India's Sharm-el- Sheikh Harakiri...

sanjaykumar · Post by **sanjaykumar** » 26 Jul 2009 07:44

The next attack will be timed as was Mumbai and the triumph of chandryaan; ie when the INS Arihant arouses Indian pride. Give it 3-4 days.

RamaY · Post by **RamaY** » 26 Jul 2009 07:52

sanjaykumar wrote:The next attack will be timed as was Mumbai and the triumph of chandryaan; ie when the INS Arihant arouses Indian pride. Give it 3-4 days.

I predict that it happens after a INC govt is formed in Maharashtra. And INC govt takes a strong action against the perpertrators showing its mettle. I presume Mr. Afjal will receive his 72 raisins then...

Gagan · Post by **Gagan** » 26 Jul 2009 08:49

This is entirely possible, but someone from India goes and tells the pakistanis, or conveys via the US not to carry out a terror attack until the next elections.
How do these people, these demons, sleep at night?

Kritavarman · Post by **Kritavarman** » 26 Jul 2009 10:28

Sad as after Tibet, Nepal, Sri Lanka Congress is selling Baloch.

chetak · Post by **chetak** » 26 Jul 2009 10:32

Kritavarman wrote:Sad as after Tibet, Nepal, Sri Lanka Congress is selling Baloch.

Yes, very true.

Soon it will be our turn to go the same way with no one left to even cry for us.

Raj Malhotra · Post by **Raj Malhotra** » 26 Jul 2009 10:43

Various theories:-

1. MMS is CIA agent - did Jaswant Singh allude to it?

2. MMS is stupid

3. MMS is trying to reign in defence ministry which is following independent policy in Afghanistan

4. MMS is calling a spade a spade. The interpretation of Sharm document can be:- Yes, we are going to fu*k around with Balochistan and you can do nothing. Everytime you shout Balochistan, your Kashmir plebiscite wail becomes nonsense.

Yes, we gonna talk and you shall see us gloating & smiling regarding what is happening in Pakistan, you can go running to uncle sam but nothing is gonna come of it!

Lalmohan · Post by **Lalmohan** » 26 Jul 2009 14:28

I have a feeling that the sharm episode may have made things worse in a different way. pakistan may feel compelled to sponsor another jehadi incident to keep face now that india is spinning denials of appeasement. if that happens, congress will feel obliged to now take real action - again to keep face, not least with the indian public. the provocation may backfire against the obama plan of propping up the pakistani civilian government. gilani is the army's man for sure, is he also the jehadi's man? is he the taqiya master?

hard talk on bbc last night had the former british commander in helmand (now openly critical of western policy) talking about reaching a compromise with the taliban in order to maintain stability in afghanistan. the pakis have been smart, lets see if Unkil falls for this or not...

Muppalla · Post by **Muppalla** » 26 Jul 2009 21:45

Lalmohan wrote:I have a feeling that the sharm episode may have made things worse in a different way. pakistan may feel compelled to sponsor another jehadi incident to keep face now that india is spinning denials of appeasement. if that happens, congress will feel obliged to now take real action - again to keep face, not least with the indian public. the provocation may backfire against the obama plan of propping up the pakistani civilian government. gilani is the army's man for sure, is he also the jehadi's man? is he the taqiya master?

hard talk on bbc last night had the former british commander in helmand (now openly critical of western policy) talking about reaching a compromise with the taliban in order to maintain stability in afghanistan. the pakis have been smart, lets see if Unkil falls for this or not...

Hope I do not change the topic. However, come-what-may there is no need for Congress to take real action. This is proven and for some time the naton will go in that path. There will be no action (not eve a token one).

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 27 Jul 2009 02:55

S-e_S Harakiri lament has calmed down after INS Arihant launch.

vera_k · Post by **vera_k** » 27 Jul 2009 06:00

Lok Sabha must get PM, NSA, FM to resign

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 27 Jul 2009 09:15

X-post from TSP thread

somnath wrote:Secret document possible key to PM’s bold initiative

A dossier given by Islamabad to New Delhi over the 26/11 Mumbai attacks is so damning for Pakistan that it may well have convinced India it’s dealing with a reformed neighbour and that there is a need to change the rules of engagement.

If, based on this Paki dossier alone, it could extract such a joint statement from India, then the Pakis should strive a little more by appearing to pursue 26/11 more diligently. They may reap richer dividends, perhaps.

Satya_anveshi · Post by **Satya_anveshi** » 27 Jul 2009 09:37

When Gilanahi meets Manmohan Singh next time, my recommendation for him is to discuss direct involvement of MMS, Sonia, LK Advani, Vajpayee, S. Radhakrishnan, Mahatma Gandhi, Ashok, the great and Sidharth Gautam Buddha in the context of SWAT, Balochistan, and other areas of Pakistan. He should demand that this matter be reflected in the new, latest, all emcompassing joint statement.

Also, he (Gilanahi) shouldn't forget the reference to issue of his 20 year neighbour's wife.

I am sure MMS will not mind and we all will know the "true" meaning of joint statements and treat them accordingly.

Gagan · Post by **Gagan** » 27 Jul 2009 09:58

SSridhar wrote:They may reap richer dividends, perhaps.

Is this possible?
The pakistanis realize that across the border is a goldmine. Just as they have succesfully extracted monies out of the US for fighting terror, they could do the same with India.
Fighting terror directed at india in return for money for pak fauj.

No wonder Shujaat Ahmed Pasha wants to talk.

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 27 Jul 2009 10:03

ramana wrote:S-e_S Harakiri lament has calmed down after INS Arihant launch.

as predicted.

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 27 Jul 2009 11:12

ramana wrote: If MMS is a sellout then how come he funded the follow-on submarine program at twice the cost per boat? And reproted by Sandeep Unninathan who is no DDM.

I do not see an conflict, a sell out does not mean that he will personally sell every man woman and child into bondage and keep the money. The sell out means that some (enough) critical compromises will be made which take away from the creation of a national identity which is independent (in the geo-pol sense), strong (internal and external security) and projects its soft power.

It is entirely possible that there will be some instances where there is an serendipitous alignment of whatever vision MMS has, and what I (or Jingos) think of as Indian interests.

We should understand India has leaped into the post modern age without going through the transformations in thought and ideas.

True, and as we have seen, a lot of people see absolutely nothing wrong with whats happening either, we see that on BRF too. Unfortunately that is a telling commentary on India today. But then a lot of people saw nothing wrong on the British rule either. Some will still happily enumerate its good qualities.

It all boils down to the value system.

Millions depend on him and he cant sellout.

I am sorry Ramana I will not take that as an axiomatic truth. Accidents happen in all sphere.

"lift the veil and see the reality"

True.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 27 Jul 2009 14:15

A project like the ATV,initiated by Mrs.G.,accelerated by Rajiv and crucial to the strategic deterrent of India faced with two N-powers China and Pak acting in unison against us,is too important for any PM even a peacenik like MMS to sabotage.I am sure the N-G family on this issue are in sync with the rest of the nation.

However,there is a definite and clear distinction as to where we stand internationally in the global balance of power ,on our own as a proud independent state and torchbearer of the Non-Aligned nations,or as a petty ally of the US led bloc of nations fighting a "war against terror"? The US's avowed aim in Asia is to checkmate China militarily,using a group of willing mercenary nations like Oz,scared neighbours of China like Japan and S.Korea,smaller states like the ASEAN bloc and Uncle Sam hopes,the Indian giant that still has a sinificant residue of a slavish mentality amongst some of its rulers,who cannot breakout of a colonial mentality of kowtowing to the white man.Uncle Sam couldn't care less where our N-deterrent came from if it was all aimed at China! In any case we are so far behind the USN in N-sub technology and SSBNs,that it matters little for Uncle Sam.As long as out future ICBMs are around 5000km in range,meant to deal with China mainly,the US will not bother.If we develop ICBMs of greater range,the US will actively work against us.Already a US senator from Texas has like Hillary "mis-spoke",mentioning India as a potential enemy after our N-sub launch,now hilariously saying that he meant China instead,like Bill who "miss-poked"!

The US,as we can see in its efforts to sell us US weapon systems,is doing so as it wants to integrate the entire Indian armed forces into its global network of allies,who share the same technology and weapon systems essential for NCW and cooperative engagement.The EUM agreement with the US is a sell-out far worse than that at S-Al-S,which can be recovered easily after the next terrorist attacks againt India which is a common feature in J&K.The facts contained in the Wilson John book on 26/11 about the entire Paki military establishment including Gen.Kill-any,being behind the attacks,is sufficient enough justiufication for India to demand that these individuals too are tried for the attacks.Pak will naturally refuse and we can revert back to our previous principled position on the issue.

somnath · Post by **somnath** » 27 Jul 2009 14:37

Philip wrote: However,there is a definite and clear distinction as to where we stand internationally in the global balance of power ,on our own as a proud independent state and torchbearer of the Non-Aligned nations,or as a petty ally of the US led bloc of nations fighting a "war against terror"?

Non aligned nations? What splendid balderdash is that? We dont even belong in that motley group consisting of all banana republics of Africa and Latin America - and non aligned against whom? One hugely symbolic act some govt has to do quickly would be to withdraw from the NAM - will do us a huge favour as a nation..

The US's avowed aim in Asia is to checkmate China militarily,using a group of willing mercenary nations like Oz,scared neighbours of China like Japan and S.Korea,smaller states like the ASEAN bloc and Uncle Sam hopes,the Indian giant that still has a sinificant residue of a slavish mentality amongst some of its rulers,who cannot breakout of a colonial mentality of kowtowing to the white man.Uncle Sam couldn't care less where our N-deterrent came from if it was all aimed at China! In any case we are so far behind the USN in N-sub technology and SSBNs,that it matters little for Uncle Sam.As long as out future ICBMs are around 5000km in range,meant to deal with China mainly,the US will not bother.If we develop ICBMs of greater range,the US will actively work against us.Already a US senator from Texas has like Hillary "mis-spoke",mentioning India as a potential enemy after our N-sub launch,now hilariously saying that he meant China instead,like Bill who "miss-poked"!

I see no harm in us being the "tilt power" in the US-China tussle over Asia! No one else in Asia has the wherewithal, econmic and muilitary to take-on China and influence events more than us..If we do that, it would be perfectly congruent to our grand vision of havig Asia in our "zone of influence"...Siding with the US is not "slavish", its pragmatic strategy based on shared values at the top level..We are not in competition with the US, at lesat not in the foreseeable future (partly for the reasons you enumerate). But we are serious struggle for dominance with China over the Asian continent - and that is where our and America's interests converge much more than the latter's with China - we should be taking advantage of it, not crying over mythical non alignment..

BTW, if americans are considering our military strength a threat, we should be flattered by that description - if they really did, they wouldnt be talking about selling their top-of-the-line stuff to us, or enetring into an excceptional nuke deal either..

Dmurphy · Post by **Dmurphy** » 27 Jul 2009 15:42

JwalaMukhi wrote:
ramana wrote: What does India get out of this?
-Well the EUM turns out much softer than advertised and everyone claims Clinton upgraded the ties mcuh beyond what was expected of the Obama Admin. clinton mutters softening stand about ENR .
Ramanaji, right on cue, the media is going to be flooded about the generosity of Ms.Clinton. Life is grand when one can own media..
http://news.rediff.com/report/2009/jul/ ... uld-do.htm
' Not every one can love India as much as Bush did, but Hillary showed enough affection for India and her chemistry with people was really reassuring."

Its time to say thanks to Hillary, says a diplomat, because she tried her best in the given circumstances.

By reading all this, I'm wondering what kept the GOI from asking Hillary Mami to stay back and break the coconut on the ATV hull!

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 27 Jul 2009 16:27

Philip wrote:The US's avowed aim in Asia is to checkmate China militarily,using a group of willing mercenary nations like Oz,scared neighbours of China like Japan and S.Korea,smaller states like the ASEAN bloc and Uncle Sam hopes,the Indian giant that still has a sinificant residue of a slavish mentality amongst some of its rulers,who cannot breakout of a colonial mentality of kowtowing to the white man.Uncle Sam couldn't care less where our N-deterrent came from if it was all aimed at China!

This is a very valid point, very well said, I fact I wanted to say the same but was afraid of more tarring and feathering.

If you look at the bigger picture since 2004 anything which can give India a decisive edge against Pakistan or in conventional warfare is hamstrung (long list, slow scorpenes, no gun purchase, the eternal MRCA quest yada yada yada)

However things in the maritime space or China specific deterrents are relatively unaffected from their original trajectory.

It would be too much of a coincidence to say that all Indian actions which can potentially upset Af-Pak game plan are on slow where as we are making a more anti China posture. Also surprisingly our actions on the Naval front (though good for us) are also good for a 1000 boat navy.

If India was truly independently pursuing its goals I would expect BOTH to happen at fair clip, and end to Naxal violence by now.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 27 Jul 2009 16:29

"Siding" with the US is what Pak is doing.It is a mere rent-boy of Uncle Sam's.The US does not believe in equal partnerships,that's why India should be independent and "use" the US to its benefit,not "side" with it.The US wants the huge Indian armed forces to act as a mercenary force to do its dirty work in Asia and elsewhere like Oz for example.China has to be made to understand that it is better for it to be a friend of India than be an enemy.Joining the US led coalition is a recipe for disaster.Encouraging local insurgencies in the N-East and using proxy Pak is a cheap way in which to keep India off balance as it is going these days.There are a large number of nations around the globe who do not want to be equated with the US led forces or be labelled as being a US camp follower.Non-Alignment or Independence in foreign policy is not dead at all.Furthermore,the US wants to castrate our independent N-deterrent by inveigling us into dubious military relationships with it.

When MMS is ready to make us adhere to the NPT through the back door ,it is indeed ironic that the ATV should be launched during his tenure as PM! Perhaps Mrs.G.(the original) from wherever she is is reminding him where his loyalties and duty lie!

The problem is that Indian decision makers do not understand our potential strength and how we can bargain from our position of strength.We behave in far worse manner than some banana republics.What did "coconut republic" Sri Lanka do to both the US and the UK? It told them to frigg off despite the most i9ntense pressure and threats and the result?The IMF loan has been sanctioned! Lanka under Rajapakse is behaving like a giant and India under MMS is Behaving like a timid rabbit!

JwalaMukhi · Post by **JwalaMukhi** » 27 Jul 2009 16:30

ramana wrote:S-e_S Harakiri lament has calmed down after INS Arihant launch.

Ramanaji, it has calmed down not because it was a well thought of Chankian move, but because life has to move on, and one can make best use of even a bad situation. It was a complete screw up, no doubts about that. If not, the disarray with which the SSMenon, SashiTharoor and the ruling party were marching would have been unwarranted. Well, what about opposition? Nay it is just reduced to bunch of bench warmers in the opposition. Did we say opposition who would have provided alternative vision?
The opposition is busy trying to First classs "B" team to the ruling party. If the statement given by the opposition leader were to be believed, even they have stopped talking to the Indian masses. Even they know the route to Power runs through elsewhere, and cater to that sentiments. Hence statements such as the one given by opposition leader also reflects fossilized thinking, and if any out of box thinking, it seems to be a race to who will smoke the best peace cheroot with a bunch of murderers.

It is important to recognize that India has seen and will see better PM than MMSji. (Let me hasten to add that the current opposition leader is not going to be substantially better, were the opposition party come to power in next elections). It is going to be continuation of the same theme for the next decade, till all the hanger ons of outdated, fossilized thinkers in the political circle fade away. The composition of the Loksabha and the leader that is going to be from the elections 2019 will be lot more crucial and decidely will conduct business in different fashion. Hopefully, till then atleast the ruling dispensations in India continue to guard and maintain the territorial integrity of India.

On the otherhand, it may be necessary at this juncture that external audience is more crucial than domestic audience to obtain and hold on to power at the center in Delhi. Following the politicos seems to indicate in that direction for now.

RajeshA · Post by **RajeshA** » 27 Jul 2009 16:36

Everything is OT here ....

somnath wrote:I see no harm in us being the "tilt power" in the US-China tussle over Asia! No one else in Asia has the wherewithal, economic and military to take-on China and influence events more than us..If we do that, it would be perfectly congruent to our grand vision of having Asia in our "zone of influence"...Siding with the US is not "slavish", its pragmatic strategy based on shared values at the top level. We are not in competition with the US, at least not in the foreseeable future (partly for the reasons you enumerate). But we are serious struggle for dominance with China over the Asian continent - and that is where our and America's interests converge much more than the latter's with China - we should be taking advantage of it, not crying over mythical non alignment..

o India's top strategic mission is to be the dominant country in Asia, most importantly for our own security, but also to ensure Indic values of coexistence throughout in Asia.

o To achieve that, we would need to assimilate the best military technology on the planet and to become self-sufficient in the long run.

What is not in our favor is:
- PRC incensed about this Indian move, tries to create a showdown before we achieve our ultimate military strength and internal consolidation. This can be prevented by a concerted push to reassure PRC

by desisting in openly supporting secession in PRC,
keeping our anti-PRC rhetoric down,
increasing our level of trade with PRC,
avoid any conflict escalation at India's borders, as much as possible without conceding land or getting our troops killed,
not making overly aggressive military moves,
not being seen as following US cue on PRC,
coordinating with PRC on some issues in Indian interest in the international arena

.

- Allowing US to dictate when and how we should take on PRC militarily. Should there be any conflict between USA and PRC, which most probably would never happen, India would have to think clearly, deep and hard how destructive it can be for India if India gets involved. The US may try to get the two Asian giants to go hammer and tongs at each other. We cannot allow the Americans to manipulate the conflict between PRC and India.

somnath wrote:Non aligned nations? What splendid balderdash is that? We dont even belong in that motley group consisting of all banana republics of Africa and Latin America - and non aligned against whom? One hugely symbolic act some govt has to do quickly would be to withdraw from the NAM - will do us a huge favour as a nation..

NAM is an extremely important vehicle to express our foreign policy.

It is used to reassure the smaller countries in the world, that India's post-colonial journey began as one of them, and India will not abandon political, moral support to them, and would not encourage foreign powers to dominate them. As and when India becomes strong militarily, these countries would have an abundance of trust through NAM to fall back on, in accepting India's ascendancy and even protection.
It affords us a forum to discuss all sorts of international issues with all the smaller countries of the world, and explore how they all can contribute to India's security, trade and ascendancy as a great power.
It affords us a context to do an internal assessment of how far our policies have become dependent on USA, and what we need to do, to win back our independence in policy-making
It allows us a platform from which we can declare to USA, the sole superpower, that we will not allow ourselves to succumb to their manipulative ways. This platform allows the foreign policy constituency in India which supports Independence in Foreign Policy Making to reassert themselves against those who are willing to give the Americans maximum leverage in our Foreign Policy Making.
It is an ideal platform for the rest of the international community to ponder over the current balance of power, and how it affects each and every country individually and collectively. It is a good place to collect a measure of anxieties and hopes of other countries
It is also an ideal platform where we can join the rest of the world without the power-brokers of the world intervening and agree on and reiterate the common principles binding our many nations - a collective mission statement, something which strengthens the disempowered global collective.

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 27 Jul 2009 16:43

somanth!! Philip and RajeshA are doing a great job in teaching geo-pol 101. You should be paying attention.

somnath · Post by **somnath** » 27 Jul 2009 16:49

Philip wrote:"Siding" with the US is what Pak is doing.It is a mere rent-boy of Uncle Sam's.The US does not believe in equal partnerships,that's why India should be independent and "use" the US to its benefit,not "side" with it.The US wants the huge Indian armed forces to act as a mercenary force to do its dirty work in Asia and elsewhere like Oz for example.China has to be made to understand that it is better for it to be a friend of India than be an enemy.Joining the US led coalition is a recipe for disaster.Encouraging local insurgencies in the N-East and using proxy Pak is a cheap way in which to keep India off balance as it is going these days.There are a large number of nations around the globe who do not want to be equated with the US led forces or be labelled as being a US camp follower.Non-Alignment or Independence in foreign policy is not dead at all.Furthermore,the US wants to castrate our independent N-deterrent by inveignlign us into dubious military relationships with it.

When MMS is ready to make us adhere to the NPT through the back door ,it is indeed ironic that the ATV should be launched during his tenure as PM! Perhaps Mrs.G.(the original) from wherever she is is reminding him where his loyalties and duty lie!

The problem is that Indian decision makers do not understand our potential strength and how we can bargain from our position of strength.We behave in far worse manner than some banana republics.What did "coconut republic" Sri Lanka do to both the US and the UK? It told them to frigg off despite the most i9ntense pressure and threats and the result?The IMF loan has been sanctioned! Lanka under Rajapakse is behaving like a giant and India under MMS is Behaving like a timid rabbit!

No one "sides" with anyone in the simplistc terms put in here..TRaditional alliances are dead - if ever there were any in the first place. People collaborate on issues..the fact is that on a host of issues our interests would converge with the US, especcially with respect to the impending clash over Asia..

About adhering to NPT, I would think that VAjpayee took us into CTBT through his "test moratorium" pledge...dont see how NPT is relevant here, the nuke deal has already ensured India a special category outside the NPT..

As a rule, saying we bheave like banana republics is a gross disservice to ourselves! Banana republics do not carry oput the sort of negotiations we do, or have the type of ambitions we do...Giev and take is natural process of finding the most optimal point for ourselves!

RajeshA · Post by **RajeshA** » 27 Jul 2009 16:50

Philip wrote:The problem is that Indian decision makers do not understand our potential strength and how we can bargain from our position of strength.We behave in far worse manner than some banana republics.What did "coconut republic" Sri Lanka do to both the US and the UK? It told them to frigg off despite the most i9ntense pressure and threats and the result?The IMF loan has been sanctioned! Lanka under Rajapakse is behaving like a giant and India under MMS is Behaving like a timid rabbit!

Maybe Rajapakse should be made Indian PM. After all he is an Indic, right?

Wasn't MKG willing to allow a serpent like Jinnah to become Indian PM once? Rajapakse is a thousand times better.

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 27 Jul 2009 16:55

RajeshA wrote:
Philip wrote:The problem is that Indian decision makers do not understand our potential strength and how we can bargain from our position of strength.We behave in far worse manner than some banana republics.What did "coconut republic" Sri Lanka do to both the US and the UK? It told them to frigg off despite the most i9ntense pressure and threats and the result?The IMF loan has been sanctioned! Lanka under Rajapakse is behaving like a giant and India under MMS is Behaving like a timid rabbit!
Maybe Rajapakse should be made Indian PM. After all he is an Indic, right?

Wasn't MKG willing to allow a serpent like Jinnah to become Indian PM once? Rajapakse is a thousand times better.

Excellent set of posts in the last few time folks.

somnath · Post by **somnath** » 27 Jul 2009 17:01

RajeshA, there is not going to be an "armed conflict" bwteen US and China, or for that matter between India and China, in the froeseeable future..All three are rational countries with much to lose (as oppposed to Pak)..

What there will be is a massive jostling for space - and the current balance in Asia will force the Chinese into conflict situations with the US (over Taiwan, Korea, Japan, SEA, potentially over ME)..India, as I described above, is a "tilt" power..So it has the option to move either way and exploit the advanatgae..But as I said sometime back, India has strategic conflict with China with tactical divergences, and just the reveerse with the US...While we cooperate with China on things like climate change, our long term objective would be to decisively cut China down to size in Asia....US on our side would be, for obvious reasons, the big silver bullet..

therefore, it is in our interest to enmesh US in a range of commercial and poltiical engagements that would dramatically increase teh "stake" iof the US in India..

About non alignment, it was always a forum for a bunch of guys talking anti imperialism one day in Havana (or New Delhi!!) and taking the second flight off to NY/Washington with the biggest begging bowl to ask for more money from the US..The member countries were of various shapes and sizes and had virtually no congruence of interest barring another platform to vent frustration of being what they are (irrelevant banana republics) on the US!!

Big powers negotiate bilaterally, or in smaller groups on congruent objectives..Our foreign policy will always be "independent" - the way I define it is whether any part of our policy is against our "self interest"..If it is, it doesnt matter if we vote against Iran in the IAEA (which was ABSOLUTELY) in our interest, BTW)..

NAM is for the smaller fish, doign what they have done all their lives, losers who make noise and influence nothing..We need to be puching at our weight now, influencing events..That would be done when we dit down with the US on major issues (like AfPak), not visiting NAM jamborees..

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 27 Jul 2009 17:38

Gurmeet Kanwal on how to handle the post S-e-S crisis
Excerpts

It has now clearly emerged that the directive to delink Pakistan's response -- to bringing the perpetrators of the Mumbai terror attacks [ Images ] to justice and to take tangible measures to end terrorism against India by Pakistan-based Jihadi organisations -- from the composite dialogue process came from Prime Minister Manmohan Singh [ Images ] himself at Sharm el-Sheikh.

Also, the mention of Balochistan in the Joint Statement of July 16 has further raised the political temperature in the country and given the Opposition one more excuse to stall the proceedings in Parliament. Opposition leaders used phrases like 'sellout' and 'capitulation' to describe the twin gaffes.

The government's spin doctors have gone into overdrive to explain the diplomatic faux pas. External Affairs Minister S M Krishna said India wanted to give the Pakistan government a 'chance to prove or disprove' that they are in control of the machinery. Minister of State for External Affairs Shashi Tharoor [ Images ] rather disingenuously tried to reduce the fallout of the gaffe by claiming that the Joint Statement is merely a diplomatic paper that has no legal sanctity.

Foreign Secretary Shiv Shankar Menon [ Images ] candidly admitted that the Joint Statement was 'badly drafted'. Other functionaries have said the only subject that will be discussed, when the two foreign secretaries meet, will be terrorism and that the government has not agreed to resume the composite dialogue process.

After some initial dithering, the Congress leadership has come out strongly in support of Dr Singh's stand that India cannot afford to take a position where it refuses to talk to Pakistan. The prime minister's expected statement in Parliament on July 29 should clear the air on the various contradictory postures.

However, whatever the prime minister might say in defence of his grand vision to seek peace with Pakistan, he cannot justify the oblique insinuation in the Joint Statement that India has a hand in what Pakistan calls 'threats in Balochistan'. This reference draws a parallel with Pakistan's prolonged proxy war in Jammu and Kashmir [ Images ], under the shadow of its nuclear umbrella, and cannot be justified even though "India has nothing to hide".

Unfortunately, the solution he prescribes is useless

The best option to deal with the post-Sharm el-Sheikh politico-diplomatic crisis would be for Parliament to send a clear message that terrorism directed against India and emanating from Pakistani soil must be brought to a demonstrable end and that the government of Pakistan must show the resolve necessary to bring to justice the perpetrators of the Mumbai terror attacks. This can be done through a Sense of the House resolution in the Lok Sabha. Such a resolution will demonstrate that when it comes to vital national interests, the people's representatives can sink their differences and stand together. It is time India spoke in one voice on a matter of national importance.

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 27 Jul 2009 17:39

Somnath & Rajesh, please take these discussions to appropriate threads.

Sanjay M · Post by **Sanjay M** » 27 Jul 2009 17:51

So despite Shiv's hollow assertions, we can see that Pak's linkage of India to Baluchistan could easily be used by it to justify its terrorism in J&K, not that our worthless Prime Minister even cares about this.

Pranav · Post by **Pranav** » 27 Jul 2009 18:24

Sanku wrote: If you look at the bigger picture since 2004 anything which can give India a decisive edge against Pakistan or in conventional warfare is hamstrung (long list, slow scorpenes, no gun purchase, the eternal MRCA quest yada yada yada)

However things in the maritime space or China specific deterrents are relatively unaffected from their original trajectory.

It would be too much of a coincidence to say that all Indian actions which can potentially upset Af-Pak game plan are on slow where as we are making a more anti China posture. Also surprisingly our actions on the Naval front (though good for us) are also good for a 1000 boat navy.

If India was truly independently pursuing its goals I would expect BOTH to happen at fair clip, and end to Naxal violence by now.

Some valid points ... how difficult is it to buy or manufacture 155mm artillery? The slackness on this matter is criminal ... (actually, as regards artillery what we should be working on at top speed is something like this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M982_Excalibur )

But on the other hand the anti-Naxal effort seems to be on track with Chidambaram. Furthermore, the tacit support to Sri Lanka against the LTTE, in the face of all the howling by western human-rights wallahs - that is also a good sign.

So it's difficult to come to a definitive conclusion.

RajeshA · Post by **RajeshA** » 27 Jul 2009 18:59

somnath ji,

The response to your post earlier is here and here.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 27 Jul 2009 19:05

"There are no permanent friends,only permanent interests",said Lord Palmerston.Or as my dear pal,the late Anura B once wonderfully put it when criticised about his stand on an issue,"politics is the art of the possible",quoting Bismarck.

Therefore,the "interests" must always be Indian.Whatever foreign policy decison is taken must benefit India,as much as the interests and no less than the other party.If any decision to be taken has the slightest hint at damaging the nation's interests,then it must be thoroughly studied and a fail-safe mechanism must be adopted in case the other party tries to leverage any agreement in its favour later.Above all,we must look at the country's interests in a truly Indic timeframe,that is not taking decisions on a firefighting basis,but planning for decades ahead.Delays in timely decison making (for example 17 years to choose a jet trainer which we are now thinking of abandoning extra purchases and developing our own advanced trainer!) which seems to be the case especially in defence matters,has a cascading effect especially in guaranteeing security.Decades wasted to build a new carrier for the Vikrant,resulting in purchasing the Hermes,now gallantly serving us even though she is 50 yrs old,and wasted time in deciding upon further sub manufacture.We were the leaders in sub-building in the '80s in the region but now other than the ATV,have lost out to Pak in building conventional AIP subs.

A wrong decision taken can mean misery for the nation for a decade+.It is especially true when choosing friends.In the sub-continent,it is amply clear that the US will never abandon Pak and have actually divided the IOR into two halves,putting Pak as their principal ally from the Arabian Sea to the Gulf,ignoring India on our legitimate Afghan interests and expecting India to suck its thumb at this humiliation,while wanting India to be its pawn in its geo-strategic plans to contain China.This is why the US has never allowed its Centcom forces to exercise with us,only elements of its Pacific forces.What effing crap! Unfortunately the pygmies (sorry if I've offended them) and the eunuchs responsible for our foreign policy are lusting at the thought of India replacing Pak as Uncle Sam's favourite rent boy.

chetak · Post by **chetak** » 27 Jul 2009 19:24

insight: ISI and signalling —Ejaz Haider

http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.as ... 2009_pg3_2

What is going on?

Signalling? And if the ISI is doing it, one needs to see why.

Strategic signalling is a growing and controversial area with more unknowns than knowns and involves various factors. Moeed Yusuf, who has done work on nuclear signalling between India and Pakistan during the 2001-02 standoff, categorises signalling as direct, indirect and tacit. His findings are interesting in so far as he contends that “it is not the use of indirect or tacit channels of communication but the potential for misinterpretation of actual military posturing that is the foremost cause for concern”.

If we take out the phrase “of actual military posturing”, the question we are left with is whether there would still be “potential for misinterpretation”.

For instance, could it be that the Indians would think it useless to deal with the civilian government in Islamabad, and since they can’t deal with the ISI directly, despair of the possibility of any forward movement on the dialogue framework?

Or could it be that the Indians think that the civilian government has signalled to them through the ISI that the latter is part of anything that comes out of Islamabad?

Or is it that the DG-ISI is signalling to them that there should be three channels, civilian principals, army to army contacts and, now, a secret channel between the intelligence agencies?

More than the signalling then, it is a matter of interpretation. One could assume, in this case — as opposed to Yusuf’s study of a crisis situation — that this signal would be — at least should be — supported by corresponding signalling from other quarters to ensure that there is no misinterpretation.

For now, of course, the report’s contents have been denied. There are two possibilities: one, the Indians, after the meeting, interpreted whatever transpired wrongly; two, they decided, to put a spin on it for their purposes.

On the Pakistani side, the ISI could have used the element of plausible deniability because it was understood on both sides that such a proposition would be denied; or, the ISI realised that the meeting had gone wrong for whatever reasons; or, the denial is correct!

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 27 Jul 2009 19:32

Chetak, what is the relevance of the above post to this topic ?

chetak · Post by **chetak** » 27 Jul 2009 19:43

SSridhar wrote:Chetak, what is the relevance of the above post to this topic ?

Just wondering if we fell into a trap or were nudged into one.

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 27 Jul 2009 20:21

NDA to petition President over the Joint Statement

somnath · Post by **somnath** » 27 Jul 2009 20:59

Philip wrote:"In the sub-continent,it is amply clear that the US will never abandon Pak and have actually divided the IOR into two halves,putting Pak as their principal ally from the Arabian Sea to the Gulf,ignoring India on our legitimate Afghan interests and expecting India to suck its thumb at this humiliation,while wanting India to be its pawn in its geo-strategic plans to contain China.This is why the US has never allowed its Centcom forces to exercise with us,only elements of its Pacific forces.What effing crap! Unfortunately the pygmies (sorry if I've offended them) and the eunuchs responsible for our foreign policy are lusting at the thought of India replacing Pak as Uncle Sam's favourite rent boy.

There is zero evidence of anything like that..Pak simply does not have the wherewithal to be anythign like taking on the responsibility you are talking about..Unfortunately there is a tendency to equate a few pieces of equipment to strategic capability..Even purely tactically, new equipment does not translate to greater capabilkity unless backed by the ability to exploit the same..New F16s are simply toys if you dont have enough money to churn out enough flying hours..Or you dont have enough money to replenish missiles that are at the end of their service lives..

Till now, the US has done nothng to circumscribe our presence in Afghanistan..In fact Holbrooke repeatedly maintains, even in Pakistan, that India as the major power in SA needs to be kept informed of developments in AfPak...

Americans are not stupid..They know which is the rising potential power..they have no reason to try and back the wrong horse when the long term game in Asia is about the jostle for space with China..

sanjaychoudhry · Post by **sanjaychoudhry** » 27 Jul 2009 21:06

they have no reason to try and back the wrong horse when the long term game in Asia is about the jostle for space with China..

Don't be so innocent. What if they are trying to kill the "wrong horse" so that they have one less horse to run against?

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 28 Jul 2009 00:00

somnath wrote:blah blah on Pak not being good enough boy for rent for US

Please follow N^3 excellent advice and spend some time reading up on Pakistan etc. He has posted enough info in a couple of threads.

It will help the quality of discussion a lot.

Meanwhile, please shed the extremely naive perspective of considering Pakistan a nation, it is a agent on rent to its creators, its abilities or failing are not its in any case, but merely projected strengths and weakness of others.