Future Strategic Scenario for the Indian Subcontinent -II

[RajeshA]

Donald Rumsfeld once said: "As you know, you go to war with the Army you have".
Well for India, one would say: "As you know, you go to war with the Government you have".

But would it not be easier to amend the Government you can have; than going with the assumption that the Government you have will be the Government that one can have always.
There are many steps that needs to happen within India first, and also in BD quite a lot, before things can move. And one of the easiest steps would be to amend the Government you can have, there are plenty of opportunities every 5 years (give or take a couple). This will happen sooner rather than later.

A democratically-elected Government, IMO, represents a consensus between will of the people and the constraints of the environment. As they say, "politics is the art of the possible"! Over generations, our political thinking has developed in a certain way and all our politicians think in a certain way. For the Hindus to get excited, some serious red lines have to be crossed. Not only do these red lines lie pretty close to the heart, these red lines themselves are pretty thick, not that easy to cross them.

Revolutionary political thinking is difficult in India, as for revolution one would never get sufficient number of people excited, and even if they get excited, they will be be fighting against the glacial inertia of the unexcitables, who wouldn't see their red lines crossed.

This thinking IMHO to a large extent reflects in our politicians. If China does not attack, Indian politicians will not move. In the meantime, our politicians will be open to only those missions, which can be wrapped as positive missions, not targeting anybody and not provoking ill-will from others. Negative missions, that is aggressive moves to stall Chinese advances, would find approval only with much difficulty.

Regardless of which party or coalition comes to power in Delhi, this thinking would not change much. It is nigh to impossible for us to change from "World is big enough for both China and India" to "Free Tibet pronto, otherwise ..."!

In chess at the end, you try to get a checkmate by constraining the space, where the King could move to. Well China is doing exactly that in our neighborhood, but we say our King is still alive and we have not been attacked, so all's well. All our moves are positive and defensive moves - a CECA here, an FTA there, a defense pact here, some forward base out of panic. But we are not undertaking any negative moves, any offensive moves - Tibet is still part of China, One-China Policy, etc. We are not using the full potential of our policy arsenal. We are not taking down the proxies and agents of PRC in the Indian Subcontinent as brutally as we could and should.

The only options visible to the government are the positive moves.

That is why I said, "we go to war with the Government we have".

[AKalam]

Self deleted.

[brihaspati]

There is one single issue about BD that does not allow me to hope for a "peaceful" integration with India. This is the issue of religious separatism which is now an entrenched ideology and tool in the elite that seems to control BD politics.

The lead up to the '71 happened because of a methodological internal conflict within the BD Islamic elite and upcoming upper-middle class after the Partition. In 47, they clearly saw separation from a "Hidnu" India as a first step towards land (and other biological resources) re-distribution. In this it is necessary to remember that whatever be the pious modern misrepresentations about the sanctity of land ownership in Islam - it is primarily to protect land ownership of landed Islamics, and the ownership rights of non-Muslims are only respected if Muslim coercive power is not strong enough.

Three things were targets of the 47 riots and Partition in Bengal. These were primarily land of the Hindus, secondly any accumulated wealth of the Hindus, and thirdly any young or beautiful women of the Hindus. There are well documented cases of these. I disagree with Akalam bhai that BM would represent a moderating influence, and that the conversion or expansion of Islamism in the central and eastern Bengal had been qualitatively any different from that in rest of India. Any moderation that appears is not an inherent and community wise feature - for if it were so, BM society should have actively intervened to prevent what happened in East Bengal on Hindus in '47. Apart from a few cases like that of Batam Sardar, not much evidence points to any presence of such "inherent moderation".

So because there was the possibility of gaining Hindu lands, property, and women - there was little or no active resistance to Pakistanization from the BM. However, as was apparent soon after, the large majority did not benefit long term from this redistribution and BD Mulsim elite saw their economic and power ambitions thwarted by the self-proclaimed TFTA's from the western side. The BD elite obviously split into two factions - one for opposing Paki westerners and the other for collaboration. The fight was an internal one and over the method of achieving further power and greater exploitative rights over East Bengal itself.

To fight against Pak, it was obviously tactically necessary to have India on side since by then Pak was already the blue-eyed boy of other potential supporters in the West. If we look carefully at the various splits and reorganizations and party formations of the period between 47 and 71 - this becomes clear. But both methodological factions had their common heritage and roots in the anti-Hindu ML foundations.

The moderation or tolerance or secularism that we see in BD is a historical legacy of that tactical compromise and not an inherent dominant societal or community feature. All such cultural attitudes are confined to pockets of marginal groups which however do not drive the mainstream of BD politics.

I am trying to point out that having looted land and wealth and women from the Hindu, the BD Muslim elite will not give it all up again unless there is the possibility of greater loot in union with India. Besides the normal educational apparatus BD has never really dismantled the Islamic ideological educational indoctrination institutions - and even the AL gov has been forced to subsidize the system by promoting and refurbishing and strengthening the madrassahs.

Further the Partition processes still drive and will continue to drive the Islamic theologian, BD elite politician and army top-brass nexus and any apparent leaning or convergence towards India will only be a tactical tool. The basic underlying controlling group interest will more genuinely ally itself with China, UK, USA or Pak than with India. Because there is no inherent cultural "moderation" - the commons will primarily do what the elites exhort them to do, especially if it is given in terms of material-interest feeding Islamic memes.

I am worried, that at least three processes are possibly taking place in BD below the radar of the type of analysis we carry out here.

(1) there are ongoing negotiations and longer term planning about collaboration with China going on - militarily and economics wise to bring the entire NE into the Chinese sphere with BD as the advance post. To cover this up we will see some apparently genuine collaboration in getting at long-known insurgent and separatists in NE India.

(2) sections of the BD security forces, including the BDR - past or current - waiting and planning for a future change of regime in line with Islamic targets in coordination with ME.

(3) BD may suddenly reverse its current anti-Jamaat, non-anti-India, line. It could even be headed for a virtual military coup masked as a civilian one.

Without removing the BD Muslim elite, its theologians and their institutions (which are increasingly funded by externals ources) and its army leadership - no integration will be possible. The voices that AKalam bhai is talking about have always been led by their Islamist elite and theologians and have no inherent cultural resistance to such exhortation.

[RajeshA]

brihaspati garu,

you speak of two things

1. Islamic urge to loot land, wealth and women of non-Muslims.
2. Islamic natural urge to distance himself from the kufr (Partition Processes), unless it is in his interest to stay.

As I see it there have been some new additions to the modern world - the land's deeds titles are registered with the registrar, one has one's wealth in bank accounts. Only women are truly approachable for 'looters' according to the old way of doing things. Basically, as long as the legal system is weak, or unavailable, or corrupted there will openly be squatting, robbery, rape, what not. In such a state, not only Islamists but any gang would be indulging in all this. So this is the question of law and order. The question is whether state is willing to take on powerful religious leaders and vested interests. If local authorities are not ready, the state police should take over, and if they can't take it, then the case should be given to CBI.

But I agree completely with you that there needs to be legislation and system, which comes down especially hard on religious bodies and figures, who abuse their mandate. I'm reminded about the film "The Untouchables". This is however true of India also. But it should give some comfort, that Indian intelligence (which would include Bangladeshis in the scenario) would be able to have more HUMINT assets in Bangladesh also, and keep "everything" under observation. It would be better to know, what is going in the Indian Subcontinent, than not to.

brihaspati garu,
I have had a different focus, so perhaps you can enlighten me on a theory. Can it be, that India lost control of the destiny of Indian Muslims because we did not have any intermediaries - the traditional Muslim elite, which migrated to Pakistan in big numbers leaving the Indian Muslims under the responsibility of the Muslim clerics, who have kept them still in ghetto mentality? Can it be that India would be better off in the case of Bangladesh, because their elite is intact? I know, that whatever the whether is, the elite just want to preserve their position and privileges, and become still more richer and influential, giving little regard to ideology. This means that Indian and Bangladeshi elite will hit off well, when the unification happens, as there would be plenty of deals to be made. Same with politicians, who would jointly have to take the responsibility of the country. Both the armies would be merged, and after the old generation of soldiers is retired, the new Bangladeshi soldiers in the Indian Army would feel part and parcel of it.

So if the elite is profiting, the poor get to work and eat, and the middle class is entertained, would there still be any move to disturb the status quo, that is to yearn for partition?

(1) there are ongoing negotiations and longer term planning about collaboration with China going on - militarily and economics wise to bring the entire NE into the Chinese sphere with BD as the advance post. To cover this up we will see some apparently genuine collaboration in getting at long-known insurgent and separatists in NE India.

That is why I think, India needs to move quickly on this. India needs to offer a new vision to Bangladesh. A "union" with West Bengal within India is a big prize for them to rethink their partners.

China has never supported the build up of manufacturing base in any other country. They would only destroy the Bangladeshi Apparel Industry, if the Bangladeshis get mesmerized by their sweet and greasy talk. So some sections of the population can be activated to oppose Chinese incursion into Bangladesh.

If BD gets to be in India, then they can throw their plans for Northeast or whatever the Chinese are trying to sell to them in the dustbin. They would already be in the same country with Indian Northeast and West Bengal. Why would they then want to hand out those parts to China?

(2) sections of the BD security forces, including the BDR - past or current - waiting and planning for a future change of regime in line with Islamic targets in coordination with ME.

No matter how much they look at Middle-East, BD will remain a SDRE country, and will not rise in the hierarchy of Islamic nations.

After merger, BDR would have the privilege to test out some of the best toys in the world and belong to a upcoming superpower. The Middleeast can offer BD elites nothing similar.

(3) BD may suddenly reverse its current anti-Jamaat, non-anti-India, line. It could even be headed for a virtual military coup masked as a civilian one.

All that is possible. That is why I think India should move quickly on this.

[RamaY]

Within a United subcontinent/India, I believe BM's and a transformed Bengal because of them can play a moderating and positive role, mainly because Bengali's, fighting hard with the elements and adversity (counting the cyclones, tornados and flood we face every year), are a hardy and survival oriented people. Survival, economic gain and uplift is more of a priority than some abstract ideals.

Sorry, but this is too much of brotherhood for my mind to accept all at one time...

Are we talking about the 'moderating and positive role' BD muslims played in United India prior to 1947, showing their differences from other Indiam Muslims, such as the muslims in western India and the muslims in Nizam etc.,

The best thing in this type of discussions is that we have a well established bench mark. The pre-1947 behavior of sub-continental muslims. India is very fortunate to have all this happened in past century as anything that happened any earlier than that could have been arugued as "myth" (like our secular historians would say)

[RajeshA]

AKalam ji,

First of all thanks for an enthusiastic and positive portrayal of the Bangladeshis, and what they could contribute within a United India.

Secondly some of the links you have pasted, need to be properly filtered. I looked at one, the one from Raza Rumi, and I am not sure, I would want to follow any more of those links.

Raza Rumi is a git - very eager to do the liberal Pakistani number of India-Pakistan equal-equal, where for him there is no difference between RSS and LeT. If any unification project in the Indian Continent has to succeed, then it is important not just to keep Pakistanis away at a pole's distance, but especially liberal Pakistanis should be kept away. They are the worst Muslim chauvinists, who may speak of liberalism in Islam but have a vehement hate for SD, and pretty much understand only with Indian Liberals who love to undermine and insult India, or with Hindus who have turned into godless Marxists, usually from West Bengal.

Pakistan, especially Pakjab, needs to go through a few generations of decontamination, before India would feel comfortable with Pakistanis under the same national roof.

I personally would not look at any links about mergers, which remotely has Pakistan to be found in the article.

Sorry if all this sounds hard-line, but BRF does not entertain Pakistani propaganda, even if it is hidden under layers of 'human feelings'.

I would request you to go through those links, and remove those which are initiatives by Pakistanis, Marxist Bengalis, Indian 'Liberals' of the Suzanne Arundhati Roy, or Praful Bidwai variety, or which smell of India-Pakistan love fest. Probably the only ones left would be by Akhand Bharatis, which would be too heavy on ideology and too light on strategic thinking. If there are Bangladeshis, who yearn for being part of a United Subcontinent, but have no love lost for Pakistanis, then those links would be very welcome.

BTW, if one googles for "India Bangladesh merger -Pakistan" you only get some company mergers.

In the end, I did check a few more, and found out that those links are pure trash propaganda against India, e.g. the one from savebd.

Kindly remove those links.

Perhaps you might be interested in exploring such an idea of unification amongst other Bangladeshis -
Bangladesh Strategic & Development Forum

[JwalaMukhi]

The only options visible to the government are the positive moves.

That is why I said, "we go to war with the Government we have".

Fair enough. Good reasoning. Much is centered on leadership issue.

But it is imperative to track how the hindu population in Bangladesh has fared historically. It has been on the decline and continues even to this day. This will be preliminary bench mark that has to sustain for a period in future atleast as long as the Bangladesh has existed. The odds of even meeting the minimum modicum criteria by Bangladesh is very very low. The taqqiya component has to be taken away from the BDs. This will be one of the preliminary steps that India has to do.
P.S.: The common BDs who have sneaked inside India to much touted livelihood and putting the future of their children is complete hogwash. The BDs who have made it into India illegally have demonstrated their primary concern in Deganga (W.Bengal) not so recently.

[Guddu]

Peaceful Consolidation of Indian Subcontinent: What's in it for Bangladesh and others?

Well we can agree that many Bangladeshis migrate to India, almost always illegally for the sake of work or for more space. So a union with India, would first and foremost give the Bangladeshis new space to expand into for economic benefits.

Now this may not go down very well with the poor in India, who want to have the first shot at some work. So the Government of United India would have to ensure that there is enough growth, job growth and inclusive growth to generate enough work for as many as possible. In fact, India should be taking a page from Bangladesh's Book on Micro-financing, and try to generate more entrepreneurial spirit. If the Bangladeshis come in, we would to treat them as our own as well.

Another thing Bangladesh could be expecting is lots of investment from India, both public and private. It would be in India's interest that as much as possible, Bangladeshis remain in Bangladeshi regions, hence the effort would be to develop Bangladesh's infrastructure as well to support bigger economy, more economic activity.

Not just Indian investments, but knowing that Bangladesh is part of United India, part of Brand India, it would give the outside world far more confidence in the present stability and future evolution of Bangladesh, resulting in far more investments from the richer countries.

There have been some who predict that Bangladesh is losing land to the sea due to rising sea levels caused by global warming. Some say Bangladesh may lose up to 17% of its land by 2050, when the sea levels rise by 1 meter.


Others say, that the silt being carried down the rivers - Ganga, Brahmaputra and Meghna, is helping in the accretion of new land. So whether it is for building river embankments, dykes, dams, cross dams, etc. India can help Bangladesh in its endeavors to save its land as well as in land reclamation, and developing newly reclaimed land. A useful blog on the issue.

The biggest gain however for Bangladesh would however be that they would be reunited with the rest of their ethnic kin - the West Bengalis in a single country - United India. Any Bangladeshi PM which can deliver this would go down in history as a great Bengali Patriot. True Bangladesh plus West Bengal would not be a separate country as some nationalists would have it, but it would be the next big thing. For Bangladeshis Kolkata would not be a Kandor anymore. The culture and ecosystem of Bengal can be whole again. Bangladesh has been a part of India for millenia and it is now being severed from it by a fence. Surely Bangladeshis would want to be one with the whole again if given the choice.

In the hierarchy of Muslim nations, which is based on martial history, TFTA level and money, Bangladesh is pretty much at the bottom. Even if they all become Jihadis and join Al Qaeda, they will not be moving up substantially. So why try? There is nothing to be achieved down that road. This can change, if they suddenly become part of an upcoming superpower growing at 9% and which would be the biggest Muslim country in the world by far - 306 million. By joining India, the Bangladeshis would have the opportunity to punch far above their weight, especially in the Muslim World, than if they remain independent as Bangladesh.

There would be misgivings about India, but the message should get across, that India has never tried to undermine any of its constituent states, but has always tried to ensure that each can develop to its maximum potential. That is the most fundamental truth about India, and if Bangladesh should join India, it would be no different.

The critical constituency is the Bangladeshi Military. Well the Bangladeshi Military would be merged with the Indian Military. They will get better training, better weaponry and better pay after the merger.

For the others, the arguments in favor would also go under similar lines.

As far as Maldives is concerned, its whole population ~400,000 would have to be found alternative accommodation on the Indian Mainland.

Nepal if it remains a separate country, would become the battlefield of superpowers, and a lot of grass would be trampled underneath. As the Chinese penetrate into Nepal, India would feel threatened, and the free movement and work opportunities that Nepalese avail of right now in India would be a thing of the past, as a big fence may come up between India and Nepal too. This is something, the Nepalese may not like and would be keen to prevent by merging formally with India.

Same is the case with Sri Lankans. They are leaning far too much towards the Chinese already. If India feels threatened by the Chinese presence, outside forces, not just Indians, but Americans also would restart their interference in the island republic by extending support to the Tamil Tigers. Sri Lankans have a very bright future, but only if the ghosts past are not let loose on the Sri Lankans again. By staying outside India, that is not guaranteed.

The Buddhist clergy of Sri Lanka would find temptation in the idea of merging with India, as being the largest Buddhist nation in the Indian Subcontinent, they would get a lot of leeway on the Buddhist places of worship.

Bhutan's security, culture and nascent democracy are much more secure if Bhutan merges with India, because India would become fully committed to protecting the territorial integrity of its northern borders.

How about a true merger with Indian Kashmir first ?...remove article 360 or whatever its called.

[RajeshA]

How about a true merger with Indian Kashmir first ?...remove article 360 or whatever its called.

They are too TFTA and now want Sharia also!

[AKalam]

AKalam ji,

First of all thanks for an enthusiastic and positive portrayal of the Bangladeshis, and what they could contribute within a United India.

Secondly some of the links you have pasted, need to be properly filtered. I looked at one, the one from Raza Rumi, and I am not sure, I would want to follow any more of those links.

Raza Rumi is a git - very eager to do the liberal Pakistani number of India-Pakistan equal-equal, where for him there is no difference between RSS and LeT. If any unification project in the Indian Continent has to succeed, then it is important not just to keep Pakistanis away at a pole's distance, but especially liberal Pakistanis should be kept away. They are the worst Muslim chauvinists, who may speak of liberalism in Islam but have a vehement hate for SD, and pretty much understand only with Indian Liberals who love to undermine and insult India, or with Hindus who have turned into godless Marxists, usually from West Bengal.

Pakistan, especially Pakjab, needs to go through a few generations of decontamination, before India would feel comfortable with Pakistanis under the same national roof.

I personally would not look at any links about mergers, which remotely has Pakistan to be found in the article.

Sorry if all this sounds hard-line, but BRF does not entertain Pakistani propaganda, even if it is hidden under layers of 'human feelings'.

I would request you to go through those links, and remove those which are initiatives by Pakistanis, Marxist Bengalis, Indian 'Liberals' of the Suzanne Arundhati Roy, or Praful Bidwai variety, or which smell of India-Pakistan love fest. Probably the only ones left would be by Akhand Bharatis, which would be too heavy on ideology and too light on strategic thinking. If there are Bangladeshis, who yearn for being part of a United Subcontinent, but have no love lost for Pakistanis, then those links would be very welcome.

BTW, if one googles for "India Bangladesh merger -Pakistan" you only get some company mergers.

In the end, I did check a few more, and found out that those links are pure trash propaganda against India, e.g. the one from savebd.

Kindly remove those links.

Perhaps you might be interested in exploring such an idea of unification amongst other Bangladeshis -
Bangladesh Strategic & Development Forum

Most welcome RajeshA ji.

I removed some of the controversial links, please let me know if there any other links that should be removed.

The actual keywords I used in google are "bangladesh india merger" with Instant off and 100 results chosen in Advanced search.

[RajeshA]

I removed some of the controversial links, please let me know if there any other links that should be removed.

The actual keywords I used in google are "bangladesh india merger" with Instant off and 100 results chosen in Advanced search.

AKalam ji,

That's the wrong way to go.

If you post the links, you're responsible for them. You cannot post just any arbitrary links you find in a Google search, regardless of criteria you use. I would request you to delete all the links. If you had read them you would find out that they're mostly about the illegal Bangladeshi immigrants in India who may ask for a merger of India's Northeast with Bangladesh. That may be a very valid problem that India has, but somehow I doubt that it was your intention.

[AKalam]

I removed some of the controversial links, please let me know if there any other links that should be removed.

The actual keywords I used in google are "bangladesh india merger" with Instant off and 100 results chosen in Advanced search.

AKalam ji,

That's the wrong way to go.

If you post the links, you're responsible for them. You cannot post just any arbitrary links you find in a Google search, regardless of criteria you use. I would request you to delete all the links. If you had read them you would find out that they're mostly about the illegal Bangladeshi immigrants in India who may ask for a merger of India's Northeast with Bangladesh. That may be a very valid problem that India has, but somehow I doubt that it was your intention.

RajeshA ji,

My apologies, the links have been deleted. I didn't read them through. Obviously that was not my intention.

[RamaY]

As I see it there have been some new additions to the modern world - the land's deeds titles are registered with the registrar, one has one's wealth in bank accounts. Only women are truly approachable for 'looters' according to the old way of doing things. Basically, as long as the legal system is weak, or unavailable, or corrupted there will openly be squatting, robbery, rape, what not. In such a state, not only Islamists but any gang would be indulging in all this. So this is the question of law and order. The question is whether state is willing to take on powerful religious leaders and vested interests. If local authorities are not ready, the state police should take over, and if they can't take it, then the case should be given to CBI.

You should visit TSP thread more often RajeshA-ji, to learn how TSP demands money from kufr lands in modern world. More over what additional value CBI can provide given its spotless reputation?

Jokes aside,

Aren't we putting the cart before the horse w.r.t Indian subcontinent. We can learn few lessons from EU and USA (have better law-and-order infrastructures and response times) on the issues they are facing with domesticating islamism and the social and security costs associated with unqualified secularism?

The philosophical issue with Islamism is its pan-national form. As long as even a single Islamic state remains in the world, Islamism will remain a social and security threat to non-islamic states. One has to wait till all the Islamic states turn secular (here I mean the current definition of secularism not Dharmic type I propose in other threads) to completely/permanently solve local Islamism issue.

IMHO, demands for secularism in Islamic states is more important than democracy. For example, India is better of with a secular Pakistan (I know, it is oxymoron) than with a democratic Pakistan (which is also oxymoron). That IMO is the difference between BD and Pakistan.

[brihaspati]

RajeshAji,

I have had a different focus, so perhaps you can enlighten me on a theory. Can it be, that India lost control of the destiny of Indian Muslims because we did not have any intermediaries - the traditional Muslim elite, which migrated to Pakistan in big numbers leaving the Indian Muslims under the responsibility of the Muslim clerics, who have kept them still in ghetto mentality? Can it be that India would be better off in the case of Bangladesh, because their elite is intact? I know, that whatever the whether is, the elite just want to preserve their position and privileges, and become still more richer and influential, giving little regard to ideology. This means that Indian and Bangladeshi elite will hit off well, when the unification happens, as there would be plenty of deals to be made. Same with politicians, who would jointly have to take the responsibility of the country. Both the armies would be merged, and after the old generation of soldiers is retired, the new Bangladeshi soldiers in the Indian Army would feel part and parcel of it.

So if the elite is profiting, the poor get to work and eat, and the middle class is entertained, would there still be any move to disturb the status quo, that is to yearn for partition?

The first planners of retrogression and insulation of Indian Muslims - from modernization under Brits - included one infamous "Nawab" of "Dacca" who himself was an out and out collaborator with the Brits. Moreover the hatred of Paki Muslims about Bengali Muslims - did not allow some of the BD Muslim leadership to "join in" and migrate. Having said that, if you actually research the BD islamists - even some of its cultural personalities - they have intermarried with Paki Islamists. Interconnections do exist.

The Pakis practically decimated the SD elite - as well as those of BM who chose to separate themselves from Paki Islamism. What we now have in BD as elite is a mixture of three societal sources - one comes from the networks that participated in the liberation struggle (led primarily by idealist youth and leftist militants who were used as cannon fodder by the ML derivatives who chose to use Bengali nationalism to gain power), another comes from upper echelons of the army whose initial loyalties and role have always been the subject of controversy and been clouded since then with repeated murky coups, third comes from old and well established theological networks. All three have substantial overlap. A fourth factor which cannot be considered elite but a fluid "classless" coterie - a kind of nationwide lumpen robber barony - including all sorts of profit and land seeking opportunists.

These four have an alliance that has stood the test of time and they have everything to fear from an interaction with Indian and SD following elite.

There is little opprtunity to deny the inherent hatred of the "Bengali" - especially the language - in the upper GV - a hatred which I have personally seen to take murderous proportions. I can foresee the resistance to incorporation of more of the Bengali stiffly from upper GV. More importantly the Bengali nationalism will be reinvented by the BD elite and reinforced by Islamism as a parallel resistance from BD side.

It may also crucially depend on the attitudes and tactics of Indian elite. If we still have current brand of "secularists" from SD origins - then there will be a merry alliance you don't even want to hear about.

To set BD back on its evolutionary path that should have been but was derailed - instead of the BD elite, we may need to get the upper-middle and middle classes on board. Just like the Bengali SD middle-classes who took to modernization like ducks to water - outpacing the elite rebels who first started it and greatly diluted their SD loyalties in the process or reinvented SD in certain ways. This process could have worked for the BM muslim at the same time but did not because of its elite's role and lack of a "middle" class a la SD (which were formed out of dispossession of previous elite under Islamic rule).

[RajeshA]

You should visit TSP thread more often RajeshA-ji, to learn how TSP demands money from kufr lands in modern world.

Oh! I used to live there, . Then China came up.

TSP blackmails the world threatening with Global Jihadism and using the middle-men - A COAS with an invisible beard, and the joker pack of politicians.

The same thing can happen internally as well - Islamic Terrorism, Jihad emanating from Indian Muslims and Bangladeshi Muslims, with some Muslims playing the role of middlemen. So the model could work.

My 'Hopes' are that a combination of a powered minority (BMs), having a share in power in Delhi, having the responsibility of development to their own people in Bangladeshi areas, having a strong ethnic bond with others, say in WB, and being SDRE, would suffice to give them a positive incentive to build India together.

Unlike Pakistan, which lives off the money from the West for being munna, Bangladesh has followed developmental politics somewhat more seriously, so the urge by the Govt there to blackmail other countries for clamping down on Jihadis has not been apparent.

More over what additional value CBI can provide given its spotless reputation?

Jokes aside,

Well CBI and IB would just have to rise to the occasion.

Aren't we putting the cart before the horse w.r.t Indian subcontinent. We can learn few lessons from EU and USA (have better law-and-order infrastructures and response times) on the issues they are facing with domesticating islamism and the social and security costs associated with unqualified secularism?

They do have converts too recently who have joined the ranks of the Islamists, but mostly it is the immigrant population who are Muslims there. They do not fit in well in the system which is very foreign to them. The Indian Muslims and Bangladeshi Muslims are basically the same as us as far as ethnicity goes. They have lived here for millennia, whether as Hindus, Buddhists or Muslims.

Whereas the Migrant Muslims in the West, even though they claim Allah's sanction to spread out everywhere, they feel they do not belong there socially, causing their alienation, which causes them not to fully embrace the national agenda of Western countries. India's Muslims feel they were left behind due to Partition, stranded in India, and also do not really belong here, causing their alienation, which causes them too not to fully embrace the national agenda. Unification with Bangladesh could give them their sense of belonging to India back, so that they are willing to work for India.

Jihadism would prosper in Muslim-majority countries, where either the radical Muslims want to overthrow a Muslim Govt., whom they consider munafiqeen or it would occur in Muslim-minority countries where the Muslims feel alienated and not empowered allowing Global Jihadist forces to subvert them. Of course, there would be proselytization pressure everywhere on other communities from the Islamists, but that can be warded off if the law and order machinery is working, appeasement levels are down and the other communities are just as confidant about their beliefs.

This is exactly what both India and Bangladesh get from their unification - Bangladesh bound by the Indian Constitution and inside India would cease to be a plausible target for Islamists, so the "Munafiqeen's" hold on power would be strengthened. Similarly the IMs would not feel alienated and stranded any more, and it would be more difficult for Global Jihadist forces to find recruits and converts to their cause. Their proselytization drive can also be blunted if the Hindus themselves start taking care of their own. So if Islamic extremism cannot spread through intensification amongst the Muslims (no Govt. to overthrow, no alienation) nor through expansion (Hindus remain Hindus), nor through inter-communal conflict through more reaching out and better law & order, then I presume it would be a win against Islamic Extremism.

We have to build on ethnicity and common history.

Till now no Indian Muslim community really has shown any responsibility to develop their masses. Bangladeshi Muslims could give them some guidance there.

The philosophical issue with Islamism is its pan-national form. As long as even a single Islamic state remains in the world, Islamism will remain a social and security threat to non-islamic states. One has to wait till all the Islamic states turn secular (here I mean the current definition of secularism not Dharmic type I propose in other threads) to completely/permanently solve local Islamism issue.

Islamism is also bound by the rules of supply and demand. If the demand is not there - no alienation therapy, no caliphate hope, no communal tension, no proselytization hope, then Indian Muslims would stop drinking the Kool-Aid from Pakistan and Saudi Arabia. An Indian Muslim Nationalism would harden them yet further against any offers from West Asia. If the Indian Economy booms and the Muslims have something from that, then they would also not be susceptible to bribery from the Saudis and Emiratis.

The one opening for Islamism would then be depression or mental weakness amongst Muslim youth, which may be containable through family guidance, proper propaganda, etc.

Tha Pan-National character of Islam could also be used in the other direction, where someday the IMs influence the geopolitics in West Asia (even though that is hoping for a miracle).

IMHO, demands for secularism in Islamic states is more important than democracy. For example, India is better of with a secular Pakistan (I know, it is oxymoron) than with a democratic Pakistan (which is also oxymoron). That IMO is the difference between BD and Pakistan.

I am all for an Islamist monster in Pakjab that is geographically contained and India-manipulated. Would serve as a good mirror to show how ugly Islam can look.

[RajeshA]

The first planners of retrogression and insulation of Indian Muslims - from modernization under Brits - included one infamous "Nawab" of "Dacca" who himself was an out and out collaborator with the Brits. Moreover the hatred of Paki Muslims about Bengali Muslims - did not allow some of the BD Muslim leadership to "join in" and migrate. Having said that, if you actually research the BD islamists - even some of its cultural personalities - they have intermarried with Paki Islamists. Interconnections do exist.

I believe, if the Pakjabi population is brought down below the Somali level of chaos, the whole TFTA of the Paki Islamist may also disappear. They amount of sectarian mayhem that would be deposited at their door, would give even the Bangladeshis reason to doubt the sanity of their Pakistani relatives.

The Pakis practically decimated the SD elite - as well as those of BM who chose to separate themselves from Paki Islamism. What we now have in BD as elite is a mixture of three societal sources - one comes from the networks that participated in the liberation struggle (led primarily by idealist youth and leftist militants who were used as cannon fodder by the ML derivatives who chose to use Bengali nationalism to gain power), another comes from upper echelons of the army whose initial loyalties and role have always been the subject of controversy and been clouded since then with repeated murky coups, third comes from old and well established theological networks. All three have substantial overlap. A fourth factor which cannot be considered elite but a fluid "classless" coterie - a kind of nationwide lumpen robber barony - including all sorts of profit and land seeking opportunists.

These four have an alliance that has stood the test of time and they have everything to fear from an interaction with Indian and SD following elite.

Thank you, brihaspati garu, for all the info.

I think the key would be the Bangladeshi Army. If they can be successfully integrated with the Indian Armed Forces, then the others could also be won over. The liberationists may be a possible elite for interest to Indians. If the Bangladeshis can make deals with the Chinese, then it should be possible to make some with SD Indians as well.

Though as you mention, there would be some resistance, until a new time-tested order is created between cooperation between the Bangladeshi and Indian elite.

There is little opprtunity to deny the inherent hatred of the "Bengali" - especially the language - in the upper GV - a hatred which I have personally seen to take murderous proportions. I can foresee the resistance to incorporation of more of the Bengali stiffly from upper GV. More importantly the Bengali nationalism will be reinvented by the BD elite and reinforced by Islamism as a parallel resistance from BD side.

It may also crucially depend on the attitudes and tactics of Indian elite. If we still have current brand of "secularists" from SD origins - then there will be a merry alliance you don't even want to hear about.

I hope the parameters of the India-BD merger/alliance can penned down, which foresees a system detrimental to the Islamists.

GV would have a lot to lose, as they would be losing their prerogative to decide the power in Delhi. Perhaps the tussle can be presented as a regional tussle, perhaps in the way of GV vs. South India, etc, a friendly match. But the exigencies of coalition building in Delhi would bring the two together also.

To set BD back on its evolutionary path that should have been but was derailed - instead of the BD elite, we may need to get the upper-middle and middle classes on board. Just like the Bengali SD middle-classes who took to modernization like ducks to water - outpacing the elite rebels who first started it and greatly diluted their SD loyalties in the process or reinvented SD in certain ways. This process could have worked for the BM muslim at the same time but did not because of its elite's role and lack of a "middle" class a la SD (which were formed out of dispossession of previous elite under Islamic rule).

I too think the middle class holds the key. From one article, I found

Bangladesh’s middle class accounts for about 10 percent of the country’s population, still low compared to Pakistan’s 18 percent and India’s 30 percent, but growing steadily. According to one report, the percentage of poor people in Bangladesh has dropped from over 60 percent in the 1980s to about 47 percent in 2000s. Data on the actual size of the Bangladeshi middle class is sparse, but there is plenty of evidence suggesting its growth.

one can see that Bangladesh's middle class could be of the order of around 17 million. One could build a merger around an alliance with them. After all, the media caters to the middle class and they would decide on the narrative on the merger between India and Bangladesh.

[RajeshA]

the links have been deleted. I didn't read them through. Obviously that was not my intention.

The Links were of the following kind:

1. Efforts at Merger between India and some part of Bangladesh by R&AW
2. Possible Merger of Parts of India, like Northeast, swamped by illegal Bangladeshi migrants, with Bangladesh
3. Possibility of Merger between Bangladesh and West Bengal
4. Some SD-hating Pakistani Liberals perfidious dreams of Merger between Pakistan, Bangladesh and India
5. Some Bangladeshi condemnation of some remarks by Akhand Bharatiyas urging merger between India and Bangladesh.

Very little on a possible merger between India and Bangladesh out there, based on assessment of actual benefits, rather than driven by some bleeding heart idealism of some Indian or Pakistani.

[AKalam]

the links have been deleted. I didn't read them through. Obviously that was not my intention.

The Links were of the following kind:

1. Efforts at Merger between India and some part of Bangladesh by R&AW
2. Possible Merger of Parts of India, like Northeast, swamped by illegal Bangladeshi migrants, with Bangladesh
3. Possibility of Merger between Bangladesh and West Bengal
4. Some SD-hating Pakistani Liberals perfidious dreams of Merger between Pakistan, Bangladesh and India
5. Some Bangladeshi condemnation of some remarks by Akhand Bharatiyas urging merger between India and Bangladesh.

Very little on a possible merger between India and Bangladesh out there, based on assessment of actual benefits, rather than driven by some bleeding heart idealism of some Indian or Pakistani.

RajeshA ji,

Acknowledged and understood. If I may point out though that not all links were exactly like the ones you mentioned above. There were at least 3 links about a Gaddafi supported Libyan think tank's promotion of an idea of Bangladesh asking for a merger with India, which I found quite interesting and amusing (he had other out of the box ideas such as Nigeria dividing along ethnic or religious lines). They may have had posted comments of Bangladeshi's who did not like the idea, I am not sure. I had also included at least 2 links which were about the economic research/study of some Harvard professor who showed that a merger of Bangladesh and India would benefit both economies and may increase growth rate for one or both by 1-2%. Other than these 5 links, the others were of the kind you have mentioned I believe.

In any event, the links and what they contained are not important.

Your line of argument, I believe, is mostly valid while I think brihaspati ji's line of objection is not quite a true reflection of BD society, although the structure and description of society by brihaspati ji is somewhat accurate. Since I grew up there and also ran some export-oriented business there for some years and created some jobs, I should hopefully know my own country and society to some extent I would think. Of course I could be accused of Taqiya, but I think that would be bad for all parties and a waste of time.

I congratulate you again for connecting the dots, and hopefully many here in BRF and other strategic circles in India will also come round to your line of thinking, in course of time.

I have come to realize, after years of reflection and analysis of our (BM and BD) geo-strategic situation, that our (BD) future is with India, not Pakistan or PRC or US led West. It is kind of obvious if one looks at the map. As you have pointed out, we are Indic SDRE first and foremost, so advancement of Indic SDRE interest on the face of the globe will advance our interest. Secondly we are SDRE Muslims, mostly (around 150 million) and some SD followers (around 15 million). Merger of BD with India will hopefully solve to a large extent the problem of security and abuse of SD followers by hands of majority BM's, or in the least increase the potentials to improve the situation in that direction. Although the Deganga incident shows to support brihaspati ji's POV, I would say that addition of BD and its elite will cause a reversal of the trend and reduce Deganga type incidents, as the rogue elements of BM political leadership will be reigned in by more responsible elite from BD side, I believe. And being SDRE Muslims, as you said, we are right there at the bottom of the pecking order, together with black sub-saharan Muslims, or perhaps just one notch above them. But this pecking order can be turned upside down once India becomes a superpower and SDRE becomes == with white or East Asians. If BD is merged with India, we also become part of this superpower and hopefully take part in the endeavor and share the fruits of this success, from early on.

There are several web forums started by Bangladeshi's. I know the people in bdmilitary.com quite well, not personally but by participating there for some time. I have also been to defence.pk to check it out and found that there are some pak-allied BD posters there led by one famous Munshi who has written a book, I find their logic old and useless. bdsdf was started by one Maruf, I believe he is a friend of my elder brother. I registered there today and am able to log in, but having trouble to see the posts, so I emailed the admin. I also used to post in Drishtipat, a HRW (Human Rights Watch) affiliated website started by a BD expat in NY. I am not sure about Maruf and bdsdf, but the others have some agenda behind them and I believe are lacking in integrity or depth. So I am willing to check out bdsdf. In general, I hardly found anyone from BD who can break out of their ossified thinking and come up with innovative solutions for the problems we face as a people and as a nation, which are not at all small, so I am skeptical that I will find much support any where, at least from BD end. From my years of web involvement, I found one admirer from bdmilitary, who actually called me up and introduced himself and eventually we became good friends over the phone. He is a BD expat in the US like myself. He is close to the strategic thinkers of the theological and political elite and personally knows many of them. I have not heard from him from some months, but I can get in touch with him. He is a dyed in the wool Islamist who drank the pak-jab and chinee koolaid, but he also believes that for BD we need our own thinking and our own way and he believes one of our own more than he believes others. I think with him I may have a team to get to work. Of course being from there, I am sure I can find many others who I can rely on, if there is a need to promote ideas.

I am also waiting to see how BRF guru's and old timers react to your break through proposition.

[brihaspati]

Akalam bhai,
I have long appreciated your POV and have welcomed you, and also requested fellow forumites to let you "speak". Similarly I much appreciate RajeshA ji's painstakingly detailed thoughts on a practical programme of what I choose to call "consolidation" rather than unification since I consider all of the subcontinent geographically, and a much larger piece of the global human population ideologically as belonging to the "Indic". Without going into the nitty-gritty of the term (which have previously gone into length and fierce debates), I think I can illustrate the issue at stake - by using the apparent POV's of the three of us.

I started the previous version of this thread, with the intent of gradually exploring the concept of a single politico-military entity all over the subcontinent and beyond based on some concept of Bharatyia nationhood. In this I moved away from geoography in its ordinary sense, and emphasized more on the idea of "nationhood" that survives in a living people - regardless of their circumstances and location. Essentially for me it had to give priority to the "cultural" basis of such nationhood over and above geography - for the essence of a people lies in its ability to preserve and enhance its accumulated civilizational knowledge.

I came to SD because it fully accommodated my reasoning mind and the modern scientific method without having to necessarily commit myself to closing off continuous quest for greater understanding and even re-examine supposed older already reached ultimate understanding. I did not find any existing other theological or ideological frameworks to allow this within itself. For me from this conclusion it became necessary to look or ways in which this civilizational achievement could be preserved and protected and extended. This meant preserving, protecting and extending Bharat. Such an extension needs "physical" extension and expansion of a nation based on that "civilization" to feed, protect, and maintain the civilization.

From this comes my conclusion that we need to disarm and defang ideologies that have consistently gone against the roots, sustenance, and brain of the Bharatyia civilization. I have always considered people separately from their ideologies, and therefore for me an ideological cleansing, reorientation is a necessary and inseparable part of the process. Without that no expanded, "union" would be stable or be able to carry out its civilizational task.

Hence my position has come towards elimination of the theological institutions and source of ideological continuation that are anti-Indic as a pre or concurrent condition for the "consolidation/unification" process.

I can see where your position comes in and differs from mine is that you do not think this as necessary or perhaps even consider such a precondition detrimental, based perhaps from a combination of genuine affection for aspects of the theology you were born into as well as political implementational considerations.

For RajesA ji, his position on "this" side of SD makes it similarly difficult to endorse keeping "hostile" theological aspects intact based perhaps again on a similar combination as yours. But he is perhaps less rigid than me in insisting on the cleansing as he may be of the conviction that parts of the hostile ideologies could be salvaged and made compatible for co-existence.

As you can see, all three of us aim for "expansion" and consolidation and union, but each of us have slightly different ultimate aims that are derived from slightly different perceptions and conclusions about the nature and future of "ideologies". These slight differences in aim lead to major differences in tactics and methodologies.

This is a small scale representation of what has happened in the SD-Islamic dynamic on the subcontinent since the Brits at least. In spite of all talks of economics being the only factor worth studying and concentrating on - the very fact that we still have to be uncomfortable with the reality of Pak and BD shows that ideology is not chimera that can be wished away. Even within BD, the different streams of thoughts that become apparent could be a similar methodological difference in achieving a common goal that of regional, Islam based dominance from BD. Whether that aim is realistic or not is a different question - but I am on the cautionary position that apparently "friendly" approaches from section of BD politics need not represent a fundamental target difference from those who are vehement opponents.

But my experience in politics suggests that the three of us could very well use each other towards moving towards our individual aims - leading to a a realizable common minimum programme being achievable - and hence my encouragement to both of you!

[RajeshA]

brihaspati garu,

I may have said this before somewhere, but to me the chief matrix of my thinking is Asian Geopolitics. Because I start there, whereas as you have a different focus, our priorities would diverge somewhat. I see a triangle in Asia - China, Islam and India.

USA is a guest only for the next 15-20 years more. Someday it would feel the overstretch.

Russia would be marginalized in Asia. It would exhaust its energies in the Caucasus. In Central Asia it would be overwhelmed by the cooperation between Turkey and China. In the Far-East it would feel its own overstretch and China's demographic pressure.

So basically it comes down to how China, Islam and India balance each other. Even as we speak, China's handshake with Islam has become almost unbreakable. It has its Uyghur problem firmly in grip - both the ethnic aspect through its alliance with Turkey and the ideological aspect through its alliance with Pakjab. In return it has promised Turkey a resumption of its leadership role in Central Asia, and has promised Pakistan the Kashmir Valley if not more. Using Turkey and Pakistan, China would try to weaken the NATO alliance from within and the American power through overstretch and attrition, using the two. Not just the Turkey and Pakistan, China also has the full support of Iran and vice versa. So even if Pakistan remains a cripple, its suffices if it fulfills its two responsibilities - steer Jihad, and box in India. With Turkey and Iran, China has bigger plans - of controlling Central Asia and keeping it free from the influence of USA, Russia and India, the last, its only meaningful but unprepared foe.

Even India's connections to the Islamic World have been turned against India, partly through Pakistan and partly through our lack of the kill instinct. So India finds itself friendless and fully marginalized in Asian Continent.

India too would be having her alliance - with Japan, with South Korea, perhaps with Taiwan, with Vietnam, but even as those countries may have the technology, they are still strategic pygmies. Technology alone, even military technology, would not suffice. Strategy, Location and Alliances would be key to prevailing. Asymmetric Warfare, proxy warfare, plausible deniability, propaganda, all would play a role. India's Asian Security Alliance's presence would be limited to the Pacific and Indian Ocean periphery, but would have no influence in the heart of Asia.

If India, and all the Indics, Dharmics, SDREs who are aboard this ship, would wish to have a chance at survival with its borders intact and not much reduced and shrunk, the India would have change the triangle. Here PRC would be the manipulator and Islam the henchman. It makes no sense to us align ourselves with PRC against Islam, because they feel, they have all the various Islamic powerhouses in their alliance pocket, and secondly Islam is only the henchman, hardly having its own production lines or technology. China would be sitting back, giving the Islamists - the Pakjabi's TSPA, the Taliban, the IMs, the BMs, all sorts of weaponry for use on India, and the ideologues sitting in Pakistan delivering reasons to attack India.

China may even encourage the Islamists to loot India of its land, wealth and women, and to create a new Islamic power in India, itself in never-ending turmoil.

Now when I see this, and think about China enticing Bangladesh to play games in India's Northeast or at Siliguri Pass or in West Bengal, and at the same time giving Pakistan the support to take on India in Kashmir, even as IMs and Maoists weaken the country from within, then I think, India is on a very slippery slope, and there is no way India is going to get a firmer footing for the challenge ahead, unless India changes the game.

So who is our bigger enemy? China or Islam. Islam may do all the damage to India, but China provides it the means to accomplish it. To be honest, I don't think our political system is in a position to handle challenges of this a magnitude, unless it develops some immunity from this China-Islam Axis.

At this point in time, when the geopolitical landscape is in flux, India may have some good cards to play. Later on, those cards too could be turned against us, and it will be too late.

[svinayak]

Rajesh ji, Very good post. Please post it in the geo politics thread

[Prem]

The best option is to mortally threaten the chinese heartland and display the capability and intent to wipe them in such eventuallity.Chinese must be made to realize that come what may , regardless of the outcome,they will be sent back quiet few hundred years to live under Japanese benevolence. Are they that stupid to think that they will get away unscathced and not realize they are digging their own grave. India can,would and will make them "barren" in every sense for the next thousand years.
By the time US decline in next20-25years, indian economy will be as large as China or close to it . Chinese wont have any strategic advantage over India in any field. They will regret to take any panga with bation full of young population.

[RajeshA]

Prem ji,

If China can afford to sit back and watch the fun in the Indian Subcontinent, simply because it has played a good geopolitical game , what hinders us from playing similar games to threaten them, to contain them, to squeeze them. Don't we have the fantasy?

[TonyMontana]

The best option is to mortally threaten the chinese heartland and display the capability and intent to wipe them in such eventuallity.Chinese must be made to realize that come what may , regardless of the outcome,they will be sent back quiet few hundred years to live under Japanese benevolence. Are they that stupid to think that they will get away unscathced and not realize they are digging their own grave. India can,would and will make them "barren" in every sense for the next thousand years.

It seems to me, IMHO, that you'll rather end the Indic civilisation as well, as long as you take us Chinese down with you. That seems to be the reaction of an angry man rather then a rathional one. China never seek to end India's existence. China only want to box India in so to speak. I don't think the Indian government would set the "Samson level" as low as you want it.

By the time US decline in next20-25years, indian economy will be as large as China or close to it . Chinese wont have any strategic advantage over India in any field. They will regret to take any panga with bation full of young population.

You can gloat all you want when it happens. Premature gloating just seems silly.

[svinayak]

Prem ji,

If China can afford to sit back and watch the fun in the Indian Subcontinent, simply because it has played a good geopolitical game , what hinders us from playing similar games to threaten them, to contain them, to squeeze them. Don't we have the fantasy?

It is easy for India to play that game against China

[TonyMontana]

It is easy for India to play that game against China

This is a honest question that I hope wouldn't offend anyone and I hope people can answer honestly.

What is stopping India from playing that game?

[shyam]

India has the option to choose its own time, the opportunity is not going to disappear soon.

[svinayak]

India has the option to choose its own time, the opportunity is not going to disappear soon.

Geo politically that option is there permanently
It will be very hard on PRC

[TonyMontana]

Don't we have the fantasy?

VS

India has the option to choose its own time,

It will be very hard on PRC

I sense two version of India being presented here. One where India is the chess master. The one patiently waiting for the right time to execute the right move. The other an India that is crippled by her own politicians who are more interested in job retention then making hard decisions for a greater India.

Personally, I'm in the second camp. The same factors preventing India from playing the game today will still be there in ten years time. You are betting on the Indian government changing her behaviour. That needs major incentives. I believe if China plays her cards right, that incentive to change wouldn't materialise for India's politicians.

[brihaspati]

Why does India have to play the "same game" as PRC is playing now? Why should the current GOI or its cabinet or the major political party behind it be the only representative and model of what mid-to-long range Indian strategy will be? Democracy has its disadvantages but also its advantages - it becomes much less predictable than one-party dictatorships.

There are multiple games and changing game rules as well with changing players, as well as changing prior beliefs, and attitudes. I think anyone with India's interests at heart - should not feel goaded into declaring and committing to any fixed policy from right now. Let us happily chatter about objectives and aims over the longer term. Our methods are our own, and the values by which we will evaluate them are our own, and we should not be under any pressure to thrash out methods for those who try to observe and see patterns of thinking.

Even if we dismiss our exercise as futile armchair fantasy, the way we think can be used as a good model to estimate how actual strategists with decision making powers may tend to think. So if we at all want to think aloud about methods - let us also confuse such pattern searchers.

RajeshA ji and others - I will only say this about China and its flamboyant overt policies : do not believe in the too-clever-by half supposed blitzkrieg progress. There are things wrong with the party and PLA itself that are already being used to steer things in certain directions. Supporters and spokespersons of China (not necessarily Chinese born) tend to increasingly try to convince others about the monolithism, the unblemished patriotism, the solid support of the people behind the party - etc., etc., but reality is somewhat - lets say - more interesting. In fact I think this clamour of "undivided people's support" will increase in tempo over the coming years.

The eventual dismantling of the current structure in China is only a matter of time. But neither is it an automatic process that we do not need to provide the necessary inputs. if we do not give those inputs it will take a longer time, and the result will be less painful for the common Chinese. If we do give those inputs - (I mean accelerate the processes already underway) then the result will be a backlash on the party leadership not even imaginable by the outside world right now. Whether we are giving those inputs or not are not something to be declared on an open forum over a cup of coffee!

Let us just say that the party itself is not what it used to be before. The beginning of the end has already started from there. The PLA is involved too. So we will see some pretty interesting developments in the next 10 years. At most they can stretch it out to 15-17 years.

Islamics who are now relying on PRC will be sorely disappointed. But will India be ready to take advantage of those developments? Why should we give that out ? What if India simply uses governments to fool others about its real intentions and removes those governments as and when some other regimes become necessary? Lets keep others on their mental feet...!

[TonyMontana]

I shall respond to the parts I think is aimed at me.

we should not be under any pressure to thrash out methods for those who try to observe and see patterns of thinking.

Me on BRF is the equivalent of an English Cricket fan on a Indian Cricket board. We can talk about batting line ups and b!tch about our teams til the cows came home. But at the end of the day, the coach is gonna play who the coach is gonna play, and the players are gonna bat, how the players are gonna bat. Don't make BRF poorer by having too high of an opinion on your own opinions. You're being paranoid if you think the CCP is here on BRF to "observe and see patterns of thinking"

There are things wrong with the party and PLA itself that are already being used to steer things in certain directions.

...The eventual dismantling of the current structure in China is only a matter of time...

Spoken like a true chess master. I applaud your conviction. But I, whilst seeing these problems, believes in my humble opinion, that the CCP is shrewed/ruthless enough to over come these challenges to its power. There are the same problems every Chinese Emperors had through out history. Looking at historical parrallels of the CCP, these are solvable problems for the Emperor.

[brihaspati]

Well...the very first "emperor" apparently failed to ensure the longevity of his "system". If the emperors really were always so ruthlessly able to solve their problems - we should still be seeing only one dynasty. With no interruption and no periodic shrinking of influence and territory.

Actually I don't think highly or lowly about any opinion! Not even about my own. I simply evaluate them as to feasibility. I am aware of the methods employed to estimate and model potential behaviour from publicly available actions or statements. If you care to explore this - it comes under a branch of applied game theory.

But whatever you say, paranoia can be useful sometimes! Don't you agree - at least from the "Chinese" viewpoint as interpreted by your personal opinion about how the unified category of "all Chinese" think?

[TonyMontana]

Well...the very first "emperor" apparently failed to ensure the longevity of his "system". If the emperors really were always so ruthlessly able to solve their problems - we should still be seeing only one dynasty. With no interruption and no periodic shrinking of influence and territory.

What are you talking about? The Chinese System today is almost identical to the first Emperor's system. Care to list how the CCP is different to Qin?

Don't you agree - at least from the "Chinese" viewpoint as interpreted by your personal opinion about how the unified category of "all Chinese" think?

Strawman. I'm well aware of the difference in opinion within different groups of Chinese.

[Pulikeshi]

Tony,

Why did the Han adopt Confucianism where as the Qin followed Legalism?
Seems from your writing that you are more enamored by Legalism

What is your opinion on Mohism seems some of Mo Tzu's teachings line up with that
of the Buddha, curious as to why it was rejected yet Buddhism seemed to have thrived?

[TonyMontana]

Why did the Han adopt Confucianism where as the Qin followed Legalism?
Seems from your writing that you are more enamored by Legalism

Confucianism and legalism are closely related concepts. I'm enamored by both.

What is your opinion on Mohism seems some of Mo Tzu's teachings line up with that
of the Buddha, curious as to why it was rejected yet Buddhism seemed to have thrived?

I don't know enough about Mohism to make a constructive comment.

[Pulikeshi]

Tony,

Let me repeat my question -
Why did the Han adopt Confucianism where as the Qin followed Legalism?

Mohism, advocated meritocracy, failed once in China very long time ago?
What were the reasons for that failure? Why is there confidence that it will work now?

[brihaspati]

Well...the very first "emperor" apparently failed to ensure the longevity of his "system". If the emperors really were always so ruthlessly able to solve their problems - we should still be seeing only one dynasty. With no interruption and no periodic shrinking of influence and territory.

What are you talking about? The Chinese System today is almost identical to the first Emperor's system. Care to list how the CCP is different to Qin?

Don't you agree - at least from the "Chinese" viewpoint as interpreted by your personal opinion about how the unified category of "all Chinese" think?

Strawman. I'm well aware of the difference in opinion within different groups of Chinese.

What happened to the emperor's successors and dynasty? as for systemic similarities that will depend on the scale and definition - if bureaucracy is your scale - then any system having bureaucracy is a "first emperor" system, anywhere in the world! But regardless of the parameters of "similarity" I am more interested in the fate of the "first emperor"'s immediate successors, courtiers, ruling elite! if you are so keen on similarities - how would you find the similarities in their treatments at the hands of those who replaced them soon after the "emperor" was buried?

[RajeshA]

Don't we have the fantasy?

VS

India has the option to choose its own time,

It will be very hard on PRC

I sense two version of India being presented here. One where India is the chess master. The one patiently waiting for the right time to execute the right move. The other an India that is crippled by her own politicians who are more interested in job retention then making hard decisions for a greater India.

Personally, I'm in the second camp. The same factors preventing India from playing the game today will still be there in ten years time. You are betting on the Indian government changing her behaviour. That needs major incentives. I believe if China plays her cards right, that incentive to change wouldn't materialise for India's politicians.

You have taken my comment out of context. Bad manners.

That comment meant that there is no need for India to go with the Samson option. There are other options to make China behave in Asia. It was not meant to disparage Indian politicians for lack of fantasy.

If China plays her cards right ...
Well China has been playing her cards for some time now, let's see how many cards are left in the deck!
India still has a full deck!

[svinayak]

Personally, I'm in the second camp. The same factors preventing India from playing the game today will still be there in ten years time. You are betting on the Indian government changing her behaviour. That needs major incentives. I believe if China plays her cards right, that incentive to change wouldn't materialise for India's politicians.

If Chinese leadership pay heed to the Indian politicians then there could be cooperation and less turbulence.

[Pranav]

The issues in the India-China relationship are quite straight-forward - it boils down to provision of nuclear weapons to depraved terrorist gangs like the Pakistan Army. Similarly, in North East Asia, China is supporting another terrorist gang - namely the "Dear Leader" and his henchmen.