Future Strategic Scenario for the Indian Subcontinent -II

RajeshA · Post by **RajeshA** » 22 Oct 2011 02:23

We need to develop opium-specific herbicides which can be distributed through herbicide carrying insects, and ultimately destroy the opium fields of Afghanistan.

vishvak · Post by **vishvak** » 22 Oct 2011 10:56

Goa is at the center of drug trade in India. But till day few have heard much against it.

Mumbai and its hinterland are no longer a favourite landing area..
...
As a result, Goa has turned into the favoured transhipment point for drug markets in South-east Asia, Africa and Europe. The police say that a large number of foreigners- mostly Russians arriving on chartered flights - bring in the drugs to Goa. However, 70 per cent of the drugs still arrive by sea.

This is not hidden.

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 22 Oct 2011 18:09

Indian intel and rashtryia wings have been tough on the spread into domestic consumption. A possible combination of the following:
(1) international pressure and political accommodation from inside has forced the transit route to be protected and allowed to continue
(2) internal rashtryia considerations about the utility of such a transit criminal network in terms of intel
(3) covert fund generation for internal political moves that will stay outside legal fishnets
(4) a part of the rashtryia setup resists the whole process but compromises on the ground that domestic consumption will not be allowed and in return the transit will be allowed.

We need to explore which part and how much of this transit fee feeds into political coffers. Part of thsi definitely funds the red, green and white extremism. But how much goes into "mainstream"?

abhischekcc · Post by **abhischekcc** » 22 Oct 2011 19:50

The drug trade accounts for 70% of global crime revenues, as per a UN report. The most important drug consumer is US, and it gets most of its supplies from South/Latin America, not from Afghanistan or Myanmar. Narco dollars are important for the west because it keeps their financial systems liquid. The lynchpin in the global drug economy are the various money laundering centers across the world - all British outposts: Caribbean islands, London, Singapore, Hong Kong, and most importantly Dubai. In fact, I would say that if Dubai is cleaned up, IOR will become crime free to a large extent. Dubai is the center of money laundering, slave trade, smuggling, arms trade, sex trade, drug trade, sanctions busting, etc

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 23 Oct 2011 17:17

A slightly dated, but good summary insight into the drug-money-politics-militancy nexus closer to home, in AFG.
http://siteresources.worldbank.org/SOUT ... DC_Ch6.pdf

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 24 Oct 2011 11:58

X Posting from the Indian interests thread.

Cong to focus on Muslim areas ahead of UP polls

Just how blatant are they going to get.

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 25 Oct 2011 17:10

^^But that also means a slow down on any hard stance on J&K and Pak. For fear of imagined backlash in votes.

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 25 Oct 2011 17:59

^^^

That is certainly one of the most important points. That is assuming the INC sees the IMs as an extension of the TSP.

RamaY · Post by **RamaY** » 25 Oct 2011 18:45

^ In the large scheme of things that is a fact, however we want to dice it. What does it tell you when INC benefits from this policy for 60 years?

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 28 Oct 2011 01:16

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/South_Asia/MJ28Df01.html
Pakistan: Reversing the lens
By Conn Hallinan

Dealing with the mess
There is a way out of this morass, but it will require a very different strategy than the one the United States is currently following, and one far more attuned to the lens through which most Pakistanis view the war in Afghanistan.

The United States and its allies must first stand down their military offensive - including drone attacks - against the Taliban and the Haqqani network, and negotiate a ceasefire. Then the United States must open immediate talks with the various insurgency groups and declare a plan for the withdrawal of all foreign troops.

The Taliban - the Haqqanis say they will follow the organization's lead - have indicated that they will no longer insist on a withdrawal of troops before opening talks, but they do want a timetable. Any government in Kabul that emerges from such negotiations must reflect the ethnic make-up of the country.

Pakistan's concerns over Indian influence must also be addressed, including the dangerous issue of disputed Kashmir. President Barack Obama ran on a platform that called for dealing with Kashmir, but he subsequently dropped it at the insistence of New Delhi.

Pakistan and the United States may have profoundly different views of one another, but on at least one issue they agree: slightly over 90% of Pakistanis would like US troops to go home, and 62% of Americans want an immediate cut in US forces. Common ground in this case seems to be based on a strong dose of common sense.

The admirers of Jihad among the India-haters - indigenous or foreign - are not dead yet.

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 28 Oct 2011 22:39

I got some personal reports of an apparent slow-down in the PRC economy - from people who were doing brisk business there. If it works out to be a longer term phase rather than one of the typical short term phenomena, it could worthwhile to watch. It may shorten the time gap I had presaged as to when PRC will start to decline in its growth and seek to turn its internal intensifying factional fights into a nationalistic aggression on perceived foreign enemies.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 30 Oct 2011 04:22

Also note the transformation in Indian and Pacific Ocean becoming Indo-Pacific Ocean due to extension of Asia from East coast of Africa to West coast of America due to globalization.

abhischekcc · Post by **abhischekcc** » 31 Oct 2011 15:28

The nomencalture change that the US is trying to effect - from AsiaPacific to IndoPacific, has two senses.

In one sense, it is the logical extension of the APac region to include India (and ME).

But in to another sense, it is about the west trying to keep semblance of relevance in an increasingly Asiatic world.

History is usually divided, based on large empires or kings. But if we divided the history of the world as per oceans, we will get three distinct phases of history -
1. The Indian Ocean phase. This was the phase since the beginning of time till 1492, when Columbus landed on American soil thinking it was India.
2. The Indo Atlantic phase - from 1492 to 1914, when both oceans were the most important to the world economy and trade, until the outbreak of WW1 and entry of US in it.
3. The Atlantic phase - from 1914 to 1991 when the Berlin wall collapsed.
4. The Pacific phase - from 1991 to 2001, when WTC attacks took place.
5. The Indian Ocean phase - from 2001 onwards.

The world has reverted back to the oldest global structure known to mankind, the one that is most stable - the Indian Ocean centered global economy. Remember that the west did not become a global force until they entered the IOR. But as before, the emerging Indian Ocean structure has not place for the west. And the nomemclature - Indo-Pacific - is a subconcious attempt to avoid looking at it.

vishvak · Post by **vishvak** » 31 Oct 2011 15:42

abhischekcc wrote:The world has reverted back to the oldest global structure known to mankind, the one that is most stable - the Indian Ocean centered global economy. Remember that the west did not become a global force until they entered the IOR. But as before, the emerging Indian Ocean structure has not place for the west. And the nomemclature - Indo-Pacific - is a subconcious attempt to avoid looking at it.

My 2 paise. This is also because India does not give license to pirate off the coast. The culture matters. Example-Britain – The Rise of a Pirate Empire

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 02 Nov 2011 20:25

Dean Nelson, the South Asia editor of Telegraph, covers all usual "neutral" bases in his article, but ends it with a subtle but smooth hand-over of all the mess in Afghanistan over to India-Pak.

Afghanistan is a proxy war between India and Pakistan
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldne ... istan.html

Afghanistan is not just the front line in Nato's fight against the Taliban, but also a proxy war between India and Pakistan. Until relations really improve between the nuclear neighbours, Afghanistan will remain another of their battlegrounds – and no safe place for serious investors.

On a similar strangely provocative heading : NYT had the line "Afghanistan Favors India and Denigrates Pakistan By JACK HEALY and ALISSA J. RUBIN Published: October 4, 2011". http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/05/world ... istan.html

But all this should be read with what General Sir David Richards had been forced to admit almost a year ago : that this war was not about any ordinary "national/economic deprivation" fueled war as proposed by apologists of Islamism - both inside and outside of Islam. In an interview
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/ ... Qaeda.html
he had stated, and his admissions are significant when filtered from the politically correct context he is forced to use in a public interview:

But this war – unlike those of the past – could last up to 30 years.

"Make no mistake," he states with added emphasis. "The global threat from al-Qaeda and its terrorist affiliates is an enduring one and one which, if we let it, will rear its head in states particularly those that are unstable.

In plain words : the winding up of operations in 2011, or even by 2014 - will only be halfway through his envisaged almost generational "30" year mark. Al Qaeda has almost attained the Djinni status - it is there, yet not there, yet there, yet not there. It can do things without being there, or not do things being there. It can not exist or be a minority opinion or a fringe "lunatic" group - yet can manifest in "unstable" states! It is a fringe element yet can exist and survive and continue among the majority for ages and yet dominate such non-fringe, non-lunatic majority groups and even "states".

"The national security of the UK and our allies is, in my judgement, at stake – that is why we are engaged in a global struggle against a pernicious form of ideologically distorted form of Islamic fundamentalism.

In plain words : A global or worldwide struggle is necessary merely to defend the national borders of UK and its allies. In the area where AQ concentrates, who are UK's "allies"? Are they "unstable"? We can guess, but such an admission is after all an admission that war beyond immediate borders are now necessary to merely secure national security. Moreover, the peculiar politically correct turn of phrase is ironic but revealing : Islamic fundamentalism has many different forms apparently, out of which some are "ideologically straight fundamentalisms" and others are "ideologically twisted fundamentalisms" out of which only the AQ form is "pernicious"!

"Our men and women in Afghanistan are fighting to prevent this from spreading. I think there are direct parallels to be made with the bravery of those who risked, and who gave, their lives in the fight against Fascism in the Second World War.

In plain words : ideologically twisted Islamic fundamentalism == fascism

The general subscribes to the notion that such an ideologically-driven adversary cannot be defeated in the traditional sense, and to attempt to do so could be a mistake.

"In conventional war, defeat and victory is very clear cut and is symbolised by troops marching into another nation's capital.

First of all you have to ask: "do we need to defeat it (Islamist militancy)?" in the sense of a clear cut victory, and I would argue that it is unnecessary and would never be achieved."

It is a bold statement and he quickly adds: "But can we contain it to the point that our lives and our children's lives are led securely? I think we can."

He finally admits - ideologically driven adversary cannot be defeated in the traditional sense of outright war only. This is the point that I had tried to drive home in a debate almost two years ago here, which ultimately turned ugly. I had tried to point out that the main reason that the Afghan war strategy - which is being admitted as much by the General here in tha later parts of the interview
- will turn out to be erroneous because of the downplaying or ignoring or dismissing of this ideologically driven angle. Unless the ideology itself is simultaneously targeted - thw are cannot be won.

In comparing with fascism , or the longer term battle that went on with communism - the west never neglected the task of ideologically undermining the two camps. Continuously, assiduously, and a no-holds barred campaign. It is here that they have not taken up the cudgels with Islamism. And the reason that they have failed. Maybe the Marxists won after all - or the surviving anti-Semitism of Christianity of certain types - remained dormant and kicking - to see an ally in fooling the "west" about the not attacking the ideology!

Having realized what they really should have done along with their war campaigns, and their inability or hesitation to take up this immensely challenging ideological effort - the west now plans to establish the idea that all this is about India-Pak onlee - and they should be forced to clean up after wests stomach upsets.

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 03 Nov 2011 20:30

http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/asi ... story.html
Iran’s hosting of Taliban reflects desire for greater role

KABUL — Iran quietly hosted a delegation of Taliban members in Tehran this month in a powerful and unusual signal of its ambition to shape the trajectory of the Afghanistan conflict as U.S. troops begin to withdraw.

Iranian officials had apparently hoped to facilitate a meeting between the delegation and Burhanuddin Rabbani, a former Afghan president and leader of the country’s reconciliation efforts, who was attending the same conference in Tehran, his associates said. Although that did not happen, the presence of the Taliban members suggests Iran has cultivated deeper ties with the insurgent group than was previously known and is stepping up efforts to influence its eastern neighbor as the U.S. role recedes.

Rabbani was bumped off later. Is it entirely impossible that the Talebs might now have quite a bit of support from Iran, who see in them a future major stakeholder in AFG? In spite of the 1998 crisis between the two, which I think Rohdani defelected into a supposed "Shia" factional self-goal and not "Taleb" operation, and which therefore suited both sides as a public story if they saw benefit in future cooperation - their cooperation has continued.

As was my speculation in 2009, Iran would find it easy to supply the Talebs across the AFG western borders, as well as provide Talebs access to CAR through an alternate route away from Pak control or intervention through the NA.

Pak has new friends - or will soon have.

devesh · Post by **devesh** » 03 Nov 2011 20:38

so, India is being setup to bleed resources in Afghanistan and then kicked out when time is convenient? PRC+Islamic-Block is becoming a reality. KSA+Iran+Pak+PRC == dominance for PRC and Islamists in CA+Afg.

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 03 Nov 2011 21:09

In a sense India cannot back out now. How far it will be forced then to defend its investments militarily will be a thorny and tricky - tricky matter. Could be of immense potential or of immense disaster - depnding on the long term planning.

devesh · Post by **devesh** » 03 Nov 2011 21:22

disaster for "nation" or for dynasty? will it be a case of Dynasty digging its grave for itself, or for both itself and Nation?

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 03 Nov 2011 21:33

Events outside the country will have no bearing on a vast majority of the population.

The nation may suffer but the dynasty will not be effected by any disaster which be falls the nation.

devesh · Post by **devesh** » 03 Nov 2011 21:45

I disagree Pratyush ji, if the PRC+Islamists decide an adventure into India, then it effects Indian people. and it also effects Dynasty. if it happens on Dynasty's watch, it will go down. 2000 years of history tells us this. ineffective leadership against invaders is a sure fire way to get shafted in Indian politics...starting with Dhanananda to Marathas...

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 03 Nov 2011 21:58

That may have been true in the past. But I am not too confident that the Dynasty will be effected too greatly if some thing of the nature took place today. In addition the way the Dynasty is appeasing the Muslims of the country. Any Islamist gains in India will be presented by them as a victory of the Indian Secularism.

Moreover, the INC did not really suffer as a result of 62. Nor did it suffer for all the economic mismanagement of the country. All that merely strengthened the dynasty.

devesh · Post by **devesh** » 03 Nov 2011 22:33

we have to be careful what we term "strengthened". 1962 was a border conflict. it didn't reach beyond the flash points in the mountain regions. and more importantly, it was only 15 years into independence. the populace and the broader country stuck to what they had. although, the JLN backed foreign policy died with 1962. later foreign policy was different from pre-1962. and especially after 1965, it was a complete break. so, lessons were learned. and JLN's stature did take a slide.

Islamist gains cannot be papered under Secularism. it won't work. the people are not idiots. there are certain conditions Dynasty needs to maintain. if Dynasty is so weak, there will be significant sections of the country which will kick INC in the ass. all the area south of Narmada will be lost to Dynasty. Punjab+Haryana+Rajasthan+Himachal will also be gone. same with Bengal+Bihar+Orissa. so, what will Dynasty rule exactly? UP alone without the important end points of the axis will be unsustainable and Dynasty will fall.

don't underestimate the activism of Indian populace. they are not idiots.

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 04 Nov 2011 17:21

B Ji,

In discussions past you have mentioned that TMC and the INC may part ways in a post left future. If the TMC goes through with the threat. Will that constitute a total break or will it just be temporary situation till they need her to beat BJP and alies.

Mamata warns Congress: Rollback oil price or Trinamool quits Cabinet

Also other then having her killed though the Maoists what are the other ways the INC can neutralise Mamta.

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 04 Nov 2011 17:32

Just when I was getting excited the INC throws in the Towel.

Partial roll back in fuel prices possible, says Congress source

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 04 Nov 2011 20:32

Pratyush wrote:B Ji,

In discussions past you have mentioned that TMC and the INC may part ways in a post left future. If the TMC goes through with the threat. Will that constitute a total break or will it just be temporary situation till they need her to beat BJP and alies.

Mamata warns Congress: Rollback oil price or Trinamool quits Cabinet

Also other then having her killed though the Maoists what are the other ways the INC can neutralise Mamta.

As I said before, MB has her local and subregional pressures. She cannot afford to allow the issue to fall into Left hands or allow her own image to be associated with compliance. This is just play-acting at the moment on both sides. There are differences, and they will sharpen. But I don't see any immediate withdrawal. The time is not ripe for either of them to allow the other to slip out. MB is keeping the pressure up to not allow INC much time in its parallel programme of playing the Left+Maoists off against each other and MB. Its like you know that you will divorce, but you don't want the other party to blame you for the split before you are ready to save as mucha s possible your "private" gains from the marriage.

The divorce will be ripe into the second term.

As for assassiantion of MB - possible. But it will immediately stick to both INC and Maoists - make MB a martyr, and clear the space for "alternatives". Bengalis - as I suggested before - are not fools, and they are subversive in a political sense. I don't think INC or Maoists will take the risk. If they do, even if the event is despicable [I don;t support assassinations as a political method] - it will only enhance the eventual right wing radicalism that Bengalis will turn to in their cyclical search for political meaningfulness. They just have to be "radical" - if left wing radicalism fails - they will turn right wing radicals, when that also fails after some time or disillusionment sets in they will turn back to left wing radiclism - and the cycle will continue. They are the periodic shock resets of GV political inertia.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 05 Nov 2011 09:48

Loss of East Bengal weakened the Bengali hold on Indian national politics.

Samudragupta · Post by **Samudragupta** » 05 Nov 2011 20:15

brihaspati wrote: it will only enhance the eventual right wing radicalism that Bengalis will turn to in their cyclical search for political meaningfulness. They just have to be "radical" - if left wing radicalism fails - they will turn right wing radicals, when that also fails after some time or disillusionment sets in they will turn back to left wing radiclism - and the cycle will continue. They are the periodic shock resets of GV political inertia.

Nothing can be more true than this statement.....and the best example seems to be Buddha Babu himself.....in fact BB seems to be the best friend of MB in this respect.....is there any chance that BB can be in the WB cabinet??

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 05 Nov 2011 23:46

BB no way.He is way too deeply tied up. There would be plenty of stuff to stick on him - especially by association - of people who virtually formed into coteries around his aura or in his name. So the PB/CC can use it to trim him to size.

At the moment they are tied up in a cross-fire between two broad factional fights. In a way legacy of older contests for personal power. The party is in a dilemma over the tactical response - blame it all on the supposed sabotage by "old-timers" supposedly displaced by the "new timers" who mostly crystallized in BB's name [which has its own problems of course as an argument - since that will imply that opposition to BB had sufficient popular pull to affect such electoral wipeouts], or stick it on a few prominent dancers around BB and make a tactical compromise with the "opposition".

But the old-timers became corrupt out of pressure from the party - for "electoral" funding needs. While the new-timers became corrupt out of their own greed and lack of real ideological commitment. Moreover communism always somehow fostered corrupt drive towards personal power - and placed such leadership on top who pretended selflessness while using the ideologically enraptured "lower orders" shamelessly. Almost always that led to coterie formation based on mediocrity, jealousy of real ability and arrogance.

Old timers knew how to hide these characteristics. New timers never had the need to know the technique of hiding. So there is no resolution.

merlin · Post by **merlin** » 06 Nov 2011 11:11

ramana wrote:Loss of East Bengal weakened the Bengali hold on Indian national politics.

OT and only tangentially relevant. If you go and see the Cellular jail in Port Blair, the vast majority of Bengali inmates there were from East Bengal. Made me wonder why so few were from West Bengal.

Samudragupta · Post by **Samudragupta** » 06 Nov 2011 13:32

merlin wrote:
ramana wrote:Loss of East Bengal weakened the Bengali hold on Indian national politics.
OT and only tangentially relevant. If you go and see the Cellular jail in Port Blair, the vast majority of Bengali inmates there were from East Bengal. Made me wonder why so few were from West Bengal.

Because WB was the centre of British Politico-miilitary control in the East...it was easy for the Zulus to set up their base in the remote regions away from Calcutta specially after the Manicktala Bomb plot and capture of Aurobindo/Barin Ghosh

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 06 Nov 2011 21:15

The story is complex and may have some relevance even for today.

The eastern part of Bengal that apparently produced more cellular jail inmates, should be seen in the peculiar subregional geopolitical context of lower GV. Divide the Bengal region roughly by 120 degree sectors based from a centre say just west of Dhaka - with one vertical bar going straight north. The Southern sector was always less closely linked with the NW sector, and whenever strong central dominance weakened - each of these sectors tried to resist the other. Probably the very shape of the major river flows determined this from times immemorial.

One can see a persistent historical tension between the NE sector - the Brahmaputra sector and the NW sector - which includes most of WB. Without going too deep into this, what is relevant for the period being discussed is to note that the WB-NW sector, because of its links with the rest of GV and north or west/south India always has tried to tie in into the national politics of subcontinental India to its west. But the SE, and NE sectors have traditionally resisted this "linking" and always had a separatist tendency.

This shows up clearly even in the thinking of the then armed insurgency movements. Aurobindo, based in the "west" with solid connections developing from long ancestral stays in Kolkata, [one ancestor was a Young Bengalist who turned orthodox and walked in reverse in mature age], quickly realized where the political effort should be directed at - mass mobilization involving "ALL" of India. Bengal on its own could neither help itself nor the nation. It had to be a shared goal. This shows up in Bose too - whose origins comes from the legendary "frontier" [between west and east so much so that neither side recognizes Jessorites as belonging to their ilk] land of Jessore.

The one person primarily responsible for inducing the "eastern" sector into revolution - was barrister P. Mitra - the transformer of an older organization into the Anushilan samiti. He recruited Pulin bihari Das - under whose extremely detailed organizational skills - the eastern branch soon outstripped the western HQ. It is significant to note that the main reaches of recruitment into his fats growing organizational network is concentrated in the southern sector : the stretch from ancient Palong division - now modern Madaripur [a name given much later to Isalmize Bengali cultural placenames using the late 18th-19th century Faraizi Sufi "saints"]. The area actually reaches from west of Dhaka into Jessore thus covering exactly the southern 120 degree sector. Pulin Das's movement was almost from the beginning focused on the immediate and what he saw as feasible regional independence. He thought the mass-mobilization theory slow and ineffective - and this would lead him to remain uncompromising with Gandhian politics, even when a major portion of revolutionaries from the east later on decided to overtly show allegiance to Gandhis line.

By his own admission he was against the method adopted in the Chattagram uprising by Surya Sen. He claims to have suggested going further east into the difficult hill territories among indigenous tribes and try to form base areas there. In this sense he anticipates Mao perhaps - but note that he still does not rely on "popular" mass movements. He is aiming primarily for liberation of Bengal - as in his plans there is no immediate scope for insurrectionary moves against the upper GV power centres.

Thus studying the dynamic between these subregional trends within Bengal should show why the WB-ites have always been torn between their concern for the nation as a whole and their immediate sub-regional concerns. This led to periodic tactical compromises with upper GV, even genuine nationalist efforts- which is represented by "easterners" as "anti-Bengali-nationalism". The upper GV and western Indian subregionalism however looks at this WB-ite nationalist concern with suspiciona nd jealousy and as a competitor for their own dominance of the GV flow for their own subregional benefits. In turn this leads to consistent rejection or sabotage of the WB-ites from upper GV - to keep the WB-ite effort politically marginal and weakened.

This in turn lends winds to the sail of the "easterners" that after all "Bengal" should look after its own interests and that the upper GV are nothing more than subregional exploiters of the rest of the subcontinent - and that the "western Benagli" weakness for "Indian nation" is essentially a betrayal of the "Bengali nation".

Use this model and a lot of history will become clear. Very clear I hope. An understanding of these dynamics should be used not to help the regional exclusivists - both from upper India and Bengal - but to harness their respective energies towards the nation as a whole.

Abhi_G · Post by **Abhi_G** » 06 Nov 2011 22:09

Complex to say the least. Do not fully agree with Brihaspati on the separatist tendency part. Sarat Bose was fully WB-ite yet could imagine of joining hands with suhrawardy for an independent Bengal.

Supratik · Post by **Supratik** » 06 Nov 2011 23:40

MB cannot desert INC. Left still has 40% of the vote. The state is financially very weak and needs CG help. BJP is not a force
in WB and she got a lot of support from Muslims who are 25% going towards 30-35%. So unless something dramatic happens or
MB gets hysterical for some reason as she has in the past, the alliance is going to stay at least in the short term.

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 06 Nov 2011 23:57

Abhi_G wrote:Complex to say the least. Do not fully agree with Brihaspati on the separatist tendency part. Sarat Bose was fully WB-ite yet could imagine of joining hands with suhrawardy for an independent Bengal.

Not everyone in a region has to follow the majority trend. Moreover Sarat babu perfectly fits the post-rejection reaction part of the model. He and his bro had been neatly "rejected" by the upper GV coterie, and those in the "western" sector who had finally switched to the "nationalist" again.

Klaus · Post by **Klaus** » 08 Nov 2011 05:19

devesh wrote:one of the libertarian agendas in US is to stop the "War" on Drugs. they say that it's another "Globalist" financial black hole which is used to suck up resources in the name of a "war".

As if on cue, is this report: US DEA has deployed five commando style units the Caribbean and LatAm.

The program, known by its acronym FAST - Foreign-deployed Advisory Support Team - dates back to the George W Bush administration. It was created originally to investigate Taliban-linked drug traffickers in Afghanistan.

New York Times reported that the program reflects Washington's growing reach in combating drug cartels, amid concerns by some policymakers that the line between law enforcement and military activities is becoming increasingly blurred.

But Michael Braun, a former head of operations for the drug agency who helped design the program, told the Times that the military-trained commandos are exactly what is needed for often dangerous drug interdiction activities.

Bruce Bagley, a University of Miami professor who specialises in Latin America and counternarcotics, said the US commando teams could help arrest kingpins, seize drug stockpiles, disrupt smuggling routes and help train security forces in small drug-trafficking plagued countries.

But he said such operations on foreign soil are inherently sensitive, and risk a possible backlash if operations go awry.

"If an American is killed, the administration and the DEA could get mired in Congressional oversight hearings," he said.

"Taking out kingpins could fragment the organisation and lead to more violence. And it won't permanently stop trafficking unless a country also has capable institutions, which often don't exist in Central America." {which brings us to the basic question: Why go for this in the first place?

You can bet that these units would've been quietly slipped in at the height of the humanitarian disaster following the earthquake in Haiti.

devesh · Post by **devesh** » 08 Nov 2011 08:40

http://in.news.yahoo.com/congress-ncp-w ... 39450.html

Congress, NCP workers' clash blocks highway

Konkan region strongmen Rane and Jadhav have been engaged in a war of words in the past few days as the civic elections in various towns and cities are round the corner.

However, senior Congress leaders in the state have chosen to keep mum on the ongoing war between two heavyweights from the Konkan region, where the Congress and NCP are attempting to upstage the Shiv Sena in the ensuing local polls.

is it just routine politics? btw, to those in the know, what is the political scene in Konkan? future projections?

Atri · Post by **Atri** » 08 Nov 2011 15:20

devesh wrote:http://in.news.yahoo.com/congress-ncp-w ... 39450.html

is it just routine politics? btw, to those in the know, what is the political scene in Konkan? future projections?

SS and NCP coming closer. BJP moving closer to MNS. These are the trends. I guess they are waiting for the old men to leave the scene (BT and SP). Of course I don't know how long with NCP last after departure of SP (which is not quite imminent, but around the corner).

NCP is party made to keep the power of 96 clan Maratha caste on MH. SS is torn between marathi issue and Hindutva issue. They have no answer to MNS. MNS has blessings of INC but now RT is visiting Gujarat, meeting Gadkari etc quite frequently.

The deccan satrap has been using ME support to stop the expansion of Delhi Sultan from 1980 onwards (probably powered earlier by Soviets and then later Generic church of west). The satrap also have to keep power to his people so they could not capitalize on internal indigenous thrust of 1992 (it was viewed by them as too brahminical since hindutva is brahminical onlee). Of course this deal with devil came with price (DI and other accomplices). This same is said about underworld of Mumbai (Haji replaced Karim lala, DI replaced haji. Nobody replaced Varadarajan Mudaliar. all his potential successors were wiped in bud from tips of DI influencing deccan satrap then in power.)

NCP will make a deal with any body to keep power in hands of 96-clan Maratha caste, this is one line summary of that party. They still resent Shahu handing over power to Brahmin Peshwa (that too from poor Konkan, then fringe Chitpavan caste) in 1707 whom they view as an upstart usurper. The elite 96 clanner power houses have maintained distance from Peshwas since then and rarely participated in any actual maratha expansion in north and south. The dynamics continue to unfold. While Brahmins are far far away from any numerical superiority, that transfer of power is still resented and feared (although current crop of MH brahmin class from Western MH today is most deracinated and disinterested class of India after current progeny of Bangla kulin bhadralok, maybe. They only care for their career with almost no political and social ambition).

Of course Dalits, SS and BJP coming together is also one thread along which things can unfold. the official deal has already been struck. Lets see what happens. Its been cherished dream of BT to have SS and dalits together. But I dunno how robust that alliance is.

repercussions of this on Konkan? well it still is poor. The H-vaadi local satrap of Konkan joined INC and since then Konkan has been with INC. The SS has been trying to sneak in game by opposing of Jaitapur nuclear power plant. The janta is destined to be poor anyways. The Ej presence has increased markedly in Konkan. The northern Konkan was already RoL dominated (Portuguese controlled and ravaged it for 300 years until 1737). The one immedietely to south of Mumbai is RoP dominated (since times of abyssinian "Siddi" rulers from Murud-Janziraa). The Indic dominated region is financially worthless. And thats where major support base for SS comes from (both in Mumbai and in rural region).

devesh · Post by **devesh** » 08 Nov 2011 20:16

the 96-clan Marathas are still pro-Hindutva right? are they going to play spoil-sport in any future Deccan+Bharatiya saffron resurgence? is it not possible for the Maratha clans to support a pan-India saffron cause?

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 08 Nov 2011 23:19

devesh wrote:the 96-clan Marathas are still pro-Hindutva right? are they going to play spoil-sport in any future Deccan+Bharatiya saffron resurgence? is it not possible for the Maratha clans to support a pan-India saffron cause?

Well some of them have played politics before the detriment of the cause, if they saw (inherent short-sightedness) that they could have some local advantage over others.

These examples have been discussed before.