Ranbir as Lord Ram: The Indus Paradox

The riveting Ramayana teaser dropped today, and Ranbir Kapoor looks the part. Imperial, restrained, emotionally loaded. But the casting raises a question Bollywood won’t ask aloud.

The male axis of Hindi cinema runs through the Indus, not the Gangetic plain. The Khans, Aamir (Afghan UP-origin), Salman (Hindu, Pathan), Shah Rukh (Delhi, Hindko-Deccani stock), are Musulman. Their anointed successors, Ranbir (Kapoor lineage from Peshawar) and Ranveer (Bhavnani, Sindhi), are Hindu but Indus-blooded all the same (Hindus of the Indus are 99.9% genetically identical to Pakistanis apparently). The geography of stardom in Bollywood is the geography of Partition.

A Kashmiri nationalist once told me, Srinagar-bred, Ivy-educated, who sang Pakistani ghazals with more feeling than most Lahoris, that Ranbir and Ranveer were being aggressively promoted to eclipse the Khans.

Of course the connective tissue of the Ranbir-Ranveer rivalry is Sonam Kapoor. She is third cousin to Ranbir through the Punjabi mafia, and second cousin to Ranveer through their Sindhi mothers. The Sindhi presence in Bollywood runs deeper than most realise; Karan Johar, Kareena Kapoor, Kiara Advani all carry it. The two men being positioned as Bollywood’s future are bound into a single pre-Partition Hindu kinship network. The contestation isn’t just cultural. It’s familial.

The man cast as Maryada Purushottam, the ideal Hindu man, the conscience-keeper of a civilisation, descends from Prithviraj Kapoor of Peshawar; a Hindu Pathan (his kinsman Anil Kapoor states on record that he is the son and grandson of a Pathan). Bollywood’s Ram comes from the other side of the Wagah.

Ranbir versus Ranveer is the wrong frame. The real question is what it means that Hindu epic cinema, â‚č4,000 crore, Hans Zimmer and A.R. Rahman, DNEG VFX, global IMAX release, chose a Kapoor. The answer is that Bollywood has always understood something the BJP perhaps never quite has: the cultural power of the Subcontinent flows from its Mleccha western rivers, not its sacred eastern ones.

Continue reading Ranbir as Lord Ram: The Indus Paradox

Cholistan: The Desert at the Edge of Everything

There is a desert in the southern Punjab of Pakistan that does not quite belong to Pakistan. Administratively it sits in Bahawalpur Division. In practice, it is shared with Abu Dhabi. Deep in the Cholistan, there is a private airstrip, Al Habieb, also known locally as Sheikh Zayed Airport II, with a runway long enough to receive the world’s largest cargo aircraft. Each winter, C-17s and Antonov-124s arrive from the Gulf loaded with vehicles, staff, telecommunications equipment and falcons, depositing the UAE president and his court into what is effectively a private desert palace. The Houbara bustard, an endangered migratory bird that Bedouin tradition prizes above almost any other quarry, is hunted here under special permits issued by the Pakistani government to Gulf royalty. The airport at Bahawalpur proper was financed by Dubai. The international airport at Rahim Yar Khan, 200 km away, is named Sheikh Zayed International Airport after the UAE’s founding father, who considered this corner of Pakistan a regular retreat.

This is not a footnote. It is a civilisational signature. The Khaleeji sheikh pursuing the Houbara across Cholistani sand dunes is, without knowing it, re-enacting something very old: the desert as a shared zone, unbounded by the nation-states that nominally contain it. Cholistan does not belong to Pakistan. It does not belong to India, or Sindh, or Rajasthan. It is a seam; and seams, by definition, belong to no single side.

The Hinge of Seraikistan

The name Cholistan derives from the Turkic chol, sands, and the Persian suffix -istan. Both layers arrived later than the place itself. The culture that defines Cholistan is Derawali: the Seraiki dialect of the encampment, the dera. It is nomadic speech in the most literal sense. Its richness is not courtly but ambulatory.

Seraiki itself is one of South Asia’s underappreciated civilisational languages. For centuries it served as the lingua franca across the interface zones of the northwest, among Baloch, Sindhi, Pashtun and Punjabi speakers, as the language of trade and movement. Cholistan sits at the heart of Seraikistan, flanked by Sindh to the south, Rajasthan to the east, and greater Punjab to the north. It is not peripheral to these zones. It is where they meet, and where, historically, what they share becomes visible.

That structural position, edge as synthesis, is the key to understanding what Cholistan is.

The Dead River and the Living Civilisation

The Hakra River, the Sarasvati of Vedic memory, once flowed through Cholistan, fed by the Sutlej and the Yamuna. It sustained dense settlement from roughly 4000 BCE until 600 BCE, when it changed course and the floodplain became desert. Along its dried bed, over 400 Harappan archaeological sites have been catalogued; among the highest densities in the entire Indus Valley civilisation.

The people who now pursue camels across that same terrain, collecting water in seasonal pools called toba, are the cultural descendants of one of the ancient world’s great urban traditions. What looks like marginalisation is, on a longer view, adaptation. The civilisation did not collapse. It reconfigured.

This matters because it frames the deeper question: who were these people, before the Hakra died?

The Dravidian Puzzle

The map that accompanies this piece is one of the most quietly extraordinary images in South Asian studies. It shows the distribution of Dravidian languages today: a vast bloc across peninsular India, with isolated remnants in central India, Gondi, Kurukh, Malto, and then, stranded alone in Pakistani Balochistan, 1,500 km from its nearest linguistic relative: Brahui.

The scholarly consensus is that this map records the aftermath of Indo-Aryan expansion from the northwest after roughly 1500 BCE. Before that expansion, Dravidian languages were far more widely spoken across the subcontinent; including, most plausibly, across the Indus Valley civilisation zone that includes Cholistan. The central islands visible in the map, Gondi in Madhya Pradesh, Kurukh and Malto in Jharkhand and Odisha, are not coincidences. They are survivors.

Brahui is the most striking survivor of all. Its very existence in Balochistan suggests that something Dravidian persisted in the northwest long after Indo-Aryan became dominant; whether as a remnant population, a linguistic relic, or evidence of a deeper pre-Aryan substrate that stretched from the Indus to the Persian Gulf.

That last possibility is what the Elamo-Dravidian hypothesis proposes: a family linking the extinct Elamite language of ancient Khuzestan to Brahui and the Dravidian south. It remains a minority and contested position in linguistics, and should be read as such. But the geographic intuition behind it is not unreasonable. Khuzestan, now the Arab-majority southwestern province of Iran, was the heartland of Elamite civilisation. If Elamite and Proto-Dravidian shared a common ancestor, the implied civilisational corridor runs from the Persian Gulf coast through Makran and lower Balochistan, through Sindh and lower Punjab, and south into the peninsula. Cholistan sits directly in that corridor.

This is not established fact. It is a live and serious question, which is exactly the kind of question Brown Pundits exists to think about.

The Roma: The Longest Migration

One further thread, less speculative. The Roma, Europe’s largest ethnic minority, numbering somewhere between 10 and 15 million, originated in precisely this northwestern zone of South Asia. Genetic and linguistic evidence converges on Punjab and Rajasthan as the ancestral homeland, with significant shared ancestry also traceable to Sindhi, Balochi and Brahui populations in Pakistan. The Romani language is Indo-Aryan at root but carries innovations from the northwestern branch, Punjabi, Sindhi, consistent with an origin in the transitional zone between dialects, which is exactly where Cholistan sits.

The proto-Roma began their westward movement around the first millennium CE, passing through Persia and Armenia before entering the Byzantine world and eventually reaching Europe by the 13th century. They are the longest-range migration in South Asian history, and they began from the desert margin that Pakistani administrative maps label, prosically, Bahawalpur Division.

What Cholistan Teaches

Pakistan is discussed, almost always, in terms of its political present: the civil-military axis, the question of democratic consolidation, the India relationship, the nuclear deterrent, the IMF programme. These are real. They are also thin.

Cholistan is a reminder of the depth beneath the thinness. A Seraiki-Derawali nomadic culture whose civilisational roots predate Islam, predate the Indo-Aryans, and reach into a pre-Aryan substrate that may connect, linguistically and geographically, to the first cities on earth. A desert from which Europe’s most persecuted people likely began their diaspora. A terrain now seasonally occupied by Gulf monarchs pursuing an endangered bird across the ruins of a Harappan settlement.

The Hindu Presence

One further detail that the administrative map of Pakistan obscures: Cholistan retains a significant Hindu population. They are classified, in the caste framework, as Shudra; the lowest varna. But that classification tells you almost nothing about how they actually live.

In villages where Muslims and Hindus exist in roughly equal numbers, the communities are functionally indistinguishable by appearance, dress, or manner. Muslim neighbours organise protection for Hindu households during fairs and festivals not because there has ever been cause for alarm, but as a matter of custom and solidarity. Full social interaction is the norm. Intermarriage and commensality, sharing food across the line, are not. The boundary is observed without hostility.

What this means is precise: the racial and demographic integrity of the region is intact. These are the same people, shaped by the same desert, the same Hakra basin, the same pre-Aryan substrate. The religious difference arrived later than the people themselves. In Cholistan, you cannot tell a Hindu from a Muslim by looking. That is not erasure of difference. It is evidence of a shared civilisational root that predates the categories imposed upon it.

The Crescent and the Saffron are medieval categories imposed on a Neolithic reality. Cholistan predates both, and will outlast the argument.

Open Thread + A Note on Standards

Brown Pundits has always been a forum for the kind of thinking that most outlets are too timid or too tribal to publish. We intend to keep it that way. But that standard cuts both ways, and we are raising it.

Effective immediately, the moderation policy is zero tolerance.

This is not a crackdown on opinion. We welcome disagreement; sharp, even uncomfortable disagreement. What we will no longer tolerate is noise dressed up as insight.

What does noise look like? You know it when you read it. It is the rattling of nuclear talking points that have not been updated since 1998. It is the reduction of a civilisation of 220 million people, or of a billion-and-a-half, to a single variable: the Crescent, or the Saffron. It is venom without weight, and venting without argument.

Pakistan is complex. India is complex. Every human society is, at its foundation, irreducibly complex.

Any comment that treats either as otherwise will be moderated; sometimes publicly, sometimes silently. We apply the sniff test: does it smell right, given the context? Given how tight our Editorship and Commentariat is, we will be judicious, as we have always been; for instance the Precedent post on the controversial Dhuruandar sequel remains Gaurav Lele’s.

This applies to both sides of every line we cover; geographical, civilisational, sectarian, or political.

We are not asking for bookishness. We are not asking for academic caution or diplomatic hedging. We are asking for the one thing that separates a pundit from a troll: considered thought. If you are going to cast aspersions, earn them. Make the case. Bring the weight. If you cannot, do not post.

We have a large and growing commentariat. That is something to be proud of. It is also a responsibility; to each other, and to the readers who come here because they expect better than what they can find elsewhere.

We expect better. We will enforce it.

Thank you for your attention to this matter.

— The Editors, Brown Pundits Continue reading Open Thread + A Note on Standards

A Minute of Silence for the Schoolgirls of Minab | Chehelom, 9 April 2026

The Chehelom, چهلم, is the Persian tradition of gathering on the fortieth day after a death to pray, remember, and bear witness. It predates Islam and runs through every strand of Iranian culture. We mark it here not as a political act but as a human one. Set your alarm. One minute. That is all we ask. XTM

At 10:45am on 28 February 2026, 165 human beings, most of them schoolgirls aged 7–12 from the Bandari and Afro-Iranian communities of southern Iran, were killed in the bombing of the Shajareh Tayyebeh school in Minab.

9 April is their Chehelom; the Persian fortieth-day memorial.

Wherever you are in the world, please set an alarm for 10:45am Tehran time on Thursday 9 April and take one minute of silence.

For the girls of Minab. For every innocent life lost in this war. No hierarchy of grief; Jewish or Arab, Muslim or Persian, American or migrant.

We are all One.

🕰 Tehran 10:45 · London 08:15 · New York 03:15 · LA 00:15 · Sydney 17:15

Share as far as you can. 🕊 Continue reading A Minute of Silence for the Schoolgirls of Minab | Chehelom, 9 April 2026

What Iran means to Kashmir| War, identity, & 5000 years of history| The Kashmir Notebook Ep 12

In this episode of The Kashmir Notebook, Gowhar Geelani is in conversation with Professor Noor Ahmed Baba, a noted political scientist and IR expert, to explore the historical, cultural, and political connections between Kashmir and Iran. Why is Kashmir often referred to as “Iran-e-Saghir” (Little Iran)? What explains the strong emotional response in Kashmir to the ongoing conflict in West Asia? Professor Baba traces these connections back nearly 5,000 years—through ancient migrations, Central Asian linkages, the influence of the Sassanid Empire, and the gradual spread of Islam shaped by Persian cultural traditions. The conversation also moves to the present geopolitical moment. As tensions escalate in West Asia, Professor Baba analyses the implications of the Iran conflict for global power structures, the Strait of Hormuz and energy security, and the shifting balance from a unipolar to a multipolar world. He reflects on the roles of the United States, Israel, China, and Russia, and discusses what these changes could mean for South Asia, particularly India and Pakistan.

Dhurandhar, Politics of Bollywood & India Pakistan

I had avoided the Dhurandhar hype for the last four months. I finally watched the first movie on Netflix and then read XTM’s review and watched the 2nd part in theatre. I profoundly disagreed with it—especially the line:

“By routing this grief through an anti-Pakistan narrative, the film asks Hamza to deny his Sikhness in order to become fully Indian, and frames that erasure as redemption.”

I’m not writing a formal review of the movie, but I will try to respond to a few generic questions raised on this forum and across social media regarding Dhurandhar.


Is the villain missing?

I agree with XTM that a central villain is missing in Part 1, but perhaps we should see Dhurandhar as a 7‑hour film split into two parts, rather than a standalone first installment.


Part 1 vs Part 2

Personally, I felt Part 1 was more tightly written and better dramatized. While some reviewers saw the love story as a needless distraction, I viewed it as a way to explore Hamza’s humanity despite his profession.


Is Dhurandhar Anti‑Islam?

On the contrary, I felt the filmmakers went out of their way to separate the issue of anti‑India terrorism from Islam—despite the fact that some terror groups do draw on fundamentalist interpretations of religion.
The villains are not portrayed as devout Muslims; they are not shown praying before missions. Rehman Dakait’s wife lighting his cigarette as a good‑luck gesture is a good example.

One could even argue that Dhurandhar focuses almost entirely on political motivations within Pakistan, while ignoring any potential religious motivations behind the Indo‑Pak conflict. I don’t know exactly how the ISI thinks, but I would wager that at least some religious motivations do exist—it cannot be purely political.


Is Dhurandhar Anti‑Pakistan?

Obviously, it is—but I disagree with XTM’s assertion that it dehumanizes Pakistani Muslims.
I didn’t enjoy the montage of political killings by “unknown gunmen”; it felt shallow. But it wasn’t the sort of random, gleeful violence we saw with Gaitonde in Sacred Games during the 1993 riots.

The film definitely leans dark, but I would still call it shades of grey, especially because of Hamza’s conversations with his wife.

I also believe that Major Iqbal’s character is humanized. He carries the burden of his father’s sins, and the mental torture he undergoes—while still maintaining a link to his wife and child—would break almost anyone. We can see why Major Iqbal becomes who he is. Ironically, this humanization also makes him a less effective villain than Rehman Dakait, as many reviewers have noted.


Is Dhurandhar pro‑Modi propaganda?

I may be wrong, but I felt the film used real politics—like demonetization—to weave its plot. Using real events increases impact, and I think that’s what the filmmakers were aiming for.

Does this mean it has no propaganda effect? Of course not. But compared to the list of A‑list Bollywood movies I’ve seen over the years, this is nothing unusual. We will probably see Hollywood films justifying the Iran war in a decade or so—that has always been the pattern.

If you pay attention, the film also touches upon how previous governments—Indira Gandhi’s as well as Manmohan Singh’s—played roles in shaping certain outcomes. It is not a “Modi or bust” narrative.
However, it would be blind to deny that the film does portray the Modi government’s actions toward Pakistan and terrorism in a positive light.


Jaskirat’s Arc

While I found certain aspects of the film underwhelming, I thoroughly enjoyed Jaskirat’s arc. Here, I completely disagree with XTM. The movie does not celebrate Jaskirat’s transformation into a killer—it shows the cost he pays at every step. It also explicitly shows how he is used by the establishment.

Jaskirat doesn’t become an intelligence operative because Pakistan “earned his hatred.” He becomes one because it was the best choice available to him. The film wants viewers to see the price soldiers pay for their “jobs.”

Also i absolutely do not understand why XTM thinks Jaskirat’s Sikhness is erased in the movie. Rather Jaskirat choses to travel back to Pathankot as a tired  Sikh in full Pagdi not macho silky muscly Hamza. I think going beyond this straightforward narrative into the alleged drugs, land dispute, Khalistan angle while thinking erasure of Sikhness or History is something i absolutely do not get.

 


On Hatred Being ‘Installed’

XTM claims:

“The hatred is not earned. It is installed.”

I disagree. You do see Hamza’s transformation through Lyari’s horrific violence, the betrayal of the Baloch by Rehman, and 26/11. You can see a monster being born in Lyari, but even then he retains his humanity—which becomes evident again when he reacts to killing his friend.

The movie does not end with a “happily ever after” for either Hamza or Jaskirat. It wants you to examine that, not ignore it.


My Take

I enjoyed both movies. Like XTM and many others, I agree that Part 2 has more flaws while Part 1 is far more seamless. Still, Jaskirat Singh Rangi’s arc in Part 2 is the highlight of the entire seven hours.


On India–Pakistan

Contrary to what social media suggests, India as a whole has moved on from Pakistan. You can see this from the declining obsession with India–Pakistan cricket matches compared to the 1990s and 2000s.

Yet, a significant number of Indians derive a kind of sadistic pleasure from Pakistan’s struggles. You see this reflected in reactions to news, such as Pakistan mediating in the Iran crisis—where both the Hindu right wing and the opposition twist the narrative for political ends.

If you once hated your neighbour in the slum you grew up in, would you still mock his poverty after moving into a middle‑class apartment? Or should you aspire to grow on your own terms?

This attitude towards Pakistan is self‑defeating. I honestly pity it.
My message to fellow Indians: Grow up and move on. Look East.

What if Pakistan successfully mediates in the Iran crisis? What if Pakistan continues to punch above its weight diplomatically?

If their mediation helps solve an energy crisis—unlikely, but possible—shouldn’t I, as an energy‑deficient Indian, be happy? If Pakistan’s rise ever poses a genuine risk to India, I will worry about it then. Until that point, I prefer to leave it to the agencies and the government. If Pakistan becomes richer and doesn’t support terrorism against India why would that be a bad thing ? I am not being naive but i think there is a marginal chance of Ind- Bangladesh level relations with Pakistan in 20 years if not 10. Inshallah

Iran: The Illusion of a Peace Deal| John Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt

Professors John Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt explain why U.S. and Iranian demands are fundamentally irreconcilable — and why this crisis is far from over. Instead of bringing Tehran to terms, Washington now finds itself further from a diplomatic settlement than it was in May 2025. Iran has played a weak hand with discipline and patience. The United States, by contrast, risks stumbling into another major strategic failure in the Middle East. At the core of the impasse is a basic reality: both sides are demanding the impossible. Washington insists on the full dismantling of Iran’s nuclear and missile capabilities, while Tehran seeks sanctions relief, reparations, and long-term security guarantees. Neither side is prepared to yield. The result is not a pathway to peace, but a deepening stalemate — with escalation, not resolution, the more likely outcome.

nos ancĂȘtres les Hindous

A pattern has emerged in these comment threads that deserves naming directly. When the Hindu hammer retreats, the space does not become neutral; it becomes anti-Hindu. The two are not the same thing, and conflating them is itself a form of intellectual dishonesty.

Hinduism is one of the most theologically complex systems humanity has produced. It is the root of Dharmic civilisation, the origin point of concepts, reincarnation foremost among them, that have radiated as far as East Asia, Southeast Asia, and arguably into the mystical strands of Abrahamic tradition. The sages, the philosophers, the vast literature: none of this coheres with the dismissal now fashionable in certain quarters, that Hinduism is simply a colonial administrative category, a British label slapped onto undifferentiated paganism.

This is the Pakistani foundational ideology speaking. It must deny Hindu civilisational continuity, because acknowledging it makes Temple destruction look like what it was: a pattern, not a series of unrelated incidents. It must deny that India had a civilisation, because if India had one, then the last pre-British colonisers of South Asia were Muslim; and that sits uncomfortably with postcolonial victimhood framing. The logic is circular and self-serving, but it is internally consistent. One cannot claim the mantle of the oppressed while being the penultimate oppressor.

The Dravidian Continue reading nos ancĂȘtres les Hindous

Open Thread

Formerly Brown asked me to post this:

1. Six Ukrainians and one US citizen have been arrested by india while crossing over from Myanmar.  Apparently they were helping to create trouble in Myanmar,  an eventually trying for a Christian state there. Sheikh hasina had sounded about US interests in such a venture.

2. Tamilnadu elections might be closer than expected. Side show: seeman’s Tamil party is attracting Brahmins!! who are opposed to Dravidians.

3. LDF might pop UDF once again in Kerala.  Ironically both fronts are accusing each other of being B team of BJP,  who have 1 seat currently!!!

4. Indian lokasabha is to add 215 more seats reserved exclusively  for women by the 2029 polls. Modi has changed india for ever.

On Dhurandhar, Decorum, and Where BP Draws the Line

The review of Dhurandhar 2 has now been posted. Read it if you haven’t. The comment thread on the Ikkis post, which ran in parallel, illustrated the review’s central argument more vividly than any film still could.

A film that educates audiences to hate will eventually produce hateful audiences.

We have been moderating this site long enough to know that comment threads are a pressure gauge, not a debating society. What happened over the last 48 hours was not debate. It was escalation; predictable, cyclical, and ultimately ending where it always ends when people get sufficiently worked up: in the language of violence.

BB was on a Dhurandhar high. We understand this. There is something in the film’s rhythm, the josh of it, as he put it himself, that makes a certain kind of Punjabi Muslim-hating Bollywood patriot feel ten feet tall. We are not without understanding. He had just watched a four-hour film designed specifically to produce this effect. But understanding the cause does not excuse the consequence.

The line was crossed when he repeated, almost verbatim, dialogue from the film, the “ghar mein ghusega bhi, marega bhi” register, and directed it as a personal threat at Kair. Saying one will infiltrate Pakistan and hold a gun to someone’s head to make them chant a slogan is not josh. It is a threat. That it is practically unenforceable is beside the point. The language normalises exactly what we argued Dhurandhar 2 normalises: the idea that the other must be humiliated into submission, not merely defeated.

BB’s commentating rights are suspended until Thursday, 2nd April. Every comment he attempts in that period will be deleted. When the suspension ends, reinstatement of authorship will depend on whether the Saffroniate faction of our commentariat, can reason with him collectively that certain red lines exist even in the heat of subcontinental rivalry. Those lines are not about Pakistan. They are about the difference between argument and menace.

Kabir and Sbarrkum retain their authorship. Kabir was asked to stop and did not, and we say so plainly. But nothing in his conduct approached the violent register BB eventually reached. We are also honest about the asymmetry here: Brown Pundits tilts toward Bharat, that is India; everyone who reads this site regularly knows this. That soft tilt means Kabir, Sbarrkum and Qureshi operate in a forum that is structurally not neutral. The least we owe them is consistent application of the rules.

We want to say something about the Punjabi dimension behind all of this, because it is analytically interesting and not merely polemical.

Continue reading On Dhurandhar, Decorum, and Where BP Draws the Line

Brown Pundits