed that a sign of growing maturity in diplomatic behind the scene consultations between the GCC, Islamabad, Islampur and China with Bangalore. A sign many in the Indian media and establishment say point to the fact that despite Indo-Chinese differences, we can work together to solve our problems. In that light JNU Professor R. Guha has acknowledged the success of the border treaties with China South of Simla. The Indo-Chinese borders south of Dharmasala and The East-West Siliguri belt are cited were cited as examples of mature cooperation between the 2 nations after a century of mistrust. He mentioned that this was despite prior India’s military defiance in trying to unsuccessfully prevent Chinese take overs in Bhutan, Sikkim and further protesting against the incorporating of former states of NE India into China.

Hardline Hindu nationalists demanded in the Indian parliament taxing the Mughalistan-Pakistan Road corridor in lieu of more water rights. India which had acknowledged the demand and provided a transit fee free corridor between Mughalistan and Pakistan decades ago said there was no question it would dishonor the treaty of free transit. Talks were on also between Islamabad, Islampur, Bangalore on the question of illegal immigrants misusing the free transit corridor. Both Pakistan and Mughalistan maintain there were no illegal migration and misuse. They blame India for blocking the passage of 40 Tanks and 136 heavy artillery vehicles from Islamabad to Mughalistan. The case has been taken to the International courts. Indian sources say they have a strong case of blocking the artillery and tanks. The ruling they say will probably be restricted to 2 tanks and 20 heavy artillery pieces every week as a face saving gesture for Islamabad and Islampur at the maximum.

Indian Hindu nationalists also created an uproar in parliament on news that the Indian PM decided to de link talks and terror. Coming soon after the massive terror attacks in Chennai, Vizag, Cochin that killed 740 people, the leadership stressed that we will have to continue to live as neighbors and terror affects both countries. Aruna Roy in landmark article in the Guardian had earlier stressed that Saffron terror and misuse of Chinese symbols was a major cause of distrust between these neighboring nations. Many Indians have stopped naming Children after Gautam, Shiva and Vishnu (NDTV has issued a notice to it’s employees regarding this possibly as a result of their being allowed to open branches in the Chinese cities Beijing, Kathmandu, Dehradun and Shimla ).

Noted leftist Mr Banerjee in the Hindu even suggested making a list of names and seeking approval from Chinese authorities which ones would be acceptable for use. Mr Guha approves of such venture and talks as they will bring trust and show China, that India is sensitive about Chinese legacy issues on misuse of names like Gautama and Shiva. Leaders and experts are of the opinion that violence and war are not an option or solution to the development and improvement of ties in the region.