Indian Interests

AbhishekD · Post by **AbhishekD** » 10 Jun 2009 05:40

Let me put it this way. I think the present MMS government maybe implementing what I will call a "Containment Policy". By Containment policy I mean that dont stir up anything but contain the problem to its minimum. I dont see any effort by this government to take the problem headon. They have not put any pressure on Pakistan or have used any military means. The BS of not hurting US agenda in the region is just that BS and I am sure not many in the Indian Government actually believe in the US agenda for Af-pak region. The problem is that India does not want to implement its own agenda in the region. It does not want to create better options that will serve its security interests.

The problem is that when you are asked to climb a hilltop and you look at the hilltop to decide that oh I am too FAT and SLOW to climb it so lets just not do it and find an excuse to tell the world why you are not doing it. India has a security issue that is unique in several ways. It is a herculean task and Indian politicians and even the indian public is not ready to tackle this problem so the MMS government has come out with a "Containment Policy", that is reduce the damage to the minimum without initiating a heavy response. Under this policy they will keep Pakistan and US engaged and use diplomatic energy as much possible and initiate a domestic policy of searching, finding and killing as much terrorist cell as much possible. There will be some action on the external front, but only when the situation is favourable such as in Bangladesh. The present Bangladesh government will help India to contain the problem.

The success of such a policy will depend upon how well India can stop terrorist attacks. India did implement such a policy quiet successfully in Kashmir or even in Punjab. As a consequence of such a policy we are going to see a huge increase in paramilitary forces, BSF, NSG, anti-terrorist squads and Intelligence gathering within the country and also intelligence gathering to help detect terrorists within India. The benefit of such a policy will be that India can get co-operation from US and some some degree even with Pakistan(as it does not hurt the present pakistani political establishment). We are going to see CCTV cameras and much closer survelliance in all major public places.

Border Management will become more vigilant, especially in the Nepal and Bangladesh border. Further there is a likelihood that we may start getting National ID cards that will help in intelligence gathering and tracking and capturing of terror suspects. The thing is that we have to measure MMS government response on the success of such a strategy as they are not going to do anything on the external front. We have to see as to how well can the MMS government implement their containment strategy and how much they can reduce the threat level in the country.

India has implemented the "Containment Strategy" successfully but only in small areas with huge influx of force and intelligence. Can India do that throughout India and weather out this terrorist assault. We dont know that. Lets see what happens

geeth · Post by **geeth** » 10 Jun 2009 09:16

>>>>There IS a problem when people use blatantly false analogies to present their version of "logic". IMO you are needlessly

Narayanan,

I think probably you miss the point. I was just responding to Ramana's post and put that as an example of just another kind of frustration - to ask if venting frustration is reason enough to ban people. We can probably see "N" number of analogies from various threads that can be grouped into military intervention theory, if that makes you more comfortable. And I made the comment because it was one-off remark - i.e., the guy didn't persist with his theory like Rahul Mehta usually does.

Also, I don't think ANY member of this forum is an idiot, including myself.

My last

on this matter.

Suppiah · Post by **Suppiah** » 10 Jun 2009 11:18

Good post Abhishek...just a $.02

AbhishekD wrote:Also strategically speaking there is a very clear divergence of Indian and US interests within the region. US wants to contain the islamist problem within the region and India wants to eliminate the problem from the region. So both tactically and strategically India's interests dont align with that of US.

Actually it is not that different...India too does not / should not care if it is largely confined to within TSP (as it is increasingly becoming anyway) since it will lead to eventual breakup of TSP and also keep it busy in the meantime.

We all define 'region' to suit our own situation.

AbhishekD · Post by **AbhishekD** » 10 Jun 2009 13:24

Suppiah wrote:

Actually it is not that different...India too does not / should not care if it is largely confined to within TSP (as it is increasingly becoming anyway) since it will lead to eventual breakup of TSP and also keep it busy in the meantime. We all define 'region' to suit our own situation.

This is the containment policy that I am talking about. I dont think it is in the interest of India to contain the problem in Pakistan. Such a problem either escalates or diminishes. It does not remain in a perpetual state of instability. Pakistan has a huge armed force that maybe able to defeat Taliban in few battlefield, but if it cannot create conditions conducive for a better living for those tribals then this problem is not going to go away.

India's containment policy is not going to completely eliminate terrorist attacks against India. It will just reduce it and at a very high cost.

Abhishek

Suppiah · Post by **Suppiah** » 10 Jun 2009 14:00

John Snow wrote:In India's region US is part of problem not part of a solution.

True. US will arm/support any group as long as that group meets immediate tactical objectives, even if that ultimately results in massive strategic harm for US itself, let alone worry about what the impact is on India short or long term. That in a nutshell is the history of Taliban/ISI/Alqaeda/etc.

However, US is also part of the solution because it is what it is. In a way we are the 'collateral damage' of US shenanigans. If you go against them totally, we will become 'real damage'. We cant fight that battle AND also take on TSP/Taliban/ISI cabal AND also take on the Chinese commies. Of all the players in this game, it is the one with some amount of handles for us to maneuver. And with whom we share some values at least. With the pakbarian animals or the talibans or the chincoms we share none.

Suppiah · Post by **Suppiah** » 10 Jun 2009 14:07

Knowing uncle is what he is (unreliable, prone to drastic 'regime changes' etc), the TSP policy can take two routes:

1. Take a sort-of-anti-US (but not too anti-US) stand by showing some solidarity with all ME/Islamic states, including Pakbarians, saying all your troubles is withe the WEST, we are NOT the west, blah blah blah. and hope that they will plant bombs either in western cities and perhaps themselves, and not amidst us. This is exactly the mirror image of the strategy US liberals try to play. That is, go kill elsewhere, we are not your enemies. Mind you they are never going to say dont kill ANYONE. If they kill us and not them they can sit around and offer free advise on how to deal with the 'root cause', give away Kashmir, go for dialogue etc.

2. Be part of the so-called US initiative and pay the price or reap the rewards, if it happens by chance (it will certainly not happen by design)

GOI has been dilly dallying between both of these.

Under both options, we have to massively strengthen our own defence/attack options anyway.

AbhishekD · Post by **AbhishekD** » 10 Jun 2009 14:29

Ajaykk wrote:

AbhishekD,
dont get me wrong and i am not shooting the messenger.

We speak of a "Containment Policy" and "containing the problem to its minimum".
Do we define this minimum to a certain number or strength of attacks ?
Also should our "Containment Policy" be on the basis of our strength or dimwitude?

I think you got me completely wrong. I am not suggesting that we should implement a "containment Policy". I am saying that the Indian public and Indian politicians dont have the balls to change the game. India and MMS is playing a cat and mouse game that is just looking at containing the problem.

My post is not an endorsement of that strategy. Indeed I am highly critical of such a strategy, but the Indian establishment has not created better options. It has just gone about and done the absolute minimum that is make an effort to contain the problem and reduce the number of terror attacks in India.

Will they be successful, we will have to see.

RajeshA · Post by **RajeshA** » 10 Jun 2009 14:32

India is getting too carried away with American goals in the region. We have to wait and see. If the current Pakistani assault on the Pushtun regions, on the Pakiban, results in an unrepairable rift between the Pakjabis and Pushtuns, then India should change our Foreign Policy on Pakistan sharply.

In that case, we should be ready to initiate an open political dialogue with the Taliban, or any other representatives of the Pushtuns. If they need arms, we should be ready to supply them arms. If they need haven, India can provide a haven. If they need intelligence, India could probably supply them with information from our spy satellites. If they need international legitimacy, India can provide that also. If the Taliban are willing to go after the Pakjabi Army, they should have our support. Our main interest is to curb the terrorism from Pakjabi outfits in India. Taliban may even be of help in that. If Pakistan disinherits Taliban, India should adopt them!

Shia Iran supports Hamas, an extremist Sunni outfit in Palestine and in the process pees on Israel, its other enemy. Secular India too can support the Taliban, an extremist Sunni outfit in AfPak and in the process pee on Pakistan, and if need be on America. Pakistan needs to be broken up regardless of how.

a_kumar · Post by **a_kumar** » 10 Jun 2009 16:36

archan wrote:I was once not too long ago told by a retired IFS officer that every Indian PM has sent that message to the pakis. It seems that at the govt. level, India finds it to be an acceptable solution, especially when the other option is a possibly nuclear war for that piece of land.

On similar lines, I happened to come across doodhwala, who has had pleasure of watching natasha/israeli charm offensive and babu's walls of chai-biscots.

The topic moved to LOC?IB and it turns out, forces seem to be the ones with one voice. While some debate what LOC=IB will achieve or will not achieve, others stand on the wall agreeing with all sides. Bottom line, as somebody pointed, while we used to advertize Rs. 90 for tomato, all we have been debating (and getting prepared for) is whether Rs.30 or Rs. 10 is a good price for the tomato.

It seems like in the end, loads of chai-biscoot and protecting turf and no long-term vision/strategy. In all this, apparently IFS does a lot of commendable work.

Raja Ram · Post by **Raja Ram** » 10 Jun 2009 17:03

Can we afford a policy of drift?

Gentle readers, the new GOI has been formed and the first indications for the more discerning are that couple of fundamental points that I have articulated in this forum in the past are getting reinforced.

1. This time round, with the a stronger mandate for the Congress, it is clear that economic growth will get overriding priority. The MMS vision of India is one based on the "Japan model" -to ensure that India emerges as an economic powerhouse primarily with a stake in international coalation of democratic powers.

2. There will be a continuation of policy of minimum engagement with neighbouring states and an increasing linkages with ASEAN, Mid East and G20 groups. Security is not seen as a pre-requisite for economic growth, but just a necessity to be looked at insofar it comes in the way of economic growth. Hire some security guards to guard the bank and be done with it, seems to be the approach.

How has the above points been reinforced? The presedential address, the PM's reply to that address, all indicate the primacy of economic growth. The complete silence on internal security front, the complete silence on re-engagement in Sri Lanka to secure Tamil interests and by extension Indian interests there, the clear announcement in the parliament that China is not an adversary despite clear acts by China against core Indian interests, the indication of resumption of talks with Pakistan despite nothing being done by Pakistan post Mumbai killings are all evidences to the above assertions.

With this in mind, let us examine, gentle readers, the first signs of post election approach to the events in Pakistan. The GOI has not indicated in any way that there will be no let up on the pressure on the pakistani government. On the contrary, there seems to be a nudge from Obama administration to resume talks at least in private and India seems to be reluctant to assert itself. Why is this? Has the US promised anything to India that will ensure that Pakistan will desist from lauching further terror attacks? The last few months, there has been no terror attacks of significance. The apparatus is there. But it is silent. In return, has India been promised that Pakistan will be broken up as per US plans and GOI aid that process by not providing an obvious rallying point to fend off the impending implsion of the pakistani state?

For there seems to be a policy of general drift. One of trying to cope with the situation around us and minimise impact as long as the cherished goal of becoming a japan like state is achieved. Rather than shaping the events around us to ensure that Indian interests, and independence are maintained, the PM seems to think that there is a possibility of reaching a peaceful settlement with Pakistan. The PM seems to think that Pakistani establishment will accept the reality of India as an economic power and a united country. The PM seems to think that the guarantors of Pakistan - the US, Saudi and PRC all have accepted India as a major power and they would allow, counsel and encourage Pakistan to deliver peace.

As a lay observer, I see no evidence of any of that happening. The pakistani establishment sees no incentive in peace with India. What do they get? What will the major powers get? As of now, nothing. I am sure that with the all the wherewithal of the state at his disposal the PM should know better.

Every thinking Indian will not find comfort if the GOI returns to talks with Pakistan. It would be a victory of pakistani policy if that happens. A great blunder if we resume talks without any tangible results are achieved as retribution. Nothing has happened. The Pakistani elite, whilst begging, have now begun to talk about the need for India to resume talks and have started demanding Kashmir. They have been emboldened and encouraged to do this by the West.

The US and Indian interests are not converging on what needs to be done in Pakistan. The US wants India to pay the price for its citizens to remain protected from jehadis of pakistan. The GOI does not seem to be in any hurry now to ensure that pakistan is made accountable. There is no threat of general elections and even if it was there, security is not an issue for our countrymen. Bitter as it may sound, our people have not responded to the threat that we face from terror and pakistan and have not demanded that the government act and stop this.

There is no mention of improving security, no gameplan against Maoists, no gameplan for Nepal or Mynmar. Nothing to show for any clarity of thought. We are drifting along and have an inexperienced foreign minister who is more adept in handling economic issues than foreign policy issues. There is no sense of urgency. No revamp of laws, police or judicial services. No accountability at all. If the government invests even 20% of the time and resources that it spends on NREGA programmes, inclusive growth, subsidies and freebies, our security situation would have improved. There is no vision beyond GDP growth.

India runs the risk of ignoring its neighbours at its own peril. Pakistan will pose an existential threat and a humanatarian crisis for us in the next 5 years. Millions are going to pour across the border if pakistan implodes in to bloody civil war. The US will be forced to join in and they may want India sucked into it. The same is the case with Nepal which is now more and more getting into the ambit of China. There is no improvement in the actions of Bangladesh despite Hasina getting back into power. There is no rehabilitation initiative post LTTE rout in Sri Lanka like what was done in Afghanistan. Nothing has been done to thwart the moves of China.

The need of the hour is to force pakistan to dismantle its terror machine and hand over its leadership for trial. GOI should not shirk its duty towards its people on this and let the interests of the US dictate how India responds. There should no be relief extended to Pakistan. Military pressure must be built up and so should diplomatic pressure on closing down terror. It should not be linked to resumption of talks. It should be demanded as the minimum that would be required for India to even consider talking to pakistan - be it track 1 or track N level.

Be that as it may, we should also recognise, gentle readers, that the majority of Indians do not think like this. They think like what GOI is currently thinking, we should worry about stock markets, travel advisories, economic growth, minority rights, and do a deal with Pakistan so that we can get on with the agenda of money making. If we become an economic powerhouse, everything will be allright.

We have a government today that actually reflects the will of the people. We deserve what we are going to get, the good, bad and the ugly. For all practical purposes, it looks like that the GOI will start talking to pakistan. The terror attacks will continue, only larger in scale this time. We will pay for it in blood, but the GDP will be 8%. After all that is the only thing that is important isn't it?

Just a ramble for what it is worth. If you get the drift...

rkirankr · Post by **rkirankr** » 10 Jun 2009 17:43

Raja Ram wrote:We have a government today that actually reflects the will of the people. We deserve what we are going to get, the good, bad and the ugly. For all practical purposes, it looks like that the GOI will start talking to pakistan. The terror attacks will continue, only larger in scale this time. We will pay for it in blood, but the GDP will be 8%. After all that is the only thing that is important isn't it?

Just a ramble for what it is worth. If you get the drift...

I think the govt will go in for talks with pak
The approach would be
to first instill a sense of the feel good in the people , for the urban it is about rising sensex and a rekindle employment opportunities, for rural and poor more NREG and freebies.
Once a perception settles (aided by DDM) that the country is on track to growth 8% etc etc
A case will be made to maintain this and lift millions of lives out of poverty. So we need stability and stability comes with peace. So let us talk to pakistan. In fact I could very well visualize how anchors in our DDM will be screaming about the "bold move by the statesman Dr.Singh to extend a hand of friendship to our brothers in the west".
Well the population couldn't care less because everyone is in a race to make money. Nation, culture, unity , strategical interests and security be damned.
I do not observe this with only uneducated but even educated types.
I do not mean to make a case for any political party here. However the people of India have failed to question the present govt regarding its failures.
I only can remember this passage.Admins can delete if not found useful
From A Forgotten Empire: Vijayanagar; A Contribution to the History of India
by Robert Sewell

The story of this terrible disaster travelled apace to the city of
Vijayanagar. The inhabitants, unconscious of danger, were living in
utter ignorance that any serious reverse had taken place; for their
leaders had marched out with countless numbers in their train, and
had been full of confidence as to the result. Suddenly, however, came
the bad news. The army was defeated; the chiefs slain; the troops in
retreat. But still they did not grasp the magnitude of the reverse;
on all previous occasions the enemy had been either driven back,
or bought off with presents from the overstocked treasury of the
kings. There was little fear, therefore, for the city itself. That
surely was safe! But now came the dejected soldiers hurrying back
from the fight, and amongst the foremost the panic-stricken princes
of the royal house. Within a few hours these craven chiefs hastily
left the palace, carrying with them all the treasures on which they
could lay their hands. Five hundred and fifty elephants, laden with
treasure in gold, diamonds, and precious stones valued at more than
a hundred millions sterling, and carrying the state insignia and the
celebrated jewelled throne of the kings, left the city under convoy
of bodies of soldiers who remained true to the crown. King Sadasiva
was carried off by his jailor, Tirumala, now sole regent since the
death of his brothers; and in long line the royal family and their
followers fled southward towards the fortress of Penukonda.

Then a panic seized the city. The truth became at last apparent. This
was not a defeat merely, it was a cataclysm. All hope was gone. The
myriad dwellers in the city were left defenceless. No retreat, no
flight was possible except to a few, for the pack-oxen and carts
had almost all followed the forces to the war, and they had not
returned. Nothing could be done but to bury all treasures, to arm
the younger men, and to wait. Next day the place became a prey to
the robber tribes ....

vsudhir · Post by **vsudhir** » 10 Jun 2009 17:49

Can we afford a policy of drift?

Raja Ram garu,

when everyone around is losing ground, merely holding onto current ground is in itself commendable. What you label a policy of drift (and I agree with your skepticism) may yet turn out inadvertantly useful if we give away nothing substantial in the next few yrs even as the wider world in general and our neighborhood in particular get mired in one of the deepest geo-conomic crises in decades.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 10 Jun 2009 18:15

In general I like your post.

AbhishekD wrote:Let me put it this way. I think the present MMS government maybe implementing what I will call a "Containment Policy". By Containment policy I mean that dont stir up anything but contain the problem to its minimum. I dont see any effort by this government to take the problem headon. They have not put any pressure on Pakistan or have used any military means. The BS of not hurting US agenda in the region is just that BS and I am sure not many in the Indian Government actually believe in the US agenda for Af-pak region. The problem is that India does not want to implement its own agenda in the region. It does not want to create better options that will serve its security interests.

Where I differ with you is that the Indian (MMS) policy does only seem like "containment". IF we look at Afghanistan, there is actually a fairly offensive policy in place. It only appears like a passive one. The proof is in even the US agreeing with Islamabad in some ways - granted it could be for other reasons too.

I see two phases to MMS' policy. Pre-election and post-election. Post-election we have seen MEA Krishna being very aggressive, CAS mentioning China is a greater threat, Army chief stating Paki nukes need to be capped and a regional AF chief stating that India can conduct a limited below-nuke-threshold war. ALL this in the span of a month. The number of seats won by the Congress party has impacted the way the policy is conducted - it has clearly become more aggressive.

On the Af-Pak policy issue, I find it hard to believe that India has a problem with the policy. Where India perhaps has an issue is the limited or no role India has been given (specially WRT China and Saudi Arabia) in implementing this policy. IF there is one party that can actually help move along the Af-Pak policy in the right direction, it is India.

India has a security issue that is unique in several ways. It is a herculean task and Indian politicians and even the indian public is not ready to tackle this problem so the MMS government has come out with a "Containment Policy", that is reduce the damage to the minimum without initiating a heavy response. Under this policy they will keep Pakistan and US engaged and use diplomatic energy as much possible and initiate a domestic policy of searching, finding and killing as much terrorist cell as much possible. There will be some action on the external front, but only when the situation is favourable such as in Bangladesh. The present Bangladesh government will help India to contain the problem.

IMHO, Indian Muslims are a road block to a vibrant policy to irradicate terrorism (within India). Some Indian Muslims have already asked for special courts to deal with Muslims who the GoI claim to be terrorists, etc. This I feel will change. But the pull between being identified as a Muslim and a secure India will be telling (on IMs). (I have close Lahore based Paki friend/s who have been feeling this pull for months now.)

The success of such a policy will depend upon how well India can stop terrorist attacks. India did implement such a policy quiet successfully in Kashmir or even in Punjab. As a consequence of such a policy we are going to see a huge increase in paramilitary forces, BSF, NSG, anti-terrorist squads and Intelligence gathering within the country and also intelligence gathering to help detect terrorists within India. The benefit of such a policy will be that India can get co-operation from US and some some degree even with Pakistan(as it does not hurt the present pakistani political establishment). We are going to see CCTV cameras and much closer survelliance in all major public places.

India is on notice from international agencies - for years now - on two counts: overhaul of infrastructure and security. That is NO secret.

I see a move to improve both since the end of the last elections. So, I suspect it had to do with some coalition members within the last GoI.

The thing is that we have to measure MMS government response on the success of such a strategy as they are not going to do anything on the external front.

"External front" - need to revive RAWs ability to perform covert activities. Else it will be a huge challenge to overcome.

India has implemented the "Containment Strategy" successfully but only in small areas with huge influx of force and intelligence. Can India do that throughout India and weather out this terrorist assault. We dont know that. Lets see what happens

I have no proof, but I have to believe that India does have some hand in events unfolding in the region. Just wish it was a bigger hand. My read is that the political situation within India had a lot to do with that. With the results of the past elections I think things will change - foe the better for all in the region. Nepal and SL are top on the list. BD seems to be on a self healing path.

The key? China.

IMHO, let the US deal with "terrorism", with India doing enough to keep terrorists outside India. And, IF the US feels that IOR is large enough for all of us - let them host China in DG. China should wrap up events in the littoral states.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 10 Jun 2009 18:19

1. This time round, with the a stronger mandate for the Congress, it is clear that economic growth will get overriding priority. The MMS vision of India is one based on the "Japan model" -to ensure that India emerges as an economic powerhouse primarily with a stake in international coalation of democratic powers.

Add to that nukes.

This is what I feel will prevent a Japan model in India. Between Indian population and the 'hood India lives in the "Japan model" will have to be remodelled.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 10 Jun 2009 18:24

On the Kashmir issue (LoC = IB, etc, etc, etc) what would be limits that China and even Saudi Arabia will be willing to go to? With Kashmir resolved Pakistan does not need a large, invisible investment in their armed forces. And, with their economic conditions in such dire conditions, there will be enough pressure to reroute "aid" for more appropriate needs.

The question is will China be willing to let go of such a potent check on India? Will China derail any meaningful resolution on Kashmir?

Raja Ram · Post by **Raja Ram** » 10 Jun 2009 18:51

I am not able to understand what India will gain by giving in on kashmir? What is the need for it? I can understand what Pakistan will gain, what the US will gain or even China, but not what India will gain.

By accepting Yellow Sea is equal to Eye Bee, will peace reign between pakistan and India? Is that the objective that pakistan is after? If, after so many years on BRF and TSP threads, the prevailing view amongst gentle readers here is that Pakistan will settle for peace and all they want is the Kashmir valley, then all I can say is that the vast majority of India will buy any lemon deal!

India can achieve peace only if Pakistan as a nation state is gone. This is not yet a completely shared view by the benefactors of pakistan. The US may be willing to look into this option but with an important qualifier, they would want a break up of pakistan with a survivor state in Pakjab that has the wherewithal to maintain the check on India (with nukes). China and the Sauds would never want a break up of pakistan.

India has an opportunity now, if they can take bold steps and assert its interests and not acquiese in subserving our national interests to the interests of the US, to shape events in the region that will ensure and underwrite our economic growth with commensurate security environment backed up by political and military clout.

In my view the Japan model vision of India is a disservice to this nation. It is OT to this thread. So will not elaborate here.

The point I am making is very simple, there seems to be a drift and going with the flow with only a single point focus on the economic agenda. Such a view jeopardizes that very goal, for growth and leadership (whatever be the model of choice) can only happen in a secure environment.

India is under real threat. Internal as well as external and Pakistan represents the biggest operational threat against the Republic. It is not my desired opinion on the GOI. I have always tried to read GOI intentions based on what it does and not what it says. That is the reason why I am having this skepticism. GOI has made some right noises but its actions indicate that it is acquesing and accommodating viewpoints that is not in its interests. That is a cause of concern.

It is early days yet, let us see how it pans out. Maybe my skepticism is misplaced. After all I am just a rambler. Take it for what it is worth.

negi · Post by **negi** » 10 Jun 2009 19:13

Manmohan makes fresh pitch for Pakistan dialogue

New Delhi: In the clearest sign yet of India’s willingness to pick up the threads of the dialogue process with Pakistan, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh told Parliament on Tuesday that it is in the country’s “vital interest” to “try again to make peace” with its turbulent neighbour.

Making a strong pitch for engagement with Pakistan, Dr. Singh cited the example of the United States, which, after 30 years of hostile relations with Iran, had realised it needed to re-evaluate its approach towards Tehran.

Although official interactions of a technical nature have continued between New Delhi and Islamabad — last week saw the meeting of the Permanent Indus Waters Commission, for example — the Indian side suspended the composite dialogue process in the wake of last Novembers terrorist attack in Mumbai. And until now, the government has publicly maintained there could be no resumption of dialogue till Pakistan moves to punish the conspirators of Mumbai and dismantles the infrastructure of terrorism on its territory.

Last week, highly-placed sources indicated to The Hindu that this stand was being re-examined with a view to finding ways of engaging Pakistan without diluting India’s call for action against terrorists across the border. And in a further testing of the political waters, Dr. Singh has now spoken of attempting a fresh start.

The Prime Minister did not abandon the pursuit of justice for Mumbai in his remarks to Parliament, even if the demand of “dismantling the infrastructure of terror” was recast as a more verifiable metric. “I expect the Government of Pakistan to take strong, effective and sustained action to prevent the use of their territory for the commission of acts of terrorism in India, or against Indian interests,” he said, “and use every means at their disposal to bring to justice those who have committed these crimes in the past, including the attack on Mumbai.”

These words sound familiar but there is a crucial difference: the demands are being reiterated as India’s reasonable expectations rather than as rigid preconditions for dialogue.

Setting the context, the Prime Minister outlined his vision of a “transformed South Asia” based on cooperation and lasting peace between all neighbours, without which India’s global aspirations would remain unfulfilled. It was, therefore, essential that India made a fresh effort to build peace with Pakistan but Islamabad had to do its bit. “I recognise it takes two hands to clap,” he said. “There are some disturbing trends, but I do hope the Government of Pakistan will create an atmosphere in which we can realise this vision.”

India, he added, would meet the leaders of Pakistan “more than half way” if they had the “courage, the determination and the statesmanship to take this road to peace.”

The Prime Minister spoke from a prepared script in the Lok Sabha but brought in the U.S.-Iran analogy extemporaneously in the upper House to more forcefully drive home his point.

Officials say it is too early to say whether Dr. Singh will meet Pakistani president Asif Ali Zardari on the sidelines of the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation summit in Ekaterinburg next week, and if so, with what agenda. The next scheduled occasion when the two principals could meet is the Non-Aligned Movement summit in Sharm el-Shaikh, Egypt, in July.

New Delhi would first like to receive from Pakistan an official account of the legal steps taken so far against the Lashkar-e-Taiba leaders and others involved in the Mumbai attack before announcing any concrete opening.

RajeshA · Post by **RajeshA** » 10 Jun 2009 19:19

LoC == IB is a bad bad idea!

Pakistan is going to crumble sooner or later. There is no end to war now between the Pakistani Army and the Pushtuns (be they TTP or take some other form). Why do we want to circumcise ourselves! India's strength will increase with time, enough to avail of future opportunities. Let's have some patience!

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 10 Jun 2009 19:38

Raja Ram,

Economic development does need an accompanying development in other areas too - like security. MMS has plans to make Mumbai a financial center - to compete with the likes of Sinagapore/HK. IF that is true and possible even MMS will have to provide world class security - specially cyber security, in addition to physical.

With events like building new airports, etc, MMS cannot scrounge on other aspects.

Such entities will be used by outsiders and will need world class status. Else there cannot be "development" - even by MMS's definition.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 10 Jun 2009 19:42

RajeshA wrote:LoC == IB is a bad bad idea!

Pakistan is going to crumble sooner or later. There is no end to war now between the Pakistani Army and the Pushtuns (be they TTP or take some other form). Why do we want to circumcise ourselves! India's strength will increase with time, enough to avail of future opportunities. Let's have some patience!

There seems to be a move - within the Indian armed forces - to look with greater intensity at China. I suspect that is because India thinks that Pakistan is imploding.

The political wheels need to start turning. A very slow process when it comes to India.

Satya_anveshi · Post by **Satya_anveshi** » 10 Jun 2009 19:48

RajeshA wrote:LoC == IB is a bad bad idea!

Pakistan is going to crumble sooner or later. There is no end to war now between the Pakistani Army and the Pushtuns (be they TTP or take some other form). Why do we want to circumcise ourselves! India's strength will increase with time, enough to avail of future opportunities. Let's have some patience!

RajeshA ji,

Just wanted to say that I have been enjoying your posts (and that of Anujan's. literally homeruns every shot:)). All those assumptions made prior to 2006-2007 are now in dustbin and must be revised.

Pakistan's state is that of Jinnah of 47. Our leaders, presumably, didn't know that the pig was sick and would die soon. Else they wouldn't have budged or at least prolonged is what I read. We don't even have that excuse of not knowing the pig's sickness now.

CRamS · Post by **CRamS** » 10 Jun 2009 19:52

RamannaGaru Rajaram:

Poor choice of words on my part, but when I said LoC == IB is best option for India, its because if something like that may be brought about, with US approval (now I am day dreaming), then maybe, just maybe, TSP's terrorist hanky panky against India will not have any western sanction thereafter. Right now, any crime by TSP againsty India is justified through the Kashmir lens; and in part, this feeds TSP's India-specific blood thirst. Now, ideally, I would have have wanted India to take TSP head on, but you have seen that successive Indian govts, including even the so called "Hindu nationalist" NDA were extending 'hands of friendship" to TSP, with the love fest reaching a crescendo under MMS; and each time TSP, sensing India's weakness and cowardice, upped the ante, the latest being Mumbai. And you saw after MUmbai, US/UK, taking on the role of Hafeez Saeed's spokesmen, demanded that India resolve Kashmir. My point is that India has its hands fuill defending the valley, we have shown no stomach to advance the LoC even by an inch into PoK, come one, lets not delude ouselves that our phony claim on all of Kashmir is sustainable. Its a joke. Finally, waiting for TSP to implode is another wild delusion; it ain't gonna happen.

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 10 Jun 2009 19:56

negi wrote:[
Making a strong pitch for engagement with Pakistan, Dr. Singh cited the example of the United States, which, after 30 years of hostile relations with Iran, had realised it needed to re-evaluate its approach towards Tehran.

Did he mention that Iran has not bombed inside US for the last 30 years but still US has refused to talk to Iran.

Raja Ram · Post by **Raja Ram** » 10 Jun 2009 20:09

CRamS:

All I can say is that you need to take a large sweep on the time dimension. While successive GOI has not done anything to advance an inch across LOC and in fact returned whatever was gained post 65 war, none of them has given up claim to PoK. The previous congress regime of PVNR ensured through unaninmous parliamentary resolution no future GOI can do that without significant price to pay.

Things are not permanent. There will come a day when India can reclaim its lost territory, and who knows the population there may even force that day to happen. It is my opinion that no GoI can ever give up what is rightfully ours even though it may not be able to assert that right - for a variety of reasons, some self imposed and some a product of real politik.

The global situation represents an opportunity. India has many things going for it. This too is not going to be permanent. My concern is only this, GOI does not seem to be acting on the opportunity, it is merely reacting to it. The tryst that India made with destiny is not one of being a second rung power always acting with circumspection and deference to others. The destiny that is India's is one of a leading power as befits its civilization. To cage India into a mid rung power ourselves is a mistake. I hope and do believe that the present GOI will live up to its duty and lead us to that tryst with destiny that started on the midnight of 14 August.

I am a product of post independent India, and a linking generation to the young India of today. I can sense that we as a nation will never want to be consigned to be a me too power. While the intention is there, the vision of what can be is not yet entrenched, as the second struggle for independence of the mind is still work in progress.

Therefore we cannot afford a drift in policy but must act with determination - with clarity of thought and unity of purpose. That is a national agenda not a UPA or NDA one.

bart · Post by **bart** » 10 Jun 2009 20:25

John Snow wrote:In India's region US is part of problem not part of a solution.

Truer words have never been spoken.

Every Indian even remotely involved with foreign policy or government should repeat this 1000 times every day when he/she wakes up otherwise one tends to gloss over that fact when faced with American obfuscation and posturing.

RajeshA · Post by **RajeshA** » 10 Jun 2009 20:27

Satya_anveshi wrote:Pakistan's state is that of Jinnah of 47. Our leaders, presumably, didn't know that the pig was sick and would die soon. Else they wouldn't have budged or at least prolonged is what I read. We don't even have that excuse of not knowing the pig's sickness now.

Satya_anveshi ji,
Thank you for your kind words.

I am of the view that the current battles (more like demolition operations) in Swat, Buner, Dir, Waziristans, Bajaur, etc will have interesting aftereffects. Over 2 million IDPs on the move in a land festered with the Talibani kind is the making of a brand new combustion engine. Basically the Pakjabi Army has been forced to drill in the most dangerous fault line in the ethnic and religious tectonic plates of the world. Theirs will be truly a generous inheritance. The true dimensions of the insurrection will only be known 2-3 years down the road. At the latest then, Delhiwallahs will have the chance to evaluate their choice of 'peace-partners' anew.

I hope that the Delhiwallahs start looking at the pig with the eyes of Obelix!

Abhijit · Post by **Abhijit** » 10 Jun 2009 20:59

containment shuntainment! the only containment policy of upa is to contain any flicker of reaction that the Indian public may display after every terrorist attack.

Pulikeshi · Post by **Pulikeshi** » 10 Jun 2009 21:11

negi wrote:Manmohan makes fresh pitch for Pakistan dialogue

What is the end goal?
A dialogue, peace, a better Indian sub-continent, preempt US making such a request

If the expectation is that a weak government in TSP will be able to secure a "possible peace",
then the babus have spent too much time in Af-Pak smoking bad maal.

It is unforgivable that no long term vision for the Indian sub-continent has been forth coming from GOI.

KLNMurthy · Post by **KLNMurthy** » 11 Jun 2009 00:50

Pulikeshi wrote:[
What is the end goal?
A dialogue, peace, a better Indian sub-continent, preempt US making such a request

If the expectation is that a weak government in TSP will be able to secure a "possible peace",
then the babus have spent too much time in Af-Pak smoking bad maal.

It is unforgivable that no long term vision for the Indian sub-continent has been forth coming from GOI.

It is not going to, without substantial political push from civic society.

tarun · Post by **tarun** » 11 Jun 2009 01:10

NRao wrote:Raja Ram,
specially cyber security, in addition to physical.

I am sorry what has cyber security got to do with anything here. If NIC runs a proprietary virus ridden OS, where even available shared source hasn't been examined by anyone competent, then say goodbye to security. The pervasive incompetence of NIC in building scalable, secure and modern web applications either by themselves or by driving away all competent bidders by making pre-qualification bids suitable only for a select few large vendors, its not doing a great deal of service to our cyber security. NIC couldn't run an election website on after spending a cool crore. Another example would be the e-mail infrastructure of NIC is so pathetic and mailbox limits so small that bureaucrats and even IFS prefer to use free webmail services outside NIC's control. Security is as good as user education. Our senior police officers who routinely mandate ID cards for 15 year olds visiting cyber cafes, ridiculous time limits in cities are a greater threat to our collective security than those who they are trying to regulate in the name of cyber security.

All we have in the name of cyber security from a policy front is a massive security circus and un-limited stupidity from the likes of vendor driven organizations promoted by NASSCOM. And the BJP's agenda was no different.

-Tarun

enqyoob · Post by **enqyoob** » 11 Jun 2009 01:29

If Pakistan is REALLY crumbling, why not swiftly accept LOC=IB and proclaim Peace and Goodwill? This removes the last excuse for the Pakistan Army to claim that it needs to be maintain strength on the East. They will have nothing to occupy themselves, except to kill each other. They will have to pretend to be fighting the Taliban, and thus speed up the collapse.

The LOC is by definition guardable, so it keeps the Pakis inside Pakistan as "IPDs".

Sooner rather than later, as the Taliban start giving Canadian visas to the Pakjabi Elites, there will be international appeals to India to go inside and stop the carnage, and take over policing of the entire area east of the Indus.

Of course, Peace and Goodwill should be accompanied by a "Any further terror attack inside India will lead to an attack on Pakistan" caveat. There I don't have faith in the will of the present GOI.

***GIVE PEACE A CHANCE. DESTROY THE PAKISTAN ARMY**************

a_kumar · Post by **a_kumar** » 11 Jun 2009 01:50

So much discussion on LoC==IB (more so in the higher circles of govt.) is a self-goal, not to mention disastrous.

The discussion should rather be on "Why should (or shoudn't) PoK be integrated back", which ofcourse will cover LoC ?? ID question.

In the first case, focus is on LoC, while in second case, focus is on Kashmir-Afghan/Punjab border. It is defeatist to focus on former.

On similar lines, contemplate why there is so much attention on Kashmir (on Indian side), while Pakistan's antics in PoK barely find a mention in the western media (or for that matter in Indian media too).

JE Menon · Post by **JE Menon** » 11 Jun 2009 02:05

For those who haven't seen it, watch the interview of this traitor, this crony of the Gandhi family, this seller out of Indian interests, this poor dental health mascot, etc. Listen between the lines. Its an old one, but still worth it...

http://www.charlierose.com/view/interview/521

There are certain points in there (2nd strike, Iran, India's role in the world) which should be paid particular attention to in order to understand the contours of our thinking.

It is not going to change significantly in the near future...

Gerard · Post by **Gerard** » 11 Jun 2009 02:18

aryank wrote:seditious rubbish deleted

Angry letter writers, anguished burdened youth and other imbeciles, please take note of these sections of the Indian Penal Code

124A. Sedition

Whoever, by words, either spoken or written, or by signs, or by visible representation, or otherwise, brings or attempts to bring into hatred or contempt, or excites or attempts to excite disaffection towards the Government established by law in India shall be punished with imprisonment for life, to which fine may be added, or with imprisonment which may extend to three years, to which fine may be added, or with fine.

131. Abetting mutiny, or attempting to seduce a soldier, sailor or airman from his duty

Whoever abets the committing of mutiny by an officer, soldier, sailor or airman, in the Army, navy or Air Force of the Government of India or attempts to seduce any such officer, soldier, sailor or airman from his allegiance or his duty, shall be punished with imprisonment for life, or with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine.

121. Waging, or attempting to wage war, or abetting waging of war, against the Government of India

Whoever wages war against the Government of India, or attempts to wage such war, or abets the waging of such war, shall be punished with death, or imprisonment for life and shall also be liable to fine.

aryank is banned. raji is banned. Those wishing to emulate them will likewise be banned. We will not permit the forum to be abused in this manner. Their camp followers need to find somewhere else on the Internet for their criminal nonsense. Bharat Rakshak Forum is not such a place.

Vishal_Bhatia · Post by **Vishal_Bhatia** » 11 Jun 2009 08:42

CRamS wrote:we have shown no stomach to advance the LoC even by an inch into PoK

This isn't exactly true... a former IA officer said it on the internet that during Parakram, we did capture some mountains, and have retained them. The LoC is not as static as is believed to be.

ShauryaT · Post by **ShauryaT** » 11 Jun 2009 09:18

Source: Pragati.

Nitin Pai

IN HIS introduction to The Shield of Achilles, Philip Bobbitt argues that history “is the distinctive element in the ceaseless, restless dynamic by means of which strategy and law live out their necessary relationship with each other. For law and strategy are not merely made in history—a sequence of events and culminating effects—they are made of history.

It is the self-portrayal of a society that enables it to know its own identity. Without this knowledge a society cannot establish its rule by law because every system of laws depends upon the continuity of legitimacy, which is an attribute of identity. Furthermore, without such a self-portrayal, no society can pursue a rational strategy because it is the identity of the society that strategy seeks to promote, protect and preserve. One might say that without its own history, its self-understanding, no society can have either law or strategy, because it cannot be constituted as an independent entity”.

Mr Bobbitt then makes a profound conclusion: that together, history, strategy and law make possible legitimate governing institutions. He goes on to argue that “there is no state without strategy, law and history, and, to complicate matters, these are not merely interrelated elements,they are elements each composed at least partly of others.

The precise nature of this composition defines a particular state and is the result of many choices…Law cannot come into being until the state achieves a monopoly on the legitimate use of violence. Similarly, a society must have a single legitimate government for its strategic designs to be laid; otherwise, the distinction between war and civil war collapses, and strategy degenerates into banditry.

Until the governing institutions of a society can claim for themselves the sole right to determine the legitimate use of force at home and abroad, there can be no state. Without law, strategy cannot claim to be a legitimate act of state. Only if law prevails can it confer legitimacy on strategic choices and give them a purpose. Yet the legitimacy necessary for law and for strategy derives from history, the understanding of past practices that characterise a particular society.”

It follows that to the extent a state lacks a shared, cohesive understanding of its own history, its choice of geopolitical strategy and domestic public policies will be less than optimal. A state that, for example, conjures up a historical narrative that fits ideology, not fact, very often ends up as a threat to its neighbours and almost always to its own people. Yet, in the end, it is ideology that has to bow to history.

Even the bloody depredations of Mao Zedong’s many revolutions failed to erase China’s past and today his successors are promoting Confucius Institutes around the world. Pakistan tried to build a nation using a selective reading of its past—the project failed once in 1971, but its sponsors did not correct course, leading to it being on the crossroads when it is not actually in crisis.

On the other hand, a shared understanding of history forms the basis for social reconciliation and sets the stage for policies that pursue the national interest—the happiness and well-being of the greatest number of its citizens. The more homogenous a society is, the easier it is to achieve such an understanding. Yet the less homogenous a society is, the more important it is to do so. In any case, the scientific method—that relies on evidence and enquiry—is without doubt the best known way to achieve that common understanding.

India’s rich civilisational history is a priceless asset—for instance, it cannot be a mere accident that India is the only country in the vast expanse between between Europe and Japan that has managed to sustain a liberal democracy.

Unfortunately contending views of the past have clouded contemporary national life. In politics, history is made an accomplice in the pursuit of increasingly violent ethnic and caste-based chauvinism. In public policy, economic freedom lies hostage to the dubious demands of social justice. In foreign affairs, the inability to completely jettison historical baggage impairs the pragmatic pursuit of the national interest. This is not to say that achieving a broad consensus on the past will miraculously solve the many problems India faces, but rather, that it will help clear the decks.

Modern history books in India were first written under the influence of British colonialism. While it is wrong to indiscriminately disparage historical narratives that were first thrown up in the colonial era, the fact that many survive without critical examination—and worse, in spite of being challenged by it—is unacceptable.

Yet they do, not least because the Indian historical establishment in the hands of an intellectual oligopoly, which in turn, is sustained by chronic under-investment in the higher education system and the lack of career opportunities for students of social sciences.

The good news is that for the first time in decades, the intellectual oligopoly has begun to be challenged—by developments in the world of science and technology. For instance, a group of Indian researchers recently challenged the conventional wisdom on the nature of the yet-undeciphered Indus script using relatively simple computational methods that had never before been applied in the discipline. The availability of inexpensive images of the Earth has not only transformed the field, but has sprung an entire community of ‘armchair archaeologists’. Indeed, the wider application of genetic studies means that there is now a “DNA test” for historical theories. Like in the case of criminal investigations, these tests are conclusive and can embarrass some people.
So there are exciting times ahead and the clear stream of reason will eventually find its way out of the dreary desert sand of dead habit. In the end, science will triumph over ideology. Added -- With one exception, where science and ideology are not in conflict - SD

chetak · Post by **chetak** » 11 Jun 2009 09:31

Vishal_Bhatia wrote:
CRamS wrote:we have shown no stomach to advance the LoC even by an inch into PoK
This isn't exactly true... a former IA officer said it on the internet that during Parakram, we did capture some mountains, and have retained them. The LoC is not as static as is believed to be.

After Kargil, many months later, the LOC was quietly "straightned out" in many places by pushing the porkis back.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 11 Jun 2009 17:05

Raja Ram,

Those args I think are ancient.

The Pakistani army will implode over some time.

Till the recent past there were external interests that were themselves in different camps.

Today - as we can see - even the mighty US is beginning to see what India has experienced for decades. And, on the instructions of the US the Pakistanis are fighting each other. This was inevitable.

To your point, GoI needs to do nothing (IMHO of course). This implosion will continue as long as there are elements within Pakistan that are Islamists. Note that there are no good and bad Taliban as Obama seems to have believed (I am not sure where he stands on that count today - I will give him the benefit of that doubt).

The point being as much as - as you too suggest - the GoI can do something, the associated risks are rather high when one considers that the US and others have to do the same to keep their own security in tact. Why should India expend any energy and accumulate more risk?

Let the US get educated and they ultimately will have to follow what India has suggested time and again. You see Islamists in Pakistan - no matter where they are and what they do (teachers, professors, scientists, police, army, whatever) are more of threat to the UK/US than India - today.

The "west" has realized this and will have to act in thier own interest. India will benefit from it.

ShauryaT · Post by **ShauryaT** » 11 Jun 2009 20:09

NRao wrote:Raja Ram,

Those args I think are ancient.

The Pakistani army will implode over some time.

Till the recent past there were external interests that were themselves in different camps.

Today - as we can see - even the mighty US is beginning to see what India has experienced for decades. And, on the instructions of the US the Pakistanis are fighting each other. This was inevitable.

To your point, GoI needs to do nothing (IMHO of course). This implosion will continue as long as there are elements within Pakistan that are Islamists. Note that there are no good and bad Taliban as Obama seems to have believed (I am not sure where he stands on that count today - I will give him the benefit of that doubt).

The point being as much as - as you too suggest - the GoI can do something, the associated risks are rather high when one considers that the US and others have to do the same to keep their own security in tact. Why should India expend any energy and accumulate more risk?

Let the US get educated and they ultimately will have to follow what India has suggested time and again. You see Islamists in Pakistan - no matter where they are and what they do (teachers, professors, scientists, police, army, whatever) are more of threat to the UK/US than India - today.

The "west" has realized this and will have to act in thier own interest. India will benefit from it.

Do Nothing! Why spend our energies! India will benefit! TSP more of a threat to the west! All this from NRao!

Why do we not just end this charade of democracy et al and simply invite the west to rule us once again!

TSP is not going down till the US does! Our energies should be focused on getting the US out of this region. Afghanistan and Iran are the backyards of India not the US! No wonder even BD and Sri Lanka do not rely on India for their strategic needs. The sad part, at least to me is what you have written is shared by a large portion of the current GoI. However, I am convinced that India and Indians are and will be at a net loss!

a_kumar · Post by **a_kumar** » 11 Jun 2009 21:02

ShauryaT wrote:
NRao wrote:Raja Ram,

Today - as we can see - even the mighty US is beginning to see what India has experienced for decades. And, on the instructions of the US the Pakistanis are fighting each other. This was inevitable.

To your point, GoI needs to do nothing (IMHO of course). This implosion will continue as long as there are elements within Pakistan that are Islamists. Note that there are no good and bad Taliban as Obama seems to have believed (I am not sure where he stands on that count today - I will give him the benefit of that doubt).

The point being as much as - as you too suggest - the GoI can do something, the associated risks are rather high when one considers that the US and others have to do the same to keep their own security in tact. Why should India expend any energy and accumulate more risk?

Let the US get educated and they ultimately will have to follow what India has suggested time and again. You see Islamists in Pakistan - no matter where they are and what they do (teachers, professors, scientists, police, army, whatever) are more of threat to the UK/US than India - today.

The "west" has realized this and will have to act in thier own interest. India will benefit from it.
Do Nothing! Why spend our energies! India will benefit! TSP more of a threat to the west! All this from NRao!

Why do we not just end this charade of democracy et al and simply invite the west to rule us once again!

TSP is not going down till the US does! Our energies should be focused on getting the US out of this region. Afghanistan and Iran are the backyards of India not the US! No wonder even BD and Sri Lanka do not rely on India for their strategic needs. The sad part, at least to me is what you have written is shared by a large portion of the current GoI. However, I am convinced that India and Indians are and will be at a net loss!

Amen.

Patting ourselves on the back on MMS's containment or the great Indian strategy of letting Pakistan suffer its creation is actually case of "sour grapes".

Pakistan was on the precipice a few years ago, repeating a pattern of every 5-10 years, and fireworks were going off on this forum in anticipation of its breakup. Again just like once every 5-10 years, Pakistan has survived by managing to beg/borrow/steal/blackmail certain "friends" into throwing a lifeline.

How many times does this charade have to repeat before people of India realize we have to fend for ourselves.

Seriously, what was GoI's play when country of after country was putting hands in their pockets to save the dear nation?
-Did it lobby or nudge or wink at any of these donor countries?
-Did it actively try to force their hand against it?
-Did it use leverage with anything at all?
-Did it atleast have India-specific riders or conditions on IMF or any other loans? What little was there in the US (It will be heartening to know GoI had something to do with this!!!) was watered down by Kerry et al.
-Did it do anything about the Agosta's and German subs that will be dedicated to harassing us in IOR?

Everybody on this forum agreed that Pakistan was on verge of financial collapse and yet an year later, the cycle restarts.

In couple of years time Pakistan will be all ready to needle India in one way or other and we will sprint to IMI to beg forgiveness and pay through the nose for munitions.