Future Strategic Scenario for the Indian Subcontinent -II

[brihaspati]

In India, the native mercantile class had long become devoid of alliance with the ruler and both had long not been involved in any joint imperial project. This started since the fall of the Mauryan empire, after which different parts had different aspiring emperors but the trading hinterland was common. Which meant that merchants developed their own network and understanding bypassing the rulers. When the Islamics came, they maintained a constant war on non-Muslims - in all possible senses, so that even if the mercantile class was somewhat tolerated - we see a gradual reversal of the share of trade and trade dominance from the non-Muslim towards the Muslim.

Is there any good reference for this for that period. The reason could be for many reasons. Indian economy was the first global multinational economy and it created stable order for 1000 years and more. It created a system of interdependent economy which no ruling class wanted to disturb.

Traders crisscrossed different empires and kingdoms. For a large part of India post Gupta, three powers were moving around with shifting boundaries. But there is some evidence that traders maintained their networks, were subject to surveillance when they went into non-home-kingdoms, etc. So they could not have formed a joint imperial project with competing powers on the same trade-hinterland all at the same time.

The reversal and the process of replacement of Indian merchants first with their agents and then Islamic merchants themselves are attested to form various sources. Islamic hostility to non-Muslim merchants is claimed by Chinese sources (like Chou ju kua) and others. Moreover we gradually find more and more refs to "agents" of Hindu merchants in CAR and Ghazni and Hormuz - but less and less actual trade journeys made by the merchants themselves or their presence at such spots. In fact the most striking would be the ref typically bandied about by our professional historians about a certain Gujarati merchant who went out west over the Arabian sea with hundreds/thousands of ships. But within approximately two hundred years we have a Muslim trader based in Gujarat owning the largest fleet trading across the same sea to the same area and who is seen as the dominant one.

[somnath]

Devesh-ji,

For some whose idea of "US imperialism in Latam" comes froma book on pop-sociology/economics, and that of US hostiliy towards India from a book that mentions India almost only as a footnote, your self assurance on "all questions have been answered" is touching...A basic question, and usually basic questions unravel the concept best, on what consitutes data for "unremitting US hostility towards India" has no answer from you...Look around you - do you find any Indian/US analyst/politician/commentariat articulatinbg anything of that sort? Maybe you should start putting flesh to your slogans before abuing someone else..

And yes, of course - if you really wanted to get an idea on US imperialism in Latam, read up Naom Chomsky - he has written more than anyone else on the subject...Pop sociology (while being very enjoyable reading - I enjoyed "Confessions..." a lot) is no substitute for hard core political perceptions...On US-India, the list is large - Fareed Zakaria to C Raja Mohan to George Perkovich - guys who write on the topic, George Friedman doesnt even think India is going to be that material

Somanth / Admins
Requesting a Census data thread (technology forum?) to follow.

!
I have posted the basic data that has come out on the census in the Economy thread..Maybe it merits a separate thread - if admins are ok, I can create one..

[somnath]

RajeshA-ji,

Dismembering a country isnt achieved through chess board actions of an external power...Look around at all the examples of balkanisation, say post WWII...From Yugoslavia to East Timor to Sudan to our very own partition to Bangladesh - a variety of largely internal factors go towards a vivisection...External powers faciltate/militate against the process, and sometimes give the tipping over shove..But finally, its a bunch of internal factors that do the heavy lifting..

Which is why IMO the current status quo in Pak is best suited to our objectives, even if the final desired denouement is a vivisection..Pak's strategic assets are today arrayed against its Army, in a fatal way at that...Fairly large chunks of its territory are not in govt control...Afghanistan has a quasi-hostile regime...And US objectives, as long as its present in Af, runs contrary to Pak's...Preserving this for a sustained period of time might just cause parts of the Islmic Republic to fall off (mind you, Bangladesh required a "24 year" effort - started with the bengali language agitation right after indepndence)..Even if it doesnt, it will render the Paki state sufficiently weak to mount any strategic challenge to India...

You already see the shift in the narrative..not so long back, maybe 15 years earlier, the narrative was about Indo-Pak "joint progress and destinies" and all that rubbish around Kashmir resolution..Today, it is about "rescuing Pak" and ensuring India's ascent to the bigger league..these guys have already conceded the big game...

JMT of course......

[devesh]

Somnath:

the basic question of whether US is hostile to Indian interests wrt Paki-stain has been answered. period. no more debate needed. when it comes to Pak, America is hostile to Indian interests. this has been proven time and time again. and many on BRF, after long study and years of watching and observing Uncle have come to the same realization. i myself am relatively new on BRF, even including my previous account. but even a cursory glance at Uncle shows that BoP is the basis of policy wrt India. to contain India's growth is the strategy. i'm done on this. no more discussions with you on how American policies negatively effect India, when we keep going in circles and never move past the basic questions.

[somnath]

^^^Devesh-ji,

Sure - given that you have already "answered" the "basic questions" (based on your readings of pop sociology and/or just "cursory glances"...), what are the next steps, according to you? US is hostile to India, wants to "contain" India - what next? You have already decided (based on what is unclear, but lets leave it at that) that "globalisation" is a US conspiracy to destroy India's economy...What are the "rollbacks" of policies that India needs to pursue? That would be a good start..

[brihaspati]

There are some very interesting ideas floating around in the last few pages. I will summarize them as hypotheses :

(1) US hostility towards India should be provable by the proportion of "hardcore" political perceptions as expressed in certain "approved" set of academics - US and Indian. We need to fix what proportion is going to be acceptable as significant, say at least 15% or some such figure? Second, what decides who are the "acceptable/qualified" academics or what constitutes such acceptability? I think this should be fixed up before we go looking for evidence, so that later on arguments like "I never said that all academics are non-hostile" or " I never said that so -and -so academic has a hardcore political perception or acceptable perception - and hence the example cited is not acceptable since the author does not belong to my acceptable list".

(2) Balkanization happens through internal drive, and external forces are only facilitators. Externals forces have no role in creating the factional lines which provide the internal drive in the first place. This is supposedly supported by history.

(3) Pakistan's strategic assets are disjoint sets from its Army and the two are engaged in a conflict with each other in a decisively destructive way

(4) US objectives, as long as it is present in AfG, are contradictory to Pak objectives.

(4) can only be even stated as hypotheses if we already have a clear idea of what Pak and US objectives are exactly as relevant in the context of (4).

We can start with (2) and (3) but the other two require some preliminary consensus on criteria.

[somnath]

Here is an interesting article (actually a speech) by Ronen Sen..Covers a lot of ground, wasnt sure where this should go, but gven the train of thought, there are some useful insights for this thread...

http://www.indianexpress.com/news/of-de ... s/771118/0

A high-profile manifestation of service-to-service cooperation was that of the navies of India, the US, Japan and Australia after the tsunami in 2004. The then secretary of state, Colin Powell, had turned down former UN Secretary General Kofi Annan’s pleas for including China in these operations in the Indian Ocean. There have been around 50 joint exercises between the armed forces of India and the US so far, which have been of mutual benefit, and led to greater recognition of the high professional standards of our armed forces.

Nothing new, but to me the most important insight repeated here..

Our approach to all these issues and responses to pending proposals reflect not just our perceptions of the US, Russia or any other country. They relate primarily on how we perceive ourselves; the extent to which we have shed our colonial-era sense of insecurity and fear of being dominated and exploited. It is high time that we stopped the charade of making a virtue of procrastination and lack of decisiveness. We need less ideological posturing and more open debate on whether our own interests are best served by remaining outside global regimes or by joining the global mainstream. We need to ask ourselves whether we should remain fence-sitters or prepare to take our place at the global high table.

[devesh]

Somnath,

do explain what the "global high table" is? you say it's a "most important" insight. do tell us what that insight is.

and what exactly is "global regime"? what is "global mainstream"?

since the above terms seem to give such an important insight to you, please do shed some light on what they are? it will be very helpful to us all in understanding what your understanding is.

the "insecurity and fear" of colonial era was an "insecurity and fear" that was rooted in 200 years of domination by Britain, and broadly speaking, it was rooted in a 1000 year old domination by foreign invaders. this "insecurity and fear" is a major survival/defense mechanism that we Indians need. this constant BS about "colonial era" is completely illogical. the "insecurity and fear" are necessary to motivate us as a nation to be independent and strong. I would be more concerned if we didn't have those.

nations and cultures are shaped by their experiences. how can you expect 200 years of oppression and 1000 years of domination by outsiders to be forgotten as if it was a small matter???

[svinayak]

This is a false argument. India has defined its geo graphic interest and much more. It has to take care of this interest and also expand it at the right time. It does not matter what other pwoer think but India has to do what is right for itself.

[somnath]

do explain what the "global high table" is? you say it's a "most important" insight. do tell us what that insight is

The "insight" is not the presence of a global high table, it is about the fact that we need to be bold and imaginative enough to sieze opportunities to sit on that table -its nothing new really...

About what is the "high table" - its not a physical construct - there is no one "table" where invites are to some members only...Its a strategic-political construct..Its a cultural construct..Its an economic construct....It is about influence to fashion global developments...It is about the indispensibilty of a country to the solutions to world's variouos problems..If you want to really give it a physical dimension - membership of the global economic elite (which we are part of in some ways already thorugh G20), membership of the world's nuclear elite (which again we are in some ways through the nuke deal - more in the pipeline), membership of the world's trading elite- we have some way to get there, membership of the world's political elite - a mixed bag right now, but we are getting there - Climate Change, WTO, UNSC, the security architetures being fashioned around the world..

the meek will not inherit the earth - fear, insecurity etc will take us nowhere...3 decades of economic policy-making was predicated on (at least the rhetori of) similar fears and insecurity...The last 2 decades of brave policy-making has shown wht imaginativeness and confidence ("of an idea whose time has come" - rememeber the quote?) can do...

which brings me to the question I had asked - what the elements of the "US sponsored globalisation conspiracy towards India" have you identified? And what needs to be rolled back? Or implemented afresh?

[svinayak]

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/row/RL33529.pdf


India in the eyes of US analysts
How sterotype is used and also double stds compared to rest and its own US records

Human Rights Concerns
Many of India’s more than one billion citizens suffer from oftentimes serious human rights
abuses. Some analysts are concerned that, as Washington pursues a new “strategic partnership”
with New Delhi, U.S. government attention to such abuses has waned. According to the State
Department’s most recent Country Report on Human Rights Practices (released March 2010), the
Indian government “generally respected the rights of its citizens and made progress in reducing
incidents of communal violence, expanding efforts against human trafficking, and reducing the
exploitation of indentured, bonded, and child workers, but serious problems remained”:
Major problems included reported extrajudicial killings of persons in custody,
disappearances, and torture and rape by police and other security forces. Investigations into
individual abuses and legal punishment for perpetrators occurred, but for many abuses, a lack
of accountability created an atmosphere of impunity. Poor prison conditions and lengthy

[Arjun]

which brings me to the question I had asked - what the elements of the "US sponsored globalisation conspiracy towards India" have you identified? And what needs to be rolled back? Or implemented afresh?

Globalization in the sense of competing on the world stage in all spheres rather than within a cocoon that is cut-off from the rest of the globe - is inevitable and to be welcomed. Therefore countries that believe themselves to be competitive (whether in science, art, sports, finance, business or any other field) should be welcoming globalization - and India is most definitely in that league.

The problem might be in the 'US sponsored' part. Many aspects of globalization need 'rules of the game' to be defined - and India needs to ensure that Indian interests are protected (if not enhanced) while setting the rules of the game. India also needs to be bringing her own value system in, while defining the new global order.

[brihaspati]

devesh ji,
the discussion is deliberately being stretched in all directions without pointing out that there are inherent and assumed criteria being used to judge. Do request first a clarification of

(1) what are the respective "interests" of India, USA, Pakistan etc? In whose eyes and and under what perceptions? Is it unanimous - even within the respective countries? What role, presumptions and assumptions play as constructed by interest groups within each country? Exactly which groups' pereceptions are being claimed as Indian interests?

(2) There is inherent and obvious spin in representing specific "apparent" actions by groups in power in India as "bold and brave" or "non-bold or cowardly". Actions preferred personally or which are seen to be aligned to what an individual deems of "interest" will be lauded to the skies, while others which go against that particular alignment will be ridiculed and derided. This will again be related to underlying affiliations to specific ideological positions and commitments.

A purely monetary, financial profits, big-business aligned to international capital and financial flows [which are still primarily dominated by the US-UK-Japan combine and only secondarily by ME petro circle and China] will see an Indian PM shaking hands with As-Sudais at a dinner hosted by a leader of a legislative house of India - to be a bold move, extending protection and space to separatists of Kashmir Valley a bold move. In fact steps taken to bring the Indian rashtra into closer proximity to Sunni extremism by extending protection to the patrons of such extremism, or claims that "Indian interests" are best served by not taking steps to encourage dissolution of Pakistan by all possible means - especially against use of covert or overt military interventions under the excuse of withdrawal of "financial" inputs from the "world order" - all these will be lauded to the skies.

Question is why? All such steps actually are exactly what the West wants of India. They do not intend India to take steps that dissoved Pakistan, or undermined Sunni clerical-feudal-theocratic imperialism, and in fact perhaps want the latter to expand in India - because a combined Evangelist -Sunni spread over India will provide a better handle on controlling the subcontinent.

India has always produced, in fact specifically more from the so-called forward castes of Hindus - eminent voices of dhimmification, who argue with all their training in sophistry as to why Indian should submit to definitions of Indian interest required by their foreign masters (if not in formal emplyment but in one sided ideological submission). This is perhaps the bane of hierarchical social ordering of endogamous "superiority by birth" concepts. We tend to produce more of the rootless from such sections, who are unable to identify with the bulk of their birth culture and take up foreign "interests" in earnest as their own affiliation, identity and interests.

[devesh]

brihaspati ji,

thank you. indeed, you are on the spot. deliberately distracting the discussion through terms such as "bold and brave" has become the norm. now, keeping in mind this tactic:

somnath,

all of the things that you say in your post sound very cool. the point of disagreement is that "bold and brave" involves the ability to look outside the box, to realize when a policy is wrong, and to take corrective action and rectify, and it also includes the foresight to realize that the old policies had a specific reason for implementation. in this perspective, i think we all agree that the decision in the 90's to move away from license raj (initiated by Rajiv), and to cautiously embrace more capitalism was the "right" thing to do.

now, this "right" thing is right b/c:
1. it infused dynamism into a stagnant economy.
2. it did away with archaic policies which were actually suppressing the economic viability and talent of the country.
3. it was done in stages whereby India slowly gained experience in the matters and mastered them
4. and ultimately, the very decision to actually do away with old policies in the economic realm did not hurt India in the broader strategic realm.

now let us move from economic to "broader strategic" realm, as I put it previously. the "old" policy of staying independent by not getting under military umbrellas of super powers still continued in the 90's and still continues today. now why was this "old" policy chosen by the "old" people? b/c:

1. it preserved India's right to have her own views and opinions.
2. it preserved India from having to become a "satellite state" or an "alliance partner" (euphemism for a poodle which is ready to follow any super power dictate)
3. and more importantly, we chose to keep an independent voice b/c the world around us was starkly similar to the world which created the British empire. American dominance of the global seas was eerily similar to Britain's heyday naval empire.

now, to the extent that the "old" strategic policy failed, it did so b/c the geopolitical aspects were allowed to be morphed into idealistic Gandhian/Nehruvian concepts in the economic realm. the real tragedy is that Bharat Rashtra couldn't manage to achieve "separation of ideologies" in the geopolitical and economic (which is actually a part of the broader geopolitical) realms.

what we started to do in the 90's is achieve the "separation of ideologies." the basic concept of strengthening Bharat's sovereignty remained while at the same time we embraced concepts that could do 2 things:
1. infuse more dynamism
2. propel Bharat away from stagnation by developing home grown economic capabilities that would preserve and Strengthen the Rashtra.
_____________________________________


now, i will stop here. the above is my definition and understanding of Bharat moving away from stagnating economic policies. i think it is important now to refine the above by adding/deleting things where required. I particularly picked the 90's "new" economic policies b/c this is when India started moving away from Cold War economic thinking, and usually this is cited as the raison-d'etre for India to adopt "open-door" policy wrt West.

we should also try to focus on "fear and insecurity," wrt other nations in world history which transformed "fear and insecurity," born out of real concerns into a cohesive policy of national strengthening. since, we are still in a dhimmified mentality, it is a useful first step to analyze what others did. unfortunately, our attitude requires this to "confirm" our own thinking process.

[somnath]

Devesh-ji,

You have completely confused me..My question was simple: what are the "US sponsored globalisation measures" that are aimed at "destroying India's economy", as you claim is well on its way in being "executed" (I would be especially intersted in the "goons of GS/JPM" etc and their shenanigans)? This is especially because according to you the fact that US is hostile to India is a given - no debates required...So I am trying to examine this forward...

Now in response, you have presented a half-baked chronology/rationale/justification (not sure what exactly) of the economic reforms process, with dollops of words like "rashtra" and some sweeping generalisations ("gandhian thoughts morphing into economic policy" etc) - not sure how this can be an answer to the above!

With the ceteris paribus condition of "US hostility" embedded, why dont you simply identify the specifics of your next axiom - as paraphrased above or as per your post?

1. Destroy Indian economy in the name of globalization --- basically send in the army of GS, JPM, etc financial goons and looters and transform Indian financial landscape into a gambling house. they might try to use extensive network of analysts, consultants, etc to carry out sabotage acts
--------------------
As of right now, #1 is possibly being planned and executed right now. #2 has been in play for 65 years now, and will continue to be real.

[devesh]

now you have confused me. where did I say "US hostility" in my last post? the above post was not a "chronology/rationale/justification". it was an analysis of 90's shift from cold war economic policies. which part of it do you not agree with? we can debate once you identify.

do you understand the concept in which "US sponsored Globalization" is taking place? specifically, we are discussing those parts of "US sponsored globalization" which are geared toward diluting individual nations' defense mechanisms and slowly erasing national sovereignty via the use of such institutions as the IMF, UN, WTO/GATT, etc. it is only the fact that countries like India and Brazil are democracies which has stopped these countries from becoming slave nations to the IMF/WTO hyenas. these jackals keep telling countries like India that we need to abandon all the trade protections that are in place in the agricultural sector. no matter that 100's of millions of poor people are dependent on these protections. no matter that without these protections, they would be destitute to the point of starvation. please do research IMF's path of destruction. this single institution is perhaps the greatest example of Post-Colonial neo-imperialism by Western nations.

in the financial realm, specifically, Ireland is a good example. the same model was given a try in India. the saving grace is that RBI remains a peculiarly uncorrupted institution in modern India. this has been the only protection. but now that this method has failed. the next obvious method to be explored is the sabotage method via big business. this is a very real possibility considering that Indian big businesses are conglomerates with huge influence and power and family owned. so, if just a small set of people belonging to a family are carefully groomed and brought into the international cabal, that is enough to fund a major attack on all forms of protection against international banking harakiri.

and as for how US has continuously been hostile to Indian interests even outside of economic realm, i will simply quote Ravi Karumanchiri from one of his posts in another thread:

... perhaps most importantly, a geopolitical partner for India who...

F] doesn’t have a well established ‘containment strategy’ directed against India (‘containment strategy’ being an enormous euphemism for; i) building-up China, ii) propping-up Pakistan, iii) running interference for TSP-based terrorists like DCH and the LeT, iv) pressuring India over J&K for the TSP, v) training and supporting Khalistanis, vi) turning a blind eye to AQ Khan, vii) quashing TSP nuclear proliferation investigations in Holland and Switzerland, etc., viii) denial of technologies and spares post Pokhran testing, iix) blacklisting and embargoing Indian R&D institutions, et cetera, et cetera).

is the above enough proof for you that US has consistently acted against Indian interests???

[somnath]

where did I say "US hostility" in my last post

I thought you said US hostility is a given, no debates!?????

Anyway, about the rest -if I understand you correctly, you have a problem with

1. IMF
2. WTO
3. Agri tariff protection under WTO
4. Financial sector reform

Unfortunately, each of the above are broad topics of discussions spanning multiple angularities...

Not sure for example, what is the exact IMF behaviour against India that you think is part of US conspiracy to destroy India's economy?

WTO is a multilateral trade body, where members negotiate a common, multilateral trade regime..Members give and take, and obviously stronger members try to take more than they give...But again, which part of US negotiating stance is aimed at destroying India's economy?

Financial sector reform, special emphasis on Ireland...What exactly in the Irish case do you find parallels for India?

Last, you mention a secret illuminati-type cabal of business families facilitating an "attack" on India's banking system - any data/source/construct for this axiom?

There can be lots of issues with your "analysis of the '90s shift", but thats not the point we are trying to progress, isnt it? The point is what are the specific US actions aimed at dstroying India's economy...

[Arjun]

The process of reforming the IMF board so that emerging economies have more voting power as compared to the US has already been initiated.

In any case, the IMF has hardly been relevant to India for the last 15 years or so. India last borrowing was in the early nineties - since the last decade India has been a lender to the IMF.

[devesh]

^^^eh....so the fact that India has good enough finances to avoid IMF hyenas is proof that IMF is just fine and dandy??? wth? this logic is alien to me. it's like saying, the thief and murderer in the neighborhood is no concern because we have such good alarm system that he can't break in!!!

[somnath]

Not sure if this was posted here before..But George Perkovich on the complex Indo-US dynamics...

http://www.carnegieendowment.org/files/ ... ations.pdf

Worth a full read..

[AKalam]

x-posting from another thread:

We live in a period of unprecedented and accelerated technological as well as social changes. I was listening to Webster Tarpley's youtube video interview on Libya's AQ fighters in Iraq, from habal's post in Libya NFZ thread. Apparently the town of Dourna in Libya has the highest concentration of AQ fighters that went to fight in Iraq. I have also heard that per capita income of Libya is among the highest in Arab League or African Union. Is it possible that first the misinformed well fed turns to Salafism or Brotherhood. When they become a little more well informed, then they find better techniques to fight for their cause, such as Gandhian nonviolent civil disobedience? Is it possible that they are fighting for self empowerment, but only the technique changes? We should also look at the unprecedented move by the Saudi's who has come to India, since they recognize that India is a power that is becoming increasingly important for them.

At present there is no cohesion among the Muslim countries of different regions, there is some cohesion between Arabs of Arab League, but that is also limited, as it is known as the club of Tin pots. But once people have been well fed for a few generations and then as they become well informed in a few more generations, then people seem to strive for self empowerment and there is no better way to empower than to unite in a larger cohesive group.

Shiv ji a while back had an interesting post about the dynamics between US, PRC, India, Pakistan, showing that US is always interested to create divisions and chaos in the Eurasian landmass, Zbig actually theorized the usefulness of this strategy in his writings I think.

I would argue that over time an Islamic block will emerge, once there is more well fed and well informed population among the populous Muslim countries. So using Huntington's civilizational blocs, the interplay will be between:

- West + Japan (as follower of the West in all matters)
- Sinic (minus Korea, which happens to be de facto satellite of the West)
- Orthodox (over the long term it will probably become part of the West)
- Hindu
- Islamic
- African
- Latin American
- Buddhist

As many have noted, I am always for larger systems, according to my pet theories, as long as it can be kept together in some fashion. From my accumulated personal experience of living in the West for many years, traveling and living in some East, South East and Central Asian countries, my gut feeling is that:

- West+Orthodox+Japan+Korean
- Sinic
- Latin American

are too far removed in terms of geography, culture or ethnicity from the other major groups which are:

- Hindu
- Islamic
- African
- Buddhist

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Clash ... _mapn2.png
(it always helps to look at the map as a visual reference)

all of whom intermingle in a large part of Eurasian and African landmass. The above 4 groups along with Latin America are also known collectively as the third world or global south. I think JLN and MKG, both had some vision along this line that reflected in India's leadership of the nonaligned movement of developing countries.

If it was possible to unite this part of humanity, as there is plenty of interplay between them, India, as the largest, most organized and stable democracy, automatically could take a leadership position in this group, which was probably a rationale for India's interest in NAM.

I think sometimes a bigger vision makes it quite simple to follow for the laymen, as it can be used as a litmus test for any external or even internal policy matter of any country within this group. Any action that will benefit the collective interest and foster internal unity of this bloc, could be considered as a positive development and vice versa. Water sharing, among a myriad of issues, within and outside the bloc, can be looked at in this light.

In this age of New Cooler deterrence, it is probably not wise to promote territorial changes of nation states, but if it was possible to form a bloc including the above four groups, then it might be possible to influence behavior of other groups with economic incentives or coercion, to get desired results.

Some regional integration movements in this direction already exist:

African Union, Arab League, OIC, SAARC and ASEAN

admitting that none are quite effective so far.

[abhischekcc]

>>Last, you mention a secret illuminati-type cabal of business families facilitating an "attack" on India's banking system - any data/source/construct for this axiom?

Somnath, the signs are all there people to see.

What devesh meant by saying that the earlier independence of the RBI has now been corrupted is this - YV Reddy worked for the benefit of Indian economy, current governor D Subbarao is not like him.

Let me explain:
There is a severe banking crisis possible in the next few months that might see a few public sector banks fail. This is an artificial crisis. But under the pretext of 'saving' the Indian banking system, these PSBs are planned to be taken over by western robber banks, many of whom have received banking licenses in the past few weeks only.

All this is being facilitated by a traitorous government.

[somnath]

What devesh meant by saying that the earlier independence of the RBI has now been corrupted is this - YV Reddy worked for the benefit of Indian economy, current governor D Subbarao is not like him.

Let me explain:
There is a severe banking crisis possible in the next few months that might see a few public sector banks fail. This is an artificial crisis. But under the pretext of 'saving' the Indian banking system, these PSBs are planned to be taken over by western robber banks, many of whom have received banking licenses in the past few weeks only.

This is pretty serious stuff...

1. A few PSBs will fail - what are the signs that you see to forecast that? In terms of asset quality, liquidity ratios, capital ratios et al?

2. They will be taken over by "western robber banks"...Hmmm, wht changes have you seen in banking regs in India that suggests any M&A possibility by foreign banks of Indian banks? Also, why would "western banks", all yet scarred from the financial crisis, want to take over bankrupt banks? (BTW, the only bank that recently got a banking license was Rabo - not really a "western robber" bank..)

3. D Subbarao is "corrupted" - what poliy prescriptions from him make you arrive at this conclusion?

[somnath]

Some regional integration movements in this direction already exist:

African Union, Arab League, OIC, SAARC and ASEAN

admitting that none are quite effective so far

Akalam-ji, ASEAN is a hugely successful grouping...There are lots of politio-eonomic architectures built to address various objectives, some successful, some not..It has really depended on the congruency of the goruping's objective..NATO has served its purpose, as an Anglo-American security compact..NAFTA is successful as a trade bloc...EU is perhaps the most sucessful case of a regional grouping..

India's championing of NAM had more to do with a shared anti-imperialist experience rather than an ethno-religious motivation - from Bandung onwards that was the narrative...But really, anti-imperialism wasnt enough as an objective, simply because it became a non sequitor! Any architecture that has lacked a cohesive and congruent objective has fallen through...

But these arhitectures are going to become increasingly important - we realised it from PVNR's time, and tried gatecrashing into many of the existing regimes, while trying to setup new ones as well...Our record has been mixed...IBSA, BIMSTEC, SAARC have all been more noise than substance...SAARC never really took off as anything...but we managed getting a foothold into ARF and ASEAN - which is a big deal...However, one of the things we realised that our chances on a bilteral basis on deal-making are much better than on a multilateral basis...The reason is the sort of neighbourhood we have, and the kind of relationships we have with different principals that might not be on best terms with eah other...

Will it pan out as a "clash of civilisations"? I dont know..I hope not, given India's multi-religious construct and societal compact...I would like to think that wht we have is a "clash of the uncivilised with the civilised"......

[abhischekcc]

Somnath,

I hope I am wrong on this one. That is all that I have to say.

[somnath]

Somnath,

I hope I am wrong on this one. That is all that I have to say.

Ahh abhishek-ji, so it was just a CT based on indeterminables? Never mind....

[UBanerjee]

please do research IMF's path of destruction. this single institution is perhaps the greatest example of Post-Colonial neo-imperialism by Western nations.

This rhetoric (which is basically a parroting of leftist institutional rhetoric) fails the basic laugh test: India is growing at 8-9% a year over 2 decades after opening up all economic institutions to the American-led global order. So either:

1) American led neo-imperialist globalization is not completely hostile to India
or
2) American led neo-imperialist globalization is largely impotent
or
3) both.

Without this growth rate nothing else would be possible, so if the American-led financial-economic juggernaut was looking to crush India and keep it to post-Raj levels of destitution, they're doing a piss-poor job of it (especially with their domestic collapses while India & China remain resurgent). This chatter about NWO globalization fanda is widely parroted in US marxist circles and its interesting to see it here.

[svinayak]

I hope I am wrong on this one. That is all that I have to say.

Please post in the GDF forum.

[brihaspati]

UBannerjee -

maybe a better case against the rhetoric would be made if you can put up estimated capital flows and repatriation if any. The Indian growth story must be deriving its "growth" from investments. How much of this capital is completely indigenous [well very difficult to estimate that, because things get pretty mixed up in a few cycles - but still people do try], and how much of profits are moving out and what is staying in. How much of that is going into basic sector and how much into the non-basic - etc.

This is an interesting bit in international trade terms. There is a long debate, of course laughed out in certain quarters and not always without reason, about "unequal exchange" and net transfer of "values".

[devesh]

UBannerjee:

India has prospered b/c India found a balance between opening up and staying closed where it needed to. we avoided the financial collapse only and ONLY b/c we weren't fooled by all the rhetoric of opening up the markets which would amazingly lead to a panacea. eliminating restrictionist policies was the first step. after that accepting foreign investments and part ownership was the next step. we did this over a period of time, which allowed Indian talent to find its footing and use the new opportunities to create Indian enterprises which ultimately led to sustained levels of increased growth rates.

but we drew a line where we needed to. we were wise in being fanatically protectionist of our finance landscape. this is extremely important. after a long period of time, India once again is starting to amass wealth, both personal and public. Gold ownership and demand are directly related to this. the wealth of India was always a lure for foreign invaders. in modern world, economics has replaced mass war as the weapon of choice. Economic sabotage is the easiest way to destroy nations today. you don't need armies, and navies. by insulating our finances from international banking harakiri, we avoided an economic collapse.

going forward, it is imperative that we form financial relationships with individual countries first. these can be small countries. in fact, small countries are a better option. these small economies, once we make them dependent on us, are essentially an extension of our economic might. our goal is not to destroy them. but to expand the basis of of our own financial strength. we should start trading with these small countries in Rupee, slowly of course, to not raise eyebrows. Nepal, Bhutan, BD, SL, Mauritius, etc.

the end goal is to create a financial order where we get to define the rules, and not have play on somebody else's terms. this is extremely important b/c the current Anglo/American global financial system is a Casino. ripping off little guys is the name of the game. and India is a little guy. and add to that, we have enough shady figures who would be more than willing to grease palms and feat wherever and whenever required. there is no need to hurry in this game. this is one place where we have the luxury of carefully planning our steps and going forward. this is the one thing where keeping the status quo, even, is beneficial to following the cool commentary of "opening up."

[somnath]

Devesh-ji,

Some more rhetoric from you, in the process you lose track of facts..For example..

India once again is starting to amass wealth, both personal and public. Gold ownership and demand are directly related to this.

to be sure, India has been the largest consumer of Gold for many many decades, even when we were a poor wretched little economy...In the last few years in fact China has outstripped India in gold demand...

Or lose track of logic..For example..

we should start trading with these small countries in Rupee, slowly of course, to not raise eyebrows. Nepal, Bhutan, BD, SL, Mauritius, etc.

If INR is made convertible on capital account selectively for some countries, what prevents ccy speculators from setting-up invstment vehicles in those cuntries to make speculative investements on INR?

But all this is slightly OT, more pertinently I still havent seen your logic/data/facts for the entire litany of "US attempts to crush India economically"...I will re-post my comment for your benefit..

Anyway, about the rest -if I understand you correctly, you have a problem with

1. IMF
2. WTO
3. Agri tariff protection under WTO
4. Financial sector reform
Unfortunately, each of the above are broad topics of discussions spanning multiple angularities...

Not sure for example, what is the exact IMF behaviour against India that you think is part of US conspiracy to destroy India's economy?

WTO is a multilateral trade body, where members negotiate a common, multilateral trade regime..Members give and take, and obviously stronger members try to take more than they give...But again, which part of US negotiating stance is aimed at destroying India's economy?

Financial sector reform, special emphasis on Ireland...What exactly in the Irish case do you find parallels for India?

Last, you mention a secret illuminati-type cabal of business families facilitating an "attack" on India's banking system - any data/source/construct for this axiom?

There can be lots of issues with your "analysis of the '90s shift", but thats not the point we are trying to progress, isnt it? The point is what are the specific US actions aimed at dstroying India's economy...

Unless all of it was, like Abhishek, a bit of a "hunch/belief", not really based on any facts/data/theory...
Seriously though, there is no analysis that can be based on just slogans interspaced with sanskritised words like rashtra and bharat...A little more data is required....

And yes, it is much better to approach the issue with an open mind rather than be cluttered with some of the amazing inanities that get passed on by pseudo-academics in terms of absolute rubbish like "indigenous capital", "being mixed up in various cycles", "profits staying in", "net transfer of values"....these are not even (usually useless) jargons, these are mumbo-jumbos that even the principal has no idea of before spouting...

[somnath]

Not sure where this should go..about India's emerging role in Af...A good column by Pranab Samanta on possibilities of India training Af Army and Police..
http://www.indianexpress.com/news/our-k ... n/772294/0

[abhischekcc]

Somnath,

Could you explain what prompted the RBI to stop payment facilities for Indian energy companies dealing with Iran? So much so that we had to go to a German bank to facilitate those payments? Or do you have a 'hunch/belief', just like the governor, that making things difficult for Indian companies would actually be good for their character?

[habal]

folks, what does this mean ? Something as innocuous as Weather Research can also be used as WMD is not CT folklore anymore ?

http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2007/ ... 60.doc.htm

ALEDIA CENTENO RODRIGUEZ, Frente Patriotico Arecibeño, said her organization had spoken last year on the United States strategy to authorize a nuclear weapons production facility in Puerto Rico, in violation of the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons. She explained that Arecibo was home to the Arecibo National Astronomy and Ionospheric Centre (NAIC), which was used as an “ionospheric heater” [an array of antennae which are used for heating the uppermost part of the atmosphere]. Arecibo was also mentioned as a test-site for the High Frequency Active Auroral Research Programme (HAARP), in a patent filed by an individual in the United States, to conducted experiments related to ionospheric manipulation. HAARP could function as an anti-missile and anti-aircraft defence system, permit interception and disruption of communications, weather and submarine and subterranean communications, among other things. The HAARP patent papers also stated that the invention could “simulate and perform the same function as performed by the detonation of a heavy type nuclear device”.

She said Arecibo was also mentioned in connection with the Puerto Rico Karst Conservation Act, which included authorization for the deployment of a nuclear weapons production facility. Aerial photos taken in the region showed antenna-like devices directed towards the ground, present since the mid-1990s. The citizens of Arecibo had not been made aware of the consequences or possible effects of those atmospheric experiments. Statements found in the literature regarding those experiments admit to the use of laser rays aimed at the atmosphere and there have been witnesses to the use of such rays for decades. There was a high rate of cancer cases of unknown origin in that region.

She said documents from the United States Department of Defence and Energy, and the National Nuclear Security Administration appeared to be directed to the use of Puerto Rican territory for the production of nuclear weapons. On 17 May, a United States House Bill on the safety for Americans from nuclear weapons testing was introduced, which states that “alternate locations for nuclear testing were being considered”. The bill also stated that the Department of Energy, acting under the National Environmental Policy Act, would be responsible for handling cases of contamination in the United States. In addition, Puerto Rico was designated as a territory under the purview of the Radiological Assistance Programme, which was ready to intervene in cases of radioactive contamination. It would seem that that entity was in charge of the well-being of the people of Puerto Rico in case of a nuclear accident.

A document on land acquisition, available at the property registry of Puerto Rico, Arecibo Section, showed the consolidation of various estates into a single 114 acre estate purchased by the United States Government. More purchases would follow. The people of Arecibo were wary of the intentions of the Untied States Department of Defense, and denounced the fact that the people of Puerto Rico were not being included in plans that affected its security and future. The Committee was urged to refer the case of Puerto Rico to the General Assembly, and to take the necessary precautions to guarantee the security of the hemisphere.

[brihaspati]

No wonder that the financial industry spawned and collected the supreme examples of arrogance and aggression that covered for a complete lack of fundamental knowledge, thoroughness in details [like not even knowing the actual procedure of estimating exchange baskets, the assumptions involved etc, various models possible and their shortcomings, and not having access to the data to top it all] and pretension at "academic supremacy". Usually it leads to ascribing others as lacking "comprehension" of what these eminent mouths are uttering because what comes out of such pretension is mumbo-jumbo itself.

This is what happens when one turns arrogantly dismissive of other's knowledge without knowing how thin a shell the dismisser himself stands on - and what such tirades expose his own fundamentals as being completely hollow and all pretense.

I will just cite one case "indigenous capital":

The advance of African capital: the growth of Nigerian private enterprise :By Tom G. Forrest, International African Institute. Published by Edinburgh University Press Limited, 1994.

Introduction :
"Even in the case of Kenya, where the debate about the character, direction and strength of indigenous capital has been intense...[p. 1]
...relations between indigenous capital and foreign capital...[p. 1]
...saw a long term path of accumulation by indigenous capital...[p.1]
...since indigenous capital can effect the form and content of policy in a variety of ways...[p. 4]

and so on.


Chapter 8: The advance of indigenous capital in Kano and Kaduna. p. 197
Forms and patterns of indigenous capital, p 241.

"The privatization programme at federal and state level, opened up some opportunities for acquisitions by indigenous capital...[p. 245]

...with indigenous capital playing a leading role [p. 251]


Swainson also treats "indigenous capital" in The development of corporate capitalism in Kenya, N. Swainson, London, Heinemann, 1980.


Lakshmi Subrhamaniam has a book : Indigenous Capital, and imperial expansion, Bombay, Surat and the West Coast. OUP. (Delhi) 1996.

The Cambridge economic history of India, Volume 2 By Dharma Kumar, Tapan Raychaudhuri, Irfan Habib, Meghnad Desai.

"another opportunity for investment of indigenous capital [p. 99]
"weakened foreign capitalists vis-a-vis indigenous capital..[p. 293]
In the context of the narrowing investment opportunities for indigenous capital....indigenous capital was usually obtained mainly in short term loans...At the least sign of crisis, indigenous capital was withdrawn...[p. 294]

So Dharma Kumar, Tapan Raychaudhuri, Irfan Habib, Meghnad Desai, Lakshmi Subrhamaniam, Tom Forrest - all indulge in "amazing inanities" that get passed on by these "pseudo-academics in terms of absolute rubbish like "indigenous capital"" which "are not even (usually useless) jargons, these are mumbo-jumbos that even" these "principals" "have no idea of before spouting..."

When did mother India start producing such profanities as Indian intellects?

[RajeshA]

Someone raised the question of Bangladesh's role in this coming period of change in West Asia. I will try to address this question from my own personal vantage point.

The comatose Muslim world that we have discussed many a times before, it seems, is showing some signs of life by twitching fingers, eyes are still shut though, but they may not be shut for long IMHO.

Muslims in far corners of the world are watching the ongoing stirring in MENA with interest, and Bangladesh, I am sure, is no exception.

The identity of the Muslim population of Bangladesh is precariously balanced between two pillars, Indic Bengali (from time immemorial) and Islam (Sunni Hanafi in particular, Shia have negligible presence in East Bengal) which is more recent. A detailed study of Muslim demographics:

http://pewforum.org/uploadedfiles/Orpha ... lation.pdf

From above study Bangladesh does not make the list of countries with more than 100,000 Shia.

Going back to the two identities of Bangladeshi Muslims, it seems like a tug of war, from 1905 Bengal Partition to 1947, it worked to create Muslim League and provide space for the proponents of Two Nation Theory to succeed in the Subcontinent, perhaps to get out from under Bhadralok class based in Kolkata (short sighted IMHO). Since 1947 the Bengali identity asserted itself (an inevitable outcome of partition in my IMHO) to get out from under the new Pakjabi master, who seemed to be the perpetual mercenary working against subcontinental interest since 1857, under the rubric of Martial race theory, with Brit-raj initially and then with Amir Khan dominated world order since 1947.

What is clear is the opportunism of Bangladeshi Muslims, following goodies from early days of conversion under Turko-Mongols in trying to find ways to a better life and a secure future. Misrule of Sheikh Mujib helped Bangladesh to swing back again towards Islam, under Army and BNP rules, but since 1991 a shaky democracy that is still consolidating over the years, has helped Bangladesh to slowly find a middle ground between our Indic Bengali identity and Islam. I believe that is where we are now.

Bangladesh Muslims are of course mindful of the geography of their territory and its constraints, so a good relation and equitable working partnership with India on many levels are important for Bangladesh, as well as fostering the common and shared cultural and ethnic history. But I believe they are not willing to trade the other part of their identity, Islam, for this relationship. Just like any other Muslim population, as the largest most homogeneous ethno-linguistic group among Muslims, Bangladesh Muslims are likely to use Islam, increase their influence in the Muslim world and play their increasingly larger role in the coming years.

While it is in Egypts interest to promote and be a part of African Union and ensure its proper share of water from Nile river, similarly Bangladesh should be and is interested in a future SAARC union. But this does not lessen Bangladesh Muslims interest to play its proper role in Muslim affairs of the world. I can only imagine that IM's may have similar aspirations of playing important roles in the new emerging Muslim Renaissance, although I admit that it is still premature to give it such a label.

When the dust settles from this turmoil in MENA, there is a high likelihood that todays warring parties will be significantly weakened and this includes:

- all remaining Tinpots in Arab world
- Mullahcracy in Iran
- Pakjabi dominated Army

as all of the above are trying to deflect attention from the truly important local and domestic issue, the empowerment of the masses, by creating side issues, like Shia-Sunni rivalry in case of GCC, a stand off with Israel-West on New Cooler proliferation in case of Iran and the bogeyman of India and Kashmir in case of PA.

I would predict that a democratic Neo-Ottoman Turkey will be the temporary winner in the region, as the leader of the Sunni nations, as it seems to have all the right elements as of this moment. A revived Arab League led by GCC can soon outshine the Turks over the course of a few decades, since it has a more dynamic population, land and resources, if the divisions subside and a workable unity can be achieved. Al Qaeda, I believe will reform (as pointed out in some previously posted articles already) and take their fight for empowerment in democratic politics in the fight for supremacy in the Muslim consciousness. But their role is not assured, since true spark of leadership came from a more globalized, secularized and democracy and freedom loving youth, which might be the best case scenario for Muslim future IMHO. So the following forces will be on the rise:

- Turkey for the time being
- till they are eclipsed by a new generation of Arab youth in a post Tinpot era
- new generation of Iranians in a post Mullahcracy era

The remaining masses of Muslims in:

- Subsaharan Africa
- Central Asia
- Subcontinent
- South East Asia

will be followers in this trend.

This attempt at an analysis is based on relative size of well fed and well informed populations that will emerge in different Muslim societies, in the next few decades, as opposed to the absolute size of population.

It is my sincere hope and wish that there is more and more of Muslim population in the well fed and well informed category, so they can eventually form a working Islamic or Muslim bloc, tying together other regional blocs, such as ASEAN, SAARC, CAU (Central Asian Union), Arab League and African Union.

Those who will not feel threatened from such an eventuality within these regions, should gain unquestioned loyalty of the Islamic bloc, but those who would try to sabotage this effort, may develop a rocky relationship with this future bloc. The way things are shaping up, IMHO it is not a matter of if, but when this loose bloc takes shape. The side shows for now are just the initial birth pangs.

The dual identity syndrome of Muslims is not just for Bengalis, but other Muslim ethnicities as well (Buddhists in ASEAN, black Africans in African Union, Mongolians in CAU etc.), who in my opinion should embrace and utilize both identities to create a world where people can co-exist and cooperate and keep outsiders, who have no relation or commonality, out of the supra regional affairs, except for purely trade, scientific and other material exchanges. These outsiders include:

- Sinic
- West+Orthodox+Japanese+Korean
- Latin American

AKalam ji,

Many people have suggested that the best model is for the country to be secular, and for all citizens to consider religion as a private matter. More or less, that is the model envisioned for India.

However we know, that people tend to think in group dynamic and religion is a strong catalyst. So it would perhaps be too much to ask the people of the Subcontinent to stop thinking of themselves as part of religious groups or stop thinking of those religious groups having political agendas, though one should not stop trying.

We also know that basically the Subcontinent's interests are the same - security, prosperity and freedom of the Subcontinentals. However often whenever we step on each others shoes while we strive to these ends, the protest assumes a religious connotation, and the two communities end up fuming at each other.

What is needed in the Subcontinent is a communal relations management infrastructure, which stops local issues from flaring up while still doing justice to those issues!

Any little space between the two communities - Indics and Muslims, would be used by external powers to push through their own agendas. That is why even a little space is dangerous, for others can use to pry open a huge ill-will between the two leading to strife and conflict.

I would say, that even if the two communities look at themselves as political movements having aspirations for the Subcontinent, it is important that the two communities align themselves so perfectly with each other, that no third party can make use of any differences between us.

So we can strive both for submission of the religious identity to the citizenship, making religious sentiments a private matter of the individual, as well as a for a perfect alignment between the Indic and the Muslim political awareness.

Even Pan-Islamism does not disturb any Indic aspirations, as long as it is led by a Subcontinental-centric nationalist Muslim leadership.

[AKalam]

RajeshA ji,

Secularization of population groups I believe will automatically come with time, as it did in the West, although there remains pockets of EJ's (EvanJehadists?). It is difficult to force people to change their religious behavior unless they do it voluntarily IMHO, but when there exists large organized groups, then there is room for more group consultation and more organized, disciplined and measured response to issues, rather than adhoc, desperate and sometimes violent response of the disenfranchised, misled and misinformed.

While people have certain group dynamics and it looks like it will be there for some decades, why not channelize them for some constructive purposes, which are built into some of these group dynamics, that is kind of what I am proposing.

As for communal relations, what you mention is of course of paramount importance, as when we can tame the local situations, only then can we truly work for global or semi global aspirations. Several factors will help:

- time as I mentioned above, as percentage of well fed and well informed will increase in our subcontinental scene
- a vision of mutual dependence and shared goal for the future, of striving towards enlightenment and prosperity, free from outside interlocutors who are interested to drive a wedge and then divide and rule, like you hinted upon
- an understanding that economic incentive or coercion or any other kind of subterfuge should not be used on economically disadvantaged populations for conversion to another faith

Since Islam, as famously said by Huntington, has bloody borders, it needs to tame its virulent elements, so it does not flare up local incidents, which have been on the decline in the subcontinent lately, but still flares up in shared places like Nigeria, South Thailand, Mindanao, Egypt or Ethiopia.

But I believe with good management, governance and timely intervention, it will not be difficult to avoid any explosive situation from getting out of control. Efforts to curb dehumanization propaganda campaigns against vulnerable groups should also help.

Please note that I have expanded on the concept of SAARC Union and given it a global Islamic dimension to cover the Asian and African continents, in part because I believe that regional solutions are key to collective security, at the same time, I want to see that Muslims channelize their group spirit for bringing continents and a large mass of humanity together in a spirit of equitable partnership, which will be a shared achievement for this large part of humanity and perhaps make Muslims once again proud of their Islamic civilization, that makes some positive contribution for humanity.

The beautiful thing for India in this vision is that, in this large space, it remains the largest and most organized state, poised to become the geographic as well as the effective center for activities in manufacturing, industry, education, defense, technology, basic research, knowledge-base etc., while denying that space for other existing and emerging status quo powers or their poodles.

[somnath]

Somnath,

Could you explain what prompted the RBI to stop payment facilities for Indian energy companies dealing with Iran? So much so that we had to go to a German bank to facilitate those payments? Or do you have a 'hunch/belief', just like the governor, that making things difficult for Indian companies would actually be good for their character?

Abhishek-ji, its the result of the US turning its screws on Iran...One of them is to redice Iran's acecss to the global financial system..Iran has been trying to move away from invoicing its trade in USD to other ccies...Fail to understand how this is related to "US attempts at destroying Indian financial systems, bankrupting PSBs and facilitating take-overs by western robber banks"??

BTW, uber-nationalist pseudo-academics have aproclivity of using Google and Wiki a bit too much, hence come out with ever greater exmples of non-contextual terms, which gets passed on as jargons...But in this case, the facts are reasonably transparent..US is trying to block Iran off the international financial system, and we are therefore trying to see if there are alterantive routes available..To be honest, its only making lives hard for a bunch of bankers and central bankers..In this daya and age, there are far too many alterante avenues of financing if one were to really look for them...Which is precisely what India is trying to do..

[brihaspati]

Found some more examples of "inanities" and "absolute rubbish" term "indigenous capital" peddled by the following "pseudo-academics" which "are not even (usually useless) jargons," but "mumbo-jumbos that even" these "principals" "have no idea of before spouting..."

(1) Segmented Capital Markets and Patterns of Investment in Late Victorian Britain: Evidence from the Non-Ferrous Mining Industry : Roger Burt, The Economic History Review, New Series, Vol. 51, No. 4 (Nov., 1998), pp. 709-733 Blackwell Publishing on behalf of the Economic History Society

role of Welsh lead mining which, perversely, was opened for London speculation from a relatively early period. However, this might be explained in terms of the low level of indigenous capital and enterprise in several of the more remote districts and their early depen- dence on immigrant Cornish entrepreneurs.3

(2) State Autonomy and Agrarian Transformation in India Author(s): Amrita Basu Source: Comparative Politics, Vol. 22, No. 4 (Jul., 1990), pp. 483-500 Published by: Ph.D. Program in Political Science of the City University of New York

The Congress party's performance in the recent parliamentary elections will also shape its relationship to foreign and indigenous capital.[p 488]

(3) The Global Economic Crisis, Contagion, and Institutions: New Realities in Latin America and Asia Author(s): Riordan Roett and Russell Crandall Source: International Political Science Review / Revue internationale de science politique, Vol. 20, No. 3, States and Markets: Essays in Trespassing. Etat et marché: essais de franchissements (Jul., 1999), pp. 271-283. Sage

One major issue, which has proven itself to be the key and works against Latin America, is the continued reliance on foreign capital inflows due to the inability to generate more indigenous capital through higher rates of internal savings. [p. 279]

(4) The Industrial Revolution and British Imperialism, 1750-1850 : J. R. Ward Source: The Economic History Review, New Series, Vol. 47, No. 1 (Feb., 1994), pp. 44-65: Blackwell Publishing on behalf of the Economic History Society

Furthermore, for indigenous capital to come out on a substantial scale in support of company imperialism, confidence was needed that then enterprise had outside backing and good chances of success. [p. 51]

(5) Introduction: State and Development: Ben Fine and Colin Stoneman: Journal of Southern African Studies, Vol. 22, No. 1, Special Issue: State and Development (Mar., 1996), pp. 5-26 Taylor & Francis, Ltd.

Second, exactly the same applies to industry,or other sectors of the economy, and to transnational and indigenous capital. [p. 20]

(6) Governance and Growth in Sub-Saharan Africa: Benno J. Ndulu and Stephen A. O'Connell: The Journal of Economic Perspectives, Vol. 13, No. 3 (Summer, 1999), pp. 41-66: American Economic Association

For example, in a pattern consistent with Robinson's interpretation, African states have in some cases nurtured a more productive relationship with politically excluded domestic capital (like Kenyans of Asian descent) than with indigenous capital which might pose a greater political risk. [p.58]

(7) Chandra, Nirmal Kr. The retarded economies: Foreign domination and class relations in India and other emerging nations. Delhi; Oxford; New York and Toronto: Oxford University Press for the Sameeksha Trust, 1988. [discusses indigenous capital - he was attached to IIM Calcutta as far as I know]

(8) Fragments of Democracy: Reflections on Class and Politics in Nigeria Author(s): Sam C. Nolutshungu Source: Third World Quarterly, Vol. 12, No. 1 (Jan., 1990), pp. 86-115 : Taylor & Francis, Ltd.

Furthermore, labour has more often been pitted against multinational companies and the state (as employer, or as initiator of policies that threaten the standing of living or wages) than against indigenous capital. [p. 104]

(9) The Nation-State and Underdevelopment: Alan Carter Source: Third World Quarterly, Vol. 16, No. 4 (Dec., 1995), pp. 595-618: Taylor & Francis, Ltd.

That the chain is reforged when the metropolis is no longer in a political or economic crisis surely demonstrates that the Third World state is not an instrument of indigenous capital either,when re-linking leads to the transfer of capital from the satellite to the metropolis.In addition, states in LDCS have often deliberately encouraged the incursion of transnational capital to the detriment of indigenous capital, which is something an instrument of indigenous capital obviously would not do. [p 602]

(10) Ethnic Politics and Third World Development: Some Lessons from Sri Lanka's Experience Author(s): V. Nithiyanandam: Third World Quarterly, Vol. 21, No. 2 (Apr., 2000), pp. 283-311 : Taylor & Francis, Ltd.

Turning to indigenous capital and entrepreneurship,plantations became the overriding means of production through the creation of a demonstration effect, which impelled local elites with investible means to turn towards plantations. [p. 287]

(11) Grafting Stability onto Globalisation? Deconstructing the IMF's Recent Bid for Transparency Author(s): Susanne Soederberg: Third World Quarterly, Vol. 22, No. 5 (Oct., 2001), pp. 849-864 : Taylor & Francis, Ltd.

Poulantzas holds that states give the same support to US capital as they do to indigenous capital (eg state subsidisation tax concessions), thereby granting the assistance needed by foreign capital (eg American or Japanese) for its further extension outside its original social formation.As such, the host state acts as a staging post for transnational capitals.7 [p. 851]

(12)State formation and legitimation Crisis in Senegal : Moustafa Diouf: Review of African political economy, No. 54, Surviving Democracy, 1992
Taylor & Francis, Ltd.

Soon after independence, the Senegalese state assumed extended responsibilities for the maintenance of political stability and national unity. It introduced policy measures to accommodate foreign capital and created the conditions for indigenous capital accumulation through 'nationalisation' or 'indigenisation' policies, responding to nationalist pressures from the Senegalese petty bourgeoisie. [p. 117]

(13) the impact of foreign and indigenous capital in rebuilding Croatia's tourism industry. Foreign direct investment and regional development in East Central Europe and the former Soviet Union: A collection of essays in memory of Professor Francis "Frank" Carter Edited by David Turnock Economic Geography Series. Aldershot U.K.and Burlington, Ashgate,2005.

(14) Conditions, Commitments, and the Politics of Restructuring in Africa: M. Anne Pitcher Source: Comparative Politics, Vol. 36, No. 4 (Jul., 2004), pp. 379-398 : Ph.D. Program in Political Science of the City University of New York

Government officials and bodies actively seek the participation of foreign capital, but, as in Uganda, a major institutional objective is to promote national investors. Part of the reason for this preference derives from the historical weakness of indigenous capital in Mozambique [p.392]

(15) Korean Minifarm Agriculture: From Articulation to Disarticulation Author(s): Larry L. Burmeister : The Journal of Developing Areas, Vol. 26, No. 2 (Jan., 1992), pp. 145-168 : College of Business, Tennessee State University

From a sociological standpoint, unimodal agriculture is often associated with a more favorable class structure for indigenous capital accumulation and national industrialization policy. [p. 148]

There were 21 more refs in my first cursory look up. Realized the source of confusion in the pompous dismissal : probably never came across any school of academic political economy. Probably also familiar - if at all - with only one contextual use of "transfer of value" - that in the corporate sense, but unfamiliar with at least two other senses which are in use. Unfamiliarity with all three of course gives a curious insight as to training and specialization.

devesh ji, if you do some search on the basis of the keywords/expressions I gave, I think you will find substantial weapons in your arsenal, unless of course you have already those things in mind! If you need a paper you cannot find that turns up in your search - let me know, I could be of some help.

friends,
in general there are criticisms of the ideas I have referred to, as I had pointed in my very post where I quoted the expressions. But there is no harm in having a really "open mind" and consider the unequal-exchange theory, or value-transfers as concepts to be explored. They could provide another perception of the subcontinental dynamics and what we constantly seem to obsess about - our relationship with the "west".

[brihaspati]

I guess, calling others "pseudo-academics" and now dismissing the term "indigenous capital" as out of context when proved that unlike pretenders, acknowledged academics do use it - is the only way out for uber-pseudo-secularists who don't do their basic homework. Probably also the result of having been caught out trying to cheat in stats - pushing Hindu numbers in UAE up by calculating in proportion to latest population estimates while subtracting it from 1996 much lower total Indian expat number - so that IM numbers can be shown to be much much lower than Hindus! Even has no "academic" shame in endorsing an interpretation that Indian expat numbers remained constant for 10 year and continues to do so even "now"!