As I write this, he has been selected for the Ireland and England tours in late June-July, becoming the youngest Indian to get an international callup ever, surpassing the great Sachin Tendulkar. He also won the IPL MVP award along with the Emerging Player Award (usually people win them years apart, not in the same year) along with a variety of other awards. This follows the U-19 World Cup in February where he was Man of the Match in the final as well as Man of the Tournament.

And it is not just me, but the entire cricketing world which has been set aflutter by his exploits. His extremely fast pace of play (even compared to some of the fastest players in the world) plus his insane shot making and bat swing have made him a fan favourite already.

U-19 Exploits

Vaibhav came into the limelight when he debuted for Bihar U-19 as a 12 year.

He had multiple exploits at the U-19 level which is where his hype built up. 

There was a 104 (62) in a Youth Test vs Australia U-19 in Chennai and then a 113 (86) in the return tour in Brisbane. In his first tour to England he hit a 143 (78) and then in South Africa he had 127 (74).

But he saved the best for his last ever U-19 knock. In the 2026 U-19 WC Vaibhav had been doing well in India’s unbeaten run to the final with scores of 72, 40, 52, 30, 68 but none of them were big innings. Fast starts in the powerplay which the rest of the batting could consolidate upon but not the kind of knock people knew he could play where he single-handedly ends the game.

He saved the best for the last and played the greatest knock in U-19 history. His 175 (80) led India to a record score of 411 and India ended up winning by 100 runs. He started out slow but at a point switched on and turned on “video game” mode and started hitting sixes all over for fun. And this was against a pretty strong England side who themselves had come through unbeaten. As someone who watched it live, I was amazed at some of the shots he played – the best of which was a tennis swat for six (attached below).

Because India has a policy of one U-19 WC per player even if they are eligible for more, that is the end of his U-19 career (Also he is too good for this level). And what a way to sign off.

IPL Glory

Vaibhav is the youngest player to get an IPL contract at 13 when he was signed by Rajasthan Royals. It was the period when his hype was building up so most people thought it to be an interesting curiosity. Most people thought he would show some potential but seem extremely out of sorts at a higher level (normal for that age).

What happened when he did play was something different. He had a decent debut hitting 34 (20) (with a six off the first ball) and this was what was in line with most people’s expectations. In his third match he hit the 2nd fastest IPL century ever of 35 balls helping Rajasthan Royals chase down 210 in 15.5 overs. Now the opposition were Gujarat Titans who were champions in 2022 and finalists in 2023 (and again finalists this year) so they are a pretty strong side and their bowling attack had the likes of Siraj who was a WC winner from 2024 as well as Rashid Khan who is seen as the greatest T20 spinner. To flay this attack in this matter was when the world realized what they were watching.

And while his initial IPL season was good, it was this year’s IPL which really cemented the craze for him in the Indian public. Fresh off his U-19 WC exploits, Vaibhav set the IPL on fire – scoring 776 runs in 16 innings at a strike rate of 237.30 and winning the MVP, Orange Cup (for most runs) and Best Emerging Player in the process.

Now the thing about this Indian T20 team is that it is one of the greatest teams in sport. Since 2024, India has a 52-7 record (49 outright wins, 3 super over wins). They have won everything they have played in that period including two World Cups, one of which was unbeaten, an Asia Cup unbeaten as well as every bilateral series, home or away.

This team includes batsmen like Sanju Samson, Man of the Tournament of the World Cup who had the greatest run of three matches in the history of the format and Abhishek Sharma, the no 1 ranked T20 batter in the world, scorer of the fastest fifty in a T20 WC final and the Man of the Tournament in the recent Asia Cup. Plus there are other great batsmen like Ishan Kishan, no 2 ranked T20 batsman in the world who had a great World Cup in his own right.

All of these guys had great IPL seasons befitting their quality but Vaibhav surpassed even them.

In Cricinfo’s Impact metrics Vaibhav is 350 points away from the second best batsman.

Also another feature of his batting was how he went after the best bowlers in the world – many of them current or former World Cup winners. He made a habit of hitting the first ball he faced from these bowlers for a boundary – Cummins, Hazlewood and of course the T20 GOAT Bumrah.

Bumrah was recently crowned the greatest T20 bowler of the century by Cricinfo. He was the Man of the Tournament in the 2024 World Cup when he won India an unwinnable game in the final and then repeated his exploits in 2026 when he delivered a masterclass in a run fest of a semifinal which India won by 7 runs by bowling very economically (as well as taking out England’s captain and best batsman) before following it up with a Man of the Match performance in the final with figures of 4/15 off four overs.

Vaibhav didn’t even spare him, hitting a six off the first ball he ever faced by Bumrah.

In the KOs, Vaibhav was again his team’s best batsman hitting 97 (29) vs Hyderabad in the Eliminator and then a 96 (47) vs Gujarat in the Qualifier 2 which they lost.

Even in that final match, Sooryavanshi brought out his tennis shot.

The Future

Vaibhav has been selected for the T20 series vs Ireland and England in late June-July becoming the youngest player to get an India callup, breaking Sachin’s record.

His hype is at an all time high, with everyone cashing in on it. He has already made ads for Google Pay for minors as an example.

Currently he is touring Sri Lanka as part of an A side (the next match is in half an hour as I type this) and even SL Cricket is promoting the series using Vaibhav. In fact, this series is getting a live broadcast plus commentary simply because of Vaibhav’s hype and not relegated to a Youtube stream as most matches at this level are.

The only similar analogy to this craze would be when Sachin came up in the late 80s-early 90s. It is very interesting to see the contrast in Indian cricket’s fortunes during both eras.

When Sachin came of age, Indian cricket was not doing well on or off the field. Cricket was controlled by the English and the Australians and Indians were relegated to occasional tours of those countries. Even on field India were a mid level team at best. Now, India sits at the high chair of cricket, with Jay Shah as ICC chairman, getting the largest pie of the ICC revenue, dedicated two and half month window for the IPL, frequent five match test series, frequent ICC trophies hosting etc. Even on field, the Indian cricket team’s fortunes have changed a lot with India currently holding two ICC trophies and generally being a top team for most of the 21st century.

In a way, Sachin was responsible for India being where it is now in cricket. If we look at the bigger picture, India was not really doing well as a country when Sachin came into the frame. Poverty stricken country, communal/caste tensions, raging insurgencies in Kashmir and Punjab etc. For all of the doom-mongering some Indians do regarding India in the present day, India has come a long way from the dark days of the early 90s.

As India liberalized and Indians got access to televisions, watching Sachin on TV became a rite of passage. If there was a match on and India was playing, people would watch Sachin’s batting before turning it off once he got out. And in this way, India’s cricket broadcast rights started making money which led to the snowball effect of where India is now, both on and off the field.

Cricket now is at another precipice as it is on the verge of global expansion. T20 is the most marketable form of cricket due to its short duration and even the Olympics have included it for the first time in Los Angeles 2028. More and more new teams/leagues are mushrooming around the world with some like Afghanistan and USA gaining certain degrees of success.

Just like Sachin led to the rise of Indian cricket, will Vaibhav become a poster boy of cricket in general and like Michael Jordan in the 90s lead to greater global popularity of cricket, compounded by the Olympics? The IPL of course will keep expanding as India keeps growing. 10 teams for a country like India is too small.

Also because Sachin’s career was so long it coincided with India transforming from a impoverished third world country to a “middle power” on the verge of “second world” status (If you take the UN’s 0.7 “high” HDI threshold. India in 2023 is at 0.685 so a few years off at max).

If Vaibhav’s career and India’s economic growth both maintain momentum as hoped for, then by the late 2040s when he is ready to hang his boots (with plenty of silverware won on the way) India will have become a member of the “Global North” and one of the three superpowers of the world (with a greater population than the other two combined and younger too).

The future is here. And it’s beautiful.

Kabir mentioned this about privilege.

All the Pakistanis on BP are privileged given that we are all English-speaking and all of us have foreign citizenship (I assume).

All the Indians on BP are also privileged in that they are able to converse in English.

Notice the difference. The Pakistanis had to go abroad to live/study. The Indians didn’t. I don’t know about most Indians here (maybe they would like to enlighten) but I have spent my entire life in India. I have only gone abroad on vacation. There is no Pakistani equivalent here.

And that is telling.

India is better than Pakistan on all socioeconomic metrics. And I can link charts, data etc here but real world examples like this are more telling.

Sujatha Gidla, a Dalit was able to get education in some of India’s best educational institutions and make it to the United States where she could write a book in English. Unlike in Pakistan, one need not be a descendant of “doctors and lawyers” to be able to go down that path.

Again, I am not denying the existence of discrimination against Dalits (or for that matter Muslims) in India.

But the fact that Dalits (and Muslims) have dissenting voices as well as a visible presence in India speaks for India’s relative egalitarianism vis a vis Pakistan.

In fact, I would say caste is even more pervasive in Pakistan than India due to the complete denial by the privileged castes (as we can see here) and the complete invisibility of it. Kabir has multiple times spoken of his Iranian ancestry as well as EK of his Kashmiri Brahmin ancestry so they are very much “Ashrafs” speaking about “Ajlafs” and “Arzals”.

Poetry by Iqbal is fine and dandy but that doesn’t change the reality on the ground.

All those Muslims exist on the Indian side too where they receive affirmative action (as they should). What is called as “biradiri” is basically “caste”.

Kabir did make this comment about “proper Muslims”.

Proper Muslims (Arabs) don’t have caste.

First of all, it is good to see the acceptance by Pakistanis that they are not “proper Muslims”.

Secondly, since they are not “proper Muslims” but “Hindu Muslims” maybe time for them to examine their faults?

Pakistan and North India

Pakistan is more “North Indian” than India. India has a much greater chunk of North India, both by area and population but it has a much bigger non North Indian population which changes the overall nature of India. Pakistan doesn’t so it remains steadfastly North Indian – in culture, language, food etc.

One of the side-effects of this is that Pakistan views India through the North Indian lens.

And while Pakistan is diverse in its own right, Indian diversity is orders of magnitude higher – in terms of race, language, culture, religion etc. India is a continent as a country. You could call it a “subcontinent”.

The nature of diaspora

Now the thing about this diversity is that when people emigrate, it does not happen in a manner similar to Noah’s Ark. The emigrant population demographics are not proportionately the same as the home country’s.

Indians in the Caribbean are from the Eastern UP-Bihar-Bengal region mostly with a smattering of Tamils and Telugus. They still have surnames like “Persad”, “Narine”. In Singapore and Malaysia, they are mostly Tamil (primarily from Dalit/OBC castes) with a few Punjabis. In the UK it is mostly Punjabi and Gujarati (via Africa). Canada is primarily Punjabi but that is changing with the recent waves. The US had a Gujarati wave and now has a Telugu wave fueled by IT.

Again, this is not an Indian thing. Italian Americans are primarily from the poorer South (including Sicily) and not from the richer North. Chinatowns around the world were established by Cantonese speakers, who are a minority amongst the Chinese.

Sampling bias

So when Pakistanis in the diaspora interact with “Indians” they do primarily with North Indians due to shared culture/language. They can bond over their love for Bollywood or Punjabi music. I don’t think they will be able to bond with the Tamil over Vijay Sethupathi movies or the Bengali over Feluda novels.

Also, the emigrant class to the west from North Indian states tend to be more “upper-caste” heavy. And these castes tend to be primarily vegetarian.

So, when a Pakistani interacts with an Indian, they are primarily interacting with North Indian vegetarians.

But to use that to extrapolate to the entirety of India is what is called a “sampling bias” in statistics.

In statistics, sampling bias is a bias in which a sample is collected in such a way that some members of the intended population have a lower or higher sampling probability than others.

If we are speaking of diaspora populations, let us consider the British Pakistani population. The vast majority of “Pakistanis” in the UK are from the Mirpur region.

Now members of this community have been often found involved in child sexual abuse – Rotherham, Oxford etc.

Now if “most” Indians are vegetarian due to selective diaspora experiences, what does that make most Pakistani men?

Even the main Netflix handle (not Netflix India, but the one based in the US) has been openly promoting the release.

A lot of Pakistanis were not pleased with this and started complaining.

Pakistani journalist Mahwash Ajaz had this to say.

Astounding that this anti-Pakistan drivel gets to be posted & promoted on Netflix but Pakistani dramas are banned by India & won’t get a place there because Urdu content on Netflix comes under direct Indian purview.

This actually reminded of similar conversations that happened around the release of the first film.

Pakistani filmmaker Faisal Rafi had this to say then.

10 years ago a few collaborators and I set out to make a film about the Lyari gangsters and drug mafia, couldn’t raise a Rs locally because a film 80% in Balochi won’t sell, approached Netflix who said Pakistani content not needed, the Twitter page is from 10 years ago too

Now the question to ask is why does Netflix, an American company cater so much to India but completely ignores Pakistan? Netflix has been pumping millions into India in the last decade for original content, both movies and shows (as well as comedy specials) but the first Pakistani Netflix original is still not here.

Two things.

Firstly, the market. India has 12+ million active users compared to Pakistan’s 300,000-400,000. That is a 30-40x difference. Also India’s subscription fees are twice as much which makes the differential even wider. No wonder Netflix caters to the Indian market.

Secondly, quality. Pakistani media isn’t great. While it might be good by “saas-bahu” standards, Netflix does have a minimum quality standard regarding scripts, acting, cinematography etc. Pakistan with its smaller less mature industry is not able to meet these standards.

Post Dhurandhar, Pakistan was about to release a “counter” to it, focusing on a more “positive” image of Lyari. It was called Mera Lyari and released recently. It sold just 22 tickets on its opening day and had to be pulled from theatres. It currently has a 2.7/10 rating on IMDB. Even Pakistanis don’t want to watch Pakistani movies.

This market asymmetry can be seen in many other places. Duolingo has Hindi, Tamil, Telugu and Bengali (shown under the Indian flag not Bangladesh’s) but not Urdu. Websites like IMDB have a Hindi language option but not Urdu.

Cricket is another field where there is such asymmetry which pricks Pakistanis.

Pakistanis often complain about:

• India getting ICC tournament hosting rights quite regularly while Pakistan has hosted only one in the last 30 years (and they couldn’t even host the final)
• India getting to play 5 match test series vs England and Australia every year while Pakistan have been reduced to a 2-3 series team
• The IPL getting a dedicated two and a half month window when international cricket is brought to a halt

And the reason for that is the same – the market size and quality.

It is more profitable to cater to India. A lot of teams’ entire revenue model is centered on hosting India as much as possible. Also India provides high quality cricket. Pakistan is not on the same level anymore.

Recently Cricinfo started a series on the greatest twenty five cricketers of the 21st century. They have revealed fifteen in which there are four Indians (Ashwin, Sehwag, Bumrah, Dhoni) and zero Pakistanis. I assume the top ten will have two Indians (Sachin, Kohli) and zero Pakistanis. 

There have been a few angry Pakistani voices crying about “Indian bias” but when prodded, even the Pakistanis could not come up with appropriate names. 

The asymmetry exists for a reason.

And considering the ever growing economic gap, things will become even more asymmetrical. 

Social media will remain the last bastion of Pakistanis.

During my vanvaas, apart from enjoying the IPL (on which I will do a post later, maybe after the final) I also watched a decent chunk of the test series. Test cricket has its own flavour of joy, distinct from the more immediate rush of T20 cricket. Its slower and more meandering pace means you can actually put it on the background while tending to other stuff. 

Some thoughts about the series.

Bangladesh has overtaken Pakistan

Bangladesh has been doing economically well over the past few decades and now surpasses Pakistan in most, if not all socioeconomic indicators – higher GDP, higher GDP per capita, higher HDI, lower poverty rate, higher life expectancy, better access to electricity etc.

Diverging HDI between Bangladesh and Pakistan

Diverging GDP pci between Bangladesh and Pakistan

Trend suggest that this gap will grow even more in the future.

Now the thing about these “numbers” are that people who are interested in them will know about them but the average person on the street doesn’t know and/or care. What actually gets their attention is the visible second order effects of these numbers.

The average Pakistani knows that India is better off than them in the present day not because of “HDI” or “GDP per capita” but because of things like the Indian cricket team’s successes (in general and versus Pakistan) or Chandrayaan and the ilk. 

Actual visible tangible things rather than abstract numbers.

And just like for India, Bangladesh’s economic rise has led it to becoming a solid team (even if not as good as India) which defeats Pakistan more often that not.

This, the average Pakistani on the street can see.

Pace is pace, yaar

Pakistani cricket fans’ greatest pride is their fast bowling legacy. Usually the preserve of non subcontinental countries, Pakistan was the subcontinental outlier which relied more on pace than spin. Even when Pakistan cricket’s fortunes turned in the 2000s, especially vis a vis India, Pakistani fans still took solace in their “meat-eating” fast bowlers compared to India’s “vegetarian” medium pacers. Of course, this trend has reversed in the last 15 years or so but I’ll leave that for another post someday.

For most of the subcontinent, especially at home – the road to success was through spinners on slow pitches.

India had the spin quartet for most of the 60s and 70s, then Kumble/Harbhajan for most of the 90s and 00s and for the past decade or so relied on Ashwin/Jadeja (although complemented with a very good pace attack unlike earlier spin attacks).

Sri Lanka had Muralitharan wheeling away for nearly twenty years followed by 10-15 years of Herath holding the fort.

Even Pakistan, for all its fast bowling bluster has resorted to this formula for most of this century. Kaneria in the 2000s (incidentally a Hindu), Ajmal in the earlier part of the 2010s, Yasir Shah in the latter part and currently Noman Ali/Sajid Khan (with the help of some industrial fans).

Bangladesh followed this same formula for test success especially over the past decade which saw them win matches vs Australia, England, Sri Lanka etc. Their talisman through most of this era was Shakib Al Hasan, later complemented by Taijul Islam and Mehidy Hasan Miraz, who were part of the current series win.

The first match of the 2024 whitewash (which was Bangladesh’s first test win over Pakistan) did follow this formula. Slow flat subcontinental pitch where Bangladeshi spinners ran through Pakistan when the pitch started assisting spin later.

To avoid this fate, Pakistan prepared a green top in the second match, expecting to overwhelm Bangladesh with their “better” pacers. But it backfired, because Bangladesh was the one with better pacers.

There was a 21 year old kid who got the limelight with a 4fer, troubling the Pakistani lineup with pace and bounce including their best batsman, Babar Azam. This kid was back in the current series making life difficult for Pakistani batsman again, including taking a 5fer in the first match of the series, derailing the Pakistani chase. He was also lethal in the ODI series played a few months ago, including a match where Pakistan was bundled out for 114. In the recent PSL he was part of the title winning team and was very effective in the matches he played including the final (he left midway for international commitments).

So Pakistani fans in a short period have already seen the devastating effects of a “Bangladeshi” fast bowler. Something they could not have imagined in their worst nightmares.

Introducing Nahid Rana.

Nahid Rana is a 6’5″ tall bowler who bowls at a high pace often touching 150 kph with lethal bounce. Basically the platonic ideal of a fast bowler which Pakistan has been waiting for since the two W’s hung up their boots many decades ago. And he happens to be Bangladeshi.

Also unlike the subcontinental style of fast bowling which relies on getting wickets by bowling straight and getting bowled/LBW wickets, Nahid has more in common with the South African/Australian style (and in their heyday, the West Indians). Nasty short pitched bowling bowled into the body and this is the kind of bowling Pakistani batsmen absolutely hate.

Pakistan are currently on a run of 17 consecutive matches lost in Australia and their record in South Africa in the 21st century isn’t much better (12L1W) and that is mostly due to the complete inability of Pakistani batsmen to play bounce.

Even more modest bowlers with this style have run through Pakistani batsmen including Hardik Pandya and Andre Russell.

To make matters worse, the Pakistani bowlers were barely able to muster any pace, huffing and puffing at 130kph before ending the day at 120kph. They had become the bhaagte huye spinners they used to mock.

First match – Low speeds of the Pakistani pacers

Second match – Fastest Pakistani still slower than the slowest Bangladeshi

CricInfo has carried an article showing how Pakistani pacers are the second worst in the world, only ahead of Ireland who barely play tests.

While the general decline of Pakistani cricket must be hurtful to their fans, the decline in pace bowling stocks adds a bit more salt.

The Hindu angle

Another commonality between the two test series was that both of the second matches had the same Bangladesh batsman as the man of the match, who had similar rescue efforts in both games.

In the 2nd match of the 2024 series, Bangladesh were reduced to 26-6 in reply to Pakistan’s 274. Batting with the tail, this batsman scored 138 to get Bangladesh to 262, cutting the first innings deficit to only 12.

In the 2nd match of the current series, Bangladesh were 116-6 in the first innings after which this batsman with the help of the tail got Bangladesh to 278. He also hit a quick 69 in the second innings.

He is a Hindu – Litton Kumar Das.

Rawalpindi, 2024

Sylhet, 2026

While any defeat to India or Bangladesh might be galling for Pakistani fans due to historical reasons (add Afghanistan to this mix too now), when the cause of that defeat is by an Indian Muslim or a Bangladeshi Hindu, it hurts a bit more. Indian Muslims whose culture they appropriate and whose existence dilutes their “inheritance”. Bangladeshi Hindus who were once “Pakistani Hindus” and who faced disproportionate violence during 1971.

Brothers Irfan and Yusuf were part of the team that defeated Pakistan in the inaugural T20 World Cup final. Irfan was man of the match and also had seminal contributions in 2004 when India defeated Pakistan away from home for the first time in both ODIs and tests.

A new reality

For an “upset” or “fluke” to happen in cricket where a weaker team defeats a stronger team, it often depends on the format.

T20 being the shortest is often the most upset-friendly as one good short performance can flip the game (the current Indian team’s dominance in this most volatile of formats speaks to its excellence).

ODIs less common but they still do happen – India and Pakistan’s exits at the hands of Bangladesh and Ireland in the 2007 World Cup being the most famous.

Tests it is very difficult because you need to sustain excellence across five whole days. Weaker teams often win a session here and there but stronger teams generally make a comeback and win.

Winning a test is hard enough for a weaker team. Winning a series whitewashing the opponent is even harder. Winning two series whitewashes over two years and in two countries is pure dominance.

The uncomfortable truth for Pakistani cricket fans is that Pakistan is the “weaker” team now.

While the first series win was genuinely an upset with fans being shocked by it, the second one had fans/analysts conceding it would be very even with Bangladesh starting as favourites. And the ensuing results validate those predictions.

A growing realization has now dawned in Pakistani cricketing circles that the current state of things might no longer be a momentary “bump” before revival, but a more permanent decline.

I have often commented on how India, the country they separated from, doing well and peeling away from them would lead to self-reflection amongst Pakistanis and a subsequent re-calibration regarding their priorities. Would Bangladesh, the country that separated from them doing the same accelerate this process?

Because as it stands, Pakistan is very much in danger of becoming the Randhir Kapoor of the subcontinent. 

Before my self-imposed exile X.T.M said something which I have pondered upon during my time away.

Pakistan has anyway lost to India alas; thus the Pakistanis have to constantly deprecate India and everything she stands for.

I don’t need to be getting into mud fights in the comments sections writing essays.

The victor doesn’t need to proclaim his victory. The defeated know.

And as the winner, I possess an asymmetric array of “tools” to do my “Dhurandharing”. Far more civil and high-signal and in a way, more wounding.

Of course, that does not mean I won’t participate in the comments, but it will be in a more “support” role. There are many Dhurandhars here with some springing up in my absence so I need not play as active a role.

I have also changed my profile picture to reflect that change. While my earlier picture was from when Hamza was actively involved in street fights, my current one is from the later part of the movie where he takes a bit of a back seat to co-ordinate other guys. Of course just like in the movie, I won’t hesitate to personally participate if necessary.

Just some general thoughts about India-Pakistan pop culture and future trends.

There were some comments in the recent discussions that caught my eye. One was about Pakistanis no longer using memes from recent Indian movies as well as another about Indian soaps being cheesy and badly made. Both are opinions I broadly agree with but there is a certain element that is being missed in such discussions.

Maybe due to the age of the commenters or maybe due to Pakistan not having equivalents, one thing was completely skipped: the rise of Indian streaming.

Due to rising incomes and internet penetration/quality, there has been a deluge of streaming platforms and shows all across India. These include American platforms like Netflix and Amazon Prime as well as dozens of local Indian platforms – JioHotstar, Zee5, SonyLiv etc. Quality of these shows vary, as with everything but freed from the restrictions of TV censorship laws, these shows on an average do tend to be more transgressive and experimental, tackling topics/themes which would simply not find a place in normal cable TV. Also because these are usually seasons of a few episodes rather than a “daily” soap, they tend to be technically of a higher quality. The discerning urban/elite Indian demographic with access to American/global pop culture are the primary audience of these shows.

In a way, memes from these shows are now far more commonplace than memes from movies. And I have seen Pakistanis use these memes along with the memes from older 00s movies (mostly Akshay Khanna comedies). Tbf, even Indians don’t particularly use memes from modern movies. The Pakistani internet does seem to be influenced by the larger Indian internet, adopting trends wholesale (I even saw a Babar Azam edit with music from the second Dhurandhar movie).

As far as Pakistani dramas are concerned, I haven’t watched any nor do I know anyone in my circle who has (and there is a big north Indian contingent). From whatever clips I have seen and what I have heard about them, I assume they are slightly more polished versions of the Indian saas-bahu serial. So I wouldn’t be surprised if there is a niche for Pakistani dramas amongst the peoples who watch said saas-bahu serials in India. As mentioned above, the more urban/elite class tend to prefer the more “sophisticated” fare on streaming or American/Korean/international shows and don’t particularly care about such daily soaps. 

But this leads to an interesting observation. As India becomes richer and liberalizes further, the “desi” values which act as a common thread between both groups of people change. We have seen many disagreements in the comments section of this very site between Indians (living in India) and Pakistanis (living abroad) about liberal values – especially ones regarding female autonomy and the role of religion.

We can also see it in cricket where the Indian cricketers have started to become more like “global” athletes with their tattoos and their model/actress wives/girlfriends. Pakistani cricketers meanwhile very much feel like “good boys” and even the desi swag of Akram/Akhtar has been expunged by the Inzamam tableeghi era.

This could mean that the demographic for Pakistani dramas in India shrink as people get more liberal/”westernized”. Not because the dramas are objectively bad, but simply because the themes/topics will not be topical anymore. I have mentioned about Joyland before so let me elaborate my experience with it further. After it got banned in Pakistan, I was very eager to watch it as I was expecting it to be this transgressive edgy piece of work. I was disappointed to see that it was a very slow, completely inoffensive drama, hardly befitting a ban. Technically it was good but I found the core “halka”. Transgressive in a Pakistani context is not transgressive in an Indian context. Sacred Games way back in 2016 actually had a trans character fully topless with a prosthetic penis attached. And Sacred Games isn’t even particularly some “art” show. It is very much a more refined take on Masala Bollywood with extra violence and sex. As an aside, that actress was a cis Muslim woman – Kubbra Sait, affirming a comment I made about how much Muslims can express themselves in India vis a vis Pakistan, especially women.

But then the reverse is also true. Indian content becoming more violent, more sexualized, more “westernized” and more “ideological” will turn off the more conservative Pakistani masses. If Pakistanis are unable to tolerate the “poison of feminism” in Pakistani dramas (which I would assume is very milquetoast or “halka” feminism to be even made in the first place) then I don’t think they will be able to handle Indian shows which push the envelop even further.

A glance at the Netflix statistics for Pakistan shows Indian content prevalent in both movies and shows. 

One can see the much hated Dhurandhar still in the top 10

But then again Netflix is very much the preserve of the elite in Pakistan and hasn’t really penetrated as far as it has in India (which has a 40-100x subscriber difference). So there is a desire for Indian streaming content amongst the Pakistani elite. And it makes sense – they get very well crafted “desi” narratives which push the envelop and appeal to their sensibilities far more compared to the toned down “over-the-top/cheesy” stuff made for the masses.

But then I don’t see the appeal of Made in Heaven or Animal amongst the general Pakistani masses.

So Indian shows/movies in Pakistan in the coming years might transform from “norm” to “niche”. Pakistani shows in India might transform from “niche” to “nothing”.

Rather than aim this post at a specific country or an individual, I would like to give some general thoughts regarding this.

Firstly, what is a leftist? This is the Wikipedia definition.

Left-wing politics or leftism is the range of political ideologies that support and seek to achieve social equality and egalitarianism, often in opposition to social hierarchy either as a whole

So you can say that democracy is a very leftist idea as it achieves a semblance of “social equality”. No matter how rich or poor you are, no matter your gender/race/caste/creed, you get one vote which counts the same as everyone else’s.

Similarly equal rights for all is also a very leftist idea as it aims for “social equality”. Of course, in real life it is not so clear cut because certain groups do have advantages over other groups due to historical reasons. But having equal rights “on paper” is at least a start towards leftist utopia. If you don’t have that at all, then equality is a non starter.

So you cannot be a leftist if you:

• Support the dismantling of democracy by dictatorships – whether it is the military kind in Myanmar, North Korea, Pakistan etc or the Islamic kind in Iran etc
• Support unequal rights for citizens – whether it is restrictions on women in Iran or minorities/Ahmadis in Pakistan etc

Now there are many people who fall into two categories (and some of the commentariat on here also falls into one of these two categories)

1. Support illiberal policies in your own home country while support liberal politics in some other country – Mamdani in the USA, Rahul Gandhi in India etc.
2. Live in a liberal first world Western country while supporting illiberal policies both in your homeland as well as other countries.

Now the thing is, I won’t say that this is “wrong”. This self-serving behaviour is very much human nature. Rather than adhere to any lofty ideal, each step is basically taken to maximize personal benefit. So when you are in the majority, support majoritarian policies which benefit you and won’t harm you. When in the minority, support progressive liberal politics to safeguard your rights.

To be a “true” leftist is actually very admirable, especially if you come from a privileged background because it means incurring personal loss for the greater good. One could always argue that in the larger scheme of things, there is a gain because having your share of the pie becoming smaller is compensated by the pie getting a whole lot bigger (ideally). But it still requires you to give up benefits for your ideals.

Now,  you can always support illiberal policies which don’t really affect you while labeling yourself as a “leftist” for a sense of smug self-satisfaction. That is fine, you are free to do what you want. But do not expect the rest of the world to see you that way.

Like in The Emperor’s New Clothes – you might imagine yourself decked out in the finest livery but the world sees you for what you really are – naked.

Opened it a day in advance for discussions.

Modi at Haifa, Israel paying tribute to the Indian soldiers who died during the Battle of Haifa

Bharat Mata Ki Ja and the Holy Land join together to shine light on the World. Hurrah.. Both Israel & India house extensive Bahá’í buildings, apparently the most visited Monument in New Delhi is the Lotus Temple. Nowhere else in the Muslim world does the Bahá’í Faith have Sites of Worship (Pakistan has been very good to Bahá’ís but terrible to the Ahmadis).

Apologies for the Hijacking but back to the Badshah of Balochistan, our very own Humza.

In my previous post about India being the successor state to the Mughal Empire, I mentioned how India was also the successor state to hundreds of other polities which existed across many millennia. British India is one such polity which I will discuss today.

Note: As before, when I use India below I mean the current day Republic of India, not the region of “India” which also encompasses some territories of the modern day states of Bangladesh and Pakistan

The Inheritance

Unlike the previous post, I won’t give as detailed a picture because in the modern age the definition of “successor state” is very well defined.

Some examples of succession in the modern period are the Russian Federation taking over from the USSR in 1991 and the French Fifth Republic taking over from the French Fourth Republic in 1958. Both of them got their predecessor’s UN seats as well as the permanent Security Council spot.

The United Nations

Since we are talking of the United Nations, let us begin with that.

India is a founding member of the United Nations, signing the UN Charter on June 26, 1945, and formally joining on October 30, 1945.

Sir Arcot Ramasamy Mudaliar led the Indian delegation and signed the United Nations Charter on June 26, 1945, in San Francisco, United States

Now I am attaching a 1962 memorandum prepared by the United Nations Secretariat regarding the “Succession of States in relation to Membership in the United Nations“. It references the partition of 1947.

Here is the link. I am going to quote verbatim.

From the viewpoint of international law, the
situation is one in which a part of an existing
State breaks off and becomes a new State. On this
analysis, there is no change in the international status
of India; it continues as a State with all the treaty
rights and obligations, and consequently, with all
the rights and obligations of membership in the United
Nations. The territory which breaks off, Pakistan,
will be a new State; it will not have the treaty rights
and obligations of the old State, and it will not, of
course, have membership in the United Nations.

In international law, the situation is analogous
to the separation of the Irish Free State from
Great Britain, and of Belgium from the Netherlands.
In these cases, the portion which separated was considered
a new State; the remaining portion continued
as an existing State with all the rights and duties
which it had before.

Pakistan became a member of the UN on September 30, 1947.

Similarly when Bangladesh separated from Pakistan as Pakistan had once from India, it had to apply for membership. It became a member on September 17, 1974.

The Capital

British India had two capitals – Calcutta and Delhi. Both went to India.

The Parliament building at the time of independence in 1947 continued to be used as the Parliament of India until 2023.

Many of the official buildings of British India were converted to their Indian equivalents upon independence.

Rashtrapati Bhavan, Delhi – Residence of the President of India. Formerly the Viceroy’s Residence.

Old Parliament House, Delhi – Was the parliament building of India from 1947 to 2023. Previously was the legislature of British India (Imperial Legislative Council) from 1927 to 1947.

Old Secretariat, Delhi – Currently the legislative assembly of Delhi. Previously was the legislature of British India from 1912 to 1927 (until the Parliament House was constructed).

Raj Bhavan, Kolkata – Residence of the Governor of West Bengal. Formerly the Viceroy’s Residence when the capital was in Calcutta. Also was the legislature of British India until the capital shifted to Delhi. 

Pakistan got a new capital at Karachi in 1947 and then shifted it to Islamabad in 1967.

Bangladesh got its capital in Dhaka in 1971.

The Memorials

Apart from the official government buildings, India also inherited other important memorials of British India.

I will just focus on one here (will elaborate more below).

India Gate, formerly known as the All India War Memorial was constructed as a memorial for the soldiers who fought for British India.

The Indian Army, also called the British Indian Army, was involved in World War I. More than one million Indian troops served overseas, of whom more than 60,000 died during the war. They mostly served in North Africa and Mesopotamia against the Ottomans (My own great grandfather was a doctor there).

India Gate, Delhi

Cricket

As desis we can’t ignore cricket.

India played its first match vs England at Lord’s, London on June 25, 1932.

India’s first test match at Lord’s, June 25-28, 1932

On partition, India inherited this team and the current Indian team’s all time records include the pre-partition records.

Pakistan got a new team and played their first match vs India at the Feroz Shah Kotla Ground, Delhi on October 16, 1952.

Bangladesh similarly got a new team on independence but had to wait longer to play international cricket. They played their first match vs Pakistan at Tyronne Fernando Stadium, Moratuwa on March 31, 1986.

The Olympics

British India first participated in the Olympics in 1900 when Norman Pritchard won two silver medals (Englishman but was born and raised in Calcutta).

The Indian Olympic Association was formed in 1927, and since that year was officially recognized by the International Olympic Committee as India’s national Olympic organization.

Upon independence, India inherited British India’s Olympic records as well as the IOA.

This included a hat trick of gold medals in field hockey led by Dhyan Chand. The last of these was at the 1936 Berlin Olympics where India defeated Germany in the final.

India vs Germany, Field Hockey final, 1936 Olympics

Pakistan Olympic Association was formed in 1948 and they participated for the first time in the 1948 London games. 

Bangladesh Olympic Association was formed in 1979 and they participated for the first time in the 1984 Los Angeles games.

Modern Legitimacy

I mentioned the India Gate earlier and how British India fought in the World Wars.

On 12 February 2025, on his France visit, Modi along with Macron visited the Mazargues War Cemetery in Marseille.

This is what Macron had to say.

More than 100,000 Indians fought for France in 1914. Ten thousand never returned. They set foot on the soil of Marseille before fighting in the mud of the trenches, unaware that they were marching to their deaths.

Their sacrifice binds France and India forever.

Other countries recognize India as the inheritor of British India.

And like I said in the Mughal Empire post, only India is the one even “claiming” this inheritance by visiting these sites – similar to the Babur and Bahadur Shah Zafar graves.

Modi at the Heliopolis War Memorial, Cairo, Egypt dedicated to Indian soldiers who died in Egypt in the First World War

The “Independent” Argument

People might claim that British India was never an independent sovereign nation. I never said it was. But it was very much a distinct polity, separate from other similar polities like British Australia or British Kenya.

Here is what else is said in the UN memorandum I linked above regarding this.

Apart from the question of separation, the Independence Act has effected a basic constitutional change in India. The existing State of India has become a Dominion, and consequently, has a new status in the British Commonwealth of Nations, independence in external affairs, and a new form of government. It is clear, however, that this basic constitutional change does not affect the international personality of India, or its status in the United Nations.

The closest modern day analogy would be Hong Kong. Like India it used to be a part of the British Empire. Unlike India, it never got independent and has now passed over to China. But throughout its existence it has always been a separate polity with its own distinct currency, passport, flag etc.

Indians never used the pound or voted in elections for representatives in London. They had their own separate versions. 

Interestingly, the Indian currency was issued by the Reserve Bank of India (established in 1935), another institute that India inherited.

Pakistan created the State Bank of Pakistan in 1948. Bangladesh created the Bangladesh Bank in 1972.

100 Rupee note with the face of King George VI

British Indian Passport

Conclusion

Similar to last time I’d like to conclude with an image transforming modern day figures to their historical counterparts.

So may I present Viceroy Narendra Damodardas Modi with a few of the rulers of the princely states – Maharaja Omar Abdullah of Jammu and Kashmir, Nizam Revanth Reddy of Hyderabad and Maharaja Bhajan Lal Sharma of Jodhpur.