Future Strategic Scenario for the Indian Subcontinent -II

[D Roy]

Yes I had given that as an indicator. To make it clear as to which area I am referring to.

I do know how old the house of Saud is of course. In any case I had edited the post to say "bedouin" before you got your comment in.

[shiv]

My post now says Bedouin. Happy?

When the Saud family installed itself as the custodian of Islamic holy lands, a delegation from India actually went there to oppose that arrangement. There were unceremoniously sent back. So there was a clear difference of opinion fairly recently (early decades of the 1900s). The Saudis were puppets of the West even back then.

To repeat what I wrote elsewhere, the next open split that the British helped to engineer was to foster the thought that the honorable and upright Muslim formed a cleaner and bolder nation than the dirty caste-riddled Hindu. While Hindu-Muslim strife and rivalry was far from absent, any efforts at coexistence or reconciliation were removed for more than a century by the British, who had by then realised that Muslims were a bunch who could be used by emotional appeals to their religion. Is it any wonder that India turned out secular and Pakistan Islamist?

Islam as you point out was already a bunch of rival islands and the British used that to their advantage, and handed that advantage to the US. In my view there are lessons to be learned here. The foremost lesson is that Islam and Muslims, by virtue of a desperate clinging to a rigid ideology are amenable to "proper handling" by an ideology free handler. How they allow themselves to be handled depends on the how the handler does his job.

As a corollary I could say that anyone who clings desperately to a rigid ideology can be handled by a person who can think outside the shackles of that ideology

[D Roy]

The only ideology worth holding onto for an Indian is Nationalism.

Simply because if India works- as it does( I most humbly submit) then one world is very much possible where Compromise, Conciliation and Conflict jostle with each other to reach a *three party* "synthesis" without massive bloodletting.

[D Roy]

And by the way, if others are divided - let them be.

If you are not, you win no?

See this point must be understood - becuase it is the most simple point to make - but is nevertheless sometimes drowned in trying to bench press personal fetishes.

If there was a single Indian defence, islamic or other other states whether united or not would not have been able to get into India.

On the other hand because it was divided a powerful ghurid state with not all but some pan-islamic support was able to get into India, by picking off one city at a time.

[shiv]

And by the way, if others are divided - let them be.

If you are not, you win no?

This is true in a two player game.

it gets more complex in a three player game.

[D Roy]

AAh the search for a corner solution ..'

carry on , carry on.

in the meantime,

Vande Mataram!

[Klaus]

In talking about any version of the Great Game, we assume that it is being played in Central Asia by Oiroopean and (in the present) Asian powers. While the objective of this game has always been domination and one-upmanship, it would be good not to forget the fact that the Ouiroopeans with their EU have other avenues for expansion.

Australia joining the EU and yet another link exploring similarities and differences

The current economic situation definitely provides some food for thought. What if various world currencies end up in a state that keeping them would be a luxury? In this case, the world could end up using just a handful of currencies. The Indian Rupee along with the Chinese RMB, Euro and USD would certainly continue to spread their areas of influence. Currencies like Canadian Dollar, Australian Dollar and New Zealand Dollar may go the way of the Deutsch Mark or the British Pound in the future.

Also, if Australia and New Zealand do join the EU, then the Oiropeans would have effectively made inroads into a resource rich area with their Eastern Oirpean brothers ready to toil away in the mines of Western Australia and contribute to Brussels coffers. China/India would still be buying Australian minerals but paying the Oiropeans in Euros. Given the fact that the Aussies would love to co-habit with fellow Oiropeans rather than the Asians, it solves their problem of skills shortage, people shortage and immigration as well. Which brings me to my next point, mass migration of Eastern Oiropeans to a new member nation in the Asia Pacific would significantly change geopolitical realities for India in the IOR in more ways than one. It would only be a matter of time before the new EU state(s) and the EU in general would start making US like "strategic" overtures toward us, so how would this development affect Indian strategic thinking within and outside the subcontinent?

I hope this is not OT for this thread, I'm sorry if this has been raised before. I just feel that such a development could be a new "arm" or a new "front" for the Great Game opened up by the Oiropeans whereas we Bharatiyas sit content and proud with the fact that we have not invaded a single country in the last 1000 years!

[brihaspati]

Well, what if too much prosperity also brings disunity? Overall increase in wealth could also be at the hands of the most efficient in cornering that wealth - regardless of the means of concentrating that wealth. Whoever feels cheated or left out then can raise his flag of "separatism".

Primitive accummulation of capital is almost always ruthless. India is no exception. The modern Indian republic has also accumulated capital [and continues to do so] in a distorted way where regional interests, under the cover of linguistic, clan or ethnic identities have been used to push for uneven appropriation of resources to push for higher growths. What makes us so sure of the role of prosperity in automatic "unification"?

As for history, the earliest successful invasions by Islamists were in the early 700's which led to first permanent colonies based around Multan and Mansera and partly in lower Sindh around Devala. This was a time when Palas were only emerging in Bengal and probably not even consolidated as a local power. The Rashtrakutas were not yet a subcontinent thumping power to reckon with.

As for rigid-ideology being seduced and manipulated by ideology-free ones, I have to concede that that is how it appears or is typically represented. However, there is no ideology that is entirely rigid or entirely flexible. Rigid ideologies are as flexible as so-called "free-ideologies" and and ideologies which pretend to be "free" could actually be hiding quite a rigid ideology behind that mask of "freeness". Sometimes "free-ideologies" get too clever by a half, and get trapped and are forced to retreat.

Is there any example of a completely "free" ideology today in the world or in the near past? If we take the western attitude towards "communism" or "Islam" as that of a ideology-free approach towards rigid ideologies then that is a distortion of reality. Both communism of the Soviet and PRC variety proved themselves ideologically flexible. Where Soviets perhaps can be considered rigid was their formal constraints of having to support anti-colonial movements or say women's education and working in professions in AFG because of ideological commitments. Now lets say, the west - using the flexibility of not even insisting on such basic human rights for AFG women - did wonders with their apparent ideology-free approach and kicked a** of USSR. In the process they strengthened the Jihadis and the retrogressors, provided a base for the likes of the Talebs and AQ and got rammed in NY. In the end, had to commit hugfe resources and forces to fight aground offensive in the region, got bogged down, and is now desperate to find ways of retreating with good face.

In the end of this great masterpieces of "ideology-free" approach has delivered to the world the wonderful gifts of a strengthened and rejuvenated Jihad, and has now started the process of retreat, withdrawal and compromise with the so-called "rigid-ideology" set. Now who has manipulated whom?!!!! To see the reasons behind such a failure, we will need to to really explore the ideological rigidities that makes the west always prefer Islam over any other non-Christian faiths, its racial constructs and ways of thinking, its core driving thoughts guided by Biblical interpretations. There is rigidity no doubt - but we typically fail to see them.

The Centre-Left in India pretends to have an ideology-free approach. Not really. They have quite a strong ideoloy under cover. This is an inveterate hatred of the majority culture of India, a tremendous suspicion and feeling of "otherness" towards Islam and Muslims, a feeling of gratitude and oneness towards Brits. From the first comes an innate fear of cultural nationalism and consolidation under the majority faith. From the second comes a persistent creation, protection and conformation of separate Islamic identity over and above any other identity. From the third comes a psychological and strategic dependence on the Anglo-Saxon axis.

[brihaspati]

Klaus ji,
East Europeans are not that popular even among the west-Europeans who basically dominate OZ-NZ politics. The Ozians built up their core society based on British racial thinking in the 50's to 70's. Subsequently, some reversal of policy did take place, but the foundational dominance structure of Anglo-Saxon is firmly established. The Anglo-Saxon represents and still continues in a very subtle form the old Nordic/Germanic aversion and hatred towards their "peripheral" regions in Europe. This is a belt running in a semi-circle from East Europe, Balkans, Mediterranean coastal groups, as well as the old Iberian group - the so called Celtic/Gaelic fringe.

I do not think that East Europeans will ever be allowed to be that integrated into Oz society. Any indication of "success" on East European side and their potential presence in the future political/business scenario will trigger exactly the same reactions as that has been happening on Indians in Oz. No such thing can repeatedly happen in such closely monitored nations unless sections of state apparatus collaborate and implement this as part of long term policy.

Moreover, realities of economics and transportation will constrain full integration with EU. It will always remain more profitable to do business with Japan, USA, and China or even India and Russia than with EU. The vital trade routes to the EU heartland are controlled by unstable and potentially hostile forces through IOR and the Suez.

[Carl_T]

Klaus ji,
East Europeans are not that popular even among the west-Europeans who basically dominate OZ-NZ politics. The Ozians built up their core society based on British racial thinking in the 50's to 70's. Subsequently, some reversal of policy did take place, but the foundational dominance structure of Anglo-Saxon is firmly established. The Anglo-Saxon represents and still continues in a very subtle form the old Nordic/Germanic aversion and hatred towards their "peripheral" regions in Europe. This is a belt running in a semi-circle from East Europe, Balkans, Mediterranean coastal groups, as well as the old Iberian group - the so called Celtic/Gaelic fringe.

Which??

[svinayak]

The Centre-Left in India pretends to have an ideology-free approach. Not really. They have quite a strong ideoloy under cover. This is an inveterate hatred of the majority culture of India, a tremendous suspicion and feeling of "otherness" towards Islam and Muslims, a feeling of gratitude and oneness towards Brits. From the first comes an innate fear of cultural nationalism and consolidation under the majority faith. From the second comes a persistent creation, protection and conformation of separate Islamic identity over and above any other identity. From the third comes a psychological and strategic dependence on the Anglo-Saxon axis.

Very well put.
It is not just dependencies of the Anglo-Saxon axis but the old colonial mentality and power.

[Prem]

The Centre-Left in India pretends to have an ideology-free approach. Not really. They have quite a strong ideoloy under cover. This is an inveterate hatred of the majority culture of India, a tremendous suspicion and feeling of "otherness" towards Islam and Muslims, a feeling of gratitude and oneness towards Brits. From the first comes an innate fear of cultural nationalism and consolidation under the majority faith. From the second comes a persistent creation, protection and conformation of separate Islamic identity over and above any other identity. From the third comes a psychological and strategic dependence on the Anglo-Saxon axis.

Very well put.
It is not just dependencies of the Anglo-Saxon axis but the old colonial mentality and power.

Hence all kind of resistence , even at the cost of national security . They rather destroy which they cant control. This is old Chacha JN 's posioning of the whole well. Control of media, education and undermining of various insitituions ought to be observed from this angle, all the time. Indians need to be reaistic and earn from Chinese experience in Nationalism as well dealing with the rats within. Adopting, incorporating few of PRC 's fundamental approaches to certain national ends will go long way in consolidating Indian strength.
In next election, it will be interesting to watch how Ramdev's active moral drive effect the political power structure. Will or can he be of any determining value to Indian's future in near term? And shiv ji, Its not the disunity of India or Indians: The individual power centres that of Sikhs or Marthas or Rajputs, Cholas etc repeteadly took on imposible missions to defend the Indic civilization , what we never seems to learn is that in battle of annihilation no mortal enemy ought to be spared, especially the ideological one. We keep doing it at the detriment of future generations. Granted we cant take on all of them now but capabilties toward this clear aim must be build, nourished and kept ready to fulfil the mission at first oppertunity. No hinderance ought to be brooked in achieving this objective and this not to be left for our children to do. They deserve not onlee bright but also safe future as They need not relive the indic experiecne of 14th -20 century .

[Klaus]

Klaus ji,
but the foundational dominance structure of Anglo-Saxon is firmly established. The Anglo-Saxon represents and still continues in a very subtle form the old Nordic/Germanic aversion and hatred towards their "peripheral" regions in Europe. This is a belt running in a semi-circle from East Europe, Balkans, Mediterranean coastal groups, as well as the old Iberian group - the so called Celtic/Gaelic fringe.

Agreed on that Brihaspati ji. But does'nt that dominance structure get called into question when the foundation (i.e UK and the British Commonwealth) itself is slowly diminishing. Agreed that UK has very reluctantly been integrated with EU but still the Euro has become more popular than the Pound and the Euro's influence will some day do away with the Pound itself. Added to this is the fact that Oz may also end up being a republic within the next 10-15 years (as its society evolves out of the Anglo Saxon core).

Also, in my earlier post I'd said that Ozians would prefer immigration by their Eastern European friends compared to Indians or Asians, agreed that the Anglo-saxon core will always have its Trans-continental differences with the Celtic/Gaelic fringe but the Anglo Saxons can live with this compared to an Asian 'invasion' (as they call it).
Coupled with a growing EU, integration with any European entity would be better for them, also their local economy would'nt be that hard-pressed to convert to the Euro, all in all it would be very similar to any European country joining the EU.

Moreover, realities of economics and transportation will constrain full integration with EU. It will always remain more profitable to do business with Japan, USA, and China or even India and Russia than with EU. The vital trade routes to the EU heartland are controlled by unstable and potentially hostile forces through IOR and the Suez.

At this juncture, it would also be prudent to remember that the EU prides itself on being a supra-national entity like no other. It is probably the only one of its kind in the world and it has prided itself on being able to support its welfare programs, member nations are also being very active in combating piracy concerns off the coast of Somalia. There will always be choke points but IMO that will not be sufficient to deter the EU if they want to open up a new front for their Great Game. Any such chokepoint could be used to India's advantage or not, depending on what the Indian establishment feels is best for its interests.

Again, please do note that I am not saying that Oz as a new EU member nation will stop trading with the booming economies of Asia. I just said that any such proceeds of trade would end up in Brussels. It (the New Great Game) could well be called the EU encirclement of Asia policy then. Given that it is the first supra-national entity in the world, its behaviour cannot be accurately predicted the way we can predict the nature of Islamic caliphates or monarchies or imperialists, even scenario building and simulation will come up short. In such a situation, what would be the Indian establishment's strategic dynamic?

No such thing can repeatedly happen in such closely monitored nations unless sections of state apparatus collaborate and implement this as part of long term policy.

What if they do? The EU is already a cogent entity, all that is stopping Oz from gaining entry is the trivial Commonwealth issue and if sources are to be believed, the wheels are already in motion (albeit slowly) towards an Oz Republic. I have already indicated that future economic situations might force some currencies (like AUD, CAD, NZD) to go the way of British Pound. Also, it is distinctly possible that the EU is the new manifestation of British and German imperialism (behind the scenes of course). If you recall, there has always been an alternative school of thought which says that Britain's traditional and natural ally was always Germany (even before the US was born). They also tried to work out a separate peace during WW2, it is another matter that it did not work out. The EU could be the perfect way in which Germany satisfies its thirst to build its world economy (without being militarily aggressive) and Britain to regain some lost glory.

BTW, Oz is already working with a select few EU member states on ambitious defence projects. Then there is the Joint Strike Fighter program (led by the US of course) which has Spain, Italy, UK, Oz and Turkey as the other participants. Future defence projects in the EU may see negligible or no US participation and that would be the time the EU really comes to its own. Moreover, Italy, Spain, France and UK possess aircraft carriers which can be used to project their national (as well as EU's) power right into the IOR. The quote of "The whole is greater than the sum of the parts" may be very apt here. The defence forces of member states may be smaller than India's but if and when the EU decides to form a military, the Indian gobermund has to deal with a lot of force in the IOR, one which is not necessarily hostile to it but one which is equally benign and non-aligned to it.

[Sanku]

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.

Yet there are 50 muslim countries today compared to how many 50 years back? 100 years back? 500 years back?

The physical integration of a nation, and its economic output are very different from a ideological nation.

India was united nation in many senses when the British were present (for a moment bringing in all the princely states under the brutish umbrella as also united India) it was also a very economically active place, in terms of activity. Tatas made their name in British India. Yet India as a nation was uniformly screwed.

Also, another thing to remember is that at the end of the day, economics does the talking.

Klaus et al, aren't we discussing the primacy of economic issues in overall strategy etc, that is which comes first, economy or capital accumulation through, non-economic means as economy being secondary? Yet we repeatedly see a statement as above used almost as a "assumption" in many discussions. Clearly you are setting up a circular argument.

This seems to be a common error in discussion that creeps in discussing economic matters. The cause and the effect can not be discussed because the above statement is considered axiomatically true subconsciously.

For example D Roy says...

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

Why? For one -- this was being discussed even when India was just born and was looking to chart its way to the future?

Also the tone suggests a statement of fact, basically on a issue being discussed , again what I would say leads to circular reasoning.

------------------------------------------

What I suggest is let NOT make a statement on "economy is needed because...." and INSTEAD look at whether growth of economy preceded expansion and state building or was a effect of that (and same for break up of state)?

Also we need to examine ideologies before and after expansion (and decay)

The need for economy is obvious, the question is how is economy linked to ideology and statecraft. Another three variable (at least problem) and the relative import of each.

[Klaus]

^^^ Sanku ji, I've noted your concerns and edited my post accordingly. Thanks for bringing up the matter so that I can cut out on any waffling henceforth.

[brihaspati]

Klaus ji,

Please look at the following ref. http://www.cris.unu.edu/fileadmin/worki ... 2010-1.pdf

The EMP has not been a success in establishing an interregional security regime (Biscop 2003; Youngs and Gillespie 2002), and although a framework for interregional cooperation exists, it remains fragile. Interests diverge both within the two regions and between them. It may be argued that the Euro-Med definition of the Middle East remains elusive and without strong advocates in the Arab Middle East. It could also be emphasized that although this may be true, the ideas associated with the EMP framework have not met with any significant opposition (Bilgin 2005). The Euro-Med definition is thus a potential alternative vision to the American-based regional representation and might serve the function of ‘balancing’ the dominant US position. The weakness of the Euro-Med construction, however, remains its strong security underpinnings, aggravating interregional asymmetries (Bilgin 2005). Thus, the US ‘Middle Easternism’ is based on security militarily defined, whereas the European security concerns are broader and bring in ‘softer’ issues. EU security perceptions are based on European points of reference and fail to acknowledge the security concerns of their Arab partners.

The article discusses one of the major weaknesses of EU security-military strategy: that is in international conctext, especially serious conflict situations, the EU does not yet act and more importantly think as a single rashtra. Its constitutents still want to reserve the right to act, think, negotiate, and implement individually when military and strategic steps are concerned. More so if they involve larger geo-political concerns and historical tie-ups.

You can see, the US and EU definitions, objectives and models for ME differ. What the article obviously misses is that EU thinking cannot see beyond a regional cooperation structure modeled on themselves. The same old Euro-centric thinking that both helped initial European colonization drives and eventual self-destructive conflicts and retreat. EU thus fails to capture the complexities of processes of the middle-east or for that matter, even Asia.

It is the same model that EU has been generating in discussions on the solution to the "Kashmir" problem. There are other references on EU military thinking that I will post later. You can also explore refs on Solanaus's statements on EU military strategy. They start off from the Klauswitz doctrine on "war". That in itself is a curious window into the mindset.

For IOR, the same attitude will continue and will fail.

[brihaspati]

There has been concerns from certain sections, that the so-called "Euro-federalist" military doctrine that emerged under Javier Solana/Blairite Britain, represented a new "collective imperialism" under the garb of "doing good". There has been speculations that this "neo-impeialism" is guiding operations against Iran, or against African nations.

But this line of thinking dwells on the so-called successful intervention in Yugoslavia and does not see the implications of the eventual withdrawal as a tail-hanger of the USA from Iraq. Same goes for the situation emerging in AFG. It shows that EU understanding of military campaigns to dominate regions is appropriate for its immediate geographical vicinity. But the further it goes away from that regional understanding, it fails to understand what really is going on.

Everywhere in Asia, Europe has failed ultimately. Its apparent success in India came out of the incomplete resolution of the ideological confrontation between Islam and non-Islamics. Wherever this conflict had been resolved, or essentially one ideology dominated a region to the near-complete exclusion of all else - Europe failed to take hold.

Europe's current short-sightedness is ironically very similar to what has hobbled and limited the Congress vision since Independence. Long, murderous conflicts with the Islamist, has created a caution on the one hand, and a deep-seated innate hatred and concept of "otherness" for the Islamist. This magnifies the power of the Islamist in the imagination of decision-makers and when some degree of prosperity has been achieved they get concerned about maintaining a fine balance between appeasement and containment of Islam. It was a concern that led to the intervention to protect Islamists, more so of the Sunni-Wahabi strain in Yugoslavia [ the first statements and aspirations of global Jihad had emerged here - long before the Bosnian massacres] and to making pro-POWI noises on "Kashmir".

It is obvious that they consider Shia Iran less dangerous, and therefore worth allowing to be targeted in favour of Sunni-Arabic interests. It is the same construct that is leading them to support the Palestinians against Israel. Those who say it is all merely greed for "oil" - should note that "real-politik" and "econo-politik" should have led to a balancing act between Arabic oil and Iranian oil, rather than a one-sided leaning towards the Sunni-Arabic.

What it leads to in both case - Congress and EU, is strengthening of separatist and expansionist constructs of Sunni-Wahabism with leadership concentrating in KSA, affecting the entire belt from North Africa, ME and India. Both will ultimately be designated in history as the blind political thinking of appeasing violently expansionist and culture-erasing ideologies that led to global conflict. Europe has done it already when it fostered Nazism and Communism, and shrank as a result - but gifting the world incalculable pain and bloodshed. In India we have already had the Partition trauma, and current policies will bring us to a similar conflagration in the future.

[brihaspati]

Deobandis continue to operate under the radar and move slowly to a separate state within the state : another fatwa towards controlling its flock, another extra judicial edict towards an Islamic state : Fatwa against modelling by Muslim women

[brihaspati]

Karzai seeks tribal support for military operation

Afghan President Hamid Karzai met with tribal leaders Sunday in the violence-plagued Kandahar province to shore up support for an impending military offensive. He promised to hold back until he had their backing.
"We will not conduct the operations in Kandahar until you say we can," Karzai told about 1,000 tribal leaders at a shura, or conference, at the governor's compound in the southern province. Karzai, accompanied by the U.S. commander in Afghanistan, Gen. Stanley McChrystal, said he will see that similar gatherings are held throughout the region to gauge the opinion of the people.

Most of the gathered leaders were apprehensive about the operation. They worried that the military push was planned during harvest. The Taliban were believed to be preparing their own operation, because they have a heads-up.

Haji Agha Lala, a tribal leader, said those at the gathering could not speak frankly because the threat of the Taliban was ever-present. Another tribal leader told CNN that Kandahar "has one government during the day, [and] another takes control over the night," referring to the Taliban. Those at the conference said their problem wasn't just with the Taliban, but with Afghan security forces, national police and the Afghan army, who don't make them feel safe.

Some say they prefer to negotiate with the Taliban rather than engage them in an offensive. Others lamented the lack of security and basic services. "Every tribe wants to protect their own thief," Karzai said. "We need to stop doing that so that we can fix the country."

A succint summary of most of the reasons why the current so-called upsurge against the Talebs will stagnate. It is not as if the AFG scene cannot be controlled. But the tribal elders show what needs to be done to establish such a control. They are eager to submit to the Taleb becuase they themselves cannot match the viciousness and the sadism of the Talebs.

Afghans are not invincible. They have been overrun and defeated many times in history. There are many instances. But in every such case they were overrun by a determined enemy that aimed for complete destruction of any resistance, with genocidic connotations. Alexander, or the Mongols. Enemeies who gave them only choice between total surrender and complete erasure. The Talebs will eventually regain control becuase the west is self-constrained compared to the Jihadis - who have no constraint as far as conflict methods are concerned. Moreover the obvious weakness of the west towards the Talebs prevents seeking complete physical liquidation of not only Talebs but anyone even remotely supporting the Talebs. To do this USA has also to destory POGWI and its various Jihadi establishments.

Something the ideological leaning of the west, preference for Sunni-Wahabism [ and not Shia Iran - which also has oil and gas], its deep involvement with the KSA structures, as well as POWI, will not allow.

[brihaspati]

Cross posting :
A previous year's Organizer article [don't know whether that organ is kosher here or whether this has been posted before] http://www.organiser.org/dynamic/module ... 315&page=4

China working on Maoist-SIMI nexus in South India?
From Arun Lakshman in Thiruvananthapuram

Sources in the intelligence agency told this reporter that the Chinese interpreters in the Indian intelligence establishment have already got vital evidences that make it quite apparent that the Chinese have already prepared a blueprint for the operation in South India and would in the immediate future create several human interest think tanks in South India for garnering support from the intellectual community and to take the state’s intelligentsia as a major propaganda machinery for its sinister operations.

The Indian intelligence agencies are on the trail of a sinister plan of Chinese for integrating the operations of the Maoist groups with the banned Islamist organisation SIMI. A top official of the Intelligence Bureau while speaking to this reporter said that a meeting between some middle-level leaders of the two organisations was held in Bengaluru recently at the behest of a foreign intelligence agent and a Kerala-based former Naxalite leader is given the charge of the operation in South India.

It may be recalled that the CPI-M of Kerala, which has been the political party that attracted the left intellectuals, is now in the grip of a fierce factional war and several intellectuals have been shown the door by the official faction of the party because of their solidarity with the Chief Minister Achuthanandan, who is now functioning in the party without proper wings.

These elements, according to the experts in the intelligence agencies, have already been roped in by the Maoist and other dalit movements to set up their base among the intellectual community of the state.

The state police have already cracked the case relating to the brutal killing of a middle-aged person while he was on a morning walk and have found a dalit outfit-Dalit Human Rights Forum-behind the murder. After a close observation, it was established that the organisation formed less than two years ago in Aluva has gained momentum in several dalit hamlets in Kerala and that it is flush with funds. A top official of the Intelligence Bureau, who is in the state in connection with the probe on this organisation, told this reporter that they are ascertaining the role played by the external intelligence agencies in creating such an outfit.

The Intelligence Bureau, in its report presented before the Union Home Minister and the National Security Advisor a few weeks ago, has said that the situation in Kerala has gone out of control and that more and more youth are getting involved in terror operations with unabated support from certain mainstream political parties.

Even if thsi borders on CT and may be unverifiable, can be reasonable explanation of trends.

Moreover, I would not be surprised if a revival of Maoist imagery, memes and thrusts is not taking place within the CPC and PLA. Facing the various problems of state-capitalism, the factional struggles within the communist hierarchy will move towards one faction adopting Maoist tactics and thinking. This should have a corresponding reflection in startegies towards India.

[brihaspati]

Gotcha! Here is an interesting article that gives possible support to my preious hypo about revival of "Maoism" in PRC.
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/China/KK24Ad01.html

Power struggle behind revival of Maoism
By Willy Lam

As the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) leadership tries to convince United States President Barack Obama and other world leaders that China is eagerly integrating itself with the global marketplace, the ultra-conservative norms and worldview of Chairman Mao Zedong are making a big comeback in public life.

In provinces and cities that foreign dignitaries are unlikely to visit, vintage Cultural Revolution-era (1966-1976) totems are proliferating. In Chongqing, a mega-city of 32 million people in western China, Mao sculptures - which were feverishly demolished soon after the late patriarch Deng Xiaoping catalyzed the reform era in 1978 - are being erected throughout government offices, factories and universities.

A newly constructed seven-story statue of the demigod in Chongqing's college district dwarfed nearby halls, libraries and



classroom buildings. Not far from the Helmsman's birthplace in Juzhizhou village, Hunan province, the latest tourist attraction is a sky-scraping, 32-meter torso of the young Mao. Moreover, the long-forgotten slogan "Long Live Mao Zedong Thought" has been resuscitated after banners bearing this battle cry were held high by college students and nationalistic Beijing residents during parades in Tiananmen Square that marked the 60th birthday of the People's Republic.

There are at least three dimensions to Maoism's resurgence in China. One is simply a celebration of national pride. Given the fact that the Helmsman's successors ranging from Deng Xiaoping to President Hu Jintao have imposed a blackout on public discussion about the great famine and other atrocities of the Mao era, most Chinese remember Mao as the larger-than-life founder of the republic and the "pride of the Chinese race".

The contributions of Mao were played up in this year's blockbuster movie Lofty Ambitions of Founding a Republic, which was specially commissioned by party authorities. Thus, Central Party School theorist Li Junru, who gained fame for his exposition of Deng's reform programs, recently characterized Mao as a titan who "led the Chinese people in their struggle against the reactionary rule of imperialism and feudalism, so that the Chinese race [could] stand tall among the people of the world".

Moreover, according to a conservative theoretician, Peng Xiaoguang, the enduring enthusiasm for "Mao Zedong Thought" - particularly among the young - testified to the intelligentsia's search for an "ultimate faith" that could speed up China's rise, particularly in the wake of the global financial crisis.

The other two dimensions of the Maoist revival portend struggles and changes within the CCP; it is emblematic of the CCP's shift to the left, as well as the intensification of political infighting among the party's disparate factions (in China, "leftism" denotes doctrinaire socialist values, emphasis on the party's monopoly on power, and a move away from the free-market precepts).

It is well known that since the Tibet riots in March 2008, the CCP leadership has tightened the noose around the nation's dissidents as well as activists of non-governmental agencies. Yet in the wake of the international financial meltdown, economic policy has also displayed anti-market tendencies, if not also a re-assumption of values such as state guidance of the economy, which were observed during the long reign of the revered chairman.

This is evidenced by the phenomenon called guojin mintui, or state-controlled enterprises advancing at the expense of the private sector. In areas ranging from coal and steel to transportation, state-controlled firms are swallowing up private companies. Moreover, government-run outfits are the major beneficiaries of the $585 million stimulus package announced late last year, as well as the $1.1 trillion worth of loans extended by Chinese banks in the first three quarters of the year.

Read the entire article for some interesting clues.

A more recent relevant article: http://www.atimes.com/atimes/China/LB12Ad03.html

Although liberal factions retain an important position of power, top cadres of the party often use quotations from Mao to give them a voice. CCP think-tanks such as the Central Party School or the Chinese Academy of Social Science are breathing new life into Mao's Credo in their lectures and research projects.

As Wang assures, "The new upsurge of Mao thinking makes strategic uses of Mao's legacy: there are many usable elements in Mao's thought, such as the mass line as a guide for understanding and adjusting the fluid relationships between the state, regions, society and individuals. The mass line is also at the center of the notion of intra-party democracy. There are also questions of national independence and state sovereignty, which were what the Chinese revolution fought for and which persist in the relation with Taiwan and minority areas. State sovereignty is related to economic sovereignty, manifest in the policy of economic self-reliance."

Foreign scholars commonly accuse the New Leftists of feeding nationalist movements.

"Using the claim that China should assume a more powerful role in international and security affairs while replacing the beneficiaries of the old world order, neo-leftist analysts have once again revealed their inclination toward their own brand of nationalism," according to Bernt Berger, an expert on China security policy at the University of Hamburg. "The assertive nationalist rhetoric behind recent neo-leftist statements appeals to a growing number of people who are dissatisfied with corruption ... This rhetoric traditionally had a hint of counter-imperialist or post-colonial emancipation and self-assertion," Berger wrote in a 2009 report for the ISN Security Watch.

Wang arrives at the same conclusion as Berger, though without acknowledging the nationalist inconvenience. "Revolutionary theories and practices crystallized by the term 'Mao Zedong Thought' are the engine of China's drive from a semi-colonized, beleaguered country to an independent nation-state, now proudly standing by other nations ... There are websites, forums and academic studies devoted to the discussion and elaboration of revolutionary and socialist motifs. The new-found confidence in China's rising power seems to say that despite all the trials and tribulations, socialist builders, after all, did something right."

Disenchantment with globalization, that began and was encouraged by the Western world, is a focal point for the revival of Mao and the new leftists. A book written by several critics of current CCP policies, Unhappy China: The great time, grand vision and our internal and external challenges, was last year's political bestseller. Wang Hui, a professor of Chinese language and literature at Tsinghua University in Beijing and probably an icon of the group, expressed regret over the new left label because it was formulated in the US and Europe. The New Leftists, as happened with concepts such as "Rightists" and "Old Leftists", could be misunderstood in China as a new faction of dogmatic elites, according to Wang Hui.

[ramana]

Bji, It could be like the counter coup on Gorby and could lead to PRC unravelling.

[brihaspati]

ramana ji,
I would be worried about the neo-Maoists within CPC and outside. They already show signs of excessive "nationalism" bordering on "imperialism". One such group actively calls for dismemberment of India [seems to be with the blessings of the party bosses] and supports the Indian Maoists.

[Pratyush]

Bji, It could be like the counter coup on Gorby and could lead to PRC unravelling.

Call me insane but I would want the Coup to succeed. As they will try to undo the economic reforms of the past 30 years. Which has the potential to cause deep unrest in PRC. They also have a historical precedent for an act of this nature.

In the 16th century a Chinese emperor ordered the destruction of the Chinese maritime fleet in harbour( Unable to find sources). A Chinese historian may provide the exact incident.

And the great leap forward by the chairman.

All in all removes the biggest Strategic Competitor of India for the next 50 odd years. From the global scale

[brihaspati]

Yes it will disrupt the current economic curve for China. But it will also be extremely aggressive towards India. Each such ideologically straigh-jacketed attemps by Maoists [under Mao!] resulted in various types of economic rollback. From each of them Mao created an attack on India [nothing personal I guess - just convenience]. The failure of 1958-59 was followed by the 1962 adventure [spectacularly successful in territorial terms]. The cultural revolution of 1966 led to the 69-70 formation of the Naxalite movement.

[brihaspati]

The Kyrghyz reverse coup, ousting Bakiev [who came to power after a similar "popular" uprising modeled on tulip revolutions in 2005] is very very interesting. Russia seems to be taking back control over Kyrghyzstan. The US supply channel to AFG from the Manas airbase can become shaky now - or under the remote thumb sign of Putin.

The activation of the old Communist Otunbayeva is interesting as a first possible indication of Russian plans for AFG region. The Uzbek Kyrghyz ethnic division that was part of the older Bakiev-Otunbayeva struggle in 2005, has implications for the southern part of Kyrghyzstan and overlap with the Dostum factor in AFG.

[Manish_Sharma]

Yes it will disrupt the current economic curve for China. But it will also be extremely aggressive towards India. Each such ideologically straigh-jacketed attemps by Maoists [under Mao!] resulted in various types of economic rollback. From each of them Mao created an attack on India [nothing personal I guess - just convenience]. The failure of 1958-59 was followed by the 1962 adventure [spectacularly successful in territorial terms]. The cultural revolution of 1966 led to the 69-70 formation of the Naxalite movement.

In a way it would be good for us. China knows that India is a lazy country stratetic vision/expansionwise. If left untroubled on a certain border we can be lulled into sleep easily. That is why they don't create border trouble or kargil like situation for us. Just attack win some land and then give a gap of 60-70 years to reapeat again. This way again they'll find us unprepared again.
Porkistan is a well wisher in this way that it keeps on creating trouble thus keeping us on our toes. If dragon also starts behaving this way then we'll have no option but to shape up.

[brihaspati]

Following up on the PRC potential collapse or not, here is an interesting debate that covers many of the angles :
http://www.carnegieendowment.org/files/ ... script.pdf. The debate actually throws up some of the directions that we can seek as relevant for India. I have always rooted for promotion of a more democratic system in China but this will be a difficult task. But a public stance of supporting democratization is a good tactical move. But in my opinion, the stimulus for change in PRC will come only when the regime is seen by its own people as having failed to deliver. Military setbacks are especially a key one to delegitimize Chinese regimes for the middle and elite take a keen pride in their "Chinese" identity

I guess there is not much of an alternative to encouraging all the centrifugal elements in the periphery of China. What the neo-Maoists want for India, is something India should want for China. And not simply talk about it but do something about it.

[ramana]

Time and time again Indics who were frustrated with the ruling dipensation withheld support to them in times of extreme distress calcualting that the external actors will clear the ruling dispensation and all paid the price for it.

I for one never want another invasion or external force acting on India because I dont agree with the ruling dispensation.
This has been the cause of self conquest thru the ages.

[vera_k]

The other way to look at this is that Indian ruling dispensations eventually turn effeminate in their attempt to prolong their hold on power. This degrades their power to such an extent that they are unable to command loyalty from their subjects by putting down any revolts.

[brihaspati]

ramanaji,
agreed. But it is also true that the ruling dispensations if also unfit and malicious to boot, ususally also collaborated with outside enemies as a means of safeguarding their own power - even against the interests of the commons. If any ruling dispensation brings us to danger in spite of repeated warnings that all their acts are making the nation vulnerable, the support must be conditional. Yes everyone should come on board, but those leadership responsible for the situation must go first and hand over power to a new dispensation from their critics.

I am not a supporter or admirer of Atunbayeva for her "Leninist" background - but that she also assumed charge replacing Bakiev. When and if such a time comes for India, the ruling dispensation must yield power. This is a practical step, since any infiltration and secret double agents are removed from decision making and lose access to inner workings.

[brihaspati]

Closing of the trap for USA in AFG starts : http://forums.bharat-rakshak.com/postin ... f=1&t=5337

2010-04-10 Caucasus/Russia/Central Asia
Kyrgyzstan moves to shut US-run Menas air base
Kyrgyzstan's new leaders have said they intend to remove a US military base, which currently serves as the premier air mobility hub for the US-led forces in Afghanistan, from their soil.

The interim government led by ex-foreign minister Roza Otunbayeva, has said it wants the US base, Manas, closed down for security reasons.

The remarks came amid growing uncertainty over whether the new Kyrgyz authorities would allow the US to use the base.

Russia, which itself maintains an air base at Kant, just 20 miles from Manas, has been keen to block US military presence in the region.

Moscow has been increasingly concerned about US military's prolonged presence in the geo-strategically important Region.

[Pranav]

^^^ actually Kyrgyzstan does not border Afghanistan.

And if the US is really interested in fixing Afghanistan, they should be relying on Russia, and not Pakistan.

[brihaspati]

Manas was so far a safe point to fly in supplies to AFG. Its just one of a sequence of gradual steps to make it increasingly and prohibitively costly for the Americans to keep their forces supplied.

[Pranav]

Manas was so far a safe point to fly in supplies to AFG. Its just one of a sequence of gradual steps to make it increasingly and prohibitively costly for the Americans to keep their forces supplied.

Well, if the Americans are determined to empower the Paks in the Afghan theater, then that cannot be considered a negative development.

Here is some news: Obama, Manmohan to discuss upcoming Indo-U.S. Strategic Dialogue : http://beta.thehindu.com/news/national/ ... epage=true

Let's see what comes out of that.

[brihaspati]

Don't want sticking my neck out here about someone who is supposedly untouchable [in the most positive sense]. After all he belongs to the illustrious class of Oxonians who went out to rule India. But most likely there are going to be commitments about future concessions if not actual and immediate concessions. Hillary has sounded the real Obamaic line about the subcontinent - balancing out both POWI and India to satisfy the increasing pro-Sunni-Wahabi line followed by USA in favour of KSA+PAK.

Nothing much will happen on Headley, [POGWI pressure], India's role in AFG, on POWI. India will come out the loser in these negotiations in long term consequences.

Strategically, the very geographical reality of POWI bordering on AFG and having continuous supply lines with PRC will be considered by Obama and the US military to be crucial in favouring POWI over and above India in the hope that POGWI will continue to facilitate US interests once USA is forced to withdraw from AFG.

[brihaspati]

In reponse to Vir-Sanghvi and others like him about the ultimate winning patience of the "State" over "Maoists", X-posting from "Red" thread:
There is a slight problem in the "State vs Maoists" paradigm. The previous episodes of Maoist urpsurge in the 70's coincided with a peculiar phase of the Cold War.

Consider 1971. USA is locked into a global cold war with USSR. It sees POWI as a crucial element in its strategy to contain communists in Asia. Therefore it sides with POGWI against Bangladeshi nationalist aspirations and moves against India and IG. But this pushes IG closer to USSR and USA is checkmated. This still does not make USA a lover of communist violence within India, especially those interested with Maoism. There could have been covert and secret services playing around with Maoists [and revolutionaries across the border in BD] as a means of weakeing USSR influence. Already Mao had been on war path with the new Soviet dispensation that criticized Stalin under Krushchev. But as soon as channels start off with Mao himself leading to the famous Nixon visit, this need for pandering to Maoists would have vanished.

This was possibly partly responsible for the success of actions against the Naxals in WB and elsewhere. Similarly the botched coup in BD by the leftists was superbly managed to both destroy leftists and bring pro-POWI military hardcore in BD to power.

Look at the timeline : 1963[break between Mao and USSR]-1965[Indo-Pak war]-1967[rearrangement of power relations within PRC after the Cultural Rev]-1969[end of first phase of cultural rev/first Left Front govs] -1971[Naxals start off -BD war of liberation]-1973[Mao-Nixon meet the previous year - withdrawal from Vietnam in Paris accord]-1975[BD coup with leftists destroyed/Mao ill and dies next year/Deng begins to reappear/Naxals begin to suffer reversals and are practically wiped off from WB]-1977[IG "punished"]. Things happen more or less with a regular pattern.

At the time the international "states" toyed with the idea of "Maoists"as a tool, but abandoned them when they could come to direct alliances and inroads with the powers that be.

So it is not only a question of Indian state vs Maoists, but Indian state vs non-Indian states+Maoists. It then is new set of equations as to whose resources are greater and whose patience is longer.

[RamaY]

Strategically, the very geographical reality of POWI bordering on AFG and having continuous supply lines with PRC will be considered by Obama and the US military to be crucial in favouring POWI over and above India in the hope that POGWI will continue to facilitate US interests once USA is forced to withdraw from AFG.

The key is to recapture POK. Without that India cannot influence sub-continental affairs. Unfortunately the entire leadership structure, including army strategies ( ) gave up on this legitimate option.

Such a move would unravel many options for India.

[Altair]

India should also think of extending its boundary till the southern most tip of tajikistan. It will be of great strategic importance.

[svinayak]

In a way it would be good for us. China knows that India is a lazy country stratetic vision/expansionwise. If left untroubled on a certain border we can be lulled into sleep easily. That is why they don't create border trouble or kargil like situation for us. Just attack win some land and then give a gap of 60-70 years to reapeat again. This way again they'll find us unprepared again.

Not attacking India is a strategy they have used for a long time since 40 years. Only small conflicts is used but they are watching the political changes inside India. The affect inside India of Two assassination in 40 years is what they are watching.
But in that 40 years China has increased its economy and GDP so that it can sustain confrontation over a long time.