On India invading another country…

Long long back I had asked a really badly phrased question on whether India has ever invaded another country. It was really badly phrased because all the words in the question, i.e. “India”, “invaded”, “another” and “country” are ambiguous, as many of you correctly pointed out. Actually, the problem was that I had a specific answer in mind, so I framed the question in a way I thought would leave only the answer I wanted, but it turns out that it didn’t.

Yup Sikkim is a good answer (congrats Yazad and CCG). If I know history correctly, Indira Gandhi’s invasion of Sikkim was completely unprovoked. She was playing some kind of geopolitical game with China and Sikkim got caught in the process. Other answers are at least debatable. Remember that I was giving the maximum amount of leeway to a supporter of Akhand Bharat, so I wouldn’t consider our Bangladesh adventure to be a good answer (not because it was not an invasion, but because a believer in Akhand Bharat would consider it an internecine battle. Chola kings’ incursions into Sri Lanka was already mentioned in the article I linked to – I had asked for other examples. Our actions in modern day Sri Lanka and Maldives cannot really be considered invasions can they? We had gone there at the invitation of recognised governments of those countries.

Look I don’t want to argue on this okay? I know that there are ten sides to this issue and you can corner me by asking me to define all my terms. For example, I wouldn’t consider an attack on Nepal an “invasion” because Nepal is kind of culturally part of India (The only reason it isn’t politically a part of India is that the British left it a semi-independent monarchy rather than make it a dependency.) But I know that I have made a hash of my argument, so I won’t press it further.

Rather, I will ask you to guess which incident I am thinking of by narrowing it thus:
1) It took place in the 19th century.
2) The place invaded is outside undivided India.
3) The place has never been ruled by the British.

What am I talking of?
If you want a lateral hint, it is:

Manmohan Singh.

31 thoughts on “On India invading another country…

  1. Hmm… not sure if it qualifies as an “Indian” war, but do you refer to the 1839 invasion of Kabul (Afghanistan) by British & Indian troops?

  2. Hmm…that’s not an easy one. Is it the 1841(42?) invasion of Tibet by the Sikhs? If I’m right, please email me how and when you will deliver the prize to me?

  3. Ranjit Singh in Kabul? Though I think in your first post you had let Afghanistan be part of Akhand Bharat, remember the Ashokan pillars and edcits (never mind that he was a Buddhist, the hindu-nazi needs his lebensraum).

  4. Sandeep you are absolutely right. You’ll get your prize the next time you come to Mumbai.

    Gautam, I don’t know. I remember reading somewhere that Indira Gandhi invaded Sikkim in 1975, but I could be wrong. But then it would be strange if two other people have the same wrong memory, so I do think that there was at least some amount of coercion involved.

  5. Sikkim was inavded, with the help of the RAW (Radical Analysis Wing).
    The Raw officers (nice name, raw officers) set up a spy post inside, spread rumours aound of a Chinese Invasion, created uprisings, and subjected Sikkim to Indian rule.

    That, is a legend told to me a relative who happened to be close to the powers that be.

    Though my memory is oft subject to doubts, in this little one, I am quite sure I have it right.

    Goa, was “invaded” by Nehru, on the pretext that Goa was an integral part of India, and that Nehru had moral rights to re-claim it.

  6. RAW = Research and Analysis Wing

    “Rumour” was actually spelt correctly. 😉
    (“Rumor” is American spelling.)

    We have driven you insane, Ravages :))

  7. I guess so. I am not usually bad with spelings*. 🙂

    I guess this is the prize I pay to get into the cartel.

    I always thought RAW was radical analysis wing.

    Also, there was another RAW – Ranging and Working. Which I guess became Pakistan’s ISI.
    Or correct me if I am wrong.

  8. Sikkim & Goa were historically an integral part of India. That is how China defended its claim on Tibet. Anyway, Sikkim wanted to become apart of India. Also, Goa was taken back because the Portuguese took the state.

  9. mate a key answer to this is that tibet would today be happeier under india than china and that is the truth

  10. Yes, Tibet under India would be happier than China, however thinking this happen is seeing day dream. It has been 58 years now since we are boosting of taking POK in our possession and it seems we will have to give the Indian kashmir to them and making Tibet part of India is impossible…. but not body can stop anybody day dreaming.

  11. India should now reconquer Nepal, Bhuta, Sri Lanka and Maledives. Just like it did with Sikkim an Goa. Later on we should target BanglaDesh

  12. Ramesh, we should not mauritius, a hindu-majority country. And bali, a hindu-majority island in Indonesia. Obviously, these islands should be apart of india for demographic reasons. Bali would be good for India’s growing navy, same as mauritius.

  13. fucking,
    why india should think of invading smaller countries like bhutan,bangladesh,It will be great shame as we cannot compete with china of almost equal status.so never think of invading small countries.

  14. sikkim really became a prey of the interests of indian politicians…..we sikkimese never wanted to be merged with india…we loved and still love our king late CHOGYAL PALDEN THENDUP NAMGYAL who died more of heart break than of any disease…..remember india has eaten a sickle named SIKKIM….when it has to give it out than it will realise the pain….we sikkimese will surely remain a part of india forever but our hearts shall never beat for india….sikkim -the land blessed by guru rinpoche or guru padmashambhava has always been looked after by the taras….chenrezig…we shall always regret the merger of sikkim with india…china would hav been a better option….everyone in sikkim knows what the indian political officers and the intelligence were up to at that time in sikkim…the referendum regarding whether the sikkimese wants democracy or monarchy was just a travesty of having an election in sikkim….the INDIAN CRPF had forcibly asked the sikkim citizens to vote for democracy..thats a well known fact in sikkim..

  15. Thank you Palzor, this is the information I was looking for. It is astonishing that majority of web searches on Sikkem do not say this, but tow the Indian government line.
    I hope and pray Sikkem can one day decide to do be what its people want it to be,

  16. If India conquers Sri Lanka, the Tamils will be free! (not re conquer, I cannot remember the last time Sri Lanka was part of India)

  17. Pakistanis are trying to get a billion dollars “to help against the Taliban and terrorism) NOT the government are terrorists (look what they did to the Sri Lankan Criket team) , and they are going to use a billion to attack India.

    And why the hell are the Assamese waving the Pakistani Flag?

  18. India has no reason to invade Nepal and Bhutan.(the bhutanese are TIBETAN refugees) But, if India reclaims Pakistan and Bangladesh, India will have a higher population than China.

  19. My answer is, Fiji

    They speak “Fiji Hindi” and a significant amount of Hindus live there.

  20. Sri Lanka was never conquered by India. There were Chola kings who ruled parts of northern Sri Lanka (Jaffna) for small periods. They intermittently invaded Sri Lanka as Sri Lanka was wealthier but they never succeeded in subjugating the whole of Sri Lanka as the Sri Lankan southern kingdoms of Kandy, Kotte and later Ruhuna never came under the Indian yoke. All in all out of the 2500 years of Sri Lankan history the Southern Indian states of Chera, Chola and Pandiya only held parts of Northern Sri Lanka intermittently for a period of 300 years(about 10 percent of Sri Lanka’s history) and thus never established sovereignity over Sri Lanka. The present day Tamils are mixture of the settlers who came with the invaders as well as indigenous Sri Lankans who lived in the North of Sri Lanka. The only Indian Emperor who could have subjugated Sri Lanka was the Mauyuran emperor Asoka, but he turned his back on conquests after the battle of Kalinga (in present day Indian state of Orissa) and became a Buddhist – he sent his son Mahinda and later his daughter Sangamitta as miisionaries to the king of Sri Lanka and converted the whole nation to Thervada Buddhism and as it stands today Sri Lanka is the citadel of Thervada Buddhism and is acknowledged by the other south east Asian countries who practice Thervada Buddhism as such.

  21. whatever happend is happend in the past we should always look forward in the future. so in my opinion if government of India really wanted to do justice to the sikkimese people according to the letter and spirit of the tripatite agreement of 8th may 1973 then the goernment has to implement the article 371F of the indian constitution as it is . government should not try to distort the contains of the article. because the article was added only to provide compensation to the poor sikkimese. thanx if some body throw some light on it.

  22. yeah india has invaded pakistan (until serperate) shri lanka(claimed),bangladesh(claimed)
    afganistan iran iraq(seperated). indian influence is on this whole planet and when you think about asia india comes up first and the most important country in asia. india is the oldest history and oldest counrty in asia and one of the oldest histories in the world after india. all this country started(southeast asia) even part of turks is indian influence
    be proud to be a indian!

  23. What you fools fail to understand is pakistan was never part of india. Goa and sikkim existed before india creation in 1947. Tibet was actually part of china at on time. India has only been around for 60 years. By ur stuipid logic northern india is a historical and integral part of afghanistan and iran.

Comments are closed.