West Asia News and Discussions

[RajeshA]

An article by Bhadrakumar, this one is very perceptive -

Tehran reaches out to Egypt’s Morsi - http://www.voltairenet.org/Tehran-reach ... to-Egypt-s

The Shia-Sunni rift is good for India. It allows India more freedom. Also a Iran-Egypt entente keeps the Iranian regime secure, but a wider Shia-Sunni conflict could make Iranians lose faith in Islamism/Islam, and allow them to work for an alternative identity, which is also good for India in the long-term.

So basically I hope Saudis succeed.

[brihaspati]

I don't care much for Assad and his regime - since their removal or not is not going to change much of the real increasing Islamization trend in the entire zone. What is amusing is the complete blindness of the Indian promoters of Saudi interests to the real problems of an increasingly confident Sunni expansionist Saudi Arabia as far as Indian interests are concerned.

Saudis have been consistently working on their expansionist agenda with a long term vision of bringing in all of ME, subcontinent and SE Asia under Sunni dominance. They have consistently worked on the founders' strategy of of deceptive alliances with "others" to isolate one single "tribe" and finish them off.

Libya and Algeria or even Egypt was a different ball game. But I wished that the Syrian struggle dragged on as much as possible, because here it means postponing the Saudis to a wee bit at least. Those Indians who are dancing up in joy at Saudi success, and mocking or gloating over Assad's discomfiture - are actually dancing up at future greater aggressive Sunni designs on India. Maybe, they already know this - and are sufficiently Arabized/Sunnized to identify themselves with promotion of Saudi interests to care a fib about long term consequences for India. Or they might see financial prospect in identifying with the Sunni Saudi camp. But for those others not yet so much gone into the Sunni Saudi camp, do pause and think.

[Samudragupta]

Bji,

I have a feeling this battle is far from over...Assad or no Assad...Iran and Shia is not going to sit idle and see their 30 years of strategic investment is going down the drains... Qaseem Soleimani is not just going to sit idle....The road from the West to East was blocked by them for the past thirty years which is again opened by the West-Sunni combo...in a way the removal of Assad is actually good from the iranian pov because it will remove the layer between the Tehran and Hezbollahisation of the Alawites...i feel Iran will have a tactical retreat to the West to the Mountains of Syria ala South Lebanon probably a semi autonomous Shia entity as the Kurds are doing it in the N-E Syria...and only after the Alawites are sufficiently millitarised they will expand East....by that time Iran will strictly focus on the South...In any way Kurdistan is going to happen and Turkey can do a damn to stop this....

[RajeshA]

brihaspati garu,

As far as I see it, Iranian regime's attitude has always been Pan-Islamist, so they have given more weight to Shia-Sunni entente. The Saudis don't care. For them Sunni is right and Shia is wrong! Both want leadership of the Islamic world.

IMHO, I think it is important that Iran, a major country with major history, really loses hope of ever attaining leadership through the Islamic route - either Pan-Islamist or Shi'ite.

Muslim Brotherhood is a new important political actor, which makes the Islamic politics in Arab countries a three-way tug-of-war - Brotherhood-Wahhabi-Shia!

It is still to be seen how the Saudis use their Wahhabi networks to neutralize Egyptian tilt towards Iran, and again try to make it a two-way tussle. If they fail, Iran would continue to hold out hope of being an important pole in this triad. Triads can become stable, but two-way tugs usually are resolved with one party winning. I would want the Iranian regime to become desperate, either they lash out hard at the Saudis, thus bringing all notions of Pan-Islamism to an end, or they jump Islamic ship, but out the regime, and become non-Muslims.

Iran dumping Islam would in fact give India a significant strategic opening. Two ends of kafir can squeeze Islamic Pakistan. But you're right, for India directly Saudis are not good.

[brihaspati]

Bji,

I have a feeling this battle is far from over...Assad or no Assad...Iran and Shia is not going to sit idle and see their 30 years of strategic investment is going down the drains... Qaseem Soleimani is not just going to sit idle....

I am also trying to point out the short-sightedness of our influential strategic minds - which in the past failed to see the dangers of staying too happy with Arab peninsular expansion, thinking that they oh-they-are-only-bashing-up-the-Persians, and after all growing Arab power means more trade and personal financial profits - ushered in the 1000 years of darkness and retreat for India.

Its exactly the same mindset and the same failure to see that an uncontested Arab peninsula means dangers again for India. But of course for the mercantile mind, monetary profits matter most - and at this stage Saudis hold the carrot.

[brihaspati]

RajeshA ji,
Iran will turn out of Islamism the earliest - as per my prediction. I have discussed it many times before - but if Iran is forced to roll back before Sunni Arab, then a reverse reaction will take place, where Iranian national pride will immediately conflate behind the theologians again [because islam is still pervasive enough to be seen as the sole mobilizing factor able to rope in the maximum number at this stage].

Iran not facing external loss-of-face will continue on its onw internal processes which I laid out before, where the fusion of theologians into state power is greatest vulnerability for Islamism - for the next two generations.

[Samudragupta]

Iranian regime's attitude has always been Pan-Islamist

RajeshAji,

The way i see it is that the dominant strategic meme of any Iranian regime is anti-Arab...excessive Islamist tendency is just an aggressive defense to take the war right in the midst of the Arabs....Iran is not going to leave Islam any time soon until and unless backed up by equally stronger strategic power from the East...because Iran sees the gates of the invasion of the Persia has always been the Western highway....for them there is no choice..either its my way or no way...they will turn suicidal under excessive stress.... add to this the violent matrix of coming of Mahdi and Shia meme of Martyrdom...u have a nuclear holocaust in front of u....

[RajeshA]

RajeshA ji,
Iran will turn out of Islamism the earliest - as per my prediction. I have discussed it many times before - but if Iran is forced to roll back before Sunni Arab, then a reverse reaction will take place, where Iranian national pride will immediately conflate behind the theologians again [because islam is still pervasive enough to be seen as the sole mobilizing factor able to rope in the maximum number at this stage].

Iran not facing external loss-of-face will continue on its onw internal processes which I laid out before, where the fusion of theologians into state power is greatest vulnerability for Islamism - for the next two generations.

brihaspati garu, Samudragupta ji

Fusion of theologians into state power means that the regime holds the flag of Islam. If Iran is defeated, Islam itself would face humiliation.

Hypothetically speaking, they can of course use their defeat to trump up even more nationalism as happened in Germany after First World War. In the case of Iran, an Islamic regime, it would be Hyper-Islamism! But what if they are trumped, defeated and humiliated by another Islamic regime?! Would Germany have become a white-supremacist stronghold if they were defeated by another white-supremacist UK, who used to consider Germany's whites as inferiors?! I think if one plank of nationalist expression doesn't work, one would jump to another plank!

Now Iran could run circles with their Pan-Islamist stand Sunni-Shia Bhai-Bhai! But the Sunnis are saying Screw You! So they are killing Shias in Baghdad, in Pakistan, in Syria, and everywhere they can! Still Iran in order to save face is just calling them fringe terrorists. But if an avowedly Islamic country like the Saudis were to humiliate Iran, and all other Arabs support Saudi position, then the Iranians would really start thinking - what am I doing in this club? That is not a fringe group, but almost whole of the Middle East Muslim world!

So what would be the other nationalist plank, Iran would jump to? Of course Iranian Nationalism - pure and simple with a rabid hate for Muslims.

That I would consider good - good for Iranians, good for Israel, and good for India.

On the other hand, it is true that it is Iranian mismanagement of the economy and their curb on freedoms that really piss off many Iranian people against both the regime and Islam. But all that discontentment does not provide the death stroke! The death stroke would have to come from a total collapse of legitimacy of Islam to protect Iran's national interests, which are most vividly shown in an external context!

[shyamd]

Just to correct certain people propagating lies - we want balance in the region and no one is jumping on anyones bandwagon- we need both parties. We want Gulf cash, oil and investments and want Iranian access to Central asia, russia and more importantly afghanistan. Therefore, we want Iran and the Gulf!

That is all that we are doing - securing our interests. In fact, we are one of the few parties that continue to buy and sell oil from Iran!

[RajeshA]

shyamd,
these are short term interests! There are civilizational long term interests to protect as well!

[shyamd]

^^ Of course! Thats why I said Iran must continue to exist in its present form - so there is regional balance and if Afghanistan is free'd then TSP will leave us alone for 5-10 years - they can't afford a war on 2 borders!

In the mean time - where is all the extra taxes that is generated by a growing economy going to go? Towards our defence - we just signed a deal for KSA to pay for growing our military arsenal! We will not lower our guard until we achieve comprehensive security with any neighbour. Our military power is continuing to grow supported by our growing economy! We are no longer the small kingdoms that used to exist.

Also wrt PRC - we are gearing up to fight a dual border war - see Rohitvats posts in IA thread on this specific subject. We are in the process of doing all that we can to win in Afghanistan and trying to maintain the current cooperation that we have been receiving from BD. In SL, the LTTE is no longer a thorn as it used to be.

[brihaspati]

So adding on to the security shield that USA already provides to Saudia, India's adding on to that shield is not somehow adding on to the Saudi expansionist design. Assad's setback is something positive, because it helps Sauds further in their longer term geo-strategic goal.

The propaganda lie actually lies in somehow ignoring the fact that Saudi interests cannot be entirely in India's interests as long as Pakistan survives as a separate nation.

From even the most naive strategic considerations :

(a) Saudis cannot increase India's military strength to the detriment of Paki whining and Paki "strategic' interests so much so that the nuke promise of Pak evaporates.

(b) as long as Pak survives, it is in Saudi interest to maintain the much vaunted "balance of power" also between Pak and India. Survival Paki nuisance capabilities would be a natural tactical way of keeping a handle on India.

Any progress that Saudis make at the cost of any other geo-political entity is agains india's interests, because Saudis already have a much larger control over military and geo-strategic dominance of the ME as well as the subcontinent. Iran is much less of a danger [ even if both Saudis and Khomeinis have and will continue to court Talebs] because of the much lesser Shia followers in India compared to the Sunnis.

The Arabic "language" pushing lobby in north and central India have become more and more active since the visit of the Saudi theologian who just a few years ago thundered about J&K. Given the bootlicking and hagiographic tendencies of the Gulf-investments-cooperation lobby within India, it becomes rather hard to swallow the propaganda of "balance of power", and "defence cooperation". Knowing the past records of our "financial flows are so improtant" school, that defence cooperation itself will mean money flowing into political pockets too, and potential entry of the Saudis into fields not conducive for India's security. Political pressure will always be sufficient to cover up pubclicity of any negative fallouts because the financial ties would become too strong.

[shyamd]

US is there for their interests. End of story. Do those individuals really think US regime was helpful to the Bahraini regime when protests took place last year?

As for assad - blatant lies are being propagated that Indians are saying that Asads fall is somehow "positive" - UN statements are enough to disprove those lies.

Everybody knows KSA interests doesn't align with ALL our interests (key difference here) and we cooperate where there is alignment and where there isn't we are competitors (as has been explained before - Afghanistan/Iran being one of them) - just like any other nation which I am sure those individuals are aware about.

KSA will do what is in its interest as will Pak (which was to give Iranians nuclear support which incidentally KSA hasnt forgotten).

As for India - every deal India does means money in political pockets - who knows that better than the US - who recently failed to get the MRCA (or get the movement on Iran that they wanted) contract despite everything that was listed - money, political pressure, NGO's paying protestors etc etc. India will do everything in its interests and despite all those things listed - which is not a new phenomenon (as those who have an agenda would love to propagate).

Its funny how certain interests have no faith in Indians - yes all indians are weak, money hungry, poor SDREs.

Anyway, 6 years, billions of dollars, extraditions etc later - still no green KSA mosque and the only known offer by K Abdullah to renovate Jama masjid rejected? Lol!

[nakul]

As for India - every deal India does means money in political pockets - who knows that better than the US - who recently failed to get the MRCA (or get the movement on Iran that they wanted) contract despite everything that was listed - money, political pressure, NGO's paying protestors etc etc. India will do everything in its interests and despite all those things listed - which is not a new phenomenon (as those who have an agenda would love to propagate).

I think the US overdid it with the NGOs. It was unexpected to see a Sonia Gandhi led govt to ban foreign funding of NGOs. MMS seems to have realized that the pappi jhappi with the US was a one night affair only and he cant expect the same treatment from successive American presidents. He has been standing upto defending India's interests in Iran rather more aggressively than his usual demeanor.

[brihaspati]

So the so-called Defence cooperation and investments does not guarantee potential Saudi-Paki collaboratioon against India? Because after all Saudis will persue their "interests" and not look after "all of India's interests"? In that case what are the conflicts of interests between the two - cases in which the two interests will not coincide? Guess : Pakistan, sunni-islamism.

Lets see how Indians with integrity are possibly looking to forward the balance of power between Saudis and Iranians : [maybe this negative assessemnt is a lie from those who do not implicitly trust the divine integrity of the Gulf-lobby]

The strategic tango in Washington
Harsh V. Pant : Fri Jun 15 2012, 02:14 hrs
http://www.indianexpress.com/news/the-s ... n/962183/0
Iran has now only a marginal role in India-US relations

After making exemptions for the EU states and Japan in March, the US has now decided to exempt seven more countries, including India, from a law about to come into effect later this month that penalises foreign financial institutions for transactions with Iran’s central bank. This decision comes at a crucial time, as Washington and New Delhi have engaged in their third Strategic Dialogue this week and India’s ties with Iran have continued to bedevil Indo-US relations for quite some time now. Wary of any international support for Iran, the US has pressured India to curb its relations with Tehran and significantly cut levels of Iranian oil imports.

By now suggesting that countries like India have “significantly” reduced crude oil purchases from Iran, US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton was not only underscoring the success of the US strategy of sanctions to isolate Iran but was also sending a signal about Washington’s seriousness in pursuing a robust partnership with Delhi.

Western efforts to undermine Iranian financial institutions have complicated payments for Iranian resources. An executive order issued by the White House in November 2011 authorises the Secretary of State to impose financial sanctions upon any entity failing to satisfactorily curb support to the Iranian market, thus pressuring countries such as India to reduce imports. In order to avoid threatened sanctions, countries like India and China have been bartering food products, consumer goods and local currencies for oil, a system which may prove insufficient in meeting the payments necessary to maintain current levels of oil imports.

As a result, despite the Indian government’s public bravado, India’s presence in Iran has been gradually shrinking, as firms such as Reliance Industries have withdrawn from Iran, partially under Western pressure, and others have shelved their plans to make investments. Indian oil companies are finding it hard to get vessels to lift Iranian cargo because of the sanctions. Even the Shipping Corporation of India, India’s largest domestic tanker-owner, has refused to provide tankers to the Indian Oil Corporation for Iranian oil.

Moreover, the Indian government itself has asked its refiners to cut their imports from Iran by about 10-15 per cent , even as Iran has tried to sell extra volumes to those refiners on long credit terms. India has also struggled to find ways to pay Iran after the US made dollar transactions almost impossible. Not surprisingly, Iran’s share in Indian oil imports is declining, and Iraq has replaced Iran as the second-largest crude oil supplier to India. Yet Delhi feels that it cannot replace Iran as an oil supplier overnight, and any drastic step by India to reduce its presence in Iran will only further entrench China in the Iranian oil and gas sector.

American pressure is not the only factor at work. There has been little evidence so far that Iran would be a reliable partner in India’s search for energy security. Iran has either rejected or not yet finalised plans due to last-minute changes in terms and conditions for a number of important projects with Indian businesses and the Indian government. Moreover, both major energy deals recently signed with great fanfare, which also raised concerns in the West, are now in limbo. India’s 25-year, $22 billion agreement with Iran for the export of liquefied natural gas (LNG) has not produced anything since it was signed in 2005. The agreement requires India to build an LNG plant in Iran and would need American components, which might violate the US’s Iran and Libya Sanctions Act. The other project involves the construction of a 1,700-mile, $7 billion pipeline to carry natural gas from Iran to India via Pakistan, and it is also currently stuck.

India has continued to affirm its commitment to enforce all sanctions against Iran, as mandated since 2006 by the UN Security Council. However, much like Beijing and Moscow, Delhi has argued that such sanctions should not hurt the Iranian populace and has expressed its disapproval of sanctions by individual countries that restrict investments by third countries in Iran’s energy sector, such the US sanctions.

India would like to keep a diversified oil basket and is reluctant to rely solely on Saudi Arabia. Riyadh is the chief supplier of oil to India’s booming economy, and India is now the fourth-largest recipient of Saudi oil after China, the US and Japan. India’s crude oil imports from the Saudi kingdom will likely double in the next 20 years, and Riyadh has repeatedly emphasised its commitment to uninterrupted supplies to a friendly country such as India, regardless of global price trends. However, Riyadh’s traditionally close ties with Pakistan and its support for radical Islamist forces continue to stifle Delhi-Riyadh relations.

So India will keep Iran a part of its energy matrix, but it is increasingly clear that despite Delhi’s public pronouncements, Tehran’s role will be a marginal one in the coming years.

[shyamd]

Americans are stupid. They think Indians are going to cower down and by playing dirty they think we will give them big contracts. They used SS and others to attack Sonia personally openly in the media. but I think they are finally getting the message that this intimidation and dirty tactics won't work. Treat us like real partners and offer us the best.

-----------
Forgot to add;
We have 2 choices:
there are people wish that we hunker down into our shell and make everyone boor and join the army like in north Korea. Go into perpetual war.

Or get as much benefits as we can in areas where interests are aligned

TSP can't even fly a F solah without US approval today. And we are getting more cooperation - more than we have had in the past. Indians are getting richer (a visit to the economics thread will help) and getting more militarily powerful (a visit to the military threads will demonstrate that and also how cooperation is helping our capabilities improve)

National security always has risks - do nothing and you saw what happened to Kuwait in 1990.

Anyway all this is a waste of time, India has decided the path of cooperation, but will not drop its guard until comprehensive security is achieved.

[Pranav]

It is in India's interest to be on good terms with the West, but it is also in India's interest that the West Asian nations retain their independence.

[devesh]

^^^

Shyamd,

supreme arrogance and contempt for those who caution against complacency when dealing with Islam. we have other examples of this also. the great Father of the Nation probably thought along the above lines when he contemptuously dismissed the warnings of the Lal-Bal-Pal trio and several others to not meddle with the Khilafat Gomorrah.

shyamd, you should withdraw your insulting remarks about turning India into NoKo. nobody is aiming for that. so please save us your exaggerated sense of self-righteousness and arrogance. you have been very enthusiastically ripping at Assad regimes state. your reasoning is full of starry-eyed idealism (at least, I hope so; and not a mask for more cynical motives), yet at the first instance when somebody questions the wisdom of laying the red carpet for Saudi dominance of ME, you descend into meaningless squabbles and comments which begin with "some of us want to turn India into NoKo", etc.....

of course, you aren't the only one. there is another forumer who was whining about lack of greater Western enthusiasm in taking care of Assad. I don't get it. is this a forum for Indian Interests. or is it the "spread Democracy" web-portal acting as a propaganda front for certain parties. going by the last several pages on this thread, the later seems more likely...

[brihaspati]

devesh ji,
"spreading democracy" is legitimate as long as it doesn't overthrow the Saudi or Bahraini or Quwaiti regimes - each of which patronizes an aggressive theological establishment - each of which in turn has spoken out against Indian interests in J&K.

[brihaspati]

There is no point in bringing in supposed Indian economic growth [which again is yet to reach the trickle down theories claimed depth] and military "expendichaa" on this thread. There are alternative means to guage the economic situation in India, and not rely on gross figures of total profits by corporates or expendichaa/invezment claims on paper - which after all onlee indicates that profits are more being cornered by the vocal minority directly connected to extraction of cuts from the pure process of financial flows than the lower trunk of the consumption pyramind.

What is unacceptable is the foisting of the financial interests of the few as the national interest of the many - and push for collaboration with entities who are driven by their ideologya s well as luckily found wealth and have consistently worked against Indian interests in the past. Given their social presence and indirect ideological presence on the subcontinent, there are foreseeable limits to reliability on their intentions.

Apart from this fuzzying the argument doesn't really help. By the way, the political affiliations and sympathies do seem to come out under provocation. Was there any need to bring in SS and SG into this?

[nakul]

We cannot turn middle east away from islam overnight. Being islamic should not stop us from supporting our interests in the region. They will not stop supporting the Kashmiri cause. Stopping exchanges with them will not make them change their minds. Its only by exchanges that we can have some leverage over them. Cultivating favorable views will take time. If it were so easy to make them toe our line, I would be happy to position INS Vikramiditya on their shores if it would make them support pakis. Unfortunately, international diplomacy doesn't work this way.

Congress will continue to support Muslims for their vote banks. As today's incident in Mumbai shows, Muslims will continue to voice their views violently irrespective of the govt attitude towards it.

[shyamd]

^^^

Shyamd,

supreme arrogance and contempt for those who caution against complacency when dealing with Islam. we have other examples of this also. the great Father of the Nation probably thought along the above lines when he contemptuously dismissed the warnings of the Lal-Bal-Pal trio and several others to not meddle with the Khilafat Gomorrah.

Which is why I said we are not going to give up our defence until we have comprehensive security. There is no letting down our guard. I hope its clear. But I am not denying its a risk - I am just saying its not going to happen and hasnt happened! But you are welcome to highlight the risk.

shyamd, you should withdraw your insulting remarks about turning India into NoKo. nobody is aiming for that. so please save us your exaggerated sense of self-righteousness and arrogance.

Lol Big words there for someone who is quick to speak on behalf of someone else and why don't you let them say what they mean... I didn't see you complaining when that said person was exaggerating and accussing others of taking money and have fully joined "sunni saudi camp" - just to be fair can you kindly say this is not correct?

Making personal remarks is also quite out of order by yourself - but hey I'll show my decency and won't respond in the same way.

you have been very enthusiastically ripping at Assad regimes state.

LOL! Hasn't everyone?!

your reasoning is full of starry-eyed idealism (at least, I hope so; and not a mask for more cynical motives), yet at the first instance when somebody questions the wisdom of laying the red carpet for Saudi dominance of ME, you descend into meaningless squabbles and comments which begin with "some of us want to turn India into NoKo", etc.....

Lol - All I said is that it is not true and again I didn't respond to the allegations that they are making that people are identifying with GCC interest because they are taking money bla bla.

Look you are welcome to highlight the risks all you want - and I am entitled to say it hasnt happened yet.

As for the Noko comment - it wasnt without warrant - there is a poster who wants power and wants a dictatorship and also wants to turn india into a military state and views every neighbour as a threat and we should be happy that we have our lives and shouldn't focus on economic growth and having food on our plate!

of course, you aren't the only one. there is another forumer who was whining about lack of greater Western enthusiasm in taking care of Assad. I don't get it. is this a forum for Indian Interests. or is it the "spread Democracy" web-portal acting as a propaganda front for certain parties. going by the last several pages on this thread, the later seems more likely...

I cant speak for that said poster - but I can speak for myself - I predicted Syria was next - I said what was going to happen, described in detail the defections would take place and why - this does not mean I am enthusiastic about the downfall of Assad, I am merely informing forum visitors of what is taking place!

This is boring and if you don't like my posts - don't read or complain to an admin or whatever... My last post on this.

[brihaspati]

Well - so glad to have a direct spokesperson on behalf of the KSA who knows what Saudis as a state "has not forgotten" about what supposedly Pakistan did in extending nuke help to Iran. Such a statement is actually extraordinary - for it gives out what the Saudi state "thinks".

Curious to know who the poster is "who wants power and wants a dictatorship and also wants to turn india into a military state and views every neighbour as a threat and we should be happy that we have our lives and shouldn't focus on economic growth and having food on our plate!" Is it about the old game of ascribing statements to people to tar and feather them and then whine when receiving in kind?

The problem is - every criticism of Saudi-hand-grabbing by a section of political opinion and establishment from India, immediately elicits a violent response. The demand starts up that we must have implicit faith in the establishment, the related political interests, about not creating loopholes or situations by which specific countries are publicly promoted as oh-so-friendly and you-know-things-have-changed-from-past - but the actions of these "friendly" countries turn out to be hostile to the nation, and in ways that cause the commons to suffer or face the brunt - while the erst-while vouching political cliques remain protected.

A section of Indian political establishment had vouched similarly about our immediate neighbours - like China, with lots of "cooperation" going on - and the political establishment even carrying out aggressive propaganda against anyone raising doubts about Chinese intentions - but, voila, China kicks. The same establishment vouched for Nepal, and Nepal turned virulently anti-India, and at a certain stage supplied the Indian Maoists with space and weapons. It so turns out that our insiders and "knowers of minds of statesmen" often claim that nothing moves in Nepal without Indian sway of fingers - thsi will imply that even the Maoist contribution from Nepal was then happening according to the orders of the Indian establishment. The same establishment had vouched for BD at various time points - and each time, ultimately BD proved itself hostile and BD establishment always keeping an element of anti-India activity.

It is one thing to say - oh we were mistaken, but it is a criminal activity to deliberately try and lull the people into sleep and create an impression that such persistently expansive and ideologically driven states like KSA with its age-old links to Pakistan under given strategic calculations - should be trusted.

By the way, I had said this many times before that - Gulf investments can come into Indian opinion-maker pockets in perfectly legal ways - as genuine legally allowed cuts and commissions from the pure process of circulation of money. Obviously anyone benefiting in such legal ways from such investments - would not want thsi source to dry up. Who talked of bribes? or was that a Freudian slip!

[Theo_Fidel]

I don't get this.

There is about 200 Million in the middle east all combined. There is 1.2 Billion Indians, if anyone does the pushing on the other it should be us pushing on them. Yet we have the same rhona-dhona over 'ktarey mei hai!' blah blah blah..... ...If anything folks should wonder what has reduced 1.2 Billion to such weakness. Not just over the past 60 years but for the last 3,000+ years. Why did Sankrit die in its heartland and why do those in the middle east cry Alla-o-akbar rather than jai baj rang bali or vel murugan. What is at the heart of Indian ideology that prevents its spread and prevents its full throated adoption even within India.

[devesh]

^^^
for starters the enthusiastic supporters of "western action against Syria" are part of the reason why India is a paper tiger. so, when we can't think of the ME situation based on our interests, but instead post page after page about how "Assad is getting what he deserves", we have a serious problem.

of all the Islamist thugs in the world, IMHO, Assad was the least concerned with J&K and India. I don't remember his regime actively participating in any of the Islamist causes in Kashmir or other Islamist causes in India. yet, we are all so gleeful about his impending ouster.

if the argument is that "lesser devil" is better than "greater devil", then for us, Assad is definitely the lesser devil. so going by this "realpolitik" argument, which is what the "analysts" claim they are doing, shouldn't we favor Assad, and not Saudis?

and one poster is so casual about this that he posts a one-liner like "LOL, aren't we all?" when asked a serious question: "why are you so happily bashing Assad?"

if this one-liner is the kind of reasoning we get from "analysts" and self proclaimed informants of the "strategic circles", we have a serious problem.

so please, stop blaming the 1.2 billion of us. first, let's start with the upper echelons.

[Surya]

the list of predictions and red lines int his thread are fast approaching a century

[Theo_Fidel]

What upper echelon boss. You ARE the upper echelon in India. Don't fool yourself.

It is complete BS you are peddling that India can not deal with Kashmir on its own terms. I don't give one flying fig over what a arrap dictator or another says about India or any of its citizens. I think we dealt with it in 1950 when we were starving and infinitely poorer and no one dares meddle with us now.

And I don't believe this B/S about the western bogey man. Those days are long behind us. If anything we are more western than the Romans and have benefited immensely from it. Indians as a whole are better fed, healthier, better educated and yes even wealthier than ever in history. This is the greatest Indian civilization that has ever existed, though we still have a long ways to go. It is time to face the world and do some serious tabala on its a$$....

People are spitting on Assad's actions. Let me tell you no national government in India would dare to do 1/1000th of what Assad has done, yes even in Kashmir. It would fall in 24 hours. India has always taken the harder rout of dealing with its problems with its citizens personally. What is there to defend about Assad or for that matter the many other tyrants in the Middle East. Trust me all their days at the lamp post are coming, even if momentarily delayed.

My personal opinion is democratic governments are cowards. Even the USA. It is better to have cowardly governments in the Middle East than artificial tyrants who are by definition unpredictable and psychotic. Historically only cowardly democratic governments have the stamina and balls (yes, really) to destroy the violent thugs out there. Forgive me for cheering on this process. Will Syria under FSA immediately turn democratic, I seriously doubt it, but there is a chance under the open media and younger generation situation. Under Assad I can guarantee ZERO chance of democracy.

[devesh]

What upper echelon boss. You ARE the upper echelon in India. Don't fool yourself.

It is complete BS you are peddling that India can not deal with Kashmir on its own terms. I don't give one flying fig over what a arrap dictator or another says about India or any of its citizens. I think we dealt with it in 1950 when we were starving and infinitely poorer and no one dares meddle with us now.

People are spitting on Assad's actions. Let me tell you no national government in India would dare to do 1/1000th of what Assad has done, yes even in Kashmir. It would fall in 24 hours. India has always taken the harder rout of dealing with its problems with its citizens personally. What is there to defend about Assad or for that matter the many other tyrants in the Middle East. Trust me all their days at the lamp post are coming, even if momentarily delayed.

My personal opinion is democratic governments are cowards. Even the USA. It is better to have cowardly governments in the Middle East than artificial tyrants who are by definition unpredictable and psychotic. Historically only cowardly democratic governments have the stamina and balls (yes, really) to destroy the violent thugs out there. Forgive me for cheering on this process. Will Syria under FSA immediately turn democratic, I seriously doubt it, but there is a chance under the open media and younger generation situation. Under Assad I can guarantee ZERO chance of democracy.

cool down. so why isn't kashmir solved? don't get melodramatic, please. you're right, we should have solved Kashmir by now. but we didn't? what is the reason?

What "spitting on Assad's actions"? BS. total unadulterated BS. how many Indians know what Assad has actually done?
how many Americans know what Assad has done? probably around 10% know whatever they saw on TV. the rest don't care about it, don't pay attention to it, and couldn't give a rat's ass about what he is doing to his own people. don't give me this "spitting" nonsense.

forget democracy. the issue is with Islamism. is this venerated democracy going to stop it? is it likely to intensify and give the Islamists a platform to push their agenda? these are the questions that need answering. specifically, is the ME moving towards a more Islamist establishment where KSA or one Sunni authority has increasing dominance?

this "democracy" hasn't stopped Turkey from re-Islamizing itself. it also hasn't stopped BD and countries like Malaysia and Indonesia from giving increasing public and private space for the Islamists to occupy. in case you haven't noticed, the Islamic institutional architecture has actually become increasingly adept at manipulating modern democracies and entrenching themselves in key positions in every Islamic society.

[devesh]

And I don't believe this B/S about the western bogey man. Those days are long behind us. If anything we are more western than the Romans and have benefited immensely from it. Indians as a whole are better fed, healthier, better educated and yes even wealthier than ever in history. This is the greatest Indian civilization that has ever existed, though we still have a long ways to go. It is time to face the world and do some serious tabala on its a$$....

give me proof. show me how current day India's balance sheet is better than what it was in the pre-Islamic era. specifically, if the issue is measuring comparative well-being, then how are you quantifying this? I hardly think we can make these sweeping generalizations in one-liners.

[anjan]

Historically only cowardly democratic governments have the stamina and balls (yes, really) to destroy the violent thugs out there.

Who gets classified as a violent thug? Were the colonial powers violent thugs? Which side of the equation was the US in Vietnam or Afghanistan? What's a democracy? Was the United States in WWII, which disfranchised most of it's poor(even the whites) and it's coloured people, counted a democracy? What's this history you're talking about? True one-man, one-vote business has been around for little more than a half century.

As for the cowards argument... Pretty much every time we've been at war with Pakistan they've been under a civilian dispensation. Incidentally you should read the Soviet assessments of the United States to see just how scared they were that the United States was unpredictable and psychotic. It's not a property inherent only to dictatorships.

I'm not actually disputing any of your arguments. I just find that you're throwing terms like "historically" and democracy and thugs pretty loosely and freely used in your arguments with no actual history to back it up.

[Theo_Fidel]

Devesh,

Lets not beat around the bush. We both know exactly what you are peddling. The aam janata of India are not invited to this project. You don't like the structure of India as at present. I happen to think India and its constitution are the greatest things that happened to its people. Not all of us have forgotten our deep history. Having read Sangam literature extensively I do know what India used to be like BTW.

What makes you believe Kashmir is not normal now. At the last Separatist morcha 40 protesters showed up. What does that tell you. It appears you think it is a problem to have muslims in India.

Islam, Muslim and Islamism is not synonymous.

Anjan,

You are dealing with code words that you might have to read a lot more to follow.

[brihaspati]

Theo ji,
you know that from very early on, I was a supporter of what was being done in Libya against Q : and I stated clearly my reasons, that Q was an opportunist with the money and close connections to the west, especially the Brits - to be amenable to switch directions easily towards helping out the jihadis in J&K. In fact he had started making such noises in the last few years of his life.

I have had little or no sympathies for the likes of Q or Mubarak - both of whom had been involved in patronizing Islamists one way or the other - and were not the dyed-in-the-wool secularists they were being made out to be. If you look back on this thread - you will find the same voices now so non-chalant about Assad, were so gravely concerned about Q and yapping about how justified the Indian gov position was on not jumping on to the bandwagon of Q bashing.

My position has been, we look on the ME dictators through the lens of overall potential consolidation of islamist forces against India. North Africa is a different dynamics compared to the Gulf-Caspian axis as far as Indian geo-political interests go. Just like you I am hopeful too of democracy as beinga step forward. But in the neighbourhood of KSA monarchy - no democracy will be allowed in the muslim world. A democracy will be more a rubber stamp legislature that formalizes and allows legitimacy/modernization facet while promoting the growth of Islamist expansionist memes as in Quwait [where even legislators speak of justifying slavery].

I am hopeful of Iranian democracy to eventually overthrow the mullahcracy and become a real democracy simply because its not Saudi and Sunni at the same time. But let us not have any illusions about the hinterland of KSA as to regime changes leading to democracy.

The other thing about 1.2 billions shaking in fear of 220 millions of ME, is perhaps not what any of us have indicated. All that the skeptics are saying is that we need not rush into strengthening Saudi position in this conflict any further if we can help it. Or equivalently Indian interests are not served by Assad's retreat and Saudi success in Syria. As to why the shaking happened supposedly in 3000+ years, that perhaps belonsg to other threads, but we can make a start by noting the strongly collaborative tendencies in a vocal but manipulative minority among Indians that pushes apparent financial interests as trumping all other considerations. Its not the first time in Indian history that mercantile interests in western and northern [and in some cases also southern] India maintained and protected Gulf interests in India in the name of business.

Those of us who are worried - not shaking or shivering or cowering [which is simply the word aggression used by some sections to try and shut us up or prevent people from thinking and doubting their reassurances] - are worried not of the 220 million outsiders. We are worried of that small minority within Indians themselves, who hide their fatal agenda under pretensions of economic good wishes and "growth" as necessitating collaborating with our traditional enemies. History shows us that every time India went down to foreign powers - it was initiated by elements of our mercantile interests.

I am with you on the essentiality of democracy in ME - but don't see that happeneing as long as the Saudi royal family and linked theological establishment survives. The pro-Gulf lobby does not refer to it at all - but Bahraini and Yemeni atrocities are alleged to be of comparable orders in non-war situation to what Assad and Sahhiba is accused of during war in Syria. This is not justifying what Assad has done - but just to point out that the democratic programme in ME can only succeed if just not the other dictator dynasties but also the Saudi, Bahraini and Quwaiti dictator dynasties too join them at the lamppost.

[Theo_Fidel]

Bji,

Agree onleee.

I note with interest that the very same things were said about India when it started off. Not only that we too were split into 4 pieces when we started off.Yet our democracy has flourished and has raised the living quality of ALL our people far above anything it has EVER been.

Just like the Libyans, I believe the Syrians too do have a chance. Most of the fighters are quite literate and many are very well educated. They seem more focused on what works rather than getting into silly quarrels about ideology.

WRT KSA they are fools if they think the Syrians are going to love them unconditionally. As I pointed out earlier, the Syrians tend to believe in a more cosmopolitan origin rather than a pure Arab one. Will KSA try to undermine Syrian democracy, absolutely. But in the age of twitter it will be hard to make it stick.

I also note that Jihadists of every stripe from TSP to Libya are now in Syria but so far not a single one from India. That should tell you something about India as well.

WRT Iran, my feeling is the longer it endures the better. I know this sucks for Iranian's, but it is perfect example of what a degenerate beast an Islamist nation turns into. None of the Arab spring folk have any desire to exchange one tyrant for another.

I still think the vast majority of ME does not subscribe to the Islamist wet dreams. KSA sheikhs may dream these things but the folks on the ground do not.

[Pranav]

I don't get this.

There is about 200 Million in the middle east all combined. There is 1.2 Billion Indians, if anyone does the pushing on the other it should be us pushing on them. Yet we have the same rhona-dhona over 'ktarey mei hai!' blah blah blah..... ...If anything folks should wonder what has reduced 1.2 Billion to such weakness. Not just over the past 60 years but for the last 3,000+ years. Why did Sankrit die in its heartland and why do those in the middle east cry Alla-o-akbar rather than jai baj rang bali or vel murugan. What is at the heart of Indian ideology that prevents its spread and prevents its full throated adoption even within India.

What's the problem. Raising awareness is part of the natural process. There can be various reasons why primitive / fanatical ideologies can become dominant for periods of time.

[member_20292]

^^^ arrey theo fidel,


you are on the right track of looking at things population related.

think of it this way, 1.2 billion cry jai bajrang bali. thats far more than 300 million crying allah o akbar.

and why would any self respecting ancient indian rajah want to plunder a land 1000 km away with sand and dates and 2 oasis per 100 km and ignore the rich neighbouring kingdom within india itself?

Till 1750 our gdp was no 1 in the world. soon it will be back to the same position. will you then tell the modern day version of the rajah, the businessman, that he has to open shop in timbuktu rather than nariman point?

this is how we should look at the world now;

http://www-personal.umich.edu/~mejn/car ... 24x512.png


and this one;


http://t3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9 ... KYMnDRY29Q


simble onlee


jay bajrang bali!

[devesh]

What upper echelon boss. You ARE the upper echelon in India. Don't fool yourself.

you think YOU and ME are "upper echelon"?!?! just b/c we have fancy degrees and might be living in US in a 4 bedroom house with a lush green backyard, you think that makes us or the vast majority of BR forumers "upper echelon"? in India, or for that matter even in US, we are not "upper echelon". the upper echelon is part of the movers and shakers of power. they know things before that happen. they are in a position to take advantage and profit from those changes. if their investments or pet projects are about to take a beating, this echelon usually knows about it and can do damage control before it happens. ME and others like me are recent munnas who have seen some amount of wealth in the last generation. the "upper echelon" in India has been in a position to take advantage of shifts and movements in the headwinds for far longer than that. the recent entrants are far, far bigger fish than ME and YOU. if you really think we constitute the "upper echelon" of India, you are seriously mistaken.

[devesh]

Devesh,
Lets not beat around the bush. We both know exactly what you are peddling. The aam janata of India are not invited to this project. You don't like the structure of India as at present. I happen to think India and its constitution are the greatest things that happened to its people. Not all of us have forgotten our deep history. Having read Sangam literature extensively I do know what India used to be like BTW.

yes, please do quote this sangam literature. I am most interested to know. Yes, I do have a problem with the current structure of India. but of course, my problem is with the fact that the "current structure" puts my cultural roots at an inherent disadvantage b/c of its biased prejudices. but of course, if your cultural roots or those moorings which you take most solace from, are constantly held up on a pedestal, then you obviously don't have a reason to dislike the current "structure". yes, let's keep talking about this "structure". and you're right, we've not forgotten our deep history. I certainly haven't forgotten what kept my neck of the woods from becoming another Islamized Punjab or Bengal over the long centuries under Islamic occupation. I very well remember what kind of tactics, agreements, understandings, and explorations my ancestors had to make, to preserve their culture not only for themselves, but also for others who are various points were allied with the extended family. so yes, let us talk of this deep history. I welcome it.

What makes you believe Kashmir is not normal now. At the last Separatist morcha 40 protesters showed up. What does that tell you. It appears you think it is a problem to have muslims in India.

"problem to have Muslims in India?" I have a problem with the ideology followed, not the population. the Muslims of present day don't have to remain Muslims forever into the future. the ideology is not permanent. it can and should be tackled.

and please save us the quantification of Kashmiri Islamism with a cute statistic about 40 "protesters" at some random rally. the atrocities perpetrated there, and that continue to be perpetrated, in the name of Islamic demographic consolidation, are very well known. don't insult the intelligence of others by peddling your cute one-liner statistics. It doesn't become you. perhaps, I can open your eyes by telling you that there has been an ongoing genocide in Kashmir for the past 2 decades, and maybe that will make you sensitive enough to not peddle psec nonsense statistics.

Islam, Muslim and Islamism is not synonymous.

when it comes to the most important things to a non-Muslim, treatment at the hands of Muslims, you will find that the 3 above are startlingly synonymous. there is no such thing as a "moderate Muslim" who assists the non-believer in their time of need against their fellow-coreligionists. I am speaking from personal experience here. The family trusted one such "moderate muslim" 60 years ago to assist when the Razakars came knocking in rural Nalgonda. This "moderate muslim" then helped his coreligionists in abducting a great aunt. and just to make it clear, the bas**** didn't have any madrassah education. he was a Fine Arts graduate and educated in English medium convents all through his schooling. forget 2 generations ago, even now, when it comes to assisting kafits against coreligionists, these "moderates" are the worst snakes. at least with Jihadis, you know where they stand. with the "moderates", you don't know shit, until you have some girl in the family kidnapped for sex.

[Mahendra]

^ May not be politically correct but is factually correct.

[rajithn]

OT.
But then, Mahendra, if we all wanted to be politically correct, would be better off reading ToIlet and others.
^ +1

[Samudragupta]

Tantawi Fired by Morsi...interesting times ahead.....