Pratap Bhanu Mehta Posted: Tuesday , May 26, 2009 at 0945 hrs IST
New Delhi:
It is deeply sad that a most gloriously inventive, radical and genuinely pious religious community like the Sikhs now seems to be frequently hostage to a regime of internal intolerance. Not only was this tradition founded on the premise of an astonishing synthesis; it allowed an amazing internal diversity as well. In the nineteenth century, there were a large number of traditions with which Sikhs identified: Khalsa, Nirmala, Udasi, Nanak-Panthi, Nihang, Kalu Panthi, Ram Dasi, Kuka, Nirankari, etc. Now it is fair to say that over the course of the twentieth century this diverse tradition has also succumbed to the cardinal sins any religious tradition can commit: establish a coercive set of monopolies.
The roots of the current conflict that took a murderous turn in Vienna will, in due course be traced to contingent causes. On the face of it, both the violence in Vienna and the violent response in Punjab will turn out to have political overtones. But underlying this conflict is the fact that Sikh identity has been transformed over the course of the twentieth century, often in the direction of internal intolerance.
Some of its followers have succumbed to the idea that there can be only one authoritative interpretation of the tradition, there can be only one authority pronouncing over temporal aspects of the religion, and that both of these monopolies will also be tied to a territorial imagination. The attempt is to monopolise the master narrative of Sikh tradition, to eviscerate its diverse imaginings, and to concentrate power in organisations like the SGPC. You take all of these aspirations, and align them with religious politics and you will get the combustible mix that we are seeing in Punjab.
The blunt truth is that the drive to standardise Sikh identity is the root cause of so many of these troubles. It is not often discussed in public, but there is no getting away from the fact that organised groups within Sikhism, including the SGPC, have served to silence internal criticism within the tradition. Openly challenging authority has become a risky business, and a number of Sikh intellectuals feel under pressure not to challenge the insidious monopolies that are putting the liberal imagination within Sikhism at great risk.
It is a truism that the conditions for generating an enlarged and liberal outlook are less a function of the doctrine of a religion, but more a product of the fragmentation of authority. When any tradition is comfortable with the idea that there is no monopoly over authority, over interpretation, it is more likely to be comfortable with internal dissent. The fragmentation of authority is important for the intellectual vitality of any tradition. But the move in organised Sikhism has often been in the reverse direction: to uphold monopoly over authority and homogeneity of identity at all cost. Unless the tradition comes to terms with this increasing internal intolerance it will remain hostage to violence.
Many religious identities see themselves under siege in the modern world, and are inventing new abstract identifications that do away with the richness of traditions. In that sense Sikhism is not exceptional. But in the Indian context the fact that so much of its authority has been closely linked to politics, complicates its character. Political parties, let alone unfriendly powers, will not hesitate to fish in this political cauldron. It is important that this conflict be contained, and justice done, before it acquires dangerous proportions. And it is important to learn the lesson that monopolies within any religion are dangerous: they generate more conflict. One can only hope that the religion will return to the eternal and limitless verities of the sabda, and not be hijacked by the narcissism of so many little selves.
Comments
Post comment
21 Comments |
Even youngstersBy: emmarcee | Wednesday , 27 May '09 21:51:43 PM Reply | Forward Very good column. You are 100 percent right. I think that Sikhs are taught a version of "infalliability" of Granth just like Quran (or Vatican in yester years). Nobdoy can question what is written. Recently in one of the blogs I found rather laughable assumption that the Historicity of Rama should be true since Grantha/ Guru Nanak said so. One young Sikh was chiding the other for saying Rama could n't have been. Where is the free thought?
Wondeful articleBy: Anshuman Singh | Wednesday , 27 May '09 20:47:20 PM Reply | Forward This article hits the nail on the head. Sikhism was created to be a movement of people of any confession of faith to subscribe to a doctrine of diversity in the path to salvation and universalism. It seems incomprehensively sad to me that a religion that was founded on the concept of in the eyes of God, "there is no Hindu, there is no Muslim" is now trying to define what exactly is a Sikh. A Sikh is any person who professes belief in the Almighty, remembers to make his actions and thoughts pious and truthful, who does not forget his responsibility to those around him regardless of origin, and does not presume to judge who is sinner and who is a saint. Its genuinely sad that a faith built to encourage inter-communal harmony is now suffering at the hands of those who would prefer it to be standardised at the price of intra-communal violence. The ultimate message of Sikhism is the unfathomable mercy of the Divine, and the ability to choose one's actions. Us Sikhs should never forget this.
Religion!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! my footBy: astrix | Wednesday , 27 May '09 17:44:25 PM Reply | Forward One solution to all problems plaguing the world today - BAN RELIGION. It does not serve any purpose at all except for inciting intolerence resulting in hatred and culminating into violence. RELIGION IS BAD for mankind. It is the root cause of all evil that exists in society today, and mind you, it is irrespective of any religion since poison by any name is poison ultimately. I urge to one and all, stop fooling yourself in the name of religion, it doesn't take you anywhere.
All religions by their definition are monopolistic and intolerant.By: Suvi Cyriac Nadakluzhackal | Wednesday , 27 May '09 15:25:15 PM Reply | Forward How else can they bring in more members and money in to their hands?
Reply to op73By: Sameer | Wednesday , 27 May '09 14:26:59 PM Reply | Forward RSS
Rising Religious Intolerance in IndiaBy: Dr. Ankeshwar Prakash | Wednesday , 27 May '09 11:37:57 AM Reply | Forward I think that it is not merely a problem of existence of caste system, rather it is a problem of rising religious intolerance in the minds of only a few people belonging to a particular community. The solution lies in honest introspection by such people. Further both central and state governments should have handled the issue carefully. Due to the involvement of religious sentiments, the governments should have been proactive rather than reactive. Guilty people, from whichever community they are, shoud be punished and brought to justice.
Read the best book on Sikh identity politics by Harjot Singh OberoiBy: op73 | Wednesday , 27 May '09 7:57:21 AM Reply | Forward The finest book on the subject discussed by Mehta is Harjot Singh Oberoi's THE CONSTRUCTION OF RELIGIOUS BOUNDARIES, which reveals the huge diversity within Sikh traditions that was stamped out by Khalsa Sikhism. Oberoi was hounded into silence for revealing this historical truth. The fact is that the monopoly of the Sikh Panth now is no different from the BJP's effort to monopolize the existing diversity of Hindu traditions.
Carry on the good work!By: Jayadevan | Wednesday , 27 May '09 7:49:54 AM Reply | Forward The very idea of speaking the words "religion" and "tolerance" with the same breath is ludicrous. Organized religion is an excellent way to acquire power - can we imagine the beneficiaries ever tolerating competition? The fact that reactions of this sort - the attack in Vienna - come from the Jat Sikhs is only incidental, they were the people whose position was being threatened. All religions have used every method in the lexicon to wipe out competition - they only needed to have the opportunity and the power. That this sort of confrontationism also serves to cement the hold of a highly corrupt priesthood is a fringe benefit. If there were no Shias or Nirankaris, they would have to be invented. Fortunately, there is always an unending supply of fools who know nothing about theology or philosophy and mistake symbols for the actual thing to commit the next horror. It would seem difficult to make the human race extinct, but God did provide a destruct button - stupidity.
Monopoly religion????By: Dr.G.Srinivasan | Wednesday , 27 May '09 6:40:16 AM Reply | Forward This happened in all religions Sikhism is no exception
Except Islam no other Religion is a very near success in eliminating castes,By: naufulamhu | Wednesday , 27 May '09 5:06:34 AM Reply | Forward I am naive and ignorant, I was under the impression that Sikhism brought a great revolution in Hinduism by abolishing the four traditional castes and hundreds of other sub-castes. Only today I understand that Cates do exist in Sikhism as it does exist in my country Sri Lanka among the Buddhists. Low caste people like us are not allowed entry into some of the Buddhist temples. Did religious conversion bring the revolution of caste-less religion?( Where are you Dr. Ambethcar) It appeared to do so in the case of Hindus converting to Christianity. But that is also wrong. Very many high caste Hindus Christians proudly add their Hindu Caste names after their Christian names such as Margaret Mudaliar, James, Sylvia, Mary, etc and in some places there are separate Burial grounds for low caste Christians, but in the case of Sri Lankan Islam and in Tamil Nadu, Muslims who used to belong to various Hindu Castes, have totally got rid of their Hindu Caste identity,, this is a real revolution
Issue is with tolerance, on Dalit side as wellBy: Navdeep Bajwa | Wednesday , 27 May '09 3:50:08 AM Reply | Forward Seems like the whole media is vilifying the higher caste sikhs for not being tolerant. The issue here is with "GURU MANYO GRANTH". Sikhs do not regard a livcing person as a guru, the holy book is the guru. THe ravidasis use the holy book but consider a living person as a guru. That is what causes this issue. Why cant tolerance be taught to ravidasis to understand this and show respect to the sikh traditions as well. A simil;ar issue caused the Nirankari problem in 80's as well and we know how that was politically and socially exploited.
Reader CommentBy: rohitchandavarker | Tuesday , 26 May '09 17:02:00 PM Reply | Forward The simmering discontent within the Sikh community resulted in this senseless violence.The reasons are manifold but the underlying reason is the chasm between the affluent sections
Guru Nanak Devji must be crying nowBy: Rajdeep | Tuesday , 26 May '09 15:56:52 PM Reply | Forward Great Guru Nanak Devji fought all his life against mindless rituals and symbolism in religion and today his followers kill somebody because he was sitting with the holy book Adi Granth instead of a notch lower. How stupid one can go on these things, some times back they were trying to kill some one else because he was dressed as Guru Govind Singhji. All the problems of rituals and castism that were cleaned by these Ten Gurus are now a days back in modern day Sikhism. Its time we all read and interpret the Adi Granth an japji Sahab once again and start the clean up act.
Business of expansion of the neo gurusBy: shantam i singh | Tuesday , 26 May '09 15:55:47 PM Reply | Forward Sikh masters and their contempraries have made religion free from the cluches of elite of their time. They have given immense importance to the idea of finding a living guru. This freedom to choose create the markets of gurus. Problem arises when these kiosk holder gurus cross the limits of their porfession. Just imagine you are a show room holder and a street seller start selling his things in your shop. What you will do? The same Sikhs are doing with this particular guru, otherwise hundreds of other deras are doing their business in their way.
Folks first try to get facts rightBy: Gurpreet Sandhu | Tuesday , 26 May '09 15:45:28 PM Reply | Forward The case here is that of one sect who call themselves ‘Ravidasis’
Monopoly ReligionBy: Parminder Singh | Tuesday , 26 May '09 14:56:31 PM Reply | Forward Sikhism tolerates all religions. It is borne out by the fact that Shabads of Hindu, Muslim Saints find a place in Guru Granth Sahibji. Nobody can deny the fact that saints like Kabir, Farid, Dhana, Tirlochan, Bhatts,Ramanand etc. did not belong to high castes. Nowhere in the Guru Granth Sahib there is preaching that Hindus/ Muslims should give up their religion. The advice to them is to be true Hindus/Muslims. Sikhs do not worship Idols, but they do not break them. Ravi Das is one of the saints whose Bani finds a respectable place in Sri Guru Granth Sahibji. However, nobody, including saints of other sects/ faiths/ deras have a right to either misinterpret or show disrespect to Guru Granth Sahib or the Sikh tradition/ teachings. If they want to charter a different line of thought, so be it. Let them have their holy book, place of worship, etc.
Folks first try to get facts rightBy: Gurpreet Sandhu | Tuesday , 26 May '09 14:27:05 PM Reply | Forward The case here is that of one sect who call themselves ‘Ravidasis’
Caste system in IndiaBy: Raman Mittal | Tuesday , 26 May '09 13:27:26 PM Reply | Forward Caste is a factor which is age old in India and refuses to die--come what may. Irrespective of religion, the caste system rises again and again and refuses to die. Nanak, Kabir, Sufis, Ramakrishna, missionaries, Constitution may have shown the door to caste based practices, but still it enters from back door. It appears the caste system is so deep rooted in Indian milieu that it is almost impossible to get rid of it. So, let us learn to live with it.
commentBy: santosh | Tuesday , 26 May '09 11:38:48 AM Reply | Forward who owns the religion?
Monopoly religionBy: MOHAN DADDIKAR | Tuesday , 26 May '09 11:29:51 AM Reply | Forward Sikhs, though deeply religious are generally a tolernat and peace-loving community. They are modern in outlook and proressive in soial reforms.But nowadays they are aping the Muslims in all spheres of human relations. So even waaring a turban has bccome a symbol of aggressive Sikhism. I reauest the Sikh commnunity to return to their age-old tolerance and love for peace and stop becoming like Muslims.
It was not the 6 people, it was a philosophyBy: T R Suman | Tuesday , 26 May '09 10:52:25 AM Reply | Forward This was not just an emotional killing of Sant Ramanand by 6 antisocial elements. This has lot to with the growing intollerence in the modern day Sikhism. A religion whose roots get watered from the respect to every religion. But the so called custodians of sikhism want to interpret the things the way they want and not the way they are. They want evry sub section of sikhism to follow there line. They can't digest the rise of so called lower caste sikhs or whatever they call them. They always forget that all of us are living in a free democratic society where everybody has it fundamental right to follow any religion in his own way. The difinition of a particular religion by a particular section is not binding to everybody. Things will get normal in the course of time but one thing is bound to happen. The social landscape of punjab has changed for ever.
Wednesday, May 27, 2009
Tuesday, May 19, 2009
Public Platform : India's Challenges
1.
All Editors' Selections » EDITORS' SELECTIONS (what's this?)
May 19, 2009 7:03 am
Link
Several comments regarding your editorial on what India should do in regards to Pakistan. You are right, India showed remarkable restraint in not attacking Pakistan after the Mumbai attack. Especially since the Indian government believes that elements of the Pakistani army/intelligence were involved. In addition, your paper reported sources in the US intelligence organization that Pakistan's ISI was involved in the attack on the Indian embassy in Kabul that killed two senior Indian officials.
Even if US aid is not used directly to build Pakistani nukes, money is fungible, and the resources freed up by the aid will be used by the Pakistani's to build nukes.
So to ask India to unilaterally stop developing additional nuclear material and to go into arms control talks with Pakistan and China is unrealistic. Do you really think that China wants to have arms control discussions? China is a major security concern for India and the US. India's military calculus is more centered on China than Pakistan. Your proposal is a non-starter.
As far as Kashmir is concerned, India would have agreed to converting the current Line of Control as the International border. That is the only pragmatic solution. There are several precedents to this. Bengal was divided between India and East Pakistan. Punjab was divided between India and West Pakistan and Pashtunistan was divided by the Durand line. Pakistani leaders have come close to accepting such a deal in the past but unfortunately have been overtaken by events in their own country before consummating the deal.
The reason that there is a strong presence of the Indian army near the Pakistani border is to prevent infiltration by terrorists from Pakistan. Often under cover fire from the Pakistani army. Every week there are reports in the Indian press of pitched battles as the Indian forces try and stop the terrorists from entering India. Do you really think that any Indian government can order its military to withdraw from the border while terrorists are entering on a regular basis.
The only way the US Af-Pak strategy will work is if the ruling elite in Pakistan (i.e. the Army ) finally realize that it is not in their best interests to keep India as the bogeyman. Until now, the demonizing of India has allowed the Pakistani army to control Pakistan. Like some one correctly said, Most countries have an army while in Pakistan the army has a country. That calculus will have to change for the Pakistani elite. India getting stronger v.vs. Pakistan will help that cause not the other way around as your editorial suggests.
— Sanjiv, San Jose, CA
Recommend Recommended by 43 Readers
2.
All Editors' Selections » EDITORS' SELECTIONS (what's this?)
May 19, 2009 7:09 am
Link
It is commendable to exhort India to show regional leadership because of the stable mandate. However - Pakistan's nuclear activities have little correlation to whether India shows leadership or not. Just because its a next door neighbor does not make India a big brother to Pakistan. Pakistan's big brother has always been the United States - and her nuclear activities and stability are directly correlated to US policies and funding. In fact, many of the suggestions made in this editorial have already been pursued ad nauseum by India with different Pakistani regimes - yielding very limited results. Kashmir has had democratically elected government for quite a while now. Asking India to "resolve" the Kashmir issue without specifying what the resolution is expected in this editorial makes it a very weak argument. India has lots of other challenges besides Pakistan that could have been addressed in this editorial. Trust me - Pakistan's nuclear activities were hardly in the Indian voter's mind when they were selecting one party over another.
Both the title and contents of this editorial are misleading. But I agree that the concern is genuine.
If there's a key to changing things in Pakistan one way or the other, it lies with the United States - and that mandate was given not last week - but on November 4th, 2008. I hope we see a game changer there.
— Susmit, PA
Recommend Recommended by 30 Readers
3.
May 19, 2009 7:12 am
Link
You are not making any practical sense when you come up with these kinds of editorials. India has two main challenges..reducing poverty and keeping itself safe from the insanity around it. Arms control talks with Pakistan and China? Where's the US in all of this? India has to make Pakistan happy over Kashmir so Pakistan can do the US bidding? Stop unilaterally refining nuclear fuel when its surrounded by China and Pakistan, two of the worlds biggest proliferators?
Come one guys. Get a modicum of common sense before you come up with this kind of stuff. Its laughable.
— gr, Glenview, Il
Recommend Recommended by 44 Readers
4.
May 19, 2009 7:12 am
Link
History is testament to the fact that the United States has been on the wrong, short-sighted, self-serving path when it comes to the subcontinent. As a result, Pakistan is now a pathethic caricature of a client state. Its leaders have been reduced to barricading themselves from the extremists in their palaces whilst at home and shamelessly begging for unaccounted aid when abroad. India has taken a different path and must continue on it. Relationship with the United States is important but comes at a great cost. India must do what is in its own best interests, develop its own foreign relationships and defend its own self interests. It can not, and must not, reduce itself to being a pawn on a global chessboard as its neighbor has.
— Nuz2Me, Utah
Recommend Recommended by 26 Readers
5.
May 19, 2009 7:12 am
Link
Does India really need advice from the editors at the New York Times ? For that matter, do they need advice from anyone in the west?
From what I read, Indians still believe in hard work, free markets and capitalism. Maybe we should be taking advice from them.
— m. jones, nm
Recommend Recommended by 28 Readers
6.
May 19, 2009 7:12 am
Link
You guys mess up with every one and others have to take responsibility. You should probably stop being selfish and develop a human heart.
— Suresh, India
Recommend Recommended by 13 Readers
7.
May 19, 2009 7:12 am
Link
As long as this idea is being shoved down Pakistan's throat that India is the dominant power and Pakistan needs to submit to their leadership in the region, nothing can be resolved.
You talk about India's "constructive" role in Afghanistan. For Pakistan it is very suspicious why India being a country with no cultural or geographic affinity with Afghanistan is being allowed to have a dominant role there. On the other hand Pakistan which has a 2200 km long border with that country and a significant population which has cultural affinity with Afghanistan is being used with no regard to its own strategic interests.
I think the idea is very clear here. Pakistan is being encircled to fall in line with India's regional leadership role with the ultimate objective of countering China. The problem with the plan is that Pakistan is getting nothing in return and it is being left to India's goodwill to solve all mutual disputes. This kind of plan can easily backfire because although Pakistan is smaller than India, it is not insignificant.
I think it would behove the US to try and deal with Pakistan seperately from India in a way that takes into account Pakistan's interests also. That is the only way of dealing with this situation in fair manner.
— SAM, CA
Recommend Recommended by 3 Readers
8.
May 19, 2009 7:12 am
Link
How can you deal with a state based on religion which preaches hatred of other religions? Until Pakistan gives up it's religious bigotry, accepts both pluralism and democracy, there is no hope for Pakistan. India might as well ask "Am I brother's keeper?"
— V.R.Anil Kumar, Mysore, India
Recommend Recommended by 23 Readers
9.
May 19, 2009 7:12 am
Link
Pakistan is only sane to fear India. With India greatly expanding its conventional as well as nuclear capabilities, build more nuclear bombs is the only way Pakistan can balance India off. In terms of military buildup, there is no significant difference between India and Pakistan. Both are very poor countries in terms of living standard of their people, but both are spending disproportionally on arms. They created real fear and contempt toward each other, because they let pride get in the way and can not master pragmatism. India was colonized by the British for a long time, that damaged their self-confidence. India need a bold leader to turn their national psyche around, but sadly, we have not seen one in the past 50 years.
As for Pakistan, India and China to get together to negotiate arms control. This is just wishful thinking. The U.S. is directly and indirectly arming India as part of "League of Democracy" to contain China; China is arming Pakistan directly and indirectly as a way to squeeze India. Those relationship are deeply entangled. Without a grand bargain that also involve the shape of U.S.-China relations, south Asia will not see true tranquility in a long time to come.
— horsham, north carolina
Recommend Recommended by 5 Readers
10.
May 19, 2009 7:12 am
Link
Asking India to negotiate with Pakistan is like asking Israel to negotiate with Iran - we don't hear that from you a lot, do we? Did United States negotiate with Iraq or Al Queda? Pakistan's nukes have only one purpose - to destroy Hindu civilization when it goes down.
— TruthPrevails, Mumbai, India
Recommend Recommended by 30 Readers
11.
May 19, 2009 7:12 am
Link
It is a fantasy to think a parliamentary-elected govt. could take a leadership role. Each member of the parliament is loyal to its special interests and.or ethnic group. Parliament-elected govts. are weak. They are the whips that the U.S. and more stable dictatorships like Iran crack.
— Lee Walker, Oakland, CA
Recommend Recommended by 4 Readers
12.
May 19, 2009 7:12 am
Link
Yeah. Right. You keep pumping billions of dollars, and selling fighter jets to a crazed Muslim country with no history of democracy or even stability; that has nukes it cannot or barely control; cannot effectively control its own regions; whose army intelligence apparatus is autonomous of the government --
and then not just advocate India to show restraint -- which by the way it shows in ample measure, but to complain that it has not done enough?!!
What hutzpah!
— krish, SF Bay Area, CA
Recommend Recommended by 41 Readers
13.
May 19, 2009 7:12 am
Link
You are right - it is high time India solve the Kashmir issue by forcing Pakistan to vacate part of Kashmir it illegally grabbed in 1948. Pakistan can't control its own territory, how can it govern the land it illegally grabbed? India should take back its own country and do a better job than Pakistan.
Also to solve problem of terrorism, India should pull another Bangladesh on Pakistan. US has pampered and spoilt Pakistan for a long time and India had to bear the brunt of terrorism eminating from Pakistan. Even now US is following the same misguided policies. So let US wollow in its own ignorance and wishful thinking. By breaking Pakistan in four countries and spliting the army, the problem of terrorism will be solved once and for all.
— umok, WA
Recommend Recommended by 12 Readers
14.
May 19, 2009 7:12 am
Link
Article:"Trying to keep up to 100 bombs from extremists is hard enough"
Every reader should remember the there were thousands of nuclear bombs in the hands of extremists for eight years, starting January 20th, 2001. Recall all the talk about from that administration about "needing" to use nuclear bombs as bunker-busters in Iraq. We almost became the third nation to use nuclear weapons, as well as the first and second such nation.
— Ken Belcher, Chicago
Recommend Recommended by 9 Readers
15.
May 19, 2009 7:12 am
Link
I agree. India must tell Pakistan that it has no intention to conquer or de-stabilize Pakistan. As widely felt in India, a vibrant and secular Pakistan is good for India as well. As an ordinary Indian citizen, I would want Pakistan to prosper on all fronts and develop tolerance for people of other faiths. If it happens, India will be at peace as well. With China, India competes in economic activity. It should not have any aspiration to counter China militarily. Because if it does, it would drain its already scarce resources which it should deploy in development and welfare of its people.
India must sign NPT. One nuclear bomb or 100 would not give security enough to any nation. In a nuclear war nobody wins. She should not support any nation that has nuclear ambitions and if possible destroy all its nuclear weapons. Even if Pakistan nukes India, nuking Pakistan will be act of revenge and destruction of common man, and what would we have achieved in the end?I am not saying do not protect yourself. But nuclear weapons are no means to achieve security. Besides, there won't be any invasion at nation's level anymore. All wars currently are low intensity conflicts. So we don't need nuclear weapons.
Kashmir can be made independent if Kashmiris of all faiths are part of it and want independence. Just Muslims and not Pandits desiring so, would not enable any peace process to reach its end. Pakistan should also ask for an inclusive Kashmir that has Muslims, Buddhists and Hindus unlike herself, where ethnic cleansing has been going on for the past 60 years.
Finally, India should control its extreme right. We were always a peace loving and a spiritual nation. Let us retain that image and move towards economic prosperity.
— dram48, Bangalore, India
Recommend Recommended by 7 Readers
16.
May 19, 2009 7:12 am
Link
This is Washington's prescription for India for Washington's own good. This is the line which Obama administration would expect India to toe. Whether these policy reccomendations are in India's interests needs to be debated. Washington has been seen as a Pakistani crony in India and the perception there is that Washington has ignored all of Pakistan's past sins, co-habited with China and spawned regional terrorism. The very fact that Washington has been unable to curb Pakistan's nuclear programme is reason enough to believe that the Obama administration is failing to use its leverage in Pakistan and Afghanistan. America cannot afford an indifferent India which is also assidously being courted by the Chinese too. Ignoring India may just mean that the powershift to China may happen a lot sooner.
— James Baker, Toronto, Canada
Recommend Recommended by 21 Readers
17.
May 19, 2009 7:12 am
Link
Maybe the US should lead the way by cutting off billions of dollars of its own taxpayers dollars sent as aid to Pakistan that is ultimately used to fund terrorist training camps and purchase nuclear weapons. An American professor I know still finds the ignorance of US representatives in Pakistan about the perils of giving billions of dollars to any hand that is stretched out, unbelievable. He was called in by the USAID head in Islamabad to give a briefing about what to do with the cash pile that organization was sitting on. She had no idea what was going on in the country and was giving away funds to anyone who approached her. Maybe you should send people who have some knowledge about the ground realities there.
— Skasster, India
Recommend Recommended by 14 Readers
18.
May 19, 2009 7:12 am
Link
The possibility of good India-Pakistan relationship is far from being practical! Past experiences have shown that Pakistan government (or to be precise, Pakistani military!) can't be trusted! It is just that they thrive on propagating a sense of hatred towards their secular neighbour.So the government in India can do absolutely nothing about it!( But they won't admit it!!)
— ranjan, india
Recommend Recommended by 11 Readers
19.
May 19, 2009 7:12 am
Link
While the spirit of the article is acceptable, the tone leaves a lot desired. Pakistan gets billions of dollars in military aid while India gets sermons. What kind of logic is this?
Yes Pakistani citizens and civil society is suffering and that has to change. Also India and Pakistan can live together with harmony as there are many concerns that are common to both countries. Pakistan has a huge responsibility in making this happen. How come the economy of Pakistan is in doldrums yet they find resources to expand their nuclear arsenal and for what purpose? In the name of assisting Pakistan in fighting Taliban, looks like US creating another Frankenstein's monster in South Asia. US should not absolve itself of its moral responsibility in the damage it is causing by continuously pouring money into Pakistan without demanding and ensuring accountability.
Looks like even Obama is also gradually subscribing to the myopic approach that US embraced for the last four decades vis-a-vis India and Pakistan. India needs no sympathy from US. It needs US to be fair and firm in its dealings with Pakistan and India. Looks like this is not going to happen
— Vish, UK
Recommend Recommended by 21 Readers
20.
May 19, 2009 7:12 am
Link
There is nothing India can do in Pakistan. They are a lot that grew up on poison fed daily that "Hindu" India is going to get them eventhough is Pakistan that started three wars. Pakistan can only validate its existence by proving that a multicultural multireligious India is not feasible. And there are its partners..us and China pumping billions and arming them to the teeth despite knowing that they help Al Qaeda and Taliban will be nourished.
Funny reading this editorial-- our government is contemplating billions more aid, and at the same time asking that India refrain! Why? So that the "freedom fighters" won't send another plane to New York? Are Indian lives cheap?
Throughout history, we seem to have sided with despots and dictators. When will we change? If you believe democracy is a good thing, then there are over a billion people that voted peacefully just now. How about a security council seat for India that is a 6th of humanity?
How about partnering with India in fixing up Pakistan and Afghanistan? America had always dared to take bold steps throughout history when compelled with moral problems. Let us get it done!
— Veetri, Phoenix, AZ
Recommend Recommended by 25 Readers
21.
May 19, 2009 7:12 am
Link
India's reelection of the government of Manmohan Singh, one of the world's most capable and prudent heads of government, is heartening. The fact that he is only the second Indian leader since independence to be reelected after serving a full term suggests that India may indeed be entering a phase of stable growth. That should appeal to those investing in the subcontinent’s future, and comfort those, like the United States, who are increasingly reliant on it as an ally. Additionally, the success of this exercise in democracy at such a large scale also resonates in countries like China, who have resolutely contended that such a system cannot work in nations of such complexity and scope.
To continue the discussion, please visit www.twitter.com/halwoods
— Hal Woods, Chicago, IL
Recommend Recommended by 18 Readers
22.
May 19, 2009 7:12 am
Link
It is past time the US understood its predicament in Pakistan. You can neither stop nor continue feeding the beast that controls Pakistan - its army. The former risks implosion of the country and the latter explosions worldwide. Sorry, India cannot help you out of this mess. You cannot lay the blame for Pakistan buying nukes out of US aid for development or fighting terrorism on India. Pakistan does not need more nukes to avoid the threat of India. Pakistani army needs them to scare the US into parting with its money, which will be used to perpetuate the feudal stranglehold over ordinary Pakistanis. Honestly, does anyone still believe that India seeks any of the extremist-ridden Pakistani territory?
Please learn not to mollycoddle dictatorships for short term gains next time you are revisiting policy. Tutorial one: Start with Saudi Arabia which I heard builds most Madrassas in Pakistan.
— SK, NY
Recommend Recommended by 28 Readers
23.
May 19, 2009 8:54 am
Link
Expecting India to play a role in stabilizing Pakistan in any manner, let alone through progress on Kashmir seems rather naive! Progress towards any solution on Kashmir is likely to cause serious internal problems for even a stable government in Pakistan, let alone the current lame-duck administration of Mr. Zardari. It's also important to understand that with most of India's neighbors, anti-India rhetoric and posturing is de rigeur for everybody in the political process - and more so in the case of Pakistan. Any attempt by India to get involved in "stabilizing" Pakistan would probably prove counter productive.
On a related note, the US Administration and policy wonks need to get real about the fundamental nature of the Pakistani State. 60 years of an Islamist foundational doctrine, virulent anti-Indianism, and 30 years of (american-sponsored) jihadism have given these ideologies deep roots in every facet of the state, and the transition that is being expected of them today requires that these very roots be torn from the ground.
The recent confrontation with the Taliban in Swat constitutes the first credible signal from the State of its willingness to transform itself and the US needs to hold the Pak Govt to this course.
The Indian Govt would be happy to move on Kashmir (as back channel negotiations on the subject with Musharraf were testament to), but the Pakistanis must necessarily abnegate recourse to terrorist proxies as instruments of state policy, and extradite known terrorist offenders currently claiming sanctuary there under the patronage of the intelligence services, before any Indian govt could reasonably reengage in a dialogue.
— Sreeram, Bangalore
Recommend Recommended by 3 Readers
24.
May 19, 2009 8:54 am
Link
This article shows naivete in discussing the region.
1. "Demand assurances" from pakistan? Who from, precisely? The President, who controls nothing? Or the Army, which took $10 Billion in the past to further their own interests? "Assurances" from any Pakistani institution means nothing.
2. "Persuade" Burma's regime? Are you aware that China and India are in competition for influence there, and that China is far ahead? That most of North Eastern Burma is full of chinese, and chinese currency is freely used there? India's interest in Burma are based on realpolitik vs China not on what the rest of the world wants vis a vis democracy etc.
— jetlagged, Northern Virginia
Recommend Recommended by 8 Readers
25.
May 19, 2009 8:54 am
Link
Oh dear. This editorial needs a translator well-versed in imperialese. I'll give some of it a go.
"[A]rguably the most dangerous country on earth" means "Oops, we gave billions to a country to help it oppress its own people, and now this seems to no longer work it turns out they also spent much of it on nukes instead of bombing villages. Whatever shall we do? Note: get out of other peoples' business is not a valid answer."
"Resolving issues over Kashmir" means "India and Pakistan should get their act together - but whatever you do, don't take the wishes of the people of Kashmir into account. That would set a bad precedent."
"India must assume its responsibilities" means "We need a local policeman for the Empire. India has just been volunteered."
— Christian Haesemeyer, Los Angeles
26.
May 19, 2009 8:54 am
Link
India should not deal with a state which has shown little regard to its citizen's basic rights to education and social empowerment. Washington's advice on engaging the leader of Pakistan should be voiced to the country which remains its strongest ally both economically and in terms of providing military hardware - China.
— Nitin, Wellington
Recommend Recommended by 2 Readers
27.
May 19, 2009 8:54 am
Link
Kashmir problem will be solved in no time if the US stops giving military aid to Pakistan. Pakistani governments of both civilian and military varieties are experts in fooling US into thinking that Pakistan is a US ally in whatever the US wants to accomplish in the region - a base fro US operations against USSR, a conduit for arms to fight Soviets or holding the line against Al Queda. Whatever the US policy, the army ends up with more weapons and gets enriched and to maintain it's position the army tells the Pakistani population that India is the enemy.
— Lordknow, Palo Alo, CA
Recommend Recommended by 2 Readers
28.
May 19, 2009 8:54 am
Link
The editorial indeed makes some valid points about India’s rightful regional role, yet it overlooks a major barrier. And that is the Pakistan’s army and ISI who benefits immensely by having India as a perpetual enemy. Their constant, and often unjustified, blackmail of the Pakistan’s populace by creating the specter of India’s unbridled aggression gives them justification for fleecing the Pakistan’s national budget. Thus any overtures by India, except for delivering the Kashmir on a silver plater, will not placate the two institutions that have held their own country, and now the world, hostage. And even after such an overture, given their record there is no guarantee that the Pakistan army and ISI will not find any reason not to continue the enmity. In fact, it may embolden these two institutions, just as making concessions to Taliban in Swat valley gave the Taliban encouragement to reach for more. Moreover, for the last 20 years, the Pakistan army and ISI have come to believe that the western nations and the US need the Pakistan army badly enough to let them extract their pound of flesh and still get away with much more. Amassing nuclear weapons while receiving billions of dollars from the US to allegedly fight a war on terror is an excellent example Pakistan army’s strategy. Twisting India’s arms to make concessions is no guarantee that the game that is being played for the last 20 years will change. Negotiating arms treaty to include China is a good suggestions but it should be separated from the India’s relations with Pakistan which should be strictly a bilateral issues. Mixing the two, although they are somewhat interrelated, is not advisable. Suggestion on broader talks on environment and water with Pakistan is indeed a good one since it directly helps the people of Pakistan, and an issue that India should take seriously.
— PK, Sacremento, CA
Recommend Recommended by 3 Readers
29.
May 19, 2009 8:54 am
Link
It is preposterous to suggest that India should initiate arms control when Pakistan is bulking up on fighter jets and nukes, ostensibly to fight the Taliban. The government should first get down to the task of taking care of the development of the country, driving growth and combating terrorism (both within and Pakistan sponsored)
— Jeejo, Bangalore
Recommend Recommended by 3 Readers
30.
May 19, 2009 8:54 am
Link
the indian congress's victory should enhance india's image in the world besides bringing stability to indian government for the next five years. most election observers expected a fragile coalition to emerge from the election. the thumping victory for prime minister manmohan singh has given him a second term, an event that has only occured once before in india's post-colonial history when jawaharlal nehru was re-elected.manmohan singh's government has promoted programs for the low income sections of indian society.the manmohan singh led congress government has actively tried to improve relations with the united states. although the new york times opposed the us-india nuclear deal, it was important for india to sign the deal and maintain it's credibility with the bush administration. to manmohan singh's credit, he was firm and determined and saw the deal through,even though his communist allies withdrew their support and his government almost collapsed. he is also viewed as a person of integrity.india's growth has slowed due to the global economic downturn.manmohan singh's past background and experience as an economist should serve india well.
india's voters ignored the talibanization in neighboring pakistan, and communal and divisive politics in electing a party that defends the country's secular values.
india is one of the top troop contributers to UN peacekeeping operations. kashmir's accession to india in '47 was legal and it's constitution is closely aligned with india's after the last 60 years.unlike pakistan which is an islamic country, indias people view themselves as a secular society and kashmir,a state that has both hindus and muslims, as an integral part of their country. india is one of the largest troop contributers to un peacekeepingg efforts and has partnered with the us in the efforts to rebuild afghanistan.
india faces daunting challenges including a large budget deficit and a need to modernize it's infrastructure.
the indian congress's win has increased hopes that economic reform will continue in india.it's communist allies opposed these reformsin recent years.however, india will have to proceed cautiously in opening it's market in view of the global downturn.
pakistan's nuclear and arms build up,and the mumbai attack last november are reminders of india's external challenges.
— amber, us
Recommend Recommended by 2 Readers
31.
May 19, 2009 8:54 am
Link
It is true that India has to assume greater role in Asian Subcontinent. But when it comes to Pakistan, we can not ignore the fact that Kashmir is not THE main problem, as it was impressed in the Editorial. Rather securing Pakistani state from Taliban and Separatists is the main issue. When it is not clear who exercises what influence in which part of the total Pakistani set-up (Government, Legislature, Armed forces, Judiciary and Media)with whom should India engage regarding Kashmir? What assurances can be given from the negotiating party that the rest of the stake holders agree? Please, let us all give Pakistani state time to set house in-order and then bring upon them additional burdens.
One at a time - Brick by Brick, a long lasting solution.
— Srikumar, Mumbai
Recommend Recommended by 3 Readers
32.
May 19, 2009 8:54 am
Link
The tone of the editorial is rather condescending. As the saying goes, for a person with a hammer the whole world seems like a nail. Not a single line in this editorial is really about India but more about protecting American's interests and ambitions - for example "...use its considerable trade clout with Iran, Sudan and Myanmar to curb Tehran’s nuclear program, end the genocide in Darfur and press Myanmar’s junta to expand human rights". Can you please add preparing a venti tazo chai-latte with soy milk for President Obama to the list?
I am not here to suggest that none of this is important but please we have enough problems on our own. We are not sure how the recession would play out in India, what to do with farmer suicides, how to have an inclusive growth, what to do with the Maoist problem and growing terrorist strikes and ways to protect the secular fabric of our nation. The people of India voted on these issues more than anything and I am really glad that the people of India gave an almost decisive mandate for a sincere and hardworking man in Dr. Manmohan Singh. India should engage with the world on its terms and conditions and when it chooses and not at the bidding of anyone.
— KM, India
Recommend Recommended by 13 Readers
33.
May 19, 2009 8:54 am
Link
'India's challenges' reads a lot like 'What the US would like India to do'. How about the real challenges: economic reform and lifting hundreds of millions out of poverty, the environment and securing natural resources for future growth? Yes, Pakistan is important, but India seems to have limited ability to affect outcomes in its disintegrating neighbour.
— shaloub, Toronto
Recommend Recommended by 10 Readers
34.
May 19, 2009 9:00 am
Link
Well, I suppose Manmohan Singh and the South Block mandarins in New Delhi should profusely thank the NYT editorial for their generous sermon. What better way could one celebrate the successful conclusion of the largest democratic exercise in human history that led to significant upsets (e.g., the routing of the Communists in Bengal).
Note the number of times "should" and "must" are used. Such patronizing editorials, unfortunately, confirm that the reputation of the arrogant American is often well-earned.
Such a patronizing laundry list of action items would be laughable but is instead disturbing coming from a prestigious newspaper. Do we Americans have a better grasp of what's good for India than the Indians themselves?
It's interesting that NYT now considers Pakistani to be "arguably the most dangerous country on earth". India had made this point over a decade ago. Unfortunately, it took another 8 years after 9/11 for this thought to dawn to our mainstream media.
Let me offer an alternative view. There is absolutely no reason to believe that a stable Pakistan is in India's interest. A stable Pakistan is one ruled by the Army, with arms purchases funded by our taxpayer money, and planning and executing mischief against India.
The dismantling of the Pakistani nation state into smaller states is in the best interest of India in particular and for the stability of South Asia in general. I would assume that India would do her best to exercise influence in Afghanistan to ensure that Pakistani nuclear weapons would not be stationed there out of range of Indian Air Force (the "strategic depth" sought by the Pakistani Army). If the Indian administration has any strategy, it would be to assiduously work towards breaking up Pakistan.
I suppose it would take another decade for NYT to come to a similar conclusion that a feudal state devoid of a national identity cannot be propped up by foreign handouts and a common dislike of India.
Till then we will listen to the sermons over morning coffee :)
— Ajit, Sunnyvale, CA
Recommend Recommended by 11 Readers
35.
May 19, 2009 9:00 am
Link
and Srilanka...India in spite of fatal losses (e.g., Rajiv Gandhi) has failed to address Tamils concern in Sri Lanka for over 25 yrs now. Its initiative for peace keeping forces and to aid Sril Lankan military would not have been necessary had India has supported the cause of Tamils in Srilanka. In these post-mortem efforts, Indian government stance has also earned the wrath of its own people (in TamilNadu).
— Balaji Raman, Singapore
All Editors' Selections » EDITORS' SELECTIONS (what's this?)
May 19, 2009 7:03 am
Link
Several comments regarding your editorial on what India should do in regards to Pakistan. You are right, India showed remarkable restraint in not attacking Pakistan after the Mumbai attack. Especially since the Indian government believes that elements of the Pakistani army/intelligence were involved. In addition, your paper reported sources in the US intelligence organization that Pakistan's ISI was involved in the attack on the Indian embassy in Kabul that killed two senior Indian officials.
Even if US aid is not used directly to build Pakistani nukes, money is fungible, and the resources freed up by the aid will be used by the Pakistani's to build nukes.
So to ask India to unilaterally stop developing additional nuclear material and to go into arms control talks with Pakistan and China is unrealistic. Do you really think that China wants to have arms control discussions? China is a major security concern for India and the US. India's military calculus is more centered on China than Pakistan. Your proposal is a non-starter.
As far as Kashmir is concerned, India would have agreed to converting the current Line of Control as the International border. That is the only pragmatic solution. There are several precedents to this. Bengal was divided between India and East Pakistan. Punjab was divided between India and West Pakistan and Pashtunistan was divided by the Durand line. Pakistani leaders have come close to accepting such a deal in the past but unfortunately have been overtaken by events in their own country before consummating the deal.
The reason that there is a strong presence of the Indian army near the Pakistani border is to prevent infiltration by terrorists from Pakistan. Often under cover fire from the Pakistani army. Every week there are reports in the Indian press of pitched battles as the Indian forces try and stop the terrorists from entering India. Do you really think that any Indian government can order its military to withdraw from the border while terrorists are entering on a regular basis.
The only way the US Af-Pak strategy will work is if the ruling elite in Pakistan (i.e. the Army ) finally realize that it is not in their best interests to keep India as the bogeyman. Until now, the demonizing of India has allowed the Pakistani army to control Pakistan. Like some one correctly said, Most countries have an army while in Pakistan the army has a country. That calculus will have to change for the Pakistani elite. India getting stronger v.vs. Pakistan will help that cause not the other way around as your editorial suggests.
— Sanjiv, San Jose, CA
Recommend Recommended by 43 Readers
2.
All Editors' Selections » EDITORS' SELECTIONS (what's this?)
May 19, 2009 7:09 am
Link
It is commendable to exhort India to show regional leadership because of the stable mandate. However - Pakistan's nuclear activities have little correlation to whether India shows leadership or not. Just because its a next door neighbor does not make India a big brother to Pakistan. Pakistan's big brother has always been the United States - and her nuclear activities and stability are directly correlated to US policies and funding. In fact, many of the suggestions made in this editorial have already been pursued ad nauseum by India with different Pakistani regimes - yielding very limited results. Kashmir has had democratically elected government for quite a while now. Asking India to "resolve" the Kashmir issue without specifying what the resolution is expected in this editorial makes it a very weak argument. India has lots of other challenges besides Pakistan that could have been addressed in this editorial. Trust me - Pakistan's nuclear activities were hardly in the Indian voter's mind when they were selecting one party over another.
Both the title and contents of this editorial are misleading. But I agree that the concern is genuine.
If there's a key to changing things in Pakistan one way or the other, it lies with the United States - and that mandate was given not last week - but on November 4th, 2008. I hope we see a game changer there.
— Susmit, PA
Recommend Recommended by 30 Readers
3.
May 19, 2009 7:12 am
Link
You are not making any practical sense when you come up with these kinds of editorials. India has two main challenges..reducing poverty and keeping itself safe from the insanity around it. Arms control talks with Pakistan and China? Where's the US in all of this? India has to make Pakistan happy over Kashmir so Pakistan can do the US bidding? Stop unilaterally refining nuclear fuel when its surrounded by China and Pakistan, two of the worlds biggest proliferators?
Come one guys. Get a modicum of common sense before you come up with this kind of stuff. Its laughable.
— gr, Glenview, Il
Recommend Recommended by 44 Readers
4.
May 19, 2009 7:12 am
Link
History is testament to the fact that the United States has been on the wrong, short-sighted, self-serving path when it comes to the subcontinent. As a result, Pakistan is now a pathethic caricature of a client state. Its leaders have been reduced to barricading themselves from the extremists in their palaces whilst at home and shamelessly begging for unaccounted aid when abroad. India has taken a different path and must continue on it. Relationship with the United States is important but comes at a great cost. India must do what is in its own best interests, develop its own foreign relationships and defend its own self interests. It can not, and must not, reduce itself to being a pawn on a global chessboard as its neighbor has.
— Nuz2Me, Utah
Recommend Recommended by 26 Readers
5.
May 19, 2009 7:12 am
Link
Does India really need advice from the editors at the New York Times ? For that matter, do they need advice from anyone in the west?
From what I read, Indians still believe in hard work, free markets and capitalism. Maybe we should be taking advice from them.
— m. jones, nm
Recommend Recommended by 28 Readers
6.
May 19, 2009 7:12 am
Link
You guys mess up with every one and others have to take responsibility. You should probably stop being selfish and develop a human heart.
— Suresh, India
Recommend Recommended by 13 Readers
7.
May 19, 2009 7:12 am
Link
As long as this idea is being shoved down Pakistan's throat that India is the dominant power and Pakistan needs to submit to their leadership in the region, nothing can be resolved.
You talk about India's "constructive" role in Afghanistan. For Pakistan it is very suspicious why India being a country with no cultural or geographic affinity with Afghanistan is being allowed to have a dominant role there. On the other hand Pakistan which has a 2200 km long border with that country and a significant population which has cultural affinity with Afghanistan is being used with no regard to its own strategic interests.
I think the idea is very clear here. Pakistan is being encircled to fall in line with India's regional leadership role with the ultimate objective of countering China. The problem with the plan is that Pakistan is getting nothing in return and it is being left to India's goodwill to solve all mutual disputes. This kind of plan can easily backfire because although Pakistan is smaller than India, it is not insignificant.
I think it would behove the US to try and deal with Pakistan seperately from India in a way that takes into account Pakistan's interests also. That is the only way of dealing with this situation in fair manner.
— SAM, CA
Recommend Recommended by 3 Readers
8.
May 19, 2009 7:12 am
Link
How can you deal with a state based on religion which preaches hatred of other religions? Until Pakistan gives up it's religious bigotry, accepts both pluralism and democracy, there is no hope for Pakistan. India might as well ask "Am I brother's keeper?"
— V.R.Anil Kumar, Mysore, India
Recommend Recommended by 23 Readers
9.
May 19, 2009 7:12 am
Link
Pakistan is only sane to fear India. With India greatly expanding its conventional as well as nuclear capabilities, build more nuclear bombs is the only way Pakistan can balance India off. In terms of military buildup, there is no significant difference between India and Pakistan. Both are very poor countries in terms of living standard of their people, but both are spending disproportionally on arms. They created real fear and contempt toward each other, because they let pride get in the way and can not master pragmatism. India was colonized by the British for a long time, that damaged their self-confidence. India need a bold leader to turn their national psyche around, but sadly, we have not seen one in the past 50 years.
As for Pakistan, India and China to get together to negotiate arms control. This is just wishful thinking. The U.S. is directly and indirectly arming India as part of "League of Democracy" to contain China; China is arming Pakistan directly and indirectly as a way to squeeze India. Those relationship are deeply entangled. Without a grand bargain that also involve the shape of U.S.-China relations, south Asia will not see true tranquility in a long time to come.
— horsham, north carolina
Recommend Recommended by 5 Readers
10.
May 19, 2009 7:12 am
Link
Asking India to negotiate with Pakistan is like asking Israel to negotiate with Iran - we don't hear that from you a lot, do we? Did United States negotiate with Iraq or Al Queda? Pakistan's nukes have only one purpose - to destroy Hindu civilization when it goes down.
— TruthPrevails, Mumbai, India
Recommend Recommended by 30 Readers
11.
May 19, 2009 7:12 am
Link
It is a fantasy to think a parliamentary-elected govt. could take a leadership role. Each member of the parliament is loyal to its special interests and.or ethnic group. Parliament-elected govts. are weak. They are the whips that the U.S. and more stable dictatorships like Iran crack.
— Lee Walker, Oakland, CA
Recommend Recommended by 4 Readers
12.
May 19, 2009 7:12 am
Link
Yeah. Right. You keep pumping billions of dollars, and selling fighter jets to a crazed Muslim country with no history of democracy or even stability; that has nukes it cannot or barely control; cannot effectively control its own regions; whose army intelligence apparatus is autonomous of the government --
and then not just advocate India to show restraint -- which by the way it shows in ample measure, but to complain that it has not done enough?!!
What hutzpah!
— krish, SF Bay Area, CA
Recommend Recommended by 41 Readers
13.
May 19, 2009 7:12 am
Link
You are right - it is high time India solve the Kashmir issue by forcing Pakistan to vacate part of Kashmir it illegally grabbed in 1948. Pakistan can't control its own territory, how can it govern the land it illegally grabbed? India should take back its own country and do a better job than Pakistan.
Also to solve problem of terrorism, India should pull another Bangladesh on Pakistan. US has pampered and spoilt Pakistan for a long time and India had to bear the brunt of terrorism eminating from Pakistan. Even now US is following the same misguided policies. So let US wollow in its own ignorance and wishful thinking. By breaking Pakistan in four countries and spliting the army, the problem of terrorism will be solved once and for all.
— umok, WA
Recommend Recommended by 12 Readers
14.
May 19, 2009 7:12 am
Link
Article:"Trying to keep up to 100 bombs from extremists is hard enough"
Every reader should remember the there were thousands of nuclear bombs in the hands of extremists for eight years, starting January 20th, 2001. Recall all the talk about from that administration about "needing" to use nuclear bombs as bunker-busters in Iraq. We almost became the third nation to use nuclear weapons, as well as the first and second such nation.
— Ken Belcher, Chicago
Recommend Recommended by 9 Readers
15.
May 19, 2009 7:12 am
Link
I agree. India must tell Pakistan that it has no intention to conquer or de-stabilize Pakistan. As widely felt in India, a vibrant and secular Pakistan is good for India as well. As an ordinary Indian citizen, I would want Pakistan to prosper on all fronts and develop tolerance for people of other faiths. If it happens, India will be at peace as well. With China, India competes in economic activity. It should not have any aspiration to counter China militarily. Because if it does, it would drain its already scarce resources which it should deploy in development and welfare of its people.
India must sign NPT. One nuclear bomb or 100 would not give security enough to any nation. In a nuclear war nobody wins. She should not support any nation that has nuclear ambitions and if possible destroy all its nuclear weapons. Even if Pakistan nukes India, nuking Pakistan will be act of revenge and destruction of common man, and what would we have achieved in the end?I am not saying do not protect yourself. But nuclear weapons are no means to achieve security. Besides, there won't be any invasion at nation's level anymore. All wars currently are low intensity conflicts. So we don't need nuclear weapons.
Kashmir can be made independent if Kashmiris of all faiths are part of it and want independence. Just Muslims and not Pandits desiring so, would not enable any peace process to reach its end. Pakistan should also ask for an inclusive Kashmir that has Muslims, Buddhists and Hindus unlike herself, where ethnic cleansing has been going on for the past 60 years.
Finally, India should control its extreme right. We were always a peace loving and a spiritual nation. Let us retain that image and move towards economic prosperity.
— dram48, Bangalore, India
Recommend Recommended by 7 Readers
16.
May 19, 2009 7:12 am
Link
This is Washington's prescription for India for Washington's own good. This is the line which Obama administration would expect India to toe. Whether these policy reccomendations are in India's interests needs to be debated. Washington has been seen as a Pakistani crony in India and the perception there is that Washington has ignored all of Pakistan's past sins, co-habited with China and spawned regional terrorism. The very fact that Washington has been unable to curb Pakistan's nuclear programme is reason enough to believe that the Obama administration is failing to use its leverage in Pakistan and Afghanistan. America cannot afford an indifferent India which is also assidously being courted by the Chinese too. Ignoring India may just mean that the powershift to China may happen a lot sooner.
— James Baker, Toronto, Canada
Recommend Recommended by 21 Readers
17.
May 19, 2009 7:12 am
Link
Maybe the US should lead the way by cutting off billions of dollars of its own taxpayers dollars sent as aid to Pakistan that is ultimately used to fund terrorist training camps and purchase nuclear weapons. An American professor I know still finds the ignorance of US representatives in Pakistan about the perils of giving billions of dollars to any hand that is stretched out, unbelievable. He was called in by the USAID head in Islamabad to give a briefing about what to do with the cash pile that organization was sitting on. She had no idea what was going on in the country and was giving away funds to anyone who approached her. Maybe you should send people who have some knowledge about the ground realities there.
— Skasster, India
Recommend Recommended by 14 Readers
18.
May 19, 2009 7:12 am
Link
The possibility of good India-Pakistan relationship is far from being practical! Past experiences have shown that Pakistan government (or to be precise, Pakistani military!) can't be trusted! It is just that they thrive on propagating a sense of hatred towards their secular neighbour.So the government in India can do absolutely nothing about it!( But they won't admit it!!)
— ranjan, india
Recommend Recommended by 11 Readers
19.
May 19, 2009 7:12 am
Link
While the spirit of the article is acceptable, the tone leaves a lot desired. Pakistan gets billions of dollars in military aid while India gets sermons. What kind of logic is this?
Yes Pakistani citizens and civil society is suffering and that has to change. Also India and Pakistan can live together with harmony as there are many concerns that are common to both countries. Pakistan has a huge responsibility in making this happen. How come the economy of Pakistan is in doldrums yet they find resources to expand their nuclear arsenal and for what purpose? In the name of assisting Pakistan in fighting Taliban, looks like US creating another Frankenstein's monster in South Asia. US should not absolve itself of its moral responsibility in the damage it is causing by continuously pouring money into Pakistan without demanding and ensuring accountability.
Looks like even Obama is also gradually subscribing to the myopic approach that US embraced for the last four decades vis-a-vis India and Pakistan. India needs no sympathy from US. It needs US to be fair and firm in its dealings with Pakistan and India. Looks like this is not going to happen
— Vish, UK
Recommend Recommended by 21 Readers
20.
May 19, 2009 7:12 am
Link
There is nothing India can do in Pakistan. They are a lot that grew up on poison fed daily that "Hindu" India is going to get them eventhough is Pakistan that started three wars. Pakistan can only validate its existence by proving that a multicultural multireligious India is not feasible. And there are its partners..us and China pumping billions and arming them to the teeth despite knowing that they help Al Qaeda and Taliban will be nourished.
Funny reading this editorial-- our government is contemplating billions more aid, and at the same time asking that India refrain! Why? So that the "freedom fighters" won't send another plane to New York? Are Indian lives cheap?
Throughout history, we seem to have sided with despots and dictators. When will we change? If you believe democracy is a good thing, then there are over a billion people that voted peacefully just now. How about a security council seat for India that is a 6th of humanity?
How about partnering with India in fixing up Pakistan and Afghanistan? America had always dared to take bold steps throughout history when compelled with moral problems. Let us get it done!
— Veetri, Phoenix, AZ
Recommend Recommended by 25 Readers
21.
May 19, 2009 7:12 am
Link
India's reelection of the government of Manmohan Singh, one of the world's most capable and prudent heads of government, is heartening. The fact that he is only the second Indian leader since independence to be reelected after serving a full term suggests that India may indeed be entering a phase of stable growth. That should appeal to those investing in the subcontinent’s future, and comfort those, like the United States, who are increasingly reliant on it as an ally. Additionally, the success of this exercise in democracy at such a large scale also resonates in countries like China, who have resolutely contended that such a system cannot work in nations of such complexity and scope.
To continue the discussion, please visit www.twitter.com/halwoods
— Hal Woods, Chicago, IL
Recommend Recommended by 18 Readers
22.
May 19, 2009 7:12 am
Link
It is past time the US understood its predicament in Pakistan. You can neither stop nor continue feeding the beast that controls Pakistan - its army. The former risks implosion of the country and the latter explosions worldwide. Sorry, India cannot help you out of this mess. You cannot lay the blame for Pakistan buying nukes out of US aid for development or fighting terrorism on India. Pakistan does not need more nukes to avoid the threat of India. Pakistani army needs them to scare the US into parting with its money, which will be used to perpetuate the feudal stranglehold over ordinary Pakistanis. Honestly, does anyone still believe that India seeks any of the extremist-ridden Pakistani territory?
Please learn not to mollycoddle dictatorships for short term gains next time you are revisiting policy. Tutorial one: Start with Saudi Arabia which I heard builds most Madrassas in Pakistan.
— SK, NY
Recommend Recommended by 28 Readers
23.
May 19, 2009 8:54 am
Link
Expecting India to play a role in stabilizing Pakistan in any manner, let alone through progress on Kashmir seems rather naive! Progress towards any solution on Kashmir is likely to cause serious internal problems for even a stable government in Pakistan, let alone the current lame-duck administration of Mr. Zardari. It's also important to understand that with most of India's neighbors, anti-India rhetoric and posturing is de rigeur for everybody in the political process - and more so in the case of Pakistan. Any attempt by India to get involved in "stabilizing" Pakistan would probably prove counter productive.
On a related note, the US Administration and policy wonks need to get real about the fundamental nature of the Pakistani State. 60 years of an Islamist foundational doctrine, virulent anti-Indianism, and 30 years of (american-sponsored) jihadism have given these ideologies deep roots in every facet of the state, and the transition that is being expected of them today requires that these very roots be torn from the ground.
The recent confrontation with the Taliban in Swat constitutes the first credible signal from the State of its willingness to transform itself and the US needs to hold the Pak Govt to this course.
The Indian Govt would be happy to move on Kashmir (as back channel negotiations on the subject with Musharraf were testament to), but the Pakistanis must necessarily abnegate recourse to terrorist proxies as instruments of state policy, and extradite known terrorist offenders currently claiming sanctuary there under the patronage of the intelligence services, before any Indian govt could reasonably reengage in a dialogue.
— Sreeram, Bangalore
Recommend Recommended by 3 Readers
24.
May 19, 2009 8:54 am
Link
This article shows naivete in discussing the region.
1. "Demand assurances" from pakistan? Who from, precisely? The President, who controls nothing? Or the Army, which took $10 Billion in the past to further their own interests? "Assurances" from any Pakistani institution means nothing.
2. "Persuade" Burma's regime? Are you aware that China and India are in competition for influence there, and that China is far ahead? That most of North Eastern Burma is full of chinese, and chinese currency is freely used there? India's interest in Burma are based on realpolitik vs China not on what the rest of the world wants vis a vis democracy etc.
— jetlagged, Northern Virginia
Recommend Recommended by 8 Readers
25.
May 19, 2009 8:54 am
Link
Oh dear. This editorial needs a translator well-versed in imperialese. I'll give some of it a go.
"[A]rguably the most dangerous country on earth" means "Oops, we gave billions to a country to help it oppress its own people, and now this seems to no longer work it turns out they also spent much of it on nukes instead of bombing villages. Whatever shall we do? Note: get out of other peoples' business is not a valid answer."
"Resolving issues over Kashmir" means "India and Pakistan should get their act together - but whatever you do, don't take the wishes of the people of Kashmir into account. That would set a bad precedent."
"India must assume its responsibilities" means "We need a local policeman for the Empire. India has just been volunteered."
— Christian Haesemeyer, Los Angeles
26.
May 19, 2009 8:54 am
Link
India should not deal with a state which has shown little regard to its citizen's basic rights to education and social empowerment. Washington's advice on engaging the leader of Pakistan should be voiced to the country which remains its strongest ally both economically and in terms of providing military hardware - China.
— Nitin, Wellington
Recommend Recommended by 2 Readers
27.
May 19, 2009 8:54 am
Link
Kashmir problem will be solved in no time if the US stops giving military aid to Pakistan. Pakistani governments of both civilian and military varieties are experts in fooling US into thinking that Pakistan is a US ally in whatever the US wants to accomplish in the region - a base fro US operations against USSR, a conduit for arms to fight Soviets or holding the line against Al Queda. Whatever the US policy, the army ends up with more weapons and gets enriched and to maintain it's position the army tells the Pakistani population that India is the enemy.
— Lordknow, Palo Alo, CA
Recommend Recommended by 2 Readers
28.
May 19, 2009 8:54 am
Link
The editorial indeed makes some valid points about India’s rightful regional role, yet it overlooks a major barrier. And that is the Pakistan’s army and ISI who benefits immensely by having India as a perpetual enemy. Their constant, and often unjustified, blackmail of the Pakistan’s populace by creating the specter of India’s unbridled aggression gives them justification for fleecing the Pakistan’s national budget. Thus any overtures by India, except for delivering the Kashmir on a silver plater, will not placate the two institutions that have held their own country, and now the world, hostage. And even after such an overture, given their record there is no guarantee that the Pakistan army and ISI will not find any reason not to continue the enmity. In fact, it may embolden these two institutions, just as making concessions to Taliban in Swat valley gave the Taliban encouragement to reach for more. Moreover, for the last 20 years, the Pakistan army and ISI have come to believe that the western nations and the US need the Pakistan army badly enough to let them extract their pound of flesh and still get away with much more. Amassing nuclear weapons while receiving billions of dollars from the US to allegedly fight a war on terror is an excellent example Pakistan army’s strategy. Twisting India’s arms to make concessions is no guarantee that the game that is being played for the last 20 years will change. Negotiating arms treaty to include China is a good suggestions but it should be separated from the India’s relations with Pakistan which should be strictly a bilateral issues. Mixing the two, although they are somewhat interrelated, is not advisable. Suggestion on broader talks on environment and water with Pakistan is indeed a good one since it directly helps the people of Pakistan, and an issue that India should take seriously.
— PK, Sacremento, CA
Recommend Recommended by 3 Readers
29.
May 19, 2009 8:54 am
Link
It is preposterous to suggest that India should initiate arms control when Pakistan is bulking up on fighter jets and nukes, ostensibly to fight the Taliban. The government should first get down to the task of taking care of the development of the country, driving growth and combating terrorism (both within and Pakistan sponsored)
— Jeejo, Bangalore
Recommend Recommended by 3 Readers
30.
May 19, 2009 8:54 am
Link
the indian congress's victory should enhance india's image in the world besides bringing stability to indian government for the next five years. most election observers expected a fragile coalition to emerge from the election. the thumping victory for prime minister manmohan singh has given him a second term, an event that has only occured once before in india's post-colonial history when jawaharlal nehru was re-elected.manmohan singh's government has promoted programs for the low income sections of indian society.the manmohan singh led congress government has actively tried to improve relations with the united states. although the new york times opposed the us-india nuclear deal, it was important for india to sign the deal and maintain it's credibility with the bush administration. to manmohan singh's credit, he was firm and determined and saw the deal through,even though his communist allies withdrew their support and his government almost collapsed. he is also viewed as a person of integrity.india's growth has slowed due to the global economic downturn.manmohan singh's past background and experience as an economist should serve india well.
india's voters ignored the talibanization in neighboring pakistan, and communal and divisive politics in electing a party that defends the country's secular values.
india is one of the top troop contributers to UN peacekeeping operations. kashmir's accession to india in '47 was legal and it's constitution is closely aligned with india's after the last 60 years.unlike pakistan which is an islamic country, indias people view themselves as a secular society and kashmir,a state that has both hindus and muslims, as an integral part of their country. india is one of the largest troop contributers to un peacekeepingg efforts and has partnered with the us in the efforts to rebuild afghanistan.
india faces daunting challenges including a large budget deficit and a need to modernize it's infrastructure.
the indian congress's win has increased hopes that economic reform will continue in india.it's communist allies opposed these reformsin recent years.however, india will have to proceed cautiously in opening it's market in view of the global downturn.
pakistan's nuclear and arms build up,and the mumbai attack last november are reminders of india's external challenges.
— amber, us
Recommend Recommended by 2 Readers
31.
May 19, 2009 8:54 am
Link
It is true that India has to assume greater role in Asian Subcontinent. But when it comes to Pakistan, we can not ignore the fact that Kashmir is not THE main problem, as it was impressed in the Editorial. Rather securing Pakistani state from Taliban and Separatists is the main issue. When it is not clear who exercises what influence in which part of the total Pakistani set-up (Government, Legislature, Armed forces, Judiciary and Media)with whom should India engage regarding Kashmir? What assurances can be given from the negotiating party that the rest of the stake holders agree? Please, let us all give Pakistani state time to set house in-order and then bring upon them additional burdens.
One at a time - Brick by Brick, a long lasting solution.
— Srikumar, Mumbai
Recommend Recommended by 3 Readers
32.
May 19, 2009 8:54 am
Link
The tone of the editorial is rather condescending. As the saying goes, for a person with a hammer the whole world seems like a nail. Not a single line in this editorial is really about India but more about protecting American's interests and ambitions - for example "...use its considerable trade clout with Iran, Sudan and Myanmar to curb Tehran’s nuclear program, end the genocide in Darfur and press Myanmar’s junta to expand human rights". Can you please add preparing a venti tazo chai-latte with soy milk for President Obama to the list?
I am not here to suggest that none of this is important but please we have enough problems on our own. We are not sure how the recession would play out in India, what to do with farmer suicides, how to have an inclusive growth, what to do with the Maoist problem and growing terrorist strikes and ways to protect the secular fabric of our nation. The people of India voted on these issues more than anything and I am really glad that the people of India gave an almost decisive mandate for a sincere and hardworking man in Dr. Manmohan Singh. India should engage with the world on its terms and conditions and when it chooses and not at the bidding of anyone.
— KM, India
Recommend Recommended by 13 Readers
33.
May 19, 2009 8:54 am
Link
'India's challenges' reads a lot like 'What the US would like India to do'. How about the real challenges: economic reform and lifting hundreds of millions out of poverty, the environment and securing natural resources for future growth? Yes, Pakistan is important, but India seems to have limited ability to affect outcomes in its disintegrating neighbour.
— shaloub, Toronto
Recommend Recommended by 10 Readers
34.
May 19, 2009 9:00 am
Link
Well, I suppose Manmohan Singh and the South Block mandarins in New Delhi should profusely thank the NYT editorial for their generous sermon. What better way could one celebrate the successful conclusion of the largest democratic exercise in human history that led to significant upsets (e.g., the routing of the Communists in Bengal).
Note the number of times "should" and "must" are used. Such patronizing editorials, unfortunately, confirm that the reputation of the arrogant American is often well-earned.
Such a patronizing laundry list of action items would be laughable but is instead disturbing coming from a prestigious newspaper. Do we Americans have a better grasp of what's good for India than the Indians themselves?
It's interesting that NYT now considers Pakistani to be "arguably the most dangerous country on earth". India had made this point over a decade ago. Unfortunately, it took another 8 years after 9/11 for this thought to dawn to our mainstream media.
Let me offer an alternative view. There is absolutely no reason to believe that a stable Pakistan is in India's interest. A stable Pakistan is one ruled by the Army, with arms purchases funded by our taxpayer money, and planning and executing mischief against India.
The dismantling of the Pakistani nation state into smaller states is in the best interest of India in particular and for the stability of South Asia in general. I would assume that India would do her best to exercise influence in Afghanistan to ensure that Pakistani nuclear weapons would not be stationed there out of range of Indian Air Force (the "strategic depth" sought by the Pakistani Army). If the Indian administration has any strategy, it would be to assiduously work towards breaking up Pakistan.
I suppose it would take another decade for NYT to come to a similar conclusion that a feudal state devoid of a national identity cannot be propped up by foreign handouts and a common dislike of India.
Till then we will listen to the sermons over morning coffee :)
— Ajit, Sunnyvale, CA
Recommend Recommended by 11 Readers
35.
May 19, 2009 9:00 am
Link
and Srilanka...India in spite of fatal losses (e.g., Rajiv Gandhi) has failed to address Tamils concern in Sri Lanka for over 25 yrs now. Its initiative for peace keeping forces and to aid Sril Lankan military would not have been necessary had India has supported the cause of Tamils in Srilanka. In these post-mortem efforts, Indian government stance has also earned the wrath of its own people (in TamilNadu).
— Balaji Raman, Singapore
Editorial in New York Times : India’s Challenges, Also Readers' Comments
Published: May 18, 2009
The Indian National Congress party cannot afford a prolonged celebration after its overwhelming election victory. Much of the postvote analysis has focused on the daunting domestic agenda. But now that Congress has a stable mandate — and can shuck a fractious coalition — it is time for India to exercise the kind of regional and global leadership expected of a rising power.
It can start with neighboring Pakistan, arguably the most dangerous country on earth. A report in The Times on Monday reminds us just how dangerous: The United States believes Islamabad is rapidly expanding a nuclear arsenal thought to already contain 80 to 100 weapons.
We have consistently supported appropriate military aid and increased economic aid to help Pakistan fight the Taliban and Al Qaeda, strengthen democratic institutions and improve the life of its people. Squandering precious resources on nuclear bombs is disgraceful when Pakistan is troubled by economic crisis and facing an insurgency that threatens its very existence.
Trying to keep up to 100 bombs from extremists is hard enough; expanding the nuclear stockpile makes the challenge worse. Officials in Washington are legitimately asking whether billions of dollars in proposed new assistance might be diverted to Pakistan’s nuclear program. They should demand assurances it will not be.
India is essential to what Pakistan will do. New Delhi exercised welcome restraint when it did not attack Pakistan after the November 2008 attacks in Mumbai by Pakistani-based extremists. But tensions remain high, and the Pakistani Army continues to view India as its main adversary. India should take the lead in initiating arms control talks with Pakistan and China. It should also declare its intention to stop producing nuclear weapons fuel, even before a proposed multinational treaty is negotiated. That would provide leverage for Washington and others to exhort Pakistan to do the same.
It is past time for India — stronger both economically and in international stature — to find a way to resolve tensions with Pakistan over Kashmir. If that festering sore cannot be addressed directly, then — as Stephen P. Cohen, a South Asia expert at the Brookings Institution, suggests — broader regional talks on environmental and water issues might be an interim way to find common ground. Ignoring Kashmir is no longer an option.
India has played a constructive role in helping rebuild Afghanistan, but it must take steps to allay Islamabad’s concerns that this is a plan to encircle Pakistan. It should foster regional trade with Pakistan and Afghanistan. More broadly, India must help to revive world trade talks by opening its markets. It could use its considerable trade clout with Iran, Sudan and Myanmar to curb Tehran’s nuclear program, end the genocide in Darfur and press Myanmar’s junta to expand human rights.
India is the dominant power in South Asia, but it has been hesitant to assume its responsibilities. The Congress Party has to do better — starting with Pakistan.
The Indian National Congress party cannot afford a prolonged celebration after its overwhelming election victory. Much of the postvote analysis has focused on the daunting domestic agenda. But now that Congress has a stable mandate — and can shuck a fractious coalition — it is time for India to exercise the kind of regional and global leadership expected of a rising power.
It can start with neighboring Pakistan, arguably the most dangerous country on earth. A report in The Times on Monday reminds us just how dangerous: The United States believes Islamabad is rapidly expanding a nuclear arsenal thought to already contain 80 to 100 weapons.
We have consistently supported appropriate military aid and increased economic aid to help Pakistan fight the Taliban and Al Qaeda, strengthen democratic institutions and improve the life of its people. Squandering precious resources on nuclear bombs is disgraceful when Pakistan is troubled by economic crisis and facing an insurgency that threatens its very existence.
Trying to keep up to 100 bombs from extremists is hard enough; expanding the nuclear stockpile makes the challenge worse. Officials in Washington are legitimately asking whether billions of dollars in proposed new assistance might be diverted to Pakistan’s nuclear program. They should demand assurances it will not be.
India is essential to what Pakistan will do. New Delhi exercised welcome restraint when it did not attack Pakistan after the November 2008 attacks in Mumbai by Pakistani-based extremists. But tensions remain high, and the Pakistani Army continues to view India as its main adversary. India should take the lead in initiating arms control talks with Pakistan and China. It should also declare its intention to stop producing nuclear weapons fuel, even before a proposed multinational treaty is negotiated. That would provide leverage for Washington and others to exhort Pakistan to do the same.
It is past time for India — stronger both economically and in international stature — to find a way to resolve tensions with Pakistan over Kashmir. If that festering sore cannot be addressed directly, then — as Stephen P. Cohen, a South Asia expert at the Brookings Institution, suggests — broader regional talks on environmental and water issues might be an interim way to find common ground. Ignoring Kashmir is no longer an option.
India has played a constructive role in helping rebuild Afghanistan, but it must take steps to allay Islamabad’s concerns that this is a plan to encircle Pakistan. It should foster regional trade with Pakistan and Afghanistan. More broadly, India must help to revive world trade talks by opening its markets. It could use its considerable trade clout with Iran, Sudan and Myanmar to curb Tehran’s nuclear program, end the genocide in Darfur and press Myanmar’s junta to expand human rights.
India is the dominant power in South Asia, but it has been hesitant to assume its responsibilities. The Congress Party has to do better — starting with Pakistan.
Tuesday, May 12, 2009
Musharraf and our national shame
DMajor Major General Mrinal Suman, AVSM, VSM, PhD, commanded an Engineer Regiment on the Siachen Glacier, the most hostile battlefield in the world. A highly qualified officer (B Tech, MA (Public Administration), MSc (Defence Studies) and a Doctorate in Public Administration), General Suman was also the Task Force Commander at Pokhran and was responsible for designing and sinking shafts for the nuclear tests of May 1998.
One of the most disgusting sights seen in recent times was media coverage of General Pervez Musharraf's visit to India. A leading magazine had invited him as a distinguished speaker.
It was repugnant to see media personnel attempting to outdo each other in fawning over him. He was treated as a peace loving and moderate leader who is a well wisher of India. One TV personality went to the extent of eulogizing him as a beacon of peace for the sub-continent. Another correspondent had no hesitation in calling him as the most erudite Pakistani leader who is held in high esteem in India.
Not one media personality questioned him for initiating Kargil aggression, lest he be offended. No one cared to ask him about numerous Indian prisoners of war rotting in Pakistani jails. Nor was he asked to explain reasons for his failure to stop terrorist training camps and infiltration of jehadis into India. Worst, he was never castigated for the most barbaric and inhuman treatment meted out to Lt Saurabh Kalia and his patrol.
One wonders what thoughts must have passed through the minds of the parents of the late Lt Saurabh Kalia when they saw Indian media going overboard in lauding Musharraf as a sagacious leader and a man whom India can trust. Lt Saurabh Kalia of 4 JAT Regiment was just 22 years old when he was captured by the Pakistani Army on 15 May 1999 along with five other Indian soldiers. Saurabh's patrol was on the Indian side of Line of Control and was the first to detect Pak intrusions in the Kargil area. The patrol was kept in captivity for three weeks and their bodies were handed over to India on 9 June 1999. The state of their bodies bore testimony to the brutal torture which they had been subjected to.
The Pakistanis had indulged in dastardly acts of inflicting burn injuries on them with cigarettes, piercing their ears with hot rods, removing their eyes before puncturing them and breaking most of the bones and teeth. They even chopped off various limbs and private organs of the hapless Indian soldiers besides inflicting unimaginable physical and mental torture. After 22 days of torture, the brave soldiers were ultimately shot dead. A detailed post-mortem report is with the Indian Army.
Pakistan is a signatory to Geneva Convention that governs treatment of Prisoners of War. Article 13 mandates - "Prisoners of war must at all times be humanely treated. Any unlawful act or omission by the Detaining Power causing death or seriously endangering the health of a prisoner of war in its custody is prohibited, and will be regarded as a serious breach of the present Convention. In particular, no prisoner of war may be subjected to physical mutilation or to medical or scientific experiments of any kind which are not justified by the medical, dental or hospital treatment of the prisoner concerned and carried out in his interest." Article 17 further stipulates that no physical or mental torture, nor any other form of coercion, may be inflicted on prisoners of war to secure from them information of any kind whatever.
Musharaf was never asked by the media to explain as to why the perpetrators of such heinous acts have not been brought to book to date. But, why blame media alone? Shockingly, inhuman and dastardly ill-treatment of gallant Indian soldiers has not stirred the conscious of India as a self-respecting country. The Government's response has been totally muted and apathetic. No political party has considered it worthwhile to pressurise the Government to demand explanation from Pakistan or take up the issue with international bodies for crimes against humanity. Although Indian human rights activists and bodies never tire themselves of crying hoarse over trivial and even concocted allegations against the Indian security forces, they did not find the abominable conduct of Pakistani soldiers worth condemning. As regards the Indian public, initial anger, indignation and revulsion have given way to indifference.
Instead of hauling Musharraf before international law commissions for crimes against humanity, India allows him to roam free in India to propagate his anti-Indian views. Even in the recent conclave, he humiliated India by calling terrorists as freedom fighters. It was nauseating, to say the least, to watch the media grovel before a vicious and remorseless enemy. Worse, the media scrupulously avoided asking him any discomfiting question, lest he be embarrassed.
Great nations are distinguished by their self-confidence and self-respect. India fares miserably on both counts. Had such treatment been meted out to Israeli soldiers, Israel would have made Pakistan pay dearly for it. In case US soldiers were brutalized in this manner, the US would have obtained custody of the guilty and tried them in the US for war crimes.
Our response to a matter of national shame has been indifferent and apathetic. It is only a soft state like India that utters a few protesting murmurs and thereafter receives the main perpetrator as a guest of India. It is inconceivable how Indian media could honour a man who dishonoured its soldiers.
Inviting Musharraf to participate in conclave of statesmen and thereafter giving him prime time coverage should make every Indian hang his head in shame.
A soldier is always prepared for the supreme sacrifice. Despite the immense pain of losing a son/husband/father, the family members of every martyr draw consolation from the belief that dying for the country is the ultimate honour for a soldier. However, they expect countrymen to remember and value their contribution to nation's security. Soldiers draw strength from the recognition received from their countrymen.
Special Series: Unsung Heroes : Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3 | Part 4
When the nation shows apathy to the fate of Saurabh's party or for the soldiers in Pakistani jails who are still clinging to the hope that India would secure their release, the complete soldier fraternity and their families start wondering whether the country cares for them at all or even whether it is worth dying for it. The nation owes an answer to Saurabh's and the parents of other martyrs for its abject apathy and failure to punish the guilty. A nation has to prove itself worthy of its soldiers' supreme sacrifice.
The glorification of Musharaf has certainly insulted the memory of innumerable soldiers who died for India's future. The media needs to do serious introspection. Not withstanding its desperation for sensational news, Indian media must remember that it owes allegiance to India and its interests.
Major General Mrinal Suman, (retd) AVSM, VSM, PhD directs the Defence Acquisition Management Course for Confederation of Indian Industry and heads its Defence Technical Assessment and Advisory Service. A prolific writer, he is often consulted by policy makers and the Parliamentary Committee on Defence, and is regularly invited to address various industrial chambers in India and abroad. The views expressed here are his own.)
One of the most disgusting sights seen in recent times was media coverage of General Pervez Musharraf's visit to India. A leading magazine had invited him as a distinguished speaker.
It was repugnant to see media personnel attempting to outdo each other in fawning over him. He was treated as a peace loving and moderate leader who is a well wisher of India. One TV personality went to the extent of eulogizing him as a beacon of peace for the sub-continent. Another correspondent had no hesitation in calling him as the most erudite Pakistani leader who is held in high esteem in India.
Not one media personality questioned him for initiating Kargil aggression, lest he be offended. No one cared to ask him about numerous Indian prisoners of war rotting in Pakistani jails. Nor was he asked to explain reasons for his failure to stop terrorist training camps and infiltration of jehadis into India. Worst, he was never castigated for the most barbaric and inhuman treatment meted out to Lt Saurabh Kalia and his patrol.
One wonders what thoughts must have passed through the minds of the parents of the late Lt Saurabh Kalia when they saw Indian media going overboard in lauding Musharraf as a sagacious leader and a man whom India can trust. Lt Saurabh Kalia of 4 JAT Regiment was just 22 years old when he was captured by the Pakistani Army on 15 May 1999 along with five other Indian soldiers. Saurabh's patrol was on the Indian side of Line of Control and was the first to detect Pak intrusions in the Kargil area. The patrol was kept in captivity for three weeks and their bodies were handed over to India on 9 June 1999. The state of their bodies bore testimony to the brutal torture which they had been subjected to.
The Pakistanis had indulged in dastardly acts of inflicting burn injuries on them with cigarettes, piercing their ears with hot rods, removing their eyes before puncturing them and breaking most of the bones and teeth. They even chopped off various limbs and private organs of the hapless Indian soldiers besides inflicting unimaginable physical and mental torture. After 22 days of torture, the brave soldiers were ultimately shot dead. A detailed post-mortem report is with the Indian Army.
Pakistan is a signatory to Geneva Convention that governs treatment of Prisoners of War. Article 13 mandates - "Prisoners of war must at all times be humanely treated. Any unlawful act or omission by the Detaining Power causing death or seriously endangering the health of a prisoner of war in its custody is prohibited, and will be regarded as a serious breach of the present Convention. In particular, no prisoner of war may be subjected to physical mutilation or to medical or scientific experiments of any kind which are not justified by the medical, dental or hospital treatment of the prisoner concerned and carried out in his interest." Article 17 further stipulates that no physical or mental torture, nor any other form of coercion, may be inflicted on prisoners of war to secure from them information of any kind whatever.
Musharaf was never asked by the media to explain as to why the perpetrators of such heinous acts have not been brought to book to date. But, why blame media alone? Shockingly, inhuman and dastardly ill-treatment of gallant Indian soldiers has not stirred the conscious of India as a self-respecting country. The Government's response has been totally muted and apathetic. No political party has considered it worthwhile to pressurise the Government to demand explanation from Pakistan or take up the issue with international bodies for crimes against humanity. Although Indian human rights activists and bodies never tire themselves of crying hoarse over trivial and even concocted allegations against the Indian security forces, they did not find the abominable conduct of Pakistani soldiers worth condemning. As regards the Indian public, initial anger, indignation and revulsion have given way to indifference.
Instead of hauling Musharraf before international law commissions for crimes against humanity, India allows him to roam free in India to propagate his anti-Indian views. Even in the recent conclave, he humiliated India by calling terrorists as freedom fighters. It was nauseating, to say the least, to watch the media grovel before a vicious and remorseless enemy. Worse, the media scrupulously avoided asking him any discomfiting question, lest he be embarrassed.
Great nations are distinguished by their self-confidence and self-respect. India fares miserably on both counts. Had such treatment been meted out to Israeli soldiers, Israel would have made Pakistan pay dearly for it. In case US soldiers were brutalized in this manner, the US would have obtained custody of the guilty and tried them in the US for war crimes.
Our response to a matter of national shame has been indifferent and apathetic. It is only a soft state like India that utters a few protesting murmurs and thereafter receives the main perpetrator as a guest of India. It is inconceivable how Indian media could honour a man who dishonoured its soldiers.
Inviting Musharraf to participate in conclave of statesmen and thereafter giving him prime time coverage should make every Indian hang his head in shame.
A soldier is always prepared for the supreme sacrifice. Despite the immense pain of losing a son/husband/father, the family members of every martyr draw consolation from the belief that dying for the country is the ultimate honour for a soldier. However, they expect countrymen to remember and value their contribution to nation's security. Soldiers draw strength from the recognition received from their countrymen.
Special Series: Unsung Heroes : Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3 | Part 4
When the nation shows apathy to the fate of Saurabh's party or for the soldiers in Pakistani jails who are still clinging to the hope that India would secure their release, the complete soldier fraternity and their families start wondering whether the country cares for them at all or even whether it is worth dying for it. The nation owes an answer to Saurabh's and the parents of other martyrs for its abject apathy and failure to punish the guilty. A nation has to prove itself worthy of its soldiers' supreme sacrifice.
The glorification of Musharaf has certainly insulted the memory of innumerable soldiers who died for India's future. The media needs to do serious introspection. Not withstanding its desperation for sensational news, Indian media must remember that it owes allegiance to India and its interests.
Major General Mrinal Suman, (retd) AVSM, VSM, PhD directs the Defence Acquisition Management Course for Confederation of Indian Industry and heads its Defence Technical Assessment and Advisory Service. A prolific writer, he is often consulted by policy makers and the Parliamentary Committee on Defence, and is regularly invited to address various industrial chambers in India and abroad. The views expressed here are his own.)
Thursday, May 7, 2009
New York Times reader comment on India going to the polls, "The world's biggest exercise in democracy"
April 15, 2009 It is truly the greatest show on Earth, an ode to a diverse and democratic ethos, where 700 million + of humanity vote, providing their small part in directing their ancient civilization into the future. It is no less impressive when done in a neighborhood which includes de-stabilizing and violent Pakistan, China, and Burma.
Its challenges are immense, more so probably than anywhere else, particularly in development and fending off terrorism -- but considering these challenges and its neighbors, it is even more astounding that the most diverse nation on Earth, with hundreds of languages, all religions and cultures, is not only surviving, but thriving.
The nation where Hinduism, Buddhism, Jainism, and Sikhism were born, which is the second largest Muslim nation on Earth; where Christianity has existed for 2000 years; where the oldest Jewish synagogues and Jewish communities have resided since the Romans burnt their 2nd temple; where the Dalai Lama and the Tibetan government in exile reside; where the Zorostrians from Persia have thrived since being thrown out of their ancient homeland; where Armenians and Syrians and many others have to come live; where the Paris-based OECD said was the largest economy on Earth 1500 of the last 2000 years, including the 2nd largest only 200 years ago; where 3 Muslim Presidents have been elected, where a Sikh is Prime Minister and the head of the ruling party a Catholic Italian woman, where the President is also a woman, succeeding a Muslim President who as a rocket scientist was a hero in the nation; where a booming economy is lifting 40 million out of poverty each year and is expected to have the majority of its population in the middle class, already equal to the entire US population, by 2025; where its optimism and vibrancy is manifested in its movies, arts, economic growth, and voting, despite all the incredible challenges and hardships; where all the great powers are vying for influence, as it itself finds its place in the world.
Where all of this is happening, is India, and as greater than 1/10 of humanity gets ready to vote, it is an inspiration to all the World.
V Mitchell, New York, NY
Its challenges are immense, more so probably than anywhere else, particularly in development and fending off terrorism -- but considering these challenges and its neighbors, it is even more astounding that the most diverse nation on Earth, with hundreds of languages, all religions and cultures, is not only surviving, but thriving.
The nation where Hinduism, Buddhism, Jainism, and Sikhism were born, which is the second largest Muslim nation on Earth; where Christianity has existed for 2000 years; where the oldest Jewish synagogues and Jewish communities have resided since the Romans burnt their 2nd temple; where the Dalai Lama and the Tibetan government in exile reside; where the Zorostrians from Persia have thrived since being thrown out of their ancient homeland; where Armenians and Syrians and many others have to come live; where the Paris-based OECD said was the largest economy on Earth 1500 of the last 2000 years, including the 2nd largest only 200 years ago; where 3 Muslim Presidents have been elected, where a Sikh is Prime Minister and the head of the ruling party a Catholic Italian woman, where the President is also a woman, succeeding a Muslim President who as a rocket scientist was a hero in the nation; where a booming economy is lifting 40 million out of poverty each year and is expected to have the majority of its population in the middle class, already equal to the entire US population, by 2025; where its optimism and vibrancy is manifested in its movies, arts, economic growth, and voting, despite all the incredible challenges and hardships; where all the great powers are vying for influence, as it itself finds its place in the world.
Where all of this is happening, is India, and as greater than 1/10 of humanity gets ready to vote, it is an inspiration to all the World.
V Mitchell, New York, NY
Wednesday, May 6, 2009
Facts about Bofors case: Shy Rao, shameless Singh ! & Public Views !
S Gurumurthy
First Published : 05 May 2009 01:42:00 AM IST
The Quattrocchi case is an embarrassment for the Government of India... The court says we do not have a strong case”. It is not Antonia Maino (aka Sonia) Gandhi defending her Italian friend. It is Prime Minister Manmohan Singh as if she had appointed him as the advocate to plead for Q. “It’s not a good reflection on the Indian legal system,” says the PM moved by compassion for Q, “that we harass people while the world says we have no case.” Singh, who was with the South Commission on a comfortable salary and perks when the Bofors scam rocked the country, seems totally unaware of the facts of the Bofors scam. Here is a short trailer of the scam.
The Bofors scam — pay-off for India’s gun purchase deal with Sweden — broke out in 1987. A third of the Indians living today were not yet born then; and a fourth of the Indians living then are no more alive today. So some history needs to be recalled here. First, the Bofors payoff was exposed by the media and the Rajiv government went all out to suppress the exposure. Including the payoff of $36.5 million to Q, the Bofors deal contemplated three streams of payoff totalling $250 million. Persistent investigations by the media and the CBI brought out the involvement of Q in the gun deal.
The closeness of Q and his wife Maria to Sonia family was always well known.
The Sonia and Maria families spent their weekends and annual holidays together.
They left one’s children in the custody of the other when going out of station. So intense was their relationship. The media found that some $7.3 million from Bofors AB had found its way into Q’s secret bank accounts. Facts began to tumble out testifying that it was fee to Q for swinging the $1.2 billion gun deal for the Swedish gun maker.
Here is how Q got the deal for Bofors.
The Rajiv Gandhi government could not decide for a long time what gun to buy — the British, Austrian or Swedish. The two brokers engaged by Bofors could not expedite the deal. Suddenly, in the second half of 1985, AE Services (AES), a shell company, entered the deal with this offer to Bofors: “Look. If we get you the deal by March 31, 1986, give us a fee of three per cent. If not, don’t pay.” Bofors accepted the offer and signed up with the AES shell on October 15, 1985. Unless Bofors knew that the man behind AES had had the clout to get it done from the Rajiv government, it would never have signed with a shell company.
And AES shell did get the Rajiv government to sign the contract with Bofors on March 22, 1986 — seven days ahead of the target date of March 31, 1986. Within six months, AES got the first tranche of its fee of $7.3 million. Proof emerged slowly that this money finally went to Q, showing he was the man behind the shell.
■ Bofors remitted on September 3, 1986, $7.3 million into AES account number 18051-53 in Nordfinanz Bank, Zurich.
This equalled 20 per cent of the three per cent bribe of $36.5 millions due to AES.
■ Two weeks later (on September 16, 1986) AES delivered $7 million into account number 254.561.60W in the same bank in the name of Colbar Investments — a company controlled by Q and Maria.
■ In April 1987, the Swedish Radio broke the news of bribes in Bofors deal with India. Later, in June 1988, the media published authoritative documents seized by the Swedish police which established the payoff. By now, Bofors scam had become a huge national issue.
■ Forthwith Q and Maria hurriedly shifted their loot, grown with interest, from Geneva to Channel Islands, to New York to Austria. First, on July 25, 1988 $7.9 million moved from Colbar to account number 488.320.60X of Wetelsen Overseas SA, in UBS, Geneva. Next, on May 21, 1990, $9.2 million moved from Wetelson to account number 123983 of IIDCL, Ansbacher, St Peter Port, Guernsey (Channel Islands). Later, on June 5, 1990, $2.4 million channelled into code-named account ‘Robusta’ in Banque Karfinco SA from Swiss Bank Corp, New York. Afterwards, on June 12, 1990, $5.3 million was transferred to code-named accounts ‘Arabica’, ‘Robusta’ and ‘Luxor’ in Austria from Swiss Bank accounts in Geneva.
■ Within six days of the Swiss government giving these details to India in 1993, Q slipped out of India and turned a fugitive, thanks to the Narasimha Rao government helping him to run away.
■ Later, in June 2003, Interpol found that Q and Maria had two accounts, bearing numbers 5A5151516L and 5A5151516M in the London branch of the Swiss bank BSI AG with Euros three million and $1 million.
They were frozen on CBI’s request.
British courts later repeatedly turned down Quattrocchi’s several appeals to de-freeze the accounts.
■ But, on December 22, 2005, the Congressled UPA government U-turned. H R Bharadwaj, the law minister, got the additional solicitor general of India, B Dutta, to go to London to do the dirty job of releasing the amounts.
Can anyone say now that Q is innocent and he just received some charity of $7.3 million from Bofors? Yet the Sonia-led government allowed Q to smuggle the bribe from the frozen accounts. All that the CBI asks of Q is this: Come to India and answer these questions — why Bofors paid him the money; did it relate to the gun deal; what is his relation with Sonia family, AE Services, Colbar Investments and the coded and numbered bank accounts through which the payoff has finally reached him.
Why not Sonia Gandhi just ask him to appear before the court and prove his innocence? Why does she, on the contrary, abet his refusal to present himself before courts in India? It is clear that she will not ask him. Why? Here is the answer: unless Sonia protects Q here, he will not protect her outside. The stakes seem to be too high.
QED: Manmohan Singh today does what Sonia wants like Narasimha Rao did then what she wanted. Yet, there is a difference between how the two obliged her. Rao felt shy to do what she wanted. So he did it stealthily. Singh does what she wants openly and shamelessly. Even, a Sonia family retainer like H R Bharadwaj feels shy to own up the shameless withdrawal of the Red Corner Notice on Q; but the PM owns it proudly. Singh is shameless about what Rao used to feel shy. Why? Unlike Rao, Singh is not an elected prime minister but a nominated one; he is not chosen by democratic process, but selected by the dynasty; he is not backed by the people, but backed by the family. So the shift from shyness to shamelessness, from Rao to Singh
comment@gurumurthy.net
About the author:
S Gurumurthy is a well-known commentator on political and economic issues
Public Views :
Indian Hindu said down below "MMS is the retainer of the private limited family company under the name INC run by mother, son and daughter. What else to expect from MMS. Winston Churchill rightly said that the Indians do not deserve freedom." I am surprised at his inference. Clearly, Churchill was a silly guy to make that statement. What is MMS's servitute good to do with Indians not deserving freedom. The death blow for Indian democracy was given by MK Gandhi when he did not respect people mandate and asked Patel to step down for the sake of Nehru. Though we call India a democracy, it is no where close to democracy - for the people?? of the people?? by the people??? Congress has left the majority poor and illeterate to hijack the elections.
By Sathish
5/6/2009 8:27:00 PM
I wonder why people call MMS a good man. I don't see any good quality in him.
By Sathish
5/6/2009 8:20:00 PM
We christian bas**tards are anti Hindu, anti Indian and are ordered to condemn patriotic Indian's articles by our church and our virgin born fake Jesus christ.
By Tonyt
5/6/2009 8:15:00 PM
Looks like the christian pedophile priests are in to commenting unsing hijada names like debator or even Hindu names. These christian fu**ckers lick the cunt of Sonia and write all nonsense instead of arguing. These unfortunate christian slaves are a pain in the world’s ass. These assholes are brainwashed, in CIA funded Sunday schools to learn English and study a fake religion called Christianity created by a criminal in the fourth centurty. These love oozing animals have eliminated races and cultures with pure genocide and slavery. These christian communal pigs invade all forum like this with abusive comments on commentators, which their genetic nature. As these christian are the rape products of Europeans. These christian bastard who use bombs and explosives in NE have no shame in proclaiming love for humans. These sodomy christians say they are not communals but give the admissions to the state funded colleges only if the hindus convert.
By The debater
5/6/2009 8:07:00 PM
Sonia put her dog Manmohan on the orders of CIA. Rao employed the dog Manmohan on the orders of CIA. For a dog of Sonia eating her shit is very pleasant experience. Unfortunately this Sonia shit eating dog Manmohan is a spy and is detrimental to India. The christian congress party is shameless and consists of all US spies. The next generation of this Italian pro is the gang rapist Rahul Gandhi who will do proud any Delhi rapist. When India is full of Jaichand like Vajpayee who changed the law to allow this Italian pro to stand for election, then what is so great about withdrawing a red corner notice.
By v Subramanian
5/6/2009 7:54:00 PM
MMS is the retainer of the private limited family company under the name INC run by mother, son and daughter. What else to expect from MMS. Winston Churchill rightly said that the Indians do not deserve freedom. After 62 years, the servility of Indians to a family which stole the name of Gandhi through an affidavit with the advice and connivance of the Great Mahatma is bafling. Churchill was prophetic indeed.
By Indian Hindu
5/6/2009 7:33:00 PM
Whenever some comments are made about the dynasty, petticoatwalas immediately pounce upon the person.
By v subramanian
5/6/2009 6:29:00 PM
Looks like the Chaddiwalas have unleashed an entire army of brainwashed, shakha-bred,venom-spitting communal pigs on this forum. the article is about Bofors scam and how conveniently these low-life scums have turned it into a minority-bashing theatre, one can just see here. Chaddiwalas have mastered the art of taking literally any topic on earth and then turn into a communal diatribe. Well trained!
By The debater
5/6/2009 5:45:00 PM
On the one hand, Obama gives millions of dollars as rehabilitation package and on the otherexpresses concern for the Americans suffering because of recession. If he is short of money, why cannot he cancel and stop all allocations made to foreign countries by his predecessors as well as by him for conversions throughout the world and redirect the amount to poor Americans instead of feeding the already overfed NGOs and the religious brokers in the country. Protecting Americans is a serious matter than promoting religious hatred and engineering religious defections and redefections in addition to allowing the religious brokers to amss more fixed and current assets from out of the funds allotted which Obama andhis audience should understand. Are there some senators with some common sense to listen to my suggestion if they are really concerned for American welfare.
By subramanian
5/6/2009 3:53:00 PM
Continued..... Because of the psuedo secularist in India, these things are happening. No wonder if Hindusism (A way of Life) vanishes in the years to come! od save us!!
By giri
5/6/2009 11:32:00 AM
Dr. Singh's shamelessness was evident when he apologised to Sikhs for what happened in 1984 after Indira Gandhi's assassination even though he was in no way connected to the gory incidents. His shamelessness was evident when he did not resign when his 'sub contractors' arranged to purchase confidence votes and the wads of currency notes were displayed in Lok Sabha during the confidence vote on nuclear deal, and now his endorsement of the letting of 'Q ' because of the latters proximity to Sonia. One can wake up a sleeping man and not who pretends to be sleeping . He has overtaken Zail Singh, in subservience. No wonder, after he is ousted from power, he might be nominated for the highest civilian award of Italy, whtever it may be worth for this ' exemplary display of loyalty ' to his Italian boss .
By Karan
5/6/2009 11:28:00 AM
Mr. Vikarm Phadke, what else do you expect from a person who belongs to a religion that does not respect other religions? The very fact that they indulge in conversion shows a. They are insecure about their own religion b. They do not respect other religions at all. To support these idiots, we have many political leaders who are driving this country to hell!. If some one decides to convert on his/her own, we have no objection. Every one has one's own choice! What amazes me is they say they are converting people for their betterment! India had stalwarts like Gandhi, Baba Amte, Vinobha Bhave etc, who never bothered to know about the religion of people to serve them!. It's unfortunate that our culture is fast vanishing! In our country if the income of a temple exceeds a particular figure it gets acquired by government & thoe priests get paid peanuts! The same is not applicable for a Mosque or a chruch. Most of these monies are being used for conversion. Because of the psuedo secula
By giri
5/6/2009 11:20:00 AM
This is such a nice article. Very happy to read it. I hope these voters who vote for Rs 500 and elect such boneless creatures to power realise it atleast once in their life time. They are too much in dark that they cannot be brought out. Mr.Gurumurthy writes in Tuklak also. But i wonder how many read it in states like Tamil Nadu even if it is a Tamil magazine. Most of the population are behind the 1Re Kumkumam run by Kolaingnar family and their TV channels. When will they change? Praying sincerely that I dont end up seeing Congressmen faces atlest for next 5 yrs on TV as ministers at the centre. God save our country!!
By Raj
5/6/2009 10:07:00 AM
It is the last resort of a frustrated person to use foul language, when one does not have any logic, reasoning or conviction of truth. Thats what Mr. Tony has done. May be he is worried that the dirty things of Sonia Antonio Maino, Quattrocchi, and their friends are coming out again and again. May be he wants to use foul language because he he sympathises with the aforementioned "most dignified" people because he is their co-religionist. Sorry for him and for all people who think that there is only One God, One Prophet, One Holy Book, only One Way to God. These are the people who have created the ruckus since nearly so many centuries, starting from the first, continuing vigorously from the fifth and getting more danger afterwards. I wish that our Mother Earth and its inhabitants (humans and all others included, equally) survive these zealots.
By vikram phadke
5/6/2009 8:48:00 AM
BJP coolie Gyrumurthy, get a life. Maybe a Hindu Thief.
By Tonyt
5/6/2009 7:29:00 AM
Except for Dr. Ajay, every thinking Indian knows that THERE is ONLY ONE POWER CENTRE in Congress and that is the FIRST family of Congress. All others are PROXY ACTORS, who can NOT even speak or act independently, as that is the FIRST CONDITION to JOIN Congress party! Well done GuruMurthy - but as usual it is of no USE - like peacock DANCING in Forest - foolish Indians will NEVER realize!
By Ike
5/6/2009 7:03:00 AM
I am glad some readers took me on my comments... Exposes such as this must be geared to exact a price, political, financial, criminal or all of the above. Bad mouthing superlatives tends to reflect back. And no amount of name calling will 'shame' politicians into ethical behavior. Moreover, 'Q' is a politically useless target. The Law Minister HR Bhardwaj is responsible for calling off the red alert by direction to CBI. This article should have called for his head. Calling PM or SG shameless would not cause a correction. The fight should be to force a more independent hand for the (a) investigative agencies, (ii) judiciary and (iii) bureucracies so that they are more fearful of wrong doing than of retribution from politicians. Meanwhile, reasonable commission for fair business transactions should be legal. The outcome of declaring a 3% commission illegal (an impractical self righeous legalese in yours truly's opinion) is wasting the other 97% of the Bofor's $1.2 billion dea
By Dr. Ajay
5/6/2009 4:01:00 AM
Congress treat Terrorists as their " SON-in-LAWS". It is " CONGRESS " who put Indian Muslims into " Beggar " position by declaring favouritsm for " VOTE BANK " & involved in Hindu-Muslim roits for 5 decades. This policy was " Divide & Rule " learned from British. 15th Aug-1947, the day India got Independent Muslims leaders never came out & begged for the Comunity & Discriminate Hindus, Sikhs etc. Muslim Community from Gujarat or Muslim Leaders from country not taking the issue of " Gujarat Roits " in this election, but " CONGRESS " dancing non-stop like " Mujrawalis " on same tune & giving clean chits to all favoured Cirminals from CBI & Courts before the Election is over.
By Dinesh
5/6/2009 3:50:00 AM
Talibaba says, give me $7 million and Talibaba will bring Quattrochchi to India. Talibaba knows how. We Talibabas, we don't fear anybody or any situation. We fanatically follow our Talibaba Holy Book. Ya ilaha il Baba, Tali rasool Baba!
By Talibaba
5/6/2009 2:40:00 AM
What have you to say about two countries' legal systems which both refused to extradite 'Q' to India? Moreover, BJP has no reason to complain because one country did so when they were in power. It would be sheer stupidity to pursue a matter that has not been conclusively proven so far. To politicize such issues at election time is nothing short of opportunism. Let better sense prevail!
By Giju
5/6/2009 12:35:00 AM
Drrrrrrr Singhhh got doctor degreee in western slavery, so he is doing his job perfectly. Its bad fortune to the nation of a billion plus people that we are ruled by such scoundrals. Its our fualt, we talk much but act less. We must act and defeat such forces. We must become leaders and rulers, we have everything in us.
By Bharat
5/5/2009 11:25:00 PM
People who call Advani Racist, tell me why so called secular partys divide people on name of CAST? Pleple who accept corrupt politicans are biggest reason for pathetic condtion of our country.
By Puudo
5/5/2009 10:26:00 PM
As long as guys like Shankar Basavanna Mudhol exist this country is bound to have many more such scams where billions and trillions will get stashed away. If he is ignorant of the facts then let him not show it open forum. In the Reliance case he was acting on the instructions of the then Indian Express owner and when a truce was reached between Mr.Ramnath Goenka and Dhirubhai , his articles were stopped... but the basic facts as brought out by Mr.Gurumurthy remained and still remain. It is not that the BJP Government did not try in bringing the culprits to the book but when you have the agents and loyalists to the CONgress at every layer of the Government machinery how you can expect something to happen in a span of 5 years? The whole world knows about the truth in the so called scams like Jain Hawala or Coffin purchase etc., they were the handiworks of the shameless CONgress goons just to spread malaise against the BJP & NDA. Again this whole Bofors resurfaced not because of Mr. Guru
By Katahavarayan Marma Yogi
5/5/2009 9:00:00 PM
Late Swarn Singh, Foreign Minister of india had once said that, "The only honest politician is the one who has no means of being corrupt, meaning those who do not have access to making easy money are the only once who are 'not corrupt'. We are calling Rajiv and Sonia corrupt because one of their son-of-B minister VP Singh betrayed them for his ulterior motives. Anyways I would prefer 'corrupt' but efficient PMs like Narsimha Rao and ManMohan Singh to racists Advani and the kinds. The writer of this article 'Shy Rao, Shameless Singh' is a paid agent of Jan Sangh, I mean BJP.
By Long Live Man Mohan Singh and N. Rao.
5/5/2009 8:20:00 PM
Gurumurthy's argument is that whether there is a case against Q or not. Yes there is. Amount involved and the years this case has been dragging all another question.
By Krishna Menon
5/5/2009 7:41:00 PM
Congress has nurtured a lot of fiends in their long of rule of 50 years to share the corrupt money. Every one knows it is not so easy to fight the corrupt system. The issue of black money was raised by LK Advani a year ago and by a CPI MP in parliament, much before. The question is why Congress government did not send request for the details to Swiss and Germany? In a democracy, the right time to bring the any wrong doings of government to people’s court is election time and people are judges.
By Ramesh
5/5/2009 6:21:00 PM
Why do politicians want their kith, kin and hangerson in Parliament, because in Parliament numbers matter. Why do they want to be MPs ,as MPs are beyond the pale of the law of the land, no court will touch them. Politics is the first resort for money making. Ideals and loyalty to nation are all bakwas. No MP wants to run a free kitchen, if kitchen is run free it is with ulterior motive. With all natural resources and human resources, the number of have nots have increased. Wealth and power is concentrated in the hands of politicians and their friends who are in all fields.
By vasudev
5/5/2009 6:17:00 PM
Gurumurthy tried blackmailing the Ambanis. It did not work. His long tirades against their various scams involing payment of less Customs Duty on imported plant & equipment fell flat. Bofors is another long running saga. What was his favourite BJP Govt doing when Quattrochhi was still in Malaysia?. Why did the then BJP Govt not persue his extradition. What about his current Black Money in Swiss banks crusade? Where was he sitting with his ideas all this while. Was he only waiting for Election Time? He is nothing but a cheap gadfly. Should be put down with a Fly swatter. Why does he not investigate the Jain Hawala scam again? Is it because LK Advani was one of those involvedin that scam? What about the Coffin Purchase scandal during BJP rule. The list on this side is also endless. Loudmouths like Gurumurthy are only worthy of contempt.
By Shankar Basavanna Mudhol
5/5/2009 4:53:00 PM
Sonia and her brood are the biggest hurdles to the development of this nation. The SRP( Sonia, Rahul, Priyanka) factor is sucking the country dry. Q is a family friend of the Maino's. Did anyone expect some other verdict? I didn't. Of course Q is innocent. It is we Indians who are the real culprits because we are letting this illiterate foreign woman run our country. We have only ourselves to blame.
By Akki
5/5/2009 4:49:00 PM
If Sonia is really patriotic to India and her children also patriotic to india and indian consitution, why they are not advising Mr. Q to come to india and face the judiciary? Because Sonia and her children's patriotism is nothing but bullshit. They are faithful to vatican and Govt of Italy not to India. India is a place for them to enjoy the govt benefit like house, security, car etc etc and when the true responsibility of being indian comes, they show their true colors. Shamelss Manmohan singh also supports them blindly because they gave him an opportunity to occupy the PM post. But Manmohan forgot onething, they didnt give him the chair to simply enjoy but to do all sort of dirty job for sonia and their gang. Our economist has become house servant now. What a pity? Advani shouldnt try for PM chair because the post has lost its value and image due to all dirty work done by Manmohan and his gang for Sonia and her family.
By sriram
5/5/2009 4:34:00 PM
Some one said it is a small amount, happened long time, so forget it. The question is not whether they are small amount or happened long time back or quality of Product. The question is WHO swindled money? The money is swindled by our own LEADER who supposed to give a corruption free government. We have given our nation's key to Prime Minister, to protect our treasure, not to LOOT. Our concern is, if people do not hesitate loot money in defense deals, would they hesitate loot money in social schemes, take bribes favouring deals in India.
By Suresh
5/5/2009 4:07:00 PM
"unless Sonia protects Q here, he will not protect her outside. The stakes seem to be too high". It's a perfect mafia deal. So does congress morph into nothing less than a new age mafia group.
By Anil
5/5/2009 3:39:00 PM
Once again salute you Guru Sir. Your tireless Crusade against this corrupt dynasty and its faithfull and shameless servants is amazing to say the least. But, what is the use? There are still some "creatures" who still root for this dynastical loot and howsoever you cry from the roof tops will go in vain as long as the creatures exist ...
By Katahavarayan Marma Yogi
5/5/2009 2:03:00 PM
" Vinasa Kale Vibaretha Buddi" (When the times are not good, the intellect works in the WRONG direction). Dr.Singh is going through bad times. ( His bad time started wihen he agreed to become PM on Sonia's selfish advice) The sooner he realises this, the better it will be for Dr.Singh. It is better for him to quit rather than serve SONIA who is enjoying power without any responsibility. Can any one list the good deeds she has done for the Country?
By K V NATARAJAN
5/5/2009 1:38:00 PM
Congress party is hight of corruption. To divert peoples attention they shout "communalism-communalism".
By Psudo
5/5/2009 12:37:00 PM
Its unfortunate that the leading national newspapes barring the NIE, sings bhajans on Rahul , Sonia instead of probing them! Sonia must prove that she is not guilty..she must come and face the media and give us an explaination..she is a coward who escapes the media scrutiny by !sending the likes of Kapil Sibal and Abhishek Singvi both of whom are lawyers who are good orators & who can confuse the common man about legal rules..
By Vishnu
5/5/2009 10:17:00 AM
Dr Ajay, are you put up in India?? Dr Ajay I think you are not an VET, so assuming you are an good and reputed doctor, let me ask you. In a Single day, how many poor patients get free treatment from you, with medicines and in some cases Pathological tests too? When you can't treat a single Poor, then how Mr Q along with Sonia can rape my poor brothers of their Wealth,..Dr Ajay you mean to say that just because Bofor's issue is 22 years old we should forget it!!! Then you may ask the Nation to even forget Afzal and Kasab too, Is not Sonia protecting her boyfriend MR Q?? If she is so honest, why she is not influencing Mr Q to come to India and face the trail and get the Clean chit from our Judiciary instead of Protecting him and aiding him...................Dr Ajay there cant be Smoke without fire
By Vikas Patel
5/5/2009 9:42:00 AM
Mr Ravi how can facts be baised!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!....Facts Are Facts and these facts are not cooked up by Mr Gurumurtrhy!! CBI probed it, and you can cross verify all these facts,if you think they are Biased....so Mr Ravi when are you going to Unmask your masters???
By Dinesh Parikh
5/5/2009 9:32:00 AM
Dr. ajay's comments are bizzare to say the least. Does it mean that for every good product that the country/govt. purchases (as it is expected to do), underhand commission can be justified and we can say that the person who is taking the commission is doing the country a favor???????????? If quattorchhi was not there, would the defense dept. not have gone in for these guns, presuming that they were good? It is clear that the decision was already taken to go in for bofors, subject to bofors agreeing to pay the proxy quattrochi or his firm commission. Thats how the corruption in the system works.
By khan
5/5/2009 9:04:00 AM
If it is just a commission and can be ignored as suggested by some readers, then why not 'Q' come to India and answer a few questions of CBI and live happily ever after? Why so much protectionism favoring Mr. Q? Why the hell the PM and the first fmily protecting him with so much vigor? What is at stake? Is there anything more it hidden?
By Raj
5/5/2009 8:38:00 AM
Question is not about the 3% commission, but about the Judiciary,and does our PM sand for and who is he serving ? We have learn from mistakes, take every opertunity to beat corrupt politician. Jsut claiming basi is easy, to defend the same is not easy. I ask my friend what is so biased in his article?
By Raghavendra
5/5/2009 8:19:00 AM
After 22 years, one has to stop beating the dead horse shamelessly... Bofors guns were proven to be good. In hindsight, one might even say that Q did a favour there - both in merchandise quality and a mere 3% commission. Yet, this never ending wrangling over the 'Q & Gandhi' factor for $36 million has prevented the Govt. from buying spares for Bofors guns - virtual $1.2 billions scrap. Is this self righteousness worth keeping India without its Howitzers or other defense acquisitions? You cannot see the forest due to the trees!
By Dr. Ajay
5/5/2009 7:31:00 AM
Mr. Gurumurthy, there comes a phase in every intellectual's life when he contemplates the preposterousness of preaching any further. Whats the point of preaching the truth ? Time and fate are not on the side of Hindus.. there is nothing but disillusionment and despair on our side.
By Mithun
5/5/2009 3:04:00 AM
Your article may have some facts, but I am sorry to say that it is totally biased...
By Ravi Sharma
5/5/2009 2:56:00 AM
First Published : 05 May 2009 01:42:00 AM IST
The Quattrocchi case is an embarrassment for the Government of India... The court says we do not have a strong case”. It is not Antonia Maino (aka Sonia) Gandhi defending her Italian friend. It is Prime Minister Manmohan Singh as if she had appointed him as the advocate to plead for Q. “It’s not a good reflection on the Indian legal system,” says the PM moved by compassion for Q, “that we harass people while the world says we have no case.” Singh, who was with the South Commission on a comfortable salary and perks when the Bofors scam rocked the country, seems totally unaware of the facts of the Bofors scam. Here is a short trailer of the scam.
The Bofors scam — pay-off for India’s gun purchase deal with Sweden — broke out in 1987. A third of the Indians living today were not yet born then; and a fourth of the Indians living then are no more alive today. So some history needs to be recalled here. First, the Bofors payoff was exposed by the media and the Rajiv government went all out to suppress the exposure. Including the payoff of $36.5 million to Q, the Bofors deal contemplated three streams of payoff totalling $250 million. Persistent investigations by the media and the CBI brought out the involvement of Q in the gun deal.
The closeness of Q and his wife Maria to Sonia family was always well known.
The Sonia and Maria families spent their weekends and annual holidays together.
They left one’s children in the custody of the other when going out of station. So intense was their relationship. The media found that some $7.3 million from Bofors AB had found its way into Q’s secret bank accounts. Facts began to tumble out testifying that it was fee to Q for swinging the $1.2 billion gun deal for the Swedish gun maker.
Here is how Q got the deal for Bofors.
The Rajiv Gandhi government could not decide for a long time what gun to buy — the British, Austrian or Swedish. The two brokers engaged by Bofors could not expedite the deal. Suddenly, in the second half of 1985, AE Services (AES), a shell company, entered the deal with this offer to Bofors: “Look. If we get you the deal by March 31, 1986, give us a fee of three per cent. If not, don’t pay.” Bofors accepted the offer and signed up with the AES shell on October 15, 1985. Unless Bofors knew that the man behind AES had had the clout to get it done from the Rajiv government, it would never have signed with a shell company.
And AES shell did get the Rajiv government to sign the contract with Bofors on March 22, 1986 — seven days ahead of the target date of March 31, 1986. Within six months, AES got the first tranche of its fee of $7.3 million. Proof emerged slowly that this money finally went to Q, showing he was the man behind the shell.
■ Bofors remitted on September 3, 1986, $7.3 million into AES account number 18051-53 in Nordfinanz Bank, Zurich.
This equalled 20 per cent of the three per cent bribe of $36.5 millions due to AES.
■ Two weeks later (on September 16, 1986) AES delivered $7 million into account number 254.561.60W in the same bank in the name of Colbar Investments — a company controlled by Q and Maria.
■ In April 1987, the Swedish Radio broke the news of bribes in Bofors deal with India. Later, in June 1988, the media published authoritative documents seized by the Swedish police which established the payoff. By now, Bofors scam had become a huge national issue.
■ Forthwith Q and Maria hurriedly shifted their loot, grown with interest, from Geneva to Channel Islands, to New York to Austria. First, on July 25, 1988 $7.9 million moved from Colbar to account number 488.320.60X of Wetelsen Overseas SA, in UBS, Geneva. Next, on May 21, 1990, $9.2 million moved from Wetelson to account number 123983 of IIDCL, Ansbacher, St Peter Port, Guernsey (Channel Islands). Later, on June 5, 1990, $2.4 million channelled into code-named account ‘Robusta’ in Banque Karfinco SA from Swiss Bank Corp, New York. Afterwards, on June 12, 1990, $5.3 million was transferred to code-named accounts ‘Arabica’, ‘Robusta’ and ‘Luxor’ in Austria from Swiss Bank accounts in Geneva.
■ Within six days of the Swiss government giving these details to India in 1993, Q slipped out of India and turned a fugitive, thanks to the Narasimha Rao government helping him to run away.
■ Later, in June 2003, Interpol found that Q and Maria had two accounts, bearing numbers 5A5151516L and 5A5151516M in the London branch of the Swiss bank BSI AG with Euros three million and $1 million.
They were frozen on CBI’s request.
British courts later repeatedly turned down Quattrocchi’s several appeals to de-freeze the accounts.
■ But, on December 22, 2005, the Congressled UPA government U-turned. H R Bharadwaj, the law minister, got the additional solicitor general of India, B Dutta, to go to London to do the dirty job of releasing the amounts.
Can anyone say now that Q is innocent and he just received some charity of $7.3 million from Bofors? Yet the Sonia-led government allowed Q to smuggle the bribe from the frozen accounts. All that the CBI asks of Q is this: Come to India and answer these questions — why Bofors paid him the money; did it relate to the gun deal; what is his relation with Sonia family, AE Services, Colbar Investments and the coded and numbered bank accounts through which the payoff has finally reached him.
Why not Sonia Gandhi just ask him to appear before the court and prove his innocence? Why does she, on the contrary, abet his refusal to present himself before courts in India? It is clear that she will not ask him. Why? Here is the answer: unless Sonia protects Q here, he will not protect her outside. The stakes seem to be too high.
QED: Manmohan Singh today does what Sonia wants like Narasimha Rao did then what she wanted. Yet, there is a difference between how the two obliged her. Rao felt shy to do what she wanted. So he did it stealthily. Singh does what she wants openly and shamelessly. Even, a Sonia family retainer like H R Bharadwaj feels shy to own up the shameless withdrawal of the Red Corner Notice on Q; but the PM owns it proudly. Singh is shameless about what Rao used to feel shy. Why? Unlike Rao, Singh is not an elected prime minister but a nominated one; he is not chosen by democratic process, but selected by the dynasty; he is not backed by the people, but backed by the family. So the shift from shyness to shamelessness, from Rao to Singh
comment@gurumurthy.net
About the author:
S Gurumurthy is a well-known commentator on political and economic issues
Public Views :
Indian Hindu said down below "MMS is the retainer of the private limited family company under the name INC run by mother, son and daughter. What else to expect from MMS. Winston Churchill rightly said that the Indians do not deserve freedom." I am surprised at his inference. Clearly, Churchill was a silly guy to make that statement. What is MMS's servitute good to do with Indians not deserving freedom. The death blow for Indian democracy was given by MK Gandhi when he did not respect people mandate and asked Patel to step down for the sake of Nehru. Though we call India a democracy, it is no where close to democracy - for the people?? of the people?? by the people??? Congress has left the majority poor and illeterate to hijack the elections.
By Sathish
5/6/2009 8:27:00 PM
I wonder why people call MMS a good man. I don't see any good quality in him.
By Sathish
5/6/2009 8:20:00 PM
We christian bas**tards are anti Hindu, anti Indian and are ordered to condemn patriotic Indian's articles by our church and our virgin born fake Jesus christ.
By Tonyt
5/6/2009 8:15:00 PM
Looks like the christian pedophile priests are in to commenting unsing hijada names like debator or even Hindu names. These christian fu**ckers lick the cunt of Sonia and write all nonsense instead of arguing. These unfortunate christian slaves are a pain in the world’s ass. These assholes are brainwashed, in CIA funded Sunday schools to learn English and study a fake religion called Christianity created by a criminal in the fourth centurty. These love oozing animals have eliminated races and cultures with pure genocide and slavery. These christian communal pigs invade all forum like this with abusive comments on commentators, which their genetic nature. As these christian are the rape products of Europeans. These christian bastard who use bombs and explosives in NE have no shame in proclaiming love for humans. These sodomy christians say they are not communals but give the admissions to the state funded colleges only if the hindus convert.
By The debater
5/6/2009 8:07:00 PM
Sonia put her dog Manmohan on the orders of CIA. Rao employed the dog Manmohan on the orders of CIA. For a dog of Sonia eating her shit is very pleasant experience. Unfortunately this Sonia shit eating dog Manmohan is a spy and is detrimental to India. The christian congress party is shameless and consists of all US spies. The next generation of this Italian pro is the gang rapist Rahul Gandhi who will do proud any Delhi rapist. When India is full of Jaichand like Vajpayee who changed the law to allow this Italian pro to stand for election, then what is so great about withdrawing a red corner notice.
By v Subramanian
5/6/2009 7:54:00 PM
MMS is the retainer of the private limited family company under the name INC run by mother, son and daughter. What else to expect from MMS. Winston Churchill rightly said that the Indians do not deserve freedom. After 62 years, the servility of Indians to a family which stole the name of Gandhi through an affidavit with the advice and connivance of the Great Mahatma is bafling. Churchill was prophetic indeed.
By Indian Hindu
5/6/2009 7:33:00 PM
Whenever some comments are made about the dynasty, petticoatwalas immediately pounce upon the person.
By v subramanian
5/6/2009 6:29:00 PM
Looks like the Chaddiwalas have unleashed an entire army of brainwashed, shakha-bred,venom-spitting communal pigs on this forum. the article is about Bofors scam and how conveniently these low-life scums have turned it into a minority-bashing theatre, one can just see here. Chaddiwalas have mastered the art of taking literally any topic on earth and then turn into a communal diatribe. Well trained!
By The debater
5/6/2009 5:45:00 PM
On the one hand, Obama gives millions of dollars as rehabilitation package and on the otherexpresses concern for the Americans suffering because of recession. If he is short of money, why cannot he cancel and stop all allocations made to foreign countries by his predecessors as well as by him for conversions throughout the world and redirect the amount to poor Americans instead of feeding the already overfed NGOs and the religious brokers in the country. Protecting Americans is a serious matter than promoting religious hatred and engineering religious defections and redefections in addition to allowing the religious brokers to amss more fixed and current assets from out of the funds allotted which Obama andhis audience should understand. Are there some senators with some common sense to listen to my suggestion if they are really concerned for American welfare.
By subramanian
5/6/2009 3:53:00 PM
Continued..... Because of the psuedo secularist in India, these things are happening. No wonder if Hindusism (A way of Life) vanishes in the years to come! od save us!!
By giri
5/6/2009 11:32:00 AM
Dr. Singh's shamelessness was evident when he apologised to Sikhs for what happened in 1984 after Indira Gandhi's assassination even though he was in no way connected to the gory incidents. His shamelessness was evident when he did not resign when his 'sub contractors' arranged to purchase confidence votes and the wads of currency notes were displayed in Lok Sabha during the confidence vote on nuclear deal, and now his endorsement of the letting of 'Q ' because of the latters proximity to Sonia. One can wake up a sleeping man and not who pretends to be sleeping . He has overtaken Zail Singh, in subservience. No wonder, after he is ousted from power, he might be nominated for the highest civilian award of Italy, whtever it may be worth for this ' exemplary display of loyalty ' to his Italian boss .
By Karan
5/6/2009 11:28:00 AM
Mr. Vikarm Phadke, what else do you expect from a person who belongs to a religion that does not respect other religions? The very fact that they indulge in conversion shows a. They are insecure about their own religion b. They do not respect other religions at all. To support these idiots, we have many political leaders who are driving this country to hell!. If some one decides to convert on his/her own, we have no objection. Every one has one's own choice! What amazes me is they say they are converting people for their betterment! India had stalwarts like Gandhi, Baba Amte, Vinobha Bhave etc, who never bothered to know about the religion of people to serve them!. It's unfortunate that our culture is fast vanishing! In our country if the income of a temple exceeds a particular figure it gets acquired by government & thoe priests get paid peanuts! The same is not applicable for a Mosque or a chruch. Most of these monies are being used for conversion. Because of the psuedo secula
By giri
5/6/2009 11:20:00 AM
This is such a nice article. Very happy to read it. I hope these voters who vote for Rs 500 and elect such boneless creatures to power realise it atleast once in their life time. They are too much in dark that they cannot be brought out. Mr.Gurumurthy writes in Tuklak also. But i wonder how many read it in states like Tamil Nadu even if it is a Tamil magazine. Most of the population are behind the 1Re Kumkumam run by Kolaingnar family and their TV channels. When will they change? Praying sincerely that I dont end up seeing Congressmen faces atlest for next 5 yrs on TV as ministers at the centre. God save our country!!
By Raj
5/6/2009 10:07:00 AM
It is the last resort of a frustrated person to use foul language, when one does not have any logic, reasoning or conviction of truth. Thats what Mr. Tony has done. May be he is worried that the dirty things of Sonia Antonio Maino, Quattrocchi, and their friends are coming out again and again. May be he wants to use foul language because he he sympathises with the aforementioned "most dignified" people because he is their co-religionist. Sorry for him and for all people who think that there is only One God, One Prophet, One Holy Book, only One Way to God. These are the people who have created the ruckus since nearly so many centuries, starting from the first, continuing vigorously from the fifth and getting more danger afterwards. I wish that our Mother Earth and its inhabitants (humans and all others included, equally) survive these zealots.
By vikram phadke
5/6/2009 8:48:00 AM
BJP coolie Gyrumurthy, get a life. Maybe a Hindu Thief.
By Tonyt
5/6/2009 7:29:00 AM
Except for Dr. Ajay, every thinking Indian knows that THERE is ONLY ONE POWER CENTRE in Congress and that is the FIRST family of Congress. All others are PROXY ACTORS, who can NOT even speak or act independently, as that is the FIRST CONDITION to JOIN Congress party! Well done GuruMurthy - but as usual it is of no USE - like peacock DANCING in Forest - foolish Indians will NEVER realize!
By Ike
5/6/2009 7:03:00 AM
I am glad some readers took me on my comments... Exposes such as this must be geared to exact a price, political, financial, criminal or all of the above. Bad mouthing superlatives tends to reflect back. And no amount of name calling will 'shame' politicians into ethical behavior. Moreover, 'Q' is a politically useless target. The Law Minister HR Bhardwaj is responsible for calling off the red alert by direction to CBI. This article should have called for his head. Calling PM or SG shameless would not cause a correction. The fight should be to force a more independent hand for the (a) investigative agencies, (ii) judiciary and (iii) bureucracies so that they are more fearful of wrong doing than of retribution from politicians. Meanwhile, reasonable commission for fair business transactions should be legal. The outcome of declaring a 3% commission illegal (an impractical self righeous legalese in yours truly's opinion) is wasting the other 97% of the Bofor's $1.2 billion dea
By Dr. Ajay
5/6/2009 4:01:00 AM
Congress treat Terrorists as their " SON-in-LAWS". It is " CONGRESS " who put Indian Muslims into " Beggar " position by declaring favouritsm for " VOTE BANK " & involved in Hindu-Muslim roits for 5 decades. This policy was " Divide & Rule " learned from British. 15th Aug-1947, the day India got Independent Muslims leaders never came out & begged for the Comunity & Discriminate Hindus, Sikhs etc. Muslim Community from Gujarat or Muslim Leaders from country not taking the issue of " Gujarat Roits " in this election, but " CONGRESS " dancing non-stop like " Mujrawalis " on same tune & giving clean chits to all favoured Cirminals from CBI & Courts before the Election is over.
By Dinesh
5/6/2009 3:50:00 AM
Talibaba says, give me $7 million and Talibaba will bring Quattrochchi to India. Talibaba knows how. We Talibabas, we don't fear anybody or any situation. We fanatically follow our Talibaba Holy Book. Ya ilaha il Baba, Tali rasool Baba!
By Talibaba
5/6/2009 2:40:00 AM
What have you to say about two countries' legal systems which both refused to extradite 'Q' to India? Moreover, BJP has no reason to complain because one country did so when they were in power. It would be sheer stupidity to pursue a matter that has not been conclusively proven so far. To politicize such issues at election time is nothing short of opportunism. Let better sense prevail!
By Giju
5/6/2009 12:35:00 AM
Drrrrrrr Singhhh got doctor degreee in western slavery, so he is doing his job perfectly. Its bad fortune to the nation of a billion plus people that we are ruled by such scoundrals. Its our fualt, we talk much but act less. We must act and defeat such forces. We must become leaders and rulers, we have everything in us.
By Bharat
5/5/2009 11:25:00 PM
People who call Advani Racist, tell me why so called secular partys divide people on name of CAST? Pleple who accept corrupt politicans are biggest reason for pathetic condtion of our country.
By Puudo
5/5/2009 10:26:00 PM
As long as guys like Shankar Basavanna Mudhol exist this country is bound to have many more such scams where billions and trillions will get stashed away. If he is ignorant of the facts then let him not show it open forum. In the Reliance case he was acting on the instructions of the then Indian Express owner and when a truce was reached between Mr.Ramnath Goenka and Dhirubhai , his articles were stopped... but the basic facts as brought out by Mr.Gurumurthy remained and still remain. It is not that the BJP Government did not try in bringing the culprits to the book but when you have the agents and loyalists to the CONgress at every layer of the Government machinery how you can expect something to happen in a span of 5 years? The whole world knows about the truth in the so called scams like Jain Hawala or Coffin purchase etc., they were the handiworks of the shameless CONgress goons just to spread malaise against the BJP & NDA. Again this whole Bofors resurfaced not because of Mr. Guru
By Katahavarayan Marma Yogi
5/5/2009 9:00:00 PM
Late Swarn Singh, Foreign Minister of india had once said that, "The only honest politician is the one who has no means of being corrupt, meaning those who do not have access to making easy money are the only once who are 'not corrupt'. We are calling Rajiv and Sonia corrupt because one of their son-of-B minister VP Singh betrayed them for his ulterior motives. Anyways I would prefer 'corrupt' but efficient PMs like Narsimha Rao and ManMohan Singh to racists Advani and the kinds. The writer of this article 'Shy Rao, Shameless Singh' is a paid agent of Jan Sangh, I mean BJP.
By Long Live Man Mohan Singh and N. Rao.
5/5/2009 8:20:00 PM
Gurumurthy's argument is that whether there is a case against Q or not. Yes there is. Amount involved and the years this case has been dragging all another question.
By Krishna Menon
5/5/2009 7:41:00 PM
Congress has nurtured a lot of fiends in their long of rule of 50 years to share the corrupt money. Every one knows it is not so easy to fight the corrupt system. The issue of black money was raised by LK Advani a year ago and by a CPI MP in parliament, much before. The question is why Congress government did not send request for the details to Swiss and Germany? In a democracy, the right time to bring the any wrong doings of government to people’s court is election time and people are judges.
By Ramesh
5/5/2009 6:21:00 PM
Why do politicians want their kith, kin and hangerson in Parliament, because in Parliament numbers matter. Why do they want to be MPs ,as MPs are beyond the pale of the law of the land, no court will touch them. Politics is the first resort for money making. Ideals and loyalty to nation are all bakwas. No MP wants to run a free kitchen, if kitchen is run free it is with ulterior motive. With all natural resources and human resources, the number of have nots have increased. Wealth and power is concentrated in the hands of politicians and their friends who are in all fields.
By vasudev
5/5/2009 6:17:00 PM
Gurumurthy tried blackmailing the Ambanis. It did not work. His long tirades against their various scams involing payment of less Customs Duty on imported plant & equipment fell flat. Bofors is another long running saga. What was his favourite BJP Govt doing when Quattrochhi was still in Malaysia?. Why did the then BJP Govt not persue his extradition. What about his current Black Money in Swiss banks crusade? Where was he sitting with his ideas all this while. Was he only waiting for Election Time? He is nothing but a cheap gadfly. Should be put down with a Fly swatter. Why does he not investigate the Jain Hawala scam again? Is it because LK Advani was one of those involvedin that scam? What about the Coffin Purchase scandal during BJP rule. The list on this side is also endless. Loudmouths like Gurumurthy are only worthy of contempt.
By Shankar Basavanna Mudhol
5/5/2009 4:53:00 PM
Sonia and her brood are the biggest hurdles to the development of this nation. The SRP( Sonia, Rahul, Priyanka) factor is sucking the country dry. Q is a family friend of the Maino's. Did anyone expect some other verdict? I didn't. Of course Q is innocent. It is we Indians who are the real culprits because we are letting this illiterate foreign woman run our country. We have only ourselves to blame.
By Akki
5/5/2009 4:49:00 PM
If Sonia is really patriotic to India and her children also patriotic to india and indian consitution, why they are not advising Mr. Q to come to india and face the judiciary? Because Sonia and her children's patriotism is nothing but bullshit. They are faithful to vatican and Govt of Italy not to India. India is a place for them to enjoy the govt benefit like house, security, car etc etc and when the true responsibility of being indian comes, they show their true colors. Shamelss Manmohan singh also supports them blindly because they gave him an opportunity to occupy the PM post. But Manmohan forgot onething, they didnt give him the chair to simply enjoy but to do all sort of dirty job for sonia and their gang. Our economist has become house servant now. What a pity? Advani shouldnt try for PM chair because the post has lost its value and image due to all dirty work done by Manmohan and his gang for Sonia and her family.
By sriram
5/5/2009 4:34:00 PM
Some one said it is a small amount, happened long time, so forget it. The question is not whether they are small amount or happened long time back or quality of Product. The question is WHO swindled money? The money is swindled by our own LEADER who supposed to give a corruption free government. We have given our nation's key to Prime Minister, to protect our treasure, not to LOOT. Our concern is, if people do not hesitate loot money in defense deals, would they hesitate loot money in social schemes, take bribes favouring deals in India.
By Suresh
5/5/2009 4:07:00 PM
"unless Sonia protects Q here, he will not protect her outside. The stakes seem to be too high". It's a perfect mafia deal. So does congress morph into nothing less than a new age mafia group.
By Anil
5/5/2009 3:39:00 PM
Once again salute you Guru Sir. Your tireless Crusade against this corrupt dynasty and its faithfull and shameless servants is amazing to say the least. But, what is the use? There are still some "creatures" who still root for this dynastical loot and howsoever you cry from the roof tops will go in vain as long as the creatures exist ...
By Katahavarayan Marma Yogi
5/5/2009 2:03:00 PM
" Vinasa Kale Vibaretha Buddi" (When the times are not good, the intellect works in the WRONG direction). Dr.Singh is going through bad times. ( His bad time started wihen he agreed to become PM on Sonia's selfish advice) The sooner he realises this, the better it will be for Dr.Singh. It is better for him to quit rather than serve SONIA who is enjoying power without any responsibility. Can any one list the good deeds she has done for the Country?
By K V NATARAJAN
5/5/2009 1:38:00 PM
Congress party is hight of corruption. To divert peoples attention they shout "communalism-communalism".
By Psudo
5/5/2009 12:37:00 PM
Its unfortunate that the leading national newspapes barring the NIE, sings bhajans on Rahul , Sonia instead of probing them! Sonia must prove that she is not guilty..she must come and face the media and give us an explaination..she is a coward who escapes the media scrutiny by !sending the likes of Kapil Sibal and Abhishek Singvi both of whom are lawyers who are good orators & who can confuse the common man about legal rules..
By Vishnu
5/5/2009 10:17:00 AM
Dr Ajay, are you put up in India?? Dr Ajay I think you are not an VET, so assuming you are an good and reputed doctor, let me ask you. In a Single day, how many poor patients get free treatment from you, with medicines and in some cases Pathological tests too? When you can't treat a single Poor, then how Mr Q along with Sonia can rape my poor brothers of their Wealth,..Dr Ajay you mean to say that just because Bofor's issue is 22 years old we should forget it!!! Then you may ask the Nation to even forget Afzal and Kasab too, Is not Sonia protecting her boyfriend MR Q?? If she is so honest, why she is not influencing Mr Q to come to India and face the trail and get the Clean chit from our Judiciary instead of Protecting him and aiding him...................Dr Ajay there cant be Smoke without fire
By Vikas Patel
5/5/2009 9:42:00 AM
Mr Ravi how can facts be baised!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!....Facts Are Facts and these facts are not cooked up by Mr Gurumurtrhy!! CBI probed it, and you can cross verify all these facts,if you think they are Biased....so Mr Ravi when are you going to Unmask your masters???
By Dinesh Parikh
5/5/2009 9:32:00 AM
Dr. ajay's comments are bizzare to say the least. Does it mean that for every good product that the country/govt. purchases (as it is expected to do), underhand commission can be justified and we can say that the person who is taking the commission is doing the country a favor???????????? If quattorchhi was not there, would the defense dept. not have gone in for these guns, presuming that they were good? It is clear that the decision was already taken to go in for bofors, subject to bofors agreeing to pay the proxy quattrochi or his firm commission. Thats how the corruption in the system works.
By khan
5/5/2009 9:04:00 AM
If it is just a commission and can be ignored as suggested by some readers, then why not 'Q' come to India and answer a few questions of CBI and live happily ever after? Why so much protectionism favoring Mr. Q? Why the hell the PM and the first fmily protecting him with so much vigor? What is at stake? Is there anything more it hidden?
By Raj
5/5/2009 8:38:00 AM
Question is not about the 3% commission, but about the Judiciary,and does our PM sand for and who is he serving ? We have learn from mistakes, take every opertunity to beat corrupt politician. Jsut claiming basi is easy, to defend the same is not easy. I ask my friend what is so biased in his article?
By Raghavendra
5/5/2009 8:19:00 AM
After 22 years, one has to stop beating the dead horse shamelessly... Bofors guns were proven to be good. In hindsight, one might even say that Q did a favour there - both in merchandise quality and a mere 3% commission. Yet, this never ending wrangling over the 'Q & Gandhi' factor for $36 million has prevented the Govt. from buying spares for Bofors guns - virtual $1.2 billions scrap. Is this self righteousness worth keeping India without its Howitzers or other defense acquisitions? You cannot see the forest due to the trees!
By Dr. Ajay
5/5/2009 7:31:00 AM
Mr. Gurumurthy, there comes a phase in every intellectual's life when he contemplates the preposterousness of preaching any further. Whats the point of preaching the truth ? Time and fate are not on the side of Hindus.. there is nothing but disillusionment and despair on our side.
By Mithun
5/5/2009 3:04:00 AM
Your article may have some facts, but I am sorry to say that it is totally biased...
By Ravi Sharma
5/5/2009 2:56:00 AM
Tuesday, May 5, 2009
Pakistan's pants are on fire'.......US Lawmakers
Washington, May 06, 2009
Several US lawmakers have questioned President Asif Ali Zardari's ability to control Pakistan with one of them comparing the country to a man whose pants are on fire but who does not realise the danger.
When one's pants are on fire one has to do two things to survive, said Democrat Gary Ackerman as a House panel on Tuesday questioned Richard Holbrooke, US special representative for Afghanistan and Pakistan on America 's strategy for the troubled ally.
"First you have to realise your pants are on fire. Then you have to do something about it," he said. "Let me be blunt. Pakistan's pants are on fire... but they seem convinced that if left alone or attacked piecemeal, the Islamist flame will simply burn itself out. That hope is, at best, folly."
Even now with insurgents a mere hour's drive from the capital, Ackerman said he suspected that among the senior officers of the Pakistani military that "bedrock belief is still that Pakistan's real enemy is India remains untouched by events."
Holbrooke urged Ackerman and others to speak with Zardari about their concerns while he is in Washington suggesting that the US has overreacted to the situation in Pakistan "when statements of concern became predictions".
The US should try "to dispel a self-fulfilling sense of pants-on-fire syndrome. It is not a failed state. It is a state under extreme stress," said Holbrooke.
"Now he said the pants really are on fire, and I understand exactly what he (Ackerman) said. But I also think it needs to be put in the perspective of what we're trying to achieve," he said.
"Pakistan as such is of immense importance to the United States strategically and politically, that our goal must be unambiguously to support and help stabilise a democratic Pakistan headed by its elected president, Asif Ali Zardari," Holbrooke said.
Several US lawmakers have questioned President Asif Ali Zardari's ability to control Pakistan with one of them comparing the country to a man whose pants are on fire but who does not realise the danger.
When one's pants are on fire one has to do two things to survive, said Democrat Gary Ackerman as a House panel on Tuesday questioned Richard Holbrooke, US special representative for Afghanistan and Pakistan on America 's strategy for the troubled ally.
"First you have to realise your pants are on fire. Then you have to do something about it," he said. "Let me be blunt. Pakistan's pants are on fire... but they seem convinced that if left alone or attacked piecemeal, the Islamist flame will simply burn itself out. That hope is, at best, folly."
Even now with insurgents a mere hour's drive from the capital, Ackerman said he suspected that among the senior officers of the Pakistani military that "bedrock belief is still that Pakistan's real enemy is India remains untouched by events."
Holbrooke urged Ackerman and others to speak with Zardari about their concerns while he is in Washington suggesting that the US has overreacted to the situation in Pakistan "when statements of concern became predictions".
The US should try "to dispel a self-fulfilling sense of pants-on-fire syndrome. It is not a failed state. It is a state under extreme stress," said Holbrooke.
"Now he said the pants really are on fire, and I understand exactly what he (Ackerman) said. But I also think it needs to be put in the perspective of what we're trying to achieve," he said.
"Pakistan as such is of immense importance to the United States strategically and politically, that our goal must be unambiguously to support and help stabilise a democratic Pakistan headed by its elected president, Asif Ali Zardari," Holbrooke said.
Obama has distorted vision of Pak-India ties ....says a Pakistani writer
M Ashraf Mirza
Is Pakistan’s perception of India as the mortal threat ‘misguided’ or President Obama’s vision about South Asia especially the Pak-India relations is ‘distorted’? It’s the pertinent question that has arisen in the minds of many Pakistanis after Obama’s comment at his Press conference in Washington marking completion of his 100 days in office. His assertion that there is ‘some recognition in Pakistan just in last few days that the obsession with India as the mortal threat to Pakistan has been misguided’ is simply startling and doesn’t represent the realities on the ground. It’s not clear what has made the US President to reach this conclusion since India is as hostile to Pakistan today as it was before. Issues of Kashmir, Siachin, Sir Creek and water remain unresolved. India’s clandestine activities to destabilize Pakistan are also very much persistent. India is pouncing on Pakistan’s neck and is sparing no effort to undermine its sovereignty. President Obama’s conclusion is misplaced since India remains as pugnacious today as it was yesterday. What has motivated Mr Obama to reach this conclusion is not known. Has India held out an assurance to the US that it will not create any problem for Pakistan? If so, the US should have convinced India to resolve the Kashmir and other contentious issues lingering between the two countries.
Pakistan has, in fact, lived with Indian hostility, aggression, belligerence and malevolence since its inception over six decades ago. India attacked Kashmir and occupied it through military action in violation of the Partition Plan creating Kashmir issue, which the world recognizes today as the nuclear flashpoint. It withheld Pakistan’s share of weapons and funds accruing from the pools of British India at the time of partition. India attacked Pakistan in 1965 and the two countries fought intense aerial and tank battles for seventeen days. The biggest tank battle after the War War II was fought at Chowinda near Sialkot in this war. India had earlier overrun Rann of Katchh in Sindh. It occupied Siachin Glacier and the two countries are since engaged in military conflict at the highest battleground on earth. India launched naked aggression against Pakistan and dismembered its eastern wing to create Bangladesh in 1971. India has built Baghlihar and Kishenganga dams on the rivers allocated to Pakistan under the Indus Water Treaty to deprive Pakistan of its rightful share of water in order to stifle its agriculture sector. Contrary to the US President’s comment, Interior Minister Rehman Malik has told Parliament’s closed-door briefing on the security situation of Pakistan last week that India is grossly involved in supporting miscreants in Balochistan with money and arms. He has proven India’s involvement in interference in Pakistan’s internal affairs with the help of charts and documentaries. Obama’s contention is also against the evidence that Pakistan provided to the President Bush during his visit to Pakistan about India’s dirty role in Balochistan through the number of Consulates that it has opened in the Afghan cities and towns all along the border with Pakistan. It also negates Pakistan’s stand at the recent tripartite summit where Pakistan had provided evidence about India’s conduct. His remark is also belied by the Indian interference in Balochistan where RAW is actively engaged in destabilizing the province through provision of funds and weapons to certain disgruntled elements. The motive of this action is unambiguously clear and that is to undermine Pakistan’s security, stability and sovereignty. And yet President Obama has the audacity to say that Pakistan’s perception of ‘mortal threat’ from India is ‘misguided’. He has rather ridiculed Pakistan’s genuine fear of India’s mortal threat to its existence as a sovereign country by terming it as its ‘obsession’. A cursory look at India’s conduct since its independence reveals its ugly face. It has remained at loggerheads with all its neighbours in one way or the other. It created Tamil Tigers over quarter of a century ago, which Sri Lanka is still fighting with to restore its writ across the country. It created, funded, trained and equipped Mukti Bahini to create insurgency in East Pakistan and ultimately resorted to brazen military aggression to dismember Pakistan’s eastern limb. It stifled Nepal economically and toppled the Nepalese governments time and again. India and Bangladesh also have had border skirmishes. Bangladesh is also crying over the dams India is building on the rivers flowing into its territory. India is, in fact, too ambitious to establish its hegemony in the region to assert itself as the regional power with political, economic and military influence over the regional countries. Its arrogance stems from its geographical size and military prowess. It still dreams of Akhund Bharat. It seems that Obama is also obsessed with India’s so-called democracy, where minorities’ miseries are unprecedented. They are living under constant threat of political, economic and physical elimination. It’s Indian brand of democracy, where thousands of anti-Muslim riots have taken place killing hundreds of thousands of the Muslims. Over a lac of Sikhs were killed in the riots following assassination of Indira Gandi. It’s India where Christians priests are burnt alive in their vehicles by the extremist Hindus. Yet India is a sacred cow in the eyes of the United States. Understandably, however, Pakistan is faced with insurgency like situation in some tribal agencies and Swat. Balochistan is also somewhat disturbed area. The responsibility of this situation, however, devolves on both the US and India. US invasion of Afghanistan is primary cause of Pakistan’s woes, which have since been deepened as a result of provision of funds and weapons by India to the renegade elements here and there. As long as US and NATO will remain in Afghanistan, Pakistan will not be able to heave a sigh of relief. The answer to Pakistan’s predicaments, therefore, principally lies in the American withdrawal from Afghanistan. The Bush administration had not studied the Afghan history before embarking on the mis-adventure of launching aggression against Afghanistan following the 9/11 attacks on Twin Towers and Pentagon. It had also not learnt lesson from the fate of the erstwhile Soviet Union.
That’s why it has failed to gain control over the landlocked country despite lapse of seven years. It’s now trying to pass the on buck to Pakistan. President Obama’s observation that the US wants to respect Pakistan’s sovereignty is also inconsistent with its conduct. The drone attacks are not only grave violation of Pakistan’s sovereignty but are also counter productive in the anti-terror war. If he is really interested in making secure and stable, he should better provide Pakistan with the tools of stability such as sophisticated military hardware and substantial economic assistance in the form of grants rather than loans.
He should better learn from President Reagan’s doctrine of fighting war instead of following President Bush, whose miserly and stingy behaviour has, in fact, led to the prolongation of the war on terror. It’s also for this reason that the menace of terrorism has escalated across the world over the years.
Is Pakistan’s perception of India as the mortal threat ‘misguided’ or President Obama’s vision about South Asia especially the Pak-India relations is ‘distorted’? It’s the pertinent question that has arisen in the minds of many Pakistanis after Obama’s comment at his Press conference in Washington marking completion of his 100 days in office. His assertion that there is ‘some recognition in Pakistan just in last few days that the obsession with India as the mortal threat to Pakistan has been misguided’ is simply startling and doesn’t represent the realities on the ground. It’s not clear what has made the US President to reach this conclusion since India is as hostile to Pakistan today as it was before. Issues of Kashmir, Siachin, Sir Creek and water remain unresolved. India’s clandestine activities to destabilize Pakistan are also very much persistent. India is pouncing on Pakistan’s neck and is sparing no effort to undermine its sovereignty. President Obama’s conclusion is misplaced since India remains as pugnacious today as it was yesterday. What has motivated Mr Obama to reach this conclusion is not known. Has India held out an assurance to the US that it will not create any problem for Pakistan? If so, the US should have convinced India to resolve the Kashmir and other contentious issues lingering between the two countries.
Pakistan has, in fact, lived with Indian hostility, aggression, belligerence and malevolence since its inception over six decades ago. India attacked Kashmir and occupied it through military action in violation of the Partition Plan creating Kashmir issue, which the world recognizes today as the nuclear flashpoint. It withheld Pakistan’s share of weapons and funds accruing from the pools of British India at the time of partition. India attacked Pakistan in 1965 and the two countries fought intense aerial and tank battles for seventeen days. The biggest tank battle after the War War II was fought at Chowinda near Sialkot in this war. India had earlier overrun Rann of Katchh in Sindh. It occupied Siachin Glacier and the two countries are since engaged in military conflict at the highest battleground on earth. India launched naked aggression against Pakistan and dismembered its eastern wing to create Bangladesh in 1971. India has built Baghlihar and Kishenganga dams on the rivers allocated to Pakistan under the Indus Water Treaty to deprive Pakistan of its rightful share of water in order to stifle its agriculture sector. Contrary to the US President’s comment, Interior Minister Rehman Malik has told Parliament’s closed-door briefing on the security situation of Pakistan last week that India is grossly involved in supporting miscreants in Balochistan with money and arms. He has proven India’s involvement in interference in Pakistan’s internal affairs with the help of charts and documentaries. Obama’s contention is also against the evidence that Pakistan provided to the President Bush during his visit to Pakistan about India’s dirty role in Balochistan through the number of Consulates that it has opened in the Afghan cities and towns all along the border with Pakistan. It also negates Pakistan’s stand at the recent tripartite summit where Pakistan had provided evidence about India’s conduct. His remark is also belied by the Indian interference in Balochistan where RAW is actively engaged in destabilizing the province through provision of funds and weapons to certain disgruntled elements. The motive of this action is unambiguously clear and that is to undermine Pakistan’s security, stability and sovereignty. And yet President Obama has the audacity to say that Pakistan’s perception of ‘mortal threat’ from India is ‘misguided’. He has rather ridiculed Pakistan’s genuine fear of India’s mortal threat to its existence as a sovereign country by terming it as its ‘obsession’. A cursory look at India’s conduct since its independence reveals its ugly face. It has remained at loggerheads with all its neighbours in one way or the other. It created Tamil Tigers over quarter of a century ago, which Sri Lanka is still fighting with to restore its writ across the country. It created, funded, trained and equipped Mukti Bahini to create insurgency in East Pakistan and ultimately resorted to brazen military aggression to dismember Pakistan’s eastern limb. It stifled Nepal economically and toppled the Nepalese governments time and again. India and Bangladesh also have had border skirmishes. Bangladesh is also crying over the dams India is building on the rivers flowing into its territory. India is, in fact, too ambitious to establish its hegemony in the region to assert itself as the regional power with political, economic and military influence over the regional countries. Its arrogance stems from its geographical size and military prowess. It still dreams of Akhund Bharat. It seems that Obama is also obsessed with India’s so-called democracy, where minorities’ miseries are unprecedented. They are living under constant threat of political, economic and physical elimination. It’s Indian brand of democracy, where thousands of anti-Muslim riots have taken place killing hundreds of thousands of the Muslims. Over a lac of Sikhs were killed in the riots following assassination of Indira Gandi. It’s India where Christians priests are burnt alive in their vehicles by the extremist Hindus. Yet India is a sacred cow in the eyes of the United States. Understandably, however, Pakistan is faced with insurgency like situation in some tribal agencies and Swat. Balochistan is also somewhat disturbed area. The responsibility of this situation, however, devolves on both the US and India. US invasion of Afghanistan is primary cause of Pakistan’s woes, which have since been deepened as a result of provision of funds and weapons by India to the renegade elements here and there. As long as US and NATO will remain in Afghanistan, Pakistan will not be able to heave a sigh of relief. The answer to Pakistan’s predicaments, therefore, principally lies in the American withdrawal from Afghanistan. The Bush administration had not studied the Afghan history before embarking on the mis-adventure of launching aggression against Afghanistan following the 9/11 attacks on Twin Towers and Pentagon. It had also not learnt lesson from the fate of the erstwhile Soviet Union.
That’s why it has failed to gain control over the landlocked country despite lapse of seven years. It’s now trying to pass the on buck to Pakistan. President Obama’s observation that the US wants to respect Pakistan’s sovereignty is also inconsistent with its conduct. The drone attacks are not only grave violation of Pakistan’s sovereignty but are also counter productive in the anti-terror war. If he is really interested in making secure and stable, he should better provide Pakistan with the tools of stability such as sophisticated military hardware and substantial economic assistance in the form of grants rather than loans.
He should better learn from President Reagan’s doctrine of fighting war instead of following President Bush, whose miserly and stingy behaviour has, in fact, led to the prolongation of the war on terror. It’s also for this reason that the menace of terrorism has escalated across the world over the years.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
