Indian Interests

Jamal K. Malik · Post by **Jamal K. Malik** » 05 Jul 2009 23:28

Jamal K. Malik · Post by **Jamal K. Malik** » 05 Jul 2009 23:34

Paul · Post by **Paul** » 06 Jul 2009 04:29

Wrt to Indian interests in the Iran vs. sunni anglo saxon combine streetfight.

I believe if iran plays the role that Germany played in WWI and WWII viz. weaken the hold of the British empire then Indian interests are well served. We need to remember that Hitler did not actually want to weaken the british empire and actually wanted to advance at the expense of the Bolsheviks....thanks to the warmonger Churchill, he did not play along and India became a free nation a few years later.

Now it is time to undo the most deleterious legacy of the british rule, partition of the subcontinent. Iran can help us here.

Iran will do well to bring down at least one of the three pegs on which western dominance of the mid east rests (Jordan, Turkey, SA/GCC) this will weaken western influence over the mid east and give India room to advance it's influence on the region between the Indus and Amu Darya.

More on this later.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 07 Jul 2009 03:30

Frontline Interview with Thomas Trautmann on Kinship and Language

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 08 Jul 2009 05:24

http://pmindia.nic.in/pressrel.htm

PM’s vision of how the world is governed in the 21st century

July 7, 2009
New Delhi

Italy as President of the G-8 has brought out a compendium on contemporaray global issues with contributions from world leaders on the occassion of the G-8 summit. Prime Minister Dr. Manmohan Singh is among the leaders whose views form part of the compendium. The PM's vision in the compendium are as follows:

The Vision of Emerging Powers – India

Manmohan Singh

Prime Minister of India

As we near the end of the first decade of the 21st century, the challenges of global governance in an increasingly inter-connected and multi-polar world are truly formidable. Our institutions of global governance, centred on what may be called the UN system, were designed for the most part at the end of the Second World War and reflected the politico-economic realities of that age. The world was then dominantly bipolar, in the political and military sense, international trade and international capital flows were low, the developing countries were not economically important, indeed most of them were not even independent.

There has been a sea change since then. Bipolarity has given way to multi-polarity, the developing countries are not only sovereign states but some group of developing countries have gained in relative economic importance and this trend will only gain momentum. The world has also become much more interconnected through the expansion of trade in goods and services and expansion of financial flows generated by capital account liberalisation. Interconnection has in turn greatly increased problems of contagion and vulnerability especially through financial linkages.

Our established institutions of global governance have evolved to some extent in response to these changes, but much less than they should have and the pace of evolution is likely to remain well behind the rate at which the world is changing. The centre piece of the post-war global architecture is the United Nations, conceived originally as the Parliament of the nations with the Security Council at its apex. The size of the international parliament has of course expanded and while there is occasional cynicism about how effectively the General Assembly can reflect global opinion, and especially evolve workable solutions on key issues, there is no doubt that it serves a valuable purpose in giving voice to every country.

However, this is not the same thing as saying that we have a structure which is functionally efficient and capable of dealing with the complex challenges the world faces today. The Security Council has not changed at all and its present structure poses serious problems of legitimacy. The system of two-tiered membership, which gives a veto to the five permanent members i.e. the nations that emerged victorious after the Second World War, is clearly anachronistic. Germany and Japan, which have significantly larger economies than Britain and France, both permanent members, are excluded. China is the only developing country in the P-5 and it is there for historical reasons, not as a large and economically important developing country. It is obvious that if the system was being designed today it would be very different. However, while the problems have long been recognised, efforts to reform the system have made little headway.

The unworkability of the existing structures has led to greater reliance on plurilateral groupings. Some of these such as the G-7, later expanded to the G-8, are to be seen as a group of countries with common interest, not necessarily representative of the global community. The original rationale of the G-7 was the belief that it would evolve more effective consultation among the more powerful countries on one side of the bipolar world of the 1970s and 1980s. Its expansion to the G-8 reflects the disappearance of that particular faultline by the collapse of the Soviet Union. However, while the Group includes many of the economically powerful nations, it is obviously not representative as it does not include any developing country.

Some years ago the G-8 has been expanded into the G-8 + 5 by adding China, India, Brazil, Mexico and South Africa. More recently, the group has been expanded even further to include a handful of countries in the name of achieving additional outreach. While these ad hoc expansions are a useful way of broadening the range of consultation undertaken by the G-8, it suffers from two limitations. The expanded group is not cohesive since the countries included for purposes of outreach do not participate fully in the proceedings, or the preparations, and the expanded group therefore does not have a composite identity. Second, these groupings do not have any special legitimacy within the UN System.

The deficiencies of the existing system of governance have been dramatically brought home during the recent international financial and economic crisis. The crisis has highlighted the fact that all economies are now highly inter connected and problems originating in one part of the world economy can quickly snowball into a global crisis. It has forcefully exposed fundamental weaknesses in the approach to financial regulation which emphasised light regulation and greater reliance on inhouse controls and market discipline to control risk. This approach gained popularity in the 1990s and is now perceived to have been overdone. The issue has revealed the inadequacies in the existing domestic regulatory systems in the industrialised countries and also in the international institutions set up to police these areas and to take remedial action when needed.

Whatever the causes and specific failures underlying the crisis, the world was quick to realise that a global crisis requires a global solution. It was also realised that the existing institutions of global governance did not permit effective coordination of a global response. The world therefore responded not by working within the existing system, but by convening a meeting of the G-20 at the level of leaders. The G-20 was established in 1999 at the suggestion of Paul Martin of Canada and has a composition which is somewhat different from the IMFC which meets regularly at Finance Ministers level. The G-20 has been meeting at the level of Finance Ministers since 1999. Recognising the seriousness of the crisis, the United States convened a meeting of the leaders of the Group of 20 in Washington D.C. in November 2008. The Group met again in London in April 2009. Unlike the G-8+5, this group has a composite identity since all member countries participate on equal terms including in the preparatory process. However, the selection of countries remains arbitrary and can be questioned as to its representativeness, especially since it departs from the composition of the IMFC which reflects the representation on the Board of the IMF.

The G-20 meeting in London certainly achieved a great deal more than normal meetings of this type, especially in two respects. First, it succeeded in expanding the perimeter of financial regulation and endorsing the establishment of global standards to which national standards can be aligned. These standards will be developed by the Financial Stability Forum (now renamed the Financial Stability Board) which has been expanded to include all G-20 countries that were not members earlier. Second it achieved a significant expansion in funding for the Bretton Woods Institutions. However, it did not achieve any significant reform of the international financial institutions. The Group has decided to meet again in September and it remains to be seen whether it will be able to evolve some ideas for making significant reforms by then.

The problems faced by the institutions of governance charged with handling the financial system are also relevant for other international institutions dealing with political and security issues, trade, climate change, etc. They need to update structures and upgrade work methods; reform decision-making and ensure effective delivery. They need to adapt, adjust and accommodate to adequately reflect ground realities, contemporary aspirations, and pressing requirements of developing countries including emerging economies.

India, as the largest democracy in the world and an emerging economy that has achieved the ability to grow rapidly, remains deeply committed to multilateralism. It has been an active member in global institutions – the United Nations, Bretton Woods Institutions, World Trade Organization, International Atomic Energy Agency and so on. It will continue to be so in the decades ahead, based on commitment to principles and values that define these institutions. India will seek its due place, play its destined role and share its assigned responsibility, giving voice to the hopes and aspirations of a billion people in South Asia. It will continue to strive for the reform of the United Nations to make it more democratic; to fight against the scourge of terrorism and dismantling its infrastructures on the basis of zero tolerance; to fight piracy on the high seas; to restructure the Bretton Woods Institutions to create a new financial architecture; to achieve an early conclusion of the Doha Round of trade negotiations, with its development dimension, and to address climate change issues, guided by the principle of common but differentiated responsibility and respective capability.

India’s view of the world has always been guided by the wisdom of that ancient Indian saying – Vasudhaiva Kutumbakam – ‘the whole world is one family’. This idea found expression in Jawaharlal Nehru’s very first address as Prime Minister: “Those dreams are for India, but they are also for the world, for all the nations and peoples are too closely knit together today for any of them to imagine that it can live apart. Peace has been said to be indivisible; so is freedom, so is prosperity now and so also is disaster in this One World that can no longer be split into isolated fragments.” That eternal message of the Indian people will guide us in our attempt to seek inclusive global solutions to intractable global problems, and give new hope to humanity.

Raja Ram · Post by **Raja Ram** » 08 Jul 2009 10:44

Note the centrality of an exclusively economic vision in that piece by Dr. Singh.

Virupaksha · Post by **Virupaksha** » 08 Jul 2009 11:55

Raja Ram wrote:Note the centrality of an exclusively economic vision in that piece by Dr. Singh.

errr, isnt the G-8 mostly an economic forum and this times agenda almost exclusively about the meltdown

vsudhir · Post by **vsudhir** » 08 Jul 2009 14:41

ravi_ku wrote:
Raja Ram wrote:Note the centrality of an exclusively economic vision in that piece by Dr. Singh.
errr, isnt the G-8 mostly an economic forum and this times agenda almost exclusively about the meltdown

Good point.

Besides, if the worldview of GoI's top leadership is indeed compromised, I'd look out for more telling signs such as a cap/rollback/eliminate on the delivery systems for desi nukes - starting with the famed third leg of the N deterrent.

Instead, from what I hear GOI has gone ahead and sanctioned two additional 7kt ATVs and an further 2 in principle. These ATVs won't roam the ocean empty - their missile tubes will need plenty of radioactive potency that cannot magically appear if our N-capabilities are watered down.

So yes, while I am no fan of the UPA sarkar's security dispensation, I would wait until clearer signs of their incompetence emerged before yelling the roof down.

Besides, discretion is the better part of valor. Before the third leg is in place, displaying belligerence towards hostile phoren designs against yindia is neither wise nor particularly courageous. Strictly IMVVHO, of course.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 09 Jul 2009 02:10

Can be in the TSP thread too.

Op-Ed Pioneer, 8 July 2009

OPED | Thursday, July 9, 2009 | Email | Print |

Waging war on Taliban

Hiranmay Karlekar

Whether Pakistan wins or not, India stands to lose

New Delhi needs to work out its response to either of the two outcomes the Pakistani Army’s ongoing offensive against the Taliban can have — failure or success. Failure may not manifest itself in the form of a defeated Pakistani Army suing for peace but the current offensive losing its steam and the Taliban regrouping and coming back to the areas from which they have been expelled. This would in effect mean a return to the pre-offensive situation in these where Taliban had terrorised the population and imposed a savage, medieval order with the Army and the Government watching passively. The possibility can hardly be ruled out given the way in which the offensives in Swat and Buner, which began on April 28 and May 8, 2009 respectively, have proceeded. In both districts of Pakistan’s North-West Frontier Province, the military’s early claims of success and predictions of a quick rout of the Taliban have been repeatedly belied. Clashes continue even now.

Should the offensive fail, the jihadi elements, who have a substantial presence in Pakistan’s Army and principal intelligence/covert operations agency, the Inter-Services Intelligence Directorate, and who are now lying low, will begin to reassert themselves. The modernist and professional elements spearheading the current offensive under the leadership of the Chief of Army Staff, General Parvez Ashraf Kayani, will be thoroughly demoralised. In such a situation, it will be a matter of time before the Taliban take over the country and gain access to its nuclear arsenal. For India, this will trigger a steep escalation in Islamabad’s proxy war against it through the instrumentality of terrorist organisations like the Lashkar-e-Tayyeba and the Jaish-e-Mohammed, which remain very much intact despite being formally banned.

The failure of the Pakistani Army’s offensive may also be followed by direct military intervention, by way of an extension of the war in Afghanistan, by the United States and allied countries, against a Taliban takeover of Pakistan. For, neither the US, nor countries like the Soviet Union, Britain, and even China, can fail to realise that such a takeover would mean Pakistan turning into an Al Qaeda base and the staging ground of terrorist strikes, backed by nuclear blackmail, all over the world, and posing an immediate survival threat to the regime in Afghanistan.

Should the Pakistani Army’s offensive succeed, Islamabad will demand form Washington, as a reward for services rendered against a common enemy, US pressure on India for a settlement of the Kashmir issue in its favour. To force Washington’s hand, it may step up sharply its unconventional war against this country and hold up the bogey of a nuclear conflict should India react sharply. Judging by Washington’s traditional weakness for Islamabad and the way the Obama Administration has showered it with aid, Pakistan may well have its way. Thus, whichever way the offensive goes, India must prepare to face a sharp escalation of Pakistan’s unconventional war against it and must focus on two aspects.

The first is reinforcing the institutional and operational infrastructure to combat terrorism. It has implemented and is in the process of implementing, a number of important measures planned in the aftermath of the terrorist attack on Mumbai on November 26 last year. These cover a wide range from reinforcing coastal security, to the setting up of hubs for the National Security Guards in cities like Mumbai, Kolkata, Bangalore and Hyderabad, the creation of a National Investigation Agency and a tightening up of anti-terrorism laws, but are essentially defensive in nature. Terrorism can never be combated successfully without inflicting an unbearably high cost on those perpetrating it. India has so far been trying to do so primarily through diplomatic means, which have not worked the way New Delhi had wished. This leaves it with unconventional warfare, in which India must acquire deterrent capability, including that of staging a 26/11 type of attack on a city like Karachi.

Simultaneously, New Delhi must consider what it should do to ensure that the major war next door, which will follow if the US and its allies intervene militarily, does not affect its critical regional and global interests, which includes having a friendly regime in Afghanistan and an end to Islamabad’s continuing unconventional war against it.

Looks like Dilli Billis are getting nervous about TSP continuation. This article must be the result of backroom chats and is for preparing the minds of the aam janata..

I agree that failure of Kiyani faction will cause an Islamist takeover and that will lead to US intervention unless those taking over are US munnas. Islamist takeover is a US nightmare and should let them handle it.

The preventive steps India should take are to keep the IBGs fuelled and forward deploy the strike corps to reduce the timelag in case of repeat terrorist attacks.

Also prepare action plan for post TSP.

Samay · Post by **Samay** » 09 Jul 2009 02:21

ramana wrote:Can be in the TSP thread too.

Op-Ed Pioneer, 8 July 2009

OPED | Thursday, July 9, 2009 | Email | Print |

Waging war on Taliban

Hiranmay Karlekar

Whether Pakistan wins or not, India stands to lose

New Delhi needs to work out its response to either of the two outcomes the Pakistani Army’s ongoing offensive against the Taliban can have — failure or success. Failure may not manifest itself in the form of a defeated Pakistani Army suing for peace but the current offensive losing its steam and the Taliban regrouping and coming back to the areas from which they have been expelled. This would in effect mean a return to the pre-offensive situation in these where Taliban had terrorised the population and imposed a savage, medieval order with the Army and the Government watching passively. The possibility can hardly be ruled out given the way in which the offensives in Swat and Buner, which began on April 28 and May 8, 2009 respectively, have proceeded. In both districts of Pakistan’s North-West Frontier Province, the military’s early claims of success and predictions of a quick rout of the Taliban have been repeatedly belied. Clashes continue even now.

Should the offensive fail, the jihadi elements, who have a substantial presence in Pakistan’s Army and principal intelligence/covert operations agency, the Inter-Services Intelligence Directorate, and who are now lying low, will begin to reassert themselves. The modernist and professional elements spearheading the current offensive under the leadership of the Chief of Army Staff, General Parvez Ashraf Kayani, will be thoroughly demoralised. In such a situation, it will be a matter of time before the Taliban take over the country and gain access to its nuclear arsenal. For India, this will trigger a steep escalation in Islamabad’s proxy war against it through the instrumentality of terrorist organisations like the Lashkar-e-Tayyeba and the Jaish-e-Mohammed, which remain very much intact despite being formally banned.

The failure of the Pakistani Army’s offensive may also be followed by direct military intervention, by way of an extension of the war in Afghanistan, by the United States and allied countries, against a Taliban takeover of Pakistan. For, neither the US, nor countries like the Soviet Union, Britain, and even China, can fail to realise that such a takeover would mean Pakistan turning into an Al Qaeda base and the staging ground of terrorist strikes, backed by nuclear blackmail, all over the world, and posing an immediate survival threat to the regime in Afghanistan.

Should the Pakistani Army’s offensive succeed, Islamabad will demand form Washington, as a reward for services rendered against a common enemy, US pressure on India for a settlement of the Kashmir issue in its favour. To force Washington’s hand, it may step up sharply its unconventional war against this country and hold up the bogey of a nuclear conflict should India react sharply. Judging by Washington’s traditional weakness for Islamabad and the way the Obama Administration has showered it with aid, Pakistan may well have its way. Thus, whichever way the offensive goes, India must prepare to face a sharp escalation of Pakistan’s unconventional war against it and must focus on two aspects.

The first is reinforcing the institutional and operational infrastructure to combat terrorism. It has implemented and is in the process of implementing, a number of important measures planned in the aftermath of the terrorist attack on Mumbai on November 26 last year. These cover a wide range from reinforcing coastal security, to the setting up of hubs for the National Security Guards in cities like Mumbai, Kolkata, Bangalore and Hyderabad, the creation of a National Investigation Agency and a tightening up of anti-terrorism laws, but are essentially defensive in nature. Terrorism can never be combated successfully without inflicting an unbearably high cost on those perpetrating it. India has so far been trying to do so primarily through diplomatic means, which have not worked the way New Delhi had wished. This leaves it with unconventional warfare, in which India must acquire deterrent capability, including that of staging a 26/11 type of attack on a city like Karachi.

Simultaneously, New Delhi must consider what it should do to ensure that the major war next door, which will follow if the US and its allies intervene militarily, does not affect its critical regional and global interests, which includes having a friendly regime in Afghanistan and an end to Islamabad’s continuing unconventional war against it.

Looks like Dilli Billis are getting nervous about TSP continuation. This article must be the result of backroom chats and is for preparing the minds of the aam janata..

I agree that failure of Kiyani faction will cause an Islamist takeover and that will lead to US intervention unless those taking over are US munnas. Islamist takeover is a US nightmare and should let them handle it.

The preventive steps India should take are to keep the IBGs fuelled and forward deploy the strike corps to reduce the timelag in case of repeat terrorist attacks.

Also prepare action plan for post TSP.

It seems as if mr karlekar had just woke up on sound of alarm from his editor and decided to write something on fakap and ended searching on a us defense website or rand,bbc, etc junk pieces.or an article from rev arundhati roy .

hnair · Post by **hnair** » 09 Jul 2009 06:48

This is based on a comment by vsudhir in PRC politics thread.

vsudhir wrote: Wow. No doubt, someone outside lit and fanned the flames. yindia better watch out for such tactics deployed against Dilli. Already ethnic and religious divisions fanned from outside are rife, some would say, esp in J&K. Somehow, am not too happy about this revolution/protest template become successful in PRC coz I fear it will definitely next be tried in the subcontinent, starting with J&K and with Myanmar.

In the past few years, any campaign in non-western nations, that espouses western "liberal causes" is fast becoming suspect. As powers be realize the increasing pushback against "money oriented" conservative ideas and mil-tech in controlling non-western regions, the move seems to be towards using innovative COTS technology and swarms of "activists" (all "free beings" of course, compared to chipanda drones) to undermine existing orders. A lot of fissures are there around the world and thanks to new networking technologies, they are very much accessible to the western globalists to further their ongoing "white man's burden" power trips.

New tech like social networking and twitter campaigns seems to be replacing the earlier era internet groups, chat forums etc in running remote campaigns. Be it the rather sad Tibet uprising last year, the anti-chavez troubles, the mexican drug wars/swine flew scare campaign, the color revolutions, the Indian pink-chaddi campaign, the iranian "struggle" and now this Oui-ouir trouble, one is wary to support any such things. At best, it disrupts the society and causes divisions. But at worst, once some concession is wrested out of their govts, the poor natives who are cajoled to take up the cause are left to face the brutality of their fellow natives. End result is a new form of "divide and rule" of natives, with profits all flowing towards west.

Some of these experiments dont seem to pan out because those who are expected to respond to provocations are not biting. eg: the recent conjured up "liberation of Indian gays". everybody including the omnipresent hijadas (whom we treat with basic respect, unlike the fate of trannies in west), yawned and moved on <still keeping fingers crossed>. I mean, we as a society dont really care if someone has different tastes. Maybe because Lord Krishna was busy telling Arjuna about life, rather than crooning "When a maaaan loves a women..." in a Barry White voice. praise the Lord, indeed.

Tailpiece: MJ's funeral was a huge event for the African-american community. Unfortunately, the community's biggest icon, the big O was the only one who seems to want to distance himself away from the community. Anyways, my point is this - we should be reaching out to such communities (Native americans of South and North Americas, Aborigines, Romas of europe etc) in the west and let them say their story aloud to Indian Parliamentarians, instead of being made to whisper to a few white men inside a basement in Capitol. Emancipation is a two way street. Round up the Kancha Ilayahs, Teestas and ARoys and get them to start holding Bollywoodized/IPL versions of Senate hearings. It is time these self-important worthies are made to do something other than being pawns in the divide and rule games. Only then will we know if ARoy really dislikes the west or only the part that is convenient to hate.

RamaY · Post by **RamaY** » 09 Jul 2009 08:15

^^^ The Pioneer Article...

it surprises me to no end that not even pioneer type op-Ed piecce can present an Indic version of strategic solution to the pakAf problem...

As long as Indian strategists capitulate to the nuke-blackmail by any adversery, the Indic cause stands to lose.

Standup like man and call the opponents' nuclear bluff, would be my reccomendation.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 10 Jul 2009 01:39

X-posted...

arunsrinivasan wrote:India, China woo Japan on ADB's Arunachal loan

The diplomatic tug of war between India and China over the $60 million loan from the Asian Development Bank, or ADB, for Arunachal Pradesh has entered a new arena: Japan.

Both India and China are trying to win over Asia’s largest economy, one of the largest donors to the Manila-based multilateral lending institution.

China does not want ADB to provide money for Arunachal, parts of which it claims as its territory. According to top sources in the United Progressive Alliance government at the Centre, Chinese authorities are seeking Japan’s help to prevent ADB from issuing “public notification” of its approval of the loan for Arunachal Pradesh.

Recently, ADB overruled China’s objection and approved a $60 million loan for a watershed development project in Arunachal. It is a part of its $2.9 billion India development plan for three years to 2012.

Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, Finance Minister Pranab Mukherjee and Foreign Secretary Shivshankar Menon are the key players formulating the diplomatic response to China. On Wednesday night, Menon, currently in Rome along with the Prime Minister for the G8 summit, had a chat with Mukherjee in Delhi to discuss the situation. Japan Prime Minister Taro Aso was also in Rome. According to sources, India has already placed its case before the Aso administration.

If the Chinese authorities succeed in their efforts, it will be a diplomatic embarrassment for India and jeopardise the future of the Arunachal project.

China was initially successful when it forced the postponement of an ADB Board meeting to decide on the plan. After China raised objections, ADB asked India to resolve the matter “bilaterally”. New Delhi reacted sharply and said that it would scrap the entire plan but not remove Arunachal from the project.

Last month the ADB Board overlooked its objections and approved the $2.9 billion plan for India. “The Asian Development Bank, regardless of the major concerns of China, approved the India Country Partnership strategy, which involves the territorial dispute between China and India,” Chinese foreign ministry spokesman Qin Gang had said after the board meeting.

China also said that the Manila-based bank should not interfere in the “political issues of its members”.

Giving the current status of the Arunachal project in Parliament today, Foreign Minister SM Krishna said: “China did not endorse the Country Partnership Strategy (CPS) 2009-12 for India at the Board of ADB on the ground that the proposed India CPS involved technical assistance funding for the Flood and River Erosion Management Project in Arunachal Pradesh, which China claims is its territory.”

India had told ADB and all member countries including the US, Japan, Australia, Canada, Indonesia, Korea, Malaysia, the Philippines, Germany and Italy that the CPS was not a political document and it did not make any judgement as to the legal or other status of any territory.

Under CPS, ADB assists member countries through technical assistance grants and projects loans.

“China's objection on political grounds is a clear violation of ADB's charter, which prohibits the bank from evaluating any proposal on grounds other than economic,” the minister said. “India's CPS was discussed in the meeting of the Board of Executive Directors of the ADB on June 15 and all member countries except China supported the document.

Krishna said New Delhi had told the ADB member nations, including China, that Arunachal Pradesh was “an integral part of India and its status is not negotiable”.
It makes one (me at least ) wonder where this India - China tug of war will end?

The sum involved is paltry $60M which India can fund from its large FE reserves. So whats the deal? Is it to get ADB to issue loans to India for 'disputed' areas? or is it get PRC an opportunity to see red?

Anujan · Post by **Anujan** » 10 Jul 2009 01:46

ramana wrote:The sum involved is paltry $60M which India can fund from its large FE reserves. So whats the deal? Is it to get ADB to issue loans to India for 'disputed' areas? or is it get PRC an opportunity to see red?

Ramana-saar
I think it is to disallow any shred of any document that recognizes China's claim to Arunachal. China has no locus standi in Arunachal and it was always assumed that "We have a claim on Arunachal" was simply a pressure tactic to let them hold on to Aksai Chin (the claim to which is much more tenuous than Arunachal, since that territory was obtained through aggression). Now they are turning around and trying to "formalize" the dispute.

Why should any international body give any hint of recognition to Chinese claims ?

Why the project got on to the ADB list is another question altogether. I dont know if it was done as a deliberate provocation or it was shortlisted through normal channels and Chinese reaction to it was unexpected.

sanjaychoudhry · Post by **sanjaychoudhry** » 10 Jul 2009 10:19

Some of these experiments dont seem to pan out because those who are expected to respond to provocations are not biting. eg: the recent conjured up "liberation of Indian gays". everybody including the omnipresent hijadas (whom we treat with basic respect, unlike the fate of trannies in west), yawned and moved on <still keeping fingers crossed>.

That's right. This gay rights campaign was an artificial campaign that was orchestrated by the US embassy through the Times of India group. Most such activists assembling for demonstration in Delhi for gay rights were American citizens (mostly goras but many African-Americans too). The campaign was quite blatantly Western.

There is a pattern to these kinds of campaigns being controlled from outside the borders of India. I began to see "gay rights" articles quitely appear in some fringe newspapers about a couple of years ago. Once some ground had been prepared in terms of publicity, the reporting moved to mainline papers in about a year, especially in Times of India. For the last two months, there was saturation coverage in ToI, which then seamlessly led to the court verdit allowing gay sex.

This method of artificial campaigning by Western embassies has now become quite familiar to me. First, press articles begin to appear in fringe English newspapers, then they slowly move to the mainline metro newspapers in about an year or so and then after some months, a favorible verdict is given by the Indian high court or supereme court. Exactly the same thing I saw in Binayak Sen campaign orchestrated by the US and UK, which led to Katju give a favourible verdit without hearing the opposition's arguments (!).

The "Times of India" newspaper group is currently the main instrument of these hatched jobs by the Anglo-saxons. Through its deranged owner, this company has sold its soul for money to the Americans. This country will be a better place without Indians of Vineet Jain's ilk. The man is hanging like a mill stone around this country' neck and has overstayed his welcome with us.

What I am worried about is: why do all such campaigns orchestrated by the Westerners nicely lead up to a favourible court verdict in India? What is the connection of these campaigns and their patrons with the Indian judges? I am seeing many judgements coming out of the courts which are perfectly in alignment with these orchestrated campaigns.

vera_k · Post by **vera_k** » 10 Jul 2009 10:51

Maybe they all are commie-pinko liberals.

negi · Post by **negi** » 10 Jul 2009 12:41

I think this is idiotic analysis (no disrespect to poster) propounded by the most yellow of all cowards aka saffron brigade who wanted to give away portions of J&K to Pak for nobel price.

Muslims are as patriotic as any Indian and if there are Muslim & Sikh Generals in Indian Forces they will react more aggressively then Brahmin Baniya brigade of golf playing bribe takers.

Indira Gandhi had Muslims as major vote bank but she smashed Pakistan and would have done same to Baluchistan in second phase in eighties till the saffrons sold us out to US in 1977.

If any leader takes on Pakistan then Indian Muslims will be first and foremost any day to make any sacrifices for India.

I think this rhetorical and unsubstantiated allegation needs to be replied to.

1. Which saffron brigade wanted to give away J&K to PAK and HOW ? Is J&K any better today ? who created this mess in J&K ? who gave J&K the special status ? who slept over the exodus of the K pandits ? SAFFRON BRIGADE ?

2. Does it even deserve a reply ; what do you mean by Brahmin Baniya brigade of Golf playing bribe takers ? should I like other secular posters on this fora consider it attack on a particular community ? or because it is about a Hindu Jarnail so it is cool .

3. During the time of India Gandhi there was no such thing as a 'Muslim Vote Bank' ; India had more bigger problems like poverty and disease to address. Things have changed now even the armed forces are being profiled based on religion by a SECULAR govt.

4. Thats a rhetoric akin to a politician; nothing more is expected from Muslims than from any citizen of India this first and foremost and similar senti stuff just does not make any sense.

Paging sekular junta ; this post is as deplorable as those Hindutva posts on election dhaga.

RajeshA · Post by **RajeshA** » 10 Jul 2009 13:36

X-Posting from the "Should we discontinue EVMs?" Thread in the General Discussion Forum.

BijuShet wrote:And 0 EVMs for over 10 million non resident Indian citizens in the Middle East, North America, Europe and else where.

This is really a sad story. Elections are one way to fix the NRI stokes to the India central hub. The India-centered interest of NRIs would stay high. Their bonds with India (in contrast to their bonds just withtheir family in India) would stay strong. The elections would give India the ability to project the elections as a huge social event abroad, where the NRIs can mingle and get to know each other. It would also be an (almost) free PR blitz for India paid by the local chapters of the political parties in the foreign lands.

The tradition of nominating 3 members of Lok Sabha by the President, 2 of them from the Anglo-Indian community, should not be scrapped. I haven't seen anybody from the Anglo-Indian community in my life, nor read about any such person. I don't even know whether there are more than 2 members of this community in India. And even if there are many people of the Anglo-Indian community still out there, what makes them more important than any other community.

Far more important is to give representation to the millions of NRIs. These 3 seats should be given to representatives of NRIs. In fact my suggestion would be to arrange for 4 seats - one for North America, one for Europe, one for Africa, and one for Asia.

This is not just about giving the NRIs a piece of the cake, but it also of India getting some free publicity. This is something the Chinese would not be able to stage anywhere.

Rahul Mehta · Post by **Rahul Mehta** » 10 Jul 2009 14:27

sanjaychoudhry wrote:Exactly the same thing I saw in Binayak Sen campaign orchestrated by the US and UK, which led to Katju give a favourible verdit without hearing the opposition's arguments (!).

ToI must have charged a ton of cash for writing in favor of Sen.

Now are you saying that Katju gave judgment merely based on ToI reports?

Are you are implying that Katju did not get a penny?

In any case, what solution do you propose to reduce such ToI-led judgment? Surely, you cant stop a judge from reading ToI. So what solution do you propose?

RajeshA · Post by **RajeshA** » 10 Jul 2009 14:49

sanjaychoudhry wrote:That's right. This gay rights campaign was an artificial campaign that was orchestrated by the US embassy through the Times of India group. Most such activists assembling for demonstration in Delhi for gay rights were American citizens (mostly goras but many African-Americans too). The campaign was quite blatantly Western.

Those who are strongly opposed to decriminalizing gays are the Mullahs and the Church. The Lalus and the Mulayams are only reading opinion polls of the Mullahs are showing opposition. Their opposition though has been muted, which would mean that they too do not notice any opposition in their core constituency, the OBCs.

So if the US Embassy has been promoting this campaign, it is fighting a proxy war between the American liberals and American evangelists on Indian soil. Well now that the liberals are in the White House, the Senate with a 60-40 majority and in the House of Representatives with a huge margin, one could expect them to be pushing for a liberal agenda.

But wait a minute. The US Ambassador to India right now is David Mulford, a George W. Bush appointee, who made a name for himself amongst the social conservatives. So why would David Mulford be pushing for a gay-friendly liberal agenda in India? Does he want to be an outcast when he returns to USA!!!

The new US ambassador to India, Timothy Roemer, sent by the Democrats, takes up his post this coming week.

AjayKK · Post by **AjayKK** » 10 Jul 2009 17:49

negi wrote:

Muslims are as patriotic as any Indian and if there are Muslim & Sikh Generals in Indian Forces they will react more aggressively then Brahmin Baniya brigade of golf playing bribe takers.

Paging sekular junta ; this post is as deplorable as those Hindutva posts on election dhaga.

I dont know how people are classified sekular. Maybe the "sekular junta" waits to jump only selectively on selective issues...

/Sekular cap on

Taking the bolded logic to its logical conclusion, does the statement...

" <snip> ... if there are Muslim & Sikh Generals in Indian Forces they will react more aggressively than... <snip> "

... mean absence of above is the reason India is not aggressive?

Or taking it forward , does the logic mean Brahmin Baniya brigade should be done away with, since they are anyway bribe takers ?

I mean no disrespect to anyone, but does it mean that since India as a nation has 800 mn Hindus, many of course belonging to Brahmin Baniya brigade, their large proportion is also reflected in various places?

I am just wondering, using sekular logic, that some of these coward baniyas might vote the "cowards aka saffron brigade", we should start with reducing their stake in the population?

I mean, lees baniyas = less "cowards aka saffron brigade" = less Brahmin Baniya golf players = less Chanakya inaction = India more aggressive ?

( Now where are those two smileys that sekularists use ? )

PS : I like the term "secular junta"

.

sanjaychoudhry wrote: The "Times of India" newspaper group is currently the main instrument of these hatched jobs

Well, next month is Ganesh Chaturthi. Which is why we now have a good environmental campaign by the said paper about PoP. Hence we should curb the celebrations inside homes is the implied message. Anyone reading only ToI or its local supplement might not even come to know that lots of idols are made of Shadoo (clay) and are also easily available. The only thing is you have to pay a litlle higher and book earlier. But then, this gyan is apparently not seen in our ToiLet paper.

paramu · Post by **paramu** » 11 Jul 2009 02:40

sanjaychoudhry wrote:What I am worried about is: why do all such campaigns orchestrated by the Westerners nicely lead up to a favourible court verdict in India? What is the connection of these campaigns and their patrons with the Indian judges? I am seeing many judgements coming out of the courts which are perfectly in alignment with these orchestrated campaigns.

Here is a court verdict which apparently looks genuine.
Rape possible even in the absence of injuries: SC

The apex court said that in rape cases the sole testimony of the witness without any corroboration can be relied on as rarely would a self-respecting Indian woman accuse a man of raping her.

Actually, absence of injury is the main technical evidence against the Orissa nun-rape accusation.

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 11 Jul 2009 02:56

Which means other than court judges, all other Indian males should carry video evidence of themselves and their activity 24/7. Any witness claiming that the man had raped would be credible evidence. All Indian males are potential rapists because they all carry the instrument of rape 24/7.

rkirankr · Post by **rkirankr** » 11 Jul 2009 16:48

Well, next month is Ganesh Chaturthi. Which is why we now have a good environmental campaign by the said paper about PoP. Hence we should curb the celebrations inside homes is the implied message. Anyone reading only ToI or its local supplement might not even come to know that lots of idols are made of Shadoo (clay) and are also easily available. The only thing is you have to pay a litlle higher and book earlier. But then, this gyan is apparently not seen in our ToiLet paper.

[/quote]

These campaigns strangely appear during festivals of Indic religions. A few years ago there was a very shrill campaign to not use crackers on Diwals because of pollution etc etc. Well crackers are used by various other communities too to celebrate. No word from any DDM.
Just imagine Diwali is one festival which is celebrated all through India. It is also popular becos of the fun element involving crackers, sweets . Many kids/youngsters want to be part of this as opposed to some festivals which might have less fun element. Now remove the fun element , one more blow to one more of the indic culture/religion.

I once read a comment (I do not remember whether it is Alberuni, Nuniz or others) , an islamic scholar who came along with the invaders had regretted that any amount of killing Hindus did not destroy Hinduism becos it was transferred from father to son and so on. Whereas Buddhism in SWAT and afghanistan was destroyed becos it was driven by few priestly class.
In medieval times there were only physical attacks on Indic culture and religion but now a days it is both physical and at a intellectual level.

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 11 Jul 2009 21:19

SwamyG wrote:IndLaw goes 'phoren'. It was bought by Thomson Reuters.

THis is the problem and nobody seems to understand the strategic nature of information. Information is power and control
Only Indians and Indian companies and legal approved agencies should control such information.

“The amount of data that Indlaw has on a realtime basis is huge. They have historical data of case history and others dating back to British time, which is over 200 years old. They did this with approximately 18 people,” said Vivek Sekhar, Chairman & CEO, 2i Capital India.

With the recent global meltdown, financial information services companies have been suffering from loss of clients globally. The acquisition of Indlaw by Thomson Reuters is an example of how large information companies are looking at fast growing markets like India for expanding their footprint. Thomson is already present in financial data in Indian market.

Prasad · Post by **Prasad** » 12 Jul 2009 01:08

India blinks on emission caps

India has also agreed to the idea that it would take actions that would bring its emissions down from business-as-usual in the mid-term (read by 2030). Till date India has claimed, and its own as well as World Bank studies have shown, that even on business-as-usual lines, India's per capita emissions in 2030 remain far below those of rich nations at present. Till date, India claims it has no reason to take further actions if it is already on a low carbon pathway.

But, observers noted, that the mention of using per capita emissions based calculations as the basis of dividing responsibilities found no mention in the MEF declaration that the Indian Prime Minister signed on. The word equity which India has always embedded in its arguments also found a weak mention in passing.

On the issue of providing finances and technologies too, India gave away more than it got in bargain, observers noticed. Till date, India claimed and the Bali Action Plan laid out that developing countries would reduce their emissions only if they were enabled by tech and fund transfer.

This has been watered down in the MEF statement and now such actions would only be `supported'. "The word `enabled' meant that actions would only be taken when the money was on the table, `supported' implies we would take actions and the money and funds would come at a later date; the trigger value has been lost," explained one expert.

RamaY · Post by **RamaY** » 12 Jul 2009 22:10

continuing with my thoughts...

Farm Subsidies & Aggriculture

I have allocated a total of Rs 108,000 crores towards farm subsidies and employment scheme and below are my assumptions, strategies, and calculations.

My primary assumption is that a nation-state has to find an efficient way to provide employment to its citizens in a way that, their incomes are above the poverty line (so can be taxable, if needed) and contribute towards national self-reliance, wealth accumulation, and power projection.

The recent economic earth-quake resets certain economic rules that are prevalent for the past century and half. My ideas are based on certain ground rules that India must be able to feed (food security) its huge population, develop renewable energy sources (in the absence of proven oil and gas reserves), be environmentally conscious, and work towards improving Gross Happiness Indix, so that the end result will be a happy, healthy, environmentally-sound base economy that can offer high level of employment opportunities.

Farm-Subsidy program

The subsidy structure allows that small farmers get the most benefit.
1st acre – Rs 2000
2nd acre – Rs 1000
3rd acre – Rs 750
4th acre – Rs 250

2000+1000+750+250 = 4000 = Rs 1000 per acre.

My plan envisions to provide a subsidy of Rs 1000 per acre-month (pro-rated) for all the farming families up to a max limit of 4-5 acres per family. For example, if I have 1.5 acres of land, I will be eligible for Rs 3000 farm subsidy per month and if I have 10 acres of land, my eligibility will be limited to Rs 4000 per month.

Now this subsidy if not 100% free. I can either opt to return this money interest free or pay it thru the harvest up to 30% of the yield, whichever is lower. For example, I owe the govt 18,000Rs (12x1500) and I have a total harvest of say 8 tons of rice in that year. I can either pay the 18k in cash or submit 2.4 tons of rice at FCI (Food Corporation of India), whichever is profitable to me.

This option (plan) also acts as crop-insurance, because in the event that I got only 3 tons of harvest in a particular year, I would return only 0.9 tons of harvest and my loan is closed. I will take a new loan next year towards next year’s harvest.

The second part of the program is an employment scheme in farming sector.

From CIA Factbook, I gathered that

Code: Select all

India Total Land:::2,973,190Sq. KM  = 734,691,248Acres = 73.47Crore Acres
Irrigated Land:::558,080Sq. KM  = 137,904,571Acres = 13.79Crore Acres
Arable Land (48.83%):::1,451,809Sq. KM  = 358,749,736Acres = 35.87Crore Acres(Potential commercial forest land)

Non-Arable Land:::1,521,381Sq. KM  = 375,941,511Acres = 37.59Crore Acres

100 Cities (20L - 1Cr):::90,000Sq. KM  = 22,239,484Acres = 2.22Crore Acres
1000 Towns (50K - 20L):::25,000Sq. KM  = 6,177,635Acres = 0.62Crore Acres
600000 villages (1 sq km):::600,000Sq. KM  = 148,263,229Acres = 14.83Crore Acres

TOTAL Populated Ares:::715,000Sq. KM  = 176,680,347Acres = 17.67Crore Acres

Permanent Forests/nature:::806,381Sq. KM  = 199,261,164Acres = 19.93Crore Acres = 27% of total land area

From the above 35.87 crore acres of available arable land, I would like to assign 5 crore acres to 1 crore below poverty line families and offer them Rs 1000 per acre per month subsidy for first 5 years on the pre-condition that

They grow
1. Other type (teak, deodar, other forest type) – 1 Acre
2. Permanent Crops (bamboos, Eucalyptus, type) – 1 Acre
3. Bio-diesel (Jatropha, palm oil etc) – 2 Acres
4. Arable (vegetables etc) – 1 Acre

arable land - land cultivated for crops like wheat, maize, and rice that are replanted after each harvest; permanent crops - land cultivated for crops like citrus, coffee, and rubber that are not replanted after each harvest; includes land under flowering shrubs, fruit trees, nut trees, and vines, but excludes land under trees grown for wood or timber; other - any land not arable or under permanent crops; includes permanent meadows and pastures, forests and woodlands,

This plan will automatically bring 1 crore families (~4crores population = 4% of total population) out of poverty immediately while adding

1. 10 million acres of new forest lands
2. 10 million acres of commercial timber
3. 20 million acres of bio-diesel = ~3billion gallons of bio diesel saving ~$3B oil imports from 5th year. The best part is this is green and renewable.
4. 10 million acres of additional food products.
5. 100 million carbon credits (2.5 credits per acre for the first 3 categories) = 100 million megawatts of electricity production = India can add another 11000 MW of thermal power generation without violating Kyoto protocol.
6. If allowed to rent the land to establish Sterling Energy Systems’ solar power dishes at 3-4 units per acre (so they do not over crowd the land) the farmers can earn additional rent at least another Rs 500 per acre.

Thus we can achieve all the stated objectives
1. Poverty alleviation
2. Food Security
3. Energy Security
4. Forests & Environment
5. New Economy (eco-friendly employment creation)
6. Cultural preservation - the tribal population is given economic security without threatening their unique cultures built around environment.

Risks:
1. The farm subsidy program needs National-Id in place so the program is not misused and the target population receives the benefits directly to their account IN CASH.
2. Close integration is required between Farm Land registration, National Id program, and Farm Subsidy programs.
3. The FCI channel can be abused (already highly corrupted channel) during crop collection.
4. Unemployment Program has to be devised in a way that the land is allotted to Tribal populations only and not sold/resold to politically motivated groups.

putnanja · Post by **putnanja** » 14 Jul 2009 03:31

No ‘Islamic’ prefix before ‘fundamentalist’ in Assam House

Assam Assembly Speaker Tanka Bahadur Rai has ruled that the words “Islamic fundamentalist” be expunged from the proceedings of the House.

Prabin Kumar Gogoi of the opposition Asom Gana Parishad (AGP) had wanted to know how many Islamic fundamentalist groups were active in the state, what were their names and strength.
...
Gogoi too intervened, making his stand clear that he was also opposed to referring to fundamental groups through their religious identities. Parliamentary Affairs Minister Bharat Chandra Narah said the word “Islamic” be dropped from the proceedings, to which the Speaker agreed.

Opposition leader and AGP chief Chandra Mohan Patowari tried to make a point that there was no harm in calling them “Islamic fundamentalists” because the US too refer to them as such.
...

ShauryaT · Post by **ShauryaT** » 16 Jul 2009 08:00

Some must read articles on the issue of the structures of parties that affect governance.

On the way down

Four instances, two questions.

•Indira Gandhi is able to block the implementation of the Allahabad High Court judgement by changing — with retrospective effect no less — the law under which it held her guilty of corrupt electoral practices;

•Rajiv Gandhi is able to use his control over three-quarters of the House to block all inquiry into Bofors.

Do these instances testify to the strength of Mrs. Gandhi and Rajiv Gandhi? Or to the weakness of the political system?

Two suggestions about reading this updated version. Do not rush through it. I have kept examples to a minimum: after a paragraph, recall the examples you know from your own personal experience that fit the words. Second, you will miss the point entirely if you think, “Oh, this is about the BJP... Oh, this is about the Congress...” Instead of concluding that I am out to convey some “hidden meanings” and trying to figure these out, think of your own party or organisation, the party or organisation that you know best, from the inside — the Congress, the BJP, the Communist parties, the regional parties: Telugu Desam, the DMK, the BSP, the AGP. It is then that you will get the point of the updating, namely that the symptoms are true of all our political parties today.

Hence, our real problem: there is nowhere to turn for an alternative.

The end of ideology

The party hierarchy comes to consist entirely of nominees — of the leader, and of those who, for the moment, have managed to insinuate themselves into the good books of the leader. Tickets have to be distributed for the forthcoming elections? The ‘state leaders’ — nominees all — ‘recommend’ some names. Neither the leader nor his nominees in the central organs have any system of independent verification. Lobbying, insinuation, come to count more than analysis; collateral ‘persuasion’ more than evidence; bargaining more than deliberation. The nominees don’t do well? There was dhaandali in the selection of candidates, someone shouts. He is smeared with motives, drowned with innuendo.

Meetings follow meetings. In each, ritual replaces substance. But the rituals, the routine are not for nothing. The ritual — the same “state-wise” reporting — is a device: a device to dodge the issues that are on everyone’s mind. Abhiyaans follow abhiyaans. They too become just routine.

The losses mount. Calls for honest examination. For accountability. The leader and his circle swing into action. They galvanise their nominees in the states. “No, no. We can’t afford any witch-hunts,” these nominees of nominees declaim. “Elections are coming up in our state. Inquiry-shinquiry will cause all sorts of mud to be hurled. The media will be full of it. Our chances will be destroyed.”

As further losses occur, an inquiry to fix responsibility is at last instituted. But who is to inquire? The leader and his circle — who, after all, are responsible for all the decisions that have led the organisation to this pass — are the ones who alone can decide. They pick from among themselves, or, if the façade of ‘independence’, of ‘objectivity’ has to be maintained, their weak men and henchmen.

The inquiry never sees the light of day. In any case, no reform that may have resulted from the inquiry is ever visible. Perhaps for good reason: in all probability, each inquiry has concluded that no individual was responsible. The shortcomings were ‘systemic’!

How the party withers away

The clever spinners

The leader, cocooned, does not notice the ground slipping away, in part because he is by now surrounded by clever courtiers. The moment a victory turns up, they are able to produce a dozen reasons to show that it is due to the leader, and, incidentally, themselves. The moment a defeat occurs, they are able to produce two dozen reasons to prove that it is due to others. And another score why the defeat is due to special, transient, exceptional, local circumstances, and, therefore, is no cause for worry.

The party’s electoral losses resume. They accelerate. Fewer and fewer new recruits join the organisation. Those who join, join for reasons other than the ideas and ideals for which that party or organisation once stood — they do so, for instance, in the belief that doing so will get them jobs, posts, contracts.

The leader and his circle could easily see the portent, if only they would. Are only the already-converted coming to our meetings? Are they coming spontaneously, or do wehave to bus them? How many uncommitted, new listeners are coming to our meetings? Indeed, the leader and his circle do not have to go even that far. They just have to look only at their own diaries: how many persons outside our circle have we met in the last week? But they don’t see. The organisation is busy talking to itself. Those within the circle are busy knifing each other. And the leader? He is enveloped in an impenetrable fog of self-satisfaction: the day’s photo-opportunity, the day’s conclave, the day’s meeting of the ‘core group’, the day’s meeting of ‘office-bearers’, the day’s meeting of ‘allies’ — what a fulfilling day...

The party stops hearing those outside the party. The leader stops hearing those outside his circle — of weak men and henchmen.

Many factors continue to obscure the fact that the ground is shifting from underneath the party. For a while, to cite one factor, the ‘core constituency’ continues to support it: out of habit; out of loyalty to the old ideals; out of an obstinate consistency. But the leader and his circle reassure themselves, “Our core constituency is intact.”

They draw an operational inference: in the belief that doing so will solidify the support of this core constituency, they reinforce earlier slogans so as to demonstrate that they remain committed to their original ideology. But each time they proclaim the slogans, they remind listeners — all the more so, this core constituency as it remains truly committed to what those slogans had promised — that, when they had the opportunity, they did nothing for those promises to materialise. Regurgitating the slogans thus does little to mobilise the core constituency. On the other hand, it consolidates the opponents. And another thing has happened in the meantime: a host of new elements have entered the arena — for instance, the young. Each time the leader and his coterie proclaim those old slogans — ‘socialism’ of the Congress; ‘Hindutva’ of the BJP; ‘Marxism-Leninism’ of the assorted Communists — they remind these new entrants that they and their party are an obsolete bunch. And then, suddenly, one day, a day like any other, that ‘core constituency’ also walks away.

I feel the BJP is at a historic juncture here. If it still seeks to fundamentally alter the vision of India and the nature of its institutions, it has to make some radical changes or it looses its claim to be a party with a difference.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 16 Jul 2009 21:53

What Shourie documents is the multi-step progression in the "Evolution of Civilizations" by Quigley. Its at step 3 or even 4.

Quigley was in fact a leading theorist of the rise and fall of civilizations, developing a 7-stage model (Mixture, Gestation, Expansion, Age of Conflict, Universal Empire, Decay, and Invasion) that was integrated into a framework of analysis that included dimensions of power (military and political), wealth (economic and social), and outlook (intellectual and religious).

Shourie specifically warns about thinking about a particular political dispensation in India while reading his articles. He is right it applies to the whole political spectrum.

In gist what has happened is the harbingers of new ideas and changes(pre- and post-Independence movement reformers) have now become vested interests and the new status quo. What ususally happens is they have three choices: resist change, adopt changes or usher in the new reformers. The first two will lead to automatic decline and decay as they are the status quo powers. So they have to make way for the new changes by copting the new reformers. It then leads fo the next step.

Please read the book:

Evolution of Civilizations

I have this on my pda!

ShauryaT · Post by **ShauryaT** » 17 Jul 2009 13:25

ramana wrote:An Introduction To Evolution of Civilizations

I have this on my pda!

Do not have the patience to read this on a PDA!, getting it printed. Thanks.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 22 Jul 2009 20:35

SwamyG wrote:^^^^
My posts are like the pomegranate seeds - plenty; but your 166 posts are like the pearls in oysters - few but precious. You offer a pearl per thread In one thread when I mentioned "Bombay School" of thoughts; ramana gaaru had said it was time for Bombay School of thoughts to move and make way fro Madras School. Sridhar, you, Anujan (and probably Ramana - he has Madras connections) are all gurus of this school of thought. Now I need to piece out from ramana on what this school does ))))

Maybe few more OT posts will send this thread to History (a.k.a Trash)

SwamyG, The Madras school of thought which is metaphor for the South India as a whole, is focussed on total India and not just on rats and lizards or peddlers. it focusses on the big picture and a wholistic development.
Read Krishnaswamy Ayyangar's book on "Some contributions of South India to Indian history" to get historical prespective. Being far from the historical ghosts they develop a larger vision and a better prespective.

Bombay school is trader mentality and see munafa (to paraphrase Guru movie) in everything

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 22 Jul 2009 23:43

I have been thinking about the kind of secularism practised in India. I think the ref to the word crept in to sort of assure the minorites against percieved majoritarian tyranny which could develop later as the republic aged. So its reverse millat point of view. In practise it included shoring up minorities and browbeating majority. This was termed pseudo-secularism as it does not really mean the Western sense of the state not allowing religion to guide it.

On reflection I think it really is crony secualrism where particular cronies (from minorities and modern Hindus(Ramachandra Guha types)) are given privileges and propped up to hold the discourse.

By calling it pseudo-secularism the adherents get away as they do believe in what they are doing. However crony secularism has a negative connotation and is the right description for what passes as secularsim in Indian politics. This way the practioners and non-practioners are both the same except the practioners award privlileges to their cronies and browbeat the non-practioners.

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 22 Jul 2009 23:48

Good nomenclature. Sir. Hope people pick it up and give it maximum mileage.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 23 Jul 2009 00:13

What thoughts did the words evoke in you? How did you react to that? It will help in refining the concepts.

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 23 Jul 2009 00:19

The first thought it evoked in me was the reference to crony capitalism and how it is still a dreaded concept in India holding back the true abilities of Indian mercentaile class. Since the crony word always comes up.

The second thought that I had was that it breaks out of the established "I have heard it before" concept of psuedo-secularism which is now associated with a Pol party rather than a phenomena (games of perception unforunately)

The third thought I had was that I agreed to the negative connotation, its more negative as compared to psuedo,the word psuedo itself has no value judgement, crony is really negative usually. Both in Des as well as US

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 23 Jul 2009 00:23

So its a six. I was worried before posting it.

astal · Post by **astal** » 23 Jul 2009 01:08

Ramana and Sanku and all,

Crony secularism is good but may I humbly suggest also considering selective secularism. Secularism in India has come to mean protecting minorities (especially fundamentalist islamic and christian) at any cost. On the other hand religions/philosophy of Indian origin are open to all sorts or insult by this narrow minded-European-grafted concept of secularism.

In creating nomenclature our goal would be to make people of India origin and people positively disposed to India, but unaware of the contribution and necessity of Indian civilization (derogatorily called DIE on the forum) to introspect as to the adverse effects of practicing pseudo-crony-selective secularism.

We also need to make malicious Indians and non Indians (read the westerners and others, ill disposed to India as a civilization) realize that we are on to their game. Using a word with negative connotation creates unnecessary hostility in people naively invested in this contorted concept secularism and makes us look shrill.

In my view a true secularist would not discriminate between a polytheist, monotheist, atheist or any other theist or non theist. If monotheists are allowed to criticize atheists for example as non believers, they must be open to all sorts of criticism themselves without hiding under the garb of blasphemy, defamation or hurting religions sensitivities.

I think the discrimination against Indian origin thought (whether malicious or naive) can best be described as selective secularism especially if the goal is to open up discussions on moving towards true secularism or pluralism.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 23 Jul 2009 01:20

Well, well, what we got now?

FT is reporting that "Maoist guerrillas threatened to kill India's prime minister and ruling party leader yesterday."

"The warning came a month after the government listed the Communist Party of India (Maoists) as a terrorist group."

shravan · Post by **shravan** » 23 Jul 2009 15:45

Witzel conference on Rigveda in Delhi a farce

Witzel needs an introduction: Witzel calls himself a ‘well-known scientist’ in press releases about his trips. In fact, he is a church agent, more specifically from Dalit Freedom Network of Colorado church (proved in the CAPEEM california textbook trial).

Witzel has admitted that he and his cohorts were part of White Nationalist Church in USA and in contact with one or more of Fetna's members in the California textbook (Harvard Donkey Trial) matter, just as with many other Indians/NRIs and members of many other Indian organizations. FETNA is a front for LTTE. It is extraordinary that a Harvard academic should be associating with members of such an organization. FETNA in their letter of Feb. 19, 2006 to California State Board of Education wrote thanking Witzel for the efforts in proposing edits in pursuance of the Colorado evangelical church agenda, denigrating the hindu heritage to promote Japhetic biblical creationism theories and to achieve conversions of poor people dubbed 'dalits' by the church.

Here is Anoop’s report of July 19, 2009 on the meet at IIC, Delhi on July 10, 2009:
[quote] I attended the session, and I feel it was not exactly a good experience for Witzel there at IIC.

The main points are:

Kapila Vatsyayan, who chaired the talk, stated many views which were indirectly aimed at Witzel and his designs.

Kapila Vatsyayan gave her opinion after the question hour by taking atleast 10 minutes (very lightly with her trade mark pleasing smile). The main points she made were:

1. Witzel and all of the academic community working on the AIT are concentrating mainly on comparitive mythology. If myths are dissected for the purpose of finding parallels between civilizations, and historical conclusions are drawn out of them, then myths cease to be 'myths'.

2. The main background of RgVeda is subjects like cosmology etc.(do not confuse the word cosmology with religion!!). Your studies never highlight that aspect. To create a voluminous text and start a revolution of intellectual work based on very tough subjects like cosmology, just imagination is not enough. We have to accept that. We should study how the Vedic people were able to work in such a higher intellectual plain which can't be seen anywhere else.

3. RgVeda is poetry of very high level. And such a high level poetry, and that too with a very difficult subject as its base, cannot be made by a people who do not have a good intellectual lineage and practice.

4. It is not acceptable that history is tried to be proved just by using comparative mythology, linguistics or one or two other streams. There should be a multi-disciplinary approach towards learning history.
And the most interesting point she made was:

5. Everyone of us recites the Vedas to Upanishads daily without thinking who made it or where it originated. Whether it belong to Mesopotamia, or Greece or India, it never matters much to us..jo research ho raha hai..hone do..we never care for that. Because we understand the reason why we are reciting it. So please take note of this when you do the research.

People including Devendra Swarup ji, and many others attended the programme.

I felt from the audience that the people in India (the fence sitters) have started a general dissatisfaction with the repeated promotion of the Invasion theory by these academics. Kapila ji's opinions were well enough to boost them.

Anoop [unquote]

He wrote on 19 July 2009, about his ‘conference’ in IIC, Delhi and Dr. Bhagwan Singh’s questions as follows: ‘…Nothing untoward happened, except that the infamous Hindutvavadin Bhagwan Singh (who has identified the Indus and the Vedic civilizations) refused to give his name in the question period. He did so only after the chair, Kapila Vatsyayana, had insisted 3 times. His aim: he wanted me to publicly revoke a one line sentence in an old, 1995 paper. I merely referred him to a paper of mine of 2001, end of discussion. -- This talk at the India International Centre was well attended by the general public. However I saw a watchman there too.’
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Indo-Eura ... sage/12741
Now read on the exquisite report of Dr. Bhagwan Singh on Witzel’s pathetic plight in the IIC meet:

Michael Witzel: rattled rat at IIC

Bhagwan Singh
22 July 2009

I was really sorry for Prof. Michael Witzel. After all, he was our honoured guest! Dr. Singh should not have pounced on him so mercilessly, playing the cat and the rat game – the cat looking ascetically resigned tossing the rat, the rat pretending to be dead, breathlessly looking from the corner of his eye to judge the cat’s next move, running for his life, only to be pounced upon and tossed up again. The Chair kept smiling all through at this plight of the powerful brainy Harvard Professor of Sanskrit!

Frankly, I enjoyed the wild play. Prof. Witzel was in a state of trauma: nervous, edgy, twitching his lips, dropping his eyelids recurrently, looking askance to avoid his interlocutor, constantly using his hanky to rub his nose, murmuring something inaudible to explain his errors, occasionally seeking help from his votaries who were present in good number, but more ignorant than their demi-god, and hence themselves dazed. Singh smiled all the way, his smile mischievous, eyes sadistically aglitter, untrue to his true nature, but true to the occasion.

Rgveda

The occasion was a lecture on the Rgveda by Prof. Michael Witzel, at the India International Centre, on 10 July 2009. Presided over by Dr. Kapila Vatsyayan, it was attended by scholars of different hues and expectations. No one suspected that Witzel with his claim to be a ranking Vedic scholar knew so little that he could not answer a single query. Indeed, he appeared blank as far as the Rgvedawas concerned. He rose nervously to speak on the Veda, but actually spoke on the Aryan migration from Afghanistan to Punjab!

The lecture merely reiterated what Prof. Witzel has written years ago: that north-western India was populated by Munda speaking people when Indo-Aryan speakers arrived on the scene. Old Indo-Aryan was influenced by the substrate Proto-Munda. He proposed a time bracket of 1500-1250 BC for composition of theRgveda and suggested Book IV and Book VI were the oldest, advantage Book IV.

Witzel painted Rgvedic society as nomadic pastoralist, illiterate and with little interest in agriculture and sedentary life. There was virtually nothing in his speech that was not lifted from nineteenth century archives. He showed no awareness of recent researches in archaeology, anthropology, literature or historical linguistics, and presented even Kuiper with his pathological distortions.

Many archaeologists and professors of history attended the lecture, including your writer, Vedic scholar Bhagwan Singh. When the floor was thrown open for discussions, Bhagwan Singh introduced himself as the author of The Vedic Harappans, and said that his data contradicted each and every statement made by Witzel; he sought permission to exchange notes on a few issues. With the Chair’s permission, Singh said:

- You have reordered the Rgvedic strata, rating IV and VI to be the oldest and the rest belonging to intermediate and late stages. I have no objection to your sequence, but find your chronology miserably on the lower side. There is a reference to white pottery in one verse in Book IV (4.27.5). White pottery is a distinctive feature of Hakra Ware dated to 3000 BC. This goes against your dating of 1500-1250 BC for the Rgveda.

Witzel was dumbstruck. He murmured something inaudible, avoiding the audience, looking sideways. He tried to explain that the sequence arranged by him was based on the number of verses in a book, the smallest being the oldest. It caused Kapila ji and others to smile openly. I could not make out the reason and reminded him that Book IV is shorter than Book VI; but the shortest book is Book II! So here again, he was caught on the wrong foot.

He hesitantly managed, “There is no evidence of chariot or horse in India earlier than the mid-second millennium.”

- But Professor, the aśva in Rgveda, whatever could it have been, was brought from sea bound areas, even the aśva in the horse sacrifice, mentioned in Book I, hymn 163.

Prof. Witzel had no choice but to bite his lips in desperation.

- You say that the wheel and chariot were invented by Aryans when they were in Central Asia, but in the Book IV itself, Bhr.gus are given the credit for manufacturing wheels (4.16.20). Chariot and wheel was therefore not Aryan, but a Dravidian invention.

Witzel pretended that the inventors might have been Aryans and manufacturers Dravidians! He now forgot the antiquity of Book IV, which according to his suggestion, could have been written in Central Asia, older even than Book VI, composed entirely in Northern Afghanistan; Dravidian speakers must have been there as well.

- You talk of substrate effect of Proto-Munda and suggest no role of Proto-Dravidian at the early stage. But Kipper had concluded that three ethnic groups participated in a cultural process. The three are conspicuously present in the Rgveda, Bhr.gus Dravidian, Angirasas Mundari, besides the Sanskrit speakers.

Prof. Witzel mumbled something for a minute; his nervousness was apparent in his evasive gestures.

Kapila ji must have taken pity at his visible discomfort. She invited others to raise doubts, if they had any. Someone at the extreme end of the hall asked a question on the distorted reading of the Sankhyayan Śrautasutra, which had exposed his culpability half a decade back. Witzel responded by referring to an article written by him, without telling us what his defence was!

After a few worthless queries, the debate shrunk back to Michael Witzel, Kapila Vatsyayan, and Bhagwan Singh.

- The problem with you, Professor, is that you are not familiar with the content of Book IV even. Hymn 57 of Book IV gives a graphic depiction of advanced agriculture, with a plough almost similar to the one that was common in India up to the mid-twentieth century, drawn by a pair of bullocks and driven by a ploughman in service. And in one of the Ŗics, the poet talks of milking the earth as a cow, year after year. It testifies to advanced agricultural activities with sedentary population and belies the myth of nomadism, pastoralism, and barbarity.

The Chair could not hold her laughter; Witzel shook in dismay.

The last nail was hammered by Kapila ji herself. In a jocular vein, she said, “The theme of the lecture was Rgveda. Vedic poetry is known for its sublimity and rare beauty. I expected Prof. Witzel to speak something on it, but he did not say even a word on the theme.”

Witzel agreed that the Hymns on Uşā are really beautiful.

I interjected, “not only Uşā Sūktas professor, the entire Rgveda. Some of it could never be surpassed, such as the Nāsdīya Sūkta, with such expression as tama āsīt tamasā gūlhmagre, darkness was entrapped within darkness.

All in all, it was an interesting evening, if not for the presentation by Prof. Witzel, then for his discomfiture.

Prof. Bhagwan Singh is a Marxist scholar who accepted the archaeological evidence against the theory of Aryan invasion of India