Indo-UK: News & Discussion

Gerard · Post by **Gerard** » 07 Mar 2009 18:54

President Barack Obama dislikes Britain, but he's keen to meet the Queen

President Obama has been rudeness personified towards Britain this week. His handling of the visit of the Prime Minister, Gordon Brown, to Washington was appalling. First Brown wasn't granted a press conference with flags, then one was hastily arranged in the Oval office after the Brits had to beg. Obama looked like he would rather have been anywhere else than welcoming the British leader to his office and topped it all with his choice of present (*) for the PM. A box of 25 DVDS including ET, the Wizard of Oz and Star Wars?

Arya Sumantra · Post by **Arya Sumantra** » 07 Mar 2009 19:18

Johann wrote:
vsudhir wrote:We know nobody will mourn our losses anyway.
There was unprecedented public sympathy in the West for the people of Mumbai, support for the Indian security forces, and revulsion against the attackers for the December massacre.

Sympathy by public at large is one thing and what the state officially does behind the scenes is another. Nearly every separatist group on subcontinent had spokesperson talking to media from London. It's a fact UK is terror head office of the world and Pakistan is terror workshop of the world. The deliberate attempt at showing us in a bad light by your media is not lost on us either. Just watch India Business Report on BBC. Every conclusion is negative. When the host interviews a businessman, no matter whether the answer is positive or cautious about india the conclusion by the host is always negative!!! Do you think we are dumb and can't see through it? Besides the best way to throw mud on a country is get someone from that country itself to talk negative. It is not difficult to buy a few sellouts or extremely naive peple in a country of a billion plus. When we launch a Chandrayaan then your media debates whether it is fair for us to do so without solving poverty first. Did you solve all your problems before inventing one machine after another? Did Industrial revolution start in UK before all poverty was removed? While you have professional clubs in soccer putting a price-tag on every sportsmen, when we start IPL suddenly every sportsmen who accepts an offer becomes a sellout and "greedy" and unpatriotic !!!

Johann wrote:For my part I saw far, far more schadenfreude on the forum than in India at large in the aftermath of 7/7. Mostly I saw revulsion at an act of terrorism against civilians, and concern about what this meant for jihadi confidence.

What you see as schadenfreude is nothing but satisfaction at karmic justice by some, nothing else. Nobody here rejoices at the misfortunes of any other nation perceived collectively just/neutral. Regardless of whatever "schadenfreude" you may have seen here no yindian is interested in being involved in all that. They expect time to do that to you. That is the difference between jihadis and us.
Still, many sympathized with UK in the aftermath of 7/7 thinking that atleast this will make you see the true colour of Pakistan and at least in your capacity stop pampering/nurturing/being conduit for them. But after all this, you continue to pamper the very state whose intelligence agency is the school of the world's terror. Unending appeasement continues in your media and among your politicians. How does one solve the problem of terror by "co-operating" with terror? Instead you have worked out a shortcut in exchange for their promise not to do anything on your soil. This is only a temporary solution. You have decided to nurture a baby snake in your midst. Don't cry later when it grows up and demonstrates its capabilities in full capacity.

JwalaMukhi · Post by **JwalaMukhi** » 07 Mar 2009 22:02

Well the exposure and dissemination of the tactics of erstwhile "Perfidious albion" will surely cause unease in certain quarters and that is expected.
The type and level of benevolence exhibited by the UKstanis needs to come under scrutiny for a long time because, their benevolence has set tracjectories of many a nations in Africa (and other colonized entities) on a path where recovery seems to be eons and eons away.
The rape and pillage of various nations is unparalleled and the frog marchings and inhumanism exhibited under the smug upperlip needs to be remembered for a long time.
The whitewashing and obfuscation tactics doesn't bode good either for the victim or the perpetarator. The prerogative to forget solely rests with the affected and cannot be delivered "on demand" just because the perpetarator wishes and morally pontificates on the usefulness of it.
The perpetrators already has done enough moral pontification and screwed the world twice/thrice over. The cause for keeping the memories alive is not for 'Shoe-den-fraud'. Because as Swami Vivekanada has already articulated very well "All the amount of mud in oceans of the world is insufficient to tar the wrong doings of the colonizers".

The question is not about revenge and gloating about misery of any of the people. The "never forget" as Jews inculcate; is very important for the "colonized" to be alert to the capability of perfidiousness behind the facade of upper lip. This is paramount so "upper lip" is not given free pass, but vehemently judged on the actions, even more so with the legacy and background carried by the "upper lip".

Forget about kohinoors, for starters, how about for a change instead of ponitficating on Kashmir, the "stiff upper lips" indulge in sincerely apologizing for "JallianWalla bagh massacre". How about an apology for the "arfican nations" for the loot and pillage. Do not even want to mention about the reparations.
Once, that is done, as would have been by any sane and shameful civilization, then other moral pontifications about when to forget/anger etc will have some weight.

Johann · Post by **Johann** » 07 Mar 2009 22:33

Ravi,

There's always a difference between politics and people. I saw a lot of horror and sympathy for India at the popular level in the aftermath of the attack, more than I had ever seen before.

As for the policy response, I've posted earlier on this thread. Blair would never have backed such an approach given how seriously he had a problem with Islamism.

Brown, unfortunately like most lefties all over the world really does believe that talking to Islamists who stir up jihadis is the right way forward hand in hand with tight domestic security. He doesnt just expect that of India - it is something he wants the UK to do as well.

JwalaMukhi,

I am not speaking as a representative of anyone other than myself. Nor am I talking about the meaning and nature of the colonial experience, or how Indians should assess it.

I am talking about the fundamentally unrealistic appraisals of the present and the future i've seen on this threat that appear to be driven by wish fulfilment and revenge fantasies.

What are these threads for region or country specific threads ultimately? To track all the relevant news, and to use them to make realistic appraisals across the board.

There's a distorted history thread - that or others can be where people wrestle with the colonial experience, what they feel about what the British owe, etc, etc.

vsudhir · Post by **vsudhir** » 07 Mar 2009 23:20

fundamentally unrealistic appraisals of the present and the future

BS

What appraisals have been made, pray?

And is the past irrelevant to the present and the future? Especially in the policy realm that croons about its unique skill set based upon historical experience in dealing with 'em ex-colonies?

Games nations play span generations. Understanding them requires a look in at the plans, ploys and perfidies of nations past. Feel free to disagree but the tumultuous nature of global events and post medieval history lays low any notion of orderly transitions and predictably realistic assessments.

And yes, there is value to possessing a moral compass.

i've seen on this threat that appear to be driven by wish fulfilment and revenge fantasies.

More BS.

Revenge? Really? And it must be true because you say so, I suppose.

The nature of the Brit state, its government, its ambitions, its aims and goals, the forces driving it are not divorced either from its past or from its present and will not be from its future. Saying what UKstan did in the past was inglorious is neither revenge mongering nor is it an unrealistic fantasy.

As for wishes, believe it or not, I do wish ordinary Britons well. Just that I am not enamored with the geopolitical aims of their nation-state, which has its roots in the past, which continues to harm Indians into the present and which seems likely to be maintained into the foreseeable future.

/Broke my own resolution to not participate further. But hey, am not the only one breaking stiff upper lip resolutions aajkal, eh?

Satya_anveshi · Post by **Satya_anveshi** » 08 Mar 2009 03:23

Gerard wrote:President Barack Obama dislikes Britain, but he's keen to meet the Queen
President Obama has been rudeness personified towards Britain this week. His handling of the visit of the Prime Minister, Gordon Brown, to Washington was appalling. First Brown wasn't granted a press conference with flags, then one was hastily arranged in the Oval office after the Brits had to beg. Obama looked like he would rather have been anywhere else than welcoming the British leader to his office and topped it all with his choice of present (*) for the PM. A box of 25 DVDS including ET, the Wizard of Oz and Star Wars?

Really, the British media attention, reflecting the general Ucondom's public attention to the gifts selected by Obama and family is entertaining. This excessive attention is bordering on begging to the US, publicly and shamelessly.

UCondom is revealing itself like Pakistan, after all they have parent-baby relationship.

On the other hand, I am seeing great similarities in the US-UCondom and India-NaPakistan relation. I mean both UCondom and NaPakistan are like leeches on their counterparts and cannot live without their support. UCondom the bastion of WASPs and Pukes the jihadis, UCondom's only export is kind of financial services, which in the current circumstances it is indistinguishable from financial terrorism whereas Pukestan's only export is terrorism.

Johann · Post by **Johann** » 08 Mar 2009 04:14

VS,

vsudhir wrote:And yes, there is value to possessing a moral compass.

Of course there is! That isnt in question. There's just not much evidence that history itself is governed by anyones preferred moral forces.

vsudhir wrote:What appraisals have been made, pray?

These are a few quotes from various posts by various people on the previous page;

Drain Britain's arrival at Karmic redmtion point. Need more parasites from pakistan ?

Britain's Bad Karma account is almost full, and its deeds are coming back to haunt them, be it Talibanization of UK, or the Ascendancy of the Slaves, or the gathering economic clout of the Coolies.

Ab tera kya hoga re Kaliya?

UKstani conomy is roaring ahead like the Eurostani tiger it has always been.

Admittedly was wrong to think the global meltdown put paid Grrrrope Britain's grrrowth prospects onlee.

$hitain will need to import another million+ rabid Paki beards to feed the surge in demand for labor (and labor demand for votes) caused by this fantabulistic growth spurt (0.1% to 16.8% is not trivial, after all), I predict.

This thread on the whole functions very differently than most of the other area/country threads. Would anyone following this thread gain insight in to British politics? How about who makes policy, or how its made? What are the major social and political debates going on in British society today, and what are the various groupings, and how big are they? How is the economy structured? Where is defence policy going? What are the different players on the media scene, who do they speak to? Where is European policy going? etc, etc

There's very little of that sort of stuff despite a very obvious gap - instead what tends to fill up the threads is essentially the most sensationalist bad news, followed by complacent assertions that the UK is about to be taken over by its Pakistani minority (approx 3.5% of the population), or its economic decline the assured irrelevance of the UK, etc. This may be emotionally satisfying for some, but its essentially for entertainment value rather than information value.

This I will be the first to say is a mirror of Western reporting on India for many, many years, and that is where the emotional satisfaction of giving the same treatment back comes in. But the only people it fools are the consumers - it kept many Westerners fundamentally misinformed about India by mirrorring back misjudgements, just as much of this thread fails to inform readers about the UK. Whose loss is that, really?

I'm not even going to claim that one sort of posting is exclusive to the other - they usually arent on the forum. Gerard for example on this thread posts both the sensationally satisfying, as well the stuff that builds the big picture. What I am talking about is the ratio of one kind of news post or comment to the other.

There are for example, a good number of active BRF members who either live in the UK, or have lived in the UK for extended periods. Not nearly enough of them are as active on this thread as they are on the rest of the forum. When they have been active on the thread its provided a far more grounded sense of way things in the UK actually work, the nature of the political scene, etc. The Indo-US thread for example has a very lively debate between people outside the US, Indians living/working/naturalised in the US, and Americans born or raised in the country. It is that interaction, that synthesis that creates value. What they have had to say has generated far less engagement than say the Indo-US thread, and I think they've gotten bored and wandered off to other threads.

RajeshA · Post by **RajeshA** » 08 Mar 2009 04:41

Johann,

you are right as far as the Indo-UK Thread is concerned.

There is perhaps a reason for such a development of the Indo-UK Thread. British Media like the BBC, Economist, Financial Times, etc. are quite widely read, so the issues in British society do get sufficient bandwidth amongst many BRFites, if I may dare to make an assumption here. Moreover through the Indian diaspora's ties to the island, Britain remains in someplace in the orbit of Indian consciousness.

Having said that, Indians have both broken free of the British-colonialised mentality on the one hand (though not free of Macaulayism), and on the other have become aware of the progressive marginalization of Britain in global power politics. Perhaps Indians (taking myself as an example) have simply lost interest in British society, thinking that India has had more than her share of obsession with it.

From the discussion on this thread, I gather, most are still interested to know how British foreign policy, or for that matter, its domestic politics, may affect the politics and security in the Indian Continent. It goes without saying, that we as big believers in Karma

find comfort in all bad news for UK arising out of their historic attitude of appeasement of Pakistan.

It is difficult to change attitudes arising out perceived irrelevance and irreverence.

JMHO

Mahendra · Post by **Mahendra** » 08 Mar 2009 04:41

Talking about 3.5% Bakistani minority, I can safely say( without going into detail about sources) that 8 out of 10 children born in a burough with a 40 to 50% native English Population is a Bakistani and 9 out of 10 abortions are done on native English girls. This 3.5% figure (which is grossly underestimated) is not a figure to be complacent about. If nothing is done very soon and the government keeps rewarding the Baby Booming Bakpakis with child benefits, the 3.5% will reach a critical mass of 13%, that's when Camden Town Sharia Council will start openly flogging decadent westerners.
This public sympathy in the aftermath of 26/11 is pure bunkum unless this sympathy is transformed into govenmental policy, that sadly isnt happening, the government in UK still believes that the HIV virus that it helped create will not affect its creator

Well even if one forgives Britain for the sins of the colonial era, there is still no valid excuse for the continued propping up of TSP, which is akin to waging a direct war with India all the while presenting a pleasant face. It is sad but fair to say that the BNP has far more sense than the mainstream parties, particularly Labour, at least the BNP seems to make a distinction between "Hindu", " sikh" and Pakjabi.

sanjaykumar · Post by **sanjaykumar** » 08 Mar 2009 04:59

Rajesh has encapsulated the dynamics of the educated Indian opinion cogently (certainly almost word-for-word my own assessment).

What most Indians need to understand is that Britain has made some fundamental changes to its society (more far reaching than anything in India) in the last 40 years. And yes they do try to be equitable. Ask the Hindus who are profiting economically and educationally.

Of course there is discrimination, is there any less of it in India? Of course there is under representation in the judiciary and legislative branches. Of course there is a notable absence of brown faces in any delegation to US/white commonwealth/Europe.

Of course. But to descend to the idiocy of Brits in black-face on 70s television is certainly joining them in the yob mentality. Feels good does it? There is plenty to rationally critique in Britain, but I suppose it takes more effort to discuss virginity tests than to coin hateful cognomens.

Mahendra · Post by **Mahendra** » 08 Mar 2009 05:19

Hindus profiting economically and educationally is due to their own hard work and not due to baksheesh.In fact Hindus have to work that much harder to benefit than their native counterparts. Yes, they do try to be equitable, but that is something which is expected from a modern society not something to be condescendingly proud about. One can argue that the US is more equitable

Yes the discrimination is no different in essence from what happens in India or for that matter in any other country (save Bakistan)

The issue is Britan's continued support of Bakistan, as long as that continues there is no merit complaining about " negative attitudes".

The changes to british society cannot be compared with the changes in Indian society, both have different dynamics and one cannot quantify it and term the changes in one society to be more far reaching than that in the other.

sanjaykumar · Post by **sanjaykumar** » 08 Mar 2009 05:31

Parenthetically, ever get that thrill when George's beatific My Sweet Lord comes on the radio? I am not religious and not particularly Beatle enamoured, but that tingling is unmistakable. May that type of cross-fertilisation continue between East and West. Britain is the most likely crucible (Rushdie, Naipaul, Mittal, Paul etc).

Sriman · Post by **Sriman** » 08 Mar 2009 06:13

X posting from Afghanistan thread..

Lalmohan wrote:this is an interesting aside... the same scottish troops on their return to glasgow are given a rapturous reception at the Ibrox stadium ahead of a football match

you can gauge from the crowd's reception what they think of the troops being in Afghanistan, and also by extrapolation what they really think of the Islamists amidst them in the UK

India could do something along these lines to bring cheer and recognition to her fighting men

Do note that this was at Ibrox, the home of the Rangers. Football in Scotland is sharply divided along sectarian lines. Rangers have a protestant/nationalist support base compared to their fierce rivals Celtic who are mainly Catholic and have a lot of Irish supporters. Old Firm matches often have some really vile chanting from both sides. Rangers regularly chant 'No surrender','Being knee deep in Fenian blood' etc. Celtic supporters are no angels either. During the heydays of the IRA i doubt the Army would have been applauded at Parkhead (Celtic ground) this way. Not sure if things have changed now though.

vsudhir · Post by **vsudhir** » 08 Mar 2009 07:02

Johann,

First off, tks for responding.
I do notice you continue to harbor some illusions about where things are coming from on this thread. I'll be brief.

There's just not much evidence that history itself is governed by anyones preferred moral forces.

Depends on what time horizon you take into account, IMHO.

These are a few quotes from various posts by various people on the previous page;

Aw, c'mon. Don't tell me the famed stiff upper lip can't take a bit of sledging now, can it? Its not like its friendly and sportive only when the TFTAs do it, is it? Or does it become hate, greed, envy, revenge mongering, wishful fantasies etc when SDREs snark back?

This thread on the whole functions very differently than most of the other area/country threads.

With good reason. The coonial special relationship UK 'enjoyed' with India is history, mercifully so. Yet, UK is not just any country (or is it?).

Would anyone following this thread gain insight in to British politics? How about who makes policy, or how its made? What are the major social and political debates going on in British society today, and what are the various groupings, and how big are they? How is the economy structured? Where is defence policy going? What are the different players on the media scene, who do they speak to? Where is European policy going? etc, etc

BRF is about how these things affect India, not for intellectual stimulation in of itself.

the most sensationalist bad news, followed by complacent assertions that the UK is about to be taken over by its Pakistani minority (approx 3.5% of the population)

Where India is concerned, UKstan's India/south asia policy has been hijacked by the piglets, IMHO. And then I have to remind mysel, that TSPian policy is no different from what London had ordained back in the 40s right down to what is happening now. You've surely seen the great game and the ISI history thread?

This may be emotionally satisfying for some, but its essentially for entertainment value rather than information value.

Baloney. The audience is also Desis noobs and youngsters who ought to know what the chummy British did in the past and continue to do today.The irreverence is not incidental.

it kept many Westerners fundamentally misinformed about India by mirrorring back misjudgements, just as much of this thread fails to inform readers about the UK. Whose loss is that, really?

Time will tell, I guess. India has little to lose at this point. We've been dissed, diss-paraged and decried enough already.

What I am talking about is the ratio of one kind of news post or comment to the other.

Ratios change. Just like the fin ratios of LLyods and HSBC recently did. These things come and go, I wouldn't worry too much about them. The show must go on.

When they have been active on the thread its provided a far more grounded sense of way things in the UK actually work, the nature of the political scene, etc.

With all due respect, the great game and ISI history threads provide enough mateial for how the UKstani establishment really works. It is that more than anything that leads me to disillusionment. There is no hope in heaven UKstan will change its course w.r.t India.

/Have a nice day.

vishnua · Post by **vishnua** » 08 Mar 2009 07:34

Johann wrote: This I will be the first to say is a mirror of Western reporting on India for many, many years, and that is where the emotional satisfaction of giving the same treatment back comes in. But the only people it fools are the consumers - it kept many Westerners fundamentally misinformed about India by mirrorring back misjudgements, just as much of this thread fails to inform readers about the UK. Whose loss is that, really?

No body's loss. In long run the island will be what it should be. Brown is fundametally wrong and i don't think he will win the next election.

As per Pakis in Britain, they are no threat to the island in the long run as well. But like you said it is not emotional satisfaction but how the real history was manupulated and was "white washed" by the europeans leading with the Brits.

Not that India is any better but India paid and is paying and will pay it's due to the Karma. As per the island the full Karmic cycle has yet to begin. Pakis are just the start.

sanjaykumar · Post by **sanjaykumar** » 08 Mar 2009 08:27

Hmmm So our haughty, insular, disdainful ancestors bear no culpability in the British conquest and interregnum?

One may play the victim as that is certainly a comfortable role to some, or one can teach them a lesson as the Jews have been doing to the Gentiles for the past 50 to 80 years. peacefully, largely integrated well. And while advancing arts, mathematics, sciences and medicine for the benefit of all.

Yes Britain has been churlish to India wrt Pakistan, but India isn't going to weep over the far pavilions when it displaces Great Britain from the Security Council.

I never forget, I am free to criticise the ambient monochromatic, monolingual, monotheistic, monosyllabic (hehe) culture of the white commonwealth, but at the end of the day I live better than 95% of them largely because of who they are. Try doing that in Poland or Germany or France. The best critiques are nuanced.

Johann · Post by **Johann** » 08 Mar 2009 11:41

Depends on what time horizon you take into account, IMHO.
What is known of the full span of recorded human history.

Aw, c'mon. Don't tell me the famed stiff upper lip can't take a bit of sledging now, can it? Its not like its friendly and sportive only when the TFTAs do it, is it? Or does it become hate, greed, envy, revenge mongering, wishful fantasies etc when SDREs snark back?

Don’t forget pride, shame, and complacency either from that list.

Sledging is a crude form psychological warfare, and of course everyone is entitled to use it, even though I find that sort of rudeness from ‘TFTA’ or ‘SDRE’ equally stupid.

The real problem is when you actually believe the stuff you say while trying to someone else down, and actually form your assessments based on that stuff – that’s when it can be any of those things on the list.

BRF is about how these things affect India, not for intellectual stimulation in of itself.
Err yes, that goes without saying. Please see the rest of the post.

Where India is concerned, UKstan's India/south asia policy has been hijacked by the piglets, IMHO. And then I have to remind mysel, that TSPian policy is no different from what London had ordained back in the 40s right down to what is happening now. You've surely seen the great game and the ISI history thread?

… With all due respect, the great game and ISI history threads provide enough mateial for how the UKstani establishment really works. It is that more than anything that leads me to disillusionment. There is no hope in heaven UKstan will change its course w.r.t India.
The TSP thread I think shows much more conclusively that Pakistani behaviour towards India is caused first and foremost by Pakistani ideology.

Unless India and Pakistan are the same thing, the record suggests that UK policy on Pakistan is not the same thing as UK policy on India. Pakistan won many free passes for its behaviour because in every vital conflict- – WWII, Cold War, and the Al Qaeda war - the Pakistani leadership is able and willing to provide vital assistance.

But to assume that UK policy is consistant to either India or Pakistan is to impose preconceptions on a complex reality. Have you read the Indian diplomat and scholar Narendra Singh Sarila’s Shadow of the Great Game on partition, written after researching through British records?

Why for example did the Heath government not involved in the US gunboat diplomacy of 1971 to defend West Pakistan? The British press for example was in general highly supportive of the Indian case, and critical of the Pakistanis. Mujibur Rehman actually flew to New Delhi from London on an RAF flight.

Why was the LeT and JeM banned in the UK by the Anti-Terrorism Act before 9/11, and before the Americans got around to it after the Parliament attack?

Why did both the NDA and UPA governments have such good relations with the Blair government?

How much analysis has there been on this thread on India’s ability and past successes in influencing UK policy on either India or Pakistan?

The assumption you’ve that there has been none, that India can not change British calculations, that there is never convergence, etc, etc. I think this would come
Who makes policy in the UK today? How is it made?

In long run the island will be what it should be.
- I think that’s certainly the assumption, perhaps even the hope that drives a lot of the commentary on this thread.

I just haven’t seen a lot of comprehensive collection and analysis on this thread to suggest to say even roughly when this is going to happen. What happens in the meanwhile?

People (and I don’t just mean those here, there were quite a few in the UK too) who like to draw straight lines. If Britain declined from the world’s pre-eminent power to just another major power (and really this happened in the late 1940s) then decline must continue downwards in this straight line.

Strangely enough, the average Briton post-Empire lives far better than he did during the Empire, which is why so very few Brits miss it. Something not often understood outside the UK. British soft power has not significantly declined since the 1960s. In terms of overall research output across all fields, it comes right after the US despite only being a fraction of the size. The influence the UK wields through trade and investment has not substantially decreased.

If or when (lets say when) India’s global economic clout overtakes the UK, and its entertainment exports exceed it, etc, etc. The assumption I’ve often seen here is that it *must* come at the UK’s expense. Most of the time it just doesn’t work that way in the world. India can certainly become a great power without the UK’s loss of status as a major power (its already happened for example with the rise of China, and the rise of a host of regional powers), while vertically integrated with great powers in the form of the EU and US. In short, the idea that the UK will just go ‘poof’ has been declared for half a century now, often most publicly by a certain type of Briton. Its just not that simple, or that inevitable.

India isn't going to weep over the far pavilions when it displaces Great Britain from the Security Council.
Every serious forseeable proposal is for the expansion of permanent membership of the UNSC, not replacement. The UK has thus had no problem endorsing India’s entry.

Brown is fundametally wrong and i don't think he will win the next election.
- Absolutely agreed on both points. Maybe this thread should look at who is going to make up the next cabinet, and what specific changes in direction are likely to occur.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 08 Mar 2009 12:20

The UK is not going to disappear as an economic or global power because it no longer has an empire,or is shackled to Brussels,as it still has innovative people in the country.Britain had some of the finest amateurs in every field,whose maverick thinking ,outside the box,made many scientific discoveries possible and influenced world affairs more than most other nations.We've just been celebrating an anniversary of Darwin and his work and the basic British ingenuity "gene" remains.With some decades of immigration,a plus point of this has been the influx of skilled minds from various parts of the colonies,especially earlier from the sub-continent.Though the negative aspect of this has been (part) the huge Muslim population,of which enough have been indoctrinated by fundamentalist Islamist thinking,posing a real threat to Britian today,the story of the Mittals,Pauls,etc.,have shown how a new style of British entrepreneurship has thrived in recent times.

There however has been a pandering to certain ethnic groups for electoral reasons,mainly by Labour,which has undermined many old established strengths of British tradition and values.Despite so many terms of Labour,supposedly the guardian of public utilities,public services in Britain have deteriorated drastically.The rail services are supposedly twice to thrice the cost of other nations in Europe,the National Health service in shambles and Britain rsorted to huge imports of cheap eastern European labour to "man the pumps" in various sectors of the economy.The social cost of this has been heavy and the next election will in all inevitability bring back the Tories who will have a huge massive task ahead to restore economic confidence.Just a few years ago,I was taken to see the almost finished international HQ of the Royal Bank of Scotland,proudly boasting at that time of being the world's second most profitable bank.It was a superb HQ,set in 100 acres of land near Edinburgh airport once part of a lunatic asylum! RBS today is almost totally owned by the British govt.,"nationalised",ye gods! LLoyds TSB,HBOS have all similarly bitten the dust."Crony Capitalism",what our dear PM,himself part of this ungodly tribe,calls "Casino Capitalism",especially of the US flavour has brought the world into deep recession and the social repercussions of this catastrophe if he rot is not stemmed,will be what Naipaul called "a million mutinies now".

One significant hopeful sign is that of Clinton and the Russian FM,on nuclear disarmament.If the two superpowers and major nuclear powers can hugely reduce their unneccessary nuclear arsenals,especially in an age of pinpoint PGM real time capability,defence spending can be substantially brought down in this exceptionally costly aspect of defence,where costs handling of dumping of nuclear waste and such a cut in arsenals will make it easier to prevent future proliferation from the non-nuclear have-nots.Britain ,a major nuclear power,and key US ally,has a major role to play in international diplomacy,but needs to find its own independent style,which served it and its interests well in the past.

sanjaykumar · Post by **sanjaykumar** » 08 Mar 2009 12:54

India isn't going to weep over the far pavilions when it displaces Great Britain from the Security Council.
Every serious forseeable proposal is for the expansion of permanent membership of the UNSC, not replacement. The UK has thus had no problem endorsing India’s entry.

India will supplement the P5 in the short term but a restructuring of the UNSC to reflect global realities, be it 2015 or 2025, is inevitable.

North Sea oil saved Britain from the graveyard of empire that was the 70s. Thatcher was wholly incidental. What will save it from its City sophisticates? Financial services in Dubai or Singapore or, egad, Mumbai may be more attractive after this financial meltdown is done.

Britain has done fantastically well with research (second to the US etc), but in a universe of brown dwarfs one did not need to put out much light to be scintillating. Can Britain compete with the billion strong cultures of China and India with deep roots of curiosity and investigation and results? Consider in 2009, Indians live much worse but where are Britain's national programs in anti-ballistic missile systems, lunar orbiters or manned moon mission? The divergence is going to be 'no contest' in 20 years.

pgbhat · Post by **pgbhat** » 08 Mar 2009 13:09

deleted wrong thread

ashish raval · Post by **ashish raval** » 08 Mar 2009 13:33

@Philip, very nicely put.

Airavat · Post by **Airavat** » 08 Mar 2009 13:52

Johann wrote:Pakistan won many free passes for its behaviour because in every vital conflict- – WWII, Cold War, and the Al Qaeda war - the Pakistani leadership is able and willing to provide vital assistance.

That should be changed to "only willing to provide nominal assistance." And this nominal assistance does not justify the repeated military and economic bailouts lavished on the Pakistan army for the last 60 years.

And with WWII you are referring to the Muslim League. Well in that case it was the other way round; all the "assistance"

of building up Jinnah and the upper-caste Muslim League over other Muslim leaders in Bengal, Punjab, NWFP, and Sindh,
of overlooking communal rioting by the Muslim League,
of jailing Hindu leaders and brutally crushing their agitations,
of creating the blueprint for Pakistan,
of invading J&K State,

...was provided by the British.

And all this was done in return for what? That Jinnah supported army recruitment into the BIA while Gandhi opposed it? Just so you know in WWI their positions were reversed....Gandhi then supported army recruitment while Jinnah opposed it! Ultimately neither the support nor the opposition of these leaders made any difference to army recruitment, which for Indians was simply a means of employment and obtaining respect.

Just as the real reasons for creating Pakistan lay elsewhere, the reasons for sustaining this malignant entity also lie elsewhere, and not in the nominal assistance of the Pakistani leadership.

vsudhir · Post by **vsudhir** » 08 Mar 2009 15:55

Sanjay,

Hmmm So our haughty, insular, disdainful ancestors bear no culpability in the British conquest and interregnum?

And tell me they haven't been beaten to death already. Or that they (and this country) have not paid for their bad karma.

One may play the victim as that is certainly a comfortable role to some, or one can teach them a lesson as the Jews have been doing to the Gentiles for the past 50 to 80 years. peacefully, largely integrated well. And while advancing arts, mathematics, sciences and medicine for the benefit of all.

Agreed. Now tell me the yindians, NRIs, PIOs aren't doing so already in fields as diverse as medicine and mathematics?

J,

The real problem is when you actually believe the stuff you say while trying to someone else down, and actually form your assessments based on that stuff – that’s when it can be any of those things on the list.

The real problem is you assume yindians == packees onlee, just like your govt has consistently maintained.

When your official media vehicle (the beeb) labels as 'gunmen' the 26/11 attackers, the purport not lost on anyone, hosannas to 'popular revulsion at the gunmen' notwithstanding. You valiant critique of the Indian special forces during 26/11 isn't forgotten either.

Lemme repeat this, for your benefit - Nobody posting here is as stupid as you seem to want to believe. UKstan retains nukes and is a member of the P5. Nobody here is unaware of facts, IMHO. Just because we're pro-India or non-pro-UK doesn't mean we can't be objective about facts. Just because the packees believed their own spiel that 1 pak soldier==10 yindian ones, doesn't mean the entire subcontinent is infected with the same meme. And pls stop implying we are. TIA.

Don’t forget pride, shame, and complacency either from that list.

Right. The 'etc' got lost somewhere I'm guessing. Pure coincidence onlee.

Last I heard, UKstani politics, pretenses and power-plays (suitably led by the US, look up shiv's 'US perfidy' thread for more) with its roots in the past, has engendered a situ where a nuke could go off in Delhi tomorrow. I don't see anyone here assessing realistically the same happening on London, or even wishing for the same (revenge-mongering, you said?). Again, that you imply that such is what posters on this board believe/want is lowblowy and inane.

And yes, lest you missed it, I have said - the irreverence is not incidental. Thee are mental blocks to overcome w.r.t our past and to the UKstani role in it. It was irreverence in other threads that overcame some of my mental blocks. There's folk out there who could do well with knowing that UKstan ain't what it has been made out to be in mainstream Indian discourse.

I just haven’t seen a lot of comprehensive collection and analysis on this thread to suggest to say even roughly when this is going to happen. What happens in the meanwhile?

Hmmm, how about Philip's little writeup above?

I clearly recall the Economist crooning post '98 that Russia is now a Latin America with nukes. And that was so true, wasn't it? Just pointing to possibilities I wouldn't dismiss outright. With a struggling economy, lost manufacturing and an eve rising share of govt in the GDP, the UK is likely not poised to attain commanding heights of economic superperformance anymore. Or is that delusional, unrealistic assessment mongering, driven by greed, shame, complacency and what not?

And I wouldn't worry too much about the Brit public getting misjudged feedback from the irreverence on this forum. They get enough by way of the beeb, conomist, and other UK media organs to satiate their beliefs.

Lastly, I expect a majority of Indians will choose to forgive past wrongs and move on when they learn of an undistorted history. Its just that I'd rather that decision be an informed one. The colorful diatribes you see on this thread are aimed much more at a domestic audience than at sophisticates like Johann. No wonder bollywood fare aimed at yindian audiences finds non-comprehension abroad. IOW, don't be surprised if you don't get what wasn't meant for you and form assessments (realistic, no doubt) on that basis.

And yes, even though I have no love lost for the UK, I wish it ordinary people well. As for yindians, we've have our shortcomings and we are dealing with them, your concern for our greed, shame...etc etc notwithstanding.

/Good luck.

Arya Sumantra · Post by **Arya Sumantra** » 08 Mar 2009 16:07

Johann wrote:There was unprecedented public sympathy in the West for the people of Mumbai, support for the Indian security forces, and revulsion against the attackers for the December massacre.

And to reduce that you planted this articleThe monster in the mirror by the lunatic Arundhati Suzanne Roy in your media.

vavinash · Post by **vavinash** » 08 Mar 2009 16:34

Is it safe to play cricket in england? I hope they move any future Indian tour to Italy or siberia since there is no chance of such attacks there.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/nort ... 930995.stm

Gerard · Post by **Gerard** » 08 Mar 2009 18:01

An attack in English Administered Northern Ireland
Two killed in attack on Antrim Army base

vsudhir · Post by **vsudhir** » 08 Mar 2009 20:36

'Run on UK' sees foreign investors pull $1 trillion out of the City

This follows news that UKstan's bank bailouts (including implicit sovereign debt guarantees) now top 20% of GDP.

IMF: A Fifth of UK's GDP Spent on Baiouts

"Alistair Darling has already spent almost a fifth of Britain's GDP on bailing out its shattered banking system – more than any other major economy, according to a grave assessment of the world financial crisis published today by the International Monetary Fund.

With G20 finance ministers due to gather in Sussex next Friday for a two-day meeting before the London summit in April, the IMF has totted up the costs of financial bailouts so far. It calculates that the UK has spent as much as 19.8% of its GDP, topping the table of G20 countries.

The US, where the investment bank Bear Stearns and the insurer AIG have both been rescued with public finds, has spent just 6.8% of its GDP. Only Norway has come close to the UK, spending 13.8%"

Meanwhile, BoE guv Sri Mervyn King is on record saying its 'impossible to say' how bad the situ is with UKstani banks. A tad unsettling for a central banker and head of the banking regulatory authority to not only not know but have no way of knowing as well, no?

My realistic appraisal? IMO, UKstan is likely to jump out of crisis within this year and should be in the pink of health very soon. Watch this space.

JwalaMukhi · Post by **JwalaMukhi** » 08 Mar 2009 22:07

On those notes, it is important to recognize that banana boy milliband is the best friend of India. The reason is: it is lot easier to deal the imbeciles/drunkards who speak truth inadvertently, than with the "closet" types. The closet types will indulge in takkhiya with the most mellifluous language while crafting the deadliest of the perfidy.

The masters of takkhiya needs to be dealt with quid-pro-quo at every single step to ensure any perfidy that takkhiya masters contemplate for the unwashed natives has built-in pain. Trust but verify may be fine in usual circumstance, but for unusual circumstance where anti-India elements are actively nourished, while speaking friendship, needs to be dealt with verify, verify and demonstrate. Trust - bah! will reserve it for situation where it is deserved.

RayC · Post by **RayC** » 08 Mar 2009 22:50

Oh sure I am furious at what that ass Miliband said.

However, I would only like to add the Miliband is NOT Great Britain as Sonia Gandhi is NOT India.

Miliband is just another punk who has the good fortune to be where he is. He has not been a brilliant minister as many of his predecessors have been. So, he is not worth the trouble of discussing.

It would be incorrect to assume that the common Briton is not concerned about terrorism or of the fact that Pakistan is the womb of international terror.

It is just the UK, like India, is a victim of Vote Bank politics. And like it or not, they have this huge colonial guilt hangover, where they go out of the way in being stupidly politically correct, so much so that they nearly allowed a silly woman of Moslem faith to give evidence in purdah! Imagine, a woman, not identified giving evidence. Then, they got hold of a lady Judge, who was allowed to see her face etc. Now, if the accused cannot see the so called 'victim's' face, because of silly religious reason, how can that be called a fair trial. This is the sad state the Britain has brought upon itself.

Then there was this case of a Moslem Briton thrashing a Afghan War veteran in a NHS hospital because the soldier had fought against Moslems. Nothing happened to that Moslem Briton, when this idiot deserved a swift kick in his pants and a long tenure in the gaol! That is Britain.

It is true that all insurgent elements have their HQs in Britain - Khalistanis, Moslems, Chechnyans, you name it and they are there. Britain was and is asking for it and 7/7 is no surprise!

Britain has to wake up and smell the coffee before it is too late.

But that, in no way, suggests that the common Briton is not against terrorism or that they are overtly in love with Pakistan.

BRF is about how these things affect India, not for intellectual stimulation in of itself.

VSudhir,

Is that what is in the guidelines?

Or have you taken it on yourself to dictate terms?

Let's keep to realities!

If one observes the threads here, there is enough to suggest inane intellectual stimulation without any results! All gas and no go! So much of pontification that it suffocates!

Quit being punctiliousness and supercilious!

RayC · Post by **RayC** » 08 Mar 2009 22:58

http://www.mcb.org.uk/library/statistics.php

This link will indicate the number of Moslems in the UK.

Straw was honest when he spoke out!

From Wikipedia:

The Muslim Public Affairs Committee UK (MPAC) attempted to capitalise on anti-war sentiment with 'operation Muslim vote' in Blackburn against him.

In October 2006 Straw attracted controversy by suggesting to a local newspaper, The Lancashire Evening Telegraph, that Muslim women who wear veils that cover their faces (the niqab) can inhibit inter-community relations, though he denied the issue was raised for political gain, stating that he had raised it in private circles in the past and it had never progressed beyond discussions. Although he did not support a law banning a woman's right to choose to wear the veil, he would like them to abandon it altogether. Asked whether he would prefer veils to be abolished completely, Straw said: "Yes. It needs to be made clear I am not talking about being prescriptive but with all the caveats, yes, I would rather." He said that he had asked women visiting his constituency surgeries to consider uncovering their noses and mouths in order to allow better communication. He claimed that no women had ever chosen to wear a full-veil after this request. However, given that he is known to suffer from tinnitus (which compromises the ability to hear), it is possible that he requested the veil to be removed so that he could lip-read the woman.

Straw's comments kicked off a wide-ranging and sometimes harshly worded debate within British politics and the media; Straw was supported by some establishment figures and castigated by others, including Muslim groups. There is debate within the Muslim community whether the Qur'an and hadith (traditions of Muhammad) require the use of the full face veil, see sartorial hijab.

vsudhir · Post by **vsudhir** » 09 Mar 2009 00:02

BRF is about how these things affect India, not for intellectual stimulation in of itself.

VSudhir,

Is that what is in the guidelines?

Or have you taken it on yourself to dictate terms?

Let's keep to realities!

Twas my interpretation of the guidelines, RayC saar. Apols if its way off base (is it?).

Anyways, point taken. Admittedly read up on UKstani history in the subcontinent and got carried away. The UK shtick of 'see, we're jolly good fellows onlee' no longer holds water, IMHO. Lemme stick my neck out and say 'apologies' to any aam UKstani who doesn't support HMG's long standing South Asia Policies and who's been grievously hurt by my sledging.

Am out of this thread. Better to laze around in the T&EC forum onlee.

/Good bye and goodluck

RayC · Post by **RayC** » 09 Mar 2009 00:35

Sudhir,

Your points are valid and very pertinent. Of that, of that there is no doubt.

However, what I wanted to state is that there is a difference between the State and the People and how the pressures of the Vote Bank clouds the govts from seeing the reality!

Do we agree with the soft state that India is today? I wonder if we, the People, do. But our good govt is happy to allow the citizens to get killed and carry on a friendly dialogue with Pakistan!

As for intellectual stimulation read some of the threads which are so highbrow that one wonders what they are stating and what is the aim or what is the end statement they are hunting for!

John Snow · Post by **John Snow** » 09 Mar 2009 02:36

I feel sorry for the two valliant british soldiers, but at the same time the Eglish Govt has to show understanding resolve the Irish problem through peaceful dialogue even if it endsup giving freedom to scotland and Londonderry. Our foreign office should advise the HM govt offer to help in this flash point in Europe.

N. Ireland police: Soldiers murdered as they lay on ground

http://www.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/europe/03 ... index.html

very saddening to see HM govt not respecting human rights and commiting atrocities in N Ireland

Johann · Post by **Johann** » 09 Mar 2009 02:57

When your official media vehicle (the beeb) labels as 'gunmen' the 26/11 attackers, the purport not lost on anyone, hosannas to 'popular revulsion at the gunmen' notwithstanding.

If the Beeb is so official, why do you think Blair actually considered cutting all public funding to it? Or why it is often so unpopular with the troops. Public is not the same thing as official. Think NCERT.

You valiant critique of the Indian special forces during 26/11 isn't forgotten either.

I have never, ever critiqued the men on the front line in any democracy - only the politicians and bureaucrats who fail to give those in front every advantage they deserve.

If you think my comments on the inertia that the bureaucracy showed towards the NSG was harsh, you would thoroughly love to hear what I think of Brown, whom first as Chancellor of the Exchequer and now as PM has done to serve the people he helped send in to two wars, or for that matter the quality of UK's current Secretary of Defence .

Just because the packees believed their own spiel that 1 pak soldier==10 yindian ones, doesn't mean the entire subcontinent is infected with the same meme. And pls stop implying we are. TIA.

Lastly, I expect a majority of Indians will choose to forgive past wrongs and move on when they learn of an undistorted history. Its just that I'd rather that decision be an informed one.

VS,

I would agree without reservation. My experience of living in India, amongst Indians of all sorts, and my return on relatively regular visits has never suggested otherwise.

I think I've made it clear that my comments were not aimed at anyone other than those who participate on the thread.

It is the quality of forum discussion, which all of us contribute to that I care about. There has to be a balance between polemical and analytical. Whenever the balance has shifted from analytical to polemical on any thread, on any subject in the time I've been on the forum (over a decade now!), I've always spoken up.

Why do we have separate threads on the forum? To give every subject the space it needs to develop.

There is a distorted history thread where the matter of how Indians should feel about the nature and impact British colonialism, etc is intensely discussed, this is the Indo-UK thread, and the purpose of tracking and making sense of the contemporary UK as it is.

If there really isnt sufficient general interest in that, then this thread should really be rolled up with the Indo-EU thread for the sake of efficiency. However, I tend to agree with Rajesh - there is real interest, and that interest should be served. And as I said earlier the biggest step towards that is more participation from all the many BRFites who live in the UK, or have lived there for a good bit of time.

I just haven’t seen a lot of comprehensive collection and analysis on this thread to suggest to say even roughly when this is going to happen. What happens in the meanwhile?

Hmmm, how about Philip's little writeup above?

Its fodder for discussion - there may be things I disagree with, but that's what makes life interesting isnt it? The point is that its on the analytical rather than polemical side. Polemics use facts for emotional effect. Analysis uses facts to try and make sense of reality.

I clearly recall the Economist crooning post '98 that Russia is now a Latin America with nukes. And that was so true, wasn't it? Just pointing to possibilities I wouldn't dismiss outright. With a struggling economy, lost manufacturing and an eve rising share of govt in the GDP, the UK is likely not poised to attain commanding heights of economic superperformance anymore. Or is that delusional, unrealistic assessment mongering, driven by greed, shame, complacency and what not?

I'd agree with you that its a perfectly valid question to pose

To attempt an answer we'd have to look at how the UK was doing compared to other Western economies at this time. We'd have to look at how does this compare this to the recurrent financial and economic crises from the late 1960s to the early 1980s.

We'd also have to look at the UK's ability to attract investment, not just in to the markets, but also in terms of FDI.

There are international measures of the competitiveness of an economy, transparency of an econoy, workforce, etc.

Of course, there would still be some differences in the interpretation of what all of that means, but that's the kind of discussion that adds analytical value.

My own tupenny is that previous periods of crisis were much more serious because they required *huge* UK-specific structural and social changes, which the country made. My suspicion is that the UK may have gone too far in 'globalising' its economy, but that isnt as hard to fix as the kind of deep management-labour (aka class conflict) issues that the UK had to address through a series of crises. Russia is not an easy country to invest in, and its not easy to make a profit. The UK on the other hand is open for business. In addition the vast majority of Russia's export driven tend to be natural resources - oil, metals and timber products. Those kinds of commodity markets tend to be volatile. Although Russia has a huge talented scientific pool, institutional problems mean research output isnt anything it could be, and research has a hard time getting turned in to profitable new products and services. If Russia can fix those problems, there's no reasons it cant dramatically improve both the quality of life for its citizens, and the stability and competitiveness of its economy. Post-imperial restructuring is hard, very hard even in the most responsive political systems. In the case of Russia, with its political system still coping with the Soviet legacy, its even harder.

Virupaksha · Post by **Virupaksha** » 09 Mar 2009 03:18

Johann wrote:Ravi,

There's always a difference between politics and people. I saw a lot of horror and sympathy for India at the popular level in the aftermath of the attack, more than I had ever seen before.

As for the policy response, I've posted earlier on this thread. Blair would never have backed such an approach given how seriously he had a problem with Islamism.

Brown, unfortunately like most lefties all over the world really does believe that talking to Islamists who stir up jihadis is the right way forward hand in hand with tight domestic security. He doesnt just expect that of India - it is something he wants the UK to do as well.

Johann,
I believe in, all politics is local politics. What was the political price (sympathy factor) paid by Brown/Miliband for his statements. I didnt see any articles in bbc or alguardian or telegraph screaming that it wasnt the case. In short, they didnt lose any british people sympathy.

I recognise your position, when you have to defend the british govt, when you might not have any role in it except possibly for voting. Fortunately or unfortunately, it doesnt matter for India if the british public espouses sympathy, it only matters if british govt changes its policy. and as per miliband statements in India and later his statements that he was simply bluntly only reiterating the official british policy, nothing has changed.

Gerard · Post by **Gerard** » 09 Mar 2009 05:48

Armed guards stood by as Brit soldiers shot at Northern Ireland base

Armed security guards employed to protect the military base in Northern Ireland where two soldiers were shot dead did not open fire on the terrorists, even when they stood over the injured men and fired further shots.

sanjaykumar · Post by **sanjaykumar** » 09 Mar 2009 06:20

As usual,

http://www.economist.com/business/displ ... d=13185039

But will they economist include this in its comment on class or the economy or the state of 'personal morality' or child welfare or better still Great Britain's enduring great power status?

http://www.michaelmeacher.info/weblog/b ... overty.jpg

But I suppose Great Britain is a wealthy country, it's not for third world countries to lose $2 trillion in 4 months by the sheer brilliance of its smartest people.

Gerard · Post by **Gerard** » 09 Mar 2009 07:38

Real IRA claims killing of British soldiers

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 09 Mar 2009 08:06

Why are the IRA doing this now? Do they think the global meltdown will let them rise and see the moon?

Ardeshir · Post by **Ardeshir** » 09 Mar 2009 11:22

Poor Kevin Pietersen. He will now be homeless, or perhaps go back to South Africa, since the UK is no longer secure and the threat of the IRA terrorists is to be considered.