Ahmad Shah Abdali, Politics, and Pashtun Loyalties.

[BarakzaiAbdali]

Assalam-Alaikum.

Greetings Dr.BarakzaiAbdali,

I hope you have recovered from your illness. I hope you are doing great.


Many Punjabis claim Ahmad Shah Baba was someone who massacred the innocent Punjabis, and someone who looted them along with taking war booty. They even argue that the reason Kandahar has a few Sikhs, or that Jalalabad has a few Sikhs is because he "forcefully" brought them with him. I think a clarification on our part is certainly needed, considering the fact that Indians have gone as far as creating "dramas" in which they depict Durranis as evil warriors. They argue why did he invaded us 17times, and I am sure you know the rest. I think a proper rebuttal is needed by our Pashtun community. I would like to invite Khalsawarrior, a Punjabi Sikh from India to present his argument as well. What are your thoughts on the aforementioned? I am interested in hearing you out. My relatives are directly related to Ahmad Shah Baba by the way, so according to them, he was a brilliant man. That is something I agree with, but I am biased I guess.

Traveling, will attempt to readdress this very important discussion soon. Thank you for your kind words, I feel much better.

[BarakzaiAbdali]

Assalam-Alaikum.

Greetings Dr.BarakzaiAbdali,

I hope you have recovered from your illness. I hope you are doing great.


Many Punjabis claim Ahmad Shah Baba was someone who massacred the innocent Punjabis, and someone who looted them along with taking war booty. They even argue that the reason Kandahar has a few Sikhs, or that Jalalabad has a few Sikhs is because he "forcefully" brought them with him. I think a clarification on our part is certainly needed, considering the fact that Indians have gone as far as creating "dramas" in which they depict Durranis as evil warriors. They argue why did he invaded us 17times, and I am sure you know the rest. I think a proper rebuttal is needed by our Pashtun community. I would like to invite Khalsawarrior, a Punjabi Sikh from India to present his argument as well. What are your thoughts on the aforementioned? I am interested in hearing you out. My relatives are directly related to Ahmad Shah Baba by the way, so according to them, he was a brilliant man. That is something I agree with, but I am biased I guess.

Glad to hear about the family tree, your leadership qualities are well inherited then. My paternal grandmother was a fellow Sadozai, but not per any lineage to Ahmad Shah.

Are both your parents Sadozai?

[BarakzaiAbdali]

Assalam-Alaikum.

Greetings Dr.BarakzaiAbdali,

I hope you have recovered from your illness. I hope you are doing great.


Many Punjabis claim Ahmad Shah Baba was someone who massacred the innocent Punjabis, and someone who looted them along with taking war booty. They even argue that the reason Kandahar has a few Sikhs, or that Jalalabad has a few Sikhs is because he "forcefully" brought them with him. I think a clarification on our part is certainly needed, considering the fact that Indians have gone as far as creating "dramas" in which they depict Durranis as evil warriors. They argue why did he invaded us 17times, and I am sure you know the rest. I think a proper rebuttal is needed by our Pashtun community. I would like to invite Khalsawarrior, a Punjabi Sikh from India to present his argument as well. What are your thoughts on the aforementioned? I am interested in hearing you out. My relatives are directly related to Ahmad Shah Baba by the way, so according to them, he was a brilliant man. That is something I agree with, but I am biased I guess.

One has to remember that Ahmad Shah astutely recognized a few rising threats. During his tenure as Nadir Shah's cavalry commander he very likely noticed that the once powerful Indian Mughal Empire that had challenged the Safavids had gone into decay. However, contrary to what the Punjab asserts as the excuse as to why the British were able to penetrate the subcontinent (they claim that we the Afghans so battered them that we reduced their ability to resist), they ought to look at the fact that the Mughal Kingdom had ceased to be an Islamic force with Akbar himself. It was Akbar that attempted to introduce Din-e-Ilahi, a fusion religion that led away from Islam.

Aurengzaib had attempted some reform and remains much hated in India for his zeal, though some Indian biographers are reevaluating prior assessments of him. However, by the time that Nadir Quli Beg invaded, Shah Waliullah and others had already noted that the the Mughals were no longer advocates of Islam anymore than they were in the era of Akbar. This is exactly why they invited Ahmad Shah to reinvade.

Second, take a look at the the Sikh incursions and the Barakzai betrayal of another Ahmad Shah of a later era, Ahmad Shah Yusufzai (or the Barelvi) who battled the Sikhs for control of Peshawar and was killed in the process. It was not lost on Ahmad Shah Abdali that the Sikhs were an escalating power. Although the nationalists absolutely loathe Ahmad Shah Barelvi, they ough to look at a very intimate connection he himself had to Shah Waliullah, which was through the latter's son. So if we criticize Ahmad Shah Yusufzai for being an adherent to "Pan Islamism" per his affiliations with Shah Abdul Aziz, or whatever loathsome term they now use for rigorous Islam, then they would do well to remember who Shah Abdul Aziz was the son of. Shah Abdul Aziz was the son of Shah Waliullah, the same Waliullah that corresponded and was religious mentor to our Ahmad Shah Abdali. The secular nationalists also try to disown Ahmad Shah the Latter from the Pashtun annals by noting some of his time was spent in India. They are caught in an intellectual chinese finger trap of their own making as Sher Shah Suri was also known to have spent a large portion of his life in India... yet they do not disqualify him from wearing the Afghan mantle.

Finally, if the Panjab is so sore about the incursions of Ahmad Shah Abdali in weakening their resolve against the British, why did they then become the greatest benefactor of British largesse? For that matter, the Sikh armies acted as a forward operating buffer for the British when they attempted to seize Jalalabad and Kabul. They utilized British arms to lethal effect in attempting to accomplish this. Had the Afghans not stopped Hari Sing Nalwa, seizure of Kabul very well would have happened. Moreover, had Ahmad Shah Baba not previously tenderized and rising Sikh legions, the fate that overtook the NWFP might have occured in the southern Afghan basin. Basically, Ahmad Shah did what was best for his people. Subsequent generals owe him a huge debt for dealing early blows to the rising Singh empire to the point that it could not cross the Khybar Pass.

Finally, what about this factoid regarding the utilization and agreements in place with the British, from the Panjab end, to place that Karzai of old, Shha Shuja Sadozai, on the throne?"

"In 1838 Auckland, Ranjit Singh, and Shuja signed an agreement stating that Shuja would regain control of Kabul and Qandahar with the help of the British and Sikhs; he would accept Sikh rule of the former Afghan provinces already controlled by Ranjit Singh, and that Herat would remain independent."

http://afghanland.com/history/greatgame.html

Finally, regarding the claim of a breakdown of Muslim power in the Panjab occuring as a consequence of Ahmad Shah Abdali, the claimants would do best to read on Tipu Sultan and his rigid fighting capability against the British. Sultan was nearly concurrent to Abdali and there are letters that exist indicating that he, as an Indian Muslim, urged Abdali's grandson Zaman Shah Sadozai to support him. The latter had some of the Islamist tendencies of his grandfather and was ready to committ until the British had the Persians foment problems on the edge of Zaman Shah's own lands. This latter fact ought to also make the secular nationalists think about the fact that Zaman Shah for all his faults, understood that he had choices and alliances to make and generally avoided alliances with Shiah Iran and British India, despite overtures. Unfortunately, the Barakzai would not be so forward thinking and would subsequently cede land and forge doomed alliances, even under the Iron Amir.

[Admin Khan]

Dr.BarakzaiAbdali,
I will respond soon.

Khalsawarrior,
I look forward to your response to Dr.BarakzaiAbdli's post.

[BarakzaiAbdali]

Dr.BarakzaiAbdali,
I will respond soon.

Khalsawarrior,
I look forward to your response to Dr.BarakzaiAbdli's post.

No need to call me Doctor. I am your equal and your brother. Besides it makes me feel ancient.

[KhalsaWarrior]

Since I am more acquainted with Sikh history I wouldnt be able to comment on the Islamic side of the discussion. Here is my take on BA's argument-

Finally, if the Panjab is so sore about the incursions of Ahmad Shah Abdali in weakening their resolve against the British, why did they then become the greatest benefactor of British largesse? For that matter, the Sikh armies acted as a forward operating buffer for the British when they attempted to seize Jalalabad and Kabul. They utilized British arms to lethal effect in attempting to accomplish this. Had the Afghans not stopped Hari Sing Nalwa, seizure of Kabul very well would have happened. Moreover, had Ahmad Shah Baba not previously tenderized and rising Sikh legions, the fate that overtook the NWFP might have occured in the southern Afghan basin. Basically, Ahmad Shah did what was best for his people. Subsequent generals owe him a huge debt for dealing early blows to the rising Singh empire to the point that it could not cross the Khybar Pass.

Let me clarify that there was no substantial Sikh threat at the time of Ahmed Shah's first invasion. When Ahmed Shah first crossed the Indus in 1748, the Sikh bands (Misls as they were called), hounded by Mughal armies roamed the jungles as bandits and hardly had any authority. Although the Sikhs were able to capture Lahore and Ahmed Shah had to return in 1751 to recapture Lahore they hardly posed any threat other than a nuisance or as harassers to the Afghan army. This however wasn't unexpected as they were natives of Punjab resisting a foreign power.

The period when the Sikhs were in absolute control of Punjab was the period 1780-1840. The latter 40 years coincided with Ranjit Singh's rule. The only main threat to Ahmed Shah's invasion was the crumbling Mughal empire, weakened by Maratha raids in the North and East and other rebellions all over the erstwhile empire.

Finally, what about this factoid regarding the utilization and agreements in place with the British, from the Panjab end, to place that Karzai of old, Shha Shuja Sadozai, on the throne?"

"In 1838 Auckland, Ranjit Singh, and Shuja signed an agreement stating that Shuja would regain control of Kabul and Qandahar with the help of the British and Sikhs; he would accept Sikh rule of the former Afghan provinces already controlled by Ranjit Singh, and that Herat would remain independent."

You might have got the dates mixed up here. This Anglo-Sikh treaty was signed in Ranjit Singh's time and hence much later than Ahmed Shah's period. Hence it wouldnt be relevant as a provocation for Ahmed Shah's invasions. In Ranjeet Singh's time, the Sikhs did try and influence events in Kabul through treaties and attacks.

And here's a passage from Wiki regarding Ahmed Shah's sixth invasion, that especially targeted the Sikhs-

The Sixth Afghan Invasion, 1762

On February 5, 1762, the Sikhs were especially the target of Ahmad Shah Abdali's sixth invasion into India. News had reached him in Afghanistan of the defeat of his general, Nur-ud-Din Bamezai, at the hands of the Sikhs who were fast spreading themselves out over the Punjab and had declared their leader, Misldar Jassa Singh Ahluwalia, king of Lahore. To rid his Indian dominion of them once and for all, he set out from Kandahar. Marching with alacrity, he overtook the Sikhs as they were withdrawing into Malwa after crossing the Satluj.
The moving caravan comprised a substantial portion of the total Sikh population and contained, besides active fighters, a large body of old men, women and children who were being escorted to the safety of the interior. Surprised by Ahmad Shah, the Sikhs threw a cordon round those who needed protection, and prepared for the battle. In this formation and continuing their march, they fought the invaders and their Indian allies (The Nawabs of Malerkotla, Sirhind, etc.) desperately. Sardar Charhat Singh Sukerchakia (the grandfather of Maharaja Ranjit Singh), Sardar Hari Singh Dhillon and Sardar Jassa Singh Ahluwalia led their forces with skill and courage. Jassa Singh sustained sixty-four wounds on his body, but he survived. Sardar Charhat Singh rode to exhaustion, five of his horses one after another.
Ahmad Shah succeeded, in the end, in breaking through the cordon and carried out a full scale massacre. His orders were for everyone in native dress to be killed at sight. The soldiers of Error and Sirhind were to wear green leaves of trees on their heads to distinguish themselves from the Sikhs. Near the village of Kup, in the vicinity of Malerkotla, about 20,000 Sikhs died at the end of a single day's action (February 5, 1762). This battle is known in Sikh history as the Wadda Ghalughara(The Great Holocaust).

I understand that previous Mughal emperors, including Aurangzeb had ambitions to rule over Afghanistan and Ahmed Shah's invasions could be looked as a measure to negate that possibility. However, to us Sikhs/Punjabis, who hadn't ever set foot beyond the Khyber, he was a foreign power invading our lands.

[BarakzaiAbdali]

Since I am more acquainted with Sikh history I wouldnt be able to comment on the Islamic side of the discussion. Here is my take on BA's argument-


Let me clarify that there was no substantial Sikh threat at the time of Ahmed Shah's first invasion. When Ahmed Shah first crossed the Indus in 1748, the Sikh bands (Misls as they were called), hounded by Mughal armies roamed the jungles as bandits and hardly had any authority. Although the Sikhs were able to capture Lahore and Ahmed Shah had to return in 1751 to recapture Lahore they hardly posed any threat other than a nuisance or as harassers to the Afghan army. This however wasn't unexpected as they were natives of Punjab resisting a foreign power.

The period when the Sikhs were in absolute control of Punjab was the period 1780-1840. The latter 40 years coincided with Ranjit Singh's rule. The only main threat to Ahmed Shah's invasion was the crumbling Mughal empire, weakened by Maratha raids in the North and East and other rebellions all over the erstwhile empire.



You might have got the dates mixed up here. This Anglo-Sikh treaty was signed in Ranjit Singh's time and hence much later than Ahmed Shah's period. Hence it wouldnt be relevant as a provocation for Ahmed Shah's invasions. In Ranjeet Singh's time, the Sikhs did try and influence events in Kabul through treaties and attacks.

And here's a passage from Wiki regarding Ahmed Shah's sixth invasion, that especially targeted the Sikhs-



I understand that previous Mughal emperors, including Aurangzeb had ambitions to rule over Afghanistan and Ahmed Shah's invasions could be looked as a measure to negate that possibility. However, to us Sikhs/Punjabis, who hadn't ever set foot beyond the Khyber, he was a foreign power invading our lands.

The Khalsa warriors, your name sake had already established themselves as contributor to the future Sikh empire before Ahmad Shah Abdali had sat on the throne. The Khalsa and their capable responses to the Mughals would surely have caught the eye of many a leader of the era as to the possibility of a formidable foe to be.

[KhalsaWarrior]

The Khalsa warriors, your name sake had already established themselves as contributor to the future Sikh empire before Ahmad Shah Abdali had sat on the throne. The Khalsa and their capable responses to the Mughals would surely have caught the eye of many a leader of the era as to the possibility of a formidable foe to be.

You could be correct. But surely Ahmed Shah couldn't have foreseen the Sikh attack on Peshawar and surrounding Pashtun lands that were to come half a century after his death. As I said, in Ahmed Shah's time the Khalsa Misls were armed bands similar to the Pashtun tribal army structure and were content with harassing the Mughals and limited their aggressions to areas within the Indus and the Satluj. Even the Mughals didn't think of them as more than a nuisance.

And I understand the tendency by patriotic Afghans to justify Ahmed Shah's invasions into India. But Ahmed Shah's forays have to be seen in a similar light as the other invasions into India. India, and especially Punjab has seen countless invasions. From Alexander to Ahmed Shah, there have been lots of men, riding down from the Khyber carrying aspirations of large kingdoms and backed by their military skill and manpower. The Greeks, the Turkic-Mongols and the Afghans - they all used similar routes.