Why blame only the British?

[A1Kaid]

Why do Pakistanis only blame the British for problems in south Asia? The answer to this question requires a history lesson which I will get into. Of course, the British were critical in dismantling the Mughal Empire and fundamentally weakening the grip of Muslim rule over the Indian subcontinent, but history didn't begin with the arrival of the British East India Company.

We're forgetting it was Persia, or more specifically Afsharid Dynasty of Nadir Shah greatly responsible for the plight and suffering of Muslims in south Asia. Nadir Shah's invasion and sacking of the Mughal capital Delhi was absolutely catastrophic and crippled the Mughal Empire both militarily and financially. This battle if known as the Battle of Karnal 1739. In this sacking Nadir Shah of Persia plundered, massacred, and looted the wealth of the Mughal Empire and took an unimaginable amount of wealth to Persia.

The consequences of this battle made the Mughal Empire susceptible to foreign invasion, as we we have come to now know from the British Empire. After the Battle of Karnal 1739, the weakened Mughal Empire faced insurgent and terrorists groups mainly Hindu and Sikh factions which made recovery for the Mughal Empire difficult. This was an empire that faced a crippling blow and then some time periods later faces insurgencies throughout the empire.

After the Battle of Karnal 1739, just 18 years later the Battle of Plassey happened in 1957. As we know the Mughal Empire at this point was the Sick Man of Asia or arguably a slow dying man, and the British Empire took full advantage of this opportunity.




My point is don't blame only the British, we have so many ignorant Pakistanis on this forum who talk about brotherhood, brother this brother that, that they have spent little time in actually reading the events prior to British involvement in south Asia. Don't blame only the British for the downfall of Muslim rule in south Asia which many Pakistani boasts of but also blame Iran. It is also important to note Iran had also attacked the Ottomans.

 

[KS]

Battle of Karnal was nothing but a raid-n-plunder mission. The Mughals were already in their death throes after the disastorous war in the Deccan against the Marathas (27 years war) which has weakened them significantly. The Marathas (and Jats,Sikhs up North) were the real reason for the weakening of the Mughal empire and not Persians or English as is suggested.

 

[ajtr]

Subcontinent culture is sycophancy. We are nation of flatters with false prestige Thats the reason we still find the same culprit families still ruling who were helping brrits in their times.Like the Scindias of Gwalior helped brits against laxmi bai in 1857.Gwalior janta still votes for this family like loyal subjects to the kings.And there are many such examples across the length and breadth of the subcontinent.Like hassan Nissar say why should we blame the british alone.It were our own people who betrayed the land and their brethren.

 

[Spring Onion]

Brits were gaurding their interests as a country/nation, our desis were gaurding their personal intrests at the cost of the state.

So who betrayed whom is clear

 

[A1Kaid]

Battle of Karnal was nothing but a raid-n-plunder mission. The Mughals were already in their death throes after the disastorous war in the Deccan against the Marathas (27 years war) which has weakened them significantly. The Marathas (and Jats,Sikhs up North) were the real reason for the weakening of the Mughal empire and not Persians or English as is suggested.

The war in the Deccan isn't the cause of the severe downfall of the Mughal empire. The Mughal empire would most likely have recovered it was the attack by Nadir Shah which finished off the Mughal empire as an effective and cohesive empire. I don't deny the war in the Deccan was harmful to the Mughal empire but the invasion by Nadir Shah is what crippled the Empire. The Marathas would have eventually been dealt with and crushed and couldn't dare to attack the Mughal capital Delhi. That is what Nadir Shah did and set the Empire in permanent dismay.

Though I do agree Marathas should also be blamed, their treason and insurgent activities opened up south Asia to foreign invasion and susceptible to colonialism. As my original point stands why only blame the British? Blame Iran/Afsharid Dynasty as well you can add Marathas as well to the list.

 

[ajtr]

The war in the Deccan isn't the cause of the severe downfall of the Mughal empire. The Mughal empire would most likely have recovered it was the attack by Nadir Shah which finished off the Mughal empire as an effective and cohesive empire. I don't deny the war in the Deccan was harmful to the Mughal empire but the invasion by Nadir Shah is what crippled the Empire. The Marathas would have eventually been dealt with and crushed and couldn't dare to attack the Mughal capital Delhi. That is what Nadir Shah did and set the Empire in permanent dismay.

When empire fights an insurgency for 50-60 yrs its does sap its power and makes center weak.thats what the long drawn maratha and sikh insurgencies did to the mughal empire right from Auranzaib's time.and when nadir shah attacked he found totally wavering weak mughal empire.I would rather say it wer thses insurgencies which helped nadirshah to plunder delhi.

 

[A1Kaid]

When empire fights an insurgency for 50-60 yrs its does sap its power and makes center weak.thats what the long drawn maratha and sikh insurgencies did to the mughal empire right from Auranzaib's time.and when nadir shah attacked he found totally wavering weak mughal empire.I would rather say it wer thses insurgencies which helped nadirshah to plunder delhi.

From my readings the Mughls were militarily capable of defeating Nadir Shah's army but bad military planning resulted in defeat-- troops were spread too thin and not concentrated properly in certain areas. The insurgency certainly did weaken the Empire but from my readings Mughal's did have the military capability to at least stop the invasion of Delhi.

 

[KS]

The war in the Deccan isn't the cause of the severe downfall of the Mughal empire. The Mughal empire would most likely have recovered it was the attack by Nadir Shah which finished off the Mughal empire as an effective and cohesive empire. I don't deny the war in the Deccan was harmful to the Mughal empire but the invasion by Nadir Shah is what crippled the Empire. The Marathas would have eventually been dealt with and crushed and couldn't dare to attack the Mughal capital Delhi. That is what Nadir Shah did and set the Empire in permanent dismay.

Nope. Not really. The failure of the 'grand' Mughal empire to finish of a guerilla campaign against a small, yet determined foe in the hills and barren tracts of the Deccan not only drained the Mughal empire of its financial resources and man power (IIRC there were about 500,000 Mughals at the peack of their campaign in Deccan) but also sapped their morale to a great extent as it had by then become an ego clash between Aurangazeb and the Marathas. Unable to achieve what he set out to achieve Aurangazeb died a dejected man. This was in Central India. In the North the Sikhs were becoming increasingly rebellious under their Gurus and fought a number off bloody battles that reduced the Mughal influence in Punjab. And in the East the Ahoms comprehensively defeated the Mughals and halted their expansion.

Add to this, after Aurangazeb his sucessors were mostly incompetent and not capable.

The rot set in the mughal rule once marathas started their rebellion. Persians or not, it does not matter. It was only a matter of time the mughal rule was to be decimated.

Though I do agree Marathas should also be blamed, their treason and insurgent activities opened up south Asia to foreign invasion and susceptible to colonialism. As my original point stands why only blame the British? Blame Iran/Afsharid Dynasty as well you can add Marathas as well to the list.

Mughals themselves were foreign invaders from Central Asia. And the war by the Marathas against Mughals is called the Maratha war of independence. There was nothing treasonous about fighting against them for independence. Infact if you ask me, the Marathas were the first freedom fighters of South Asia, along with the Sikhs.

 

[acetophenol]

IMO,we should see the brits,europeans and other bunch of kings robbing our wealth in the past as history. We should never hate or blame them on the basis of history.

 

[KS]

IMO,we should see the brits,europeans and other bunch of kings robbing our wealth in the past as history. We should never hate or blame them on the basis of history.

A dark chapter in our history. Yes. When internal rivalries were exploited by foreigners to defeat us and plunder our wealth.

 

[ajtr]

IMO,we should see the brits,europeans and other bunch of kings robbing our wealth in the past as history. We should never hate or blame them on the basis of history.

You cant forget the history when same kings/Feudal/rai bahadurs etc who helped brits are still ruling us and looting our wealth and depositing it in west.

From my readings the Mughls were militarily capable of defeating Nadir Shah's army but bad military planning resulted in defeat-- troops were spread too thin and not concentrated properly in certain areas. The insurgency certainly did weaken the Empire but from my readings Mughal's did have the military capability to at least stop the invasion of Delhi.

When you are forced to fight battle just outside the capital of your empire then it says a lot about the capability of mughals defeating Nadir shah.

 

[A1Kaid]

You cant forget the history when same kings/Feudal/rai bahadurs etc who helped brits are still ruling us and looting our wealth and depositing it in west.

When you are forced to fight battle just outside the capital of your empire then it says a lot about the capability of mughals defeating Nadir shah.

What did I just tell you, the Mughals poorly planned the defense of empire. The army was spread out in areas sometimes units were miles apart from each other. There were problems with leadership and political interference was another problem. From what I've read chain of command was trumped my political setbacks within the Mughal ruling elite.

 

[Spring Onion]

You cant forget the history when same kings/Feudal/rai bahadurs etc who helped brits are still ruling us and looting our wealth and depositing it in west.

When you are forced to fight battle just outside the capital of your empire then it says a lot about the capability of mughals defeating Nadir shah.

The kins of these raja mahrajas are still well off and its the common man who is still Pooooorest as was under these rajas.

so whats the big deal for a common man.

 

[Android]

A dark chapter in our history. Yes. When internal rivalries were exploited by foreigners to defeat us and plunder our wealth.

and it looks like we desi people haven't learnt anything from our history coz the same is happening even now

 

[angeldust]

Please remember that we have to thank the British for uniting us and finally galvanizing us into action with a kick up our *****.

Please stop crying about what the British did to us. Why did the British not make headway with the Chinese? Or the Japanese for that matter?

We have wasted the last millenium. Let us make sure that we do not continue to wallow in the past but learn from it and use it rather than doing this sporadic rona dhona on the Net and the media.

O woe is me. O woe is me.

What are we doing today after the British are gone?

Both Pakistan and India are still fighting each other internally and externally.

We are still in a status quo 3-way death hold with China.

We look the other way when the neo-colonialists are rampaging all over Asia.

And in doing so we remain confined to our individual Asian corners as the Western world continues to call the shots, in spite of being crunched financially.

Can we not control our markets? Can we not realize that we control more than 2/3 of world consumption, and resources.

We are a brown and yellow mess.