The Ideology of Akhand Bharat: Its Significance and Consequences

The Ideology of Akhand Bharat: Its Significance and Consequences

The concept of Akhand Bharat—literally meaning "Undivided India"—is rooted in the Hindu nationalist imagination and is promoted by various right-wing organizations in India, especially the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) and its affiliates. The ideology envisions the political, cultural, and territorial unification of the entire Indian subcontinent, which includes present-day India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Nepal, Bhutan, Sri Lanka, Afghanistan, and sometimes even Myanmar and Tibet. While it may appear as a romanticized revival of ancient geographical unity, the implications of such a vision are profound, complex, and deeply controversial.

Historical Origins of Akhand Bharat

The idea of a united subcontinent is not new. In ancient times, empires like the Maurya Dynasty under Emperor Ashoka and later the Gupta Empire controlled vast areas of the subcontinent. However, these were never absolute or permanent unions; instead, they were fluctuating empires held together by political alliances, military conquests, and loose federations. In the 20th century, Hindu nationalist thinkers such as Vinayak Damodar Savarkar and M. S. Golwalkar further propagated the idea of Akhand Bharat as a sacred and indivisible land of Hindus, which must eventually be restored.

The partition of British India in 1947, which led to the creation of Pakistan, was perceived by these ideologues as a dismemberment of a holy land. Since then, the Akhand Bharat vision has been used as a political and cultural slogan aimed at reversing partition, both ideologically and territorially.

Core Ideology Behind Akhand Bharat

The Akhand Bharat ideology is driven primarily by the following themes:

1. Cultural Nationalism: The belief that the Indian subcontinent shares a common Hindu cultural heritage that transcends modern national borders.

2. Religious Revivalism: It emphasizes the dominance of Hinduism as the mother culture and regards other religions, especially Islam and Christianity, as foreign influences.

3. Geopolitical Reunification: Advocates believe that the political reunification of the subcontinent is not only possible but necessary for the strength and resurgence of Bharat Mata (Mother India).

4. Historical Rectification: Supporters see the partition as an artificial wound created by colonial powers and seek to "correct history" by erasing this division.

Political Significance in Modern India

Though not a part of official Indian foreign policy, the idea of Akhand Bharat subtly influences the political rhetoric of parties like the BJP, especially when aligned with RSS thought. Maps depicting Akhand Bharat are often found in RSS publications and even in some schools run by RSS-affiliated groups. In 2015, a BJP Member of Parliament, Yogi Adityanath (now Chief Minister of Uttar Pradesh), stated that Akhand Bharat would be a reality by 2025.

 Similarly, in 2023, the newly inaugurated Indian Parliament building featured a mural map of Akhand Bharat, causing diplomatic tensions with neighboring countries.

For Hindu nationalists, Akhand Bharat represents the ideological and civilizational zenith of India—when the nation returns to its imagined glorious past, unified under Hindu values and political leadership.

Implications and Consequences

1. Threat to Regional Sovereignty

The most immediate consequence of the Akhand Bharat ideology is that it threatens the sovereignty of neighboring nations. Pakistan, Bangladesh, Nepal, and Sri Lanka are independent countries with distinct political identities and national interests. The idea that they should be “reabsorbed” into a greater India is perceived as aggressive, hegemonic, and expansionist.

2. Destabilization of South Asia

South Asia is already a politically sensitive and volatile region. Any rhetoric or symbolism supporting territorial unification can exacerbate geopolitical tensions, particularly between India and Pakistan, two nuclear-armed rivals. It may also influence the delicate diplomatic balances that India holds with Nepal, Bhutan, and Bangladesh.

3. Communal Polarization

At its core, Akhand Bharat is not a secular or inclusive vision; it is Hindu-centric. It promotes the notion of a Hindu cultural hegemony that marginalizes other religious communities, especially Muslims and Christians. If pursued politically, this could lead to widespread communal unrest and deepen existing divides within the diverse societies of the region.

4. Violation of International Law

The ideology inherently violates the principles of international law and the United Nations Charter, particularly regarding the respect for sovereignty, territorial integrity, and non-interference. Any attempt to physically enforce Akhand Bharat would be considered an act of aggression.

5. Hindrance to Regional Cooperation

Organizations like the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC) aim to foster cooperation among South Asian countries. The propagation of Akhand Bharat undermines such efforts by sowing mistrust and suspicion among nations, making regional collaboration more difficult.

6. Internal Indian Consequences

Within India itself, the promotion of Akhand Bharat ideology diverts attention from pressing issues like poverty, unemployment, environmental challenges, and economic inequality. It also emboldens extremist elements who may use nationalist rhetoric to justify hate crimes or suppress dissent in the name of cultural unity.

Responses from Neighboring Countries

Countries like Pakistan and Bangladesh have strongly condemned references to Akhand Bharat, viewing them as a justification for Indian imperialism. Even Nepal and Sri Lanka have reacted negatively to Indian leaders’ symbolic gestures that reference the ideology. This has led to diplomatic protests, erosion of trust, and heightened nationalism within these nations as a counter-response.

An Unrealistic and Dangerous Vision

While Akhand Bharat may seem appealing to some as a return to a glorious and unified past, it remains a utopian and unrealistic fantasy in the 21st century. The idea fails to consider the diversity, complexity, and evolution of the post-colonial national identities in South Asia. People across the region have fought long and hard for self-determination, and any attempt to impose a singular cultural or political identity upon them is bound to fail and may lead to violent conflict.

Conclusion

The ideology of Akhand Bharat is more than a historical or cultural curiosity; it is a politically charged and potentially destabilizing vision that threatens the delicate balance of peace and cooperation in South Asia. While unity, cooperation, and mutual respect among South Asian nations are admirable goals, they must be pursued through dialogue, economic partnerships, and mutual sovereignty—not through expansionist dreams rooted in religious nationalism. In an age of globalization and interconnectedness, true strength lies in embracing diversity and coexisting peacefully, rather than attempting to revive a mythic past through ideological hegemony.