Future Strategic Scenario for the Indian Subcontinent -II

[ramana]

Pullekeshi, An apt post from one so named!

[Prem]

India, is the manager of the Indian sub-continent and beyond (not South Asia, I do not know where that is...).
It is India's job to ensure peace and stability in her Region of Interest.
If Pakistan as an entity furthers this goal, then it has a right to exist.
I think we know the answer: If not, we need to remove its reason to exist systematically.

QED

Please repeat it many times.

Send it to MEA and PMO office and disturb their sleep.

[brihaspati]

Carl_T wrote
"War-like, but ruthless and sadistic"...want to back up that claim?

Is the "professional historian's" habit of selective diting so infectious nowadays? My full comment was "not only war-like, but also ruthless and sadistic" - which has an entirely different meaning from what you cut and pasted. Which implies, given two sides which have both shown "war-like" tendencies, the west psychologically draws closer to the side that shows "sadistic ruthlessness". Look at the general popular representations, even by "professional historians", about the "glory" and "civilizing" influence of the Romans and the Greeks. Compared to that you do not hear about the "cvilizing" influences of the cultures the Romans replaced or erased. How many cultures do you find around the Mediterranean who casually applied the exquisite refinements in sadism that the Romans showed? Surely you have sufficient knowledge about European history to make a comparison? Or for that matter the highly "cultured" Greeks? Why is only Akhenaten's contribution to "civilization" so brilliant an overshadow over all the others - he was not the only powerful pharaoh to pamper some form of "monotheism"? Only difference from the others, he did it with intolerance and violence.
Come to the later periods - ah, thats even more wondrous! What are the roots of the modern European monarchies? All are derived from Germanic hordes. Do you remember anything you have read about their early foundations and careers? Surely you duly noted the fondness for the "bloody eagle" or "Prima Nocta"? And how, even now modern "professional historians" try to whitewash all that posing "economic motivations onlee". Oh yeah, the Nordics could not eat and light home fires if they did not get the fair right to loot, rape, and murder! Who are the "greats" of "western culture" - Caesar - the "bald whoremonger" (fond nickname by his own soldiers), Octavius, Vespasian, Constantine, Carolus Magnus, Willelmus Ego ********. Even Alexander the Great, who got into fits because a small Afghan hilltop community decided to resist or a Multani city decided to resist - and decided to wipe them out! Each of these are great to the "west" because they imposed their own sweet will, without any consideration for the rights and thoughts of others. None showed themselves above the common human shortcomings of greed, lust, meanness. Contribution of these "greats" to human progress please!

If anything, the "West" tends to support cultures whom it can imagine as an extension of its own values - Huntington's civilization argument - examples would be ethnic Ukrainians, Israel, Taiwan, South Korea and Christian Sudanese. If it cannot extend any sort of imagined ideological or ethnic similarity, and if there is no conflict between them and the core states of the West, then in the case of the US it picks what it sees as the less violent side and deems them the "good guys", that would be the Bosnians, ethnic Albanians, Tibetans.

So its support of the South American military juntas and dictatorships were because they represented an extension of "western culture"? The societies supporting Pinochet, Somoza, et al were extensions of "western values"? So the support extended to Wahabis or Baathists as against Arab world moderates and socialists, not all of whom were pro-Soviet, or support to Jihadi Islamism itself, were all because that is an extension of "western culture"? Look at the volumes that compare the different "social formations" and 'cultures" in India - tomes vomited out tby the "west" - and you still don't see the admiration for the violent "Islamic" culture and its "superiority" compared to the "pagan" and "militarily" useless "Hindu"? Even though they faced their strongest military opposition from the "non-Muslim"?

Anyway, as usual, this will again go OT!

For Indian subcontinent, it is better to try and understand that trying to find each and every justification in "realpolitik" and quantifiable variables like "economic indicators" does not give the entire picture. It is ideology and culture which determine values which determine needs which determine market demands for more specialized goods once "basic" biological needs are satisfied. Erasing cultural obsessions from considerations removes an important if not only - driving factor in understanding long term behaviour as nations.

The west will continue to support Jihadi Islam against India, given all other factors equal, simply because it admires and understands the sadism and ruthlessness involved in the ideology much better than the more restrained and "mysterious" attitude of Indian culture. Situation can only change, if some other factor overwhelmingly compensates for this leaning - for example "a bribe" of "cost effectiveness" and "profits" to be made from dissolving POWI.

[brihaspati]

Pulikeshi ji,
I have no issues with your "religion/revenge" point except the fact that it may not be very easy to prove that "personal motivations" are not hidden behind formal "real politik or economic interests onlee". We cannot rule out the effect individual leaders or groups have in shaping national efforts towards objectives. Can we entirely rule out personal and hidden factors influencing how those efforts are shaped and represented to the outside world! Surely, the foundation politics of the Indian Republic show the effects "individual upbringing", biases, follies and obsessions have had on the destiny of India! Surely we know how militray action could be easily comprehended for Hyderabad and J&K but none whatsoever for Bengal or Punjab. It was unthinkable for some brilliant luminosities of India that "Kashmir" would be "lost" - but apparently not so unthinkable that a similarly "Muslim majority" area like western Punjab or Eastern Bengal would be "lost"!

Economic and "realpolitik" reasons are sometimes overtly used as an excuse and cover to enhance personal objectives - that is the "reality" of "politics".

[Carl_T]

Is the "professional historian's" habit of selective diting so infectious nowadays? My full comment was "not only war-like, but also ruthless and sadistic" - which has an entirely

Getting touchy are we? I missed writing the "also" but your post is right there unchanged.

What are the roots of the modern European monarchies? All are derived from Germanic hordes. Do you remember anything you have read about their early foundations and careers? Surely you duly noted the fondness for the "bloody eagle" or "Prima Nocta"? And how, even now modern "professional historians" try to whitewash all that posing "economic motivations onlee". Oh yeah, the Nordics could not eat and light home fires if they did not get the fair right to loot, rape, and murder! Who are the "greats" of "western culture" - Caesar - the "bald whoremonger" (fond nickname by his own soldiers), Octavius, Vespasian, Constantine, Carolus Magnus, Willelmus Ego ********. Even Alexander the Great,

Now I was referring to modern scenarios, but since you brought it up - as I stated, they all are "imagined" cultural cousins!

So its support of the South American military juntas and dictatorships were because they represented an extension of "western culture"? The societies supporting Pinochet, Somoza, et al were extensions of "western values"? So the support extended to Wahabis or Baathists as against Arab world moderates and socialists, not all of whom were pro-Soviet, or support to Jihadi Islamism itself, were all because that is an extension of "western culture"?

Ah..but there is a difference between support due to sentimental and cultural reasons and support in order to further a strategic cause.

South American military juntas along with Wahhabis and Baathists and Mujahideen were selected for support due to strategic reasons, not because the West secretly looooooves Osama and Saddam and Pinochet. The same goes for the WWII partnership with the Soviets. The western media has never tried to whip up support for Saddam Hussein or Pinochet. Now if you compare that to how the media has historically treated Israel, Tibet, South Korea, ethnic Ukrainians, Bosniaks, all of whom are either "imagined cousins" in the case of Israel and Korea or "victims" in the case of Tibetans or Bosniaks.

[brihaspati]

Taiwanese - founded by Chiang Kai Shek, famous for his genocides and massacres, or making public torture and execution a gruesome spectacle. USA consistently supported him even when he was losing battles and wars against the Japs. He was supported over and above more moderate leadership.
And Pinochet or Somoza not praised or raised to the skies! You must have come after the 80's into the world. Saddam not a darling! Look up Saddams early career with his "uncle" and whom he opposed. West chose Saddam.

Of course lots of tears shed for Tibetans. But Tibetans were not "sadistic enough". So no concrete help given. Compared to that the Bosnian Muslims were more "energetic" - the earlier Jihadism and declared aims of Islamic ambitions are typically suppressed nowadays. The Bosnian Muslims also have quite a historical reputation in the area - also suppressed. But coincides with the eventual support of them by the "west".

[Pulikeshi]

Pulikeshi ji,
Economic and "realpolitik" reasons are sometimes overtly used as an excuse and cover to enhance personal objectives - that is the "reality" of "politics".

If realism is the true face, then idealism is the mask. (it is my original as far as I know)
Only a fool gets that order wrong!

Economics (household management in ancient Greek) was abhorred by Ludwig Von Mises and he hence preferred the term praxeology.
Anyway, my point is that in its general form Economics is really Political-Economics.
There is no such thing by itself as Economics!

That said, since it is really Political-Economics, it is as always whats in it for me!

[Pratyush]

Pratyush, the point is that - revenge is personal, geo-politics is goal and interest oriented.
In geo-politics one can make affiliations with even the worst rogue, if it furthers one's interest or goals.

India, is the manager of the Indian sub-continent and beyond (not South Asia, I do not know where that is...).
It is India's job to ensure peace and stability in her Region of Interest.
If Pakistan as an entity furthers this goal, then it has a right to exist.
I think we know the answer: If not, we need to remove its reason to exist systematically.

QED

Aha........ Pax Indica,

The answer is very simple to me. Pakistan doesn't further this goal. It is the single largest obstruction to towards the achievement of our goals. That state or as one of the elders called it a consortium of anti Indian interests, has to go.

I have been trying to look at it in a way where India has to pay the least cost while achieving the destruction of Pakistan. And how to define this cost for us.

This has been my constant refrain on this subject in different threads. And I don't have an answer at this point in time. Only the question.

Ps I would like to suggest a replacement of the Indian sub-continent with Greater India.

[Sanku]

Hi,

Religion (with a capital R) is one more tool in the toolbox.
Please do not confuse that as a goal or interest of a state, especially a secular democracy.

Was that to me? Yes on one level I agree, on another I disagree, if you have been following me for last 10 years you would understand.

Jokes apart (I loved what that post of Acharya BTW) -- religion (with a small r) is often the factor in deciding what the goals or the intrests of the state are. (Not Religion with capital R)

It provides, why we do this, in so called secularism, the word religion is replaced with world-view, moderately enlightened self interest and other such PC speak, in a effort to effect a break between Religion and religion.

I prefer to ignore the spin.

[brihaspati]

Pulikeshi ji, at the risk of being dubbed otherwise, I would rather see "personal ideals" as the real face with, "realism" as the mask. "Idealism" on the other hand is self-restrictive. Idealism becomes a mask only when it helps not to do something. Where personal "ideals" require not to take action, the restraints of "idealism" can come in handy! Surely Indian leadership has provided many examples?

The so-called temporary relief provided to the Andhra government an opportunity to make permanent some of the most dangerous trends in Indian rashtra. 4% reservations for Muslims in jobs and education has been allowed to go ahead for the moment by the Supreme Court. In spite of the right noises made in the released portion of their ruling, [discourage use of religious categories but go for non-religious uniform reservations based on "backwardness"].

But by Indian experience, and in fact in any multiparty democracy, once any cultural identity is given a privilege by law that allows them to have a bigger share of the resources of the whole nation compared to their contribution, allows them to sustain lower levels of skills and efforts and still gain greater consumption levels - that privilege can never again be taken away. Parties not in power will be eager tos upport making such prvileges permanent in return for electoral support.

Are we not moving towards a separate state within a state for Islam? Allowing separate laws, reservations based on religious identity in "Kashmir" has led to the current situation where they want autonomy and complete erasure of any non-Islamic traces from their territory. We are already guaranteeing separate Sharia based laws, increasing levels of "fatwas", demands for gagging and banning critical or alternative voices, and now finally religion based reservation in states resources. Any such advantage gives incentives for increasing the numerical strength of the Islamic identity, and even conversions. Already, even with a supposed minuscule "minority", many things cannot even be mentioned for fear of hurting "sentiments" and bringing on "law and order problems" created by this unpredictably volatile ideology. So minority is not really a minority in terms of imapct and influence - as it can hold entire rashtryia administrations to ransom by holding the threat of "getting hurt" and "creating law and order problems".

What are the characteristics of a modern rashtra? It has its own code of law, it has a system of control over its own population through its own selected/elected/traditionally derived leadership who have the right to create laws and administer them, it can control its own finance and regulate its own economy to guarantee benefits for its populations, it can have independent foreign policy, a well-defined territoiry within which it has acknowledged primacy and concentration of population, an independent structure of defence against what it considers "outsiders".

In India, Muslims have at least one aspect of the law under their own code, it has recognized Muslim bodies as leadership who have the right to exercise jurisprudence and create modify, interpret laws and impose their decisions through fatwas whicha re never challenged, waqaf and other subsystems of economic and financial control exist with such economies being totally exempt form Indian rashtryia intervention. To this is now going to be added "reservations" or guaranteed share of Indian productivity without any return obligation to contribute - a kind of modern zazyia - living off the products of labour of non-Muslims. Muslims have openly declared their primacy of interest and continued obsession with creating pressure on the Indian rashtra to satisfy their own foriegn policy objectives like the Palestine cause regardless of Indian overall strategic interests [ I have already quoted one such expression on the forum]. There alreaduy have been expression of interest from so-called liberal voices of IM like M.J. Akbar about creating a separate Harit Pradesh to protect and enhance "Muslim interests". The only thing that remains is a separate set up for defence. I am not sure that given all the other aspects in place - such a setup is infeasible to build up. Both ends of then Pakistan at the moment of Partition showed that such a transition towards active militant extraction of territory and form a rashtra - can be quite quick in Muslim dominated regions.

Recent riots in Bareilly, or outpouring of "outrage" against "Tasleema Nasreen" in Karnataka, can perhaps indicate a long term planned move by the core of Islamist leadership towards this final piece of the jigsaw to form an independent or semi-independent Muslim rashtra in the North and East. In the beginning, such acts can be passd off as sporadic, and at most "externally soucred" terrorist outfit provoked. This will be done as longa s they fail. Once a sustainable territorial entity can be obtained based on successful terror/riots/violence/ethnic cleansing of non-Muslims all that sporadic/spontaneous/isolated/terrorist inspired violence will be seen to be part of a long term project of establishing new Islamic rashtras on the subcontinent.

[brihaspati]

Once declared even as an interim order, political forces will ensure that it can never be rolled back. Considerations of deterioration of law and order can have subtle and indirect effects at all levels of decision making processes. Next in line will be EJ's demanding reservations. Andhra is a good test-case to test the waters from the usual suspects, it seems.

added later : D.Roy ji - this was in response to your post which appears to have vanished. Hopefully SC bench will preserve the wisdom and look for long term effects and consequences.

[RamaY]

Once declared even as an interim order, political forces will ensure that it can never be rolled back. Considerations of deterioration of law and order can have subtle and indirect effects at all levels of decision making processes. Next in line will be EJ's demanding reservations. Andhra is a good test-case to test the waters from the usual suspects, it seems.

added later : D.Roy ji - this was in response to your post which appears to have vanished. Hopefully SC bench will preserve the wisdom and look for long term effects and consequences.

Brihaspati-ji, One reason could be that the Muslim + Christian population in AP reached the magical 15%; and the power is in the hands of closet EJs.

[svinayak]

Once declared even as an interim order, political forces will ensure that it can never be rolled back. Considerations of deterioration of law and order can have subtle and indirect effects at all levels of decision making processes. Next in line will be EJ's demanding reservations. Andhra is a good test-case to test the waters from the usual suspects, it seems.

added later : D.Roy ji - this was in response to your post which appears to have vanished. Hopefully SC bench will preserve the wisdom and look for long term effects and consequences.

Brihaspati-ji, One reason could be that the Muslim + Christian population in AP reached the magical 15%; and the power is in the hands of closet EJs.

Thay are doing social engineering in AP using the sociology studies in the US universities. There are lot of research papers being done in the western universities on identity politics and similar topics. All of them are EJ topics on liberation theology.
Outside news is only about dalit representation and aspiration of regions such as Telengana.
Violence is another tool and is being sponsored by groups which have links to global organization. Nobody gets a clue on who is driving all these movements. Threat of violence and actual violence and coertion is being used to study the effects of change in social movement and social order.

Indians have become tools and laboratory of experimentation in the universities in the west. Unless Indian become aware of these Indians will continue to be slaves.

[Abhi_G]

^^^^

In reference to Acharya's comment on "social engineering"......

http://www.thaindian.com/newsportal/unc ... 96175.html

Boston University likely to open campus in India

New Delhi, Dec 29 (IANS) One of the prominent varsities in the US, the Boston University, is likely to open a campus in India. Its president is visiting New Delhi in January for the purpose.
Varsity president Robert A. Brown is expected to meet Human Resource Development Minister Kapil Sibal and attend a seminar on de-regulating Indian education Jan 9.

The development took place after Sibal toured the university in October and had a discussion with Brown about an Indian campus of Boston University.

“Minister Sibal’s visit was a wonderful opportunity to hear first hand about the opportunities and challenges for higher education in India and to brief the minister and his delegation on Boston University programmes in research and education,” Brown has been quoted as saying in his campus magazine.

[Masaru]

SC allows quota for Muslims in AP

The self congratulatory gloating in the comments section is a pointer to the slippery slope nature of these measures.

Given the history of these measures SC should have been extremely careful before legitimizing
such tendencies. Nest will be the WB case with the %age hiked to 10% and will be soon replicated across
India.

[Pulikeshi]

Pulikeshi ji, at the risk of being dubbed otherwise, I would rather see "personal ideals" as the real face with, "realism" as the mask. "Idealism" on the other hand is self-restrictive. Idealism becomes a mask only when it helps not to do something. Where personal "ideals" require not to take action, the restraints of "idealism" can come in handy! Surely Indian leadership has provided many examples?

I do not know if you have participated in the discussion on Mearsheimer, Morganthau and others at BRF many eons ago.
It would be interesting to note that individuals in a state come together to play the role of the virtual person that represents the state.
Unless you are talking monarchy, dictatorships, etc.

This may hurt the head...
But, in managing complex activities - in what it called social-networks (not Facebook, Twitter kind per se)
making realism the mask will buy you nothing in the short term.
Unless it is the ideal of a group of people to pursue realism.
Change comes from the idealist, but is guided by the folks worrying about realism.
Call me cynical

[svinayak]

I do not know if you have participated in the discussion on Mearsheimer, Morganthau and others at BRF many eons ago.
It would be interesting to note that individuals in a state come together to play the role of the virtual person that represents the state.
Unless you are talking monarchy, dictatorships, etc.

National interest can be "created" from the citizens of the country just like personal interest of an individual.

This may hurt the head...
But, in managing complex activities - in what it called social-networks (not Facebook, Twitter kind per se)
making realism the mask will buy you nothing in the short term.
Unless it is the ideal of a group of people to pursue realism.
Change comes from the idealist, but is guided by the folks worrying about realism.
Call me cynical

Lot of this has to do with image creation.

[brihaspati]

Pulikeshi wrote
I do not know if you have participated in the discussion on Mearsheimer, Morganthau and others at BRF many eons ago.

Nah! Probably long before I was born into BR! Wish I was present though. Immensely enjoyed if Maulanas were tearing them apart [ideologically I mean].

It would be interesting to note that individuals in a state come together to play the role of the virtual person that represents the state.
Unless you are talking monarchy, dictatorships, etc.

I think, the state as a person is a model taken to simplify discussions. No "state" is a monolithic/homogeneous entity. A model is a simplification that is formed on the minimum complexity that is sufficient to explain all behaviour. Different subgroups dominating a "state" can converge in certain aspects and in that aspect it is correct to treat the "state" as a person. In other aspects a state may show up heterogeneity.

This may hurt the head...
But, in managing complex activities - in what it called social-networks (not Facebook, Twitter kind per se)
making realism the mask will buy you nothing in the short term.
Unless it is the ideal of a group of people to pursue realism.
Change comes from the idealist, but is guided by the folks worrying about realism.
Call me cynical

There are always struggles between idealists and "pragmatists". A pragmatist often plays the role of a conservative or status-quoist. Idealists often play the role of "radicals". For most parts of civilizational development pragmatists outnumber idealists. The reason is simple - humans are in general risk-avoiders. Idealists are trying to change paradigms which may or may not be costly and potentially risky. The problem comes when because the pragmatists dominate the scenario, necessary and vital changes required or better methods of doing things than the status quo, will be vehemently resisted. Idealists manage to change paradigms only when, the methods of old ways of doing "business" insisted upon by "pragmatists" begin to fail.

Once the idealist's core ideas succeed, the new set of pragmatists generated from that upheaval will hold on to the new paradigm until the next radical change is needed.

Apply this to India. In all aspects of "state" we saw a radical shift under PVNSR. Was he an "idealist"? Question to ponder However, real idealist shifts are porobably yet to happen. We will see reflection of the process in changes about long-term goal about POWI, power projection, internal reform from the policies of protecting and enhancing fragmentation, and changes in military doctrine. No sign yet. So pragamtists are strong at present. Only when their policies lead to retreat and roll-back will the country be ready for paradigm change.

[ramana]

SC allows quota for Muslims in AP

The self congratulatory gloating in the comments section is a pointer to the slippery slope nature of these measures.

Given the history of these measures SC should have been extremely careful before legitimizing
such tendencies. Nest will be the WB case with the %age hiked to 10% and will be soon replicated across
India.

Upperclass Indian Muslims have a path for achieving success in India. Its the underclass that needs an incentive. If they can get educated and achieve success they can emulate the upper class. So reservations are a way to provide a soar path for a portion of the Indian Muslims who choose to study. I also want an overarching women's right to not be defrauded with regard to property rights irrespective of their religion. Quite often husbands stake ad lose family property in businesses often without consent of wives.

Huma if you reading this let me know!

[JwalaMukhi]

Thay are doing social engineering in AP using the sociology studies in the US universities. There are lot of research papers being done in the western universities on identity politics and similar topics.
Outside news is only about dalit representation and aspiration of regions such as Telengana.
Indians have become tools and laboratory of experimentation in the universities in the west. Unless Indian become aware of these Indians will continue to be slaves.

Here is one link to a center that is being run by Pitamah K.Subrhamanyam's son Prof. Sri.Sanjay Subrhamanyam. Through and through south asianitis. Some time back the center had link to their publications, which was predominantly all the topics that Acharaya lists in the above post.
The publications were mediocre but good at collecting data and were spinning it as needed.
http://www.international.ucla.edu/south ... ntid=27999
Anyways, one could guess the quality of students being sought through this
http://www.international.ucla.edu/southasia/study/

To enter the minor, students must (1) be in good academic standing with a 2.0 grade-point average or better

[brihaspati]

ramana ji,
it is one thing to say that some degree of positive discrimination is necessary in any society to allow sufficient opportunities for any citizen who has somehow been disadvantaged because of immediate past circumstances, so that he/she can improve her conditions and become better contributors to society also. Most will not disagree with this. It also makes sense to do so for the long run progress of the entire society itself.

Problem starts when you make this conditional on human-created cultural identities. If you reserve based on a "religious" identity, you are actually automatically endorsing all the baggage that comes with that identity. This becomes a confirmation to strengthen any exclusive claims that the particular identity has. It also automatically strengthens any other aspect of that identity that can actually have a negative influence on normal progress for that subgroup. Studies show that population growth rate, women's fertility rate for this particular belief--system in India, remain consistently higher at all levels of education and economic background from corresponding levels in other groups. So education and economic background will not be a factor in controlling demographic factors here, which in turn has a negative impact on skills, educational and economic achievement. By reserving on the basis of this identity, we will be subsidizing such tendencies. Is that good for the long run prospects of the society?

I do support measures to protect "family" property rights in favour of women. For I believe, in an indirect way it will lead to decrease in marriages and consequent decrease in population growth. Increasingly, the state will have to take over the role of the "father" and that has interesting consequences for society in general. This is a phenomenon that long started to affect "western societies". People are very quick in coming to realize that they need to defend ownership of what they have produced by their own efforts. In most cases, where "property" really is an issue - it is a matter of the elite, propertied classes - whose women rarely are allowed/take active role in creating such property or wealth. If women are automatically given such rights without any consequent prerequisites to create wealth and be equal contributors, men will tend not to go for such marital partnerships, and the greatest factor in early or any marriages in India - immense social and kinship pressure will reduce. The families of the man will themselves not want to relinquish what they see as their own creation. This is good for the long term for Indian society as it stands!

[Masaru]

Upperclass Indian Muslims have a path for achieving success in India. Its the underclass that needs an incentive. If they can get educated and achieve success they can emulate the upper class. So reservations are a way to provide a soar path for a portion of the Indian Muslims who choose to study.

As always the intentions as B-san mentioned above are noble, the devil remains in the way these measures get implemented and interpreted as precedence for further concessions down the road. Any such measure is very very hard to over turn once a vocal violent vested interest is formed.

Couple of data points in that direction

here and here.

“It’s like winning a battle. But, the Muslims are yet to win the war. : Asaduddin Owaisi, an MP representing Majlis-e-Ittehadul Muslimeen (MIM), said.

A similar reservation should be provided to Muslim women as part of the Women’s Reservation Bill, he said.{Soon there will full fledged separate electorate system like Jinna wanted}

In Lucknow, ‘naib imam’ and member, All India Muslim Personal Law Board, Maulana Khalid Rasheed Firangi Mahali, said: “Four per cent reservation is too less. It should be extended to the whole community and not for certain castes. Islam does not recognise the caste system.”{But still the backward classification within the community and the resultant benefits are more than welcome!}
.

Vahanvati sought to clear the apprehension that only Muslims would be benefited since the Act specifically excluded 10 categories of Muslims from the ambit of reservation. At the same time, he pointed out the example of Kerala and Karnataka where Muslim community as a whole was considered as a backward class.

Minority as well as SCs/STs and landless poor will be automatically included in the Below Poverty Line list to be prepared after a census by the Union Rural Development Ministry. More than anything, Ministry insiders feel, the move will also help the Government to send a ‘message’ to the Muslims who have been feeling that their political space has been shrunk due to the women’s reservation Bill .

Looking from a historical context barely 60 years after a partition partly due to opposition to separate electorate system Indian ruling class has arrived at a consensus in protecting and promoting 'political space' for a certain 'minority' community. The partition itself happened barely (IIRC) 40 years after the first such proposal was mooted for administrative efficiency by the British. So the extrapolation from this in to future 50/100 years out is definitely not very sanguine.

[Carl_T]

To enter the minor, students must (1) be in good academic standing with a 2.0 grade-point average or better

That's just to get the minor at undergraduate level. 2.0 GPA is standard minimum for any major.

[Bharath.Subramanyam]

.

Will this happen?

http://www.dnaindia.com/money/report_a- ... na_1363881

If it happens then, can this economic problem creat the social unrest & force regime? Can economic & social problems create a situation in China where its national unity is threatened?

Then as Bharat Verma says, will PLA attack India to divert the attention and to create a outlet for rage & issues?

[brihaspati]

For PRC, the crucial factor is how if and any faction within the PLA turns against the existing regime. Historically, and it is also easy to see why it holds into the modern age, - overthrow of the regime always required three crucial elements. Excessive extraction of surplus from the peasants by the rulers and peasant uprising or disenchantment with the sons and daughters of heaven, combination of this disenchantment with radical protest groups that also have sufficient military experience, catalysis by "intellectuals".

Hence in the modern period, role of PLA factions will be crucial. If one of them turns against the ruling dispensation - the process will first turn inwards rather than outwards. Even if external "devil" is propped up, it will be used by one faction against the other - much more than any real war against the "foreign devil".

The PRC is essentially going into dynastic mode - with many of the new leadership being foisted to take over being the second generations of previous luminaries [as in every communist structure - luminaries could also have suffered disastrous eclipses from tiem to time, but that does not disqualify them, in fact sometimes favours their next generation].

Problem with such a dynastic takeover is that, one of them may decided to do a Gorbachov, [to take revenge on what happened to his dad or grandpa or mom] while if others persist in maintaining the corruption and inequality or not allowing liberal democracy, they will be violently overthrown. Either way, that internal rupture and sibling-rivalry is the key. Not necessarily the social discontent. Intellectuals have already done their bit, and radicals are looming below the surface -submarine like. The internal rivalry within PLA and the extended CPC structure now needs to become acute. That will lead to internal cleaning operations first when PRC will not be interested in outside world manipulation that much.

[brihaspati]

Obama's visit is a pointer to the dilemmas of the US position in AFG now. It should be quite clear now, that what I have tried to say repeatedly about the inevitability of withdrawal of US+UK forces given their faulty undertsanding of jihad - gives some obviously dangerous outcomes for India.

I did raise the issue of allying with the NA. But I think the time is fast running out for that. For the northerners, and the Tajiks, Russia would be a much better ally - without fetters of appeasing Islamist interests and powers that hobbles India. In fact given the recent spate of love kisses that have gone on between GOI and diehard Islamist powers like KSA or other Gulf countries , India's actual role in any conflict in AFG will be doubtful and dubious. India is forever going to be bothered by internal electoral considerations [whether they are justified or not is a different issue - but electoral politics demands preservation and protection of Islamist identities] to take any clear and concrete hostile action against jihadis of any shape and colour - including the Taleban. This does not make for good qualifications as an ally for any internal forces in AFG.

USA is fighting desperately to come to an understanding with Islamist expansion plans, and it is doing the same mistakes that India has done - appeasing. This will lead to incraesing pressure on Israel to go soft and concede, and in fact pressure on all countries now forced this way or the other to float along with the USA - to concede as mucha s feasible to the Jihadis.

India will have to retreat from AFG under current situation. Its only hope lies in some degree of coordination with Russia. But Indian influence in AFG will soon be reduced and erased. It will be part of the comprehensive package of concessions that will gradually be unveiled underneath all the dramatic speeches of "defeating AA" and "thwarting the Taleban" etc.

However, Indian electorate will not see the writing in the wall, until the the new power structure in AFG manifests fully. Pakistan will next head for an Islamic Emirate - not first in name, but gradually - after the PA and the new Talebs come to an understanding [basically the old PA and new PA or the regulars and the irregulars]. POWI and POGWI is going to fall definitely. But not in the direction many hope for here. Not disintegration, not subnational dismemberment. It will be a form of Taleban as part of an integrated force with PA.

[Klaus]

Problem with such a dynastic takeover is that, one of them may decided to do a Gorbachov, [to take revenge on what happened to his dad or grandpa or mom] while if others persist in maintaining the corruption and inequality or not allowing liberal democracy, they will be violently overthrown. Either way, that internal rupture and sibling-rivalry is the key. Not necessarily the social discontent. Intellectuals have already done their bit, and radicals are looming below the surface -submarine like. The internal rivalry within PLA and the extended CPC structure now needs to become acute. That will lead to internal cleaning operations first when PRC will not be interested in outside world manipulation that much.

Does this mean that the PLA's hold in border areas near Krgyztan, Tajikistan and Central Asia (their "expansionist" manifest destiny) would weaken? Past ruling dynasties in China have always grown and shrunk in terms of geographical area over a period of 80-100 years on average, would that statistic be applicable here? I guess you are talking of the 2012-2013 timeframe here.

Also, one thing to note is that the Chinese economy is in tinterhooks at this point (as many learned maulanas in the T-E forums have stated), so it looks pretty obvious that China would stand on political edge? However, it would be able to ascribe a linear relationship between economical woes and political ones, especially in the real and dynamic world, so what if they happen together (a top level assasination perhaps being the trigger?)

[Pranav]

Continuing discussion from Afghanistan thread:

Here is a possible solution to the mess that might satisfy both the Afghans and Americans:

* Talibs reconcile with Karzai and the US, and accept long-term presence of some US troops, as in Japan or South Korea.

* An independent Balochistan for access to Afghanistan

* Afghans and Balochis play ball with the US with respect to pipelines and minerals

* As a corollary, the US totally abandons the illegitimate and artificial state of Pak, leading to its demise due to economic reasons and internal strife.

* Area controlled by the Pakjabi military-jihadist elites dissolves into 6 or 7 independent nations, most of which enter into a South Asian Economic Union.

But all this first requires the US to abandon the long-standing policy of propping up the Paks to put a leash on India. That wrong policy is keeping the whole region unsettled.

One thing that's wrong with this picture is that one can replace "Balochistan" by "Pakistan" and western elites can still get their desires fulfilled. With the added bonus of preserving Pak as an entity to keep India down.

This may indeed be the route that the US has chosen to go -

In the April 2010 edition of The Atlantic magazine, Maj-Gen Michael Flynn, director of intelligence, US Central command, was quoted as saying that militant leaders Jalaluddin Haqqani and Gulbuddin Hekmatyar were both “absolutely salvageable”.

http://www.dawn.com/wps/wcm/connect/daw ... ion-us-140

Recall the moves by the ISI and CIA to block Karzai's efforts to reach a reconciliation with some elements of the Taliban, by arresting Mullah Barader. This is what Karzai had to say about it:

Some prominent Afghans say that Mr. Karzai now tells associates that the Americans’ goal here is not to build an independent and peaceful Afghanistan, but to exercise their power.

In January, Mr. Karzai invited about two dozen prominent Afghan media and business figures to a lunch at the palace. At the lunch, he expressed a deep cynicism about America’s motives, and of the burden he bears in trying to keep the United States at bay.

“He has developed a complete theory of American power,” said an Afghan who attended the lunch and who spoke on the condition of anonymity for fear of retribution. “He believes that America is trying to dominate the region, and that he is the only one who can stand up to them.”

Mr. Karzai said that, left alone, he could strike a deal with the Taliban, but that the United States refuses to allow him. The American goal, he said, was to keep the Afghan conflict going, and thereby allow American troops to stay in the country.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/30/world ... l?ref=asia

So it appears that the US is sabotaging any attempts at peace except on terms acceptable to the ISI and itself. Mullah Barader was taken down, but Haqqani, the ISI poodle, who is hated by ordinary Afghans, is "absolutely salvagable".

The main problem is that the US sees no costs associated with its anti-India policies. Big purchases by India of nuclear reactors and trojan-infested defense equipment will only increase US influence on India rather than vice-versa.

The least any patriotic Indian government would do is to stop financing US efforts to destroy India. However Indian leadership may be under their own compulsions.

[Neshant]

Mr. Karzai said that, left alone, he could strike a deal with the Taliban, but that the United States refuses to allow him.

I'm pretty sure its just the opposite.

US wants to strike a deal with the Taliban so it can scale down in Afg. No way they want to keep a war costing tens of billions going indefinately.

[Pranav]

Mr. Karzai said that, left alone, he could strike a deal with the Taliban, but that the United States refuses to allow him.

I'm pretty sure its just the opposite.

US wants to strike a deal with the Taliban so it can scale down in Afg. No way they want to keep a war costing tens of billions going indefinately.

US wants a deal, but with the right kind of Taliban, who will be acceptable to the ISI. That is why the Karzai-Barader talks were sabotaged by the ISI and the CIA, while Haqqani is considered to be "absolutely salvagable".

[brihaspati]

Klaus wrote
Does this mean that the PLA's hold in border areas near Krgyztan, Tajikistan and Central Asia (their "expansionist" manifest destiny) would weaken? Past ruling dynasties in China have always grown and shrunk in terms of geographical area over a period of 80-100 years on average, would that statistic be applicable here? I guess you are talking of the 2012-2013 timeframe here.

It is indeed important to consider the contiguous areas of China into CAR as a potentially centrifugal force. Here three forces are competing subtly againsy PRC - USA, Russia, and Islamist groupings including both the one around Iran and the other around the KSA-POWI axis. The Chinese plains powers always fell before "north+western" "barbarians" and retreated into the plains. This time around, only the Islamists in CAR have the expansionist motivation to play the "barbarian" - others are restrained because of their own obligations and political culture. I am not so sure about the 2012 point. It is true that it can be driven by a so-called self-fulfilling prohecy route - if a lot of key decision makers themselves are deluded about a particular point of time, they will act out of impulse and actually precipitate a crisis.

Very few proper underclass uprising in China have actually changed regimes - in fact probably only two. The last one being the one taken over by the CPC to come to power. Certain crucial factors have to come together for such a thing to succeed. So it has to be more an internal feud within the ruling elite that has to change regimes - a modern "palace intrigue". But it does not have to go to the extent of an assassination. On the other hand it cannot succeed unless a faction of the PLA supports it. In fact the old formula of "rebellious mandarins=dissident intellectuals/activists" + "idealist military leaders= anti-corruption PLA factions" need to act together against "emperor+eunuchs = CPC top brass" + "corrupt mandarin around the emperor=corrupt CPC party bosses" to make such regime changes possible. The neutrality of the "peasants=common Chinese" can only be secured [or even pro-change] if more time is allowed for generational replacement under existing conditions of widening inequality and intrusion of more explicit capitalist forms. This may need more that 2012.

Also, one thing to note is that the Chinese economy is in tinterhooks at this point (as many learned maulanas in the T-E forums have stated), so it looks pretty obvious that China would stand on political edge? However, it would be able to ascribe a linear relationship between economical woes and political ones, especially in the real and dynamic world, so what if they happen together (a top level assasination perhaps being the trigger?)

Even if the PRC economy is on tenterhooks - it has too great a penetration into the global capitalist system for the USA or the west to allow it to collapse entirely. The financial repercussions back on their asset-vanished wastelands would be apocalyptic.

[brihaspati]

Pranav wrote
US wants to strike a deal with the Taliban so it can scale down in Afg. No way they want to keep a war costing tens of billions going indefinately.

US wants a deal, but with the right kind of Taliban, who will be acceptable to the ISI. That is why the Karzai-Barader talks were sabotaged by the ISI and the CIA, while Haqqani is considered to be "absolutely salvagable".

For the current economic crisis to be survived in the way USA wants, it needs two crucial economic entities to be on board - Gulf-centric hydrocarbon, and "basic item production" through low cost industrial production as in China. It also needs the East-west land and sea trade-routes to remain open. The Gulf-centric hydrocarbon gives more leverage to KSA like entities and is probably already being reflected in traditional KSA-Sunni-Wahabi obsessions : force Israelis to retreat and contract, and protect and expand Sunni-Arab influence along from POWI and AFG to contain Iran. Chinese concerns will also be reflected in US policies. The need to keep trade routes open also needs dominance in North Africa, and eastern Mediterranean [ and hence a peculiar contradictory situtaion in trying to keep both Israeli and KSA interests].

Overall, this actually means serving POWI interests and Chinese interests - both acting against India.

[Brad Goodman]

.

Will this happen?

http://www.dnaindia.com/money/report_a- ... na_1363881

If it happens then, can this economic problem creat the social unrest & force regime? Can economic & social problems create a situation in China where its national unity is threatened?

Then as Bharat Verma says, will PLA attack India to divert the attention and to create a outlet for rage & issues?

I am not sure I really agree with this hypothesis. If I were PRC and I want to distract people's attention. I need a quick victory to show. Why will I pick the biggest bully in my neighbourhood to make a tamasha. I can pick the weakest guy (country) beat it in few days or a week declare victory sing victory songs and superiority of han race and calm people down.

[brihaspati]

Why does KSA need to "look to the East"? The following article finds KSA's strategy "reasonable", lists all the danger signals for India, and still fails to see the ludicrousness of a GOI request for KSA to become a mediator/influence on POGWI.

http://geopolitics.world-citizenship.org/wp-archive/238

The official visit of King Abdullah bin Abdul Aziz to New Delhi in January 2006, where he was entertained as the guest of honour on India’s Republic Day, saw the signing of Delhi Declaration in which, among other things, the Saudi monarch recognized the threat of terrorism to peace and stability in the region.

9/11 indirectly brought US pressure on Riyadh when it was found that some religious extremist organizations functioning in different parts of the world received cash doles from the gulf kingdom where they had their premiers. The ar-Rabita had patronized organizations and institutions that now looked beyond the role played by the mujahideen. The dream of world Islamic caliphate began haunting these premiers. Thus as the US brought pressures on Riyadh to choke the funding sources of terrorist groups, freeze their deposits and curtail their activities and operations, the monarchy thought that time was ripe to wriggle out of Western and American monopolizing grip and seek alternative economic and commercial space. Hence came to fore the ‘Look East’ strategy.

It was in pursuance of this strategy that King Abdullah bin Abdul Aziz had conducted a tour of four South East Asian countries including China and India in 2006. Finding economic and commercial depth for his country eastward was the main purpose of the visit. And the visit of Indian prime minister to Riyadh on 27 February 2010 in response has to be understood in the light of this historical background.

As a mark of goodwill gesture, when New Delhi assured Riyadh that it seriously wanted normalization of relations with Pakistan and addressing grievances of people in Kashmir, Riyadh indicated its willingness to support India’s request for observer status in the OIC. India had first tried with Iran but finding Teheran very belligerent towards the US, she changed stance.

Undoubtedly energy is the driving force behind Indo-Saudi friendly relations. India is the fourth largest recipient of Saudi crud oil. It is expected that in next twenty years crude imports from Saudi will double. Export of Saudi crude oil to India, for which the Saudis made a commitment of uninterrupted supply, is the jugular vein of Indo-Saudi trade relationship. When India voted against Iran’s nuclear programme in IAEA, Tehran reneged on its oil commitments to India. But the Saudis proved dependable friends.

Interestingly, Saudi oil flow to India was a mere trickle in 2006 when King Abdullah, had embarked on his landmark visit to New Delhi to launch his path-breaking “Look East” policy of engaging the powerful emerging economies of Asia in Saudi Arabia’s quest to reduce its dependence on oil through economic diversification. The visit of the Saudi monarch in 2006 had resulted in his country replacing the UAE as India’s number one crude oil resource, with exports jumping from $500 million to $23 billion in 2008. Today, Saudi Arabia is India’s fourth largest trade partner with bilateral trade being valued at over $25 billion. Indian investments in Saudi Arabia have also increased significantly. There are over 550 small and medium Indian enterprises in the Kingdom with a total value of more than $2.5 billion.

Today there are nearly 2 million Indians engaged in developmental enterprises in Saudi Arabia and they constitute the largest expatriate community. Foreign remittances amount to nearly 4 billion dollars annually. In turn, the Kingdom is the largest source of crude oil for India, meeting 20 percent of India’s oil imports.

Indian opposition raised question about the Prime Minister asking the Saudis to impress upon Pakistan that she must wind up terrorist camps on her soil working against India. Unfortunately, the deeper nuances of Prime Minister raising the issue with the Saudis have been missed. Saudi – Pak relationship is far deeper than what we know of. It is well known that proliferation of Saudi money to Indian religious schools (madrassahs) numbering anything between 8000 and 40000 has become catalyst to the growth of salafi radical movement in India. It has taken advantage of India’s liberal political environment. Deviating from its old secular and nationalist attitude, the Ahle- Hadith have pandered to salafi thought and inducted radical curricula for the inmates of the madrassahs. Liberal Saudi funding has gone to mosques, madrassahs and publishing houses promoting salafi ideology. Saudi scholarships are made available to Indian students for studying religion in Saudi institutions with outright salafi orientation. On their return these students-mullas preach the same ideology into which their indoctrination has been made. The returnees take on themselves to exploit the susceptibilities of younger generations on Indian Muslims. Transfer of Saudi money through hawala system has been found as the means of providing financial support to the radical organizations and activities without being detected by sleuths.

In this entire unhealthy and anti-national maneuvering, Pakistani ISI has been grabbing all available opportunities to destabilize relations with India and disrupt peace effort in the region. It was therefore, in fitness of things that the Prime Minister asked the Saudi monarch to draw Pakistan’s attention to the fact that continuation of anti-India terrorism in one form or the other on Pakistani soil does not help stabilize peace in the region.

If the article's claims at the beginning about the need in KSA to stop its competitor Iran from expanding its influence are true, then the further need for "expansion" by KSA into "East" becomes weak. India cannot be a potential sphere of influence for Iranians in terms of religion or Ummah, Marxists have mostly been digested by the Indian state machinery and whatever extremism remains appears to follow political necessities of central power politics of India, USSR's is no longer communist, the other commie PRC has the bitterest of competitions going on with India. So why does KSA need to befriend India according to the driving reasons stated in the article?

Is GOI hoping that mere "requests" is a diplomatic pressure using the "economic" handle on KSA to see "reason" going to work miracles? On the other hand, such a request can be interpreted by Islamists as one more concession to the theological capital of Jihad by India as having right+intention+capability to control over POWI/POGWI.

Why was not that request also about winding up of networks and sharing information about the "trainees" from India being brainwashed in KSA without any hindrance, the exact nature/flow/source of money and ideology and personnel by so-called "charities" and "cultural organizations" from KSA into India? What this dumb request means is on the one hand more power and recognition to KSA to indirectly meddle in India's internal concerns [because POWI is an internal concern of India - which POGWI has made so through the issue of "Kashmir"], and allowing the Islamist and Jihadi networks to continue to infiltrate Indian society by practising freely their radicalization programmes sourced and funded from KSA.

POWI/POGWI is formally a third country - much more direct would have been the control or expectation of control over KSA's own and homegrown radicalization/Jihadization networks! These are the masterpieces of our "state sponsored" academia in the humanities!

[D Roy]

KSA needs to diversify its economy big time and does not want to be completely beholden to the yamrikis.

As far as economic support is concerned Whatever it does not get from China it will seek from India and vice versa.

Pukistan is ultimately expendable. and it will get yamriki dole as long as it takes the yamrikis to properly settle down in Iran.

with or without dole Pukistan will soon be facing an Indian economy which is 20 times larger. After that Pukistan will become an Uttar Pradesh with an army and increasingly forced to do business with India. The only thing the Puki worries about is that economic growth rate. with each passing day resistance to India becomes futile. that is why all this bombay/shombay etc.

In another decade the Puki rentier whore will find it simpler to just accept money from India, than be part of "geopolitical" games.

And I don't think India under this dispensation or any other is ever going to leave Afghanistan.

[Atri]

The expendable Pakistan for KSA tells us many more things. One of them is that for expansion of Wahabism, Pak is of decreasing importance. With India willing, who requires Pak. Pak is required only when India is not willing.

The state of Pakistan is not of any problem. It is the ideology which led to partition that is the problem. defeating Pak, disintegrating pak is not an answer to the problem which lies in hearts. otherwise there would have been peace after 1971.

The ideology which led to partition is the real enemy of India (Nazaria-e-Pakistan). In other words, Partition was one of the acceptable solutions. Other of course being Mughal India.

[brihaspati]

One of the persistent errors that we make is the vulgar Marxist argument of "economy" as the base driving the "superstructure" of society and rashtra. From this faulty and wrong understanding of what Marx originally meant, a whole mindset has been spawned in modern Indians brought up from childhood on a constant diet of subtle pseudo-marxist cues.

We repeatedly see this line of thinking even in the most inveterate haters of Marxists per se, that economic growth alone automatically makes the rashtra/superstructure impervious to invasion/damages/destruction by powers with a less strong economy.

In India's case, Indian society and regimes fell exactly after long periods of economic stability and obvious financial accummulation. The Islamics succeeded overrunning India at a time when estimates of Indian GDP range among the highest in the world. For example the first phase of 700-1000, indicates an almost complete lack of archaeological finding of bullion based coinage of affected kingdoms - which coupled with narrative and other evidence of huge amounts of precious metal looted and shipped out from India by Islamists, shows that a huge amount of wealth was accummulated before the invasions.

Even skipping the interim periods and various estimates of high GDP's [and high share of world GDP] for various kingdoms and regimes, like Cholas or Palas, just consider the Mughal period when in spite of the various policies of the Mughals that alienated peasants from the land and had a general disastrous effect on the economy - Indian share of the world GDP was still high [ranging from 16-25%]. But it still fell to the British with a much lower share of world GDP and wealth like a house of cards.

The higher the difference in growth rates and overall accummulation rates between POWI and India, the greater is the probability of violent, overt and covert attacks into India.

One thing stands out in Indian reaction to such attacks when there is Indian prosperity - that is the "mercantile mentality". Indians with plenty of accummulation appear to have decided not to risk their apple cart by taking violent, retaliatory and counter-genocidic aggression to erase once and for all communities and ideologies that have dared to launch such attacks in teh first place. Who knows what may happen! what if the prosperous Indian gets killed and is unable to enjoy the fruits of his accummulation? So the game starts all over again!

Try to appease and buy off. Now that whets the appetite of the unproductive famished rat coming out of his desert hole! So the rat wants more - not just money but lands and women to increase numbers. Well give them a piece of territory and and some of our people to chew up! As long as I can enjoy and preserve most of my wealth! let it happen to the north - if I am in the south - or in the south if I am in the north. To other families , other regions, other dialects, any identity that I can separate myself from - even invent new distinct identities to shake off any shame of not taking action on the excuse that my identity is not being attacked! To people I held power over if it saves my skin.

The more wealth I accummulate - the more of an appeaser I will become if I am a prosperous Indian.

[brihaspati]

POWI is not expendable for KSA. For so far, KSA has not agreed to anything or shown signs of effecting any policy change that affects fundamental ambitions in POWI regimes. We should not take formal stances by KSA luminaries as reflecting any fundamental change in the core reltionship behind the KSA state - the original understanding and mutual use strategy by Saud and Wahab. This alliance of Sunni revivalism, Jihad and autocracy still continues. In spite of official claims from KSA apologists otherwise, channle 4 of UK showed an undercover sting operation among proselytizers in UK trained in KSA - that shows a consistent deceptive/"taqqyia" approach in consolidating the jihadi mentality among Muslim populations living in seas of non-Muslims.

If GOI wants to play this game knowing all the undercurrents - then they should not have made any requests about influencing POWI. Dealing with POWI should havebeen kept firmly as an Indian only business. On the other hand, it would have shown some sign of real maturity if KSA was requested to withdraw support to its various organizations that are carrying out their Islamization programmes with funds sourced from KSA.

[D Roy]

The period that you mentioned 700-1000 was also a time of incredible internecine warfare between three Indian powers ( Rashtakutas, Palas and Gurjara Pratiharas) in central and north India and the Cholas with their mighty navy were very much ascendant. what a lot of people don't know is that the Palas were not defeated by muslims/ senas / but by a chola invasion fleet that came up the bay of bengal.

We were divided and all these kingdoms had their own dynamic. even then the arabs did not make it beyond sindh. It was the converts from transoxania with turkic blood who started making the big inroads first with the Ghaznavids and then the Ghurids. And the sultanate and its allies would not have made it into Bengal if the Palas had not been vanquished by the Chola navy.

WE WERE DIVIDED PERIOD!

SO the GDP figure that you talk about was not in the hands of a single entity and military expenditure was not really being directed by any of these states towards countering a single threat. On the other hand , the Republic of India is the strongest state entity to have taken root in the subcontinent since Samudragupta's time. In fact it in many ways has begun to resemble the British empire and is emerging as a net provider of security to the gulf.

I am of course skipping the mughal empire. even if we look at that , there was a time when Indian muslims used to be unabashedly welcome in the Bedouin lands on the pilgrimage to mecca because they used to line the journey with gold and silver coins. at that time the shoe was clearly on the other foot.

Only a growing economy , will give us the ability to increase our military werewithal. why do you think we are building a navy? and why do you think the gulf states are coming around now?The Soviet Union showed that security without economy meant nothing. On the other hand security and economy can go pretty much hand in hand.


Without the economic rise there would be no need to discuss the "Future Strategic Scenario on the subcontinent". Really.

As far as the view that the rich become soft , it doesn't apply because corporate interests don't fight on their own in the field now do they? Neither does it diminish their thirst for war, if their interests are threatened - as the west has shown. We of course have a very rich martial tradition and now a massive professional army.

Also it is seen that whenever the corporate interests of any of India's giant empires are threatened , the PROFESSIONAL army is pretty much used to snuff out rivals- example- Magadh's defeat of Kalinga. Ashoka was influenced by Magadh's legendary trading guilds.
Make no mistake our present and future buildup will very much be led by economic pull and corporate push factors. And business conduits are increasingly playing a larger role in our diplomacy/ military strategy and indeed in any future "reconciliation".


SO to use a Marxist adage - Capitalism and Imperialism are two sides of the same coin!


And by the way in the analysis of "EXPANSION" their seems to be a whiff of an assumption that the Islamic kindoms/ republics are somehow more dedicated to their "CAUSE" than everybody else is. But if one sees the history of Islamism it is probably the most seducible and that is why we have over 50 muslim countries today rather than even one or two caliphates and sultanates.
If anything given the partiality towards collecting various taxes( religious or otherwise) etc , I think Islamist movements are most lured by mammon. the gulf states are making "rational" economic choices. they have seen what has happened to Dubai and they know what can happen once the oil runs out.


Pakistan's current state of chaos would not have been as aggravating if they had managed to develop their economy better. In the years to come, there will be no Pakistan if they don't build economic linkages with India. Even the Kiyani's of the world have realized that without a fix to the economic situation they are going nowhere. The key link is money, which even the gulf states will not have if they don't tie their economic bandwagon to India and China.

[shiv]

I am of course skipping the mughal empire. even if we look at that , there was a time when Indian muslims used to be unabashedly welcome in the Saudi lands on the pilgrimage to mecca because they used to line the journey with gold and silver coins. at that time the the shoe was clearly on the other foot.

I do not want to derail the topic. While we go on about disunity in India it is important not to forget or acknowledge Islamic disunity. "Saudi" is a very new name. No such entity existed when Mecca was under the control of the Turkish Caliphate.

It was brilliant British (and later American) divide and rule that chopped up the Caliphate, put Ibn Saud (and hence Saudi Arabia) in power and at the end of it all they told the Muslims in India that their main rivals were the egregious Hindus and that they were only innocent Islamophile passers-by.

The importance is that there are at least 3 parties here. Not just India and Islam. When we talk of equations between only 2 parties and recognize the fact that one party was disunited, we are ignoring other significant parties and unity and disunity among them that have shaped history.