Strategic leadership for the future of India - II

[ramana]

Could be x-posted elsewhere....


I, me and Myself

I, me, myself
It's no surprise that Manmohan Singh's latest Pakistan initiative is a crashing failure, says N.V.Subramanian.

6 April 2011: Where A.B.Vajpayee failed to win peace with Pakistan, it is improbable that Manmohan Singh will succeed. The analysis is as follows:

Before the BJP came to power, there was the notion that it alone could clamp down a peace with Pakistan. Regardless of how many people in India believed this, it was certainly a popular feeling in Pakistan.

The reasoning for this was simple -- and perhaps simplistic. With its hard-line on politics, including foreign relations, and with its links to the conservative RSS, the BJP was a match for the radicals in the Pakistan army and ISI.

Any solution that came in a BJP regime backed by a radical establishment on the Pakistan side would be acceptable to both countries. But what was the peace settlement to be? The details were fuzzy.

Did the BJP actually have a position on the core dispute of Jammu and Kashmir? It did have a formal view, reflecting the Indian Parliament resolution, that Pakistan-occupied Kashmir (PoK) had to be given up to India.

But this was the maximum position. By itself, Pakistan would never give up PoK. And India would not launch a war to regain it, because that would certainly ratchet up to a nuclear exchange.

The BJP had a minimum position, which is not very unlike the Congress line, or indeed the general Indian thinking. This is to convert the present LoC into a permanent border, and sort out other issues such as Siachen, etc, gradually.

Many years ago, this writer interviewed several BJP politicians, and they all hewed to the minimum position, although with requests to play it down.

As politics of the late-Nineties played out, the BJP formed a NDA coalition government, with Vajpayee as PM. Vajpayee brought his image of a friendly first Janata government foreign minister to his new assignment.

This allowed him to engage the other South Asian governments more easily than a Congress government could, because it still had to live down its Big Brother disposition towards them.

While much is made of the Vajpayee-Nawaz Sharief bonhomie, it is actually his engagement of Parvez Musharraf that is more interesting -- and illustrative.

Here was the architect of the Kargil War who lost it but nevertheless became a minor hero in his own country. He also had to face the full might of the Indian military machine menacing Pakistan on the border after the 13 December Parliament terrorist attack.

But Musharraf was a hard nut to crack. He did not reciprocate the intensity of Vajpayee's feelings for rapprochement until the two terrorist attacks on him. Even then, he confessed the limitations of his power.

He made it clear first during the Agra summit and repeatedly thereafter that without a consensus in Pakistan's military establishment, peace steps with India were hard to take.

The most he could deliver was a ceasefire on the LoC, and by and large, and for a variety of reasons, it has held. But beyond that, Vajpayee procured little on his Pak peace project, which was part of his political vision for India.

Indeed, Vajpayee held out the dangers to Pakistan for being antagonistic towards India. He said in the context of Fazlur Rehman's visit in July 2003 that if India and Pakistan did not make peace, a third country would intervene.

Vajpayee was clearly alluding to the US post its intervention in Iraq. That same theme has been repeated by the Pakistan PM after his Mohali meeting with Manmohan Singh.

And yet, Manmohan Singh can never bring to successful closure Vajpayee's Pak peace project. There are several reasons for this.

The most important is that complete peace with Pakistan, which fundamentally means resolution of the J and K issue to both countries' satisfaction, can never materialize till the Islamist Pakistan army/ ISI reign supreme.

If Musharraf as part of this Islamist military establishment could not/ did not deliver to Vajpayee, how can Pakistan's current democratic figureheads make a grand presentation of peace to Manmohan Singh?

Immutable from Pakistan's perspective is its hate-India ideology, its compulsive need to avenge Bangladesh, and its determination to Balkanize this country, all of which are well-known and been frequently addressed in this magazine.

The other reason for Manmohan Singh's expected failure on Pakistan is that he approaches that country from a position of weakness. If India after the Kargil victory and Operation Parakram could not entirely convince Pakistan about peace, how can Manmohan bring a change of heart with zilch leverage?

And unlike Vajpayee who had the nation rallying behind him, Manmohan Singh as an isolated and unelected PM brings no traction to the Pak peace process.

To be sure, Vajpayee had his cabinet detractors against the peace project. Importantly, he understood their concerns, and consequently made limited peace offers to Pakistan. Manmohan Singh faces cabinet opposition to peace-making with Pakistan of a different order.

There is fundamental disagreement to his approach. Key ministers are not at all convinced that the time is opportune to negotiate peace with Pakistan. They intuitively realize that a project that failed with Vajpayee (with all his strengths) cannot succeed with Manmohan (burdened with infirmities).

But the most important reason for Manmohan Singh's failure on Pakistan is likely to emanate from his intentions. Having failed as PM on all fronts, he is desperate for success on Pakistan.

It was a most cynically-motivated decision to embed the Mohali summit in the match between India and Pakistan. Till two days ago, PMO officials were crowing about it to journalists over expensive coffee paid by you and me.

They were sure that India's World Cup victory and the alleged "Mohali spirit" would shore up Manmohan Singh's image. It was all about image-making.

Well, first Shahid Afridi crashed the PM's high spirits.

And now, the stink of corruption, which Manmohan Singh felt was wafted away by the World Cup, has returned to torment him again.

Nemesis has taken the form of Anna Hazare.

Manmohan Singh often says he honestly wants peace with Pakistan. No Indian PM can say and mean otherwise. But he sees peace with Pakistan as a political tactic to consolidate his disastrous prime-ministership.

That way, he surely drowns any prospect of peace with Pakistan.

[Klaus]

Has this person been on the BRF radar before?

Some of his foundation's claims seem outlandish, one of them being his claim that his blessings can reflect UV rays from drinking water, making it safer.

[devesh]

^^^
the above is an imported strategy from the Western multi-billion dollar "Psychic" industry. mix in Pseudo-science with the ability to read body language and manipulate people: and you have a man with mysterious powers. till now, we used to have fraud babas come up every now and then to exploit people. now, as the success of "Psychics" in West becomes a global phenomenon, some of our own ch***yas are copying this strategy.

[ramana]

Two X-posts that are the anti-thesis of this thread...

Another brilliant article on the events leading to 1962 war:

http://www.rediff.com/news/2002/dec/18chin.htm

"I remember many a time when our senior generals came to us, and wrote to the defence ministry saying that they wanted certain things... If we had had foresight, known exactly what would happen, we would have done something else... what India has learnt from the Chinese invasion is that in the world of today there is no place for weak nations... We have been living in an unreal world of our own creation."

Jawaharlal Nehru, Rajya Sabha, 1963

Instead of "I", Nehru used the collective "we", a clear indication of his reluctance to own up his own mistakes as a man.

"The fact of the matter is that Nehru felt a gnawing of conscience throughout this episode. He knew that the blame for the disaster was more his than that of his loyal friend [defence minister V K Krishna Menon]," says journalist and historian Durga Das.

"The decision-making system during 1959-62 was starkly ad hoc and designed primarily to suit the personality of the Prime Minister -- who preferred to deal with these matters personally -- even Krishna Menon seldom took a stand on any point or even made a contribution when the Prime Minister was in the chair... in the Army Headquarters, it was General Kaul who had caught the Prime Minister's eye... It was not Krishna Menon who was primarily culpable for the practice of General Officers establishing direct access to politicians... It was Nehru who, many years previously, first established this irregularity," says the then director general of military operations, Brigadier (later Major General) D K Palit, in his book War in High Himalayas.

So he was not a natural leader who tried to find excellence. Leadership was thrust on him.

and

Some other brilliant articles by same author:

How Nehru Let Us down: http://www.rediff.com/news/2002/dec/03chin.htm

Excerpt:

As for our leaders then, only Sardar Patel had some understanding of the concept of sovereignty. Nehru always displayed an abject lack of it. Examples are galore, right from the time of Partition.

His refusal to accept the accession of the State of Jammu and Kashmir on September 19, 1947, when it was originally offered by Maharaja Hari Singh, a good five weeks before the invasion of his state by Pakistan. Had the accession been accepted then, the entire state would have been ours. The Pakistan of those days would never have dared attack India, so superior was our military strength on account of the division of the armed forces on religious lines.

Later, Nehru practically surrendered our sovereignty when he invited Lord Louis Mountbatten, the governor general, to preside over and chair the meetings of his own Cabinet and the Cabinet Committee on Defence on matters regarding the accession and the military action after Pakistan invaded Jammu and Kashmir. Mountbatten, basically a servant of the British Crown, did his best to delay the decisions.

Worse, as India started winning the war and liberating parts of north Kashmir, Nehru inexplicably (most likely under the strong influence of Mountbatten and his wife, who shaped much of his thinking in those days) declared a 'ceasefire' and stopped our victorious army dead in its tracks before it could liberate the entire state. He declared the ceasefire arbitrarily, without consulting his full Cabinet, the Constituent Assembly (as Parliament was then known), his military commanders, or the maharaja/prime minister of Jammu and Kashmir.

Nehru was the architect of Article 370, with which he burdened India to placate a hurt Sheikh Abdullah.

The Chinese occupation of Tibet should have forced a reassessment of the threat to India. After they enforced their suzerainty on Tibet in 1951, the threat deserved greater attention. But when General K M Cariappa met Nehru to discuss the defence of the North East Frontier Agency, he was bluntly told to mind only Kashmir and Pakistan as his concerns for defence and leave China to the politicians and the diplomats.

As Lieutenant General S P P Thorat recounts in his autobiography 'From Reveille to Retreat', "When [in 1959] I, as GoC-in-C Eastern Command, met Menon in Delhi, I opened the subject [of defence against the Chinese] with him. In his usually sarcastic style he said that there would be no war between India and China and [if there was] he was quite capable of fighting it himself at the diplomatic level."

Nehru learnt no lessons from the war in Kashmir. Practicality always took a back seat in his mind, which was dominated by idealism. He went on emotionally in his rhetoric of 'Hindi Chini bhai bhai', all the while considering himself a superior international statesman and India an elder brother of China.

He was proudly going around as the unchallenged leader of the Third World. He failed to realise that the Chinese leaders had begun to resent his approach and his manner of dealing with them, that as per them China was the natural leader of the Third World, that the initial bond of personal friendship he had formed with the Chinese leaders was not strong enough to withstand this strain, and that personal relations can never score over vital national interests in any case. Countries fight wars when their vital interests are threatened. Nehru and Krishna Menon failed to understand this.

Nehru's rigidity on the border issue, his insistence on Chinese withdrawal before border talks could begin, his grant of political asylum to the Dalai Lama and permission to him to establish a Tibetan government-in-exile (an act that created conditions for a future invasion of Tibet by India or outside powers through India to restore the Dalai Lama's rule, if desired), the hostile Indian press on the question of the occupation of Tibet, and Nehru's increasingly aggressive statements on the border made the Chinese believe he had become a tool in the hands of the Anglo-American imperialists.

Chinese Premier Zhou Enlai was maintaining a friendly posture, but he had practically begun to hate Nehru, as is clear from the text of his conversations with US President Richard Nixon in 1972, now made public. There were possibly some outward signs of this and some hints were dropped, but Nehru was blind to them. The Chinese, basically secretive in nature, were also not very open about their ill feelings.

The Chinese also knew that India was unprepared for a high-altitude war, and there was no imperial power behind her with any ready plan to enter Tibet. Since the Indian threat was unreal, punishing Nehru must have been the only, or a major, motive for their attacks.

Nehru continued with his blind love for socialism and an oppressed sister nation. Zhou and his generals were invited for many military functions like the passing out parade of the National Defence Academy, firepower demonstration/exercises by the army, and even visits to the various military establishments like the Defence Services Staff College and the College of Combat, Mhow. Zhou embraced the young cadets passing out then with affection, but had no qualms in butchering them when they were guarding our borders in 1962 as young officers.

Biggest lack of leadership is accountability and awareness of own contribution to the disaster and letting some one else take the blame and allow minions in press to shape opinions.

Maybe he thought Kashmir should go to TSP hence his reluctance and bungling in the initial days?

[devesh]

Nehru was a moron whose burden we still carry today....why spend time writing huge articles every once in a while....his legacy is a burden.

[ramana]

Again whats the point of name calling? One has to understand how and why we got here and see what lessosn can be learned or unlearned.

One lesson is that there has to be 'accountability' or ownership of the problem. That means not blaming the others or let someone else be the fall guy. What this does is it erodes the moarle of the lower ranks when they see the root of the problem does not acknowledge their role in the problem.


A simple "mea culpa" and "I get it" would have sufficed. Without this all corrective action is futile for humans are involved.
A further proof of his not getting it is the letter to Kaul after he was shown to be prime cause of the military setback.

He should have written that on his own private letterhead and not the PM's letter head for that undermines the chain of command.

BTW after POKII India is trying to revive the unified servcies command and is finding it difficult due to the mis-steps he put in place right after 1947.

All in all he seems ot be the inappropriate leader to be the Prime Minster. He should have been the President if at all he had to be somebody.

[Jarita]

^^^
the above is an imported strategy from the Western multi-billion dollar "Psychic" industry. mix in Pseudo-science with the ability to read body language and manipulate people: and you have a man with mysterious powers. till now, we used to have fraud babas come up every now and then to exploit people. now, as the success of "Psychics" in West becomes a global phenomenon, some of our own ch***yas are copying this strategy.

The guy is very critical about anything Indian including karma. His western audiences applaud him

[ramana]

Has this person been on the BRF radar before?

Some of his foundation's claims seem outlandish, one of them being his claim that his blessings can reflect UV rays from drinking water, making it safer.

Klaus, How does this post jive or reconcile with the thread title? Looks like totally non sequitor.

[ramana]

Here is a report from Pioneer on a forgotten uprising in Assam

Few remember Phulaguri Uprising 150 years ago

Few remember anti-British Phulaguri uprising 150 years ago Tuesday, 25 October 2011 13:03 Durba Ghosh / PTI | Guwahati

Peasants of remote Phulaguri village in central Assam's Nagaon district had dealt the first blow to the British in the northeast in 1861, but 150 years later there are few in independent India who remember the rebellion.


The revolt, known as 'Phulaguri dhawa', in which a British official was killed and several police officers were injured, was triggered by a ban imposed on opium cultivation and a proposed taxation on betel leaf and nut.

The British crushed the rebellion, but the incident shook the foundation of the British rule in the region all the same, a resident of Phulagari and president of a committee, formed to commemorate the 150 years of the revolt, Hari Kanta Das said.

"It is sad that the state government has forgotten to commemorate the event and honour the martyrs and even the local Congress MLA who had earlier promised to be present at a small function organised by us, failed to attend it," Das said.

The resources with the organising committee were limited and so "we decided to hold only an hour-long function to commemorate the day on October 18, but now we plan to hold a public meeting on October 30 which will be a part of the celebration," he said.

Whatever might have been its original objective, the uprising became a symbol of challenge to the mighty British power in the province and projected the anti-colonial character of the Assamese people, Das said.

Nagaon Deputy Commissioner M Angamathu, however, pointed out that the district administration has decided to form a 25-member committee, comprising historians, intellectuals and prominent citizens, to prepare a detailed history of the uprising.

"We have some other plans to commemorate the uprising by promoting Phulaguri as a tourist spot with all amenities to showcase the contribution of the northeast to the freedom struggle," Angamathu said.

A memorial was erected by the district administration about a decade ago at the very place on the bank of the Kollong River where thousands of farmers had gathered to launch an agitation against the economic policies of British rulers and the various measures that led to the destruction of traditional ways of livelihood.

The genesis of the uprising has been traced to the British government's direction to the local administration to conduct a feasibility study on the possibility of imposition of tax on betel leaf cultivation which was extensive in the district.

The possibility of imposition of another tax, close on the heels of ban on opium cultivation in 1860, triggered the simmering discontent into a full-blown rebellion.

On October 18, 1861 Lt Singer, Third Class Deputy Commissioner, arrived at Phulaguri along with a jail 'daroga' and began negotiation with the peasants who had gathered there, but the situation soon turned violent and Singer, along with a few policemen, were beaten to death and his body was thrown into the Kollong River.

The incident triggered a brutal retaliation by the British and 141 persons were arrested as per government estimates and tried at Nagaon and even at Calcutta with many of them awarded death sentence and life imprisonment.

INC had a delibrate policy to project only their movement as the genuine independence movement. All others were ignored or suppressed. When the rebellion was too big to ignore they had no choice but to acknowledge it however reluctantly.

[brihaspati]

This suppression of popular uprisings is what led to this abiding myth of our "commons" being apathetic. An erstwhile poster on the forum converged with the congrez line - just because of the success of this rashtryia tactical line.

congrez actually does this out of two reasonings:

(1) actual highlighting of all the various popular uprisings as well as their circumstances will show that the congrez movement was a layered hijacking of popular anger into a narrow dynastic channel in collaboration with sections of the Brits

(2) many of the original circumstances in which these popular movements arose could closely parallel circumstances existing now. The forceful overthrow of unpopular regimes which can no longer be removed from power using peaceful and legitimate means - is a long standing Indian tradition - that cannot be allowed to be established to safeguard a dynastic continuity in power.

[Bharath.Subramanyam]

Vinod Mehta has published his memoir "Lucknow Boy: A Memoir"


See what he has written about ABV:
http://www.hindustantimes.com/News-Feed ... 64918.aspx
http://www.hindustantimes.com/News-Feed ... 64918.aspx

My relations with Vajpayee were good. Very good. I had known him since my Debonair days and when I moved to Delhi in 1991, I had several opportunities to meet him socially and officially…

…Vajpayee was no saint. He liked to drink moderately and eat non-vegetarian food less moderately. Being a bachelor and a political star (Henry Kissinger: power is the ultimate aphrodisiac), he was never short of female company.

When he became India's first bachelor prime minister, he juggled a strange domestic life. A Mrs Kaul, whose husband was a college professor and had passed away, moved into 7 Race Course Road, along with her daughter Namita and the daughter's husband, Ranjan. Namita's official designation was foster daughter and Ranjan Bhattacharya became foster son-in-law.

Vajpayee, to his credit, made no effort to hide the ménage à quatre…

…AB Vajpayee's PMO fell into the hands of three individuals. Brajesh Mishra, who had been India's permanent representative at the United Nations between 1979 and 1981 and on deputation with the UN till 1987, was his closest aide... When things got hot for the 'moderate face' of the BJP inside the party, he would pop off to New York to spend time with Brajesh, doing, rumour had it, some naughty things…

…The husband and wife team of Ranjan and Namita were the other power centres in 7 Race Course Road. Vajpayee may have had some reservations about his son-in-law. However, the foster daughter could do no wrong in his eyes. Namita and Ranjan began assiduously cultivating the Delhi media. They had unconcealed contempt for what they called knickerwala journalists; they mingled with Vir Sanghvi, Barkha Dutt, Shekhar Gupta - even me.


Also see what he writes about Sonia Gandhi:
http://www.outlookindia.com/article.aspx?278925
http://www.outlookindia.com/article.aspx?278925 (Almost at the last)

===========================================================

Many people in the forum wonder why some parts of BJP doesn't fight 'too much' on corruption or why they never developed newspapers, tv channels supporting them when they were in power for 6 years or even later.

Some parts (not all) of BJP fears as they have done things which dynasty will use against them. Some leaders also have very extensive 'corporate' dealings which puts them in issues.

=====================================================
Very surprising that Vinod Mehta doesn't give out anything like this (like what he writes about ABV) about the dynasty (even the courtiers/friends of the dynasty).

If you fight the dynasty, you should not have any baggage (even in your extended family). They will unleash full media on you or on your supporters. Also they have other methods.


Other methods:
i. There was a young BaJhaPa MP from North East who was very patriotic and dynamic. In 2009 elections he lost because of massive rigging & some amount of violence. He even filed a case in the court. By due to threats to life, he left BaJhaPa and was forced to join dynasty party.

ii. Another IIT&IIM product from UP (a rags to riches entrepreneur) joined BaJhaPa before 2009. Since he is from a caste, which dynasty party is looking wean away from Mayawati, it looks like there were offers. Since then he has been fearing for his life & kind of keeps low profile (lives a lot in Southern India).

===============================================

Finally with Gadkari there has been lot of good changes. Revitalizing the party structure, focusing on good governance, making sure ego tussle is kept out etc. They are becoming a party of good governance. Their focus is 'economic development', 'military development alone'. I don't think they will take any ideological issues in the near future.

One missing component is the creation of ideological media. Partially because Sangh believes in secularism, not understanding that secularism is what feeding semitic forces to tear India. May be they are doing it out of necessity. They see the society not responding to ideological issues and think that India only needs economic & military development for another 15-20 years. Or it can be pain wrong understanding of semitic ideologies by Sangh, as Sita Ram Goel & Ram Swarup said.

People in general think RSS controls BJP. But when you start interacting with many leaders of 'thought leaders' of BJP, you know how much they keep 'sanghwallahs/knickerwallas' away. Also partially the blame is on Sangh, as they have not focused on developing the skill set of its people, who can take on JNUwallahs, seculars and media lackeys.
=======================================


Economic liberalization, news/information from all over the world & effects of foreign travel has unleashed 'a hunger' even in the huge 'deracinated' population. They will vote out leaders/parties which won't deliver on governance. Since dynasty & the party system can never deliver good governance & keep away from corruption (not just because of individuals/leaders, but because they have the mughal mansabdhari model), they will shrink slowly.

Since the party knows it can never do 'good governance' and 'corrupt free', it wants to be the party of freebies (NREGA, RTE, RTF etc). But since there is no way the mughal nasabdhari model can deliver these freebies correctly to voters without skimming in the middle & keep the voters in tight leash, this is also bound to fail. For this model to work, they need complete control of the administration with committed cadre like CPM in Bengal. DMK failed with all these freebies since it can not have the control over the rural/urban population of TN (like CPM).

The news from UP is that 'Son is Setting' , marginally a few seats might increase for dynasty. But not even second position. So daughter might come in after UP elections and son might get promoted before UP elections.

Slowly the dynasty is setting as B ji says. Another good thing is that this dynasty has made sure no other dynasty can claim the gaddi or the party. The one person from AP who could have got the Delhi Gaddi due to the support of one Semitic religious affiliation & started a dynasty, got 'accidented'.


AP, Orissa, Kerala, Punjab might bring out oppurtunities

[ramana]

Bharat, have you tried to correlate the demand to remove AFSPA in Kashmir and the principal backer is PC aka the family! What if they want to empower MHA with those AFSPA powers to combat saffron terrorism?

[ramana]

Someone cared to study our pet peeve!!!!!


Nandini Chatterjee, "The Making of Indian Secularism: Empire, Law and Christianity, 1830-1960"
Palgrave Macmillan | 2011-03-01 | ISBN: 0230220053 | 320 pages |

This book examines religion in India under British rule and the immediate postcolonial years, from an unusual angle, placing Indian Christians at the centre of the story. It addresses legal developments regarding religion and its practice during British imperial rule in India, and the political emergence of Indian Christians as a community in this context.

[RamaY]

The more I think about JLN I get to believe that he is a curse on India from the get go!

1. His ambition cost India the partition (assuming making Jinnah would have avoided partition. It is a different matter if partition is a good thing or not)

2. His ambition again cost India the PMship of Sardar Patel.

3. His stupidity cost JK state the first time (when he rejected Raja Harisinghs accession)

4. His lust cost JK the second time (when he made Mountbatten to chair the military meetings)

5. His stupidity cost JK the third time (when he went to UN)

6. His self-centeredness cost JK the fourth time (when he accepted A370)

7. His ego cost Tibet

8. His stupidcost resulted in 1962 defeat

9. His pride cost India the Gandhi clan (by making Gandhi give his name to Firoz khan)

10. His blood line cost India the future

[skher]

Bharat, have you tried to correlate the demand to remove AFSPA in Kashmir and the principal backer is PC aka the family! What if they want to empower MHA with those AFSPA powers to combat saffron terrorism?

X-posting from J&K discussion thread:

saar...it seems to indicate more confidence in HM's ability to manage the Central Armed Police Forces, the ministry in general and allow CRPF to claim the turf as the prime COIN agency. A possible entry point to creation of National Counter Terrorism Centre.

[

This statement was actually a lightbulb moment for me.

Yes, this is a move by the HM and its tools (CRPF, IB etc.) to claim turf from the army as the prime COIN agency.

Since the IA is apolitical... IA being the prime COIN agency thus far, posed no danger to democracy.

However, if the HM takes over the COIN mantle... the next thing you know, they will be enacting equivalents of AFSPA to empower their own limbs. POTA, TADA type implements... but even more draconian. They will justify these implements in the name of "national security" because they will be employed in J&K, NE etc. in much the same way as AFSPA was.

However, unlike the AFSPA... these implements will be at the disposal of the very political central govt. of India, to use as it pleases in any part of India.

Combine this situation with PC and Pigvijay's pronouncements on "Saffron Terrorism"... with things like the NAC's "Communal Violence Bill", expressly targeted against Hindus and only Hindus... and it's not difficult to see where things will go from here.

There is a desire within the HM to restore the crushing power of Central Govt authority that existed in Indira Gandhis' day... but put it at the disposal of a regime that doesn't enjoy a fraction of the popular legitimacy that Indira Gandhi did. The objective is to replace AFSPA and Indian Army with a highly politicized force, exercising extra-constitutional powers, that can selectively target domestic political opposition.

[skher]

saar...it seems to indicate more confidence in HM's ability to manage the Central Armed Police Forces, the ministry in general and allow CRPF to claim the turf as the prime COIN agency. A possible entry point to creation of National Counter Terrorism Centre.

This statement was actually a lightbulb moment for me.

Rudradevjee, this bullet list is an encore.

A clear disinformation of intent can be inferred from hon'ble CM Omar Adbullah's recent speech.
To be fairest possible, he seems to wish for complete overhaul of Rashtriya Rifles on Assam Rifles lines:

1. Rename Rashtriya Rifles to pre-1953 status name, as J&K Rifles.Better yet, imo, Kashmir Rifles,under MHA. Have distinct features in uniform , say pherans and Karakulis. Motto "Friends of Valley people".
2.Recruit youths locally, directly and permanently.Officers on secondment and not three year deputations.
3.Reorganise Force Hqs into battalions: Jammu(D,R & U), Kashmir(V & K) and Ladakh (Leh and Kargil).
? Merge SOG as an autonomous part of new force.
? Supervision of emergency services viz: fire,rescue, paramedics and disaster relief by attaching State Home guard/civil defence org. under new SDIG post.
? Break J&K police into separate organizations on similar lines.
? New State Youth service that participates in Op Sadbhavna.

[Klaus]

Has this person been on the BRF radar before?

Some of his foundation's claims seem outlandish, one of them being his claim that his blessings can reflect UV rays from drinking water, making it safer.

Klaus, How does this post jive or reconcile with the thread title? Looks like totally non sequitor.

Earlier, there were discussions on this very thread discussing Baba Ramdev (much before the events of 2011) and the possibility of him being a strategic leader. There were also discussions about the role of HAF. I thought that there was a prospect of such foundations being in a position where they could effect some positive quanta of change for Indian interests.

Apologies if that is not the case, the post can be deleted.

[Bharath.Subramanyam]

Ramana ji: My thoughts below.


Recently a journalist Minhaz Merchant wrote a blog in Times Of India:
http://blogs.timesofindia.indiatimes.co ... -fears-rss
http://blogs.timesofindia.indiatimes.co ... -fears-rss

The strategy used by the Congress to "partner" sections of the media in villifying Anna's campaign has already proved counter-productive. The newspapers, TV channels and senior editors who act as surrogate mouthpieces of the Congress have succeeded only in damaging their own reputations built over decades. That damage is irreparable. ....

Sonia and Rahul's long-term problem is that the Congress' national voteshare has been stuck in a narrow range between 25% and 28% since the 1996 Lok Sabha poll. The Muslim vote contributes at least 10% (over a third) to this voteshare and hands the Congress more than a third of its Lok Sabha seats. The mainstream Hindu vote has deserted the Congress - only around 16% of the 83% majority (around one in five) now vote for it. Following Anna's movement, the erosion in majority support to the Congress is set to deepen. The Muslim vote, as a consequence, has become even more critical to the Congress's future electoral viability.

This is the background against which Digvijay Singh's anti-BJP/RSS tirade has to be seen. As the Gandhi family's unofficial ventriloquist, he is tasked with pandering to the most regressive symbolisms in the Muslim votebank - Batla House, Azamgarh, saffron terror, etc. This cynically exploits Muslim paranoia and heightens the community's siege mentality....

I not sure how he says that "only around 16% of the 83% majority" vote for INC. But there may be some element of truth to this as middle class, lower middle class votes in urban areas & rural areas will take a beating due to Anna Hazare, Baba Ramdev etc. I did some googling on this 'Minhaz Merchant'. He doesn't seem to be a 'knickerwalla or sanghwallla' even remotely.

More than the "Saffron terror" by PC & Digvijay, the bigger problem for Bharat would be the Communal Violence Bill. I think even if dynasty loses power in 2014, the ruling party/parties can be targeted using this Bill. Say Nitish/Jayalalitha/Modi/Sushma Swaraj become PM in 2014 in a coalition govt. After 1 year (they will wait for the anger against dynasty to subside), say a 'religious riot' 'happens'. They will be able to use the media, Orepean & massa govts, NGOs to rip the legitimacy in front the people. People like Ram Vilas Paswan, TC, NC, TDP, TRS will fear 'semitic' vote in the coming assembly elections and move away. Most than this, the worst part of this bill is that in a riot affected area, it transfers the administration to "NGOs".

This bill is more dangerous than 'Saffron terror' talk by PC et al. I hope Mamata, DMK, Sharad Pawar & other parties see the danger in this bill and not let it pass in parliament. It can be used against their state governments as well.

AFSPA in Kashmir or 'Saffron terror ghosts' of dynasty are for 2014 elections. The bills like NREGA, RTE, RTF, Communal Violence Bill etc would be the 'article 370' kind of gift from the dynasty to this nation for many years to come. India Gandhi added 'secularism' & 'socialism' to the constitution without defining them when she was in political trouble.
=================================

There are some thoughts on how to counter the 'media', transnational NGOs etc. But that is not kosher here in this thread.

[ramana]

Article about SC Bose

http://www.bookforum.com/inprint/018_02/7801

[vishvak]

There are some thoughts on how to counter the 'media', transnational NGOs etc. But that is not kosher here in this thread.

The NDA does not know how to use state powers like CBI, ED etc. while Congress does. Also, NDA halts at the thought of democracy about making the most of these.

CBI can go to the Supreme Court and talk depends upon its perception of independence at different times. NDA should have better understanding of all these.

[ramana]

X-post...

Guys....puhlease! Give Rajiv his due,It was he who swiftly crushed the attempted coup in the Maldives,putting his premiership in the line,who sent in the IPKF into Lanka to keep the peace and when the LTTE betrayed India's good intentions "tamed the tiger",at grievous cost though,but in such manner that elections were held in the N-East and a pro-India Tamil leader elected. It was the disgraceful royal parvenu,VP Singh,whose ambitions and anti-national actions still reverberate today.Mandal,Bofors-no new artillery yet for the IA,German sub building scuttled thanks to his HDW charges,now found false by the courts, and worst of all bringing back the IPKF without honour and abandoning the promises and guarantees given to India by the GOSL of the time,that set back India after Rajiv gave it a new positive posture in global affairs.Rajiv also brought peace to Punjab through the accord with Sant Longewal.True,he had faultss,but his sincerity was obvious,as was his plan for global nuclear disarmament,scuttle by the "Pig 5".

Democracy in India is returning to its feudal roots,its all "mom and pop", just like the old wedding invitations,"family and friends" on the cover.If you have the Nerhu-Gandhi dynasty in Delhi,aped by any number of political families in the north,you have the Pawar dynasty in Maharashtra,the Karunanidhi-Maran "joint family" in Madras ,the "D.Gowda and Son" emporium in Bangalore,and the numerous "ever-Reddys" of AP and Bellary! At least in Orissa,Patnaik Jr. is perhaps least controversial of all dynastic deities.So gentlemen,join the crowd!

Coming back on track,the AH movement is at a low ebb due to the many egos at work within it.For one Kejriwal must speak less and smile more.In fact he should go on "maun" and not AH.His longwinded speeches are the sure cure for insomnia.Bedi is better on chat shows,she has better "cut and thrust" debating abilities.Nevertheless,the AH movement is not dead or about to be cremated.It is pausing to take breath and stock of the situ. Its failings are miniscule when compared with the mega-looting of the nation by the cronies of a man supposed to be a money expert,one Dr.Singh,also supposedly "leader of the nation",custodian of its wealth,best seen confabulating abroad with his western cronies and pontificating and prescribing the virtues off economic chastity to a bunch of mountebanks and economic-rapists who have invaded the country and are scooting off with India's family silver through FDI !

VP Singh and his role in murdering politics in not understood.

[ramana]

Philip,
quote]
It was the disgraceful royal parvenu,VP Singh,whose ambitions and anti-national actions still reverberate today.Mandal,Bofors-no new artillery yet for the IA,German sub building scuttled thanks to his HDW charges,now found false by the courts, and worst of all bringing back the IPKF without honour and abandoning the promises and guarantees given to India by the GOSL of the time,that set back India after Rajiv gave it a new positive posture in global affairs
[/quote]

IOW, VPS decimated the Indian international posture and reduced the Indian military capabilties and denigrated the honor. Was this a pro quid quo for getting Bofors scoop to stage a palace coup? Recall all this is just after Brasstacks in 1987. And WOP, says RG gave the authroization for the nukes to be weaponized before he lost power.

VPS is least studied PM in India.

[brihaspati]

There are some thoughts on how to counter the 'media', transnational NGOs etc. But that is not kosher here in this thread.

The NDA does not know how to use state powers like CBI, ED etc. while Congress does. Also, NDA halts at the thought of democracy about making the most of these.

CBI can go to the Supreme Court and talk depends upon its perception of independence at different times. NDA should have better understanding of all these.

I am no apologist for the NDA, but to be fair - orgs like the CBI, ED are built up over long term from career professionals who are also survivors of political power hunger. The intel sectors of India followed on undisturbed from serving their imperial masters against their own countrymen - to serving the new masters for exactly the same ends. The Congress has been in power from that stage and they could ensure that only their men dominated the nets. Because of inheritance from the imperial times - they are also likely to have had possible traces of influences from the island or the island's larger than life partners in international crime. So they could be subject multiple interests and manipulations that is not so easily decontaminated in couple of years of central power.

Any future nationalist regime will have to start from scratch and rebuild such organs from the basics. Retain the old-guard for blackmail and extraction of past info, or even double-agents - but not employ them anymore in actual work.

[Sushupti]

IOW, VPS decimated the Indian international posture and reduced the Indian military capabilties and denigrated the honor. Was this a pro quid quo for getting Bofors scoop to stage a palace coup? Recall all this is just after Brasstacks in 1987. And WOP, says RG gave the authroization for the nukes to be weaponized before he lost power.

Same can be said about Mr. Mohandas and Jawaharlal viz a viz Lal-Bal-Pal and Subhash. Mir Qasims should know their limitations as a puppet.

[manju]

The more I think about JLN I get to believe that he is a curse on India from the get go!

1. His ambition cost India the partition (assuming making Jinnah would have avoided partition. It is a different matter if partition is a good thing or not)

2. His ambition again cost India the PMship of Sardar Patel.

3. His stupidity cost JK state the first time (when he rejected Raja Harisinghs accession)

4. His lust cost JK the second time (when he made Mountbatten to chair the military meetings)

5. His stupidity cost JK the third time (when he went to UN)

6. His self-centeredness cost JK the fourth time (when he accepted A370)

7. His ego cost Tibet

8. His stupidcost resulted in 1962 defeat

9. His pride cost India the Gandhi clan (by making Gandhi give his name to Firoz khan)

10. His blood line cost India the future

This looks like a good outline for a good song.. If made well, can communicate to the masses with maximum effect.

[ramana]

Book Review in Pioneer

No Twist in Nehru Tale

So hagiography still continues. Interesting that Notwar Singh is able to see the truth while others want to avoid it.

No twist in Nehru tale
Saturday, 10 December 2011

The book is a collection of predictable articles on Jawaharlal Nehru by those who knew him or worked with various agencies of the Government of India, writes SARADINDU MUKHERJEE


Witness To History: Transition and Transformation of India, 1947-1964
Author: Nehru Centre Mumbai

Publisher: Oxford University Press

Price: Rs 445

A lot has been written on Jawaharlal Nehru. And yet one finds a number of books coming out every year, most of them disappointing in content and research. The book under review is a collection of articles on various aspects of the first Prime Minister, mostly by people who knew him or worked with various agencies of the Government of India. Since much has been written on Nehru, there is hardly anything new in this collection.

PC Alexander — a high-profile bureaucrat under the Congress dispensation and, strangely, once the NDA’s presidential candidate — and former diplomat Muchkund Dubey have the most disappointing pieces. Dubey is full of quotations from Nehru’s homilies on all sorts of international developments, without a case study of any situation handled or mismanaged by the Prime Minister. Dubey’s ideological stance is clear when he says: “Nehru had a clear vision of an international order which would replace the capitalist system which had been rendered outmoded by the changes brought about by science and was on the verge of collapse due to its inherent contradictions”. This sounds more like a pamphlet used in the Jawaharlal Nehru University. Dubey can’t explain why Mao Tse-tung dealt a severe blow to Nehru’s ‘Hindi-Chini, bhai-bhai’ sort of mumbo-jumbo, and why the latter had to seek military help from US President JF Kennedy to ward off further drubbing from China.

Jagmohan writes positively about Nehru’s concern vis-à-vis urban planning, but does some plain-speaking about his handling of Jammu & Kashmir. Sheikh Abdullah is rightly described as one “with streaks of megalomania and duplicity embedded deep in his mind”, and how he was “nursing secret ambitions to carve out a virtual Sheikhdom for himself and his coterie”. Jagmohan also talks about the “first mistake” made by Maharaja Hari Singh who “flirted with the idea of independence”.

Constitutional expert Subhas Kashyap, who had known Nehru since his student days in Allahabad, provides interesting details regarding his interactions with him, long before he became the Prime Minister. He also lists the critique of Nehru, even though very briefly: For accepting Partition; for “decimating by design the ideologically-based healthy Opposition and alternative to the Congress — the Praja Socialist Party”; for ditching Subhas Chandra Bose; for weakening within the Congress the liberal Left by ousting the socialists; and, for his faulty approaches towards Kashmir and China. Nehru’s disastrous politics of making Indian state anti-Hindu, and his refusal to carry out an exchange of population between India and Pakistan (as demanded by many Muslim leaders) are, however, missed out.

MV Kamath, despite his fascination for Nehru, offers fulsome praise to Netaji Bose, and how his disappearance “took away the only competitor to Nehru”. Kamath is bothered by Nehru’s “disdain for Hinduism”, and offended by his refusal to associate himself with the rebuilding of the Somnath temple. He also criticises Nehru for refusing the permanent membership of the UN Security Council, besides his mistakes on Tibet, Kashmir, Krishna Menon, among others.

K Natwar Singh, surprisingly, notes how Nehru was “shackled by his own version of history”, and how the “ambiguities of history bypassed him”. He admits: “Nehru had grievously faulted on Kashmir and China”. It would, however, surprise many to know that Nehru was “sympathetic to the demand of Jews for a homeland”. On the Kashmir issue, Singh says, “The melancholy fact is that Nehru converted an entirely domestic matter into an international one. This was no ordinary blunder.” He is honest enough to say that even after 63 years, it is a “strain to condone Nehru for accepting Mountbatten’s advice to take the Kashmir issue to the United Nations”. He also talks about how Sheikh Abdullah, a member of the Indian delegation to the UN in 1948, actually “undercut” India’s position by calling for Kashmir’s independence in a private conversation with Warren R Austin, the American delegate to the UN.

Karan Singh, predictably, avoids being critical of Nehru’s handling of Kashmir. Far from providing any insight, which he was perhaps best equipped to do, he has not a word to say on either the Abdullahs or the jihadi strand in the Valley. He errs in saying that our Constitution-makers created a secular state — the fact remains that it was the Hindu-Buddhist ethos that made India secular. It’s a different matter that our ‘secular’ politicians have turned it into an anti-Hindu, pseudo-secular state.

Inder Malhotra’s piece justifies every fault of Nehru, and calls him the “moderniser” of India. The reality is that the process of modernisation was initiated long before Nehru was born, by people like Raja Rammohun Roy, Dayananda Saraswati, Ishwar Chandra Vidyasagar in the social realm and Dadabhai Naoroji, Surendranath Banerjee, Bal Gangadhar Tilak, Babasaheb Ambedkar in the political domain.

--The reviewer teaches history in University of Delhi

[ramana]

No Comment

[ramana]

Another forceful article on Civil-Military relationship.
http://www.indiandefencereview.com/mili ... itary.html


Bji, If you read this article, since Independence a layer of bureaucracy was installed between the politicians and the military and they arbitrate all the issues. The politicians all seem to have disdain for the forces and barely have any rapport. The military gets limited access to ensure there is little rapport between them and the politicians.

Is this the Subhas Chandra Bose impact on INA factor at work to deny a national army in India?

[brihaspati]

Another forceful article on Civil-Military relationship.
http://www.indiandefencereview.com/mili ... itary.html


Bji, If you read this article, since Independence a layer of bureaucracy was installed between the politicians and the military and they arbitrate all the issues. The politicians all seem to have disdain for the forces and barely have any rapport. The military gets limited access to ensure there is little rapport between them and the politicians.

Is this the Subhas Chandra Bose impact on INA factor at work to deny a national army in India?

Very likely. Most of this system was placed between 1954-59. Also trying to place officers based on apparent personal affinity. Those years are also the strangest in terms of JLN's reactions, and divergence between public and private stance.

[ramana]

Not really. The downsizing started right after 1950. The Army was supposed to be downsized to 300,000men. The equipment malfeasance under Krishna Menon's jeep scandal was right then?

[brihaspati]

Yes downsizing started from 50 - on various official grounds, including expenditure and supposed FP. But the cuts happened on the lower and middle ranks most- exactly those deemed by Brits to be the most possibly subversive. So things were happening exactly as the Brits wanted, as ably performed by their info-builders perhaps in India.

But the attempt to control the army by selective positioning based on personal affinities started from mid fifties. This is also the time JLN blew hot and cold over military management on the Chinese frontier. He might have been making statements in one direction in the public/parliament - but acting otherwise on ground, with frequent reversals of positions. He could have been under an info blitz deliberately undertaken by hosts both inside and outside. Not having real handles over FP or Indian agents outside, he swung as he was bombarded.

In this light, the supposed existence of the letter to ask for USAF direct help, is not surprising. It does appear that he was not really against the army, but he was led to suspicion of its reliability on personal terms. This peculiarity appears to have increased between 54-59, coinciding with death of Satlin, CPSU 20th congress, and some strange docs coming out of Mao on JLN himself, in the same period.

[RajeshA]

In UK, the Queen or King can confer knighthood upon any individual she/he finds to have done exemplary service to the "British Empire"! Then the person gets a title "Sir", or "Dame" or "Lady"!

I think we should have something similar in India! Let's consider some "Dharmic Samiti" of well-known Dharmic personalities! What if every year the confer the title "Arya" or "Aryaputra" on some Indic or even outsider, who has done exemplary work in promoting Dharma. Or for that matter say every 10-20 years some politician could be conferred the title "Dharamraj"!

It was an honorific in days gone by! It can be reinstated as an honorific again!

The fact is that now people are using "Arya", who have no claim to it - Nazis, Afghans, Iranians, Linguists to refer to Indo-Aryan Language Family, etc. It is important that Indics reclaim this title. If it becomes a well-known title in the world, people would become more aware of its Indian origins.

Also many politicians may become interested in getting such a title conferred onto them, so they may try to act according to Dharma as well, improving both their leadership and governance.

Recently Greg Chappell, the former Indian Cricket coach from Australia, remarked that Indians are not trained to have leadership qualities.

Published on Mar 07, 2012
Greg Chappell attacks Indian culture and cricket team: Times of India

The (Indian) culture is very different, it's not a team culture. They lack leaders in the team because they are not trained to be leaders. From an early age, their parents make all the decisions, their schoolteachers make their decisions, their cricket coaches make the decisions.

The culture of India is such that, if you put your head above the parapet someone will shoot it. Knock your head off. So they learn to keep their head down and not take responsibility.

The Poms (British) taught them really well to keep their head down. For if someone was deemed to be responsible, they'd get punished. So the Indians have learned to avoid responsibility. So before taking responsibility for any decisions, they prefer not to.

I don't really wish to endorse this view, but if this is true at some level or another, it is indeed important that Indians be encouraged to have a more leadership attitude in whatever they do.

To some extent titles such as "Arya", "Aryaputra", etc. could help!

[harbans]

Greg is right in a way. People in India today are rootless to quite an extent. I was shocked to see the EU ad how a calm, meditative European lady calms the barbarians of India, China through a Dharmic meditative posture. But even more shocking is the absence of outrage at the usurpation. People still haven't got what really is offensive about that ad..it's the outright 'Ulta chor Kotwal ko daate' thing that they have managed without us getting outraged. There is no offensive racism i find in the ad, it's the usurpation.

That's why i see the need to reclaim our core. It will help us defend. It will give a platform, a spine. Presently there is none. When people dub our religious values as rat, cow worshippers, caste, sati as core, we don't know how to react. At the same time, they equate Christ and Dharma, separate Dharma from our populace..maybe they have a point. But we know it is false. So when will we reclaim what is ours. Ironically it is not Islam which is the fastest growing religion in the West..it is the Dharmic one. And that is a good thing, what is wrong is the ownership aspect while downgrading Indic religion to rats, cows and caste.

By negating Dharma to appease we are only hastening our own downfall. Encouraging as mentioned by Rajesh Ji a promotion of Dharmic values is a good step. But presently our PM and establishment even make dedicated bids to foil worldwide Dharmic conferences..even the millenia centenary of Buddha they caved in under pressure from Adharmic China and tried blocking it, then cancelled the President and PM attending the conference. Shame...these are not the kind of leaders that INdia should churn out. But it was considered Chanakyan by MEA and GoI to appease the Chinese by not atending. This is pure spinelessness and i couldn't agree more with Greg after seeing so many such instances.

[amit]

Greg is right in a way. People in India today are rootless to quite an extent. I was shocked to see the EU ad how a calm, meditative European lady calms the barbarians of India, China through a Dharmic meditative posture. But even more shocking is the absence of outrage at the usurpation. People still haven't got what really is offensive about that ad..it's the outright 'Ulta chor Kotwal ko daate' thing that they have managed without us getting outraged. There is no offensive racism i find in the ad, it's the usurpation.

Harbans Ji,

While on a broader canvas I don't dispute what you're trying to convey in terms of the fact that there are many things that are wrong with us, on the more specific issue of Greg's comments against the Indian team, all I can say is he's talking from that part of his body where the sun never shines and as a result the stench in unbearable.

Mind you this is the same Indian team which a few months ago won the World Cup and did so because individual players stepped up to the table and took responsibility. Yuvraj Singh was playing while knowing that there was good chance he had cancer and he was vomiting during most of his innings, yet what leadership he displayed match after match! Ashish Nehra was trashed in the death overs during the match against Australia. Yet in the very next match against Pakistan he came in during the same death overs and delivered. Munaf Patel was like a man transformed during the match against Pakistan.

And before the World Cup, India did claw its way to the top of Test cricket and that was not by any accident. Individual players came up and took leadership to make that possible. Yes the last two tours have been a disaster and I personally think head's should role. But comments like the one Greg made and by others reminds me of an old proverb in my mother tongue which translates to: "When an elephant falls, even ants trample over it".

On a broader level, there is much that is wrong with us but let us find out what it is ourselves and fix it. Listening to a firangi spouting nonsense and then going into a bout of self-criticism, which we are inclined to do - I include myself in this criticism - is IMO another lacunae in our character. The first step a proud nation needs to take is not to care a fuk what others think or say about them. This is something that the Chinese have learnt very well from the Amir Khans. We need to do the same.

[member_20617]

Start Quote (Ramana's Post):'Did the BJP actually have a position on the core dispute of Jammu and Kashmir? It did have a formal view, reflecting the Indian Parliament resolution, that Pakistan-occupied Kashmir (PoK) had to be given up to India.

But this was the maximum position. By itself, Pakistan would never give up PoK. And India would not launch a war to regain it, because that would certainly ratchet up to a nuclear exchange.

The BJP had a minimum position, which is not very unlike the Congress line, or indeed the general Indian thinking. This is to convert the present LoC into a permanent border, and sort out other issues such as Siachen, etc, gradually.' (End Quote)

On one hand BJP (and the rest of Indian Parliament) says that PoK belongs to India but on the other hand BJP doesn’t mind converting the present LoC into permanent border. Isn’t this contradictory?

Why are we so keen on giving up PoK which actually belongs to us?

[harbans]

The first step a proud nation needs to take is not to care a fuk what others think or say about them. This is something that the Chinese have learnt very well from the Amir Khans. We need to do the same.

Your assessment Amit Ji is correct. However we have been on this subject here across various threads without the need of any firang advise. India over many decades we have seen dithers a lot in international relations. It's decision making. Even with Pakistan, it's border disputes which should not be disputable. The spine on which our MEA policy stands is rooted blindly in chiches like "India does not interfere in the internal affairs of other countries". So we ignore Chinese transgressions in Tibet. We are on the back foot. Our strategic leadership has become so weak that we lathi charge Dharmics who protest Chinese killings in Tibet. We don't know what stand to take except that of appeasement. Then the same lot try and hide behind a garb of Chanakya ness..the same lot falls to propaganda that marginaliszes Hinduism from Dharmic tradition..

That lack of spine results in all sorts of opinions rooted in all sorts of ideology and creates more noise than resultant signal. To re-imbibe that spine and backbone and promote leaders that stand for Truth and Justice is why we are talking about reviving the spirit of standing up for core Dharmic values and reclaiming it. Look at the example of leaders today who will not attend the World Buddhist conference in Delhi because it upsets China, fact is they even tried to stall the conference and not hold it in India. Look at the SC judge who when asked to Judge on Gen Singhs DOB, said 'one must sway with the wind' or something to that effect. This is the very top bracket..and they yell at the top of their voices How Proud they are of this country. 'Pride' Amit Ji is not a Dharmic value. Pride is a result of arrogance. It leads to destruction. Never associate Pride and Bharat together for instance. India should not be an experience to give you pride. It should be an experience to humble oneself. I am humbled to be an Indian i say, not Proud to be one. Pride, Ugliness and arrogance lie in almost the same subset of Adharmic quality. As an Indic and Dharmic specifically one must never associate pride as a quality..all 3 pride, ugliness and arrogance however are amply there in our leadership. We must undo that.

[amit]

Your assessment Amit Ji is correct. However we have been on this subject here across various threads without the need of any firang advise. India over many decades we have seen dithers a lot in international relations. It's decision making. Even with Pakistan, it's border disputes which should not be disputable. The spine on which our MEA policy stands is rooted blindly in chiches like "India does not interfere in the internal affairs of other countries". So we ignore Chinese transgressions in Tibet. We are on the back foot. Our strategic leadership has become so weak that we lathi charge Dharmics who protest Chinese killings in Tibet. We don't know what stand to take except that of appeasement. Then the same lot try and hide behind a garb of Chanakya ness..the same lot falls to propaganda that marginaliszes Hinduism from Dharmic tradition..

That lack of spine results in all sorts of opinions rooted in all sorts of ideology and creates more noise than resultant signal. To re-imbibe that spine and backbone and promote leaders that stand for Truth and Justice is why we are talking about reviving the spirit of standing up for core Dharmic values and reclaiming it. Look at the example of leaders today who will not attend the World Buddhist conference in Delhi because it upsets China, fact is they even tried to stall the conference and not hold it in India. Look at the SC judge who when asked to Judge on Gen Singhs DOB, said 'one must sway with the wind' or something to that effect. This is the very top bracket..and they yell at the top of their voices How Proud they are of this country. 'Pride' Amit Ji is not a Dharmic value. Pride is a result of arrogance. It leads to destruction. Never associate Pride and Bharat together for instance. India should not be an experience to give you pride. It should be an experience to humble oneself. I am humbled to be an Indian i say, not Proud to be one. Pride, Ugliness and arrogance lie in almost the same subset of Adharmic quality. As an Indic and Dharmic specifically one must never associate pride as a quality..all 3 pride, ugliness and arrogance however are amply there in our leadership. We must undo that.

Harbans ji,

No disagreements with you on this assessment. In fact I fully understand and support the thought behind your post. My limited point is we did not/ do not need a firangi idiot like Greg - believe me I know just how hollow he is intellectually, I had the misfortune of sharing a drink with him some years ago and having an autographed miniature bat as a rueful testament to that - telling us we lack leadership qualities. I'm no too sure how much leadership qualities the average Aussie has, by the way. In short Greg's interview should be treated for what it is, a piece of crap.

[Rahul M]

harbans ji, what ad ?

[amit]

harbans ji, what ad ?

I think Harbans ji is alluding to the ad posted in the India-EU dhaga.

[harbans]

India-EU dhaga the growing together ad..

http://slog.thestranger.com/slog/archiv ... commission