Future Strategic Scenario for the Indian Subcontinent -II

[devesh]

I think the treatment of Devyani has put the EJ's squarely in opposition to Indian bureaucracy.

we can see that right here on the forum.

this is a "dhoodh ka dhoodh, pani ka pani" moment. elements of the Indian State now firmly being opposed, and consequently shocked and surprised, by "interests" that they saw as "benign/useful" friends.

[brihaspati]

I already suggested, poor homework by concerned avid initiators, and magnificent self-goals by all - from both sides. This is such an issue that all the myths and propaganda clash with themselves. But no easy solutions. Whatever is done, there will be at least one aggrieved party, perhaps more than one.

[devesh]

well, going by US statements, Devyani and India are already an aggrieved party.

and the tally cannot remain there. there must be reciprocal action to make it 1-1 instead of 1-0.

in the spirit of scoring self-goals, one needs to be scored by India as well. a visible, and unambiguous self-goal that leaves US with something of similar style that they gave India.

[brihaspati]

devesh ji,
I have already suggested : this issue will not go far. There will be a lot of peacock-tail waving, but ultimately everyone involved is compromised to various degrees.

GOI cannot protest too much - as it may highlight, issues connected to "reservations", the similarity of financial and accumulative or power behaviour of the "reserved" and the alleged repressing "unreserved" when in power, the possible political and financial nexus behind the dad, ityadi. Pushing too much on Richards, might trigger off EJ backlash, and onlee the EJ-God knows how far that goes up the chain at Delhi. That in turn may have serious electoral consequences in the saviour and saved states of the south - at least thats what the official and unofficial think tanks might whisper into the policy making ears. The external EJ promoters, like Euro land , and USA - will also advise in similar vein. The same old problem of whitewashing and promoting religious identities in India that have transnational power centres and persistent imperialist subversion in favour of their "home" power centres.


USA cannot yield the real reasons - which most likely is based on a black op aimed at compromising Devyani, whose details must have been forwarded before by Paki and German observers working for US agencies. Or the deeper moles within from "our" side who work for them. The US could not have moved so, without deep knowledge of her connections, family backgrounds, and this input has to come from sources deep within the desh admin setup - which would be the only place with both the motivation and the infrastructure to collate such info and pass on.

Richards family could only be whisked off with the full knowledge and facilitation from this internal but powerful sector, that probably already interfaces and has been doing so from long before 26/11 that allowed Hadley and co to operate freely.

Devyani has been taught a lesson, and will not really be able to speak up on all relevant aspects. Its a lesson for her father too internally.

Taken all these possibilities together, you can see why neither side will really open up and acknowledge whats going on. Its a kick to India, but mediated by collaborating partners from both sides.

I would humbly remind of my old model of the Brit intel system having been left untouched over all of the subcontinent, and which recruited and perpetuated itself in continuity after formal independence in all of these countries on the subcontinent. This interface was the one on which USA had to lean for the cold-war, but the real interface still works semi-independently of all the govs on spot, and can collate and coordinate public outrages, or moves or put info in leaders' ears so that they react in certain ways that ultimately benefit primarily UK, but also partners of UK within USA and general west-European-Anglo-Saxon perceived interests.

[brihaspati]

People also have to analyze who might get worried at continued US-India walking together. Pak, UK, and China - all would love to see the relation soured. All three have very active friends within the US power circles. In a way the three form also an older alliance that goes back further than US interest in IOR.

[prahaar]

Bji, could this be a fallout between the Mayawati brand of SC rise versus the Jogi brand? Please note how the elite circles who do not hold punches when it is about Behenji, are mum about all that is allegedly wrong with Jogis. On the face of it, looks like the worst type of propaganda which shows EJ interests smothering Dalit rise.

[brihaspati]

Bji, could this be a fallout between the Mayawati brand of SC rise versus the Jogi brand? Please note how the elite circles who do not hold punches when it is about Behenji, are mum about all that is allegedly wrong with Jogis. On the face of it, looks like the worst type of propaganda which shows EJ interests smothering Dalit rise.

Isn't that wonderful?!! Too clever by half self-goals. Hara is showing signs that he can be also Hari.

[devesh]

http://www.albalagh.net/qa/Kashmir_Jihad_qa.shtml

Treaty Obligations in Shariah: Kashmir Jihad and Simla Agreement

Q.) My question is regarding the validity or otherwise of the "Jihad-e-Kashmir." I present my proposition as follows:
1. According to "Surah Anfal", verse 72, as far as those Muslims are concerned who do not migrate to "Darul-Islam" from Darul-Kufr", the Muslims living in "Darul-Islam" are not supposed to take care of them i.e. there is no relationship of "Walyaat" between the two of them.

2. If such Muslims who are living in "Darul-Kufr" ask for help in matters of "deen", then we are duty bound to help them.

3. However, such help cannot be given against a country with which we have a "treaty" or "mithaq."

4. The word "mithaq" is of wide import meaning anything in the normal course of affairs, on the basis of which one country has reasonable belief that it is at peace with the other one, has normal relations with it etc. For example, while we have no specific treaty with China, which says that both countries would not attack each other, we do have a "mithaq" with China.

5. According to Simla Agreement, Pakistan and India agreed to cease hostilities. That means we are, now, not at war with India. Both countries further agreed to settle Kashmir dispute through mutual consultations.

6. The Muslims living in Kashmir come directly under the category mentioned in verse 72, Surah Anfal, as they have not migrated to Pakistan, which is for all legal purposes a "Darul-Islam". This, then means that we can not help them in their struggle as we have a treaty with India which has ceased hostilities i.e. we are at present not at war with India. And it is a known fact that we are helping them militarily and otherwise also. Many Jihad groups are based in Azad Kashmir.

7. Furthermore, the Holy Qur'an also lays down the principle that if a treaty has to be invalidated or repudiated by Muslims due to dishonesty or violation by the other party, it should be done openly and not by secret or covert methods. This means we cannot violate the provisions of Simla Agreement or the fact that we have ceased hostilities with India, unless we openly repudiate the agreement, subject to the conditions mentioned in the Holy Quran.

8. If we want to liberate Kashmir or help Kashmiris, than we shall have to first openly repudiate the Simla Agreement or any other relevant treaty, and only then, we can help them or even attack India

Sir, under these circumstances do you agree that the present "Jihad-e-Kashmir" is un-Islamic. If it is so, what sort of attitude should an ordinary Muslim adopt? (Muhammad Subhan Butt, Lahore Cantt.)

A.) You have asked me about the present position of Jihad in Kashmir with reference to verse 72 of Surah Anfal. In fact, this verse has been revealed in the context of the circumstances prevailing at that time. In the earlier days after the migration of the Holy Prophet, Sall-Allahu alayhi wa sallam, to Madinah, all the Muslims were ordered to migrate from Makkah because they were not allowed to observe their religious obligations therein. Therefore, it was one of the major obligations of every Muslim of that time that he migrate to Madina, so-much-so that it was held to be a sign of Iman. Later on after Makkah was conquered by the Holy Prophet, Sall-Allahu alayhi wa sallam, the obligatory nature of migration was abrogated and it was announced by the Holy Prophet, Sall-Allahu alayhi wa sallam, in the famous Hadith reported by all the authentic resources: "No migration after the conquest of Makkah."

It means that migration to Madinah from the Darul-Islam was no longer an obligation on every Muslim. Rather the rule prescribed for future was that if a Muslim cannot observe his religious obligations in Darul-Kufr, he is duty bound to migrate from there to a place where he can perform his religious duties. But if the government of a Darul-Kufr allows him to observe his religious duties, then it is not incumbent upon him to migrate to Darul-Islam. However, in this case migration to Darul-Islam is advisable or Mustahab.

On the other hand, the Muslims living in Darul-Kufr have all the right to struggle for their freedom especially when a non-Muslim country has imposed its rule upon them without any valid justification, as is the case in Kashmir. It was agreed upon at the time of partition of Pakistan and India that the people of Kashmir will be given a choice through a plebiscite to determine their political future. Not only did India violate this agreement, but its government also occupied the territory by force. The people of Kashmir have never entered into an agreement with the government of India to remain under their rule for ever. Therefore, if they are struggling for their freedom, no objection can be raised against them from the Shariah point of view. As far as Pakistan is concerned, its stand is that it has not provided any military support to the freedom fighters; rather it is providing them with moral support only.

However, if Pakistan elects at some time to provide them with military support, it can be justified from the Shariah point of view. First, because so far as I know, the two countries have not entered into a no-war pact. Second, because if there was an implied or tacit agreement, the same has been violated by India at a number of occasions. If there is a no-war pact with a country, the Shariah prohibits a Muslim country to attack it unless the pact is violated by the opponent country or is canceled in express terms by the Muslim country. In both these cases, the Muslim country is free to choose whatever it deems fit.

[brihaspati]

^^^Did the Muslims of Kashmir enter into an agreement with the gov of Pakis to always remain under Paki rule - as it happens in Paki occupied Kashmir? Does Kashmiri Muslim = all people of kashmir? Dose any religion have the right to impose its specific religious overlordship on all aspects of gov and state and society because it is majority on a specific subregion within an overall national structure? Should that logic be used to impose Hindu specific religious overlordship on all aspects of nationhood because overall in the territory of the nation Hindus are the majority?

[brihaspati]

Further the interpretation of "not breaking treaty in secret manner but openly" is a kind of fudging. The precedences used to build the shariah in most schools of jurisprudence for this specific aspect is based on the founder's supposed actual behaviour in the early raids.

These cases actually can be and have been used historically by the ulema to justify surprise attacks on allies. Night time raids that affect women and children and non-combatants, on unarmed people who never expected the attack because they thought they were allies - were all undertaken. Mostly on the excuse that an angel had visited the founder in a vision with insider info that the hitherto allies were planning a betrayal.

With great glee and appreciation the ahadith spend line after line on the surprise with which "allied" people were simply getting up in the morning to go to their orchards when the early Islamics fell on them with full battle gear under the personal leadership of the founder.

But it is also patently dishonest on the part of the author of that piece to claim that these stuff were always done openly - no, for there are explicit pieces in both the main and the subsidiary texts that justify secret assassinations, support for such assassination raids, ambushes on people with whom there were formal treaties. The calls were given from the first or early mosque at Jewish outpost of Yathrib - renamed Medina after genocide of the Jews from the spot.

[Agnimitra]

^^^

The phrase "الحرب خدعة" ("War is deception") is authentic (sahih) hadith from the lips of the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh). It was narrated by Bukhari, Muslim, Abu Dawood, and Tirmidhi, (among others).

There is commentary on this particular hadith also. since it is in Bukhari and Muslim, ibn Hajar and al-Nawawi have most likely commented on it. And since subterfuge and deception is now universally considered a very important aspect of war by all fundamentally political philosophies, many books about jihad will also speak about it.

Refer to the 'Mashaari al-Ashwaaq' - the english language lecture series by the Arab-American fugitive preacher Anwar al-'Awlaqi. He does touches upon this and tells the story of the assassination of Ka'b ibn Maalik the Jew, in which the Sahabah (Companions of the Prophet) who assassinated him deceived him first, pretending to be friendly and making up a story to be able to bring their weapons into the city without it being suspicious. He also narrates the story of Nu'aym.

Abu Ja'far Muhammad ibn Jarir al-Tabari was a scholar who lived between 224AH and 310AH. Two of his very famous works: Tafseer al-Tabari, and Tareekh al-Tabari. [tareekh = history]

[devesh]

what is surprising in that article is the resurrection of Shimla Agreement! I didn't realize that document had such importance?! or is it an attempt to find something in nothing?

[brihaspati]

Here is Putin's version of how he and his group sees the events in Ukraine : a lot of lessons to appreciate, and things similar to what we have been saying about our own backyard and neighbourhood :

http://eng.kremlin.ru/news/6889

I do not like to resort to quotes, but in this case, I cannot help it. Here is a quote from another official document: the Written Statement of the United States America of April 17, 2009, submitted to the same UN International Court in connection with the hearings on Kosovo. Again, I quote: “Declarations of independence may, and often do, violate domestic legislation. However, this does not make them violations of international law.” End of quote. They wrote this, disseminated it all over the world, had everyone agree and now they are outraged. Over what? The actions of Crimean people completely fit in with these instructions, as it were. For some reason, things that Kosovo Albanians (and we have full respect for them) were permitted to do, Russians, Ukrainians and Crimean Tatars in Crimea are not allowed. Again, one wonders why.

We keep hearing from the United States and Western Europe that Kosovo is some special case. What makes it so special in the eyes of our colleagues? It turns out that it is the fact that the conflict in Kosovo resulted in so many human casualties. Is this a legal argument? The ruling of the International Court says nothing about this. This is not even double standards; this is amazing, primitive, blunt cynicism. One should not try so crudely to make everything suit their interests, calling the same thing white today and black tomorrow. According to this logic, we have to make sure every conflict leads to human losses.

I feel that having seen my predictions as to how the west and islamists would move in AFG and Syria [and in another place outside the forum I have written about Egypt too] and the eventual outcome - coming out more or less accurately - I have reasons to get concerned about the next moves, targeting India. If NM "wins", this will become all the more necessary for both internal and external forces. The attacks are likely to be highly coordinated, initially made to look like isolated atrocities, with pressure being kept on any "saffron" gov not to react because it would mean targeting innocent minorities, all the while egging the same infrastructure to intensify the atrocities.

This is intended to lead to a win-win situation. If the "saffon" gov reacts, it can be painted "fascist" an dIslamist internal and external networks can be persuaded to be on "secular" side. If the saffon gov doesnt react, then people can be goaded about how the gov cannot protect them. Moreover, typically this method has been crucially used by Islamists to raise the morale of as-yet-not-participating Muslim populations within non-muslim socieities.

I also feel that the islamist network in the north is well consolidated and well integrated with corresponding parts of society, officialdom, state functionaries, supporting militant-medical-weapons-logistics networks, and spans both east, and west and north through Nepal - external supply routes.

[Prem]

[. If NM "wins", this will become all the more necessary for both internal and external forces. The attacks are likely to be highly coordinated, initially made to look like isolated atrocities, with pressure being kept on any "saffron" gov not to react because it would mean targeting innocent minorities, all the while egging the same infrastructure to intensify the atrocities. This is intended to lead to a win-win situation. If the "saffon" gov reacts, it can be painted "fascist" an dIslamist internal and external networks can be persuaded to be on "secular" side. If the saffon gov doesnt react, then people can be goaded about how the gov cannot protect them. Moreover, typically this method has been crucially used by Islamists to raise the morale of as-yet-not-participating Muslim populations within non-muslim socieities. I also feel that the islamist network in the north is well consolidated and well integrated with corresponding parts of society, officialdom, state functionaries, supporting militant-medical-weapons-logistics networks, and spans both east, and west and north through Nepal - external supply routes.

It relate to the gathering and reactivation of people now known as Berkley Group. But India is too big to fall with these tricks. It May push India into Chinese Camp along with Russia with potential to change the existing order dominated by WEST.

[Pratyush]

Can India and China cooperate, given the mindset of the rulers in China.

[darshhan]

Can India and China cooperate, given the mindset of the rulers in China.

subject to a specific condition. To oppose, curtail and defeat America in Asia. The premise being that enemy's enemy is my friend. and since America is the greater enemy of both countries, this particular alliance can be explored.

It is extremely important that US is driven out of Asia

[brihaspati]

The core of the Chinese regime - a certain axis of power shared between parts of the PLA and the party - is firmly against allowing any leverage to India. They see India as a rival for domination of Asia, and they will not stop until and unless they can weaken India sufficiently to reassure themselves. This is not necessarily the obsession of Chinese masses at large.

I think both Indian and Chinese strategists should recognize that the western borders of China are their primary weakness, even if they appear now at the peak of their strength by managing to create subservient regimes - even Hindu Nepal and Islamists all around - on a buffer around this border.

The Tibetan plateau, all the way to the Mongolian steppes, represent a certain exposed salient or bulge for them. Traditionally they have always had difficulty in defending the zone this far out from the plains. It might seem ridiculous in the age of missiles and fighter jets that "distance" or terrain matters - but ironically they still do : as was effectively seen in AFPAK.

The bulge now appears a sign of strength - but it can be turned militarily - if carefully planned [with political groundwork] into a disaster for China.

As long as Tibet remains an undecided nation/[or independent country] issue, this portion of the Chinese regime will do everything possible to undermine India. As long as Pakistan continues to exist, China has no need to negotiate with India.

think on that point!

[Pratyush]

First post reporting that MDMK wants to rename the nation as United States of India. Is this an idea that has any merit. Or is it a prduct of a crack pot mind.

On a personal note, I think, it would make the job of assimilation of the subcontinent in a political union easy. What do the other members think.

[Klaus]

First post reporting that MDMK wants to rename the nation as United States of India. Is this an idea that has any merit. Or is it a prduct of a crack pot mind.

On a personal note, I think, it would make the job of assimilation of the subcontinent in a political union easy. What do the other members think.

I think of it as saarc bait, no pun intended. What is to be done once the bait is taken needs to be chalked out-articulated-detailed-sculpted & fine tuned.

[svinayak]

First post reporting that MDMK wants to rename the nation as United States of India. Is this an idea that has any merit. Or is it a product of a crack pot mind.

On a personal note, I think, it would make the job of assimilation of the subcontinent in a political union easy. What do the other members think.

There are several problems.
India is not a country created recently and Indian history does not start with British colonization
India is one country and one people. The Indians are not many people.

The "United States " is a western symbol and is not meant for India.
No westernization of name should be allowed in India. Those days are past.

Decolonization of India is still not complete.
De Englishization of India has yet to start

[brihaspati]

I think we had discussed briefly the provision for new "states" to join in. I had proposed the creation of a future constitutional provision for autonomous affiliates, with most things internally/regionally defined, but core defence/currency/FP/free-movement being allowed on a federal/union/central basis. My idea was specifically to take care of future provision for areas like Tibet. But not many seemed to be in favour - [obviously given our great fear in expanding].

This is not for Pakiland but say AFG, Tibet, SL ityadi. Pakiland/BD/Nep should be ours as states anyway.

[brihaspati]

The swing or accumulation of votes in favour of a candidate in Indian elections does not necessarily reflect the motivations ascribed by urban intellectuals - who conveniently decide that the same population gives super-importance to selected "civilizational issues" over "economic development" which they also favour, but then the very same population also hate "civilizational issues" which they hate, and vote for "economic development" onlee.


What I see happening, is something that is not new for India - genuine popular discontent against a regime is cleverly harnessed by a political conmen, probably with a core of genuine leadership - but with ever increasing circles of opportunists surrounding them, when they smell that popular discontent might indeed change the very regime to which they have hitherto sucked on to like leeches and served as mosahibs against these very same people.

Time and again I see this argument that "now the need of the hour is to encourage and not do anything that psyches out the new entrants - swingers - switchers of support from the older regime". Inevitably each genuine change aspirant movement ultimately fails because it allows these two level opportunist voices to gain limelight. One level justifies the induction of the opportunists by similar arguments, (the external voices) and the other one acts from within the new movement. Typically they will seek to displace the "old-guard", because the older-guard would have developed within the more struggling phase and hence less corruptible and an obstacle for the leech-class to stay on in a beneficial arrangement with the state under change of regime.

There is a recent study on social-psychopathology of the US population. By an extension, typically there is likely to be a much higher proportion of these in the political and financial industry. The most notable feature of this psychopathology is their charismatic nature.

I think BJP is headed that way. The leech class is so widely entrenched, that it will reinvent itself within the "Modification" drive. Modi himself could be the epitome of incorruptibility, but already we see the signs of avatarification phenomena - a typical sign that the leech-class has actually leeched on to the "new".

I see that the demand for BJP/Modi dropping civilizational issues as not vote-worthy, vote-damaging, highlighting and pressurizing that onlee economic "development" be stressed with complete erasure of "civilizational concerns" - is a demand of the leech class. The vacuum ideology section that sustained a Jawaharlal Nehru in the first place, and what they want is a new Nehru. Modi can serve the purpose of getting a Nehru since he can sustain the illusion among the civilizational aspiration thread within the current discontent, and thereby manage the "saffron assertion" that would otherwise cost external and internal religious interests - while the cozy financial interests that benefit onlee a small proportion of Indian populations can be maintained in exclusive networks.

Jawaharlal nehru did not become what he became - a cynical manipulator, personal responsibility shirker, with a maniacal obsession with maintaining personal image and personal power even at the cost of not being truthful to the nation, entirely out of his own character. He was shaped up in interaction with an immensely corrupting and totally-devoid-of-humanity colonial regime as well as the leech-class that had already shaped up in India in the north surviving in collaboration with and a vacuum ideology under Islamic rule.

The leech class and the Brits saw potential in him being the substitute who could be used to assure the increasingly restless anti-colonial sentiments of Indians, and contain them, while managing a smooth transfer of power bypassing these "chaotic/fundamentalist/Hindu" masses so that the financial and elite interests and networks that had developed in collaboration under the Brits could continue in a cozy beneficial relationship with the new regime.

The same method is being applied on Modi. And he is really alone. He will be eventually even more isolated - as a new coterie will form, who will do their best to eliminate and sideline anyone seen to be connected to the "older" guard. There will be many a old political battle scar that cane be used to drive the wedges further - for onlee in greater isolation of Modi from the older subnetworks that fueled the BJP, with a steady replacement of potential stubborn pieces by more "flexible" newer functionaries - being actually a facilitator for the leech class reinventing itself in state power after swinging from the Congress.

[ramana]

Bji, This breaking/Imagining India has been a favorite pastime of Islamists and Westerners.

http://videshisutra.com/2013/06/07/imag ... /#more-845

[brihaspati]

Bji, This breaking/Imagining India has been a favorite pastime of Islamists and Westerners.

http://videshisutra.com/2013/06/07/imag ... /#more-845

There would be a much better way of managing the old-versus new conflict. Seeing what is happening, I sometimes regret abandoning the field. This is something that will eventually recreate the saffron version of cong if not checked in time.

[Vayutuvan]

ramana garu: I have the River of Gods by Ian McDonald. Even though I did not read the book itself, I read excerpts, reviews, and an interview of the author in some online forum. McDonald does not come across as somebody with only superficial knowledge of India and its socio-religious landscape. After reading the interview, I had to push it down the stack of books to read. Also read the reviews of his other book - Cyberabad days - which reinforces my skepticism.

We need Indians who are well grounded in Indian history (and epics like MB and Ramayana, and puaranas) to write books in this genre. There is a big market out there for these books.

[ramana]

Bji, This breaking/Imagining India has been a favorite pastime of Islamists and Westerners.

http://videshisutra.com/2013/06/07/imag ... /#more-845

Thsi "million mutinies", permanent disorder, Mugalistan, PAAPistan are all ways of others seeing India. What we need to do is reverse and even better change the gaze and envision a different India capitalizing on what we have instead of wishing for unobtanium. This vision should be for next five, ten and 20 years.
And should be grounded in reality based on world situation.

[Vayutuvan]

ramana garu: I have the River of Gods by Ian McDonald. Even though I did not read the book itself, I read excerpts, reviews, and an interview of the author in some online forum. McDonald comes across as somebody with only superficial knowledge of India and its socio-religious landscape. After reading the interview, I had to push it down the stack of books to read. Also read the reviews of his other book - Cyberabad days - which reinforces my skepticism.

We need Indians who are well grounded in Indian history (and epics like MB and Ramayana, and puaranas) to write books in this genre. There is a big market out there for these books.

Corrected post removing a negation.

[ramana]

In line with my thinking:

First essay in a series on why 2014 elections are so important

The Prize - That is India

Please read and get informed of the stakes in 2014.
Its the pathway to 2050.

[ramana]

Next one:

First essay in a series on why 2014 elections are so important

The Prize - That is India

The Fight - 2014 Elections!

Second Essay Second essay in a series on why 2014 elections are so critical for Indians!

[Agnimitra]

RamaY ji those are great blogposts. Sharing via twitter and FB.

[ramana]

Third one should be on its way.

[Vamsee]

Brihaspati garu,

Your hint was the first thing that came to my mind when I read below tweets.

https://twitter.com/Vamsee9002/status/4 ... 8087248896

[Vamsee]

Cross posting from NaMo Thread
=========================

I am having this discussion on Twitter regarding BJP manifesto item of providing asylum to persecuted Hindus anywhere. How exactly do we sell this issue to people who are conditioned to do all religions equal-equal?

Some tweets from my TL:
What is the best & politically correct reply to - "How can you call for deporting illegal BD Muslims but ask for asylum to BD/Pak Hindus"?
2. If we say because Hindu's are persecuted over there, "What about Muslims" persecuted ( eg. rohingya?)" - How will you reply?

1. @unknowncorner It can not be answered satisfactorily with out explicitly stating priority/primacy of Indic faiths. @sarkar_swati
2. @unknowncorner Is there any other politically correct answer? That is what I am trying to explore on my TL @sarkar_swati

@amz360 What if Shia is persecuted in Pak and wants asylum in India? Or baloch? What is the answer? Why only Pak Hindus?

@Vamsee9002 rohingya's being muslims, ownership lies with 2 muslim nations
@tataiermail In other words India discriminates between Indic & Abrahamic faiths. Does this fly in Nehruvian India? Is India Hindu nation?



@Vamsee9002 @unknowncorner @sarkar_swati YES!! Asylum is a privilege and not a right. The government of the day is free to choose claimants.
@notramcguha But what "logic" do you sell to India? Do you explicitly say that we differentiate between Indic & Abrahamic religions ? @unknowncorner @sarkar_swati



1.@notramcguha I am not asking to satisfy myself I am asking how this policy can be effectively "sold" in "secular" India which treats Indic & non-Indic religions equally

[brihaspati]

^^
If we allow Muslim asylum seekers to be successfully able to or want to migrate only to India, then it tarnishes the image of pan-Islamic brotherhood and Islam as an all accommodating, all-sharing, all-inclusive religion. We must give other Islamic nations the chance to prove the really superior aspects of Islam at least as manifested on fellow Muslims.

Indian secularism demands that Islam is not demeaned or painted in bad-light in any way. India should offer only transit and refugee status while it facilitates their application for asylum in Muslim nations first so that Islam's superiority is not maligned.

For Pak Hindus, however, we are only helping Paki society getting better by getting rid of patriarchal, casteist, hindu-supremacist, and inclined-to-saffron-terror, pagan, superstitious elements - and not unleashing them on an otherwise innocent, advanced, progressive, non-hierarchical, modernist world outside of India.

A triple argument. Hope that sounds convincing.
B.

[Vamsee]

Cross posted from Social Media Thread
===================================
2 people I would like to see on Twitter

Jupiter garu & UlanBatori garu

[brihaspati]

Vamsee ji,
shq pointed out one weakness/gap in my argument : if we are helping Pak improve their progressive/modernist credentials by getting rid of "casteist/***" Pak Hindus, why should we add them to an already "Hindu"-laden secular India? My prompt answer was that India is the only secular country where the Hindu can be properly dealt with - and all such casteist/regressive Hindu imports will be fixed by the Congress and the Left, led by such illustrious secularists like say RG jnr, or Prakash Karat.

No other nation has such a powerful combination eagerly waiting to civilize the Hindu.

This could be your 4th argument.

[Agnimitra]

X-posting a response from NaMo thread and adding to it:

What is the best & politically correct reply to - "How can you call for deporting illegal BD Muslims but ask for asylum to BD/Pak Hindus"?

No one can question our humanitarian credentials, for India did give asylum to a great number of genuine war refugees from BD in 1971, who have since become Indian citizens.

But apart from that, the historical purpose of partition - demanded by those Muslims themselves - means that they cannot further seek immigration into India, while their non-Muslim minorities can.

Importantly, several Bangladeshi intellectuals have spoken on record of the idea of expanding their "lebensraum" into India, especially India's NE. Given this intention, we are entirely justified in assuming that there is a conscious effort to push Muslim migrants into India as a means of demographic warfare.

Book: Illegal Immigration from Bangladesh
I quote from the book:

Now there is also a strong demand within Bangladesh on the basis of what Bangladeshi intellectuals call "lebensraum" or living space and they seem to put it across as if they have a right to the living space that is available around Balgladesh and I will quote excerpts from what people like Sadiq Khan and Abdul Momin, both Foreign Secretaries of Bangladesh nd considered to be intellectuals, have said. I will read from an Article I wrote long ago - "Our Land, their Living Space." "A few articles in the Bangladesh press by some responsible and eminent Bangladeshi thinkers should throw light on the Bangladeshi perception on the question of the country's unbearable population growth and its large-scale illegal immigration to other countries. On the question of "lebensraum" by Sadiq Khan, in the Weekly Holiday of October 18, 1991, the writer, a former diplomat ad intellectual, puts forth a strong defence of thelarge-scale Bangladeshi immigration." Incidentally, the name of the newspaper Holiday is most misleading. It is a bit of a digression, but it is interesting digression. Far from having anything to do with holidays, the paper is about the most highly political publication of Bangladesh. the innocuous-sounding name had to be chosen because it commenced publication during the early years of martial law, and a newspaper with a less innocuous-sounding name would not have had any chance of securing permission to publish. This was revealed to the writer by the editor of the Holiday himself, who also owns the paper. his is how Mr. Sadiq Khan's article on Lebensraum, a German word meaning 'living space', begins.
[...]

In light of the fact that there is evidence of illegal immigration from Bangladesh being encouraged by state policy there, it is unreasonable to expect India - an over-populated country with enough problems of its own - to succumb to such a situation. It is not a war or other huge natural calamity that is causing the immigration.

2. If we say because Hindu's are persecuted over there, "What about Muslims" persecuted ( eg. rohingya?)" - How will you reply?

We have already given asylum to the Rohingya - even though Bangladesh itself mostly refused them asylum! This is absurd since the origin of the Rohingya is Bangladeshi. Therefore, reason demands that India first exercise pressure on Islamic states like BD to absorb Muslim refugees like the Rohingya, rather than be cuckolded into carrying their babies. It is also rather troubling to see reports emerge that one of the settlement camps of Rohingya refugees is J&K. India needs an urgent review of its lax refugee and immigration policy, which appears to be manipulated by external and perhaps internal forces inimical to national interests as they exist under the demographic equation with which India started in 1947.

From Pak - their Shi'as need to seek asylum in Iran, just like many Afghan Shi'a did. Their Shi'a played a very active role in the partition, and therefore they cannot turn around and demand re-entry. India is not a dharamshala or guesthouse where anyone can walk in out whenever they please. Building social and cultural capital is a fundamental part of nation-building. Therefore, that must be factored into refugee policy.

However, we can and will help the Pakistani Shi'a, Ahmadis, and other persecuted minorities to carve out a safe haven within the territory of Pakistan itself, perhaps as a separate breakaway state.

1. @unknowncorner It can not be answered satisfactorily with out explicitly stating priority/primacy of Indic faiths. @sarkar_swati

Not true. See above. It can simply be explained in terms of building social and cultural capital, which is standard theory in sociology and political economy.

[Vamsee]

Thank you Brihaspati & Agnimitra

[vishvak]

"No one can question our humanitarian credentials"

Pseudo seculars have quietly ignored credentials of paki/BD islamists all this while so these people need to be taken to task for that too.

[Prem]

Simple solution is no asylum for group or community of people who partitioned India . Religion have nothing to do with it, State have no business in religion. Those who asked or participated in partition movement are free to go and live in their respective religious places in Arabia, Persia, Car or deep in Indian Ocean.