Future Strategic Scenario for the Indian Subcontinent -II

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 23 Jan 2011 17:38

I think it is better to simply mention which geo-political regions are our core interests. This keeps them as our interests as long as India stands. We do not need to specify in details what exactly we will deem as the satisfaction of our "interests". The above can be a "minimal" programme meant for public consumption.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 24 Jan 2011 00:38

The 2Gs are the are interests of the current India.

Reminds me of Queen Melsinde and her son Baldwin!

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 24 Jan 2011 00:48

There are two basic power centres in the Cong : the dynasty and the coterie, and the "fund managers". Whenever that equilibrium breaks down, the throne shakes. Both sides can bite too if they feel threatened. It is the circulation of "resources" that keeps the Congress apparatus afloat. 2G was a failure of communications and a struggle between "old" and "new" generation "fund managers" for exclusive rights to manage funds. This is reflected in the old/new gen coterie struggle too. I guess the external forces seriously want the coterie to stabilize - otherwise a lot of kissing-Pak strategies will fail.

But the other pain in the gluteals is a contradictory pressure from the biz-interests on external side to crack down on the "corruption" bit which is of concern for them when cash fluidity is a problem in the west. If the liquidity problem had been overcome they would be happily bribing the very same entities they now lambast. But it is a problem right now.

So external biz demands are contradictory to what the political masters from west want, and also upsetting for the cozy arrangement between coterie and fund managers - and perhaps even some international flows circulating between entities having common interests in India. Greater financial difficulties in the west, would mean greater difficulty for Congress leadership.

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 26 Jan 2011 01:01

I think to understand the method being employed for Jammu and Kashmir, we should study how Croatia and Kosovo was handed over to the Islamist mafiosi.

I will try to link up a sequence of articles on this : here is a first on the role of "interlocutors". http://www.ceri-sciencespo.com/archive/ ... articb.pdf

In fact the first time the term was used from GOI side about J&K - it immediately struck me that the European and behind it the Clintonesque sudden change of characterization fo terrorist to "freedom fighters" [the KLA was suddenly dubbed "freedom fighters" by the Clinton admin from previous listinga s terrorist and used to help the NATO forces, but KLA has subsequently been alleged to have itself been committing atrocities and which apparently the the EU do-gooders wilfully ignored then on ground] - also started up with the foisting of "interlocutors".

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 26 Jan 2011 01:18

Bji,
Can you look at the GDF version of this thread?

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 27 Jan 2011 04:11

Thanks to a pointer in another thread about the apparent lack of parallels between the Kosovo/Croatia situation and J&K, I would like to point out that - yes - there were no strong opposition party like in India to fight the external attempts at creation of Islamic homelands and bases within non-Muslim ex-Serb/Slav ex-Yougoslav region. In J&K situation, there are no US or NATO forces sent with the explicit aim of supporting separatists.

However, the ground reality may not actually be that far fetched. US and NATO forces are not really that far away from India. American groups - especially political leadership - in particular have little difficulty in switching their characterizations of "terrorists" into "freedom fighters" as long as such "freedom fighters" are not communists/pagans or shias [even here there could be problems with what happened about Shah-Khomeini drama].

The strong "opposition" party may face a fascist onslaught from those in rashtryia power in the near future. It does not have the hold over the rashtryia coercive machinery to ensure protection.

Prem · Post by **Prem** » 27 Jan 2011 04:56

BSir ji,
NATO forces in K will rock both India and China and not realistic scenario. Any such attempt might become detrimental for Wesetrn global interests. They wont risk this just to right a new Poakshastar for short term pleasures.

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 27 Jan 2011 05:01

They would very much like to have an excuse to support a KLA. In fact even without doing it, just mere hints would be enough to set GOI trousers on fire, and keep them eager and wet to oil-up Paokies or Kashmiri Islamists. Moreover, if the excuse is an extension of Paki influence and territorial control - why should China be "rocked"?

Prem · Post by **Prem** » 27 Jan 2011 05:15

WEST might use Poak excuse but wont let that sweet spot alone and keep it to themselves . They have the ability to offer monetary/military incentive and Bikau maals are never in shortage in that part of the world. A new country out of Afghanistan, Baluchistan and K controlled by Mama and Bhanjas will be a dream come true . So useful in separating ME, China ,India,CAR and Russia . K is the Kore to move or spin the wheel. Good for WEST but bad for the rest and the above rest might just get together in their interest to start the real unrest to punish the west and eventually put them to eternal rest by ending their supremacy quest. Of course, its onlee good guess but most probably, they wont enter K for this purpose because stakes are not so high Yet. They rather let Poakland cruble than take chance for such gathering of Eastern powers with such convergence in strategic interest.

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 29 Jan 2011 20:17

Prem ji,
the Islam dominated ocuntries are now mostly out of US influence - society wise. There are strong appreciation for the tools that west has provided, but this should not be taken to mean any deep love for US or the west. There will be desire for greater civil liberties, "hedonsim" if you choose to call that - in those parts of the Islamic societies which has been able to enrich itself fabulously.

But basic economic trends show that for the whole society to reach that "dirty rich" stage, is a long way off, and perhaps not even feasible given current framework. Which means the overwhelming majority of Islamic societies in large populous Islamic nations will not identify with western lifestyles and values except those that help them to attain power - facebook for mobilization and jeans for convenience in street fighting compared to traditional flowing gear.

No US influenced and controlled independent region in the CAR/POK/AFG is possible. US is a dying imperialist power, and is a the stage that the Brits were after the WWI - apparently supreme and unchallenged and at the peak after the fall of USSR. But, it is dying as a superpower. It does not have the wherewithal and internal drive left to create new pro-US nations in Islamist regions which have produced their own populist narratives.

In fact TSP itself is in a precarious position where popular anger, may provide the spark for disintegration because of pre-existing Islamic networks ready to take advantage of "disorder" and ethnic dissent. OIC and the Arab league may try to pre-empt this by calling for a general programme of reforms and electoral or representative reforms. Which in turn will only bring together a kind of populist-Islamist supported by portions of the military government.

The military in most Islamist countries will appear more respectable and admirable to the Islam-trained minds, and will form an essential core of these new populist-Islamist regimes after execution of the top few levels seen to be associated with "ancien regimes". Mini-Irans more likely than pseudo-Kemalist neo-Turkeys.

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 02 Feb 2011 03:15

Peaceful and tolerant Maldives - January, 2011.

http://minivannews.com/politics/islamic ... bill-15394
23rd January,2011

In the article, Deputy Commissioner of Maldives Police Service Ahmed Muneer is quoted as claiming that the bill would “provide sufficient powers to act pre-emptively on national security matters.”

“Our radical preachers are enjoying street credibility and radicalisation is visible at the street level. It’s a problem for us, but things would aggravate if the radicals get integrated into Maldivian politics,” Muneer told the magazine.
[...]
In response to reports of the bill, the Islamic Foundation said it “will not be intimidated by any threats from the Maldives government, the Zionist Israel and United States (the self proclaimed super-power) to abandon its work to propagate Islam in this country.”

The Islamic Foundation has also been highly critical of the Maldives’ government’s foreign policy following its decision to allow Israeli eye doctors to perform free surgery in the country during a visit in early December 2010.

The Foundation called on the government to “shun all medical aid from the Zionist regime” prior to the arrival of the seven eye surgeons, claiming that Isreali doctors “have become notorious for illegally harvesting organs from non-Jews around the world.”

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 02 Feb 2011 03:28

More interestingly : Kashgar Times provides some hilarious articles from the Chinese and Pakistani viewpoint based in NewYork :

http://www.kashgartimes.com/?p=554
Bharat losing Maldives[?]

Also the same page provide an interesting bash up of M J Akbar. He should see where he gets with his open ended statements that appear to be favouring Pak. It is not sufficient, and falls short of tolerable levels from the "other" side.

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 04 Feb 2011 18:38

Twittervolution : model for renewed separatism in Kashmir valley?
http://www.expressindia.com/latest-news ... my/745010/

Facebook used to fuel unrest in Kashmir: Army
RIYAZ WANI
Posted: Feb 02, 2011 at 0515 hrs IST

Srinagar: For the first time, the Army has expressed concern over social networking sites, saying they are being used by anti-national elements to unleash propaganda against the security forces in the Kashmir Valley.

“Facebook and other social networking sites are being used as a tool of propaganda against the Army and other security agencies by elements hell-bent on disturbing peace in the Kashmir Valley,” said S A Hasnain, General Officer Commanding of the Srinagar-based 15 Corps.

Hasnain’s statement assumes importance in the wake of protesters in the Egypt crisis using Facebook to mobilise people. More so, when the Valley is staring at yet another summer in nervous anticipation of fresh trouble.

There are already many pages devoted to the burgeoning Egyptian crisis on the social sites in the Kashmir Valley. Besides, the evolving situation in Egypt has become the exciting new subject of discussion on Facebook and Twitter.

Addressing mediapersons at an Army function at Khanabal in South Kashmir, Hasnain said video clippings posted on Facebook highlighting alleged excesses by security personnel were fabricated.

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 09 Feb 2011 02:13

The changing scene in Karachi - useful lessons. Can we compare with Mumbai and see what may and what may not happen?
http://www.foreignaffairs.com/features/ ... rban-bulge

Karachi is Pakistan's largest city and its financial capital, providing the majority of the country's tax revenue and nearly a quarter of its GDP. It is a miniature Pakistan: every major regional ethnic group in the country is represented in substantial numbers. The city's politics are dominated by the Muttahida Quami Movement (MQM), a notionally secular party claiming to represent the largest "ethnic" group -- the Muhajirs, Urdu-speaking descendants of the refugees who left India during partition in 1947.

But the MQM is in relative decline: although Muhajirs make up almost 50 percent of Karachi's population, the party has no provincial population to draw from and is facing a steady influx of Pashtun workers, whose numbers have grown since 2002, when the fight against insurgents in the country's northwest first gained momentum and pushed millions of people south. The city's other major political parties have adopted the MQM model, propagating narratives of perceived inequality along ethnic lines. The Awami National Party (ANP), which claims to represent Karachi's estimated five million Pashtuns, is attempting to carve out an increasing share of power. It is allied with the Pakistan People's Party (PPP), a Sindh-based party that rules at both the national and provincial levels but is a minor power in Karachi, where it effectively represents Sindhis and Balochis.

The MQM's unwillingness to accommodate a growing population of Pashtuns is at the root of what is beginning to be described as a "civil war" inside Karachi. In 2010, nearly 1,400 people -- almost as many as were killed in suicide bombings and terrorist attacks over the same period -- died in "target killings" of party workers and members of one or another ethnic group.

The violence is sometimes the result of armed cadres affiliated with the MQM or ANP taking up the fight of aggrieved community members, such as when Muhajir students are harassed walking to school through Pashtun areas, or when "minority" residents are asked to pay protection money. But Karachi's political observers, urban rights activists, and even police officials agree that much of the violence is being driven by the militant cadres of the parties (and the criminal groups affiliated with them) for control of land and profits and to increase their respective ethnic base's representation in contested voting districts.

After the MQM leader Raza Haider was assassinated last August, more than a hundred people, mostly Pashtuns, were killed in three days of violence. Naseeb, a Karachi-born Pashtun from ANP-controlled Qasba Colony, said that after Haider was killed, random Pashtuns were targeted daily: "They just saw someone wearing a shalwar kameez and they assumed he was a Pashtun and shot him without asking."

One root cause of the ethnic strife is the retreat of the state; Karachi's local government has simply failed to keep up with the city's expanding population. It has refused or been unable to provide basic physical infrastructure and services, such as housing, water, and electricity, or economic opportunities and resources to the majority of residents. Instead, the urban poor have relied on ethnic-based sector entrepreneurs to provide these essential services. This informality in social and economic relations has allowed ethnic rivalries to fester.

The dynamic is perhaps best illustrated by Karachi's haphazard land-development policies. So-called developers take over state land illegally and rent plots to people from their own ethnic group. The tenants gradually obtain services such as electricity and running water from illegal contractors and middlemen who bribe municipal officials and police to look the other way. Many people in these communities work in the informal economy, with transactions and contracts guaranteed by ethnic organizations such as the MQM or ANP. Eventually, the residents of these unofficial plots organize themselves and demand formal recognition and protection from the state.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 09 Feb 2011 02:27

Karachi is scene of inter ethnic fight. Mumbai is not.

Lets not score self goals here.

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 09 Feb 2011 02:30

ramana ji,
of course they have very dissimilar components too. My explicit question was in what ways "may not", which implies that the differences from Mumbai in the larger social context may mean something quite opposite to what has happened in Mumbai - in spite of the basic premise of the article - about land-grab and its political consequences - being essentially the same.

Similarities - are apparently about the "financial hub", attractive for migrants, originally built up by migrants too, and then now a kind of struggle for dominance between those who came earlier and those who came later. The same patterns of urban violence that once engulfed Mumbai and still does in an indirect way - the criminal networks, the advantages and problems/vices of being a port city.

The difference - Mumbai is part of a much more stable political setup as a rashtra, while Karachi is not. So it could be useful to try and predict the future trajectory based on Mumbai experience keeping in mind that that stabilizing factors will be missing.

Johann · Post by **Johann** » 09 Feb 2011 03:08

Haven't Indian corporate interests played a huge role in national, state, and muncipal level investments in Mumbai's infrastructure and services?

Karachi is Pakistan's trading and financial hub, but Pakistan never developed strong manufacturing companies like the Tatas, the Birlas, Kirloskars, Bajajs, Godrejs, Ambanis, etc which were based in Bombay.

The majority of these companies were founded before partition, and were founded by Non-Muslims.

Ayub Khan tried to encourage industrialisation after taking over in the late 1950s but there was little sustained synergy between the state and private capital.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 11 Feb 2011 01:02

Brihaspatiji< Looks like there was seminar in Kolkata on very topic!!! Thanks for keeping BRF ahead of the curve:

PERILS OF A DIVIDED REGION

- New forms of cooperation may help create a united South Asia

PERILS OF A DIVIDED REGION
- New forms of cooperation may help create a united South Asia
Surendra Munshi

The Bengal Club and The Telegraph panel discussion held recently in Calcutta addressed the serious issue of South Asia. What if Bangladesh, India, Pakistan, and Sri Lanka were to reunite to become United South Asia (USA)? The promise: No visa for USA.

What about the perils? Given the resistance that Pakistan has to the overbearing presence of India (Sunanda K. Datta-Ray) and taking into consideration the Indian view that Pakistan sponsors terrorism as a State policy against India (Ronen Sen), is it at all realistic to think of United South Asia? What has happened to the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation? These questions, among others, were raised. Kanti Bajpai tried to present a possible Pakistani view by pointing out that for Pakistan it is important that a level playing field is created. It can be created if India goes down while others go up, or India breaks up into smaller units, or, less radically, if India makes generous concessions on all bilateral issues. An alternative view is that India play a stronger role in the region.

Positive response to the idea of coming together came from our eastern neighbour. Farooq Shobhan spoke in favour of moving forward with building blocks and strengthening sub-regional cooperation. Bangladesh could play a creative role in this respect. Not ignoring terrorism, trade imbalances, or other hindrances, he conveyed a sense of optimism. Did not Bollywood and cricket, he asked, create important elements of commonality? Pratap Bhanu Mehta took the discussion to a different level when he spoke of the entire region as vulnerable to the problems created by ecological changes, poverty, and wasteful expenditure on armament necessitated by persisting conflicts. Are these not reasons enough for regional cooperation?

In the discussion that followed, also through the participation of the audience, it became clear that, while democracy holds a positive hope in the region, it also creates problems with petty politicians serving their vested interests and missing out on the big picture. The promise of democracy, as it was pointed out, is the realization of the concept of citizenship which does not make distinctions across identities. If all citizens are assured of their rights, it becomes less important to claim these rights based on identity politics.

These are serious thoughts that deserve the attention of all thinking persons, even if at present prospects appear utopian and problems real. Any major idea that affects the destinies of millions of people needs to go through a period of gestation. Ideas develop in the minds of people, unlike babies in the wombs of their mothers, through a process that is neither straight nor predictable. Viewed in this manner, even a cynic will grant that the panel discussion mentioned here served a useful purpose.

We need to take the discussion forward. ‘No visa for USA’ or the name, United South Asia, may indeed be catchy but it hides a serious concern. If the countries of South Asia were to come closer, should it be in the form represented by the United States of America? This may be a wrong beginning to the debate. The manner in which the US was formed in my view does not hold the right model for this part of the world. We need to consider very different histories here. Moreover, the name United South Asia may allow the acronym USA but it does not even allow the presence of the word ‘states’ in the name and thus may suggest to some an even greater merger than is feasible or even desired.

The other model to consider in this respect is the model of the European Union. This may be more similar to the experiences of South Asia with the overarching European identity going along with the memory of bitter national rivalries that had to be overcome to initiate a meaningful discussion. There is much to learn from this model. Even this model may not be the right model for this region. What is the right model? Perhaps there is none that exists at present. Does it mean then that the whole idea is to be rejected? Are the people of this region so devoid of imagination that they cannot give shape, with a collective will, to the right model for themselves? There is much scope for creative thought here.

Who will be the creators of this idea? Who will carry it forward? It is clear that a major problem is vision deficit in this region. Pettiness comes with its own cost. It makes people blind to important issues, and, even worse, it diverts energy towards behaviour arising out of petty spite. The questions about the creators and carriers of the idea may be answered by suggesting that, in the absence of towering personalities, the burden falls on different persons from different domains. Intellectuals, policymakers, creative persons, journalists, civic activists, industrialists, politicians, and others representing social, economic and political life need to work together to create and carry forward the idea.

A valid question may be raised here. It may be argued that before we get carried away with the idea that exists only in a nebulous form as yet, we need to ask an important question: who will benefit from it? What has India, for instance, to gain from associating with a failed State like Pakistan? This kind of calculation can go beyond national boundaries. It may be asked: which classes or communities will gain by this idea? Answers to these questions may be attempted in different ways. Fragmented economic or political calculations, however, will not answer adequately the question about who will gain. For that purpose we need to consider the region as a whole and the people of this region. We need, as Mehta did, to ask: how can the problems of ecological threat or poverty be addressed adequately? Does the answer lie in conflict or cooperation?

Even if it is granted that the answer is cooperation, it may be asked: is it possible to go back in history? Can the mischief of Partition be undone? Can the countries of the region really reunite? To attempt to answer these questions, it will be important to realize the harm that is done by the word ‘reunite’. It is important to understand that no amount of nostalgia will turn the clock back, nor is it desirable. Not all was well in the India that the British ruled. The region has come forward in many ways since that time, even when all the failings are noted. If the missing yoke does not ensure forced cooperation any longer, there is no reason for not trying to promote new forms of free cooperation. The critical point is to evolve new forms of cooperation that are freely chosen in the interest of the collective good. Once this principle is accepted, the dependence on the security of the past has to be done away with. A new solution has to be evolved to a new challenge.

Is history then irrelevant? No, it is not. George Santayana, the Spanish philosopher and poet, made the famous remark: “Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it.” We need to learn from those aspects of our history which have brought us nothing positive. Communal violence, terrorism, criminal apathy towards the poor — all these features of the present and the history of this region have a lesson to teach us. To move forward when there are actual possibilities of giving this region peace and some prosperity across the board, there is a pressing need to go beyond pettiness.

Not that the history of this region has only negative lessons to offer. This region can offer not only for the people of this region but for entire humanity lessons on living together. We need just to look with unbiased eyes at our collective heritage. It is available in Upanishadic thought, Buddhist sermons, sufi chants, and in the voices of a large number of persons, notably Gandhi, who realized its true potential in the struggle against the inhumanity of colonialism. Small differences cease to be tyrannical once people resolve to live together for mutual benefit. In this resolve, there is no place for going down to enable others to go up. There is place just for one thought. All go down if all do not go up.

[email protected]

Realism muddled with delusions. But core idea is good.

RajeshA · Post by **RajeshA** » 11 Feb 2011 03:07

Ramana garu,
Thanks for sharing the post above. That was exactly the effort in my ebook to clear the muddled thinking on exactly this particular topic.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 11 Feb 2011 04:49

Please take the effort and invite the wrtier. We need to build bridges.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 11 Feb 2011 19:10

Bji, You asked about Mumbai. Draw your own comparisons!

Mumbai: 26/11 had local support but most political types who know Mumbai think "yeh tho hona hi tha". It must be understood that notwithstanding Mahesh Bhatt and the Bollywood Khans, IMs, Parsis and even Christians feel marginalized in Mumbai in a SS, MNS and NCP dominated street. SP and INC try to votebank IMs, Christians and North Indians but the Marathi Manoos now owns the street in Mumbai as never before since the Parsis fled Shivaji Maharaj's raids on Surat and formed an alliance with the Brits by moving their businesses to Fort Bombay. Bollywood Punjus, IMs, Christians and Parsis are now slowly accepting the fact that Mumbai is going to be a more and more Marathi city- regardless of how much they tell each other and foreigners that "we still call it Bombay". The Chembur Tamils and Gujjus all over the city are generally OK with the Manoos.

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 13 Feb 2011 02:31

ramana ji,
thank you for the pointers!

Here posting something I feel could be useful for analysis:

"totalitarian intellectual": A "totalitarian intellectual" is one who fails to recognize that he is after all defending the "wrong" side, the "wrong ideology" - especially any ideology that seeks to erase all counter-argumentors taking them as personal threats to absolute dominance and power. For the "totalitarian intellectual", his opponent is not the ideology but the person who is arguing against him on the basis of that ideology. His aim is not the erasure or discrediting of his opponent's ideology but his opponent himself. So intellectuals who identify/defend/advocate "Marxism" which has explicit acknowledgment of the role of desirability of state as an instrument of coercion in the hands of the abstract "proletariat" which out of practical necessity becomes "vanguard" which then is a short distance to the "dictatorship of the party" - are "totalitarian intellectuals". Intellectuals who justify/defend/advocate dynastic/autocratic state power seeking to extend control over all aspects of public life are similarly "totalitarian intellectuals".

"media as lampooner/comic of politics/politicians/corruption and thereby a facilitator of acceptance of corruption as something trivialized and tolerated" :

media makes the discourse of corruption/ideological contamination acceptable even while it trivializes and mocks it. Audience sees it as something to be laughed at and not something to be angry at. Media forms one wing of the "public sphere" that helps power to be produced and held on to.

"losing pre-colonial language is losing home and becoming an orphan as a post-colonial" Taking colonialism not just as British or European in India, but also as Islamic/Arabic/Turko-Afghan - the pre-Islamic languages was both a tool of expression as well as a repository of what the identity/self was. Whenever the colonial power recognizes this it tries to corrupt the pre-existing language by imposing its own language as the official/court one, and by forcing the defeated to engage the colonials in the language of the winners. This changes the character of the native language, its words, and thereby restricts/constrains the way that identity was originally confirmed and reassured to the self.

When the original has not been killed or replaced fully - because the colonial masters themselves wanted to maintain separation for their own egos and identities - the individual and culture becomes homeless. Its own home - its language - has been invaded and is no longer recognizable as a home, even if it has structures/elements from the old "home". It is like a "house" where you once lived as a child in a family, but where you now see also strangers moving around, who are not guests and over whose actions or movements or stay you have no control.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 15 Feb 2011 02:33

Talmiz Ahmed the Ambassador reviews Robert kaplan's "Monsoon Asia" in Frontline.

Strategic Scenarios

.....
Kaplan's extensive writings over 26 years indicate an evolution in his thinking from an unabashed imperialist rooting for U.S. hegemony to a more sober and reflective observer deeply conscious of U.S. military and political setbacks in Afghanistan, Iraq and Palestine.

This reflective Kaplan gets a number of points right. He points out that over the long term the future in “Monsoon Asia” will be one of “greater integration” in which the U.S. will have little or no role. He sees in Asia “a non-Western mold of astonishing inter-dependence, and yet ferociously guarded sovereignty, with militaries growing alongside economies”. The former gung-ho imperialist and advocate of U.S. military interventions now asks for sensitivity: the future of American power, he points out, “necessitates an understanding of other people's historical experiences, not just its own”.

While the U.S. power and influence in Asia is diminishing, Kaplan remains unsure about what the future holds for the region and about the U.S. position in it. Page after page, he moves from optimism to despair, envisaging at times an era of cooperation and, at other times, of strife and violence. This is not surprising since the region itself is in such turbulence and its outlook is so uncertain that pendulum-like swings possibly remain the only option for the commentator. Every situation is possible: you will have an ugly Sino-Indian rivalry across Asia that will devour resources and encourage conflict. Alternatively, there will be a situation in which “India's and China's mutual dependence on the same sea lanes could also lead to an alliance between them, that, in some circumstances, might be implicitly hostile to the United States”.
.....

Kaplan's analysis is welcome for its candour in describing the U.S.' diminishing power, role and influence, and his advocacy that the U.S. work more cooperatively and sensitively with the principal Asian powers in benign, mutually beneficial arrangements. However, three reality checks are necessary.

First, while several parts of Asia are in turmoil, there are also in place very substantial connectivities across the continent, which reflect a revival of the old silk routes. Asian countries are witnessing high growth rates so that, today the bulk of Asian oil and gas is consumed within Asia. Intra-Asian trade links now constitute the most substantial engagements for most Asian countries. Investments within Asia, nascent at this stage, indicate a clear trend, particularly as all the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) countries, storehouses of investible surpluses, are pursuing robust “Look-East” policies. The logic of comparative economic advantage amid burgeoning economic success is slowly but surely replacing traditional political animosities and could in time even end then. The short point is that “Monsoon Asia” is not waiting for a U.S. role to fulfil its own destiny; it has already embarked on it, and it is for the U.S. to create space and fit in benignly.

This leads to the second point: for far too long, U.S. policies have served to divide Asia, foment discord and, with the American propensity to pursue the military option, leave behind a trail of discord and devastation. For the U.S. to now play a constructive role in Asia, it would need to fundamentally rework its mindset and policy approaches, aspects that are not examined or even mentioned by Kaplan. The main change required of the U.S. would be to work with other countries on the basis of equality and mutual respect, something it has hardly ever done even with its allies. Flowing from this, it would have to engage with them through diplomatic effort rather than intimidation and war. This would require getting rid of perennial “hate-figures” such as Iran, given that the 30-year U.S.-Iran confrontation has been a major source of instability in West Asian and world affairs.

CONSTRUCTIVE U.S. ROLE

This leads to the third reality check on Kaplan's scenario of a constructive U.S. role in “Monsoon Asia”. Kaplan has conveniently omitted all discussion of U.S. policy on and role in West Asia. Early in the book, he notes that the U.S. “may not control events inside the ‘big sandbox' of the Middle East”, and, surprisingly, suggests that the U.S. can “compensate” for this obvious shortcoming “by dominating the door in and out of this sandbox”, that is, Hormuz and Bab al-Mandeb. This suggestion is both ignorant and embarrassing. It is difficult to understand how Kaplan could fail to see that the Asian security scenario from Palestine to Pakistan is today inextricably linked, and Asian stability cannot be obtained through a piecemeal approach. Clearly, Kaplan does not wish to enter the West Asian imbroglio since, in the pursuit of Asian peace and U.S. interests, he would, in the face of strident Israeli opposition, have to recommend a more active U.S. role in the peace process and a more even-handed approach, which would deprive Israel of the freedom it currently enjoys to stall all peace initiatives, expand settlements in the occupied areas, and wreak havoc and destruction on the Palestinian people at will.

The proposed change of mindset and approach would also require the U.S. to review its ties with the Muslim world, described by Kaplan (as also Bernard Lewis, Huntington and many other U.S. writers) with the broad-brush, undifferentiated, monochrome label of “Islam”. Even as the battle against extremism and terror is supported across the Muslim world, Islamophobia is spreading rapidly in the U.S. and Europe and, unless checked, will doom all possibility of a benign future in Asia. Restraining Israeli depredations and addressing the issue of Palestine are central to combating radical Islam, a point that goes unmentioned in the book.

In spite of all the current differences and disputes and uncertainties about the future we might have in Asia, one reality is obvious and will not be reversed: the age of Western imperialism is truly over. Throughout the book, Kaplan quotes from The Lusiads by the Portuguese poet Luiz Vaz Camoes, who in the 16th century celebrated the achievements of Portugal's early mariners and statesmen who, through ruthless messianic violence, had subjugated for a while the entire Indian Ocean region. One quotation is relevant for all those who still have dreams of imperialist grandeur:

Delusions are possessing you,

Already, ferocity and brute force

Are labeled strength and valour.

Talmiz Ahmad, an Indian diplomat, is the author of Children of Abraham at War – The Clash of Messianic Militarisms. The views expressed here are his own.

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 17 Feb 2011 03:02

Kaplan's comments about the ultimate failure of "messianic violence" or its highlighting by Talmiz, actually commits the analysis mistake of criticizing from within the very same messianic framework that they are criticizing.

Messianic violence partly fails because of its messianism, because it necessarily has to think of a single lifetime focus. Everything has to be achieved in a single life, everything to be enjoyed in a single lifetime. Its a one shot game. Which means, messianic violence usually loses steam in a few generations. Moreover, the extreme greed and emotional involvement in such genocidic ventures can cause a burn-out.

Violence need not be messianic alone. At least Talmiz could have looked into the Bharatyia traditional concept of violence carried out unemotionally for a sustained and prolonged campaign to reform and restructure societies. The key is the unemotional application of violence, and the objective to establish a just society [nishkama karma in war and "dharma" as objective of war].

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 17 Feb 2011 03:20

Bji< DOnt mind lekin can you expand on that idea in your blog.? I think its important to show the difference between messianic violence and dharmic violence as decribed in the Puranas. This is to counter the Martha Nussabum type half baked critiques who attack Hinduism from the very same messianic framework.

BTW it will explain how the raging Turkish invaders became Indianised in a few generations and same with the Mongols/Chagatai Turks who became civilised Mughals!

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 17 Feb 2011 03:32

brihaspati wrote:
Violence need not be messianic alone. At least Talmiz could have looked into the Bharatyia traditional concept of violence carried out unemotionally for a sustained and prolonged campaign to reform and restructure societies. The key is the unemotional application of violence, and the objective to establish a just society [nishkama karma in war and "dharma" as objective of war].

Kaplans book has key problem.
He has a separate chapter on Gujarat and hints about the violence of 2002. He is trying to project a trend and image of India and also what could happen in the future.

Fundamentally what he and his group are saying is that Islamist growth and anarchy coming out of Pakistan is not going to stop. This is going to spread to the region and India will be affected. India will react to it and one of the reaction will be similar to what Gujarat is facing. This will change the region and the IOR will go thru social transformation over 100 years and more.

Kaplan is hinting that Pakistan will reach its end state after many decades and there will be no action to change it from the western nations. The change they created inside Pakistan from 1970s by putting seeds of violence in the afghan war will never end. This is the reason for the "unwinnable war" in Af-Pak region.

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 17 Feb 2011 03:58

Okay, ramanaji! I will try! Work is piling up.

Also been coopted into some interesting things about modelling identity formations. Wondering about formation of the DIE and their continued regeneration. Both from the network viewpoint as well as my own small input into the area - it seems that the crucial factor will possibly turn out to be the degree of self-sufficiency and network isolation of elite individual. Those highly integrated will have tendency to compromise and switch identity and enhance difference . Those not so integrated in his/her local micro/subnetwork and also with high self-esteem will rebel against the compromise.

This is a tentative proposition. Moreover this work is not reported as being applied to the DIE, and I will not report it for publication too - for reasons you can guess. But we can probably predict likely candidates for compromise and rebellion or give circumstances and factors. So if it has at all any relevance, I guess it should not go the normal peer review road which will alert too many bells. As and when it goes out it will be on a completely unconnectable population.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 17 Feb 2011 04:05

There is a lot of work in social science on identity formation. Will see if I come across some titles.

And read the Desikachari book on Islam in India in fourteenth centuries. What he says is to switch an identity the new group should appear successful. And a whole group has to adopt new identity for societal preservation and continuity.
IOW a whole biradari or village, state, country has to adopt the new identity in order to maintain social cohesion. Or else the new adopter become orphans and whither away.

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 17 Feb 2011 04:06

brihaspati wrote:Okay, ramanaji! I will try! Work is piling up. Also been coopted into some interesting things about modelling identity formations. Wondering about formation of the DIE and their continued regeneration. Both from the network viewpoint as well as my own small input into the area - it seems that the crucial factor will possibly turn out to be the degree of self-sufficiency and network isolation of elite individual. Those highly integrated will have tendency to compromise and switch identity and enhance difference . Those not so integrated in his/her local micro/subnetwork and also with high self-esteem will rebel against the compromise.

This is a tentative proposition. Moreover this work is not reported as being applied to the DIE, and I will not report it for publication too - for reasons you can guess. But we can probably predict likely candidates for compromise and rebellion or give circumstances and factors. So if it has at all any relevance, I guess it should not go the normal peer review road which will alert too many bells. As and when it goes out it will be on a completely unconnectable population.

Good work. Please fill me in.

RoyG · Post by **RoyG** » 17 Feb 2011 05:27

‘Hindu religion has a tendency to take up armed struggle’

Economist Meghnad Desai, 70, a UK resident for the past 35 years, has always held strong opinions about politics in India. This professor emeritus at the London School of Economics talks to ARPIT PARASHAR about the history of militant Hinduism, Modi’s Gujarat and the burden of secularism on the Indian Muslim.

Saffron side Meghnad Desai has his own unique take on Hindutva

PHOTO: SHAILENDRA PANDEY

Why do you say that the phenomenon of Hindu terror is not likely to go away?
India is not a secular nation, it is a Hindu nation. And reviving the Hindu nation has been the aim of a very important branch of politics. In a lot of ways, people like Vivekananda, who are now termed secular, were not secular at all. They had no reason to be secular. The lesson for (Bal Gangadhar) Tilak from the Bhagwad Gita was ‘karmayoga’, which was supposed to be a militant struggle, not just a curricular term. So one should not be surprised that Hindu religion has the tendency to take up armed struggle, because it was not called terrorism earlier. And Abhinav Bharat, which (Veer) Savarkar started ages ago, is seen today planting bombs and so on. This is a longstanding tradition. Madan Lal Dhingra and Savarkar supported violence — and Dhingra is considered a hero of the freedom struggle. The Congress may not accept it but the roots of this religious violence come from them. So if there is Hindu terror, one has to understand it comes from a background where it was considered an honourable way.

But how can these groups justify their acts in today’s world? By creating the ‘other’ in the Muslim?
They probably hate the Congress as much as they hate Muslims. They believe that the whole dream of the Indian nation has been betrayed by Partition. They can’t understand the concept of secularism and the push for it in a Hindu majority nation — that if democracy is a majority concept and if Hindus are the majority, why can’t India be a Hindu nation? This is the sort of naïve logic on which they play.

And, of course, they are against Muslims because they term them ‘traitors’, sometimes because of Pakistan, and sometimes even talking about Muhammad bin Qasim! They would even go back to things that happened a thousand years ago! It is quite similar to how the concept of Islamist terrorism works. One should then think about where these youngsters throwing bombs around come from. Earlier it was the British, now it is the Muslims to throw bombs against.

So it’s a response to Islamic terror?
No. It was there even before Islamist terrorism started. It may have flared up because of what Lashkar-e-Toiba and such groups did, but Abhinav Bharat had been around before 9/11 or Islamist terrorism even cropped up. They were never a big movement but are very much now directing their angst against Muslims, rather, against the concept of secularism.

But political parties too have been directly involved in this. Indresh Kumar and Swami Asimananda have been close to the top BJP leadership. Asimananda was with the RSS and claims to know LK Advani and AB Vajpayee personally.
It is time for the BJP to stand on its own feet as a normal political party which caters to all Indians and is based on a fairly healthy theory of nationalism. They like RSS when Nitin Gadkari is appointed the chief and even Advani and Atal have acknowledged that being in RSS was a great thing for them — so has Narendra Modi. But it cannot escape the fact that some people in RSS are connected to Abhinav Bharat and follow the line of thinking that the only way of attaining Hindu dominance is through terrorism.

Also, RSS has its main base in Maharashtra and the Marathi-speaking people have had this great burden of history — that they nearly came to power as the last Hindu empire to rule the country but lost in 1761. The idea that Marathas would have come to Hindu Padshahi still is a dream. 1857 was their last revolt in trying to defeat the British and take back that dream that the British had snatched away. Such views and dreams among certain sections of Marathas — in the RSS or closer to it — are still there. Shiv Sena, for example, takes up that kind of politics citing history and the dream.

Also, after Gandhi came, the religious movements completely got marginalised. So the RSS hates Gandhi because he claimed the Hindu space of freedom struggle and won!

Where does the Indian Muslim find himself in all this?
The Indian Muslim has always had a great problem because of what happened during Partition. The whole question before Partition was about minority rights and their protection when India attains independence. Nobody had thought about democracy or majority rule and governance till then. Partition has weakened Muslims in India enormously. What was once about one-third of the population is now about 15 percent.

‘Some in the RSS think that the way to attain Hindu dominance is through terror’

And today the Indian Muslim cannot behave like a Hindu or a Christian. He is always examined much more sharply. Even the so-called Congress secularists want Muslims to ‘behave’ properly. If a Muslim is critical of Congress rule, they’d say “What’s wrong with him? Doesn’t he realise that we are his only guarantee for secularism?” There used to be a lot of left-wing Muslims before Independence but we see little of that kind of critical thinking about Islam and even politics and governance among the Muslims today. So this sort of push for a secularist ethos has confined Muslims to a corner.

You come from Gujarat, where there has been a lot of talk about development. Newly appointed VC of Dar ul-Uloom Deoband was recently in controversy for talking about it.
The Rajiv Gandhi Foundation ranks all states according to development and governance and had ranked Narendra Modi’s Gujarat as the best governed state a few years ago. Gujarat comes high on the list of wellgoverned states in the country. Congress wants to keep pushing the thing about Modi being bad and communal. They are now in an absurd position where nobody has been able to indict Modi in nine years, but bad as he might have been in 2002, he has brought about development. Gujarat’s numbers are extremely good compared to other states – on education, employment, etc. Let us judge Gujarat like any other state and not say that nothing good can happen there because Modi is bad. So Vastanvi says after his experience in Gujarat what he has seen.

Vastanvi has a good reputation and the institution (Dar ul- Uloom) needs him. I hope he gets re-elected when the Shoora meets on 23 February. What he says about Modi is not relevant to what he can do in such a great university.

What does the term fundamentalist secularist mean?
Like fundamentalist Islamists, there are fundamentalist secularists who refuse to believe that the Muslims can do any wrong. For example, in the Batla house case there was a huge debate over the death of Mohan Chand Sharma. Similarly, there are people who believe that the Parliament attack never happened and that the BJP staged it. Such people are not the friends of Muslims, are happy to keep them neglected. After Maulana Azad, there has not been one strong leader from among the Muslims in this country. A Muslims can be President or Vice-President but not a minister for finance, foreign affairs, home, defence, etc.

‘The RSS hates Gandhi because he claimed the Hindu space and won!’

What do you think about TEHELKA’S recently published SIT report indicting Modi?
All that is there in the report is known. They say he had done this in the aftermath of the riots. The case is yet to be decided. CBI has not been able to indict Amit Shah either. Do the investigating agencies have a case that they can take to the court and get a proper conviction? When TEHELKA published the report one newspaper clearly pointed out that there isn’t enough evidence to lead to Modi’s conviction whereas others said, ‘Oh, now it has been proved he was behind the riots’. There are people trying to keep the issue boiling and not bringing it to a conclusion. They want BJP and Modi to be on the defensive. There have been no convictions in 1984 riots case either.

But there is mention of police officers showing selective amnesia about specific incidents and speeches made by Modi.
It is strange that evidence can be leaked this way in India. Police are involved in unprofessional behaviour and leaking of evidence. The case needs to stand in court and we should wait for that.

http://www.tehelka.com/story_main48.asp ... 1Hindu.asp

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 17 Feb 2011 06:25

Has Meghnad Desai given up his peerage? If not he should have been cited as Lord Meghnad Desai. He was created a lifetime honorary peer. As far as I know it means he had to have British citizenship. If so then he is no longer Indian but PIO.

As to his main point of emphasizing "Hindu militancy" and doing an equal equal with Islamist terror, what he omits is the context of militancy as seen in the "Hindu" and the "Islamist". For the Islamist, "submission" to his prophet and his God, and carrying out militant Jihad is the core of existence and religious life [ in some later texts this militancy has been qualified as not only aggressive but also defensive]. Several of the "strong" hadiths make it clear that Jihad is mostly meant as aggressive and warlike, and dispossession, enslavement, capture and forced sex-slavery or marriage of women, conversion - of the target populations of Jihad - are all sanctioned through revelation. Moreover, Jihad is seen as a first duty [preferred to all other activity] in both the primary text as well as the commonly accepted as authentic - Shahi - Hadith of Bukhari.

Further, and most importantly, there are no limits and ethics of war in the early texts, nothing is beneath the dignity or morals of conduct of the attacking Jihadis. None of it is condemned, and sometimes revelations appear just in time to justify such deception or perfidy - even as per prevailing "pagan" ethics.

Compared to this, there appears to be a very strong underlying theme of trying to ethically clarify and outline even war - in the "Hindu". The earliest such obsession with ethical conduct in war, is spread out all over the descriptions of conflict in the Mahabharatam. Moreover, however great the person is, be it even the reincarnation of God, he is not spared the ethical backlash and even penalties.

This agonizing over ethics of war is a fundamental distinction from Islamic doctrine of war, where no such agony is present.

Lord Meghnad Desai is blissfully unaware of history then -and this selective amnesia serves it spurpose of doing equal equals - perhaps the main reason that there is such a loud demand that we should not remember "history"?

RoyG · Post by **RoyG** » 17 Feb 2011 06:54

Brihaspatiji,

Do you think that the revolution currently taking place in the Islamic world will find it's way to India?

Samudragupta · Post by **Samudragupta** » 17 Feb 2011 09:22

It is interesting to note the points made by Mr. Desai, now the whole gamut of the struggle is shifting to "Religious Violence" and Maratha Chuvanism, it will be interesting to know his idea about the INA and the Revolutionary Punjab and Bengal.
One more interesting point that is coming up is that, suddenly the name of Abhinav Bharat is popping up from nowhere , previously it used to be RSS now AB, so what may have changed suddenly, either RSS may have changed its track or it has gown to a level where making unrealistic claims is no longer enough to stay relevent in the public mind.

People like Desai is slowly getting trapped in their own creation.

Atri · Post by **Atri** » 17 Feb 2011 19:54

These people will never get the point behind simple phrase "establishment of Dharma - Dharma Sansthapanaarthaaya". This phrase is so basic and so simple that a common villager in some remotest village of India will understand and grasp without difficulty.. These so called literates are pathetically dim-witted to understand the whole point behind Maratha and Sikh movements..

This mischief (of passing Indian nationalism of Marathas as regional chauvinism) has been going on since fall of Pune in 1818. Same goes with Sikhs. With sikhs, they tried the approach of "martial race theory" after persecution in Punjab in decade of 1850s. Same goes with bengal (terming them effeminate after Bengal army revolted and gave them kick in arse in 1857).

Every movement (vijaynagar, rajput, ahoms, jats, bundelas, sikhs, marathas and others) in past, present and future, has/had nothing to do with regional chauvinism, OR religious inquisition. Its about establishment of Dharma. that shall remain the drive to take up arms OR to renunciate the arms for every Dharmic individual.. Dharma not only teaches when to take up arms, but also teaches, when arms should be thrown away and vows of sanyasa should be taken..

Compare all this with Islam, now..

Samudragupta · Post by **Samudragupta** » 17 Feb 2011 21:15

Saw the ICC WC carnival in Dhaka, mentioned almost all the cultural and Geographical points except anything about Hindu icons and not even the temple of Dhakeswari....It still seems to be EP

Abhi_G · Post by **Abhi_G** » 17 Feb 2011 21:20

If WB Govt. cannot even have the ubiquitous icon of durga's face (prevalent in Bengali homes) in the state's symbol because of secularism, who cares about Dhakeswari temple.

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 17 Feb 2011 22:42

RoyG wrote:Brihaspatiji,

Do you think that the revolution currently taking place in the Islamic world will find it's way to India?

In the ME countries, it was a new social class - the more modern educated intelligentsia and youth who took the opportunity to go against the existing regime. In India, this class is lost in a vast sea of "majoritarian" non-Muslims. They are not the "majority" with respect to the rashtra. Neither do they have the pull - in the face of competing Madrassah and Dawa institutions which are most likely to have been penetrated well and good by the rashtra and the parties in power for most of the time since Independence.

It will be an "Islamic demo" if and only if the regimes and elements within the rashtra encourage it. Without such a support spontaneous Islamist street uprisings will be difficult to sustain. Tactically it will be a mistake for them - also because it will only isolate their leadership further.

The line if at all will be different - an attempt to coopt the "Dalit" in an Islamo-Dalit alliance. We will see a careful bracketing of "Islam" and "Christian" with "Dalit" - to separate the "Hindu" from the Dalit, while maitaining the monolithic aspirations of Christianity or Islam. No attempt will be made to identify the "exploiters" among Islamists or Christianists and give them a separte identifier as they do for the "Hindu". This shows that they are essentially motivated by religious hatred and religious mobilization, where nothing bad, or none of the cricticisms aimed at the "Hindu" can ever be mentioned back on Islam or Christianity.

Either case, it only helps consolidate the "Hindu", or helps it to "plug the loopholes". More activism on Islam and Christian part against the Hindu identity will simply increase the pressure inside the "Hindu" to "clean up their act". On the other hand if they don't agitate against the "Hindu" they have no other enemy, and all proselytizing ideologies need a devil or they die. So I would welcome such initiatives on the Islmist or Christianist activism part - they cannot make it a full fledged revolution, but will in the process force the "Hindu" to move more tactically.

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 18 Feb 2011 02:52

What Lord Meghnad Desai omits - and therefore is able to claim equal equal - is a comparison of the attitudes towards militant violence between the "Islamic" and the "Hindu". Here I provide some examples, and a classic contrast would be about killing women and children as part of war for a cause.

Killing women : The Murder of Asma bt. Marwan at Medina by Umayr b. Adiy al-Khatmi -March, 624CE

During those days, poets served as mouthpiece of political and social satire. One such poetess was Asma bint Marwan of the Banu Aws, and did not hide her dislike for Islam. She was married to – Yazid b. Zayd, a man of Banu Khatma and had five sons and a suckling infant. After the Badr war, she composed some satirical poems which became became very popular. In his mosque, at night, Muhammad sought a volunteer to assassinate Asma bt. Marwan. Umayr b. Adiy al-Khatmi, belonging to the same tribe as Asma’s husband (Banu Khatma) volunteered. In the dead of night he crept into her apartment. Her little children then surrounded Asma while she slept. Hugging her bosom was her infant, suckling her breast. Umayr cautiouslyremoved the infant from her breast and plunged his sword in her belly with such a force that it passed through her back. This severe blow killed Asma on the spot. It was just five days before the end of the month of the sacred month of fasting, Ramadan when Muslims are not supposed to shed blood.[Ibn Ishaq]

After murdering Asma, next morning, Umayr went to pray in the mosque where Muhammad was waiting eagerly and asked “Have you slain the daughter of Marwan?’ Commenting on this Ibn S’ad writes, “This was the word that was first heard from the Apostle of Allah, may Allah bless him.” When Umayr replied that the job had been carried out with success, Muhammad said, “You have helped God and His apostle, O ‘Umayr!’ When Umayr asked if he would have to bear any evil consequences, the apostle said, “Two goats won’t butt their heads about her.” Muhammad then praised Umayr in front of all gathered for prayer for his act of murder, and Umayr went back to his people. Five days later, the Muslims celebrated the first Eid. [Ibn Ishaq]

When Umayr returned to Upper Medina, he passed the sons of Asma who were burying their slain mother. They accused Umayr of murder of their mother. Without hesitation, Umayr admitted the accusation boastfully and threatened to kill the whole family if they dared to repeat the lampoons that their mother had composed deriding the Prophet of mercy. “That was the first day that Islam became powerful among B. Khatma. The day after Bint Marwan was killed the men of B. Khatma became Muslims because they saw the power of Islam”. [Ibn Ishaq]

Singing girls, as they are typically derisively referred to in the early texts, probably represented bards or misntrels in pre-Islamic Arab society, who apparently were free to sing in public. But crucially they are attributed with poetic prowess and creation of lampoons against the Muslims - which points to a remarkable degree of intellectual freedom and assertion allowed Arab women before Muhammad. Such women were special targets of Islam.

Sunaan Abu Dawud: Book 14, Number 2678: Narrated Sa’id ibn Yarbu’ al-Makhzumi: The Prophet (peace_be_upon_him) said: on the day of the conquest of Mecca: There are four persons whom I shall not give protection in the sacred and non-sacred territory. He then named them. There were two singing girls of al-Maqis; one of them was killed and the other escaped and embraced Islam.

Later, Umar killed Sarah by causing his horse to trample her at al-Abtah. On the day of occupation of Mecca, Muhammad commanded that six men and four women be killed. The women were: 1. Hind bt. Utbah b. Rabiah, 2. Sarah, the freed slave girl of Amr b. Hashim b. Abd al-Muttalib; she was killed (waqidi) on the day of invasion. 3. Quraybah; killed on the day of invasion, 4. Fartana escaped death and lived until the Caliphate of Uthman.

Western documentaries on the capture of Mecca typically drop this part of the peaceful conquest of Mecca, and sing paeans about the supposed forgiveness and amnesty by the conquerors.

In the "conquest" of the Banu Quarayzah, in March, 627, one woman of the B. Qurayzah, the wife of Hasan al-Qurazi and a friend of Aisha, was killed. Aisha’s narrated her story of beheading thus:

One of their women was killed. By God, she was by me, talking with me and laughing unrestraintedly while the Messenger of God was killing their men in the marketplace, when suddenly a mysterious voice called out her name, saying, “Where is so and so?” She said, “I shall be killed.” “Why?” I asked. She said, A misdeed that I committed.” She was taken away and beheaded. (Aisha used to say: I shall never forget my wonder at her cheerfulness and much laughter, even when she knew that she would be killed.).’

[The misdeed was that she had dropped a millstone on the head of a Muslim attacker]. Only one is not something to be rejoiced at as the saleable women were gathered and marched off to be sold as slaves in the market.

There are similar stories of a nearly 80 year old woman (Umm Quirfa) being killed by tying her legs to camels and making the camels run in two directions for resisting giving up her beautiful daughter to the warriors who went disguised as traders.

There is no condemnation of these acts in the Hadiths, and in fact the founders are shown to have absolutely no bouts of conscience or remorse. No philosophical debates, no divine balancing act of "karma" is mentioned.

Compare this with the whole reason that Bheesma does not fight Shikhandi - because the latter was not deemed a man and for the practical purposes of war as a woman. Bheesma actually allows himself to be drilled full of arrows and still refused to take up weapons. We do not hear of women being targeted for killing in Mahabharatam. Even deceptions - or intended deceptions which were technically not lies - like Aswathama hata iti gaja, earns its user a penalty of at least to visit or pass through hell.

We hear of the widows coming out on the battle field to burn their dead male relatives. Do we read any mention of them being enslaved and marched off to slavery and any divine justification for that immediatley coming out from emissaries of God? None whatsoever. Even "God" on earth in human form feels obliged to do penance in a way - by being pierced in the feet by arrows of a hunter. No action, no slip of ethics allowed a free run in the Mahabharatam - and no one is exempted.

Do we find any such element in any part of the Islamic narrative? How do people like Lord Desai read their history and their cultural texts? Where is the range of reading and the grasp to really know about what you are talking about? Does it also reflect in other areas they talk about? That they claim their conclusions based on selective and incomplete reading of narratives? Or is it a much deeper fallacy of logic and argument simply sustained by a mutual admiration society useful for specific political agenda to be placed as respectable/credible to the public?

Prem · Post by **Prem** » 18 Feb 2011 03:05

BSir ji,
There never have been dearth of Bikau Maaal among Hanoods. Megryan Desai or Kasab Kasai , they all have the same purpose in thier life. They are doing their duty of filling the Paap Ka Gharra to the top before getting smashed to pieces. This is the way it always have been from time to time.

Atri · Post by **Atri** » 18 Feb 2011 18:31

He hath disgraced me, and hindered me half a million, laughed at my losses, mocked at my gains, scorned my nation, thwarted my bargains, cooled my friends, heated mine enemies; and what's his reason? I am a Yindu. Hath not a Yindu eyes? Hath not a Yindu hands, organs, dimensions, senses, affections, passions? Fed with the same food, hurt with the same weapons, subject to the same means, warmed and cooled by the same winter and summer, as a Sickular is? If you prick us, do we not bleed? If you tickle us, do we not laugh? If you poison us, do we not die? And if you wrong us, shall we not revenge?

If we are like you in the rest, we will resemble you in that. If a Yindu wrong a sickular, what is his humility? Revenge. If a Sickular wrong a Yindu, what should his sufferance be by Sickular example? Why, revenge. The villainy you teach me I will execute, and it shall go hard but I will better the instruction.

With humble apologies to English kavi-kulaguru...