Home Blog Page 77

Ajit Doval’s ‘revenge through nation building’ triggers outrage from usual Left-liberals who misread history, memory and intent

Anurag
-
0
Ajit Doval’s ‘revenge through nation building’ triggers outrage from usual Left-liberals who misread history, memory and intent

On 10th January, National Security Adviser (NSA) Ajit Doval addressed young Indians at the Viksit Bharat Young Leaders Dialogue. His speech was rooted in civilisational decline, historical memory and national rebuilding. However, it was quickly stripped of context and projected as a communal provocation by a section of political leaders and self styled liberal commentators.

At the centre of the manufactured outrage was Doval’s use of the word “revenge”. He qualified and contextualised the term himself during the speech. What followed was not a reasoned disagreement but a predictable escalation. History itself was put on trial, and any discussion of India’s past humiliation was branded as hatred.

The likes of former Chief Minister of Jammu and Kashmir Mehbooba Mufti, The Wire’s propagandist masquerading as journalist Arfa Khanum Sherwani, Tavleen Singh and Suhasini Haider did not take much time to frame the speech as “insecure”, “Islamophobic” and “dangerous”.

Yet none of these reactions engaged with what Doval actually said during his speech. They relied on insinuation, assumption and a deliberate narrowing of a civilisational argument into a communal box.

What the NSA actually spoke about

During his address, Doval did not say anything that could be marked as impulsive or rhetorical. It was a structured reflection on how India’s freedom came at the cost of centuries of humiliation, executions, destroyed villages, looted cultural sites and economic collapse. Doval spoke of how generations lived without agency, forced to watch their civilisation weaken without the capacity to respond.

Importantly, he emphasised not grievance but responsibility. He asked the young generation to understand history not as a source of perpetual sorrow but as a reservoir of strength. The word “revenge” that he used, and which the so called critics seized upon, was immediately explained by him as rebuilding India into a strong, self confident nation rooted in its own values, institutions and capabilities.

Doval did not call for violence. There was no naming of a religious community. There was no incitement. The speech remained focused on historical lessons and national capacity.

Colonialism and decline, not a Muslim exclusive narrative

One of the most misleading claims made while criticising him was that he targeted Muslims or framed history through a Muslim invader lens. This assertion collapses when the speech’s content is examined.

Doval clearly spoke about foreign rule, civilisational decline and colonial exploitation. His speech included references to economic devastation, and he cited academic work that documents how India and China together once accounted for over half of the world economy before centuries of decline. He did not attribute the decline to a single community but to repeated external domination and internal vulnerability.

To reduce such a wide historical argument to a Muslim exclusive narrative is not analysis. It is projection. Those who criticised him inserted a communal reading where none existed.

Civilisational memory is not hatred

A deeper discomfort is hidden in plain sight behind the outrage. The idea that India should remember history without judgement, without naming loss and without acknowledging trauma is what the “critics” want. This demand is neither realistic nor intellectually honest.

The memories of civilisations are built on records, archaeology, economic data and historical documentation. Remembering destroyed villages, looted temples or cultural erosion is not an act of hatred. It is an acknowledgement of facts. No civilisation erases its past to appear polite in the present.

Countries across the world openly discuss slavery, genocide, colonial exploitation and war crimes. No one accuses them of hatred against contemporary communities. However, in India, the so called intellectual setup is such that the act of remembering history invites accusations of bigotry.

The misuse of islamophobia as a shutdown tool

Another troubling pattern in the backlash was the casual expansion of the islamophobia label. Any uncomfortable discussion of historical facts was quickly reframed as violence normalisation or dog whistles. This approach is adopted not to protect minorities but to undermine serious discourse.

In literal terms, Islamophobia should be used when Muslims are targeted, discriminated against or harmed for their faith. In this case, or in similar cases where atrocities of the past are discussed, Muslims in the present are not harmed at all. Merely remembering the humiliation, cultural decline, genocides and looting India faced does not make it fall under the category of “Islamophobia”, even if Muslims were among those who carried out the atrocities.

The revealing contradiction in the outrage

There is also a contradiction that remains largely unaddressed. Many Indian Islamists consistently claim that Muslim rule in India was peaceful, tolerant and benevolent. However, the same voices erupt in outrage when even a general mention of historical atrocities is made.

If history was uniformly peaceful, why does discussion provoke such hostility? The discomfort suggests an anxiety about narratives that are no longer fully controlled.

Acknowledging that periods of rule involved violence, destruction and decline does not delegitimise any modern community. It only recognises that power, across history and geography, has rarely been benign.

Reading Doval in strategic continuity

Doval’s address cannot be read as a standalone moment. It fits into a larger shift in how India now views itself and its place in the world. The present leadership functions through an interconnected strategic outlook rather than isolated voices.

The Prime Minister defines the framework, placing India’s interests first, asserting independence in decision making, and ending the habit of seeking external approval. The External Affairs Minister translates this approach into action overseas by pushing back against unsolicited mediation, moral lectures and double standards.

Doval reflects the same mindset domestically, asking Indians to move beyond viewing history as a catalogue of grievances and instead treat it as a source of strength for rebuilding national capacity. This posture is not hostility. It is self assurance. Those who label it insecurity often find it difficult to accept an India that no longer feels the need to explain or apologise for itself.

Memory versus grievance

The self styled critics of India’s current leadership often collapse memory into grievance. For them, remembering historical loss automatically implies resentment and hostility. This confusion lies at the heart of the panic over Doval’s remarks.

In his speech, Doval did not argue for eternal victimhood. He argued for learning from failure, recognising vulnerability and ensuring it is never repeated. There is a significant difference. Nations that forget their past do not become enlightened. They become careless.

Power built quietly, not theatrically

India’s growing stature today is not the result of loud slogans but structural decisions. Foreign policy credibility, economic resilience and strategic autonomy were built by refusing to apologise for existence.

The next challenge, as Doval implicitly underlined, lies at home. Capacity building in manufacturing, judicial efficiency, urban infrastructure, education and governance. This is where power compounds. This is the revenge Doval spoke of, slow, institutional and irreversible.

Conclusion

Ajit Doval’s speech was not a call to hatred. It was a call to responsibility. The outrage surrounding it reveals less about the speech and more about the discomfort of those who fear a nation that remembers, reflects and rebuilds without seeking validation.

Nation building is not revenge against people. It is revenge against decline.

Iran used Russian tech and Chinese research to jam Starlink? Inside Tehran’s playbook to enforce an internet blackout as Starlink’s packet loss surges to 80 per cent

Shraddha Pandey
-
0
Iran used Russian tech and Chinese research to jam Starlink? Inside Tehran’s playbook to enforce an internet blackout as Starlink’s packet loss surges to 80 per cent

Iran is witnessing massive street protests against the Mullah regime and a violent crackdown on the protestors. The Khamenei regime has imposed a complete blackout in the country, restricting anti-government protestors from accessing the internet. SpaceX activated its satellite internet, Starlink, in Iran to help protesters bypass the internet ban. However, now even Starlink is being shut down, reportedly using Russian technology and Chinese research.

Iran government shut down the internet in hopes of crushing the protests but Starlink stunned the Mullah regime

The internet and social media have been crucial in communication and coordination among anti-government protestors in Iran. Taking note of the impact, the Mullah regime imposed a nationwide blackout on 8th January. The blackout started at around 6:45 pm UTC (10:15 pm local time) on Thursday, and Cloudflare Radar reported internet traffic in Iran had slumped to “effectively zero.

Before the imposition of a total blackout, a significant drop in IPv6 traffic was recorded, suggesting that the Iranian government was selectively shutting down the internet as protests intensified.

Iran’s internet shutdown is said to be highly sophisticated, selectively allowing specific government communications while cutting off most external access. Reports say that even VPNs and proxy services, which the Iranian people have historically used to bypass internet blackouts, are largely ineffective this time.

Popular government-monitored platforms like Rubika and Eita have also been shut down. Banking systems, ride-hailing apps, including Snapp and Tapsi, online shopping platforms, as well as international phone calls have been restricted in Iran. While this move was supposed to quell protests, locals say that boredom and frustration have only motivated more and more people to hit the streets against the Khamenei-led regime.

However, as Elon Musk’s SpaceX enabled Starlink in Iran for free on 9th January, protestors with smuggled Starlink terminals bypassed government-imposed restrictions and gained access to an uncensored internet. It must be recalled that Starlink has been a major workaround in the 2022 Mahsa Amini and the 2019 anti-government demonstrations in Iran. Tens of thousands of Starlink terminals were smuggled into Iran, as there is a ban on owning the device or using SpaceX’s satellite internet.

It is estimated that there are around 40,000 to 50,000 Starlink subscribers in Iran.

Iran government achieves startling success in jamming Starlink signals

Amidst a violent crackdown on anti-government protestors, the Iranian authorities are reported to have successfully jammed Starlink signals in many areas, causing massive disruptions. Experts have found that the Iranian regime is using military-grade jammers to cause packet loss on Starlink’s uplink and downlink traffic, rising from 30% to 80% by 9th January.

The disruption caused by Iranian authorities includes interference with GPS signals, on which Starlink relies for terminal-satellite connections. This resulted in patchy or near-total internet outages in protest hotspots across Iran.

Internet researcher and Director of Internet Security and Digital Rights at the Miaan Group, Amir Rashidi, said that he has never come across, during his 20 years of research, the military-grade jammers the Iranian regime is using to block Starlink. Rashidi said that such a sophisticated technology was either provided to Iran by Russia or China, if it was not developed domestically.

“I have been monitoring and researching access to the internet for the past 20 years, and I have never seen such a thing in my life,” Rashidi said.

It is essential to note that blocking Starlink is not an impossible feat. Previously, Russia has been able to jam Starlink internet in Ukraine. However, Iran pulling this off at such a massive scale is quite surprising, ending the myth of ‘LEO’ or Low Earth Orbit satellite constellations being nearly impossible to jam.

While there is no official confirmation from Russia’s, Iran’s or China’s end, reports suggest that Iran’s ‘Kill Switch’ tactic has resulted from a combo of Russian hardware, Chinese tech manual and Iran’s testing ground.

However, this ‘Kill Switch’ approach adopted by the Iranian regime, the experts estimate, is draining the country’s fragile economy of $1.56 million for every hour of internet shutdown.

Notably, the jamming technology is sophisticated and unprecedented and reportedly involves Electronic Warfare (EW) systems delivered by Russia, particularly, the Murmansk-BN and/or Krasukha-4 systems. Russia has been developing EWs for decades, and has deployed three major EW systems: Krasukha-4 for radar jamming, Leer-3 for disrupting cellular networks and Murmansk-BN for strategic electronic disruption. Russia has used these systems in its ongoing war against Ukraine and has managed to disrupt Starlink in Ukraine, though not permanently. Russia’s success in causing Starlink internet jamming prompted SpaceX to deploy software updates to mitigate it.

Besides Russia, China, which can launch an offensive in Taiwan anytime, has also researched Starlink countermeasures through synchronised jamming from multiple ground stations. In November 2025, Chinese researchers reportedly simulated jamming Starlink internet in case of a potential conflict in Taiwan.

In their research titled: Simulation research of distributed jammers against mega-constellation downlink communication transmissions, Chinese researchers found that it would take about 1,000 to 2,000 airborne devices to effectively jam the Starlink internet system.

“The orbital planes of Starlink are not fixed, and the movement trajectories of the constellation are highly complex, with the number of satellites entering the visible area constantly changing. This spatiotemporal uncertainty poses a significant challenge for any third party attempting to monitor or counter the Starlink constellation,” the study reads.

 “A grid-based deployment approach for jammers is adopted to enhance the spatial distribution flexibility of the adversarial side, along with a jamming probability calculation method and a jamming effectiveness evaluation metric. Based on actual satellite operation data, taking the Starlink system as an example, the jamming coverage range is calculated under different conditions of radio frequency power, grid spacing, and antenna radiation patterns. Simulation results show that when the node transmission power is 26 dBW, the average jamming coverage per node can reach 38.5 km², providing support for the regulation and management of mega-constellations,” states the study by Zheijang University and Beijing Institute of Technology researchers Gu Hanqing, Yang Zhuo, Zhang Peng, and Wen Xiaowen.

Being heavily-sanctioned and constantly at loggerheads with the US and Israel, in addition to mounting domestic discontent, the Mullah regime in Iran has for years been upgrading its internet control capabilities. The Iranian government intends to develop a national intranet akin to China’s Great Firewall. While Starlink was used by many Iranian people during last year’s Israel-Iran conflict amidst internet shutdown, this is the first time that Iranian authorities have effectively targeted the satellite internet service on this scale in the country.

Needless to say, SpaceX will come up with countermeasures, including frequency hopping or beam adjustments, among others, to counter the interference by Iranian authorities.  

Economic crisis, hyperinflation and oppressive Islamist Mullah regime: Iran’s protests triggered by economic downslide

What began as a localised strike by shopkeepers and bazaar traders in Tehran on 28th December 2025 soon snowballed into protests spreading across almost all of the 31 provinces in Iran. Slogans like “Death to Dictator,” referring to Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khamenei, are being raised on the streets of Iran even as the Islamic Revolutionary Guards continue to hunt down agitators. Calls for the return of Iran’s exiled Shah Reza Pahlevi are also being made. So far, over 500 people, including children, have been killed. Meanwhile, around 48 security personnel have also lost their lives.

According to the US-based Human Rights Activists News (HRANA), more than 10,600 people have been arrested by the Mullah regime.

The ongoing protests in Iran are primarily triggered by a serious economic crisis, although regime change voices are also significantly loud. The immediate trigger is the dramatic collapse of the Iranian Rial (Iran’s currency), which plunged to a historic low of around 1.42–1.45 million to the US dollar. The Rial lost nearly half of its value in 2025 alone.

It is notable that Rial was never in a very strong position against the US dollar, as when Mohammad Reza Farzin took charge as the Central Bank’s chief, the exchange rate of Rial was 430,000 to the USD. However, the sudden drop to 1.42 million showed the quagmire the Iranian currency has descended into.

This record depreciation of the Iranian currency is fuelled by prolonged international sanctions, slashed oil revenues after the June 2025 clash with Israel, and domestic economic mismanagement. The depreciation of the Iranian currency’s exchange rate is reported to have been significantly triggered by the government’s liberalisation policies.

Resultantly, Iran is grappling with hyperinflation, with official rates surging 42.2% in December 2025 and food prices reaching an alarming high of 72% year-on-year, while medical goods rose by 50%.

With growing reliance on imports, failure to access frozen funds abroad and foreign exchange, Iran’s economy is in deep trouble. The country’s GDP growth dropped from 5.7% in 2023 3.7% in 2024 and to a projected 0.6% in 2026, as per the IMF.

Due to eroding purchasing power, millions of people are struggling to afford basic goods, food, and healthcare. Besides the unbearable living costs, what has further exacerbated the situation is the impending tax hikes in the new Iranian year. The Iranian taxpayers fear that their condition is going to worsen further after tax levies are raised.

Chaos in Iran: US-backed protests and Shah’s shadow may reshape Afghanistan and hand Pakistan leverage at India’s cost

Shriti Sagar
-
0
Chaos in Iran: US-backed protests and Shah’s shadow may reshape Afghanistan and hand Pakistan leverage at India’s cost

Iran is witnessing one of its most intense waves of unrest in nearly three years, with protests spreading rapidly across cities and provinces. Videos circulating on social media show massive crowds chanting anti-regime slogans, clashing with security forces, and targeting symbols of state authority. One widely shared clip shows one of Iran’s largest mosques engulfed in flames, becoming a powerful symbol of public anger.

With the internet down and phone lines cut off, gauging the demonstrations from abroad has grown more difficult. According to a report by CNN, US-based Human Rights Activists News Agecy claimed that the death toll in the protests has grown to at least 72 people killed and over 2,300 others detained. Iranian state TV is reporting on security force casualties while portraying control over the nation.

The protests reportedly began on 3rd January, triggered by rising prices, unemployment, and economic hardship. However, the anger quickly moved beyond economic issues. Protesters are openly calling for an end to Iran’s clerical system that has ruled the country since the 1979 Islamic Revolution. Slogans demanding regime change have been heard across Tehran, Mashhad, Isfahan, Shiraz, and smaller towns as well.

The exiled son of Iran’s last shah, Reza Pahlavi, who has emerged as a prominent voice in the fragmented opposition, made his strongest call yet for the protests to broaden into a revolt to topple the clerical rulers. “Our goal is no longer just to take to the streets. The goal is to prepare to seize and hold city centres,” he said in a video message on social media.

Iranian rights activist Masih Alinejad shared the mosque video on X, calling the unrest “47 years of rage.” According to her, religious institutions have long been used as tools of repression, not faith. The message resonated widely among protesters who see the regime as disconnected from everyday life.

According to the Institute for the Study of War, at least 116 protests across 22 provinces have been recorded since 8th January. In response, the Iranian government has imposed a near-total internet shutdown to stop coordination and prevent images from reaching the outside world.

Iranian security forces dig in

As protests intensified, Iran’s Army and the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) moved quickly to assert control. In statements broadcast on state television, both institutions declared security a “red line” and warned that continued unrest would not be tolerated.

The IRGC claimed that “terrorist groups” backed by foreign powers were attacking military and police installations. It said several security personnel and civilians had been killed, and public property had been damaged over the last two nights. The Army echoed this message, pledging to protect strategic infrastructure and accusing enemies such as Israel and unnamed hostile groups of exploiting unrest.

Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei has urged Trump to “focus on his own country” and blamed the US for inciting the protests. According to him, the aim was not reform but destabilisation and regime change.

Why Tehran says the protests are US-backed

Iran’s Supreme Leader has made it clear that it sees the unrest as part of a larger Western plan. This view gained traction after strong statements from Washington.

US President Donald Trump openly warned Iranian authorities against using force on protesters. “Iran’s in big trouble,” Trump said on Saturday, 9th January, claiming people were taking over cities “nobody thought possible.” His warning was blunt: “You better not start shooting, because we’ll start shooting too.”

Soon after, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio declared American support for Iranian protesters, saying, “The United States supports the brave people of Iran.” For Tehran, this removed any doubt that Washington was backing the unrest.

From Iran’s perspective, this fits a familiar pattern. The US has long sought regime change in Tehran and has never hidden its preference for a pro-Western government, similar to the Shah’s rule before 1979. Iranian leaders argue that social media amplification, sanctions pressure, and diplomatic threats are all part of a coordinated strategy to weaken the regime from within.

Trump’s bigger goal: Regime change in Iran

Trump’s statements suggest that the unrest is not just a humanitarian concern for Washington but an opportunity. The US has never accepted Iran’s current political system and sees the protests as a chance to reset the country’s leadership.

The memory of the Shah looms large here. Mohammad Reza Pahlavi ruled Iran as a Western-backed monarch until he was overthrown in the 1979 revolution. His regime was closely aligned with US interests, particularly in oil, security, and regional politics. Trump has repeatedly hinted that a return to such alignment would be beneficial for the US.

This is why Iranian leaders believe the protests are not spontaneous but encouraged and sustained by external forces. Whether or not this is fully true, the perception itself is shaping Iran’s response.

Why a US-aligned Iran is bad news for India

If Iran tilts back towards Washington, India stands to lose far more than it gains. The most immediate damage would be felt in Afghanistan, where India’s strategic space has already shrunk since the Taliban takeover in 2021.

Chabahar, India’s gateway at risk: Iran maintains control over the strategic Chabahar Port, and it is the only overland trade route for India to reach Afghanistan directly in the west without relying on Pakistan. India has also spent billions of dollars in Chabahar over the years to extend their assistance and reach Afghanistan and Central Asia.

A US-aligned Tehran could restrict India’s use of Chabahar under American pressure. This would choke India’s ability to send supplies to Afghanistan, forcing New Delhi to rely on costly airlifts or, worse, Pakistan-controlled routes.

Iran-Pakistan coordination against Indian interests: Iran and Pakistan share a common 900-kilometre border. If Iran tilts towards Washington and Islamabad, a possible Iran-Pak border cooperation mechanism could hinder Afghan resupply routes to anti-Taliban forces, such as the National Resistance Front, supported by the Indians.

Pakistan has long sought to eliminate India’s influence in Afghanistan. With Iran’s cooperation, Islamabad could isolate northern Afghan regions where India once had strong ties.

Trade corridors hijacked: The Chabahar route connecting India’s International North-South Transport Corridor through Iran to Central Asia and Russia may also be upstaged. A US-tilted Iran might divert the trade through Pakistan’s Gwadar port and the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor at the expense of India, increasing costs for Indian projects in the region.

Afghanistan: India’s biggest strategic vulnerability

Afghanistan has always been India’s bridge to Central Asia and a counterweight to Pakistan’s regional ambitions. After the Taliban returned to power in 2021, India lost its physical presence and much of its influence overnight.

A hostile alignment involving the US, Pakistan, and a compliant Iran would further squeeze India out of Afghanistan. This would not only limit India’s diplomatic reach but also reduce its ability to shape regional security outcomes.

Shah was a Western-backed ruler with a pro-Pakistan stance

There is a growing narrative that portrays the Shah of Iran as a heroic, stable ruler who kept Iran prosperous. For India, this is a dangerous myth.

The Shah was firmly aligned with the West and Pakistan. During the 1965 and 1971 wars, Iran openly backed Pakistan. It supplied arms, oil, aircraft, and ammunition, even acting as an intermediary to source weapons when Pakistan faced shortages.

In the 1971 war, Iran provided Pakistan with 12 helicopters and military equipment like artillery, ammunition and spare parts. Iran also provided Pakistan with oil during the war at cheaper rates, according to a Foreign Relations Of The United States document.

Since the 1971 Indo-Pakistani War, there have been reports that Iran may again act as an arms purchasing agent for Islamabad if Pakistan cannot obtain Western military equipment and spare parts, according to the document.

It has to be remembered that both wars were thrust upon India by Pakistan’s actions.

The Shah once warned that Iran would not allow Pakistan to be weakened and compared Iran and Pakistan to “one soul in two bodies.” India, despite its civilisational ties with Iran, found itself on the opposite side of Tehran’s strategic calculations.

“Iran has no aggressive intentions, but it will not accept any attempt to liquidate Pakistan. The Power and India must be fully aware of our resolution…. We do not want a new Vietnam on the frontier of Iran,” the Shah of Iran, Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, said during Pakistan’s war with India.

This history shows that a Western-backed Iran does not automatically align with Indian interests.

Next possible scenarios

One scenario is that the protests are crushed. While this would stabilise Iran internally, it would increase tensions with the US and could lead to more sanctions. India would be forced to balance relations carefully, especially on energy imports.

A second scenario is regime change or a weakened clerical system that leans towards Washington. This would likely strengthen Pakistan’s hand in Afghanistan and reduce India’s access to Iran and Central Asia.

A third scenario is prolonged instability. This would disrupt oil markets, affect global prices, and hurt India’s energy security while creating regional uncertainty.

Conclusion: US wins are not automatically India’s wins 

The unrest in Iran highlights a hard truth for India: American strategic victories in the region do not always benefit New Delhi. While Washington speaks of democracy and freedom, democracy is invoked selectively, used as a weapon against adversaries. It continues to pressure India over Russian oil purchases and threatens sanctions. 

Trump’s administration has slapped a 25% tariff on Indian imports for purchasing Russian oil, in addition to the 25% general import tariff already in place, effectively doubling duties to 50% in August. The move has strained US-India trade relations and put ongoing negotiations for a free trade agreement on hold.

At the same time, the US has a long history of siding with Pakistan when it suits its interests. A US-backed political shift in Iran could once again reshape the region in ways that marginalise India.

For New Delhi, the lesson is clear. Strategic autonomy matters. India must prepare for multiple outcomes in Iran and Afghanistan, without assuming that Western intervention will align with Indian interests.

From Yakub Memon to Umar Khalid: When ‘justice’ fails to fit the religious narrative of the Leftist-Islamist nexus

अजीत झा
-
0
From Yakub Memon to Umar Khalid: When ‘justice’ fails to fit the religious narrative of the Leftist-Islamist nexus

‘धर्मेण राज्यं धार्यते’ means that the state/government is governed by Dharma. This philosophy recurs frequently in the Mahabharata, especially in the Shanti Parva and Anushasana Parva. The concept of Rajdharma mentioned in the Manusmriti also bears a similar essence. The principles laid down by Kautilya regarding the governance of the state and justice follow the same philosophy.

In the Shanti Parva, Bhishma Pitamah tells Yudhishthira that a king’s first duty is justice, and that the foundation of justice is Dharma, not public sentiment. Indian tradition has always held that a state is governed by Dharma, not sentiment. Dharma incorporates justice, rules, and decorum.

Even in modern times, the same philosophy underpins the judicial system. The greatest strength of the Indian judicial system is that it is neither driven by individuals nor guided by mobs. However, an organised ideological gang has consistently attempted to get the judiciary bogged down by a mobocracy where empathy replaces law, religious identity replaces evidence, and narrative becomes decisive in delivering justice.

Whenever an Islamic terrorist, leftist thinker, or so-called ‘minority icon’ doesn’t receive the verdict they want, the Islamo-left alliance resorts to pressure tactics to bend the judicial system. Clamours of ‘danger to the Constitution,’ ‘death of Human rights,’ and ‘the judiciary succumbing to fascism,’ grow louder and noisier.

The pattern that has been repeated over the past few years, from Yakub Memon to Umar Khalid. From the mainstream media to left-liberal thinkers and appeasing politicians, everyone unanimously puts the judiciary in the dock. The question is no longer what the law says, but what the ‘sentiment of a religious mob’ wants.

Umar Khalid-Sharjeel Imam: Religious identity is everything

Both Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam are facing serious charges of divisive speeches, inciting violence, and engaging in anti-national conspiracies. The courts are examining the evidence and following due process. But this is unacceptable to the left-liberal cabal. For them, bail is not a legal remedy, but an ideological right. When bail is denied, the court is termed as ‘insensitive.’

The entire discussion overlooks the fundamental truth that emotions do not govern the law. The question of bail is determined by the gravity of the charges, the evidence, the role of the accused, and the status of the investigation. Yet, every time courts deliver judgments in accordance with the law in such cases, a concerted narrative of justice being ‘insensitive’ begins to emerge.

However, the riot conspirators did not show the so-called ‘sensitivity’ towards the victims of the anti-Hindu riots in Delhi in 2020. The media that is showering pity on the riot accused who were denied bail did not appear as aggressive for the victims of violence, arson, and murder then.

Will the definition of sensitivity be decided based on religious identity?

Uproar over Kuldeep Sengar’s bail

Interestingly, the same Islamo-left gang that created an uproar when Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam were denied legal relief was wailing when the Delhi High Court granted bail to Kuldeep Sengar. In this case, too, the problem wasn’t the legal conditions of bail, but the fact that the court did not deliver a decision that suited the mob’s demands. The message was clear: either decide according to their standard of ‘morality’ or be ready to be labelled as ‘insensitive.’

This double standard is no coincidence. On the one hand, if the accused belongs to a certain ideology or religious identity, bail becomes a ‘human right.’ On the other hand, if the accused falls outside that identity, the bail is declared a ‘travesty of justice.’ In reality, this is not justice, but identity-based morality. Justice (the legal remedy of bail) is portrayed as questionable because of the accused’s identity (Hindu).

Yakub Memon: Religious identity, not terror charges, is important

The night of July 30, 2015, is etched in the history of Indian judicial history. Yakub Memon, the terrorist convicted in the Mumbai bombings, underwent a proper legal trial. Years of hearings, appeals, and reconsiderations—everything was done in accordance with the law. Yet, the rush to open the Supreme Court in the wee hours that day appeared like some judicial emergency had come up. Who showed up? The same Islamo-left gang—the same lawyers, the same activists, the same TV faces. The sentiments were the same—pity for the terrorist (with a particular religious identity), and silence for the victims.

The question here wasn’t about the hanging of the terror convict. The question was whether the punishment for terrorism would also be determined based on identity?

Is being a Muslim an immunity against the law of the land?

Karthigai Deepam: Legitimising Hindu faith is a crime

There were demands of impeachment against Justice Swaminathan, who delivered the verdict on Tamil Nadu’s Karthigai Deepam festival. The reason? The decision favoured Hindu tradition. The message was clear – if you sit in court and legitimise Hindu faith, your position will be destabilised.

Ram Mandir, Justice Gogoi and Justice Chandrachud

Former Chief Justice of India Ranjan Gogoi was targeted after delivering the historic Ram Temple verdict. Every decision, every appointment, was linked to that verdict.

Moreover, after a photo of former Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud with Prime Minister Narendra Modi at Ganesh Puja surfaced, a narrative was created, making it almost criminal for a judge to display his faith, and suggesting that the judiciary had surrendered to the government.

Are only those who are godless, traditionless and uprooted fit to be judges?

Muslim accusations and the shield of ‘sensitivity’

Pressure tactics against the Indian judiciary are not a new phenomenon. In numerous cases involving Islamic terrorism, whether they involve accused of banned organisations or incidents of riots and violence, the same old script comes into play. Arrests are labelled ‘harassment,’ chargesheets ‘political revenge,’ and trials ‘Islamophobia.’

The entire narrative is created and peddled by people who have spent years trying to establish that if the accused is Muslim, the law must be extra ‘sensitive,’ as if the law sees through a religious lens. The pressure isn’t limited to the media; it extends to the court environment, public discourse, and administrative decisions.

The pressure of ‘minority’ politics

It’s no secret that certain ideological groups have been imposing their narrative on the judiciary and administration. The term ‘minority’ is used as a shield to raise suspicion about every legal process. When an accused belongs to a particular ideological or religious identity, the criminal charge against him is viciously portrayed as ‘political dissent.’

These are the tactics used to pressure the judicial institutions. The courts are expected to look not at the law or evidence, but at the religious sentiments of the crowd and social media trends. The courts are expected not to make a legally valid decision, but to appease emotions.

This is not justice; this is appeasement

Silence on victims, prime time on the ‘feelings’ of the accused

The mainstream media also feeds this appeasement. A large part of the mainstream media passes its own judgment instead of asking questions. It presents court orders out of context and exerts moral pressure on judges. This is not journalism, but ideological activism. This is the same media that remains conspicuously silent on the suffering of victims, but devotes hours of prime time to the ‘feelings’ of the accused.

Mob narrative versus the process of justice

The mob wants quick results. Law takes time. The mob wants slogans. The law demands evidence. The mob seeks emotional satisfaction. Law seeks truth. This is why when courts don’t toe the line, they are labelled ‘anti-democratic.’

This is what the courts did in the cases of Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam. They followed the law, leaving aside the emotional cacophony. This is what makes the Islamo-Left alliance uncomfortable.

Vedic View: Justice not based on feelings

In the Indian Vedic tradition, justice was never subordinate to emotion. न धर्मात् परो धर्मः, meaning there is nothing above Dharma (justice). Manusmriti states, “When justice is destroyed, the people are destroyed. Neither the king nor the enemy, no one is spared.”

This is why, in Indian tradition, a judge is expected to be free from any pressure, beyond fear, and not devoid of faith, but rather devoted to Dharma (justice). Justice does not mean compassion, but rather a decision in accordance with Dharma (justice). Compassion, as a characteristic, is meant for the individuals, not for the judicial system. This is the fundamental distinction, which is being deliberately erased in today’s discourse.

A society that surrenders justice to emotional blackmail ultimately betrays its victims. The Vedic tradition has taught us that the Dharma of justice transcends coercion/identity.

To preserve justice, it must be free from sentiment. When courts become afraid of the mob, anarchy, and not democracy, will emerge.

The same anarchy of ‘सर तन से जुदा’ (Islamic calls for beheading) that we see on the streets today.

(This article is a translation of the original article published on OpIndia Hindi.)

Repeated Islamic invasions, unbroken resolve: How Hindu rulers kept Somnath, the pillar of Sanatan Civilisation alive

ભાર્ગવ રાજ્યગુરુ
-
0
Repeated Islamic invasions, unbroken resolve: How Hindu rulers kept Somnath, the pillar of Sanatan Civilisation alive

Somnath is not merely a temple; it is a symbol of India’s historical memory of a civilisation where faith, valour, and cultural self-respect repeatedly rose in defiance of assaults driven by religious fanaticism. Across centuries, whenever Somnath was attacked, Hindu rulers and warriors responded, sometimes by taking up the sword to block the aggressor’s advance, and at other times by laying brick upon stone to rebuild the temple once again.

From Arab to Turkic invasions, religious zealotry repeatedly targeted Somnath, at times through maritime routes and at other times via north-western land corridors. Yet after every act of destruction, history also records that Hindu rulers did not merely survive; they restored both the temple and the civilisation it represented. This article documents that uninterrupted tradition of resistance.

This work is dedicated to the memory of those great rulers and warriors who defended Somnath, fought battles, endured struggles, and kept the temple alive. It also traces the journey into modern India, where reconstruction itself became a declaration of national self-respect.

Background of Islamic Attacks and Resistance

Between the 11th and 14th centuries, Somnath in western India was attacked multiple times. The objective of these assaults was not limited to plundering wealth or demolishing a structure, but to humiliating a civilisational centre. Yet the tradition of Somnath never broke. Political power changed hands, but the spirit of resistance endured, sometimes on the battlefield, sometimes through restoration.

Mularaja Solanki: The Political Foundation of Saurashtra’s Defence

In the 10th century, Mularaja Solanki (I) founded the Solanki (Chaulukya) dynasty and established Anhilwad Patan as the capital. This was a period marked by Arab maritime raids along the western coast and the gradual advance of Islamic forces from the north-west. While there is no explicit record of Mularaja fighting a direct battle over Somnath, it is historically evident that he established a consolidated Hindu political authority in Gujarat and Saurashtra. This authority later became the shield protecting Somnath. Mularaja’s contribution lay less in the sword and more in political stability, for without a stable state, the defence of any temple is impossible.

Bhimdev I: After the Ghaznavid Attack

In 1026 CE, Mahmud of Ghazni attacked Somnath, an assault driven not merely by plunder but by the intent to shatter a powerful religious symbol. The aftermath plunged Gujarat into fear and instability. It was during this period that Bhimdev I assumed power. He restored administrative control over Saurashtra and re-established Hindu authority. His historical significance lies in the message he conveyed: an invasion does not mark the end of a state.

Under his rule, the Somnath region returned to Hindu control, and the temple was rebuilt. This reconstruction after the devastation of 1026 CE is regarded as the first major political restoration in Somnath’s history, demonstrating how cultural resolve can revive itself despite severe political shocks.

Siddharaj Jaysinh: Cultural security through military strength

Among the most powerful Solanki rulers was Siddharaj Jaysinh. His reign coincided with the rise of Turkic powers in northern India. He not only defended borders but also established robust political protection over Saurashtra and the Somnath region. During his time, temples were not merely places of worship but symbols of state prestige. An attack on Somnath was viewed as an attack on the state itself, a mindset that helped keep Gujarat secure for a prolonged period.

Under Siddharaj Jaysinh, Gujarat and Saurashtra were militarily strengthened. Temples and pilgrimage centres received state protection, and Somnath emerged as a symbol of political security and cultural honour. Construction and restoration works were also undertaken at the temple during his reign.

Queen Naiki Devi: Halting the invader at Kayadara

In the 12th century, a decisive moment arrived when Queen Naiki Devi defeated Muhammad Ghori at the Battle of Kayadara in 1178 CE. This was not merely a military victory; it spared western India and the Prabhas–Somnath region from large-scale destruction. Contemporary and later historians regard this victory as a decisive defence of Somnath.

This was not just a battle, but a defence of Somnath and Gujarat’s civilisational identity. A woman ruler standing firm against a fanatical invasion remains one of the most inspiring chapters of Indian history. Naiki Devi’s valour proves that in battles of faith and self-respect, neither gender nor status is a limitation. When civilisation is under attack, every individual can become a warrior.

King Kanhaḍ Dev

Between great empires, local rulers also played a decisive role in Somnath’s defence. According to folk history, King Kanhaḍ Dev organised local military forces in Saurashtra. These forces formed the first line of defence against attacks arriving via coastal routes and inland passages. While formal historical texts offer limited detail, Somnath could not have survived without such local resistance.

In the Rajasthan–Gujarat border regions, Kanhaḍ Dev’s campaigns against Turkic and Ghori-aligned forces helped secure routes leading to Somnath. His example illustrates how, even amid major empires, the faith and sword of local rulers kept temples and culture alive, strengthening the foundation for future reconstructions.

King Bhoja Parmar

King Bhoja of the Paramara dynasty contributed more through civilisational revival than battlefield warfare. After Ghaznavid attacks had shaken Hindu society psychologically, Bhoja extended political patronage to Shaiva traditions, temple culture, and classical learning. This was not merely religious support but a political assertion that the Sanatana civilisation cannot be destroyed.

Traditional and literary sources associate King Bhoja and Maharaja Vikramaditya with the restoration of Somnath. In Shaiva tradition and popular memory, Bhoja’s role remains significant, demonstrating that temple protection requires not only military power but also cultural vision and intellectual resurgence.

King Mahipal Dev

Among the Paramara rulers, King Mahipal Dev represented continuity through administration and protection rather than warfare alone. During the 14th–15th centuries, he is said to have repeatedly defeated the forces of Gujarat’s Islamic governor Zafar Khan, safeguarding the Somnath region. Folk tradition holds that he trained local communities in martial skills to ensure the temple’s defence under all circumstances.

Kumarapala

Though a follower of Jainism, Kumarapala extended administrative support for the protection of Hindu pilgrimage sites, including Somnath. This underscores that Somnath’s defence was not a sectarian issue but a civilisational one. While the invaders were religiously motivated, the resistance was rooted in Indian civilisation itself. During the 12th century, Kumarapala supported temple administration and restoration, enabling Somnath’s pilgrimage tradition to regain stability.

The Maratha Empire

In the 18th century, the Maratha Empire displaced Islamic political authority from Saurashtra. This was not a temple-centric war but a struggle for political liberation, without which reconstruction was impossible. Maratha campaigns created conditions of stability, enabling Somnath’s revival and the protection of religious sites across Gujarat.

Queen Ahilyabai Holkar

In 1783, Queen Ahilyabai Holkar reconstructed Somnath. This was more than an architectural act; it was a response to centuries of humiliation. Political constraints led her to build the temple slightly away from the original site, but she consecrated the Shiva linga and revived worship traditions. Before modern reconstruction, this was the most significant effort to keep the flame of faith alive. Tradition holds that Lord Somnath appeared to her in a dream, inspiring this act.

National reawakening in Modern India: From Sardar Patel to PM Modi

After independence, the reconstruction of Somnath became a matter of national self-respect, not merely religious revival. Despite opposition from Nehru, Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel’s resolve led to the construction of the grand temple, marking independent India’s first decisive assertion of its cultural memory.

K.M. Munshi provided ideological and administrative leadership, and in 1951, the temple was inaugurated by President Rajendra Prasad. Under Prime Minister Narendra Modi, Somnath today is presented not as a relic of the past but as a living cultural heritage. The renewed emphasis on its history and preservation signals that Somnath’s story continues to pulse within India’s national consciousness.

The history of Somnath shows that religious fanaticism returned repeatedly, but Hindu rulers and warriors stood firm every time—sometimes in war, sometimes in reconstruction. That is why Somnath still stands today, not merely as a temple, but as a symbol of civilisational resilience. This article is an attempt to remember those who preserved this tradition through the sword, determination, and sustained effort.

References

  • R.C. Majumdar – The History and Culture of the Indian People (Volume 5)
  • Satish Chandra – Medieval India
  • Jadunath Sarkar – History of the Marathas
  • Gujarat State Gazetteers (Prabhas/Somnath)
  • K.M. Munshi – Pilgrimage to Freedom

Beyond the abode of Lord Shiva: Learn how Somnath served as the financial engine and gateway for India’s ancient global trade networks

आशीष नौटियाल
-
0
Beyond the abode of Lord Shiva: Learn how Somnath served as the financial engine and gateway for India’s ancient global trade networks

Modern geopolitics often refers to the idea put forward by Geopolitical theorist Nicholas Spykman that “Those who control the rimland, control the heartland.” While this theory is usually treated as a 20th-century concept, India had understood this reality much earlier.

For ancient India, the sea was not separate from the land. Those who knew the sea could protect the land, grow wealth, and connect civilisations. The strongest symbol of this knowledge was the Somnath Temple, a place remembered today mainly for its destruction, but once known as the gateway to India’s maritime world. 

Somnath is often spoken about as a single tragic episode: Mahmud of Ghazni came, the temple was destroyed, and history moved on. This view misses the larger picture. The attack on Somnath was not an isolated act. It marked the beginning of a long and carefully unfolding process that weakened India’s control over the seas.

If Somnath is not seen together with Kutch, Bharuch, Surat, the Konkan coast, and finally Goa, the deeper pattern of India’s maritime decline remains hidden.

India before the 11th Century: A Civilisation of the Oceans

Before the eleventh century, India was not only a land-based society. It was a strong maritime civilisation without colonies or overseas empires. Indian traders, sailors, monks, and pilgrims moved freely across the Arabian Sea and the wider Indian Ocean. They traded, taught, learned, and settled peacefully without fear.

This reality is recorded in the Greek text “Periplus of the Erythraean Sea”, written in the first century, which clearly describes Indian trade routes reaching Oman, Yemen, Basra, and the eastern coast of Africa. These were not small or occasional journeys. They formed a regular and trusted network connecting ports, cultures, and economies.

India’s relationship with the sea was not built on conquest but on confidence and knowledge. Navigation, astronomy, shipbuilding, and seasonal winds were well understood. This maritime wisdom did not vanish; it survived quietly in traditions, coastal communities, and temple records.

A living memory: The voyage of INSV Koundinya

This heritage is not only preserved in history books. It has been brought back to life in recent times. Economist and policy advisor Sanjeev Sanyal, who serves as an economic advisor to Prime Minister Narendra Modi, is currently undertaking a sea voyage aboard the INSV Koundinya.

This ship is not a modern steel vessel. It has been built using the same method that Indian merchants used a thousand years ago. There is not a single iron nail in it. Coconut ropes stitch the wooden planks together, just as they once did when Indian ships sailed confidently across the Indian Ocean. The voyage began in Gujarat and covers nearly 1,400 kilometres to Oman, following ancient trade routes.

The mission of the Indian Navy is not symbolic alone. It demonstrates that India’s maritime systems were practical, durable, and globally connected long before modern navies came into being.

Temples as economic powerhouses

One of the most misunderstood aspects of India’s maritime past is the role of temples. Between the tenth and twelfth centuries, especially during the Chola and Solanki periods, temples were not only religious centres. They functioned as financial, legal, and social institutions.

Kings, traders, and common people donated wealth to temples. This wealth was not locked away. Temples acted like banks. They lent money at interest to merchant guilds, helping them fund risky overseas journeys to Sumatra, Java, Zanzibar, and East Africa. Sea trade involved dangers like storms, piracy, and shipwrecks, risks that individual traders could not bear alone. Temple treasuries could absorb losses, making long-distance trade possible.

When voyages succeeded, merchants returned a share of their profits to the temple. In this way, religion, economy, and maritime trade formed a strong and balanced system.

Guilds, Ships, and the central role of Somnath

Indian maritime trade was organised through powerful guilds such as the Manigramam and the Ainnuruvar, also known as the Five Hundred Lords. These guilds maintained their own security forces and fleets to protect ships from pirates. They operated by rules, contracts, and shared responsibility.

In western India, Somnath stood at the heart of this system. The port of Prabhas Patan had been active since Harappan times. Trade from the Roman world, West Asia, and Africa passed through this coast. The route from Dwarka to Somnath and Khambhat was not just a trade corridor. It was also a path of pilgrimage, culture, and social exchange.

Somnath was therefore more than a shrine of Lord Shiva. It was a legal authority, a financial hub, and a cultural anchor for India’s maritime civilisation.

Ghazni’s strike and the breaking of a network

After the seventh century, Arab and Persian traders became active in the Indian Ocean. They formed trading groups such as the Anjuvannam, based around mosques and markets. Over time, these networks grew faster than the temple-based Hindu system.

When Mahmud of Ghazni attacked Somnath in the eleventh century, the aim was not simply religious destruction. The plunder of wealth, said to be worth around 20 million dinars, struck at the financial backbone of the maritime system. No mosque was built on the site because the purpose was not conversion. Destroying the Shivalinga symbolised the destruction of a legal and economic institution.

For Islamic empires, trade was a tool of power. When they saw that India’s maritime system could not be easily controlled or conquered, they focused on breaking its centres instead. Somnath was the first major and symbolic target.

Losing the Sea, One coast at a time

The fall of Somnath damaged more than a temple. It shook India’s maritime confidence. Slowly, ocean crossings began to be discouraged, later becoming known socially as “kala pani.” What began as a strategic defeat slowly turned into a social habit.

This decline was not uniform across India. While Ghazni attacked in the west, Rajendra Chola was leading powerful naval campaigns in the east, reaching Sri Lanka, Sumatra, and Southeast Asia. Gujarat’s rulers also valued the sea for defence and trade. As a result, India’s maritime civilisation did not collapse overnight. It was weakened piece by piece.

The Ban Stambh, or arrow pillar, at Somnath still stands as evidence of ancient Indian knowledge of astronomy and geography. It states that there is no land obstruction from that point to the South Pole, a claim later confirmed by modern science.

From sultanates to the Mughals: A land-based turn

After Somnath, pressure increased along the western coast. Bharuch, Konkan, and Saurashtra gradually fell under new powers. The Delhi Sultanate and later the Mughal Empire were largely land-focused. Their strength lay in agriculture, forts, and armies, not navies.

Even during the Mughal period, rulers depended on foreign sailors to protect pilgrim ships going for Hajj. The sea was not seen as a space of power. This distance from the ocean slowly disconnected India from its maritime roots.

By the time Vasco da Gama reached India in 1498, the once-busy Indian seas were largely empty of Indian fleets. European powers came not just to trade, but to dominate. By the sixteenth century, Hindu-led maritime networks had been nearly wiped out.

Somnath rebuilt and memory revived

The reconstruction of Somnath in 1951 was more than an architectural project. It was an attempt to restore a civilisational memory. Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel saw it as the return of national confidence, while Jawaharlal Nehru feared its political meaning.

Yet the rebuilding signalled that India’s connection to the sea, though weakened, was never erased. As Al-Biruni once observed, kingdoms may fall, but memories endure.

India and the Indo-Pacific: An unfinished journey

India’s growing role in the Indo-Pacific today is not a sudden shift. It is the continuation of a journey paused centuries ago. While many see the Indo-Pacific only through global power rivalry, for India, it is a familiar space of old trade routes and cultural ties.

India’s naval partnerships, participation in QUAD, and investments in naval strength are part of this return. When Prime Minister Narendra Modi spoke at the Shangri-La Dialogue in 2018, he described a free, open, and inclusive Indo-Pacific, echoing India’s ancient maritime values.

India’s approach is not about domination but balance. It recalls a time when the sea was a space of rules, trust, and shared prosperity.

Somnath marked the moment India began to drift away from the sea. Today, India’s return to the Indo-Pacific marks the revival of a forgotten habit of civilisation. What is coming back is not just naval power, but memory, confidence, and continuity.

The civilisation that once shaped the Indian Ocean cannot remain on the shore forever. From Somnath to the Indo-Pacific, India is slowly completing a story that was left unfinished for nearly a thousand years.

India–Germany set to clear Rs 72,000 crore submarine deal: How Project-75I transforms Indian Navy’s undersea warfare capability and advances Atmanirbharta

Jinit Jain
-
0
India–Germany set to clear Rs 72,000 crore submarine deal: How Project-75I transforms Indian Navy’s undersea warfare capability and advances Atmanirbharta

India and Germany are set to ratify one of the most consequential defence-industrial agreements in India’s naval history, with German shipbuilder Thyssen Krupp Marine Systems (TKMS) set to partner Mazagon Dock Shipbuilders Limited (MDL) for the construction of six advanced conventional submarines for the Indian Navy. The deal is expected to be finalised during German Chancellor Friedrich Merz’s visit to India on January 12–13, 2026.

Valued at around $8 billion (Rs 72,000 crore), the deal marks the decisive conclusion of the long-running Project-75I Tender, a programme that had remained stalled for years due to shifting policy frameworks, technical demands, and India’s insistence on proven and survivable submarine technology.

At the centre of the agreement is the Indian Navy’s selection of the German Type-214 Next Generation (214NG)submarine, a 2,500-ton diesel-electric platform equipped with air-independent propulsion (AIP). The German design edged out Spain’s S-80 Plus, offered by Navantia, primarily due to its operationally validated AIP system, superior acoustic stealth, and lower lifecycle risk. For a navy that operates in contested waters and depends on undersea persistence rather than surface visibility, the maturity of the German platform proved decisive.

Why AIP and stealth tipped the scales

AIP technology has become a baseline requirement for modern conventional submarines. Traditional diesel-electric boats must periodically surface or snorkel to recharge batteries, exposing themselves to detection. AIP-equipped submarines, by contrast, can remain submerged for weeks, allowing them to conduct extended patrols, surveillance, and strike missions with minimal acoustic and electromagnetic signature.

The Type-214NG employs a fuel-cell-based AIP system, widely regarded as one of the most reliable and battle-tested solutions in service today. Spain’s bio-ethanol-based AIP, while innovative, has not yet achieved comparable operational validation. In undersea warfare, where failure is not an option, the Indian Navy opted for technology that has already proven itself in real-world naval environments.

Karachi 1971: The moment India understood naval power

India’s insistence on stealth, endurance, and survivability is rooted in hard historical experience. During the 1971 India-Pakistan war, the Indian Navy executed Operation Trident and Operation Python, devastating Karachi Port, Pakistan’s primary maritime hub. The strikes crippled Pakistan’s naval logistics and fuel infrastructure to such an extent that sustained naval operations became impossible.

That attack was not merely tactical; it was strategic. It hastened Pakistan’s defeat and played a critical role in the war’s outcome, culminating in the creation of Bangladesh. For the first time, India’s political and military leadership fully grasped that control of the seas could decisively shape conflicts on land.

Yet, despite this lesson, India’s submarine modernisation moved slowly in the decades that followed. Procurement delays, technological dependence, and policy inertia left the Navy with an ageing underwater fleet even as regional threats evolved. Project-75I, therefore, is not just a procurement programme; it is the long-overdue institutional response to lessons learnt in 1971.

Operation Sindoor and the return of Karachi as a strategic pressure point

The relevance of this lesson resurfaced dramatically during Operation Sindoor in May 2025, when hostilities between India and Pakistan escalated following a major terror provocation. Between May 8 and May 11, the Indian Navy was placed on heightened operational readiness, with credible reports indicating that India was prepared to strike Pakistan’s financial and logistical nerve centre, Karachi Port, once again if escalation continued.

Karachi remains the backbone of Pakistan’s economy, handling the overwhelming majority of its maritime trade, energy imports, and financial flows. The very fact that the Indian Navy could credibly threaten a repeat of 1971, this time with far more advanced maritime surveillance, missile platforms, and undersea assets, underscored how naval power functions as strategic leverage even without shots being fired. Operation Sindoor reinforced a hard truth: Pakistan’s greatest vulnerability lies at sea, and India’s ability to exploit that vulnerability depends heavily on undersea dominance.

In this context, the India–Germany submarine deal assumes far greater significance. It is not a peacetime modernisation exercise but a capability upgrade shaped by recent, real-world hostilities. Once, the Indian Navy is equipped with new-age submarine, it’s capability to strike Karachi will be further enhanced, reinforcing deterrence through credible, survivable, and persistent undersea strike capability.

Make in India at the core of Project-75I

A defining feature of the India–Germany agreement is that all six submarines will be built in India, with MDL acting as the primary construction agency. TKMS will provide design authority, engineering expertise, consultancy, and critical technologies, ensuring that India acquires not just platforms but deep technical competence.

The programme is expected to begin with approximately 45% indigenous content, rising to nearly 60% by the final submarine. This phased indigenisation directly aligns with India’s Atmanirbhar Bharat objectives and addresses a long-standing weakness in defence procurement—dependence on foreign OEMs for upgrades, spares, and lifecycle support.

The framework for this collaboration was established in June last year, when TKMS and MDL signed a memorandum of understanding to jointly pursue Project-75I. MDL’s experience with the Scorpène-class submarines under the earlier Project-75 has positioned it as India’s most capable submarine-building shipyard, making it a natural partner for the programme.

Strategic timing and geopolitical relevance

According to sources familiar with the negotiations, the final contract could be concluded within the next three months, with momentum expected during German Chancellor Friedrich Merz’s visit to India on January 12–13. The timing is geopolitically significant. Germany is seeking a larger strategic footprint in the Indo-Pacific, while India is consciously diversifying its defence partnerships beyond legacy suppliers.

For New Delhi, the deal comes amid growing undersea challenges. China’s rapidly expanding submarine fleet, including nuclear-powered platforms, is increasingly active in the Indian Ocean. Chinese submarines have docked in regional ports and conducted patrols close to Indian waters. Meanwhile, Pakistan, with Chinese assistance, is also upgrading its submarine capabilities.

In this environment, India’s ageing conventional submarines represent a strategic vulnerability. Project-75I addresses that gap by restoring undersea deterrence and enhancing India’s ability to monitor, deter, and if necessary, deny adversaries freedom of movement in critical maritime corridors.

Long-term impact on India’s naval posture

Once inducted, the six Type-214NG submarines will significantly enhance the Indian Navy’s capacity for covert surveillance, sea denial, and precision strike operations. Equipped with advanced sensors, torpedoes, and missile launch capabilities, these platforms will form a critical layer of India’s maritime deterrence architecture.

Equally important is the industrial legacy of the programme. By absorbing advanced submarine design and construction technologies, India positions itself for future indigenous submarine projects and follow-on orders. The programme strengthens MDL’s role as a strategic asset and helps create a specialised supply chain capable of sustaining India’s long-term naval ambitions.

A quiet but decisive milestone

When finalised, the India–Germany Project-75I agreement will rank among the most consequential naval procurement decisions in India’s recent history. It strengthens underwater combat capability, advances genuine indigenisation in one of the most complex domains of warfare, and elevates Germany as a key long-term defence-industrial partner.

From the burning docks of Karachi in 1971 to the silent depths of the Indian Ocean in 2026, India’s naval journey has come full circle. Project-75I signals that the lessons of history have finally been institutionalised—not through rhetoric, but through capability, technology, and strategic foresight.

Protectors of Somnath: Know about Veer Hamirji Gohil, the brave Hindu warrior who overwhelmed the large army of Islamic invader Zafar Khan

ભાર્ગવ રાજ્યગુરુ
-
0
Protectors of Somnath: Know about Veer Hamirji Gohil, the brave Hindu warrior who overwhelmed the large army of Islamic invader Zafar Khan

Many brave men have nurtured India’s soil with their blood and contributed to its prosperity and glory. Millions of young Hindu warriors sacrificed their lives to protect the Sanatan Dharma and the Sanatan heritage. It is because of such young warriors that the Sanatan legacy lived on. One such young warrior was Veer Hamirji Gohil (Hamirsinhji Gohil), who made the supreme sacrifice in a religious battle, giving up his life to protect Somnath Mahadev. Leftist historians have always ignored Hindu warriors and attempted to erase them from history, and Veer Hamirji Gohil was no exception.

The history of Veer Hamirji Gohil is sparsely documented in the history of 14th-century Gujarat. He finds mention in some independent Hindu texts. Veer Hamirji is still remembered in the Kathiawar region through folk tales. Hamirji Gohil and some of his companions fought against the Islamic invaders to protect the Somnath temple. Let’s take a look at his complete history.

Who was Hamirji Gohil?

Chapter 9 of the Kathiawar Sarvasangraha mentions that in 1391 AD, Zafar Khan bin-Wazir-ul-Mulk was the governor of Gujarat, and it was during this time that Somnath was attacked. Furthermore, the Gujarat Sarvasangraha also contains an account of Zafar Khan’s invasion of Somnath. Poet Kalapi’s work, ‘Hamirkavya’, also mentions this event. More recently, books such as ‘Gohil Veer Hamirji’ (Dhirsinh Gohil), published in 1921, and ‘Somnath and Hamirji Gohil’ (Jaymall Parmar) provide impartial historical accounts. Based on the references in all these books, we have attempted to understand the history of Hamirji Gohil.

Hamirsinhji Gohil was the ruler of the Arthila state, located in the Amreli region of the Saurashtra (Kathiawar) district of Gujarat state. Bhimji Gohil of Arthila had three sons: Dudaji, Arjanji, and Hamirji. Dudaji ascended the thrones of Arthila and Lathi, Arjanji ruled over 11 villages of Gadhali, and the youngest son, Hamirji, ruled Samadhiyala. Notably, Hamirji Gohil was an ancestor of Sursinhji Takhtsinhji Gohil, who was famous as the poet ‘Kalapi’. In 1398 AD, Hamirji was on the throne of Samadhiyala, and it was during this time that Zafar Khan attacked Somnath.

Arjanji and Hamirji Gohil shared a deep, affectionate bond. However, one day, a quarrel erupted between the two brothers over a rooster fight, and in a fit of rage, Arjanji banished his younger brother Hamir from their home. Following this incident, Hamirji left Gohilwad and went to Marwar, where he lived with his brave Rajput friends, who empathised with him.

Zafar Khan’s Attack on the Somnath Temple

The history of the attack on the Somnath Temple is also found in the 14th-century Islamic Persian historical accounts (Mirat-i-Sikandari). At that time, the Tughlaq dynasty ruled Delhi under Muhammad Tughlaq II. After the defeat of his governor, Shamsuddin, in Junagadh, Zafar Khan was appointed as the governor of Gujarat. Over time, he became the independent ruler of Gujarat. He established his centre in Somnath. He was a staunch opponent of idol worship, and his gaze fell upon Somnath, a place of immense religious significance for millions of Hindus.

Zafar appointed a Muslim named Rasul Khan as the police chief of Junagadh. Shortly afterwards, Zafar ordered that ‘idolaters’ (Hindus) should not be allowed to gather in Somnath. At that time, the Shivaratri fair was being held in Somnath. Rasul and his men began a massacre and ordered the extermination of the Hindus. In response to this incident, the local Hindus killed Rasul Khan. When Zafar Khan came to know about this, he became enraged and marched to quell the unrest in Sorath. Zafar Khan issued a decree to attack Somnath and set out towards it. He departed with Muslim soldiers from the Kabuli, Makrani, Afghani, and Pathan communities to wreak havoc on Somnath.

Meanwhile, Arjanji Gohil became very distressed and ordered a search for Hamirji at Mansura fort. Hamirji had gone to Garhvi in ​​Marwar and was informed about Arjanji’s condition. Hamirji became concerned and returned to his brother in Arthila and started living there.

“Have the Rajput women died? Will the Rajput army attack Mahadev in front of them?”

One day, after strolling in the forest with friends like Chhatrapal Sarvaiya, Patalji Bhati, Sanghdevji Solanki, and Nanji Maharaj, a Brahmin from Sihor, Hamirji returned home and started eating hurriedly. Dudaji’s wife, Hamirji’s sister-in-law, said to him, “Why are you in such a hurry? Do you want to climb Somaiya Mountain (the local name for Somnath) immediately?” Hearing this, Hamirji asked, “Sister-in-law, is Somaiya in danger?” His sister-in-law replied, “The army has come to demolish the Somaiya temple, and the Governor of Gujarat’s army is advancing towards Somnath.”

Upon hearing his sister-in-law’s words, Hamirji immediately stood up without finishing his food and said, “What are you uttering? Is there no Rajput who will go and die for Somnath? Will the army of the Mlecchas (Muslims) attack Somaiya (the local name for Somnath) while there are still Kshatriyas around? Has Rajput valour died?” With these questions, Hamirji stood up in anguish. His sister-in-law said to him, “There is no shortage of Rajputs in Kathiawar; they are countless, but no true hero seems willing to come forward to defend Somnath. This is not some ordinary hunting game; this is about having the courage to face a powerful army in defence of Mahadev. And if you are so troubled, then you yourself should take up arms, brother-in-law. You are also a Rajput, aren’t you?”

Hamirji’s sister-in-law spoke her mind frankly, but Hamirji’s pride was deeply wounded. Hamirji said to his sister-in-law, “Please convey my Jajera Johar to both my brothers. Whether anyone accompanies me or not, I will go to the Somnath temple.” His sister-in-law tried to dissuade him, but Hamirji remained resolute. Hamirji set out for Somnath with around 200 warriors. At a time when the people were gripped by fear of Zafar Khan and the kingdom was plagued by internal strife, Hamirji embarked on his journey to the Somnath temple alone.

Phase A: Gifts on the way and a marriage at Dronagadha

Hamirji was travelling on the road to Somnath when he came across a Nesada, a settlement of Maldharis such as Bharwads and Ahirs. At midnight, he heard an elderly woman singing a Marsiya (a folk song sung at someone’s death). Hamirji went to her and asked, “Whose Marsiya are you singing?” The elderly woman replied that her son had recently died, so she was singing his Marsiya. Hamirji insisted, “Will you sing my Marsiya? I want to hear it.” The woman shockingly replied, “What did you say? How can I absolve myself of sin by singing your Marsiya while you are still alive?” Hamirji said, “We are on the path of death. We have set out for Somaiya to protect Somnath. We will not return from there.” The elderly woman blessed Hamirji and said, “Get married on the way, for a warrior should not step onto the battlefield unmarried. Saying this, the elderly woman started walking towards Somnath and told Hamirji, “I will go to Somnath and wait for you.”

From there onward lay the expanse of Dronagadhda, spread across the Gir region, where Vegdaji, a Bhil Chiefain, held great influence and authority. All the Bhils considered Somnath their revered deity. Vegda Bhil had a daughter named Rajbai. Once, a Jethwa Rajput was going on a pilgrimage to Tulsishyam, and a war broke out between the Bhils and the Jethwas. The Jethwa Rajput died, but before dying, he entrusted his young daughter to Vegdaji. The Jethwa Rajput took a promise from Vegdaji that he would raise his daughter and marry her to a Rajput warrior.

The elderly woman reached Vegda Bhil’s place and said, “Hamirji Gohil is on his way to the Somnath temple; arrange your daughter’s marriage with him. He is a brave Rajput from Gohilwad.” Some time later, Hamirji arrived in that area and, by chance, met Vegda Bhil. At Vegda’s insistence, Hamirji stayed in his hut for two days. Afterwards, Vegdaji arranged the marriage of Hamirji and his daughter. Thus, Hamirji’s marriage took place en route to the Somnath temple.

The Rajputs sacrificed their lives to defend Somnath

The very next day after his wedding, Hamirji set off for Somnath. Vegdaji and other Bhils were with him. He had also gathered young men from other castes, including Rajput, Kathi, Rabari, Bharwad, Ahir, and Mer. This small band of warriors finally reached Somnath. Hamirji, Vegdaji, the priests, and the residents of Prabhas Nagar, along with some Rajputs, were patiently waiting for Zafar Khan in the temple courtyard. Zafar Khan had heard that some Hindu warriors would confront him, but he was not worried. Zafar Khan reached the foothills of Prabhas Mountain. At that moment, Vegdaji’s Bhil soldiers greeted Zafar Khan with arrows, and the Muslim army cried out in distress.

On one side was the religious fanaticism to destroy the temple of Lord Shiva, and on the other lay the fierce desire to protect Somaiya. Zafar advanced his cannons, but the Bhil soldiers, employing guerrilla warfare tactics, broke the morale of the Muslim army. Soon, the number of Bhil soldiers started dwindling, and Vegdaji was also martyred. The battle lasted for nine days. By then, only a few warriors remained with Hamirji. As the battle was nearing its end, Hamirji performed the Somnath Aarti early in the morning. Red Gulal showered on the warriors who had come to bid farewell to death in the courtyard. The elderly woman (bard) was also in the temple. Hamirji requested her to sing a Marsiya. For an hour, the courtyard echoed with the sound of the Marsiya. Sitting on the shore, turning her prayer beads, the elderly woman said, “O brave one, you are blessed, for you have preserved the water of that heroic manhood of Kathiawar which was destined to die.” She sang the Marsiya–

‘વે’લો આવ્યો વીર, સખાતે સોમૈયા તણી;
હીલોળવા હમીર, ભાલાની અણીએ ભીમાઉત.’

‘માથે મુંગીપર ખરુ, મોસાળ વસા વીસ;
સોમૈયાને શીષ, આપ્યું અરઠીલા ધણી.’

The battle began with the Marsiya. On one side were Hamirji Gohil’s warriors, and on the other, Zafar Khan’s Islamic soldiers. The remaining Hindu warriors fought in the temple courtyard to protect the Shiva Lingam. Hamirji’s entire army was annihilated, but being a Rajput, he single-handedly charged into the Islamic army. His entire body was mutilated. As Zafar struck Hamirji Gohil with full force, his head was severed from his body and fell onto the Shiva Lingam of Somnath. It is said that despite a severed head, Hamirji’s body continued to fight till the destruction of the Islamic army. The Islamic army was annihilated on the battlefield, and in the end, victory belonged to Hindu pride. Hamirji himself had attained martyrdom, but his vow to protect Somnath had been fulfilled as the remaining Islamic army fled.

The incident shows how a lone Kathiawar Rajput, along with a few devoted warriors, offered his life at Somnath when the valour of Saurashtra faltered. Today, outside the Somnath temple stands the temple of Vegdaji, and within the temple complex, directly opposite the Shiva Lingam, is the statue of Hamirji Gohil. To express their gratitude, the devotees of Somnath established a tradition according to which the saffron flag of the Somnath temple is first taken to Hamirji’s statue before being hoisted to the temple’s pinnacle. This tradition continues to this day.

The story of valorous Hamirji Gohil, who sacrificed his life before the Shiva Lingam of Somnath, was not a figment of imagination or a fiction, but a historical truth. Hamirji was a man who dared to lay down his life for his faith. When kingdoms were engrossed in their own self-interest, when power had become inert, and when people silently endured everything out of fear, a young Rajput, along with a few warriors, stood up to defy death at the feet of Somnath. The sacrifice of Hamirji Gohil often conveys the message that history is not written by those in power, but by the blood of heroes who remain unwavering even in the face of death for the sake of their faith. The Somnath Temple, as it stands today, is not merely a pile of stones, but a witness to the sacrifices made by heroes like Hamirji before the Shiva Lingam.

(This article is a translation of the original article published on OpIndia Gujarati.)

Lahore and Sialkot could have been India’s, but Congress gave it away: Tashkent Agreement Explained — How a battlefield triumph became a strategic disaster

श्रवण शुक्ल
-
0
Lahore and Sialkot could have been India’s, but Congress gave it away: Tashkent Agreement Explained — How a battlefield triumph became a strategic disaster

10th January, 1966, is a dark chapter in Indian history that still haunts us. On this day, an agreement was reached between India and Pakistan in Tashkent, known as the Tashkent Agreement. Under this agreement, the territories our brave soldiers had won in the 1965 war, risking their lives and shedding enemy blood, were simply returned at the negotiating table.

Imagine if the Tashkent Agreement hadn’t been reached, the city of Lahore would be part of India, not Pakistan. Our map would have looked so different and stronger. But that didn’t happen, and the then Congress government’s weak and pressure-stricken foreign policy was responsible for this. This single decision caused centuries of damage to the country, a price we still pay today.

Infiltration in Kashmir, terrorist incidents, attacks like Pulwama… all stem from that mistake. In this report, we will examine the entire story of that period in detail, so that lessons can be learned from history and such mistakes can be prevented from happening again.

Pakistan was badly defeated by India in 1965

The 1965 Indo-Pak War was primarily triggered by the Kashmir issue. Pakistan’s then-President, Ayub Khan, devised an ambitious plan, dubbed “Operation Gibraltar.” Under this operation, Pakistan sent thousands of infiltrators and soldiers into Jammu and Kashmir to incite locals to revolt and seize Kashmir. Ayub Khan was so arrogant that he declared that he would capture Delhi and have “dinner in Delhi.” However, the Indian Army shattered his dream.

Our soldiers not only apprehended the intruders but also retaliated against Pakistan. India’s Prime Minister at the time was Lal Bahadur Shastri, a simple but strong-willed leader. He told his soldiers, “We’ll have breakfast in Lahore tomorrow.”

This was not just a slogan, but a symbol of the courage of the Indian Army. And indeed, it would prove to be quite true during the war, as our soldiers reached the borders of Lahore. This war demonstrated how prepared and brave the Indian Army was, but political decisions changed everything.

Indian troops overwhelm from Kashmir to Kutch, enter Lahore sector as well

The war was fought on multiple fronts, and the Indian Army prevailed everywhere. In the Lahore sector, Indian troops destroyed Pakistani defence lines. We reached the Ichhogil Canal, considered the last line of defence for the city of Lahore. A further advance would have led to the capture of Lahore. Similarly, India captured strategically important areas like the Haji Pir Pass in Kashmir, a significant blow to Pakistan, as this pass controlled the infiltration route.

The Pakistani army was facing a crushing defeat. Thousands of its soldiers were killed, its most modern Patton tanks were destroyed, and its aircraft were shot down. India had clearly gained the upper hand. Pakistan suffered so many losses during the war that it was left with no fighting strength. Internationally, India was hailed as the victor, having not only defended itself but also entered enemy territory. But alas, this victory hung in the balance.

Stories of the bravery of Indian soldiers are still told today and fill us with pride. Consider, for example, the Battle of Asal Uttar. There, Pakistan’s most advanced Patton tanks were destroyed by the Indian Army. Our Sherman tanks overpowered them, demonstrating that courage is greater than weapons.

Officers like Major Bhupinder Singh sacrificed their lives in this battle, but they pushed the enemy back. Similarly, in the Chamb sector, our troops repelled Pakistani attacks and captured it. Pakistan suffered heavy losses, with over 4,000 soldiers killed, while India lost approximately 3,000 soldiers.

Over 200 Pakistani tanks were destroyed, while ours were only 80. In the air battle, the Indian Air Force shot down several Pakistani F-86 Sabre jets. The international media was also talking about India’s victory. But this is where the story changed, as political interference took hold, shifting the outcome of the war from the battlefield to the table.

The world was divided during the Cold War; talks were held at the invitation of the Soviet Union.

It was the era of the Cold War, when the world was divided into two camps: the United States on one side and the Soviet Union on the other. Both superpowers wanted to prevent an Indo-Pak war, which was spreading instability in Asia. The United States had supplied weapons to Pakistan, but when the war broke out, it halted arms supplies to both countries. The Soviet Union initiated mediation. Soviet Prime Minister Alexei Kosygin summoned India and Pakistan to Tashkent.

Our Prime Minister, Lal Bahadur Shastri, accepted the invitation and went to Tashkent. Pakistan was represented by Ayub Khan. Negotiations began, and pressure mounted. The Soviet Union wanted peace because it considered India an ally, but it also didn’t want to lose Pakistan. The United States was also exerting pressure from behind. This pressure on Shastri ji became so intense that, despite his strong position, he was forced to yield.

The government buckled under international pressure, and Nehru had initiated it

The Congress government came under international pressure, and this proved to be its biggest weakness. The United States had imposed an arms embargo, which was particularly damaging to Pakistan, which was dependent on American weapons, but India was also affected to some extent. The Soviet Union wanted peace and persuaded Shastri that continuing the war would be disastrous for both countries.

Shastriji was a strong leader, but the weak diplomacy of the Congress Party and its bureaucracy left him isolated. Party leaders and advisors buckled under pressure, as Congress’s long-standing policy was to yield to international pressure to secure peace. This trend had been ongoing since Nehru’s time, when he had even come close to victory in the 1948 war, taking the matter to the United Nations, thus giving Pakistan an advantage. Shastriji was under so much pressure that he agreed to a compromise, even though victory was ours on the battlefield.

We handed over our conquered territories to the enemy.

The Tashkent Declaration was signed on 10th January, 1966, and this day proved to be a tragic turning point for India. The key points of the agreement were that both countries would vacate all territories occupied during the war and restore the status quo ante bellum, as it existed before 5th August, 1965. Furthermore, both countries would resolve their disputes peacefully and refrain from using force. Diplomatic relations would be normalised, trade and communication channels would be opened. There would be no interference in each other’s internal affairs, and prisoners of war would be treated humanely.

All this sounds good, like a major step towards peace, but in reality, India completely squandered its strategic advantage. We returned the Lahore sector, Sialkot, and key areas of Kashmir, while Pakistan gave up nothing. This agreement was one-sided, proving detrimental to India.

Returning Haji Pir Pass was India’s biggest mistake

Returning the Haji Pir Pass was a grave mistake, and this decision haunts us to this day. This pass was crucial to preventing infiltration into Kashmir, as it controlled the routes from Pakistan into India. Our soldiers had captured it in the war, but it was returned in the agreement. What was the result?

Pakistan later began sending terrorists through this route. The return of areas like Haji Pir was a major reason for the terrorism that spread in Kashmir in the 1980s and 1990s. Similarly, the territories captured in the Lahore sector were also returned. Had we retained these, Pakistan’s defense lines would have been weakened and its claim to Kashmir would have been further weakened. The security of Lahore city would have been affected, and Pakistan would never have been so aggressive. But Congress’s weak policy returned all this, giving Pakistan new strength.

Pakistan took advantage of India’s weakness in foreign policy

This submissive policy of the Congress party has been in place since Nehru’s time and has been the biggest weakness of India’s foreign policy. Even in the 1947-48 Kashmir War, Nehru stopped the war when it was close to victory and took the matter to the United Nations, which benefited Pakistan, and the Kashmir issue remains unresolved to this day. Congress suffered the consequences of its weak preparation and policy in the 1962 China War. The same thing happened in 1965; standing on the brink of victory, Congress surrendered everything. This was a political weakness, as the party buckled under international pressure.

Nehru’s policy of nonviolence and peace was good, but it proved so weak in the face of the enemy that it cost the country dearly. Even strong leaders like Shastri fell victim to this policy. Had the Congress taken a firmer stance, history would have been different.

Ayub Khan became a hero despite losing

India suffered minimal losses in the war, proving how clear our victory was. Over 4,000 Pakistani soldiers were killed, while India lost nearly 3,000. Over 200 Pakistani tanks were destroyed, and their F-86 Sabre jets were shot down. Our soldiers pushed back the enemy in Sialkot, Lahore, and the Rann of Kutch. 

But the Tashkent Agreement evened the waters . Pakistan was given a new lease of life, even though it had been defeated. Ayub Khan returned home a hero because he had lost nothing. India proved itself weak by returning the captured territory. This decision was the result of Congress’s weak leadership.

Even today, there is a demand for an inquiry into Shastri’s death.

Shastri’s mysterious death on 11th January, 1966, the day after the agreement, remains a mystery to this day. Officially, it was attributed to a heart attack, but many questions arose. His body turned blue, suggesting poisoning. A postmortem was not conducted, further fueling suspicion. The family suspected poisoning and claimed Shastri was unhappy with the agreement. Some allege a Soviet or Pakistani conspiracy, as the Soviets wanted the agreement and Pakistan benefited from Shastri’s death. This death sparked numerous theories about the agreement, and even today, demands for an investigation persist. Shastri’s death shocked the entire nation.

Shastriji was a strong leader, and his slogan “Jai Jawan Jai Kisan” still resonates today. He rescued the country from a food crisis and boosted the morale of the army during the war. However, the Congress party’s old policies put him under pressure. Had he asked for more time or taken a firmer stance, the outcome might have been different. His death plunged the nation into mourning, and criticism of the agreement increased. People say that Shastriji was unhappy with the agreement and this stress led to his death.

Criticism in both India and Pakistan

The Tashkent Agreement was met with strong criticism in India, and understandably so. People took to the streets, demonstrating. Disillusionment spread even within the military, as no one was willing to return the land the soldiers had won with their blood. Opposition parties accused the Congress of weakness, saying this amounted to treason. This proved that Congress’s foreign policy had always yielded to pressure and failed to protect national interests.

The agreement was also criticised in Pakistan, as it achieved nothing in Kashmir. However, it did regain Indian territory, which was a significant relief. Tashkent allowed Pakistan to spread terrorism. Returning Haji Pir facilitated infiltration, leading to decades of unrest in Kashmir.

India is still suffering the consequences of Congress’s mistakes.

Today, when attacks like Pulwama and Uri occur, we remember Tashkent. If India had those areas, Pakistan would not have been so strong, and terrorism would not have been so deeply rooted. The country continues to suffer from this Congress‘s mistake, with thousands of lives lost. The current government has changed its policy. Operations like the surgical strike and Balakot demonstrate that we no longer bow to pressure. The enemy retaliates. This change was necessary. Strong diplomacy is needed to prevent a mistake like Tashkent.

Had the Tashkent Agreement not been signed, Lahore and Sialkot would have remained part of India.

Had the Tashkent Agreement not been reached, the map would have been different. Cities like Lahore and Sialkot would have belonged to India, and Pakistan would not have become such a significant threat.

Even today, 60 years later, the lesson remains: even after winning a war, one must remain vigilant. Negotiations are good, but compromising on national interests is not. Learning from Congress’s past policies, India is becoming stronger today, and the enemy is being given a befitting reply. This is a painful historical event. The sacrifices of our soldiers deserve respect, not retribution. The Tashkent Agreement reminds us of this and shows us how high the cost of weakness is.

(This article is a translation of the original article published on OpIndia Hindi.)

As ED crackdown on I-PAC chief Pratik Jain rattles Mamata Banerjee, read how the political consultancy is shrouded in corruption

Shraddha Pandey
-
0
As ED crackdown on I-PAC chief Pratik Jain rattles Mamata Banerjee, read how the political consultancy is shrouded in corruption

Pratik Jain, the co-founder of the political consultancy firm Indian Political Action Committee or I-PAC, has come under scanner over alleged links to the coal mining scam. On 8th January 2026, the Enforcement Directorate raided at several locations in Kolkata and Bidhannagar.

The ED searched I-PAC’s office located on the 11th floor of a building in Salt Lake, the Loudon Street residence of I-PAC’s head, Pratik Jain, and the office of a trader in the Posta area of Burrabazar, Kolkata.

Pratik Jain also heads the IT Cell of the Trinamool Congress (TMC). Due to this, apparently, West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee was furious over the ED action against Pratik Jain and caused chaos during the raids.

Banerjee made a surprise visit to the residence of Pratik Jain while the ED conducted searches. “This is most unfortunate. The ED has raided the house and office of our IT wing and its head. They are trying to collect all kinds of information,” Banerjee said. She added that she had spoken to Pratik Jain, whom she described as being in charge of her party’s work.

The I-PAC, the Coal Mine Scam, and TMC’s Goa poll campaign connection

Founded in 2013 by poll strategist-turned-politician Prashant Kishor, I-PAC is a successor to Citizens for Accountable Governance (CAG). The I-PAC is a political consultancy providing campaign strategy, data analytics, and grassroots mobilisation services to various political parties across India. The I-PAC is having close links with the Trinamool Congress since 2019 and delivered a success a decisive victory to the party in 2021 West Bengal state assembly elections.

However, after Prashant Kishor’s exit in 2021 and Rishi Raj Singh and Pratik Jain taking over the consultancy’s control as Directors, alongside Vinesh Chandel, I-PAC faced electoral setbacks in Delhi wherein its client Aam Aadmi Party lost election to the Bhartiya Janata Party (BJP) in 2025. Before this, the I-PAC failed to generate momentum for its client YSRCP in Andhra Pradesh where the BJP-Telugu Desam Party alliance emerged victorious in 2024.

Source: I-PAC’s website

Besides, the I-PAC came under scrutiny over alleged financial improprieties, opaque funding, and links to political corruption. The current ED action stems from the evidence, the probe agency says it has about Jain’s connection with some hawala transactions pertaining to a coal mining scam in West Bengal.

 “One hawala operator linked to layering of proceeds of crime of coal smuggling had facilitated transactions of tens of crores of rupees to Indian Pac Consulting Private Limited,” the ED said, adding that the raids were a part of investigation under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA).

Back in 2020, an FIR was filed in the illegal coal mining scam case. The investigation revealed that coal was being mined and stolen from the lease zone of Eastern Coalfields Limited (ECL) in and around the Paschim Bardhaman district in West Bengal. This was happening in collusion with the railways and CISF officials alongside other relevant department. The probe further traced presence of Hawala operators in the case.

It emerged that the illegally mined and stolen coal was being sold in plants in Bardhaman, Purulia, Bankura, and other districts in West Bengal. The probe revealed that most of the coal was being sold to Shakambhari group of companies. The investigators found that around Rs 2,742.32 crore, including taxes and royalties, was siphoned off via illegal mining from the ECL lease area between December 2017 and October 2020.

The ED probe found that the illegal mining syndicate illegally mined around 25.51 lakh metric tonnes (MT) of coal worth Rs 1,114.35 crore.

A man named Anup Maji was reported to be the mastermind of the coal mining scam. Between the years 2000-2015, around 16 FIRs were registered against Maji.

In 2020, the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) registered a fresh case of coal theft and smuggling. It was found that Anup Maji had hired several employees for the maintenance of record of the illegally mined and stolen coal which was sold to various companies. The probe further revealed that one Gurapada Maji transferred Rs 89 crore as proceeds of crimes via Anup Maji’s associates between 2017 and 2020. Meanwhile, another accused person Jayadev Mandal transferred proceeds of crime amounting to Rs 58 crore.

Between January and April 2021, the Enforcement Directorate carried out search and seizure operations at 46 locations linked to the accused persons under Section 17 of the PMLA.

The I-PAC came into the picture here after the ED investigation found that one of the Hawala operators in the coal mining scam had facilitated the transfer of crores of rupees to the I-PAC. Following this, the ED launched searches on the premise linked to I-PAC chief Pratik Jain.

It has alleged that coal scam money from Anup Maji were routed through hawala to IPAC, were used for TMC’s Goa election campaign. Thus, there emerged an alleged direct link between the coal scam funds and TMC’s Goa political financing.

The Enforcement Directorate has alleged that the TMC used “Rs 20 crore proceeds of crime” in Goa between 2021 and 2022. The probe agency mentioned this in a writ petition filed before the Calcutta High Court on 9th January.

The coal mining scam proceeds of crime were routed via a firm R. Kanti Lal in Kolkata and through some other hawala operators before reaching I-PAC and its director Pratik Jain. Once the money reached I-PAC, the ED alleges, it was used for TMC’s poll strategy in Goa in 2022.

Notably, on during the Thursday raids, the ED also searched R. Kanti Lal firm’s office in Kolkata.

The ED said that a WhatsApp conversation between Anup Maji’s accountant Niraj Singh and his associate station Ashok Kumar Mishra who was the former in-charge of Bankura police from 26th August 2020, showed that the firm R. Kanti Lal was used for transfer of proceeds of crime via illegal channels.

Notably, Ashok Kumar Mishra was arrested by the ED in 2021. Mishra is currently out on bail.

“Intelligence was received that around Rs 20 crore of proceeds of crime from Kolkata to Goa was transferred through R. Kanti Lal firm. The employee who handled the hawala transfers at Goa is Sagar Kumar Patel,” the ED said in its petition.

The probe anti-graft agency said that during interrogation, Patel told them about one Akshay Kumar, who admitted that he received cash in Goa through a hawala channel arranged by ASM Event Technology’s proprietor Pankaj Malik.

According to the ED, Akshay Kumar is an employee of event management companies ASM Event Technology, and Hertz and Pixelz.

Furthermore, the ED revealed that Akshay Kumar was questioned twice, on 26th October 2023 and 10th January 2024. During this, Akshay Kumar said that the two event management companies ASM Event Technology, and Hertz and Pixelz, worked for the I-PAC. These companies managed I-PAC’s events during the years 2021 and 2022.

During questioning, Alpesh Patel, an employee at R. Kanti Lal firm confessed that he had arranged Rs 20 crore cash in Goa from Kolkata and that this money was given to Akshay Kumar. It further emerged these funds were arranged at the behest of one Mukesh Patel, the owner of Rajesh Maganlal firm.

The questioning of Mukesh Patel led ED sleuths to one Mukesh Thakkar alias Munna. The ED said that Mukesh Patel arranged the illicit funds at the request of Mukesh Thakkar.

Thakkar revealed that Jitendra Mehta, who ran a non-banking financial company (NBFC) in Kolkata, had aided in transferring the proceeds of crime linked to the coal mining scam.

“Jitender Mehta has assisted in transferring the proceeds of crime through hawala from Kolkata to Goa. He has assisted in transferring Rs 20 crore to Goa to be used by I-PAC in Goa. As per information, Pratik Jain, Co-founder and Director of I-PAC, has handled I-PAC operations in Goa. The funds have been handed over to Akshay Kumar, who is an employee of Hertz and Pixel and ASM Event Technology which have admittedly worked for I-PAC in Goa,” the Enforcement Directorate said in its petition filed before the court.

Who is Pratik Jain?

Notably, Pratik Jain is an engineer-turned-political consultant. He is the co-founder of the I-PAC. Jain did his Bachelor of Technology (B.Tech) from IIT Bombay in 2012. He previously interned at the Axis Mutual Fund. Jain also worked at Deloitte for a brief time period before becoming a founding member of ‘Citizens for Accountable Governance’ NGO.

Importantly, Pratik Jain is the head of the IT Cell of the West Bengal’s ruling party Trinamool Congress. Jain’s I-PAC played a significant role in TMC’s victory in the 2021 state elections.

During Thursday ED raids, Mamata Banerjee’s dramatic arrival at the scene and taking away of some files and a hard disk raised eyebrows with questions being raised if the Chief Minister acted out of fear and desperation to cover up a scandal yet to be fully unearthed.

On 9th January, TMC leaders, including CM Mamata Banerjee and loudmouth Mahua Moitra are staging a sit-in protest and holding a rally against the Central government over the ED raids at Pratik Jain’s residence. In fact, CM Banerjee has personally lodged a police complaint against the Enforcement Directorate at Kolkata’s Shakespeare Sarani station.  Questions are being raised over why the TMC is so rattled over probe agency investigating a private consultancy firm.

YSRCP government gave Rs 274 crore to I-PAC via shell companies: When TDP accused Jagan Mohan Reddy’s party of diverting public funds for I-PAC

Back in 2023, the Telugu Desam Party (TDP) accused then CM Jagan Mohan Reddy-led YSRCP government of diverting Rs 274 crore of public money to the Pratik Jain-led I-PAC. It was alleged that under the pretext of supervising village and ward volunteers, the Jagan government illegally diverted Rs 274 crore to the I-PAC.

TDP spokesperson Neelayapalem Vijay Kumar had alleged that in July 2021, a GO was issued by the Andhra Pradesh government which appointed the consortium of Ram Info, Vupadhi Infotech, and Max Security Detective Agency for surveillance of volunteers across the state. The TDP alleged that the employees working at Ram Info were actually I-PAC employees.

It was further alleged that a post-facto GO was issued by the YSRCP government to pay Rs 68.02 crore annually to a consortium named eld Operation Agency (FPO) from June 2020 onwards.

The appointment of a private agency for volunteer supervision was illegal since volunteers are a part of the government. Moreover, issuance of a GO without calling tenders was a further violation of the law by the YSRCP government, the TDP alleged.

The TDP this was only one part of a larger scam. “The actual motive was to benefit I-PAC which works as political consultant for YSRCP. The employees working in Ram Info are actually employees of I-PAC. The conspiracy was hatched to pay for the services rendered by I-PAC to YSRCP from the public exchequer by creating shell companies,” the TDP leader alleged back in 2023.

1...767778...7,598Page 77 of 7,598