Indian Interests

Keshav · Post by **Keshav** » 30 Jun 2008 02:30

JE Menon wrote:It is rare to see such a whining, self-pitying, untruthful article as the one above. Let's wait for the next American or Brit to write what a great country India is. Maybe this fellow will be happy then....

Its ok to push a point of view, but the writer have some pride along with his prejudice. Only one of the deliberate attempts at misleading need to be exposed to show the shallowness of the write up.

What's wrong with the above article?

Duangkomon · Post by **Duangkomon** » 30 Jun 2008 12:43

It has to be said that there is no clear consensus on Indian interest which has become more apparent in the nuke deal debate.There exists an inability among most Indians to rise above political,ideological,caste,community and religious loyalties and agree on an inclusive nationalism based on the best interest of all Indians. Most Indians cling on to their traditions and past grievances and are slow to adapt to new ideas or create a modern vision for a future India. This is evident even among the NRI Indians living and educated in the west.

JE Menon · Post by **JE Menon** » 30 Jun 2008 13:00

Number one: the selective quoting to demonise Nehru (personally, one does not care much about that. Anyone who has read anything substantial of what Nehru wrote and did, will see that it is selective). But the guy quotes or refers to Churchill, Galbraith, Madison, Dalrymple (for god's sake), Welles Hangen, Will Durant, to prove a point that successive Indian governments have screwed up in their civilisational duty.

On the good side, all too briefly Dadabhai Naorojee and Swami Vivekananda. I have little doubt that if Swami Vivekananda saw the acts of some of our so-called civilisational defenders, he will cringe in shame. The man speaks without confidence, and speaks of victimisation of one sort or the other - the language of the weak. It is bloody 60 years since we got independence. The centre-right is the largest opposition bloc. They have already wielded power once, and should wield it again. But for that they must get the pulse of the nation right, look forward and construct a new future - not moan about a shameful past which is unchangeable, but the consequences of which are not irredeemable.

Instead, what we have is another moan about how everything is the fault of Nehru (what he told Galbraith!!!) and the communists. The BJP must speak the truths of today and tomorrow, not repeat the factasies of yesterday in the hope that it will appeal to some. It will appeal to a few, no doubt, but not enough to take a parliamentary majority. They have already shown their capabilities and a certain rigour and a hierarchical discipline that is not personality based. They can rule. But India is not for revolution, it is for evolution - and the changes that those to the right of the BJP want to bring in through the BJP are revolutionary, with quite a substantial borrowing of methods and tactics - and an absolutist core - from the very people whose imprint they want to wash away. This is self-defeating.

Surprising though it may seem, I am favourably inclined towards the BJP in general. I detest the personality/dynasty politics of the Congress (at least to the extent that it is taken... Sibal compared Sonia to Jesus IIRC). But the BJP does not offer what I want. I want a proud India, proud of its Hindu civilisation but not dogmatic or didactic, a welcoming India with an electicism second to none, an India confident enough about itself not to whine about a "foreign hand" every time something untoward happens (but canny enough to look into EVERY possible foreign hand and crush it quietly when found), an India that speaks for the world, not just for India, an India where economic freedoms are like in no other country so that people find they have no choice but to do business with us. People like Advani, Shourie, Modi etc speak in similar terms sometimes, but this is yet to be translated into a coherent and sustainable worldview that does not involve propagating antagonisms. Maybe I'm wrong.

I am quite certain that there are quite a number of people like me, waiting for the BJP to articulate the above but dismayed that, instead, the focus seems to be on an ideological confrontation such as this persistent nagging about Nehru and Gandhi. To beat the Congress, they have to show a bigger heart and loftier goals that appeal to the common man. For all the criticism that comes of our past leaders from the worthies of the centre-right and those further to the right on the political spectrum, both Gandhi and Nehru did a better job of making that appeal.

Gurumurthy's article does not cut it, I'm afraid.

JE Menon · Post by **JE Menon** » 30 Jun 2008 13:20

>>There exists an inability among most Indians to rise above political,ideological,caste,community and religious loyalties and agree on an inclusive nationalism based on the best interest of all Indians.

Interesting post Duangkomon.

And yet, India has managed "somehow" to become one of the primary military powers in the world, with an open polity, as open an economy as many other "tigers" if not more, a strategic partner for virtually every country, a country viewed worldwide as a benign power, a considerable wielder of soft power, and increasingly a country whose views are widely respected and relevant to the problems faced by the world today.

How does one explain that?

G Subramaniam · Post by **G Subramaniam** » 30 Jun 2008 15:36

JE Menon wrote:>>There exists an inability among most Indians to rise above political,ideological,caste,community and religious loyalties and agree on an inclusive nationalism based on the best interest of all Indians.

Interesting post Duangkomon.

And yet, India has managed "somehow" to become one of the primary military powers in the world, with an open polity, as open an economy as many other "tigers" if not more, a strategic partner for virtually every country, a country viewed worldwide as a benign power, a considerable wielder of soft power, and increasingly a country whose views are widely respected and relevant to the problems faced by the world today.

How does one explain that?

http://goodnewsindia.com/index.php/gni

The way he said it is , that these achievements are possible due to thousands and maybe millions of unsung Indians who dont get publicity because the media is pushing bad news
And he documented several of these grass-roots efforts

Duangkomon · Post by **Duangkomon** » 30 Jun 2008 15:49

JEM,you have articulated what I had in my mind much better than I coud've done in your first 3 paras.
I don't mind either BJP or congress if they work on issue based politics, issues related to a better life for me, my family and all Indians, not how Americans or muslims or hindus or christians, etc are screwing me or will screw me. Besides both the parties cannot be wished away...they are both here to stay. Ideally it should be upto the GOI at the time to assess and deal with the real threats on Indian progress both internal and external keeping the nations best interest in mind.

The "somehow" you mentioned makes me want to believe in God or good providence as it's often said about the functioning of Indian state itself. What you have said about the Indian military,economy,softpower etc are well and good but are they good enough. Most of the stature is due to the sheer size of it all rather than the level of development or advancement IMHO.
Decision making or non making based on ideology or partisan bickering instead of pragmatic steps towards the fast development of Indian society, in this day and age, is really frustrating and demoralising.As if brain drain isn't bad enough the white elephants of Indian institutions like judiciary, law enforcement etc and the people running it that stifle meritocracy and resist change will further damage India irreparably. Without the best effort India will never be a powerful nation state. It will "somehow" keep floating around a nomans land.
And let the individuals decide what hindu civilisation means to them intead of hoping for a state enforced ideology which is ridiculously regressive and counter productive.
IMVHO the first step is to believe in a common vision of a powerful future India where everyone has a stake in making it a powerful nation.

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 30 Jun 2008 22:56

JEM, just curious, what's your beef with dalrymple ?

Keshav · Post by **Keshav** » 30 Jun 2008 23:04

Rahul M wrote:JEM, just curious, what's your beef with dalrymple ?

He's a Mughalophile who doesn't seem to be able to see any Indian history before Babur.

satyarthi · Post by **satyarthi** » 30 Jun 2008 23:10

JEM,

When I see a disproportionately huge amount of names of Gandhi and Nehru Clan (Nehru, Indira, Rajiv etc), stamped onto public property in India, then I need to ask whether that is not a "selective" propping up of a clan at the cost of many other equally or more worthy names?

When Gandhi selected Nehru over Patel, he created this present day clan whose names are stamped all over India's public property.

How many people can recall a Patel road or a Savarkar road?

Present day Congress party sits on top of all the past laurels, propagated by a state sponsored propaganda machinery, of Gandhi/Nehru and is still enjoying unfair advantages of that lineage. So, it is hardly a matter of past to be forgotten and forgiven.

IMHO it is important to bring down these gods of the Congress party to the level of all the other lesser Gods of comparable virtue. And given all the unfair state sponsored advantages they have enjoyed so far, I am OK with even completely "one sided" articles on them. Since the positive side has been so overplayed, a balance needs to be restored IMHO.

The current Dynasty-Raaj where a Rahul Gandhi occupies repeated headlines, ONLY because he is in the clan of Gandhi/Nehru is a present day problem, not a ghost of the past.

I call this clan the Gandhi/Nehru clan, because for all practical purposes Nehru was the Manasa-Putra of Gandhi.

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 30 Jun 2008 23:19

Keshav wrote:
Rahul M wrote:JEM, just curious, what's your beef with dalrymple ?
He's a Mughalophile who doesn't seem to be able to see any Indian history before Babur.

keshav, that is not true. yes, he is a mughalophile and sees or writes little beyond that period but that is mostly because his expertise is limited to that period.

btw, he does acknowledge India's past glory.
e.g
http://www.time.com/time/specials/2007/ ... 26,00.html

In fact, even his portrayal of 1857 revolt in the last mughal is incredibly unbiased, much more so considering that it is coming from a mughalophile brit.
BRF has in generally done a disservice to this guy. I had a similar opinion of him (formed by BRF, of course) before I read the last mughal.
If you read this book, you will find that it carries a lot we can use to nail the truth about India's history.

surinder · Post by **surinder** » 30 Jun 2008 23:34

If you count the total number of Roads, Nagars, Colleges, Institutions named after even Sanjay Gandhi, it far exceeds those for Bhagat Singh, Rajguru, Sukhdev, or Udham Singh, etc.

The second category gave their lives for the nation and their progeny/relatives live in ordinary colonies as ordinary Indians. The relatives/progeny of the first category live in the poshest colonies, travel in style, have Z-level security, do not get searched at airports, study at Harvard and carry lakhs of dollars with them, if they need to. The money/property they posses far exceeds any known sources of income.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 30 Jun 2008 23:37

Satyarthi, There is line of thought that as India is slowly transforming from Bharat and the aboliion of the traditional royal families that were consecreted and governed Hindu rituals, there is a need to provide a sheet anchor for the masses during this transition. And this is provided by the Nehru-Gandhi family which has noting to do with Mahatam Gandhi. This was a line from an interlocuor of Modern India.

I think it smacks of Stalinist or dictatorial tendencies and told him so.

Rishi · Post by **Rishi** » 01 Jul 2008 00:35

Duangkomon wrote: I don't mind either BJP or congress if they work on issue based politics, issues related to a better life for me, my family and all Indians, not how Americans or muslims or hindus or christians, etc are screwing me or will screw me. Besides both the parties cannot be wished away...they are both here to stay. Ideally it should be upto the GOI at the time to assess and deal with the real threats on Indian progress both internal and external keeping the nations best interest in mind.

We (salaried/educated types) crib and

the kind of pols we have. How many would actually sacrifice the security of a comfortable/taken-for-granted-life to get into politics? Wishing that Cong/BJP/BSP etc should govern us with justly and magnificently is collective free riding and wishful thinking, and any sort of hand wringing and disappointment when one realizes that the pols have their hands in the till and are (with rare exceptions) self-serving incompetents, is just the pot calling the kettle black.

Nehru, Mahatma Gandhi et al were all set to be career barristers, until they took the decision to be a lot more. They were revolutionaries. The complacency of a comfortable life cocoons many from venturing into politics. So unless things become so bad or different that people (or persons) actually decide to sacrifice their personal life for a thankless public life, we can expect the dynasty/godfather/gunda/sycophancy culture to dominate politics. If any "issues" are actually dealt with by this bunch, it is our good luck.

Walter Mittyesque thought experiment: If this was 1930s British India, what and where would you be?

Gosh. I am awarding myself the armchair jingo whine post of the month citation for this

ps: Not directed at anyone in particular.

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 01 Jul 2008 01:15

JE Menon wrote: The man speaks without confidence, and speaks of victimisation of one sort or the other - the language of the weak. It is bloody 60 years since we got independence. The centre-right is the largest opposition bloc. They have already wielded power once, and should wield it again. But for that they must get the pulse of the nation right, look forward and construct a new future - not moan about a shameful past which is unchangeable, but the consequences of which are not irredeemable.

Instead, what we have is another moan about how everything is the fault of Nehru (what he told Galbraith!!!) and the communists. The BJP must speak the truths of today and tomorrow, not repeat the factasies of yesterday in the hope that it will appeal to some. It will appeal to a few, no doubt, but not enough to take a parliamentary majority. They have already shown their capabilities and a certain rigour and a hierarchical discipline that is not personality based. They can rule. But India is not for revolution, it is for evolution - and the changes that those to the right of the BJP want to bring in through the BJP are revolutionary, with quite a substantial borrowing of methods and tactics - and an absolutist core - from the very people whose imprint they want to wash away. This is self-defeating.
But the BJP does not offer what I want. I want a proud India, proud of its Hindu civilisation but not dogmatic or didactic, a welcoming India with an electicism second to none, an India confident enough about itself not to whine about a "foreign hand" every time something untoward happens (but canny enough to look into EVERY possible foreign hand and crush it quietly when found), an India that speaks for the world, not just for India, an India where economic freedoms are like in no other country so that people find they have no choice but to do business with us. People like Advani, Shourie, Modi etc speak in similar terms sometimes, but this is yet to be translated into a coherent and sustainable worldview that does not involve propagating antagonisms. Maybe I'm wrong.

Gurumurthy's article does not cut it, I'm afraid.

JEM, Good articulation. Only detail is that the author does not speak for BJP and the article appeals to the general public. He has disagreed with BJP many times and his forum also has done it.

The change you are looking for has to start with everyone and himself/herself. They have to change what they want to see themselves.

JE Menon · Post by **JE Menon** » 01 Jul 2008 01:51

Duangkomon,

I agree with a lot of things you said, but not some others…

>>The "somehow" you mentioned makes me want to believe in God or good providence as it's often said about the functioning of Indian state itself.

This sidesteps my question, in a sense, unless you are saying that it is actually God or good providence that has been looking out for India over the past 6 odd decades. Are you really saying that God and/or good luck is responsible for what we have achieved? If so, can we depend on them to get the big picture in order for the next six decades as well? When will they stop being on the side of India? But of course, you are not saying that (I hope). So my question still stands: how do you explain that “somehow”…

>>What you have said about the Indian military,economy,softpower etc are well and good but are they good enough.

A rhetorical question, I presume. I mean, what is good enough? And even if we know it what is the optimal time to get to that stage? Look, I am not arguing that we could not have done better – but we certainly could have done much worse. Yet we didn’t. We got our politics right, our economy is getting there, and our head is in the right place in terms of fundamental human rights and values.

>>Most of the stature is due to the sheer size of it all rather than the level of development or advancement IMHO.

Couldn’t that same argument be made for the negatives as well? In other words, could we not just as well say that all the miseries the “common man” faces and problems facing the country as a whole is “due to the sheer size of it all”, the enormity of the human challenge in our country?

>>Decision making or non making based on ideology or partisan bickering instead of pragmatic steps towards the fast development of Indian society, in this day and age, is really frustrating and demoralising.

It should not be. This ideological and partisan bickering is the stuff of democracy. It is the essence of the public voice and personal choice. It is what makes certain that no extremes prevail, no genocidal Long Marches Forward are imposed. It may be frustrating and demoralizing, indeed, but who said the right path is also the easy path? And nobody said it would be pretty. But there is no better way, if the objective is to improve the condition of Indians with minimum bloodshed and maximum participation - both goals worthy of our past.

No need to be despondent. The Indic civilization is not about to lie down and die.

JE Menon · Post by **JE Menon** » 01 Jul 2008 02:03

Rahul,

Nothing against Dalrymple in particular... He writes well. But he's one of those awarded the "India expert" tags largely by the Delhi chatterati with whom he mixes. I don't think he's an ill-intentioned man at all, just that Gurumurthy bringing him in is sort of like the last pull on the bucket rope before the bucket comes out of the well, if you know what I mean. I expect he will quote Alex von Tunzelmann in his next article. (Not that I have anything against von Tunzelmann. She writes engagingly and honestly, I think).

Acharya,

Didn't mean to imply that Gurumurthy was speaking for the BJP, if that was how my post came through. But wasn't he a BJP functionary in the past, or am I confusing him with someone else (could be).

JE Menon · Post by **JE Menon** » 01 Jul 2008 02:26

Satyarthi,

>>When I see a disproportionately huge amount of names of Gandhi and Nehru Clan (Nehru, Indira, Rajiv etc), stamped onto public property in India, then I need to ask whether that is not a "selective" propping up of a clan at the cost of many other equally or more worthy names?

The answer would be yes, it is a selective propping up of a clan/dynasty.

>>When Gandhi selected Nehru over Patel, he created this present day clan whose names are stamped all over India's public property.

Let’s say you are right about this… although I think the political incompetence and timidness of some of Nehru’s congress party contemporaries in the aftermath of his death had something to do with it; it was really Indira who forged the dynasty IMHO.

>>How many people can recall a Patel road or a Savarkar road?

I certainly can’t.

>>Present day Congress party sits on top of all the past laurels, propagated by a state sponsored propaganda machinery, of Gandhi/Nehru and is still enjoying unfair advantages of that lineage. So, it is hardly a matter of past to be forgotten and forgiven.

Forgetting is foolish, but there is nothing to be forgiven. Neither Nehru nor Gandhi were criminals. They were humans on whom the burden/blessing of guiding/ruling India fell. They did the best they could with the intellectual resources at their disposal. Both were good human beings, albeit flawed in their own ways, like the rest of us. For the Perfect Ruler, we need the 111 Strike Corps in Rawalpindi to bring him in.

>>IMHO it is important to bring down these gods of the Congress party to the level of all the other lesser Gods of comparable virtue.

Couldn’t agree more.

>>And given all the unfair state sponsored advantages they have enjoyed so far, I am OK with even completely "one sided" articles on them. Since the positive side has been so overplayed, a balance needs to be restored IMHO.

And herein lies the problem. Gurumurthy’s article does not restore balance. It merely plays into the Congress line that here are a bunch of crazies who want to take India into communal hell, and this is exactly what happens when secular deities such as Nehru and Gandhi are demonized (which is a problem anyway because these are not easy targets). I have no problem with balance or one-sided articles, but there should be a certain sophistication to them, or else it’s a self-goal.

satyarthi · Post by **satyarthi** » 01 Jul 2008 04:07

JEM,

Agreed.

Keshav · Post by **Keshav** » 01 Jul 2008 06:07

JE Menon wrote: And herein lies the problem. Gurumurthy’s article does not restore balance. It merely plays into the Congress line that here are a bunch of crazies who want to take India into communal hell, and this is exactly what happens when secular deities such as Nehru and Gandhi are demonized (which is a problem anyway because these are not easy targets). I have no problem with balance or one-sided articles, but there should be a certain sophistication to them, or else it’s a self-goal.

Good point. Don't know if this is off-topic or not.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 02 Jul 2008 21:59

A few x-posts from nuke thread

Raju wrote:
enqyoob wrote: The actual history of ancient Glorious India (when it existed) is not as a vast empire with guards standing at every corner armed with nyookulear mijjiles. It is a vast region with open borders, with free movement of people. With rishis (not 2 b confused with Brayatollah Rishi ) going around engaging in deep debates on the Meaning of Life, wimmens traipsing around doing Bharatnatyams and Pakis sitting around peacefully getting high on their hashish hookahs. So there may be more than one way, in MMS' mind, of making Aksai Chin and Manasarovar and Mohenjodaro "part" of Greater India.

You or I or most BRFees may not agree with this. But MMS may be doing exactly what is needed in his view to get to this dream. And who is to say that this is not a better model than Dubya's "Noo Whirled Odor" with its demonstrations so far in Eyerak and Afghanistan?

Singha wrote:Raju, thats a very wrong interpretation of PRC history. the wall was unsuccessful
in keeping out the mongols and in its western parts was earthen and weak. so the
"Han" of today is of mongol ancestry and in turn the "Han" invaded and subjugated
the vast peoples of the south and center to impose Hanhood on everyone.

Walls lose you the advantage of mobility and surprise - you sit there with no
initiative waiting for the enemy to choose his time and place for a fight.

the vastest swathes of territory have always been taken by cavalry on the
open steppes and deserts.

India's faults lay in disunity and life being good here, nobody paid a thought to
walking across and looting afghanistan, caspian rim states and persia.

amit wrote: Singha,

Thought this is OT but you hit the nail on its head. What people tend to forget is that the Gangetic Plains has been one of the world's most fertile regions which for thousands of years have fed its inhabitants with diligence.

In anceint times, people migrated/looted or captured new territories because their life in their home areas were miserable and poor. New territories meant new riches, new slaves and most important more food.

In history there are very few people like say Alexzander who captured new territory for the just the glory associated with it.

Ancient Indians looked around at neighbouring countries and only saw poverty and misery, why the hell should they make the ardorous journey on horse back or elephant back or just plain marching to capture deserts and sandy dunes?

And off course disunity is the sad byproduct of independent thinking which is both the bane as well as strength of Indians.

Raju wrote:GDji, there are two kinds of walls. One is a natural wall as that provided by mountainous terrain and the other is a physical wall built in the plains. The Mongols took advantage of the walls provided by nature whereas the Han's built physical walls to imitate natural walls.

Wall is a necessity, but it is imperitive of those sitting behind those walls to venture afar and conquer virgin lands in the satisfaction that their own communities behind are walled behind some kind of defence. This is what is happening today vis a vis the west. Han and our failure was not due to walls but the failure was due to lack of foresight of those sitting behind those walls.

RamaY wrote: Rajesh ji,

I beg to disagree. That is the impression Laloo's and Mayavathi's are trying to give to aam-janta... but

1. If that is true and the common-man/woman believes them, then they should be winning elections every time. For example in UP who is the true representative? Kalyansingh/Mayavathi/Mulayam?

2. Unfortunately these regional parties are sending almost 200/540 MPs to Indian Parliament and enjoying key portfolios such as Agriculture, Defense, Finance, Commerce, Railways etc... So they should reflect the national mood as well. More over they are representing states that rival any normal European country. So we need more responsible leaders at state levels as well. And it will be our ignorance to believe that a leader has to fall to such low levels to represent aam-jantaa.... common man in India is many more time wiser than that... For Example: NModi, coming from a BC background, is able to demonstrate better Administrative, policy, national interest, and business mgmt ethos? so there are extremely good leaders who can represent the common man in Indian politics without weakening the nation state...

3. We are not dying tomorrow. We can definitely see how much Laloo (as an individual) contributed to Railway's success (we will see more case studies coming out soon), and how good Mayavathi's administration would be in next five years.. A true indicator of a leader is how well they lead the team (whatever it is) when things go unplanned and unmanageable.

NRao garu - I thought about it... but somehow i have a very bad feeling about touching BD. Looking at our current national ethos and leadership, I am worried touching BD would result in India losing more territories to BD (populace) and converting the border states into muslim (m not against muslims but islam) majority states. See what is happening in JK… we will have this discussion some other time, on some other thread perhaps…

Brining the discussion back to N-Deal - The "strategic embrace" with the USA should be the prime reason to sign this deal. Who said we have to buy N-reactors only from US? We need not buy anything if we want.. just sign the deal and keep quite... ask only the maal for civilian reactors... focus on developing Thoriam-cycle... complete the remaining phases of KundanKulam with Russian reactors... use the economy-slowing-down to your advantage... buy lots of Chinooks (Service ceiling 18,500 ft/5,640 m) and a used air-craft carrier from unkil by 2012 along with F-18s. Force China to show its cards.... we are not losing anything with this deal... like someone said "126 F-18s in 2010 are better than 500 F-22s in 2050"...

If you want to test, test it at the time of your choosing... Make sure you know and plan for the consequences... we will face sanctions if/when we test next time, irrespective of whether this deal is there or not...

enqyoob-sar: Why spiritualism should only achieved thru pacifism? If that is the only way, I prefer separating state from spiritualism. Let there be peace loving rishis spreading Sanatana Dharma, while a strong and aggressive leader leads Bharatavarsh towards its destiny as a nation and culture.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 06 Jul 2008 09:05

Science magazine, in its 6 June 2008 issue had a specail feature on Indus civilization including new research from both India and Pakistan.

Please read and think it over

http://www.sciencemag.org/content/vol32 ... /index.dtl

BTW, In India Forum there is special thread following the Indus./Saraswati Civilization discoveries in the Indian History forum.
--------------
AND
Some people were asking about acharya's taxonomy of the Indian elite.

Here is a draft version in slideshare

http://www.slideshare.net/vepa/indian-elite-research

RamaY · Post by **RamaY** » 07 Jul 2008 20:27

XPOST:

Sumeet wrote:Wasn't there recently news that Lalu's Railway ministry employs least number of muslims.

So here is Lalu's response:

Madrasa degree valid for railway jobs: Lalu

Sunday, July 6, 2008 (Patna)

The Indian Railways have decided to accept Madrasa (Islamic seminary) degrees as valid for its job requirement, Railway Minister Lalu Prasad said in Patna on Sunday.

''Now students of Madrasa, like any educational institution, will be able apply for jobs in the railways,'' Lalu Prasad said.

''All the necessary official formalities in this regard will be finalised soon by the railways,'' Lalu Prasad said.

The move is seen as part of Lalu Prasad's political strategy ahead of the parliamentary elections to woo Muslim voters.

Early this year, the minister promised to increase the percentage of Muslim employees in the railways.

But a latest report of a review meeting of the group of secretaries of central government last month found the railways were still lagging in recruitment of Muslims.

Last year acting on the Rajinder Sachar Committee recommendations, the government issued directives to all ministries to improve participation of minorities in government jobs.

Till February 2008, of the 67 departments and ministries under the central government, the railways had nearly three percent Muslim employees, which is well below the average five per cent mark.

Rajesh ji - Your questions answered...

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 08 Jul 2008 00:27

from Deccan chronicle 7 july 2008

India needs a strategic ‘quick fix’ By Arun Kumar Singh

The passing away of Field Marshal Sam "Bahadur" Manekshaw on June 27 marks the end of an era. Sam was not only independent India’s most successful Army Chief, but was also the last "top link" of the brief period of revival in India’s strategic culture under Prime Minister Indira Gandhi. In all fairness, there was another briefer period of realpolitik in 1947-48, when "Iron Man" Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel unified India. The Kashmir problem would have been solved permanently had the government heeded the advice of then Maj. Gen. K.S. Thimmaiya and allowed the Army another fortnight to clear out the Pakistani raiders from what is now Occupied Kashmir.

All Indians are aware of the Chinese obsession with Arunachal Pradesh and the Pakistani obsession with Kashmir.

Few, however, are aware that in addition to the illegal occupation of Aksai Chin (38,000 sq. km), China has additional claims in areas of Uttarakhand (1,818 sq. km) and Himachal Pradesh (303 sq.km).

Thus, at its convenience, China can choose to "reactivate" tensions along the entire northern border, or lull our politico-bureaucratic setup with "sweet talk". While the commonly-held view is that China will not open a second front against India till it resolves the Taiwanese problem, it would be prudent to be prepared, especially given India’s tragic history of being surprised due to a lack of strategic culture. In any case, India can safely assume that China will continue to "blow hot, blow cold" till it is confronted with a decisive Indian political leadership, backed by conventional and strategic military deterrence capability. In 1980, then Prime Minister Indira Gandhi approved a 15-year plan to upgrade defence along India’s entire 4,056-km northern border with China. This was indeed a very good decision as in 1986-87 China tested India’s resolve in the Sumdorong Chu faceoff in Arunachal Pradesh. Here, some six well-equipped Indian mountain divisions faced an equal number of Chinese troops. Realising that they lacked overwhelming advantage — military and infrastructure — the Chinese blinked first. However, they waited for the right time to hoodwink India with sweet talk.

Mrs Indira Gandhi was assassinated in 1984. In 1989, Pakistan-backed insurgency started in Kashmir. The Soviet Union broke up in 1991, and along with the loss of this strategic partner (Mrs Indira Gandhi had signed the Indo-Soviet Treaty in 1971 to offset any American or Chinese pressure) and low-cost supplier of military hardware, India faced a severe economic crisis. This led, once again, to the downgradation of the military. Mrs Gandhi’s 15-year plan of defence upgrade was abandoned and no funds were spared for uranium mining. The border peace and tranquillity agreement with China was signed in 1993.

While India forbade any development activity on its side of the border (some airfields became non-operational due to neglect), China utilised the next 10 years in settling land-border disputes with its neighbours (except India), provided large-scale military and economic assistance to Pakistan along with nuclear weapons and delivery systems and built up infrastructure for effective border management with India. India, in keeping with its naïveté, lapped up the Chinese talk about "a border agreement without populated areas", verbally accepting that "Sikkim is a part of India" etc. In 1998, India conducted its second series of nuclear tests, and like the first test in 1974, shied away from fully testing another device despite the window of opportunity created by Pakistan’s tit-for-tat tests of a proven Chinese weapon two weeks later. Worse still, India declared a voluntary moratorium on further testing.

In 2003, India formally threw away its last bargaining chip by agreeing to the Chinese suzerainty over Tibet. India’s politico-bureaucratic security setup was suddenly faced with hundreds of border incursions. India has now (belatedly) begun to build up infrastructure and its military capabilities. It is still some 10 years behind China.

Well aware of its present military and economic lead, and India’s preoccupations — with Pakistan, jihadi strikes in the hinterland and internal coalition politics, which prevent strategic decisionmaking — China has done what it does best: combine sweet-talk with a steel fist to keep India guessing.

The signs are ominous given that the incursions are continuing despite China’s preoccupation with the earthquake rehabilitation work and the Beijing Olympics. Similarly, Pakistan, despite its preoccupation on the western front, has breached the four-year ceasefire more than once.

By September 2008, Beijing would be "free" from its Olympics duties and will be able to concentrate fully on India. At the same time, Pakistan (and the jihadi elements) too would be tempted to cause mischief before the Kashmir elections in October.

So what can India do to deal with the three immediate threats — China, Pakistan and the terrorists?

It is clear that trying to please China has failed. Our enemies will only respect a strong and decisive Indian government. In the next five years, India has to solve its hardware and manpower problems. In my opinion, the Army urgently requires modern artillery and much more than the two new mountain divisions planned (as per press reports). The IAF too requires twice the number of the 126 MMRCA jets planned, and the Navy needs to import a squadron each of modern, multi-role submarines and corvettes.

On the strategic front, the answer with regards to first and second-strike capability is obvious: India needs operational versions of the proposed Agni-5, ICBM and the proposed new indigenous ABM system at the earliest. Our immediate stockpile of nuclear weapons and delivery systems need to be well above the three-figure mark. There is also a need for our DRDO scientists to stop making statements and deliver "real systems" instead of having "items under trial" for decades or promising "technology demonstrators".

Here are a few measures the Government of India should take before September 2008:

l Institutionalise India’s defence and strategic posture by fully integrating the three service headquarters with the ministry of defence. This induction of "vertical specialisation," should ensure that we do not suffer anymore tactical or strategic surprises.

l Create a modified version of the CDS with a separate budget for acquisitions and maintenance. This newly-created four star officer, could initially be the single point of advise to the government only for the use of strategic weapons and out of area contingencies. The present IDS HQ, Strategic Forces Command and the Andaman-Nicobar Command can come directly under him. Subsequently, by 2012, his role can be reassessed, and enlarged if necessary.

l Reassess India’s "no first use" policy with regards to nuclear weapons. This is to cater for specific contingencies.

l Secure a part of our energy requirements by signing the India-Pakistan-Iran gas pipeline deal.

l Use the strategically-located Andaman and Nicobar Islands as "unsinkable aircraft carriers" by basing fighter and long-range maritime patrol aircraft there. Assure all friendly countries that these are purely defensive measures.

l Provide the military, civil intelligence agencies and counter terrorist forces with the necessary manpower and latest weapons.

l Take a quick "yes or no" decision on the Indo-US nuclear deal. A country of India’s size, population and growing economy should not cut a sorry figure by "sitting on the fence" on most issues. In this case, the deal will make little difference economically (it will contribute only six to eight per cent to the national power grid over the next century) or even politically (because India will have to "test" sooner than later).

l Review the defence budget which (as per the Army Chief and media reports), has fallen to 1.98 per cent of the GDP (the lowest since 1962) taking 11.5 per cent inflation into account.

l Take a good hard look at the Rs 60,000-crore farm loan waiver and the Sixth Pay Commission recommendations, which combined amount to 10 per cent of the GDP. With the Indian economy in a tailspin due to rising oil prices and domestic populist policies, its growth rate may fall to 6.5 per cent. As per a recent Goldman & Sachs report, India is placed last in the BRIC economies. In my opinion, the root cause of discontent among government employees is the disproportionate hike given to the IAS community by the Pay Commission. A simpler and more cost-effective solution would be to reduce the number of IAS officers (from its present 225 to 35 secretaries, as it was in 1981) and amend the newly-introduced 14-year promotion rule for joint secretaries and make it 21 years (only two per cent of defence personnel reach equivalent rank in over 28 years) while upgrading the armed forces, police and paramilitary.

While the above proposals would contribute towards reviving India’s strategic culture, I think two more gestures are needed. The first is to set up a National War Memorial. The second is to posthumously award the Bharat Ratna to Sam Manekshaw, so that the present list of 37 (which includes 25 politicians and five artistes) has at least one deserving soldier.

— Vice-Admiral Arun Kumar Singh retired as Flag Officer Commanding-in-Chief of the

Eastern Naval Command, Visakhapatnam

Wonder how long to when they will pull th plug on his articles?

HariC · Post by **HariC** » 08 Jul 2008 01:17

Rahul M wrote:JEM, just curious, what's your beef with dalrymple ?

He is almost a closet Brian Cluffy (That aussie wannabe-paki Colonel) . His writings on travel in Hyderabad and Goa are a good example. He roots for the Nizam and the Portugese and laments about the Indian invasion of both states. He talks about how old citizens extolled the virtue of the colonial rule and how the indian invasion have spoiled it all. This should be there on the travelintelligence website.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 08 Jul 2008 01:20

He traces his ancestry to the Nizam's dominions and documents it in this book "White Mughals". So thats his POV that GOI actions on Nizam are bad. However the press ignores it and portrays him as a balanced Westerner. Beef should be with his supporters and not him for he is open about his preferences.

ManishC · Post by **ManishC** » 08 Jul 2008 02:20

ramana wrote:He traces his ancestry to the Nizam's dominions and documents it in this book "White Mughals".

Read "The Last Mughal" last year which had reference to the White Mughals, one of them in the employ of a small time nawab at time of mutiny. Did not know Dalrymple was progeny of this group.

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 08 Jul 2008 03:36

HariC wrote:
Rahul M wrote:JEM, just curious, what's your beef with dalrymple ?
He is almost a closet Brian Cluffy (That aussie wannabe-paki Colonel) . His writings on travel in Hyderabad and Goa are a good example. He roots for the Nizam and the Portugese and laments about the Indian invasion of both states. He talks about how old citizens extolled the virtue of the colonial rule and how the indian invasion have spoiled it all. This should be there on the travelintelligence website.

Hari, I haven't read the articles you are referring to, but I would like to make a small point.

Dalrymple's works(some) carries points which are invaluable to presenting our history in a positive way. (I can give examples from last mughal if you want)
Won't his opinions carry even more weight if he is perceived to be of the opposing camp ?
He presents an excellent opportunity to do some +ve psy-ops if we can play our cards correctly !
Just think, what is better than using Romila Thappar's comments to shut up a DIE ??

RamaY · Post by **RamaY** » 09 Jul 2008 04:39

Asia Times: Delhi carries a small stick

Selected quotes:

India's burgeoning economic growth, growing foreign exchange reserves, and expanding middle class are necessary but insufficient conditions for India's emergence as a great power. This will require certain fundamental shifts in strategic thinking both internally and on the world stage.

Externally, India needs to develop a more assertive and aggressive foreign policy. Part of this requires India to develop a long-term strategic doctrine, upgrade its military and adopt more proactive and well-coordinated diplomacy. However, more fundamentally, it requires a change in mentality.

No country in history has risen to great power status with instability on all of its borders and active insurgencies in over half of its states (Naxalite, northeast, Kashmir). Despite its growing energy needs, which are necessary to sustain its growth and development needs, India has been unable to gain access to natural gas supplies on its doorsteps in Bangladesh and Myanmar to its east and Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iran and Central Asia to its west, due to a mix of tense bilateral relations, instabilities in these states and competition from China.

Indian policymakers need to remind themselves of US president Theodore Roosevelt's saying to "speak softly and carry a big stick". Instead, they appear to have been doing the opposite: bragging of India's status as one of the world's oldest civilizations, leader of the Non-Aligned Movement, the world's largest democracy, and now rising economic power under the motto of "India rising", while showing little substance. For too long there has been discussion on the gap between the India's potential, capabilities and accomplishments. Only when India stands up on the world stage will it receive the respect that it deserves.

vsudhir · Post by **vsudhir** » 10 Jul 2008 06:14

Partitions of the mind (IE)

Pratap Bhanu Mehta on the ominous signs that identity politics is now firmly entrenched into our body politic in an unprecedented way. Worth a full read, IMHO.

Some select excerpts:

In one stroke, these agitations have also nullified the little modest gains that had accrued as a result of the representative process in Kashmir. There has been no serious political initiative from the Indian government. The prime minister decided not to use whatever political capital he had, to follow through on his promising start on Kashmir. There are no leaders with any stature that can pick up the slack, and arguably no capable mediating figures left in national politics. Make no mistake about it: the crisis in Kashmir will only deepen, and its effect on politics in the rest of India ought not to be underestimated.

Then there was the disgraceful spectacle of Mayawati parading clerics on the Indo-US nuclear deal. We all heaved a sigh of relief when A.P.J. Abdul Kalam could be trotted out as a “Muslim” in favour of the deal. But that only reinforced the deeper insidious tendency: that one is always representative of one’s community; it is inescapable even for a former president. The phrase “don’t communalise foreign policy” was taken to mean one of two things: that not all Muslims have the same views, or as an exhortation not to make it a Hindu-Muslim issue. But the idea that any Muslim could speak on this issue without it being necessary to identify him as a Muslim was not even an option. It is nonsense to worry about communalising foreign policy when our mode of identifying citizens is communal in the first place.

One can discuss all the legal niceties of the rights of St Stephen’s College as a minority educational institution to set its own admission criteria. But four things were disturbing about its decision to increase the Christian quota. An institution that symbolised a shared public space and excellence will now be sacrificed to identity politics. Our minority institutions were excellent shared spaces; like AMU they have been progressively diminished. Second, so many progressive teachers, who in any other case would have balked at the idea of an institution largely funded by the state taking directives from religious authorities, openly condoned the idea of St Stephen’s being run, more as an appendage of the Church than an educational institution.

Third, it has been reported that so-called minority colleges will now also be exempt from the various requirements on faculty recruitment that the UGC imposes on colleges. Why not give all colleges the same freedoms? These exemptions will set in motion exactly the same opportunistic dynamic that my community of Jains engaged in recently: seeking minority status for no other than the most instrumental reason that they can run their own educational institutions without interference from the state. Instead of a straightforward set of freedoms based on freedom of association, we have made rights contingent upon community identity.

It could be argued that raising these questions is being over-anxious: communal polarisation is not worse than in the past, there is a revulsion against certain forms of violence; even Narendra Modi is apparently trying to keep up appearances. Terrorism has not produced the kind of backlash it did previously; there is, on the face of it, a new maturity. But this was precisely the time to fundamentally alter the language of citizenship, to rescue it from the dead end of a permanent distinction between majorities and minorities. While there is a surface calm, deeper divisions are being insidiously entrenched. Don’t be surprised if ugly times return soon.

The ref to Modi as 'even Narendra Modi is putting up appearences' was a low blow, IMO. And largely underserved.
Otherwise a fine article and a poignant point made.

csharma · Post by **csharma** » 10 Jul 2008 11:39

Ramana, Can you post the pdfs of the articles on Indus Valley Civilization in ScienceMag. It seems you have to be a member to get access to them.
Thanks.

Inder Sharma · Post by **Inder Sharma** » 10 Jul 2008 12:43

Rahul M wrote:Hari, I haven't read the articles you are referring to, but I would like to make a small point.

Rahul, Hari definitely has a point on Dalrymple here.

Read his ‘Age of Kali’, which he has tried to pass off as a balanced view of resurgent India. But any average BRfite can see through the farce.

That book has dedicated chapters for all those issues that oils Human Rights Industry in India.

So keep counting all of it: Caste, Sati, Bombay Riots (Gujarat hadn’t happened when he wrote it), Goan Invasion (Occupation in his understanding), Hyderabad ‘occupation’, abolishing of oh-so-lovely Nawabs & Nizams, ‘Emerging Pakistan’ under Benazir (irony), IPKF (wanted to potray that as India’s Vietnam), Bhawari Devi Rape case as example of Oppressed Dalits and Women, And the justification for Anarchy of Laloo Yadav’s henchmen in Bihar as social revolution of OBCs etc.

Amongst the good things he supposedly covered was Bangalore & Bollywood. Here again, he couldn’t hide his glee that work in both B’s is derivative of the west.

Now its your call??

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 10 Jul 2008 18:17

Inder, that is even better. If the person is known to be anti-Indian that would give more credence to his positive points about India. You can say, look even this guy has to admit these points about India.
Of these, there are a lot in the last mughal.
I hope you have read the last mughal, you will understand what I mean.

Let me clarify, I'm not asking people to take dalrymple's words as gospel truth, I'm asking them to utilize the wonderful positive psy-ops opportunity his works provide.

At the risk of repeating myself,

what is better than using Romila Thappar's comments to shut up a DIE ??

regards.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 10 Jul 2008 19:43

RahulM, When the well is poisoned how can its waters lead to amrit unless you are Bhagavan Shiv? I wouldnt touch him with a ten foot pole for us mere mortals. I would point out how the well is poisoned because of his halcyon view of his past ancestors and that colors his perception of the present. He has double bias- British and Islamic.

RamaY · Post by **RamaY** » 10 Jul 2008 20:20

Rajesh,

Continuing our discussion on Laloo/Mulayam/Mayavati/Karunanidhi types...

Quoting N.V.Subramanian >> Failed PM

Laloo, a by-word for corruption and misgovernance in Bihar, indeed, the man to bring neo-darkness to Bihar, is hailed by the UPA, IIM Ahmedabad, and Wharton for turning around Indian Railways. But the facts are otherwise.

Ignoring the pressing need to renew over eighteen thousand kilometres of tracks and repair or replace the railways' over lakh and twenty-seven thousand bridges, half of which are more than a hundred years old, Laloo's ministry is frenziedly increasing goods' and passenger traffic to raises surpluses. Railway officers warn that this is causing enormous wear and tear to tracks and bridges, making them accident-prone, and that Laloo's successor will inherit a broken down network.

There are also complains that Laloo's officers are doing creative accounting to exaggerate profits. Writing in Frontline magazine about the 2007-2008 budget, V.Sridhar said, "(Laloo) Prasad has chosen to focus on the surplus (because) if surpluses can be shown to have increased dramatically, then the rest hardly matters…the Railways' accounting system made some changes that removed the allocations for the Depreciation Reserve Fund (DRF) from its classification of working expenses. This has the effect of inflating the "cash surplus" projected in the Railway Budget…Moreover, other charges in the classification of expenses enabled the Minister to reduce the "expenditure side" of his budget, which had the effect of exaggerating the surplus."

Laloo Yadav has also used the railways' monopoly to directly swindle and/ or to exploit the traveling public. While the ninety-day advance reservation scheme and the average twenty-seven per cent cancellation have filled railway coffers, it has also lead to ticket black-marketing and hit genuine travelers. The railways have also raked in on abolishing "cluster tickets" and renaming "express" trains as higher-priced "superfasts" without significantly cutting running time. Wagons have been loaded four to eight tonnes more raising safety concerns among railway officers. But why industry and business schools cheer for Laloo is because he is so market-friendly.

Take the case of dedicated freight corridors. V.Sridhar of Frontline writes, "The concept of dedicated freight trains and dedicated freight corridors, which is already being applied to special container trains on routes with high traffic potential, is likely to divert profits from the Indian Railways to private operators. Dedicated freight trains, operated by private companies to move their own cargoes, will choke a profitable source of revenue for the Railways. Dedicated freight corridors, which are likely to be built by private parties on routes where there is a light density of traffic, will make it more and more difficult for the Indian Railways to operate routes that are not remunerative."

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 11 Jul 2008 00:26

From Pioneer, 10 July 2008

Amar Singh does not surprise

Second opinion: Ben Stocking

By asserting "LK Advani is more dangerous than Bush", Mr Amar Singh has betrayed two things. One, he is anti-Hindu. Two, he has very little knowledge of American history. As far as his anti-Hindu stance is concerned, he seems to share this trait with all other Hindu leaders of Uttar Pradesh.

Our first Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru was also from the same State. He remained in power for almost 17 years and was out-and-out pro-Muslim. He had openly asked his Home Minister, Sardar Patel, not to associate himself with the rebuilding of the Somnath Temple. He was also instrumental in providing for superior rights to Muslims even though the community had forced the division of India on communal lines.

No Chief Minister of Uttar Pradesh during the regime of Prime Minister Nehru or afterwards did anything to recover the Hindu shrines from the Muslims in the State. It is more likely that they never visited the shrines for the fear of being reprimanded by the Prime Minister. When Ramsay MacDonald gave his communal award in 1932, which provided for separate electorates for the depressed classes, Mahatma Gandhi had gone on a fast unto death. He did not want Harijans to be permanently separated from the Hindu fold.

In sharp contrast to this, Mr VP Singh divided Hindus through the introduction of OBC status. As for the Samajwadi Party, its pro-Muslim leanings are well known. Its leaders have no qualms about heaping insult on Hindu ethos. Mr Mulayam Singh Yadav has held an Iftar party on the banks of the holy Ganga at Haridwar. Would Mr Singh dare to celebrate Diwali in a masjid?

The Marathas, the Sikhs, the Rajputs and the Jats all fought the Muslim and the British invaders. The Hindus of Uttar Pradesh have yet to produce a pro-Hindu leader. The State remains backward primarily because Hindu leaders there suffer from a slavish mentality.

Mr Amar Singh should know that the Americans do not tolerate any attack on their soil. If someone dared to do so, the counter-attack would be swift and massive. When Japan attacked Pearl Harbour, the US responded robustly. The attacks of 9/11 were answered by carpet-bombing Afghanistan. The Americans are not anti-national. It is only a trait of the Hindu leadership, particularly those from Uttar Pradesh.

I think the word pseudo-secular is a weasel word for it masks the correct word which is Anti-Hindu. I think this should be the new word, for the DIE can hide their anti-Hinduness as pseudo -secularism, which is Modern and can justify it to themselves. I am going to start suing this word instead of pseudo-secular.

For example Amitabh Bachan while refusing to light lamp in the late 90s under the guise of secualrism, had his d-i-l go through all sorts of religious ceremonies. So what gives? Well all those are private and lighting lamp on stage is public. So anti-Hinduness in public can be rationalized as secular/Modern behaviour and justified.

"Calling things by right name is begining of wisdom" My drafting book on nomnclature.

Raju · Post by **Raju** » 11 Jul 2008 09:53

btw the regional boss being referred to in this article is Mulayam Singh I suspect.

Politicsparty

India's NSA M. K. Narayanan is defacto Prime Minister.

NSA MANI DIKSHIT WAS ASSASSINATED

Manmohan Singh had against Sonia’s wishes manipulated to appoint Mani Dikshit as the National Security Adviser, immediately after he became Prime Minister.

Mani Dikshit was assassinated (By his enemies or enemies of the Nation?) by an injection that injects a chemical that gives an impression that the victim died of a Heart Attack.

The System declared that Mani Dikshit died of Normal Circumstances by consuming too much liquour and smoking too much tobacco.

An Honest Investigation subjecting all suspects to a Lie Detector Test and a Narco Analysis Test will reveal sensational muck.

NSA: N SONIA AGENCY

M.K.Narayanan ‘s Forte is that he has convinced Sonia that He Alone will be Loyal to her in protecting her and her children from Assassination and from Political Coup if he is the NSA bossing over all Intelligence and Security Agencies. So that every shred of Information would come to the NSA First to enable Pre-Emptive strikes and erase all threats.

The NSA System keeps tabs on all Threats to the Sonia System in the fields of Terror, Politics, Government, Party Bosses, Business, Media and chaps like Pranab Mukherjee in the Cabinet.

All Intelligence, Security and Economic Agencies are bossed over by the NSA.

The NSA is Sonia’s BODYGAURD.

NSA IS De Facto PRIME MINISTER
In Sonia’s System M.K.Narayanan the National Security adviser is the de facto Prime Minister.

INDIAN INTELLIGENCE AGENCIES STRIKE GOLD

India’s Intelligence Agencies sometime in the second quarter of 2008 got a gift from the American Intelligence Agencies.

The Swiss Account Numbers of a Regional Party Boss, His Brother, His Son, His Film Actor, His Film Actress, His Factotum with thousands of crores were available. The Details of the Property in London, Singapore, Australia and everywhere on the Globe were also made available.

If this information was made available to the CBI and the Enforcement Directorate of the Income Tax Department the Boss and his associates would be in Tihar Jail unable to explain the wealth accumulated.

The Volume of wealth is so enormous that if it got in to the Media then the Regional Boss would have to Retire from Politics Immediately and Forever.

END OF REGIONAL BOSS

There was Only One Way for the Regional Boss to continue in Politics.
The Regional Boss prostrated at the feet of the NSA as if he is GOD, called him Boss and surrendered his Politics to him.

Will the NSA save the Regional Boss?
Will the NSA use the Regional Boss to do all the Errands that the political System wants accomplished? Almost like squeezing every drop of juice from the Sugarcane and then using it as firewood to cook a delightful meal.

Will the NSA expose the Regional Boss to make a Deal with the Enemy of the Regional’ Boss?

Inder Sharma · Post by **Inder Sharma** » 11 Jul 2008 14:20

ramana wrote: The Marathas, the Sikhs, the Rajputs and the Jats all fought the Muslim and the British invaders. The Hindus of Uttar Pradesh have yet to produce a pro-Hindu leader. The State remains backward primarily because Hindu leaders there suffer from a slavish mentality.

This is a remarkable piece of historical synopsis very rarely discussed.

Almost the entire efforts of the Jihadi Sultan’s: ranging from brigands of Gazni to Mughals: was to break into the rich towns like Kannauj, Kosala, Kasi, Patliputra and conduct wholesale massacre for maal-e-ganimah and Gazi-hood.

The only challenge these marauding gazi’s would face is in Upper-Punjab & Rajasthan with Thanesar/Sirhind invariably being the last stance of the defenders. Once the hindus in thanesar were defeated; it was very rare that these genocidal islamists would find any worthy resistance anywhere in the Gangetic basin.

To no surprise, that almost the entire sultanate period overlaps gangetic belt. And very rarely includes militant areas like rajasthan, maharashtra , outer fringes of Punjab etc. And if at all it did, the Sultanate’s hold on these areas, at the very best used to be temporary and confined to their medieval version of “Green Zones”.

This acceptance for the cruel invader has over a period of time engrained itself as dhimmitude in large sections of UPites. It is quite evident that UP Muslims (proto-pakistanis) remain aggressive as ever and are always at minutes-notice to riot at will. OTH, UP Hindus are ever willing to refer to ‘Gangi-jumuni sabhayta’. A plea for: “stay calm, we are timid”

Though, there are some leaders at very local levels who do dare to challenge the mess but most of them eventually get eliminated before they can alter the status quo. For instance, the assassination of Krishnanand Rai (A Pro-hindu leader) by M.A Ansari is one good example. And few individuals like Yogi Adityanath who oppose such jihadi cohorts get hounded by Anti-Hindus as “Emerging Modi”.

In a slightly different context, the paki thing of referring Indians as ‘Bahaman’, Bania, SDRE, Dhothi wearing, cowering, 1:10 phallus, etc; these are largely pointed at the hindu residents of Gangetic belt (UP to Bengal).

RamaY · Post by **RamaY** » 11 Jul 2008 19:17

Mani Dikshit was assassinated (By his enemies or enemies of the Nation?) by an injection that injects a chemical that gives an impression that the victim died of a Heart Attack.

Can we get this medical checkup done for the Houri-yat guys when they visit AIIMS next time?

I can pick the tab for it... seriously

vsudhir · Post by **vsudhir** » 19 Jul 2008 07:53

On the eve of a Govt facing a no-trust vote when its numbers are suspect, here are excerpts of that legendary televised ABV speech in 1996 in the Lok Sabha before the vote on his ill-fated 13-day Govt.

This house is for debate, debate that must be conducted with calm, thoughtfulness and most importantly with logic and reason. Some wanted to bypass the debate with a quick vote in their eagerness for power

Mr. Speaker I have spent 40 years in the Parliament. In these 40 years I have been witness to many such occassions. Governments have been formed, Governments have changed, new coalitions have come together but through all this the Indian Democracy has always emerged stronger. I am confident that irrespective of the outcome of this trial by the fire, Indian Democracy will only get stronger.

Mr. Speaker I have spent the last 40 years in Parliament being critical of the Government. Today for the most part I have been at the receiving end of criticism. I am especially thankful of all those who have been supportive of this Motion of Confidence. I shall also reply to those who have been critical of this motion. But first I need to thank Mr. Murasoli Maran. (Mr. Vajpayee speaks in english)

I have a special word of gratitude for my dear friend Shri Murasoli Maran…(Interruptions). Maran, I stand corrected. Despite our differences on certain issues, he was generous enough to set the record straight on the issue of horse-trading by stating categorically that we did not use suit-cases to convert our minority into majority. He has in fact demolished the baseless and politically motivated allegation levelled by some Members. I am also glad that Thiru Maran has taken note of our resolve to restore the balance of resources in favour of States.

We have always held the opinion that the Centre cannot be strong if the States are weak. Thiru Maran is disturbed over our advocacy of one nation, one people, one culture. I am happy that he shares our perception of one nation. But I must say that he has got it all wrong on our interpretation of one people and one culture. I categorically state here that the BJP does not stand for uniformity. We recognize the celebrated India’s multi-religious, multi-lingual and multi-ethnic character. This view is best reflected in a poem by none but one of India’s greatest Poets Subramania Bharati. That poem is entitled: “En Thaai” i.e., ” My Mother”. I would like to read it in Tamil. It says:

“Muppadhu kodi mugamudaiyal
Vuyir moimburam ondrudaiyal
Ival cheppoumozhi padhinettudaiyal
Enil sindhanai ondrudaiyal”

Mr. Vajpayee continues in Hindi

Mr. Speaker some accusations have been made against me and these accusations have hurt my heart deeply. The accusation is that I am lusting for power and that my conduct over the last 10 days has been driven by this lust for power. The honorable members are witness to my 40 year record in the Parliament, they know my character and my conduct. Me and my colleagues have never engaged in dirty tricks driven by a lust for power. I have not engaged in splitting any party to grab power unlike Mr. Pawar in Maharashtra.

Throught out this debate in all this cacophony if there is one tune that emerges it is this insinuation that Mr. Vajpayee is good but his Party is bad. So I ask of the honorable members what they intend to do for the good Mr. Vajpayee ?

If by splitting parties a majority can be cobbled to form a Government, I would not like to touch such a Government with even a barge pole.

To quote Lord Rama, I dont fear death but if there is one thing I do fear it is slander. MY 40 year political life is an open book.

If the Indian voter has given the BJP a mandate of sorts by electing it as the single largest party in the Lok Sabha, should the voice of the voter be ignored and overruled ?

If the President invites me to form the Government and asks me to swear in my cabinet and prove my majority in Lok Sabha, should I beat a retreat instead of rising up to the challenge ?

What is the harm in accepting the President’s invitation and exploring the formation of a Government through a positive exercise of discussion and debate with other parties to evolve a common minimum program ?

How is that lust for power ? This was not an individual’s decision, it was a consensus decision of the party.

We have always maintained that the strength of the Government be tested on the floor of the house and not in the Rashtrapati Bhavan or Raj Bhavan. Hence it was essential for this house to be convened and the President address the house. But even the motion of thanks to the President has not been allowed by the opposition.

I did not make an issue of that lest I am accused of stalling the trial of strength with that as an excuse. It has been my endeavour to hasten the floor test at the earliest despite the number of days the President had given us to prove the majority. We could have clung to power for the maximum duration but we did not.

Mr. Speaker, it is not proper to strike below the belt opportunistically. It is not proper to cast aspersions on one’s integrity without basis. I dont believe in playing that game and I will never do so in the future.

Some have questioned the legitimacy of my attempt to form a Government on the basis of my party’s vote share. Let me remind them that in our Parliamentary Democracy based on the Westminister model it seats that count and not vote share. We dont have a proportional representation system. The Westminister model may be flawed and I have been critical of it in the past, but it is the model we have and must be the only operative basis to determine legitimacy.

I have been reminded of vote share, let me enumerate the vote share of each of the individual parties that have ganged up today against the BJP and you will see how much in the deficit you are. Some have forwarded the logic that we are now getting together and the combined vote share of the opposition surpasses the BJP’s vote share.

Well let us examine why you are getting together today, for what purpose ?

Are you getting together to offer a stable Government to the Nation ?

Are you getting together to offer a Government where power will be vested in those with accountability ?

Let me remind you that you dont even have a common platform on which there is consensus ?

What mandate from the people of India are you talking about, when you did not even fight the election on a common platform ?

Logic is being offered that the people’s mandate was against the BJP. How can this logic be accepted when the BJP was not even in fray in some of the southern states. What kind of a mandate are you talking about ?

It is time the Opposition showed the courage and conviction to admit what is being mentioned in private. You have come together with the single purpose of keeping the BJP out of power at any cost.

This is not a healthy sentiment in our democracy. It has a whiff of fascism and sets the wrong precedent for those who have entered the house for the first time.

Let me remind you that my 40 years of public service have been to serve democracy. We have played by the rules of democracy. We have fought elections and vied for the ballot.

If there is one message in the mandate of 1996 it is against the previous Congress Government. The Congress has lost half its strength and its base has depleted in many states. Where is the legitimacy in this ganging up against the BJP by seeking the support of the very same Congress party against who the voter has spoken loudly.

Let me warn you, this is not a healthy precedent for our democracy for it is premised in negativity and is not constructive in its spirit.

When I first entered Parliament I had no illusions of becoming Prime Minister one day. I was a journalist and I have no stomach for the kind of politicking that is in currency here. I was the leader of opposition then I am the Prime Minister now. The premiership gave me no particular joy and today when I relinquish this office I will leave with no particular sadness either. But the moment does raise some questions !

Today another accusation has been made that the BJP has abandoned many issues dear to it. Today we are being questioned why the President’s address had not reference to Ram Janmabhoomi, Article 370, Uniform Civil Code. These questions are being raised in a manner to suggest that the members of the opposition are disappointed at the abandoning of these issues. It is these same parties which have also been critical of our advocacy of these issues.

Why are these issues not on our agenda ?

They are not because we dont have a mandate for these issues. The Indian voter may have rejected you but they have not accepted us fully either. We have the humility to recognize that and hence as the single largest party it is our responsibility to evolve an agenda with the widest consensus.

So how can this attempt at evolving a consensus while keeping out contentious issues be a crime that attracts accusations ?

Let me forward this same logic against this ganging up called the United Front. Will it have all of the issues on the Marxist agenda in its common program ? If that is the case why are the Marxists hesitant to join the government ? Why do they want to support it from outside to enjoy power without any of the accountability ?

To run a coalition government requires accomodation. In 1977 too we had set aside our demand for India to go Nuclear for it was essential to rescue the Indian Democracy from the clutches of Emergency. There were no accusations then.

…..

Mr. Speaker I would like to take my speech to where I began from. There should be no polarization in the country. Especially polarization of the kind that is resulting in a politically untouchable class. The divide cannot be so wide that no debate is possible, no consensus or compromise is possible.

The nation is beset with many challenges and crises. These crises are not of our making. Whenever the nation has been in crisis we have not been found wanting in our support of the Government of the time. The bipartisanship was such that Prime Narasimha Rao found it fit to have me lead the Indian delegation to GENEVA, the Pakistani were shocked and puzzled. There is no culture of bipartisanship in Pakistan where the Leader of the Opposition is called upon to advocate the National Interest. That is not our culture or heritage when it comes to issues of National Interest. Governments come and go but our democracy and national interest will never be compromised.

This debate will end today but the chapter that unfolds tomorrow requires some reflection. This bitterness must not be allowed to linger.

Mr. Speaker this debate has been witness to mudslinging on independent organizations that are not represented here. These organizations that have spent their energies in Nation Building and Character Building. One may have differences opinion with the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh, but the kind of allegations that have been levelled against the RSS are completely uncalled for.

Mr. Speaker in closing let me address one more issue. It has been alleged that the BJP does not have nationwide support and that it is a cow belt party. But we have received votes across the country even in states like West Bengal.

Today single MP parties are aspiring to displace us from Government. They have all come to New Delhi to gang up against us. But with what purpose ?

If it is to serve the nation we welcome them ?

We have also been serving the nation.

Had we been in politics for the lust of power, had we not been patriots, had we not been selfless in our practice of politics, do you think this mandate would have come about ?

There is 40 years of trials and tribulations that have gone into this mandate. This mandate is no accident or miracle. We have worked hard for it, we have struggled for it and won the hearts of the people. We have toiled 365 days of every year as a party. This is not a election time fly-by night party.

Today we stand as the accused in this trial by fire because we came up short on a few seats. We accept our shortcoming but we will not yield any ground on the fact that we are the largest party in the house. You will have to run this house with our support and you would do well to remember that.

You wish to run the country, you have our best wishes. We will continue with our mission to serve the nation. We bow our heads to the lack of majority in the floor of this house but let me assure you that we will neither rest nor pause till that National Mission which has motivated and inspired us all these years has been accomplished.

Mr. Speaker, I am leaving for the Rashtrapati Bhavan to tender my resignation.

WHy it is in the Indian interests thread, I guess would be obvious by now.

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 23 Jul 2008 12:01

Anybody heard of him
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rash_Behari_Bose

[edit] Indian National Army
A dinner party given to Bose in his honor by his close Japanese friends, including Mitsuru Tōyama, a right-wing nationalist and Pan-Asianism leader (center, behind the table), and Tsuyoshi Inukai, future Japanese prime minister (to the right of Tōyama). Behind Tōyama is Bose. 1915.

Bose along with A M Nair was instrumental in persuading the Japanese authorities to stand by the Indian nationalists and ultimately to support actively the Indian freedom struggle abroad. Bose convened a conference in Tokyo on March 28-30, 1942, which decided to establish the Indian Independence League. At the conference he moved a motion to raise an army for Indian liberation. He convened the second conference of the League at Bangkok on June 22, 1942. It was at this conference that a resolution was adopted to invite Subhas Chandra Bose to join the League and take its command as its president.

The Indian prisoners of war captured by the Japanese in the Malaya and Burma fronts were encouraged to join the Indian Independence League and become the soldiers of the Indian National Army (INA), the military wing of Bose's Indian National League. But his rise to actual power and glory was unfortunately terminated by an action of the Japanese military command, which expelled him and his general Mohan Singh from the INA leadership. But though he fell from grace, his organisational structure remained, and it was on the organisational spadework of Rashbehari Bose that Subhash Chandra Bose later built the Indian National Army (also called 'Azad Hind Fauj'). Before his death, the Japanese Government honoured him with the 'Second Order of the Merit of the Rising Sun'.