Indo-UK: News & Discussion

surinder · Post by **surinder** » 19 Mar 2009 02:59

^^^^

India has in the past asked UK to return our artifacts, especially the Koh-i-Noor. UK's response has been contumacious. They bluntly stated in a letter that they have it by the principle of possession (i.e. they have a right to it because they have possession of it.).

The veneer of Jane Austen niceness come off in these situation. If UK was to return the museum artifacts back to the colonies, its museums & treasures would be empty. Then if it was followed by repatriating stolen money, it would go bankcorrupt many times over. They know it and would not yield, unless forced. In the mean time, it makes far more practical sense for the British to raise noise about the Nazi stolen wealth!!!

Stan_Savljevic · Post by **Stan_Savljevic** » 19 Mar 2009 04:43

A quote from Gen. Aung San of Burma from the 1940s, seems like said today.

Now what of Great Britain itself, after this war? Great Britain is no longer “great” and the sun over her empire has begun sinking though it has not sunk completely. At one time British imperialism was the biggest empire in the world not only in the political and military spheres but also though less visibly, in the economic and financial spheres pulling many strings in many countries even outside her visible empire. But today, this is no longer true. She is a debtor even to her colonies and dependencies like India and Egypt. By the ineluctable laws of historical Karma, she has been compelled to pay frequent pilgrimages to the Mecca of World Finance, to the United States of America. Though some years ago, there had been a fierce, yet silent warfare between the two, away on the high sea of Finance the once dogged and tenacious John Bull has now turned himself into Mohamed frequenting the Mountain on which the Statue of Liberty stands greeting every one who comes. Even though outwardly she retains her colonial empire her colonies in the very logic of things, have become more liabilities than assets, and she cannot afford to keep them for long to her own detriment. Whether British imperialism will see the writing on the wall in time and shed her imperialism not only in words but also in fact and thus seek the willing and energetic co-operation of the peoples in those countries which are now her colonies, in order to harness productive potentialities at home and abroad to the maximum and thereby regenerate her own country and the countries which are now her colonies; or whether she will choose to go the same old way of other empires and decay and perish ultimately – this is the question which Britain must decide now or never.

http://www.aungsan.com/Prob_Burma.htm

joshvajohn · Post by **joshvajohn** » 19 Mar 2009 08:08

British government has to invest in new areas of industries and research that will provide jobs for their own. I like the idea of charging people for drinks. it is good. British government should spend much on culture and entertainment centres as pubs are closed. Local food production industries and other types of traditional industries to provide jobs for the young people. Even India needs to open its doors for young Birtish to come and work there in their call centres or banks and so on. Interdependency and mustual movement are inevitable and should be encouraged by both governments. I know many Brits are working in Bangalore at various centres. such interchange can form the future where nation state provides space for any adventurer to move anywhere and work. Also the transfer of money should be made easy for the British people to send their income back home from India!!!

Atri · Post by **Atri** » 20 Mar 2009 10:04

Refuse visa to Modi, demand British Indian Muslims

Would they also talk the same language on Musharaff who have doing the same for years on Baloochis?

surinder · Post by **surinder** » 20 Mar 2009 22:38

Chiron wrote:Refuse visa to Modi, demand British Indian Muslims

Would they also talk the same language on Musharaff who have doing the same for years on Baloochis?

That would be the responsibility of the Hndus & Indians to protest such a visa. Why fault the M's in acting in their self-interest, we need to fault ourselves for not doing what is in ours.

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 20 Mar 2009 22:40

Chiron wrote:Refuse visa to Modi, demand British Indian Muslims

Would they also talk the same language on Musharaff who have doing the same for years on Baloochis?

What about Kashmir terrorists getting Visa in UK after killing Hindus?

Anybody protesting that

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 21 Mar 2009 00:14

Brits are in a very bad position. Such logic does not apply to them at this point in time.

vsudhir · Post by **vsudhir** » 21 Mar 2009 22:50

3 UK teens jailed for killing Indian in racist attack

How soon will the fabled UKstani justice system turn 'jailed' to 'bailed', eh?

Brits are in a very bad position. Such logic does not apply to them at this point in time.
Brits are in a very bad position. Such logic does not apply to them at this point in time.

Quite the contrary. They've made another bold gamble. Long used to dealing with gungadins, chhaaplooses and spineless netas in Dilli, they think insulting us will get them more bhaav as usual.

Under a nationalist dispensation, Dilli be something else and UKstani attitude will miraculously transform, I wager. You should see the UKstani fawning at PRC's GUBO handouts to understand how stiff their upper hip must be.... just my 2 paise onlee...

darshan · Post by **darshan** » 21 Mar 2009 23:27

Report uncovers child trafficking

Children as young as three are being trafficked to Wales from China, Bangladesh and Nigeria for sex, drugs and domestic servitude, a study shows.

Of 32 cases referred to, there were more instances of boys than girls.

The children were described as being victims of sexual exploitation, street crime, domestic servitude, cannabis production and forced labour.

The report, Bordering on Concern, was carried out for the children's commissioner for Wales, Keith Towler.

The study, conducted by children's protection organisation ECPAT UK, was asked to find an evidence base for child trafficking in Wales.

Authors of the report said: "Children who may have been trafficked are extremely vulnerable.

"Many will have experienced at least one form of abuse, whether physical, sexual, emotional or neglect, often of an extreme nature.
“ The sample we've got here is small but is undoubtedly only the tip of the iceberg ”
Keith Towler, children's commissioner for Wales

"Children are raped, beaten, tortured, deprived of their basic needs and enslaved.

"They are moved from their country of origin to one or more new countries, by individuals or gangs who have tricked or deceived them."

The study examined the levels of awareness of child trafficking issues among social services and selected voluntary sector organisations and the levels of cooperation.

It also looked at how identified cases of child trafficking had been dealt with by social services.

The report said: "Evidence was found of confirmed and suspected cases of child trafficking encountered by social services, the voluntary sector and the police.

"Data was gathered from 41 practitioners who described 32 cases that caused them concern."

As a result of the report, a number of recommendations have been made by Mr Towler.

It includes setting up of an all-Wales group on trafficking by the assembly government.

He said he hoped the research would "help shift the culture of disbelief" that has surrounded the issue in Wales.

"For child trafficking to be tackled effectively there first has to be an acceptance that it exists," he said.

THE COMMISSIONER'S RECOMMENDATIONS
# Assembly government to audit relevant training available to practitioners
# Awareness to be raised of the role of the refugee children advice and information worker
# More training and support for foster carers
# Welsh Assembly Government to convene an all-Wales group on trafficking
# Welsh Assembly Government to respond within one year
# All local safeguarding children's boards to implement Safeguarding Children Who May Have Been Trafficked guidance Source: Bordering on Concern

"The sample we've got here is small but is undoubtedly only the tip of the iceberg.

"I hope this research will help shift the culture of disbelief and that practitioners will start working together to ensure all children and young people in Wales - wherever they originate - enjoy the same rights, including the right to be safeguarded."

Christine Beddoe, from child protection organisation ECPAT UK, who led the study added: "Trafficked children were found throughout Wales but there was evidence of a number of barriers to identifying children and keeping them safe.

"Of these barriers the most worrying was that professionals didn't believe it could happen. This left children vulnerable.

"Government agencies must actively promote child trafficking as an issue that can and does happen in their local area."

The Welsh Assembly Government said: "The assembly government issued Safeguarding Children Who May Have Been Trafficked in April 2008 to professionals and volunteers from all agencies to help them effectively safeguard children who might have been trafficked.

"The Welsh Assembly Government has met the children's commissioner's office to discuss the report and will be considering its recommendations carefully, before deciding what action is required."
Story from BBC NEWS:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/hi/u ... 948738.stm

Published: 2009/03/18 06:44:01 GMT

Tilak · Post by **Tilak** » 22 Mar 2009 00:13

To my special friend Gordon, 25 DVDs: Obama gives Brown a set of classic movies. Let's hope he likes the Wizard of Oz

As he headed back home from Washington, Gordon Brown must have rummaged through his party bag with disappointment.

Because all he got was a set of DVDs. Barack Obama, the leader of the world's richest country, gave the Prime Minister a box set of 25 classic American films - a gift about as exciting as a pair of socks.

Mr Brown is not thought to be a film buff, and his reaction to the box set is unknown. But it didn't really compare to the thoughtful presents he had brought along with him.

The Prime Minister gave Mr Obama an ornamental pen holder made from the timbers of the Victorian anti-slave ship HMS Gannet.

Gordon Brown is frustrated by 'Psycho' in No 10
While not exactly a film buff, Gordon Brown was touched when Barack Obama gave him a set of 25 classic American movies – including Psycho, starring Anthony Perkins on his recent visit to Washington.

Tim Walker
Last Updated: 4:31PM GMT 18 Mar 2009

Alas, when the PM settled down to begin watching them the other night, he found there was a problem.

The films only worked in DVD players made in North America and the words "wrong region" came up on his screen. Although he mournfully had to put the popcorn away, he is unlikely to jeopardise the special relationship – or "special partnership", as we are now supposed to call it – by registering a complaint.

A Downing Street spokesman said he was "confident" that any gift Obama gave Brown would have been "well thought through," but referred me to the White House for assistance on the "technical aspects".

A White House spokesman sniggered when I put the story to him and he was still looking into the matter when my deadline came last night.

Well GB should give his DVD player to Miliband, he sure knows that the technical aspects and fixes lie in Kashmir region.

KrishnaMu · Post by **KrishnaMu** » 22 Mar 2009 05:49

FCO brims with ‘cowardly egos’ - Foreign Office damned in hushed-up repor

Miliband is not named in the report but will shoulder some of the blame. The foreign secretary, fresh from embarrassing photographs of him gurning with a banana at last year’s Labour conference, scored a diplomatic own-goal on a visit to India in January when he upset one of Britain’s last allies.

He insisted that the Indian government should sort out the problem of Kashmir, the failure to do so being a direct cause of the terrorist attacks in Mumbai which left almost 200 dead. India begged to differ, just as it had when the late Robin Cook made a similar gaffe in 1997.

I really hope MEA shown big middle finger to them. Once brit always imperalistic egostic brit.

Utter disgrace by this upper class twit. Still you can feel sting in his eyes that "Imperialistic". Oh well! they are apparently known as "Zimbabwe in Europe" because "Quantitative Easing" as BBC pundits put it. Quantitative easing my back side, Its just bloody nothing but printing god damn money couldn't regulate their own backyard london city economy. Thats what Mr Mugabe did, i think UK is following its colonies at last i suppose. I am sure my prediction at the end 2010 IMF will take over Downing house No. 11 (Chancellor's house). These muppets lecturing us about solving world problems. When UK will evicted from G7??

sanjaykumar · Post by **sanjaykumar** » 23 Mar 2009 02:34

Er- what is this thing called karma?

I am beginning to get nervous.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/7869431.stm

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 23 Mar 2009 05:19

Guys,

Is there any Indo-UK news in any of these postings?

Most, if not all, seem to be events in the UK, and, nothing to do with India!!

Keshav · Post by **Keshav** » 23 Mar 2009 05:46

Er- what is this thing called karma?

People have done worse things and gotten away with it. It's always the common person who gets it, never the person in power.

NRao wrote:Guys,

Is there any Indo-UK news in any of these postings?

Most, if not all, seem to be events in the UK, and, nothing to do with India!!

Most of the news postings are about bad things happening in Britain. India had it bad for 200 years. Cut the people some slack.

Lalmohan · Post by **Lalmohan** » 24 Mar 2009 15:52

Keshav wrote:
Er- what is this thing called karma?
People have done worse things and gotten away with it. It's always the common person who gets it, never the person in power.

NRao wrote:Guys,

Is there any Indo-UK news in any of these postings?

Most, if not all, seem to be events in the UK, and, nothing to do with India!!
Most of the news postings are about bad things happening in Britain. India had it bad for 200 years. Cut the people some slack.

quite a few BRF'ites of Indian origin live in Britian, and one way or the other, the GOAT has re-linked Britian and India in whole different ways to the 'historic' relationships. What bad things happen in Londonistan is of relevance to India.

Lalmohan · Post by **Lalmohan** » 24 Mar 2009 17:11

The UK Home Office is launching a review of its anti-terror strategy. The Home Minister has made it very clear that Pakistan is a major part of the problem. Here is an anlysis of the revised strategy

Home secretary Jacqui Smith urges 'civil challenge' to those who undermine British values

Tilak · Post by **Tilak** » 24 Mar 2009 17:35

NRao wrote:Guys,

Is there any Indo-UK news in any of these postings?

Most, if not all, seem to be events in the UK, and, nothing to do with India!!

Point taken. Should have posted it in Media Watch thread.

vsudhir · Post by **vsudhir** » 25 Mar 2009 06:19

Dunno how seriously to take 'news' coverage at some of these UKstani rags anymore.
Anyway, here goes.
Mervyn King warns Gordon Brown to stop spending

The Governor of the Bank of England laid bare tensions between Gordon Brown and the Treasury yesterday by warning that Britain could not afford a second economic stimulus in the Budget.

Mervyn King threw caution to the wind as he sided with Alistair Darling and the CBI against Downing Street in raising strong doubts over any prospect of another round of “significant fiscal expansion” next month.

Mr King spoke as the Prime Minister, beginning an international tour to co-ordinate measures for next week’s G20 gathering in London, called on leaders to do “whatever it takes to create growth and the jobs we need”.

yawn.
Meanwhile Brussels meows more helpful BS.

Britain was urged by Brussels, meanwhile, to make “additional efforts” from next year — code for tax increases or spending cuts — to reduce its burgeoning budget deficit. The situation had worsened substantially since last summer, the European Commission said, as it gave Britain a new target of 2013-14 for cutting its deficit back to below 3 per cent of GDP, replacing the previous target of 2009-10. This leaves Britain with the longest planned period of “excessive deficit” in the EU, after a target of 2010 was given to Greece, 2012 to France and Spain, and 2013 for the Irish Republic.

Stan_Savljevic · Post by **Stan_Savljevic** » 25 Mar 2009 07:08

NRao wrote:Guys,
Is there any Indo-UK news in any of these postings?
Most, if not all, seem to be events in the UK, and, nothing to do with India!!

NRaoji, I will choose a different take on this. Much of our problems seem to stem from the fact that we are not that well-informed about the happenings and going-ons in certain regions of the world. Even if it is not directly related to India, we could still keep these news-tickers in the hope that we will understand the mindset of our nemeses. If done in moderation, I dont see much harm... But if going overboard, a reminder to refocus is not a bad idea either.

Neela · Post by **Neela** » 25 Mar 2009 13:49

I am slowly realizing that the British media, having nothing to be proud for most part of their history, are worse thanwolves and vultures in a lion's garb!

The British Nano

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/dean_nelso ... itish_nano

Then, there in the lobby we spotted the reassuringly British figure of Clive Hickman, Tata's head of engineering, and the chief engineer of the Nano.

Ha! As he explained how he had led his team to overcome serious design challenges to build a family car for just over £1,300, his pride at having beaten European emissions levels....I felt a nauseous surge of patriotism rise through me.

That it takes Indian investment to bring out the best of British design and engineering is for one for another day.

And some comments that cut him down to size!

Mr. Nelson I am sure if you indulge youself in juvenile pleasure of penis size comparison you would be possessed by nauseous surge of envy at the result. Its a global world so lets try to share and celebrate each others success if it doesnt hurt too much of your hyper inflated British pride.

Clive Hickman didn't contribute to the design of the Nano. He was signed up onto the team about a year ago, when the Nano manufacturing plant was having problems in Bengal. He previously worked as the Managing Director of Tata Motors' European Technical Centre until 2008, when the Nano was already complete. Girish Wagh, an engineer, was the head of the Nano engineering team from conception to completion.

Read the comments and enjoy the public whipping!

shyamd · Post by **shyamd** » 26 Mar 2009 02:03

Sky News is running specials on "Pakistani Terrorism". Speaks to a leader of the LeT. The guy openly says we target India, Indian troops, Indian military installations etc. They also visit Swat and can be viewed online at Sky news website.

What is interesting is, Sky are running programs on Shariah law and womens rights. Debating the Integration of the Pakistani community. Some of the speakers are saying, Why are there no Indians or any other nationalities involved in terrorism, they are only Pakistani. Gordon Brown in his speech in the EU also talked about terrorism emanating from Pakistan.

Sudden change of mood. But nothing from BBC.

Keshav · Post by **Keshav** » 26 Mar 2009 03:02

Neela -

You didn't post the most important comments!

Clive Hickman didn't contribute to the design of the Nano. He was signed up onto the team about a year ago, when the Nano manufacturing plant was having problems in Bengal. He previously worked as the Managing Director of Tata Motors' European Technical Centre until 2008, when the Nano was already complete. Girish Wagh, an engineer, was the head of the Nano engineering team from conception to completion.

It's largely an office job with little or no design involved. He's definitely on the team now, but he wasn't involved in design/development. I've also spoken with Tata people about it and they can confirm this. While I'm sure the team he now leads was involved in the creation of the Nano, he wasn't part of it at the time. Work on the Nano started many years back. As I pointed out before, the engineer that lead and designed the Nano team was Girish Wagh, and you can read about him here off the Tata website:

You can read the interview with Girish Wagh here:
http://www.tata.com/media/interviews/in ... mI6WDexCg=

vsudhir · Post by **vsudhir** » 26 Mar 2009 07:10

Tata warns of job cuts at Jaguar

surinder · Post by **surinder** » 27 Mar 2009 11:17

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/magazine/4757181.stm

This article mentions the debts the UK was supposed to have paid in World War 1. Was it owed to India? Which countries was it owed to?

Lalmohan · Post by **Lalmohan** » 27 Mar 2009 20:13

surinder wrote:http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/magazine/4757181.stm

This article mentions the debts the UK was supposed to have paid in World War 1. Was it owed to India? Which countries was it owed to?

this is money owed to unkil for jeeps and planes sent across the atlantic for tommy atkins to use to beat the hun and the jap. unkil is the only recipient. as far as india is concerned, the viceroy 'very kindly' (and without reference to any indians) declared india to be solidly behind the mother country and declared war on the axis, and donated all the money and men without any conditions, as the natural thing to do.

indians participated voluntarily in this war, but did so for their own conditions, i.e. an acceleration of the imminent independence process

surinder · Post by **surinder** » 27 Mar 2009 20:47

^^^ But I recall a statement by Churchill bristling at owing money to Indians. They did owe money formally. I think many of the Rajas (like Dogras of Kashmir etc.) lent copious amounts of money. Was that money ever repayed? Was the money Chruchill was livid about ever repaid?

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 27 Mar 2009 22:17

Surinder, You are right. It was the order of $10B-$12B. Dean Rusk mentions it in one of his speeches about the Marshall plan. No it was never paid back though folks say obsolete equipment was sold to Indian militray(a/c carrier, jets, crappy tanks etc) under the Sterling balances plan.

surinder · Post by **surinder** » 27 Mar 2009 22:24

Then it seems like something the GOI should ask UK to repay. Especially given that UK had been making war payments as late as 2006. The symbolic benifit might be enormous.

Gerard · Post by **Gerard** » 28 Mar 2009 01:50

The Global Impact of the Great Depression
by Diet Rothermond
Routledge
page 157

'Pax Brittanica', the unchallenged hegemony of Great Britain, was badly damaged by the First World War. All the colonial powers had benefitted from this hegemony because it preserved the status quo, and the decline of Great Britain was therefore bound to damage the whole edifice of European colonial rule. The main pillar of the British Empire was India, and for this reason India had a special role to play in the emancipation of the periphery. India had contributed substantially to the British was effort in the First World War, but it had also gained war profits.
After the war an insecure Great Britain was confronted with a more self-confident India in which not only intellectuals but also traders and businessmen harboured nationalist ideas and rallied around Mahatma Gandhi. British-Indian relations in the interwar period were marked by the fact that the British were neither willing nor able to suppress the Indian freedom movement by brute force. But they were also unwilling to grant Dominion status to India at a time when this would have been regarded as a generous concession. If India had been given that status in 1929 it would have been free to deal with the great depression in its won way and would have probably entered the Second World War as a British ally. But under the impact of the depression Britain had to tighten its colonial control over India so as to avert its won bankruptcy.
When India got involved in the Second World War by supplying two million soldiers to the British, the colonial rulers were caught on the horns of a dilemma. The Atlantic Charter which they had signed with their American allies promised freedom and self determination to all peoples of the world. They had also concluded an agreement with the Americans which was designed to prevent the accumulation of war debts which had beset American-British relations after the First world War. The agreement stipulated that all nations participating in the war effort should share the burden equitably. But Churchill had made clear that the Atlantic Charter should not apply to India and other colonies. Since India thus was not a free ally it could not be forced to share the financial burden of the war effort and all its contributions had to be credited to its account with the Bank of England.
This indebtedness to India was mentioned by the British to the Americans whenever they wanted to cut American aid because they noticed that dollar reserves were accumulating in London. Churchill was furious about the British war debt to India and would have liked to cancel it by defining it as India's contribution to the allied war effort. However, the Americans were watching him and he could not have it both ways. In India, a British cancellation of those war debts would also have caused alarm and led to a reduction of Indian deliveries. After all, Indian private industry supplied the British with essential goods and a cancellation of all debts would have ruined the British credit worthiness.
Leopold Amery, the secretary of state for India, told Churchill that it would be unwise to tell a taxi driver on an urgent trip that one would not pay for it at the end of the journey. Amery had an over-optimistic idea of the postwar use of Indian balances in the Bank of England, believing that they would help to boost British exports. This led Keynes to describe him as a dangerous lunatic. Keynes had a different view to what Amery considered to be a potentially positive effect. To him, this potential Indian claim on British goods amounted to a mortgage on British postwar production. But neither Churchill nor Keynes could prevent the accumulation of Indian balances in the Bank of England, which finally contributed to India's independence.
The other colonies neither had as much share in the war effort as India nor did they have the institutional infrastructure for a smooth transfer of power. But once the main pillar of the British empire had been removed, the rest of the edifice was bound to crumble sooner or later.

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 28 Mar 2009 02:15

Did you type it

Gerard · Post by **Gerard** » 28 Mar 2009 02:28

Yes. Extract via google (not copy-pastable)

vsudhir · Post by **vsudhir** » 28 Mar 2009 02:31

Gerard wrote:Yes. Extract via google (not copy-pastable)

Wow.
Hats off.

Johann · Post by **Johann** » 28 Mar 2009 03:21

ramana wrote:Surinder, You are right. It was the order of $10B-$12B. Dean Rusk mentions it in one of his speeches about the Marshall plan. No it was never paid back though folks say obsolete equipment was sold to Indian militray(a/c carrier, jets, crappy tanks etc) under the Sterling balances plan.

Ramana,

What made the Vikrant or Canberras obsolete at the time of sale? What made the Centurion 'crappy'?

Anyway for details on Indo-British defence relationship, sterling balance, arms sales, etc see Martin Wainright's "Inheritance of Empire: Britain, India and the Balance of Power in Asia 1938-55"

India was buying weapons using the sterling balance almost from the stroke of midnight on independence day, but availability was low given the Malayan Emergency and Korean War - once those wars ended the availability of British weapons increased, and Indian purchases increased.

Nehru's arms purchases from the UK in the 1950s in particular gave India an independent naval power projection capability that no country in Asia or Africa could match.

It is not until the 1960s, after the Sterling balance had been largely settled that the UK bowed to US pressure on the matter of arms sales to India.

surinder · Post by **surinder** » 28 Mar 2009 05:14

Johann,

The question is whether the terms of the loan were one-sided or were they fair and equitable. Was India free to get the money back and use that money to get armaments from USSR. Was the value of goods+services realy equal the amount borrowed. Could UK have gotten the same terms for the loans from elsewhere in the world? In essence, was the money filched from India?

In any case, India was a slave when the loan was made, and that is how slaves are treated (and probably should be treated).

vsudhir · Post by **vsudhir** » 28 Mar 2009 23:49

Police identify 200 children as potential terrorists

The number was revealed to The Independent by Sir Norman Bettison, the chief constable of West Yorkshire Police and Britain's most senior officer in charge of terror prevention.

He said the "Channel project" had intervened in the cases of at least 200 children who were thought to be at risk of extremism, since it began 18 months ago. The number has leapt from 10 children identified by June 2008.

The programme, run by the Association of Chief Police Officers, asks teachers, parents and other community figures to be vigilant for signs that may indicate an attraction to extreme views or susceptibility to being "groomed" by radicalisers. Sir Norman, whose force covers the area in which all four 7 July 2005 bombers grew up, said: "What will often manifest itself is what might be regarded as racism and the adoption of bad attitudes towards 'the West'.

"One of the four bombers of 7 July was, on the face of it, a model student. He had never been in trouble with the police, was the son of a well-established family and was employed and integrated into society.

"But when we went back to his teachers they remarked on the things he used to write. In his exercise books he had written comments praising al-Qa'ida. That was not seen at the time as being substantive. Now we would hope that teachers might intervene, speak to the child's family or perhaps the local imam who could then speak to the young man."

Gerard · Post by **Gerard** » 29 Mar 2009 22:56

George Soros: Britain may have to seek IMF rescue

Johann · Post by **Johann** » 29 Mar 2009 23:49

surinder wrote:Johann,

The question is whether the terms of the loan were one-sided or were they fair and equitable. Was India free to get the money back and use that money to get armaments from USSR. Was the value of goods+services realy equal the amount borrowed. Could UK have gotten the same terms for the loans from elsewhere in the world? In essence, was the money filched from India?

In any case, India was a slave when the loan was made, and that is how slaves are treated (and probably should be treated).

Surinder,

This was not so much a commercial loan, as a line of credit that paid for war production, capital expenditure, operational costs as well as pensions and salaries, which until WWII had gone in the opposite direction (ie raj-era GoI expenditure often exceeded tax receipts requiring financial support from the govt in London). Some interesting details here; http://rbidocs.rbi.org.in/rdocs/content/PDFs/89646.pdf

The GoI whether run by the British or Indians needed funds to operate. Even if India had not achieved independence in 1947, the GoI would have collected on what was owed to it in order to pay for expenses - principally the Cold War in Asia; fighting the PRC in Tibet and Korea, and deterring the Soviets in Iran and Afghanistan.

If you're trying to assess the cost of the Indian military build up in the 1950s paid for by Sterling balance debt, compare it to the way that India paid for military build-ups from the 1960s through 1980s.

Please read the Wainright book in my previous post which goes in to detail in to arms sales and strategic relationships- you will see that the post-Independence GoI and MoD have a history of being very tough negotiators in arms deals. India chose to accept only what they wanted, and guided by their own strategic framework, at only prices they were willing to pay.

The Vikrant, the Canberra, etc etc served for over a generation in Indian forces and helped win two wars, and served well in to the 1990s and beyond (the Canberra has only just been recently retired from the strategic aerial recce role in both India and the UK) without adding to Indian debt.

India did not develop an interest in Soviet arms until the Johnson Administration in the mid-1960s pressured the UK to reduce arms sales to India, in part because the Johnson team wanted to reduce military aid to the subcontinent which they had come to view as unproductive.

Yet even at the highly, highly subsidised terms of Indo-Soviet arms sales with rupee payments, generous evaluations of the value of Indian trade goods, lengthy repayment period, wilingness to accept rupee payments, etc, India still accumulated a substantial debt.

Such a level of subsidisation comes at a high political cost - India's geopolitical and economic indepdendence was reduced in the 1970s by the scale of dependence on Soviet aid, which is why Indira Gandhi in the 1980s moved to buy European, including British weapons at market prices. Its not surprising that the beginnings of economic liberalisation followed in order to help pay for this. There is a real correlation between GoI economic policies and sources of arms purchases you can track from independence onwars.

In fact I'd argue that the 1950s and early 1960s were one of the best decades of post-independence Indo-British relations precisely because the UK's sterling debt to India meant that the UK had to keep India happy. Once the debt was paid off NATO-centric concerns trumped others.

Lalmohan · Post by **Lalmohan** » 30 Mar 2009 01:10

The IAF was set to buy the English Electric Lightning before the US forced the UK to withdraw it, and at the same time supplied F104's to Pakistan. This forced India's hand into procuring Mig21's. I think this was the start of the Soviet armament wave over the next two-three decades

Gerard · Post by **Gerard** » 30 Mar 2009 19:11

Five arrested in G20 terror probe

surinder · Post by **surinder** » 30 Mar 2009 20:13

Johann,

Thanks for the indepth and clear explanation.

I will ask my favorite question again: How do you know so much about so many things?