Strategic leadership for the future of India

[brihaspati]

To analyze MKG's assassination a simple principle of who benefits from the crime can be applied. RSS benefits the least. The two who gain most are the British who had by this time been planning for a post-WWII scenario where they no longer dominate Asia and still would like to retain a hold on the subcontinent, using Pakistan as a virtual dependency. MKG's behaviour was getting suspicious as he was scheduled to meet the Pakistani supremo. Similarly, any potential accommodaion, however far fetched, of the Pakistani supremo would have jeopardized JLN's supremacy.

In Indian politics, certain figures "vanish" at most opportune times for the dregs and the trash of hard-bitten survivors-at-any-cost. They get assassinated, or die under mysterious illnesses, or even benign accidents like bones sticking in the throat. We always have to look for "who benefits" to understand what facilitated certain "vanishings" to move on without any obstruction.

[Pranav]

Have the Gurus already seen this article by Rajinder Puri?

Mahatma Gandhi's Assassination
by Rajinder Puri

Mahatma Gandhi was assassinated by Nathuram Godse on January 30, 1948. Godse was accompanied by Narayan Apte. Both were hanged. The two traveled from Bombay to Delhi via Gwalior to perform the murder. Some of the named conspirators in the murder were already under police surveillance because they owned small arms. The authorities therefore must have been aware of the impending danger.

Despite India’s independence the administration remained under British control, run by officers in key posts appointed by the British, with Lord Mountbatten as Governor-General and General Boucher as the Army Commander in Chief. Total British control becomes evident from the Mountbatten Papers in which Home Minister Sardar Patel is quoted repeatedly complaining to Lord Mountbatten that the police and army were abetting the communal riots. Clearly the Sardar was powerless.

After the assassination a leading freedom fighter alleged that the Home Ministry was criminally negligent by allowing the murder to occur. The leader blamed the government and Sardar Patel for allowing the murder to happen. That leader was Jaya Prakash Narayan.

On June 3 1947 the Congress Working Committee passed the resolution accepting the Partition of India. There was communal tension but no communal riots to speak of in Punjab. Gandhi observed ‘maun vrat’ (day of silence) on that occasion. He was reportedly isolated by Nehru and Patel and was unhappy. Mountbatten visited him and said he hoped that Gandhi would not oppose the Partition under the Mountbatten Plan. Mountbatten also noted that he was surprised that Gandhi should have observed his day of silence on such a crucial occasion. Gandhi wrote on a scrap of paper his reply: “Have I ever opposed you?” Mountbatten preserved that paper as historical evidence and it is still there in the Mountbatten papers.

But as India became independent on August 15, 1947 Gandhi became increasingly unhappy. He was sidelined by Nehru and Patel who moved about in ministerial flagged cars. Gandhi was a marginalized figure. The riots that escalated after Independence brought about the biggest transfer of populations in recorded history. Inder Gujral’s father and Bhimsen Sachar, who opted to stay on in Pakistan, along with millions of Hindus, were forced to flee to India. An estimated million people were slaughtered in the engineered riots while the police and army stood aside. Over ten million were rendered homeless as they fled their homes to uncharted territory to become refugees.

Gandhi became restive and realized his blunder in compromising. He started plans to undo his mistake. The intelligence that kept watch on all activities in Birla House, where Gandhi stayed, was aware of his unhappiness. That is why Mountbatten met Gandhi and advised him not to oppose the Partition. By doing so he would harm the future of Nehru and Patel who were his creations and disciples. But Gandhi persevered with his plans. He gathered 50 Punjabi refugee families, most of them housed in Delhi’s Purana Quila camp, and finalized plans to travel to Lahore and settle down there to create peace and harmony between India and Pakistan. Gandhi had already written to Jinnah about his desire to settle down in Pakistan. Jinnah said Gandhi was most welcome and invited him to come to Karachi. But Gandhi decided to travel by road to Lahore and settle down there. Plans were finalized for Gandhi and the fifty families to start their journey to Lahore on February 14, 1948. Exactly one fortnight earlier Godse assassinated Gandhi.

Did Gandhi suspect he would be killed? On the day he was killed he finalized his last will and testament by which he recommended that the Congress Party should be dissolved and converted into a social organization named the Lok Sevak Sangh. Had Gandhi carried out his plan he would have been a nuisance for Mountbatten, Nehru and Patel because he would have worked for Indo-Pakistan reconciliation. He had already been totally marginalized in the Congress thanks to his erstwhile loyalists, Nehru and Patel. But the same Gandhi after death became the global brand image for the Congress Party. Surprisingly there is little or no mention by historians of Gandhi’s plans to settle down in Lahore. Why? Because his assassination aborted the plan?

For some strange reason Godse’s trial was held in camera. Godse’s defence was not allowed to be publicized by the Indian government. It was whisked away to Britain. One British weekly published it. Years later it was available to those who searched for it. It is now available on the Internet. The demands for truth about Netaji Subhash Bose are still resonating. Should not the truth about Gandhi’s assassination also be reappraised? Godse’s legal defence, which counters several allegations of the prosecution regarding the assassination, could provide a starting point.

January 28, 2008

[surinder]

To analyze MKG's assassination a simple principle of who benefits from the crime can be applied. ...

Add to that the fact that MKG is taken care off after the British "leave" India. (As the post by Pranav (quoting Puri's article) shows that British were still in control of India, something not known to most (including me). Also, how does the Godse statement reach UK, but not India?) A very clean deniability and distancing by the Brits.

Pre-47, there must have been something about MKG the British must have liked. Note that the UK has a full run-in with MKG in South Africa. He showed all his cards there; from there the British allowed him to go to India and be annointed by the INC leaders. There must have been a vetting process by the British in allowing the Mahatma to go from SA to India. They must have concluded that the Mahatma was a useful tool, at least at some level. Keeping in light all the staunchly pro-British pro-Empire statements of MKG.

In Indian politics, certain figures "vanish" at most opportune times for the dregs and the trash of hard-bitten survivors-at-any-cost. They get assassinated, or die under mysterious illnesses, or even benign accidents like bones sticking in the throat. We always have to look for "who benefits" to understand what facilitated certain "vanishings" to move on without any obstruction.

Brihaspati, You had given me a boon to ask any question to you to satisfy my curiosity. So here I am collecting on my boon: Which vanshings are you referring to? Or other mysterious illnesses and bones in the throuat. There is a lot about history I can learn from you; so if you can give more details I shall be most indebted.
Thanks.

[Abhi_G]

Bone in the throat - First Chief of Air Staff, Air Marshal Subroto Mukherjee.

http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/IAF/Histo ... Air-4.html

[Rahul M]

To analyze MKG's assassination a simple principle of who benefits from the crime can be applied. RSS benefits the least. The two who gain most are the British who had by this time been planning for a post-WWII scenario where they no longer dominate Asia and still would like to retain a hold on the subcontinent, using Pakistan as a virtual dependency. MKG's behaviour was getting suspicious as he was scheduled to meet the Pakistani supremo. Similarly, any potential accommodaion, however far fetched, of the Pakistani supremo would have jeopardized JLN's supremacy.

FWIW I remember coming to the same conclusion, long back, in the first HFL thread, whose second edition, along with the Indian Interests thread saw the debut of brihaspati ji, I believe !

[Atri]

Death of Lal Bhadur Shastri at Tashkent? He was one promising man..

Who benefited the most?? The immediate benefactor was Indira Gandhi. But, was she a power to reckon with when she became PM? What really happened in Tashkent, no one will really know. Other benefactor was Pakistan, and hence UK/USA. The immense support which Indira got from USSR five years later on the eve of 1971 war was too astounding. She beautifully influenced Unkil and Soviets to separate BD.

LBS was much like MKG, when it comes to social understanding of Bhaarat. He potentially could have led the Bhaaratiya renaissance. I have similar fears for Narendra Modi. Bhaarat needs a Devavrat Bheeshma with boon of Ichhaa-Mritryu.

Or may be, it was indeed a casual coincidence, as Forrest Gump says,"Shit Happens".

Nasadiya Sukta's indecision is the ultimate reality..

[Pranav]

Death of Lal Bhadur Shastri at Tashkent? He was one promising man..

One more: Homi Bhabha, who conveniently died in a suspicious plane crash.

Chiron, I totally agree that Narendra Modi needs to watch out.

[Pranav]

Another article by the redoubtable Rajinder Puri, citing credible sources alleging that Sonia was on foreign payroll.

How Free is India?

Can Corrupt Politicians
Preserve Freedom?

by Rajinder Puri

Today independent India enters its sixtieth year. How free is it? The crisis involving Mr. Natwar Singh raises disquiet. Mr. Natwar Singh’s twists and turns as he defended himself invited ridicule. The role of the opposition parties was no better. The NDA had sought Mr. Natwar Singh’s arrest after the Oil for Food scandal surfaced. Later it supported him to attack the government. Some intriguing aspects of this crisis merit special attention.

The Pathak Report most conveniently dovetailed with the political objectives of the Congress. Mr. Natwar Singh “misused” his position but took no money. Therefore he deserved cabinet expulsion but no legal conviction. The Congress itself was exonerated. Mrs. Sonia Gandhi wrote a letter to President Saddam introducing Mr. Natwar Singh. At the same time Mr. Natwar Singh wrote letters introducing Mr. Andaleeb Sehgal. The Pathak Authority considered Mr. Natwar Singh a facilitator. Why not Mrs. Sonia Gandhi too? Mr. Natwar Singh told media he fully briefed Mrs. Gandhi after his Iraq visit. He said: “I have not done anything in Iraq without the knowledge of Sonia Gandhi....Not even a leaf moves in the Congress without Mrs. Gandhi’s knowledge.”

If this is true, whether or not she saw his three letters becomes irrelevant. The amount allegedly pocketed by Mr. Andaleeb Sehgal and Mr. Aditya Khanna is a small fraction of the money realized from the vouchers. Where did the rest go? If Congress was the beneficiary it would distance itself from Mr. Sehgal and Mr. Khanna. Mr. Natwar Singh’s letters left a trail. Was that what angered the Congress?

The key question is whether or not Mrs. Sonia Gandhi knew of the oil vouchers enterprise. Until all the money earned from the oil vouchers is traced a final conclusion would be hasty. Even though the Pathak Report exonerated Mr. Natwar Singh from taking money he could not spill the beans. The Enforcement Directorate (ED) leaked to media information about the money trail leading to Mr. Natwar Singh’s son, Jagat. The government therefore can arrest Mr. Jagat Singh at will. Was that why Mr. Natwar Singh first rubbished the PM and later apologized?

The conduct of the opposition parties was odd on two counts. Earlier they described the PM as Mrs. Sonia Gandhi’s pawn. Yet, along with Mr. Natwar Singh, their attack targeted Dr. Manmohan Singh instead of Mrs. Sonia Gandhi. Why? The PM is associated most with the Indo-US nuclear deal. Is that why he was targeted? The second odd aspect was that three former foreign ministers – Mr. Natwar Singh, Mr. Yashwant Sinha and Mr. Jaswant Singh – targeted the Indo-US nuclear deal with uncharacteristic vehemence. All three, while in office, pursued a nuclear policy that led up to the nuclear deal. The deviation from past nuclear policy pointed out by them amounts to nitpicking. It does not explain their somersaults.

The question arises: Does their conduct reflect political opportunism or something more sinister? Could they be vulnerable to external pressure? Targeting Dr. Manmohan Singh meant targeting the Indo-US nuclear deal. One example should suffice to indicate possibility of political vulnerability at the highest level. While media reports succeeded in exposing major scandals, a far more damaging allegation continues to be ignored. It is contained in the published writings of Dr. Yevgenia Albats.

Dr. Albats is a Soviet journalist who officially investigated the KGB when the communist regime was still in control. She was appointed as a member of the official KGB Commission set up by President Yeltsin in 1991. She had full access to secret files of the KGB. She authored a book, The State within a State: KGB and Its Hold on Russia. In 1989, she had received the Golden Pen Award, the highest journalism honor in the then-Soviet Union. She was a fellow of the Nieman Foundation for Journalism at Harvard University in 1993 and earned a graduate degree and doctorate from Harvard.

After translating official KGB documents Dr. Albats disclosed in her book that KGB chief Victor Chebrikov in December 1985 had sought in writing from the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union (CPSU), "authorization to make payments in US dollars to the family members of Mr. Rajiv Gandhi, namely Sonia Gandhi, Rahul Gandhi and Ms Paola Maino, mother of Sonia Gandhi." CPSU payments were authorized by a resolution, CPSU/CC/No 11228/3 dated 20/12/1985; and endorsed by the USSR Council of Ministers in Directive No 2633/Rs dated 20/12/1985. These payments had been coming since 1971, as payments received by Sonia Gandhi's family and "have been audited in CPSU/CC resolution No 11187/22 OP dated 10/12/1984.”

In 1992 the media confronted the Russian government with the Albats disclosure. The Russian government confirmed the veracity of the disclosure and defended it as necessary for “Soviet ideological interest”. The Hindu of July 4, 1992 carried this report. Mr. AG Noorani included this information in an article published in The Statesman of January 31, 1998. In December 2001, Dr. Subrmaniam Swamy filed a Writ Petition in the Delhi High Court with relevant KGB photocopies and sought a CBI investigation. In May 2002 the Court ordered CBI to ascertain from Russia the truth of these charges. The CBI stalled for two years and eventually told the Court that without a registered FIR the Russians would not entertain any such query. But why was not an FIR registered? Dr Swamy’s failure to follow this up more vigorously is puzzling.

In November 1991 the respected Swiss magazine, Schweitzer Illustrate, published a report alleging that Rajiv Gandhi had 2.5 billion Swiss francs, equivalent roughly to two billion US dollars, in numbered Swiss bank accounts. The Internet is swamped with allegations against Mrs. Sonia Gandhi detailing cities, foreign banks, account numbers and even names of persons allegedly handling her accounts. Such allegations would easily have been dismissible as scurrilous had there not been the Albats disclosure. Surely Mrs. Sonia Gandhi owes herself and the nation an emphatic and effective rebuttal of the Albats charges? On June 14, 2005 Mrs. Sonia Gandhi visited Russia on a personal invitation by President Putin. There was no need for any minister to accompany her. Yet Mrs. Gandhi sought and got foreign minister Natwar Singh to accompany her. One wonders if Mr. Natwar Singh can shed any light on that visit.

Given the inexplicable conduct of India’s politicians, the public would tend to believe that most are compromised and subject to dictation by one foreign power or another. In the light of this, on this Independence Day, thinking Indians should soberly ask themselves a simple question: Can the people of India be free if their rulers are not?

August 15, 2006

[Pranav]

Another article by the redoubtable Rajinder Puri, citing credible sources alleging that Sonia was on foreign payroll.

Sonia was allegedly on KGB payroll, there must be plenty of insects getting paid by Unkil. People do not realize that the seemingly divergent systems of Capitalism and Communism converge at the Apex. Nothing happens by accident.

[Rahul Mehta]

So what should be "Strategic leadership for the future of India"?

[Pranav]

It is very fascinating that there were five attempts to assassinate MKG before the sixth one succeeded, and three of the five previous attempts involved Nathuram Godse!! The last unsuccessful attempt was on 20th Jan 1948, just 10 days before the day on which MKG was finally killed. Madanlal Pahwa was arrested on 20th Jan, and he had in fact spilled the beans Re Godse and Co.

So Nathuram had very definitely been on the British police radar screen for a long time.

Read the full story at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assassinat ... tma_Gandhi

[LokeshP]

Death of Lal Bhadur Shastri at Tashkent? He was one promising man..

Who benefited the most?? The immediate benefactor was Indira Gandhi. But, was she a power to reckon with when she became PM? What really happened in Tashkent, no one will really know. Other benefactor was Pakistan, and hence UK/USA. The immense support which Indira got from USSR five years later on the eve of 1971 war was too astounding. She beautifully influenced Unkil and Soviets to separate BD.

LBS was much like MKG, when it comes to social understanding of Bhaarat. He potentially could have led the Bhaaratiya renaissance. I have similar fears for Narendra Modi. Bhaarat needs a Devavrat Bheeshma with boon of Ichhaa-Mritryu.

Or may be, it was indeed a casual coincidence, as Forrest Gump says,"Shit Happens".

Nasadiya Sukta's indecision is the ultimate reality..

Krishna's proclamation in Gita comes to mind: "maamekam sharanam vraja"
for illiterate fanatical yindoos like myself that is the ultimate shielf of protection and i personally will be hoping and wishing that your fears don't come true. such an event in the current times can very well be the death-blow for a Strong Powerful Bharat. i see no other personality who can kick start the process other than our bania from Gujarat.

[Pranav]

One thing that is clear: We're going to have a very hard time getting the right leadership if our elections are compromised. I have very serious misgivings about the Electronic Voting system that has been put into place. There is no paper trail. It's a recipe for disaster.

In 2006, there was a report on the integrity of EVMs authored by a committee chaired by Prof PV Indiresan. This report is available at http://www.scribd.com/doc/6794194/Exper ... ort-on-EVM . It appears that this report does not address some serious security holes.

Do folks have any views on this?

[svinayak]

It is very fascinating that there were five attempts to assassinate MKG before the sixth one succeeded, and three of the five previous attempts involved Nathuram Godse!! The last unsuccessful attempt was on 20th Jan 1948, just 10 days before the day on which MKG was finally killed. Madanlal Pahwa was arrested on 20th Jan, and he had in fact spilled the beans Re Godse and Co.

So Nathuram had very definitely been on the British police radar screen for a long time.

Read the full story at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assassinat ... tma_Gandhi

Or Godse could be on the payroll of the British authorities.

[surinder]

Sonia was allegedly on KGB payroll, there must be plenty of insects getting paid by Unkil. People do not realize that the seemingly divergent systems of Capitalism and Communism converge at the Apex. Nothing happens by accident.

Her behaviour in the entire Nuke deal drama is quite revealing. Here is a govt that does not care two hoots about the poeople, all it cares about is its own gaddi. In the entire 5 year rule of MMS+Rajmata they take this single issue and are willing to let the govt. fall for it. When a govt like GoI makes a life and death issue of something it can mean only one of two things: either it is for election (re-election to be exact), or there is someing black in the daal. The nuke issue is not an issue that bothers the common man. Why would they gamble their entire political capital on it?

This leads me to suspect that Rajmata and Yuvraj might be CIA assets.

[surinder]

Death of Lal Bhadur Shastri at Tashkent? He was one promising man..

Who benefited the most?? The immediate benefactor was Indira Gandhi. But, was she a power to reckon with when she became PM? What really happened in Tashkent, no one will really know. Other benefactor was Pakistan, and hence UK/USA. The immense support which Indira got from USSR five years later on the eve of 1971 war was too astounding. She beautifully influenced Unkil and Soviets to separate BD.

Yes, LBS's death is a bizzarre event. Soviets, it must be noted, are experts in inducing strange illnesses. Their research in this area has been outstanding. Recall that a year or two ago an ex-kgb agent had developed a wierd illness in London and died, after accusing kgb for his death.

The obvious benificiary was IG, she got had been trying to battle the stalwarts of Congress; this was also marked when the old Congress died and it became Congress-I. This was the real start of the Dynastic model, accompanied by shoe-licking sycophancy which characterized IG and became the sine-quo-non of Indian politics.

[kittoo]

Death of Lal Bhadur Shastri at Tashkent? He was one promising man..

Who benefited the most?? The immediate benefactor was Indira Gandhi. But, was she a power to reckon with when she became PM? What really happened in Tashkent, no one will really know. Other benefactor was Pakistan, and hence UK/USA. The immense support which Indira got from USSR five years later on the eve of 1971 war was too astounding. She beautifully influenced Unkil and Soviets to separate BD.

LBS was much like MKG, when it comes to social understanding of Bhaarat. He potentially could have led the Bhaaratiya renaissance. I have similar fears for Narendra Modi. Bhaarat needs a Devavrat Bheeshma with boon of Ichhaa-Mritryu.

Or may be, it was indeed a casual coincidence, as Forrest Gump says,"Shit Happens".

Nasadiya Sukta's indecision is the ultimate reality..

Krishna's proclamation in Gita comes to mind: "maamekam sharanam vraja"
for illiterate fanatical yindoos like myself that is the ultimate shielf of protection and i personally will be hoping and wishing that your fears don't come true. such an event in the current times can very well be the death-blow for a Strong Powerful Bharat. i see no other personality who can kick start the process other than our bania from Gujarat.

Man don't talk like that. Modi is our only hope. Nothing should happen to him.
If he dies or anything happens to him, I believe for the first time I'll weep for death of a politician.

[brihaspati]

Surinderji,
your question has already been answered! Most of the names I had in mind are already mentioned. But I will try to give a list soon. For all this information about the "payroll" aspect makes me wary.

The process by which this "foreign payroll" stuff gets rolling has both an internal as well as external dynamic.

We have developed a parasitic, courtier type system. This group is insatiable for "funds". Watching them for a long time, the common Indian also says "what the h***, if the babus can benefit for 5 years, why shouldn't we do the same in extracting benefits at least for the election day?" Since none of the carefully filtered Indian leadership allowed to come to supreme power as a result of transfer of power from the empire, had that unchallenged mass authority that makes them completely confident of their rule (without adminitrative and colonial machinery to remove potential thorns) - and the system continued this process of "selection" from the top to ensure continuity - we have succession of leaders who could raise waves but were perhaps always unsure of complete, unflinching support from the masses.

Thus they would rely on courtiers, who would in turn need funds to maintain both themselves and their benefactorin power. Early post-formal-colonial India would not generate a huge amount of cash to go around fort these courtiers - so here a "bailout" from foreign agencies come in handy.

The second factor that comes in is the pre-existing system's ensurance of only allowing those to rise to the supremem leadership positions who have some "grave" weaknesses. Weaknesses that can help the system (courtiers and componenst of teh state machinery) to drag the "leader" by "their ear and their hairs" (an exact expression overheard in a "highly moral/ethical uncorrupted" party's top conference - instructions being given to a juinior comrade about how to select the panel that is going to be "democratically elected" by the delegates) into "proper line". A leader without weaknesses in the colonial system bequethed to us, is a dangerous trojan horse - he/she can totally upset the apple cart.

Here, money and other perks (foreign agencies have been reported to be quite saucy in their non-monetary "payments" - perhaps irresistible for the starved and the repressed) can either be forced on the "leader" as a precondition for getting "selected" - to taint him sufficiently for subsequent pliability, or entrapped, or warned that if not accepted or allowed to be enjoyed by the courtiers could have dire consequences.

MKG I guess shrewdly recognized this and partially combatted this by making politics "open". Without secrecy a lot of leverage of manipulation by agencies are nullified. Second, he appealed directly and straightforwardly to the masses, leading to less dependence at least in the early days on courtiers. Third, open up personal life for scrutiny - a shrewd move I assess to so much being revealed about personal issues that most people would hide for their lives.

This leads us to also the problem of Islamic and Victorian Christian moralism layered on the modern Bharatyia that forces many of the natural tendencies in humans to be dubbed "unnatural" and "un-Indian", or not appropriate for a "leader". A leader cannot have a sexual life for example. See how MKG declared a lifelong "brahmacharya", or Subhasji had to hide his marriage and his family. We need to revise many of our social and moral attitudes and redefine acceptability - this will free up a lot of "weaknesses" that can now be currently employed to puppet dance our leadership.

[brihaspati]

If you want to preserve Modi, don't create the impression that you pin all your hopes on him for "national revival". A surefire way to draw the attention of those who panic at any sign of people dreaming and focusing on an individual.

[brihaspati]

Regarding Godse's multiple attempts and being under Brit radar:

a possible mechanism is to find the weak member of a radical group. Or even better send out undercover agents as agitators who form/attract/entice radical members into a group. They report continuously back to their handlers. Gradually, as the gov or the agency plans, the undercover aligns or promotes or encourages the group towards a course of action desired by the gov. Either the undercover is himself liquidated if he poses the risk of exposure or is tried with the others but let off lighter. If neither is feasible, the trial is usually "partially hidden". The undercovers themselves might have been recruited by the same methods of "entrapment/blackmail" as proposed in my earlier post for "leaders".

[Atri]

LBS was living in bipolar world. Today, the world is not as strongly bipolar as it was in 1960's when LBS and Homi Bhabha died. The world is multipolar, with India herself is emerging as one of the power centres.

Modi's job in Gujarat as efficient administrator and messiah of privatization won't put him on bad books of Unkil, Russia. He is already on bad books of ISI, but, WTF...

He is on bad books of Desi power centres, especially the ruling dynasty. Rajmata and Yuvraj are not very happy with Modi's rise. This is where the tricky part it. BJP is knowing or unknowingly ensuring that his rise is slow. The gaze of opponents is now not fixed on Modi alone, but on both Modi and Advani.

Modi can do a chandragupta maurya part two and reach grass-root level of India while gaze of enemy is fixated on Advani, his chanakya. If BJP can pull this off in next 5-7 years, and make modi equivalent to stature of Vajpayee when it comes to public out-reach and acceptance, it will be a great service to Bhaarat. However, BJP should not place all the eggs in one basket. They should start grooming other young leaders who can be worthy generals of Modi or even efficient replacement, in case Modi falls.

BJP and Bhaarat cannot afford a loss of one more promising leader after Pramod Mahajan. India needs a leader who is accepted by general population and a statesman and visionary equivalent to Vajpayee by 2020-2025. India cannot risk a weak leadership after 2018. India's military preparations will be almost done by then. India will start projecting her powers, both soft and hard more efficiently by then. Oil will be much more scarce then, than it is now. The India-China rivalry will reach its zenith. India needs to develop a sustainable system in these 11 years and a panel of competent leaders. If India reaches 2025 unscathed, it will be a great boon for humanity. Because IMO, the second decade of 21st century will be very ominous indeed.

The asian powers will not risk starting the all-out war unless they are completely sure about their powers. They won't start the conflict prematurely as Hitler did. Owing to deep-rooted values of Sun Tzu and Chanakya, there will be a really massive build-up before final showdown. And given that the conflict will happen in region of 3-4 billion people, it will be long drawn and devastating. If India can save herself from the bull-fight until 2020 and develop internally, then she will be a major swing factor in deciding the new world order.

My best wishes to mother India.. just take care, mother....

[surinder]

Brihaspati Ji,

Good insight into how leaders are selected.

One comment on :

MKG I guess shrewdly recognized this and partially combatted this by making politics "open". Without secrecy a lot of leverage of manipulation by agencies are nullified.

The price of this "open" strategy was that MKG did not challenge the very right of the British to be in India. That is, of course, assuming he wanted to challenge it in the first place. This type of a challenge was done by Ghadarites, Bose & Bhagat Singh. They were summarily liquidated.

My opinion: If this is the compromise that MKG made, that is akin to bombing a village to save the village.

[ramana]

One way of looking at it was that before Freedom, INC was supposed to be the token team playing in the political field to allow the fans to think they are in the play and MKG figured out that he can score the goal and win the match if he can get the fans to support him. And thats what he did by mass basing the INC. But at same time the timing has to be right or the umpires will declare 'no goal'. Thats why it(goal score) was after the two WWs that weakened the colonial power and its umpires.

Others who did not have the patience got in the gaol.

[Keshav]

So what should be "Strategic leadership for the future of India"?

It should to create an atmosphere of liberalism and nationalism around a particular cultural core in order to elect a leader who can use those qualities to create an artistic, materially wealthy, spiritual, safe place to live, whereby Indian culture and values can be transmitted throughout the world.

Thats the strategy in a nutshell.

[kittoo]

LBS was living in bipolar world. Today, the world is not as strongly bipolar as it was in 1960's when LBS and Homi Bhabha died. The world is multipolar, with India herself is emerging as one of the power centres.

Modi's job in Gujarat as efficient administrator and messiah of privatization won't put him on bad books of Unkil, Russia. He is already on bad books of ISI, but, WTF...

He is on bad books of Desi power centres, especially the ruling dynasty. Rajmata and Yuvraj are not very happy with Modi's rise. This is where the tricky part it. BJP is knowing or unknowingly ensuring that his rise is slow. The gaze of opponents is now not fixed on Modi alone, but on both Modi and Advani.

Modi can do a chandragupta maurya part two and reach grass-root level of India while gaze of enemy is fixated on Advani, his chanakya. If BJP can pull this off in next 5-7 years, and make modi equivalent to stature of Vajpayee when it comes to public out-reach and acceptance, it will be a great service to Bhaarat. However, BJP should not place all the eggs in one basket. They should start grooming other young leaders who can be worthy generals of Modi or even efficient replacement, in case Modi falls.

BJP and Bhaarat cannot afford a loss of one more promising leader after Pramod Mahajan. India needs a leader who is accepted by general population and a statesman and visionary equivalent to Vajpayee by 2020-2025. India cannot risk a weak leadership after 2018. India's military preparations will be almost done by then. India will start projecting her powers, both soft and hard more efficiently by then. Oil will be much more scarce then, than it is now. The India-China rivalry will reach its zenith. India needs to develop a sustainable system in these 11 years and a panel of competent leaders. If India reaches 2025 unscathed, it will be a great boon for humanity. Because IMO, the second decade of 21st century will be very ominous indeed.

The asian powers will not risk starting the all-out war unless they are completely sure about their powers. They won't start the conflict prematurely as Hitler did. Owing to deep-rooted values of Sun Tzu and Chanakya, there will be a really massive build-up before final showdown. And given that the conflict will happen in region of 3-4 billion people, it will be long drawn and devastating. If India can save herself from the bull-fight until 2020 and develop internally, then she will be a major swing factor in deciding the new world order.

My best wishes to mother India.. just take care, mother....

Your analysis is spot on I think. Its the great Asian game in 21st Century, and it just might be the biggest this world has ever seen.

[ramana]

X-posted from IF....

Sanjay says:

“I would not say Gandhi was in the “pay” of the British.”

It is not necessary to pay a leader money to raise his profile or use him to achieve one’s strategic objectives.

Do you know who Gandhi was surrounded with at Tolstoy Farm in South Africa and who arranged for his marches and publicity and gave him guidance? They were all White missionaries and church-men. They surrounded him at all times and lived with him.

After 1857, the Brits got a fright and wanted the revolt never to be repeated again. In fact so deep was this fear that Gen. Dyer confessed after Jallianwalah Bagh that he thought there was a conspiracy in Punjab for a 1857 type revolt and he wanted to teach Indians a bloody lesson to nip it in the bud.

The Brits desperately needed a leader of Indians with the central message of pacifism, non-violence against the invaders and the philosophy of “never pick up arms again even if the Brits kill you all.”

Gandhi was aggressively propped up and promoted by missionaries and Genernal Smuts. General Smuts “agreed” to Gandhi’s demands, thus tremendously boosting his name in India. Nobody had heard of Gandhi before. This act of Smuts spread his fame far and wide as a man who can get the British government to bend. It is a different matter that the “bending” was deliberate.

Strategically, to make a show, the British government in South Africa and India sometimes bowed to Gandhi’s wishes to “prove” the effectiveness of his method of non-violence and impress other Indians. It was just a show to promote Gandhi as India’s tallest leader. Notice how when Gandhi arrived in India, how British government kept bowing before him in all his agitations and conceded what he had demanded.

In contrast, the Brits were brutal with nationalist Hindus such as Savarkar and Subhash Bose and simply refused to meet them, while all doors were kept open for Gandhi. Gradually, Indians began to rally behind Gandhi as the “leader who gets the work done.”

Historians should do serious research about this angle of Gandhi as a British creation and prop. Unfortunately, even after 60 years, British intelligence reports and personal files about Gandhi and Nehru are still classified by the British government. Nobody can have access to them.

The Britisher’s propping up of Gandhi had a precedent for the Brits. They knew how the Romans circulated the fable of Jesus Christ among the restive Jews under their occupation and — what a coincidence — Jesus’s message was exactly similar to Gandhi’s with respect to the invaders — “turn the other cheek” and “Give unto Ceasear what belongs to Ceaser.” It is not a coincidence that in the entire Bible, there is not one derogatory reference to the Romans. But the Jews are abused and cursed all through, with calls for thier genocide. By convering jews to christianity, the Romans managed to create an indegenous militia against the Jews. (same thing that the church is now doing in Orissa. It converts tribals and turns them into an armed militia against the Hindus.)

Have you heard of a book called “Ceaser’s Messiah”?
Here it is: http://www.caesarsmessiah.com/main.html

It tells you why and how Romans invented the cult of Jesus and spread it among the Jews. The Jews who converted to Christianity immediately became the biggest defenders of the Roman empire and enemies of Jews who were resisting the Roman rule.

This is because worship of Jesus is nothing but worship of Ceaser by proxy. The Jews became hunted in Christian socieites becasue the blame of “killing Christ” was cleverly laid on their door. For 2000 years, they were forced to live in ghettos on the periphery of Christian societies. I would say the Romans succeeded brilliantly in their plan of screwing the Jews and creating a rival cult to exterminate them. (Why risk roman soliders in killing jews when you can outsource the job to the converted jews.)

The Brits took a leaf from the Roman book and tried to create India’s own Jesus with the same message of “turn the other cheek” and “never pick up arms against the occupation army.”

I can say that Gandhi’s creation and promotion by Brits was the biggest psyops operation of modern times.

See here the video of interview of Joseph Atwill who wrote “Ceaser’s Messiah.” It is an eye-opener.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zSIzJWgp4vI

It is not a coincidence that a leader preaching non-violence arose in India within 25 years of the revolt of 1857.

One of our senior members used to allude to the role of Gen. Smuts in shaping MKG's aura but I was too dense to pick up on it.


BTW, I saw in Berkeley, Ca., a portriat of MKG as Jesus in the style of Orthodix icons. this was in the mid 80s.

[ramana]

Folks need to look at Burma in 1935. It was first Partition and the INC leadership agreed and were allowed to form Provincial govts in 1937.

[jaladipc]

I will put some points here precisely....

So far India has/had seen only 1 or 2 dare devil leaders and we do have to ignore some of their mistakes which on the other side gave value in the strategic level.And after that we are thriving for a new leader to lead the country of lions back on track.Wots the use of a sheep leading a group of lions??????
that is wot happening currently.....It makes its followers to eat the same grass either in the short term or in the long term(grass here is specifically corruption, incompetent,need for **** most of the time,.......)Hence if a sheep rules the country for a min of 2 terms every thing is ruined and as per our beloved chanakyan philosophy ,"Yadha raja tatha Praja" people do follow the same and finally we end up here from being a so called great and ancient civilization on this planet to the so called malnourished and under poverty held,corrupt,......list goes on.

Wot makes the difference is strictly the person who is leading us.Both US and USSR became the icons of the world during the 60`s means its not becos of their citizens,but becos of their leaders who are leading them.Of all the nazis how many of them are war mongers???? Hardly less than 1/4 of the percentage.But the leader him self is....This makes the real difference.It is always said that its better to take on the person leading the crowd than taking on each and every individual.Which in return creates the fear factor among the people who are following him unless the second in-charge occupies the position.
It is a proven theory that a group of sheep lead by a lion will easily take care of a group of lion lead by a sheep.
So which category we fall under??

It is nothing new that people gather and discuss strategies and the measures need to be taken by a nation to get itself come out of the well it was settled since centuries.The only thing changed is......long time back they used to gather in an individual house/forest/some where else,now we are gathering over the internet.IF we think like anything got changed??? we have to sense a bold NO .Wot needs to be changed is? after every 5 years we go and get a blue ink on our finger to elect that sheep.Why not elect a lion irrespective of its caste,creed and religion and sex? Is it becos of the fear that the lion might eat all of us?

But the thing here is if its a lion we all know that 101% it only eats meat so we can be carefull.But if its a wool covered sheep we are electing? how the hell on earth we predict wot it eats and digests?And we are ending up in the same zone after every five years.

2 years back when i was on IDF i has put down a strategy to take care of the entire south asia just leaving the china and east asian belt intact.At the same time i do rolled over the necessity of a leader(strong enough)to lead a population of 1.15 billion.At any given time we are having a gud 25% of the people living in poverty and malnourished.No matter who ever comes into power and wotever he does to increase his bank balances nothing different happens.Same thing happening regarding the most needed anti-corruption.If corruption alone in india is causing a mere $500 billion loss to the fed every year which starts from the basic attender to the hi-fi politician and IAS/IPS person how much advantage we can gain once this devil is domesticated?? INCREDIBLE right.....

People might be saying that no matter how we are,we still are posting the average 8% growth every year.But the thing to know is we will never cross that average mark until we got rid of this devil.We can see wonders in a corruption free land.No more foreign content(means no terrorism)
Once you can control a nation with a >1 billion population and give them food,shelter the rest of the world is a matter of minutes.We will have say in each and every thing.We will be the leader in the so called unipolar world.

Chanakya once said::: To control the crop which is infested,its not worth spraying the pesticide for time being.We have to know the origin of those pests and have to destroy their.Even though we loose once crop during this process,we can stay peaceful from the next crop onwards.

Money makes everything.Not only it makes the toy to dance but also makes it to serve you a coffee.
Unless the people in India and other gov officials are fools how come a telugu movie star and now the party leader chiranjeevi`s total assests onleeee Rs 88 crore while his remuneration for every movie on average is Rs 4 crore? since 2000 onward.
Same with sonia;she confessed that she dont even own a car
There is USD 1.5 trillion lying in swiss banks onleee which is un accounted money of these so called leaders or heros.Think about it once how much change we can bring utilizing atleast a percent of that money.

My entire post is to highlight the importance of money and utilizing it.Which ofcourse is the main cause that the west are now leaned towards India means we are posting a good GDP that we are in the late 70`s/80`s/90`s.
Now people want china becos they have/had money.US is strictly playing a double game with India becos of that.
In the short term we will get rid of pakistan becos of US interference and in the long term we have to go along with Chinese mess which is made by the same US.
Frankly speaking US is a country which dont want other to sleep/live peacefully.It always brings troubles intentionally.Today pakistan is in its way blocking the central asian trade.So it is getting rid of the pakistan and its nuclear arsenal.Sooner than later pakistan has to dismantle its nuclear infrastructure and weapons for no cause just becos it is friends with US.Which might be a good thing for India in the short term but will turn into a gallows in the long term unless the situation being tackled carefully.This is where a strategist leader is important.
Once we reach that stage of having leaders looking after the nation as a whole rather than looking at a particular corner we will never grow up.
If the highly infested naxalism in Andhra/karnataka can be controlled why not the same in North-east? just becos of the step-mom love towards north-east.Just becos we dont get anything in return from those poor states apart from those 10 or 20 votes needed to prove majority in lokshaba.In a family not all the people need to be productive.Same thing with those states too.You gotta have to teach them how to be productive.As long as u show the step-mom affection things wont be good.
I really feel like elaborating a lot other things.But my time is not favoring it.Just want to put a bottom line like this.Neither the congress nor the BJP`s foreign policies are good enough.Infact BJP is not showing a much better foreign policy than before.Atleast we can see a watchful development in the strategic level IF BJP comes to power.
for sure we need a ringmaster who dont belong to any of these infested groups. JAI HIND.

[brihaspati]

jaladipcji,
understand your feelings. May I humbly request you to elaborate your ideas over several posts focusing on one area in each? I think from a lot of what you mention, that your ideas are not going to be much out of place here in these threads as similar ideas have been broached here before.

[jaladipc]

jaladipcji,
understand your feelings. May I humbly request you to elaborate your ideas over several posts focusing on one area in each? I think from a lot of what you mention, that your ideas are not going to be much out of place here in these threads as similar ideas have been broached here before.

I already mentioned on day one on this forum.
A new leadership is taking shape.
To give a comfortable timeline it would see light in the next general elections.As to make the present parties and leaders of the respectives to put their fingers on their nose.
wot all i can say now is have to keep the same heat for 5 more years.Each and every objective in favor of the nation will be fulfilled.
One has to consider that not all strategies will be formulated in the home land.When ones home is not safe ,neighbors home is preferable.That is wot going to happen.

[ramana]

It might be useful for collective memory to link the bios of post-Independence forgotten leaders like GB Pant, HN Kunzru, Kamraj Nadar, T Prakasam, Lala Lajapt Rai. Also important is to link bios of the vilified Syndicate leaders for they also had served the nation but were vilified by the Mrs G., circle of sychophants.

[jaladipc]

boss,
how long these G clan are gonna keep their pressure?
frankly its end of their regime.
Behold for the bumpy ride ahead.
history always repeats.Awaiting for the golden days ahead.... JAI HIND

[LokeshP]

after Rajiv's death many wondered what would happen to the Gandhi dynasty since the next generation was still too young. Sonia wasn't yet in control, so PVNR took charge and after his term was done, we saw Gujraj and Devegowda, then finally Vajpayee.

this time, the dynasty succession has well and truly come of age and the time to make a statement has come for Rajkumar, if he wishes to continue the legacy. but i think ppl have finally caught up to the dynasty strategy here and they aren't as naive as before. by ppl i mean the common man and all politicians in general. the old guard (chidambaram, Arjun Singh, Pranabda, etc) might be fine with succession rules already in place, but situation is fast changing, and INC will lose out to BJP and all the other assorted parties if it doesn't wise up to the reality that the Nehru dynasty doesn't hold the monopoly over Indian politics anymore. if INC as a whole wises up then there might actually be a chance of consolidation of political vote-blocks and possibly further exapansion of INC into some of the lost vote share over the decades. but Rajmata and Rajkumar are rank opportunists and will take the INC down with them if they have to but will never stop clinging.

it would be interesting to see where the 15th Lok Sabha takes us. what kind of formations will be put in place, how long it lasts, and considering the extremely fractured nature of the current situation, how effectively will it take care of Indian interests? more importantly how will their karma compare with INC (Sonia & Rahul)? if a rag-tag group of opportunists can come together and do better than INC on national priorities, then there might still be some hope for India yet.....and considering the beating the Dynasty will take b/c of the loss even after Rahul baba's grand entrance, we might well see in the forseeable future a steadily dwindling INC which might become all but extinct by 2040. as India develops and more people move out of poverty, as new lines are drawn for political debate and new battle-grounds for ideological tug-of-wars, a steady shift will be noticeable by 2020. there will be merging of many vote-blocks, splitting of some others to join greener pastures based on the issues and debates of the time....

[kittoo]

A little off topic question, but I wanted to ask, What is the meaning of this statement in Indian Flag code-

where the Flag is displayed in open, it should, as far as possible, be flown from
sunrise to sunset

What does it mean- as far as possible?

The reason I ask this is because I wanted to put flag on roof of my house (in accordance with all the flag codes, obviously) cause I sincerely believe that sometimes little things go far. I seriously believe that the little things like flags everywhere have done great for unification and patriotic feeling in the US. Now I am pretty sure there wont be anyone here on BRF who would bring the stupid ideology that one cant do anything.

If its all right, I urge every Indian here to start this, until and unless it respects the flag fully.

[brihaspati]

A 1969 article from the US viewpoint about the "Indicate vs Syndicate struggle" :
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/artic ... 93,00.html

Note the interesting issues and dilemmas and what made the Syndicate lose out - their greater concern for preservation of the entity of "Congress" than their own preservation in power - making them restrained in their approach. IG proved the applicability sometimes under certain circumstances of Dantonian "encore le audace, tujour.."

"The Syndicate had even greater cause for anger last week, when the presidential votes were counted. In a stunning upset, Giri won a narrow victory over Reddy. Left-wing Communist electors backed Giri almost unanimously. About 40% of Congress Party parliamentarians defied the Syndicate to vote for him. Giri polled 420,077 votes to Reddy's 405,427.

....The Syndicate could yet avenge itself. When it meets this week, the Congress Party's 21-member working committee could vote to discipline Indira or even expel her, but such action would be subject to later approval by the All India Congress Committee, a far larger forum of 700 delegates. The working committee is considered unlikely to take the drastic step of expulsion, primarily because it would tear the party apart —and perhaps leave Indira as a non-Congress Prime Minister with leftist support. The alternative possibility of bringing down her government with a vote of no-confidence was all but ruled out by her show of strength among the Congress M.P.s. In any case, Indira is not overextending herself to placate the right-wingers. After the election she made a point of saying: "If some vested interests, without understanding the government's policy, oppose it, they invite their doom." "

Note Giri's early "Irish revolutionary" stint in Dublin - a pointer that early hotheadedness does not necessarily indicate real statesmanship later.

[Pranav]

Folks, this is a must-watch. This is an interview of KGB defector Yuri Bezmenov, who was stationed in New Delhi in the 1970's, and makes a large number of fascinating observations regarding Indian Commies and the CIA/Commie modus operandi.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid ... i+Bezmenov,

[svinayak]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atulya_Ghosh

Atulya Ghosh

Atulya Ghosh (Bengali: অতুল্য ঘোষ) (1904 – 1986) was a Bengali politician and an able political organiser who had become a legend in Indian political circles. [1] He has been described as “a wise, scholarly and honest leader who was a superb political organizer.”

How the western newspapers were looking at the Indian leadership

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/artic ... hix-sphere
A Show of Independence
Friday, Nov. 25, 1966
As a proud and somewhat willful lady, Indira Gandhi smarts under the allegation that she was picked as Prime Minister largely because the Congress Party's political pros reckoned that she would be easy to control. Yet she seemed to confirm that charge two weeks ago when she backed down on three Cabinet changes after running into strong protests from party bosses. Last week, as if to assert her independence, Mrs. Gandhi went right ahead and made some Cabinet changes anyhow.

Defense for Home. True, no one was fired. But four ministers were moved to different jobs, and in the process she rid herself of a portfolio that she had inherited unwillingly two weeks ago. It was the important Home Ministry, from which she had removed Gulzarilal Nanda for his failure to block the violent Hindu demonstrations against cow slaughter that recently erupted near Parliament. Now she passed the powerful post to Y. B. Chavan, 53, the former Defense Minister. In so doing, she also created a powerful potential rival for the future.

So far, Chavan has been impeccably loyal to Indira, but he, too, has the qualifications of a Prime Minister: service as an anti-British guerrilla in his teens, two jail terms during the independence struggle, experience as a former chief minister of the highly industrialized state of Maharashtra, which includes Bombay, and an excellent record as a Cabinet minister. He was originally summoned to New Delhi and given the Defense post in 1962 by Jawaharlal Nehru, who needed a replacement for Leftist Krishna Menon in the dark days after Red China's attack. Chavan rammed through an effective rebuilding of the army. Now he was clearly out to rebuild the Home Ministry's gentle image. His first major orders in his new job were to prohibit a student demonstration in New Delhi and to jail two socialist members of Parliament who encouraged students to defy his ban.

In Indira's other ministerial switches, Swaran Singh, 59, went from the Foreign Office to Chavan's old post at Defense. His place in foreign affairs was taken by Mahomedali Currim Chagla, 66, an Oxford-educated Moslem who has served as ambassador to both the U.S. and Great Britain. Chagla's vacant spot in Education went, in turn, to Fakhruddin Ahmed, 61, whose old post as Minister for Irrigation and Power will be filled temporarily by one of his senior assistants.

Syndicate Worries. What had Indira gained? Very little, her friends feared. True, she had shown that she could defy the bosses, and her shuffle put stronger men in more important posts. The big fear was that her tactics had turned the most important party bosses against her. Powerful Railways Minister S. K. Patil was upset over the elevation of Chavan, a rival in Bombay politics. Patil is one of the three kingmakers who comprise the "Syndicate" that has often controlled Congress Party appointments. The other two—West Bengal Politico Atulya Ghosh and Transportation Minister Sanjiva Reddy—were also upset by Indira's sudden show of independence. If they are still angry about it after next February's national elections, they just might try to edge the proud lady Prime Minister quietly out of her job.

[ramana]

Acharya, During the Indicate-Syndicate wars of the late 1960s, the Indira Congress and the press vilified the SYndicate leaders as being antediluvian and out of touch. In retrospect the Sybdicate leaders were all strong regional leaders who had national stature and connections. With their fall/decimation in the Presidential election which VV Giri won, INC became a dynastic monopoly of the Nehru-Gandhi family. And the rot started as there was no credible alternative and psycophancy took over. The post-Emergency elections in 1977 threw up the Janata Party, but the leadership pulled in all directions and fought like Killkenny cats.


Please try to find also the biographies of other leaders I mentioned in my post.

Thanks, ramana

[Stan_Savljevic]

A little off topic question, but I wanted to ask, What is the meaning of this statement in Indian Flag code-

where the Flag is displayed in open, it should, as far as possible, be flown from
sunrise to sunset

What does it mean- as far as possible?

Read Naveen Jindal's, who got hit by a shoe in the election campaign, crusade on flying the national flag:
http://www.rediff.com/news/2001/jun/13spec.htm
http://www.the-south-asian.com/April200 ... Jindal.htm

Raigarh’s Additional SP, Lal Ummed Singh, told The Indian Express that the management of Jindal Power had been booked under Section 2 of the Prevention of Insults to National Honour Act (1971). “The flag on the plant building had reportedly not been taken down at sunset, as stipulated in the Flag Code of India,” he said.

There are a number of traditional rules of respect that should be observed when handling or displaying the flag. When out in the open, the flag should always be hoisted at sunrise and lowered at sunset, irrespective of the weather conditions. The flag may be also flown on a public building at night under special circumstances.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flag_of_India
http://web.archive.org/web/200601101559 ... ag2002.htm

[SwamyG]

In the Indian English, I think "as far as possible" means "within your ability" or "do your best" or "go to your limits". The underlying implication is - give it all you have got and give up only when you really can not do the things.

I think it is expected of you to roll down the flag after sun set.


It is my interpretation.....and probably you should consult a lawyer if you really don't want to get into trouble.