Indian Interests

All threads that are locked or marked for deletion will be moved to this forum. The topics will be cleared from this archive on the 1st and 16th of each month.
RamaY
BRF Oldie
Posts: 17249
Joined: 10 Aug 2006 21:11
Location: http://bharata-bhuti.blogspot.com/

Re: Indian Interests

Postby RamaY » 05 Jul 2012 00:55

^^ RajeshAji,

I remember you saying the same. When I said I was talking about people like you, Shivji, Bji, Ramanaji etc.,

P.S: While I rant against some of your and Shivji's (and similar posters) posts, I think I am very clear about your Dharmic intentions. I too post equally rhetorical posts to make our forum guests to understand the other side of the coin. It is part of the debate process. Kindly note.

svinayak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14223
Joined: 09 Feb 1999 12:31

Re: Indian Interests

Postby svinayak » 05 Jul 2012 00:57

RajeshA wrote:Published Jun 25, 2012
By N.S. Rajaram
Sangh Parivar must get more progressive

"Progressive" word is a foreign word.

AbhiJ
BRFite
Posts: 494
Joined: 29 Sep 2010 17:33
Contact:

Re: Indian Interests

Postby AbhiJ » 05 Jul 2012 01:02

Noticed One New School of Thought:

Modern India is a Mix of Dharmic and Abrahamic Religions and both define their Character from the last 1000 Years. Be contempt and live as if both are Sons of the Soil.

RamaY
BRF Oldie
Posts: 17249
Joined: 10 Aug 2006 21:11
Location: http://bharata-bhuti.blogspot.com/

Re: Indian Interests

Postby RamaY » 05 Jul 2012 01:10

Abrahamic faiths (not People) have no business in Bharat. They have their home lands to be content with.

It is naivity to mix the people and faiths. If these so-called Indians are OK with their adopted faiths today, they will be ok with their natural faith too, because they were locals once. We need not accept the faith/ideology to accept the people.

It is the faith/ideology that is the issue, not people. The faith/ideologies shows its characteristics thru the people, whose minds/souls it occupies. (PS: Even communism, secularism, mercantilism etc., are also ideologies).

svinayak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14223
Joined: 09 Feb 1999 12:31

Re: Indian Interests

Postby svinayak » 05 Jul 2012 01:12

AbhiJ wrote:Noticed One New School of Thought:

Modern India is a Mix of Dharmic and Abrahamic Religions and both define their Character from the last 1000 Years. Be contempt and live as if both are Sons of the Soil.

This is a manufactured 'modern India' and it is a fake. It does not have a place inside India

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54682
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Indian Interests

Postby ramana » 05 Jul 2012 01:34

There is one trap of Modernism we need to keep in mind. If we define India is a Hindu nation we will take away from the universality of Hinduism for all humans. In other words Vasudeva Kutumbum becomes a narrow concept confined to a geographical area. Seeing the many OIT migrations with ancient Middle Easterners attesting to Vedic Gods do we want this confinement?

nakul
BRFite
Posts: 1251
Joined: 31 Aug 2011 10:39

Re: Indian Interests

Postby nakul » 05 Jul 2012 02:03

ramana wrote:There is one trap of Modernism we need to keep in mind. If we define India is a Hindu nation we will take away from the universality of Hinduism for all humans. In other words Vasudeva Kutumbum becomes a narrow concept confined to a geographical area. Seeing the many OIT migrations with ancient Middle Easterners attesting to Vedic Gods do we want this confinement?


Defining India as Hindu does not mean disconnecting it to its offshoots. On the contrary, it focusses on the vibrant culture that has been the source of pride for people for millenia. Students from far away came to our universities to learn the knowledge of the Vedas & Upanishads. Similarly, we spread our culture to lands in the middle east and east asia. There have been connections unearthed between India & Central American civilizations. Vasudeva Kutumbukam has been the standard for eons. Only exclusivist religions try to distinguish themselves by disowning their roots. On the other hand, most of the other religions are not shy about their sources.

svinayak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14223
Joined: 09 Feb 1999 12:31

Re: Indian Interests

Postby svinayak » 05 Jul 2012 02:05

>>>Defining India as Hindu does not mean disconnecting it to its offshoots.

It is important to make sure that there is nothing anti Hindu inside India. such as laws, history, education and media
This is more important

abhishek_sharma
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9664
Joined: 19 Nov 2009 03:27

Re: Indian Interests

Postby abhishek_sharma » 05 Jul 2012 05:06

Views from the Right

Why oblige Nitish?

WHILE the Media Watch section of RSS journal Organiser highlights the “undue focus” on BJP’s internal affairs in the wake of Bihar Chief Minister Nitish Kumar’s insistence that the NDA pick a “secular” prime ministerial candidate, senior RSS leader M.G. Vaidya has contributed a full-page article analysing the debate. The article juxtaposes the “two extreme points” represented by Gujarat Chief Minister Narendra Modi and Nitish.

Claiming that “no individual is secular, unless he is an atheist”, Vaidya asserts that “the state has to be secular” because a “non-secular or a theocratic state is a perversity, a contradiction in terms”. While the article says that the whole debate is “uncalled for”, as Lok Sabha elections are two years away, it goes after Nitish for his motives. The article also laments Nitish’s “haste” over his prime ministerial “ambition” and says little to back Modi’s purported ambition for the same post.

While the article gave little indication for who the RSS’s choice for PM might be, it asserts that the Sangh Parivar is well within its right to support “a devotee of Hindutva” for the post of PM, just as Nitish has got the right to demand a “secular PM”. But there is no reason for the BJP to “oblige” Nitish on this issue, the article says. “Why is Nitish in such haste? If he wants to severe his party’s ties with the NDA, he can do it any time,” says Vaidya, stating that Nitish is free to aspire for prime ministership and also “amuse himself” with his personal opinion about Modi. Vaidya gives assurances that the “devotee of Hindutva” who will be the RSS’s choice “will surely guarantee that his statecraft will be genuinely secular” and will not practice “pseudo-secularism”.

Missing Abu Jundal

THE issue of the deportation of the Mumbai terror accused Abu Jundal to India from Saudi Arabia has failed to get due space in both RSS journals, perhaps due to publication deadlines. However, the Panchjanya has an editorial that says that the revelations from Jundal further confirm India’s stance on the involvement of Pakistan’s state players in the 2008 attacks. The editorial has asked the Indian government to act “tough” against Pakistan and tell them that it will not tolerate anti-India actions emanating from their soil behind the curtain of commercial ties and talks.

Gag order

AN EDITORIAL in Organiser criticises the UPA government’s efforts to remove “offensive” content from the Internet and charges them for seeking to “gag” the public. “The UPA government is out to gag the free and critical voice,” says the editorial, and alleges that “government investigative agencies are on a huge hunt to locate the physical location and identity of several IP addresses from America, which have posted material not palatable to the Gandhi family.”

Target Akhilesh

AS THE BJP tries to find its feet in the increasingly bipolar polity of Uttar Pradesh, RSS weekly Panchjanya has trained its guns at the state’s youngest CM, Akhilesh Kumar in an article evaluating his government’s record on crime since assuming power.

The article compares records on rape, dacoity, kidnapping, loot, murder, extortion and riots in the Akhilesh regime with the last two years to say that “the extent of crime within this period surpasses even that of previous Mayawati regime” and asserts that UP is moving towards “lawlessnes” and “anarchy” under his rule.

Another report highlights the 81 per cent hike in the budget for minority welfare to charge Akhilesh with “Muslim appeasement”, implying it was done with an eye on the Lok Sabha elections in 2014.

Compiled by Ravish Tiwari

ShauryaT
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5246
Joined: 31 Oct 2005 06:06

Re: Indian Interests

Postby ShauryaT » 05 Jul 2012 05:40

RamaY wrote:
How many attacks from the Taleban will we bear, before we retaliate? Can safely expect the number and intensity of attacks to go up. Indian retaliation is assured and so goes our own economic prosperity agenda.


This is nothing but rhetoric that doesnt make any sense. This has been going on for too long on this forum without any substantial information.
You should present your counters, if you believe the above is rhetoric with no basis in fact of a scenario that could likely envelop. Leave it to readers to judge. Too painful to try to explain every judgement made in that sentence and show how one came to the above conclusion. You can continue to believe that war and internal security has no economic consequences. Really nothing for me to prove or say.

RamaY
BRF Oldie
Posts: 17249
Joined: 10 Aug 2006 21:11
Location: http://bharata-bhuti.blogspot.com/

Re: Indian Interests

Postby RamaY » 05 Jul 2012 05:48

^ that is the best you could comeup with ShauryaTji?

I already gave my points. Also asked for specific details. Really appreciate if you can provide a detailed study instead of saying war is bad in every thread. Can you please specify when is the reign of peace since 1947 so we can compare the cost/benefits of so-called piss process?

For example you can say the Mohan-almighty's regime between 2004-2012 is the most pissful period. Then we can compare that period with say a war torn period between 1947-1955 or something like that?

ShauryaT
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5246
Joined: 31 Oct 2005 06:06

Re: Indian Interests

Postby ShauryaT » 05 Jul 2012 05:52

ramana wrote:There is one trap of Modernism we need to keep in mind. If we define India is a Hindu nation we will take away from the universality of Hinduism for all humans. In other words Vasudeva Kutumbum becomes a narrow concept confined to a geographical area. Seeing the many OIT migrations with ancient Middle Easterners attesting to Vedic Gods do we want this confinement?
I will take it a step further. The political unity of India is needed only and only to protect the spiritual genius of India. It should be a core purpose of the state, enshrined in its preamblem. A state seeking to protect the universality of SD is no different in concept from the US seeking to protect and propagate the ideals of Freedom. In fact it is a much needed edifice, until such time it is not under threat - which is a long time.

ShauryaT
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5246
Joined: 31 Oct 2005 06:06

Re: Indian Interests

Postby ShauryaT » 05 Jul 2012 06:03

RamaY wrote:^ that is the best you could comeup with ShauryaTji?

I already gave my points. Also asked for specific details. Really appreciate if you can provide a detailed study instead of saying war is bad in every thread. Can you please specify when is the reign of peace since 1947 so we can compare the cost/benefits of so-called piss process?

For example you can say the Mohan-almighty's regime between 2004-2012 is the most pissful period. Then we can compare that period with say a war torn period between 1947-1955 or something like that?
In context of India, not many on the table, as we have either been blundering or slumbering. Otherwise many exist in context of the cold war for the US, Russia, EU. A peace dividend is an obvious point for me. It creates pre-conditions for a certain type of stability that business and citizens look for. Confidence leads to positive decisions, that leads to more economic activity and investments. All other things remaining equal, it is a key underlying factor. Security is a pre-condition for economic growth is my understanding. What type of proofs you are looking for? J&K has more stability that is finally leading to more economic activity in the region as a result of the CFA of 2003 and other things achieved diplomatically and under threat of escalation with TSP and through our own internal security measures. I really do not understand, why are you even questioning this.

Virupaksha
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 3110
Joined: 28 Jun 2007 06:36

Re: Indian Interests

Postby Virupaksha » 05 Jul 2012 06:10

ShauryaT wrote:
ramana wrote:There is one trap of Modernism we need to keep in mind. If we define India is a Hindu nation we will take away from the universality of Hinduism for all humans. In other words Vasudeva Kutumbum becomes a narrow concept confined to a geographical area. Seeing the many OIT migrations with ancient Middle Easterners attesting to Vedic Gods do we want this confinement?
I will take it a step further. The political unity of India is needed only and only to protect the spiritual genius of India. It should be a core purpose of the state, enshrined in its preamblem. A state seeking to protect the universality of SD is no different in concept from the US seeking to protect and propagate the ideals of Freedom. In fact it is a much needed edifice, until such time it is not under threat - which is a long time.

Taking your what ifs to another level - because all your statements simply seem to say,

oh that is not a mirage there. You will get to it if you continue on the same path. Ignore all the efforts before doing the same chasing of mirage in the same path for the past 100 times. That one is not a mirage. You have to continue on the same path.

This particular post assumes that the weilder of "political unity of India" has its core purpose of "spiritual genius of India" and is never actually used to go against "spiritual genius of India"/whatever you may want call it. What happens if it is not true.

RamaY
BRF Oldie
Posts: 17249
Joined: 10 Aug 2006 21:11
Location: http://bharata-bhuti.blogspot.com/

Re: Indian Interests

Postby RamaY » 05 Jul 2012 06:12

^ fair enough.

We have enough of abstract statements. It is time to settle this once and for all with facts and references.

Can you please provide the data when FSU, US, EU etc got the peace dividend? please tell us how and when these entities became regional/world powers and whether it is their peace or war strategies that helped them become the powers they are/were.

ShauryaT
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5246
Joined: 31 Oct 2005 06:06

Re: Indian Interests

Postby ShauryaT » 05 Jul 2012 06:28

Virupaksha ji: can you please rephrase. I did not understand anything from your post. If the purpose of the state is enshrined and there are institutional bodies to protect and propagate and teach, just like we are taught about the ideals of democracy today - not that easy for someone to go against ideals and core tenets of SD. But I did not get the thrust of your post and what you are trying to say.

brihaspati
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12410
Joined: 19 Nov 2008 03:25

Re: Indian Interests

Postby brihaspati » 05 Jul 2012 08:12

A very old debate - does conflict slow "growth" or not? We had a lively debate on this with Lord of the Moon - who consistently cited Polachek's early work and ignored the lack of causality tests in that work. I cited other subsequent work that finds empirical reverse direction causality too - such as conflict between Pak and India [seems to increase "growwwth"].

Polachek took another paper out in 2010. He still does not test for causality. However even he finds - statistically insignificant [without testing for say Granger] but positive correlation of growth with non-fatal low-intensity conflict.

But the following paper should provide some insight into the real reasons behind the angst in the "conflict reduces growth" side :
DIW Berlin: Discussion paper 1105. Beyond the Overall Economic Downturn: Evidence on Sector-specific Effects of Violent Conflict from Indonesia by Marc Vothknecht and Sudarno Sumarto

The panel analysis provides important insights into sector-specific vulnerabilities during violent conflict and in the early recovery phase. We find, first, that activities depending on capital and transactions are particularly affected by violent conflict. Second, conflict-related declines in economic growth are of temporary nature, with some areas of the economy recovering faster than others once conflict ends. Third, the results confirm that the scale of the economic downturn depends on the intensity and type of violence, rather than the mere existence of mostly non-violent or low intensity conflicts. Finally, spillover effects from violence in neighboring regions are less clear and appear to only affect transaction-intensive industries, most notably transport industries and financial services.



Besides historical legacies, ethnic diversity is often seen as another explanation for cross- country differences in the effectiveness of public policies. Heterogeneous preferences across ethnic groups are likely to impede agreement on policy decisions and result in lower spending on public goods (Alesina et al. 1999).


What happens to the "diversity is supreme god" mantra?

The relationship between education and economic growth is more contested. While a positive link between individual education and income is confirmed by a large body of microeconomic studies (see e.g. Psacharapoulos and Patrinos, 2004), cross-country evidence is mixed. Recent macro-level analyses on the impact of educational attainment on economic growth fail to establish a significant relationship (see Easterly and Levine (2001) for a discussion). Potential explanations include differences between social and private returns to education, measurement errors and limited data comparability.


Hmm. So even education may not definitely push GDP.

In general, cross-country studies tend to focus on the factors that drive long term growth and rarely provide for short term interventions. A distinction between short term growth dynamics and long term equilibrium effects could therefore add valuable insights for policy makers (Rao and Corray, 2009).

Evidence from cross-country studies often also suffers from restrictive assumptions. Pooling across countries implicitly assumes a universal growth process and homogeneous growth parameters, i.e. identical underlying production functions and technological improvements. With most samples, however, consisting of very heterogeneous countries at different stages of development and with diverse economic structures, cross-country parameter estimates, at best, display inter-country averages, but tell little about the evolution of growth for individual countries (Bos et al., 2010).


Thats a cautionary tale for those of us would believe in the final conclusions of the papers based on those limitations.

We find significantly different effects of violent conflict across sectors. As proposed by Collier (1999), industries dependent on either capital or transaction are most vulnerable to conflict. In particular, this applies to manufacturing, finance, transport and communication, as well as the retail and hospitality industries. The construction sector suffers substantially during active conflicts, while a slightly positive trend is found in the early post-conflict period. Other sectors’’ recovery appears less rapid; both manufacturing industries and the finance sector seem especially reliant on a lasting peace.

As we do not control for saving rates, reduced investment is a potential driver of the economic downturn in times of conflict. Overall, the analysis points to only temporary, short term impact of violent conflict on economic growth. A limitation of this study is the intermittent character of the conflict data. Observations on conflict before and after the respective survey years are not available, which prevents us from conducting a more detailed analysis of the growth dynamics during conflict and in post-conflict times.

(A crucial weakness of such studies should be noted - data is often insufficient to carry out significant tests of causality).

So the sectors who worry most about conflict because their "growth" is most seriously affected out of all sectors - capital and finance. How many Indians benefit from this sector? which section of the population's income is guaranteed from a cut from the pure process of circulation of money? How many Indians are bankers, or bankers kids, or financial advisors, or investment specialists, or desk traders?

Polachek (2010) and others - often cite "rule of law", "securing property rights" and reducing uncertainty of investments returns as a decisive factor in growth - with rule of law supposedly preventing exploitation of the weak by the strong. Sure - "rule of law" is the 24/7 buzzword of most Oiropean democrazies with sttrrrong inztitutions made of reinforced concrete and steel - including the fabled "city" - that small piece of real estate of towers beside an old river, that made legalism and obsession with the formal observation of "rule of law" the absurd theater of the 21st century. However within that very "rule of law" - the traders and their mentors played around merrily on the weak - with almost little or no penalties at all to those sufficiently "strong" among them.

Rule of law, states, and institutions are built in ways that the controllers of rule-of-law, or states, or institutions, never have any need to break the law. Laws are framed in ways that leaves the required gaps for them to sail through, or their needs are taken care of in ways that are not available to the non-rulers.

The whole paradigm of "conflict reduces growth" is the concern of the rulers and the controllers of state and financial institutions, or those who benefit from such state and financial institutions. State institutions are designed to safeguard the accumulation and appropriation of wealth by a minority of the population (yes including so-called communist heavens)- the latter to be cyclically defrauded on various pretexts, while the powerful do not have to pay for the costs.

Prem
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21166
Joined: 01 Jul 1999 11:31
Location: Weighing and Waiting 8T Yconomy

Re: Indian Interests

Postby Prem » 05 Jul 2012 08:46

http://news.yahoo.com/india-free-generi ... nance.html
India to give free generic drugs to hundreds of millions
( Another NREGA= Bhookhe Dhi Dhee(daughter) rajji, te Kheh uudan laggi=Hungry man gets the food to eat but Daughter has become delusional)

MUMBAI (Reuters) - India has put in place a $5.4 billion policy to provide free medicine to its people, a decision that could change the lives of hundreds of millions, but a ban on branded drugs stands to cut Big Pharma out of the windfall.From city hospitals to tiny rural clinics, India's public doctors will soon be able to prescribe free generic drugs to all comers, vastly expanding access to medicine in a country where public spending on health was just $4.50 per person last year.The plan was quietly adopted last year but not publicized. Initial funding has been allocated in recent weeks, officials said.Under the plan, doctors will be limited to a generics-only drug list and face punishment for prescribing branded medicines, a major disadvantage for pharmaceutical giants in one of the world's fastest-growing drug markets."Without a doubt, it is a considerable blow to an already beleaguered industry, recently the subject of several disadvantageous decisions in India," said KPMG partner Chris Stirling, who is European head of Chemicals and Pharmaceuticals."Pharmaceutical firms will likely rethink their emerging markets strategies carefully to take account of this development, and any similar copycat moves across other geographies," he added.But the initiative would overhaul a system where healthcare is often a luxury and private clinics account for four times as much spending as state hospitals, despite 40 percent of the people living below the poverty line, or $1.25 a day or less.
Within five years, up to half of India's 1.2 billion people are likely to take advantage of the scheme, the government says. Others are likely to continue visiting private hospitals and clinics, where the scheme will not operate."The policy of the government is to promote greater and rational use of generic medicines that are of standard quality," said L.C. Goyal, additional secretary at India's Ministry of Health and Family Welfare and a key proponent of the policy."They are much, much cheaper than the branded ones."Global drugmakers like Pfizer, GlaxoSmithKline and Merck will be hit. They spend billions of dollars a year researching new treatments and target huge growth for branded medicine in emerging economies such as India, where generics account for around 90 percent of drug sales by value, far more than in developed countries.U.S.-based Abbott Laboratories, which bought an Indian generics maker in 2010, is the biggest seller of drugs, both branded and generic, in India, followed by GlaxoSmithKline

devesh
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5129
Joined: 17 Feb 2011 03:27

Re: Indian Interests

Postby devesh » 05 Jul 2012 09:03

a post by a member of Rajiv Malhotra's Yahoo forums:

I want to report on what is happening in Hyderabad, AP. Since the publication of Telugu version of Ilaiah's Book
POST-HINDU INDIA, there have been lot of brain storming sessions on the TVTelugu Channels and Telugu News
papers on the Threats to Hinduism and Future of Hinduism. A Hindu Bhakti Channel has gone a step forward and
organized whole day discussions with Ten Pithadhipathis (Religious leaders), concerned retired officers of the IPS
and IAS, Retired judges of AP high court, Telugu News paper editors, concerned citizens - about 10 of them on
July 1, 2012.


They noted the usual issues of diverse Hindu traditions, no central authority, pace of conversions which is very high
in AP and the present generations having no opportunity to know the basics of HInduism, slow death of regional language
and shift to English in a smaller and flatter world.

The outcome of the session is to start A HINDU DHARMA SAMMELAN, which looks after the social, political. organized
relgious issues of Hindus. For example all the temples of Hindus in AP are under the state government and the income
accrued goes to the Common Good Fund which is used for miscellaneous activities such as municipal works in Tirupati
and giving subsidies for minority religious establishments and Bethelham pilgrimage assisstance to Chrstians introduced
by a Christian CM of AP during 2004-2010. The minority religious establishments have no state control. This
point was raised in the presenceof the CM of AP and the one before him who is presently a governor.
We hope something good comees out of it.and some steps will be taken in the direction of some positive action.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54682
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Indian Interests

Postby ramana » 05 Jul 2012 09:08

ShauryaT wrote:
ramana wrote:There is one trap of Modernism we need to keep in mind. If we define India is a Hindu nation we will take away from the universality of Hinduism for all humans. In other words Vasudeva Kutumbum becomes a narrow concept confined to a geographical area. Seeing the many OIT migrations with ancient Middle Easterners attesting to Vedic Gods do we want this confinement?


I will take it a step further. The political unity of India is needed only and only to protect the spiritual genius of India. It should be a core purpose of the state, enshrined in its preamblem. A state seeking to protect the universality of SD is no different in concept from the US seeking to protect and propagate the ideals of Freedom. In fact it is a much needed edifice, until such time it is not under threat - which is a long time.


ST, I am not sure of this. Sanathan Dharma and Indic civilization spread and spiritual genius of India flourished without and despite political unity of India and core purpose of the state. My fear is if the Sanathan Dharma is identified with a state instead of the nation then it gets subsumed if the state goes.

Example Zorastarianism was the state religion of the pre Islamic Persians. It got wiped out with the fall of Cstephon.
Mithrasim was the state religion of Rome and fell with conversion of Constantine.

Sanathan Dharma lived and will live so long its not state sponsored.


Do I make myself clear or is it fuzzy?

svinayak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14223
Joined: 09 Feb 1999 12:31

Re: Indian Interests

Postby svinayak » 05 Jul 2012 10:23

This cannot be done until Indian education and Indian media is under the control of Indians.
Indian political system has to be rooted inside India

chandrabhan
BRFite
Posts: 196
Joined: 23 Jul 2008 10:59

Re: Indian Interests

Postby chandrabhan » 05 Jul 2012 10:46

Dear Mods,
I am writing this here as I don't know the appropriate thread for this. Saw the enormous Hulla boo created by ELM on the supposed biography of Chruhat lottery thief . Having seen him from close quarters as young man during the CONgress (T) experience, I have the following to say. Most of it , I am sure is already known..

1. He was extremely ambitious, Shameless and cunning.
2. Morally decadent
3. Hated PVNR for usurping the Prime minister seat which he believed was rightfully his being the loyal servant to the Gandhis and CONgress party
4. PVNR's name for PM was propped up by NATWAR Singh to keep away Arjun Singh. Arjun Singh agreed to the name as he was fearful of Pawar. Pawar was far more powerful politically and economically.
Both of them were in agreement to keep ND Tiwari out from the top post. Also for the first time ND Tiwar lost lok Sabha election in 1991. He did not protest.
Not many people know that Rajiv Gandhi offered to make N D Tiwari PM for a a year under Bofors cloud , which he declined saying it will give a wrong signal to people. Arjun Singh , M L Fotedar united in spiking his chances as he was also powerful politically having been CM of UP and union minister for long.
5. Churhat chor continued to instigate Sonia on PVNR , planting stories with friendly journos and always taped his conversations.

Met him many times when my grandfather was hospitalised for bypass. Arjun Singh's hatred for Rajputs also derived its source from him being of mixed blood. His mother was 'Ahir' and Rajputs shunned him and his father.
His father anyway was sent to jail for 3 years for corruption and died in 1955. Arjun Singh swore revenge.

To summarise, highly ambitious, almost hated Nehru Gandhi family for sending his father to jail ( never ever discussed this in public or to anyone political). Feared Pawar to the core and hated PVNR for obvious reasons. He was increasingly aware of shifting political base and hated the Shukla brothers. Used to blame a lot of things on them as well.

Despite my grandfather's advise, he was called by my father to campaign and we lost elections. Rajputs simply did not vote for him and Brahmins got angry for getting someone so anti Brahmin to campaign.

Rant over!

ShauryaT
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5246
Joined: 31 Oct 2005 06:06

Re: Indian Interests

Postby ShauryaT » 05 Jul 2012 19:58

RamaY wrote:^ fair enough.

We have enough of abstract statements. It is time to settle this once and for all with facts and references.

Can you please provide the data when FSU, US, EU etc got the peace dividend? please tell us how and when these entities became regional/world powers and whether it is their peace or war strategies that helped them become the powers they are/were.
Now, you are changing the question as to what led to a peace in the first place, to open a whole history of debate for those conflicts, some going back centuries. There are examples, where war has not led to peace. I am not falling for this. Keep it simple.

First, I do not understand, what your issue or case is. If your case is only war brings peace dividends, then I have to look no further than many unresolved conflicts, where compromises, even if imperfect has led to better security and peace. It falters sometimes in months, years or lasts for decades. Both routes are valid in context of TSP, if prosecuted ably.

Relative calm in Israel against Palestenian terrorism has always been rewarded with increased economic activity and tourism. So, has the peace agreement with Egypt – till now.

The Good Friday agreement is an example of a negotiated peace and so is the anglo-Irish treaty of the last century. Speak to the folks in Northern Ireland and ask them if they have better security and a peace dividend.

Taiwan and PRC do not have lack of issues to fight on but both have collaborated and derived mutual benefits by not pursuing active confrontation. Their economic integration is deep enough that actual war is a remote possibility. It will hurt both of them severely.

Many of the above are indeed not perfect but have delivered positive results. Similar templates and half way measures, leading to a better security environment is possible with TSP.

Why look outside, when we have enough examples from our own history of various agreement after agreement that compelled a muslim ruler to provide space to its hindu subjects – allowing Hindus to survive for another day.

There are enough examples, where a negotiated peace has led to lasting dividends after years and sometimes centuries of being avowed enemies.

There are examples where peace treaties, after war such as in Versailles, did not lead to lasting peace. Shimla is another example on the same lines and so is the Algiers agreement between Ehiopia and Eritrea.

One can point to history and get examples for almost everything is not the point. A credible path forward has to rely on a sense of reality and likely outcomes in light of existing conditions and a read of these conditions changing. One can use history as a guide, however the solution templates have to fit current reality.

For the ultimate resolution of a conflict, one party has to either give up their claims and reconcile or be subdued is foreign policy 101.

What is your point and what are you trying to prove once and for all with facts and references or call my rhetoric on? If your case is that only ultimate war will bring peace between TSP and India, then you should make your case how, in what time frame, with what capabilities? Conditions?

Forget some ultimate war between ideological enemies, make a simple case of how will you advice the polity in India to prosecute its relationship with Pakistan and then show a body of leaders or advisers, who agree with these views. If you do not have any such body, then show how will you propose creating one. I was making a case for limited war with limited goals only to realize - I will never be able to see it as a reality - we are that bankrupt in our will.

As for me, my case is simple, we do not have the will and capabilities to prosecute total war and be able to deal with its aftermath. It is a view similar to 99% of what the Indian polity, advisers have concluded. My real problem is with slumbering nature of GoI and an edifice that is infested with termites. Does not mean Danda against TSP is forsaken in its entirety. It is a nuanced and limited objectives approach. Not seeking to resolve some ultimate ideological conflict, built over centuries and more than a millennia. I do not know of any tools to resolve this ultimate conflict in our life times.

RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15995
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

Re: Indian Interests

Postby RajeshA » 05 Jul 2012 20:11

ShauryaT wrote:I do not know of any tools to resolve this ultimate conflict in our life times.


That is very very very simple.

You show them you are the strongest there is, and no strategy leads the other to change that. You show them you are the best there is, and no strategy leads the other to change that. You show them you are the rightest there is, and no strategy leads the other to change that. And you tell them that the only way they can have more than crumbs as a share of it is if they become like you.

You show them you were here first. You show them you are the most enlightened, most intelligent, most beautiful. You show them you are the strongest, and every time they challenge that, you give them pain. You show them you are always right, and the media, you dominate, puts out the message in unmistakable words.

Most importantly this has to be the constant message at the national level, at the communal level and at the individual level.

That is the only way!

RamaY
BRF Oldie
Posts: 17249
Joined: 10 Aug 2006 21:11
Location: http://bharata-bhuti.blogspot.com/

Re: Indian Interests

Postby RamaY » 05 Jul 2012 21:08

Excellently put RajeshAji :)

ShauryaTji

A one line answer is "Uttishtha Bharata!" Klaibyam Masmagamam Paartha = Do not become helpless Arjuna

More details -
(1) When you are weak, make peace is the saying. Yes Hindus did make peace when they were week. But now their time has come for Hindus to raise and the Asuras have to make space or perish.

(2) Let Pakistan give up their climes and reconcile. Why? Because (A) They were the wronged party and (B) They are the weaker party.
For the ultimate resolution of a conflict, one party has to either give up their claims and reconcile or be subdued is foreign policy 101.


(3) Even a Talibanized Pakistan will not change the power equation between India and Pakistan. They will be a weaker party and must obey Indian supremacy or perish. A few cities nuked will not make India weak.

(4) No body (including me) asked for India to invade Pakistan. At the same time we also do not want to make unnecessary peace deals with Pakistan. If and when Pakistan wants to make peace with India -
(A) They need to give up their climes on PoK and Northern Areas
(B) Protect Hindu interests, historical artifacts in Pakistan
(C) No more state/non-state terror attacks on Indian interests within or outside India

Beyond this we do not have any business in the internal affairs of Pakistan. If they want more Islam in their personal and political life, let them have it to their hearts content.

(5) India has been independent for 60+ years. It is a $1.7 trillion economy. Its annual defense budget is $30+B. If it does not have the capabilities to protect its interests and regain its lost territories now, when will it be ready?

Coming to the will of the nation, it has very little to do with the economic progress of the society. There is little evidence that further economic progress will automatically increase the will of the nation to protect its territorial and cultural integrity.

(6) There are many tools and strategies to resolve the ideological conflict with in a short period of 20-30 years.

***

That said, there are major and immediate challenges to Indian growth. They are
- Social Engineering by NGOs and EJ groups
- Maoists
- Corruption
- Deteriorating Law and Order situation

Let the current political dispensation spend time on it, instead of wasting time on unnecessary peace initiatives with Pakistan.

Pakistan should be given just one response - "dont have time for you now" whenever they want to talk and give a thappad every time they act.

nawabs
BRFite
Posts: 1637
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Interests

Postby nawabs » 05 Jul 2012 21:33

Discussion about Shastriji's death in Tashkand on air in NDTV right now with Anil Shastri,Kuldeep Nayar,Tarun Vijay invited.Tarun Vijay mentioned how Shastriji's personal doctor died a few days after with his whole family in an accident.
Last edited by nawabs on 05 Jul 2012 21:38, edited 1 time in total.

abhishek_sharma
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9664
Joined: 19 Nov 2009 03:27

Re: Indian Interests

Postby abhishek_sharma » 05 Jul 2012 21:38

ShauryaT wrote:Taiwan and PRC do not have lack of issues to fight on but both have collaborated and derived mutual benefits by not pursuing active confrontation. Their economic integration is deep enough that actual war is a remote possibility. It will hurt both of them severely.


Sorry, this is just false. China does not occupy/attack Taiwan due to Unkil's guarantees. Note that they have not renounced the use of force to take Taiwan.

ShauryaT
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5246
Joined: 31 Oct 2005 06:06

Re: Indian Interests

Postby ShauryaT » 05 Jul 2012 21:44

RajeshA wrote:You show them you are the strongest there is, and no strategy leads the other to change that. You show them you are the best there is, and no strategy leads the other to change that. You show them you are the rightest there is, and no strategy leads the other to change that. And you tell them that the only way they can have more than crumbs as a share of it is if they become like you.

You show them you were here first. You show them you are the most enlightened, most intelligent, most beautiful. You show them you are the strongest, and every time they challenge that, you give them pain. You show them you are always right, and the media, you dominate, puts out the message in unmistakable words.

Most importantly this has to be the constant message at the national level, at the communal level and at the individual level.

That is the only way!
I should have highlighted the whole post and made it easier :) Could not agree more as a matter of principle, i think you probably missed the last part of the sentence, which has a qualifier, in our life times. Unless you think, we can achieve all of these tools in our life times, say a couple of generations 20-50 years?

My view is we are long, long way from home. SD is and has been under severe threat and pressure. We have almost lost the ideas (no amount of theory helps, it has to be practiced) that govern a Dharmic life and state support is essential for that process.

Prem
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21166
Joined: 01 Jul 1999 11:31
Location: Weighing and Waiting 8T Yconomy

Re: Indian Interests

Postby Prem » 05 Jul 2012 21:54

Here is a clue,As per religious scholars, Jihad is not recomended if the kuffar is twice as strong than the Jihadi power centre. Jihad is like a habitually stubborn donkey which require periodic ear pulling, beating and other remedial methods to keep the miscreant in line of decent behavior. If we dont solve the problem and kick the Cane further,then we are asking our next geneartions to suffer like the past ones. India need 20-30 years of planning to prepare itself for removing this curse on civilized humanity. Kalyug wont give way to Satyug till the Tamasic filth is cleaned worldwide .
To begin, India need to start demonstrating that if forced upon,Its not afraid of Nuke war.

ShauryaT
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5246
Joined: 31 Oct 2005 06:06

Re: Indian Interests

Postby ShauryaT » 05 Jul 2012 22:10

RamaY wrote:(6) There are many tools and strategies to resolve the ideological conflict with in a short period of 20-30 years.

Make a vigorous and strong case for it – based on current and likely trajectory of realities.

I will not respond to the other stuff, for it is a futile exercise, when you have the above beliefs. I will not call the above rhetoric, yet, for you have to make the case for it.

In 65 years, we could not solve this ideological conflict with IM's and BD is a recent data point to consider. IM's are a veritable vote bank in current policy exploring reserved spaces, just like they did in colonial India. So, what will happen in 30 years?

ShauryaT
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5246
Joined: 31 Oct 2005 06:06

Re: Indian Interests

Postby ShauryaT » 05 Jul 2012 22:21

abhishek_sharma wrote:
ShauryaT wrote:Taiwan and PRC do not have lack of issues to fight on but both have collaborated and derived mutual benefits by not pursuing active confrontation. Their economic integration is deep enough that actual war is a remote possibility. It will hurt both of them severely.


Sorry, this is just false. China does not occupy/attack Taiwan due to Unkil's guarantees. Note that they have not renounced the use of force to take Taiwan.
So, what explains Taiwan's economic integration with PRC - enduring enmity? Or are Taiwanese fools or are they banking on this "iron clad?" security protection forever?

Reality is a little more nuanced. Especially when readings are made through Chinese eyes and not western one's only. Anyways, this is about Indian interests, not pursuing Taiwan-PRC relations here. The example was made in context, will appreciate if the discussion of a limited objectives approach leading to security benefits can be kept intact.

abhishek_sharma
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9664
Joined: 19 Nov 2009 03:27

Re: Indian Interests

Postby abhishek_sharma » 05 Jul 2012 22:33

ShauryaT wrote:So, what explains Taiwan's economic integration with PRC - enduring enmity?


Taiwan is happy as long as China does not occupy it. There is no harm in trade as long as this core interest is taken care of.

Or are Taiwanese fools or are they banking on this "iron clad?" security protection forever?


Taiwan has no choice. They cannot force US to provide better protection.

Reality is a little more nuanced. Especially when readings are made through Chinese eyes and not western one's only.


Yes, reality is more nuanced. People who forget Taiwan-China crisis in 1996 should certainly remember that. They should explain why US sent its aircraft carriers to that region. I wonder why economic linkages were not sufficient to prevent that crisis. I also don't understand why Taiwan buys F-16s and why those sales cause takleef to China. Trade has already ensured that war is a "remote possibility". Why do Chinese react angrily when those sales are announced? Reality is certainly very nuanced.


Anyways, this is about Indian interests, not pursuing Taiwan-PRC relations here. The example was made in context, will appreciate if the discussion of a limited objectives approach leading to security benefits can be kept intact.


I like how discussion becomes OT when holes are found in arguments :D

ShauryaT
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5246
Joined: 31 Oct 2005 06:06

Re: Indian Interests

Postby ShauryaT » 05 Jul 2012 22:56

abhishek_sharma wrote:
ShauryaT wrote:So, what explains Taiwan's economic integration with PRC - enduring enmity?


Taiwan is happy as long as China does not occupy it. There is no harm in trade as long as this core interest is taken care of.
Precisely the point. There are core interests and there are other interests. TSP-India can continue to protect their core interests, while engage and pursue other interests of mutual benefit. This type of process requires engagement, CBM's and compromises. On another point, I actually appreciate China's resolve to protect its core interests and challenge the mighty USofA. I wish India would have done the same, when PRC/US combine collaborated to arm the Pakistanis with a nuclear weapon.

abhishek_sharma
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9664
Joined: 19 Nov 2009 03:27

Re: Indian Interests

Postby abhishek_sharma » 05 Jul 2012 22:57

And please note that peace in J&K and a terror-free environment in all states of India are core interests (at least for me). :D

RamaY
BRF Oldie
Posts: 17249
Joined: 10 Aug 2006 21:11
Location: http://bharata-bhuti.blogspot.com/

Re: Indian Interests

Postby RamaY » 05 Jul 2012 23:00

Core interests of India w.r.t Pakistan in my view

If and when Pakistan wants to make peace with India -
(A) They need to give up their climes on PoK and Northern Areas
(B) Protect Hindu interests, historical artifacts in Pakistan
(C) No more state/non-state terror attacks on Indian interests within or outside India

Beyond this we do not have any business in the internal affairs of Pakistan. If they want more Islam in their personal and political life, let them have it to their hearts content.

ShauryaT
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5246
Joined: 31 Oct 2005 06:06

Re: Indian Interests

Postby ShauryaT » 05 Jul 2012 23:01

abhishek_sharma wrote:And please note that peace in J&K and a terror-free environment in all states of India are core interests (at least for me). :D
You and I can define what we want, what becomes a core interest is when successive governments pursue a resolution to an issue over a sustained period of time. It is these that constitute core and other interests for the state.

If you ask a billion people, you will get a billion views of interests including some who think nuclear war is no biggie.

So, real quick on the above. My read of the governments view of the above is.

- There is no serious desire to regain PoK
- Internal security in all parts of India, including J&K is certainly a core interest, which all parties have worked upon.

abhishek_sharma
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9664
Joined: 19 Nov 2009 03:27

Re: Indian Interests

Postby abhishek_sharma » 05 Jul 2012 23:10

ShauryaT wrote:You and I can define what we want, what becomes a core interest is when successive governments pursue a resolution to an issue over a sustained period of time.


That is really a cop out. Given that the country is governed by corrupt politicians, I guess we will reach the conclusion that looting the resources of the country is our core interest.

nachiket
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7907
Joined: 02 Dec 2008 10:49

Re: Indian Interests

Postby nachiket » 06 Jul 2012 02:20

ShauryaT wrote:
- Internal security in all parts of India, including J&K is certainly a core interest, which all parties have worked upon.

Who are these parties? Pakistan certainly has worked and continues to work to undermine India's internal security in several ways. Increasing trade and people-to-people contacts (whatever the hell that means) is pointless so long as this remains true.

vishvak
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 5836
Joined: 12 Aug 2011 21:19

Re: Indian Interests

Postby vishvak » 06 Jul 2012 02:50

Mauritius offers India 2 islands in effort to preserve tax treaty
..at a time when it's very keen on persevering with the 1983 double-taxation avoidance treaty with India.
..
He said the "blue economy" had great potential. India could use North and South Agalega Islands (which are located 1,100 km north of Mauritius and have an official total area of 70 sq km) for setting up hotels and tourist resorts, for trade, marine studies, or for building a strategic presence in the Indian Ocean, official sources told TOI. North Agalega Island also has an airstrip.
..
which is closer to India than the African country —for development as a tourism and trade hub.
..
India can use Mauritius as a springboard for investment (to Africa) and locally. Now we want India to respond positively and take advantage - and it is true for other friendly countries - of the tremendous potential of the Blue Economy, which is the ocean economy...
..
"We want to develop as an ocean basket and ocean market," said the minister. "The potential is tremendous. We work very closely with India. We should not forget that India has helped us in marking our territories, has helped us in conducting hydrographic studies and in two years we will acquire an offshore vessel from India under the line of credit that India has offered. We are doing several projects together."
..
The discussions between the two countries on the two islands -- which may give India strategic depth in the Indian Ocean, especially in its fight against piracy - had then focused on the development of hotels and resorts and upgrading an existing airstrip in the island into an airport.

In 2006, sources had told TOI that there was also an option to develop a port on one of the two islands. There were, however, no discussions on how the arrangement would be structured.
..

More India reassures Mauritius on tax treaty
Better Indians start structured arrangement discussion, considering that it is clear North and South Agalega Islands can offer a definite strategic advantage to fight piracy, offer a blue water business environment for Mauritius and also because it is near Africa. As also there is an airstrip for convenience. North and South Agalega could be similar to North and South Andaman only, a definite similarity there with more choice of blue economy for ocean also.

Indian ocean can be have a Strategic Mahatma Gandhi Shanti Yojana between Indian States, Union Territories, islands and central Govt. for better blue water naval affairs to fight piracy and safe trade.

svinayak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14223
Joined: 09 Feb 1999 12:31

Re: Indian Interests

Postby svinayak » 06 Jul 2012 03:09

one of the islands has to be built like India's Diego Garcia


Return to “Trash Can Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests