All threads that are locked or marked for deletion will be moved to this forum. The topics will be cleared from this archive on the 1st and 16th of each month.
Karna_A wrote:
As I mentioned before, this superstition can be avoided by renting the Kohinoor to UK for $1 billion a year(its priceless, but somewhere its valued at $10 billion because of its history).
If UK leases 5 Vanguard class submarines together with its SLBMs to India forever, that would be equal to Kohinoor's rent. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vanguard_class_submarine
That would make sure when TSP thinks of taking down India with it, India takes down whole of Middle East.
"Na rahega baans, na bejegi bansuri"
Brrrriiiilllllliaaaannnnnt! Karna_A, you are my favourite BRFite. There isn't a statement/idea you express which isn't music to my years. If I were asked to select next PM from BRF, I would pick you without blink.
Your last point in "Managing Pakistan's Failure" was also music to my ears. Though you have not told me the Guru's name yet so I can study is works
A group of demonstrators in Pakistan have burned an effigy of David Cameron in protest at the recent comments made by the Prime Minister.
The British politician provoked an angry response this week when he told an audience in India that elements in Pakistan were promoting the export of terror.
About a dozen activists with the group Shabab-e-Milli, an affiliate of the radical Jamate Islami, chanted anti-PM slogans outside the Karachi Press Club.
The protesters shouted "Down with Cameron," and held up a banner reading "David Camroon - The loos mouth".
Rally organiser Mohammad Yousuf Munir called on his country to cut diplomatic ties with the UK.
He added: "There should be a protest on an international level as Pakistan is working in coordination with the international community in its war against terror. It's a sheer injustice."
Pakistan's information minister, Qamar Zaman Kaira, said there was "resentment" in his country over Mr Cameron's comments.
And General Hamid Gul, a former director of Pakistan secret service the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) told Sky News: "I think it is a very unkind comment. We never expected that.
BBC also showed the Pakistani ambassador making serious allegations and comments about India. India should observe the BBC's one sided report very often and make a decision about it. In the name of indepedent report they often side with Pakistan. India should have media war against BBC's reports and also BBC as a whole its operations in India. Because their agenda is simple and clear which is to show Pakistan as if they fight for Kashmir not as terrorists. BBC has not learnt the lesson from Pakistani involvement in their own country their training for attacks and their language and their way of doing things in UK. There is no regard for India in their report in such contexts while allowing Pakistani reps to take over their time in BBC's live programme to speak against India and mass graves in Kashmir and so on. First what are the activities of BBC in India? How can they be brought under pressure? Second here there is a big number of British Indian population who pay their license to BBC. They should register their protest against one sided report of BBC.
Also Pakistan is a failed country. their intelligence is involved in the activities against India. Very clearly reports have proved by US and other countries. This has reflected in the Cameroon's speech. Rather than going into deeper analysis of Cameroon's speech and knowing the details they brought Milliband to criticise Cameroon. then they allowed Pakistani ambassador to speak against India in full swing without any voice from Indian side.
BBC works against Indian interest. It is like supporting terrorism in them name of independence. If there is a neutral position then both sides should be involved in the public discussions. Indian government has to do two things. One is to monitor the malign campaign against India by a few media and others and then counter it using different media and public awareness telling the truth. Secondly if any media is found guilty in promoting consistently against India particularly in favour of terrorism they should be considered as a threat to our country. How can they do business in our country if they a threat to our country by providing one sided negative information against our country.
There should be some serious research into this and expose this to British public. Even Cameroon should see who is behind such things. There should be a number of officials who must have benefited from Pakistan investments or some interests in BBC. There are people within BBC who would try to justify Pakistani activities by saying they are neutral. Is there some terror money flowing into BBC? who is behind it and how are they connected to Pakistan should be investigated. If there is a clear neutral position no one would bother about it and also there will be bias but bias cannot be there all the time unless some one is paying someone to do this in the public. Also Cameroon needs a strong public media spinner who would put BBC in its place by defending what he says while he is out there. Having worked with ISI some cannot get out of these things even in UK. It is a pity that ISI is being considered as a friendly organisation by the western countries after wikileak.
Makes one wonder, if Cameroon's going public on remarks about pakis was in return for the HAWK deal. This dramatic change from being the usual 'diplomatic' or 'politically correct' to being downright 'brutally honest' has to have a certain motivation.. I suspect the HAWK deal would have a small role to play in all of that. And if thats an example of the poitical leverage we can derive from defense deals, then we can only expect good things from MMRCA deal. Cameroons shown how far he is willing to go to make India happy and if the EF wins the political benifits would be unprecedented..
Just as much as Rome wasn't built in a day,an enhanced partnership was not going to magically emerge in the space of a couple of days.It's only a beginning.Britain has expressed its intent;and India has demonstrated a willingness to respond.The amalgamation is now a process.Proof of the pudding will be evident not before two to three years.
The new wave of India-UK relationship, well summarised..
Britain has recently focused too much on the US - an obsession with the so called 'Special Relationship'. Relationships with the up and coming powers have also concentrated too much on China and India has been relatively ignored - which is silly given the common language and institutions. So Cameron, Cable et al. are very wise to make this move - yes, it's business driven; however don't underestimate the affection and regard that many in the UK has for India.
British Prime Minister David Cameron has invented a new diplomacy - go to one country and criticise another.
In telling an Indian audience that "we cannot tolerate in any sense the idea that [Pakistan] is allowed to look both ways and is able, in any way, to promote the export of terror" he trod on, to say the least, delicate territory.
Some would say he blundered. The former British foreign secretary, David Miliband, says there is a difference between being a straight talker and a "loudmouth" and Mr Cameron ignored the fact that Pakistan is now itself a target for Taliban terror.
What David Cameron said was not particularly new or revealing. It was why, when and where he spoke that was interesting.
American and British officials have for long claimed that Pakistan, through its intelligence agency the ISI, has acted ambivalently.
The US Defence Secretary Robert Gates said of the Pakistanis last year "to a certain extent, they play both sides".
A paper, written by a senior officer at the British Defence Academy in 2006, claimed: "Indirectly Pakistan (through the ISI) has been supporting terrorism and extremism - whether in London on 7/7 or in Afghanistan or Iraq."
{In other words everyone here know the truth but we are keeping quiet to further our agendas}
One side-effect of Mr Cameron's new opening to India is that any such criticism by Britain of India over Kashmir will now be suppressed and in fact we saw the opposite - criticism of Pakistan.
Which raises the point - do you further your diplomatic aims by openness or by discretion?
while the comments no doubt keep a pulse on public sentiment, remember its not people-to-people wkk bhaichara that enables the money and technology flows of the world - its decisions behind closed doors by the business and political elites of any country. if that is in place, the 'people' can rave and rant (lots of americans do that wrt freebies to Israel) but there is nothing much they can do to change the course of events.
Of course, British rule had blunders, cruelties and prejudices. And yet, by comparison with the other great empires, from the Romans and the Persians to the French, the Dutch and the Spanish, Britain’s empire stands out as a beacon of tolerance, decency and the rule of law.
Beacon of tolerance indeed! What delusions some UKStanis live in!
Another RAPE b$%^ch jealous that there was no equal equal. Someone needs to drill into her frickin brains, if she has any, that India's faults like gender discrimination are not the equivalent of TSP's use of terror as an instrument of state policy, and it is for this that David Camron was taking to the ruling filth of her TSP.
As of now, projects worth around 250 million pounds are operational in India through aid from British agencies like the Department for International Development (DFID). The Finance Ministry is said to have argued that India ought to have its own policy on accepting or rejecting aid before an “embarrassing” decision is thrust by a foreign government because of its own internal politics, like the UK. This suggestion, sources said, was also taken seriously because the Finance Ministry felt India no longer requires such aid or assistance to run its development programmes.
While this larger question is still under inter-ministerial deliberation, the issue had its impact on Cameron’s visit. The Ministry of External Affairs felt that any firm refusal or rejection, without a proper policy in place, could have a negative bearing on the visit. The middle ground reached was that the UK was welcome to provide funds to projects it may have identified, but no specific amount would be announced in the joint press statement. The decision is said to have not gone down too well with London.
So, for instance, the UK was apparently keen on announcing 50 million pounds assistance to certain bio-technology and non-renewable energy projects, but this was taken off at India’s instance from the joint press statement. Instead, in case of bio-technology, the statement just specified the initiative of the Department of Biotechnology and the London-based Wellcome Trust to “come together in a new collaboration to support the development of innovative healthcare products at affordable costs”.
Pakistan Army 'encouraging Cameron protests' http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldne ... tests.html
Allies of Pakistan’s president have accused the Army of encouraging street protests, in which effigies of David Cameron were burned by Islamic militants, as part of a campaign to sabotage his planned visit to Britain this week.
Prior to this, UK was eager to prevent India's emergence as a global economic power.
Now it seems the UK has abandoned that strategy in favor of cooperation.
Why the change ?
Not that the collective kumbaya feeling should not be encouraged. But I just don't think India should fall for the anti-pakistan retoric they are using.
Focus instead on trade related issues where both India & UK may benefit mutually and keep it at that. All the rest is but an act.
If we want to clamp down on terror training – keeping "our cities safe" – then Pakistan is the heart of the action.
It can't be military action. That is absurd. It can be aid in action. But diplomatic action, for once, matters most of all. And it must begin at square one.
Kashmir? The reason why Pakistan's military stays so strong, so funded, so bent on matching India's every move. The reason why Pakistan democracy has proved so frail. The reason why Islamabad dabbles in Afghanistan's shifting alliances. Begin to broker a final Indo-Pakistani peace, try to set stable relations at the core of the subcontinent, and everything else begins to follow.
Not easy. Not sweet talk on a trade visit to Delhi. But if you don't know where to start, then you'll never finish.
As Britain and India embark on laying the groundwork for a new special relationship, economics and trade are likely to dominate. But politics has a way of intruding and complicating matters. After all, it was only in 1997 that during Queen Elizabeth’s visit to India that the then British Foreign Secretary Robin Cook offered to mediate between India and Pakistan on the issue of Kashmir only to be reminded by the then Indian Prime Minister, I.K. Gujral, that “Britain is a third-rate power nursing illusions of grandeur of its colonial past.” The evidence so far suggests that Cameron’s visit to India will have a more polite ending.
^^ James, there's more about that visit that isn;t known widely.
Thx to Mihir Bose for bringing the truth out in 1 of his columns.
Apparently queen madam was supposed to address a joint session of desi parliament. But the day before, she and her husband fillip were on a visit to some museum in dilli that had an exhibit on the jallianwala bagh massacre. Then the gr8 Ahole archduke or some such pompass titled sri philip had the sublime grace to dispute the number of dead in jallianwala and some dismissive remarks along the lines of 'it wasn't that bad'. A quiet diplo row ensued that resulted in the cancellation of the queenie address to sansad.
Its precisely this chootzpah that the likes of philip and cook and milipede display, that somehow its ok to downplay, diss or otherwise insult yindians because "they're all-too-reasonable and tomorrow, when present becomes past, they'll get over it and move on anyway", that could do with some serious disabuse.
Cameron stands firm...and principled on Paki exporting terror.Good for him and a clear signal to other western duplicitous democracies,that the root cause of Islamist terror worldwide has its epi-centre in Pakistan.
Terrorism row: David Cameron refuses to back down on Pakistan terrorism remarks
David Cameron will not apologise for his comments about Pakistan exporting terrorism when he meets the country’s president for talks this week.
By Andrew Porter, Political Editor
Published: 6:45AM BST 02 Aug 2010
David Cameron has refused to retract remarks he made while visiting India The Prime Minister provoked outrage in Pakistan when, during a trip to India last week, he said Islamabad could not “look both ways” when it came to tackling terrorism. Some Pakistani politicians urged Asif Ali Zardari to cancel his meeting with Mr Cameron in protest, but the visit will go ahead.
Mr Zardari arrived in Paris last night. He will travel to London tomorrow and meet Mr Cameron at Chequers on Friday. Downing Street stressed that Mr Cameron would not back away from his remarks about Pakistan promoting “the export of terror” and he would not apologise. “He stands by his comments,” a senior source said. “We are not looking to inflame the situation and we made clear that his comments were not directed at the Pakistan government, but what he said was clear. We are glad the president’s trip is going ahead and we are looking forward to the talks.”
Related Articles
David Cameron 'should not apologise'
David Cameron's ancestors helped suppress Indian mutiny
Pakistan Army 'encouraging Cameron protests'
Pakistani protesters burn effigy of Cameron
The talks are certain to be tense. Qamar Zaman Kaira, Pakistan’s information minister, said at the weekend that Mr Zardari would seek to correct Mr Cameron’s “misperception” when they met. A meeting between Pakistan’s ISI intelligence agency and British security experts was cancelled in protest after the Prime Minister’s comments.
David Miliband, the shadow foreign secretary, stepped up his attack on Mr Cameron yesterday, saying he should have recognised Pakistan’s suffering at the hands of terrorists and its democratic progress over recent years, rather than highlighting allegations of covert support for the Taliban in Afghanistan.
On Saturday, Mr Zardari is expected at a rally of his governing Pakistan People’s Party (PPP) in Birmingham, where, according to reports in his homeland, he is planning to launch the political career of his son Bilawal Bhutto Zardari.
PS:Robin Cook "cooked" his own goose when visiting India by his asinine statements.David Milli-"Bond" thinks that he's the diplomatic equivalent of 007,but keeps on shooting himself in the foot.His gaffes over support for the adventurism of disgraced Georgian leader,"Shaky-willy",who lost control of a goodly bit of his country to the Russians,and others-like his support for the Pakis ,terribly unpopular to true Brits,shows him to be the court jester of HMG!
Going to UKstan
Verified by VISA (also Explains why DC came to Yindia)
Sudeshna Sen in Letter from London
THIS time of the year is usually dull for people like us. Everybody’s headed into the summer holidays. Luckily, half the British cabinet and its ginormous retinue have just come back from India, in what people here say is the biggest outbound grand procession in living memory. Now, we’re getting megatons of press about how Pakistan is hopping mad with David Cameron for hinting it exports terrorism to India. Since making statements about Pakistan wasn’t supposed to be the point of this visit, which is domestically being touted as a trade or ‘jobs’ mission, the Indian business community is left wondering what, if anything, it achieved.
The massive British media delegation that followed the cabinet has noticed and commented that the Indian media largely ignored the visit. And how American dignitaries get more space. Well, yes, I said, when they called and asked me — but what did you want us to talk about? Nobody in India got the plot of the story the Brits were trying to sell. I didn’t have the heart to tell them that most modern Indians haven’t the foggiest who all these VIPs are, or why they should be concerned with UK politicians at all. I’ll leave the post-mortem for the blogs etc, precisely because I know it doesn’t really matter to you.
Instead, I’ll focus on the other big issue that emerged into the headlines from this visit: immigration caps. Dear reader, this is what it’s all about, actually. Firstly, there’s asea of misinformation in public, and that’s very deliberate. It’s because the UK government is trying to give diametrically-opposing messages to its local populace, its business community and overseas trading partners. The Tories won the election promising to ‘cut immigration to thousands’. Specifically, non-EU economic migrants. That itself is obfuscation.
The UK public is annoyed about immigration not because of the categories now under attack; the problem is with EU citizens who can compete with locals for jobs. Non-EU citizens can’t and never could. But nobody can do anything about EU. It’s also with a huge influx from the commonwealth, mainly the subcontinent — Pakistan, Bangladesh and India — who come here and live on welfare, strain creaking public services, create massive Asian ghettos and tick off the locals. That category comes in as dependents of British citizens — who happen to be rather large vote banks — refugees, asylum seekers and, of course, illegal immigrants. Nobody wants to tackle that political hot potato. Other immigration categories — non-skilled, semi-skilled, shortage occupations, curry chefs et al— have already been closed off.
So, this current cap affects Tier 1, Tier 2 and student visas. Students don’t figure in overseas diplomacy. That’s a problem for UK universities themselves, which depend on the humongous fees — £9 billion, according to one estimate — foreign students pay to cross-subsidise low local tuition fees. The Con-Lib government has warned that university tuition fees will go up for British citizens. Everyone’s hysterically objecting to that, but hey, you can’t have your cake and eat it too. UK universities, unlike their US counterparts, are government-funded. The state has run out of money, and now lucrative foreign students.
What’s making businesses hopping mad is with Tier 1 and 2, where numerical quotas limit inbound investors, entrepreneurs, very highly skilled professionals, intra-company transfers, professionals and businesspeople on work permits.
None of them can enter this country without significantly-high salaries and bank balances, top-end qualifications, and usually an overseas or foreign-owned company paying their way. They also don’t — can’t — use public resources, other than state schools and NHS; their visas don’t allow access to state benefits.
They’re usually net contributors to the domestic economy, including social security payments that can’t be repatriated if they leave. And finally, only a small percentage — 17% or so, according to the last Migration Advisory Committee report — end up as immigrants. Most of them leave after their postings or secondments, but UK Home office doesn’t count exits — only entries. Vince Cable calls it the visa issue, not immigration, and he’s absolutely right. It’s that Mode 4 stuff in the WTO, free movement of talent and services, economic protectionism. That’s what the Indian government and business community — not to mention every other non-EU country, UK’s own business leaders, the City of London and Mr Cable’s department itself — has a problem with. Overseas companies have just been handed a hastilycobbled-together quota of work permits for this year, and it’s driving them crazy.
The exercise is also incredibly self-defeating. Almost all of UK’s industry is foreign-owned, and not by Europeans. Mr Cameron promotes Britain’s time-zone as a major trade advantage, but how will overseas businesses use the prime meridien? UK desperately needs skilled professionals and inbound investors to recover from recession, and the politicians know that. Unfortunately, no UK politician can tell his voters that this ain’t immigration, it’s essential inflow of foreign capital and talent. They’d have to tackle the real problem categories then, which they can’t. The most they can do is what they’re trying to: reform the welfare system. That’s still a long way off, so meantime, I expect more visa horror stories.
I think this is a very realistic approach. Pakistan was cooperating those days against Russian presence in Afganistan. Pakistan was also trying to justify their involvement against India using Kashmir as a scapegoat. But Ofcourse they are also victim of TErrorism.
But their official involvement in some of the terror activities in name of getting information and being friendly to Taliban has hust them and also hurt many British soldiers. One should also realise the fact that it was Pakistani training that enables Taliban to fight Nato and other forces in AFganistan. But now also they might not train directly but their connection trying to pacify bothsides by cooperating with US and UK and also with TAliban and terror groups not only hurts them but also hurt other countries internationally.
If one looks at any recent attacks on any Western country or in any Islamic countries they have some connection with Pakistan either groups there or individuals or even some ISI people. If some of hte unrevealed confessions and hidden evidences are released by CIA it will have enormous impact on International countries on Pakistan. Even Russians would make a war on Pakistan for their involvement in Chechenia.
Now it is time for pakistan not to provide monitory suport or any other support any terror groups within and outside India. THe reason Deawood is going around with Pakistan's helo itself is enough evidence of Pakistan's international terror plans.
Even the Pakistani Democratically elected government is often kept in darkness and comes under threat if they try to interfere into ISI's business. The ISI also has some good connections and power within Pakistan Army which tend to operate on its own.
In this sense unless there is a clear cut crackdown on any terror groups within Pakistan the international countries are under threat both for ideological training and monitory support and so on. Particularly even justice is carried out by the terror groups in Pakistan. Recently it has become very difficult for 10% minorities of Pakistan to live in their country.
I do not know why BBC is not showing anything about Pakistani's minorities and their madarassa's training. Even in UK I think it is essential to crackdown on these madarassa's which are promoting hatred towards the government here among the children in the name of education.
I am not classifying th whole of Pakistan as a terrorist country and not classifying Pakistan government as promoting terrorism around the world. The problem is if they have a government it should crack down on a few powerful folks within the goernment and brinin in some secular minded people into the government. Unless there is a control of terror groups within Pakistan the government will continue to be the victim of the terror. In some quarters there is a strong mind to control but unfortunately they are powerless minority and also those who holds the power or at least manipulate the public and power are really enjoying emotionalising the majority and also exporting terror to other countries by arguing 'do somewhere else these things not here'. In this sense there are considerable forces in Pakistan who export terror around the world. This cannot be denied because of their open support for the terror groups outside Kashmir in India and also outside their country in Western countries because they can always claim that it is their people but not their country which is involved. But they would have given full information about cities in the West and also other places.
pakistan is being pushed into a corner with no recourse to flight... as sun tsu says, an enemy so cornered will fight with the ferocity of ten tigers... or in the paqui contquext... they have nothing to loose other than take india down with them
I very much doubt that pakis will fight like tigers if pushed into a corner. They are bullies - their mentality is to attack the weaker person, and cower in front of the stronger. Period. When pushed into a corner, they WILL cut a deal. There will not be any armageddon as long as the generals want to keep their 100s of acres of land in that country.
Will the overtures to India bear fruit? The kerfuffle over Cameron's Pakistan comments threatened to overshadow the significance of his visit to India. Leading a delegation of five Cabinet Ministers and numerous business leaders, Cameron made India the first and only Asian country on his itinerary -- and made clear that the U.K. seeks a broad-based commercial, security, and diplomatic upgrade in its relationship with India. Ironically, amidst the Obama administration's ongoing neglect of India, it may be the Cameron government that carries forward the Bush administration's legacy of elevating the strategic partnership between India and the West.
This is going to be a hugely intersting visit,where the official face of pak,its unpopular Pres.,corrupt to the core,aims to put Britain's PM in his place.Such gas and gall can only come from the inferiority -ridden terrorist state of Pak.Just look at this excerpt.
Pakistan president will 'put David Cameron straight' over terror claims.
Asif Ali Zardari will demand more support at Chequers meeting and warn against using India as a platform for accusations
The row over David Cameron's claim that Pakistan is exporting terrorism threatened to escalate tonight as a senior Pakistani official revealed President Asif Ali Zardari planned to "put him straight" when he meets the prime minister at a showdown summit at Chequers on Friday.
"David Cameron has been doing some plain talking. Now Zardari will be doing the plain talking," the official said. "We have to tell him [Cameron] what the reality is, to educate him about what we have suffered, and that if we are not supported at this time, how things will get worse."
"..how things will get worse".This is a direct threat to Britain that Pak will use all the terrorist forces at its command at home and in the UK to wage war against Britain if it does not support Pak in its blackmail.It is past time for the British govt. to warn any immigrant community,not just the Pakis,that such actions against the British state will result in mass deportations and long ter,s of imprisonment of those found guilty of criminal attacks,those who support such terror groups and those who preach such inflamotory remarks inciting others.
India should maintain the pressure upon Pak and refuse to talk to the TSP until the perpetrators of 26/11 and other offenders against India are brought to book.Such official statements during Zardari's visit would help keep focus upon the insidious,duplicitous role of Pak in the region ,nail Paki lies and force nations to reduce the extant of their ties with Pak.
Why the Pakistanis are alarmed?
Indian media reveal details of British submarine operations Link
Pakistanis were also alarmed at a pds700 deal signed during the visit, between British companies Rolls Royce and BAR to supply 57 Hawk trainer aircraft to India, which will create 200 new jobs in the United Kingdom.
"The PAKISTANI MILITARY ORGANIZED AND SUPPORTED THE TALIBAN TO TAKE CONTROL OF AFGHANISTAN IN 1996“ as recent UN report on Bhutto killing confirmed. So Pakistan was in control of Afghanistan before and at the time of 9/11 attacks. Pakistan was, is, always has been and always will be the real problem and a terrorist threat to the world.
Pakistani governments have been given an intentional free pass for their role in creating this global menace.
Nobody forced Pakistani government to facilitate relocation of Osama bin Laden from Sudan to Afghanistan in 1996. Democratic government of Pakistan chose to do so of its own free will.
Ex-CIA official Bruce Riedel said in an interview on 1/29/2009 that ''In Pakistan, the jihadist Frankenstein monster that was created by the Pakistani army and the Pakistani intelligence service, is now increasingly turning on its creators. It's trying to take over the laboratory.'' Pakistani Army and Intelligence Service (ISI) chose to create this ‘jihadist Frankenstein monster’ with full blessings and financing by Pakistan’s democratic governments in 1990s.
Sandy Berger, Bill Clinton’s national security advisor told 9/11 Commission in March, 2004 that ’Pakistani Army was the midwife of Taliban’.
Declassified DIA Washington D.C., "IIR (intelligence Information Report) Pakistan Involvement in Afghanistan," dated November 7, 1996 states how "Pakistan's ISI is heavily involved in Afghanistan," and also details different roles various ISI officers play in Afghanistan. Stating that Pakistan uses sizable numbers of its Pashtun-based Frontier Corps in Taliban-run operations in Afghanistan, the document clarifies that, "these Frontier Corps elements are utilized in command and control; training; and when necessary combat“.
Declassified U.S. Department of State, Cable "Pakistan Support for Taliban" from Islamabad dated Sept. 26, 2000 states that "while Pakistani support for the Taliban has been long-standing, the magnitude of recent support is unprecedented." In response Washington orders the U.S. Embassy in Islamabad to immediately confront Pakistani officials on the issue and to advise Islamabad that the U.S. has "seen reports that Pakistan is providing the Taliban with materiel, fuel, funding, technical assistance and military advisors. [The Department] also understand[s] that large numbers of Pakistani nationals have recently moved into Afghanistan to fight for the Taliban, apparently with the tacit acquiescence of the Pakistani government." Additional reports indicate that direct Pakistani involvement in Taliban military operations has increased.
Threats to cancel talks with the US – or carrying out the threats – could cost Pakistan more than $1bn a year in aid, which it says it needs to quash extremists on its turf. But Britain is just another middle-ranking European country itching to get out of Afghanistan. It is not even the major troop contributor there, so Pakistani intelligence officials can shake their fists at Cameron. At the moment, however, it appears that President Asif Zardari will stick to his London schedule, shake hands and engage in dialogue.
At different levels – and in very different ways – "America" also explains why Cameron got little coverage in the Indian media, why Barack Obama will address the Indian parliament during his state visit in November, and why Cameron couldn't in July. No country in the world can offer India as much as the US economically, intellectually or militarily. The sale of 57 Hawk aircraft is simply not in the same league as the Indo-US civilian nuclear deal of 2006. And in 2008-9, Britain was only India's seventh-largest trading partner, below China, the US, the United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia, Germany and Singapore, but above Hong Kong, Belgium and Switzerland.More generally, Indians do not carry American historical baggage. The US did not found an Indian empire, and imprison Mahatma Gandhi and Jawaharlal Nehru for 11 and nine years respectively for daring to demand independence
Indians do not have a British dream. Indians dream an American dream, not just of going to the US but of making their country jump from rags to riches, and finding a pot of gold at the end of the Indo-American rainbow. The national interests and resources of Britain, the US, India, Pakistan will shape their relationships. Cameron should not be criticised for understanding this obvious fact.
As for the second group – Islamists with ties to Great Britain who engage in attacks outside the country: the report’s authors modestly state that because their information constitutes a sampling, and not a comprehensive list, they do not provide statistical analyses. But their sample indicates the phenomenon’s reach, so I compiled a list of countries (and the number of British-linked perpetrators) in which British-linked IROs have occurred.
The centre’s list includes Afghanistan (12), Algeria (3), Australia, Azerbaijan, Belgium (2), Bosnia (4), Canada, France (7), Germany (3), India (3), Iraq (3), Israel (2), Italy (4), Jordan, Lebanon, Morocco (2), Netherlands, Pakistan (5), Russia (4), Saudi Arabia, Somalia, Spain (2), United States (14), and Yemen (10). I add to the centre’s list Albania, where an attack took place before 1999, and Bangladesh and Kenya, which seem to have been overlooked.In all, 28 countries have come under assault from British-based Islamist terrorists, giving some idea of their global menace. Other than India, the target countries divide into two distinct types, Western and majority-Muslim. An odd trio of the United States, Afghanistan, and Yemen have suffered the most British-linked terrorists.This documentation prompts several questions: One, how much longer will it take for the British authorities to realize that their current policies – trying to improve Muslims’ material circumstances while appeasing Islamists – misses the ideological imperative? Two, evidence thus far tends to point to IROs on balance strengthening the Islamist cause in Great Britain; will this remain the pattern even as violence persists or will IROs eventually incur a backlash?
MMB is Mad Mullah Brigade.
assistance to certain bio-technology and non-renewable energy projects, but this was taken off at India’s instance from the joint press statement. Instead, in case of bio-technology, the statement just specified the initiative of the Department of Biotechnology and the London-based Wellcome Trust to “come together in a new collaboration to support the development of innovative healthcare products at affordable costs”.
The evidence so far suggests that Cameron’s visit to India will have a more polite ending.