Conceptual Thread-1

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 53396
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Conceptual Thread-1

Postby ramana » 14 Jul 2010 09:47

x-post..
The most likely scenario is that India and China with who ever wants to be associated with them will form a mutual trading bloc of 4 B+ people and this will create the largest world economy since the first millenium and this will transform globalization like nothing else. This is a global shift and nothing much one can do about stopping its momentum!
------------
Can we explore this idea and see what synergies can happen?
So from Johannesburg to Jakarta is Indo-China sphere. There will be joint investments with the host country. No exclusive sphere or concerns.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 53396
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Conceptual Thread-1

Postby ramana » 14 Jul 2010 20:42

X-post...
Ajatshatru wrote:
no offence intended but I can't help noticing. You see, when Pakistanis talk about their problems this is exactly what they say. (In your sentence above replace China with India and India with Pakistan). Unless we are very careful and very honest we too end up hiding behind the same excuses and rationalizations that Pakistanis have used for years.


Dr Shiv, again agree but please allow me to add that projected GDP of both China and India by 2040 would be light years ahead of Pakistan’s GDP in 2040 (assumption: Pakistan state as we know it today would still exist in 2040). That is why I wrote earlier: ‘a stage may have been reached now where the gap between India and Pakistan would widen, perhaps, drastically in the coming decades’.

Dr Shiv, again please feel to disagree but I strongly believe Hindus are the best entrepreneurs/traders in the world. From 1st to 17th century, barring in one or two centuries, India always led the world economically….people who talk of richness of Mughal India period forget India was the richest nation even before Islamic invasions (and all these Islamic invaders did was either loot or those who ruled in some parts of India benefitted from the solid economic base that had already been created by the Hindus). Slightly OT here but I as a youngster I remember reading “Arabian nights” and in one of the stories, the author of this book describes how on a visit to India on visiting a pearl bazaar sees mounds of pearls kept on streets outside shops as if they were peanuts….

What I am trying to say here:
1. Past 200 years (18th – 20th century) is a mere aberration in world’s long history and for centuries India lead the world economically….
1. It is in Hindu's genes to do well in business/trade etc. and as long as India has Hindu majority, given a level playing field (without artificial restrictions like ‘License Raj’ etc.) India is destined to lead the world economically and despite claims by Pakistanis, a Muslim majority Pakistan may not be a real economic competition to India in the coming decades….

RamaY
BRF Oldie
Posts: 17249
Joined: 10 Aug 2006 21:11
Location: http://bharata-bhuti.blogspot.com/

Re: Conceptual Thread-1

Postby RamaY » 18 Jul 2010 20:23

Singha wrote:typical delhi/itivity strategy of dumping bodies on a "project" and hoping that something good happens, without the necessary strong logistical tail and planning to match.


Singha-ji,

Is this about my post :oops:

I don't know but I am confused. Don't you think it is better to address each issue separately as if it is independent of its surroundings? How/When can we solve any problem if we tangle it with poverty, corruption, bureaucracy, political self-interests, religious conversions, national security, geopolitics, environment, civilization etc? While we need to keep the underlying spirit Indic (if that is what you meant by strategizing for the complete domain space), don't you think tangling each issue with everything else is a useless exercise, never leading to action on the ground?

I would rather approach each problem independently, as a project if you will meaning it has specific objective, timeline, and resources, and then worry about the consequences. Strategizing before implementation for every parameter and outcome is not only a near-impossible task but also eliminates any opportunity for feedback mechanisms. On the other hand, time bound projects, provide feedback streams for next projects allowing changes in strategy. This is what they call "managing by projects".

We did a study on this at my work place (I am about to publish a white-paper on it) and the findings are inline with above philosophy. Of course there always will be different approaches to a given problem. I was presenting my approach knowing that there will be gaps.

Sorry for the OT. I am X-posting this in conceptual discussion thread. We can continue our discussion there if you are interested.

A_Gupta
BRF Oldie
Posts: 11486
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31
Contact:

Re: Conceptual Thread-1

Postby A_Gupta » 23 Jul 2010 05:58

When Fazlul Haq moved the Lahore Resolution in March 1940, he called for "sovereign, independent states in the Northwest and East of India". 1971 completed the Lahore Resolution in the East. The fulfillment of the Lahore Resolution in Pakistan is work yet to be completed.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 53396
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Conceptual Thread-1

Postby ramana » 06 Nov 2010 02:46

A quote on trendwatching/ forecasting:

Start with a clear head and a sense that everything that’s happened
in the last couple of years is about to fall away, whether
you want to pick at the dead skin or not. Then take an overarching
peek at what’s ahead—while knowing that the conventional
wisdom is totally wrong.


RamaY
BRF Oldie
Posts: 17249
Joined: 10 Aug 2006 21:11
Location: http://bharata-bhuti.blogspot.com/

Re: Conceptual Thread-1

Postby RamaY » 16 Nov 2010 00:27

I haven't worked on my thoughts completely, so am posting here till the idea gets developed.

Everyone thinks India should follow US model when it comes to economic progress and worry that PRC beat India in this race. I collected some data over the weekend and it is hardly <10% of data that I am working on.

This is the foundational data that I use to say what I say in various threads, especially in Rural Development, India/PRC/US economy, Alternate Budget Scenarios etc.,

Appreciate some thoughts so I can fine tune my thoughts as I go...

Image

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 53396
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Conceptual Thread-1

Postby ramana » 26 Nov 2010 10:08

X-post from Mumbai thread....
Posting in full

http://www.indianexpress.com/story-print/716240/

How India debated a war with Pakistan that November

PranabDhalSamanta Posted online: Fri Nov 26 2010, 05:02 hrs

New Delhi : The last of the 26/11 terrorists had been killed only a few hours back when Prime Minister Manmohan Singh presided over an urgently called meeting of the country’s security top brass. Present at that meeting on November 29, 2008, were Defence Minister A K Antony, the then National Security Advisor M K Narayanan, heads of both intelligence agencies and the three service chiefs — the Army was represented by its Vice-Chief Lt Gen M L Naidu as Army Chief Gen Deepak Kapoor was overseas — among other high-ranking officials. The key issue on the agenda — India’s response.

By then, there was no doubt among any of those present at this meeting, which lasted for over two hours at the PM’s residence, that the entire attack had been controlled, coordinated and plotted by the Lashkar-e-Toiba and its handlers in Pakistan. An undeniable body of evidence had already piled up from the calls monitored between the terrorists and their handlers in the course of the attack. More evidence was pouring in by the hour. There was no way any government in New Delhi could drag its feet — the Prime Minister knew he had to ask the dreaded question to all those responsible for the defence of India.

He started with the words that the people of India “will not forgive us” for what had happened and that the government had indeed failed them. This was not an empty comment. About 10 days before, US intelligence had intercepted a phone call from “somewhere in the Arabian Sea” to Pakistan-occupied-Kashmir. The input with coordinates of the boat’s position had been passed on to Indian agencies and then disseminated but not with the immediacy and urgency it deserved. Coast Guard authorities carried out reconnaissance sorties but by then it was too late. They found nothing on those coordinates except for scores of fishing boats that looked alike. The boat had obviously moved on. The Coast Guard filed a report that it needed the latest coordinates. And that’s where matters lay until the night of November 26 when the 10 terrorists surfaced in the heart of Mumbai.

Yet, the Prime Minister kept his calm and turned to the three service chiefs. He asked them whether they had any options in mind. In the same breath, he preemptively made it clear that he did not favour another Operation Parakram. That option was off the table from day one, recall sources. The then Navy Chief Admiral Sureesh Mehta chose to remain quiet. After all, the Navy was carrying out exercises in the area when the 10 terrorists slipped in without raising an alarm. The Army Vice-Chief wanted to wait for Gen Kapoor to return before they could crystallise their thoughts.

It was Air Chief Marshal Fali Major who eventually spoke up and suggested striking terror camps in PoK. The Air Chief was sure that his planes and pilots could do the job but the intelligence agencies would have to provide the coordinates. There was no further discussion on the subject that day, but it was also not the last conversation.

So, how close did India and Pakistan come to war? The views range from “very close” to “fleetingly close” but the fact which all key players confirm is that the military option was indeed on the table. It was subsumed by only a larger question of how would Pakistan react?

LIMITED STRIKES

IN the days that followed, the military top brass went aboutnworking on the options. The Air Force, in particular, did go into the finer aspects of conducting a limited air strike in PoK but the political decision-making never moved any further.

However, the Defence Minister did hold a meeting with the three service chiefs after the PM’s first meet. At that point, the Army Chief was asked whether limited ground strikes could be carried out. Gen Kapoor is said to have responded that an operation was possible but he would need a week’s notice and that it would be a “highly risky” affair. He is said to have added that any political approval on this must include flexibility for the Army to respond anywhere along the LoC or for that matter, even the international border. In the Army’s assessment, any strike would definitely lead to an escalated military conflict and the government ought to prepared for it. The Air Force agreed that a strong Pakistani reaction was certain but was not willing to predict the levels of escalation.


F-16 scramble

WhileHILE this continued, the Army proposed that it would like to prolong the stay of two of its brigades involved in a scheduled peacetime military exercise on the Rajasthan border. The go-ahead was given and the two brigades overstayed for about two weeks.

Much later, in early January, when then Foreign Secretary Shivshankar Menon, who is now the National Security Advisor, visited the US, his eloquent assertion in all his meetings about how India had not provoked Pakistan was only once challenged. Gen David Petraeus is learnt to have told him that this was not true because Indian troops had overstayed after finishing their military exercise. To Pakistan, he felt, this was a provocation to which it gave a disproportionate response by placing troops on alert and moving its fighters closer to the border.

There was also another incident about an Indian plane violating Pakistan airspace which apparently led to a F-16 scramble on the Pakistan side. Islamabad lodged a strong diplomatic protest. India denied with equal conviction. But at the same time the Air Force was asked to carry out an investigation.

The result was that there was indeed some violation by a reconnaissance plane of the Aviation Research Centre, RAW’s air wing, that was conducting a sortie along the LoC. This aircraft, perhaps, went too close to the LoC, violating the rule that both sides will not send their aircraft that near.


The n-threat

A few days later, a meeting was held in the nuclear bunker where the top leadership of the government is to be rushed in case of a nuclear strike. This was not provoked by 26/11. It was scheduled much before the attacks with the objective of familiarising the PM and other ministers of the emergency drill. But in the backdrop of the Mumbai attacks, the meeting could not have ignored the security environment of the day.

The PM is believed to have asked how would one distinguish a nuclear strike from any other non-nuclear, yet devastating attack. This was important because like many in the bunker, he too wanted to be sure that sufficient safeguards were in place to prevent a mistaken response. A long explanation was given. The PM then wanted to know if there was a chance Pakistan could misjudge a conventional strike by India and trigger a nuclear response.

There was near silence. Pakistan, by then, had already created “war hysteria” which many felt was unprovoked. The larger consensus was that you could not be sure about Pakistan’s response. It’s reliably learnt that it was this uncertainty which halted Indian strategists from fully backing any military response.

Under considerable pressure to show some response, the Prime Minister had independently tasked Menon to draw up a list of India’s options. Menon did carry out the exercise like a professional and gave an unsigned note that started with extreme measures like a limited military strike to less effective but dramatic steps like scaling down diplomatic relations, stopping cricketing ties, visa restrictions among others. He and Narayanan met regularly, at the PM’s instructions, to discuss the question of options in the days and weeks after the attacks.


Deniable option

In the wake of all the uncertainty over how Pakistan would respond, there was also talk about the “deniable option”. One which would involve covert operatives carrying out a sensational strike in Pakistan or in PoK. It’s learnt that RAW and the Army were specifically asked this question. RAW’s response to the NSA stunned all except, perhaps, Narayanan himself who is among the doyens of Indian intelligence. India’s premier external intelligence agency admitted that it had no assets in Pakistan to carry out such an action. It was explained that India lost all the meagre local support it had in pockets of Pakistan after the Babri Masjid attack and what little was left, was shut down by a prime ministerial diktat during I K Gujral’s tenure.

The Army said it had the ability to carry out commando operations but the government had to be clear what would be the approach if anyone was apprehended. Also, the Army let it be known that it was not sure how Pakistan would react if it found out.

This discussion headed nowhere after this because the ground realities were clear that India had consciously not cultivated this option. Some others felt it was pointless to discuss the “deniable option” because the whole idea of a response should be that the “other side” should know who did it.


Us role

JUST as Singh deliberated these issues here, on November 29 itself, then US President George W Bush held a meeting with his security advisors and also on the video link with his missions in India and Pakistan. He told them that the last time something like this happened in the United States, “we went to war”. Prime Minister Singh, he added, was also under immense pressure and that the United States must do all it can to help him so that he does not go to war.

That eased matters a bit as Bush made it clear to Pakistan that it needed to “roll up and crush” the terror outfit behind the attack. US assistance was unprecedented, forcing Pakistan to accept that the attack was carried out from its soil.

But when the dust settled, all agreed that the unpredictability on the Pakistan side and the fear that its decision makers could opt for a disproportionate response, including the nuclear option, stymied any possible chance of military action on India’s behalf after 26/11.

After the first two weeks following the attack, the question that overtook everyone’s mind was what if there is another terror strike? Would India be able to hold back then?

Two years later, when asked if that phase is now over, a high-ranking security official remarked: “I can’t say, but I think that the question is still as serious. Can we keep quiet if there is another Mumbai? No, this question is still relevant.”


i would like an effort to locate at first level the Google coordinates of all known terrorists like Hafiz Saeed and the terrorist camps in PoK.

Gagan, Can you lead the effort?

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 53396
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Conceptual Thread-1

Postby ramana » 05 Jan 2011 23:44

The recent news of Kiyani closing Sui Cantonment means they are preparing to lose Balochistan. Most likely uncle will take over balochistan. In that case India should prepare for Singh re-integration. Most likely Pakjab an Northern Areas will survive for a few more decades of hell. Paktun-Khyber will revert back to Afghanistan in which case Northern Afghanistan areas could re-merge with neighboring countries undoing the old Durrani kingdom

RamaY
BRF Oldie
Posts: 17249
Joined: 10 Aug 2006 21:11
Location: http://bharata-bhuti.blogspot.com/

Re: Conceptual Thread-1

Postby RamaY » 06 Jan 2011 00:05

:mrgreen:

Ramanaji, its not funny that we foresaw this on this forum...

Is there any simulation model we can use to study a possible Balochi integration? Perhaps we should come up with a Indic-integration model.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 53396
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Conceptual Thread-1

Postby ramana » 06 Jan 2011 01:10

Baloch is US munna. They had their eyes on it since WWII.

Brobst book on Great Game says Gen Curtis LeMay was adamant that they needed bases there as it provides shortest route to FSU heartland from there.

Kalat was integrated by TSP even though it was independent to provide the rationale for US to support TSP.

shyamd
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6822
Joined: 08 Aug 2006 18:43

Re: Conceptual Thread-1

Postby shyamd » 06 Jan 2011 04:43

^^ Gilani was in oman last week coincidentally. Something to read into? They are creating a ferry service from Muscat to Gwadar. MSB says Oman providing support with MI6 support remember.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 53396
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Conceptual Thread-1

Postby ramana » 19 Jan 2011 09:59

Will try to locate online resources to analyze news stories.

chandrabhan
BRFite
Posts: 194
Joined: 23 Jul 2008 10:59

Re: J&K News and Discussion-2011

Postby chandrabhan » 02 Feb 2011 10:20

Ramana sir,
I keep on wondering nowdays if politics is a good option to force some change from within the establishment. Since my family roots are in INC, that looks the only party right now who shall give a ticket to me if i decide to contest. Another question is what can a novice MP like me achieve sitting in the backbenches or not even alloted time to speak in parliament.

How can the Farce that is being perpetrated by MMS and Maino Cabal be forced to a debate in parliament? More I think about it , more i get convinced that street agitation (flag hoisting kind) through out the country is the only way to abrogate article 356 and force a change in GOI's stance. My brother and uncle keep on edging me to take the plunge in politics. I keep on telling my brother that he has served 4 terms in assembly and achieved zilch for the country or state.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 53396
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: J&K News and Discussion-2011

Postby ramana » 02 Feb 2011 10:28

Baba you are heaven sent for us. To have a real dilli billi who knows BR! Lets take this offline.

You can do a heap lot of good. And your brother too!

Aditya_V
BRF Oldie
Posts: 11230
Joined: 05 Apr 2006 16:25

Re: J&K News and Discussion-2011

Postby Aditya_V » 02 Feb 2011 10:48

chandrabhan wrote:Ramana sir,
I keep on wondering nowdays if politics is a good option to force some change from within the establishment. Since my family roots are in INC, that looks the only party right now who shall give a ticket to me if i decide to contest. Another question is what can a novice MP like me achieve sitting in the backbenches or not even alloted time to speak in parliament.

:oops: How can the Farce that is being perpetrated by MMS and Maino Cabal be forced to a debate in parliament? More I think about it , more i get convinced that street agitation (flag hoisting kind) through out the country is the only way to abrogate article 356 and force a change in GOI's stance. My brother and uncle keep on edging me to take the plunge in politics. I keep on telling my brother that he has served 4 terms in assembly and achieved zilch for the country or state.


Whatever you do, if you and your family are going to do any good, don't ever state this, there are lot of Internal factions within the INC who try and destroy you and families political career for stating this., and A Roy, JNU cabal will be looking for all excuses to refuse a ticket.

Hari Seldon
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9224
Joined: 27 Jul 2009 12:47
Location: University of Trantor

Re: J&K News and Discussion-2011

Postby Hari Seldon » 02 Feb 2011 11:02

I agree. A real neta in our midst....who could have thought it. Good, good.

Prem
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21084
Joined: 01 Jul 1999 11:31
Location: Weighing and Waiting 8T Yconomy

Re: J&K News and Discussion-2011

Postby Prem » 02 Feb 2011 11:15

Chandrabhan ji
Whoever remove the curse of Congress on Indic people will earn the heart felt appreciation . The current cabal of Congresswala are the most corrupt and weakesst in protecting the Indian nation and its interests.

chandrabhan
BRFite
Posts: 194
Joined: 23 Jul 2008 10:59

Re: J&K News and Discussion-2011

Postby chandrabhan » 02 Feb 2011 12:04

Ramana sir,
I shall send a mail offline. I am in 2 minds for a long time regarding this.

jamwal
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 5095
Joined: 19 Feb 2008 21:28
Location: Somewhere Else
Contact:

Re: J&K News and Discussion-2011

Postby jamwal » 02 Feb 2011 12:26

If I'm not over stepping my boundaries here, There is nothing better than having an ally in the "enemy" camp.

aditya
BRFite
Posts: 144
Joined: 18 Dec 2005 03:15
Location: Sub-sector Jingopura

Re: J&K News and Discussion-2011

Postby aditya » 02 Feb 2011 15:28

jamwal: you make this sound like some conspiratorial cloak and dagger business. There is no "enemy camp" and "friendly camp".

I once interacted with a group that is quite close to the one Chandrabhanji mentions but also including "right-wing Hindu nationalists."

I mentioned the Chinese threat to someone whom I hoped would be receptive (given their nationalist credentials). I received a weary "heard-it-all-before" nod in response (which would be a good thing if it meant that they do not need my advice in handling the menace.)

When I mentioned Naxals, the response was : "arrey dekhiye sahb, jab garibi hoti hai..."

As the person in question has relatives in the opposing camp, I asked a personal question regarding how they manage to separate their personal lives from their opposing political perspectives. The answer I got was politically correct: "the nation comes first."

What I feel is that politicians are fairly amoral. They may have their views which may or may not agree with yours or mine, but all those become irrelevant operationally.

It is like containers that are filled 1/10th with 9/10ths empty. The 1/10th corresponds to their personal opinions, while the remaining 9/10ths are filled in with electoral and other considerations. Of course, the proportions may vary depending on the individual politicians.

We tend to cheer politicians who make the noises we like to hear, and abuse those who speak differently. In the process, we often forget that in either case, what we are hearing is not so much the politician's voice but that of the constituency he has invested in.

The same applies to everyone ranging from Omar Abdullah in J&K to Madhya Pradesh and elsewhere.

Omar Abdullah's recent statements on the jihadi murderers seems to betray the clash between his personal interests and his political ones. At a personal level, he is a "liberal" with respect to the context, having married a non-Kashmiri and non-Muslim. I'm sure his statement on the jihadi murders is heartfelt.

However, given the environment he operates in, his political interests lie in appeasing the Kashmir valley separatists (something we loathe on BRF), while his personal interests clearly lie with India.

If India were to fail, Omar and his family would clearly suffer the fate of Najibullah in Afghanistan or Salman Taseer in Pakistan. Omar does not need BRF to remind him of this fact but he cannot afford to state it publicly.

Preventing the BJP rally in Lal Chowk while at the same time inviting the BJP as state guests to Srinagar once again reflects this clash between Omar Abdullah the individual and Omar Abdullah the politician.

If one wants to influence the discourse, the right course of action IMHO would be to invest in more than one political group and at the same time making it politically lucrative for politicians from more than one group to invest in "your side".

Chandrabhanji, it is reassuring to know that the INC has people like your family who bat for India. All the best.

Sanku
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12526
Joined: 23 Aug 2007 15:57
Location: Naaahhhh

Re: J&K News and Discussion-2011

Postby Sanku » 02 Feb 2011 15:32

^^^ Sir good post with one flaw

If one wants to influence the discourse, the right course of action IMHO would be to invest in more than one political group and at the same time making it politically lucrative for politicians from more than one group to invest in "your side".


The way to achieve the above is precisely by the following

We tend to cheer politicians who make the noises we like to hear, and abuse those who speak differently. In the process, we often forget that in either case, what we are hearing is not so much the politician's voice but that of the constituency he has invested in.


Change the behavior of politicians by showing where the powerful constituency is. Hope you understand.

jamwal
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 5095
Joined: 19 Feb 2008 21:28
Location: Somewhere Else
Contact:

Re: J&K News and Discussion-2011

Postby jamwal » 02 Feb 2011 16:21

Aditya jii,

It's not that I think of Congress as the enemy. I just meant that it's nice to have someone who understands our POV in that party. I'm not overly affiliated to BJP or completely anti-Congress. In these times support for any political party should be on case by case basis. It's just that BJP is proving itself to be more nationalist as compared to Congress which is more concerned with secular votes and e-con-omy.
IMHO onlee

Vikas
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6168
Joined: 03 Dec 2005 02:40
Location: Where DST doesn't bother me
Contact:

Re: J&K News and Discussion-2011

Postby Vikas » 02 Feb 2011 18:14

Aditya, Unfortunately the public stance taken by such leaders end up harming the interests of the nation.
No Problem if a particular leader has a POV opposite to what I believe in e.g. about economy or GST or NAREGA or Nano Plant, but if the stance becomes anti-National strategically or if the utterances of such leaders bolster the terroristic tendencies then definitely the line has been crossed from being idealogical opponent to Enemy.
Sometimes rationalizing actions/reactions to give them human feeling doesn't help. Ruthlessness when national interests are at stake thats what I believe in.
Commies cheering anything for China to the extent of blaming India and MSA acting almost like lapdog of Pakis is not pandering to any constituency. It is downright anti national.

Bharath.Subramanyam
BRFite
Posts: 131
Joined: 28 Jul 2009 00:17

Re: Conceptual Thread-1

Postby Bharath.Subramanyam » 02 Feb 2011 22:24

Chandrabhan ji,

Can you send an off line email to bharath DOT Subramanyam AT geemaaail ?

Would like to discuss one or two things offline.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 53396
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Conceptual Thread-1

Postby ramana » 02 Feb 2011 22:30

Bharath, He is going to send me an email and will add you to it once I get it.

SwamyG
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16102
Joined: 11 Apr 2007 09:22

Re: Conceptual Thread-1

Postby SwamyG » 03 Feb 2011 00:35

Chandrabha ji: Good luck with whatever party you join; and hope you get to achieve what you set out to achieve for the country. Advanced shubhkamanaye onlee.

SwamyG
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16102
Joined: 11 Apr 2007 09:22

Re: J&K News and Discussion-2011

Postby SwamyG » 03 Feb 2011 00:42

aditya wrote:However, given the environment he operates in, his political interests lie in appeasing the Kashmir valley separatists (something we loathe on BRF), while his personal interests clearly lie with India.

If India were to fail, Omar and his family would clearly suffer the fate of Najibullah in Afghanistan or Salman Taseer in Pakistan. Omar does not need BRF to remind him of this fact but he cannot afford to state it publicly.

Very similar to what I asked Kanson in another thread. OA, or any politician in J&K, would surely know what is in it for them, if they even get out of India. Pakistan will not allow J&K to exist independently and peacefully. Never. He stands lose his limbs and life in such a scenario. India offers him the liberalism, life, power, respect, fame and prosperity. But he has to play both sides, in order to be an extra-ordinary and with special privileges he needs the J&K to keep simmering. The flame can be neither increased or reduced, needs to be kept at the optimum so he continues to get what he wants. If DMK's Karunanidhi by supporting INC reaps rewards by getting important cabinet positions, OA reaps benefits by keeping J&K always on the front burner. Neither on the back burner or off the stove.

brihaspati
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12410
Joined: 19 Nov 2008 03:25

Re: Conceptual Thread-1

Postby brihaspati » 03 Feb 2011 01:43

Chandrabhan ji,
if you are really serious, you have made a blunder by even declaring the intent. From the details you have posted, some would probably and definitely identify you and your kin. You cannot or should not join in any way now or in the near future. Any new face in the network will be instrantly tied up with what you have written.

Second, in order to be trustworthy, you will have to participate in activities that will allow the leadership to control you or blackmail you. The main reason, many of those you found talking - were talking in the way you abhorred. They have no way out. If you refuse to fall in line and allow yourself to be stamped with things that will allow the leaders to pull you by the hair and the ears when required - you will be suspected and not allowed in into power or decision making.

Maybe lie low for a while, and watch who is talking with whom and their networks and underhand activities. There are some circles in Delhi Cong, who are inclined in the "right" direction, but they will pretend to be "left" Cong until they are convinced about you. There are ways to help you, but I would concur with their caution and maybe they will "find" you in proper time, if you are sincere. Also dont trust someone just because he/she appears to take you into confidence and speaks BRF-speak. That party is quite paranoid now, and has an extensive network of reporting on its own activists. Just take it easy for some time! :P

Bharath.Subramanyam
BRFite
Posts: 131
Joined: 28 Jul 2009 00:17

Re: Conceptual Thread-1

Postby Bharath.Subramanyam » 03 Feb 2011 01:58

thanks Ramana garu

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 53396
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Conceptual Thread-1

Postby ramana » 10 Oct 2011 09:58

ramana wrote:Based on released papers, the Allies had a simple strategy to win in WWII. It was:

- Defeat Germany and then Japan.

Similarly India now needs to
- dissuade PRC and draw TSP and defeat it.
TSP unfortunately is on this path and is not ready to see reason.

US is not a factor nor ever was. It goes with the winner.

Dissuasion of PRC requires various tactical elements wgich can be developed.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 53396
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Conceptual Thread-1

Postby ramana » 10 Oct 2011 23:17

The A3 and A5, the ATV and its loadout, the 3 new mountain corps, the lightweight howitzers, the upgrading the IAF infrastructure and basing SU30MKIs, all these are dissuasive measures against PRC in case they want to open a two front war.
The first three elements are for escalation control in case it goes unconventional. The others are to ensure that threshold is not breached.

The only thing is are the procurements and absorption in a timely manner?

The way the US-TSP relations are going downhill after Abortabad shows that there could be a TSP last ditch attempt like Gen Yahya khan's pre-emptive strike in 1971. Only this time its before the TTP types take over the TSP kabila.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 53396
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Conceptual Thread-1

Postby ramana » 23 Nov 2011 09:59

key events in 2011:

Euro crisis leading to Indian economy reaching new heights
OBL raid
TSP multiple centers of powers coalescing
Port Darwin decision showing a new seaborne containment /sanitary cordon around PRC
Fukushima disaster and Kudankalam
Indo-Afghan treaty and its ramifications

Can we have some volunteers to write opeds on each of these?

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 53396
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Conceptual Thread-1

Postby ramana » 03 Apr 2012 22:51

X-Post.....

Acharya wrote:Good scenario but several factors are different.

The problem for the US is, if they lose Europe then their hold in the GCC becomes weak. Hence why the GCC is building its relations with India up. You will see more strategic cooperation between the two. The gulf looks around and it sees untrustworthy allies and they barely survive in a hostile environment.


That is why US/UK have parked themselves in Iraq. They are working on the new map of the middle east. They are going to be in Af-Pak for the next 30 years.
These are the signs when they are retreating and they are losing their total dominance. This dominance started when they defeated the ottoman empire in 1917 in WWI.

There is going to be confrontation between a combined Gulf and the Chrsitian west. This can come in if the Gulf states discover that Anglo American power can be disloged from the area if they can. This could be World War III but of a different nature.

They want to protect and expand the greater Israel area including Jordan and northern Iraq. They want to control Libya and Egypt as thier long term region since EU need the protection in the southern flank. Iran will be kept weak with war and the Saudi region will be split based on OIL politics. They will make sure that their access to central asia is kept clear for the next 30-50 years.

RamaY
BRF Oldie
Posts: 17249
Joined: 10 Aug 2006 21:11
Location: http://bharata-bhuti.blogspot.com/

Re: Conceptual Thread-1

Postby RamaY » 08 Oct 2013 23:54

An interesting statement is made in a corporate strategy session - "There needs to be enough Church and State". We also heard about "Agile evangelists or SM evangelists" etc.,

The purpose is to ensure that the company maintains (and even creates if needed) a unique "church/Culture" not only within but also in customer/consumer's mind so the company has its own identity.

Corporate culture is a well known, well researched and well supported aspect of any business identity (Brand value) and it is considered to carry a significant value. Later this concept evolved into not just business level but also individual product level.

This is how societies assemble, evolved and carve a niche for themselves.

Then why is it a bad thing at a national level?

RamaY
BRF Oldie
Posts: 17249
Joined: 10 Aug 2006 21:11
Location: http://bharata-bhuti.blogspot.com/

Re: Conceptual Thread-1

Postby RamaY » 31 Jul 2014 20:30

On Geopolitics...

There was no Geopolitics in western civilization till Romans. Roman empire originally was nothing but today's EU before it became an east european Roman/Byzantine empire.

The next 700yrs are spent on Crusades between West and Middle-East. This left the Asia proper out of this equation.

At this time somehow the Middle-East had enough human/financial resources to fight a two front war > Crusades with West and Conquests of India on the other side.

The next 600 yrs are about West colonizing East bringing the mayhem to Asia proper.

Discovery of Oil in ME forced west to make peace with ME.

Now West is able to replace the old islamic state with new islamic arab states which are loyal to west and are protecting west's eastern frontiers by fighting various asian powers (India, China, Russia etc).

Looking at the map it is high time to push the muslim civilization to go occupy Europe. For that the existing power structures in Arabia must go.

Islam is just a tool in all this things. West wants to protect Islam so it can be a rallying point to hurt asian countries. Asian countries can remove this just by banning islam and forcing their citizens to follow native faiths. Once this is done, Indians need not worry about splintering of India and another partition to assert their national interests. But as long as secularism exists as the guiding principle, it will not let Islam die, thus keeping the breaking-india and future-partition options open w.r.t India.

Lot of people mistake human rights with secularism. Hinduism can offer even better human rights to individuals in the absence of secularism unless people think being an islamist/evangelic is a human right.

RamaY
BRF Oldie
Posts: 17249
Joined: 10 Aug 2006 21:11
Location: http://bharata-bhuti.blogspot.com/

Re: Conceptual Thread-1

Postby RamaY » 01 Aug 2014 07:10

Geopolitics 2

Every empire must end. But the sun setting empire can, and often does, select who will be its successor. We could see this throughout the history.

It is said that Britain identified USA as its successor empire after WW1 and passed on the baton to USA after WW2. Eventhough USA was once a British colony and fought a violent war of independence, the British empire thought USA to be a more 'natural' successor to the empire than say Russia.

Even USA as the sole superpower after Cold War, it started propping up China as its potential successor if chips fall down and we started seeing the G2 scenarios evolved in past decade.

If we the world map we can see two set of groupings, more like compatible civilizations. In the east we have Russia, China, India and Japan. In the west we have USA, Europe, Britain and Canada. The Brazils of South America are same as the Austraila/Newzealand of Asia; at best They are representatives of outside block in the core pool. Canada is to west as Russia as to east; a vast territory with lot of natural resources but very small local populations.

The melting pot is the ME region and Africa. The colonial hangover (of last two empires - British & USA) is currently holding them in Western control, while their real value proposition is for East. West is trying to harass and delay raise of East by holding on to the two USP's of ME, namely Oil and Islam.

Given this background, it is not only natural but also desirable that the Asian group makes much needed compromises in their internal dynamics before one of them can take the baton from the west as the next empire.

The key sore points in this equation are Pakistan, Indo-China border issues, Energy security, China-Japan and Japan-Russia border issues etc., None of the Asian group powers can become the next empire without solving these issues.

Can China trust India to be a natural successor for it when the time comes? Will China benefit to have India as its successor empire than say Turkey?

What can be done to this end? Following are some suggestions.

- China cuts its relationships with Pakistan and supports India's pursuit to take over PoK. China also gives up its claims on Aksai-Chin. This will severe the Islamic corridor between Pakistan & Xinjiang and distance China from Islamic nuicense.

- Russia and China extend their proposed Oil/Gas pipeline network into Burma/Inda thru Yunnan province. This will be connected to India's own Oil/Gas grid in North-East India.

- India develops a undersea Oil/Gas pipeline from Iran and connects it to the Russia-China grid.

- This will setup a Oil/Gas network stretching from Iran-India-China-Russia-Japan. This will connect two major suppliers with three major customers. At current rates this is a $500-600B energy grid completely liberating Asia from Western energy politics. India & China can balance each other supply routes by controlling their grids.

- Once cut from their Asian markets the ME islam can be turned to focus on their western frontiers like they did during crusades. Europe & USA will be natural places for Islamist hordes to enjoy the fruits of civilization.

- This will force West to use Pakistan as the spoiler of Asian game. But surrounded by the entire Asian group on all four sides Pakistan will not last more than a week and cease to exist as an western agent.

This will move the frontiers of Asian group to Africa and Australia for the next round of geopolitics.

panduranghari
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3758
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Conceptual Thread-1

Postby panduranghari » 02 Aug 2014 18:49

GuruPrabhu wrote:We are being constantly fed by the MSM that a stable TSP is in India's interests, this logic can be seen resonating in all TV shows where even ministers in the GOI come up with the same opinion. This lie is repeated so often that most people who hear it would tend to believe it , how do we get it across to the voting public of India that TSP isnt a nation but is an amalgamation of warring tribes who can never be stable. For starters we can begin by writing cogent ripostes to all the newspaper reports selling us lies about how TSP's stability is good for us in the long term.


The current NSA - Doval Saheb - also thinks so. If you listen to his multitude of YouTube lectures, he does not fail to state the necessity of stable TSP.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 53396
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Conceptual Thread-1

Postby ramana » 02 Aug 2014 20:17

A stable but cut down TSP is useful.
TSP- Sindh-Balochistan

KP will revert to Afghanistan.

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36388
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: Conceptual Thread-1

Postby SaiK » 02 Aug 2014 20:27

Can't cut TSP w.o. chopping chip's tail.
Jmt


Return to “Strategic & Security Issues Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests