Bharat Rakshak

Consortium of Indian Defence Websites
It is currently 19 Apr 2014 06:43

All times are UTC + 5:30 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 6163 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39 ... 155  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Indian Interests
PostPosted: 29 Mar 2011 08:03 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 22 Dec 2008 06:36
Posts: 4609
Location: land of strip and search
somnath wrote:
ramana wrote:
Our own brfite rips into the so called philanthropists of the world- wonderful read.

Buffett should learn our ethos of giving- R Vaidya


there are huge issues with the assumptions made in that article - X-posting my issues from the Economy thread..

The article is a mix-and-mash of truths, half-truths and legends to construct a "glorious India" picture and make snide ones on Buffet and Gates..


Quote:
Ratan Tata may be shy to point out to Bill Gates that ‘the Tata founders bequeathed most of their individual wealth to many trusts they created for the greater good of India and its people’. So is the case with G D Birla and Jamnalal Bajaj. This may not be trumpeted by Kumara Mangalam Birla and Rahul Bajaj

Only half correct, in fact maybe quarter or less The point on the Tatas is substantially true, though most of the stakes in individual Tata companies are with Tata sons, which is not only a philanthrophic organisation (TCS, for example for a long time used to be a division of Tata Sons)...But for the Tatas, it is a well made point..For all the others, Bajaj, Birla et al - it is absolutely wrong to say that "most" of their wealth was bequeathed to charitable trusts..Quite to the contrary, most of the wealth was carved up between various brothers of the clan, with disputes over them spilling over well in to the 21st century..the corpuses managed by the Bajaj and Birla charitable trusts are miniscule compared to the total wealth of the families...

Quote:
It is interesting that Bill Gates who has operations in Cayman islands and Reno of Nevada to minimise or evade taxes to be paid to the United States government is enthusiastic about “Giving by India Inc”.

This is a real clincher..I dont know whether Bill Gates has anything in Cayman, but Indian business worthies have not evaded taxes!!! the list of big tax evaders and "deliberate NPA creators" in India would be a roll call of honour of the business families...

Quote:
Somebody should also tell Bill Gates and Warren Buffett that India Inc constitutes less than 15 per cent of our GDP and the real growth masters are small partnership and proprietorship firms which are deeply involved in giving.

Where did this "15%" number come from? The % estimated for the US is variously put between 50 and 80%...

The question is not of "small time charity" done by people like us...As anyone in the philanthrphy business will tell you, the biggest challenge in the business is the ability to scale up...What Buffet and Gates are doing is to bequeath a very large estate, consisting of their vast paper wealth to a foundation...For Gates, that will be ~50 billion dollars..the foundation will have access to the income streams from this - assuming a dividend yield of 1.5%, that is an annual cash flow of 750 million dollars...Now that is game breaking...Something similar has been done by Azim Premji, and by the Tatas...To compare that against sponsorhip of wrstlers to the Asian Games is stretching the point to a breaking point..

Lets not get into a mentality of denigrating the "other" in order to glorify ourselves - for an IIM-B prof, not expected...Not expected at all...


This quoted by me and replied in
viewtopic.php?p=1056825#p1056825


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Indian Interests
PostPosted: 29 Mar 2011 08:55 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 01 Jul 1999 11:31
Posts: 14217
Location: Deepest & Highest
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2011/03/ ... 7823.shtml
India captures 16 pirates after 3-hour battle
Indian navy also rescues 16 crew members held hostage by pirates who had taken trawler off Indian coast
Quote:
AP) NEW DELHI - India's navy and coast guard have captured 16 Somali pirates after a three-hour-long battle in the Arabian Sea, a navy spokesman said Monday.Also, 16 crew members who had been taken hostage by the pirates were rescued from the hijacked Iranian trawler off India's western Lakshadweep islands on Sunday, Captain Manohar Nambiar said.The pirates were using the trawler as a roving pirate base to launch attacks on passing vessels in the Indian Ocean, he said.The pirates were trying to seize a merchant ship, MV Maersk Kensington, when a coast guard vessel and an Indian naval ship picked up its distress signals and went to its aid.The pirates opened fire at the coast guard ship as it drew near, triggering a battle during which the pirate trawler caught fire. The pirates and the hostages, picked up from the sea by the navy ship, were headed for Mumbai.Of the 16 hostages, 12 are Iranians and four are Pakistanis, the navy spokesman said."The pirates will be handed over to the Mumbai police for prosecution. The crew members will be questioned to establish their credentials and then handed over to their embassy officials," Nambiar said.The Indian navy has seized around 120 pirates, mostly from Somalia, over the past few months. Two weeks ago, the navy captured 61 pirates when they attacked a naval ship.Indian warships have been escorting merchant ships as part of international anti-piracy


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Indian Interests
PostPosted: 29 Mar 2011 08:58 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 29 Jan 2003 12:31
Posts: 3244
Location: Singapore
krisna wrote:
same article quotes a few other things also regarding charities in Indian and US. please care to mention them

Which ones are you referring to?

Crux of the argument is tht there is a lot that has been done in the US, the Gates Foundation is one..We can lern from that...there are Indian examples, and they need to be lauded...But neither do we need to invent more "glory" than is there (there are bright pockets - but few and far between), nor attribute malfeasence to the likes of Gates in order to draw any lessons...Numbers tell the story..


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Indian Interests
PostPosted: 29 Mar 2011 08:59 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 01 Jul 1999 11:31
Posts: 14217
Location: Deepest & Highest
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/29/world ... .html?_r=1
India Reports an Increase In Wild Tiger Population

Quote:
NEW DELHI — India said Monday that it was making progress in saving endangered tigers, with a new nationwide survey estimating a 20 percent increase in their numbers in the wild over the last five years. The survey, released by the Ministry of Environment and Forests, put India’s current tiger population at 1,706, compared with 1,411 in 2006. The new figure is an extrapolation based on photographic evidence in sample sites, along with other indicators. India is home to about half of the world’s wild tigers. Their numbers had declined sharply for decades, largely because of poaching and the pressures of development encroaching on their natural habitat. “These numbers give us hope for the future of tigers in the world,” Jim Leape, the international director of the World Wildlife Fund, said in a statement. “India continues to play an integral role in the tiger’s recovery.” Jairam Ramesh, the environment minister, cautioned that the country faced a major challenge in providing enough habitat for tigers to roam wild. He said that the survey also concluded that the amount of land occupied by tigers was shrinking, squeezing their living space.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Indian Interests
PostPosted: 29 Mar 2011 20:28 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 22 Dec 2008 06:36
Posts: 4609
Location: land of strip and search
somnath wrote:
krisna wrote:
same article quotes a few other things also regarding charities in Indian and US. please care to mention them

Which ones are you referring to?


acting coy isnt it. :rotfl:
want to hide inconvenient ones to buttress your side.

One should be open to accept and learn on one hand and impart one's knowledge to others on the other hand.

I think in rig veda- it is said knowledge comes from all sides ( something like that)

I dont remember the exact quote in sankrit-- yeah it is from India's culture onlee. :((

Quote:
Crux of the argument is tht there is a lot that has been done in the US, the Gates Foundation is one..We can lern from that...there are Indian examples, and they need to be lauded...But neither do we need to invent more "glory" than is there (there are bright pockets - but few and far between), nor attribute malfeasence to the likes of Gates in order to draw any lessons...Numbers tell the story..

Quote:
The article is a mix-and-mash of truths, half-truths and legends to construct a "glorious India" picture and

The article does not mention about glory of India at all. Please tell me where in the article the words of glory or glorius India past is mentioned.He is giving examples of charity within India by sdres onlee. Charity begins at home.
Quote:
make snide ones on Buffet and Gates..

Please read the article which states that-
Quote:
It is important that both of them are educated about our system and ethos of giving which exist from ancient times and do not need lectures through business channels which live and even die for TRPs.

Again it is your fertile imagination to suit your own ends. :rotfl:

Quote:
Lets not get into a mentality of denigrating the "other" in order to glorify ourselves - for an IIM-B prof, not expected...Not expected at all...


you are casting aspersions on the author without giving a convincing answer. It is very sad that you indulge in this way. :(


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Indian Interests
PostPosted: 29 Mar 2011 22:26 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 01 Jan 2010 21:41
Posts: 7081
^Not sad, it is as usual.

--------------------------------
How much of charity in India is actually tracked and how reliable are the numbers of the so-called charities in the US? If such folks were actually exposed to these "charities", they'd know better.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Indian Interests
PostPosted: 29 Mar 2011 23:44 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 19 Nov 2008 03:25
Posts: 12047
Bangalee babu-moshais here on on the forum - can you please enlighten me as to the relative proportion of Bangalee authors who have primarily written in Bangla, and Bangalee authors who have primarily written in English? I would be curious to know if Bangla born/Bangla parent-tongue authors primarily writing in English are nowadays considered to be writing in Bangla? I mean has Bangla now been converted into English of some sort, and therefore writing in English is the same as writing in Bangla - and therefore, the two languages are sort of equivalent?

Assume that we can always deduce and solemnly declare so - without knowing anything about the person - as to whether that person has or has not read Bankim or Rabindranath in the original, what is your estimate of the number of times that those who can read in the original - find that primarily Bangla writers have used "Calcutta" or "Cal" in their writing?

I think this is of significant Indian interest - because if true it means that at least one regional language has now become practically indistinguishable from English.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Indian Interests
PostPosted: 30 Mar 2011 06:41 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 29 Jan 2003 12:31
Posts: 3244
Location: Singapore
krisna wrote:
you are casting aspersions on the author without giving a convincing answer

Not casting aspersions on the author - dont know how you arrived at that - only expressing disappointment with the effort..As for the rest, I have posted my treply in the other thread..


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Indian Interests
PostPosted: 30 Mar 2011 08:40 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 22 Dec 2008 06:36
Posts: 4609
Location: land of strip and search
somnath wrote:
krisna wrote:
you are casting aspersions on the author without giving a convincing answer

Not casting aspersions on the author - dont know how you arrived at that - only expressing disappointment with the effort..As for the rest, I have posted my treply in the other thread..


I have replied here
viewtopic.php?p=1057619#p1057619


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Indian Interests
PostPosted: 30 Mar 2011 17:44 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 26 Nov 2010 19:16
Posts: 134
There is awful lot of charity that goes unreported.. for example, my schoolheadmistress, a padma sree award winner from guntur in andhra pradesh has a charity called Heal(health and education for all)( http://www.heal.co.uk/who-are-we.html)( a charity for destitute children). I know an awful lot of charity donated by family and riends in Guntur.A lot of research only happens in cities,perhaps a few big towns and it is generally very dificult to form a coherent views on any subject unless there is a comprehensive review of this, perhaps in census data...


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Indian Interests
PostPosted: 30 Mar 2011 18:11 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 06 Apr 2009 13:23
Posts: 5321
somnath wrote:
krisna wrote:
same article quotes a few other things also regarding charities in Indian and US. please care to mention them

Which ones are you referring to?

Crux of the argument is tht there is a lot that has been done in the US, the Gates Foundation is one..We can lern from that...there are Indian examples, and they need to be lauded...But neither do we need to invent more "glory" than is there (there are bright pockets - but few and far between), nor attribute malfeasence to the likes of Gates in order to draw any lessons...Numbers tell the story..


Gate Foundation is hardly a philanthropy - it is promoting GMOs and vaccines. The use of vaccines for fertility reduction and for producing mental impairment is well known.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Indian Interests
PostPosted: 31 Mar 2011 06:10 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 29 Jan 2003 12:31
Posts: 3244
Location: Singapore
Pranav wrote:
Gate Foundation is hardly a philanthropy - it is promoting GMOs and vaccines. The use of vaccines for fertility reduction and for producing mental impairment is well known.

Malaria is one of the major focus areas of the Bill Gates Foundation...But why does it make it "non philanthrophic"?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Indian Interests
PostPosted: 31 Mar 2011 10:44 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 13 Dec 2009 12:28
Posts: 2061
Location: Bruneau Jarbridge
somnath wrote:
Pranav wrote:
Gate Foundation is hardly a philanthropy - it is promoting GMOs and vaccines. The use of vaccines for fertility reduction and for producing mental impairment is well known.


Malaria is one of the major focus areas of the Bill Gates Foundation...But why does it make it "non philanthrophic"?


Malaria is one of the major focus areas of the Schlumberger foundation as well, these conglomerates carry it out in order to expand/consolidate their scope of projects and operations in Sub-Saharan Africa, Indonesia and South America, not for the sake of the philanthropic act itself.

IMO, we need to rethink the motivations of Western philanthropists, they carry it out to make materialistic gains elsewhere. Thus, they are non-philanthropic from the traditional Indian PoV.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Indian Interests
PostPosted: 31 Mar 2011 10:55 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 06 Apr 2009 13:23
Posts: 5321
Has this been posted already?

Dark side of giving: The rise of philanthro-capitalism - http://articles.economictimes.indiatime ... wanda-agra


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Indian Interests
PostPosted: 31 Mar 2011 11:29 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 21 Oct 2008 01:52
Posts: 2928
Pranav wrote:
Has this been posted already?

Dark side of giving: The rise of philanthro-capitalism - http://articles.economictimes.indiatime ... wanda-agra

I would doubt that the Gates Foundation has any malevolent intentions in public health or agriculture....Bill Gates, given his background, obviously believes in the power of technology and science to address critical issues - which thus would automatically align the Foundation with promotion of GM crops, as well as in creation of vaccines in the healthcare space.

But Big Pharma or Monsanto should not be the automatic partners - in fact Indian low-cost firms in these spaces would make a better choice. As regards GM / non-GM, vaccines vs other methods - the recipient country needs to take the call based on available evidence.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Indian Interests
PostPosted: 31 Mar 2011 13:59 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 12 Jul 1999 11:31
Posts: 3585
Location: In the soft spots!!!
CSR programs have to be justified to the shareholders. In the early days of CSR, companies did try to make purely philanthropic contributions, but shareholder pressure made them narrow their focus on projects that:
1. Were in the same line of activity as the commercial functions.
2. Could somehow be justified that it would lead to the expansion of market later on.

Their is nothing conspiratorial in this line of thinking. It was all done very openly, and there was a lot of debate (ok, not too much, but it was there).

-------

Of course, purely charitable institutions like Gates foundations, should not have these compulsions.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Indian Interests
PostPosted: 31 Mar 2011 14:11 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 29 Jan 2003 12:31
Posts: 3244
Location: Singapore
Unfortunately, a lot of the debates tend to get "motivated" because the principals (corporate or individual) have certain known policy positions that can seemingly be conflicting, or vested...So anyone can favour GM crops - there is a large body of "experts" who do that - but if a philanthrophist with links to big agri business does it, it immediately becomes a question of "vested" interest...It may be, but in many cases it would just be the fact that the sponsor principal believes in the superiority of GM crops...

The fundamental issue is philosophical...Large scale philanthrophy gets into areas that are traditionally the domain of the govt...Now govts have the societal mandate to make policy choices, people get inherently uncomfortable when individuals seemingly start making them...And if these individuals are influential otehrwise, as they usually are, conspiracy theories are easy to build.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Indian Interests
PostPosted: 01 Apr 2011 15:07 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 23 Aug 2007 15:57
Posts: 12315
Location: In a sad place
http://www.dailypioneer.com/326243/Wiki ... verse.html

WikiLeaks, in reverse
April 01, 2011 2:15:30 PM

Manvendra Singh


Quote:
If US and India have developed a relationship that is institutionalised then it is a no-brainer to believe that change of Governments will not lead to any policy shift

..............

On the day after the Iran vote in the IAEA, he was livid having been to see the Prime Minister and received a bizarre rationale for the Indian decision. And was lamenting the absence of Mr Vajpayee. On the question of sending troops to Iraq, Mr Mr Vajpayee, then Prime Minister, had suggested to the CPI(M) delegation which met him that they take their opposition to the streets. So he could tell the Americans that his countrymen were against the decision, said the MP. That is political statesmanship, he added. And that is how policies are going to be made, even as naïve cables may surmise otherwise thanks to WikiLeaks.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Indian Interests
PostPosted: 04 Apr 2011 13:12 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 14 Jul 2006 23:29
Posts: 1531
Goa minister detained with $10 mn at Mumbai airport

Quote:
Goa's Education Minister Atanasio Monseratte was detained by the customs department at the Mumbai international airport after he was allegedly found carrying over $10 million, an official said.

Acting on a tip-off, the customs sleuths waited for Monseratte who arrived here by a domestic flight from Goa and was reportedly planning to go abroad.

Officials from the customs and other departments were questioning him for the huge amount of cash. He was also carrying Rs.2.5 million in Indian currency.

Security at the Mumbai airport has been extremely tight since the past few days in view of the World Cup final between India and Sri lanka and the heavy movement of VVIPs from India and abroad.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Indian Interests
PostPosted: 04 Apr 2011 20:36 
Offline
Forum Moderator

Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Posts: 36513
Could be posted many threads:

Exploring Idea of India


Quote:
Exploring the idea of India

April 04, 2011 8:47:07 PM


THE INTOLERANT INDIAN: Why We Must Rediscover
a Liberal Space


Author: Gautam Adhikari
Publisher: HarperCollins
Price: Rs 399

Though an eminently readable book, it doesn’t talk much about the ‘intolerant Indian’. Instead, it addresses in detail why we must rediscover a liberal space, writes SUNANDA K DATTA-RAY


A suave, highly Westernised Pakistani barrister I once met in the US took my breath away by claiming the Taj Mahal was Pakistani. Now, Gautam Adhikari tells us in this fine dissection of the anatomy of the Indian state that some Bangladeshis also feel that an example of Islamic art like Shah Jehan’s monument to love cannot be Indian. :P

Two assumptions are central to the claim. First, the socially handy theory that Muslims worldwide constitute a single community transcending national identities which enables “local peasants and fishermen who converted to Islam” (the words of another Bangladeshi Adhikari quotes) to upgrade themselves and claim fictitious ancestors of culture if not blood. Nirad C Chaudhuri speaks of a Mymensingh peasant lad saying dates, which he had never seen, were his favourite fruit! Second, that Muslims (like Sangh Parivar diehards) regard India as a Hindu — not multi-religious— country.

When Amartya Sen rejects this claim, it’s not necessarily because he feels secularism has taken deep root in India’s soil. His argument is that given an Indian’s multiple identities, “religion-based categorisation” doesn’t take precedence “over other systems of classification.” That would have been a comforting thought for avowed secularists like the author, except for the evidence of thousands of shrines mushrooming all over our towns and cities with passers-by stopping to pay homage to deities of their choice.

The small-time Jharkhand politician who tried to build a temple to Mahendra Singh Dhoni isn’t the only one to tap into what Patrick French called India’s “deep religious impulse… rooted in Hinduism”. Adhikari describes how LK Advani “posed on the truck with bow and arrow in hand, trying his elderly best to resemble Ram” to (in the author’s view) divert attention from the Mandal Commission to the temple-mosque issue. Clearly, religion isn’t confined to the private domain.

Syed Shahabuddin used to remind us that lighting lamps to inaugurate events or breaking green coconuts to launch ships are Hindu rituals. One can counter by saying with PB Gajendragadkar and others that Hinduism is not a religion like other faiths but “a way of life”. But that argument excludes 150 million Indian Muslims unless one goes the whole way with the Sangh Parivar to insist that Muslims are also Hindus, like all citizens of Hindustan.

It’s just as well that instead of pursuing such contentions into the darkness of dead ends, Adhikari makes a robust case for a secular liberal democratic republic. This is advocated as a matter of principle but also of pragmatism since it’s the only way of holding together India’s diverse communities in harmonious unity. Presumably, he would recommend the same prescription for a state that is culturally and ethnically homogenous.

The question has to be asked because it’s always tempting to make a virtue of necessity. Thus, the reader is not quite sure whether the author bridles at Arundhati Roy’s claim that Kashmir was “never an integral part of India” because he disputes Roy’s historical accuracy or fears that her outspokenness will “provid(e) succour to anti-Indian forces across the border in Pakistan”. Patriotism is not always the best friend of objective assessment.

But Adhikari must be complimented for avoiding the other flaw in Indian thinking which exalts democracy as the panacea for all ills. There are indications here of a realisation that free elections in Egypt, for instance, would enable the Muslim Brotherhood to sweep the polls with no way left then of arresting a drift towards Islamism. Perhaps the same might apply to the Taliban in Afghanistan. Hindu bigots needn’t gloat over this, for the danger lies in unchecked majoritarianism, not in any particular creed.

If election is one temple of democracy, the media is another. Adhikari does well to voice his scepticism about TV talk shows that “verge on naked jingoism and take on the role of both prosecutor and judge when pursuing stories that can arouse high nationalist passion”. But the print media, in which he has spent a lifetime, is no saint either. Some acknowledgement of its failings would have been appropriate.

These are minor blemishes. An eminently readable and formidably researched book’s real drawback is that it does not fully deliver what the main title promises. Instead, it addresses in detail the second-deck heading, “Why we must rediscover a liberal space.”

I had expected more examination of Indian instincts and attitudes, and some attempt to explain whether ordinary men and women have it in them to live up to the noble principles laid down by the founding fathers whom Adhikari admiringly invokes. Are Sikhs who revere Indira Gandhi’s murderers as martyrs, Muslims who fired the Sabarmati Express coach or Hindus responsible for killing more than 500 Christians in Orissa just aberrant? Or, is their only crime to take prevalent impulses to illogical extremes?

Such a study would entail measurement of all the conventional indices of tolerance — lifestyle, social intercourse, eating habits, intermarriage, worship, etc, as well as of the cause and effect of the current fashion among prominent Hindus of throwing ostentatious iftar parties. Obviously, education plays a major part in liberating the mind. So does income. Though Hindu landlords in elite areas are reportedly chary of renting accommodation to even well-placed Muslim tenants, no educated Hindu, no matter how fanatic his faith, would have dreamt of burning alive Graham Staines and his two little sons.

Britain demonstrates that the separation of state and religion is not the sine qua non of secularism. Though the Head of State is also Supreme Governor of the Church of England, British society is by and large secular because the people are educated and reasonably well-off. It’s an impolitic thing to say nowadays but there would have been less bigotry here if the letter and spirit of Macaulay’s Minute had shaped education throughout the country.

Adhikari presents an admirably comprehensive picture of the India of his dreams. But he could have said more about the strengths and failings of the Indians who populate this idyllic landscape and who alone can bring his dream to life.

The reviewer is former editor, The Statesman


I get the feeling that we are seeing the last stand of the Secualar brigade.

What will evolve is an Indian concept of toleration which is rooted in native traditions as we grow stronger as a nation.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Indian Interests
PostPosted: 05 Apr 2011 06:01 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 01 Jul 1999 11:31
Posts: 14217
Location: Deepest & Highest
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/magnit ... 2011-04-04

Magnitude 5.7 quake at India-Nepal border: reports
Quote:
MUMBAI (MarketWatch) -- An earthquake of magnitude 5.7 struck at the India-Nepal border shortly after 5 p.m. local time Monday, according to media reports. Tremors were felt as far as central Delhi, according to The Wall Street Journal. An official from the India Meteorological Department told the daily that the quake's intensity was "medium" and that its focal depth was 10 kilometers (6.25 miles). There were no immediate reports of damage.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Indian Interests
PostPosted: 06 Apr 2011 08:03 
Offline
Forum Moderator

Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Posts: 36513
In a speech delivered at the Institute for Defence Studies and Analyses, New Delhi, on April 1, 2011, Ambassador Ronen Sen who has served with distinction as India’s top envoy in Moscow and Washington, reminiscences on how India struggled to retain Russia as a defence partner after the USSR fell apart, and what that means for ties with the US?

LINK

Quote:

Of defence and defensiveness

Monday 4 April ’11

Ronen Sen

Defence cooperation, or for that matter, nuclear, space and high-technology cooperation, has to be seen in the perspective of the evolving global economic and geostrategic architecture. The essential underpinning of such cooperation is strategic partnership based on the convergence of long-term interests. These include not just protecting our territorial integrity, tackling threats posed by terrorists and insurgents, nuclear proliferation, promoting energy security and so on. They also involve promotion of our economic interests, through balanced trade and market access.

After our independence we went through several phases in our defence cooperation. First it was primarily the British, and then predominantly the Soviet Union, from the ‘60s onwards, followed by diversification of procurements from West European countries since the early ‘80s. Thereafter, we had to cope with unprecedented challenges to our defence preparedness following the collapse of the Soviet Union, which accounted for over two-thirds of our defence inventories, and establish a partnership with Russia in the ‘90s. The latest stages involved our defence partnership with Israel and the ongoing process of establishing defence cooperation with the US. During virtually all these transitional phases there were initial reservations and resistance to change in significant sections of our political, bureaucratic and, to a lesser extent, military establishments. The debate on the current transitional phase in our defence cooperation is thus not unprecedented.

The only difference is that this transition coincides with a cyclical peak in our defence modernisation programme. This is in the backdrop of the massive military modernisation and force-projection programme of China, rather than its surrogate in the Indian subcontinent, Pakistan, which is also highly dependant on the US....

One of the most difficult tasks in my diplomatic career was not only to restore defence cooperation with Russia after the collapse of the Soviet Union, but to give it a boost with new contracts, as an indispensable element of a new strategic partnership with Russia. The old monolithic structure of defence production involved thousands of major and subsidiary enterprises spread all over the Soviet Union meeting centrally-determined production quotas. No enterprise had any idea of costing, supply chains or marketing mechanisms. Russia retained about 80 per cent of this industrial infrastructure. Yet it could not on its own produce many weapon systems without inputs from enterprises in newly independent states. Orders from the Russian armed forces dried up, with a budget cut of 68 per cent in 1992 alone. They lacked funds even for maintenance of existing inventories and had to resort to cannibalisation for spares and aggregates. Defence production declined by almost 90 per cent between 1992 and 1997. Old structures had collapsed. New ones were constantly in a state of flux. We had no option but to resort to unorthodox measures during the most difficult initial years of the post-Soviet transition period...

I am certain that after more than a decade of subsequent consolidation and revival of the Russian economy, under the leadership of Vladimir Putin and Dmitry Medvedev, our defence cooperation has been further strengthened. The biggest current challenges to this relationship are to impart it with greater and more balanced economic content, and the modernisation of the Russian defence industry to sustain defence cooperation in a longer term perspective. We have a big stake in the success of Russia coping with these challenges, since our dependence on Russia for defence supplies is greater than on the rest of the world combined. It is in fact greater than the dependence of most NATO countries on the US. Russia, the US and our other partners will have to demonstrate their competitiveness through a substantially increased serviceability of their systems in current use by us and for new procurements.

Let me now turn to our defence cooperation with the US...

A high-profile manifestation of service-to-service cooperation was that of the navies of India, the US, Japan and Australia after the tsunami in 2004. The then secretary of state, Colin Powell, had turned down former UN Secretary General Kofi Annan’s pleas for including China in these operations in the Indian Ocean. There have been around 50 joint exercises between the armed forces of India and the US so far, which have been of mutual benefit, and led to greater recognition of the high professional standards of our armed forces.

By far the most important agreement governing our cooperation is the India-US New Framework in Defence Cooperation signed at the defence ministerial level in Washington DC in June 2005, after the NSSP, and just prior to the historic civil nuclear initiative. This agreement was a significant manifestation of the strategic dimension of India-US relations.

The US, which has been used to dealing with either allies or adversaries, is currently in the process of learning to deal with a partner with shared values and intersecting interests, but assertive of its autonomy as a vibrant democracy. The process of understanding and undertaking mutually acceptable adjustments aimed at addressing systemic differences between India and the US will have to be done quickly, and not over several years as in the case of our cooperation with the Soviet Union.

Increasing public awareness in India of the evolution of India-US relations, and the extraordinary extent of US support of our national security concerns in our region and beyond, should help in balancing our deep-rooted perceptions of the unreliability of the US as a defence partner. We could also explore ways of reducing dependence and promoting inter-dependence and mutual stake-holding in defence collaboration with all our partners. Pending issues for creating a better atmosphere and enhancing comfort levels for cooperation should also be addressed...

Our approach to all these issues and responses to pending proposals reflect not just our perceptions of the US, Russia or any other country. They relate primarily on how we perceive ourselves; the extent to which we have shed our colonial-era sense of insecurity and fear of being dominated and exploited. It is high time that we stopped the charade of making a virtue of procrastination and lack of decisiveness. We need less ideological posturing and more open debate on whether our own interests are best served by remaining outside global regimes or by joining the global mainstream. We need to ask ourselves whether we should remain fence-sitters or prepare to take our place at the global high table. :mrgreen:

Excerpted from a speech at the Institute for Defence Studies and Analyses, New Delhi, on April 1. Sen is a former ambassador to Russia and the US.



Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Indian Interests
PostPosted: 07 Apr 2011 18:24 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 13 Dec 2009 12:28
Posts: 2061
Location: Bruneau Jarbridge
ramana wrote:

I get the feeling that we are seeing the last stand of the Secualar brigade.


They will try and merge into the background, people like Medha Patkar joining Anna Hazare's movement should be seen in light of this. I wouldnt be surprised even if Ms Roy finds acceptance in the Lokpal committee due to her literary credentials! The calls to "the greater good and "eradication of corruption" will give the WKK's a convenient outlet to merge back into the background.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Indian Interests
PostPosted: 07 Apr 2011 19:06 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 10 Aug 2006 21:11
Posts: 13876
Location: Hindu Enclave, Narrow-Mind Street
Quote:
Two assumptions are central to the claim. First, the socially handy theory that Muslims worldwide constitute a single community transcending national identities which enables “local peasants and fishermen who converted to Islam” (the words of another Bangladeshi Adhikari quotes) to upgrade themselves and claim fictitious ancestors of culture if not blood. Nirad C Chaudhuri speaks of a Mymensingh peasant lad saying dates, which he had never seen, were his favourite fruit! Second, that Muslims (like Sangh Parivar diehards) regard India as a Hindu — not multi-religious— country
.

There is nothing great about a Hindu or RSS thinking India to be a Hindu country. What WKKs cannot come to terms with is Muslims calling India "Hindustan" :P

Hindus and muslims are clear about what they are and what they want and what the other side wants. It is these liberals and WKKS who are confused and confuse others.

Quote:
unless one goes the whole way with the Sangh Parivar to insist that Muslims are also Hindus, like all citizens of Hindustan


One has to go all the way, sooner the better.

Quote:
Britain demonstrates that the separation of state and religion is not the sine qua non of secularism. Though the Head of State is also Supreme Governor of the Church of England, British society is by and large secular because the people are educated and reasonably well-off.


The comment that created the off-topic thread :)


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Indian Interests
PostPosted: 08 Apr 2011 06:36 
Offline
Forum Moderator

Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Posts: 36513
Chinese are coming


Quote:
The Chinese are coming!

By Lt Gen JFR Jacob

Issue: Net Edition | Date: 06 April, 2011

The Dragon has emerged from its lair with a vengeance.

A senior Indian army officer was denied an official Chinese visa on the grounds that he was commanding in Jammu and Kashmir, a disputed territory according to the Chinese.

The Chinese occupy considerable amount of territory in Ladakh, which they captured in 1962. They are now slowly making inroads into the Indus Valley and other areas. In 1963, Pakistan had illegally ceded some 5,000 square km (2000 sq miles) in the area of the Karakoram to China.

Pakistan is now reported to have handed over control of the major part of the northern territories to China. Media reports indicate that there are some 10,000 Chinese soldiers based in Gilgit on the pretext of protecting the widening work on the Karakoram Highway and the construction of a railway line to link east Tibet with the Pakistani port of Gwadar in the Gulf of Oman.

The Russians in the 19th and 20th centuries dreamt of a getting warm water port on the Arabian Sea. The Chinese seem well on the way to fulfilling this Russian dream.

In a further move to encircle India by sea, the Chinese are establishing naval and air bases on Myanmar’s Ramree Island in the Bay of Bengal. (Incidentally, I took part in the amphibious assault on Ramree Island during World War II). These bases on Ramree Island will help the Chinese in their endeavors to control the upper Bay of Bengal and pose a threat to Kolkata, Vishakapatnam and the Andamans.

The presence of Chinese troops in Gilgit is a matter of great concern. During the Kargil conflict, the five battalions of the intruding paramilitary Northern Rifles were maintained from Gilgit and thence from Skardu. There is a good road from Gilgit to Skardu. In pre-Partition days, road communications to Gilgit were along the Kargil-Skardu-Gilgit route. This section can easily be restored in a short period of time.

The reported presence of Chinese troops in Gilgit poses a serious threat to Indian road communications to Ladakh running through Kargil.

Another matter of concern is the increased Chinese interest in the Indus Valley. The easiest approach to Leh is along this valley. The Chinese have not only shown interest in the Indus Valley but also the Karakoram Pass between India and China.

Any Chinese move through the Karakoram Pass will threaten our troops in Siachen and our base at Thoise. In the contingency of any future conflict with the Chinese, new areas of conflict in Ladakh will open up. I served in Ladakh for two years immediately after the Chinese invasion of 1962, and it also fell under my purview subsequently as Chief of Staff and Army Commander covering the northeast. During this period there were many incursions and incidents.

Keeping these factors in mind, there is an urgent requirement for another division and supporting armour to be raised for the defence of Ladakh and two more for the north east.

In the northeast, the Chinese may, after negotiations, reduce their claims from the whole of Arunachal to the Tawang tract and Walong.

Major Bob Kathing and his Assam Rifles platoon only moved to take control of Tawang in the spring of 1951
. The Chinese had placed a pillar in Walong in the 1870s. They have built up the road, rail and air infrastructure in Tibet. It is assessed that the Chinese can now induct some 30 divisions there in a matter of weeks.

We are committed to ensure the defence of Bhutan. We need at least two divisions plus for the defence of Bhutan. In West Bhutan, the Chinese have moved upto the Torsa Nulla. From there it is not far to Siliguri via Jaldakha. This remains the most serious potential threat to the Siliguri corridor.

The Chinese have developed the infrastructure in Tibet to enable them to mount operations all along the border. We are still in the process of upgrading our infrastructure in the north east. It will take many more years before the infrastructure in the north east is upgraded to what is required. Thus we need to raise two more divisions and an armoured brigade for the north east.

There is an urgent requirement for more artillery, firepower and mobility. More helicopters are also needed to ensure mobility. Mobility is a key factor in military operations. Mobility is necessary to obtain flexibility as also the ability to react in fluid operations. In order to ensure the means to react, we need reserves. These reserves have yet to be created.

The Air Force needs to deploy more squadrons in that region, since, unlike 1962, the Air Force will play a decisive role in any future operations.

The Chinese are also said to be re-establishing their earlier links with the Naga insurgents.

In 1974/75, I was in charge of operations that intercepted two Naga gangs going to China to collect weapons and money. The Nagas were then compelled to sign the Shillong Accord, and Chinese support for the Naga insurgents was put on the backburner. Twelve years of peace followed. But now, the Chinese, in collusion with the Pakistani ISI, are said to be in the process of re-activating their support of the Naga insurgents as part of an overall scheme to destabilize the north east.

The increasing military collaboration between China and Pakistan is of growing concern, but we seem woefully unprepared for this contingency.

The government urgently needs to expedite the induction of land, air and naval weapons systems and to build up the required reserves of ammunition and spares. In any future conflict, logistics will be of paramount importance.

During the 1971 war, it took me some six months to build up the infrastructure for the operations in East Pakistan. The requirements now are far, far greater. Modern weapons systems take a long time to induct and absorb. The induction of new weapons systems and build up of logistical backing should be initiated on an emergency footing.

At the moment, we seem to have insufficient resources to meet this contingency.

We are critically short of modern weapons systems and weaponry. No new 155mm guns have been inducted for some two decades.

During the limited Kargil conflict, we ran out of 155mm ammunition for the Bofors field guns. Fortunately for us, the Israelis flew out the required ammunition.

New aircraft for our Air Force are yet to be inducted. The navy is short of vital weapons systems. These shortages need to be addressed at the earliest.

There is no Soviet Union with its Treaty of Friendship to help us now [in 1971, the Soviets moved 40 divisions to the Xinjiang and seven to the Manchurian borders to deter the Chinese. We have to rely on our own resources. We must show that we have the will and wherewithal to meet the emerging contingencies.

It is high time the government reappraises the emerging situation and puts in place the measures required to meet the developments, before it is too late.

Responses

Posted on: April 6, 2011 at 08:31 AM
Posted by: Amol Hari Joshi

The Chinese are doing what they always did - military and demographic expansion. Why aren’t Indians doing what they did in the past ? Now the Indians did beat the Huns/ Kushans/ Shak out of their territory, right ? Add to that the British and the Portuguese in recent times. So what stops them today ? Sino threat is not as big as it seems nor does the Pak threat appear to be as sinister with its N-arsenal - YET. What of tomorrow ? Take lessons from the past. Mohamads - both Ghauri and Gazani were defeated several times and yet the Rajput largese towards them stopped Indians from achieving any conclusive victory. Marathas resorted to similar grandiose with Abdali and eventually faced their nemesis in Panipat defeat. Will the Indians ever learn ?


Posted on: April 6, 2011 at 03:28 AM
Posted by: Col. U.S. Rathore

A new strategic equation is emerging in the sub-continent. Pakistan is well aware about waning American influence and rise of China. Chinese are creeping forward on our western, northern and eastern borders. Their ultimate aim is to pose a simultaneous threat to Kashmir and Arunachal Pradesh. Conventional military thinking and organisation will not help. We need to be proactive and more innovative. Chinese moves needs to be countered now. Very soon we will hear about their presence in Nepal, Bangladesh and Myanmar in the guise of infrastructure building.

© Copyright 2010 Indian Defence Review

also the following.....

http://www.hindustantimes.com/MEA-seeks ... 82171.aspx
MEA seeks report on China presence along LoC

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/indi ... ?prtpage=1
Chinese along LoC? Top general sounds warning


A few notes. Lots of good info on past history which was hidden so far.

- Recall the up-gradation of Eastern Naval Commander to Vice Admiral and the opening of new naval bases outposts in Bay of Bengal:
Paradeep and Tuticorn

- Recall NATO is already in Afghanistan
- Recall PRC is in POK.
The PRC plan seems to be to prevent India from taking advantage of any change in TSP by occupying POK and creating threats in other areas.

And the biggest recall Vajpayee speech in Urumqui (2003?)where he advised TSP to come to terms or outside powers will enter and takeover. Offcourse it applied to India too!

Well outside powers have come in an GOI in its own maya has delayed arms inductions as bogus confidence building measures to assuage terrorists in TSP and their masters in DC.

Focusing on chimera economic growth the UPA has jeopardized the Indian security posture.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Indian Interests
PostPosted: 08 Apr 2011 08:48 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 17 Feb 2011 03:27
Posts: 4574
http://www.business-standard.com/india/ ... ks/431467/

Bahrain unrest gets to Indian banks

Quote:
The escalating tensions in Bahrain following the recent unrest in West Asia and North Africa have prompted Indian banks to put on hold their expansion plans in the island nation.

Bahrain has of late emerged as a regional hub for banking because of low tax rates and easy regulations. At present, 409 banks and financial institutions have operations there.

Private lender YES Bank had sought the Reserve Bank of India’s (RBI’s) nod to open a branch in Bahrain. It has decided to withdraw the application.

“Given what has happened, we will most likely modify the application to mention some other geography. We are in the process of doing that,” said Jaideep Iyer, deputy chief financial officer and president, financial management, YES Bank.

State-owned Canara Bank has got a licence from the Central Bank of Bahrain to set up a wholesale bank branch. Senior officials say the bank has decided to delay its entry into Bahrain.

“We are watching the situation,” said S Raman, chairman and managing director, Canara Bank, declining to say anything more.

India’s largest lender, State Bank of India (SBI), had relocated some employees from the Bahrain branch after the crisis broke out. The bank says they will be moved back as the situation there appears to be improving.

A senior SBI official said the bank had moved out a part of its international assets from the Bahrain branch’s books. The bank was not routing fresh non-Bahrain business through that branch, he said. Because of tax advantages, banks often route some of their global business through Bahrain offices. SBI has two branches — a full commercial branch and a wholesale bank branch — in Bahrain.

Why did we choose Bahrain? The predominant criteria for any geography outside India are the ease of regulation, the ease of entry and the cost. Bahrain fits the bill,” said YES Bank’s Iyer.

These benefits now seem to be overshadowed by the political instability in the region. The government in Bahrain declared an emergency in March after protests from Shiites.

“In a way, we are lucky not to have looked at Bahrain. We are planning to have a branch in Dubai,” said a top official of Union Bank of India. The government-owned lender has an office in Dubai and now plans to open a branch. He requested anonymity as the bank is yet to get RBI’s approval for its Dubai branch.

YES Bank said it was considering Dubai and Hong Kong for opening an overseas branch.

“Dubai International Financial Centre (DIFC) is one option. We are also evaluating options in East Asia. I think Hong Kong could be an option,” said Yes Bank’s Iyer.

“The good thing about HKMA (Hong Kong Monetary Authority) is it is reasonably proactive. The tax rates are also moderate. Hong Kong is also probably a better geography than DIFC for the brand,” he said.



what is the experts say on this?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Indian Interests
PostPosted: 08 Apr 2011 08:51 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 09 Feb 1999 12:31
Posts: 12919
That region is high risk now. Plz post in other thread and not this


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Indian Interests
PostPosted: 08 Apr 2011 08:54 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 17 Feb 2011 03:27
Posts: 4574
it seemed to me that Indian banks investing in foreign countries, and the subsequent protection of that investment constituted an "Indian interest." but admins can move if it's not relevant here.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Indian Interests
PostPosted: 12 Apr 2011 00:25 
Offline
Forum Moderator

Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Posts: 36513
X-Post...

kittoo wrote:
x-post

An amazing article, and from the unlikeliest of sources!-

http://epaper.dnaindia.com/epapermain.a ... e=04/06/11

Quote:
'Italian by birth and Catholic by baptism'

John Maclithon

I was surprised when the Congress party gave me a Padma Shri — I am the only foreign journalist to ever get it. For, in my 40 years of political reporting in India, I have always been a vocal critic of the Nehru dynasty. Someone recently even called me "a vitriolic British journalist, who in his old age chose to live back in the land he never approved".
It started with Operation Blue Star. I was one of the few western correspondents who criticised Indira. As I have said since then, the attack on the Golden Temple and the atrocities that followed produced in all Sikhs a sense of outrage that is hard today to alleviate. I believed then that the large majority of Hindu India, even if politically hostile to Indira Gandhi, openly identified with — and exulted in — her will to overwhelmingly humble a recalcitrant minority.
Indira Gandhi helped my fame grow by wanting to imprison me during the Emergency. She threw me out of India for a short while, but the result was that most of India tuned in to my radio's broadcasts, The Voice of India to hear what they thought was 'accurate' coverage of events.
When Rajiv Gandhi came to power, I believed he was sincerely trying to change the political system, but he quickly gave up when the old guard would not budge. I criticised his foolish adventure in Sri Lanka, although I felt sorry for him when he was assassinated.
It is in Kashmir, though, that I fought most viciously against Rajiv and subsequent Congress governments for their human right abuses on the Kashmiri Muslims of the Valley. I was the first one to point out then that the Indian government had at that time no proof of Pakistani involvement in the freedom movement in Kashmir. Thus, I always made it a point to start my broadcasts by proclaiming that "the Indian government accuses Pakistan of fostering terrorism", or that "elections are being held in Indian-controlled Kashmir…"
Other foreign journalists used the same parlance to cover Kashmir and they always spoke of the plight of the Muslims, never of the 4,00,000 Hindus, who after all were chased out of their ancestral land by sheer terror (I also kept mum about it).
As for Sonia Gandhi, I did not mind her, when she was Rajiv Gandhi's wife, but after his death, I watched with dismay as she started stamping her authority on the Congress, which made me say in a series of broadcasts on the Nehru dynasty: "It's sad that the Indian National Congress should be completely dependent on one family; the total surrender of a national party to one person is deplorable. You have to ask the question: what claims does Sonia Gandhi have to justify her candidature for prime ministership? Running a country is far more complicated than running a company. Apprenticeship is required in any profession - more so in politics". I heard that Sonia Gandhi was unhappy about this broadcast.
After then president Abdul Kalam told her that she had kept both her Italian and Indian passports for a long time, and which disqualified her from becoming the prime minister of India, she nevertheless became the supreme leader of India behind the scenes. It is then that I exclaimed: "The moribund and leaderless Congress party has latched on to Sonia Gandhi, who is Italian by birth and Roman Catholic by baptism." She never forgave me for that.
Today, I can say without the shadow of a doubt, that when history will be written, the period over which she presided, both over the Congress and India, will be seen as an era of darkness, of immense corruption, and of a democracy verging towards autocracy, if not disguised dictatorship, in the hands of a single person, a non-Indian and a Christian like me. Truth will also come out about her being the main recipient for kickbacks from Bofors to 2G, which she uses to buy votes, as the WikiLeaks have just shown.
Finally, I am sometimes flabbergasted at the fact that Indians -Hindus, sorry, as most of this country's intelligentsia is Hindu - seem to love me so much, considering that in my heydays, I considerably ran down the 850 million Hindus of this country, one billion worldwide.
I have repented today: I do profoundly believe that India needs to be able to say with pride, "Yes, our civilisation has a Hindu base to it." The genius of Hinduism, the very reason it has survived so long, is that it does not stand up and fight. It changes and adapts and modernises and absorbs - that is the scientific and proper way of going about it. I believe that Hinduism may actually prove to be the religion of this millennium, because it can adapt itself to change.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Indian Interests
PostPosted: 12 Apr 2011 02:48 
Offline
Forum Moderator

Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Posts: 3516
If you liked that one, you'll love this one...surprised that no one has posted this before.

http://dir.groups.yahoo.com/group/india ... sage/39679

An Empress of India in New Clothes by John MacLithon12 Nov 2010 12:54:07 AM IST

Like Sonia Gandhi, I am a Westerner and a brought-up Christian. Like Sonia Gandhi, I have lived in India many years and I have adopted this country as my own.

But the comparison ends there. I did land in India with a certain amount of prejudices, clichés and false ideas, and I did think in the enthusiasm of my youth to become a missionary to bring back Indian ‘pagans’ to the ‘true god’. But the moment I stepped in India I felt that there was nothing much that I could give to India, rather it was India which was bestowing me. In fact in all my years here India has given me so much — professionally, spiritually, sentimentally. Most Westerners, who come here, still think they are here to ‘give’ something to a country, which, unconsciously of course, they think is lesser than theirs. It was true of the British, it was true of Mother Teresa, it is true of Sonia Gandhi.

It is a fact that Sonia brought discipline, order and cohesion into the Indian National Congress. But the amount of power that she, a person of foreign origin, an elected MP like hundreds of others, possesses should frighten her. All the television channels report without a blink that Maharashtra CM rushes to Delhi to meet Sonia Gandhi to plead for his life. But should not Chavan have gone to the Prime Minister first?

The CBI blatantly and shamelessly quashed all injunctions against Ottavio Quattrocchi and even allowed him to get away with billions of rupees which he had stolen from India. Yet, without batting an eyelid, and with the Indian media turning a blind eye, it goes ruthlessly after the chief minister of the most efficiently run state, the most corruption free. Today the Congress, with Sonia’s overt or silent consent, pays crores of rupees to buy MPs to topple non-Congress governments. Her governors shamelessly hijack democracy by twisting the law.

Are Indians aware that their country has entered a state of semi-autocracy where every important decision comes from a single individual residing in her fortress of 10 Janpath, surrounded by dozens of security men, an Empress of India? Do they know that the huge amounts of the scams, whether the 2G, the CWG, or the Adarsh housing society scam, do not go into politicians’ pockets (only a fraction), but to the coffers of the Congress for the next general elections, and more than anything to please Sonia Gandhi? Nobody seems to notice what is happening under the reign of Sonia Gandhi.

That an Arundhati Roy is allowed to preach secession in India, whereas on the other hand the Congress government has been going after the army, the last body in India to uphold the time-honoured values of the Kshatriya — courage, honour, devotion to the Motherland. They alone today practise true secularism, never differentiating between a Muslim or Hindu soldier and who for a pittance daily give their lives to their country. First it was the attempt of a caste census, a divide-and-rule ploy if there is one; then there are the first signs that the government is thinking about thinning down the presence of the Indian army in the Kashmir valley, which will suit Pakistan perfectly. And now there is the Adarsh housing society scam in which the army officers, at the worst, were innocently dragged into it. We know now that it was the politicians of the Congress who benefited the most out of it.

It would be impossible in France, for example, to have a non-Christian tell a Hindu (who is a non-elected President or PM) to be the absolute ruler of the country behind the scenes, superseding even the PM. There are many capable people in the Congress. Why can’t a billion Indians find one of their own, who will understand the complexity and subtlety of India, to govern themselves? Not only that, but her very presence at the top has unleashed forces, visible and invisible that are detrimental to the country. There is nothing wrong in espousing the best of the values of the West — democracy, technological perfection, higher standards of living — but many of the institutions are crumbling in the West: two out of three marriages end in divorce, kids shoot each other, parents are not cared for in their old age, depression is rampant and Westerners are actually looking for answers elsewhere, in India notably.

One does not understand this craze to Westernise India at all costs, while discarding its ancient values. Sonia Gandhi should do well to remember that there still are 850 million Hindus in India, a billion worldwide and that whatever good inputs were brought by different invasions, it is the ancient values of spirituality behind Hinduism which have made India so special and which gives it today unique qualities making an Indian Christian different from an American Christian, or an Indian Muslim different from a Saudi Muslim.

It is an insult to these tolerant Hindus to show United States President Barack Obama as his first input of the Indian capital the tomb of Humayun, a man who slaughtered Hindus in thousands, taking Hindu women and children as captives. He even subjected his elder brother Kamran to brutal torture, gouging his eyes out and pouring lemon into them!

The tragedy of India is that it was colonised for too long. And unlike China, it always looks to the West for a solution to its problems. Sonia Gandhi, whatever her qualities, is just an incarnation of that hangover, an Empress of India in new clothes.

__________________

Disclaimer: I'm personally suspicious of all non-Indian writers who write prescriptive articles - whether they are appealing to us or not. More often than not, they often end up telling us what we are doing wrong, and how we can make it right. It appears they are under the impression that we cannot come to these conclusions ourselves. The white man's burden has undoubtedly become lighter, and they carry it warily, but it remains...


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Indian Interests
PostPosted: 12 Apr 2011 07:38 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 17 Feb 2011 03:27
Posts: 4574
Quote:
There is nothing wrong in espousing the best of the values of the West — democracy, technological perfection, higher standards of living — but many of the institutions are crumbling in the West: two out of three marriages end in divorce, kids shoot each other, parents are not cared for in their old age, depression is rampant and Westerners are actually looking for answers elsewhere, in India notably.

One does not understand this craze to Westernise India at all costs, while discarding its ancient values.


this man deserves to be honored, if in fact, he truly feels this way and is not some clever front man (i refuse to let go of my paranoia).
question to be asked: who is this guy really? he's publishing under an alias. why not do it in the open. his credibility and service to the nation will increase multifold.

as such, i will give him the benefit of the doubt, unless i find evidence that says otherwise.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Indian Interests
PostPosted: 12 Apr 2011 09:54 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 16 Oct 2005 05:51
Posts: 2277
It started with Operation Blue Star. I was one of the few western correspondents who criticised Indira. As I have said since then, the attack on the Golden Temple and the atrocities that followed produced in all Sikhs a sense of outrage that is hard today to alleviate. I believed then that the large majority of Hindu India, even if politically hostile to Indira Gandhi, openly identified with — and exulted in — her will to overwhelmingly humble a recalcitrant minority.



I guess we ought to defer to bura sahib on this but I have never heard a Hindoo exult in any such thing nor have they expressed satisfaction at humbling anyone. Perhaps I hang out with unHindus.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Indian Interests
PostPosted: 13 Apr 2011 19:57 
Offline
Forum Moderator

Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Posts: 36513
X-post...
Ashok Mehta writes in Pioneer. Time for introspection.

India needs to review forces

Quote:

India needs to review forces

April 13, 2011 8:26:08 PM

Ashok K Mehta

Blindly acquiring military hardware is not going to help as the nature of threat has changed radically. A Strategic Defence and Security Review would help.

Done last year, Britain’s first comprehensive Strategic Defence and Security Review since 1998 is far-reaching. It is bold, honest and innovative, entailing analytical risks to extricate the armed forces from the Cold War mindset to face the new ground realities, including cuts amounting to 38 billion pounds over 10 years. It informs of the limits of British power — of what it can do alone and in partnership with allies. Pax Britannica no longer rules the waves. It is high time India carried out a similar full-scale review involving all departments of Government to produce both a macro and micro picture of the security situation.

Paraphrased, Britain’s national security strategy which flows from its Strategic Defence and Security Review has put the protection of people, territory and ways of life from major risk uppermost, followed by shaping a stable environment to reduce threats to national interest at home and abroad by tackling potential risks at source.

The high priority risks identified for the next five years are terrorism, including the use of chemical, biological, radiological and nuclear weapons; cyber attacks by other states; major accidents or related hazards; and, international military crises like the one in Libya. Britain has renewed its commitment to success in Afghanistan with a condition-based withdrawal commencing in 2015.

The most striking feature of the Strategic Defence and Security Review is the admission that Britain will no longer be able to undertake combat missions on the scale of Iraq and/or Afghanistan. Against the 45,000 troops deployed in Iraq in 2003, it will now be able to field only up to 30,000 troops for limited periods and with sufficient notice. For protracted operations over several years, the maximum deployable force will be 6,500 as against 10,000 currently committed in Afghanistan. These are significant shrinkages in combat capability, forcing joint or collective defence.

The shift from high-end conflict to low-intensity operations is removing the Cold War mentality of tank-on-tank battles with heavy artillery in the Fulda gap to counter terrorism in Afghanistan.

The strategic parameters are also changing. Although the Trident submarine fleet will remain till 2016 (when its retention will be reviewed) to maintain an independent nuclear deterrent, a joint nuclear capability with France is being considered. The strategic dialogue with France extends to creating joint and integrated defence capabilities like combined joint expeditionary force, maritime task force, joint military doctrine, joint acquisition of military equipment, etc.

The decision to retain one of the two new aircraft carriers with option to field the second has been made in recognition of the salience of stand-off air power. The existing Harrier fleet has been retired as no aircraft carrier will be operational till 2016. Even then the carrier-based version of the joint strike fighter will become available only in 2020. While British forces will remain deployed in Afghanistan till 2016 at the very least, in the interregnum, compatible allied aircraft could take the deck of the British aircraft carrier. These are big calculated risks which the Government of Britain is preparing to take.

By 2015 the Army is to be reduced by 7,000 to 95,000 troops with cuts in tanks and artillery. Manpower reduction will be compensated by Special Forces and Territorial Army who are doing exceptional work in Afghanistan. Similarly the Royal Navy will be down by 5,000 to 30,000 sailors, main losses being in the frigate fleet and Nimrod maritime patrol aircraft. The RAF will be downsized by 5,000 personnel to 33,000 and many aircraft will be retired. The Government has come to the conclusion that future air wars are unlikely and the RAF will have its fast jet fleet based on two advanced aircraft: Typhoon and Tornado.

Britain’s Future Force 2020 will have two aircraft carrier, five multi-role brigades and an adequate Air Force backed by a minimum effective nuclear deterrence. The non-military pillars of security address conflict prevention through building stability overseas, counter-terrorism and counter radicalisation, creation of a cyber crime strategy, a national crime agency, a maritime information centre and a special security policy. Long-term cooperation with France is the cornerstone of bridging the capability gap while maintaining its role in the European Union and allied security architectures like Nato.

Viewed strictly from the military prism and set against the future character of conflict, the Strategic Defence and Security Review has initiated a total transformation of the armed forces. The emphasis is on precision fire rather than suppression and to combat specific challenges like improvised explosive devices in Afghanistan. The Strategic Defence and Security Review virtually rules out conventional war. including air battles. It believes in partnership of shared capabilities, including a minimum effective nuclear deterrent. Transformation entails risks of capability voids which are to be filled by allies.

The Strategic Defence and Security Review’s impact on Britain’s defence industry is significant. It earns 15 billion pounds annually and employs 355,000 people. Already 7,000 jobs have been lost through suspension and cancellation of programmes, including a 14-billion-pound centralised training academy in Wales.

Accompanying transformation will be the turbulence among combatants made redundant like pilots from Harrier and Nimrod fleets and foot soldiers returning from Afghanistan in a severely recession-hit British economy. Retooling its military has had other consequences. Besides rebasing of 20,000 troops from Germany, a task force set up to scout for forgotten imperial outposts across the world on the payroll of Britain’s Ministry of Defence has traced 20,000 British citizens in locations as exotic as yacht clubs in the US.

Britain ordered its first major strategic reconfiguration in the 1960s in what was called the East of Suez drawdown and political vacuum. The current Strategic Defence and Security Review cuts the cloth according to Britain’s size and stature as a middle level power.

India should draw lessons, the most obvious being ordering a whole Government review of existing capabilities, threats and opportunities and future forces to cope with the challenges. The Indian Army is engaged in an ad hoc transformation which is ‘uplinked’ with the other two services. The Indian Air Force and Navy’s numbers of aircraft and ships have gone haywire as their long-term re-equipment plans never materialised due to bad planning and funding support. Consequently India is already the world’s biggest importer of weapons and will spend $ 100 billion in the next decade.

Britain has cut costs and capability through a defined review mechanism. India is to boost military capabilities which must derive from getting the character of future conflict right without dissipating resources on the fashionable ‘full spectrum of war’. Identifying critical missions and affordable risks must come from political foresight, good generalship and deft diplomacy. We must not duck the review at any rate.


It might be useful to have an informed citizen's review as parallel exercise.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 13 Apr 2011 21:49 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 01 Mar 2010 22:42
Posts: 3995
Location: Frontier India : Nemo me impune lacessit
Very uninformed. It takes a leaf out of a book called "Arming without Aiming." But, that is not true. Tell me which weapon system we are buying that is "not overdue"? We even don't have fighter aircrafts, submarines, guns etc which is "a replenishment." Just that we are producing lil quantity extra missiles and under water launch capability. Why so much fuss?

Once upon a time it was DRDO, now the geniuses have taken up "strategic thinking" as the next punch bag.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 13 Apr 2011 22:46 
Offline
Forum Moderator

Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Posts: 36513
CJ, Ashok Mehta is a retired IA officer and is very serios in his owrks. He is asking for a strat review now. I thought there was one done in early 2000 after Kargil after a very long time. In US they have one every four years. Maybe once decade would be good idea for India to review the plans for things are changing.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Indian Interests
PostPosted: 14 Apr 2011 00:14 
Offline
Forum Moderator

Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Posts: 36513
X-posted...

LINK


Quote:
India 5th most powerful nation, says govt index

Sachin Parashar, TNN | Apr 13, 2011, 01.35am IST


NEW DELHI: India is the fifth most powerful country in the world, says the latest national security index (NSI) designed by the country's foremost security and economic experts. A part of India's National Security Annual Review 2010, which will be officially released by foreign minister SM Krishna on April 19, the NSI 2010 placed India fifth in the hierarchy of top 50 nations identified on the basis of their GDP.

According to Foundation for National Security Research director Satish Kumar, who edited the national security review, the NSI is based on an assessment of defence capability, economic strength, effective population, technological capability and energy security of the top 50 countries. The US is at the top of the list on the basis of these criteria followed by China, Japan and Russia.

South Korea emerged as the sixth most powerful nation followed by Norway, :( Germany, France and UK.

While India ranked third in the case of population and fourth in terms of defence capabilities, it was at the 34th position in technology and 33rd in energy security. Only US, China and Russia are ranked higher than India in defence capability. In economic strength, India ranked seventh.

Out of the five criteria, maximum weightage was given to defence capabilities at 30%. Economic strength, technology and effective population had weightage of 20% each. Energy security had the remaining 10%. The national security annual review governing body, which comprises a host of experts, is headed by former foreign secretary M K Rasgotra.

On the likelihood of people raising eyebrows over India's extremely high rank, the NSI report said the strategic community in India will still take time to get used to India being such a powerful country. "Of course, the variable that helps India most is the size of its skilled working population. But that variable helps China to a great deal,'' it said.

China ranked first in the assessment of effective population which was calculated on the basis of three variables -- size of population between 15 and 64, size of population educated up to secondary level and above and human development index based on UNDP reports. The US is at the second position in effective population category. :?:

Norway's high position was attributed to its number one position in the field of energy security. :?: The NSI said some of the most powerful countries in the world were not necessarily energy self-reliant. The weight given to various indicators in arriving at the above conclusions was based on judgment. According to the annual security review, a group of experts went over the indicators and their opinions were collated to arrive at the relative weightage given to indicators.



If this thing is going on annually why did Ashok Mehta ask for a new strategic review?

Also I understand the methodolgy they used weighting factors for key indicators but to rank Norway ahead of Germany, France and UK shows the process has some shortcomings.

Ususally when you do ranking one has to look at the results and see if they make sense. And what are the consequences of the rankings? How can energy security with a weighting factor of 10% triumph over the other factors.
Something is odd.

And Norway has been a haven for TSP terrorists!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Indian Interests
PostPosted: 14 Apr 2011 00:21 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 09 Feb 1999 12:31
Posts: 12919
ramana wrote:
X-posted...


If this thing is going on annually why did Ashok Mehta ask for a new strategic review?

Also I understand the methodolgy they used weighting factors for key indicators but to rank Norway ahead of Germany, France and UK shows the process has some shortcomings.

Ususally when you do ranking one has to look at the results and see if they make sense. And what are the consequences of the rankings? How can energy security with a weighting factor of 10% triumph over the other factors.
Something is odd.

And Norway has been a haven for TSP terrorists!

What is missing is the geo political aspect of the nation. Some nation being in the location/region has inherent advantage.

India is near Middle east and CAS - region to the largest oil/gas resource in the world. But has the least access to them. This should tell how geo political advantage of Indian location has been turned upside down by the British colonial system with regional issue.

China has advanatge since it is largest in the pacific north east. But has problem to access the oil regions. It may change in the future is a large reserve is found near shore.

Unstable region also make the power less affective.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Indian Interests
PostPosted: 14 Apr 2011 00:54 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 10 Aug 2006 21:11
Posts: 13876
Location: Hindu Enclave, Narrow-Mind Street
Quote:
China ranked first in the assessment of effective population which was calculated on the basis of three variables -- size of population between 15 and 64, size of population educated up to secondary level and above and human development index based on UNDP reports. The US is at the second position in effective population category


Ramanaji,

calculated on the basis of three variables -- INDIA...... CHINA.... US (Approximations)
size of population between 15 and 64, ------ M398,757,331/F372,719,379----- M505,326,577/F477,953,883 ----- M104,411,352/F104,808,064
size of population educated up to secondary level --- 50%? ---- 60-70%? --- 80%?? (guestimate - too lazy to google)
above and human development index based on UNDP reports ----- 0.519 ------- 0.663 --------- 0.902


Acharyaji,

Bingo!!! Remember the maps I used to post??? My weightage criteria included fresh-water resources (more important to India and China), HDI, Access to resource centers, etc., historical starting point is also important (imagine China going thru the Islamic invasions followed by complete colonization like India did)


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Indian Interests
PostPosted: 14 Apr 2011 04:21 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 17 Feb 2011 03:27
Posts: 4574
PRC finding oil near its shore will be a good development. of course, you never know. the extra money will make CPC even bolder. but objectively speaking, it should alleviate some of their fears of oil blockade, etc. this should, objectively speaking, make them less inclined to commit to imperial designs in IOR. but never know with CPC. on the other hand, find oil off shore will dramatically increase PRC posture in the Pacific, which will be major headache for Uncle and therefore Uncle will be more likely to create harakiri or a Japan redux, just to play the savior.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 14 Apr 2011 08:11 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 01 Mar 2010 22:42
Posts: 3995
Location: Frontier India : Nemo me impune lacessit
We actually have a CT and an armed forces vision. UK Defence forces are increasingly getting engaged with CT. They do not have a credible threat. They can use their idle force in CT. For USA, its army (moral part you can discuss seperately) is on war on foreign terrain. So use of armed forces is justified.

In India, we have two parallel threats. One is terrorism, for which MHA is evolving a CT force. The second threat is on our borders. Indian Army has limited CT deployment as well as the main threat. IN has piracy duties and it does the same as Army, partial deployment for CP. This has been done with SDR's. Who says we don't have SDR?

Our fundamental problem is that our "basic minimum" equipment required are not met yet. Equipment is ageing. Unlike Britain, we do not have even the basic equipments and if there, not in required numbers. For example, Britain is trying to choose from how many carriers it needs to have. In India, we are struggling to replace our carrier and get another which is below the required capacity. Ideally, we need 3, one on patrol, one in repairs and one is readiness. I would have agreed if we had 4 carriers and we should relook.

Where are we arming? We are just replacing older systems with newer ones, trying to build up basic numbers. We do not have a credible deterent against the potential aggresor in the north. They can hit any part of our territory and we cannot. In west, we have a rabid threat and if the state collapses, we will have free flow of friendly jehadis eager to make India another Pakistan.

India already has reviews. We (as Rammana said) did it in 2000. A SDR should be good for atleast 50 years. Navy and IAF have decided how they want to go. The numbers, the quality etc. They are very clear. The aerospace command, the use of space etc. Successive Chiefs have been clear that they are evolving on basis of threat perception. Indian Army is bit different. being in the thick of CT, they need regular reviews on evolving threat. Then they have other parts like armour and artillery. They seem to be reequiping based on a already set down guideline.

Then we have strategic forces. it is nacent and is working toward a laid out plan. It still need to be in its full potential.

I fail to see his point of view. Some folks don't like it, but, I will say this again. Our Fauji officers have still not got over the british Raj hangover. If britain does it, then India should also do it (even after we have already done it). Other day, his counterpart who clogs a think tank system came up "oh we don't have enough budget and hence no equipment (after returning money fro over a decade)." Then another genious came up with we don't have equipment. I am totally confused with these folks.

Strategic review is welcome, no one can disagree. But, doing it every day is a problem.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 6163 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39 ... 155  Next

All times are UTC + 5:30 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: AshimSharma, MSNbot Media and 28 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group