Historical comprehension

Hyderabad sits nestled amongst one of the oldest rock systems of the world. These granite rocks are 2500 million years old. Rain, sun and wind have for aeons, through their collective and continuous physical and chemical actions, worked them into weird shapes. Some appear perched upon each other so precariously that you feel some giant-children playing at house making must have kept them there. From times immemorial they have stayed like that without tumbling down. They will remain like that long after we are gone. Golconda Fort was once a mere hillock, a hump of a giant camel, a mass of scattered misshapen granite. It was sheer wilderness. There cow and goatherds used to graze cattle and sheep belonging to the nearby villages. It was so popular with graziers that it took the name of 'hillock of the graziers' - Golla Konda in Telugu, the local language. Golla Konda later on became 'Golconda'. Hyderabad is the daughter of Golconda Fort which stands in ruins now, eight kilometres away from the centre of the city. The fort was built about a thousand years ago, during the Kakatiya rule (AD 1000 - 1321) which had its capital at Warangal - a city about 150 kilometres to the north of Hyderabad. Rudramba Devi, queen of the Kakatiya dynasty, ruled for 34 years from AD 1262 to 1296. She withstood the combined attacks of the Pandyas, the Yadavas and the Hoysalas with the help of her grandson, Prataparudradeva who succeeded her (AD 1296 - 1323). He too was an illustrious ruler but was subjected to repeated attacks by the Sultans of Delhi: there were five during the two decades after AD 1303. Finally, he was defeated by Ulugh Khan, imprisoned and taken prisoner to Delhi. On the way he committed suicide. Ulugh Khan later became the Sultan of Hindustan, and is known as Mohammad Tughlaq. Since his empire had extended to the south, Delhi was no longer the centre of political gravity. He, therefore, ordered that the capital of India be shifted from Delhi to Daulatabad. For two decades this city remained the capital of India.

आंतरराष्ट्रीय राजकारणाचे शास्त्र बाल्यावस्थेत आहे. भूतकाळात, म्हणजे 1914 च्या सुमारास आंतरराष्ट्रीय संबंध त्यामध्ये व्यावसायिक दृष्टया गुंतलेल्या लोकांचा मामला होता. लोकशाही देशांमध्ये परंपरेने परराष्ट्र धोरण हे पक्षीय राजकारणाच्या व्याप्तीच्या पलीकडले मानले गेले; आणि परराष्ट्र खात्यांच्या गुढ व्यवहारांवर बारिक नियंत्रण ठेवण्यास आपण सक्षम आहोत असे प्रातिनिधिक संस्थांना वाटत नव्हते. ब्रिटीश नाविक दलाने आपल्या संभाव्य शत्रुंच्या संदर्भात असलेले वर्चस्व जे त्या काळात आवश्यक मानले जावयाचे काही काळासाठी जरी गमावले, किंवा परंपरेने ब्रिटीशांचे हित संबंध असलेल्या वा तसे मानले गेलेल्या प्रदेशात युद्ध सुरू झाले तर ब्रिटीश जनमत सहज प्रक्षोभित होत असे. सक्तीची लष्कर भरती आणि वर्षानुवर्षे परकीय आक्रमणाची भीती यामुळे युरोपच्या खंडीय भागात लोकांमध्ये एक सर्वसाधारण, सततची आणि सहज अशी आंतरराष्ट्रीय प्रश्नांसंबंधीची जाणीव होती. परंतु या जाणीवेची अभिव्यक्ती मुख्यतः कामगार चळवळीच्या माध्यमातून होत असे ज्यायोगे कामगार चळवळीने वेळोवेळी पोथीनिष्ठ असे युद्धविरोधी ठराव पारित केले. अध्यक्षांनी सिनेटच्या (वरिष्ठ सभागृह) सल्ल्याने आणि मान्यतेने करार पूर्ण करावेत अशी अद्वितीय तरतूद अमेरिकेच्या राज्यघटनेमध्ये होती. परंतु या अपवादात्मक तरतूदीला व्यापक महत्त्व प्राप्त करून देण्याच्या दृष्टीने अमेरिकेचे परराष्ट्र संबंध अत्यंत तोकडे होते. राजनयाच्या रंगतदार पैलूंना मात्र बातमीचे मूल्य होते. परंतु विद्यापीठात काय किंवा बुद्धीवाद्यांच्या व्यापक वर्तुळांमध्ये काय, वर्तमान आंतरराष्ट्रीय घडामोडींचा सुसंबद्ध अभ्यास केला जात नव्हता. युद्ध हे अजूनही मुख्यतः सैनिकांचे काम मानले जात होते; आणि त्या ओघानेच आंतरराष्ट्रीय राजकारण हे राजनैतिक अधिकाऱ्यांचे काम मानले गेले. आंतरराष्ट्रीय घडामोडींचे संचालन व्यावसायिकांच्या हातून काढून घ्यावे किंवा ते काय करीत आहेत त्याकडे गंभीरपणे आणि पद्धतशीरपणे लक्ष द्यावे अशी सर्वसाधारण इच्छाही नव्हती. Question number 26 to 30: The beginnings of a science The science of international politics is in its infancy. Down to 1914, the conduct of international relations was the concern of persons professionally engaged in it. In democratic countries, foreign policy was traditionally regarded as outside the scope of party politics; and the representative organs did not feel themselves competent to exercise any close control over the mysterious operations of foreign offices. In Great Britain, public opinion was readily aroused if war occurred in any region traditionally regarded as a sphere of British interest, or if the British navy momentarily ceased to possess that margin of superiority over potential rivals which was then deemed essential. In continental Europe, conscription and the chronic fear of foreign invasion had created a more general and continuous popular awareness of international problems. But this awareness found expression mainly in the labour movement, which from time to time passed somewhat academic resolutions against war. The Constitution of the United States of America contained the unique provision that treaties were concluded by the President "by and with the advice and consent of the Senate". But the foreign relations of the United States seemed too parochial to lend any wider significance to this exception. The more picturesque aspects of diplomacy had a certain news value. But nowhere, whether in universities or in wider intellectual circles, was there organized study of current international affairs. War was still regarded mainly as the business of soldiers; and the corollary of this was that international politics, was the business of diplomats. There was no general desire to take the conduct of international affairs out of the hands of the professionals or even to pay serious and systematic attention to what they were doing.