Indian Interests

Klaus · Post by **Klaus** » 19 May 2011 22:44

^^^ The pure tech aspects would have to go into the T-E forum, however Out of India 2.0, associated motivations, economic, military and tactical find a place in the Kibbutz thread.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 24 May 2011 23:18

Iraq Notebook: Bollywood party in Baghdad

Cehck picture four

Associated Press ^ | Tuesday, May 24, 2011 |

IRAQ NOTEBOOK: Witches, Bollywood at grad party
REBECCA SANTANA, Associated Press Updated 09:01 a.m.,

Tuesday, May 24, 2011

BAGHDAD (AP) - Harry Potter-inspired witches in flowing black satin gowns and pointed hats shimmied onstage as young warlocks in black-and-red capes looked on. Nearby, Indian-themed music blared from a boom box at a Baghdad version of a Bollywood movie set.

Fun and frivolity aren't the first things that come to mind when someone mentions Baghdad. But this is college graduation season and time for a tradition that has survived the upheaval of war, kidnappings and bombs: masquerade parties.

Students here like to party just like young people anywhere who've spent the last four or five years with their noses buried in a book.

And they like a good masquerade.

"We based our costumes on the movies we see. We started thinking of our outfits at the beginning of the year," said 23-year-old Shahad Rafaie, dressed as a witch with glitter sprinkled across her face and a black headscarf covering her hair and neck.

"We are exhausted after studying for five years!"

The overthrow of Saddam Hussein unleashed an outpouring of religious extremism from both Sunnis and Shiites that often left Iraqis wondering what was acceptable conduct and fearful of outward displays of celebration.

Liquor stores and restaurants serving alcohol were bombed. Women feared going out in the street without a headscarf if they went out at all. Plays, musicals and art exhibits were almost nonexistent.

But through it all Iraqi university students held onto one of the educational system's lesser known traditions: the end-of-the-year costume bash. Like the class photo, prom and final exams, the parties have become a Baghdad tradition over the past 10 years.

At a celebration Saturday at Baghdad University's College of Pharmacy, the party resembled a Baghdad-based Bollywood movie set, with female students dressed in brightly colored Indian-themed saris with gold embroidery and bangles on their wrists.

Nearby young men in burgundy-colored Sherwani jackets, yellow satin trousers and red turbans on their heads shimmied to the sound of Indian music with lyrics in Arabic.

Across the lawn, a coven of Harry Potter-inspired witches celebrated in matching costumes - the women in black satin dresses with collars and sleeves trimmed in red, pointy black hats and wooden canes substituting for broomsticks. The men wore black-and-red capes over red satin vests as fellow students danced and took photos.

{Post Saddam Iraq is Janus faced. One side looks to India and the other to UK. Note absence of US icons here.}

Layla Tariq Mohammed said the graduates hired a tailor weeks ago to make the costumes.

One young man said they had tossed around the idea of dressing up as Mexican cowboys complete with sombreros and ponchos, or as U.S. Navy sailors, but the girls didn't go for the knee-length skirts.

There was not a drop of alcohol in sight, and instead of taking place under cover of darkness where furtive kisses or hand-holding might go unnoticed, the party was held at midmorning and on university grounds. Many family members sat on the sides watching.

"It's a very beautiful thing. It is fun. They want to express their joy," said Wafaq Jawad, 56, who came to watch her niece.

Still, it was surprisingly liberal: Many women did not wear the headscarves often worn by religious conservatives on Baghdad's streets and many of the students danced.

The parties aren't so popular with the administration, however. One student said the college dean banned their band from coming on campus and it took a series of negotiations before he permitted them to bring in a boom box.

"I don't think all the colleges like it, but they also can't do anything about it," said Haydar Ajib, a 25-year-old graduate.

The dean, who was at the party and mingled with the students, said a band wasn't appropriate for a university setting and he had offered to help the students find a club to hold their party if they insisted on a band.

Dr. Alaa A. Abdulrasool alluded to the social and religious norms the school must navigate when deciding what is appropriate and what is not. The students can celebrate and dress up but they must also be aware of the society in which they live, and the fact that it might not be as liberal as they are, he said.

He also pointed out that students from all over Iraq study at the college, including many who are more conservative than those dancing to the Bollywood tunes and it was important to make sure all felt included in the celebrations.

"In the last few years, they thought that freedom meant they could do anything they wanted," he said.

Images 3 & 4

Image 3

Image 4

Pranav · Post by **Pranav** » 27 May 2011 06:23

Arun Jaitley: Why the communal violence bill is flawed - http://www.rediff.com/news/column/arun- ... 110526.htm

This draft bill however proceeds on a presumption that communal trouble is created only by members of the majority community and never by a member of the minority community. Thus, offences committed by members of the majority community against members of the minority community are punishable. Identical offences committed by minority groups against the majority are not deemed to be offences at all.

Thus a sexual assault is punishable under this bill and only if committed against a person belonging to a minority 'group'. A member of a majority community in a state does not fall within the purview of a 'group'. A 'hate propaganda' is an offence against minority community and not otherwise. Organised and targeted violence, hate propaganda, financial help to such persons who commit an offence, torture or dereliction of duty by public servants are all offences only if committed against a member of the minority community and not otherwise.

No member of the majority community can ever be a victim. This draft law thus proceeds on an assumption which re-defines the offences in a highly discriminatory manner. No member of the minority community are to be punished under this act for having committed the offence against the majority community.

It is only a member of the majority community who is prone to commit such offences and therefore the legislative intent of this law is that since only majority community members commit these offences, culpability and punishment should only be confined to them.

If implemented in a manner as provided by this bill, it opens up a huge scope for abuse. It can incentivise members of some communities to commit such offences encouraged by the fact that they would never be charged under the act.

Terrorist groups may no longer indulge in terrorist violence. They will be incentivised to create communal riots due to a statutory assumption that members of a jihadi group will not be punished under this law. The law makes only members of the majority community culpable. Why should the law discriminate on the basis of a religion or caste?

An offence is an offence irrespective of origin of the offender. Here is a proposed law being legislated in the 21st century where caste and religion of an offender wipe out the culpability under this law.

Who will ensure implementation of this act

The bill provides for a seven-member national authority for communal harmony, justice and reparations. Of these seven members at least four of them including the chairman and vice-chairman shall only belong to a 'group' (the minority community). A similar body is intended to be created in the states. Membership of this body thus shall be on religious and caste grounds. The offenders under this law are only the members of the majority community.

The enforcement of the act will be done by a body where statutorily the members of the majority community will be in a minority. The governments will have to make available police and other investigative agencies to this authority. This authority shall have a power to conduct investigations and enter buildings, conduct raids and searches to make inquiries into complaints and to initiate steps, record proceedings for prosecution and make its recommendations to the governments.

It shall have powers to deal with the armed forces. It has a power to send advisories to the central and state governments. Members of this authority shall be appointed in the case of central government by a collegium which shall comprise of prime minister, the home minister, and the leader of the opposition in the house of people and a leader of each recognised political party. A similar provision is created in relation to the states. Thus, it is the opposition at the Centre and the states which will have a majority say in the composition of the authority.

What are the procedures to be followed

The procedures to be followed for investigations under this act are extraordinary. No statement shall be recorded under section 161 of the CrPC. Victim statements shall be only under section 164 (before courts). The government will have a power to intercept and block messages and telecommunications under this law. Under clause 74 of the bill if an offence of hate propaganda is alleged against a person, a presumption of guilt shall exist unless the offender proves to the contrary. An allegation thus is equivalent to proof. Public servants under this bill under clause 67 are liable to be proceeded against without any sanction from the state.

The special public prosecutor to conduct proceedings under this act shall not act in aid of truth but 'in the interest of the victim'. The name and identity of the victim complainant will not be disclosed. Progress of the case will be reported by the police to the victim complainant. The occurrence of organised communal and targeted violence under this act shall amount to an internal disturbance in a state within the meaning of Article 355 entitling the central government to impose President's Rule.

The drafting of this bill appears to be a handiwork of those social entrepreneurs who have learnt from the Gujarat experience of how to fix senior leaders even when they are not liable for an offence.

Offences which are defined under the bill have been deliberately left vague. Communal and targeted violence means violence which destroys the 'secular fabric of the nation'. There can be legitimate political differences as to what constitutes secularism. The phrase secularism can be construed differently by different persons. Which definition is the judge supposed to follow? Similarly, the creation of a hostile 'environment' may leave enough scope for a subjective decision as to what constitutes 'a hostile environment'.

The inevitable consequences of such a law would be that in the event of any communal trouble the majority community would be assumed to be guilty. There would be a presumption of guilt unless otherwise proved. Only a member of the majority shall be held culpable under this law.

A member of the minority shall never commit an offence of hate propaganda or a communal violence. There is a virtual statutory declaration of innocence under this law for him.

The statutory authority prescribed at the central and state level would intrinsically suffer from an institutional bias because of its membership structure based on caste and community.

I have no doubt that once this law is implemented with the intention with which it is being drafted, it will create disharmony in the inter-community relations in India. It is a law fraught with dangerous consequences. It is bound to be misused. Perhaps, that appears to be the real purpose behind its drafting. It will encourage minority communalism. The law defies the basic principles of equality and fairness.

Social entrepreneurs in the National Advisory Council can be expected to draft such a dangerous and discriminatory law. One wonders how the political head of that body cleared this draft. When some persons carried on a campaign against the Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act -- an anti-terrorist law, the members of the UPA argued that even terrorists should be tried under the normal laws. A far more draconian law is now being proposed.

The states will be watching hopelessly when the Centre goes ahead with this misadventure. Their power is being usurped. The search for communal harmony is through fairness -- not through reverse discrimination.

Pranav · Post by **Pranav** » 27 May 2011 06:25

^^^

Clause 8 prescribes that 'hate propaganda' is an offence when a person by words oral or written or a visible representation causes hate against a 'group' or a person belonging to a 'group' (meaning a religious or linguistic minority and in a given state may include the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes.) ...

Under clause 74 of the bill if an offence of hate propaganda is alleged against a person, a presumption of guilt shall exist unless the offender proves to the contrary. An allegation thus is equivalent to proof.

The NAC members want to subject Hindoos to anti-blasphemy laws. This is even more draconian than Sharia laws in Pakistan.

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 27 May 2011 08:01

^^^Jaitley ji is compelled to protest from his official and formal party position. But such a draft bill should be allowed to be placed and be acted upon and applied by the current regime. The regime is now forced to come out more and more in the open about where exactly it stands with respect to various communities. The more such attacks happen, the more will be the various current drifting factions of the "majority" be forced to recognize that hostile forces do not distinguish between the different factions. For the agents of imperialist ideologies, removal of any possible remaining cultural or ideological resistance to their ultimate designs is urgent.

It is expected that such a bill if passed will be used politically by the centre-left and selectively too. But the more it is applied clearer becomes the real nature of the current regime and on whose side it works. So longer term such a bill is beneficial. The politically astute should be able to reap handsome benefits of mobilization and consolidation from every such application of the law.

Every non-Islamic society whose elite decided to encourage Islamists - have ultimately faced the taste of their own handiwork. Indian elite will be no exception - and the political descendants of those who have shaken hands with the likes of As Sudais will face their greatest danger from the Islamists themselves. We will just have to wait and see what the apologists of sucking up to KSA, or go-soft-on Pak and Kashmiri separatist politicians - will land up in. They think they are too clever - and will be able to digest and manipulate the hostile elements. It is only a repeat of what happened in the past.

Rupesh · Post by **Rupesh** » 27 May 2011 08:47

The most dangerous argument

By Shyam Saran

My recent visit to Canada and the United States coincided with the assassination of the al-Qaeda chief, Osama bin Laden, in Abbotabad by US Special Forces, and its aftermath. Anger over Pakistan’s duplicity was pervasive. A sense of closure and even relief was evident in the US, but there was apprehension that this would not mean the end of terrorism. There was expectation of revenge attacks.
Most analysts were convinced that the Pakistan army and the ISI had been fully complicit in providing refuge to OBL. There were differences of opinion on how Pakistan should be dealt with. However, few suggested that economic and military assistance to Pakistan should be curtailed or eliminated

What should be of growing concern to India is a parallel argument which seeks to “explain”, and sometimes justify, Pakistan’s long-standing and continued use of cross-border terrorism as an instrument of state policy. In the blizzard of commentary about the OBL affair, there are, invariably, references to the Pakistani obsession or paranoia about a threat from India; that exaggerated or even misplaced as this perception may be, it is, after all, ground reality.

It is argued that the already large and growing asymmetry between India and Pakistan in all indices of power is what Pakistan seeks to address through reliance on cross-border terrorism, as well as augmenting its already significant nuclear arsenal. Without saying that cross-border terrorism against India is justified, nevertheless, it is often asserted that unless India is leaned upon to settle the Kashmir issue, draw down its armed deployment on the India-Pakistan border and reduce its presence and activities in Afghanistan, the US and the West will not be able to persuade Pakistan to abandon its role as a breeding ground for terrorism, which threatens Western interests in Afghanistan and in their own homelands.

It is not what the US and the West have done to alienate Pakistan that is the cause of the latter’s recalcitrance, but Indian “obstinacy.” The fact that the America is the most hated country in Pakistan, that American and Western soldiers are being killed by Taliban forces, aided and abetted by Pakistan, and that US largesse has made no dent in Pakistan’s negative perceptions, are all minimised as contributory factors while highlighting the so-called India factor.

A view is beginning to crystallise that the way to political settlement and stability in Afghanistan and the amelioration of the fundamentalist and terrorist threats to the West, could be facilitated by persuading India to become invisible in Afghanistan and resolve the Kashmir issue to Pakistan’s satisfaction (for anything less would hardly make a difference). Taken to its logical conclusion, India may have to cut itself into smaller pieces so that Pakistan feels safe! What makes India feel safe or unsafe, and that India, too, may have legitimate security concerns, does not seem to matter.

The Economist says, with categorical certitude, that the Americans have made a mistake, “to see Pakistan in the context of the fighting on its north-west frontier, and thus to ignore the source of most of the country’s problems, including terrorism: the troubled state of relations to the East”. Please note the telling phrase “including terrorism”. The article makes another bizarre deduction: “If Pakistan’s world view were not distorted by India, it might be able to see straight on terror”. Really? The Economist’s solution? America should lean on India to “show restraint in and flexibility on Kashmir.”

Indian diplomacy is thus faced with a serious challenge. It must not allow the old India-Pakistan hyphenation to again become a major constraint. We should make it clear that India’s vital interests, both on Kashmir as well as on the larger issue of combating terrorism are not up for being used in a cynical attempt to assuage Pakistan. Our pursuit of closer relations with Afghanistan has its own independent logic. It is not up for trade with Pakistan or anyone else. There should be a categorical and powerful rebuttal of the revisionist arguments which seek to undermine the global consensus on unreservedly fighting the forces of terrorism. The world cannot be made safe from terrorism by making India unsafe.

Pranav · Post by **Pranav** » 27 May 2011 13:19

brihaspati wrote:But such a draft bill should be allowed to be placed and be acted upon and applied by the current regime. The regime is now forced to come out more and more in the open about where exactly it stands with respect to various communities. The more such attacks happen, the more will be the various current drifting factions of the "majority" be forced to recognize that hostile forces do not distinguish between the different factions. For the agents of imperialist ideologies, removal of any possible remaining cultural or ideological resistance to their ultimate designs is urgent.

B ji, I think the anti-blasphemy law will only make it more difficult for Indics to shake off their stupor, because it will criminalize any attempt to warn people about the danger.

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 27 May 2011 15:26

brihaspati wrote:^^^Jaitley ji is compelled to protest from his official and formal
party position.
SNIP...........
It is only a repeat of what happened in the past.

+ 1 to that, this will make the RJB mobilisation look like a walk in the park. If presented and approved in the current form. The Kangress is thinking of getting a majority and installing one of the Gandhies in 2014, It may well forget about it, if it chooses to present the act in its current form.

Just reminds me of the saying, "history repeats it self, but those who dont learn from it repeat it".

Klaus · Post by **Klaus** » 27 May 2011 16:14

While India takes one step forward in Ethiopia and the African continent, it takes two steps back by merely talking of implementing such laws. Present GoI seems to revel in handing over rocks to people like Unfair to take pot-shots at India by bringing the hyphenation with TSP back on this issue (with comments such as 'India going to implement a law which is similar to TSP's blasphemy laws', equal-equal onlee!), aam aadmi will then retort saying that these foreign experts have no business commenting on India's internal affairs! And the wheel will continue to turn.

Such is life.

harbans · Post by **harbans** » 27 May 2011 17:29

The fight against this bill must be hard and bitter. These are WKKs making up the bill, without realizing the danger in it. A similar bill was supposed to be passed in the UN too but was blocked (?)

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 27 May 2011 21:52

I didn't understand MMS's policy of withdrawal of anti piracy ops by IN. retaliation dhoti fear!?

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 28 May 2011 00:29

Pranav wrote:
brihaspati wrote:But such a draft bill should be allowed to be placed and be acted upon and applied by the current regime. The regime is now forced to come out more and more in the open about where exactly it stands with respect to various communities. The more such attacks happen, the more will be the various current drifting factions of the "majority" be forced to recognize that hostile forces do not distinguish between the different factions. For the agents of imperialist ideologies, removal of any possible remaining cultural or ideological resistance to their ultimate designs is urgent.
B ji, I think the anti-blasphemy law will only make it more difficult for Indics to shake off their stupor, because it will criminalize any attempt to warn people about the danger.

But without such a process the leadership that perpetuates this suicide cannot be taken out. Siddharaja Jaisimha's descendants did not survive really. Imagine, if somehow he managed to correct or hide his p-secism while being what he was [or the mercantile oligarchy around him] - you would not have had a Vijaynagar or say even a Shivaji able to rise. We should be glad that more such open siding with protection of Islamism or EJ-ism is taken resort to by the existing rashtryia system. It is the Islamists and the EJ's who will deal the death blow to these very benefactors.

Sam · Post by **Sam** » 28 May 2011 01:11

India, US pledge to boost intelligence cooperation
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/43194487/

Indian Home Minister P Chidambaram, left, shakes hands with U.S. Secretary of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano, prior to a delegation level meeting in New Delhi, India, Friday, May 27, 2011. Napolitano is on a four-day visit to India to increase cooperation in counter terrorism, intelligence sharing and cyber security between the two countries. (AP Photo/Manish Swarup)

finding common ground in their concern over global terrorism, commitment to democracy and booming trade.

2008 attacks in Mumbai that killed at least 166 people. India has blamed Pakistan-based insurgent groups for the killings.

India should keep repeating this as often as possible.

Granted PC and other Indian ministers are smart guys but what about the shirt?
No suite, not tie no problem.
Should the shirt not be at least tucked in?
This gives a false impression as if PC gubo-ed for Janet or made out with her

devesh · Post by **devesh** » 28 May 2011 07:24

who cares what image it gives to other countries. in India, it's common. so we do it. the so called "image" does not matter. it's a non issue...

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 28 May 2011 09:24

What to do, we are like this onlee.........

Besides the Indian politition is a man of the "masses", so he will dress to show himself as a man of the masses. That is what he is doing .

We ought to be proud of our polititions who retain the local touch and a distinctly Indian style in their dress code.

Ambar · Post by **Ambar** » 28 May 2011 09:59

Sam wrote:
Granted PC and other Indian ministers are smart guys but what about the shirt?
No suite, not tie no problem.
Should the shirt not be at least tucked in?
This gives a false impression as if PC gubo-ed for Janet or made out with her

Ever seen someone tuck their shirt inside their mundu ? He is wearing a customary south Indian attire.Why should he be pretentious like Pakis who wear fine english tailor cut suits with yankee inspired flag pins and then head out with a begging bowl ?

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 29 May 2011 23:07

Needs to be seen by more people

X-Post.....

Atri wrote:Here is an excerpt of my discussion with few right minded readers but who have fell for the macaulay's propaganda. the underlined italics are their statements which I tried to answer. the topic arose over whether to call 1857 as national war OR a regional revolt. the favourite horse

Not quite , because although a core group ( mainly Marathas ) had a concept of 'Bharatvarsha' , right from the time of Bajirao , Shivaji and perhaps even before that , few other people seem to espouse an ideology of 'a land that has to be defended ' .

We are talking about idea here. In minds of 14 year old shivaji, the sense of pan Indian Hindavi self-ruling system was visible. So was the case in minds of bajirao, nanasaheb, sadashivrao, madhvrao et al. not just Marathas, but many other predecessors of marathas who united India.

What is nation? What is Rashtra? it is sense of belongingness which people feel arising out of shared heritage. When people feel they are a nation, they become a nation. Ever since Judaism exists, Israel has been the "nation" of Jews. the actual israel came into existence after WW2. But, the nation of Israel existed.

Association of "Rashtra" and "Desha" is what is made mandatory by modern socio-polity. While it works in today's world, one has to acknowledge that there existed different systems in different places and times.

The shared heritage which produces sense of belongingness can come from anything - language, religion, culture, race. usually, it is complex mixture of all of them with one factor dominating over others. In Europe, that factor is language. In China, that factor is Race (Han ethnicity). In India, that factor has been culture.

There was and is a common cultural thread which weaves all "Desh" (Regions) in India. while the rulers of different "Desh" were interacting with eachother, the factor which kept the janta interlinked was culture.

So whenever a raja from particular desh would unite substantial portion of subcontinent, other rajas would adjust their policies in accordance to the behaviour of the raja of central power. That central power need not unite entire subcontinent politically to create a nation.

We Indians have this habit of constantly raising the bar much above others and if we fail to cross that bar, we self-flagellate.

This is what I refer to as itirations of Indian rashtra. We have maurya India, sunga India, gupta India, vardhan India, saatvahan India, tripartite india (pratihara-paala-rashtrakuta), Rajput India, Mughal India, maratha india, british India, today's republic of India. If we assume arbitrarily that maurya India was India 1.0, today's republic of India is India 11.0. This ROI is evolved through all these previous iterations.

There are many more, I just randomly cited few names which came to my mind. there have been many "Raashtriya" iterations of India. We had Rashtriya iterations of India because Indian Rashtra existed. simple only. Why then should we define our rashtriyatva on observations of foreigners? This is macaulay's history taught to us. From european point of view, nations are defined on basis of language. when british came in India as dominant power (after 1803), the condition of India was that of infighting rulers. This is when the english intellectuals started venturing in India, trying to know it. They wrote what they found. Later after 1857, they wrote what they found suitable. It is here when AIT, arya-dravida faultline and many others were sown and nurtured.

later after independence by creating states based on languages, our own politicians sowed even more faultlines. While it is not the purpose to criticize nehru for this in this thread, the ROI chose this type of administrative setup to function. Even today, there are border disputes among states, water disputes and all sorts of disputes. In today's system states and common man cannot possess weapons and maintain army, hence the war happens in courts and elections. In earlier times, it used to be conventional war as well. In that system war was an option for political units like "states" as well.

Should then we say that India is still not a nation, but a bunch of quarelling states. Because this is how they describe India. While there are disputes, there is also a cultural common thread which dominant policy maker (Central govt) accepts. In today's world we explicitly define things, our ancestors did feel the necessity to have it written. May be it was written down and the documents are not available today. Who knows? The ones which are available say that they viewed India as one nation.

Why then self-flagellate?

Today , even if Arunachal Pradesh or Kashmir is attacked , people in Kanyakumari believe their nation is under seige . Did this feeling exist then ? And if it had , even Mahmud Ghaznavi would not have been able to enter .

This is exactly what I am talking about. This feeling exists today mainly due to faster means of communication and transportation. Why impose our modern views on ancient and medieval ancestors? This is like few of the moderators here who argue Mughals are Indian because modern Indian constitution defines person to be Indian if he is born in territories controlled by British India.

About Gazni, you must have not read about Battle of Bahraich. Please read it. various Indian kings from Punjab to bengal and north, did form an alliance and repulsed the gaznavid invasion in matter of 8 years. India was not invaded by any central asian force for next 160 years. similar alliance was woven by Yashodharma of malwa to repel Hunnic invasion and defeated Mihirakula. India remained immune from foreign invasion for 500 years thereafter. So, this feeling did exist then and now.

Once a common social-economic-spiritual code is enforced throughout, the political unity does not matter much in India. When that common code is endangered, the fragmented political power unites in India (willingly or forcibly, catalyst of this fusion differs in different times). Continuing on 1857 after this, the origin of this movement to establish national cause was ganga-valley in 1857. The origin of the movement prior to that was in mountains of sahyadri. Before that, it was rishyamukha mountain near hampi. before that, it was redfort of delhi. so on and so forth.

Why does point of initiation matter? everything has to start from somewhere and at the point of inception, even a giant tree is a seed and a sapling. I have mentioned about tatya tope's ventures to south of vindhyas to initiate second phase. I also mentioned about habit of making erstwhile maratha strongholds (also Sikh strongholds) as the base for their contonments. I have discussed about the displacement of entire network of Peshwas from Pune to Kanpur. Also the Mumbai-Pune train route which was made operational on war-footing in 1856 and which facilitated premptive troop movements into deccan.

There are many reasons why uprising did not spread over to south of narmada at that time. But, didn't it aim for it? yes it did, thats what proclamation of bahadurshah and actions of various commanders like tope etc show. hence it is an anglo-Indian war. I would also call their wars with eastern nawabs, marathas and sikhs as anglo-Indian wars. Because maratha India and later Sikh empire were Indian rashtras. whereas british was a foreign rashtra. Not Rashtra, but a foreign company treating India as market, not nation.

I think Company was as serious in running administration in India like America is serious in Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan today. And they will face the same fate (rather, they are facing it in small jolts not a huge one as in 1857.)

Altair · Post by **Altair** » 29 May 2011 23:33

SaiK wrote:I didn't understand MMS's policy of withdrawal of anti piracy ops by IN. retaliation dhoti fear!?

We were doing Unkils job and not getting proper ROI. Besides we have uninvited yellows frequenting our waters. It is a question of priorities. I resent MMS but this time he is following advise from our uniformed men.

devesh · Post by **devesh** » 29 May 2011 23:36

^^^
rightly said, there is no need for us to go picking fights with Somali pirates as long as they stay away from our vessels and our *interests*. let the Global Hegemon of the Seas worry about the pirates....

JE Menon · Post by **JE Menon** » 30 May 2011 02:58

>>no need for us to go picking fights with Somali pirates as long as they stay away from our vessels

They didn't in the first place. That's the problem. And, as far as I can tell, it is a change in tactics, not in strategy. I'm pretty sure that in the months ahead, the outlines of the new tactic will become clearer...

somnath · Post by **somnath** » 30 May 2011 08:21

Wasnt sure where to post this, but "Indian Interest" is closest...

The recent shenanigan over appointment of a new head of IMF, after DSK's fall, suddenly had a bit of "emerging market"-unionism played out..Traditionally, the head of IMF has been a European (and World Bank an American)..This time, they said that given the changing power equations, it should change, and someone outside Europe should take over..India was in that game as well, and there was a bunch of BRIC sloganeering done...As it happened, while playing the BRIC-card along, China did a side-deal with France, supporting Chirstine Lagarde in exchange for having a Chinese as #2...We were left at the unionist sidelines..

As it so happens, we would have rather had a European/American as #2 than a Chinese!

We as a country need to learn how to play these big boys games...the sort of blind anti-Americanism that clouds judgements even now at times are counterproductive to our own interests...We need to be realistic about our capabilities, and play the game accordingly..

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 30 May 2011 10:06

^^^

What does A EU maneuvering and BRIC dyanmics have to do with "blind anti Americanism"?

Talk of non-sense dished out to push a transparent agenda along.

AjitK · Post by **AjitK** » 30 May 2011 10:21

Well, there was almost no chance of an emerging country candidate getting the top job. It was just a reminder from the BRICS that they should be counted. The BRICS statement refers to the WB as well. After all, Brazil had made it clear that it was not averse to a European candidate.

Perhaps, Indian officials/ Virmani just wanted to highlight the unfairness of the system (Sanjaya Baru thinks this is the best strategy given current power equations). There is point up to which this "united front" thing is to be taken and after that each country has to look after its own interests.

JE Menon · Post by **JE Menon** » 30 May 2011 16:13

We as a country tend to be afflicted by both blind anti-Americanism, and blind pro-Americanism. Both, obviously, do not serve our interests. But this blindness tends to be more among mango-man (where applicable and where he gives a crap) and the media. The latter can be persuaded, and undoubtedly often are. Mango-man, on the other hand tends to develop either affliction over time and tends to stick with it... Politicians tend to bend with the prevailing wind, even when it stinks. While not singing the bureaucrat song, which I do now and then

, I feel this group is likely the least afflicted... but certainly not immune to either.

somnath · Post by **somnath** » 30 May 2011 17:09

AjitK wrote:Well, there was almost no chance of an emerging country candidate getting the top job

Absolutely, it was clear fro day 1..But given that, instead of showing BRIC groupism, a better approach would have been to just stay out, or even openly support Lagarde's candidature...If it wasnt to be an Indian, status quo is the next best alternative, certainly better than having a Chinese as #2...And we shouldnt be surprised anymmore at these Chinese games - they are adept at it - play it all the time in various fora..To be honest, IMF head isnt a big deal, but India needs to know how to play the "game", without ideological blinkers...

JE Menon wrote:We as a country tend to be afflicted by both blind anti-Americanism, and blind pro-Americanism.

I tend to disagree...there isnt a whole lot of anti-Americanism in India among the public - the polls, FWTAW show that as well..Anti Americanism is played up by politicians to suit their own agenda from time to time...Indira Gandhi's was an extreme case, but most politicians do that even now...In some cases, it just leads to policy making taking turns for the worse...JMT..

JE Menon · Post by **JE Menon** » 30 May 2011 17:53

Somnath,

There isn't a lot of blind anti-Americanism now, or so it seems from the polls. But it wasn't always the case. Even 15 yrs ago, the situation was quite different I'm sure. But I have no data to back it up. It was just an observation. No claims on which group is the majority. I'm sure it exists though, even among babus (especially non gora-facing babus). Again, from my personal observation. Could be wrong.

RajeshA · Post by **RajeshA** » 30 May 2011 18:11

somnath wrote:
AjitK wrote:Well, there was almost no chance of an emerging country candidate getting the top job
Absolutely, it was clear fro day 1..But given that, instead of showing BRIC groupism, a better approach would have been to just stay out, or even openly support Lagarde's candidature...If it wasnt to be an Indian, status quo is the next best alternative, certainly better than having a Chinese as #2...And we shouldnt be surprised anymmore at these Chinese games - they are adept at it - play it all the time in various fora..To be honest, IMF head isnt a big deal, but India needs to know how to play the "game", without ideological blinkers...

somnath ji,

By being one of the P5, N5, the Chinese are already acknowledged "leaders", and they don't have to jostle for the leadership of mere mortals and pipsqueaks. They can make their deals. India on the other hand is not part of the decision making bodies, and is forced to keep her leadership based on morality and above-reproach behavior, and around that we try to collect our herd.

Of course, by taking the moral leadership route, we lose out on the benefits that comes from making unscrupulous deals, selling short the interests of every body else in the process.

These are the downsides of being locked out of the "high table" as you like to say!

That is why I keep on saying that it is better to make a deal with USA, for India to be accepted as one of the P5 as UK's seat in the UNSC comes up for debate after the secession vote by the Scots, instead of taking the G4+1 route.

AjitK · Post by **AjitK** » 30 May 2011 19:08

somnath wrote: Absolutely, it was clear fro day 1..But given that, instead of showing BRIC groupism, a better approach would have been to just stay out, or even openly support Lagarde's candidature...If it wasnt to be an Indian, status quo is the next best alternative, certainly better than having a Chinese as #2...And we shouldnt be surprised anymmore at these Chinese games - they are adept at it - play it all the time in various fora..To be honest, IMF head isnt a big deal, but India needs to know how to play the "game", without ideological blinkers...

India shouldn't choose either extreme. There is a middle ground and I guess thats what India has chosen. Its a fine balance. We shouldn't be outrightly aggressive in such matters or just agree to support anyone put forward by the EU. The voting power is such that without negotiations & some maneuvering, its not possible to achieve a higher profile. We can't stay on the sidelines & hope for some crumbs to fall our way.

I don't think Indian officials were unaware of Chinese moves. The simple fact is that India is nowhere near the level of influence/economic power of the Chinese, never mind the vote shares. As for the IMF, the Chinese may get the deputy Director post and it will probably stay with the BRICS. Medvedev has floated this proposal.

devesh · Post by **devesh** » 31 May 2011 10:56

^^^
the trick is to look like we're taking the middle ground or whatever is convenient to the outside world. but fighting for our interests, whatever they might be, in the background and in the foreground when necessary. anti-americanism/pro-americanism are all side sentimentalities which will be used as and when required. our interests are what matters. doesn't matter what the Americans perceive that as.....that's just side show for MSM.

Hari Seldon · Post by **Hari Seldon** » 01 Jun 2011 20:06

No better dhaga than this...TVR SHenoy calls a spade a spade for a refreshing change from a mainstream journo.

The communal polarisation of Kerala's voters

There was a clear polarisation of Christian and (especially) Muslim votes in favour of the UDF. This caused enough misgivings to start a consolidation of Hindu votes behind the LDF, says T V R Shenoy.

First off, thanks for acknowledging that yindoo consolidation was inchoate, fumbly and in delayed reaction to that in the one true faiths.

Delving into 70 years of memories I cannot recollect another time when Kerala was so split on communal lines. Look no farther than the newly-elected Kerala assembly if you want to see proof of that.
[...]
Assuming, however, that Hindus still constitute about 50 percent you would think the majority community make up roughly half of the assembly. As they, nominally, represent the majority that assumption should be particularly true of the treasury benches.

Wrong. 49 of the 72 MLAs in the ruling United Democratic Front are non-Hindus -- a tad over 68 percent. Contrariwise, only 19 of the 68 MLAs in the Left Democratic Front are non-Hindus -- just under 28 percent.

There was a clear polarisation of Christian and (especially) Muslim votes in favour of the UDF. This caused enough misgivings to start a consolidation of Hindu votes behind the LDF. (And yes, I recognise the irony of Hindus surging behind nominally atheist Marxists but that is the reality of Kerala!)
[...]
... reason for writing about the make-up of the Kerala assembly is that every section of society in the state is already talking about it -- from mailmen to ministers -- but privately. Nobody wants to come out and admit the obvious, that in a democracy it is deeply flawed to have a government where the majority community is severely under-represented.

Shades of apartheid are a tad overblown but there's little doubt the status of Yindus in this country is being whittled down to second class ever so slowly, surely and systematically only. Am I already sounding loony? Well, read on and judge for yourself.

At this point, I know there are some readers who will whine about journalists writing about 'communal' topics. Spare me the rubbish!

Bravo, sir. For a journalist., you're already starting to earn my grudging respect only...

We live in a day where the Manmohan Singh [ Images ] cabinet has approved a caste-based census. This is also a time when, in the wake of the Sachar Committee Report, reservation for Muslims is being openly discussed.

I hope you realise what this means. It was the Congress, at the urging of Mahatma Gandhi [ Images ], that ensured there would be no separate enumeration of castes in the census after 1931. And the founding fathers of the Republic of India -- memories of where Muslim reservation had led India fresh in their minds -- did not opt for religion-based reservation.

If the Sonia Gandhi-Manmohan Singh duopoly wish to overturn over 60 years of Congress policy let us admit that there will be consequences. Both caste and religion will play increasingly larger roles in public life. Berate it if you like but start getting used to the fact.
[...]
used to be said that what Bengal thinks today India shall think tomorrow. When it comes to politics it would be more accurate to say that what Kerala suffers today India must endure tomorrow. Kerala was experimenting with coalition governments long before they took shape in New Delhi [ Images ] -- and Kerala is seeing the effects of communal polarisation on government well before the caste-based and religion-based policies of the UPA regime are felt in India as a whole tomorrow.

Whoa. 'Nuff said, I guess.

Time for some smart uns in the LDF to break away and lighten their red shades to saffron perhaps? VSA's too old to hang on for long.

Anyways, let it not be said that we here weren't warned. Just that we were too powerless to do anything about the imminent inevitable.

Manny · Post by **Manny** » 02 Jun 2011 04:24

I see that that this is already posted here.

http://www.rediff.com/news/column/the-c ... 110601.htm

Kerala is still, technically, a state where the majority of the population is Hindu. The data for the 2011 Census are not out but according to the 2001 numbers, 56.2 percent of Keralites were Hindus, 24.3 percent were Muslims, and 19 percent were Christians. Those values have almost certainly changed over the past decade; the 2001 Census also revealed that the Hindu and the Christian figures had fallen since 1991, the Christian population dropping by 0.32 percent and the Hindu population by 1.48 percent.

Assuming, however, that Hindus still constitute about 50 percent you would think the majority community make up roughly half of the assembly. As they, nominally, represent the majority that assumption should be particularly true of the treasury benches.

Wrong. 49 of the 72 MLAs in the ruling United Democratic Front are non-Hindus -- a tad over 68 percent. Contrariwise, only 19 of the 68 MLAs in the Left Democratic Front are non-Hindus -- just under 28 percent.

There was a clear polarisation of Christian and (especially) Muslim votes in favour of the UDF. This caused enough misgivings to start a consolidation of Hindu votes behind the LDF. (And yes, I recognise the irony of Hindus surging behind nominally atheist Marxists but that is the reality of Kerala!)

Lets get this straight. So these commie leftists of Kerala thought they can sleep with evangelicals and Islamists and seriously believed those two would become atheistic commies like them? Now these loser leftist Hindus are caught with their pants down, they want religious and conservative Hindus to vote for these commies back in power?

Are they freaking kidding me?

Sheesh!

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 05 Jun 2011 07:32

LINK

Separate council mooted for defence studies in varsities
Aarti Dhar
Share · print · T+

With national security as a discipline and autonomous subject not finding a rightful place in higher education in Indian universities, even though international security received far greater attention, a committee of defence experts has suggested setting up a Council of National Security Research and Studies, corresponding broadly with the Council for Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR), to promote and coordinate defence and strategic studies in the country.

The expert committee, set up by Union Human Resource Development (HRD) Minister Kapil Sibal, to make suggestions on developing scholarship in the field of studies relating to national security interests, has recommended setting up autonomous Centres of National Security Studies on the pattern of the Defence Ministry-funded Institute of Defence Studies and Analysis (IDSA). These would be funded directly by the HRD Ministry and will aim to attract young, bright scholars to undertake policy related future-oriented research through award of fellowships.

Stressing on the need to recast and standardise the existing syllabus of National Security Studies, the committee has said there is a need for developing faculty and research, and interim steps in that direction can include inviting visiting faculty, workshops, seminars and national as well as international fellowships. Appointment of National Research Professors in the field of national security and related social science fields has also been recommended.

The committee, which was also asked to review programmes for Defence and Strategic studies in the university system, was headed by Air Commodore (Retd.) Jasjit Singh, Director of the Centre for Air Power Studies and former Director, IDSA; Dr. Sanjay Baru, Editor-in-Chief ,Business Standard; Prof. Satish Kumar, Editor,National Security Annual Review; Prof. Gopal Malviya, Head, Department of Defence and Strategic Studies, Madras University; Prof. M.N. Verma, Head, Department of Defence and Strategic Studies, Allahabad University; as Members and Prof. Ved Prakash, Vice-Chairman, University Grants Commission, as Member Convener.

UBanerjee · Post by **UBanerjee** » 05 Jun 2011 08:31

Can anyone direct me to debates, discussions and panels held by Indian think-tanks on Indian foreign policy/geopolitics which I can download in audio format.

Thanks in advance.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 09 Jun 2011 20:25

Google cache of M.F. Hussain dead

For me good riddance to bad rubbish and a perverted person who took advantage of artistic freedom in India to attack Hindu religious icons.

He used and abused the tolerance of Hindus to attack their beliefs and icons.

vera_k · Post by **vera_k** » 09 Jun 2011 21:24

^^

But he did a good job of exposing the contradictions in the Indian constitution when it comes to protections under article 19(2). And that the "secular" proponents of the constitution have chosen to beat a tactical retreat instead of proposing to eliminate 19(2) says volumes.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 09 Jun 2011 21:36

just tolerance theory put to test..

Prem · Post by **Prem** » 09 Jun 2011 21:45

Lets see who does he paint in Jahannum!!

KJo · Post by **KJo** » 09 Jun 2011 22:06

No reason for a Qatar citizen to be buried in India...

putnanja · Post by **putnanja** » 09 Jun 2011 22:18

That bugger wanted to make a film on prophet mohammed, and immediately skied downhill when some mullahs objected. No "secular" or "human rights" group intervened, and neither did MFH make a big deal off it. No regrets or condolences from my side to that guy's death. Like ramana said, he misused the freedom of expression to hurt hindu sentiments. Our government was quick to condemn the dutch cartoons of mohammed and quran burning pastor in US as hurting religious sentiments. But MFH's paintings were artistic and not meant to hurt anyone's sentiments!

UBanerjee · Post by **UBanerjee** » 09 Jun 2011 22:25

^ Same leftist claptrap infuses the chattering circles in US/Europe as well, where desecration of Christian/Jewish/Hindu icons is allowed but any mocking of Islam is strictly verboten.