West Asia News and Discussions

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 26 Mar 2011 08:00

Then no need for the Saudi Maulana to have to reinforce and endorse it. It only detracts from the deshi Maulana's authority.

shyamd · Post by **shyamd** » 26 Mar 2011 14:29

Firstly, he was there under the invite of Deoband I think not the GoI. Anyway, keep in mind he does help in certain decisions made and he is close with King A.
Our links with such people have paid dividends when we had to rescue Indians truck drivers taken hostage in Iraq.
Secondly, What did the man say in his speech to IMs and what did he get upto?
Thirdly, the man is on tv every friday leading the prayers, so I wouldn't be surprised if they havent heard his speech's before.
Fourthly, he is the most senior muslim cleric. What was the reaction of IMs to his visit and his speech? It would be good to post these.

Also keep in mind reality of politics - IMs are a constituency(a fairly large one too) of India and there will be sucking up to IMs.
If you don't like it, please vote for another party that chooses not to.

MMS met several senior US jewish leaders, why? Because of their influence in US politics.
Like I say, it is self interest that governs everything.

Nothing more to say on this. If you don't like it, write a letter to your MP or MMS.

RajeshA · Post by **RajeshA** » 26 Mar 2011 15:15

Re: Dr As-Sudais visit to India

Our interests in Saudi Arabia can be many. I consider the most important to be their revoking support to Pakistan, and right behind that is control over the charity money from the Gulf that flows into the Indian Subcontinent, including Pakistan, Bangladesh and elsewhere.

What we need to be careful is that we do not allow the Saudi clerics, especially the retrogressive ones, to increase their influence amongst the Indian Muslims, or the ideology of such to take root in India. Such should be the red lines for India.

So in order to get what we desire, we may have to offer the Saudis some enticement, but these enticements should never cross our red-lines.

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 26 Mar 2011 18:30

If he had a pulling effect on IM, all the more reason not to encourage such visits. If his speeches are already known through TV, why was it extra important to bring him here physically. Every such visual, public contact, gesture, proximity has a corresponding political subversive role. MMS meeting top-Jewish officials in USA and not on Indian soil is entirely different from letting a top-Saudi cleric come and address IM's on Indian soil.

We don't know of a network of Jewish religious institutions propagating Judaism, and funded by Israel, all over India. While the Saudi role in Sunni institutional spread over India is rather well known.

GOI or some political party behind the GOI may attract biz interests that want to profit from increased collaboration with the Saudi elite. We are yet to see tangible benefits for the future of India in encouraging such contacts. Problem, is benefits for which India? For those who cannot see the political subversion in the Saudi clerics public presence here, India means business interests which hope to profit from Saudi benevolence. In return for that they are prepared to accept increased Saudi religious authority within India - since any attempt from India to "improve relations" will automatically imply tacit overlooking of Saudi funds acting on the religious front. Heck, even Dawood Ibrahim benefits from increased Saudi influence - even if exactly opposite is the propaganda, that increased Saudi collaboration means India can pressurize Pak or D-company better.

I think it is clear now, that there are two different Indias we are talking about. Those who find nothing wrong in increased Saudi collaboration and religious presence in India, deliberately ignore the entire Indian experience with Arabic Islamism, consistent and continuing role of the ME monarchies with respect to Pak, and are basically that section of Indian political spectrum who are primarily driven by the mercantile mentality. Here strategic interests of the entire society can be exchanged or compromised in return for benefits of small sections of elite and business interests - who will sell the land, people, culture everything if necessary. This is the section which repeatedly highlights the numerical significance of Indian Muslims - and use that as an excuse to carry on the JLN-esque line - that Islamic identity must be protected, enhanced and sharpened within India. This is the India that continuously takes the easy way out - by pampering those aspects of Indian Islam that identifies with Arab or ME Islamism and islamic identity.

That is not my India. In my India, Muslims are Indians first and then Muslims. In my India, everything must be done to disconnect and deconstruct the ME or Arab connection of their foundations. Their numerical superiority for me is a historical casualty and blunder to which I do not have to be a slave in abject submission - under excuses of real-politik and "benefits" which are themselves not at all clear or guaranteed.

I know the MP business quite well, and what voting man-pasand candidates to power entails, so urgings as to what method I should employ is really superfluous. I would suggest that the current crop should be encouraged to do their current business about these subversive collaborations as much as possible. Exactly such greed in the end will lead to demise of the current system.

Suppiah · Post by **Suppiah** » 26 Mar 2011 19:18

Regarding the saudi cleric's visit, I would also agree that we should go by what he says and what his track record at home is. Would love to know more about that...if one day the obnoxious royal family is disposed, these are the guys that are going to run the show...in Saudi or for that matter most of middle east, it is not choice between Rush Limbaugh and Nancy Pelosi it is kind of a choice between David Duke and Rush Limbaugh.

Sometimes they can help...I do remember reading about Syed Ali Khameni trying to advise Muslims to settle Ayodya peacefully (though unable to find that ever since through Google or elsewhere)...such efforts are not bad if done carefully and quietly. It can make a difference and neturalise some of the loud mouths within IM and the anti-Hindu Stalinist rapist goon yellow cabal that support them as part of their own anti-Hindu pogrom.

The statements attributed to him so far appear innocuous..

Having said that, our media and others including GOI and its agencies should look at such visits critically and look for things that should worry us - interference in local affairs, pan-ummah jihadi agenda and so on...and if they find something worrying crack down without any consideration for vote bank politics. that is where we seem to have a problem.

Suppiah · Post by **Suppiah** » 26 Mar 2011 19:27

shyamd wrote: MMS met several senior US jewish leaders, why? Because of their influence in US politics.
Like I say, it is self interest that governs everything.

There is no jewish vote bank in India....so the self-interest in one case matches national interest and in other case may no may not...

shyamd · Post by **shyamd** » 26 Mar 2011 19:37

Brihaspati ji, trust in GOI and our strategic community. We refused King Abdullah's offer to renovate Jama Masjid. We will limit the influence to a certain extent, but at the same time we find it useful at this juncture to maintain links with such individuals. Please be pragmatic about this issue, we need to develop our economy and this will impact our defence expenditure positively. Our relations are not at the expense of Israel.

This was not a GoI invitation. He is free to visit India as a private citizen. We need to know more details of the visit, we are just speculating right now. Who paid for his helicopter visit...etc. I had a look at the Saudi consulate which is normally very good at these things, so it could be that he was here on a private invitation.

I'm working on something that will hopefully allay your (and anyone else's) concerns on our relations with Israel. Lets see if it comes through.

shyamd · Post by **shyamd** » 26 Mar 2011 19:44

Suppiah wrote: There is no jewish vote bank in India....so the self-interest in one case matches national interest and in other case may no may not...

Exactly. Thats why we don't see it as useful to maintain close ties with senior jewish religious figures. Ultimately, vote bank politics is democracy. Its a negative exernality that the leader of the day supports something just to maintain power i.e. the Short termism that Brihaspatiji is talking about - this is actually one of the reasons why political scientists don't really believe in democracy as a way of rule.

In KSA, the clerics are pretty much tied to the rulers, hence why we should maintain some form of contact with them. Not to mention we have 4 million or so indians in the gulf. So what about them? We need to protect their interests and these sort of connections can help when needed. Don't read too much into it.

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 26 Mar 2011 21:04

Democracy is a method of representation in the rashtra, and it is usually not confused with the rashtra itself. so democracy should not be blamed for faults of the rashtra.

The Jama Masjid renovation would be too publicly visible, and the offer came at a time when the UP politics was cloudy, the Barelvi Sunni fight had not yet taken a decisive turn. Given that any "collaboration" is justified without the now legendary caution as per convenience, [excuse of caution and uncertain outcome to cover for inaction, while excuse of realpolitik to jump into shaking hands with dubious regimes whose own outcomes are uncertain] - if everything is determined by immediate "tactical gain" how can we claim that there are red-lines? What makes it so certain that at a given political juncture, GOI or the sections behind it are not going to pull off similar "justified concerns and reasons" to justify much more than Jama masjid renovations?

There is nothing really to claim that certainty. Adjustments and compromises happen in small apparently innocent accommodations. Over time this then becomes the staging post for the next round of compromises since the very idea of compromises have already been legitimized. To pass it off as small concessions but long run reversals kept firmly in mind - we need to see concrete manifestations. Reduction in flow of Saudi funds into private religious institutions, decrease in the numbers of such institutions, less preachers going to KSA to get trained and returning and gaining followers, - need to see all that. Sections of the Indian Ulema have already planned and declared their intention to become political entities. Would like to see a KSA move to dismantle that political trend.

We are backing an outgoing and decadent dynasty. We are helping the mullahcracy that flourished in an alliance with these feudals find a potential new field in India. We know that Western Christian evangelists see India as the new field where they must move to survive and we know what money power behind them can achieve. Are we preparing to similarly welcome another failed theocracy as and when they are pushed out and come and spread and survive and flourish in India?

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 26 Mar 2011 22:32

Dr As Sudais's statements - how authentic and reliable are they for "Indian strategic thinkers"? GOI? which one of his faces are we using to fool public opinion?

Sacranie, Iqbal, Muhammad Abdul Bari & Mehboob Kantharia, et al. Interview with John Ware. A Question of Leadership. Panorama. BBC London, England. August 21, 2005.

Sheikh Abdur-Rahman Al-Sudais, Imam, Ka'ba, Mecca, Saudi Arabia: The history of Islam is the best testament to how different communities can live together in peace and harmony. Muslims must exemplify the true image of Islam in their interaction with other communities.

John Ware: Sheikh Sudais is a leading Imam from the great mosque in Mecca, Islam's holiest city. He had one voice for his Western audience - another for his followers in Saudi. Sheikh Abdur-Rahman Al-Sudais: The worst…of the enemies of Islam are those…whom he…made monkeys and pigs, the aggressive Jews and oppressive Zionists and those that follow them: the callers of the trinity and the cross worshippers…those influenced by the rottenness of their ideas, and the poison of their cultures the followers of secularism…how can we talk sweetly when the Hindus and the idol worshippers kuffar... indulge in their overwhelming hatred against our brothers…in Muslim Kashmir…

Was Ware lying? Why no defamation suit against him? Just out of "tolerance"?

Moore, Charles (July 9, 2005). "Where is the Gandhi of Islam?". The Daily Telegraph. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main ... xml&page=2 . "In Mecca two years ago, al Sudais described Jews as ‘scum of the earth’, ‘rats of the world’ and ‘monkeys and pigs who should be annihilated’.

In general for India, if any western gov denies visa or decided to prevent Indian figures on charges of "hatred incitement" then it is proof positive that those individuals are indeed guilty. Canada decided to prevent As Sudais's entry into Canada.

http://www.antisemitism.org.il/article/ ... ng-country

Canada / 18-05-2004
Canada – A Saudi Imam is Banned From Entering the Country

The Canadian Government has decided to prevent the entry into the country Sheikh Abdul Rahman Al-Sudais, the Imam of the Great Mosque of Mecca, because of his preaching of hatred of the Jews. Al-Sudais did not apply for a visa to the Canadian authorities. The General Director of the Islamic Center of Toronto, who according to the media, was behind the Sheikh's invitation to Canada, denied that he had invited the Imam to participate in a mass gathering that began on 18th May. The decision to ban the Imam's entry into Canada is part of the authorities' campaign against antisemitism, in the light of recent events in Toronto and Montreal, and against racist incitement in general.

http://www.alharamainsermons.org/eng/mo ... cle&sid=71
As-Sudais "dearly loved and popular sermon" on April 9th, 2002.

Read the history to know that yesterday’s Jews are evil predecessors and today’s Jews are worse successors. They an ingrate people, they altered God’s words, worshipped calf, killed Messengers and denied their Messages. They are exiled people and the worst of mankind. Allaah cursed them and cast His wrath upon them. He turned some of them to monkeys and pigs and worshippers of creatures. They are worst in position and are astray from the right path.

History of Jews is full of deception, trickery, rebellion, oppression, evil and corruption. They always seek to cause mischief on the earth and Allaah loves not the mischief-makers. They even insulted Allaah. The Quraan says,

“The Jews say: ‘Allaah’s Hand is tied up (i.e. He does not give and spend of His Bounty). Be their hands tied up and be they accursed for what they uttered.’”

(Al-Maaidah 5:64)

High and Glorified is Allaah above what they uttered.

They have accused Allaah’s Messengers with great and heinous crimes. They harmed Prophet Moosa, denied Eesaa, killed Yahyaa and Zakariya and attempted to kill Prophet Muhammad. They used magic spell on him and poisoned food for him. Allaah addresses them,

“Is it that whenever there came to you a Messenger with what you yourselves desired not, you grew arrogant? Some, you disbelieved and some you killed…”

(Al-Baqarah 2:87)

Fellow Muslims! Today we are facing the most severe war against the enemies of yesterday, today and tomorrow; a war against the descendants of Banu Qurayzah,[the tribe all whose adult males were publicly beheaded, women taken as slaves and sold with the exception of one selected by the prophet for personal use] Banu Nadeer, Banu Qaynuqaa.* May everlasting curse of Allaah be upon them. Can our people now understand the true colour of these accursed and erroneous people after their evil have become widespread and their aggression has become well-known?
[...]
Allaahu Akbar! These are signs of victory: Jihaad has remained the only wining card and the light of hope in the hands of those sincere people among the Ummah, for playing politics and using all kinds of oppression have failed.

Even though emotions are high over the issue of Palestine, we should however not let that overpower our reason and wisdom and take the matter out of Islaamic control and regulation.

We must put all efforts to reform ourselves, and awaken from forgetfulness and spread deep awareness. Also, we must take strong, studied and constructive steps in fighting the Jewish evil machinations with wisdom and resoluteness.

Brethren in Faith! It is an obligation of every Muslim to stand beside our Muslim brethren in Palestine, to assist them morally and financially and to fight along with them in the cause of Allaah. In many verses of the Quraan and the Sunnah fighting with one’s wealth is given preference over fighting with one’s soul. Allaah says,

“O you who believe! Shall I guide you to a trade that will save you from a painful torment? That you believe in Allaah and His Messenger and that you strive hard and fight in the cause of Allaah with your wealth and your lives: that will be better for you, if you but know.”

(As-Saff 61:10-11)

The Messenger of Allaah said, “Fight the polytheists with your tongues, wealth and lives.” (Muslim)
A true Muslim does not hesitate to spend and gives in the way of Jihaad and sacrifice. Allaah says,
“Behold! You are those who are called to spend in the cause of Allaah, yet among you are some who are niggardly. And whoever is niggardly, it is only at the expense of his own self. But Allaah is rich and you (mankind) are poor. And if you turn away (from Islaam and obedience to Allaah), He will exchange you for some other people and they will not be like yourselves.”
(Muhammad 47:38)

"Saudi Imam Preaches Hate". International Broadcasting Bureau. April 25, 2002.

On April 19th, a prominent Saudi imam said in a sermon broadcast on radio and television that Arabs ‘must say farewell to peace initiatives’ with the Jewish state. Even worse, the sermon by Sheikh Abdulrahman Al-Sudais [shake ahb-d’l-RAHKH-mahn ah-soo-DAYSS] was filled with anti-Semitic vitriol.

Preaching at the Grand Mosque in Mecca, Islam’s holiest shrine, Sheikh Sudais called Jews ‘the scum of humanity…the rats of the world…prophet killers…pigs and monkeys.’ He prayed to God to "terminate" the Jews.

In addition to spewing such villainous bile, Sheikh Sudais also claimed falsely that the Israelis ‘aspire to tear down the al-Aqsa mosque [in Jerusalem] to build their so-called temple on its ruins.’ In fact, the Israeli government has never expressed any interest in tearing down the mosque, which is built near the ruins of a Jewish temple. On the contrary, Israel respects Muslim holy sites and has pledged to keep them accessible to all."

Interview with Tim Russert. Adel Al-Jubeir, Foreign Policy Advisor to Crown Prince Abdullah on NBC's ‘Meet the Press’. Meet the Press. NBC Washington, DC. May 18, 2003.
MR. RUSSERT: But it went on and on, and you mention imams in Saudi Arabia. This is what a top Saudi Arabian religious leader said, using inflammatory anti-Semitic rhetoric -- "Pray to Allah to terminate Jews. Urge all Muslims to shun peace with Israel." Shaikh Abdelrahman al-Sudais, one of the top imams in Saudi Arabia, called on Muslims to say farewell to peace initiatives with these people, Jews. He prayed to the Muslim God to terminate the Jews, whom he called the scum of humanity, rats of the world, prophet killers, pigs and monkeys.
MR. AL-JUBEIR: That's also incorrect. And he was reprimanded for this.
MR. RUSSERT: He was reprimanded?
MR. AL-JUBEIR: Oh, yes.
MR. RUSSERT: Is he still preaching?
MR. AL-JUBEIR: Yes, he is. But he's not -- I think if he had a choice he would retract these words -- he would not have said these words. It's clearly not right. You cannot -- you cannot defile, you cannot malign other people, certainly not when it comes to their faith.

So there is no blanket denial that As Sudais did say such stuff. We see soon after, from 2003-4 onwards that he is given a lot of publicity in calling for "peaceful coexisting with non-Muslims".

So he and his colleagues (I can name quite a few others) have been given a reigning in order since it gives out the underlying thinking.

Which one of his statements should we believe? If you say the "hatred" was meant for a particular audience, and not sincerely meant, why should not his public statements here be similarly suspect as not authentic? Once you show someone willing to lie publicly why can you exempt him from similarly shamming in the other direction?

Rony · Post by **Rony** » 27 Mar 2011 04:34

Indian navy vessels arrive at Jubail Port??

Three Indian navy ships from the Southern Naval Command - INS Tir, INS Krishna and ICGS Veera - arrived at Jubail Port Thursday, as part of efforts to enhance relations with Saudi Arabia.
The Southern Naval Command is the First Training Squadron of the Indian Navy. It has been training officers and sailors of the Indian Navy in basic courses and specializations at various stages of their careers. It also offers training courses to cadets of other friendly countries.
A press conference was held Thursday on board the INS Tir, which was addressed by Talmiz Ahmad, Ambassador of India to the Kingdom; Captain K.N Sushil, Southern Naval commander, Kochi; and Captain Sanjiv Issar, Commanding Officer INS Tir.
Ahmad stressed the importance of dialogue and identified areas of common maritime and other interest between India and Saudi Arabia.
He said India has long-standing and strong relations with Saudi Arabia, which was strengthened by the recent visit of Manmohan Singh, the Indian Prime Minister, to the Kingdom.
“Relations are improving with strategic partnerships in defense, culture, politics, energy and economics.”
He added that A.K. Antony, India’s Defense Minister, will visit the Kingdom on May 7 in Riyadh, which will further strengthen bilateral relations between the two countries.
“I am very delighted with the visit of the three Indian naval ships. They are part of historic maritime linkages that India has had with the Gulf for several centuries. Ours is a mission of goodwill and friendship. We want to exchange ideas with the personnel of the Saudi Navy about development, technology, strategy and tactics,” he added.
Issar said that around 500 crew members are on board the three ships which include training officers and sailors of the Southern Indian Navy.
He said they had previously visited Muscat and Abu Dhabi before Jubail.
After four days of maritime joint exercises and talks with their Saudi counterparts, they will be leaving for India on Sunday.
“The Saudi government welcomes our visit and we will exchange ideas to benefit each other,” said Sushil.
Hydrographic surveys to determine sea borders will be one of the major topics under discussion. Various Indian cultural programs were held on the ship, including Bharathanattyam, a Panjabi dance.
Also present at the event were Colonel Garbiel Benescu (Defense, Military, Air & Naval Attaché of the Embassy of Romania, Riyadh); and Captain Keith Pollock (Defense Attaché of New Zealand Embassy, Riyadh).

krisna · Post by **krisna** » 27 Mar 2011 06:49

The Coming Shia War

The Al-Khalifas have ruled Bahrain for nearly two centuries, much of the time as a British protectorate, and for the last forty or so years as an emirate and most recently as a kingdom. With centuries of Persian rule up to about the mid 18th century, the majority of Bahrainis profess the Shia sect of Islam.

Unlike other rulers in the Persian Gulf, the Al-Khalifas have had to contend with four major handicaps: (i) Bahrain has no oil or natural gas wealth to speak of, (ii) it is literally a stone’s throw away from the Eastern Province of Saudi Arabia, where most of Saudi Arabia’s 15 percent or so Shia population live, (iii) the Al-Sauds, who financially support the Al-Khalifas, viscerally hate the Shia and have subjugated and deprived them for decades, and (iv) the Sunnis are, at most, 30 percent of Bahrain’s population. The Al-Khalifas find themselves between a rock and hard place.

The Al-Khalifas have thrown their lot in with the Al-Sauds by mistreating their Shia majority. The Shia communities have less of everything the Sunni minority enjoys: modern infrastructure, healthcare, education, jobs, wealth, and a whole host of other privileges. To buttress their rule, the Al-Khalifas have put together a harsh security force largely made up of foreign mercenaries: Pakistanis, Jordanians and Yemenis. They have actively recruited and granted citizenship to Sunnis to increase their numbers. And most recently they have “invited” Saudi forces (accompanied by a few from the UAE to afford the Saudis GCC cover) to help them put down the protests, called on Kuwait to help patrol their waters, arrested the leaders of the Shia opposition for no valid reason, killed peaceful protesters and declared a three-month state of emergency, banning any and all peaceful demonstrations. This is not a pretty picture of Al-Khalifa rule in Bahrain—selling the country to the Al-Sauds and starting a process that could surely be classified as ethnic cleansing. Is this something the United States can afford to embrace? No.

How can the United States and Europeans freeze the assets of the Gaddafi clan, condemn the use of overwhelming force and mercenaries, and say virtually nothing about Bahrain and Saudi Arabia’s role therein? How can they use military intervention to protect those in peril in Libya and do nothing in Bahrain except to advise ‘restraint’ to all parties?

Iran’s population is more than the population of the rest of the Persian Gulf combined, while the combined population of Iran and Iraq, both majority Shia countries, is about four times that of the six countries that make up the Gulf Cooperation Council. Iran and Iraq are respectively 90 and 60 percent Shia, while Bahrain is about 70 percent Shia. Iraqi Shia know what it is like to be discriminated against after decades under Saddam Hussein. In fact Iraqis already protested in Basra last week in support of their brethren in Bahrain. One thing is for sure. Iran, Iraq and their surrogates, such as Hezbollah, will not stand idly by and let this persecution against Shia gather momentum. They will intervene with ominous implications not only for Bahrain, but also for the rest of the GCC and for the future of the United States in the Persian Gulf.

King Abdullah has reportedly taken the position that he will never allow Shia to have a say in shaping their destiny in Bahrain. Such a position is a morally reprehensible. How dare he interfere in the internal affairs of another country? How dare he quash the justifiable demands of a people?

If we continue to support despots in the Middle East we are handing Iran and Iraq unbelievable propaganda material. It is they who will have the moral high ground. We are giving them carte blanche to interfere in Bahrain, and eventually in Saudi Arabia, as the only means to prevent killings and ultimately ethnic cleansing. We are putting them on the right side of history. We must stop looking at each event in isolation. These are the conflicts that, if not addressed today, will beget the massive wars of the future.

Suppiah · Post by **Suppiah** » 27 Mar 2011 07:29

The 'track record' of our valued friend Saudi mullah is interesting.....it seems more anti-Israel than anti-India but who knows?

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 27 Mar 2011 07:56

I bolded the ref to "qufr idol worshippers" who torture "Muslims" in "Kashmir". But go ahead and search out, he has gems scattered all around in his sermons and speeches, and his two primary angst appears to be against "Qufr" repression on KM's and "iblis Jews" repression on Palestinian muslims. Moreover one of his dearly beloved and globally popular sermons I quoted has a passage that frets and fumes about the deviation of the primacy of "Islamism" and islamic objectives in the Palestinian struggle into mere "nationalism". He thundered about the need to keep it focused on "Islamic" objective and not just nationalism. Which should send the keynote of his thinking loud and clear. Nationalism is subordinated in his thinking to "Islamic" objectives. He is more guarded since 2003. But about leopards and spots...

Klaus · Post by **Klaus** » 27 Mar 2011 11:27

brihaspati wrote:Democracy is a method of representation in the rashtra, and it is usually not confused with the rashtra itself. so democracy should not be blamed for faults of the rashtra.

The Jama Masjid renovation would be too publicly visible, and the offer came at a time when the UP politics was cloudy, the Barelvi Sunni fight had not yet taken a decisive turn. Given that any "collaboration" is justified without the now legendary caution as per convenience, [excuse of caution and uncertain outcome to cover for inaction, while excuse of realpolitik to jump into shaking hands with dubious regimes whose own outcomes are uncertain] - if everything is determined by immediate "tactical gain" how can we claim that there are red-lines? What makes it so certain that at a given political juncture, GOI or the sections behind it are not going to pull off similar "justified concerns and reasons" to justify much more than Jama masjid renovations?

B ji is indeed Vichatavak Shikhamani!

Means one who is gifted and spritually endowed with striking precision, depth and clarity of utterances/writing.

UBanerjee · Post by **UBanerjee** » 27 Mar 2011 12:13

Brihaspati ji, that is a very accurate exposé on the Saudi imam. These fellows are well-known to drip honeyed words when the situation calls for it, while spewing fire and brimstone among the fanatical. There have been many such exposures, tapings of speeches given in Arabic in the "privacy" of the mosque where no foreigner was supposed to hear, including in Western nations among the so-called "moderate Islamists".

It's always best to keep that in mind; the idea of subordination to kufr is always a dangerous idea, subject to intra-Islamic forces that will degenerate any equilibrium (it is one thing to trade with the kufr, another to become one of them). At least pending some reformation that demolishes the literal authority of their holy texts. These forces are the ones now spreading virally from Makkah and Medina, even to the traditionally relaxed Islam, tamed by dharmic forces, of Bangladesh, Malaysia and Indonesia. The deep-rooted memes of "exclusive, alien, superior" will never leave Islam until drastic changes take place.

sum · Post by **sum** » 27 Mar 2011 18:11

Brihaspati ji, that is a very accurate exposé on the Saudi imam. These fellows are well-known to drip honeyed words when the situation calls for it, while spewing fire and brimstone among the fanatical. There have been many such exposures, tapings of speeches given in Arabic in the "privacy" of the mosque where no foreigner was supposed to hear, including in Western nations among the so-called "moderate Islamists".

Simple religion proscribed logic called Taqiyya

shyamd · Post by **shyamd** » 28 Mar 2011 01:37

Todays IM panders up to several such figures like Z Naik. Who knows, maybe he was secretly giving out terror speeches or maybe IM was giving him discourse on Kashmir muslims and their repression, maybe it might go one step further to helping them understand Kashmir from IM eyes or maybe it is one step towards their aim of ruling 'Hind' once again.

Whatever his intentions... we have an interest in West Asia (oil, our economy etc) and the millions of NRIs living there. Maintaining links with individuals helps preserve our interests. Is he dodgy? Yes. Are his friends dodgy? Yes.

All of this ultimately comes down to our scenario that I posted in the TSP thread.

shyamd wrote:
ramana wrote:ShyamD, You need to elaborate on the pressures and demands on TSPA which make it weak and overstretched. Not many know this aspect.
Sure. Its simple. They are deployed in the northern borders, fighting Af-Pak under cover, internal security duties in Balochistan plus foot troops in Kashmir and then they have to watch Indian border etc. You have your boss/financier (KSA et al) who want you to help them out against Iran or any internal unrest. You have TSP top guns who are part of the navy/air force in the middle east. With all these internal troubles and now possible Iran war looming, many TSPA troops are not even sitting in TSP, they are in the arab peninsula. MI6 walla's landing in Pindi are not talking about India border, they are talking about NWFP and Arabian peninsula issues - which just goes to back up what I am saying.

Then on top of that, if lets say a war between India and Pak take place, whats Kayani going to say to his boss/financier in KSA? Sheikhji can I bring back my troops, India is preparing for war. KSA is gonna say, listen birather, if you take your troops back to TSP, you are breaking our agreement and we can no longer provide aid for you as you are jeopardizing sunni islam, the land of the 2 holy mosques as Iran can give us a lot of trouble etc etc.

So KSA spy chief is landing in Delhi not for chai-biskoot but saying to us, lay off TSP, we'll give you good deals. US is nodding in the background saying yes, we want you to have peaaceee onlee so that the US can give TSPA a kick in the backside to do some operations chasing taliban up and down NWFP/FATA.

TSPA chief is saying come lets have some CBM, lay off us and we wont do anything. Now as Gaganji has rightly pointed out, as soon as all this lovey dovey CBM stuff is over and US pull out, TSPA regains its influence in Gandhaara. He's going to have a lot of abduls on his hands with AK47s and not a lot to do. These abduls could further take over parts of Pak and go gung ho for Islamabad. Or Kayani/ISI could choose to re-direct energies to Kaafir India.

So, in a few years time, ISI is going to be issuing orders to conduct a super major strike in India that will kick off a war. 26/11 failed to start the war that they soo badly wanted. So this time ISI has to think of something bigger. This is when the Jihadi with nukes scenario is going to come into play.

To summarise: Iran is not going to go nuklear until 2015 at the earliest. So, at some point US/GCC/Israel has to defang Iran or teach it a lesson. I see a safe Kashmir, India (apart from a few small terror strikes here or there) for the next few years until TSP get released from their Af-Pak duties and GCC duties.

What does India need to do?

The options are quite limited, India should get the US to stay in Afghanistan, as Kashmiri terrorist don't want to fight yindu soldiers but they are after the big power - the US (the dajjal/the higher caste kaafir). US doesn't have the economic appetite to stay the course in Afghanistan.

Next option is arm the Tajik's/old school Northern Alliance guys and open a significant front. Or you hope for the Iranians to get stronger and make the KSA even more scared of Iran. So, KSA forces TSP to deploy more assets in the GCC coupled with a drawn out Northern Alliance v Taleb war.

This might be the ideal situation where KSA is forced to economically support India (which is what our west asia ties are about) in return for keeping the Indo Pak border safe (which is also what we want). It buys time for us to clear out the militancy. Pak is overstretched and is fighting in the northern front, as well as having significant numbers deployed on the peninsula. India grows economically, safe border, room for options, our resources can be deployed to the navy etc etc.

This is just the skeleton of what I think will happen. There is still lots to talk about such as the PRC/Russia role in all of this, Iraq etc etc.

Just my 2 pence.

So I guess, the summary of the post was that the barrel of the gun is pointing in a different direction for the next 4 years. But its going to be back on us a few years after that. So, whats our move? Whats our game plan?

I dont think my post invoked the meaningful debate that I was hoping to create on the situation that we are facing.

Brihaspati has raised a very good question actually, to what extent do we build/shut our relations with West Asia? Also, Can we limit IM influence with the KSA establishment and to what extent? These are the same questions that our strategists are asking ourselves today.

The aim at the moment is to use West Asian $$'s to develop our economy, which in turn gives us the political, defence power to exert our influence. Cutting us off from their money, may mean our economy doesn't develop AS fast as it could. Less money in our coffers to develop the ecoonomy, which means more resources as a percentage that should be used to boost growth is taken away for defence.

When I speak about democracy, lets look around us. Does the wider public have the knowledge and maturity to vote based on our long term aims? Last I heard, in TN they are still handing out $$'s and saree's, grinders, mixies etc to win a vote. From who's money? My tax money, Our tax money. People still want to vote based on caste lines or short term gains. How do you instill such long term views in our society? The feeling I get back home, is that people are living in their own world and don't really care about whats going on a thousand miles away in West Asia or on our borders. When vijayanagar united, who took those decisions? Was it the people or the ruling establishment? If we look at our hindu system, we have the policymakers to make the policy and we have the implementers of the policy. Using Vijaynagar would be a useful comparison. We in BRF want a strong hindu nationalist leader to come to power - but does the rest of our educated and under-educated see this? When we talk of Israel, their entire polity is united in their political aims to a certain extent. In India, does the majority share the similar larger political aims?

These are just my thoughts.

I'm really busy this week, so I'd hope someone can take the lead on such a debate.

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 28 Mar 2011 01:53

shyamd wrote:Todays IM panders up to several such figures like Z Naik. Who knows, maybe he was secretly giving out terror speeches or maybe IM was giving him discourse on Kashmir muslims and their repression, maybe it might go one step further to helping them understand Kashmir from IM eyes or maybe it is one step towards their aim of ruling 'Hind' once again.

Whatever his intentions... we have an interest in West Asia (oil, our economy etc) and the millions of NRIs living there. Maintaining links with individuals helps preserve our interests. Is he dodgy? Yes. Are his friends dodgy? Yes.

All of this ultimately comes down to our scenario that I posted in the TSP thread.

Indian objective should be that Indians living in West asia can worship their religion in the region.
If Indian cannot propagate their religion then India should not allow them to propagate inside India.

shyamd · Post by **shyamd** » 28 Mar 2011 03:14

Acharya wrote: Indian objective should be that Indians living in West asia can worship their religion in the region.
If Indian cannot propagate their religion then India should not allow them to propagate inside India.

That means changing India's identity into a Hindu country rather than a secular nation. Not just that, you must have a hindu leader who can negotiate this, like the pope has done in the interfaith dialogue they had with king Abdullah a few years ago. This opened KSA up a little to christianity.

Can we create a hindu national council (with representation from the various schools of thought) to organise our community and negotiate? Which will be able to have a vatican type relationship with its people. What model do we look for? Will the Kangress and pseudo-secular types allow this and more importantly do the hindus in India identify with hindu identity incorporated into politics? I guess we do to a certain extent with BJP, but again, if all hindu's believed in this, we are 80% of the population, why haven't we voted in BJP every time? When I tried selling this to a politically active hindu. He replied to me: "I agree with everything you said. But these politics are heavily controlled by brahmins, they don't like letting other castes in, and as soon as you have a meeting with them, they all bunch into their brahmin clique and they don't let other castes in. I can't tolerate this type of behaviour".

Just thinking out aloud.

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 28 Mar 2011 03:18

shyamd wrote:
That means changing India's identity into a Hindu country rather than a secular nation. Not just that, you must have a hindu leader who can negotiate this, like the pope has done in the interfaith dialogue they had with king Abdullah a few years ago. This opened KSA up a little to christianity.

Inside India it is a secular governance but that cannot be an identity of the nation for rest of the world. There is no "secular religion" which is recognized in the world. Rest of the world looks at every Indian as an "Hindu". This is the first thing Indians have to understand.

shyamd · Post by **shyamd** » 28 Mar 2011 03:23

Thats great Acharyaji. But the moment you start uniting India into a Hindu India. Then, you are going to have media, pseudo secs, so called Human Rights groups coming and poking you saying you are racist, you are damaging rights of minority groups blah blah. You know the rest. Then the popular media reacts and influences the majority.

Do we trust the majority of Hindu's to make a decision under Hindu interests? How many times have we done so?

I know we are running off topic here. But its worth a thought.

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 28 Mar 2011 03:26

shyamd wrote:Thats great Acharyaji. But the moment you start uniting India into a Hindu India.

It is only for the external world and for the media to project our Hindu world view.
Who said it needs the Hindus to be united inside India.

RamaY · Post by **RamaY** » 28 Mar 2011 03:42

Shyamdji,

India is a pluralistic society and the foundations of it are in SD whether one understands/acknowledges it or not. Indian demand for religious tolerance in West-Asia is based on that pluralistic world-view and in the interests of its multi-cultural citizenry. This MUST not be seen and projected as Hindu ==.

Your rant on Indian democracy is unjustified. The issue is neither the population who were denied basic economic opportunities and nor the democratic system as it is. The issue is with the political parties, the very policy makers that you want to have a freehand in defining and implementing the West-Asia policy. Don't you think it is in fact the inherent success of democracy that BJP is not coming in to power every time even though majority of the population is Hindu? That politically active Hindu you spoke to is ignorant*. What is the proportion of Brahmins in political positions starting from Gram-Panchayats to MLAs to MPs to GoI Cabinet?

Acharya-ji is correct in that irrespective of what India internally is, it will be seen as a Hindu nation by other nations and societies. Majority of Hindus do make their decisions under Hindu/Indian interests if you look at macro trends; and they have done at every time it is required.

So India should DEMAND acceptance of religious pluralism and democracy in west-asia as a precondition for its support in internal/international matters of GCC members. Their petro-$$s are not rescuing them today and it will be our stupidity to sell our value system and national interests for few $$$s.

*P.S: Ignorance and political activism are not mutually exclusive as we have been seeing lately with RG, MMS, PC, LKA etc.,

shyamd · Post by **shyamd** » 28 Mar 2011 04:11

Thanks for the reply.

RamaY wrote:Shyamdji,

India is a pluralistic society and the foundations of it are in SD whether one understands/acknowledges it or not. Indian demand for religious tolerance in West-Asia is based on that pluralistic world-view and in the interests of its multi-cultural citizenry. This MUST not be seen and projected as Hindu ==.

They are opening up minus KSA. Most of the GCC have Hindu temples and are granting more temples. Its mainly KSA that doensn't really believe in a multi-cultural society. And thats mainly due to the fact that they want to protect their culture, i suppose that goes for the other GCC nations too. THey feel their culture is under threat - (read dubai police chiefs comments). THey feel that UAE may become another state of India and the world is going to push this down their throats. They are quite scared of the day when expats are going to start demanding their rights. The Chief felt that day is coming soon.

Your rant on Indian democracy is unjustified. The issue is neither the population who were denied basic economic opportunities and nor the democratic system as it is. The issue is with the political parties, the very policy makers that you want to have a freehand in defining and implementing the West-Asia policy. Don't you think it is in fact the inherent success of democracy that BJP is not coming in to power every time even though majority of the population is Hindu? That politically active Hindu you spoke to is ignorant. What is the proportion of Brahmins in political positions starting from Gram-Panchayats to MLAs to MPs to GoI Cabinet?

The problem with democracy is that they'll do anything to keep power and it creates a whole list of negative externalities. I just dont have the feeling that Indian society (apart from the well educated types) have the maturity to vote based on national or long term interests and also foreign policy. I guess it depends where you go. This is just my experience - I may be wrong. It would also be interesting to see how many nations were democracies when they developed?
My comments were in the context of unifiying under a hindu leadership to defend Hindu or Indian interests. I made that comment because there are some who lack trust in the current leadership to protect Hindu/Indian interest.

The poltically activeperson was speaking about uniting under the BJP. Nothing to do with cabinet or other local level orgs.

Majority of Hindus do make their decisions under Hindu/Indian interests if you look at macro trends; and they have done at every time it is required.

Can you give us some examples please?

So India should DEMAND acceptance of religious pluralism and democracy in west-asia as a precondition for its support in internal/international matters of GCC members. Their petro-$$s are not rescuing them today and it will be our stupidity to sell our value system and national interests for few $$$s.

Good debate. Within the GCC it differs depending on country. Bahrain, Oman perhaps the most open. Others are a bit more hardline.

Another thing is, you can't go and say you MUST have democracy just because we have it. This is not about their internal matters - really the scenario I posted comes down to our dealings with Pakistan and our economy. Pakistan will be inherently weak, would you want to take advantage of it? Do you want to take advantage of $$'s heading our way that can really help our economy and thereby improve livelihoods. To what extent and how can we limit the influence of radicalism as a result of this if we choose to accept?

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 28 Mar 2011 04:31

To really go into this, we will need to bring up the degree of interdependence that exists between the mullahcracy and Saudi "royalty" and its historical trajectory up to current times. That will not be comfortable reading and discussion.

For me, given the alignment of rashtryia institutions as they stand, the logical framework and justifications being dished out - its uncannily similar to the mindset, logic, and course of events that happened with the upper west coast of India from 7th to 14th century. Communications and transports were slower then so events took a longer time, less people so battles were short but wars long, and economies were smaller so conflicts had to take resting gaps. No such escape routes now.

Exactly the same arguments about trade from across the pond, capital flow from across the pond, relationships maintained and preachers allowed to come and settle and spread - with active participation of trading hotshots from Indian non-Islamic side in protecting such "investments" - this was how the last Gujarat kings, and earlier the Sindhi rich Buddhist urban merchants handed over the region.

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 28 Mar 2011 04:34

brihaspati wrote:
Exactly the same arguments about trade from across the pond, capital flow from across the pond, relationships maintained and preachers allowed to come and settle and spread - with active participation of trading hotshots from Indian non-Islamic side in protecting such "investments" - this was how the last Gujarat kings, and earlier the Sindhi rich Buddhist urban merchants handed over the region.

Good that you came to the debate.
They want to be dalal and make us slaves of foriegn culture and religion. 1000 year of history has been wiped out of their mind.

shyamd · Post by **shyamd** » 28 Mar 2011 04:42

First thing is, No one is opening up to Islamism. If the Saudi's choose to invest in Infrastructure bonds etc, what relation does that have to do with us selling our country away? I guess its good to take the IM community away from KSA mullahcracy. But how can you impose or do that? Whats the solution to this?

Also, I guess to both Brihaspati and Acharya, what is your vision for India? The barrel is going to point at us in 4 years. What do you want to do in the next 4 years before it does?

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 28 Mar 2011 06:22

No one is opening up to Islamism? How do we come to that conclusion? Even after As-Sudais is allowed to address a public gathering of IM and his alleged role in settling ideological/policy conflicts around Vastanvi? What study of data on Saudi origin funds flow to Islamic Dawa networks in India? What is the latest balance of forces [occupation of mosques, Dawa institutions, masjid committees, majlises, funds, land ownership etc] between the Barevis and the Sunnis - and what are the current connections between the latter and the Saudis?

Saudi political/diplomatic/national and business interactions are never really free of the underlying equation that lies at the root of the apparent stability of the House of Saud - the close alliance between the mullahcracy and the house. The mullahcracy is not just a religious network that holds up the dynasty and mediates between the dynasty and the complex tribal power equations, but more importantly the mullahcracy serves as the international extension of the Saudi state into other countries which one way or the other are forced to walk with the Saudis - be it oil, capital, or deep mutual dirt and dependencies developed in an imperial past.

Thus the Saudi mullahcracy function in the same role and capacity as the Christian missionaries in the British and to a lesser extent the mainland European colonial project. Their function is to consolidate affiliation and focus on the "imperial" centre for "guidance" of the faithful - so that such affiliation and identification can then be used to manipulate the "unfaithful" or not yet fully dominated other nation as per needs of the imperialist centre.

In Indian history - from the time the first Arab raids happened, to the fall of Gujarat to Ulugh, there is a consistent pattern. The cycle is always started on the excuse of international trade, Indian merchant interests taking an active interest in fostering and protecting Arab "investments" and presence on Indian soil in the form of "business interests". But consistently there is also a pattern of associated establishment of Islamic institutions and they being allowed to freely convert locals - initially funded by this very same trade and formally led by the very same Islamic traders themselves.

Islamic trade initiatives are also consistently about spreading and consolidating their religious hold into target markets. This is always a joint Islamic ruler/regime/state and its investor/capitalist/merchant/trader project. Thus trade is always interwoven with negotiating for rights to found Islamic institutions for propagating Islam and the right to convert. The Islamics, like the other massive imperialist project of the Anglo-Saxon - have right from the beginning realized the value of organized religion and its propagation and conversion of the target market as part of the imperialist project.

I can safely and confidently predict that massive Saudi capital investment will accompany automatically tacit acceptance by the GOI and protection of increased Saudi origin and Sunni networked Dawa activities. That is a preparation to make it easier for a future Islamist take over of large tracts of regions within India.

Four years is too long. One way of saving the ME dynasties and authoritarians is to give a new project to the anger and frustration of the commons. If Israel is solidly protected, then better to turn that towards a "conquest" of India. What is being hoped for as a means of controlling such a thrust - a tie-up with the Saudis - will actually facilitate such "conquests". The Saudi royalty is not going to lift a single finger to turn any such moves. They know that their capital investments will either be safe or that they stand to gain much more in return for any collateral damage of such capital in India by its own ghazis.

GCC countries allowing a temple here and there does not mean anything. Intermarriages where a native Muslim woman marries an immigrant non-Muslim Indian man who retains his religion are virtually unknown - or at least they don't happen on GCC soil, but on further emigration in neutral third countries. Conversion into Hinduism or Sikh panth not allowed. So no serious demographic risk to islamism. The non-Muslim Indian communities remain vulnerable and easily coerced as and when needed. The recent uprisings should be examples.

In contrast, however, no such demographic barriers operate against Islamics in India. In fact the rashtra, government and media, academic establishment will go out of the way to protect and enhance exactly such activities from the Islamic side which are denied to non-muslims in GCC-land.

It seems only Indians fail to understand this.

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 28 Mar 2011 06:53

shyamd ji,
this is not the thread to talk of my vision for India. Actually, and ironically, I rather welcome Islamic misadventures sourced from across the pond and the drain into the regions of India most likely to be the recipients of such loving attentions. These will be the regions where already strong Sunni and indirectly Saudi affiliated networks are established. House of Saud wagging the little finger formally against or for such "misadventures" from the immediate west of our borders - actually has no effect on such "misadventures". They will be carried out anyway whether or not GOI makes good friends of the Saud or not.

I welcome it because at one stroke it exposes (a) the mercantilist hijacking of national interests (b) the fallacy of appeasement of totalitarians [not just kings] in neighbourhood as a policy (c) it subjects the population to the real face of the Islamist imperialist project (d) it weakens or partially destroys the political legitimacy of existing ruling structures in India that have continued in this path.

It is better to be mentally prepared for that eventuality, and when needed organize independently to face that in the most tactically flexible way - meaning complete lack of any ethical consideration in fighting back.

What about more mundane responses? Well how about asking for a restriction on influx of Saudi clerics for a start? How about putting pressure on the Deobandis and the Sunni board to gradually publicly announce how they also have uniquely Indian elements that are compatible with Islam - which in any case is supposed to be "universal" and not Arabia specific!

Promise help to the GCC dynasties against "AQ" led "miscreants" putting royal skins to sweat on the streets - only - and only if GCC agrees to collaborate in the carving up of Pakistan, with the major portion handed up to India.

The counter demands from India cannot be just about capital, it should also be veiled threats that otherwise India supports the "street" if Pak is not handed up on a platter. In return India will collaborate with GCC on a nuke shield - why not even a joint project to go for the H-B!

UBanerjee · Post by **UBanerjee** » 28 Mar 2011 07:19

The long-term game vis-a-vis Islam should be to promote and fund counterstrains that can compete with Saudi funded more rabid strains. In the game of nations going forward, China, India and the US will be the major players, but the Ummah will be the wild card that will be used by one against the other - demographically ripe, control of oil supplies, and unable to play at the high tables themselves. The US used this force against the Soviets and some helpful splash damage was created against India. But they are now struggling to contain the very same force. India's strategy has so far been unsurprising, but it will be interesting to see how it evolves going forward, as well as how China interacts with the same. I am particularly interested in how Christianity appears to be growing fast within China.

At the moment, only the Americans can claim to be brothers of the Book, although there are strong Greek and Roman pagan influences in American culture that are much less talked about.

abhishek_sharma · Post by **abhishek_sharma** » 28 Mar 2011 09:26

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 28 Mar 2011 09:34

shyamd wrote:
Also, I guess to both Brihaspati and Acharya, what is your vision for India? The barrel is going to point at us in 4 years. What do you want to do in the next 4 years before it does?

Indian interest comes first. Indian interest will be protected no matter what. This is the basic setup of a nation.

The cycle is always started on the excuse of international trade, Indian merchant interests taking an active interest in fostering and protecting Arab "investments" and presence on Indian soil in the form of "business interests".

This will not be allowed at the cost of Indian interest.

habal · Post by **habal** » 28 Mar 2011 09:40

US knows what pakistanis and Araps think about them and how they speak about them on the streets, and refer to them behind their back, yet they go all out to establish and maintain relations with these groups. As far as India is concerned, realpolitik demands the same and moreover they are also in our neighbourhood. But how we allow them to affect us, is of our choosing.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 28 Mar 2011 10:09

Nightwatch 25 March 2011

Bahrain: Sheikh Isa Qassim, a prominent Shiite cleric in Bahrain, said "brutal force" used against protestors will not keep them from continuing to demand rights and dignity. Qassim spoke at a Friday sermon in Duraz, a Shiite village and opposition center northwest of Manama. Thousands attended, despite a ban on public gatherings. Police and army maintained tight security.

Bahrain Social Development Minister Fatima al Beloushi said demonstrators who ran over unarmed policemen and beat up patients in a hospital have a foreign agenda and links to a neighboring country and Hezbollah. Al Beloushi said the government has direct proof the acts were instigated by a foreign country and Hezbollah provided training for the demonstrators.

Bahrain made a formal complaint to the Lebanese government over Hezbollah's offer of support to the mainly Shiite anti-government protestors in Bahrain. Foreign Minister Sheikh Khalid bin Ahmed al-Khalifa said Manama will not tolerate threats from a militant group and will consider lodging a complaint with international entities if Lebanon does not act. He said the decision to make a formal complaint was made in consultation with the Gulf Cooperation Council.

Foreign Minister Sheikh Khalid also had a warning for Iran, to stop meddling. He said," The threat from Iran could increase 'to any level' at a time of deep divisions between Iran and its Arab neighbors in the Persian Gulf region…. They could make mistakes in causing a conflict," Sheik Khalid said. "The campaign against us from Iran at this stage is political, but it could have a different posture at any time."

Comment: Bahrain and the Gulf Cooperation Council thus far have failed to present any evidence of Iranian or Hezbollah meddling. Some evidence, a trial or email exchange even, would strengthen the case for outside military intervention as well as begin to undermine the protest movement.

The complaint to the Lebanese government implies Bahrain at least believes its accusations against Hezbollah. It needs to produce an outside agent for the international press.

Special Comment: The intervention by the Shield Force has not secured the monarchy. The Shiite clerics sense the monarchy has been weakened by the secular youth protests which now have been suppressed. That provides them the opportunity to expand their influence, if not weaken the monarchy, by stoking unrest.

Thus, they have begun to emerge as the spokesmen for political change and the inciters of the next round of protests. The internal security problem is no longer an Arab youth event in Bahrain when the clerics get involved. Their involvement will reshape the security situation in ways that could invite more and more overt Iranian meddling, over time.

Saudi Arabia: Hundreds of people demonstrated, demanding the release of prisoners in the town of Rabiae in Qatif Province, Saudi Arabia,

Comment: The protests persist in defiance of a government ban. They all are located in eastern Saudi Arabia where the Shiites are the majority.

This situation is heading slowly in the direction of fragmentation. If the protests grow and become difficult to control, the Shiites will want greater autonomy in the provinces in which they are the majority of the population. That is the first stage of a fragmentation scenario.

{And KSA was busy supporting TSP to fragment India!}

Yemen: Today the "Day of Departure" protests took place in Yemen, after Friday prayers. By some accounts, hundred of thousands of protestors gathered in Sanaa. Soldiers fired warning shots to prevent regime loyalists, excited by a speech by President Saleh, from attacking protestors. Large rival crowds had assembled on the streets.

In his speech, President Saleh said he was willing to relinquish power, but only "to safe hands." He said he does not want power, that he is against "firing a single bullet," and that concessions are given to ensure that there is no bloodshed.

Comment: Today's statement is Saleh's third major concession to the crowds. First he said he would resign at the end of his term in 2013. Last week he said he would resign by the end of 2011 in a constitutional process. Today, he said he would pass power to someone with "safe hands," apparently at any time.

Today's statement not only encouraged the opposition to demand more immediately, it also reinforced that Saleh has given up and is looking for an exit strategy. The pattern is always the same. Concessions encourage the opposition.

Only overwhelming force will stop these protests, but there is a catch. The only sure way to determine whether the application of force was overwhelming is if the protests stop.

Possibly the most significant silence is that of Saudi Arabia. Earlier this week a scholar assessed that Saudi behavior indicates it is content to have Saleh overthrown and replaced. Saudi Arabia has made no public statement supporting Saleh and that is a certain sign that his time is very short.

Jordan: Six people were injured and one killed when supporters of the government pelted a group of protestors with stones in central Amman. The protestors -- approximately 1,000 in number -- demanded the firing of the prime minister and the dissolution of parliament.

Comment: Unlike Bahrain, the Jordanian protestors are not anti-monarchy. Should they become anti-monarchy, Jordan risks a civil conflict between the city folk and the Bedouin who back the King.
{Bahrain is shia-sunni, Jordan is all Sunni but urban want freedoms like in Egypt. Its not rural vs urban}

Syria: Unprecedented, illegal protests occurred after prayers today in Damascus, Duma, Latakia, Homs, Reka, Dar'a, Hamah and Tel. Across the nation, at least 23 people were confirmed killed by security forces. In Damascus, witnesses reported at least three killed in fights between supporters of the al Asad regime and its opponents.

Security forces killed at least 20 people in Sanamein, near Dar'a in an attempt to control anti-government demonstrations. One estimate assessed the crowd in Dar'a as 50,000 people. Protestors burned a statue of the late President Hafez al Asad in Dar'a, a witness said.

In Qatar, a "highly influential" Sunni Muslim cleric, Sheikh Yusuf al-Qardawi, mentioned the unrest in Syria in a sermon that was broadcast on al-Jazeera and posted on YouTube. "Today the train of revolution has arrived at a station that it was destined to reach, the Syrian station," he said. "It isn't possible for Syria to detach itself from the history of the Arab nation."

Comment: The train or street car metaphor, favored by Turkey's Prime Minister Erdogan, is being repeated widely in the Arab world. When spoken by a cleric, it means democracy is a station stop, not a terminal point, in Arab history.

The violence is a very good indicator that Bashar al Asad is not in control. The military and security chiefs are running this show.

Syria is a flip-flop version of Iraq under Saddam. In Iraq, the Sunni minority governed a Shiite and Kurdish majority. In Syria an even smaller Shiite sect - the Alawites -- govern a large Sunni majority with a steel fist.

The al Asad's are Alawites as are all the top leaders. Alawite generals are ruthless in handling internal security problems, because a mass uprising would destroy their regime and result in the massacre of their sect, if the Alawites ever lost control,

As long as the Alawites retain the loyalty of the army and can hold Damascus, unrest in outlying towns is not directly threatening. Dar'a is a long way from Damascus. Unrest is centripetal and will move to Damascus, if it has roots. When it reaches Damascus and the Alawite-led security forces prove unable to suppress it, then Asad's regime is in trouble.

Most officers are Alawites, so analysts should look for defections from the Sunni enlisted ranks. They also need to watch capital flight. Syria is run by an oligarchy that will be prone to bolt fast when the risks increase.

Finally, internal instability in Syria is a setback for Iran, Syria's most important ally, and for Hezbollah, one of Syria's beneficiaries and an Iranian proxy. Hezbollah warned its members to halt weekly trips to a shrine in Damascus and to avoid travel to Syria.

It is a potential boon for pro-western groups in Lebanon because Syrian attention has turned inward for now.

Israel: Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said Israel stands ready to act with great force and determination to end the recent acts of terror and rocket attacks. Netanyahu said any civilized society will not tolerate wanton attacks on its civilians.

Education Minister Gideon Saar estimated that the Israel Defense Forces eventually will have to carry out a large-scale operation in the Gaza Strip, bigger than Operation Cast Lead.

Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee Chairman Shaul Mofaz warned that continuing the stalemate in the peace process endangers lives and said the government should take the opportunity to advance on this issue. He said Israel is in need of a strategy that moves forward the diplomatic process with the Palestinians and talks with the Syrians, while simultaneously stopping rocket attacks. Palestinian militants crossed a red line recently, and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu must determine how to end the rocket attacks, Mofaz stated in a radio interview.

Comment: The words show a span of official opinion around a central theme: there will be a significant Israeli military operation in the Gaza Strip.

Curiously, if the Palestinian militant attacks are diversions to suppress youth protests against the Hamas regime, as reported, the Israelis can undermine Hamas by encouraging and clandestinely organizing a Palestinian youth spring, but they probably are already working on that. Thus far Hamas is no more tolerant of internal dissent than Iran or Syria.

Bahrain, KSA, Yemen and Syria are all mysteries and not puzzles.

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 28 Mar 2011 18:50

ramana ji,
it is not a mystery. I did warn of the possibility of the Islamic ME not necessarily remaining along the curve we box them into. I meant it primarily around Iran in my posts, but the trends and underlying themes were quite clear for some time in general for ME, and one can see this if he studies the history and socio-political trends in ME - not just along the lines presented by European scholarship or mullah-scholarship alone. History given to us is always, always an edited and interpreted version. But if you go beyond that to the sources, you can see patterns emerge - and the ME story is not a simple Islamist story, or a European colonial story.

I also warned that this first round will most likely strengthen the hands of a "reformed" clergy, who will pretend to support "revolution" to reposition them in power. But even this is not new - each time such uprisings happened, Islamist clergy divided itself into two factions, one of which hedged with the "uprising". The Islamist network ensured that the other faction would be protected if "uprising" succeeded. But the clergy will always quickly reconstruct a feudal elite dependent on themselves and go back to the usual business of an Islamist elite.

What is different this time around is the impossibility of insulating the youth completely from "dangerous" ideas. So the uprising will seek its own course in between the twin [and in many senses complementary] demands and desires of European imperialism and Islamic imperialism. The next gen will be the key to the final demise of mullahcracy. If Anglo-Saxon imperialism takes a hard knock before that then no-one will be left to protect mullahcracy - unless regimes like that of current India come to their rescue.

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 28 Mar 2011 18:56

By the way, Abhishek_sharma ji's posted pic shows that a formal GOI invitation is not really the issue here in case of Sudais. He is being consciously and deliberately "allowed" by the GOI. Honb'l PM'jis hand shake will one day come to haunt him and his party. How can a formal legislative functionary host an Islamist cleric at dinner? Media can of course be silent about the controversial Saudi cleric, but why should the GOI join in the Saudi royal project of whitewashing their clerics - by default? This is secularism? Do we see the same PM'ji shaking hands with domestic non-Muslim non-Christian "clerics" - like say the Shankaracharya? Self delusion has no limits I know, but deluding the people is an offense!

RamaY · Post by **RamaY** » 28 Mar 2011 19:19

ShyamD garu,

There is nothing wrong in GCC wanting to protect their culture, which is different from their religion; and India should not shy away from protecting its culture - which is pluralism and democracy (making public opinion part of the governance). Perhaps that Dubai Police Chief should be educated that GCC has in fact been under Bharatiya protection for millennia and there is nothing to be afraid of it, in addition to briefing him the benefits of Dubai becoming a state of Bharatiya federal structure. Also remind him that even at the height of Islamism it couldn't conquer India completely and couldn't rule the parts it occupied from its centers in west-asia.

In every system rulers want to extend their rule and that has nothing to do with democracy. What democracy in fact offers the citizenry is an opportunity to change the ruling coalition without war, rebellion and revolution; and the side benefit is peaceful and systematic transfer of power from one party to another. We have had much discussion on the [sic] contribution of the so-called "educated class". More than 90% of our elected leaders are graduates and nearly 100% of our babudom are graduates, yet it didn't reduce systemic corruption or make the governance effective; national interests, correcting Indian history and education system are not even in their horizon. I will bring everyone's favorite example USA; that society decided to go democratic, however non-inclusive it was, before it developed its society and became super power.

All GoI needs to do is to protect Indian Interests. There are no Hindu interests outside Indian interests, unlike muslim and christian interests. That is why you don't see Hindus unifiying under a hindu leadership. Coming to Hindu contribution to Indian Interests, do I need to remind you that majority of people participated in 1857 mutiny were hindus and more than 80% of Bharatiyas participated in Indian independence movement were Hindus and that Hindus contributed more than their population share in India's economic growth post-independence and more than 80% soldiers who died in eight wars Indian Army fought since independence were Hindus and so on...

So, yes India can tell the leader/nation that approaches for Indian help that they must respect Indian values and that India cannot do anything outside its national interests. Not involving in others' internal matters doesn't mean we accept their isolationist tendencies be it religion or culture. GCC should be clearly told that they cannot expect Indian support without opening their societies to the ideas of pluralism and democracy. They must be reminded, gently but firmly, that their petro$$$ and [sic] supposedly-unifying faith are not that invincible after all.

I disagree with you and RajeshAji on approaching the islamism issue with Pakistan in mind. Pakistan is nothing but the pre-independence Bharatiya population that put external faith and social-isolationism ahead of their civilizational roots, culture and territorial integrity. By giving unnecessary importance to islamism and the so-called muslim-sentiments you are flirting with the very trap of Pakiness. Inviting Zakir-nayaks and Al-Sudais types to India and exposing Indian Muslims to those isolationist world-views are not indian interests. Sections of Indian muslims still hold the idea that they are alien to this land and culture and believe in the superiority of their ideological holy lands. Why encouraging that nonsense by giving them social and political space?

Do you really think $50-$100B of FDI is what holding Indian economic progress, especially after learning about all those scams? The 2G scam alone is valuated between $20B (conservative) and $50B. Don't you think instead of prostrating at GCC, it would be in Indian interests to give a one time amnesty to all black money stored outside India with a 10-20% onetime tax or the provision that such blackmoney can be invested ONLY in Indian Infra bonds pegging the interest rate 3-5%?

P.S: My assessment of your poltically-active friend seems to be correct. How many of BJP CMs are brahmins? (Raman Singh - Chhattisgarh; Narendra Modi - Gujarat; Prem Kumar Dhumal - Himachal Pradesh; B. S. Yeddyurappa - Karnataka; Shivraj Singh Chauhan - Madhya Pradesh; Ramesh Pokhriyal - Uttarakhand; Arjun Munda - Jharkhand). Please ask him shouldn't one be crediting the brahmin leadership of BJP for holding on to their nationalistic political activism against all odds for many decades before they could get into power in 1998? Also ask him how many national political parties in India were started by non-brahmins and what happened to the brahmin-started political parties (INC and Left?) when the leadership moved to non-brahmin or non-hindu personalities. The point is our society was already blamed (incorrectly) of seclusiviness in the name of [sic] castism and we do not need to repeat it by secluding another section (brahmins this time).

Samudragupta · Post by **Samudragupta** » 28 Mar 2011 21:42

Specialists are better trained to do their job,so it may happen that two specialists overlap and it always happens...afterall at the end of the day everything is "Maya"

...some set of equations....

but the more important point is we have a mad dog among four(RICP) civilized(?) houses and no body wants to take after the dog...interestingly the percentage of madness is increasing day by day and one of the household the Indians seems to have around 4 years to take care of the dog.....so what will it do....Well Mackinder seems to be returning from the grave but since it is a WA thread...how about the Arabs and how about the Turks...can they save themselves..or is it that the dog will be ultimate ruler collecting Chauth from each of the household for the Khan????

shyamd · Post by **shyamd** » 28 Mar 2011 22:39

No time for detailed reply:

RamaY wrote:ShyamD garu,

There is nothing wrong in GCC wanting to protect their culture, which is different from their religion; and India should not shy away from protecting its culture - which is pluralism and democracy (making public opinion part of the governance). Perhaps that Dubai Police Chief should be educated that GCC has in fact been under Bharatiya protection for millennia and there is nothing to be afraid of it, in addition to briefing him the benefits of Dubai becoming a state of Bharatiya federal structure. Also remind him that even at the height of Islamism it couldn't conquer India completely and couldn't rule the parts it occupied from its centers in west-asia.

Their cultural identity, their way of life is changed. They have a small population really, so they feel they are under threat. You may feel that there is no threat etc, but they want to protect their culture and customs. Its also about their power, they want to keep the benefits going to their constituency. No time to go into detail.

In every system rulers want to extend their rule and that has nothing to do with democracy. What democracy in fact offers the citizenry is an opportunity to change the ruling coalition without war, rebellion and revolution; and the side benefit is peaceful and systematic transfer of power from one party to another. We have had much discussion on the [sic] contribution of the so-called "educated class". More than 90% of our elected leaders are graduates and nearly 100% of our babudom are graduates, yet it didn't reduce systemic corruption or make the governance effective; national interests, correcting Indian history and education system are not even in their horizon. I will bring everyone's favorite example USA; that society decided to go democratic, however non-inclusive it was, before it developed its society and became super power.

It has a lot to do with democracy, can't you see the shortsighted moves that they make? Agree with bits and bobs of the rest.

All GoI needs to do is to protect Indian Interests. There are no Hindu interests outside Indian interests, unlike muslim and christian interests. That is why you don't see Hindus unifiying under a hindu leadership. Coming to Hindu contribution to Indian Interests, do I need to remind you that majority of people participated in 1857 mutiny were hindus and more than 80% of Bharatiyas participated in Indian independence movement were Hindus and that Hindus contributed more than their population share in India's economic growth post-independence and more than 80% soldiers who died in eight wars Indian Army fought since independence were Hindus and so on...

Whats Indian interests? Same question goes to Acharya. Indian interests - also includes developing economy.

Ahh, all those examples are REACTIONS to a major threat - war of independence etc. Not a constant move to a long term goal. My comment was more related to democracy.

So, yes India can tell the leader/nation that approaches for Indian help that they must respect Indian values and that India cannot do anything outside its national interests. Not involving in others' internal matters doesn't mean we accept their isolationist tendencies be it religion or culture. GCC should be clearly told that they cannot expect Indian support without opening their societies to the ideas of pluralism and democracy. They must be reminded, gently but firmly, that their petro$$$ and [sic] supposedly-unifying faith are not that invincible after all.

And also they will argue, they are slowly opening to democracy: municipal elections, parliaments. Kuwait is now a constitutional monarchy. Oman has increased legislative powers etc.

I disagree with you and RajeshAji on approaching the islamism issue with Pakistan in mind. Pakistan is nothing but the pre-independence Bharatiya population that put external faith and social-isolationism ahead of their civilizational roots, culture and territorial integrity. By giving unnecessary importance to islamism and the so-called muslim-sentiments you are flirting with the very trap of Pakiness. Inviting Zakir-nayaks and Al-Sudais types to India and exposing Indian Muslims to those isolationist world-views are not indian interests. Sections of Indian muslims still hold the idea that they are alien to this land and culture and believe in the superiority of their ideological holy lands. Why encouraging that nonsense by giving them social and political space?

Fair point. I agree that they should isolate them from islamists. How do you disconnect the IMs from meeting Islamists? THere is nothing preventing any IM switching on tv and listening to this chap giving his message every friday. You can't stop people from visiting these characters during Haj or umrah.

Do you really think $50-$100B of FDI is what holding Indian economic progress, especially after learning about all those scams? The 2G scam alone is valuated between $20B (conservative) and $50B. Don't you think instead of prostrating at GCC, it would be in Indian interests to give a one time amnesty to all black money stored outside India with a 10-20% onetime tax or the provision that such blackmoney can be invested ONLY in Indian Infra bonds pegging the interest rate 3-5%?

Umm... black money has come via the Mauritius route and others anyway. I have thought about about the amnesty plan, but will it be a political disaster - is any partywilling to risk it? Are you okay with legitimizing black money and all the crimes this entailed for the longterm?