Nile goes through at least 5 African countries but we associate it with Egypt. 94% of Indus goes through Pakistan. The Indus basin overlaps in Afghanistan, China and India but is central to Pakistan. I have shown you on maps but you still ignore. Yes some of the basin does overlap other countries but it is peripheral to China, Afghanistan and India but is central to Pakistan. A country is not made by 5% but is defined by 95%. Some parts of India have people with Tibeto-Burman features and look East Asian. Does that make India in the same category as China, Japan, Vietnam, Taiwan, Cambodia, Myanmar etc.
Of course not because they [Tibeto-Burmans] are peripheral people of India. The ethnic groups from the Ganga and Dravians define India. Similarly the small sliver of Indus Basin in India [note some of it also extends to China, Afghanistan] do not go on to define those countries. For instance Mundigakh is a IVC site in Afghanistan. I don't see Afghans rummaging here using the Kabul sub-basin [it is part of Indus Basin as River Kabul flows into Indus near Attock] as way of jumping on IVC.
There are aspects of Egyptian civilization found in Sudan, Ethopia, Axum etc but that we all know the core of that civilization is in Egypt. Although there are lot of Blacks with issues over inferiority who try to use those "leavings" as a claim on Egypt much as your doing with us. They call that Afrocentrism.
What a pathetic off base explanation.Only the majority of the main indus river flows through pakistan and in ancient times there was no border,its 4 tributaries are still lifeblood of north west india and were so from rigvedic times.
What do racial features have to do with this discussion?Yes India is a heterogeneous federal state with many racial subtypes mixed or dominating regionally.I see that as nothing to be ashamed of.The IVC is only one part of our history ,not nearly the whole.There is the whole vedic history,the sangam era history,the glorious architecture and literature of chola-chalukya-pallava kings,the tribal culture of the north east.All of this we proudly claim as ours,we don't have selective amnesia like you.
We are not 'leavings' in the case of the IVC .You might call yourself that if you want to.We have the most number of significant sites and sites with technology levels beyond that of mahenjo daro.46 out of 64 of the sites with significant features belong to india.Pakistan has only 16 and afghanistan only 2.Bigots like you that rejected your own history and heritage to adopt that of the arab and glorify invaders that raped and devastated your own ancestors lands and lives are the ultimate example of inferiority complex.
I understand your need to feel significant as if this area taken in isolation had some unique greatness but lol lets take a look historically -
It was the only area of the indian subcontinent conquered by the persians.
They fell before the onslaught of the greeks,alexander conquered them only being turned away by the power of the huge armies of magadha.Chandragupta maurya liberated them and recovered this area from seleucus and the greeks.The area was conquered by indo-greek bactrians and remained under their rule after the fall of the mauryans but not in the indian heartland where sungas and satavahans prevented further expansion.
They were then conquered by the Kushans and saka indo -parthians who replaced the bactrians as the foreign masters.The sakas were crushed by the gupta empire who again liberated this area .
Come the fall of the gupta empire and the hunas under toramana and mihirkula devastate the region,conquering kashmir,western punjab and roughly the whole area corresponding to modern pakistan and afghanisthan.But he is defeated trying to penetrate into india proper by alliance of yasodharman of malwa and later guptas.
After that the area was a fringe region whereas the centre of imperial power was in kanauj.In the tripartite struggle for mastery of india the 3 powers were rastrakutas in the south,palas in bengal and gurjara partiharas in rajasthan-gujarat.
The arabs arrive - and the first and only region to be conquered?Sindh in modern day pakistan.The 'invincible' world conqueror arab caliphates try to cross the indus and attack the indian heartland and are given such a brutal drubbing by gurajara pratihara and chalukya-rastrakutas in battles of rajasthan that their own arab writers write 'arabs had nowhere to flee and caLiph gave up all hopes of conquering hindustan'.
After that rajputs dominate the area.When the ghaznavid turks came - the 2 main areas that were conquered first FATA and punjab.Ghazni burned lahore and defeated the shahis of that area.
Ghori's first conquest - Multan.Turkic sultans like balban considered indian converts inferior,refused them entry into administration and refused even to meet such 'lowly persons'.When the turks were replaced by the afghan sultans ,they did eh same - filling the administration with afghans only.The only indigeneous power afghans ever respected or allied with were the only ones that had fought the sultanate throughout - the rajputs.Not the local power of any 'pakistani' dynasty.
Same case with Mughals..the first ones to be conquered by babur are pashtun tribals from your FATA region where babur boasts in his baburnama how he made minarets of skulls out of them.Only indigeneous powers mughals accomodated - rajputs and later marathas.Marathas defeated and overran the mughal empire.
In the west however in region of modern day pakistan area first you were being looted by the afghan abdalis and then were conquered by the sikhs until replaced by the british.
A simple look at the region's history makes it very clear that for most of your history you have been a conquered people,subject to foreign domination and liberated only when a centralized power from the subcontinent proper retook the region.And lol,you tell us of inferiority complex,you who have been conquered by others for most of known history while we built empires like the guptas,mauryas,pratiharas,cholas ,pallavas and many more.Name one great historical empire centred on modern day pakistan region - none.
You have 2 options to deal with your history of defeat.
1.Either claim you are all descendants of foreign invaders who settled in the region,thus you can take some claim 'as the heirs of the muslim empires' ,but then you can't claim the IVC because you came much later.
2.Or you can claim you are mostly indigeneous inhabitants with a continuous history to lay claim to IVC heritage,but then you would have to live up to the fact that for most and almost all of your history you were slaves to foreign powers.So which one will it be?
