The Strategic Issues & International Relations Forum is a venue to discuss issues pertaining to India's security environment, her strategic outlook on global affairs and as well as the effect of international relations in the Indian Subcontinent. We request members to kindly stay within the mandate of this forum and keep their exchanges of views, on a civilised level, however vehemently any disagreement may be felt. All feedback regarding forum usage may be sent to the moderators using the Feedback Form or by clicking the Report Post Icon in any objectionable post for proper action. Please note that the views expressed by the Members and Moderators on these discussion boards are that of the individuals only and do not reflect the official policy or view of the Bharat-Rakshak.com Website. Copyright Violation is strictly prohibited and may result in revocation of your posting rights - please read the FAQ for full details. Users must also abide by the Forum Guidelines at all times.
In order to give such reassurance, the Central Government should concede that apart from the subjects acceded in 1947, namely defence, foreign affairs, communication, currency to the Central Government, the rest of the subjects will vest in Central Government State Government. In order to further reassure the people of Jammu and Kashmir, the Central Government should agree unilaterally to withdraw all central legislations that have been extended up to date to Jammu and Kashmir. It will then be up to the Jammu and Kashmir legislature to pass new laws or apply those laws with suitable modifications, as they feel necessary.
Some well meaning people react adversely to this suggestion on the ground that this would be creating a special category unlike the other parts of the states. But why should it surprise anyone because Jammu and Kashmir is a special case and is so recognised in our Constitution by Article 370, which is non derogable. This suggestion of mine is only putting life to the original content of Article 370.
But that does not mean watertight separation of two parts of Jammu and Kashmir. In fact all efforts have to be made to continue the underlying oneness of the state. Thus so far as the borders between the two parts of Jammu and Kashmir are concerned, they can be made as porous and as free as between USA and Canada or even like as at present in the European Union. People belonging to each side should have no problem not only in travelling but in even having trade with each other freely.
Of course ordering judicial enquiry into all these killings is immediate. As an immediate gesture the Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act, 1958 must be withdrawn straightaway. Even an individual can use appropriate force, if necessary - of course subject to judicial scrutiny - so why keep this legislation alive when it is admittedly an impediment in peace returning to the valley?
brihaspati wrote:
PRC needs to be cut down to size. USSR could be cut down to size and the same tactics will bring PRC down. They want war, let them be drawn out into multiple wars. One theatre is of couse Africa. Another is SEAsia.
A 20 year programme should be good enough to bring this about. Actually China is not even in the position that USSR was post 1945. it took 44 years for USSR. It will not take that long for PRC.
How do you propose India could bait China into these wars? Or are you so confident that China will start these wars you're planning a 20 year programme around this?
If PA and Pakistani State is slowly giving up the control over Northern Area of J&K to PLA and Chinese, it speaks volumes about the ability of Pakistan to hang on to its sovereignty and its territory. We can see in the next decade, the unraveling of the experiment called Pakistan and its associated thesis "Two-Nation theory".
Added to this is the devastation, caused by the recent floods in Pakistan. More than 60 years after independence, Pakistan is still living off hand-outs. It is highly unlikely that Pakistan will be able to limp back to normality any time soon after such a devastation.
Consider this, Northern Areas of J&K are controlled by China. Major parts of NWFP and possibly parts of Paki-Punjab fall under the influence of Afghanistan/Pathans. What happens to Sindh and Baluchistan? Does Baluchistan become a battle ground for a proxy war between the Persians, the Arabs and the Americans ?
If the Paki state is unable to deal effectively with this flood, the next decade might see the disappearance of it from the map of the world if not explicitly then implicitly.
This beggars the question, why are we in fact offering aid to this god forsaken country? I have more than a million better places where this so called 5 million dollars might be spent on. And also as far as i can recall, Pakis have never ever asked, for our assistance. So why are we hell bent on giving something to someone who does not want it from us.
Let the Pakis depend on the hand outs from their western benefactors and their Arab masters. I don't want my tax money to go such an ungrateful maggots.
Offering aid to Pak becomes a diplomatic necessity - it is called relief-politics. If India did not offer - India would be tarred and feathered by the very same world community that now ridicules Islamambad's handling of relief efforts.
not that it should have mattered - except the small pretension that India wants "peace" and cooperation and "good-neighbourly" atmosphere. But India could have simply announced that it was ready to send in food or material help if Pak asked for it. That would have belled the cat without having to kill it.
brihaspati wrote:
PRC needs to be cut down to size. USSR could be cut down to size and the same tactics will bring PRC down. They want war, let them be drawn out into multiple wars. One theatre is of couse Africa. Another is SEAsia.
A 20 year programme should be good enough to bring this about. Actually China is not even in the position that USSR was post 1945. it took 44 years for USSR. It will not take that long for PRC.
How do you propose India could bait China into these wars? Or are you so confident that China will start these wars you're planning a 20 year programme around this?
In the previous version of this thread, we had explored the the possibility of developing the SEAsian sector "militarily" in support of the already existing fears in the regional powers against Chinese territorial designs. Put up a Pacific nuke fleet if possible to threaten the coastal economic engine of PRC as neutralization of PRC missile and nuke threat on the north and east of India. Basically flank and stretch PLA out. The bulging shape of current occupied regions within PRC control means an extremely difficult border to hold on to.
I meant aggression on all fronts - economic, proxy wars, force them to spend on military side more and more, and force them to shore up on the SE as well as NW.
This beggars the question, why are we in fact offering aid to this god forsaken country? I have more than a million better places where this so called 5 million dollars might be spent on. And also as far as i can recall, Pakis have never ever asked, for our assistance. So why are we hell bent on giving something to someone who does not want it from us.
Let the Pakis depend on the hand outs from their western benefactors and their Arab masters. I don't want my tax money to go such an ungrateful maggots.
$5 million is chicken sh!t compared to what the pakistanis need. Sending such a small amount won't matter materially on ground. It will probably get looted before it makes 10kms past the border.
brihaspati is right that not offering this aid would have made us the target of criticism. However, the pakis, expert as ever at shooting themselves in the foot, rejected the aid - thus giving us another reason not to do more.
If US/UK/KSA ask us to do more, we can always point to this boorish behaviour and ask them to rein in pakistani intransigence , which even they know is a waste of time.
The more important problem with respect to Pak is the virtual concession to the separatists about "autonomy" being hinted at from a section of the GOI side.
It is going exactly according to the proposed machinations of the UK-style Good-Friday-Agreement for Northern Ireland being transposed on to J&K. It now looks so suspiciously close to providing the right excuses to take the plan forward - that the Palestinian Intifada style of Islamic agitation now copied by Valley Muslims was specifically a part of this plan.
Before this, it would have been difficult for all the enthusiasts - the UK or EU based think-tanks [who appear to have caught on to the bug of creating Islamic homelands in regions which they had traditionally found difficult to control - and also suspected of being Euro-independent - as in the Balkans, and now India-Pak] as well as sections of the ruling regime in India - to justify what is coming next.
Even the leaked highlighting of PLA troops in Gilgit could be a double-edged sword. On the one hand it may appear to justify Indian "jingoism" and hardening of attitude to China. But on the other hand it may be used to urge more political concessions to the Valley to keep them "in".
^^^ Brihaspati Ji no doubt that the similarities are mind boggling but giving up of Kashmir means breaking India into many pieces in the very next ten years.I don't think this is going to happen.
^^^ Brihaspati Ji you know as well as I do that whatever spin they might put on it, unraveling of India will begin immediately and finish in ten years.Do you envision that happening?
According to many western hopefuls, it should start in November this year. The frequency with which they are now raising it leads me to suspect that the underlying plan is moving forward with a gradual build up of public expectation. Lets keep it as CT!
^^ this could not happen without a nod from 10 Janpath. Any insight into what is driving this. GOI is stronger than before, so why weaken the country now
^^^ I can't claim to speak for Brihaspati Ji but what he is saying is not C.T but mainstream to anybody who does some searches on the net and connects the ground reality in Kashmir(IMO).Brihaspati Ji is trying to give the western angle not the response ultimately from G.O.I.
^^ Yet the actions of GOI seem contradictory i.e., Spending in Afganistan etc. The goal seems to be to carve access to west asia.
The build up is very suspicious though, given that media that serves as mouthpiece off the first family is tomtoming the separatist line of thinking. Is there a contradiction withing GOI and who is the real culprit?
Manishw wrote:^^^ I can't claim to speak for Brihaspati Ji but what he is saying is not C.T but mainstream to anybody who does some searches on the net and connects the ground reality in Kashmir(IMO).Brihaspati Ji is trying to give the western angle not the response ultimately from G.O.I.
This western angle has persisted for a long time, right from the cold war days. Even more recently "Halfbright" & clinton were talking about splintering India. There seems to be a cabal of the "Zbe" & "CFR" school of thought that persists with this splinter India thinking. The "Kennedy" school of thinking was somewhat pro India.
So the question is that why now? Has this been a slow build up by placing the right cogs long long time ago? It has to be part of long term penetration strategy. What is important is who the players are? Does anyone have detailed background of MMS? Who put him where he was?
If Pak is going down and may split. How can they leave India alone. Is that ==
Adding another point if the west is itself going down won't they feel like having their proxies ruling Kashmir.Though my 2 cents says that the response ultimately from G.O.I is going to dash all such ambition's.
Jarita wrote:^^^ I understand the POV of Paks handlers. What is not clear is GOI's stand on the whole issue and the various stakeholders.
Playing the Devil's advocate here, the G.O.I would like the maximum time available to it to prepare before getting into any confrontation with K.M's, Porkis and their 3.5 friends/handlers.
Last edited by Manishw on 30 Aug 2010 22:02, edited 1 time in total.
Manishw wrote:[
If Pak is going down and may split. How can they leave India alone. Is that ==
Adding another point if the west is itself going down won't they feel like having their proxies ruling Kashmir.Though my 2 cents says that the response ultimately from G.O.I is going to dash all such ambition's.
When the system is weak in most region then they need to make sure others also have similar problems. If Pak is in shambles they will not let India bask in good times.
I think it is better to model the Indian system as a typical stable parliamentary democracy where any government is a dynamic internal process of continuous negotiations between various pressure groups. In fact perhaps even one faction having a very strong opinion/position on one aspect will secretly maintain contacts with some members of the opposite strong-position faction. This is a kind of political hedging of risks of decisions.
The positive side of that process is that things cannot change drastically with unforeseen circumstances for the overwhelming majority of the population. The state overall can still survive by passing on the costs of miscalculation by sacrificing an electorally weak segment - or creating such an identity to blame that will not be able to penalize the state in retribution.
In a way this is probably what is happening even with "K". Of course there are many in the regime and admin who secretly share in the opinion that some of us are expressing here to a "ruthless" approach. The regime as a whole definitely also gamed that scenario so we should not think that they have never considered it. Problem is the hedging mentality by which others and these guys themselves will also keep the "soft punch" option alive.
The negative side of this process is that - too much hedging is not even "capitalist" behaviour - but pure pre-capitalist "mercantile" behaviour which paranoidly avoided risk-taking.
Ironically - if we think about it - all long term stable parliamentary democracies somehow develop an entity outside the parliamentary process which can maintain continuity and some kind of image of a separate and independent authority or source of legitimacy. Thus the Brits have maintained their monarchy, Americans have a flexible oligarchy of business and corporate interests, most Europeans either follow the Brit model or the American or a combination of both. In Asia, apart from Oz, it is only India that really functions along the Anglo-Saxon model. Its extra-parliamentary authority is of course more or less a dynasty in copy-cat Brit form.
The system arose in Britsthan because of their traumatic struggles between hereditary authority and the representative forms. So they maintain both as a check on each other. In India, however the legislature was never really that strong to penalize the dynasty as they did in Britsthan [a real thorough kicking a la Charles I or even say the succession to Charles II]. So to a great extent it is a one way show and the greatest weakness of the Indian model.
This leads to the admin and the regime itself desperately develop means of hedging within itself by encouraging both opposing positions at the same time. This may not be appropriate to foresee and forestall crises that develop slowly below the radar.
Why should the MEA declare officially that they are independently trying to confirm PLA presence in Gilgit? They should already have had the information of presence or not - isnt it? Why at all react to NYT info this way? I don't know what sort of thinking leads to this!!
Unless UP and Bihar are affected, nothing will happen in India. There is so much territorial buffer that that core of India can let the periphery go to the dogs.
derkonig wrote:^^^
It is because of Paki born MMS who can't seem to comprehend which of which country has he been appointed the PM of.
MMS is not Paki born.. there was no Pakistan when he was born.
And for a moment imagine if Yuvraj is sitting in MMS chair. Things can go far worse without MMS.
Why should the MEA declare officially that they are independently trying to confirm PLA presence in Gilgit? They should already have had the information of presence or not - isnt it? Why at all react to NYT info this way? I don't know what sort of thinking leads to this!!
Its the lack of thinking that leads to this. If the following statement from Mader Fo$$er MEA spokesman Vishnu Prakash is true, the situation is dire.
Per MEA..
"We have seen media reports and are seeking independent verification of these reports. If true, it would be a matter of serious concern and we would do all that is necessary to ensure safety and security of the nation".
Safty and security? WTF? No mention of territory in question being a disputed territory and TSP has no right to allow any other nation to take charge...
You know what, before I looked down on the AoA shoeshine bumers....but when you come across people in MEA, shoesshine buming doesn't sound bad at all...
derkonig wrote:^^^
It is because of Paki born MMS who can't seem to comprehend which of which country has he been appointed the PM of.
MMS is not Paki born.. there was no Pakistan when he was born.
And for a moment imagine if Yuvraj is sitting in MMS chair. Things can go far worse without MMS.
Well he is paki born. As for clown prince, how much worse can he make it? Not only its tough topping MMS's dhimmitude but also MMS is but "appointed" with all decisions being taken from you know where. So will baba's ascension make any material change to how this nation is being governed? baba or no baba, things will just continue down the slippery slope that MMS/his handlers have set this nation & civilization onto.
surinder wrote:What is the distance of UP & Bihar to Gilgit?
Unless UP and Bihar are affected, nothing will happen in India. There is so much territorial buffer that that core of India can let the periphery go to the dogs.
Surinder ji, you over-estimate the influence of the poverty-stricken people of UP and Bihar.
The elites who rule India were chosen by the British, and have no allegiance to UP or Bihar.
UP and Bihar have already gone to the dogs, although Bihar is now making an effort to come out of the morass.
There is a possibility that the politics as practiced by Lalu may return in the next election in Bihar. He is already making all the noices regarding the MY axis. I am not sure how sucessful he will be but I am not really optimistic about the future of Nitish Kumars CM ship. The main attack against him will come stating he is an alie of the Communal BJP. In the aftermath of the Ayodhya verdict.
^^^ Yes and the yindoos of the country should be prepared to face one humiliation after another to feed the ambitions of the first family in their so called 'secular' vote bank politics till the elections are over.
surinder wrote:What is the distance of UP & Bihar to Gilgit?
Unless UP and Bihar are affected, nothing will happen in India. There is so much territorial buffer that that core of India can let the periphery go to the dogs.
Friends,
let us get out of the self-flagellation mode. UP and Bihar traditionally hold a very large population concentration and hence been seen as electorally crucial.
Political mindsets in elite or opportunist elite always have a certain inertia of historical experience. So if decades ago they grew up in an atmosphere where they thought that tnis region was the key - they will still do so. This does not mean that they will not hedge to get seats from other regions - but here they may buy such support. Mentally they attach themselves however to these two states.
It is crucial to understand the structure and historical experience of these two states to understand the entire political posturing of most regimes since Independence.
This is the region which did fight Islamic invasions in the beginning but apparently with much less tenacity and success once the western gates in the Punjab were breached. Just compare the rate of progress of the armies from Kabul to Tarain and from Tarain to borders of Bengal crossing the entire UP and Bihar portion of the Gangetic valley.
My model was that the fighters and resistors died fighting or escaped to other regions to live and fight another day. Those who stayed put were the compromisers who valued their lands and possessions much more than their ideology even if seeing how ruthlessly destructive and proselytizing the invaders were who specifically targeted the culture. Over time such compromisers would delude themselves into believing that their compromises with ideology and culture is the real historical ideology/philosophy/attitude for Bharat - because they were also the most populous region and historically the supposed centre of Bharatyia culture [the so-called limitation of Aryavarta]. If such illustrious heritage could now compromise and think so - surely the rest of India must take this as the new Bharatyia culture and mindset? [The story of the blue-dyed jackal of Sanskrit literature]
Now we should be looking at the reality of the demographics and cultural organizational network distribution in these two states. All along the Ganges river there existed a network of settlements and theological seminaries and institutions from the time of the sultanate. The historical compromises and cohabitation [in social sense] has given rise to a mentality that colours all the doctrinal thinking in the regimes at ND. The Barelvis and the Deobandis are increasingly at it within themselves for the supreme control over their common faith allegiance and institutions. So the non-Islamic political groupings of the region will try to ally with one faction against the other or side with whichever side wins in that internal theological-financial struggle. But overall they will not be able to take the initiative - for their entire philosophy and mindset now is a historical inertia of self-justification of their own compromises.
This should not make us feel frustrated or hopeless. If that region is weak now, if we also hope and blame everything on that region - then we are after all submitting to the demand by forces from that region who claim that the rest of India must follow their lead. Start looking for strength in the overall country and nation, and not be dictated to in ideological terms by what those two states are producing.
We have been trained to look up to certain subgroups, or certain subregions as the supreme light-giver. If they fail we run into despair. This is the result of creating exclusive classes of leadership. Let us free ourselves from this overwhelming obsession with the upper Gangetic valley for future direction of India. The agrarian reality of past historical periods is now getting lesser in importance and hence there is bound to be a lessening of the influence and impact of the GV even if not entirely vanished.
Leadership and drive can come and should be looked for in all regions of India, and not just one particular grouping in one part of the country.
Great Article Brihaspati Ji as usual.I just wanted to add a few observations of my own.It is when I was just a teen somewhere around 12 -14 yrs maybe that I visited my maternal grandparent's in Punjab.This was just before the Khalistani movement and I remember that many Punjabi's Hindus and sikh's alike were fed up with the demo graphical change affected by migration from people from Bihar and U.P who were coming to seek employment opportunities.This then took on its own colour where the Khalistani's came into the picture and the rest as they say is history.
I mention this because these states have had/are having huge effect on rest of India.Similar disgruntlement is also felt in Mumbai and Delhi which is known to many people.Of course the Geo political significance can be better explained by you.
That is perhaps a wrong tactic - we cannot penalize the lower end of the spectrum for what their leaders and tops did. We should have been able to absorb them as escapees and swell our own ranks. But yes I think one the one hand they should be under pressure to make an effort to learn the local language and integrate - whereas on the other we must extend to them the welcome if they agree to integrate!
There are multitudes of cultures, languages, religions, sects, customs. Many such groups have very small populations and are on lands whcih are at the mercy of the enemy or nature. Such small vulnerable populations need to preserve their historic past. They cannot function if at a drop of a hat millions of Biharis/UP'ites descend and overwhelm it demographically.
As Manish pointed out, such is the case of Punjab. UP/Bihar would not even feel the pinch if a million went and changed the character of a place completely. Many cities in Punjab have already become UP/Bihar majority. States like J&K Valley and Laddakh have protected themselves by laws which prevent such migrations by act of law. Such i also the case in HP, Arunachal & Sikkim.
Preserving such cultures requires an empathy with them, not a grab mentatility. Politicians from UP/Bihar will continously rise up to defend the treatment of "their guys" in other states. Train routes and faires will be kept in line with the needs of mass migrations of these people. Local elections will continue to be faught by political guidance from Patna & Lucknow.
But when it comes to fighting for the nation, there is little empathy for the same regions that are a target of migration. There are no mass movements and trains full of volunteers willing to travel to the periphery to die to protect the motherland.
This is not to say that UP/Bihar do not welcome other people of India into their states. They do. Many Punjabis, marathsi, Sindhis, Bengalis live in these states with zero backlash. This is remarkable. People of these regions do have a certain niceness and gentleness to them.
Unfortunately democracy has meant, 1-man, 1-vote. So these regions will continue to influence the directon of india for a foreseeable future. We cannot change that reality very easily. Unfortunately, these regions sit right smack in the center of the country. Protected by many states to eaither sides, and by mighty Himalayas in the North. It will take complete destruction of India before the "core" is affected seriously.
I am beginning to feel, if Pakistan had taken lands/cities like Lucknow, Barielly, Banaras, or Patna, Indian reaction to TSP would be vastly different.
surinder wrote:
But when it comes to fighting for the nation, there is little empathy for the same regions that are a target of migration. There are no mass movements and trains full of volunteers willing to travel to the periphery to die to protect the motherland.
Incorrect, for example look at the number of dead in the last massacre of CRPF in Maoist violence and see which states they come from.
Look at the demographics of Indian Army today.
This stuff about people here not fighting is plainly incorrect, at most a temporary hiatus due to British policies post 1857.
, which even they know is a waste of time.