Nitin neatly traces the origins of Pakistani missile names in reverse chronology, from Babar to Ahmed Shah Abdali. Which is entirely logical and not at all surprising. As he notes

…the naming of this missile follows a familiar pattern of naming its missiles after Afghan chiefs who invaded India (and ironically what is today Pakistan) at different times in history.

The missile names are in keeping with the idea of Pakistan, nay the seed-ideology that led to its birth. The missiles are named as such to serve a constant reminder of what Islam–or its heroes–did to India historically and to perhaps say, “it’s not the end yet.” I remember reading somewhere that Pakistan was created to give rebirth to the grand Mughal dream of a complete Indian (Islamic) conquest. Kashmir is just the beginning of this unfinished business.

And as Nitin himself notes in this entry, the rules of the house have not changed. Peace process eyewashes will continue passively while the real “peace” efforts that Pakistan is pouring its heart into will increase with ever more aggressive thrusts–more Ghauris and Ghaznis will be built, and perhaps Tipu will also see the light of the day.

But Tipu Sultan, who is celebrated as a hero by Indian nationalists, does not quite fit the profile of Ghori, Ghazni, Abdali or even a Babar. That leaves Mohammed bin Qasim, an eighth-century Arab general who first brought Islam to India. Perhaps he’s next.

(Ed: Italics mine)

Those that celebrate Tipu as a hero mostly belong to the secular crowd; others may also respect his “freedom fighter” profile, but as I’ve somewhat indicated in this entry, it is a false view.

In Tipu’s time, a lot of Indian kings fought against the British who, it should be remembered, were just toying with the idea of conquering India. In 1799, the year of Tipu’s death, the British had to still deal with the Marathas, French and other powerful foes. They had by no stretch of imagination conquered India entirely. And here lies the fallacy of calling Tipu a freedom fighter: how can you liberate a country which is not yet enslaved? Or a country whose kings don’t realize that their foolish infighting could lead them to slavery in the long run? Those who fought the British really faced danger to their kingdoms, and others merely fought thinking them to be allies of the enemy king. In my limited reading, I cannot say which king(s) really realized the danger the British posed to India as a whole. But Tipu was definitely not one of them.

We need to remember that Tipu was fighting against the British on two fronts: conquest of territory and later, defence of his own kingdom. The Mysore kingdom fell only after Tipu’s death. It’s true that Tipu lost large portions of his kingdom–Mangalore, for instance–to the British, but the Mysore kingdom as a whole hadn’t really fallen to the Brits till his death. And Tipu wasn’t your typical rebel-in-the-forest who led a victorious march with this band of guerilla fighters against the invader who had usurped Mysore. Where then is the question of a fight for freedom? What kind of logic is it which calls these battles as freedom struggles? Using the same logic, can I call Siraj U Daula a freedom fighter simply because he evicted the British from Bengal?

There’s another angle. Tipu allied with the French to fight the Brits. If he was really the freedom fighter he is portrayed to be, he would be equally wary of their designs after the Brits were defeated: I find it hard to believe that he a master statesman, wouldn’t have thought of such a fundamental political possibility. The French were as foreign to us, and had similar invasive plans as the Brits.

Very simply, Tipu’s ambition, like any other king was to conquer more territory. If you call Tipu a freedom fighter, you’d be obliged to similarly term the Maratha Peshwas or any other king who fought the British at that time. The sole criterion therefore to determine who is a freedom fighter shouldn’t rest on the fact that he/she fought the British at some point in history.

I have no objection to people who praise Tipu as a fierce warrior, a courageous leader, and all the other nice things we attribute to a valourous king. However, reality is that Tipu was an ambitious, conquest-hungry king and also an aggressive Islamic proselytizer.

Which is why Pakistan will be justified in naming its next arsenal Tipu.