India-US Strategic News and Discussion

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 09 Jul 2011 16:14

Yes Hawk trainers,b0ught by India!

Ramanna,"platter" is rght as the govt. of MMS and FM Krishna have handed over on a "platter" our foreign policy to Uncle Sam...sory,Aunty Hilary!

Rony · Post by **Rony** » 09 Jul 2011 16:21

America's secret romance with Islamism

Kamalshah, son of Pahlawanshah, son of Said Ahmad Faqir, a resident of Laqlick, stormed into the shari'a court of the remote Afghan district of Kunnar in February 1886, demanding justice.

His wife Qalandar Bibi, Kamalshah told the qadi, or religious judge, had eloped with another villager and was pregnant with his son. But, it turned out, that wasn't the problem he wanted dealt with.

“This woman has jewels belonging to me,” he declared, “two necklaces, one bracelet, one hundred and ninety pins and one pair of golden earrings — the price of which amounts to sixty rupees.”

“I want my things,” Kamalshah complained, “but she refuses to give them up.”

Eight years before Kamalshah appeared before the qadi of Kunnar, journalist Howard Hensman, embedded with British forces during the Afghan war of 1879, offered a somewhat different account of the culture of Afghan men.

The Afghan woman, he claimed — though he never met one — was “shut up and kept from mischief within the four walls of her master's harem.”

The men were “particularly jealous of their women”; insults to their honour were certain to be “confronted by some buck Afghan with a knife in his hand and an oath in his mouth.”

Kamalshah's subversion of our stereotypes of the Afghans offers a prism through which we may reflect upon the intellectual foundations of an extraordinary project that will be key to United States foreign policy in the first decades of this century: its effort to undo the seismic ruptures opened up by 9/11 by seeking a rapprochement with the global Islamist movement.

Envoys from Ennahda, the Tunisian Islamist party, met with key lawmakers and State Department officials in Washington DC in May. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has also said she would welcome dialogue with those of Egypt's Muslim Brotherhood, long reviled as irredeemable fascists, “who wish to talk with us.” In Afghanistan, President Barack Obama's administration is locked in a secret dialogue with the Taliban.

America's secret romance with the Islamists has a disturbing history — and its renewal ought be a real source of concern for those concerned with democracy.

America's Islamist project
President Dwight D. Eisenhower's appointment book for 1953 bears the record of a meeting with “the Honourable Saeed Ramadhan.” Mr. Ramadan, as his name is commonly spelt today, had travelled to the U.S. as part of a delegation of three dozen religious scholars and political activists, who its government hoped to cultivate to promote its anti-communist agenda in newly independent Arab states.

Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) analysts, declassified documents show, described Mr. Ramadan as a “Phalangist” and a “fascist.” In the Cold War, these weren't necessarily disqualifications.

“By the end of the decade,” journalist and historian Ian Johnson has recorded, “the CIA was overtly backing Ramadan. While it's too simple to call him a U.S. agent, in the 1950s and 1960s the United States supported him as he took over a mosque in Munich, kicking out local Muslims to build what would become one of the Brotherhood's most important centres.”

British geostrategic doctrine likely had something to do with the making of this alliance. Francis Tucker, the last General Officer-Commanding of the British Indian Eastern Command, believed that the creation “of a new Muslim power supported by the science of Britain” would “place Islam between Russian Communism and Hindustan.”

From Dennis Kux's book, Disenchanted Allies, we learn that John Foster Dulles — Eisenhower's Secretary of State and a key architect of the United States' wars against democracy in Iran, Guatemala and Indo-China — believed that the Gurkhas were Pakistani Muslims, and wanted men he believed were racially-superior fighters to be on the anti-communist side.

In the wake of the Soviet Union's intervention in Afghanistan, the U.S. would use those connections, funnelling arms and logistical support through Pakistan to the jihadists it is now locked in war with. President Ronald Reagan famously described the Afghan jihadists as “freedom fighters”: he and others on the American religious right saw in them, not without reason, ideological soulmates.

Less well known are the U.S.' efforts to rebuild bridges with Islamist groups after the horrific events of 9/11. During President George W. Bush's second term in office, the U.S. reached out to Muslim Brotherhood-linked organisations in Europe. In 2006, for example, the State Department organised a conference in Brussels, bringing together western Islamists.

The objective was to play on the fissures within the Islamist movement: Ayman al-Zawahiri, Osama bin Laden's successor, was bitterly opposed to the Muslim Brotherhood, and its cadre were engaged in pitched battles with al-Qaeda-linked organisations in Palestine, Egypt and Iraq.

Mr. Obama was mocked when, in 2009, he began reaching out to what was called the “moderate” Taliban: David Rothkopf, writing in Foreign Policy, imagined the CIA being tasked with seeking men who “advocate stoning unfaithful women to death with only small rocks and pebbles,” and “offer Bin Laden refuge in his home only during inclement weather.”

Now, though, Mr. Obama's Islamist efforts at Islamist outreach form the stuff of America's new consensus: there is, more than one commentator has said, no other way.

Part of the reason for this is tactical. The U.S. allied with reactionary regimes throughout West Asia — as it did in South America — in an effort to beat back nationalism. Egyptian rulers from Anwar Sadat onwards flirted with the Muslim Brotherhood, in an effort to legitimise their power — all the while cracking down ferociously on democratic opponents. In Pakistan, General Muhammad Zia-ul-Haq pursued a similar trajectory.

Now, as popular dissent evicts American-allied despot after American-allied despot, the U.S. finds it has no credible secular-democratic partners to engage with.

There is also, however, an ideological foundation for America's new policies: the notion that Islamists, unlike secular democrats, are in some way authentic, organic representatives of their peoples and cultures. The idea is tied profoundly to the role of religion in America's own civic life. In his 2009 speech to what is often called “the Muslim world,” Mr. Obama repeatedly invoked the common traditions of religion to legitimise his defence of democratic rights — not the secular traditions of the Enlightenment, from which they emerged.

Back in 1978, scholar Edward Said pointed to the pervasive influence essentialist ideas about faith and identity had on Western thought. The notion of that Islam explained the workings of societies as diverse as Algeria and Indonesia suffused not just scholarship, but also popular culture: Charles Deveraux's novella Venus in India, first published three years after Kamalshah approached the qadi of Kunnar, is replete with images culled from Hensman.

Intellectuals belonging to quite different traditions projected on Islamic societies their own fantasies. Deborah Baker's superb biography of Maryam Jameelah, an enormously influential American-born writer, shows she saw in the reactionary ideas of Islamist ideologues Sayyed Qutb and Abul Ala Maududi a means of resistance against modernist materialism. French philosopher Michel Foucault's uncritical support for Iranian Islamism, Janet Afary and Kevin Anderson have shown, rested on similar propositions.

Even now, the ideas survive: historian William Dalrymple, no reactionary, described the Taliban as being “in many ways the authentic voice of rural Pashtun conservatism.”

Claims like these have in fact at best problematic empirical foundations. In a nuanced 2010 essay, scholar Thomas Ruttig noted that three decades of conflict brought about dramatic changes in the structures of Pashtun society. Education, generational change and urbanisation also brought transformations — as did ideology. Even though Taliban leaders were rooted in tribal societies, Dr. Ruttig noted, “their self-identification, the balance between being Pashtun and being Muslim has changed, as in the case with many Afghans.”

Little of this nuance, though, informs reportage or scholarly writing: a few minutes with an internet search engine will demonstrate that the word “fierce” and its variants preface references to ethnic Pashtuns with mind-numbing frequency. The word, needless to say, almost never presages discussions of European nations where killing has taken place on an industrial scale.

Islamism is thus almost never understood as just one of several competing modernist movements — its influence a consequence not of its organic character, but of the geopolitical patronage.

Even though Islamists have moderated their positions in recent years, their politics remain disturbing. The Muslim Brotherhood ideologue, Youssef al-Qaradawi, for example, says he appreciates music and supports the right of women to work — but also describes the Holocaust as divine punishment of Jews. He remains committed to “the spread of Islam until it conquers the entire world and includes both the East and West which marks the beginning of the return of the Islamic Caliphate.”

In the decades to come, it is possible that the rigours of democratic politics will compel figures like al-Qaradawi to temper their positions: to engage in the kind of alliance-based politics that has allowed the American religious right to work within the democratic system.

The U.S. patronage of the Islamist cause, however, will legitimise and strengthen it — not allow the regeneration of genuine, competitive democracy. Its current course threatens to compound the tragic consequences America's anti-communist crusade had for the lives of millions across the world.

abhischekcc · Post by **abhischekcc** » 09 Jul 2011 22:05

It is not just Arab money, it is black money from every country, including India, that is propping up the London property market. The London RE market is a scam - they have legislated a green zone surrounding the city, which does not allow the city to expand, thus artificially limiting the supply of land into the market. This is why prices never fall in London, even during the recent crash of global markets, London RE prices were happily chuging up. Add to that the luster of London as a money laundering capital of the world, and you understand why the filthy rich of the world want to own a house in the filthy money city of the world.

Manish_P · Post by **Manish_P** » 10 Jul 2011 19:11

Cross post from the TSP thread

US suspends Pakistan military aid

The US says it is withholding some $800m of military aid to Pakistan.

White House Chief of Staff Bill Daley told ABC's This Week programme that Pakistan had "taken some steps that have given us reason to pause on some of the aid".

Prem · Post by **Prem** » 13 Jul 2011 00:46

http://blog.heritage.org/2011/07/12/was ... otiations/

Heritage hosts a discussion this morning featuring Indian Brigadier General Amrit Pal Singh, James J. Carafano and Frank Cilluffo on how India is transforming its internal security architecture in a way that mirrors the U.S. response to 9/11. The event, Reforming India’s Homeland Security Architecture: Learning from U.S. Experience, starts at 10:00 a.m. ET. Watch the webcast.

( did anyone catch it)

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 13 Jul 2011 05:23

CNN: In Texas, Young Hindus Want To Americanize Ancient Faith
http://www.hafsite.org/CNN_young_Hindus ... &utm_term=

The Hindu American Foundation (HAF) and Rishi Bhutada, HAF Executive Council member, were featured in the following piece by Dan Gilgoff on CNN.com.

Houston, TX (CNN) - In many ways, 29-year-old Rishi Bhutada is a traditional Hindu, not so different from his Indian-born parents.

An officer at his dad’s pipefitting company, Texas-born Bhutada had an arranged marriage in India three years ago and then brought his wife back to his hometown, where they recently welcomed a son.

Bhutada is a strict vegetarian and avoids alcohol, as do many observant Hindus.

And the dashboard of his Toyota Prius is adorned with a small metal statue of Ganesh, an elephant-headed Hindu god known as the remover of obstacles. Bhutada prays to it each morning before leaving his driveway.

And yet Bhutada is a different kind of Hindu than his mom and dad.

His parents were part of a major wave of Indians who arrived in the U.S. in the 1960s and ’70s and focused their religious lives on building a community of believers and temples around Houston, which was then a Hindu wilderness.

Bhutada, by contrast, wants his religion to step out from that now-well-established Hindu hive to engage the broader culture.

Driving to lunch recently at a strip mall Indian buffet, he spoke of trying to forge a distinctly American Hindu identity that’s more tightly woven into the national fabric.

"The immigrant generation is focused on India, on the home country,” he said, noting that the TV in his parents’ house is often turned to a Hindi-language channel beamed in from the subcontinent. “I’m focused on the United States, which is my home country.”

That helps explain why a national group he’s involved with, the Hindu American Foundation, recently launched a Take Back Yoga campaign, aimed at raising awareness about the practice’s Hindu roots and values among non-Hindus.

And it's why Bhutada testified at the Capitol in Austin last year against a statewide school curriculum that calls Hinduism a polytheistic religion, a characterization many Hindus reject.

Hari Seldon · Post by **Hari Seldon** » 13 Jul 2011 07:24

Bumper sticker on a Yindu SUV in NYS "Pagan. And proud of it." Good thing it wasn't in TX, would've gotten vandalized.

abhischekcc · Post by **abhischekcc** » 13 Jul 2011 09:39

The title of the article posted by Acharya is misleading wrt the actual content of the article.

The HAF is not leading to Americanization of Hindu community, it is intensifying the original character of Hindi community in America.

It is Hinduisation of America, not Americanisation of Hinduism, that is taking place.

----------

The rate at which non-WASP communities are strengthening, the original character of US will be lost in a mosaic.

devesh · Post by **devesh** » 13 Jul 2011 21:09

^^^
you mean "Hindu community" not "Hindi community" right.

I point out b/c it's a favorite "slip" of Marxists and Hindu haters; to equate Hindu with Hindi is their favorite game. hope you're not falling for it.

as for America's demographics, I have my fears. if economic slump become a long term "here to stay" feature, then all kinds of minorities from Hindus to Hispanics, to non-conformists in religion, all kinds of people *MIGHT* face the kind of situation like in Germany post WW-I.

I know that might seem like an exaggeration but I have observed some very strong cases of "grievance" mentality in some middle class Whites. not a good trend for minorities. "grievance" mentality is still very subdued but it takes only micro communities which are energetic in their messages to spread the attitude around.

Neshant · Post by **Neshant** » 14 Jul 2011 13:06

devesh wrote:^^^
as for America's demographics, I have my fears. if economic slump become a long term "here to stay" feature, then all kinds of minorities from Hindus to Hispanics, to non-conformists in religion, all kinds of people *MIGHT* face the kind of situation like in Germany post WW-I.

I know that might seem like an exaggeration but I have observed some very strong cases of "grievance" mentality in some middle class Whites. not a good trend for minorities. "grievance" mentality is still very subdued but it takes only micro communities which are energetic in their messages to spread the attitude around.

The longer the Great Recession lasts and the more desperate the people get, the darker the mood will get. People of color will be especially vunerable.

I also expect the Federal Reserve will be shut down within 5 years. Bernanke is vunerable since he is seen as the stereotypical Jewish banker screwing the masses.

Once the extent of the economic rot and fall in living standards comes to light to the great white masses, all hell will break loose if the drop is steep.

Personally I think a few more middle eastern countries will be invaded for their resources & money for 'economic stimulus'. UAE with is monarchy, largely foreign population and mountain of cash pile looks like a prime candidate to undergo a Libya style civilian protection racket. Fatten them up with big oil profits and then its off to the market to get halal-ed.

darshhan · Post by **darshhan** » 14 Jul 2011 19:06

devesh wrote:^^^
you mean "Hindu community" not "Hindi community" right.

I point out b/c it's a favorite "slip" of Marxists and Hindu haters; to equate Hindu with Hindi is their favorite game. hope you're not falling for it.

as for America's demographics, I have my fears. if economic slump become a long term "here to stay" feature, then all kinds of minorities from Hindus to Hispanics, to non-conformists in religion, all kinds of people *MIGHT* face the kind of situation like in Germany post WW-I.

I know that might seem like an exaggeration but I have observed some very strong cases of "grievance" mentality in some middle class Whites. not a good trend for minorities. "grievance" mentality is still very subdued but it takes only micro communities which are energetic in their messages to spread the attitude around.

The grievance in some part is also due to politics of identity and votebank practised by leftists.Not all whites with grievance are racists.And yes this grievance can be dangerous in future for the minorities in US.I only hope that asians including Indian origin persons in US do not fall prey to leftist politics.Indians should stay away from taking sides.This is between whites,blacks and to some extent hispanics.

abhischekcc · Post by **abhischekcc** » 14 Jul 2011 21:19

devesh, I meant Hindu community, not Hindi. It was a typo.

Garooda · Post by **Garooda** » 15 Jul 2011 00:00

abhischekcc wrote:The title of the article posted by Acharya is misleading wrt the actual content of the article.
The HAF is not leading to Americanization of Hindu community, it is intensifying the original character of Hindi community in America.
It is Hinduisation of America, not Americanisation of Hinduism, that is taking place.
----------
The rate at which non-WASP communities are strengthening, the original character of US will be lost in a mosaic.

So is it good or bad?

The same goes for Westernization of India

Ask Shiv Sena

They are worried about losing their culture to the West

Is it good or bad?

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 15 Jul 2011 00:05

Media can be controlled but the race and genes cannot be controlled

Klaus · Post by **Klaus** » 15 Jul 2011 10:55

Pentagon defense contractor robbed of 24000 files.

"In a single intrusion this March, 24,000 files were taken," Lynn said in a speech at National Defence University here outlining the Pentagon's strategy in cyberspace.

Speaking to reporters after his speech, Lynn described the theft of data from the unidentified defence contractor as "significant" and one of the largest ever.

"It was large - 24,000 files," he said. "It was data-related to systems that are being developed for the Department of Defence.

"It was done, we think, by a foreign intelligence service," he said. "In other words a nation state was behind it."

China has been blamed for a number of probes of US corporate and military computer systems over the past few years but Lynn declined to point the finger at any specific suspects in the March intrusion.

Lynn said the data theft had "compromised information relative to the design of military equipment" but had not "set us back in terms of the development of the system".

In his speech, Lynn said some of the data stolen by intruders is "mundane, like the specifications for small parts of tanks, aeroplanes, and submarines.

"But a great deal of it concerns our most sensitive systems, including aircraft avionics, surveillance technologies, satellite communications systems, and network security protocols," he said.

"The cyber exploitation being perpetrated against the defence industry cuts across a wide swath of crucial military hardware, extending from missile tracking systems and satellite navigation devices to UAVs (unmanned aerial vehicles, or drones) and the Joint Strike Fighter," he said.

Lynn also said he did not believe the March intrusion involved the use of SecurID tokens that were stolen from US computer security titan RSA Security in a sophisticated hacking attack in March.

RSA's parent company, EMC Corp has acknowledged that intruders breached its security systems at defence contractor Lockheed Martin in May using data swiped from RSA.

Outlining the Defence Department's strategy in cyberspace, Lynn said the Pentagon considers cyberspace an operational domain, like land, air, sea and space.

rajanb · Post by **rajanb** » 15 Jul 2011 11:00

abhischekcc wrote:It is not just Arab money, it is black money from every country, including India, that is propping up the London property market. The London RE market is a scam - they have legislated a green zone surrounding the city, which does not allow the city to expand, thus artificially limiting the supply of land into the market. This is why prices never fall in London, even during the recent crash of global markets, London RE prices were happily chuging up. Add to that the luster of London as a money laundering capital of the world, and you understand why the filthy rich of the world want to own a house in the filthy money city of the world.

You know if we withdraw all Indian money from Swiss banks, most european economies would be in dire straits.

RajeshA · Post by **RajeshA** » 15 Jul 2011 13:06

Acharya wrote:Media can be controlled but the race and genes cannot be controlled

I beg to differ!

Cosmo_R · Post by **Cosmo_R** » 15 Jul 2011 19:57

Hari Seldon wrote:Bumper sticker on a Yindu SUV in NYS "Pagan. And proud of it." Good thing it wasn't in TX, would've gotten vandalized.

Could it have been Jose?

http://names.whitepages.com/jose/pagan

UBanerjee · Post by **UBanerjee** » 15 Jul 2011 22:20

The idea of pulling a Nazification in the US is pretty laughable- its just too late. 34% of the population is already non-white. The armed services have a lot of blacks and hispanics as well.

Expect 50% within 3-4 decades as the old boomers (majority white) die out.

Not to mention even among the whites there are some major divisions. Italians (50 years ago were not even considered white), Irish, Slavic, etc.

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 15 Jul 2011 22:31

Visa denied/withdrawn...

During fiscal year 2010, , 17,414 LCA for H1B Visa were denied, 8,444 were withdrawn. For 2011 so far, 12,978 were denied and 8,433 were
withdrawn. Many visa petitions were denied for simple technical reasons, for example, mismatched Employer ID Number.

RajeshA · Post by **RajeshA** » 15 Jul 2011 23:07

X-Posting from Bangladesh News & Discussions Thread

The article is so damning, so posting in full.

Published on Jul 15, 2011
By Kevin Rafferty
Kissinger blighted millions as U.S. jockeyed for position: Japan Times

HONG KONG — Henry Kissinger has distilled many words of wisdom from four millennia of Chinese civilization, and several centuries of Western diplomacy, including almost half a century of personal experience at the sharp end of power politics. He has captured headlines and captivated some of the world's best commentating minds with his 580-page book "On China."

Most reviews and comments have been favorable, though professor Andrew Nathan in the upcoming Foreign Affairs neatly dismisses the tome as "really neither history nor memoir. Its purpose is to argue that the United States should yield gracefully to China's rise in order to avoid a tragic conflict."

This month marks 40 years since Kissinger feigned sickness in Pakistan and made a secret flight to China to pave the way for President Richard Nixon's historic visit to the country the following year. For me, Kissinger's biggest failure is what he omits.

By the fawning way he used Pakistan as his launchpad, Kissinger's diplomacy was also helping to perpetrate one of the worst atrocities of the 20th century, the slaughter of about 1.5 million people and the flight of 10 million refugees whose only crime was to express their wish for democracy through the ballot box and peaceful protests.

Yet, there is no mention in the book, not a sentence of regret, not a word of apology, not even a passing note that the bloody birth of Bangladesh was brought about because Kissinger, reaching out to China, simultaneously encouraged the Pakistan military to butcher the people of East Pakistan, as it then was. It is their tragic 40th anniversary, too.

To set out the facts, in December 1970 the Bengalis of East Pakistan, separated by 1,600 km of Indian territory from West Pakistan, where the military lived and ruled, voted overwhelmingly in the freest and fairest elections Pakistan had seen for Sheikh Mujibur Rahman's Awami League, which stood on a platform of greater autonomy — not independence — from West Pakistan.

The Awami League won 160 of the 162 seats from East Pakistan, giving it an overall majority in the 300-member constituent assembly for Pakistan.

For the next three months there was deadlock as President General Yahya Khan and Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, leader of the People's Party, which had majorities in two of the four provinces of West Pakistan, played obstructionist games about the terms on which the assembly would meet to arrange a new civilian constitution.

The deadlock was broken when Yahya sent troops to arrest Mujib and his key lieutenants and let the army loose on East Pakistan. Tanks were sent to deal with Dhaka University students, who had been active in protests against the military regime. The army set fire to apartments and then mowed down their fleeing occupants. The military reign of terror spread far and wide beyond the cities. The World Bank said whole villages had just ceased to exist.

By all eyewitness accounts the soldiers conducted mass murder and rape. Estimates of the dead range up to 3 million. About 200,000 women were raped and almost 10 million Bengalis fled to refugee camps in India.

One gruesome picture showed a bloated crow hopping on piles of corpses, its glittering eye contrasting with the bulging sightless eyes of the dead.

The rest of the world condemned the atrocities and sent aid for the refugees. Nixon and Kissinger said nothing but kept supplying aid, including military aid, to West Pakistan and encouraged other countries to divert military hardware to Pakistan when public opinion and Congress tried to block U.S. military deliveries. Kissinger sent a message to Yahya praising his "delicacy and tact" in Operation Searchlight, as the Pakistan Army called the crackdown. In July 1971, Kissinger objected to the idea that the Pakistan army should get out of civilian administration in East Pakistan to help the relief efforts, claiming, "Why is it our business how they govern themselves?"

Archer Blood, the U.S. consul-general in East Pakistan, and his entire staff were so appalled at the callous attitude of their own government that, in April, Blood sent the rightly famous eponymous cable of dissent: "Our government has failed to denounce the suppression of democracy. Our government has failed to denounce atrocities ... Our government has evidenced what many will consider moral bankruptcy ... But we have chosen not to intervene, even morally, on the grounds that the Awami conflict, in which unfortunately the overworked term genocide is applicable, is purely an internal matter of a sovereign state..."

For his courage, Blood was called a "pansy" by Kissinger, silenced, recalled early and transferred.

Kissinger continued to support Yahya and the Pakistan military through thick and thin, beyond the need for Pakistan's good offices in opening the door to China. As war between Pakistan and India, strained by the costs of housing and feeding the refugees, loomed toward the end of 1971, Kissinger was urging China not to be "a silent spectator" at the impending dismemberment of its ally Pakistan.

Kissinger was wrong at almost every turn, even if he could justify the murder and mayhem of Bengali civilians, women and children to satisfy his diplomatic ego.

He was wrong to see India or Indira Gandhi as a Soviet stooge. Whatever her many faults, Gandhi was never anyone's stooge, and anyone with any understanding of India would see in it a civilization as rich and historic as China's.

He was wrong, and insulting to both countries, to imagine that East Pakistan "would become a Bhutan" — how shallow to compare a tiny Himalayan kingdom with a teeming country of 100 million people in the floodplain of the Ganga and Brahmaputra rivers.

He was wrong to assume that India would move on with Soviet backing to carve up West Pakistan and upset the political balance of the whole area as far as the Middle East.

He was wrong to regard Bangladesh as an eternal "basket-case" economy that would forever need foreign aid, although the original expression was not his.

Bangladesh will struggle to reach middle-income status, but is on the way there. Bangladeshis are proving that they may not be as intelligent as Kissinger, but they are brighter, more economically productive and less destructive than Pakistani generals.

He was wrong to support the Pakistan military. It is a mystery how someone as intelligent as Kissinger could support a group so stubborn and stupid as the top Pakistani generals under Yahya Khan. By doing so, he set the precedent for military might as a substitute for political negotiations, for Zulfikar Ali Bhutto to disregard the wishes of the electorates in Baluchistan and the North West Frontier Province, and later for the army to overthrow and execute Bhutto.

If the United States had persuaded Yahya Khan to concede autonomy and even independence to East Bengal, then it would have saved the deaths and devastation of one of the world's poorest areas that had been damaged by decades of misrule by the Pakistan military. It would have improved America's standing in the world, boosted its relations with India and changed the culture in Pakistan.

Perhaps then, the whole history of Pakistan's troubled frontier areas with Afghanistan would have been changed before Islamic extremists appeared on the scene.

Equally dangerously, a few years later in the mid-1970s Kissinger missed the signals coming from Afghanistan. Afghanistan's then President Sardar Mohammed Dauod gave me an interview, pleading for renewed American interest and investment to counteract the Soviet economic domination that Daoud himself had originally encouraged.

If he talked to a small-fry newspaper editor — I was founder-editor of Business Times in Malaysia — Daoud must have tried to get the message out to people who could influence politics and investment flows.

Was Kissinger asleep or just dreaming of his global realpolitik that he missed a chance to effect a practical change to a dangerous world?

Daoud was overthrown in 1978 by leftists who were a precursor to Soviet-backed communist rule, and to the creation of U.S.-fomented Islamic rebels using Pakistan as a base and Pakistan army and intelligence and U.S. supplies as their weapons. The rest is not merely history, but continues to haunt the whole world today.

Dr. Realpolitik Kissinger, in defiance of all the proud traditions of his adopted country, did not give a damn about democracy. He will no doubt reply that "On China" is about China, the differences between Chinese diplomacy based on the game of wei qi, which teaches the art of strategic encirclement, rather than chess (which Kissinger should know originated in India, 13 centuries before Clausewitz), with its concepts of clashes and total victory, and his meandering meetings with Chinese leaders over the past 40 years, and definitely not about Bengalis who got in the way.

But what is diplomacy that does not have regard for the people it affects, and who are diplomats who regard millions of victims as mere collateral damage?

Kissinger may not be the monster who was Mao Zedong, responsible for 40 million to 70 million deaths of his Chinese comrades. But it would have been good if in his declining years Kissinger had been humble enough to acknowledge and apologize to those whose lives he blighted by his pursuit of power.

Kevin Rafferty covered the East Pakistan cyclone and 1970 elections and the Bangladesh war of 1971 for the Financial Times.

JE Menon · Post by **JE Menon** » 16 Jul 2011 20:35

Bravo Mr. Rafferty. This war criminal should be called out as often as possible.

Realpolitik my ass. The guy is nothing more than a thug with language.

CRamS · Post by **CRamS** » 16 Jul 2011 22:31

JE Menon wrote:Bravo Mr. Rafferty. This war criminal should be called out as often as possible.

Realpolitik my ass. The guy is nothing more than a thug with language.

Many people on this August forum mocked me when I called Fareed Zakraiah a quintessential Uncle Tom. On one of his GPS shows, he had this war criminal Mofo Kissinger on to talk about his book and as usual, he did shashtaanga namaskaram to him, I mean his guboing was so profuse, he introduced him as "our" elder statesman, and while I was waiting throughout the interview, not one question about Paki massacres in Bangladesh, US propping of this terrorist TSP regime, Nothing. Just glowing fawning adulation as is the wont of most elite Americans when it comes to this bloody thug. Only my man Christopher Hitches had the guts to call this b@stard for what he is: a war criminal. (Of course, as an aside, I don't know what happened to Hitchens but he lost a ton of my respect after he avowedly spported US/UK's ang rape of Iraq in broad daylight).

tejas · Post by **tejas** » 16 Jul 2011 22:34

I have always had a visceral hatred for Kissinger. In one of his earlier memoirs he actually stated India was responsible for and started the 1971 war with Pukistan! And yet this war criminal is still given a visa to visit India which to me is inexplicable/inexcusable.

This SOB is a an apologist for the communist thugs in China and the GOI should spare no resource in trying to prosecute him for war crimes instead of issuing him visas to attend conferences at 5 star hotels

CRamS · Post by **CRamS** » 16 Jul 2011 23:00

Tejas,

Talking about getting visa, what can you say about the elite cowards who rule India. You just saw in the other thread the contempt and hatred Salman Taseer had for India, and yet when he met his 72, more people were weeping for this so called "libreal" in India than in TSP. Don't know whether it is worth calling India a country when its tormentors like Kissinger, Musharaff etc are qulogized and rolled out the red carpet.

VinodTK · Post by **VinodTK** » 17 Jul 2011 01:25

Nirupama Rao named India's next ambassador to US

NEW DELHI: Government today officially announced the appointment of foreign secretary Nirupama Rao as the next ambassador to the United States, an assignment she will take up shortly.

Rao, has been appointed as the next ambassador of India to the United States of America and she is expected to take up her assignment shortly, official spokesperson in the Ministry of External Affairs said here.

Her appointment to succeed Meera Shankar as the US ambassador was cleared by the government last month.

The 1973-batch IFS officer assumed the office of the Foreign Secretary on August 1, 2009, becoming the second woman to head the Indian Foreign Secretary after Chokila Iyer.

She was to retire in December last year at the age of 60 but was given an extension till July-end when the government fixed a two-year term for the post of foreign secretary.

Rao has served in various key positions and had been India's envoy to various countries, including China and Sri Lanka. She has also been the only women spokesperson in the MEA.

She had earlier served in Washington as a junior diplomat.

CRamS · Post by **CRamS** » 17 Jul 2011 06:12

Calling on the gurus including R-man, Dr. Shiv, RamanaGaru, SS et. all to decode this gobly gook from Uneven. To me its the usual equal equal drivel, but I look forward to other analyses. Especially see his BS about regional solution to AfPak.

Failure in Af-Pak: How the U.S. Got It Wrong

Stephen Cohen

http://nationalinterest.org/commentary/ ... ?page=show|

July 15, 2011

The United States has failed to get South Asia right.

In India, the U.S. was caught off guard by New Delhi's refusal to revise legislation that would have permitted American firms to bid on projects in the immense nuclear market. This was followed by an Indian decision to exclude two American companies from the $10 billion competition for a multi-role combat aircraft. Both developments were crushing disappointments to those who had expected these deals to be the capstone of a new strategic partnership.

In Pakistan, the United States tracked down and killed Osama bin Laden without help from the government. Despite repeated denials, this "non-NATO" ally had been hosting Osama bin Laden for years in a small city notable for its military installations. The jury is out on Islamabad's exact role, but either of the two likely scenarios—a benign inability to capture, or active protection—casts doubt on the value of a decade of almost unconditional American inducements and support.

In Afghanistan, almost ten years after vanquishing the Taliban, there is still confusion about strategy. Should we continue with our counterinsurgency efforts, or move on to a more limited counterterrorism strategy? We still have no idea what role Pakistan will play in Afghanistan's future, let alone India, which already has a large economic role there. Reducing our assistance to Pakistan, as announced last week, may put additional pressure on Islamabad to perform, but it is just another isolated measure with few prospects of having any long-term effect.

There are several reasons why American policies towards India, Pakistan, and Afghanistan have gone awry. One is that the United States lacks a clear conceptual understanding of what it calls "Af-Pak." Additionally, Washington is sub-optimally organized to think strategically and coherently about the area. Both of these insufficiencies are rooted in a wrong "theory of the region" which has led the United States into serial blunders.

For many decades, American policy towards India and Pakistan was derived from a Cold War framework. India was incorrectly seen as a Soviet ally just as Pakistan's reliability as an American ally was misjudged. This was a costly mistake because it not only neglected our overlapping interests with India, it ignored Pakistan's ability to exploit US tolerance as it covertly built nuclear weapons and nurtured a terrorist network that now poses a major threat to itself, India and the world.

Then, even as our Cold War imperatives started to wind down, we failed to prevent both countries from entering into a nuclear arms race and never confronted the one country—China—that was singularly responsible for Pakistan's proliferation. The United States was thereafter unable to stop Islamabad from turning into the world's nuclear ATM machine. At the same time, even while creating an exception for Israel, America dogmatically argued that the universal and treaty-bound approach to nonproliferation was the only way and scoffed at Indian efforts to manage proliferation regionally.

Finally, after 9/11 and the onset of the global war on terror, we hived off Pakistan from India and tried to de-hyphenate the two states, treating them as if they had no relations with each other except for the occasional crisis. This ignored a variety of historical, cultural and geostrategic imperatives that do tie the two states together, and it intensified our inability to take coherent decisions regarding the South Asian region.

These perceptional failures were compounded by faulty government organization. For example, the institutional setup in the military commands and the Defense Department perpetuate the India-Pakistan divide; the State Department is fragmented between the office of the Special Representative for Af-Pak and its South Asia bureau; and the White House has different reporting and decision lines for India and Pakistan.

The rise of India as a major power, the decline and possibly failure of Pakistan, increasing Chinese influence, and an unstable Afghanistan where we are entangled in a costly war cannot be managed without major organizational reform—including the creation of a new combatant command for South Asia and the Indian Ocean.

Organizational reform is a necessary but not sufficient adjustment. The United States also needs to correct course on three fronts.

More broadly, in the case of India, Washington must moderate expectations: New Delhi will not evolve into its new ally in Asia, like Japan. Our alliance with Pakistan will continue to stimulate Indian defense acquisitions from other suppliers—including Russia and Europe—as New Delhi will never want to rely on us to service their American equipment in case of a new conflict with Pakistan. The same reasoning applies to the 2008 nuclear cooperation deal: it improved relations, but did not make India an ally. New Delhi has a deep commitment to strategic autonomy, as indicated by its insistent use of the moderating prefix "natural" to describe its US relationship. In the end, India got what it needed from Washington, including recognition of its nuclear weapons program and support for its permanent membership on the United Nations' Security Council, at little or no cost.

America's Pakistan policy too needs to move from wishful thinking to a more strategic use of both carrots and sticks. American officials—civilian and military—persistently fool themselves by subscribing to the Pakistani definition of the relationship as suffering from a "trust deficit." Trust will come only if we (and Pakistan) can verify that the agreements entered into are being fulfilled. And it is not only Pakistan that has engaged in subterfuge; for example, by insisting on carrying out drone attacks in the Federally Administered Tribal Areas and by privileging the army as its main interlocutor in the country, the United States has often intensified the asymmetry in civil-military relations and undermined the progress toward full democracy. On the other hand, sheer trust without verification led to chronic Pakistani non-compliance, and from Pakistan's military point of view, an American failure to deliver as promised. It is already an asymmetrical relationship. The new US-Indian strategic alliance (even though still more symbolic than real), the failure of the Pakistan aid program to show results, and unilateral American military actions threaten to rupture the relationship entirely.

America also needs a fundamental course correction in Afghanistan. This policy now is based on the wrong assumption that this is a nation-building project that can succeed within the framework of a counterinsurgency strategy. This narrow view has neglected Afghanistan's broader geopolitical context, including the vital roles of Pakistan, Iran, Russia, China and India. This is why we are now reaping the harvest of an insistence on doing it alone. At the same time, we can no longer ignore that any acceptable solution for Afghanistan depends on a secure and supportive Pakistan, which, in turn, also depends on a stable South Asia and the normalization of India-Pakistan relations.

India is a friend, but not an ally. Pakistan is an ally, but not a friend. Afghanistan is everyone's problem. To pursue its interests in these three states, America needs to approach the region holistically, both in conceptual and organizational terms. With a new crew manning key positions on the ship of state, this is the best opportunity for a course correction.

CRamS · Post by **CRamS** » 17 Jul 2011 06:22

VinodTK wrote:Nirupama Rao named India's next ambassador to US

NirupamaJi is a useless lighweight moutpiece for Sonia. Waste of time having her in such an important diplomatic assignment. She will host dinners, make vacuous speeches just like that previous clown, Ronen Sen, who talks more like US ambassador to India than vice versa. Ditto Meera ShankarJi. The last ambassador who was somewhat articulate in advancing Indian interests, I forget his name, was during Vajpayee's time. I recall he tried his best aligning India's battle with TSP-sponsored Isalmic terrorists with US's, he failed no doubt, but neverthless tried.

CRamS · Post by **CRamS** » 17 Jul 2011 06:29

http://forums.bharat-rakshak.com/viewto ... f#p1130131

RamanaGaru, where did he admit he was wrong, he is still peddling equal equal

tejas · Post by **tejas** » 17 Jul 2011 08:10

CRamS garu, I am often left wondering if there is something genetically defective in Indians in general. As eminent historian Will Durant stated, the Muslim conquest of Indiia was perhaps the bloodiest and most savage conquest in history. His estimate was between 80-90 million Hindus butchered. Yet cities are named after these barbarians and followers of their totalitarian "religion" are not only allowed to freely practice their "faith" but should have first dibbs on the nation's resources according to our PM. Is there an Adolph Hitler avenue in Israel? One thing India has never had a shortage of is homegrown traitors.

Stan_Savljevic · Post by **Stan_Savljevic** » 17 Jul 2011 08:26

Please cease and desist from using unparliamentary language for Indian diplomats.

Rangudu · Post by **Rangudu** » 17 Jul 2011 08:31

I'm still trying to figure out what specific insight or point of view there is in that piece by Uneven.

CRamS · Post by **CRamS** » 17 Jul 2011 08:44

What I find truly poisonous even diabolical in the following thesis "any acceptable solution for Afghanistan depends on a secure and supportive Pakistan, which, in turn, also depends on a stable South Asia and the normalization of India-Pakistan relations" by Uneven which seems to be the dominant thinking in DC is this: TSP's recalcitrance is attributed to lack of normalization between India & TSP and so US should facilitate that. OK, lets accept that. Now first thing TSP will demand as part of "nornalization" is Kashmir on a silver platter. So if India refuses, then the bar changes to blame India for not "normalizing" relations with TSP. I mean these slime balls know this, and yet parrot this nonsense.

Bascially: any acceptable solution for Afghanistan depends on a ridding Pakistan's use of terror as an instrument of state policy both in Afganisthan and against India. Until US can get around to making this its official AfPak policy, it will contine to fakAf.

KLNMurthy · Post by **KLNMurthy** » 17 Jul 2011 09:00

Rangudu wrote:I'm still trying to figure out what specific insight or point of view there is in that piece by Uneven.

let me take a shot: it seems to boil down to:
1. scale back relationship with India
2. Give pak what it wants and 'solve' the India-pakistan problem.
3. Doing 2 will solve Afghanistan

Only new thing is an explicit call to scale back the India connection.

Rangudu · Post by **Rangudu** » 17 Jul 2011 09:04

^^ I don't see those points specifically, perhaps they are implied but lots of people call for "normalized" India-TSP ties but it can mean anything. This piece is basically inane.

Airavat · Post by **Airavat** » 17 Jul 2011 10:29

Indians as "high value" illegal immigrants

with fewer Mexicans and Central Americans crossing the border, smugglers are eager for more "high-value cargo" like Indians, some of whom are willing to pay more than $20,000 for the journey. The influx has been so pronounced that in May, Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano told a Senate committee that at some point this year, Indians will account for about 1 in 3 non-Mexican illegal immigrants caught in Texas.

Many of those detained in Texas hail from Indian states such as Punjab and Gujarat, places that are relatively prosperous and where it's common for people to seek greater fortunes abroad even if they are financially secure at home.

CRamS · Post by **CRamS** » 17 Jul 2011 10:31

Rangudu wrote:^^ I don't see those points specifically, perhaps they are implied but lots of people call for "normalized" India-TSP ties but it can mean anything. This piece is basically inane.

Yes, but when TSP has so loudly declared time and again what it means by normalization, and US oficials themsleves have meantioned Kashmir as the "core" issue, it is obvious that "normalization" either in US or TSP lexicon means India making massive concessions to TSP. Essentially diluting India's power which is no skin off US's back and suits TSP just fine. Thats why anyone with a half a brain looking at the situation objectively, especially after so much perfidy from TSP, ought to know that root cause is TSP terror. But by casting the real problem as "normnalization between India & TSP", it is a euphemism for justifying TSP's abominable behavior. Do US officials talk about normalizing realtions between Israel and Hamas? Why not talk about nornmalizing relations between US and Al Queda?

A_Gupta · Post by **A_Gupta** » 17 Jul 2011 11:00

tejas wrote:CRamS garu, I am often left wondering if there is something genetically defective in Indians in general. As eminent historian Will Durant stated, the Muslim conquest of Indiia was perhaps the bloodiest and most savage conquest in history. His estimate was between 80-90 million Hindus butchered. Yet cities are named after these barbarians and followers of their totalitarian "religion" are not only allowed to freely practice their "faith" but should have first dibbs on the nation's resources according to our PM. Is there an Adolph Hitler avenue in Israel? One thing India has never had a shortage of is homegrown traitors.

Lala Lajpat Rai is a traitor to India?

The enemies of the 8th to 16th centuries form an important and intergal part of the Indian population today. They are neither foreigners nor rulers. Racially they are, in the vast majority of cases, the bone of our bone and the flesh of our flesh.

A_Gupta · Post by **A_Gupta** » 17 Jul 2011 11:07

At the same time, we can no longer ignore that any acceptable solution for Afghanistan depends on a secure and supportive Pakistan, which, in turn, also depends on a stable South Asia and the normalization of India-Pakistan relations.

Uneven has put the cart before the horse. The correct statement is that a reformed Pakistan will lead to normalization of India-Pakistan relations and then to a stable South Asia. Or to put it another way, the epicenter of global terrorism is also the source of instability in South Asia. Get rid of the terrorism and the other good results will follow.

RajeshA · Post by **RajeshA** » 17 Jul 2011 11:08

OT

A_Gupta wrote:Lala Lajpat Rai is a traitor to India?
The enemies of the 8th to 16th centuries form an important and intergal part of the Indian population today. They are neither foreigners nor rulers. Racially they are, in the vast majority of cases, the bone of our bone and the flesh of our flesh.

It is not about not permitting Indian Muslims to practice their faith (as far as it is within the bounds of Indian Law). It is about society and state withdrawing any support to the memory of those who have committed genocide on Hindus and have destroyed and plundered their civilizational treasures.