Ajit Doval’s Call for Civilisational ‘Revenge’

On January 10, 2026, National Security Advisor (NSA) Ajit Doval addressed 3,000 young leaders in New Delhi with a message that was both a historical reckoning and a strategic blueprint. At the heart of his address was a provocative call: to take “revenge” for India’s history.

However, Ajit Doval’s definition of revenge has nothing to do with the reactive violence often portrayed in cinema. Instead, he framed it as a constructive, institutional, and civilisational ascent. By building a nation so strong, self-reliant, and technologically advanced that it can never be subjugated again, India achieves the ultimate “revenge” against centuries of decline.

Lessons from a Millennium of Invasions

Ajit Doval’s speech was rooted in a candid assessment of India’s past. He reminded the youth that while India was historically an advanced and peaceful civilisation that never sought to loot others, its primary failure was a lack of security consciousness.

• The Cost of Helplessness: He spoke of the trauma of the past 1,000 years, where India witnessed the destruction of villages, the looting of temples, and the systemic erosion of its wealth during various Invasions.

• The Legacy of Sacrifice: He invoked the memories of Bhagat Singh and Subhash Chandra Bose, contrasting their era of sacrifice with the current generation’s “privilege of choice.”

  - Advertisement -

• Security as a Priority: The core lesson Doval highlighted was that a progressive society cannot survive without a robust defensive shield. Economic and cultural greatness are fragile without the power to protect them.

The Strategic Shift: Atmanirbharta and Global Independence

In today’s context, Ajit Doval’s words translate into a rejection of what many call “Western boxes” the habit of seeking external validation for India’s domestic and foreign policies.

1. Defense Autonomy: The call to “revenge” history manifests in Atmanirbharta (self-reliance). Building indigenous defense systems and high-tech manufacturing isn’t just an economic goal. It is a security imperative to ensure India is never again at the mercy of foreign suppliers.

2. Strategic Autonomy: By focusing on internal strength, India moves away from being a “silent spectator” in global affairs to becoming a decisive “pole” in a multipolar world.

3. Institutional Strength: Doval emphasized that the “slow, irreversible” building of judicial, educational, and economic institutions is the most potent form of national power.

The Manufacturing of Outrage

As is often the case with discourse that challenges the status quo. Ajit Doval’s speech was met with immediate pushback from “Left-liberal” commentators. By clipping the word “revenge” and stripping it of its constructive context. Leftists attempted to brand the speech as communal or “Islamophobic.”

• The Intentional Misinterpretation: Leftists ignored Doval’s explicit clarification that “revenge” means building a great India based on “our rights, our ideas, and our beliefs.”

• Historical Denialism: The outrage revealed a deep-seated discomfort with acknowledging the actual trauma of historical Invasions. For the critics, remembering loss is often equated with inciting hatred. A logic that Doval’s speech explicitly rejected by focusing on responsibility over grievance.

• The “Validation” Trap: The backlash highlights a recurring pattern where civilisational memory is branded as communal to silence debates on national security and historical truth.

Memory Is Not Hatred

Remembering history does not equal targeting present communities. Across the world, nations openly discuss slavery, colonial exploitation, and genocide. Such remembrance is not seen as hatred but as accountability.

Yet in India, recalling destruction or decline is often branded bigotry. This selective sensitivity reveals an ideological discomfort with civilisational self-awareness. Ajit Doval’s speech challenged that discomfort.

He argued that forgetting history weakens nations. Learning from it strengthens them. That distinction was central to his message.

Revenge Against Decline

Ultimately, Ajit Doval’s address was a call to move beyond the “victim mindset” of the past. By framing nation-building as the ultimate response to history. He offered the youth a purpose that is both spiritual and strategic.

In this context, “revenge” translates into quiet power accumulation. It means building institutions that cannot be coerced. It means economic and military resilience that prevents future humiliation.

Nation-building, as Ajit Doval articulated, is not revenge against people.
It is revenge against weakness, dependency, and historical neglect.