Podcasts about british india

This week we talk about British India, Kashmir, and water treaties.We also discuss the global order, sovereignty, and tit-for-tat escalation.Recommended Book: Power Metal by Vince BeiserTranscriptWhen then British India was partitioned by the British in 1947, the country carved up by its colonialist rulers into two new countries, one Hindu majority, the Union of India, and one Muslim majority, the Dominion of Pakistan, the intention was to separate two religious groups that were increasingly at violent odds with each other, within a historical context in which Muslims were worried they would be elbowed out of power by the Hindu-majority, at a moment in which carving up countries into new nations was considered to be a solution to many such problems.The partition didn't go terribly well by most measures, as the geographic divisions weren't super well thought out, tens of millions of people had to scramble to upend their entire lives to move to their new, faith-designated homelands, and things like infrastructure and wealth were far from evenly distributed between the two new regions.Pakistan was also a nation literally divided by India, part of its landmass on the other side of what was now another country, and its smaller landmass eventually separated into yet another country following Bangladesh's violent but successful secession from Pakistan in 1971.There was a lot more to that process, of course, and the reverberations of that decision are still being felt today, in politics, in the distribution of land and assets, and in regional and global conflict.But one affected region, Kashmir, has been more of a flashpoint for problems than most of the rest of formerly British India, in part because of where it's located, and in part because of happenings not long after the partition.Formerly Jammu and Kashmir, the Kashmir region, today, is carved up between India, Pakistan, and China. India controls a little over half of its total area, which houses 70% of the region's population, while Pakistan controls a little less than a third of its land mass, and China controls about 15%.What was then Jammu and Kashmir dragged its feet in deciding which side of the partition to join when the countries were being separated, the leader Hindu, though ruling over a Muslim state, but an invasion from the Pakistan side saw it cast its lot in with India. India's counter-invasion led to the beginning of what became known as both the Indo-Pakistani war of 1947-1948, the first of four such wars, but is also sometimes called the first Kashmir war, the first of three, though there have been several other not-officially-a-war conflicts in and over the region, as well.Things only got more complicated over the next several decades; China seized the eastern part of the region in the 1950s, and while some Kashmiris have demanded independence, both India and Pakistan claim the region as totally their own, and point at historical markers that support their claim—some such markers based on fact, some on speculation or self-serving interpretations of history.What I'd like to talk about today is what looks to be a new, potentially serious buildup around Kashmir, following an attack at a popular tourist hotspot in the territory, and why some analysts are especially concerned about what India's government will decide to do, next.—Early in the afternoon of April 22, 2025, a group of tourists sightseeing in a town in the southern part of Kashmir called Pahalgam were open-fired on by militants. 26 people were killed and another 17 were injured, marking one of the worst attacks on mostly Indian civilians in decades.In 2019, Kashmir's semiautonomous governance was revoked by the Indian government, which in practice meant the Indian government took more complete control over the region, clamping down on certain freedoms and enabling more immigration of Indians into otherwise fairly Muslim-heavy Kashmir.It's also become more of a tourist destination since then, as India has moved more soldiers in to patrol Indian Kashmir's border with Pakistan Kashmir, and the nature of the landmass makes it a bit of a retreat from climate extremes; at times it's 30 or 40 degrees cooler, in Fahrenheit, than in New Delhi, so spendy people from the city bring their money to Kashmir to cool off, while also enjoying the natural settings of this less-developed, less-industrialized area.Reports from survivors indicate that the attackers took their time and seemed very confident, and that no Indian security forces were anywhere nearby; they walked person to person, asking them if they were Muslim and executing those who were not. Around 7,000 people were visiting the area as tourists before the attack, but most of them have now left, and it's unclear what kind of financial hit this will have on the region, but in the short-term it's expected to be pretty bad.In the wake of this attack, the Indian government claimed that it has identified two of the three suspected militants as Pakistani, but Pakistan has denied any involvement, and has called for a neutral probe into the matter, saying that it's willing to fully cooperate, seeks only peace and stability, and wants to see justice served.A previously unknown group calling itself the Kashmir Resistance has claimed responsibility for the attack, and Indian security forces have demolished the homes of at least five suspected militants in Kashmir in response, including one who they believe participated in this specific attack.The two governments have launched oppositional measures against each other, including Pakistan closing its airspace to Indian airlines and shutting down trade with its neighbor, and India shutting down a vital land crossing, revoking Pakistani visas, and suspending a 1960 treaty that regulates water-sharing along the Indus River and its tributaries—something that it's threatened to do, previously, and which could devastate Pakistan's agricultural sector and economy, as it basically regulates water that the country relies on for both human consumption and most of its crop irrigation; and for context, Pakistan's agricultural sector accounts for about a forth of its economy.So if India blocks this water source, Pakistan would be in a very bad situation, and the Pakistani government has said that any blockage of water by India would be considered an act of war. Over the past week, a Pakistani official accused the Indian government of suddenly releasing a large volume of water from a dam into a vital river, which made flooding in parts of Pakistan-held Kashmir a real possibility, but as of the day I'm recording this they haven't closed the taps, as Pakistan has worried.For its part, India wouldn't really suffer from walking away from this treaty, as it mostly favors Pakistan. It serves to help keep the peace along an at times chaotic border, but beyond that, it does very little for India, directly.So historically, the main purpose of maintaining this treaty, for India, has been related to its reputation: if it walked away from it, it would probably suffer a reputational hit with the international community, as it would be a pretty flagrantly self-serving move that only really served to harm Pakistan, its weaker arch-nemesis.Right now, though, geopolitics are scrambled to such a degree that there are concerns India might not only be wanting to make such moves, whatever the consequences, but it may also be hankering for a larger conflict—looking to sort out long-term issues during a period in which such sorting, such conflict, may cause less reputational damage than might otherwise be the case.Consider that the US government has spoken openly about wanting to take, by whatever means, Greenland, from the Danish, a long-time ally, and that it's maybe jokingly, but still alarmingly, said that Canada should join the US as the 51st state.These statements are almost certainly just braggadocio, but that the highest-rung people in the most powerful government on the planet would say such things publicly speaks volumes about the Wild West nature of today's global order.Many leaders seem to be acting like this is a moment in which the prior paradigm, and the post-WWII rules that moderated global behavior within that paradigm, are fraying or disappearing, the global police force represented by the US and its allies pulling inward, not caring, and in some cases even becoming something like bandits, grabbing what they can.Under such circumstances, if you're in a position of relative power that you couldn't fully leverage previously, for fear of upsetting that global police force and tarnishing your reputation within that system they maintained, might you leverage it while you can, taking whatever you can grab and weakening your worst perceived enemy, at a moment in which it seems like the getting is good?It's been argued that Russia's violation of Ukraine's sovereignty may have helped kick-off this new paradigm, but Israel's behavior in Gaza, the West Bank, and increasingly Syria, as well, are arguably even better examples of this changing dynamic.While the Democrats and Joe Biden were in the White House, Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu seemed to be mostly playing ball, at least superficially, even when he very clearly wasn't—he did what he could to seem to be toeing rules-based-order lines, even when regularly stepping over them, especially in Gaza.But now, post-Trump's return to office, that line-toeing has almost entirely disappeared, and the Israeli government seems to be grabbing whatever they can, including large chunks of southwestern Syria, which was exposed by the fall of the Assad regime. The Israeli military launched a full aerial campaign against the Syrian army's infrastructure, declared a 1974 disengagement agreement with Syria to be void, and though it initially said it would hold the territory it has taken temporarily, it has more recently said it would hold it indefinitely—possibly permanently expanding its country's land mass at the expense of its neighbor, another sovereign nation, at a moment in which it felt it could get away with doing so.It's not clear that India has any ambitions on Pakistani territory, beyond what it holds in Kashmir, at least, but there's a chance it sees this moment the same way the Israeli government does: as a perhaps finite moment during which the previous state of things, the global rules-based-order, no longer applies, or doesn't apply as much, which suggests it could do some serious damage to its long-time rival and not suffer the consequences it would have, reputationally or otherwise, even half a year ago.And India's leader, Narendra Modi, is in some ways even better positioned than Israel's Netanyahu to launch such a campaign, in part because India is in such a favorable geopolitical position right now. As the US changes stance, largely away from Europe and opposing Russia and its allies, toward more fully sidling up to China in the Pacific, India represents a potential counterweight against Chinese influence in the region, where it has successfully made many of its neighbors reliant on its trade, markets, and other resources.Modi has reliably struck stances midway between US and Chinese spheres of influences, allowing it to do business with Russia, buying up a lot of cheap fuel that many other nations won't touch for fear of violating sanctions, while also doing business with the US, benefitting from a slew of manufacturers who are leaving China to try to avoid increasingly hefty US tariffs.If India were to spark a more concentrated conflict with Pakistan, then, perhaps aiming to hobble its economy, its military, and its capacity to sponsor proxies along its border with India, which periodically launch attacks, including in Kashmir—that might be something that's not just tolerated, but maybe even celebrated by entities like China and the US, because both want to continue doing their own destabilizing of their own perceived rivals, but also because both would prefer to have India on their side in future great power disagreements, and in any potential future large-scale future conflict.India is richer and more powerful than Pakistan in pretty much every way, but in addition to Pakistan's decently well-developed military apparatus, like India, it has nukes. So while there's a chance this could become a more conventional tit-for-tat, leading to limited scuffles and some artillery strikes on mostly military installations across their respective borders, there's always the potential for misunderstandings, missteps, and tit-for-tat escalations that could push the region into a nuclear conflict, which would be absolutely devastating in terms of human life, as this is one of the most densely populated parts of the world, but could also pull in neighbors and allies, while also making the use of nuclear weapons thinkable by others once more, after a long period of that fortunately not being the case.Show Noteshttps://www.france24.com/en/asia-pacific/20250427-indian-pakistani-troops-exchange-fire-for-third-night-in-disputed-kashmirhttps://www.france24.com/en/live-news/20250422-at-least-24-killed-in-kashmir-attack-on-tourists-indian-police-sourcehttps://www.france24.com/en/asia-pacific/20250424-india-will-identify-track-and-punish-kashmir-attack-perpetrators-modi-sayshttps://www.nytimes.com/2025/04/27/world/asia/india-pakistan-kashmir.htmlhttps://archive.is/20250426143222/https://www.reuters.com/world/india/india-pakistan-exchange-gunfire-2nd-day-ties-plummet-after-attack-2025-04-26/https://www.nytimes.com/2025/04/24/world/asia/india-pakistan-indus-waters-treaty.htmlhttps://www.nytimes.com/2025/04/23/world/asia/kashmir-pahalgam-attack-victims.htmlhttps://apnews.com/article/india-pakistan-kashmir-attack-829911d3eae7cfe6738eda5c0c84d6aehttps://www.bbc.com/news/world-south-asia-11693674https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Partition_of_Indiahttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kashmirhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kashmir_conflicthttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indo-Pakistani_war_of_1947%E2%80%931948 This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit letsknowthings.substack.com/subscribe

Welcome to the Global Corporations Special Series on the Law Channel on the New Books Network. This Special Series is dedicated to interviews with scholars about recent books engaging with different aspects of global corporations – with a focus on the role of law and legal forms. Our guest today is Professor Philip J. Stern, Professor of History at the History Department at Duke University. Philip is a historian of the British Empire, with an interest in the role of companies and corporations in colonial enterprise, overseas exploration and cartography, the historiography of British India, early modern economic thought, and digital and data visualization approaches to the problem of colonial sovereignty. We spoke with Philip in a live event as part of a workshop in Hong Kong on the history of companies in Asia about his most recent book, Empire, Incorporated: The Corporations That Built British Colonialism (Harvard University Press, 2023). The book places corporations at the centre of the story of the British Empire. It is both a masterful synthesis of a vast body of existing historiographical literature and an incredibly original contribution describing the various corporations engaged in the interrelated and competing projects of what it terms as “corporate or venture colonialism” and their long afterlives of entangled sovereign and commercial powers. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/new-books-network

Welcome to the Global Corporations Special Series on the Law Channel on the New Books Network. This Special Series is dedicated to interviews with scholars about recent books engaging with different aspects of global corporations – with a focus on the role of law and legal forms. Our guest today is Professor Philip J. Stern, Professor of History at the History Department at Duke University. Philip is a historian of the British Empire, with an interest in the role of companies and corporations in colonial enterprise, overseas exploration and cartography, the historiography of British India, early modern economic thought, and digital and data visualization approaches to the problem of colonial sovereignty. We spoke with Philip in a live event as part of a workshop in Hong Kong on the history of companies in Asia about his most recent book, Empire, Incorporated: The Corporations That Built British Colonialism (Harvard University Press, 2023). The book places corporations at the centre of the story of the British Empire. It is both a masterful synthesis of a vast body of existing historiographical literature and an incredibly original contribution describing the various corporations engaged in the interrelated and competing projects of what it terms as “corporate or venture colonialism” and their long afterlives of entangled sovereign and commercial powers. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Welcome to the Global Corporations Special Series on the Law Channel on the New Books Network. This Special Series is dedicated to interviews with scholars about recent books engaging with different aspects of global corporations – with a focus on the role of law and legal forms. Our guest today is Professor Philip J. Stern, Professor of History at the History Department at Duke University. Philip is a historian of the British Empire, with an interest in the role of companies and corporations in colonial enterprise, overseas exploration and cartography, the historiography of British India, early modern economic thought, and digital and data visualization approaches to the problem of colonial sovereignty. We spoke with Philip in a live event as part of a workshop in Hong Kong on the history of companies in Asia about his most recent book, Empire, Incorporated: The Corporations That Built British Colonialism (Harvard University Press, 2023). The book places corporations at the centre of the story of the British Empire. It is both a masterful synthesis of a vast body of existing historiographical literature and an incredibly original contribution describing the various corporations engaged in the interrelated and competing projects of what it terms as “corporate or venture colonialism” and their long afterlives of entangled sovereign and commercial powers. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/south-asian-studies

Welcome to the Global Corporations Special Series on the Law Channel on the New Books Network. This Special Series is dedicated to interviews with scholars about recent books engaging with different aspects of global corporations – with a focus on the role of law and legal forms. Our guest today is Professor Philip J. Stern, Professor of History at the History Department at Duke University. Philip is a historian of the British Empire, with an interest in the role of companies and corporations in colonial enterprise, overseas exploration and cartography, the historiography of British India, early modern economic thought, and digital and data visualization approaches to the problem of colonial sovereignty. We spoke with Philip in a live event as part of a workshop in Hong Kong on the history of companies in Asia about his most recent book, Empire, Incorporated: The Corporations That Built British Colonialism (Harvard University Press, 2023). The book places corporations at the centre of the story of the British Empire. It is both a masterful synthesis of a vast body of existing historiographical literature and an incredibly original contribution describing the various corporations engaged in the interrelated and competing projects of what it terms as “corporate or venture colonialism” and their long afterlives of entangled sovereign and commercial powers. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/law

Welcome to the Global Corporations Special Series on the Law Channel on the New Books Network. This Special Series is dedicated to interviews with scholars about recent books engaging with different aspects of global corporations – with a focus on the role of law and legal forms. Our guest today is Professor Philip J. Stern, Professor of History at the History Department at Duke University. Philip is a historian of the British Empire, with an interest in the role of companies and corporations in colonial enterprise, overseas exploration and cartography, the historiography of British India, early modern economic thought, and digital and data visualization approaches to the problem of colonial sovereignty. We spoke with Philip in a live event as part of a workshop in Hong Kong on the history of companies in Asia about his most recent book, Empire, Incorporated: The Corporations That Built British Colonialism (Harvard University Press, 2023). The book places corporations at the centre of the story of the British Empire. It is both a masterful synthesis of a vast body of existing historiographical literature and an incredibly original contribution describing the various corporations engaged in the interrelated and competing projects of what it terms as “corporate or venture colonialism” and their long afterlives of entangled sovereign and commercial powers. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Welcome to the Global Corporations Special Series on the Law Channel on the New Books Network. This Special Series is dedicated to interviews with scholars about recent books engaging with different aspects of global corporations – with a focus on the role of law and legal forms. Our guest today is Professor Philip J. Stern, Professor of History at the History Department at Duke University. Philip is a historian of the British Empire, with an interest in the role of companies and corporations in colonial enterprise, overseas exploration and cartography, the historiography of British India, early modern economic thought, and digital and data visualization approaches to the problem of colonial sovereignty. We spoke with Philip in a live event as part of a workshop in Hong Kong on the history of companies in Asia about his most recent book, Empire, Incorporated: The Corporations That Built British Colonialism (Harvard University Press, 2023). The book places corporations at the centre of the story of the British Empire. It is both a masterful synthesis of a vast body of existing historiographical literature and an incredibly original contribution describing the various corporations engaged in the interrelated and competing projects of what it terms as “corporate or venture colonialism” and their long afterlives of entangled sovereign and commercial powers. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/british-studies

In today's episode, we're diving into one of the most under-appreciated but fascinating corners of British military history: the Waziristan campaign of 1936–1937. It's a tale of Gurkhas, armoured cars, tribal lashkars, and the infamous Faqir of Ipi—all set against the harsh, unforgiving terrain between British India and Afghanistan.   Jon Pick and I will be talking sniping, ambushes and mountain warfare. You'll hear about heroic stands, and questionable decisions.   And if you enjoy this kind of thing—well then keep in touch and stay up to date with my newsletter by heading over to redcoathistory.com/newsletter and signing upIt's where all the best stories march first. Jon's military book business is excellent and can be found here - https://www.ebay.co.uk/str/yorkmilitarybooks 

When the award-winning actor and playwright Anusree Roy was growing up, her grandmother would tell her stories about the Partition of India in 1947, when British India was divided into the Muslim-majority Pakistan and the Hindu-majority India. Now, decades later, Anusree is performing in a play she wrote about the Partition called “Trident Moon.” It follows nine women and girls over the course of one life-changing night as they try to survive unspeakable danger. Anusree joins Tom Power in our studio to tell us why she wanted the story to feel unsentimental, what history books leave out about the Partition, and why humour serves such a vital role in the play. If you're looking for more conversations about theatre, check out Tom's interviews with playwrights Michael Healey or Larissa FastHorse.

Send me a messageIn this episode I look at "The Man Who Would Be King", a story by Rudyard Kipling and made into a film in 1975 starring Sean Connery and Michael Caine.A ripping adventure yarn set on the wild frontiers of British India.But, was there any historical truth to the story?Related episode:James Brooke: The White Rajah of SarawakBecome a PatronBuy Me a CoffeeSupport the show

PREVIEW: INDIA: DEI: Colleague Sadanand Dhume of WSJ editorial analyzes the engraved quota system in India where the majority of government posts are not open to competition -- instead chosen by caste or heritage. More later. 1860 British India

Originally released October 4, 2021. The Cobra Effect is a story of unintended consequences. In British-controlled India, the government tried to offer an incentive to help curb the rampant deadly cobra problem. Their solution backfired. This is the story of the model that economist & sociologists call the "Cobra Effect." Then comedy writer Jimmy Mak comes on the show to play the quick quiz! Review this podcast at https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/the-internet-says-it-s-true/id1530853589 Bonus episodes and content available at http://Patreon.com/MichaelKent For special discounts and links to our sponsors, visit http://theinternetsaysitstrue.com/deals

Last time we continued to speak about the insane battle over Southern Xinjiang. In Yarkland, chaos erupted as inflation soared, prompting Chinese officials to retreat to fortified New City. Panic led to desperate measures, including the use of dummy figures for defense. As insurgents advanced, Colonel Chin's forces looted and fled, sparking violence against Uyghurs and Hindu moneylenders. By April, rebel forces captured Kashgar, fracturing Chinese control. Amid shifting alliances, Ma Chanzeng sought power, but internal strife among leaders like Temur culminated in further violence and betrayal, with power ultimately shifting to the Khotanlik provisional government under Muhammad Amin Bughra. Abdullah's revelation ignited conflict among Muslim troops. The Uyghurs and Kirghiz briefly united against the Chinese, ultimately capturing the New City. As tensions rose, massacres occurred, fracturing alliances and leading to a power struggle. After the execution of Uyghur leader Temur, Abdullah seized control of Yarkland, while charismatic Tawfiq Bay rallied forces against the Tungans. Eventually, the Khotan Amirs dominated the region, achieving unity amidst chaos, leaving only the besieged Tungans at bay.   #135 Kumul Rebellion part 4: The reunification of Xinjiang Welcome to the Fall and Rise of China Podcast, I am your dutiful host Craig Watson. But, before we start I want to also remind you this podcast is only made possible through the efforts of Kings and Generals over at Youtube. Perhaps you want to learn more about the history of Asia? Kings and Generals have an assortment of episodes on history of asia and much more  so go give them a look over on Youtube. So please subscribe to Kings and Generals over at Youtube and to continue helping us produce this content please check out www.patreon.com/kingsandgenerals. If you are still hungry for some more history related content, over on my channel, the Pacific War Channel where I cover the history of China and Japan from the 19th century until the end of the Pacific War. Do you remember Ma Chongying, basically the guy that started most of this madness? Following him getting severely wounded at Liaotun in autumn of 1932, he had withdrawn the majority of his forces to his old domain in northwestern Gansu. He set up a HQ at Anxi and through his subordinates began expanding territory and increasing recruitment via conscription. The British missionaries Mildred Cable and Francesca French were living in Tunhuang at the time and wrote extensively about Ma Congying's recruitment efforts “The town was robbed of everything in the nature of food, goods and money ... next to food the most coveted possessions of the oases were the young, vigorous, hardy men ... These were the men whom Ma Chung-ying wanted for gun fodder, and orders were issued to the press-gang to fetch them in from every farm of the neighborhood, and collect them in Tunhuang City. Every day we saw them being rounded up. The ropes which they themselves had twisted from desert grass were used to tie their hands behind their backs, and to noose their necks in a running-knot. Roped together in droves of twenty to thirty, according to the success of the raid, they were brought to town by captors who rode the horses levied from these boys' own stables. Thrust behind the high palings of temple courtyards, the imprisoned youths lined the barriers, looking out for some passers-by who might belong to their own group of farmsteads and would take a report home that son or husband had been captured”. After initial training at Tunhuang, the recruits were taken to Anxi for further training. Cable and French were ordered to Anxi to aid Ma Chongying with his wounds and to  take care of other Tungans who reportedly had been injured by fire arrows during the siege of Kumul Old City. They did a good job as within a short amount of time Ma Chongying was able to ride again.  Back in Xinjiang, following the failed Uyghur led rebellion at Kumul and facing another imminent Tungant invasion in the Turfan area Jin Shujen turned increasingly to the USSR for help. In September of 1931 he bought two biplanes for the Soviets at 40,000 Mexican silver dollars each. The planes came with two Russian pilots and on October 1st, Jin signed a secret trade deal with the USSR allowing 8 Soviet trading agencies to set up shop in Urumqi, Chuguchak, Kashgar, Kulja, Aksu, Kucha, Khotan and Yarkland. Customs duties on Soviets goods were reduced and a new Xinjiang-Soviet telegraph line and radio communications were established. Jin signed these deals illegally without notifying Nanjing and in return received economic and military assistance from the Soviets. In July of 1932 he would receive another 8 aircraft. Yet despite the Soviet assistance, Jin's provincial forces with the exception of Peppengut's White Russian detachment remained ill trained and ill officered. Following the relief of Kumul Old City and Ma Chongyings retreat back to Gansu, Chang Peiyuan, the provincial commander in chief and military governor of Ili went to Urumqi. It appears that Jin did not fully trust Chang Peiyuan, possibly fearing that the victory at Kumul had stirred up dangerous ambitions in Chang. This distrust seemed to be mutual, as Chang, upon receiving orders to transfer to the provincial capital, chose to defy them and returned to Ili in an act bordering on open rebellion. In response, Jin appointed Sheng Shihtsai, Chang's Chief-of-Staff during the Kumul campaign, as the new Provincial Commander-in-Chief. This decision would have significant implications both for Jin's future and for the future of Xinjiang. Sheng Shihtsai was born in 1895 in Liaoning Manchuria. He was the son of a small landowner. In 1917 he traveled to Japan to study political economics at Waseda University and came back to China in 1919 to participate in the May 4th movement. During that time he developed radical and anti-Japanese stances. He then joined the military training school in Guangdong and later enrolled in the northeastern military academy. He entered military service under Guo Songling, haha that old cry baby, who was deputy under Zhang Zuolin. Sheng Shihtsai rose through the ranks becoming a Lt Colonel. In 1924 Guo Songling sponsored Sheng's admission to the Shikan Gakko military academy in Japan. Sheng returned briefly to help Guo Songlings failed coup against Zhang Zuolin, but was able to escape imprisonment with support from Feng Yuxiang and Chiang Kai-Shek. They got him a ticket back to Japan, and he returned to China in 1927 to participate in the northern expedition as a staff officer attached to Chiang Kai-Sheks HQ. After the northern expedition, he was made chief of war operations section of the General staff at Nanjing, but in 1929 resigned as he did not get along with his superiors. After all of this he took an interest in China's border defences. At the time a delegation from Xinjiang visited Nanjing searching for financial aid. Jin Shujen had instructed one of his delegates, Kuang Lu the deputy General secretary of Xinjiang, to find an able bodied officer to help reorganize Xinjiang's military. Kuang Lu fished around and found Sheng who looked like a very promising man. Sheng then traveled via the USSR arriving to Urumqi in the winter of 1929. His initial welcome was a luke warm one as Jin was suspicious of this highly qualified overseas educated man, obviously seeing him as a potential threat. Moreover, Jin's brother Jin Shuxin hated Sheng's appointment because the man outshined him. Despite the jealousy, Jin was basically grasping at straws and needed the help so he made Sheng the chief of staff over the Xinjiang Frontier Army and also the instructor at the provincial military college.  In the words of historian Chan Fooklam “Sheng's appointment was like Jin burying a time bomb under his bed, he had brought upon himself his own doom”. Despite receiving aid from the Soviets and British, Jin's grip over Xinjiang was slipping away. In May of 1932 Ma Chongying had dispatched Ma Shuming to take over the Tungan operation against Turfan. As we talked about, Ma Fuming, leading the provincial forces at Turfan simply defected. Also at this time Chang Peiyuan's insubordination was breaking out, easing the way for Sheng to be promoted to commander in chief. Sheng was directing an unsuccessful campaign against Uyghur insurgents at Karlik Tagh. Following news of Ma Fumings defection and the Tungan capture of Turfan, Sheng advanced west from Kumul to try and prevent the combined Muslim forces from marching upon Urumqi. After a bloody two day battle he recaptured Turfan, but this has little effect over Ma Shuming who had already moved his HQ to Kara Shahr.  During mid-winter, Ma Shuming's Tungan cavalry and Ma Fumings Turkic insurgents began an advance to Urumqi. At some point a force of provincial troops sent to Urumqi by Jin, specifically to guard the Dawan Cheng Pass were ambushed and annihilated by the Tungans. Meanwhile full scale rebellions had broken out at Kucha led by Temur and at Khotan led by the Amirs. To this Jin responded by expanding Pappenguts White Russian detachment from its original strength of 250 to 1500 men. The White Russians, most of whom came from Ili Valley, had literally no choice but to enlist. Alongside threatening any White Russians with deportation to the USSR, Jin also arrested many Russian women to compel their husbands to enlist. By early January of 1933, Ma Shumings Tungans had crossed the Dawan Cheng and were now operating at will in the Chaiwupao corridor, to the immediate south of the capital. Wu Aichen the political envoy on behalf of Nanjing reported on January 29th, that the city gates were suddenly closed and a month of food shortages and communal tensions rose. Wu Aichen would witness the brutality of the war. In his reports, the Tungans advanced towards the city during the night, seizing the Great West Bridge after a heavy fight. The Provincial commander defending the city only had 700 troops under him and if it was not for 300 White Russian troops suddenly arriving, the city most likely would have fallen then. Wu Aichen described the White Russian troops as superb fighters, albeit savagely drunk as they drove back the Tungan and Uyghurs during two days of hand to hand combat. Meanwhile Tungans had captured the radio station and a nearby height called Devil's Hill which overlooked the Urumqi suburbs. The Chinese officials feared letting in any more Muslim civilians to the Old City, thus they kept the city gates causing large numbers of refugees from the suburbs to gather outside the walls. This was particularly evident at the west gate which became the focal point of the fighting. Wu Aichen witnessed much of it and had this to say. “In times of peace this street was one of the most prosperous in the city, but now it was crowded With innocent fugitives, whose plight was terrible indeed. There was was worse to come, however, for now the advancing rebels came to this quarter and seizing the houses made loop-holes in the walls. In the flat roofs they set up machine-gun posts which could enfilade Government positions on either side of them. I could see for myself that the situation was desperate and that our troops would be pinned against the walls. General Pai, who was in command, did not hesitate. He gave the order that the street of the small religion should be set on fire. Then followed a scene so frightful that the reader's imagination must suffice. As the flames swept down the long lane of wooden structures they became an inferno of horror, for the roar of the conflagration was added to the rattle of gunfire, .and the hideous shrieks of those who were trapped. The rebels sought safety in flight, and as they crossed the open were machine-gunned from the Red Mountain; but the fugitives had nowhere to fly to and perished to the last man, woman and child. Nevertheless the city was saved, and when at last the flames died down the approach to the West Bridge was strewn with the bodies of our assailants. On the evening of the second day I had completed ten thousand words of copying. I asked how many were dead. I was told at least two thousand. Once again I returned to my task, reflecting that a human life had been taken at every fifth word”. Following the defeat, the Muslim forces had to pull back from the West Gate area, however, they still held control over the West Bridge, a mere half mile northwest. This gave them a great launchpad for night raids and many would be killed trying to scale the walls under the mouths of guns. The White Russian troops emerged as the backbone of the defenses, holding the city walls and making occasional sorties. Urumqi would have fallen if it was not for Sheng Shihtsai who came to her aid with his troops from Turfan. Upon seeing his relief forces the Muslim insurgents broke off their attack and withdrew into the surrounding countryside. With winter coming to an end, with fear of a cholera outbreak looming the Chinese went to work burying the dead. Wu Aichen was one of those who helped with the burials and wrote a horrifying description about the conditions of the city. Over 1000 bodies were buried in a single mass grave within the suburbs and the final death toll was estimated to exceed 6000. Following the relief of Urumqi, the Muslim insurgents seized all they could in the countryside such as Dawan Cheng, the districts of Fukang and parts of Santopao where an estimated 900 Han Chinese were killed. The insurgents burned the stocks of rice that usually fed the capital and on March 1st a detachment of 100 provincial troops were ambushed and annihilated at Chitaowan. The situation throughout the province deteriorated; to the south Ma Shaowu had isolated Kashgar and in the north a Kazakh rebellion broke out in the Sahara Sume region under Sharif Khan. The Kazakh uprising convinced the Soviets that Jin Sujen was going to inevitably lose Xinjiang. They acted without any notice to Nanjing by dispatching forces to help hold up Urumqi. Fate would have it, 2000 battle hardened Chinese troops had recently been driven over the Heilongjiang border into Siberia by the Japanese during the invasion of Manchuria. So Stalin signed off on sending them over the trans-siberian and Turk-sib railways to the Xinjiang frontier of Chuguchak. This force designated the Northeast National Salvation Army consisted of regular soldiers who were well trained and held good morale. They arrived to Urumqi on March 27th of 1933, substantially bolstering the provincial military, more particularly that of the new Provincial commander in chief, Sheng Shihtsai who just so happened to also be a Manchurian.  Sheng led the new forces to push back the invading Tungans of Ma Shuming who was forced over the Dawan Cheng back to his HQ at Kara Shahr. The Uyghur insurgents were demoralized and Khoja Niyas Hajji who controlled a belt around the Xinjiang-Gansu frontier began begining for assistance from Ma Chongying. Meanwhile Jin basically was undermined by Sheng and was seeing further unrest in Urumqi. The White Russians who had bore the brunt of the fighting to defend Urumqi were royally pissed off as they had not all been paid and were provided the worst horses and ammunition of all the defenders. Moreover Jin's popularity with all nationalities, even Han Chinese had fallen dramatically because his brother Jin Shuxin had reportedly exorted the granaries during the siege. Following the relief of Urumqi, Pappengut and the other White Russians approached the leaders of the northeast national salvation army with grievances against Jin Shujen and were given assurances of support to mount a coup against him. On April 12th, around 400 White Russians stormed the capital with 200 of them seizing the city gates and yamen. Jin managed to escape over the city walls and fled to the USSR via Chuguchak. From there he returned to China via the Turk-Sib and Trans-Siberian. Meanwhile his younger brother Jin Shuxin was captured and executed. Sheng Shihtsai was encamped at Uruba at the time of the coup and insisted in his future memoirs he had nothing to do with the coup and that it was all the USSR's doing. Regardless after the coup Sheng was urged to go to Urumqi where negotiations began with Liu Wenlung who was appointed Provincial Chairman while Sheng was made Tupan or “border defense commissioner”. Ie; Sheng was made the de facto ruler of Xinjiang.  After Ma Shumings failure to take Urumqi and Khoja Niyas Hajji's pleas for help, Ma Chongying determined to reenter the fray in person. Despite the setbacks, the Tungans had crossed the Dawan Cheng and nearly taken the capital, coupled with the seizure of Kashgar, Ma Chongying most likely believed there was still a great chance to take it all. He had spent 18 months rebuilding his army and better yet, because of the USSR's illegal move to save Urumqi, Nanjing officially recognizing his Tungan forces as the 36th division of the NRA. Ma Chongying moved his HQ from Anxi to Suzhou and really improved his military. A German engineer named Vasel working with him described him as a man who admired Napoleon, Bismarck and Hindenburg and who “was frequently to be seen running at the head of his troops during training, even in sub-zero temperature. Military training was pursued with a spartan rigour, pushed to the verge of utter ruthlessness. Desertion was punishable by death, and on one occasion I saw Ma personally behead five such offenders. In one of those sudden fits of exuberance that were typical of him, snatching up casually some hand grenades, which he had made himself, and hurling them, one by one, against the lofty clay-coloured walls of the city. And then he laughed heartily when he saw his men fling themselves flat on the ground as splinters of steel hurtled in all directions. He scorned to seek safety by throwing himself on the ground, and was quite delighted when he saw that I too did not seek cover”. During spring of 1933, Ma Chongying prepared to reinvade Xinjiang. A Swedish man named Bexeill was working along the Gansu-Qinghai border and noted Ma Chongying heavily taxed his territory in northwestern Gansu to the limits of the peasants endurance. He apparently even sent troops into Qinghai to illegally tax them. By May of 1933 his army departed Suhou for Yumen and Vasel gives us this description of them. “A dark mass of human beings, camels and oxen, was pouring out of the city gate towards the west amid clouds of dust. There were hundreds of heavily-laden camels, the bells on their necks clanging monotonously, their drivers easily discernible by their gaudy headgear. In the rear followed high-wheeled ox-carts, flanked on either side by infantry. Behind them again came a company of cavalry, which presently galloped past the lumbering camels and oxen along the track through the desert ... and now I had an opportunity of seeing at close range General Ma's famous cavalry riding past me and keeping its post at the head of the marching columns. This was the famous white cavalry regiment of which General Ma was especially proud. The broad iron swords of the dragoons clanked as they rode along on their magnificent white horses, while on their shoulders they carried carbines of the most varied and antiquated patterns. Next came the brown regiment, while in the rear followed the black regiment, comprising some two thousand horsemen. A short distance behind the cavalry came the infantry - regiment after regiment, headed by the Chinese (Kuomintang) standard. On they swept, platoon after platoon, followed by their officers, with their mausers at the ready. The columns strode along, keeping perfect time with their shrill, high-pitched, mournful, Asiatic marching songs. Sandwiched between some of these trained and trustworthy soldiers I saw large drafts of recruits who had been compelled to join General Ma's forces. These raw levies were constantly kept under very close observation'. On Top of Ma Chongyings new Tungan army, young Uyghurs were also conscripted into his ranks. 2500 Tungans under the command of his younger brother Ma Chongjie captured Kumul in May with little opposition. This was because the area was dominated by Ma Chongyings ally Khoja Niyas Hajji. After this Ma Chongjie issued bilingual proclamations to the people of Kumul, stating they were free of Jin Shujen's tyranny, who at the time was in the USSR. Meanwhile Sheng hurriedly prepared a force of 5000 to meet the invaders near Urumqi. Ma Chongying advanced upon Qiqiaoqing unopposed, getting even further west than his first invasion of 1931. Instead of taking the main road to Turgan, the Tungans crossed the narrow defile between Barkul Tagh and Bogdo Ula to hit the garrison town of Kitai. The first major battle broke out near Mulei, due east of Kitai on May 15th. Two days later a mixed force of 4000 Tungans and Turkic Muslims attacked Kitai led by Ma Chongjie. On May 26th Sheng sortied from Urumqi at the head of 5000 men, 1000 of whom were White Russians. Sheng planned to hold Santai, the halfway point between Urumqi and Kitai. Sheng's men attacked the invaders around Kitai, but lost the battle for the city, though Ma Chongjie was killed in battle. Sheng then retreated back to Urumqi by June 1st. Things looked dire for Sheng, he was unsure how Nanjing would react to the coup against Jin Shujen, his position was threatened to the east by Ma Chongying now headquartered at Kitai and to the west by Chang Peiyuan the military governor of Ili whom he suspected was not loyal to Urumqi and in league with the Tungans. Ma Chongying was now within striking distance of Urumqi, when he suddenly halted his attack and sent a telegram with terms. It turns out Ma Chongying had no idea Jin Shujen had been overthrown, so he was unsure how to proceed. This bought Sheng more time to raise defenses, sending the White Russians to hold Fukang as he dispatched Wu Aichen on a peace mission to Kitai. Wu Aichen's mission failed, so Sheng went to Fukang to take personal command of the army and to meet Ma Chongying around the hamlet of Zuniquan. During the battle of mid June, the provincial forces managed to gain the upper hand due to severe weather conditions for which the lightly clothed Tungans were ill prepared for. The Uyghurs forces of Khoja Niyas Hajji also took no part in the fighting despite being in the immediate area. The Tungans were defeated at Zuniquan, but not routed. Ma Chongyings men managed to retreat in well order to Qiqiaoqing and from there advanced to Turfan joined Tungan forces under Ma Shuming. Combined the Tungans marched to Dawan Cheng. At the same time a Pacification Commissioner, Huang Musung was sent by Nanjing to Urumqi. His mission was to establish peace between the provincial forces and Ma Chongying, both of whom claimed loyalty to Nanjing. Sheng was suspicious of Huang Musung and felt Nanjing might be simply backing the Tungans. Thus Sheng had Huang Musung placed under house arrest. Then Sheng accused three Xinjiang officials of plotting with Huang Musung, Chang Peiyuan and Ma Chongying to overthrow him and had them all executed via a firing squad. Thus Sheng clearly had distanced himself from Nanjing and turned 100% to the USSR for help. During early Autumn Ma Chongying was still in Turfan reorganizing the forces while Sheng was consolidating his position in Urumqi and quelling the Kazakh rebellion.  Meanwhile Khoja Niyas Hajji was growing uneasy with his alliance to Ma Chongying and began to open up secret negotiations with Sheng and soon was appointed Chief Defense commissioner for Southern Xinjiang. He then took his Uyghurs across the Dawan Cheng and occupied Toksun only to be surprise attacked and decisively defeated by Tungans under Ma Shuming. By late July Khoja Niyas Hajji took his battered survivors and fled for Kucha. At this point Huang Musung managed to secure his release from house arrest by telegramming Nanjing the recommendation that Sheng Shihtsai and Liu Wenlung be confirmed in their posts as the chief military and civil authorities over Xinjiang. Nanjing had really no options other than to comply.  On September 2nd Lo Wenkan, the foreign minister of Nanjing, came to Urumqi and officially confirmed Sheng into office and then mediated between Sheng and Ma Chongying. To compensate Ma Chongying he was offered the post of Garrison Commander of Eastern Xinjiang which he accepted, thus gaining control over Kumul, Barkul and part of Turfan. After Lo Wenkan departed in early October, suddenly Sheng announced the discovery of a new plot against him. He accused Liu Wenlung of conspiring with Ma Chongying, Chang Peiyuan and Lo Wenkan to overthrow him. Liu Wenlung was forced to resign and was replaced as the provincial chairman by Zhu Juixi. Sheng then prepared a final hammer blow against Ma Chongying. However Ma Chongying had secretly been working with Ma Shuming to deliver a lighting stroke against Urumqi which came in December of 1933. Tungan forces passed Dawan Cheng and began attacking the capital. Likewise in response to the constant accusations, Chang Peiyuan finally threw his support to the Tungans. He led his troops across the Talki Pass into Zungharia and attacked the Provincial forces stationed at Wusu. Meanwhile encouraged by the advance of the Gansu Tungans, the indigenous Tungans of Zungharia rose en masse to Ma Chongyings banner. In late december a detachment of the 36th NRA led by Ma Shuming bypassed Urumqi and attacked Chuguchak. Vasel happened to witness this and described the battle as such “The sun's rays, by this time, were shining obliquely across the street and showed us the Tungan army entering the town ... Stirrup to stirrup, the young regular soldiers in their smart uniforms looked a well-disciplined, trim and efficient force. r recognised one of their officers, Ma Shih-ming, the Commander-in-Chief's adjutant, who had frequently been my guest in Soochow. These regular soldiers rode past on beautiful horses, while huge red flags floated in the breeze above their heads, bearing the character 'Ma' in black letters on a white ground. At a short distance followed a horde that was tolerably well equipped . . . I saw needle-guns, blunderbusses and muzzle-loaders ... In their rear dense clouds of dust, which shut out the light, billowed onward, and then came the infantry. . . men with wild eyes and matted hair. . . outlaws who had nothing to lose and everything to gain from the upheaval that was going on. After the infantry followed a huge horde of camels, with their rhythmical swaying gait, laden with produce and goods of every conceivable type ... the breath came from their mouths like smoke - their necks were craned forward, and their heads kept bobbing up and down.”With the Tungans taking Zunghaira, the Khotan Amirs running amok in the south and Chang Peiyuan joining the fray, Sheng's position at Urumqi was hopeless. While Ma Chongying and Sheng Shihtsai continued their struggle in the north, in the south Muhammad Amin Bughra woo'd Khoja Niyas Hajji to become president of a new secessionist Islamic state. Thus was born the Turkic Islamic Republic of Eastern Turkestan ie TIRET. While Khoja Niyas Kajji was the quote president, this was simply symbolic, the real leadership remained with the Amirs. Amir Abdulah retained control over Yarkland, Amir Nur Ahmad Jan over Yangi Hissar and Kashgar and Bughra over Khotan. Shari a law was implemented, a national flag with a white star and crescent over a blue ground was made and the new state sought aid and recognition from Britain. But the TIRET would never receive said recognition or aid, for Britain respected Nanjing's government as the sole authority in Xinjiang. TIRET turned next to Turkey, but found no real help. Then they turned to Afghanistan who likewise could not help them. TIRET was doomed from the very beginning. Meanwhile the battles raged between Sheng and Ma Chongying. Sheng knew Nanjing would not assist him so he turned to the USSR. Sheng dispatched diplomats Chen Teli and Yaoxiong to Moscow pleading for assistance. The Soviets were sympathetic and quite concerned with events such as the rise of TIRET and the possibility of Ma Chongying capturing Urumqi as they suspected him and TIRET to have ties to the Japanese. Weary of Germany and Japan, the USSR took up a policy of curbing any influence from either, especially in her Central Asian frontiers. The Soviets sent this warning to Nanjing “'We do not mind if you Chinese develop [Eastern] Turkestan. But if you permit [Eastern] Turkestan to become a second Manchuria, we must act to protect ourselves. '” Thus in late 1933, following pleas for help from Sheng Shihtsai, the Soviets chose to intervene on behalf of Sheng, whom was known to be a loose cannon and unreliable, but atleast was anti-Japanese. The USSR appointed Apresoff as the new consul-general at Urumqi and upon his arrival Sheng conducted a purge. Officers from the Northeast National Salvation army and White Russian volunteers were arrested and shot, including Pappengut. The White Russians units were reorganized under the command of new Soviet officers. Sheng signed a secret deal with the USSR to allow them to build a railway from Sergiopol, through Chuguchak to Urumqi. Sheng also announced 6 new principles going forward (I) anti-imperialism, (2) kinship to Sovietism, (3) racial or national equality, (4) 'clean' government, (5) peace, and (6) reconstruction.  The Soviets were pleased and after receiving approval from Nanjing dispatched two brigades, numbered some 7000 men supported by tanks, artillery and aircraft against the insurgent positions at Kulja and Chuguchak. The Soviets had orders to “clear the roads and liquidate the rebellion”. They rapidly overwhelmed the forces of Chang Peiyuan who committed suicide in shame. The Tungans of Ma Shuming put up a better fight but were dislodged from the Chuguchak area. According to Vasel, the Tungans managed to beat back some attacks during 30 days of battle. In one instance the Tungans foiled a Soviet pincer attack by “crawling through the snow, camouflaged by reversed sheepskins, and storming, from a very short distance, Soviet machine-gun posts whilst wielding the characteristic curved sword of Islam”. The main battle broke out on the frost-bound banks of the Tutun River, 30 miles northwest of Urumqi. According to The Times correspondent Peter Fleming , “the Battle of the Tutun River 'raged for several days; but the Tungans' unskilled ferocity was no match for a mechanised foe, and the troops ... were badly demoralised by gas bombs dropped by the Soviet airmen”.  Both the Soviets and Tungans took heavy casualties, but ultimately the Soviets won, forcing Ma Chongying to retreat from Urumqi to the Dawan Cheng, pursued by a mixed force of Soviets, White Russians and Chinese. The Tungans attempted to make a stand at Dawan Cheng, but according to Vasel “a detachment of Soviet troops supported by armoured cars was attacked by a force of some 500 Tungans. After savage hand-to-hand fighting the Soviet forces were driven back, and their armoured cars were rolled off the mountainside by the victorious Tungans. At this juncture, by a strange twist of fate, the surviving Soviet troops were relieved by a force of White Russian 'volunteers', and Ma Chung-ying was forced to continue his retreat through Toksun to Korla”. Meanwhile in Southern Xinjiang, the Soviets tried to break the TIRET. A Soviet backed force of irregulars known as the “Tortunjis” was set up at Ulug Chat, led by Yusuf Jan. The Soviets also negotiated secretly with Khoja Niyas Hajji who despite being the president of the TIRET had taken all of his forces to Aksu. As a result Khoja Niyas Hajji received Soviet arms in return for turning against his anti-soviet colleagues. Yet despite Soviet support, Khoja Niyas Hajji's Uyghur forces were decisively defeated by 800 Tungans under Ma Chongying. Khoja Niyas Hajji had to abandon his HQ at Aksu fleeing for Kashgar with 1500 men on January 13th of 1934. The Tungans soon besieged Kashgar New City forcing Khoja Niyas Hajji and local forces under Sabit Damullah to withdrew towards Yangi-Hissar, then held by Nur Ahmad Jan. Within 24 hours the Tungan advance guard led by Ma Fuyuan entered Kashgar meeting little resistance. According to British Consulate General Thomson-Glover “'some 800 Tungans and 1,200 conscripts caused nearly 10,000 rebel troops to flee from Kashgar'” To make thing more complicated at this time Ma Shaowu assumed senior military and civil control on behalf of Nanjing and at the request of Ma Chanzeng and Ma Fuyuan. Thus the capital of TIRET was recaptured for Nanjing, but not by their approved forces under Sheng, but of those under Ma Chongying. Following the fall of Kashgar, TIRET moved its administration to Yangi-Hissar. Meanwhile Khoja Niyas Hajji fled to Irkeshtam on the Soviet border and there signed a treaty with the USSR to dissolve the TIRET and relinquished his forces to be used by the Xinjiang provincial authorities against the Tungans and Khotan Amirs. For this he was rewarded Civil Governor for life over Xinjiang with Sheng Shihtsai retaining military governorship. On February 14th, the Khotanlik forces tried but failed to recapture Kashgar. In response for two days the Tungans systematically looted Kashgar old city while they massacred nearly 2000 of its citizenry. Then Ma Chanzeng and Ma Fuyuan advanced to Yangi-Hissar where on March 28th looted its old city and killed everyone they got their hands on. In the face of the Tungan onslaught, Amir Nur Ahmad Jan fled into Yangi Hissar New City and Sabit Damullah fled for Yarkland. Nur Ahmad Jan led a fierce resistance at the New City until April 2nd when Amir Abdullah arrived from Yarkland with several thousand troops. However caught out in the open, Abdullah's men were obliterated by the Tungans and Abdullah was cut down and his severed head was sent to Kashgar to be exhibited outside the Id-gah Mosque. Yangi-Hissar New City continued to resist, “wielding only rifles and conserving their scanty ammunition and rolling back the attackers scaling the walls by means of large stones and tree trunks”. The Tungans took New City on April 12th, putting 500 of its defenders and Nur Ahmad Jan to the sword. Meanwhile the administration of TIRET received word of Khoja Niyas Hajji's deal with the Soviets and refused to dissolve. Thus Khoja Niyas Hajji went to Yarkland to try and convince Amir Muhammad Amin Bughra to dissolve the TIRET. He arrived there in Mid April, only a few days before the Tungas would. Bughra fled towards Khotan as Khoja Niyas Hajji looted Yarkland taking Sabit Damullah prisoner and advanced to Aksu. The Tungans arrived at Yarkland on the 20th and immediately pursued Khoja Niyas Hajji. Khoja Niyas Hajji managed to get to Aksu where he handed over Sabit Damullah who was promptly hung. Meanwhile Ma Chongying arrived at Kashgar with 10,000 men on April 6th where he denounced Sheng Shihtsai as a Soviet Puppet and stressed loyalty to Nanjing to its population. Other Tungan forces captured Sarikol and together marched upon Khotan. Khotan was taken on June 12th without a fight and unlike at Kashgar and Yangi-Hissar, the Tungans did not loot, but instead hunted down Muhammad Amin Bughra who had escaped with 3000 troops towards Keriya. Bughra managed to give them all the slip and fled with several ponies carrying hold to Ladakh in British India where he received permission to travel to Srinagar. Thus ended the TIRET experiment as Ma Chongying claimed he had recaptured southern Xinjiang for Nanjing. Ma Chongying then met with Thomson Glover “that he had come to Kashgar 'to try and save south Sinkiang from Russian influence', and continued to stress his loyalty to Nanjing”.  Meanwhile Ma Chongying set up a defensive line at Maral Bashi and Fayzabad with his brother in law, Ma Hushan in command. During May and June of 1934 Ma Chongying tried to gain sympathy from the British for his cause, but they refused to get involved. In a surprising turn of events, as told to us by Thomson Glover “Ma Chung-ying left Kashgar for Irkeshtam early on 7th July with three or four of his officers. . . and an escort of some 50 Tungans and one or more members of the USSR Consulate or Trade Agency. Arrived near the border to Russia the escort were met by Russian or Russian-employed troops. The Tungan escort dispersed or handed over their arms to some of Khoja Niyas' levies, and Ma Chung-ying disappeared into Russia”. Why the courageous Tungan threw in the towel is a mystery. He had not yet been deceive beaten, he could have taken his Tungan force and held out for 3 years before returning back to Gansu. Regardless the Soviets had offered him sanctuary and he just took it. His fate is a complete mystery, some say he was killed by the Soviets, some say he rotted in a dungeon, that he lived a life of luxury as a Soviet guest, and one claim is that in 1938, when Sheng Shihtsai visited Moscow, Stalin had him executed as a gift. Ma Chongyings command passed to Ma Hushan who set up a HQ at Khotan and carved out a sphere of influence extending from Karghalik to CHarkhlik. The provincial forces did nothing to stop him, and instead signed a truce, ending the wars with the Tungans. Sheng Shihtsai had won, he now held absolute power over Xinjiang, though as we will see much later on, Xinjiang was certainly not done seeing battles. I would like to take this time to remind you all that this podcast is only made possible through the efforts of Kings and Generals over at Youtube. Please go subscribe to Kings and Generals over at Youtube and to continue helping us produce this content please check out www.patreon.com/kingsandgenerals. If you are still hungry after that, give my personal channel a look over at The Pacific War Channel at Youtube, it would mean a lot to me. Thus in the end, after all of these different groups of people formed uprisings, betrayed one another and fought this large game of thrones for Xinjiang, it was Sheng Shihtsai who prevailed above all. Xinjiang was by no means stable and would continue to see chaos well into WW2 however.   

fWotD Episode 2804: Gerald Durrell Welcome to Featured Wiki of the Day, your daily dose of knowledge from Wikipedia’s finest articles.The featured article for Tuesday, 7 January 2025 is Gerald Durrell.Gerald Malcolm Durrell (7 January 1925 – 30 January 1995) was a British naturalist, writer, zookeeper, conservationist, and television presenter. He was born in Jamshedpur in British India, and moved to England when his father died in 1928. In 1935 the family moved to Corfu, and stayed there for four years, before the outbreak of World War II forced them to return to the UK. In 1946 he received an inheritance from his father's will that he used to fund animal-collecting trips to the British Cameroons and British Guiana. He married Jacquie Rasen in 1951; they had very little money, and she persuaded him to write an account of his first trip to the Cameroons. The result, titled The Overloaded Ark, sold well, and he began writing accounts of his other trips. An expedition to Argentina and Paraguay followed in 1953, and three years later he published My Family and Other Animals, an account of his years in Corfu. It became a bestseller.In the late 1950s he decided to found his own zoo. He visited the Cameroons for the third time, and on his return attempted to persuade Bournemouth and Poole town councils to start local zoos. These plans came to nothing but he finally found a suitable site on the island of Jersey, and leased the property in late 1959. He envisaged the Jersey Zoo as an institution for the study of animals and for captive breeding, rather than a showcase for the public. In 1963 control of the zoo was turned over to the Jersey Wildlife Preservation Trust. The zoo repeatedly came close to bankruptcy over the next few years, and Durrell raised money for it by his writing and by fundraising appeals. The site for the zoo was leased, and to guarantee the zoo's future, Durrell launched a successful appeal in 1970 for funds to purchase the property. He wrote about his further expeditions, and the zoo, and his own experiences in Corfu and after the war.Durrell was an alcoholic and had repeated problems caused by his drinking. In 1976 he separated from his wife; they were divorced in 1979, and Durrell remarried, to Lee McGeorge, an American zoologist. He and Lee made several television documentaries in the 1980s, including Durrell in Russia and Ark on the Move. They co-authored The Amateur Naturalist, which was intended for amateurs who wanted to know more about the natural history of the world around them, though it also had sections about each of the world's major ecosystems. This book became his most successful, selling well over a million copies; a television series was made from it.Durrell became an OBE in 1982. In 1984 he founded the Durrell Conservation Academy, to train conservationists in captive breeding. The institution has been very influential: its thousands of graduates included a director of London Zoo, an organisation which was once opposed to Durrell's work. He was diagnosed with liver cancer and cirrhosis in 1994, and received a liver transplant, but died the following January. He was cremated, and his ashes were buried at Jersey Zoo.This recording reflects the Wikipedia text as of 01:12 UTC on Tuesday, 7 January 2025.For the full current version of the article, see Gerald Durrell on Wikipedia.This podcast uses content from Wikipedia under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License.Visit our archives at wikioftheday.com and subscribe to stay updated on new episodes.Follow us on Mastodon at @wikioftheday@masto.ai.Also check out Curmudgeon's Corner, a current events podcast.Until next time, I'm neural Olivia.

What do you buy for a man who has everything?  Thomas Roe is tasked with wooing the Emperor Jahangir. On March 6th 1615, he sets sail from England on the 8 month voyage to the Mughal Empire, home to one fifth of the world's population. He has been sent by James I and the East India Company on a diplomatic mission to improve trading relations. The English envy the fabulously rich Emperor Jahangir whose personal wealth is ten times that of the national revenue of England at the time. Expecting to be greeted as a diplomat, Roe arrives in India and is forced to undergo a customs check. He is ill and accompanied by a badly behaved cook and a drunk chaplain. He hasn't even reached court in Ajmer and everything seems to be going wrong. Will he succeed in his mission to win over Jahangir? Listen as Anita and William are joined by Nandini Das, author of Courting India: England, Mughal India and the Origins of Empire, to discuss the grumpy ambassador's stay at Jahangir's court and how it shaped the East India Company. Twitter: @Empirepoduk Email: empirepoduk@gmail.com Goalhangerpodcasts.com Assistant Producers: Anouska Lewis & Alice Horrell Producer: Callum Hill Exec Producer: Neil Fearn Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

“India has 2,000,000 million gods, and worships them all,” wrote Mark Twain, following his 1896 speaking tour of British India. “In religion other countries are paupers; India is the only millionaire.” Twain was exaggerating, but perhaps only a little. Consider that Hinduism, Buddhism, and Jainism all took form some 2,500 years ago in South Asia, that they and their offshoots are now practiced by hundreds of millions of people around the world, and you will see how that wealth has been spread about.  In his new book Religions of Early India: A Cultural History, Richard H. Davis explores how that wealth was accumulated, and how it began to be spent. Beginning from before the earliest written records–which are, for a Western historian, astonishingly early–he traces the story forward to thirteen hundred years before the present, in approximately 700 AD, just as the entire Afro-Eurasian world was about to be transformed by the advent of Islam.  Richard H. Davis is Professor Emeritus and Research Professor of Religion at Bard College.  His primary research and teaching interests include classical and medieval Hinduism, Indian history, South Asian visual arts, and Sanskrit. He is author of, among numerous other books, The Bhagavad Gita: A Biography. Religions of Early India is his most recent, and is the subject of our conversation today.

Seventh Day of CraftLit (2024) All of CraftLit's Christmas episodes can be found at LINK TO DAY 1 of the Twelve Days of CraftLit— VIDEO: AUDIO ONLY: If you missed the other days, here's a quick directory: DAY 1: DAY 2: DAY 3: DAY 4: DAY 5: DAY 6: DAY SEVEN The Eve of St. Nicholas  By: Elizabeth M. Laws Hibberd / Faith Wynne (1836 - c. 1930) -     From:   eText: What the Little Bird Told the Christmas Tree (1913)    Read by: Ruth Golding -   The Thin Santa Claus or The Chicken Yard That Was a Christmas Stocking (1909) By: Ellis Parker Butler -     From:   eText:   Read by: Several readers - Read by: (2:09) (30 December 1865 – 18 January 1936) was an English short-story writer, poet, and novelist chiefly remembered for his tales and poems of British soldiers in India, and his tales for children. He was born in Bombay, in the Bombay Presidency of British India, and was taken by his family to England when he was five years old. Kipling is best known for his works of fiction, including The Jungle Book (a collection of stories which includes "Rikki-Tikki-Tavi"), Just So Stories (1902), Kim (1901) (a tale of adventure), many short stories, including "The Man Who Would Be King" (1888); and his poems, including "Mandalay" (1890), "Gunga Din" (1890), and "If—" (1910). Read by: (3:16) (11 December 1883, Ogden, Utah –22 February 1963, Wadsworth, Kansas) was a soldier in both the British and American armies of World War I, and an author, screenwriter, actor and movie producer. Read by: (14:18) (18 June 1855 – 18 February 1913) was an Australian short-story writer and novelist. Read by: (14:35) (1862 - 1934) - Read by: (5:18) A Spin for the Ages (2023) By: Bob Greenberger         Read by: Aiden Ordover _____ Digital Premium Audiobook Shop:  CraftLit's Socials Find everything here:  Join the newsletter:  Podcast site: http://craftlit.com Facebook:  Facebook group:  Pinterest:  TikTok podcast:  Spooky Narration:  Email: heather@craftlit.com Call and share your thoughts! 1-206-350-1642 SUPPORT THE SHOW! CraftLit App Premium feed  (only one tier available) PATREON:  (all tiers, below) Walter Harright - $5/mo for the same audio as on App Jane Eyre - $10/mo for even-month Book Parties Mina Harker - $15/mo for odd-month Watch Parties All tiers and benefits are also available as —YouTube Channel Memberships —Ko-Fi NEW at CraftLit.com — *Premium SITE Membership*  (identical to Patreon except more of your support goes to the CraftLit Team) If you want to join us for a particular Book or Watch Party but you don't want to subscribe, please use  or CraftLit @ Venmo and include what you want to attend in the message field. Please give us at least 24 hours to get your message and add you to the attendee list. Download the FREE CraftLit App for iOS or Android (you can call or email feedback straight from within the app) Call 1-206-350-1642

On December 3rd, 1971, India and Pakistan go to war on two fronts, battling for the future of Bangladesh. In the East, the Indian army races against time, hoping to capture Dacca and force a Pakistani surrender before the United Nations can demand a ceasefire. Meanwhile, Richard Nixon and Henry Kissinger unleash a fusillade of diplomatic pressure to frighten a defiant Indira Gandhi into compliance. After months of imprisonment, Sheikh Mujibur Rahman learns what has happened to his country. The war ends, and a new era begins.  SOURCES: Bass, Gary K. The Blood Telegram: Nixon, Kissinger, and a Forgotten Genocide. 2013. Bennet-Jones, Own. The Bhutto Dynasty. 2020. Carney, Scott. Miklian, Jason. The Vortex: A True Story of History's Deadliest Storm, an  Unspeakable War, and Liberation. 2022. Chang, Jung. Halliday, Jon. Mao: The Unknown Story. 2005. Frank, Katherine. Indira: The Life of Indira Nehru Gandhi. 2001. Gewen, Barry. The Inevitability of Tragedy: Henry Kissinger and his World. 2020. Hiro, Dilip. The Longest August: The Unflinching Rivalry Between India and Pakistan. 2015. Hitchens, Christopher. The Trial of Henry Kissinger. 2001. Hoodbhoy, Pervez. Pakistan: Origins, Identity and Future. 2023. Jalal, Ayesha. The Struggle for Pakistan. 2014. James, Lawrence. Raj: The Making and Unmaking of British India. 1997. Jayakar, Pupul. Indira Gandhi: A Biography. 1975. Khosa, Faisal. The Making of Martyrs in India, Pakistan & Bangladesh. 2021. K.S. Nair. December In Dacca. 2022. Keay, John. India: A History. 2000. Mookherjee, Nayanika. The Spectral Wound. 2015. Raghavan, Srinath. 1971: A Global History of the Creation of Bangladesh. 2013. Rose, Leo. Sisson, Richard. War and Secession. Pakistan, India, and the Creation of Bangladesh. 1990. Saikia, Yasmin. Women, War, and the Making of Bangladesh. 2011. Schanberg, Sydney.”He Tells Full Story of Arrest and Detention.” New York Times Jan 1972 Schendel, Willem van. A History of Bangladesh. 2009. Schwartz, Thomas Alan. Henry Kissinger and American Power. 2020. Sengupta, Nitish. Land of Two Rivers: A History of Bengal. 2011. Siddiqi, A. R. Yahya Khan: The Rise and Fall of a Soldier. 2020.  Tudda, Chris. A Cold War Turning Point: Nixon and China, 1969-1972. 2012. Walsh, Declan. The Nine Lives of Pakistan. 2020. Zakaria, Anam. 1971: A People's History from Bangladesh, Pakistan, and India. 2019. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

This podcast dives deep into the complex history and dynamics of Nepal-India relations, shedding light on pivotal topics like the Sugauli Treaty, Kalapani border dispute, and Lipulekh territorial issues. We explore how Nepal's relationship with British India shaped its current geopolitical position and discuss the Void Treaty and its implications for Nepal's sovereignty. With a focus on geopolitics in South Asia, we analyze the challenges of Nepal's foreign policy instability and its struggles to maintain an independent foreign policy amidst pressure from both India and China. Key themes include the differences between Bhagwaan, Ishwar, and Devta, the India-China conflict, and Nepal's unique challenges with water sovereignty and political dependency. The podcast also covers the 2015 blockade, how it impacted Nepal's economy, and the nation's increasing efforts to navigate its position between larger powers. We delve into Nepal's hydropower projects, the Mahakali River dispute, and discuss whether Nepal could become the “Israel of the East” in terms of its strategic importance. Other highlights include Nepal's dependency on India, the significance of Greater Nepal, and the cultural and political implications of Nepal's transition to secularism. This comprehensive discussion offers insight into the key figures, treaties, and policies shaping Nepal's modern history. Whether you're interested in geopolitical issues, Hindu theology, or regional history, this podcast is a must-watch for understanding Nepal's challenges and aspirations. GET CONNECTED WITH Chandra Dev Bhatta: X: https://x.com/cdbhatta?s=21  

This historical fantasy is from the realms of classic YA and we're both super excited to revisit this novel that we both read around 10 years ago for the podcast as from what we remember, it has definite dark academia fantasy vibes.While this series is now out of print, ‘The Great and Terrible Beauty' is still available in ebook, and it stands as a touchstone of YA. It's 1895, and after the death of her mother, 16-year-old Gemma Doyle is shipped off from the life she knows in British India to Spence Academy, a proper boarding school in England.Lonely, guilt-ridden, and prone to visions of the future that have an uncomfortable habit of coming true, Gemma's reception at Spence is a chilly one. To make things worse, she's being followed by a mysterious young Indian man who has been sent to watch her. But why? What is her destiny? And what will her entanglement with Spence's most powerful girls – and their foray into the spiritual world – lead to?But how will it hold up to the tropes of dark academia and a reread a decade later?In this episode we discuss:Revisiting a classic YA novel fifteen years laterSophie's issues with historical fiction and the subjugation of womenAn unexpected treatise on politics, reading, and how everything is political in the wake of the 2024 US Presidential ElectionAnd a whole lot of tangents…

Jami Chandio comes on The Pakistan Experience to discuss the History and Philosophy of Sindh. On this deep dive podcast we discuss the Sindh Rawadari March, Sindh's stand against religious extremism, the historic injustices against Sindh, the separation of Karachi from Sindh, the Sindhi Language, the creation of Pakistan, partition, One-unit movement, Federalism, the 18th Amendment and more. Mr. Jami Chandio is an author, literary critic, scholar and public intellectual having more than 20 published books on his literary and academic account. He delivers lectures and conducts academic trainings in Universities and public spaces across the country and abroad on political philosophy/theories, democratic federalism, federal history of British India and Pakistan, Tasawwuf, political Islam and pure literature. He has been delivering lectures and trainings to Parliamentarians, politcal cadres, civil servants and academia in Pakistan since 2004. He serves as a resource person with many national educational institutions, international think tanks based in Pakistan and South Asia. As a visiting scholar he delivers lectures on federalism at National Institute of Management (NIM) to the batches of senior civil servants from across the country. He was awarded 5-month academic democracy fellowship in Washigton DC in 2008-9. He represented south Asian and did research fellowship in European Parliament in 2004 on European federalism. He has been conducting research and writing critical studies on curriculum reforms and text books in Pakistan. In 2022 he conducted review and critical analysis of curriculum and textbooks as an independent consultant by UNESCO Pakistan on “ Integrating Culture and Heritage in Curriculum and Textbooks in Sindh, Pakistan”, which was widely appreciated and acknowledged by the UNESCO and Government institutions as well as civil society and academia. He has worked with higher educational institutions on educational reforms, policy frameworks and setting strategic outlines as an academic scholar and expert. His books and research papers are included in curriculum in higher education in many Universities in Pakistan federalism and literary criticism. He is a widely travelled scholar, author and researcher. The Pakistan Experience is an independently produced podcast looking to tell stories about Pakistan through conversations. Please consider supporting us on Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/thepakistanexperience To support the channel: Jazzcash/Easypaisa - 0325 -2982912 Patreon.com/thepakistanexperience Chapters: 0:00 Introduction 1:30 Sindh Rawadari March 6:50 Religious Organizations were against the creation of Pakistan 10:00 Federalism and the Creation of Pakistan 15:15 Was Pakistan created as an Islamic Country? 20:00 Was Pakistan created through the Assemblies? 25:00 Constitution, Federation and Religious Parties 35:27 PMLN and PPP 40:00 Separating Karachi from Sindh 50:00 Imposition of Identity and the Urdu Language 1:01:00 Languages are dying in Pakistan 1:04:56 Interfaith Harmony and the Sindhi Language 1:12:40 Culture and Demography of Karachi 1:23:00 Sindh vs One Unit 1:32:30 NFC Award 1:35:00 Audience Questions And Please stay in touch: https://twitter.com/ThePakistanExp1 https://www.facebook.com/thepakistanexperience https://instagram.com/thepakistanexpeperience The podcast is hosted by comedian and writer, Shehzad Ghias Shaikh. Shehzad is a Fulbright scholar with a Masters in Theatre from Brooklyn College. He is also one of the foremost Stand-up comedians in Pakistan and frequently writes for numerous publications. Instagram.com/shehzadghiasshaikh Facebook.com/Shehzadghias/ Twitter.com/shehzad89 Join this channel to get access to perks: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC44l9XMwecN5nSgIF2Dvivg/join

Pakistani-Canadian journalist Sadiya Ansari investigates the life of her mysterious grandmother Tahira, who leaves her children to follow a lover in post-Partition Pakistan. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

As Yahya Khan's crackdown in East Pakistan sparks a refugee crisis and a guerilla insurgency, the neighboring nation of India, led by Prime Minister Indira Gandhi, must decide how to respond. Meanwhile, President Richard Nixon and Henry Kissinger pursue secret talks with Communist China. In Madison Square Garden, musicians George Harrison and Ravi Shankar organize a massive charity concert for the people of Bangladesh.  SOURCES: Bass, Gary K. The Blood Telegram: Nixon, Kissinger, and a Forgotten Genocide. 2013. Bennet-Jones, Own. The Bhutto Dynasty. 2020. Carney, Scott. Miklian, Jason. The Vortex: A True Story of History's Deadliest Storm, an  Unspeakable War, and Liberation. 2022. Chang, Jung. Halliday, Jon. Mao: The Unknown Story. 2005. Frank, Katherine. Indira: The Life of Indira Nehru Gandhi. 2001. Gewen, Barry. The Inevitability of Tragedy: Henry Kissinger and his World. 2020. Hiro, Dilip. The Longest August: The Unflinching Rivalry Between India and Pakistan. 2015. Hitchens, Christopher. The Trial of Henry Kissinger. 2001. Hoodbhoy, Pervez. Pakistan: Origins, Identity and Future. 2023. Jalal, Ayesha. The Struggle for Pakistan. 2014. James, Lawrence. Raj: The Making and Unmaking of British India. 1997. Jayakar, Pupul. Indira Gandhi: A Biography. 1975. Khosa, Faisal. The Making of Martyrs in India, Pakistan & Bangladesh. 2021. K.S. Nair. December In Dacca. 2022. Keay, John. India: A History. 2000. Mookherjee, Nayanika. The Spectral Wound. 2015. Raghavan, Srinath. 1971: A Global History of the Creation of Bangladesh. 2013. Rose, Leo. Sisson, Richard. War and Secession. Pakistan, India, and the Creation of Bangladesh. 1990. Saikia, Yasmin. Women, War, and the Making of Bangladesh. 2011. Schendel, Willem van. A History of Bangladesh. 2009. Schwartz, Thomas Alan. Henry Kissinger and American Power. 2020. Sengupta, Nitish. Land of Two Rivers: A History of Bengal. 2011. Tudda, Chris. A Cold War Turning Point: Nixon and China, 1969-1972. 2012. Walsh, Declan. The Nine Lives of Pakistan. 2020. Zakaria, Anam. 1971: A People's History from Bangladesh, Pakistan, and India. 2019. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

"British India was what had been annexed before 1857. The rest of it was princely India, which formed 45 percent of the subcontinent, almost half. At school, we learn about what happened in British India but most of us don't know about what happened in the part ruled by rajas and nawabs even though it formed such a big part of the independence movement and transfer of power and so on. It's a key element of the story of independence but somehow, it doesn't figure in textbooks. The general idea we have is that the princely kingdoms were all backward and feudal. All of them were not like that. In fact, the first constitution in India was in a princely kingdom -- Baroda. Many princes were forward thinking — there was the Maharaja's temple entry proclamation in Travancore, some states like Mysore were industrialising... The idea that all of them were backward is not true. I have tried not to pass judgement. I have tried to humanise these people and see them from different perspectives...Nehru and Patel had nothing but disdain for the royal class but Patel was a practical person. He knew he had to get them on board to sigh their own death warrants. This book is a bit of history and geography. Had it not been for these events, the map of India would be very different. I have tried to not make it like reading a record but like watching a movie" - Mallika Ravikumar, author, '565; The Dramatic Story of Unifying India' talks to Manjula Narayan about how Sardar Patel, VP Menon and the hurriedly formed States Department managed to coax and, in some cases, force princely states like Tripura, Bikaner, Travancore, Bhopal, Jammu and Kashmir, Patiala and Hyderabad, among others, to join the Indian union in 1947.

Harikatha Pitamaha Ajjada Adibhatla Narayana Das (31 August 1864 – 2 January 1945) was a multifaceted gem of a talent in diverse fields of learning and forms of fine arts in Madras Presidency, British India. He was born in Ajjada village, near Bobbili. Ajjada Adibhatla Narayana Das garu, a versatile genius of all times from Andhra Pradesh. He was a poet, musician, dancer, linguist, and philosopher with an unparalleled body of work in a wide variety of subjects with great depths. A seemingly impossible feat by human effort inspiring the rest to push their limits. A Real life "Bahumukha Praznasaali" poly art exponent. KiranPrabha narrates the highly interesting life journey of Sri Adibhatla Narayana Dasu Garu, in this episode.

On March 25th, 1971, President Yahya Khan launches Operation Searchlight in East Pakistan, a brutal military crackdown intended to snuff out Bengali separatism and restore West Pakistani authority. Meanwhile, an American diplomat in Dacca named Archer Blood begins reporting and documenting the slaughter, hoping to convince his government to step in and restrain Yahya. In Washington, D.C., President Richard Nixon and his national security advisor Henry Kissinger weigh the political costs of intervening in the atrocities, while secretly planning a groundbreaking outreach to Communist China.  SOURCES: Bass, Gary K. The Blood Telegram: Nixon, Kissinger, and a Forgotten Genocide. 2013. Bennet-Jones, Own. The Bhutto Dynasty. 2020. Carney, Scott. Miklian, Jason. The Vortex: A True Story of History's Deadliest Storm, an  Unspeakable War, and Liberation. 2022. Chang, Jung. Halliday, Jon. Mao: The Unknown Story. 2005. Frank, Katherine. Indira: The Life of Indira Nehru Gandhi. 2001. Gewen, Barry. The Inevitability of Tragedy: Henry Kissinger and his World. 2020. Hiro, Dilip. The Longest August: The Unflinching Rivalry Between India and Pakistan. 2015. Hitchens, Christopher. The Trial of Henry Kissinger. 2001. Hoodbhoy, Pervez. Pakistan: Origins, Identity and Future. 2023. Jalal, Ayesha. The Struggle for Pakistan. 2014. James, Lawrence. Raj: The Making and Unmaking of British India. 1997. Jayakar, Pupul. Indira Gandhi: A Biography. 1975. Khosa, Faisal. The Making of Martyrs in India, Pakistan & Bangladesh. 2021. K.S. Nair. December In Dacca. 2022. Keay, John. India: A History. 2000. Mookherjee, Nayanika. The Spectral Wound. 2015. Raghavan, Srinath. 1971: A Global History of the Creation of Bangladesh. 2013. Rose, Leo. Sisson, Richard. War and Secession. Pakistan, India, and the Creation of Bangladesh. 1990. Saikia, Yasmin. Women, War, and the Making of Bangladesh. 2011. Schendel, Willem van. A History of Bangladesh. 2009. Schwartz, Thomas Alan. Henry Kissinger and American Power. 2020. Sengupta, Nitish. Land of Two Rivers: A History of Bengal. 2011. Tudda, Chris. A Cold War Turning Point: Nixon and China, 1969-1972. 2012. Walsh, Declan. The Nine Lives of Pakistan. 2020. Zakaria, Anam. 1971: A People's History from Bangladesh, Pakistan, and India. 2019. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

In 2021, Vancouver City Council formally apologized for historical discrimination toward  passengers travelling on board the Komagata Maru steamship from British India in 1914.  Last month, the City unveiled special commemorative signs near the harbour honoring those impacted by the Komagata Maru tragedy. The street signs were designed by Jagandeep Nagra, a queer Punjabi visual artist and community advocate.

Joseph Rudyard Kipling (30 December 1865 – 18 January 1936) was an English journalist, novelist, poet, and short-story writer. He was born in British India, which inspired much of his work.Kipling's works of fiction include the Jungle Book duology (The Jungle Book, 1894; The Second Jungle Book, 1895), Kim (1901), the Just So Stories (1902) and many short stories, including "The Man Who Would Be King" (1888). His poems include "Mandalay" (1890), "Gunga Din" (1890), "The Gods of the Copybook Headings" (1919), and "If—" (1910). He is seen as an innovator in the art of the short story. His children's books are classics; one critic noted "a versatile and luminous narrative gift".Kipling in the late 19th and early 20th centuries was among the United Kingdom's most popular writers. Henry James said "Kipling strikes me personally as the most complete man of genius, as distinct from fine intelligence, that I have ever known." In 1907, he was awarded the Nobel Prize in Literature, as the first English-language writer to receive the prize, and at 41, its youngest recipient to date. He was also sounded out for the British Poet Laureateship and several times for a knighthood, but declined both. Following his death in 1936, his ashes were interred at Poets' Corner, part of the South Transept of Westminster Abbey.-bio via Wikipedia Get full access to The Daily Poem Podcast at dailypoempod.substack.com/subscribe

Nuances podcast about Our Asian Stories. Each episode explores different aspects of sexual diversity in premodern Asia with commentary from guest scholars. Episodes are divided into a narrative portion, and a discussion with a guest co-host from the queer Asian community. Introduction & content warnings Why is this series focusing on premodern Asia? The West isn't the only imperial power From the Silk Road to the Age of Exploration British colonization of India, Section 377 & vagrancy Laws Premodern Chinese law about sexual crimes (w. Prof. CunCun Wu) Portuguese vs British India (w. Prof. Anjali Arondekar) Spanish colonization of the Philippines French colonization of Vietnam/Cambodia/Laos Discussion with co-host Stella Acknowledgments Guest co-host: Stella is a writer, editor, and co-host for the Brazn Azn podcast along with the lovely Virginia Duan.  Did you enjoy this episode?

Provincial Democracy: Political Imaginaries at the End of Empire in Twentieth-century South India (Cambridge UP, 2023) delves into the period between the decline of empire and the rise of the Indian nation-state in the context of seismic global transformations of the early twentieth century-namely the two World Wars and the crisis of the imperial order. Rama Sundari Mantena argues this period is defined by not only the dominance of the nation state and debates over a new global order, but also mass participation in defining and negotiating the form and substance of democratic political futures. Mantena recovers this debate by reconstructing the emerging vocabularies of liberalism, political rights, and self-government in colonial South India, especially in the princely domain of Hyderabad and among Andhra speakers in British India's Madras province. Provincial Democracy shifts the focus from the dominant narrative of linguistic nationalism as defining regionalism to debates over questions of representation, rights, political reforms, and federalism. Thus, it uncovers a broad perspective on political imaginaries that anticipated democracy in independent India. Rama Mantena is Associate Professor of History at the University of Illinois Chicago. Her first book The Origins of Modern Historiography in India (New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2012) explored everyday practices surrounding acts of collecting, surveying, and antiquarianism in the early period of British colonial rule in India. Anindita Ghosh is a doctoral candidate in history at the University of Illinois Chicago. Her dissertation is about the histories of absorption of the eastern native states of South Asia into the nations and their socio-political afterlives in the post-colonial nations. Vatsal Naresh is a Lecturer in Social Studies at Harvard University. His recent publications include co-edited volumes on Negotiating Democracy and Religious Pluralism (OUP 2021) and Constituent Assemblies (CUP 2018). Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/new-books-network

Provincial Democracy: Political Imaginaries at the End of Empire in Twentieth-century South India (Cambridge UP, 2023) delves into the period between the decline of empire and the rise of the Indian nation-state in the context of seismic global transformations of the early twentieth century-namely the two World Wars and the crisis of the imperial order. Rama Sundari Mantena argues this period is defined by not only the dominance of the nation state and debates over a new global order, but also mass participation in defining and negotiating the form and substance of democratic political futures. Mantena recovers this debate by reconstructing the emerging vocabularies of liberalism, political rights, and self-government in colonial South India, especially in the princely domain of Hyderabad and among Andhra speakers in British India's Madras province. Provincial Democracy shifts the focus from the dominant narrative of linguistic nationalism as defining regionalism to debates over questions of representation, rights, political reforms, and federalism. Thus, it uncovers a broad perspective on political imaginaries that anticipated democracy in independent India. Rama Mantena is Associate Professor of History at the University of Illinois Chicago. Her first book The Origins of Modern Historiography in India (New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2012) explored everyday practices surrounding acts of collecting, surveying, and antiquarianism in the early period of British colonial rule in India. Anindita Ghosh is a doctoral candidate in history at the University of Illinois Chicago. Her dissertation is about the histories of absorption of the eastern native states of South Asia into the nations and their socio-political afterlives in the post-colonial nations. Vatsal Naresh is a Lecturer in Social Studies at Harvard University. His recent publications include co-edited volumes on Negotiating Democracy and Religious Pluralism (OUP 2021) and Constituent Assemblies (CUP 2018). Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/history

Provincial Democracy: Political Imaginaries at the End of Empire in Twentieth-century South India (Cambridge UP, 2023) delves into the period between the decline of empire and the rise of the Indian nation-state in the context of seismic global transformations of the early twentieth century-namely the two World Wars and the crisis of the imperial order. Rama Sundari Mantena argues this period is defined by not only the dominance of the nation state and debates over a new global order, but also mass participation in defining and negotiating the form and substance of democratic political futures. Mantena recovers this debate by reconstructing the emerging vocabularies of liberalism, political rights, and self-government in colonial South India, especially in the princely domain of Hyderabad and among Andhra speakers in British India's Madras province. Provincial Democracy shifts the focus from the dominant narrative of linguistic nationalism as defining regionalism to debates over questions of representation, rights, political reforms, and federalism. Thus, it uncovers a broad perspective on political imaginaries that anticipated democracy in independent India. Rama Mantena is Associate Professor of History at the University of Illinois Chicago. Her first book The Origins of Modern Historiography in India (New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2012) explored everyday practices surrounding acts of collecting, surveying, and antiquarianism in the early period of British colonial rule in India. Anindita Ghosh is a doctoral candidate in history at the University of Illinois Chicago. Her dissertation is about the histories of absorption of the eastern native states of South Asia into the nations and their socio-political afterlives in the post-colonial nations. Vatsal Naresh is a Lecturer in Social Studies at Harvard University. His recent publications include co-edited volumes on Negotiating Democracy and Religious Pluralism (OUP 2021) and Constituent Assemblies (CUP 2018). Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/political-science

Provincial Democracy: Political Imaginaries at the End of Empire in Twentieth-century South India (Cambridge UP, 2023) delves into the period between the decline of empire and the rise of the Indian nation-state in the context of seismic global transformations of the early twentieth century-namely the two World Wars and the crisis of the imperial order. Rama Sundari Mantena argues this period is defined by not only the dominance of the nation state and debates over a new global order, but also mass participation in defining and negotiating the form and substance of democratic political futures. Mantena recovers this debate by reconstructing the emerging vocabularies of liberalism, political rights, and self-government in colonial South India, especially in the princely domain of Hyderabad and among Andhra speakers in British India's Madras province. Provincial Democracy shifts the focus from the dominant narrative of linguistic nationalism as defining regionalism to debates over questions of representation, rights, political reforms, and federalism. Thus, it uncovers a broad perspective on political imaginaries that anticipated democracy in independent India. Rama Mantena is Associate Professor of History at the University of Illinois Chicago. Her first book The Origins of Modern Historiography in India (New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2012) explored everyday practices surrounding acts of collecting, surveying, and antiquarianism in the early period of British colonial rule in India. Anindita Ghosh is a doctoral candidate in history at the University of Illinois Chicago. Her dissertation is about the histories of absorption of the eastern native states of South Asia into the nations and their socio-political afterlives in the post-colonial nations. Vatsal Naresh is a Lecturer in Social Studies at Harvard University. His recent publications include co-edited volumes on Negotiating Democracy and Religious Pluralism (OUP 2021) and Constituent Assemblies (CUP 2018). Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/intellectual-history

Provincial Democracy: Political Imaginaries at the End of Empire in Twentieth-century South India (Cambridge UP, 2023) delves into the period between the decline of empire and the rise of the Indian nation-state in the context of seismic global transformations of the early twentieth century-namely the two World Wars and the crisis of the imperial order. Rama Sundari Mantena argues this period is defined by not only the dominance of the nation state and debates over a new global order, but also mass participation in defining and negotiating the form and substance of democratic political futures. Mantena recovers this debate by reconstructing the emerging vocabularies of liberalism, political rights, and self-government in colonial South India, especially in the princely domain of Hyderabad and among Andhra speakers in British India's Madras province. Provincial Democracy shifts the focus from the dominant narrative of linguistic nationalism as defining regionalism to debates over questions of representation, rights, political reforms, and federalism. Thus, it uncovers a broad perspective on political imaginaries that anticipated democracy in independent India. Rama Mantena is Associate Professor of History at the University of Illinois Chicago. Her first book The Origins of Modern Historiography in India (New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2012) explored everyday practices surrounding acts of collecting, surveying, and antiquarianism in the early period of British colonial rule in India. Anindita Ghosh is a doctoral candidate in history at the University of Illinois Chicago. Her dissertation is about the histories of absorption of the eastern native states of South Asia into the nations and their socio-political afterlives in the post-colonial nations. Vatsal Naresh is a Lecturer in Social Studies at Harvard University. His recent publications include co-edited volumes on Negotiating Democracy and Religious Pluralism (OUP 2021) and Constituent Assemblies (CUP 2018). Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/south-asian-studies

Swati Chattopadhyay's book Small Spaces: Recasting the Architecture of Empire (Bloomsbury, 2023) recasts the history of the British empire by focusing on the small spaces that made the empire possible. It takes as its subject a series of small architectural spaces, objects, and landscapes and uses them to narrate the untold stories of the marginalized people-the servants, women, children, subalterns, and racialized minorities-who held up the infrastructure of empire. In so doing it opens up an important new approach to architectural history: an invitation to shift our attention from the large to the small scale.  Taking the British empire in India as its primary focus, this book presents eighteen short, readable chapters to explore an array of overlooked places and spaces. From cook rooms and slave quarters to outhouses, go-downs, and medicine cupboards, each chapter reveals how and why these kinds of minor spaces are so important to understanding colonialism. With the focus of history so often on the large scale - global trade networks, vast regions, and architectures of power and domination - Small Spaces shows instead how we need to rethink this aura of magnitude so that our reading is not beholden such imperialist optics. With chapters which can be read separately as individual accounts of objects, spaces, and buildings, and introductions showing how this critical methodology can challenge the methods and theories of urban and architectural history, Small Spaces is a must-read for anyone wishing to decolonize disciplinary practices in the field of architectural, urban, and colonial history. Altogether, it provides a paradigm-breaking account of how to 'unlearn empire', whether in British India or elsewhere. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/new-books-network

Swati Chattopadhyay's book Small Spaces: Recasting the Architecture of Empire (Bloomsbury, 2023) recasts the history of the British empire by focusing on the small spaces that made the empire possible. It takes as its subject a series of small architectural spaces, objects, and landscapes and uses them to narrate the untold stories of the marginalized people-the servants, women, children, subalterns, and racialized minorities-who held up the infrastructure of empire. In so doing it opens up an important new approach to architectural history: an invitation to shift our attention from the large to the small scale.  Taking the British empire in India as its primary focus, this book presents eighteen short, readable chapters to explore an array of overlooked places and spaces. From cook rooms and slave quarters to outhouses, go-downs, and medicine cupboards, each chapter reveals how and why these kinds of minor spaces are so important to understanding colonialism. With the focus of history so often on the large scale - global trade networks, vast regions, and architectures of power and domination - Small Spaces shows instead how we need to rethink this aura of magnitude so that our reading is not beholden such imperialist optics. With chapters which can be read separately as individual accounts of objects, spaces, and buildings, and introductions showing how this critical methodology can challenge the methods and theories of urban and architectural history, Small Spaces is a must-read for anyone wishing to decolonize disciplinary practices in the field of architectural, urban, and colonial history. Altogether, it provides a paradigm-breaking account of how to 'unlearn empire', whether in British India or elsewhere. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/history

Swati Chattopadhyay's book Small Spaces: Recasting the Architecture of Empire (Bloomsbury, 2023) recasts the history of the British empire by focusing on the small spaces that made the empire possible. It takes as its subject a series of small architectural spaces, objects, and landscapes and uses them to narrate the untold stories of the marginalized people-the servants, women, children, subalterns, and racialized minorities-who held up the infrastructure of empire. In so doing it opens up an important new approach to architectural history: an invitation to shift our attention from the large to the small scale.  Taking the British empire in India as its primary focus, this book presents eighteen short, readable chapters to explore an array of overlooked places and spaces. From cook rooms and slave quarters to outhouses, go-downs, and medicine cupboards, each chapter reveals how and why these kinds of minor spaces are so important to understanding colonialism. With the focus of history so often on the large scale - global trade networks, vast regions, and architectures of power and domination - Small Spaces shows instead how we need to rethink this aura of magnitude so that our reading is not beholden such imperialist optics. With chapters which can be read separately as individual accounts of objects, spaces, and buildings, and introductions showing how this critical methodology can challenge the methods and theories of urban and architectural history, Small Spaces is a must-read for anyone wishing to decolonize disciplinary practices in the field of architectural, urban, and colonial history. Altogether, it provides a paradigm-breaking account of how to 'unlearn empire', whether in British India or elsewhere. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/architecture

Swati Chattopadhyay's book Small Spaces: Recasting the Architecture of Empire (Bloomsbury, 2023) recasts the history of the British empire by focusing on the small spaces that made the empire possible. It takes as its subject a series of small architectural spaces, objects, and landscapes and uses them to narrate the untold stories of the marginalized people-the servants, women, children, subalterns, and racialized minorities-who held up the infrastructure of empire. In so doing it opens up an important new approach to architectural history: an invitation to shift our attention from the large to the small scale.  Taking the British empire in India as its primary focus, this book presents eighteen short, readable chapters to explore an array of overlooked places and spaces. From cook rooms and slave quarters to outhouses, go-downs, and medicine cupboards, each chapter reveals how and why these kinds of minor spaces are so important to understanding colonialism. With the focus of history so often on the large scale - global trade networks, vast regions, and architectures of power and domination - Small Spaces shows instead how we need to rethink this aura of magnitude so that our reading is not beholden such imperialist optics. With chapters which can be read separately as individual accounts of objects, spaces, and buildings, and introductions showing how this critical methodology can challenge the methods and theories of urban and architectural history, Small Spaces is a must-read for anyone wishing to decolonize disciplinary practices in the field of architectural, urban, and colonial history. Altogether, it provides a paradigm-breaking account of how to 'unlearn empire', whether in British India or elsewhere. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/south-asian-studies

Swati Chattopadhyay's book Small Spaces: Recasting the Architecture of Empire (Bloomsbury, 2023) recasts the history of the British empire by focusing on the small spaces that made the empire possible. It takes as its subject a series of small architectural spaces, objects, and landscapes and uses them to narrate the untold stories of the marginalized people-the servants, women, children, subalterns, and racialized minorities-who held up the infrastructure of empire. In so doing it opens up an important new approach to architectural history: an invitation to shift our attention from the large to the small scale.  Taking the British empire in India as its primary focus, this book presents eighteen short, readable chapters to explore an array of overlooked places and spaces. From cook rooms and slave quarters to outhouses, go-downs, and medicine cupboards, each chapter reveals how and why these kinds of minor spaces are so important to understanding colonialism. With the focus of history so often on the large scale - global trade networks, vast regions, and architectures of power and domination - Small Spaces shows instead how we need to rethink this aura of magnitude so that our reading is not beholden such imperialist optics. With chapters which can be read separately as individual accounts of objects, spaces, and buildings, and introductions showing how this critical methodology can challenge the methods and theories of urban and architectural history, Small Spaces is a must-read for anyone wishing to decolonize disciplinary practices in the field of architectural, urban, and colonial history. Altogether, it provides a paradigm-breaking account of how to 'unlearn empire', whether in British India or elsewhere. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/art

This week we talk about student protests, curfews, and East Pakistan.We also discuss Sheikh Hasina, Myanmar, and authoritarians.Recommended Book: The Identity Trap by Yascha MounkTranscriptBangladesh is a country of about 170 million people, those people living in an area a little smaller than the US state of Illinois, a hair over 57,000 square miles.It shares a smallish southeastern border with Myanmar, and its entire southern border runs up against the Bay of Bengal, which is part of the Indian Ocean, but it's surrounded to the west, north, and most of its eastern border by India, which nearly entirely encompasses Bangladesh due to the nature of its historical formation.Back in 1905, a previously somewhat sprawling administrative region called Bengal, which has a lot history of human occupation and development, and which for the past several hundred years leading up to that point had been colonized by various Europeans, was carved-out by the British as a separate province, newly designated Eastern Bengal and Assam, at the urging of local Muslim aristocrats who were playing ball with then-governing British leaders, the lot of them having worked together to make the region one of the most profitable in British India, boasting the highest gross domestic product, and the highest per-capita income on the subcontinent, at the time.This division separated Bengal from its Hindu-dominated neighboring provinces, including nearby, and booming Calcutta, which was pissed at this development because it allowed the British to invest more directly and lavishly in an area that was already doing pretty well for itself, without risking some of that money overflowing into nearby, Hindu areas, like, for instance, Calcutta.This division also allowed local Muslim leaders to attain more political power, in part because of all that investment, but also because it freed them up to form an array of political interest groups that, because of the nature of this provincial division, allowed them to focus on the needs of Muslim citizens, and to counter the influence of remaining local Hindu landowners, and other such folks who have previously wielded an outsized portion of that power; these leaders were redistributing power in the region to Muslims over Hindus, basically, in contrast to how things worked, previously.In 1935, the British government promised to grant the Bengalese government limited provincial autonomy as part of a larger effort to set the subcontinent out on its own path, leading up to the grand decolonization effort that European nations would undergo following WWII, and though there was a significant effort to make Bengal its own country in 1946, post-war and just before the partition of British India, that effort proved futile, and those in charge of doing the carving-up instead divided the country into areas that are basically aligned with modern day India and modern day Pakistan, but two-thirds of Bengal were given to Pakistan, while one-third was given to India.This meant that a portion of Pakistan, the most populous portion, though with a smaller land area, was separated from the remainder of the country by Indian territory, and the logic of dividing things in this way was that the British wanted to basically delineate Hindu areas from Muslim areas, and while large, spread-out groups of Muslims lived roughly within the borders of modern day Pakistan, a large, more densely crowded group of Muslims lived in Bengal, hence the otherwise nonsensical-seeming decision to break a country up into two pieces in this way.Frictions developed between mainland Pakistan and the portion of Pakistan, formally Bengal, that was initially called East Bengal, and then renamed East Pakistan in 1955, almost immediately. There was a movement to get the Bengali language officially recognized as a state language, alongside Urdu, which was promoted as the exclusive federal language of Pakistan, early on, and a list of six demands were presented to the Pakistani government by East Pakistan-based politicians, all of which aimed to get the region equal representation in what they felt was a West Pakistan-biased system, despite the fact that, again, East Pakistan, formally Bengal, was the most populous part of the country, and they had the most thriving economy, as well, bringing in most of the country's income.These demands led to what's become known as the Six Points Movement, which in turn, just a few years later, kicked off the Bangladesh War of Independence, which was exactly what it sounds like: an effort by folks in East Pakistan to achieve independence from the larger government of Pakistan, which had in recent years been taken over by a military junta which, like the previous government, didn't give as much political power to Easy Pakistanis.That junta, in late March of 1971, launched a military operation called Operation Searchlight that was meant to take out separatists in East Pakistan—but in practice this meant they swooped in and started targeting academics, members of the local intelligentsia, and people of Hindu faith, alongside members of the rabble-rousing groups that were petitioning for more power in this smaller-by-landmass, but larger by population and income, segment of the country.Operation Searchlight sparked the aforementioned Bangladesh War of Independence, and nine months later, the military government's efforts during this conflict were deemed to be genocidal because of how they targeted ethnic Bengalis, killing somewhere between 300,000 and 3 million of them, while also intentionally and systematically raping hundreds of thousands of Bengali women, the soldiers who committed these acts doing so with the formal go-ahead from their government—they were told to do so, basically.These atrocities eventually pulled India into the conflict, in part because millions of Bengalis were fleeing across their border to escape the genocide, and in part because the genocide was occurring, to begin with, and that sparked the 1971 Indo-Pakistani War, which eventually led to an end to that genocide when Pakistan's government surrendered at the tail-end of 1971.That victory led to, formerly Bengal, then East Pakistan, now Bangladesh's independence from Pakistan. It also concretized India's military dominance in the region, and Pakistan, what remained of it, lost more than half its population, much of its economic base, and suffered a long period of embarrassment that left it questioning the basis of its militant, braggadocios approach to both nationalism and foreign policy; it was previously a well-respected and feared military force, but it became a somewhat eyes-downcast entity in the region for a while, lots of reforms eventually helping it shore-up its economy, but remnants of this period still percolate in its internal politics and government operation, to this day, including its antagonism toward India, and its support of local jihadist groups, which the government uses as a counterbalance against India and other local power structures, which it can no longer face head-on.What I'd like to talk about today is a swirl of new tumult in modern day Bangladesh, and what this moderate uproar might mean for the country's future.—Modern Bangladesh is surrounded by conflict.Myanmar's military government is in the midst of a civil war, following the recent overthrow of its democratically elected civilian government, and the subsequent rise and loose collaboration between rebel groups in various parts of the country.India is booming, and is broadly considered to be the next big power player on the world stage, though it's already a regional titan. It also continues to scuffle with Pakistan to its northwest, and with China along its shared borders, which are located just a short distance north of Bangladesh.Bangladesh's coast, along the Bay of Bengal, has long underperformed economically, despite being surrounded by some of the most impactful producers of goods in the world, and this coastline, including the one occupied by Bangladesh, has become incredibly unpredictable in recent years: regularly flooding, entire villages being swept out to sea, and freshwater sources increasingly tainted by those incursions of salt water.This area already has a lot going on, in other words, and many of those goings on seem primed for amplification in the coming years, as global power structures and economic tangles continue to flex and break and rearrange, and as the climate continues to behave in increasingly distressing ways; there's a political and military realignment happening in this part of the world, but geopolitics and global economics are also swirling and rearranging in all sorts of unpredictable ways.All of which serves as context for a recent series of protests that arose around Bangladesh beginning in July of 2024.These protests were held by mostly students who were not fans of a quota scheme that was originally implemented by the government in the wake of that 1971 war with Pakistan, this system abolished in 2018, but which was reimplemented by the country's High Court shortly before the protests began.And this system basically promised that 30% of all government jobs would go to the descendants of people who fought in that war against Pakistan, for independence, alongside some jobs for minority groups, folks from traditionally underrepresented districts, and people who are disabled—though mostly it was meant to honor the descendants of those veterans.The protesting students were pissed about this reimplementation because the country's economy isn't great at the moment, and unemployment is rife; the jobs that are available are not paying much, and are not terribly secure. About 18 million young people are currently unemployed in Bangladesh.Government jobs, in contrast, tend to provide some level of consistency and predictability, pay relatively well, and tend to stick around—folks in such jobs aren't worried about being fired or their jobs disappearing, because of their very nature. So the best jobs, by that standard, are government jobs, and nearly a third of those jobs have been promised to people who, in many cases, just happened to be born to the right parents or grandparents; and notably, the majority of folks with families who fought in that conflict, are also supporters of the current, authoritarian Bangladeshi government—so part of the criticism here is that these quotas offer a means of giving cushy, reliable jobs to supporters of the current regime, without seeming like that's what they're doing.These peaceful student protests were met with heavy resistance and violence by the government, which deployed police and soldiers who shot at protestors and shut down universities and the internet in the country, and that led to more protests, including by non-students, who were also met with at times deadly force.About 150 people have been confirmed killed, so far, though that's the government's figure, and other, independent counts have tallied more than 200 dead. Hundreds of protestors were also arrested and curfews were implemented.The Supreme Court responded to the initial protests by reducing the quota in late July, to the point that about 5% of government jobs would go to descendants of those veterans, which in practice meant about 93% of all government jobs would be divvied-out in a normal way, hiring people based on who's the best candidate.Protests largely ceased after that announcement, and the government restored internet services 11 days after shutting it down across the country. Social media platforms like WhatsApp and TikTok remain restricted, however, as these services were used to promote and organize protests.Curfews have also been relaxed somewhat, though police are reportedly sweeping through schools and cities, grabbing people who were recorded at protests, arresting thousands of them, including at least half a dozen students who led the initial protests that kicked everything off.Protest leaders are now demanding that the remaining curfews be lifted, that those who were arrested are released, charges against them dropped, and that the leaders responsible for the heavy-handed response should resign.Some protestors have also called for the country's Prime Minister, Sheikh Hasina, to step down, as she initially called the students traitors, though she later backtracked and said she didn't want them to be harmed.Hasina is the longest-serving Prime Minister in Bangladeshi history, having initially stepped into the position in 1996, then stepping back into the role in 2009—she's held the office ever since.She's generally considered to be an authoritarian, and has been accused of fixing elections, extrajudicial killings, and the imprisonment, or worse, of politicians and journalists who challenge her in any way.She is, given all that, then, perhaps not surprisingly blaming these protests not on the students—not any longer, at least—but instead on opposition political parties who she says are attempting to challenge her rule, and thus, the wellbeing of the country as a whole.Given that this is a relatively well-established authoritarian regime, there's a nonzero chance those who are in charge of these protests will take the win with the quota system, even though it wasn't fully removed, and step back from these other, more substantial demands that are unlikely to be met, short of perhaps a token resignation here and there by lower-run government officials who take the bullet for those higher up.Outside demands for impartial investigations into who caused what are likewise unlikely to move forward, and the government has made it pretty clear it intends to double-down on the "it's the political opposition doing this to us, and you" narrative, which could help them justify further clamping-down on these groups, even to the point of more imprisonments and killings, but bare-minimum, in such a way that it makes dislodging the current ruling party even more difficult in the future.It's possible that tumult elsewhere around the world, including in Bangladesh's own backyard, might encourage overreaction, not under reaction, from those in charge, as Myanmar's military government is having a lot of trouble with rebels, these days, and while it's not impossible that the prime minister will give in to more moderate demands, publicly apologizing for the violent response and firing some of her higher-level ministers, her government's history hints that things are more likely to tilt in the other direction, at least for the foreseeable future, and at least if the protestors fail to scale-up their operations to incorporate more of the country's population than they have, thus far.At the moment, then, things have calmed a bit in terms of protests and government responses to those protests in Bangladesh. But there are elements to this story that have made things even more volatile than they already were, and because of how uncertain so many variables in the region are right now, there's a chance we'll see this, or connected movements and storylines, bubble back up at some point in the near-future.Show Noteshttps://www.washingtonpost.com/world/interactive/2024/bay-of-bengal-climate-change/https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sheikh_Hasinahttps://www.reuters.com/world/asia-pacific/bangladesh-protests-quelled-anger-discontent-remain-2024-07-26/https://www.theguardian.com/world/article/2024/jul/26/bangladesh-student-protests-mass-movement-against-dictatorhttps://apnews.com/article/bangladesh-campus-violence-hasina-bc513b6d68cf5b94cfd898f3c7f153d2https://www.thehindu.com/news/international/bangladesh-student-group-vows-to-resume-protests-if-demands-not-met/article68456310.ecehttps://www.aljazeera.com/news/2024/7/25/bangladesh-minister-defends-govt-response-to-protests-amid-calls-for-probehttps://www.aljazeera.com/program/newsfeed/2024/7/24/bangladeshs-deadly-protests-explainedhttps://www.britannica.com/topic/largest-U-S-state-by-areahttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bangladeshhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indo-Pakistani_war_of_1971 This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit letsknowthings.substack.com/subscribe

Mumbai-based Anirban Dasgupta is a stand-up comedian and screenwriter with a distinct comedic style. A former corporate salesman, Anirban has performed extensively in India and across the world including the prestigious Just For Laughs in Montreal and the Melbourne International Comedy Festival. His first stand-up special Take It Easy was released on Amazon Prime Video to wide acclaim, as was Afsos, the dark comedy series he created, also on Prime. This year he makes his Edinburgh debut with his show Polite Provocation, where he explores three generations of his family back to British India, the birth of his daughter and the immediate question: what world did he bring his child into?. Anirban Dasgupta is guest number 410 on My Time Capsule and chats to Michael Fenton Stevens about the five things he'd like to put in a time capsule; four he'd like to preserve and one he'd like to bury and never have to think about again .Get tickets for Anirban Dasgupta's Edinburgh show here - https://tickets.edfringe.com/whats-on/anirban-dasgupta-polite-provocation .Follow Anirban Dasgupta on Twitter: @adg_5 & Instagram: @anirbandasgupta5 .Follow My Time Capsule on Twitter, Instagram & Facebook: @MyTCpod .Follow Michael Fenton Stevens on Twitter: @fentonstevens & Instagram @mikefentonstevens .Produced and edited by John Fenton-Stevens for Cast Off Productions .Music by Pass The Peas Music .Artwork by matthewboxall.com .This podcast is proud to be associated with the charity Viva! Providing theatrical opportunities for hundreds of young people. Get bonus episodes and ad-free listening by becoming a team member with Acast+! Your support will help us to keep making My Time Capsule. Join our team now! https://plus.acast.com/s/mytimecapsule. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

In the wake of the deadly Bhola Cyclone, 50 million Pakistanis go to the polls on December 7th, 1970 and cast their votes in a national election, which yields unexpected and destabilizing results. As the emergent factions fight for control of Pakistan's nascent democracy, the political process slowly disintegrates and the gulf between East and West Pakistan becomes irreconcilable. SOURCES: Bass, Gary K. The Blood Telegram: Nixon, Kissinger, and a Forgotten Genocide. 2013. Bennet-Jones, Own. The Bhutto Dynasty. 2020. Carney, Scott. Miklian, Jason. The Vortex: A True Story of History's Deadliest Storm, an  Unspeakable War, and Liberation. 2022. Chang, Jung. Halliday, Jon. Mao: The Unknown Story. 2005. Frank, Katherine. Indira: The Life of Indira Nehru Gandhi. 2001. Gewen, Barry. The Inevitability of Tragedy: Henry Kissinger and his World. 2020. Hiro, Dilip. The Longest August: The Unflinching Rivalry Between India and Pakistan. 2015. Hitchens, Christopher. The Trial of Henry Kissinger. 2001. Hoodbhoy, Pervez. Pakistan: Origins, Identity and Future. 2023. Jalal, Ayesha. The Struggle for Pakistan. 2014. James, Lawrence. Raj: The Making and Unmaking of British India. 1997. Jayakar, Pupul. Indira Gandhi: A Biography. 1975. Khosa, Faisal. The Making of Martyrs in India, Pakistan & Bangladesh. 2021. K.S. Nair. December In Dacca. 2022. Keay, John. India: A History. 2000. Mookherjee, Nayanika. The Spectral Wound. 2015. Raghavan, Srinath. 1971: A Global History of the Creation of Bangladesh. 2013. Rose, Leo. Sisson, Richard. War and Secession. Pakistan, India, and the Creation of Bangladesh. 1990. Saikia, Yasmin. Women, War, and the Making of Bangladesh. 2011. Schendel, Willem van. A History of Bangladesh. 2009. Schwartz, Thomas Alan. Henry Kissinger and American Power. 2020. Sengupta, Nitish. Land of Two Rivers: A History of Bengal. 2011. Tudda, Chris. A Cold War Turning Point: Nixon and China, 1969-1972. 2012. Walsh, Declan. The Nine Lives of Pakistan. 2020. Zakaria, Anam. 1971: A People's History from Bangladesh, Pakistan, and India. 2019. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

The Persian Gulf has long been a contested space--an object of imperial ambitions, national antagonisms, and migratory dreams. The roots of these contestations lie in the different ways the Gulf has been defined as a region, both by those who live there and those beyond its shore. Making Space for the Gulf: Histories of Regionalism and the Middle East (Stanford UP, 2024) reveals how capitalism, empire-building, geopolitics, and urbanism have each shaped understandings of the region over the last two centuries. Here, the Gulf comes into view as a created space, encompassing dynamic social relations and competing interests.  Arang Keshavarzian writes a new history of the region that places Iran, Iraq, and the Arab Peninsula together within global processes. He connects moments more often treated as ruptures--the discovery of oil, the Iranian Revolution, the rise and decline of British empire, the emergence of American power--and crafts a narrative populated by a diverse range of people--migrants and ruling families, pearl-divers and star architects, striking taxi drivers and dethroned rulers, protectors of British India and stewards of globalized American universities. Tacking across geographic scales, Keshavarzian reveals how the Gulf has been globalized through transnational relations, regionalized as a geopolitical category, and cleaved along national divisions and social inequalities. When understood as a process, not an object, the Persian Gulf reveals much about how regions and the world have been made in modern times. Making Space for the Gulf offers a fresh understanding of this globally consequential place. Arang Keshavarzian is Associate Professor of Middle Eastern and Islamic Studies at New York University. He is the author of Bazaar and State in Iran: Politics of the Tehran Marketplace (2007) and coeditor of Global 1979: Geographies and Histories of the Iranian Revolution (2021). Ahmed Yaqoub AlMaazmi is a Ph.D. candidate at Princeton University. His research focuses on the intersection of law, the occult sciences, and the environment across the Western Indian Ocean. He can be reached by email at almaazmi@princeton.edu or on Twitter @Ahmed_Yaqoub. Listeners' feedback, questions, and book suggestions are most welcome. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/new-books-network

The Persian Gulf has long been a contested space--an object of imperial ambitions, national antagonisms, and migratory dreams. The roots of these contestations lie in the different ways the Gulf has been defined as a region, both by those who live there and those beyond its shore. Making Space for the Gulf: Histories of Regionalism and the Middle East (Stanford UP, 2024) reveals how capitalism, empire-building, geopolitics, and urbanism have each shaped understandings of the region over the last two centuries. Here, the Gulf comes into view as a created space, encompassing dynamic social relations and competing interests.  Arang Keshavarzian writes a new history of the region that places Iran, Iraq, and the Arab Peninsula together within global processes. He connects moments more often treated as ruptures--the discovery of oil, the Iranian Revolution, the rise and decline of British empire, the emergence of American power--and crafts a narrative populated by a diverse range of people--migrants and ruling families, pearl-divers and star architects, striking taxi drivers and dethroned rulers, protectors of British India and stewards of globalized American universities. Tacking across geographic scales, Keshavarzian reveals how the Gulf has been globalized through transnational relations, regionalized as a geopolitical category, and cleaved along national divisions and social inequalities. When understood as a process, not an object, the Persian Gulf reveals much about how regions and the world have been made in modern times. Making Space for the Gulf offers a fresh understanding of this globally consequential place. Arang Keshavarzian is Associate Professor of Middle Eastern and Islamic Studies at New York University. He is the author of Bazaar and State in Iran: Politics of the Tehran Marketplace (2007) and coeditor of Global 1979: Geographies and Histories of the Iranian Revolution (2021). Ahmed Yaqoub AlMaazmi is a Ph.D. candidate at Princeton University. His research focuses on the intersection of law, the occult sciences, and the environment across the Western Indian Ocean. He can be reached by email at almaazmi@princeton.edu or on Twitter @Ahmed_Yaqoub. Listeners' feedback, questions, and book suggestions are most welcome. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/history

The Persian Gulf has long been a contested space--an object of imperial ambitions, national antagonisms, and migratory dreams. The roots of these contestations lie in the different ways the Gulf has been defined as a region, both by those who live there and those beyond its shore. Making Space for the Gulf: Histories of Regionalism and the Middle East (Stanford UP, 2024) reveals how capitalism, empire-building, geopolitics, and urbanism have each shaped understandings of the region over the last two centuries. Here, the Gulf comes into view as a created space, encompassing dynamic social relations and competing interests.  Arang Keshavarzian writes a new history of the region that places Iran, Iraq, and the Arab Peninsula together within global processes. He connects moments more often treated as ruptures--the discovery of oil, the Iranian Revolution, the rise and decline of British empire, the emergence of American power--and crafts a narrative populated by a diverse range of people--migrants and ruling families, pearl-divers and star architects, striking taxi drivers and dethroned rulers, protectors of British India and stewards of globalized American universities. Tacking across geographic scales, Keshavarzian reveals how the Gulf has been globalized through transnational relations, regionalized as a geopolitical category, and cleaved along national divisions and social inequalities. When understood as a process, not an object, the Persian Gulf reveals much about how regions and the world have been made in modern times. Making Space for the Gulf offers a fresh understanding of this globally consequential place. Arang Keshavarzian is Associate Professor of Middle Eastern and Islamic Studies at New York University. He is the author of Bazaar and State in Iran: Politics of the Tehran Marketplace (2007) and coeditor of Global 1979: Geographies and Histories of the Iranian Revolution (2021). Ahmed Yaqoub AlMaazmi is a Ph.D. candidate at Princeton University. His research focuses on the intersection of law, the occult sciences, and the environment across the Western Indian Ocean. He can be reached by email at almaazmi@princeton.edu or on Twitter @Ahmed_Yaqoub. Listeners' feedback, questions, and book suggestions are most welcome. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/middle-eastern-studies

In March 1971, the nation of Pakistan was split apart by a vicious civil war, eventually culminating in the creation of a new state: Bangladesh. In this first episode of a multi-part series, we trace the origins of the conflict and introduce the key historical figures involved.    SOURCES: Bass, Gary K. The Blood Telegram: Nixon, Kissinger, and a Forgotten Genocide. Bennet-Jones, Own. The Bhutto Dynasty.  Carney, Scott. Miklian, Jason. The Vortex: A True Story of History's Deadliest Storm, an  Unspeakable War, and Liberation.  Chang, Jung. Halliday, Jon. Mao: The Unknown Story.  Frank, Katherine. Indira: The Life of Indira Nehru Gandhi.  Gewen, Barry. The Inevitability of Tragedy: Henry Kissinger and his World.  Hiro, Dilip. The Longest August: The Unflinching Rivalry Between India and Pakistan.  Hitchens, Christopher. The Trial of Henry Kissinger.  Hoodbhoy, Pervez. Pakistan: Origins, Identity and Future.  Jalal, Ayesha. The Struggle for Pakistan. James, Lawrence. Raj: The Making and Unmaking of British India.  Jayakar, Pupul. Indira Gandhi: A Biography.  Khosa, Faisal. The Making of Martyrs in India, Pakistan & Bangladesh.  K.S. Nair. December In Dacca Keay, John. India: A History.  Mookherjee, Nayanika. The Spectral Wound.  Raghavan, Srinath. 1971: A Global History of the Creation of Bangladesh.  Rose, Leo. Sisson, Richard. War and Secession. Pakistan, India, and the Creation of Bangladesh. Saikia, Yasmin. Women, War, and the Making of Bangladesh.  Schendel, Willem van. A History of Bangladesh. Schwartz, Thomas Alan. Henry Kissinger and American Power.  Sengupta, Nitish. Land of Two Rivers: A History of Bengal.  Tudda, Chris. A Cold War Turning Point: Nixon and China, 1969-1972. Walsh, Declan. The Nine Lives of Pakistan.  Zakaria, Anam. 1971: A People's History from Bangladesh, Pakistan, and India.  Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Last time we spoke about the Mongolian Revolution of 1921. Mongolia found herself stuck between two crumbling empires who both were engulfed in brutal civil wars. Warlord Duan Qirui invaded Mongolia effectively making it a protectorate. This prompted Mongolian nobles to form resistance groups like the Consular Hill and East Urga to combat Chinese dominance. The merging of these groups birthed the Mongolian People's Party, seeking Soviet support for independence. Meanwhile, psychopath Roman von Ungern-Sternberg, claiming descent from Genghis Khan, emerged as a militaristic force, aligning with Russian Whites and Japanese interests to seize Mongolia. His brutal campaign ousted Chinese occupiers, restored the Bogd Khan to power, but brought tyranny, especially targeting Jews and Red Russians. The Mongolians were now seeking help, yet again from the Chinese, but someone else was looking to pick a fight with the megalomaniac Ungern-Sternberg. #102 The Case of Mongolia and Tibet's “status”   Welcome to the Fall and Rise of China Podcast, I am your dutiful host Craig Watson. But, before we start I want to also remind you this podcast is only made possible through the efforts of Kings and Generals over at Youtube. Perhaps you want to learn more about the history of Asia? Kings and Generals have an assortment of episodes on history of asia and much more  so go give them a look over on Youtube. So please subscribe to Kings and Generals over at Youtube and to continue helping us produce this content please check out www.patreon.com/kingsandgenerals. If you are still hungry for some more history related content, over on my channel, the Pacific War Channel where I cover the history of China and Japan from the 19th century until the end of the Pacific War. Last we left off, Ungern-Sternberg was having a merry time in Urga Mongolia. His secret police force led by Colonel Leonid Sipailov was hunting down all Reds and Jews he could find amongst the Russian colonial community of Mongolia. Although they never went after Mongols, they certainly were barbaric to their own. Its estimated Sipailov's goons killed nearly 900 people, roughly 6% of the Russian colonial population of Mongolia at the time. Of these over 50 were Jewish, representing 6% of those executed under Ungern-Sternbergs orders. Meanwhile Ungern-Sternberg continued to develop his Asiatic Cavalry Division, seeking to make it the base model for a future Mongolian national army. His division at this point was quite multicultural, consisting of Russians, Cossacks, Chinese, Japanese, Mongols, Buryats, Tatar, Tibetans and other groups. Ungern-Sternberg had crushed as many Red Russians as he could find, but they were not done for the count. A Mongolian Red leader emerged named Damdin Sukhbaatar. Sukhbaatar meaning “Axe Hero” in Mongolian was born in Ulaanbaatar, a Chinese trading settlement a few kms east of Ikh Khuree. His parents abandoned their home banner in Setsen Khan aimag when he was 6, as they moved to the Russian consulate. He then grew up around Russians, picking up the language. In 1911 when Mongolia declared independence, Sukhbaater joined the new national army. Russian military advisors to the Bogd Khan set up military academies at Khujirbulan in 1912 and Sukhbaatar found himself at one of them. He was shown to have a talent for military tactics and was good at riding and shooting. He quickly became a platoon leader of a machine gun company. In 1914 he found himself involved in a soldiers riot, they were discontent with corruption in the army and bad living conditions. He survived the ordeal and would soon serve under the command of Khatanbaatar Mahsarjav in Eastern Mongolia by 1917. That year sprang forth the Russian Revolution and China's Warlord Era, chaos would reign supreme. Soon Outer Mongolia was under Chinese occupation and this sprang forth two underground political parties, Consular Hill and East Urga group. By 1920 they united to form the Mongolian People's Party and Sukhbaatar found himself becoming a delegate sent multiple times to multiple places in the new Soviet Union seeking military assistance. In 1921 Sukhbaater was placed in charge of smuggling a letter from the Bogd Khan through numerous Chinese checkpoints. In a father of marco polo like fashion, he hid the letter in the handle of his whip and its found in a museum today in Ulaanbaater. Now the year prior the Soviet government stated they were willing to help Mongolia, but asked the delegates to explain to them how they planned to fight off the foreign invaders. In September numerous delegates were sent to Moscow, while Sukhaatar and Choubalsan took up a post in Irkutsk for military training and to be contacts between the Soviets and Mongolia.  Meanwhile back in Mongolia, Ungern-Sternberg began an occupation. Mongolian delegates Chagdarjav and Choibalsan rushed back to Mongolia to find allies amongst the nobles. On February 10th a plenary session of the Comintern in Irkutsk passed a formal resolution to “aid the struggle of the Mongolian people for liberation and independence with money, guns and military instructors" The Mongolian People's Party had thus gained significant military assistance and was now a serious contender in the battle for Mongolia. The party held its first congress secretly between March 1st-3rd at Kyakhta attended by 17 and 26 members. They approved the formation of an army, to be headed by Sukhbaatar alongside two Russian advisors. They also adopted a new party manifesto and by March 13th formed a provisional government headed by Dogsomyn Bodoo. Sukhbaatar had begun recruiting troops for what was called the Mongolian People's Partisans as early as February 9th. By the 15th of February the Mongolians decided to seize Khiagt currently under Chinese occupation. They sent an ultimatum to the Chinese, but their commanders refused to surrender. By March 18th, the Mongolian Partisans were 400 men strong as they stormed the Chinese garrison at Kyakhta Maimaicheng. They seized it from the Chinese, despite being heavily outnumbered and this greatly bolstered their confidence. To this day this victory is celebrated as a military holiday. The party issued a proclamation announcing the formation of a new government that would expel the Chinese and promised to convene a congress of representatives of the masses who would elect a permanent government.  The provisional government moved over to Khiagt where they established ministries of Finance, Foreign affairs and military. A propaganda war also emerged between the provisional government and the Bogd Khaan's court. The provisional government began spreading leaflets along the northern border urging Mongolians to take arms against White Russians while the Bogd Khaan's side issued warnings to the people the supposed revolutionaries were going to destroy their nation and their Buddhist faith with it. Meanwhile the Soviet Union was trying to re-establish diplomatic relations with the Chinese government. They had dispatched representatives to Beijing and the Chinese did the same in Moscow. Because of this delicate situation, the Soviets were trying to keep everything low key about the Mongolian movement. However in early 1921, the Chinese cut talks with the Soviets because of the mess Ungern-Sternberg was causing in Mongolia. The Soviets offered Red Army assistance to dislodge his forces from Mongolia, but the Chinese rejected this. Since talks were severed, the Soviets then felt ok to unrestrain themselves in terms of aiding the Mongolian revolutionaries. Throughout march of 1921, a flow of Soviet advisors and weapons came to the Mongolian revolutionaries. By April they doubled to 800 troops and they began sending spies and diversionary units throughout the region spreading propaganda and terror to weaken Ungern-Sternbergs forces. Once Ungern-Sternberg found out about the incursion he quickly assembled an expeditionary force to dislodge the hostile Red invaders. It seems Ungern-Sternberg was under the false belief he was a very popular figures and would receive support in Mongolia and from Siberia. Truth be told, he failed to strengthen his small army properly and would be outgunned and outnumbered heavily by the Reds. He also had no knowledge the Reds had already conquered Siberia and that the new Soviet government was beginning to make some economic progress.  Ungern-Sternberg divded his Asiatic Cavalry Division into two brigades, one was under his personal commander, the other under Major General Rezukhin. In May of 1921 Rezukhin launched a red west of the Selenga River while Ungern set out towards Troitskosavk. Meanwhile the Soviet Red Army sent units towards Mongolia from different directions. The Soviets enjoyed a enormous advantage in terms of pretty much everything. They had armored cars, minor aircraft, trains, river gunboats, plenty of horses, more ammunitions, supplies and man power. Initially Ungerns force managed to defeat a small detachment of 300 Red Army troops enroute to Troitskosavk. But Between June 11-13th the 35th Division of the Soviet 5th Red Army led by Commander Mikhail Matiyasevich alongside Mongolian People's Partisan forces decisively defeated him. Having failed to capture Troiskosavask, Ungern-Sternberg fled back for Urga, sending word to Rezukhin to do the same. The combined Red forces pursued the White Russians to Urga, skirmishing along the way and would capture the city on July 6th, brushing aside its few guard detachments. Although the Reds had seized Urga, they had not defeated the main bulk of Ungern-Sternbergs division who were then regrouping around Akha-gun-hure along the Selenga River. Meanwhile another Red Army led by Colonel Kazagrandi slaughtered a 350 man strong White Russian force stuck in the Gobi desert. Kazagrandi's forces ultimately accepted the surrender of two groups of White Russians they had managed to cut and divie, one being 42 men, the other 35. Chinese forces were also attacking White Russians remnants as they crossed the border. It is beleived some of these men were deserters of Ungern-Sternbergs division.  Ungern-Sternberg now cought to invade Transbaikal, attempting to rally his soldiers and local peoples proclaimed to all Semyonov had reached an agreement with the Japanese who were soon to unleash an offensive to support them. The reality however was the Japanese had given up on the White cause. After a few days of rest, the Asiatic Cavalry division began raiding Soviet territory on July 18th. His force was estimated to be perhaps 3000 strong. In response the Soviets declared martial law in regions where White remnants were raiding. Ungern-Sternbergs men managed to capture some minor settlements, one being Novoselenginsk that they took on August 1st. Yet upon taking this settlement, Red Army forces began to converge on his location, prompting Ungern-Sternberg to declare they would go back to Mongolia to rid it of communism again.  By this point, most of his men were not idiots, they knew they were following a doomed cause. Many of them sought to desert and flee for Manchuria to join up with Russian refugees there. Ungern-Sternberg meanwhile seemed to also have his own escape plan, he was going to head for Tuba and then Tibet. Men under both brigades began to mutiny and on August 17th, Rezukhin was assassinated. The next day the same assassins tried to kill Ungern-Sternberg. He managed to evade them twice, by fleeing with a smaller detachment consisting exclusively of Mongolians. The Mongols rode out a distance with him, before tying him up and leaving him there to flee. At this point the rest of his two brigades had scattered for this lives fleeing over the Chinese border. Ungern-Sternberg was captured on August 20th by a Red Army detachment led by Petr Efimovich Shchetinkin. Petr also happened to be a Cheka, this was a Soviet secret police organization that infamously conducted the Red Terror. Ironically, I think I can say this here, but I am currently writing a few series for KNG and one is on the Russian Civil War, I go through the formation of all these organizations, if you want to check that out though, I think its a KNG patreon exclusive for awhile. On September 15th of 1921, Ungern-Sternberg was put on trial for well over 6 hours, under the prosecution of Yemelyan Yaroslavsky. In the end he was sentenced to be executed by firing squad. He was killed that night in Novosibirsk. Thus ended the reign of quite a psychopath, gotta say written about many, this guy was something special.  Funny side note, historian John Jennings who worked at the US Air Force Academy argued Ungern-Sternberg ironically may have single handedly led Mongolia into the arms of the Bolsheviks. Ungern-Sternbergs expedition into Mongolia and conquest of Urga had driven out the Chinese forces who may have been a match for the incoming Red Army. Likewise, taking his white army into Mongolia basically drew the Reds to Mongolia to hunt him down, thus in the end some would argue its all his fault Mongolia became a Soviet satellite later on.  After Ungern-Sternbergs death and the mopping up of White armies in the region, the Soviets and Chinese reopened talks about the Mongolian situation. Unbeknownst to the Russians, China had actually appointed Zhang Zuolin to deal with the Ungern-Sternberg situation. Zhang Zuolin was supposed to create an expeditionary army to expel him from Mongolia. Yet by the time he was about to initiate the expedition, Red Army forces flooded the region making it a political nightmare for China. What ended up happening, similar to Colonel Kazagrandi's hunt of Red's in the Gobi desert, Zhang Zuolin hunted down Ungern-Sternbergs remnants as they fled into Manchuria. Thus when the talks began between the Russians and Chinese, the Chinese were emboldened, believing Zhang Zuolin had in fact cleaned up the entire situation on his lonesome and that they had the upper hand militarily. China came to the table stating Mongolia was still part of China and thus was not the subject of international negotiations. Meanwhile after Ungern-Sternberg was run out of Urga, the Mongolian People's Party proclaimed a new government on July 11th. Sukhbaatar became the minister of the army and Bogd Khan had his monarch powers limited to basically just being symbolic. It was a rough start for the new government. Dogsomyn Bodoo became the Prime Minister and Foreign Minister, but he immediately found himself at political war with Soliin Danzan. Danzan had lost his seat as party leader to Tseren-Ochiryn Dambadorj a relative to Bodoo. Danzan assumed Bodoo had helped his relative steal his seat. Danzan became the Minister of Finance and began engineering a scheme to get rid of Bodoo from his office.  Bodoo had initiated a very unpopular company, initially instigated by the Soviets. It was to modernize the peoples by forcibly cutting off feudal accessories, such as Mongolian feels, womens jewelry and long hair. Danzan accused Bodoo of plotting alongside another leading figure Ja Lama, the Chinese and Americans to undermine the entire revolution so they could establish an autocratic government. Ja Lama was a warlord who fought the Qing dynasty and claimed to be a Buddhist lama. When Ungern-Sternberg sent a delegation to Lhasa in 1920, Ja-Lama murdered all of them. Since Ungern-Sternbergs death, Ja Lama attempted to operate an independent government from a hideout, he was a bit of a loose cannon. There was also Dambyn Chagdarjav who was loosely linked to the supposed cabal. He was the provisional governments former prime minister when Unger-Sternberg was around. He was quickly outed and replaced with Bodoo, and it seems it was just convenient to toss him in with the accusations against Bodoo. On January 7th, of 1922 Bodoo resigned from all his positions in the government, stating it was because of health issues. This did not stop Danzan who laid charges against Bodoo, Chagdarjav, Ja Lama and 14 others, who were arrested and interrogated by Russian secret police working with the Mongolian government. They were all found guilty and executed by firing squad on August 31st 1922. They all would only be the firsts of a longer lasting purge raging through the 1920s and 1930s. Following the execution of Bodoo, party leaders invited the high Buddhist incarnation, Jalkhanz Khutagt Sodnomyn Damdinbazar, hell of a name by the way, to became the new prime minister. He was largely chosen to quell religious minded Mongolian's who were upset at the execution of Bodoo who was a lama. Danzan was not done with political rivalries. He soon found himself butting heads with Rinchingiin Elbegdori a leader amongst the leftists and chief advisor to the Comintern in Ulaanbaatar. Following the 1921 revolution, Elbegdorj was appointed head of the Army training and education department. Alongside Choibalsan, he founded the radical Mongolian Revolutionary Youth League. He enjoyed backing from Moscow and he came to dominate the political scene in Ulan Bator. Danzan had previously collaborated with him to get rid of Bodoo, but afterwards Danzan sought to reduce the number of Soviet advisors in Mongolia and attempted to place the Revolutionary Youth league under party control. Danzan was a business man who supported capitalism as a path for Mongolia, thus he was not exactly friendly to those like Elbegdorj who wanted to make Mongolia socialist if not full blown communist. Elbegdorj joined some rightists led by Tseren-Ochiryn Dambadorj in an effort to defeat Danzan. During the third party congress in August of 1924, both accused Danzan of only representing the interests of the bourgeois and being in league with American and Chinese corporations. Danzan found himself alongside others put on trial and sentenced to death. Funny enough the trial and execution literally occurred within the same 24 hour period of the congress, the others simply continued on haha. Some rich irony in the fate of Danzan. I wont delve to far into the rest, but it goes without saying, Elbegdorj would himself be accused of representing the interests of bourgeois and was exiled to the USSR and would be executed during the Great Purge in 1938. Yes it was a very messy time for Mongolia, but in 1924 the Chinese and Soviets signed a treaty that saw the Soviets recognize Mongolia was an integral part of China.  That pretty much ends the story for Mongolia for now, but I thought it might be interesting to end this podcast looking at another similar case study, that of Tibet. Now Tibet came under rule of the Qing Dynasty in 1720. When the Wuchang uprising broke out, revolutionary fever hit numerous provinces within China, as it likewise did in territories like Tibet. A Tibetan militia sprang up and launched a surprise attack against the Qing garrison. The Qing forces were overwhelmed by the Tibetans, forced to flee back to China proper. Obviously the Qing dynasty was scrambling to face the revolutionary armies throughout China, and could not hope to challenge the Tibetans. By 1912, Qing officials in Lhasa were forced by the Tibetans to sign a three point agreement, officially surrendering and expelling their forces from central Tibet. When the new republic of China government sprang up that same year, they proclaimed control over everything the previous Qing dynasty controlled, 22 provinces within China, Outer Mongolia and Tibet.  As the provincial government's president, Yuan Shikai sent a telegram to the 13th Dalai Lama, restoring all his traditional titles. The Dalai Lama refused them and stated in a reply "I intend to exercise both temporal and ecclesiastical rule in Tibet." Now prior to the Xinhai Revolution, in 1910 the Qing had sent a military expedition to Tibet, one could argue it was an invasion mind you, to establish direct Qing rule over Tibet. This was because the British had performed their own expeditions in 1904, destabilizing the Qing dominance over Tibet. The Qing forces occupied Lhasa on February 12th of 1910 and they deposed the 13th Dalai Lama by the 25th. The Dalai Lama was forced to flee to India, but he returned in 1913 whence he proclaimed stated “that the relationship between the Chinese emperor and Tibet had been that of patron and priest and had not been based on the subordination of one to the other. We are a small, religious, and independent nation" In January of that year, a treaty was signed between Mongolia and Tibet, proclaiming mutual recognition of each others independence from China. Within the treaty both nations pledged to aid each other against internal and external enemies, free trade and declared a mutual relationship based on the Gelug sect of Buddhism. The Tibetan officials who signed this document at Urga were led by Agvan Dorjiev, a Buryat and thus subject of Russia. This caused some doubts about the validity of the treaty. The 13th Dalai Lama would go on to deny ever authorizing Dorjiev to negotiate such political issues. The Russian government likewise stated Dorjiev had no diplomatic capacity on behalf of the Dalai Lama to do such a thing. The text of the document was neer published, many believe it never even existed, until 1882 when the Mongolian Academy of Science finally published it.  Upon signed the supposed treaty, Agvan Dorjiev proclaimed that Russia was a powerful Buddhist country that would ally with Tibet against China and Britain. In response to this, Britain convoked a conference at Viceregal Lodge in Simla, India to discuss the matter of Tibet's status. The conference was attended by representatives of Britain, the Chinese republic and Tibet's government based out of Lhasa. Sir Henry McMahon, the foreign secretary of British India led the British; for China it was I-fan Chen, the commissioner for Trade and Foreign affairs at Shanghai; and for Tiet it was Paljor Dorje Shatra, known also as Lonchen Shatra, the leading prime minister of Tibet. Now the British and Chinese had telegram communications to their governments, but the Tibetan team only had land communications. What became known as the Simla conference, was held in both Delhi and Silma because of the extreme summer heat of Delhi, saw 8 formal sessions from October 1913 to July 1914. In the first session, Lonchen Shatra declared "Tibet and China have never been under each other and will never associate with each other in future. It is decided that Tibet is an independent state." Thus Tibet was refusing to recognize all the previous treaties and conventions signed between Tibet and China. The Tibetans sought their territorial boundaries to range from the Kuenlun Range in the north, to the borders of Sichuan and Yunnan. The Tibetans also sought payment for damages done to them over the past years. Ifan Chen's counter proposal was to state Tibet was an integral part of China and that China would not tolerate any attempts by the Tibetans or British to interrupt China's territorial integrity. Ifan Chen continued to say a Chinese official would be stationed in Lhasa and they would guide Tibet's foreign and military affairs. Tibet would also grant amnesty to all Chinese who had recently been punished in Tibet, and Tibet would conform to the borders already assigned to it. McMahon then issued the first and most important question “what is the definition of limits of Tibet”. Afterwards they could deal with the lesser issues, such as Tibetans claims of compensation for damages and for Chinese amnesties. Lonchen Shatra agreed to the procedure, Ifan Chen countered it by asking the political status of Tibet should be the first order of business. Ifan Chen also revealed he had definitive orders from his government to give priority to the political question. McMahon thus ruled he would discuss the frontier issue with Lonchen Shatra alone, until Ifan Chen was given authorization from his government to join it, ompf. It took 5 days for Ifan Chen to get the authorization.  On the issue of the frontier, Ifan Chen maintained China had occupied as far west as Giamda, thus this would encompass Pomed, Markham, Zayul, Derge, Gyade, Draya, Batang, Kokonor and Litang. Lonchen Shatra replied that Tibet had always been an independent nation and at one point a Chinese princess had been married to a Tibetan ruler and a boundary pillar had been erected by them at Marugong. Ifan Chen countered by stating the so called pillar was erected 300 li west and soon both argued over the history of pillars and boundary claims going back centuries. China claimed their historical evidence was that of Zhao Erfengs expedition of 1906-1911 which constituted a effective occupation recognized under international law. Lonchen Shatra said that was ridiculous and that what Zhao Erfeng had performed was a raid and thus unlawful.  McMahon meanwhile formed the idea of distinguishing Inner and Outer Tibet. He based this on the premise the Chinese had only really occupied Outer Tibet and never Inner Tibet. McMahon proposed formalizing this with official boundaries and pulled up old maps dating back to the 9th century for border lines. He also brought out maps from the 18th century and using both came up with two defined zones for Inner and Outer Tibet. Lonchen Shatra opposed some parts of Outer Tibet should be added to Inner Tibet and Ifan Chen argued some parts of Inner Tibet should be given to Sichuan province. A series of confused negotiations began over historical claims over territory, while border skirmishes erupted between the Tibetans and Chinese. McMahon losing his patience appealed to both men stating for "can we have a broad and statesmanlike spirit of compromise so that our labors could be brought to a speedy conclusion”. Ifan Chen maintained it was still premature to draft anything since they had not established what was Inner and Outer Tibet. Finally in April of 1914 a draft convention, with a map was begun by the 3 men. Ifan Chen was the most reluctant but gradually accepted it. Britain and China agreed to leave Tibet as a neutral zone, free of their interference. However China repudiated Ifan Chen's plenipotentiary actions, stating he had been coerced into the draft convention, McMahon said that was ridiculous. China charged McMahon for being unfriendly to China and having an uncompromising attitude, which is funny because if I read to you every single meeting these men had, it was 99% Ifan Chen not budging on a single issue. China continued to lobby for more and more adjustments, but all would be turned down prompting China to state they would not sign the convention. The official boundary between Inner and Outer Tibet became known as the McMahon line, it was negotiated between Britain and Tibet separately. The convention stated Tibet formed part of Chinese territory, after the Tibetans selected a Dalai Lama, the Chinese government would be notified and a Chinese commissioner in Lhasa would quote "formally communicate to His Holiness the titles consistent with his dignity, which have been conferred by the Chinese Government". The Tibetan government would appoint all officers for Outer Tibet and Outer Tibet would not be represented in the Chinese parliament or any other such assembly. China refused to acknowledge any of it. This entire situation remains a problem to this very day as most of you probably assumed. I would like to take this time to remind you all that this podcast is only made possible through the efforts of Kings and Generals over at Youtube. Please go subscribe to Kings and Generals over at Youtube and to continue helping us produce this content please check out www.patreon.com/kingsandgenerals. If you are still hungry after that, give my personal channel a look over at The Pacific War Channel at Youtube, it would mean a lot to me. Mongolia saw some bitter fighting between Red and White Russians and Chinese, and would gradually gravitate towards the Soviets. The case of Tibet, unlike Mongolia, was somewhat less violent, but a political maelstrom nonetheless. The chaos of China's warlord Era would greatly affect these two, well into the 1930's.  

The post-World War II era was characterized by decolonization in Asia and Africa, with resistance movements leading to the unraveling of the British empire in colonies such as former British Kenya, where the Mau Mau launched a lengthy uprising between 1952-1960, as well as in former British India, with the dissolution of the British Raj and creation of an independent India and Pakistan in 1947. Journalist Tom Stevenson provides historical examples illustrating how the rise of American hegemony following the decline of Britain's imperial power was bolstered by British foreign policy at every juncture. 

In 1781 and 1782, Britain battles the Kingdom of Mysore, headed by Hyder Ali in southern India. At the same time, Britain takes colonies from France and the Netherlands. French and British Navies fight multiple battles offshore for control of the subcontinent. Blog https://blog.AmRevPodcast.com includes a complete transcript, as well as pictures, and links related to this week's episode. Book Recommendation of the Week:  The Dutch East India Company and Mysore, 1762-1790, by Jan Van Lohuizen,  Online Recommendation of the Week: Mill, James The History of British India, Vol. 4,  https://archive.org/details/historyofbritish04milliala Join American Revolution Podcast on Reddit: https://www.reddit.com/r/AmRevPodcast Ask your American Revolution Podcast questions on Quora: https://amrevpod.quora.com Join the Facebook group, American Revolution Podcast: https://www.facebook.com/groups/132651894048271 Follow the podcast on Twitter @AmRevPodcast Join the podcast mail list: https://mailchi.mp/d3445a9cd244/american-revolution-podcast-by-michael-troy  ARP T-shirts and other merch: http://tee.pub/lic/AmRevPodcast Support this podcast on Patreon https://www.patreon.com/AmRevPodcast or via PayPal http://paypal.me/AmRevPodcast Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

During the Second World War, at least three million Indian people, who were British subjects, died in the Bengal Famine. It was one of the largest losses of civilian life on the Allied side. But there is no memorial to them anywhere in the world - not even a plaque. Can three million people disappear from public memory?From the creator and presenter of the award-winning series Three Pounds in my Pocket and Partition Voices, this is the story of the Bengal Famine of 1943. For the first time it is told by those who were there - farmers and fishermen, artists and writers, colonial British and everyday citizens. Nearly all of the testimony in the series has never been broadcast before. Eighty years on, those who lived through it are a vanishing generation. Time is running out to record their memories.We begin in 1942. As the Japanese sweep through South East Asia, Calcutta (now Kolkata) is inundated with hundreds of thousands of Allied soldiers from all over the world. Fear of a Japanese invasion of British India provokes a consequential decision.Presenter: Kavita Puri Series producer: Ant Adeane Editor: Emma Rippon Sound design and mix: Eloise Whitmore Production coordinators: Maria Ogundele and Sabine Schereck Original music: Felix TaylorWith thanks to Dr Janam Mukherjee, Professor Joya Chatterji and Dr Diya Gupta. Interviews with American soldiers courtesy of The National World War II Museum, New Orleans: nationalww2museum.org/ Interviews with G S Khosla and Debotosh Das Gupta courtesy of the University of Cambridge Major General Dharitri Kumar Palit interviewed by Gillian Wright, 1987, British Library reference C63/195/09. Audio © British Library Board and the interviewee. The British Library has been unable to locate the family of the interviewee. Please contact oralhistory@bl.uk with any relevant information.