West Asia News and Discussions

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 29 May 2011 21:10

brihaspati wrote:
You need to change the posting style. Here you need to sell India to them and not sell KSA to Indians. Then lot of what you are saying will make sense to many

How?
I am curious to know exactly what and which "India" is being packaged to be sold to the Gulf?

(6) India as being ruled by a regime which will actively protect Islamism and Islamic proselytization and therefore a theological-expansion-investment destination
[the tie up of Wahabis and the monarchies is so strong that the theologians always seem to be able to extract allowances to fund and proselytize as part of any economic largesse deal with foreign nations].

Can we have the financial investments minus the theologians and their ideological and institutional tentacles? Or we will be asked by the "relations building" exercise by our over-zealous "strategic" circles to shut up because otherwise the "investments" will be jeopardized?

It is not. They are not promoting India in Arab land. That is what I was trying to point out in his post.

KrishG · Post by **KrishG** » 29 May 2011 21:17

anmol wrote:Is this in our interest ? Aren't we setting precedent, which gives credence to certain nations/peoples support for Kashmiri Separatist's demands ?

The two-state solution is in itself accepted by both parties (Israel and Palestine) as the only way forward in the conflict. In such a situation what is the issue with India supporting that. AFAIK India hasn't officially endorsed the Palestinian demand of the 1968 borders or has it opposed it. The MoEA has a very fine line to walk on. It believes that it's position on the conflict should not irk either the Arabs or the Israelis. And it's doing exactly that by endorsing the two-state solution but not going into the specifics.

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 29 May 2011 22:00

anmol wrote: Is this in our interest ? Aren't we setting precedent, which gives credence to certain nations/peoples support for Kashmiri Separatist's demands ?

Stating position on independent "Palestine" on the "two-state" base is consistent with our long support from Nehruvian roots about this. Apparently, for all other issues India is supposed to not stick to the past in policy, or to have "ideological considerations", but flexibly change with the current passing wave - but only here, no realpolitik - but consistent ideological "support" for right to "self determination of oppressed people" is applicable.

Openly welcoming the "Hamas Fatha" reconciliation is actually the more galling and perhaps deliberately chosen to be so. Any according of legitimacy to the "Hamas" [are they clear of various "terrorist organization" blacklists already?] from GOI is directly in opposition to the official Israeli position.

But more importantly GOI currently seems to be blissfully unaware of the problems of a Pakistan like geographically separated two-territory state which straddles Israeli territory on two sides which provides greater territorial penetration into Israel from contiguous Islamic countries. At a geostrategic level the Islamists will simply have expanded their military bases deep into Israeli territory. GOI needs to ignore of course the openly declared and stated aims of the Hamas leaders and clerics that their ultimate aim is the complete destruction of Israel.

Maybe, becoming part of the GCC led Sunni coalition makes it necessary to make such noises on GOI part to prove its loyalty to the Islamist cause. Eventually it will strengthen also similar moves for J&K. But then again maybe that is also on the cards? You need peace to do business - and that peace must be bought at any price, and then the price can be compensated for by "trade" and "capital flows"!

shyamd · Post by **shyamd** » 29 May 2011 22:53

brihaspati wrote:None of your comments address the significance of the necessity of the dinner party with As Sudais

Eh? We were discussing chairs in Indian uni's and then you jump to this? LOL!

Its funny that you chose to respond to a general statement "People chose to focus on KSa to India due to whatever insecurities that they have and people fail to see the otherside as you have quite rightly suggested." Which wasn't even directed to you particularly.

You have not clarified - but simply asked us to "wait" and "see".

Lol! It clearly stated: address the effects of Omani heritage in India, and Indian monuments discovered in Oman.

Am I running the research that you ask me to clarify whats going to come into it.

Is the fact that India has remained largely non-Muslim and has a much longer, richer and larger pre-Islamic and non-Muslim component - going to be truthfully allowed to be represented in the Gulf educational and cultural narrative?

Why don't you email the chap who is running this and ask him these questions? Post any response here too. Lets make this into something meaningful.

Also please post some plans from the GOI and strategic circles as to concrete steps taken to check Gulf flow of funds and theologians - except pious propaganda that increase of trade will at some point somehow make the Saudis feel guilty about their theological and Jihadi connections.

Check with RBI. They have a list of banned institutions I believe. They also have SoP for charities and investigations and so on. GoI refused KSA offer to renovate Jama masjid in delhi, the primary reason was this concern.

Historical precedence shows that as far as the Arabs are concerned, increasing volumes of trade did not prevent eventual religious "conquests" - and in fact went on hand in hand. Exactly as now, ruling regimes then sucked up to Arab sourced proselytizers ostensibly on the "trade relations" logic. Arab Muslim buisnessmen appear to have always made it a point to use "trade" to sponsor and support Islamic institutions on Indian soil. Those were almost always in regions around which later Islamic power centres grew up.

Okay. Who's backing the EJs?

devesh · Post by **devesh** » 29 May 2011 23:05

shyamd ji,

the very first post by b'ji in opposition or in suspicion of this development, was made against the move, not against you. the point we're trying to make is that, we shouldn't thump our chests too much, b/c at the end of the day, it might do more to harm India's sense of history than help us. to help your arguments, why don't you research if GoI is doing anything to rectify this issue? why do you insist on acting like a PR lobbyist for Arab countries and dismiss India's concerns as paranoia??? isn't this the same disdainful attitude of pseudoseculars wrt to "Hinduism" and "Bharat." if it is your wish to point out the benefits of this agreement, then do point out the benefits and not just dismiss any misgivings on our part as paranoia.....

RamaY · Post by **RamaY** » 29 May 2011 23:17

ShyamDji,

Adding to what Devesh said above, we should look at the net civilizational costs from such puppy zhuppy deals.

There is nothing wrong in developing economic relations with Arabs/Jews/Christians/Martians etc. The scary part for us "paranoid" group is that the interlinking of economic & military relationship with theological concessions.

The presence of sizable muslim population in India makes it difficult for india to demand a reciprocal accommodation from KSA. So it would be wise for GoI to leave that topic altogether in their discussions and instead focus on what is required for it's national interests.

Even on the economic relationship front, the remittances should not be seen as pseudo economic aid from KSA (your posts put too much emphasis on that). GCC has whatever india immigrant presence they have on the quality basis, and not as a favor to India. So in pure economic terms GCC must be getting at least 30% RoI on Indian remittences so it should not be taken as a favor from indian perspective. This is same as USA giving an Indian H1B visa; it is not meant to help india but to help USA to get quality work force.

Another thing is, we are yet to see any significant GCC investment in Indian infra projects. Kindly provide references if you know.

devesh · Post by **devesh** » 29 May 2011 23:33

Another thing is, we are yet to see any significant GCC investment in Indian infra projects. Kindly provide references if you know.

exactly.....so, the argument is that we need to chasing some great mirage of investment in the future by giving up our civilizational inheritance now. give up now, and wait for our investments in some future era!!! that is the message from KSA.

shyamd · Post by **shyamd** » 29 May 2011 23:36

devesh wrote:shyamd ji,

the very first post by b'ji in opposition or in suspicion of this development, was made against the move, not against you. the point we're trying to make is that, we shouldn't thump our chests too much, b/c at the end of the day, it might do more to harm India's sense of history than help us. to help your arguments, why don't you research if GoI is doing anything to rectify this issue? why do you insist on acting like a PR lobbyist for Arab countries and dismiss India's concerns as paranoia??? isn't this the same disdainful attitude of pseudoseculars wrt to "Hinduism" and "Bharat." if it is your wish to point out the benefits of this agreement, then do point out the benefits and not just dismiss any misgivings on our part as paranoia.....

I used the word paranoia because the specifics of that agreement signed were sciences and engineering etc and DARAH had a program (with most countreis incl Japan about research on other countries opinions on the arabian peninsula. The DARAH focuses specifically on relations after King Abdulaziz took the throne. Then somehow sciences/egnineering got linked into relgious exchange.

Did you know that IMs signed a treaty with King Abdulaziz to make Makkah and Madina into an independent state separate from the Saudi state. Some IMs have asked for this treaty to be enacted post Sudais visit - which I also posted on this forum btw. So I think the accusation of "acting like a PR lobbyist for arab countries" is a bit unfair and those who have had conversations with me via email can vouch for that.

Indian concerns are - funding for takfiri mosques. Yes, its been a concern for a while and I have stated many a time the reason why India rejected the offer to renovate jama masjid in delhi was for this reason. Have we raised it with the govt? Yes. KSA has expanded our cooperation on counter terorr, extradition treaties, arrested PFI suspects etc etc. They have also tightened up the rules on funding terror. To achieve something we can't expect it to happen overnight, it takes time. So I am not dismissing concerns as paranoia, but I am dismissing the random links of other deals to this issue. Then previously there were posts (silly posts) about how India is getting nothing out of the various deals that we have signed with KSA. So, I addressed those posts - some of it is just pure paranoia (one poster actually admitted it to a certain extent - dont want to name and shame but you can go back and check).

RamaY · Post by **RamaY** » 29 May 2011 23:51

ShyamDji,

You are getting good at this

You made my sarcasm an admission. That is all fine.

If you don't mine, could you please provide a list of projects that are to be funded by GCC investments. I am searching the world for that list but am not successful so far.

We need to see if these investments are worth
- India's silence w.r.t GCC-Paki strategic deals
- india's silence/invitation for sudai type visits.
- india's investments in GCC area

Please note that I am putting aside gelf-remittences and oil-deals because they are pure economic deals which existed before this love fest.

devesh · Post by **devesh** » 29 May 2011 23:58

^^^
and also if it's worth India allowing Wahhabi networks to flourish in and around India???

shyamd · Post by **shyamd** » 30 May 2011 00:10

RamaY wrote:ShyamDji,

Adding to what Devesh said above, we should look at the net civilizational costs from such puppy zhuppy deals.

Sure. Indeed there is still a war that needs to be fought wrt the marxist/british history of India.

There is nothing wrong in developing economic relations with Arabs/Jews/Christians/Martians etc. The scary part for us "paranoid" group is that the interlinking of economic & military relationship with theological concessions.

Agreed. We are increasing higher education - sciences engineering education. This is one aspect. Another aspect is cultural - which I think is where the primary concern is. The cooperation agreement was signed 2 years ago. Lets see what the Indian embassy has showcased if they have. I knwo in other GCC states that are less stricter, there are regular indian festivals being celebrated, cultural shows (with a lot of local attendance).

The presence of sizable muslim population in India makes it difficult for india to demand a reciprocal accommodation from KSA. So it would be wise for GoI to leave that topic altogether in their discussions and instead focus on what is required for it's national interests.

Its difficult. But, when you are on good terms with them, you can make a start. Vatican has taken so long to negotiate for a church to be opened in KSA. We can make a start now by developing good relations and eventually working towards opening a temple in KSA. Temples are present in several other GCC states (some for over 400 years).

Even on the economic relationship front, the remittances should not be seen as pseudo economic aid from KSA (your posts put too much emphasis on that).

Trade is the core of our relationship as well as energy security.

GCC has whatever india immigrant presence they have on the quality basis, and not as a favor to India. So in pure economic terms GCC must be getting at least 30% RoI on Indian remittences so it should not be taken as a favor from indian perspective. This is same as USA giving an Indian H1B visa; it is not meant to help india but to help USA to get quality work force.

Yes its mutual but it has benefitted india in the past and it is continuing to benefit india in the future.

Another thing is, we are yet to see any significant GCC investment in Indian infra projects. Kindly provide references if you know.

Oman to invest $ 3 billion in fertiliser sector in India
Oman - $1.5 billion joint investment fund is well publicised. Its a model now being taken to other countries in the GCC too. Oman I don't need to say further as they are buying our INSAS and so on and we have loads of stuff going on with them.
Qatar to invest $5 billion in India
But in addition to this Qatari's opened an office in Delhi just for investments.

UAE - India wanted them to get involved in the Delhi, Mumbai infra corridor. Not sure how successful that was. But suffice to say India is UAEs largest trading partner.

Kuwait - announced plans earlier in the year to invest in education and healthcare in India and have some sort of mandate to invest minimum $1b in indian stocks. But our relations aren't well developed with Kuwait and have only just started to have an uptick due to the efforts of the indian ambassador (there was a tribute to him in the national papers actually).

KSA - initial framework was signed for a Joint Initial Fund worth $750m. KSA and Oman are investing in our energy security (Storage specifically - strategic security in accordance with deals signed in 2006 and Delhi declaration). Lots of other things going on. We only signed tax avoidance treaties and economic treaties last year, so we will see more big deals going forward. We are still at the begining of relations here, Saudi business councils visit more regularly now. Go through this thread on the specifics of the KSA deals.

India - GCC FTA is almost finalised, talks still going on. There is plenty more, just need to watch this thread.

RamaY · Post by **RamaY** » 30 May 2011 00:12

Thank you ShyamDji.

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 30 May 2011 00:57

shyamd wrote:
Did you know that IMs signed a treaty with King Abdulaziz to make Makkah and Madina into an independent state separate from the Saudi state. Some IMs have asked for this treaty to be enacted post Sudais visit - which I also posted on this forum btw. So I think the accusation of "acting like a PR lobbyist for arab countries" is a bit unfair and those who have had conversations with me via email can vouch for that.

This is long back before WWI period.
The reason for asking for explanation is that there is a lobby inside India trying to lobby for KSA/GCC. Some MPs have warned that they are trying to get inside and even ask for Islamic banking. I know this group
India cannot have arabic system including banking/economic/cultural/theology etc.

shyamd · Post by **shyamd** » 30 May 2011 01:43

^^ Yes 1920s. Posted it a few pages back.

Who are the MPs (any names we can keep an eye out for) and is there any sort of evidence that they are lobbying for KSA/GCC or are they just close with them?

Also have there been warnings sounded on the pro US lobby who were batting for US a/c in the MRCA deal?

Islamic banking - aren't there islamic banks in the west and MNCs like HSBC offer this service. Whats so big about this? Thanks

Mukesh.Kumar · Post by **Mukesh.Kumar** » 30 May 2011 02:17

Quick quip. If anyone cares to research, Islamic banking has been in India since a long time. In fact some of the basic research and work on Islamic banking was done at AMU. There is voluminous work though it has tapered off slightly post 2001.

And guys Islamic finance isn't as bad as it is sometimes made out to be. The basis of the joint stock company comes from the mudabala system in Islamic finance.

@ Shaymd- please check mail. Interesting rumour. Wnated to run it by you. Let me know if you hear anything. Pasvad- beedi

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 30 May 2011 04:20

shyamd ji,
maybe time to get parsimonious with the lol's? It was you who started off on the "Portuguese/French/Brit/Russian Orthodox" bit and connected them all to trade relations. That was not about the "chair" either. Since you brought up the "religious" connection, it was only natural to ask the question as to why our rashtryia elected top functionaries needed to entertain As Sudais to "help" "financial flows" when they do not need to do so for all the other countries you mentioned!

As Sudais comes up as a serious issue because of his past and recent past too. I think we have had posts about his comments based on hardcore religious "hate speech", continuing only up to a few years ago. After a bit of international focus on the issue the monarchy apparently stepped in and since then he has been represented as a 180 degree turnaround into an apostle of tolerance. If it is true it would be a remarkable change of heart, rarely convincing in the world of theology emanating from ME.

The issue was raised by me to draw attention to the fact that all this campaign about increasing "investment" from the Sunni bloc in ME appears to coincide with top elected representative of the Indian state apparently quite serious in hosting such a theologian. It is natural to think then that the current regime is willing to look the other way about potentially dangerous theological initiatives and presence/inroads into India from the Arabian peninsula - on the excuse or dazzle of promised "financial flows" into the economy.

I was one of the first ones over the last few pages to point towards KSA while you were trying to fit the GCC into the face of Oman only - so you obviously included me in your dig at personal "insecurities" even if you pass it off as "general" comment. "Paranoid" and personal "insecurities" as comments are irrelevant. Don't know what you wanted to achieve with such tags.

I remember the first time you tried to curry the Islamist position on denial of "Jewish homeland" and denial of Islamic atrocities on the Jews in the past and you soon went into similar personal commentary. Ultimately I think I showed you the "other side" of that story too.

As has been pointed out that you are a messenger, and I have tried to respond to your "message". Don't think that the brief of the messenger includes ridiculing those who differ on the message as "paranoid" or having personal "insecurities". Moreover, you are making it appear as if this current phase of leaning over to the Saudi/GCC/Sunni side is unanimously supported even in the corridors of power. I disagree. There is quite strong disapproval from factions. Let's rest it at that.

krisna · Post by **krisna** » 30 May 2011 04:39

India forges new bonding with Libya

During Prime Minister Manmohan Singh’s African safari, India forged a new bonding with war-torn Libya — much of it away from the limelight — while exploring new investment opportunities and strengthening ties with other African nations.

So overwhelmed was Libyan Foreign Minister Abdal al Latti al Obedi, that he reportedly told External Affairs Minister S M Krishna, “Our brothers (friendly Arab and African countries) didn’t help as much as you did for us!”
New Delhi officially endorsed the African Union’s (AU’s) stand of calling for an immediate ceasefire and a political solution through peaceful means and dialogue for peace in Libya, a country that has annual bilateral trade of $844.62 million with India.

Top official sources told Business Standard that New Delhi had to intervene to even secure hotel bookings for the Libyan delegation in Addis Ababa, the seat of AU. “Initially many hotels were scared to host the Libyan leaders. We finally managed to get them rooms in Hilton Hotel,” said an official.

Facing uncertainty, the Libyans initially were hesitant to send a minister-led delegation to Addis Ababa for the AU-India summit. But New Delhi, through its diplomatic channels, convinced Tripoli to send a high-level delegation and assured it of diplomatic support.

During the meeting, Krishna expressed “regret” over the NATO airstrikes and supported the call for an immediate ceasefire in Libya. He also urged for stopping violence and attacks on civilians, an Indian official said later. After the India-AU Summit, Singh said, “We have discussed the Libya situation at length at the summit, and we fully support the AU position.”
Indian companies, especially in sectors like hydrocarbon, power, construction and information technology have several ongoing projects in Libya.
“We are also concerned about the 18,000 people of Indian origin who were working there,” said another official.
While India’s oil import from Libya is just one million tonnes out of the annual import of 160 million tonnes, many Indian workers are engaged in Libya in construction and petroleum sector jobs.

walking a tight rope.

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 30 May 2011 10:48

shyamd wrote:
Sanku wrote: Clearly the follow on implications are being missed. That is of tapping into the talent of scientific manpower in Indian establishment.
LOL! Can I ask you, which country do you live in and do you work for any of the IT companies?

Can you please tell me how that attempt to make a personal commentary on me (however misplaced) has any bearing on this discussion? Am I to assume that because you take exception to my views on GoI policy of allowing the Saudi theological machinary a free run in India and supplying them with hard technical knowledge in the bargain, you will make attempt to make personal jibes?

If we are all aware of the nature of relations, then tell us whats wrong with its promotion?

We == people on BRF by and large, not India as a whole.

Also because we understand Salafist (say for example) its not that we will give them a free run shall we? I personally view the above news as a lose-lose deal for India.

D Roy · Post by **D Roy** » 30 May 2011 12:25

Gentlemen,

its like this. Money flows in from KSA to India for all kinds of stuff except what is best suited to our burgeoning economy. But at the end of the day it's a pittance used more for non-productive activities than anything else.

What is being done now is setting up mechanisms whereby much much more money is channelized to the organized sector - transport and petro infrastructure etc.

Thus KSA's disruptive stake is being transformed into a serious productive one.

It's like this - there's country A - I am not too fond of it - I like A's neighbour B better- but at the same time I don't want complete enmity with A either. So I send in some money, keep some minions in A and do some trade.

Now, times have changed - A's become big and powerful - B's imploding - C which used to be my guarantor is playing its own game - and A can deeply influence my region.

So its time to turn to A in a major way and upgrade relations and begin a productive relationship that allows me to business with A based on our comparative advantages ( Investment and oil for me) , ( quickly deployable tech and security for A).

Desh is also telling KSA to do more "directly" for the Mango Abdul. Through official channels this time.

abhischekcc · Post by **abhischekcc** » 30 May 2011 12:35

Apparently, GOI has the same views on Libya as me.

RajeshA · Post by **RajeshA** » 30 May 2011 12:49

At a point in time when Egypt too is looking at reorientation of its foreign policy, India should take the initiative and bind Egypt more tightly to India.

shyamd · Post by **shyamd** » 30 May 2011 14:04

Sanku wrote: Can you please tell me how that attempt to make a personal commentary on me (however misplaced) has any bearing on this discussion? Am I to assume that because you take exception to my views on GoI policy of allowing the Saudi theological machinary a free run in India and supplying them with hard technical knowledge in the bargain, you will make attempt to make personal jibes?

Since you don't get it, let me explain it to you. You said: "That is of tapping into the talent of scientific manpower in Indian establishment."

Really? So, we must stop all scholarships to western countries as they may tap into a scientific manpower. We must stop our doctors from going to the west for training as they are tapping our medical talent. Promotion of research is something that goes on with most countries that we have a relationship with.

Now after your 2nd reply you have changed this to giving "theological machinery a free run in exchange for hard tech knowledge".
Free run - well it did kick up a storm on his visit. Google for it and you'll see what I mean.

The focus of his speech according to this article:
Honorable imam Haram focused on indo-Saudi relations

Posted by RINA on March 26, 2011 in News · 0 Comment
Deobandh: During his visit to the Darul Uloom Deobandh the Honorable Imam Haram mentioned old cordial relations of India and Saudi Arabia. The intellectuals and scholars of Arab have remained in contact with the Darul Uloo. A few days before a scholar Sheikh Awama had been here and we hope these visits will furhter strenghthen our relations. He was pleased to find that Muslims in India have been living a peaceful life with honesty towards their country. He addressed thousands of people in Masjid rasheed during Friday prayers. He made special prayers for both the countries particularly for the King of Saudi Arabia. He also mentioned that the Holy Prophet of Islam descended as a blessing for the whole universe. His teachings were that all muslims and Non- Muslims should live together with love as love is part and parcel of faith. Muslims are good citizens because they truly follow their religion. He admired the services of Darul Uloom Deobandh. He will not only remember this visit but will also convey his observations to the successors.

So I guess, can we analyse the reaction of his visit and the purpose of his visit.

I am not defending Sudais visit - he was here on a private visit on the invite of a deobandi organisation.

We == people on BRF by and large, not India as a whole.

Also because we understand Salafist (say for example) its not that we will give them a free run shall we? I personally view the above news as a lose-lose deal for India.

You are comparing one aspect of the deal to the religious side of the deal. I think what is more fruitful to analyse is the number of visits of KSA official religious leaders visit to India for lectures etc and compare it to before we forged a strategic partnership. Its a good area to analyse. Lets get something fruitful out of this.

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 30 May 2011 14:37

shyamd wrote: Really? So, we must stop all scholarships to western countries as they may tap into a scientific manpower.

Why? Is USA of Saudi? Funny pointless and meaningless extrapolation, having no rhyme or reason and unnecessary in the context.

Having said that, yes, I believe that there needs to be mechanism to better use our manpower productively inside India, through various means. Yes I also say that foreign money in Indian education is quite tricky.

Posted by RINA on March 26, 2011 in News · 0 Comment
Deobandh: During his visit to the Darul Uloom Deobandh the Honorable Imam Haram mentioned old cordial relations of India and Saudi Arabia. The intellectuals and scholars of Arab have remained in contact with the Darul Uloo.

I see there is a fundamental disconnect here. What you think as good I think as bad. Its the question of value system.

I personally see external powers giving certificates to Indians about religiousity and culture as BAD. Clearly you do not share the feeling.

You are comparing one aspect of the deal to the religious side of the deal.

That was only one example, one counter example is sufficient to break a logic. I have provided that.

Bottom line, WE DO NOT NEED SAUDI ARABIA promoting its ideology in India. Let Indians find their own moorings.

I dont think you get it.

Lets get something fruitful out of this.

Oh yeah we are getting a fruit out of this for sure.

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 30 May 2011 14:39

shyamd wrote: I am not defending Sudais visit - he was here on a private visit on the invite of a deobandi organisation.

Really and just happened to walk into New Delhi govt circles on private visit.

Fascinating.

shyamd · Post by **shyamd** » 30 May 2011 14:49

Since you have chosen to twist what I have said and quite frankly have lied. I am compelled to respond.

brihaspati wrote:shyamd ji,
maybe time to get parsimonious with the lol's? It was you who started off on the "Portuguese/French/Brit/Russian Orthodox" bit and connected them all to trade relations.

That was not about the "chair" either. Since you brought up the "religious" connection

It was I who brought up the religous connection? Nice try...

Your first comment stated:

For Arabia and the gulf region, can there be any "Indian" "monuments" before advent of Islam in the period of "Jahillya"? For that matter is there any history of Arabia for KSA before the advent of Islam? Isnt that all a period of darkness? Moreover "archeological" elements have reportedly been destroyed to prevent "iconification" and "idolatry" - reportedly even about items hailing from the founding fathers? [a primary source of criticism of "Ottoman" displays!].

And you say I bought up the religious angle? You can read the rest of your post to see the religious angle to it. So not only are you wrong but you have resulted to lieing.

As Sudais comes up as a serious issue because of his past and recent past too. I think we have had posts about his comments based on hardcore religious "hate speech", continuing only up to a few years ago. After a bit of international focus on the issue the monarchy apparently stepped in and since then he has been represented as a 180 degree turnaround into an apostle of tolerance. If it is true it would be a remarkable change of heart, rarely convincing in the world of theology emanating from ME.

He was here on a private visit and invite by the Deobandi's. PM chose to meet him in a private capacity as he was at a private dinner with an official(a speaker of a house or some official). If you have a problem with that, then I guess MMS has an email, where you can ask him these questions.

Lets leave it at that.

shyamd · Post by **shyamd** » 30 May 2011 15:05

Sanku wrote:
shyamd wrote: Really? So, we must stop all scholarships to western countries as they may tap into a scientific manpower.
Why? Is USA of Saudi? Funny pointless and meaningless extrapolation, having no rhyme or reason and unnecessary in the context.

Having said that, yes, I believe that there needs to be mechanism to better use our manpower productively inside India, through various means. Yes I also say that foreign money in Indian education is quite tricky.

Extrapolation? Its exactly the same, we have similar deals with the west in case you didn't get it. We appear to be getting something fruitful of how isolated you want India to be similar to the commies who want trade barriers up and so on.

Agreed with using our manpower productively inside India - I guess GoI is trying to do that by trying to develop the economy and creating the opportunities. Otherwise, people will migrate as people have done in the past to Gelf or US etc.

I see there is a fundamental disconnect here. What you think as good I think as bad. Its the question of value system.

I agree that there should be no connection between the religious establishment of KSA and the IM establishments.

However, I was disputing people linking other agreements which aren't really religious in nature and linking it to religion unnecessarily.

That was only one example, one counter example is sufficient to break a logic. I have provided that.

Okay. lets apply the same logic - US did not give up Headley until towards the last moment when he planned an attack on their ally Denmark. So are you saying that we should cut our relations with the US? The US continues to spend on arming our neighbour, sanctioned us after we took a decision in our national interest to test nuclear weapons. They have also done other countless things - one of which is an accusation that they are backing certain anti establishment groups. Why haven't we given up relations with Washington?

Bottom line, WE DO NOT NEED SAUDI ARABIA promoting its ideology in India. Let Indians find their own moorings.

I agree.

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 30 May 2011 15:26

shyamd wrote: Extrapolation? Its exactly the same, we have similar deals with the west in case you didn't get it.

NO Saudi == West is the extrapolation here.

Saudi != West.

However, I was disputing people linking other agreements which aren't really religious in nature and linking it to religion unnecessarily.

Well if three things happen together, it would be very difficult to convince anyone that there is no linkage. In this case I think the linkages are obvious.

Okay. lets apply the same logic - US did not give up Headley until towards the last moment when he planned an attack on their ally Denmark. So are you saying that we should cut our relations with the US? The US continues to spend on arming our neighbour, sanctioned us after we took a decision in our national interest to test nuclear weapons. They have also done other countless things - one of which is an accusation that they are backing certain anti establishment groups. Why haven't we given up relations with Washington?

First off, I am not advocating cutting of relations with either Saudi or US. It is not "either have no relations or let their theologians run a muck" choice.

Secondly yes, I have long supported calibrating our relations with US to account for the factors you have mentioned. Including their influence in India. You can check out for yourself in the related discussion. I for example will be equally horrified at MMS dining with Pastor Benny. However since Xians are not sufficient enough to form a vote bank to influence the Dilli ki gaddi. That is not a very high priority for MMS.

They are 2 of the 3 1/2 friends and they need be handled differently.

I have been a trenchant critic of MMS for the same reasons.

However still that does not mean USA == Saudi. Also this is not US thread, or US related discussion. Unless you say its US forcing us to open door to Saudi religious influence.

RajeshA · Post by **RajeshA** » 30 May 2011 15:41

Basically the discussion comes down to India needing a policy for Saudi Arabia, where we leverage what we give them be it security, manpower, technology, political backing, cultural exchanges, etc in exchange for

India being able to push back takfiri and Islamist influence in the Indian Subcontinent, and not just India.
Gulf investments in our infrastructure and military strength.

Now Saudis are not going to hand over their influence over Subcontinental Muslims to India, unless they are left with no choice. That is the bargain we have to make, and to mould the geopolitical environment in the region accordingly, so that they are forced to make that decision.

India needs to be able to reclaim Subcontinental Muslims' mind space, and any strategy which contributes to it is good.

shyamd · Post by **shyamd** » 30 May 2011 15:47

Sanku wrote: Well if three things happen together, it would be very difficult to convince anyone that there is no linkage. In this case I think the linkages are obvious.

Which is why I said lets analyse what was the purpose of Sudais's visit, has there been more visits compared to prior strategic deals were signed.

First off, I am not advocating cutting of relations with either Saudi or US. It is not "either have no relations or let their theologians run a muck" choice.

Exactly. Thats what I am trying to say too. I have said we need to control the religious side from the beginning.

Secondly yes, I have long supported calibrating our relations with US to account for the factors you have mentioned. Including their influence in India. You can check out for yourself in the related discussion. I for example will be equally horrified at MMS dining with Pastor Benny. However since Xians are not sufficient enough to form a vote bank to influence the Dilli ki gaddi. That is not a very high priority for MMS.

We can't achieve what you would like without first creating opportunities at home - it takes time to do that and we need to develop the economy - the GCC deal can help us achieve it. Today there are still people trying to travel abroad for work because to them the right opportunities do not exist in India.

So what I am saying is the with the KSA, GoI should have strong economic, defence, energy, security and counter terror relations and should limit the influence of KSA religious establishment.

As for vote bank politics - this is democracy for you. People could easily ask why NDA chose to provide Hajj subsidies and so on too.

However still that does not mean USA == Saudi. Also this is not US thread, or US related discussion. Unless you say its US forcing us to open door to Saudi religious influence.

KSA religious influence is a danger, as is US support to weaken India (perhaps even try to split it internally and hijack our foreign policy). The US's move to control decision makers in the MRCA decision is also an issue - thankfully the system worked again. So likewise, GoI remains wary of KSA religious funds to relgiious schools in India (we showed that by refusing King Abdullah's offer to renovate Jama Masjid).

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 30 May 2011 16:26

shyamd ji,
I cannot hope to beat you in the twisting and lying game. My comment about "bringing in religion" was in the context of that passage discussing your strange railing about "breaking off trade" relations with Brits/Portuguese/French/Russians because of their respective actions in the past or in the near past against "Indic" religions. I had to therefore point out the stark difference between the apparently necessary behaviour of the Indian state in appeasing/entertaining religious functionaries as a "natural" phenomenon/requirement for "investments". I pointed out that we still do not seem to need to do so for the countries you mock while we have done it for KSA.

The initial discussion that I raised - was about the prevalent religious attitudes in KSA ruling and theological circles which determines how "history" is to be represented in texts and educational material, and the well known fact of archeological elements being destroyed deliberately to prevent iconification. This "discussion" of "religion" as having effect on archeology/historical research on the peninsulas is very much part of academics - and was firmly in the context of "chair" in cultural subjects.

You appear to be more interested in trying to paint and tar me rather than respond to issues. I still have not responded in kind to your personal commentary. Do you suppose it is making your case for GCC-leaning on the excuse of "investments" and hopefully-in-the-future-greater-influence-to-control-Islmists stronger?

Why don't you respond to my detailed pointing out that your example countries seem to be managing to do business with us without GOI or elected functionaries entertaining their clerics?

So what I am saying is the with the KSA, GoI should have strong economic, defence, energy, security and counter terror relations and should limit the influence of KSA religious establishment.

That is the crucial question - if you are claiming that we are the beneficiaries - we hope to gain from inflow of capital, how do you rule out being forced to accept giving concessions to the religious establishment at the same time - especially given the extremely close symbiotic relationship that the ruling regime has with the clerical establishment? What you are claiming otherwise goes against all pragamtics of such bargaining between "regimes"! If you say - no religious ingress - but security umbrella for GCC, that is military protection of the rulers - as the price, does not that identify you as a protector of regimes of a particular sect and autocracy, and automatically gets you involved in religious or sectarian conflicts of the ME? So religion comes into it anyway!

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 30 May 2011 16:32

Why bring in USA every time KSA comes up? If it is so important to show up USA as the major threat to India, then perhaps shyamd ji can answer clearly the following question : does he think that the USA is the greater threat to India compared to KSA, and that if it comes to a choice between the two - India should go with KSA rather than USA? Does he really think that the apparent tiff and break between the two is final and that in a sense they can really be separated as "threats" where India is concerned?

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 30 May 2011 16:51

shyamd wrote: Which is why I said lets analyse what was the purpose of Sudais's visit, has there been more visits compared to prior strategic deals were signed.

Fine let us by all means analyze, however please dont expect us to come to same conclusion after analysis like you have.

Exactly. Thats what I am trying to say too. I have said we need to control the religious side from the beginning.

Forgive me I do not think bringing in outside theologians is going to help us control the religious issues at home. We are opening up our country to further baleful influences, and eroding domestic control on domestic affairs.

We can't achieve what you would like without first creating opportunities at home - it takes time to do that and we need to develop the economy - the GCC deal can help us achieve it.

I am sorry, I don't understand how selling of family silver (and I am being charitable) is a good way of raising capital for effort. Are we this broke as to plumb to depths of asking for alms to develop?

Are we sure that this deal with the devil is worth the growth? Just exactly what will grow Will there be any India left at the end of that growth?

This "money at any cost", mindset is deeply destructive.

Today there are still people trying to travel abroad for work because to them the right opportunities do not exist in India.

I want Indians to keep doing that, even if choices exist, and carry the culture, the value system and beliefs outside. Not accept others interference in our internal matters.

So what I am saying is the with the KSA, GoI should have strong economic, defence, energy, security and counter terror relations and should limit the influence of KSA religious establishment.

But we dont see that. What we see is growing "cultural" relationship mostly on their terms, with us getting ZERO in terms of others. Well maybe not zero, but mostly pittance, hardly worth the while. (And yes I know we buy oil, lets not say that we should prostate ourselves because the Saudi's are so kind as to sell us oil)

As for vote bank politics - this is democracy for you. People could easily ask why NDA chose to provide Hajj subsidies and so on too.

I am sorry, you really don't expect to say, oh vote bank politics is a natural manifestation of politics, that is almost like MMS saying corruption and cash for votes is okay because they won the elections.

In fact the above behavior in India is precisely the issue, we are willing to "overlook" all manner of ills and issues in the name of "democracy" and "trade" when it is not "democracy and trade" but "hijack and murder of democracy" and "mercentalism and sell out" but dressed as trade etc, by controlling factions of GoI.

KSA religious influence is a danger -- GoI remains wary of KSA religious funds to relgiious schools in India (we showed that by refusing King Abdullah's offer to renovate Jama Masjid).

Despite a few sections of our system still working, I do not think that GoI as a whole has done a good job with this, or with handling US relations (MRCA notwithstanding) -- and past good work is immaterial, they will be offset by dangerous actions as above.

shyamd · Post by **shyamd** » 30 May 2011 17:24

brihaspati wrote:shyamd ji,
I cannot hope to beat you in the twisting and lying game. My comment about "bringing in religion" was in the context of that passage discussing your strange railing about "breaking off trade" relations with Brits/Portuguese/French/Russians because of their respective actions in the past or in the near past against "Indic" religions.

Nice try... Well I already posted who spoke first regarding the whole religious comments. Go back and check who mentioned Sudais first too.

You appear to be more interested in trying to paint and tar me rather than respond to issues. I still have not responded in kind to your personal commentary. Do you suppose it is making your case for GCC-leaning on the excuse of "investments" and hopefully-in-the-future-greater-influence-to-control-Islmists stronger?

Of course I am more interested in tarring you. You can see that in my first reply to your comments.

Why don't you respond to my detailed pointing out that your example countries seem to be managing to do business with us without GOI or elected functionaries entertaining their clerics?

Archbishop of canterbury has met with the PM. Just last year infact.
http://pib.nic.in/release/phsmall.asp?phid=31024 for a photo.

The official title of Archbishop of canterbury: The Archbishop of Canterbury is the senior bishop and principal leader of the Church of England, the symbolic head of the worldwide Anglican Communion, and the diocesan bishop of the Diocese of Canterbury. In his role as head of the Anglican Communion, the archbishop leads the third largest group of Christians in the world.

I am sure PMs have met with the Pope's too in the past. HH Dalai Lama, jewish leaders in NY, etc.

That is the crucial question - if you are claiming that we are the beneficiaries - we hope to gain from inflow of capital, how do you rule out being forced to accept giving concessions to the religious establishment at the same time

We refused an offer that came directly from King Abdullah to renovate Jama Masjid precisely because we wanted to signal that we don't want much to do wit htheir religious establishment.

- especially given the extremely close symbiotic relationship that the ruling regime has with the clerical establishment? What you are claiming otherwise goes against all pragamtics of such bargaining between "regimes"! If you say - no religious ingress - but security umbrella for GCC, that is military protection of the rulers - as the price, does not that identify you as a protector of regimes of a particular sect and autocracy, and automatically gets you involved in religious or sectarian conflicts of the ME? So religion comes into it anyway!

We have to look at it from a strategic point of view, not the religious angle.

RajeshA · Post by **RajeshA** » 30 May 2011 17:45

- self-deleted -

shyamd · Post by **shyamd** » 30 May 2011 17:52

brihaspati wrote:Why bring in USA every time KSA comes up? If it is so important to show up USA as the major threat to India

I brought in other countries too as you have quoted me.

Are you saying US does not constitute a threat at all to our civilisation when they arm Pak (last time I checked haven't they contributed to the killing of several soldiers and civilians too. Forgotten Headley and pullback 93 grenade going missing case in protection of Pak and perhaps Dawood ibrahim? They have also allowed Pak to go nuclear which poses one of the biggest threats to our civilisation) and help PRC interests?

then perhaps shyamd ji can answer clearly the following question : does he think that the USA is the greater threat to India compared to KSA,

I don't need to answer this childish questions.

and that if it comes to a choice between the two - India should go with KSA rather than USA? Does he really think that the apparent tiff and break between the two is final and that in a sense they can really be separated as "threats" where India is concerned?

Rasthriya will do what is in its national interest to do so depending on the context and situation. Period.

shyamd · Post by **shyamd** » 30 May 2011 18:02

RajeshA, indeed. Shall edit the comment.

Suppiah · Post by **Suppiah** » 30 May 2011 19:25

Have been reading with a smile the exchange between Shyamd and Brihaspath ji's....in the past I have also expressed sentiments that we should look at the obnoxious Saudi regime with the same eyes we look at a cockroach that crawled out of the sewer. They deserve nothing better.

Having said that we should not forget the Taqiya factor - if we can keep them fooled that would be perhaps one bomb less, one AK47 less and who knows they may get humanised one day. So to that extent, I would endorse the love fest organised by our WKK / pseudo-liberal gang. Who knows, we can one day deal with them without revulsion or perhaps with friendship.

IMHO that may have to wait for end of oil era, by which time we have no further use for them nor will rest of humanity.

KSA is very different from China...here the regime is against India, perhaps some of the brain washed people are too, but by and large it is a great civilisation we can respect, admire, emulate and learn from...and exchange ideas. An adversary worthy of our own illustrious past, even if they remain adversary.

Having tough time saying the same of Saudibarbaria.

shyamd · Post by **shyamd** » 30 May 2011 19:49

Sanku wrote: Fine let us by all means analyze, however please dont expect us to come to same conclusion after analysis like you have.

Sure

Forgive me I do not think bringing in outside theologians is going to help us control the religious issues at home. We are opening up our country to further baleful influences, and eroding domestic control on domestic affairs.

Like I said, lets look for the evidence how many have come before and after the strategic deal and also the message of sudais.

I am sorry, I don't understand how selling of family silver (and I am being charitable) is a good way of raising capital for effort. Are we this broke as to plumb to depths of asking for alms to develop?

Ask the question in the economic thread and you'll surely get your answer.

I want Indians to keep doing that, even if choices exist, and carry the culture, the value system and beliefs outside. Not accept others interference in our internal matters.

What interference in internal matters have you seen to date?

But we dont see that. What we see is growing "cultural" relationship mostly on their terms, with us getting ZERO in terms of others. Well maybe not zero, but mostly pittance, hardly worth the while. (And yes I know we buy oil, lets not say that we should prostate ourselves because the Saudi's are so kind as to sell us oil)

See my comments to RamaY on the "pittance" and the ZERO nature of the deal.

I am sorry, you really don't expect to say, oh vote bank politics is a natural manifestation of politics, that is almost like MMS saying corruption and cash for votes is okay because they won the elections.

Nope vote bank politics is part and parcel of politics - isnt it common to issue policies/say things to win votes? Bharat Nirman programs and plenty of other congress party programs are nothing but vote bank politics. For example, Giving free land in TN is very much vote bank politics as they are trying to reach the poor (certain castes to be precise). Lots of ppoliticians promise construction of a bridge etc to get votes from a certain constituency. This is politics 101 all over the world.
I encourage you to read root's how bad economics is good politics. They did research on this subject and one of the focus points is Indian politics.

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 30 May 2011 20:27

shyamd wrote: Ask the question in the economic thread and you'll surely get your answer.

I believe the strategic impacts should be discussed here, however, if you make a post, a share the link here I will follow it.

What interference in internal matters have you seen to date?

Well, the question is what are the changes being made portend for the future, therefore using the past here does not mean much. However, most calls given by the clergy in both Saudi & Iran, are indeed followed up, with fatawas being honored and so on and so forth. (I can provide a list if you want but do we really want to get there?)

The trend for a section of Indian populations to take a cue from SaudiA is undeniable, and now we want to officially sanction extra-territorial linkages?

I encourage you to read root's how bad economics is good politics.

Well I guess you agree that the mistakes on any front can not use that for justification. Okay so we have gotten that out of the way.

Basic reset -- what are we getting from Saudi? What are we giving them?

Clearly we are getting
Their "culture"
Some money

We are giving
Officially sanctioned interaction between umaah as okay.
A tap into our hard knowledge infrastructure.

What exactly is India's advantage in this?

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 30 May 2011 20:56

shyamd wrote:^^ Yes 1920s. Posted it a few pages back.

Who are the MPs (any names we can keep an eye out for) and is there any sort of evidence that they are lobbying for KSA/GCC or are they just close with them?

Also have there been warnings sounded on the pro US lobby who were batting for US a/c in the MRCA deal?

Islamic banking - aren't there islamic banks in the west and MNCs like HSBC offer this service. Whats so big about this? Thanks

If you are familiar with the Indian politics you will realise who are these
US lobby are familiar and we control it, It does not come with the baggage of the religion - maybe some EJs
US policy is transparent. KSA policy towards kffur nations are still not transparent and their view point about Indian religions are still opaque

HSBC is not allowed to offer inside US and other western nations. It is about sensitivity and long history of islamic imperalism. This is big issue and try to understand what the country and the constitution stands for.