Indian Interests

SwamyG · Post by **SwamyG** » 13 Dec 2011 21:53

Fvck, nothing is straight forward in life - especially politics. If one shows even a little more interest in global politics and strategy, I am sure one is going to end up being a cynic and a negative nanny in life. Reading Arthasastra, I wondered WTF is Kautilaya so distrustful of any human. As for as me, I doubt anything happens in India without US poking its nose or wondering about its interests. I definitely admire JLN for the fact that he steered India away from the big USA and USSR. Man it does boil one's blood.

It is one thing for a political party to appease some community and institute laws or policies that appear as jackass, but it is another to succumb to foreign powers. India, I know will succumb to the FDI Retail, it is only a matter of time. Resistance, sadly, is futile.

US pressure builds on social media screening; Katju supports Kapil Sibal's move
Clearly the stakes are high for US to pile pressure on India.

SwamyG · Post by **SwamyG** » 13 Dec 2011 22:00

The EU can dream what the fvk it wants, they can twist and sway the others only as long as they have the money. The population of India and China are good enough to have a sustainable economy as people buy essential goods. Let the EU buy whatever it wants to keep France and Germany happy. Ultimately it is a three way fight between UK, France and Germany. France and Germany are on the same side for now. Every time EU farts or sneezes, UK wonders how it can benefit and is shit worried about its Financial Superiority.

For the rich countries to exist, there needs to be poor countries. India and China have crossed the critical threshold. Indians, after almost a millennium of suppression by Islam and Christian Europe are finding their feet. Well if EU is so concerned about pollution, they should not have began the industrialization. Tough luck. The per capita of CO2 emissions of Canada is higher than India, and they all try to talk down China and India.

vera_k · Post by **vera_k** » 13 Dec 2011 22:11

SwamyG wrote:US pressure builds on social media screening; Katju supports Kapil Sibal's move
Clearly the stakes are high for US to pile pressure on India.

The stakes are also high for the Imperium

Facebook tells Rahul bitter truth

I'm all in favour of any trend that pushes back against the creeping Talibanism in the GoI and Supreme Court under guise of protecting secularism.

RamaY · Post by **RamaY** » 13 Dec 2011 22:14

^ On Yuvraj's voting

739 voters who say yes to him "because he looks good and talks well".

must be some of our birathers in alms...

devesh · Post by **devesh** » 13 Dec 2011 22:45

Sibal's recent advocating for censorship is most likely fueled by the paranoia of the regime coupled with sweet inputs from background interests who clearly feel threatened by the change is generations. in the short term, they will probably be successful in hiding the dissatisfaction of the populace. but in the long term, it will fuel a fanatical hatred for the regime; and those outside forces who are seen as supporting or backing the regime (the article about US pressure is on the spot) in its activities will be clearly marked as "unfriendly".

both Pakis and Anglo-American imperialists are making the same blunder: by antagonizing a generation that is fundamentally different from all the previous ones, they are ultimately setting themselves up for the same marker >> UNFRIENDLY. and this generation will pass on its collective experiences to the next one....

either way, in the short term, things won't be good for the "dissidents" and "trouble makers". threats to family/friends might become common if somebody shows too much spine in opposing the Dynasty and its supporting coterie of domestic servants and foreign masters...

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 13 Dec 2011 23:09

I think we should separate out the issue of international unequal trade as exploitation of countries like India/China - from the issue of non-alignment and the supposed wisdom and tremendous benefits thereof from the legendary Nehruvian vision.

Ia m quoting from K.Gajendra Singh's writeup on the was-never-there-never-written letters allegedly sent by JLN to Kennedy admin during 1962 : http://www.boloji.com/index.cfm?md=Cont ... leID=10265

[Inder Malhotra ] quotes from the two “Eyes Only” letters Nehru sent to John Kennedy which described the war situation as “desperate” and asked for “more comprehensive” US military aid, especially in the form of air power “if the Chinese are to be prevented from taking over the whole of Eastern India.”

In keeping with the Hindu-Brahmin[??!!] tradition of keeping things secret, the first public mention of these two letters in the Rajya Sabha by MP, Sudhir Ghosh, in 1965 was flatly denied by the then prime minister, Lal Bahadur Shastri. There were no such letters. Washington, after some years, admitted these letters were received, but refused to reveal them. In the 1980s, copies of these letters were duly placed in the US National Archives, and some other places in USA, after heavy censoring. It was claimed in USA that at the request of the Government of India the letters were not being made public.
[...]
Giving the background he says that the second letter, sent “within a few hours of the first”, was vastly more important. In this, Nehru informed Kennedy that during the short interval, “the situation in NEFA (North-East Frontier Agency, now called Arunachal Pradesh) has deteriorated still further. Bomdila has fallen and the retreating forces from Sela have been trapped between the Sela Ridge and Bomdila. A serious threat has developed to our Digboi oilfields in Assam. With the advance of the Chinese in massive strength, the entire Brahmaputra Valley is seriously threatened and unless something is done immediately to stem the tide, the whole of Assam, Tripura, Manipur and Nagaland would also pass into Chinese hands.”

Nehru added “The Chinese have poised massive forces”, “(also) in Chumbi Valley between Sikkim and Bhutan and another invasion from that direction appears imminent... In Ladakh, as I have said in my earlier communication, Chushul is under heavy attack and the shelling of the airfield at Chushul has already commenced. We have also noticed increasing air activity by the Chinese air force.” (In the earlier letter, Nehru had said that after Chushul there was “nothing to stop the Chinese till they reach Leh, the headquarters of the Ladakh province of Kashmir.”)
[...]
Nehru further pointed out that hitherto he had “restricted our requests to essential equipment” and thanking the US for the assistance “so readily given” and went on: “We did not ask for more comprehensive assistance, particularly air assistance, because of wider implications... in the global context and we did not want to embarrass our friends.” The next five lines state what has been indicated above: “The situation that has developed is, however, desperate. We have to have more comprehensive assistance if the Chinese are to be prevented from taking over the whole of Eastern India. Any delay in this assistance reaching us will result in nothing short of a catastrophe for our country”.

Continues Inder, remarkably, Nehru’s request for comprehensive aid, especially “immediate support to strengthen our air arm sufficiently to stem the tide of the Chinese advance” goes into minute details, and is prefaced by the statement: “We have repeatedly felt the need to use our air arm in support of our land forces but have been unable to do so because in the present state... we have no defence against retaliatory action by the Chinese.” In this context the specific demands are for: “[A] minimum of 12 squadrons of supersonic all-weather fighters” and a “modern radar cover (which) we don’t have.” Nehru added that US air force personnel “will have to man these fighters and radar installations while our personnel are being trained.”

More significantly, he spelled out that US fighter and transport aircraft “manned by US personnel will be used for the present to protect our cities and installations from Chinese attacks and to maintain our communications... and if this is possible... to assist the Indian Air Force in air battles with the Chinese air force over Indian areas where air action by the IAF against Chinese communication lines, supplies and troop concentrations may lead to counter air action by the Chinese. Any air action to be taken against the Chinese beyond the limits of our country, e.g. in Tibet, will be taken by the IAF planes manned by Indian personnel.”
[...]
So he wrote: “The Chinese threat as it has developed involves not merely the survival of India, but the survival of free and independent Governments in the whole of this sub-Continent or in Asia. The domestic quarrels regarding small areas or territorial borders between the countries in this sub-Continent or in Asia have no relevance whatever in the context of the developing Chinese invasion. I would emphasise particularly that all the assistance or equipment given to us to meet our dire need will be used entirely for resistance against the Chinese. I have made this clear in a letter I sent to President Ayub Khan of Pakistan. I am asking our Ambassador to give you a copy of this letter.

“We are confident that your great country will in this hour of our trial help us in our fight for survival and for the survival of freedom and independence in this sub-Continent and rest of Asia. We on our part are determined to spare no effort until the threat posed by Chinese expansionist and aggressive militarism to freedom and independence is completely eliminated”.

Gajendra Singh winds it up with a panegyric on the necessity [and supposed planned reality of the effort] of the economic "independence" from USA. But here he ascribes sole credit for such a policy onlee on JLN - contradicting his own earlier approach that "mistakes" are kind of "shared" and not to be ascribed to one individual alone. Maybe Singh thinks that where mistakes in international policy happen the blames are to be "shared" - but where credits are to be given, it should not be "shared". Whether the "economic independence" line was deliberate, or a matter of circumstantially determined, or a matter of pressure from indigenous capital which already had established a good grip on the UP dominated congrez from the 1937 ministries - is a matter of another debate.

If we indeed have economic credits for the initial policy to ascribe to - maybe, just maybe - we should start exploring the much-bashed [perhaps with good reason for other aspects] early big capitalists of India. It is not a homogeneous troop all showing acclaimed marks of commercial patriotism and economic valour, but there are patterns that should be visible.

SwamyG · Post by **SwamyG** » 13 Dec 2011 23:19

I think JLN staying away from USA and USSR was a good thing for India.

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 13 Dec 2011 23:25

devesh wrote:Sibal's recent advocating for censorship is most likely fueled by the paranoia of the regime coupled with sweet inputs from background interests who clearly feel threatened by the change is generations. in the short term, they will probably be successful in hiding the dissatisfaction of the populace. but in the long term, it will fuel a fanatical hatred for the regime; and those outside forces who are seen as supporting or backing the regime (the article about US pressure is on the spot) in its activities will be clearly marked as "unfriendly".

both Pakis and Anglo-American imperialists are making the same blunder: by antagonizing a generation that is fundamentally different from all the previous ones, they are ultimately setting themselves up for the same marker >> UNFRIENDLY. and this generation will pass on its collective experiences to the next one....

either way, in the short term, things won't be good for the "dissidents" and "trouble makers". threats to family/friends might become common if somebody shows too much spine in opposing the Dynasty and its supporting coterie of domestic servants and foreign masters...

On the other hand, such measures inevitably leads to alienation of the rashtra from the people. Suppression of rights to criticize - even on the excuse of defamation of religion as proposed by a brilliant legal mind [ is it not the same mind which also gave some profound statements from ideological perspectives?] - will not affect the lowest of the economic and political low, but it does hurt where it matters for the rashtra. It pinches the aspiring middle sections - which are also seeking power. Thats how the Bolsheviks and CPSU fell, and thats how CPC will fall. If the congrez chooses that line - good luck!

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 13 Dec 2011 23:27

If he did not make the mistakes all alone, he alone could not have stayed away or apart [for arguments sake, even if historical pointers, events and actions on the ground prove that right from the beginning that policy was never really a policy - and were jerked off like used underwear whenever it suited the power centre represented by the man.]

Letters exist proving that acclaimed ideological pretensions of non-alignment can be dropped in a twinkle secretly, and publicly denied, and we still must declare that "he/he/He/he" kept India away and apart from USA and USSR. [edited out. Apologies for being provoked by blind idolization].

johneeG · Post by **johneeG** » 14 Dec 2011 00:28

Yep, JLN seemed bewitched by USSR and Communist China. And steered the country towards socialism until 62. In 62, he turned to the US for help. Where is non-alignment and 'steering away'? Its a myth.

Also, JLN seemed to be liked by the Brits like Mountbatten. They didnt seem to appreciate the stand of Sardar so much.

Yayavar · Post by **Yayavar** » 14 Dec 2011 00:42

If you read the history of the intervention across the world by USA and USSR, but mostly by USA across south-america (the banana republics), the Vietnam/Cambodia, Korea, or Iran (installing of the Shah) etc. it is no surprise that the newly independent India wanted to keep the distance. I cant blame Nehru/Indian leaders for the attempt even if it is shown that one could not stay completely neutral.

RamaY · Post by **RamaY** » 14 Dec 2011 01:01

SwamyG wrote:I think JLN staying away from USA and USSR was a good thing for India.

Yes. Brutus is an honorable man!

devesh · Post by **devesh** » 14 Dec 2011 03:30

one only needs to take the most cursory of glances at JLN's behavior towards Britain. any issue which came into conflict with "British interests" were crushed without question. this carried on after 1947. the usual British targets who provoked intense suspicion and hatred from the British, also received similar treatment from Nehru. of course, Nehru going to UN based Mountbatten's "advice" is the epitome of boot-licking to the Anglo-Saxon masters. this "nearness" of Nehru to the Anglo-Saxon model turned Kashmir into an international fiasco.

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 14 Dec 2011 03:48

Gajendra Singh draws attention another crucial aspect I always crib about. In 1962, the withholding of IAF was calculated by the "shared-mistakers-that-onlee-included-JLN-but-was-not-JLN" based on US/Brit intel "hunches". I have always suggested that because of the smooth transfer of power - Brit intel structure probably survived well within the new Republic. The network would then span both sides of the border, feeding info as it suits the external controllers. The lack of independent intel from within Tibet and China and reliance on western sources appears not to have changed much.

Even now, things like 26/11 happened - and other blasts, with no clues, no forward intel. So folks are reduced to constructing and implicating people based on the political and electoral necessities of their internal formal masters.

This also makes me suspect the mood swings of ex-intel interfacers like BK ji as being carefully orchestrated by feeding info of a particular construction.

johneeG · Post by **johneeG** » 14 Dec 2011 04:16

The following book presents Nehru as a closet commie:

Genesis and Growth Of Nehruism

The book is authored by a 'communal' Hindu named Sita Ram Goel.

About the book:

The eighteen chapters of this book appeared originally as eighteen installments of a series written by 'Ekaki' in the weekly Organiser, New Delhi, from June 5 to October 9, 1961. The nineteenth chapter, Choosing Between USA And USSR, was contributed by me to the Diwali 1962 issue of the Organiser which came out soon after the first wave of Chinese invasion on October 20, 1962. They have been reprinted with a few minor changes here and there.

That means much of the book was written before the Chinese aggression of 62. So, it was not hindsight.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 14 Dec 2011 06:52

johneeG, Goel's appraisal portrays JLN as a Soviet stool pigeon where as his actions furthered Anglo-Saxon interests.

Bji, The non use of IAF on which the nation expended so much scarce money is strange. Recall it was not exactly awash with funds in the 50s and early 60s.
Same time wonder who drafted his request for 12 squadrons of jet fighters and all that? Was it from IAF or who? Did India have the airfields to host so many planes at that time?

SwamyG · Post by **SwamyG** » 14 Dec 2011 07:34

China and India slam Canada on Kyoto withdrawal: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/pol ... le2270216/. Canada was throwing tantrums and accusing India. They protested little too much - I thought daal toda bahut hi kala hain. France and Japan joined the chorus too.

Meanwhile "India Inc." is hailing the Durban-Deal: http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/new ... 094059.cms

Hailing the outcome of crucial Durban talks, India Inc today said the decision to continue with UN carbon market beyond 2012 would help companies to focus on "enhanced action" to fight climate change.

Seen as a major victory for India and other developing countries, the European Union agreed to continue with targets for reduction of carbon emission, under the Kyoto Protocol, beyond 2012.

"It (clear future direction for carbon markets) also indicates a new lease of life for Clean Development Mechanism (CDM), especially in the Indian context where this market mechanism under the Kyoto Protocol has been a catalyst for enhanced action on climate mitigation by Indian industry," industry body Ficci said.

Hmmm, earlier reports indicated, at least from some quarters, India had lost some in the bargain. Maybe there is something that they won; or it could be spin by some powerful forces. If China and India agreed to legal bindings, then what is FCCI saying? Is it a face saving measure? Hindustan times carries the narrative that Jayanthi was a 'deal-maker' than a 'deal-breaker': http://www.hindustantimes.com/News-Feed ... 82011.aspx

But as a safeguard, India inserted sufficient vagueness into the language describing the successor mechanism of Kyoto to avoid caving in to an international legal treaty that would constrain our economic growth. The word "equity" was also officially entered into the agenda of the working group of the UN Climate Change Convention, leaving space for heavy bargaining over differential responsibilities of the South when the successor to Kyoto is instituted.

The pragmatic quid pro quos that Natarajan executed at Durban stand in sharp contrast to acts of bravado and dogged rejection of any concessions at the multilateral level for which India had become notorious ever since the former commerce minister, Kamal Nath, stuck his neck out in Geneva in 2008 and was castigated as the arch-villain responsible for the logjam in the Doha Round of negotiations at the World Trade Organisation (WTO).

The reality behind this propaganda campaign against India was that western powers were in relative decline and hence finding the behaviour of emerging economies too uppity. {should go into the economic perspective dhaaga too.}What has happened since Nath's undeserved infamy, however, is that the west has realised that the scales are indeed tilting towards the east and that the former must accommodate the latter's priorities instead of characteristically trampling on them in a hitherto unequal international economic order. The EU and the US of 2008 are mellower today because of their economic malaises and are relenting somewhat to keep India and China within the loop of existing institutional frameworks.

In fact, it is now India's chance to turn the heat on the US for the latter's foot-dragging in the long-delayed Doha Round talks of the WTO. India's trade secretary Rahul Khullar recently predicted that the Doha Round would not be concluded successfully until the US presidential elections were over in late 2012. That American domestic political lobbying in the farm sector has been the real spoiler of the Doha Round is now becoming all the more evident.

We are fall guys no more, not only in front of our own perennially convinced nationalistic home audience, but before the cynical world at large too

So Canada can withdraw from Kyoto. And excuses like Canada being very close to USA economy and will follow USA approach onlee is thrown around: http://ca.reuters.com/article/topNews/i ... X420111213. Yet EU or Canada will not accommodate India - especially with such a small CO2 emission footprint. Oh well, it is the typical Conservatives at the helm in Canada

A good summary? http://www.thehindubusinessline.com/opi ... 712209.ece

The most significant outcome of the recently concluded United Nations Climate Conference at Durban has been the sidelining of the principle — arrived at earlier in Kyoto, Japan — that industrialised nations have a greater responsibility for reducing emission of greenhouse gases (GHGs) responsible for global warming. The Kyoto Protocol required these countries, numbering 37, to bring down the GHGs produced by them by 5.2 per cent in 2012, from their already high 1990 levels. What Durban has done is to undermine this basic principle. It has pledged to finalise a new protocol by 2015 that would bind all countries, whether industrialised or developing, to a regime of emission cuts effective from 2020.

ps: JLN bashers in full swing

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 14 Dec 2011 07:56

ramana ji,
I quoted the letter extracts on purpose. Not just because they are history or related to JLN, but also because they exhibit the exact fears/imaginations/lack of psychological preparations/blind ideological pre-cognitions that seem to be guiding the decision-making at the highest levels.

The uncanny resemblance to possible current scenarios are unmistakable. The fear of "retaliation" overwhelms the top-brains. This is the key. The key by which others raise the stakes, bluff, or feed disinformation to keep the fear of retaliation high. Chanakya describes the method. Maybe the intense hatred and distaste for anything that did not fit the reconstructed peaceful-onlee-empire-giving-up-onlee Asokan myth - had to be rejected.

That gud(h)rapurushas should not be trusted, and that the "king" must have his own eyes and ears where each ear and each eye does not know the existence of the other ear and the other eye, that intel needs to be assured thinking of all possible contaminations of one's own networks - is a sign of maturity in the king. There is no excuse that one did not "know" that he was being fed disinfo. Why does Indian intel go blind specifically when it is about moves that are aligned with wider Anglo-Saxon designs? The 1962 war came in the backdrop of signals that Mao was already sending out, of his differences with the USSR.

The game was clear post 1962. between 1958-61, and then from 61-66 are two phases in which Mao was essentially placing himself in the market for the west to reach out against USSR. That the Brits were playing this favourably in response is immediately clear in the 64-66 phase when the west turned away again from India. Part of this was of course the brief but defiant JLN's reposturing about NAM once the Chinese withdrew thereby allowing the western policymakers the excuse needed to help the Pak-China axis. What happened in Tashkent will forever remain a mystery. But it all fell into place. This makes it impossible for a paranoid IG to look for help anywhere outside the USSR [or trust that she would get such help when needed even if she dazzled and charmed western media circuses]. Her personal isolationist approach probably ironically freed her from the immediate disinformation networks and she went ahead with the 1971 campaign. For this she does get punished in 1977. Meanwhile Mao is keeping the pressure on the west by supporting the Vietnamese in early 70's - reminding them that he is yet to get what he wants from the west. So comes the early 70 secret understanding between Mao and USA. But IG has grown even more paranoid through 77 and therefore possibly more isolated from the Anglo-Saxon hands within, proving to be a "rogue", going nuclear full throttle, and therefore had to be culled in 1984. The return in 1980 could have had external blessings from USSR, and hence even more marked her out for elimination.

The ease with which, people who have failed to take the hints perhaps from handlers with their tails tied to the island or across the wider pond, are eliminated without prior intel - the ease with which Pakis can operate criminal and religious moves inside, carry out atrocities - all, point to something we have to remember on any journey we make into the future.

Pranav · Post by **Pranav** » 14 Dec 2011 08:06

brihaspati wrote: The ease with which, people who have failed to take the hints perhaps from handlers with their tails tied to the island or across the wider pond, are eliminated without prior intel - the ease with which Pakis can operate criminal and religious moves inside, carry out atrocities - all, point to something we have to remember on any journey we make into the future.

B ji, this blindness is a result of profound ignorance. Our leaders have hardly been better than Gaddhafi in their understanding of the world. That was one of the motivations of the "India and the new world order" thread.

johneeG · Post by **johneeG** » 14 Dec 2011 10:07

ramana wrote:johneeG, Goel's appraisal portrays JLN as A Soviet stool pigeion where as his actions furthered Anglo-Saxon interests.

Actually, I have always believed that JLN had soft-corner for the Anglo-Saxons and was not averse to acting according to their interests. Perhaps, he was 'installed' for this reason. But then, I later learnt that he had soft corner for commies. And Goel portrays him as a closet Soviet agent. Now, I am a bit confused. Was he Anglo-Saxon agent or Soviet agent? Or Was he a double agent like headley? Or as his hagiographers claim: was he trying to balance the US and USSR?

With Indira, there seems to be no doubt that she was more inclined towards Soviet. And KGB, seems to have infiltrated the country in her time. Also, India commies seem to have infiltrated and entrenched in various institutions, specially education and media.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 14 Dec 2011 10:35

In UK the socialist commies control the Indian Congress connection. All those Harold Laski and his successors. So they are both AS and FSU pasand.

SwamyG · Post by **SwamyG** » 14 Dec 2011 20:22

Durban climate meet: India compromised more than it gained

After two weeks of intense negotiations and a week of gruelling meetings among ministers, India appears to have conceded more than it gained at the Durban climate conference.

But officials put a spin on the results, saying that India's main plan of 'equity' has been accepted by the 194 countries meeting in Durban, and therefore, it was a success for the country.

Ah, so like I speculated yesterday it is 'spin'.

What India achieved in getting 'equity' included into the text was mere words, but what it has conceded is concrete action - a commitment on emissions cut.

The European Union, the strongest votary of the protocol can only hope to reduce its emissions to any large extent by cutting down growth of its economy.

If the ongoing recessions, or slowdown in the EU continues, it would help them meet the targets but it's an irony that a global commitment may be fulfiled only by reducing the well-being or potential progress in well-being of its citizen.

India lost the plot at Durban The Hindu's editorial. Obviously it is sympathetic to China, but further adds to the confusion of actual gain vs compromise.

It is clear that India was unprepared for the groundswell of support for a compact to deliver a global climate agreement binding on all nations. The Manmohan Singh government, egged on to intransigence by significant sections of civil society, sent a delegation that had no positive mandate, alienating it from all those countries whose interests lie in an early climate agreement. India, together with China, which was supportive of India throughout the meeting, was more or less isolated. The strategic mishandling of Durban is evident from the fact that after opposing for two weeks the very idea of an ‘agreement to have an agreement,' India finally assented to the Durban Platform without even the token inclusion of any of its core concerns such as equity. Repeated references to the principle without any attempt to put more flesh and bones on it made India appear more of a querulous holdout than a champion of developing country concerns. New Delhi has its work cut out in preparing for the tough negotiations due to commence next year. It needs to make up the ground ceded at COP 17. At a more fundamental level, it is high time the government realised that the interests of the 1.2 billion people that it so frequently invokes at climate negotiations lie as much in an early climate agreement as in adequate access to global atmospheric space, and grasped the complexity of translating this into negotiating realities.

The last word on this topic and discussions are yet to be written. More negotiations are planned in the next year.

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 15 Dec 2011 03:08

Pranav ji,
there has never really been a questioning of the causes behind consistent intel failure - especially where it concerns Tibet/China and TSP. [Perhaps to an extent even in Sri Lanka]. The first Republican admin relied on the institutions and personnel of the structure left behind and originally put up by the Brits. This is no blanket accusation of lack of patriotism or nationalism - but not everyone's idea of loyalty and nationalism or patriotism need to coincide. The Brits constructed their dossiers carefully, so they would have plenty of material to keep a lot of people under their thumb - even if those thumbed were so unwillingly. [This is the same tactic employed even now at various levels - from political parties to perhaps admin.]

Even now, these two things bother me a lot :
(a) Failure of intel to warn off things with sufficient urgency like 26/11
(b) the use of the rhetoric of "retaliation" and supposed consequent "war/destruction/stagnation of prosperity growth" if India retaliates to Paki or Chinese b*******.

China- TSP-China-Sri Lanka - what do they have in common as relevant for this discussion? well all of them had rather cozy interactions with the Brits. Indian elite had too - and hence things get all the more murky. "Who whom?"!

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 15 Dec 2011 03:42

johneeG wrote:
ramana wrote:johneeG, Goel's appraisal portrays JLN as A Soviet stool pigeion where as his actions furthered Anglo-Saxon interests.
Actually, I have always believed that JLN had soft-corner for the Anglo-Saxons and was not averse to acting according to their interests. Perhaps, he was 'installed' for this reason. But then, I later learnt that he had soft corner for commies. And Goel portrays him as a closet Soviet agent. Now, I am a bit confused. Was he Anglo-Saxon agent or Soviet agent? Or Was he a double agent like headley? Or as his hagiographers claim: was he trying to balance the US and USSR?

With Indira, there seems to be no doubt that she was more inclined towards Soviet. And KGB, seems to have infiltrated the country in her time. Also, India commies seem to have infiltrated and entrenched in various institutions, specially education and media.

If you explore this you may find some very interesting aspects. British Marxists have consistently shown that at the core they do work for British interests. British communists could have been used as a link/go between by both the British state as well as the Soviets - especially during Stalin's reign, and there are indications that the connection probably continued. Brit marxists reveal their true colours on various less known issues - for example they tried to whitewash the record of slavery and they were the keenest in trying to academically establish the myth that Britains "industrial revolution" had no inputs from the triangular "slave trade" and imperialist extraction of capital from India.

Similarly the British communists tried hard to use Indian communists placed in Moscow to prevent any possible help being forwarded to Indian opponents of the empire. [Abani Mukherjee versus Manabendranath or even Bose].

Keeping India "socialist" in the early years would serve British post-imperial targets rather well, and they would have the experience and the expertise to use radical ideologies to have a finger in the Indian pie - especially the radical leftist pie. The Indian communist movement was practically taken over and dominated by the Brit-Marxist-"influenced" RTI's from the late 30's to early 40's [JB and many many others]. In fact there was a curious swing in the Indian communist movement during July-August '42. The movement had actually started off supporting the "anti-imperialist" struggle, and those outside jail continued this line. Those who were in jail suddenly switched "position". In jail, out of contact with the "field-mass", the communists suddenly realized that the "people's war" against "fascism" was more important than the anti-imperialist struggle - and as a result, they appear to have been released earlier so that they could come out and campaign in favour of the "anti-fascist" struggle. The official explanation given is that "Moscow" ordered the change.

But the British facilitation [within its jails] gives a curious possibility. Perhaps recruitment was already made then? Encouraging a radical-pseudo-leftist colour to the likes represented by JLN, serves many purpose of the Brits. It keeps India from bypassing the Brits in establishing separate channels to Washington. It keeps the new Indian economy from taking on more direct capitalist routes towards competition. It effectively prevents the resurgence of the much-hated [and directly blamed for Brit retreat] "Hindu" towards national dominance - and in Brit eyes the one identity that proved the most troublesome [most armed and political resistance initiatives were coming from the "Hindu" - only a paltry resistance came from the "Muslim" in India outside the Pathans.] Most importantly - a false sense of "insider knowledge" could be generated in the new leaders through the left-interface to British communism.

Until 59, and perhaps even to 1962 - JLN and some of his key advisers showed a certain ideological false favourable image of communism, that played no mean role in the unpreparedness for 1962. So in that sense, the Brits had their puppets - whom they need not have directly under control. But who could be led to false beliefs and thereby satisfy ultimate Brit targets for the subcontinent. This is a very sadistic, revengeful, and in many senses an extremely twisted psychopathic core of a rashtra - a model for the core of the British rashtra - that should help in understanding long term behaviour of their ruling centres of power.

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 15 Dec 2011 04:05

brihaspati wrote:
Actually, I have always believed that JLN had soft-corner for the Anglo-Saxons and was not averse to acting according to their interests.

JLN was the lasst Englishman inside India

johneeG · Post by **johneeG** » 15 Dec 2011 04:42

Bji,

I found 'CT' site about Nehru and his lineage:

[deleted nonsense]

johneeG · Post by **johneeG** » 15 Dec 2011 05:04

So Ramana Garu,
there is no truth in it?

Airavat · Post by **Airavat** » 15 Dec 2011 08:22

Why Delhi replaced Calcutta as capital

In early 1911, an eight-member committee was constituted by the Governor General, Lord Hardinge of Penhurst, to look into the viability of Calcutta continuing as the capital of the British empire in India. The panel, which had only one Indian member in Saiyid Ali Imam, submitted its report on August 25, 1911, arguing strongly for shifting the capital to Delhi. Calcutta, the committee argued, is "ill-adapted" to be the capital of the "Indian Empire", which extended from Burma in the far East to Afghanistan in the west. It made particular mention of the partition of Bengal that had generated ill-feeling among Bengali Hindus.

"Public opinion in Calcutta is by no means always the same as... elsewhere in India," the panel said, adding that Delhi had "splendid communications", a good climate for seven months and being closer to Shimla (the summer capital) would result in substantial savings. The British were tired of Calcutta's heat and humidity. Besides, Delhi is closer to the commercial centres of Bombay and Karachi "whose interests are sometimes opposed to those of Calcutta", the panel noted. It listed out several political advantages as well - Delhi's connection with Hindu legends, especially the Mahabharata war, and that "Mahomedans" would be happy to see the "ancient capital of the Moguls restored to its proud position as the seat of an Empire".

Another key reason was the "undesirable" possibility of the Governor General of India and the Governor of Bengal residing in the same city and "liable to be brought in various ways into regrettable antagonism or rivalry". King Gorge V put the seal on the proposal by announcing the capital shift on December 12, 2011. And the entire country heard it in stunned silence.

Pranav · Post by **Pranav** » 15 Dec 2011 10:18

johneeG wrote:So Ramana Garu,
there is no truth in it?

There are well known lurid tales about the Nehru clan, and some of them are well founded. See the book "Reminiscences of the Nehru Age" by Mathai, excerpts of which have been posted in the JLN thread in the GDF.

But there is a lot of stuff for which there is no reliable source and may be false (e.g. allegations regarding paternal ancestry of Feroze Gandhi).

johneeG · Post by **johneeG** » 15 Dec 2011 10:25

Pranav wrote:
johneeG wrote:So Ramana Garu,
there is no truth in it?
There are well known lurid tales about the Nehru clan, and some of them are well founded. See the book "Reminiscences of the Nehru Age" by Mathai, excerpts of which have been posted in the JLN thread in the GDF.

But there is a lot of stuff for which there is no reliable source.

I have read/heard so much stuff about him, I dont know what to believe and what not to. I had hoped that some Guru like Bji would clarify grain from chaff.

I dont know whether you saw the link, but its claims are explosive(if not ridiculous bordering on absurd). Now, I would have dismissed them as such, but past experience of listening to many tales of Nehru stopped me from doing so.

Anyway, I wanted to know whether the name 'Nehru' is a common hindu last name?

Pranav · Post by **Pranav** » 15 Dec 2011 12:05

These Bills need A relook - http://www.tehelka.com/story_main51.asp ... 1BILLS.asp

Bills coming up for land confiscation, promotion of GM foods etc.

Hari Seldon · Post by **Hari Seldon** » 15 Dec 2011 19:24

About bloody time....way overdue! May no other Indian state suffer like the poor manipuris did!

No Manipur blockade rerun: Nariman

NEW DELHI: States affected by road and rail blockades may soon get some respite with solicitor general R F Nariman on Wednesday saying official forces would clear traffic in 24 hours.

At a time when a bench of Justices G S Singhvi and S J Mukhopadhaya was analyzing the situation arising from fortnight-long rail blockades in Rajasthan, Uttar Pradesh and Haryana, advocate Prashant Bhushan told the court that Manipur faced a road blockade for 121 days which threw normal life out of gear and seriously damaged the land-locked state's economy.

Nariman, whose assistance was sought by the bench during the last hearing, said once intelligence reports or information received otherwise indicates possible road or rail blockade agitation, the home secretary concerned must take immediate steps to clear traffic within 12 hours.

"If the said blockade is not removed within 12 hours for any reason, whatsoever, then under such circumstances, the home secretary of the state shall immediately request the Union home secretary to direct central forces or any other paramilitary force available at the command of the Centre to initiate desired preventive steps immediately to maintain or restore public order within 24 hours," Nariman said.

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 15 Dec 2011 21:35

Is it just me or their are just too many negative news items when it comes to WB after MB became CM?

Yayavar · Post by **Yayavar** » 15 Dec 2011 22:12

johneeG wrote:
Anyway, I wanted to know whether the name 'Nehru' is a common hindu last name?

Probably not. The story goes that they lived near a 'nehar' or canal and picked it from there. Exactly as Harivanshrai picked 'Bachchan' as his last name. It is what he was called when he was a child. So it is not a common last name.

There are many interesting stories of how certain last names came to be picked by certain individuals as they came in contact with formal administration in the British era. Otherwise one hardly had or needed a 'regular' last name. Many people did pick caste/profession or place as their last names.

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 16 Dec 2011 02:28

johneeG wrote:
Pranav wrote:
There are well known lurid tales about the Nehru clan, and some of them are well founded. See the book "Reminiscences of the Nehru Age" by Mathai, excerpts of which have been posted in the JLN thread in the GDF.

But there is a lot of stuff for which there is no reliable source.
I have read/heard so much stuff about him, I dont know what to believe and what not to. I had hoped that some Guru like Bji would clarify grain from chaff.

I dont know whether you saw the link, but its claims are explosive(if not ridiculous bordering on absurd). Now, I would have dismissed them as such, but past experience of listening to many tales of Nehru stopped me from doing so.

Anyway, I wanted to know whether the name 'Nehru' is a common hindu last name?

Please, don't call me a guru.

Anyway, in fact in spite of Mathai's outpourings, he too could be challenged, because a lot of things he says are as yet without independent documentary or verifiable evidence. This says nothing. Absence of proof could mean mere rumour, or it could mean reality, that is well hidden. There are things that one always has to just keep as model - potentialities/possibilities - without rejecting them, without accepting them. We have to keep those as hypotheses, claims and as we gain more knowledge/tools - to re-explore them. Maybe in the future, we will have docs in the public domain which are now hidden, even after 40 or 50 or 60 years. Docs which are claimed to be so multiple-lifetime sensitive that even after generations flowing through our mighty rivers, that even now their supposedly explosive powers can upset international relation. Relations which are so important that a whole nation needs to be kept in the dark from knowing the truth.

Given such an attitude and the apparent evidence that "sensitive" documents appear to vanish from our sensitive governments archives over time - say from one "committee" to the next - . Natural "ruination" perhaps - like the sarcasm with which our eminent historians professionally dismiss archeological artefacts as possibly been eaten up by white-ants - or the "naturally crumbling ruination" that affects Hindu temples in the Muslim period, but not Buddhist ones in the Hindu period which were ruined not by neglect but by Hindu. Maybe white ants gradually eat up incriminating documents. Maybe not.

Really sinister aspects of individual deeds, or thoughts, have a peculiar way of reappearing in the public domain. This is primarily because collaborators in such sinister deeds often keep records or pointers for their own safety as well as the safety of their progeny and descendants. Once the sword of a rashtryia regime that hangs over such heads and evidences are removed, such "facts" do reappear.

So I would suggest waiting for the appropriate time to check these things out.

Pranav · Post by **Pranav** » 16 Dec 2011 13:21

SC: Why has LN Mishra murder trial dragged for 37 years?

NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Thursday wanted to know why trial in the murder of then railway minister L N Mishra, who wielded considerable political clout being close to then PM Indira Gandhi, in a bomb attack in Samastipur on January 2, 1975 was dragging in the lower court even after 37 years. ...

Bomb thrown on the rostrum in Samastipur railway platform on January 2, 1975, during inauguration of broad gauge line, seriously injuring then railway minister L N Mishra who died the next day on way to hospital

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/indi ... 126884.cms

Had LN Mishra become troublesome for Indira Gandhi?

Atri · Post by **Atri** » 16 Dec 2011 14:05

The ship of democracy sails in greedy waters

good article on tehelka.. posting in full...

WHEN UNION minister Sharad Pawar was slapped by an obviously unbalanced youth, Anna Hazare passed an acerbic comment, “why just one slap?” As it always happens, he was roundly condemned by the establishment for making a remark in bad taste. But a more pertinent criticism would be that it personalised, and therefore trivialised, a conflict whose outcome would decide the future of India. Herein is a prolonged conflict between civil society and a criminalised government that has progressively disempowered the ordinary people of India. This form of government has also emptied the democracy of much of its content.

If Anna’s reaction could be branded irresponsible, then society’s Pawar-sympathy is downright hypocritical. Especially, when it is well known within the circles in Mumbai and Maharashtra, that Pawar symbolises the epitome of cronyism that the Indian democracy has degenerated to. The two chargesheets filed by CBI in April against Raja and others in the 2G scam have exposed this network, built entirely on corruption, intimidation and patronage, where politicians like Pawar are deeply involved. The rot is not just on the surface but it runs deep and is spread from Dubai and Lichtenstein to Singapore, New Delhi to Mumbai to Chennai, from metropolis to village and tehsils, as also from cabinet ministers to criminal underdogs.

Thus, it doesn’t come as surprise that the chargesheet filed by CBI draws close to a well written masala movie script. It has all the ingredients of a Bollywood gangster movie that stars not our regular film stars but the power-elite of the Indian state. The movie has an interesting beginning: the rise of two dynamic young CEOs aged 37 and 38, who head (in one case headed) the fastest growing real estate companies in Mumbai and Chennai, and owed their meteoric rise to a powerful political patronage. The CEOs represent DB Realty (based in Mumbai); the second is Greenhouse Promoters (based in Chennai).

DB Realty has a humble beginning, which was created in 2006 by two Mumbai families – small time hotelier Usman Ebrahim Balwa and a real estate dealer Krishna Morari Goenka. In the next four years DB Realty grew at a pace never before witnessed even in Mumbai’s rambunctious real estate sector. By early 2011, DB had added 21 million square feet (msqf) of new residential and office space to the Mumbai market and had another 40 msqf under construction. Its managing director, Shahid Balwa, the younger son of Usman Balwa, had assets worth $1.06 billion and was listed by Forbes as the 66th richest man in India.

How did a newcomer in the real estate business become one of the largest builders in Mumbai in as little as five years? Within the annals of the state secretariat it was common knowledge that the young Balwa enjoyed a close relationship with an influential politician and owed his company’s success to that liaison. According to the articles reported by Times of India, the files concerning DB Realty were processed and permissions granted within days.

Who was DB Realty’s mysterious backer? Niira Radia, the lobbyist employed by Tatas, Unitech and scores of other companies, revealed during interrogation by the CBI: ‘As per the general perceptions in Mumbai and outside, DB Realty is controlled, directly or indirectly by Sharad Pawar and his family. This created a sensation in the media, but most people still did not know that DB Realty may also have been a conduit for investments by the notorious gangland don, Dawood Ibrahim.

According to Zameeruddin Ansari, an associate of Dawood’s brother Anees Ibrahim, whom the Mumbai crime branch arrested in September 2004, Pramod Goenka’s real estate company was a conduit for the D-Company’s investments in Mumbai’s real estate market. This disclosure had come after a far more damning accusation made six months earlier, in October 2003, by a rival Mumbai builder Rajesh Patange who accused Krishna Murari of having placed the ‘contract on his life’ in a dying declaration after he had been shot by four hitmen in a typical Mumbai contract killing. But neither in 2003 nor in 2004 did the Mumbai police even interrogate, let alone charge him with either offence.

The Maharashtra police also had evidence, gleaned from arrested gangsters, that Shahid Balwa’s father Usman Ebrahim Balwa was closely associated with another notorious underworld don, Chhota Shakeel. In all it, and central security agencies, sent seven reports to the state government between 2003 and 2008 against the Goenka and Balwa families, but no one paid attention. “We invest so much resources (in the collection of this information) because there are serious issues of national security” a Delhi-based official, probably an R&AW employee, lamented to the Times of India. “But governments just ignore them,” he went on to say.

It remains to be seen how much of the above information is included in the CBI’s chargesheets against Shahid Balwa and Vinod Goenka, Krishna Murari’s other son and Balwa’s partner in DB Realty. But the media and the public can join the dots that connect the Balwas and the Goenkas with Sharad Pawar and Dawood Ibrahim; and Pawar to Dawood.

GREENHOUSE PROMOTERS had a similar meteoric rise in Chennai, for similar reasons. Early in his career as a local lawyer in Perambalur, Tamil Nadu, A Raja once defended a young man who had a small business in Karur district, buying plots of land with margin payments and completing the payment when he sold the land to someone else. His name was Sadiq Batcha. Batcha had sought legal help when some of his deals went sour. This became the foundation of an extraordinarily lucrative partnership. When Raja later entered politics, he seems to have begun to feed Batcha with information about where the government intended to buy land for new projects in the area, for whenever the government announced a project in the neighbourhood of Perambalur, Raja’s constituency, the land had already been bought by Batcha and had to be acquired from him at a much higher price.

In 2004, when Raja first became a union minister in the NDA government, Batcha set up a real estate firm, Greenhouse Promoters. His joint managing director in the company was Raja’s elder brother, Kalaiperumal. In the next few years the company grew at a dizzying pace, always buying land cheap and selling it to the government, or to major real estate companies, at much higher prices. Within a few years Greenhouse Promoters, which started with an equity capital of just Rs 1,00,000 reported a revenue of Rs 600 crore - sixty thousand times its equity base, and had offices in Bengaluru and Singapore! Raja’s wife, nephew and various other relatives have also been employees and directors of the company.

The 2G scam has conjoined the fates of these two companies with that of one of India’s largest and most iconic companies, Anil Ambani’s Reliance Telecommunications. After an intense interrogation in February, and faced with a second summons from the CBI, Sadiq Batcha committed suicide on March 16 this year. The CBI was trying to track down where the presumed payments made to Raja that had been salted, and had come across evidence that suggested that it had been put into accounts in six countries. At the time of his death Greenhouse was describing itself as a company engaged in exports. According to some newspaper reports, the CBI had wanted to interrogate Batcha to learn the identities of four persons from the D-Company whom it suspected of having set up the Singapore account. Batcha’s suicide could not therefore have come at a more convenient time for all concerned.

Much of what has appeared in the media is still conjecture. Ambani may not have known about DB Realty’s murky origins, and the charges that the CBI has hinted at are still to be proved in court. But in the court of public opinion not only these companies and their owners and managers, but the entire Indian state stands condemned. For, the 2G scam and its attendant disclosures has exposed a web of shady transactions and a systemic abuse of state power that stretches all the way from two of the central government’s most powerful ministers, to several of India’s most respected industrialists, managers, lobbyists and journalists, to a political party in Tamil Nadu with an otherwise enviable record for good governance, to hitmen in Mumbai’s underworld, and to two of its most detested gangster chiefs, one of whom is a self-proclaimed enemy of India and has actively aided terrorist attacks on Mumbai.

The complete disappearance of moral values that this story reveals should be of immense concern to all Indians, because it directly threatens our future. But what is particularly troubling is the way these disclosures have reinforced the long-held suspicion that Bal Thackeray’s off-the-cuff allegation that Maharashtra Congress, headed by Sharad Pawar, had been the political patron and protector of Dawood Ibrahim in the 1980s and early 1990s. For, if DB Realty was only formed in 2006, who was the powerful patron, hinted at by the Mumbai police and central intelligence agencies, who shielded Krishna Murari Goenka from a charge of murder in 2003 and his son from interrogation for having business dealings with Dawood Ibrahim in 2005?

If the allegations are true, Pawar, former chief minister of Maharashtra for more than a decade and also a powerful minister in the current Manmohan Singh cabinet, has felt no qualms in dealing with, and protecting Dawood Ibrahim. Ibrahim was the kingpin of the 1993 serial bomb blasts in Mumbai and carried out the bombings allegedly in collusion with the Pakistan ISI. Is there anything sacred left in the Indian state?

Prem Shankar Jha is a senior journalist based in New Delhi.
[email protected]

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 16 Dec 2011 14:15

Atri wrote:
good article on tehelka.. posting in full...

What M********-ji spoke of in hushed tones in Nukkad and elsewhere has been written in bright bold font by Prem Shankar Jha in Telehka.

What gives?

Telehaka giving space to Prem Shankar Jha? Telehaka going against a key cog in the Dynasty wheel as of now? Is there a Delhi Sultanate -- Adil Shahi war in pipeline?

Prem Shankar Jha suddenly feeling suicidal? Or is the UPA power crumbling so fast that the whispers are growing louder now?

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 16 Dec 2011 14:25

^^^

It is likely that this is just the beginning of the Chorus the end of which will usher in the clown prince in a gesture of grand sacrifice. While ditching the Sardar.

Atri · Post by **Atri** » 16 Dec 2011 14:33

Sanku wrote:
Atri wrote:
good article on tehelka.. posting in full...

What M********-ji spoke of in hushed tones in Nukkad and elsewhere has been written in bright bold font by Prem Shankar Jha in Telehka.

What gives?

Telehaka giving space to Prem Shankar Jha? Telehaka going against a key cog in the Dynasty wheel as of now? Is there a Delhi Sultanate -- Adil Shahi war in pipeline?

Prem Shankar Jha suddenly feeling suicidal? Or is the UPA power crumbling so fast that the whispers are growing louder now?

my feelings exactly.. people have been speaking of this in hushed tones since 1990.

delhi has no power to attack adil shah now.. the only sad part is this is adil shah and not shivaji.. there were two invasions (and rebellions) by adil shah against delhi one before shivaji's rise and one after his death.. this mughal-adil fight made environment conducive for rise of shivaji. will mahadev agree this time again? the civil polls of MH has given massive public mandate in favor of NCP.. in case of mid term polls, MH (and ap too) is firmly in hands of UPA. is adil shah jumping out of bandwagon?

BTW, the bold emphasis was mine in previous post...