Future Strategic Scenario for the Indian Subcontinent -II

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 30 Sep 2010 02:26

http://www.nyu.edu/classes/keefer/joe/mccarty2.html
The Taliban's Twin Towers
by Steve McCarty
Professor, Kagawa JC, Japan
"Actually in early 1999 the Japanese vernacular daily Asahi Shimbun (1999) ran a front-page story detailing that by the fall of 1998 the Taliban had started to demolish the Great Buddhas, but by the time the Western press got the message it was too late. Despite proclamations going back to the days of Nixon that Japan should serve as a bridge between East and West, the untranslated majority of vernacular sources are not taken seriously. Analyses of Japan based only on English sources often seem to suffice, with the language barrier excusing an inability or unwillingness to acknowledge the value of Japanese news sources on non-Japanese matters.

Paraphrasing again from the Japanese, the article stated that in the Afghan civil war Bamiyan had been bombarded from 1997, and the taller Buddha's head was partly destroyed [photos show that the face had been razed then or earlier, in obvious obedience to Islamic fundamentalism]. In the fall of 1998 Taliban tanks blasted the face off the shorter Buddha and destroyed murals such as that of Athena. The Indian, Persian and Greek influences made the site a most precious symbol of East-West fusion for humanity (Asahi Shimbun, 1999).

At that time, two years before Omar's well-publicized threat, this author tried to warn Asian Studies circles that the destruction was being carried out. The criticism of the Taliban was forwarded to a network in Malaysia, possibly raising some hackles in the Islamic world. But East-West fusion is outgunned, with few defenders of its cultural treasures for humanity.

Commentators in early 2001 thought UNESCO had already declared the Buddhas a World Heritage Site, but no one had done the PR. The World Culture Report (UNESCO, 2000) shows that Afghanistan has only received one form of assistance from the World Monument Fund (1998-2000) for Endangered Heritage Sites.

For Afghanistan was not like Japan where well-funded regional groups continually campaign for their historical treasures to be recognized as World Heritage Sites. The UNESCO World Culture Report 2000 includes frameworks for identifying cultural assets of countries. It explicitly endorses the Japanese concept of intangible cultural properties, so people here on the island of Shikoku may succeed in having their pilgrimage of 88 temples so recognized. Fine, but who is speaking up for cultural properties in impoverished or war-torn nations within which different cultures may be in contention?

The Bamiyan twin Buddhas represented another culture facing the Islamic fundamentalists, towering over them, as it were. Throughout Asia and in most cultures, greater age tends to equate with greater legitimacy and venerability. Thus the greater antiquity of the Buddhas in Afghanistan than Islam could imply a superiority evoking a sense of rivalry akin to envy or jealousy. Local people were not Buddhists but still called them mother and father, evidence that culture runs even deeper than religion.
[....]
Jealousy cannot explain the worldwide opposition to conspicuous consumption of natural resources, unilateralism and the abrogation of international treaties. But there does seem to be a universally human tendency to envy that adds to the emotional charge of righteous indignation directed on 9/11/01 at America's decadence. People around one make sure that hubris is followed by nemesis, so individuals and institutions would be advised not to make light of jealousy and envy. Rather reflect, and take a step out of harm's way."

The author makes an important psychological connection that drives Islamists in and around the subcontinent. Any site, reference, association in popular memory that connects the land to pre-Islamic cultures and civilization are a challenge to them. They can never rest completely reassured of the control over peoples' minds unless every such site or memory is disputed and challenged or delegitimized. So disputes over ancient sites are not only about land - but erasure and replacements of any trace or hint of association of that land with non-Islamic cultures, just as the fond attachment of the now Muslim locals with the Bamian statues was a source of immense envy and jealousy.

The Afghan archaeologists have recently unearthed an extensive Buddhist site near Kabul on a land that will soon be blasted for mining by China. But given that the Talebs are going to be handed AFG on a platter - what is the hurry in excavating the site?

We tend to think of wars and battles only as physical and material. A part of the war is psychological and which the Taleb type Islamists have never really given up on, while the rest of us sort of relax when the overt violence gets less reported or actually dies down in a temporary lull.

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 02 Oct 2010 03:02

Pak blockades NATO supplies

US doubts Pak's blockade of NATO supplies will last
2010-10-01 22:30:00
Last Updated: 2010-10-01 23:00:27

Fighting Rages As Karzai Urges NATO Restraint
U.S. Marines and Afghan soldiers are slowly advancing in their offensive in...
Washington: The Obama administration is confident that Pakistan will soon remove its restriction on the flow of NATO supply convoys across the border into Afghanistan, the administration's special representative for the two countries said Friday.

"It's inconceivable to me that the closing of the routes â€” the alleged closing, which is not a full closing anyway â€” would continue more than a short period of time," Richard Holbrooke told a conference here.

The Pakistani government shut the Torkham border in the country's northwest Thursday in apparent protest of a NATO helicopter incursion that killed three of its soldiers on the border. Holbrooke argued that it would make no economic sense for Pakistan to continue to restrict the flow of materials to U.S.-led NATO forces.
[...]
He offered no criticism of Pakistan's efforts to battle extremists but noted, "We have always said we think more should be done in this regard."

Interesting move on Pak part. Same goes for US letting it be known that it has approached BD for troops for AFG. it just indicates that US is desperately seeking whoever it can coerce from within the Islamic nations to get involved against their coreligionists in AFPAK.

Do not know what sort of self-delusion about Islamism prompted someone to even suggest this to the US admin! The US perhaps has crossed the threshold which I proposed would be the time point beyond which their stay towards overwintering in AFPAK will force them into a Saigon type situation. Something from which they will have to leave but cannot until the last bitter end.

Very long time ago we had speculated about Mushy's return and resurgence. It is possible that the USA has simultaneously threatened supporting a Mushy takeover while planning a military move to cease the nukes. This can shake up a lot of interconnected arrangements including putting PRC/PLA in a tight spot.

War seems to be close on a much larger scale near the subcontinent and perhaps being actively planned for. While Indians get engrossed in the court case.

praksam · Post by **praksam** » 02 Oct 2010 23:29

India in Afghanistan and Beyond: Opportunities and Constraints
C. Christine Fair, The Century Foundation, 9/28/2010

The international community has been ambivalent about India’s profile in Afghanistan. While the Afghan government and its international partners welcome India’s constructive role, many also worry about the negative externalities associated with India’s footprint in the country, particularly with respect to Pakistan, which has long feared Indian encirclement and complains sharply about India’s expanding presence in Afghanistan. In this report, Christine Fair outlines India’s current interests in Afghanistan, how it has sought to achieve its aims, and the consequences of its actions for India, Pakistan, and the international efforts to stabilize Pakistan and Afghanistan. She argues that India’s interests in Afghanistan are not only Pakistan-specific but also tied to India’s desire to be seen as an extra- regional power moving toward great power status. This papers details:
India’s role in Afghanistan. India deems Afghanistan’s stability essential to its security outlook, fearing that a resurgent Taliban would provide support for militant groups with an anti-Indian agenda.
The India-Pakistan-U.S. triangular relationship. The U.S. is in a difficult position, Fair argues, trying to pursue independent relationships with either India or Pakistan.
The way forward for the U.S. Attempts to solve this regional dilemma have not met with much progress over the past decade, and, absent a change in the U.S. approach, the outlook is not promising.

http://www.tcf.org/list.asp?type=PB&pubid=724

Downloadable text

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 02 Oct 2010 23:41

praksam wrote:India in Afghanistan and Beyond: Opportunities and Constraints
C. Christine Fair, The Century Foundation, 9/28/2010

The international community has been ambivalent about India’s profile in Afghanistan.

Who is this international community. India is one of the victim of Afghan terrorist for more than 20 years. It has a stake in the afghan country

Manishw · Post by **Manishw** » 02 Oct 2010 23:51

brihaspati wrote:
War seems to be close on a much larger scale near the subcontinent and perhaps being actively planned for. While Indians get engrossed in the court case.

B Ji,

Don't wont to interrupt your thought process but just another Indicator I follow is the BSE sensex.It is going to cross(21000) previous all time high(IMO) and further to perhap's 24000 and johnny's come lately are going to jump in to give PTB a killing.This is some time off.Similarly CWG has also to be tracked.November should see some action.

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 03 Oct 2010 18:19

An interesting piece - not because of the harangue, but how some Indians themselves may help in giving the spin on history of the AF-PAK conflict. Moreover, is this a small way to try and establish the grounds for US retreat and get India to suffer the consequences of American ignorance and bigotry in favour of Islamism?

http://www.indiacurrents.com/news/view_ ... 7c3b9d56c6
Why We Are Destined To Fail In Afghanistan
SUNIL DUTTA, Aug 03, 2010

We are failing in Afghanistan because we haven’t focused on the right players: India and Pakistan. Afghanistan was a playground for Soviets and the United States in 1980s, now the key players are India and Pakistan.
[...]
To fight against India’s growing influence in Afghanistan, Pakistan nurtured and backed the Taliban to take over Afghanistan, and supported and protected Al Qaeda (and it continues to do so, despite posturing about its support for U.S. war on terrorism).[ ]

India has given over a billion dollars in aid to Afghanistan; this from a country that ranks a miserable 134 out of 182 nations in Human Development Index. It has four consulates in addition to its embassy in Kabul. The United States, in comparison, has no consulates. This seems to undermine Pakistani influence in Afghanistan.
[...]
After the Soviet departure, the ISI sent the Taliban forces to capture Kabul in Afghanistan. U.S. lack of interest in the region allowed the situation to fester. Only after the attack on the Twin Towers did the United States wake up to see that the jihadis, trained by Pakistan in Afghanistan’s mountainous region, had turned their attention towards the United States. The war between India and Pakistan had finally involved us.
[...]
The seeds of pathological politics have settled deeply in Pakistani and Indian rulers’ psyches, causing immense misery to more than a billion people in South Asia. Only external diplomatic initiative can resolve this conflict. Unless Pakistan feels secure in its relationship with India, it will continue to support the Taliban and other Jihadi groups to destabilize Afghanistan and, by proxy, India.
[...]
Pakistan’s existential dangers come from within: using Islam for political expediency, deeply entrenched corruption, poverty, and illiteracy. It will never give up supporting the jihadi elements until its rivalry with India is resolved. The only way to bring peace to Afghanistan is through New Delhi and Islamabad.

Sunil Dutta, Ph.D., is a Lieutenant with the Los Angeles Police Department. The opinions articulated in this article are his own.

It is so interesting to note that, at one stroke all of US involvement in the promotion of Islamist insurgency as part of the Cold War is wiped off, and even the "war" and "Taleban" in primarily shifted on to Indian responsibility and supposed provocation.

How did mother India produce such brains for export? Although there is some confirmation in the traditional joke that to join certain services it does not matter whether you leave the brain at the doctors for repairing and do not need it again.

On the other hand, these could be small mouthpieces of the establishment to try and create the public impression that it is now India's responsibility because "India started it all".

sanjeevpunj · Post by **sanjeevpunj** » 03 Oct 2010 18:27

Interesting article by Sunil Dutta.Shows exactly what US wants, to keep out of the mess in this region, and let India take the lead.I think India should consider annexing Pakistan under its wing now. :p
It would end the threat on the rest of the world, it would end terrorism, it would decimate Taliban, and eventually raise India in the eyes of the world.Are the Top Brass listening?

Klaus · Post by **Klaus** » 03 Oct 2010 18:43

With regard to the bear, greedy opportunistic humans and the hard-working bees of the ripe hive which is desh, according to Manishw ji some action is expected in November in the sub-continent. Against this backdrop, what can the bees do to create a distraction?

Aside: There is a species of bee which create decoy hives filled with wax and dead feathers, this hive is located in the direction of the most common wind draft in the area during nights, when the bears or opportunists are most prone to attack.

There have also been instances in Korea where bees have "employed" hornets (who are the mortal enemies of bees) to attack and disable creatures who venture too close to the hive with malafide intentions. The hornets get some baksheesh in the form of abandoned hollow nests in trees for the autumn season. Curiously enough, the beehive, the decoy hive and the hornet's nest form a scalene triangle and lie in the direction of wind draft.

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 04 Oct 2010 05:47

CWG is well protected. So not much chance of a provocation here. But with attention divided into Mandir, and CWG - the field is ripe for diversions far afield. Momentarily hawks are on the upswing as the wily doves have retreated to regroup. First target will be to internally neutralize the hawks before carrying out distractions. I would not be surprised if the army has a substantial handle in and around CWG without much overt signs. Problem is now that at least four points - surprisingly all along the North-to-Gangetic Plains arc will need continuous such attention - J&K, two in UP, and Arunachal. This leaves the south deceptively calm but the far south is slowly heating up with the intermediate eastern coastal strip not dead. It is the spreading around of forces and even continuous covert attention needed that is distracting.

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 04 Oct 2010 15:13

B if the good guys have to constantly keep a watch on more and more areas due to the fact that the enemy has widened the field of conflict. Wont this by extention adversaly effect the enimies ability move and act effectively due to a dilution of their focus. Or are they so sure of their abilities that they are beyond this concern.

Or my thinking is completely in the conventional realm.

JMT

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 04 Oct 2010 19:10

Pratyush ji,
that problem is on both sides isn't it? One of the difficulties in our strategic thinking "experts" who get focus in the media and "academic" circles is that they all have pet obessions not only about priorities but also about particular conflicts. They rarely look at it in a comprehensive and interconnected manner.

It is a bad application of a certain management thinking of compartmentalizing a problem - the so-called piece by piece solution. That method doesnt alway work in situations where you cannot take super-fast action and other compartments have the time to react and compensate. USA has followed this method and look where it has landed up.

Some think the China-India theatre is most dramatic, some think TSP-POWI-India theatre, some want to focus entirely on "internal development", and each claim that all energy should be focused on their pet problem excluding the others - forgetting that each of the others have an impact and consequence from the particular area they are shouting about.

It is this compartmentalizing of thinking that is the greatest obstacle to dealing with current evolving scenario. To a certain extent this gets reflected in public obsessions too - as a result of media cues - so it becoems one long film festival. Yesterday the mandir, today the CWG, tmrw perhaps an incursion in AP, the day after the Valley, then a POGWI dance, back to Bihar or Gujarat or Andhra - and festival goes on. People are led from one high to the next - in an attempt to erase the memory of the previous one. However all of these are interconnected - as a fundamental problem that reveals that the current political decision making system is falling apart in trying to solve it piecemeal.

RajeshA · Post by **RajeshA** » 05 Oct 2010 01:43

brihaspati wrote:as a fundamental problem that reveals that the current political decision making system is falling apart in trying to solve it piecemeal.

I once had a discussion with a gentleman whose business was to train German bureaucrats. During the discussion we came to the conclusion that any bureaucratic system needs two type of bureaucrats:

The ones who hold the system
The ones who improve the system

The Holders keep the show running and care for the day-to-day needs of the system. The Improvers need to analyse the context of the running system, see what problems are not being looked after, what problems would be arising in the future, which developments one has to watch out for, think creatively about solutions to the problems, suggest organizational and technical changes to the system to better deal with the challenges, and then pass over their ideas over to the holders.

The improvers need to be good analyzers and analyze the problem as a whole. They need to have creative minds. They need to be free of bureaucratic shackles. Also their renumeration should be calculated differently than the pay-scales as they are calculated for others, for the holders. For them there should some provision for financial benefits if their solutions and analysis has proven their worth or not. As that is found out much later, such considerations should be factored in their pays and more importantly in their pensions.

We need to have a dynamic bureaucracy able to deal with an ever changing environment and deal with it optimally. This does not seem to be the case right now.

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 08 Oct 2010 01:10

Omar Abdullah feels compelled to raise a distinction between "accession" and "merger", and the demand for AFSPA is partly appeased by withdrawing bunkers from Srinagar. Add to that this whiff from West Bengal.

Pull back joint forces from Naxal belt: Mamata

Posted by admin on Oct 7th, 2010
Kolkata: Railway Minister and Trinamool Congress (TMC) chief Mamata Banerjee has reiterated her demand to withdraw the joint forces from the Maoist-dominated area in West Bengal. She has embarrassed the Government, on Wednesday by announcing protests against the war on the Maoists.

The TMC chief has said the party is all set to begin go back joint forces agitation from Thursday. “The TMC will organise go back joint forces agitation from Thursday, ” says Mamata. Mamata has alleged that the ruling CPI-M is using the joint forces operation as a shield and is building its own armed camps.

The TMC delegation had recently met the President Pratibha Patil to brief her on the issue. The operation by the joint forces started in Lalgarh in June 2009 to flush out the Maoist from that area.

This shows further why militancy of the Marxist and the Islamist kind are going to be most difficult to eradicate under the present setup. Both types have established such interconnections in local or regional networks that makes it impossible for aspiring regional forces to ignore them. Which makes it impossible for their opponents to ignore them too. This represents a subtlety of tactical flexibility shown by the "militants" that was not there before.

Does it represent a "bad" trap for the future of the Indian state? I don't think so. What it means is that such a growing political strength of these militants will force actual political polarization and choice by the various pretenders to state-power. Even if that reduces the clearly-anti-militant political grouping to a minority - it gives great political clarity of purpose. A kind of purging of deviant trends that sabotage attempts to tackle the problem.

sarkar · Post by **sarkar** » 09 Oct 2010 00:36

brihaspati wrote:Does it represent a "bad" trap for the future of the Indian state? I don't think so. What it means is that such a growing political strength of these militants will force actual political polarization and choice by the various pretenders to state-power. Even if that reduces the clearly-anti-militant political grouping to a minority - it gives great political clarity of purpose. A kind of purging of deviant trends that sabotage attempts to tackle the problem.

Yeah I believe its democracy at its best. I just hope that these maoist don't start blowing themselves up in marketplaces just like islamic militants. Fortunately they don't believe in jihad's 72 virgins theory.

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 10 Oct 2010 18:43

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-south-asia-11510115

US special forces in Afghanistan were seconds from rescuing a UK hostage when she was almost certainly killed by a suicide bomb vest, the BBC understands.They had reached the building where Linda Norgrove was held and were "very, very close" to her, the BBC was told. It is understood tribal elders negotiating her release asked Nato not to intervene so they had more time.

Obviously BBC is playing it safe, and does not spell out whether the vest had been deliberately put on Linda to be detonated as and when required. Nothing is also told about what happened to the alleged kidnappers.

One of the mistakes of the AFG policy is the so-called soft-approach and "winning over of hearts and minds" chicanery. A complete failure to understand Islamist mindsets leads to such spectacular retreats. Afghans are not exceptionally brave or exceptionally militant. They were once converted out of Buddhism under ruthless Arab and Turkic tactics. If Alexander's biographers have to be believed, Alexander applied similar techniques and Afghans succumbed. We have records of appeals by Afghans to other powers against Mongols. So these so-called Afghan tribal leaders, warlords and militants are not invincible. But they capitulate if they face genocide. Short of that, they will use all possible chinks in the armour of those they want to sponge off or exploit - especially "liberal" or "humanitarian" values.

Any area where militants operate and tribal leaders claiming aboslute power and freedom are not able to deliver the heads of the militants should be cordoned off and completely "sanitized" - using Islamic precedence for treating resistance which the Afghans will surely understand and should be reminded of as perpetrated on non-Afghans by their still iconic symbols in historical times. Which means no living thing survives in their territory.

Of course European Islamophiles will intervene [somehow something they never manage with similar intensity when Islamists themselves are the culprits - we still have no European grand initiative to try Taleban leaders for "crimes against humanity", no attempt to try Chinese leaders for Tiananmen Square], but allowing Europeans to intervene has never been good for the subcontinent.

Policies on the subcontinent should be taken back into Indian hands for initiatives.

AKalam · Post by **AKalam** » 11 Oct 2010 01:49

This kind of collective punishment and genocide will be a non-starter. If Indian elected leadership ever get this kind of attitude, then India as a state may remain boxed in, as it is today for the foreseeable future. Perhaps you should promote this practice in Kashmir and see what happens. You cannot bring medieval techniques in 21st century and expect that it will work and make India a regional leader.

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 11 Oct 2010 02:09

It was a suggestion for the Americans to try out first. Without it they will never defeat the Talebs. While we may sit on our gluteals and ponder whether medieval techniques can be applied or not, the Islamists gain strength, liquidate all moderates, and any opposition, and gather strength for the next expansion move. It could become not a matter of choice but of a necessity for a future Indian government who may have to adopt it on a much larger scale compared to a much smaller scale applicatiopn if carried out by ground forces in AFG right now.

The so-called tribal leaders so keen to bitterly fight to keep their individual and personal powers, must then take some responsibility for cleaning up their own compost heaps. If they want power they must show that they are worthy of it and not use external resources to protect and nurture Jihadis.

TonyMontana · Post by **TonyMontana** » 11 Oct 2010 02:28

brihaspati wrote: mistakes ... soft-approach ... ruthless ... Afghans succumbed ... genocide. ... "sanitized" ... no living thing survives ...

Call me a broken record. But you keep bring this up.

Abyss. Stare. etc.

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 11 Oct 2010 02:55

^^^Too highly encoded for me to decipher uniquely. However, I think you can understand from your theory of "core interests" as reigning supreme - and everything justifiable from that angle. The crumbling and capitulating only when faced by an enemy who is even more genocidal than the Afghans themselves - is a fact of history, so dont see why bringing that "fact" up jars on you.

TonyMontana · Post by **TonyMontana** » 11 Oct 2010 03:03

brihaspati wrote:^^^Too highly encoded for me to decipher uniquely. However, I think you can understand from your theory of "core interests" as reigning supreme - and everything justifiable from that angle. The crumbling and capitulating only when faced by an enemy who is even more genocidal than the Afghans themselves - is a fact of history, so dont see why bringing that "fact" up jars on you.

By your logic, the best solution to the problem of "core interest" is the total elimination of all other competiting parties. No one to compete. No one to threaten your "core interests". So why don't India start now on developing a genetically modified super-virus that kills everyone but the Indic people? Why don't you have genicide as the first port of call for any "core interest" problems.

There's things people don't do my friend. Why does it take a Chicom drone to teach you that?

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 11 Oct 2010 03:09

Akalam bhai,
further note that Russia, China all have undertaken genocides and continue to do so. In spite of that you have not found it difficult to include them in a leading triumvirate for an "Asian Union". If they can keep their leadership status even after Chechnya or uyghurs or Tibetans - I think it is unfair to only think that India is the one who will get penalized or should be penalized in doing what is in its "core interests" against an entity they never ever shows any humanity in its treatment of "others".

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 11 Oct 2010 03:13

TonyMontana wrote:
brihaspati wrote:^^^Too highly encoded for me to decipher uniquely. However, I think you can understand from your theory of "core interests" as reigning supreme - and everything justifiable from that angle. The crumbling and capitulating only when faced by an enemy who is even more genocidal than the Afghans themselves - is a fact of history, so dont see why bringing that "fact" up jars on you.
By your logic, the best solution to the problem of "core interest" is the total elimination of all other competiting parties. No one to compete. No one to threaten your "core interests". So why don't India start now on developing a genetically modified super-virus that kills everyone but the Indic people? Why don't you have genicide as the first port of call for any "core interest" problems.

There's things people don't do my friend. Why does it take a Chicom drone to teach you that?

Well total elimination of all competing parties is a vast extension from the simple reprisal strategy for areas that resist giving up their Jihadi ways that I had suggested. What you suggest is the driving engine behind CPC-PLA, sure. Now the virus stuff then raises a curious question - was the SARS stuff a botched experiment driven by similar ideas? As usual improper copying of technologies and failure of logic could have led to the epidemic!

TonyMontana · Post by **TonyMontana** » 11 Oct 2010 03:38

brihaspati wrote: I think it is unfair to only think that India is the one who will get penalized or should be penalized in doing what is in its "core interests" against an entity they never ever shows any humanity in its treatment of "others".

brihaspati wrote: Well total elimination of all competing parties is a vast extension from the simple reprisal strategy for areas that resist giving up their Jihadi ways that I had suggested.

Okay Brihaspati-ji. You've convinced me. I now stand corrected. Shall we now discuss the methodology of such implimentation? I think it will be an interesting and worth while contribution to BRF.

Let me start.

I suggest some sort of train net work where the affected parties could be brought to some sort of processing center.

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 11 Oct 2010 12:15

Tony, that is not acceptable, the threat of genocide (threat not execution it self in a credible manner if I get B's meaning right.) has to be implimented in the populations centers it self, sort of kill one on ours we kill 100 of yours in the population centers' it self. Make an example, teach a lesson, demonstrate it, get it verified by the target population etc.

A train to a processing cenete doesnot do that, if you get my drift. The idea is not to eliminate them. But to convince to them that they will be eliminated if they don't reform / Change.

Once the target population is convinced of the reality of the threat, the warriors will be elimitnated in a blaze of glory. The pragmatists and compromisers will try to ingratiate them selves with the victor in order to survive. That is what we are looking at.

Not the final solution as espoused by Hitler, as assumed by through your reference of trains to processing centers.

JMT.

abhischekcc · Post by **abhischekcc** » 11 Oct 2010 12:40

AKalam wrote:This kind of collective punishment and genocide will be a non-starter. If Indian elected leadership ever get this kind of attitude, then India as a state may remain boxed in, as it is today for the foreseeable future. Perhaps you should promote this practice in Kashmir and see what happens. You cannot bring medieval techniques in 21st century and expect that it will work and make India a regional leader.

AKalam,

Your statement is self contradictory. You say that genocidal policies will box India in, but at the same time you say that India is already boxed in??? According to your logic then India must already be carrying out genocidal policies. But you admit that India currently is not doing so.

So what are you saying exactly?
If India is boxed in without genocidal policies, then, according to your logic, it has no further disincentive to not carry out genocide.
Since we are already boxed in (according to your logic), genocide will help break the internal deadlocks that India has, without fear of any further boxing in (also, according to your logic). You are making genocide sound tempting.

Prem · Post by **Prem** » 11 Oct 2010 23:48

Killing bad guys cant be bad . Bad Guys and Indians hunting them will be favour to civilized world.

AKalam · Post by **AKalam** » 12 Oct 2010 00:19

brihaspati ji,

The problem with Amir Khan is that it has to follow rules of engagement that does not violate Geneva conventions:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourth_Geneva_Convention

that does not allow collective punishment. The type of retribution you are suggesting and Pratyush ji clarified, is exactly the type of collective punishment Israel is known to apply against Palestinians and Lebanese (1:100) which is considered as war crimes. Amir Khan got away with it in earlier wars in Korea, Vietnam and elsewhere, but the world today is different, everyone has a cell phone with camera to record evidence of war crimes and have the internet to reach the masses world wide.

Amir Khan's approach in Afghanistan is based on its goals, the explicit one is about denying a space for extremists like Al Qaeda that attacks US interests and the implicit one is of course geopolitical influence in the region. Amir Khan was a partner in sowing the seed of this monster back in 1979, now once the genie is out of the bottle, its hard to put it back in. Amir Khan's options are not good, some people are saying that the end will be like Vietnam, but all we can do is wait and see what happens.

Now I want to address another issue about BRF. There is an increasing tendency to change the word Muslim (followers of Islam) to Islamist and use it as a blanket term to cover all Muslims, where as the term Islamist used to be reserved for people who generally believe in political Islam, a phenomenon that started in early 20th century. This kind of train of thought brings into mind another important word, Dehumanization:

http://www.lucifereffect.com/dehumanization.htm

Muslims have conducted genocide in the past, Islam is a fascist cult, Kafir and Kuffar is dehumanization of the other par excellence, so it is justified to apply the same technique of dehumanization against Muslims, as the crimes of the jihadists and extremists make the Muslim people as a whole (1.6 billion souls on different parts of the globe) guilty and subject to dehumanization - this is the gist of the argument that seems to take shape from the rhetoric.

Israel was up against Arab nationalists initially, but when Arab nationalism did not produce the desired results for the Arabs, increasingly Arabs started using Islamism as a tool and automatically the Israeli propaganda machine trained their guns on Islamists, Islamism and ultimately on Islam and Muslims as well (Daniel Pipes as one prime example).

Unlike Israel, who is essentially a squatter nation of limited historic legitimacy, and its grievances with Islams and Muslims completely self manufactured since Balfour Declaration, while they lived and found sanctuary in Islamic empires through out history, while Europeans engaged in pogroms in regular intervals - Indic civilization has justifiable historic grievances being at the receiving end of Islamic onslaught and eventual conversion of 25% of its population, which has now become 30-40% of Indic population, causing systemic problems and changes in the sub-continent. The nature and gravity of the problem is much more serious and needs careful analysis and considerations, and it is in my opinion of a completely different level, than the hyped up hoopla and much ado about a small transplanted nation of Israel. While I see the convenience in finding common cause with Israel, for India, one must also consider carefully the idea whether India is to follow Israel's footsteps, while there is 160 million Muslims in India, even if we ignore the fact that there are another 300 million or more Indic Muslims in neighboring nations within the sub-continent.

I know I am stating the obvious, to a group of people who know all this and more, my question is why is there so few Indian Muslims in this site, if any, why the silence from 13% of the population. As far as I can tell, I am the only active Bangladeshi here, there is no one from Pakistan, Afghanistan, Myanmar or Nepal. We have TonyMontana from PRC, and I believe I have seen occasional comments from Sri Lankans. I would encourage BRFites to invite as many people of other nations (as well as well from Indian minority community) to participate, as it is important to have many points of view from real live "horses mouth" as they say and hopefully it will make BRF a more effective site for its participants. Sites like BRF is important to understand Indian point of view and share/exchange ideas with others, I think. It is too important to be dominated by any particular type of point of view at the expense of others.

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 12 Oct 2010 00:26

http://www.alarabiya.net/articles/2010/ ... 19033.html
Kissinger urges regional engagement in Afghanistan

Former U.S. Secretary of State Henry Kissinger said Afghanistan's neighbors need to be engaged in order to find a long-term solution to the conflict there.

Pakistan, Iran, China and India all have an interest in preventing a Taliban victory and al-Qaeda from establishing itself in Afghanistan, Kissinger told an international security conference in Geneva on Friday. "The presence of a terrorist, drug-producing state in that geographic location will affect every country," Kissinger said. "For Pakistan it will undermine whatever order exists today," he said, adding that Shiite-majority Iran would also be threatened by a fundamentalist Sunni regime in Kabul.

"In many respects India will be the most affected country if a jihadist Islamism gains impetus in Afghanistan," said Kissinger. "Even China, with its problems in Xinjian, cannot be indifferent," he said, referring to China's northwestern province which has recently seen increased Muslim unrest.

The 87-year-old, who negotiated U.S. disengagement from the Vietnam conflict, said "an essentially unilateral American role cannot be the long-term solution" for Afghanistan.

Normally whatever Kissinger says about India should raise our antennae a hundred fold and dismiss as some kind of a Judaeo-Christian version of Taqyia [Harry can claim both roots]. However, in this case singling out India is most interesting.

None of the reasons he gives for the other countries are valid. The reality is starkly different from what he represents it as here. Pakistan's relations are much more complex - with close connections to the Haqqanis, to protect whom PA can even go to grappling with the US. China has greater stake among its neo-Maoists to use Pakistan to remove USA from the scene so that the area can come under Chinese influence - compared to the Uyghur episode. Iran's Shia-Sunni divide not withstanding, there are indications of indirect support for the Talebs for the very same reason - clear and protect the Gulf from US influence.

Actually, Pakistan, Iran and China - all of them have an interest in seeing US depart from the AFPAK. Only one who may have some long term interest in going against the Talebs are the Russians - but how far will the US go to collaborate with Putin about it! Or for that matter what price will Putin extract?

Geelani of Kashmir Valley, I think made a statement about "US defeat/exit" from AFPAK helping the Kashmiri separatist cause.

It may be so that, the kashmiri separatist agenda is planned for in stages leading towards their target with the timeline of US retreat from Afpak in mind.

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 12 Oct 2010 00:49

Akalam bhai,

While I see the convenience in finding common cause with Israel, for India, one must also consider carefully the idea whether India is to follow Israel's footsteps, while there is 160 million Muslims in India, even if we ignore the fact that there are another 300 million or more Indic Muslims in neighboring nations within the sub-continent.

I know I am stating the obvious, to a group of people who know all this and more, my question is why is there so few Indian Muslims in this site, if any, why the silence from 13% of the population. As far as I can tell, I am the only active Bangladeshi here, there is no one from Pakistan, Afghanistan, Myanmar or Nepal. We have TonyMontana from PRC, and I believe I have seen occasional comments from Sri Lankans. I would encourage BRFites to invite as many people of other nations (as well as well from Indian minority community) to participate, as it is important to have many points of view from real live "horses mouth" as they say and hopefully it will make BRF a more effective site for its participants. Sites like BRF is important to understand Indian point of view and share/exchange ideas with others, I think. It is too important to be dominated by any particular type of point of view at the expense of others.

If you note, I am in the minority here on the forum! If you meant that my type of opinion dominates - then it is not true. As usual, the silent "majority" dominates - which means we may not really know what the majority really thinks. For all we know they may contain even more radical viewpoints on both opposite ends of the spectrum. Those who actually express somewhat "radical" opinion rather openly - are perhaps the "moderates". Otherwise we cannot explain the degree of violence that shook the subcontinent in the Partition riots. The open voices of radicalism that we can actually see before were so few in numbers - that eminently foresighted statesmen who were keenly aware of "destiny", failed to estimate the intensity.

The fact is that very few from the other countries you mention will even have the courage to speak of anything that does not vehemently criticize or denigrate everything Indian . Most of these societies have turned themselves on such an all-sweeping ideological view about India - either Islamism or Maoism [ and in case of myanmar there is the added layer of ethnic hatred stemming from the Burmese expulsion of expat Indians] - that the overwhelming majority cannot even express any positive sentiments about Indian grievances. I am sure you know what the case is for Bangladesh!

On the forum, my views have been strongly criticized before and many perhaps hold similar sentiments and do strongly defend Muslims of the subcontinent as well as the current official or academic representation of the records of Islam. However I have been criticized for bringing out the actual record which perhaps does not show the theology and its heritage in the best possible light and which is typically seen as an attack on the followers themselves.

The question you raise is actually very interesting for an entirely different reason. If a future Indian regime takes a rather harsh stand on any social group and region that continues to protect Jihad against India - why should that negatively impact all Muslims of India and the subcontinent? Are not Muslims themselves against violent military Jihads against India? Are not the treatments I described solidly supported in the precedence of the Sunnah and as recorded even in the Shahi Hadith of say Imam Bukhari? A huge lot of legitimacy in the current theology is derived from the supposed legitimacy of those historical precedents - in fact there are perhaps no other justification for many of the practices now claimed to be inviolable and which cannot be compromised on?

Taking sides on the ground on crucial issues can actually show where the community stands - and this is what makes the whole issue problematic.

RamaY · Post by **RamaY** » 12 Oct 2010 01:04

^

For all we know the silent IM majority might support the "repressive" strategy by india. It is a different matter if Israel does it in Palastine or US in Iraq or Russia in Chechenya.

More over none of these talibannis can be called Muslims as Islam is a religion of peace and these people are bringing bad name to Islam.

This "silent majority" can be a double edged sword!

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 12 Oct 2010 01:05

US has used collective punishment in Iraq to a fair extent, why not Afg, this is not a rhetorical question, I am genuinely curious.

RamaY · Post by **RamaY** » 12 Oct 2010 01:15

^ They were trying to avoid killing Good Taliban, who are there to hurt Indian interests.

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 12 Oct 2010 01:20

Thanks RamaY, any other reasons? (note I do not disagree just want to continue the though process)

Prem · Post by **Prem** » 12 Oct 2010 01:25

There is lot of value in using local "idiots" to promote geopolitcial interests so onlee few selective gets the 72s by big powers, others have to wait to receive the reward fromthe hands of Indians. We get to clean the filth scattered by fatsoes either by dirtying our own hand or by hiring local "experts".

RamaY · Post by **RamaY** » 12 Oct 2010 02:11

Sanku wrote:Thanks RamaY, any other reasons? (note I do not disagree just want to continue the though process)

I think there are multiple reasons for lack of "collective punishment" by amri-khan.

- Afghans have already been under collective punishment scheme for past 30 years
- There is very little civic infrastructure left to destroy.
- The living population is sparse. Whatever urban centers are there (so-called cities and towns) are already under US control (except for few talibanni attacks)
- Unlike in Iraq there is little "coordinated" fight against amri-khan
- The general afghani population is not participating in the fight. They let anyone/everyone pass thru them. (This is a key point Indian strategists must note IMHO. The general afghan public is highly pacified due to 30 years of continuous war. The fighting is between USA and Pakistani interests post 9/11. Earlier the fight used to be between USA+Paki Vs Russia+Iran+Indian interests.
- The real fight is happening in remote regions and Af-Pak border.

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 12 Oct 2010 09:10

X posting from the Pak-af thread.

Rajesh,

If the political will is astute then there is no reason why India should not go into Afghanistan. If TSP has been pacified. In that I agree with the "western experts". That the road to peace in Afgannistan runs through Islamabad. India must take down TSP and alter the political boundries of the Subcontinent once more. This was done in 71, it has to be done again. India simply has no choice any more.

If it allows the TSP to continue to exist then, it deserves what it gets from the TSP and the west / PRC. The currency of soft power is credible if it is backed up by hard power. There can be no better demonstration of hard power other then the demolition of the TSP.

How that can be accomplished can be debated. But the end result must be accepted. If India is to take a prominant position in the International relations.

Once the TSP is under controll. Controlling Afghanistan become easy.

Moreover, it also gives us unristricted access to the resource rich CAR. Along with the opportunity of re-establishing the Silk route.

JMT

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 13 Oct 2010 18:02

Afghans typically swing to the side they see as potentially victorious - with the sides opposing such victorious groups as giving up or not-so-genocidal as the victors. I would pose that large parts of the south, as well as increasing portions of the central and north are considering tacitly going over to the Taleb side. At the least some kind of division of control between Talebs and non-Talebs will happen along a north-south divide, but with the whole country coming under Talebs the greater possibility.

As I had pointed out that previously - a trade-route depndent AFG could be controlled from the urban centres in historical periods, but now the trade is multilateral and not dependent on strict routes - as well as mostly illegal in nature. So just as in India, the non-Islamics in remote or countryside maintaining control over productive forces eventually were able to overcome urban-centre based Islamic power, the Taleb type force will overcome the urban centre based control from non-Talebs. USA cannot maintain a whole regime in power only in the cities by airdropping for a very long time.

The western part of Pak is getting out of hand both the official state in Pak as well as US forces. Soon, without overrunning part sof Iran, USA amy not have a good supply line either.

RamaY · Post by **RamaY** » 13 Oct 2010 19:54

brihaspati wrote:The western part of Pak is getting out of hand both the official state in Pak as well as US forces. Soon, without overrunning part sof Iran, USA amy not have a good supply line either.

That would be a good idea

On an auspicious moment, India should recognize both Afghan and Paki Taliban.

The key is to unwind TSPA. That will remove all sorts of veils in the geopolitical drama.

Dharmic forces can gain silent-majority's (I love this word. By bringing this I don't have to give any references

) support by bringing the truth open.

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 15 Oct 2010 19:18

Watched the first episode of Channel 4's docu on the Mostaraq op at Marjah. Those who have access can perhaps try it out.
http://www.channel4.com/programmes/disp ... /episode-1

Made by a BAFTA and Grierson award-winning team, the film returns to Marjah four months after the original invasion to find IEDs again being laid just 2km from the Marines' base, Taliban fighters, including snipers, still active and mobile, and a local population that is far from won over.

Those who have a rudimentary understanding of Pashto will also see how some of the translators on ground are conveying a slightly different import to the Afghans compared to what is given out by the commanding officers - [the english subtitling is not exact].

One of the marines compares the submissive attitude of the Afghans to outrages by the Talebs with the "lid coming off" reaction when the Marines do something. In many ways the doc supports most of my own assessments gained from understanding the processes of Islamization in the region, and the survival and war strategies of such societies as apparent from past and recent conflicts. It also shows why the current approach will ultimately only mean loss of men and materials and morale in the long run.

Afghanistan will not be broken until the military hardware capacities of its surrounding Islamist nations are not broken - which primarily means Iran and Pak, and in another direction at least the sanitization of the Chinese border. Starving out the insurgents of ammunition and destroying as much of livestock [the only self-sufficient means of survival in the remotest regions] as possible will go a long way.

The initial Islamist stratgey of expansion against more advanced civilizations typically has been the use of difficult terrain, continuous deceptive pretension of cessation of hostilities and "turning away from violence" when the going goes difficult and simply use the "friendly gesture" as time to recuperate and organize or plan another deceptive attack. They also try to extract the resources to fight their target from the target itself. There are two principal classic means - either pretend giving up violence and in return extract material resources, or use ideological weaknesses [like "liberalism/humane attitudes"] from within the target to extract voluntary investment of resources. Afghans have been doing this successfully for decades now. The most recent tactic is also classic - once they restricted horse trade and prevented farriers from coming to India. So they would sell a limited quantity of horses to Indians at exorbitant prices, which the Indians would need to fight the invading cavalry. The funds from Indians would be used to destroy Indians.

This is being repeated in a classic fashion on the supply convoys.

That region is following solidly in its traditional tactics learned from centuries of Islamist practice. Only their opponents have chosen to blind themselves.

RajeshA · Post by **RajeshA** » 15 Oct 2010 20:32

Jihadis have always been a means to keep a major power in Asia in check - be it the Soviet Union, be it United States or be it India. Any Asian power that has dared to extend its power to any other part of Asia through the Central Asian landmass or its periphery has been brought to heel by unleashing Jihadism against the power.

The next superpower in Asia is China. The challenge for other powers is how to use Jihadism against China.

The India-Pakjab dynamic has been used by China to prevent such a scenario. We need to regain control over the Potohar plateau to better influence the target of Jihadi wrath.

One says there can be no place for two swords in a sheath. Similarly our major problem is that we try to marry an ideology to our nation. We try to divide our loyalties to both some ideology on the one side, say Dharma or Secularism or Internationalism or even Nationalism, and India's national interest on the other side. There is always a gap, there is always a confusion, there is always hesitation.

If we want to further India's national interests, then except for the purpose of propaganda, no ideology should be given consideration.

If a strategy passes the test of logic, realism and priority, then it should be pursued regardless of its ideological soundness.

I say, India needs to harness the forces of Jihad to finish off PRC and any other major power that arises against us. I even think, India is well endowed for such a policy.