Go Goa Gone

Poolside 1 BHK Apartment in Resort

Siolim, Goa, India
Serene Siolim- Gateway to the pristine beaches of North Goa at Tropical Dreams Resort with Lush green surroundings Ground Floor across the biggest swimming pool in Goa is furnished with SplitAC Ref...
Vacation Rentals in Siolim

Friday, October 29, 2010

Text of Simla Agreement & War Criminals Published by webmaster

Text of Simla Agreement & War Criminals
Published by webmaster


Simla Agreement on Bilateral Relations between India and Pakistan was signed by Prime Minister Indira Gandhi, and President of Pakistan, Z. A. Bhutto, in Simla on July 2, 1972. The Agreement was ratified on July 28, 1972 and came into force from August 4, 1972.

The Text of the SIMLA AGREEMENT

The Government of India and the Government of Pakistan are resolved that the two countries put an end to the conflict and confrontation that have hitherto marred their relations and work for the promotion of a friendly and harmonious relationship and the establishment of durable peace in the subcontinent so that both countries may henceforth devote their resources and energies to the pressing task of advancing the welfare of their people.

In order to achieve this objective, the Government of India and the Government of Pakistan have agreed as follows:
(i) That the principles and purposes of the Charter of the United Nations shall govern the relations between the two countries.
(ii) That the two countries are resolved to settle their differences by peaceful means through bilateral negotiations or by any other peaceful means mutually agreed upon between them. Pending the final settlement of any of the problems between the two countries, neither side shall unilaterally alter the situation and both shall prevent the organisation, assistance or encouragement of any acts detrimental to the maintenance of peace and harmonious relations.
(iii) That the prerequisite for reconciliation, good neighbourliness and durable peace between them is a commitment by both the countries to peaceful coexistence respect for each other’s territorial integrity and sovereignty and noninterference in each other’s internal affairs, on the basis of equality and mutual benefit.
(iv) That the basic issues and causes of conflict which have bedeviled the relations between the two countries for the last 25 years shall be resolved by peaceful means.
(v) That they shall always respect each other’s national unity, territorial integrity, political independence and sovereign equality.
(vi) That in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations, they will refrain from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of each other.
Both governments will take all steps within their power to prevent hostile propaganda directed against each other. Both countries will encourage the dissemination of such information as would promote the development of friendly relations between them.
In order progressively to restore and normalise relations between the two countries step by step, it was agreed that:
(i) Steps shall be taken to resume communications, postal, telegraphic, sea, land, including border posts, and air links, including over flights.
(ii) Appropriate steps shall be taken to promote travel facilities for the nationals of the other country.
(iii) Trade and cooperation in economic and other agreed fields will be resumed as far as possible.
(iv) Exchange in the fields of science and culture will be promoted.
In this connection delegations from the two countries will meet from time to time to work out the necessary details.
In order to initiate the process of the establishment of durable peace, both the governments agree that:
(i) Indian and Pakistani forces shall be withdrawn to their side of the international border.
(ii) In Jammu and Kashmir, the line of control resulting from the ceasefire of December 17, 1971, shall be respected by both sides without prejudice to the recognised position of either side. Neither side shall seek to alter it unilaterally, irrespective of mutual differences and legal interpretations. Both sides further undertake to refrain from the threat or the use of force in violation of this line.
(iii) The withdrawals shall commence upon entry into force of this agreement and shall be completed within a period of 30 days thereof.
This agreement will be subject to ratification by both countries in accordance with their respective constitutional procedures, and will come into force with effect from the date on which the instruments of ratification are exchanged.
Both governments agree that their respective heads will meet again at a mutually convenient time in the future and that in the meanwhile the representatives of the two sides will meet to discuss further the modalities and arrangements for the establishment of durable peace and normalisation of relations, including the questions of repatriation of prisoners of war and civilian internees, a final settlement of Jammu and Kashmir and the resumption of diplomatic relations.
Source:
The national encyclopedia of Bangladesh Banglapedia records the event as:
Simla Agreement a peace settlement reached between India and Pakistan following the WAR OF LIBERATION of Bangladesh in 1971 which India supported as an ally. The Pakistan army surrendered on 16 December 1971, and the whole army was taken to safety as Prisoners of War. Bangladesh was eager to try them as war criminals. Releasing the prisoners from the Indian custody and keeping them away from the threatened war trial became a grave national issue for the government of Pakistan. On the other hand, India needed to restore normal relations with Pakistan in order to restore its image as a peace loving nation. Pakistan Prime Minister Z.A Bhutto and Indian Prime Minister Mrs Indira Gandhi met in a summit meeting at Simla (28 June-2 July 1972) and signed the peace treaty.

According to the terms of the agreement, India and Pakistan decided to put an end to all hostilities and establish friendly relations between them in all affairs- regional and international and restore the status quo in Jammu and Kashmir as on 17 December 1971. Under this agreement India returned all prisoners of war to Pakistan without holding any trial. India also made a ‘package deal’ with Pakistan, not mentioned in the agreement, under which Pakistan was to accord diplomatic recognition to Bangladesh and open negotiations for mutually exchanging the citizens opting for Bangladesh and Pakistan. [Asha Islam]

Conclusion

A careful reading of the text shows that in the agreement, the signatories Prime minister India Gandhi of India and President Z. A. Bhutto of Pakistan were more concerned for normalizing the bilateral relations of India and Pakistan. There was off-the-record understanding for the diplomatic recognition of Bangladesh by Pakistan. The question of genocide and war crimes is either ignored or neglected and India returned all prisoners of war to Pakistan without holding any trial.

Composed by Dr. M. Razzaque from BUET
Jan 08, 2008
Filed under: War Criminals and Colloborators, 2July-1972Indira Gandhi, Simla Agreement, Zulfikar Ali Bhutto

Thursday, October 28, 2010

Defeating Political Islam by Moorthy S. Muthuswamy


Defeating Political Islam by Moorthy S. Muthuswamy

 
About the Author
Moorthy S. Muthuswamy resides in America. He received a doctoral degree in nuclear physics from Stony Brook University, New York. He has published numerous opinions, articles, and book chapters spanning over ten years.


Editorial Reviews
Review
""[An] excellent analysis of the threat the Islamic ideology poses to the West....not only identifies and analyzes the problem civilized democracies face with Islam, but he also aims to give possible ways to deal with it as well. This book is a must-read for everyone and an eye-opener for those who are not yet aware of the threat Islam poses to our Western civilization...." --Geert Wilders, a member of the Dutch Parliament and the political leader of the Party for Freedom (PVV).

"Defeating Political Islam attacks and destroys the ideas of "war on terror" and a benign Islam that has been high jacked by extremists. He shows that our prime error is ignoring the fact that political Islam exists, that it has a detailed ideology and a history of conquest. If we do not engage in an ideological battle with political Islam, we are doomed to lose a war we refuse to recognize....If I were President, I would direct that every officer and diplomat that dealt with the Middle East and Asia read, study and comprehend Defeating Political Islam." --Bill Warner, Director--Center for the Study of Political Islam

"Here is a thorough and provocative discussion of the threat of the global jihad and Islamic supremacism in all its dimensions. Moorthy Muthuswamy deserves our gratitude for presenting a solidly argued exposition of what must be done in order to fight, and win, this conflict on ideological and political grounds, defending human rights and religious freedom from the threat posed to them by the jihadists. We can only hope that our political leaders and those of all the nations that are threatened by the jihad will heed his wise counsel before it is too late." --Robert Spencer, author of the New York Times Bestsellers The Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam (and the Crusades) and The Truth About Muhammad.

"Defeating Political Islam attacks and destroys the ideas of "war on terror" and a benign Islam that has been high jacked by extremists. He shows that our prime error is ignoring the fact that political Islam exists, that it has a detailed ideology and a history of conquest. If we do not engage in an ideological battle with political Islam, we are doomed to lose a war we refuse to recognize....If I were President, I would direct that every officer and diplomat that dealt with the Middle East and Asia read, study and comprehend Defeating Political Islam." --Bill Warner, Director--Center for the Study of Political Islam

""[An] excellent analysis of the threat the Islamic ideology poses to the West....not only identifies and analyzes the problem civilized democracies face with Islam, but he also aims to give possible ways to deal with it as well. This book is a must-read for everyone and an eye-opener for those who are not yet aware of the threat Islam poses to our Western civilization...." --Geert Wilders, a member of the Dutch Parliament and the political leader of the Party for Freedom (PVV).
Product Description
Al Qaeda and its sympathizers are often viewed as isolated fanatics outside of the mainstream Muslim population outlaws not only in the West but also in respectable Muslim nations. This book argues just the opposite: that in fact terrorism is the logical outgrowth of an international Islamic political agenda that is endorsed and funded by Islam's major players Saudi Arabia, Iran, and Pakistan. Author Moorthy S. Muthuswamy labels these nations the "Axis of Jihad". For decades, he says, they have been devoted to extending their spheres of influence in the name of religion.

Utilizing a recent groundbreaking statistical analysis of Islamic doctrines and an analysis based upon the outlook of Muslims, he discusses the possibility that Islam is less a religion and more an ideology of conquest.

Muthuswamy urges US policymakers to rethink the War on Terror along the lines of the successfully waged Cold War against communism. The nuclear physicist-author makes the following main point:

Like the Cold War, this war is more a contest of ideas than armed conflict. Rather than placing the emphasis on military might and costly wars abroad, the West should invest the bulk of its effort in a science-based ideological war, one that is directed at discrediting the simplistic, conquest-oriented theological roots of Islamist indoctrination and jihadist politics.

Muthuswamy also emphasizes the importance of a largely non-Muslim India in the War on Terror, in view of its location and size. The India-born author gives a fascinating description of modern Islamic conquest in South Asia. His insights into the Islamist siege and subversion of Indian democracy should be revealing for the citizens of western democracies.

The author asserts that the West needs India in dealing with the conundrum that is Pakistan, as they both share language, culture, and more with each other.

This fresh perspective on the ongoing threat from Islamist terrorism offers much to ponder about the future course of US foreign policy initiatives.


This review is from: Defeating Political Islam: The New Cold War (Hardcover)
I purchased this book primarily to learn the views on political Islam and Jihad from a "non-white" European/North American. As the author points out, India has been victimized by Islam perhaps more than any other country on the planet with the exception of Arabia itself. However, unfortunately, all too often during the past several decades or so, Indians have, in the name of political correctness and "non-aligned" movement solidarity stemming from the Nehru/Nasser aliance, white washed the centuries of ethnic cleansing perpetrated on them by Islam, as well as the more recent predations. So, it was quite refreshing to learn that at least some Indians are beginning to re-examine their past so as to better understand the threat to their future. Whether one agrees with the author or not, one should read this book for the sections on India if nothing else.
His primary thesis is that militant Jihad can never be defeated unless the philosophical underpinnings of political Islam are discredited and eliminated. Unfortunately, he points out, that political Islam itself (and ultimately Jihad) can never be eliminated unless the theological underpinnings of Islam itself are discredited and proven to be false. Contrary to what certain intellectually challenged critics claim, he is not advocating the mass extermination of Muslims or any sort of persecution. In fact, he makes the point several times that military responses to Jihad are not the solution, though they may be needed from time to time to gain short term breathing room. Rather, his main point is that the only way to defeat political Islam and subsequently eliminate Jihad, is to
subject the Islamic trinity of Qur'an, Hadith, and Sunna to the same scientific and scholarly scrutiny that Christian doctrines have been subjected to over the last several centuries. Use science, he says, to first convince the westernized, intellectual Muslims of the errors of their religion, and then this will eventually trickle down to the masses in the third world countries. The Western powers could speed this process up by setting up TV and radio stations beamed to the Islamic world where their scriptures would be analyzed by experts and held up against the findings of science. In the process, the numerous contradictions and outright silliness of most of literatures in their holy trinity of Qur'an, Hadith, and Sunna, would become apparent to all leading to a mass defection from the religion. He warns, however, that such an effort would likely unravel Christianity as well as religion in general gets de-mythologized by science.

I wanted to give this book five stars for the author's unique approach to dealing with Political Islam and for his invaluable recounting of the true (and very grave) situation in India. However there were a few issues that prevented me from doing so. One was his tendency to repeat himself rather often. Another issue was his tendency to accept the position of the apologist Steven Swartz that the virulent form of Sunni Islam sweeping the world today is entirely the fault of Saudi Arabia's Wahhabism. In so doing, the author undermines his own thesis that it is Islam itself that needs to be dismantled. By placing all of the blame for virulent Islam and Jihad on the shoulders of the Wahhabis (bad though they are), he is, in a sense, letting the MB and Sayyid Qutb off the hook. Then there is the matter of minor factual errors. For example, on page 69 he makes reference to "the Saudi tribes Muhammad was a part of." Historically, the Saudis did not appear until the 15th century, and then the ruled only one tiny village near Riyadh. They did not become major players until they wedded themselves to the Wahhabi doctrine in the 18th century. So, there were no Saudi tribes during the time of Muhammad. What the author should have said, was Arab tribes. Unfortunately he made that same mistake several times throughout the book, projecting "the Saudis" back into historical times and geographical areas when and where they did not exist.


I would like to thank Mr. Webb for a thoughtful review.

I didn't claim that the virulent form of Sunni Islam sweeping the world today is entirely the fault of Saudi Wahhabism.

In fact, I pointed out the following in discussing the evolution of Indonesia: "My answer to the original question of why Indonesians have now become less moderate is, they listen to and discuss Islamic theology much more now than they did fifty years ago.... the increase in Islamic extremism seen all over the world coincides with the increase in funding for propagating Islamic theology. We can see consistently that more exposure to Islamic theology leads to more extremism - exactly the kind of correlation expected, based upon the statistics we've discussed."

Even in discussing the attributes of Wahhabism itself, I noted: "As new groundbreaking research discussed in the next chapter shows, statistically, jihadist politics form a significant component of Islamic doctrine. Hence, one has to wonder whether the Wahhabi interpretation of Sunni Islam is indeed a fair and accurate representation of Islamic doctrine as defined in the trilogy."

In my effort to identify the roots of many Muslim attributes - from terror to shunning education and modernism - to just one thing: the Islamic doctrine itself, I appear to have come across as repeating myself.


Islamism is a Threat Posing as a Religion

Islamism is a Threat Posing as a Religion

Islamism is a Threat Posing as a Religion

Mervyn F. Bendle
October 28, 2010

http://www.familysecuritymatters.org/publications/id.7769/pub_detail.asp


Tuesday, October 26, 2010

On Partition of India

As per Sukh Lal Dhani- On Partition of India

There are some other aspects as well. which allow a new glimpse of Gandhi's life. They include the following some of which will not be liked by the official historians, for want of directions from above;

1. Gandhi was not an ordinary person like most of us. He belonged to the line of Prime Ministers of a group of states around Rajkot;


2. Prime ministers to Indian states and Residents used to be appointed by the British rulers, who acted as agents of the Empire as again the rulers of Indian states;

3. Only those students were sent to England to study law were generally not promising students and whose parents had enough of money to spare;

4. Most of he colleges in England used to be residential ones, and the degrees were allotted after spending a particulate number of years.


5. Even matriculates could such law degrees;

6. Merit was determined by the British rulers not on the basis of excellence of candidates but it was suited to the deficiency of the candidates;

7. Most of the early Indian students came from about 600 students came from princely states who were taught lesson that "parhoge lkhoge hovoge khraab, kheloge koodoge banoge nawab";


8. When students from ordinary but rich families started going to England for higher studies, and secured better grades than the princes, the merit of princes was upgraded by allotting more marks for sports, extra curricular activities;

9. Gandhi was an average student, he never gave priority to studies, he started spending time in learning dance and leading an easy life and eating meat;

10. Still, he cared for the opinion of his elders, particularly his mother. Therefore he imposed self-discipline and reverted to his early comparatively chaste life;

11. He does not deserve to be give special credit for believing in non-violence since Manusmriti required Vaisyas to remain subservient to Brahmanas and particularly the armed Kshatriyas. His non-violent conduct could not be ascribed to the teachings of the Buddha and Lord Mahaveera;

12. his conduct in South Africa confirmed to the delight of the Brituish rulers that if r the leadership if Indian distrust was entrusted to a man like Gandhi, they could easily rule over India unhindered fro many more decades;

13. When Capital of India was at Calcutta, Tagore family used to be the best recipient of the favors of the British Empire. Rabindra Nath Tagore's grand d father was so rich that he had traveled in his own steamer to England for being in the audience of Queen Victoria;

14.The Tagore estate around Shantiniketan was the health resort of British couples earmarked for merrymaking;


14. After shifting of the Capita to New Delhi in 1912, the role of Tagore was taken over by Motilal Nehru at Allahabad.


15. Motilal Nehru was initially not an advocate but he was only a mukhtiar and in that capacity he had become friendly to one Judge Mullah, who had give his Anand Bhavan to Motilal;

16. Motil al had an excellent rapport with judges in England so that Jawaharlal had the freedom to visit their residences even as a law student;

17. Jawaharlal Nehru was senior to Gandhi in Congress;

18,Gandhi was persuaded by Gopal Krisna Gokhale and Tagore's emissary Andrews by going to South Africa to shift to India and take charge of Politics there;

19. Gandhi was asked by Bal Gangadhar Tilak to remain on probation for quite a few years and get acquainted with rural India and its poverty. BG Tilak was a Congress extremist who wished the British to leave immediately unlike Gokhale, the mentor of Gandhi;

20. Gandhi had come to hold the reigns of Congress in 1921 when he got a resolution passed to the effect that he would remain a life tie dictator of Congress;

21. Thus the writ of Gandhi was honored not because of any special regard for him but because of his being a dictator and his continued friendship with all the Viceroys of India;

22, Gandhi's arrival in India was celebrated by he British rulers by conferring upon him the Kaiser-I hind Award on him on the very next day of his arrival in India for the most outstanding services to the British Empire while being in South Africa;

23. Gandhi had not helped the Boers and Zulus of South Africa in their revolt against British Rulers but he had served to his best the British rulers;

The list can go on and on but at this stage it should suffice to generate the special interest in the unwritten side of history of Indian freedom struggle.


Dr. Dhani

Untold History of India's Partition RANDOR GUY spoke to British historian, ANTONY COPLEY

Untold History of India's Partition

RANDOR GUY spoke to British historian, ANTONY COPLEY

The noted British historian, ANTONY COPLEY, whose areas of specialisation include, Hinduism, Modern Indian History, the life and career of leaders like Mahatma Gandhi, Pandit Nehru, (Rajaji), and Mohammed Ali Jinnah, has been an active India-watcher for years.

A senior member of the Faculty of History in the University of Kent at Canterbury, England since 1967, he has written many books on various aspects of Indian history and culture. Prof. Copley was recently in India on a study tour and RANDOR GUY spoke to him about some events of recent Indian history.
http://www.facebook.com/topic.php?uid=103295562390&topic=19170
Excerpts from the interview.

Many think that the Partition of India in August 1947 could have been averted! Do you think so?

OVER the last 10 years that led to the Partition, there was lot of poor communication, possibly dishonesty and lots of misunderstanding. People were adopting positions, fencing for the future power structure in India and in doing so opportunities were constantly being lost...

When you say, "people", who were they?

The leading representatives of the Congress starting with Pandit Nehru with Gandhi beginning to be marginalised. Sardar Patel was, of course, another key player... On the other side was Jinnah, the outstanding figure of the Muslim League, and the representatives of the British Government, this was the structure. The only last possible moment when the division could have been avoided was in 1946 when the Cabinet Mission came here — Lord Pethick-Lawrence, A. V. Alexander and Sir Stafford Cripps. Those negotiations were the best prospect for any possible all-India settlement. Once the Cabinet Mission proposals had been discarded and the Muslims rejected them, there was no more opportunity.

Why did they reject them?

That was the beginning of a rethinking process by Nehru about the most possible future of independent India. Nehru began to sense that coming to some arrangement with the Muslim League was so off-putting. His experience with the Muslim League representatives in the Interim government cabinet in 1946 made him painfully aware that it was not worth the candle of trying to find some order over the division of power between the two forces. It made much more sense to cut your losses! So he began to move away from such division to reluctant toleration of partition of India. Jinnah too was for a showdown for the partition. The Congress was also scared of the initiative slipping away and getting out of their hands. The radical movements taking over especially the Leftists in Bengal! The biggest factor in the last stage was the readiness in West Bengal for partition. The Bengalis (Hindus) felt marginalised and alienated by the Muslims and were willing to accept a truncated Bengal to restore their prestige.

When you say that Gandhi was marginalised and Pandit Nehru took over, was it deliberately done by him and others or did Gandhi himself contribute to it by his moralistic stance and philosophy?

Nehru was very faithful to Gandhi. It was a painful process of setting aside the peculiar and high values of Gandhi. Once the practicalities of power politics began to be dominant, he realised that an idealist like Gandhi could not be the focus of the power structure. Gandhi said that when India became independent the Congress party should be disbanded and become a social service organisation! Besides he made some extraordinary proposals like Jinnah should become the Prime Minister of India! He even offered it to Jinnah, he never abandoned the idea even in 1947. Meanwhile the Congress moved in another direction.

Was there any lust for power in the Congress leaders at that time?

They were only human...People who had devoted major part of their adult lives in prison felt themselves getting closer to power and the prospects of an independent India seemed much brighter than ever before and they did not want to postpone what they have been seeking for years.

Looking back to 1942, when the Congress rejected the "Cripps Plan", Rajaji came up with his "CR-Plan". He advised the Congress to accept the formation of Pakistan but was violently opposed by the party. Some historians think that if only the Congress had only accepted the CR-Plan, the trauma of Partition in 1947 could well have been avoided. Do you agree?

The CR-Plan anticipated in acute detail what actually happened later in 1947. In a way he paved the way for talks if not a solution. Rajagopalachari largely engineered the Gandhi-Jinnah Talks of 1944. It gave Jinnah much publicity, much propaganda of his cause, much force and increased the chances of formation of Pakistan.
CR was the most brilliant, serious, rational and clever-thinking man India ever produced. Here was a man who could see far ahead but he could not grasp the human frailties in the situation. We now know that Cripps did not have the support of the Home Government in London! Winston Churchill was not for any proposals. And he did not want the Cripps Plan to work. FDR was pressing Churchill that he should do something for India and her demand for freedom. So Churchill knew he had to make some of gesture to the Americans to get them off his back.

So he was trying to please Roosevelt more than anything else?

I think that, as far as Churchill was concerned, it was his perceptual objective that there should be no offer to India for freedom especially in the war situation. Cripps was entirely in a false position. He thought it would work. He did not know that Amery (the Secretary of Sate for India) was hand in glove with Churchill!

There is an interesting incident not known to many. Sir C. P. Ramaswamy Aiyer, then the Dewan of Travancore State, met Sardar Patel in Bombay. Both were on their way to meet Sir Stafford Cripps. Patel told Sir C. P. that nothing would come out of the Cripps Plan. The whole thing was a front engineered by Nehru to become the Prime Minister of India and it would not happen for he (Patel) was putting it down and going to kill it! He had already told Gandhi and he had agreed that it should be done! Sir C. P. was taken aback at this revelation. So he wrote a secret communication to Lord Linlithgow who was equally surprised! He narrated it all in a secret letter to Amery in London, which I read in the " Transfer of Power" Documents.

In 1942 Nehru was genuinely anxious that the Cripps proposals should work, though on Congress terms. He was a genuine democrat — anti-fascist. He was anxious to get the Congress to agree to some arrangement with the Raj, He felt that it would help to avert in the future the partition of India.

Talking of Jinnah, do you think that his role on Indian politics was much bigger than Gandhi's?

In terms of their moral presence Gandhi was by far a greater man. Jinnah had two moments of dominance in the Indian story. One was during the First World War (1914-1918), which the Congress just frittered away. Here was a man who could be a very powerful and useful ally but they alienated him and allowed him to drift into negative relationship with the Congress. And he comes back in 1935 with a new proposition, he has to work extremely hard to build up his position as the all India Muslim leader, and by 1945 he is a key player. But Jinnah was an impossible man to negotiate with.

Was it part of his psyche or a mere put-on?

He was naturally reserved, he had so many human setbacks, his marriage, the importance that Gandhi got from the "Khilafat Movement", he never really recovered from the serious hurt of the series of injuries he had in life. He was a very secretive man, kept his ideas well in control, a loner. I recognise him as master tactician of real politique. You may not like him but you have to recognise his political talents and manoeuvring skills. In the beginning he didn't want Pakistan but some all-India settlement for Muslims. He allowed the Pakistan Movement to become the vehicle to manoeuvre the politics of the Indian sub-continent. It was a case of the means becoming the end. Perhaps the means was Pakistan and the end was the Prime Ministership of India. He very much hoped in 1946 and was shattered when Lord Wavell (then Viceroy of India) didn't allow him and Nehru became the Prime Minister of the Interim Government. Gandhi did invite him to take over but it did not happen. We do not know when the tuberculosis he suffered from became rampant — he kept it a closely guarded secret but he knew he had not long to live. That's why he chose to become the President of Pakistan, and not Prime Minister.

Barak Obama visiting India





SC vacates stay on Godhra trial: Godhra train burning pre-planned: panel

SC vacates stay on Godhra trial: Godhra train burning pre-planned: panel
India Blooms News Service

http://www.indiablooms.com/NewsDetailsPage/newsDetails261010j.php


New Delhi, Oct 26 (IBNS) The Supreme Court on Tuesday vacated a stay order on the Godhra riots cases of 2002 in Gujarat, paving the way for a verdict also in the case of train burning.


It paved the way for verdict in eight of the nine riot related cases by the special courts hearing them, except the case of Gulbarga Society.

The Supreme Court earlier had stayed the judgements because it was felt that the verdicts might affect the investigation and outcome of the other ongoing cases.

Supreme Court conducted the hearing on the report submitted by Special Investigation Team (SIT) probing the Godhra riots.

Prashant Bhushan, whose appointment as amicus curie was opposed by the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), withdrew himself.



Godhra train burning pre-planned: panel

courtesy: http://www.indiablooms.com/NewsDetailsPage/newsDetails250908a.php

Ahmedabad, Sept 25: A probe panel today said the Godhra train burning six years ago that killed 59 people and triggered Gujarat-wide communal violence was not an accident but a premeditated crime - leading to jubilation in the BJP camp.

The first part of the Godhra Commission report tabled in the Gujarat Assembly on Thursday gave a clean chit to Gujarat Chief Minister Narendra Modi.

The report says that the incident of burning S-6 coach of Sabarmati Express on February 27, 2002, was a pre-planned conspiracy and not an accident. The report was tabled in the House as it met for a three-day session.

Justice (Retd) G T Nanavati and Justice (Retd) Akshay Mehta of the Commission submitted the first part of their report covering their findings on the burning of S6 coach of Sabarmati Express near Godhra Railway Station on February 2002 to the state government last week.

According to the report, the burning of the train was a pre-planned act. Around 140 litres of petrol was used to set the train on fire. The report also states that Maulvi Umrej plotted the conspiracy to set the Sabarmati Expresss ablaze. The policemen who were assigned to travel on the train neglected their duty and have been dismissed.

The commission was set up in 2002 and it submitted first part of its report after six years. The commission is likely to submit the second part of its report about their findings on the post-Godhra riots and the role of government in it by December.

This finding of the two-member Commission goes contrary to a probe headed by another former Supreme Court judge U C Banerjee set up by the Lalu Prasad-headed railway ministry that the coach burning was purely an accident. Retired justice Akshay Mehta was the other member of the Nanavati Commission

When questioned about these latest developments in the case, Banerjee refuted the findings of the Nanavati Commission. He said, "I have not seen the report yet. I have examined a large number of passengers. I stand by the report I had submitted. It was an accidental incident and not pre-planned. I have also negated the use of petrol after examining the evidence. All my findings are based on the evidence submitted before me.”

NGOs had opposed the tabling of the report in the state assembly by filing a petition in the Gujarat High Court. The petition was, however, rejected by the court saying that there is no such provision in the Commission of Inquiry's Act which restricts any commission to submit the reports in parts.

BJP hails Nanavati report, says it exposed the truth

The Bhartiya Janta Party (BJP) on Thursday (September 25) hailed the Nanavati Commission report on the Godhra carnage that gave a clean chit to Gujarat Chief Minister Narendra Modi and claimed it exposed Railway Minister Lalu Prasad's contention that the incident was an accident.

“We will request that the matter should proceed according to the Nanavati Commission report in the courts also. It will prove to be a milestone in convicting the culprits,” BJP spokesperson Prakash Javadekar told reporters.

“More than 50 Kar Sewaks were burnt alive and Lalu Prasad Yadav had made an effort to show it as an accident via the Bannerjee Commission report, which was ill-conceived and never conducted an exhaustive inquiry," Javadekar said.



Modi committed contempt of court: Setalvad

Social activist Teesta Setalvad, who was at the forefront of the campaign for justice to the victims of Godhra riots, today said Gujarat Chief Minister Narendra Modi has committed contempt of court by releasing the Nanavati Commission report in the state Assembly.

Speaking to TV channel TIMES NOW, she said, “I would like to point out that the Chief Minister has scant respect for the rule of law and investigation. He has committed contempt of the Supreme Court by releasing the report at this juncture.

Setalvad said the Raghav Behl committee appointed by the Supreme Court is going into the Godhra incident. "By releasing the report at this juncture, it is clear that the Chief Minister wants to use this manipulative report as an electoral arsenal". “We can be hopeful that the Supreme Court will restrain the Chief Minister from the misuse of this report," she added.

The Godhra Committee report on the burning of the S-6 coach of the Sabarmati Express, which was tabled in the state Assembly today, gave a clean chit to Modi and said the fire was pre-planned.

Readers Comments on Suzane Arundhati roy


salim (uk)
3 hrs ago (10:34 PM)
if it was PoK or Tibet these idiots would have been shot from point blank range. NO QUESTIONED ASKED!!!!!! How weak is our law %26 constitution???? AURANDHATI ROY, Geelani & others at this forum should be investigated by CBI & IB for their role & involvement against the nation & punished with capital punishment to serve a warning for any others that may have involvements in anti national activities..May Allah also guide those Kashmiri teenagers who have been misguided by the likes of Geelani that peace & prosperity is with INDIA only. I am from Delhi originally & I have friends from PoK in london who actually wish they could be identified as Indians as they want a good image not be known as citizens of a failed terrorist state.

Ganesh Pai 2 hours ago

Pity the writers who back-stab their motherland to stay in the limelight. I would challenge her to go to China and say that Tibet was not a part of China, or go to Russia and say that Chechenya was not part of Russia. May be her ultra-left deceased ideology permits only anti-national views and not truth and justice. Being a writer is not a license to bark your mouth like dogs. She urgently needs a stay at the asylum cause that the plea she is going to take at the trial.


Vragav 2 hours ago

May be writers should have expiry date like medicines, otherwise it will kill the people who consumes it......she crossed her expiry date...her continuous statement is the proof of it......dear fellow citizens, pls ignore her....

Rkk 2 hours ago

who is she? what is her expertise in this? a Booker prize does not entitle her to talk nonsense. she should only write fiction. She should be locked up and keys thrown in the sea. A million soldiers have fought for Kashmir and several thousnds of soldiers have lost their life for it. it is obvious that this statement is only to get cheap publicity - but how low can she stoop!!! May she rot in hell foe eternity


joker123 12 minutes ago

Arunadhati

Write that your Kashmir struggle is based just on "Religious Grounds"?

Write about What your new found friends mean by "Ethnic Cleansing"?

Write about victims of your so called struggle=== Kashmiri pandits?


in reply to Sreeejuz

I have been in Maoist areas and know the conditions out there. We want situation to improve but not at the cost of National integrity. Why don't people talk about KASHMIRI PANDITS. Just because they are a minority in Kashmir and people talking about them won't get due publicity for the same. The only place in India where Muslims are majority does not allow any other religion. If 90% population becomes insane we need to consider them insane rather than proving them right at cost of 10% good citizens.


Free Tibetian 29 minutes ago

If this lady had said something about the Muslim personal law in Indian, the musamans would have issued a Fatwa against her. Geeting the Booker Prize does not mean someone is intelligent. Since the booker prize this woman has sold nothing of substance, now she is trying to get some cheap publicity to remain in the limelight. As a free Tibet I am happy to live in India. FREE TIBET NOW


Sundar 51 minutes ago

Ms Roy , your calls for justice is based on your completely distorted perception , do not link the rubbish you have written with looters ,scamster's and murderer's . You senseless writing in the name of freedom and justice is only creating hate and divide over a sensitive and complicated issue


Seve 1 hour ago

I say pity the nation that harbours and appeases a visceral liar and a twisted spin doctor with a penchant for treachery and betryal, what an attention seeking wind bag.


Indian by Default 1 hour ago in reply to moon

Sure, all Arundhati Roy had to say about Kashmiri Pandits that driving them away was a criminal act. I fail to understand the high morals of the Lady as to why then is siding with Criminals?
To quote her"Kashmir has never been an integral part of India -- it is a historical fact. Even the Indian government has accepted this." When did it happen? Certainly in Ms Roy dreams. Otherwise the Indian Govt is crying hoarse from all platforms including UN that Kashmir is an Intergral Part of India. Perhaps the Lady is deaf so as to not to hear it.
One should not Pity the Nation and society but Pity individuals like Roy that in order to keep themselves in news they have to stoop so low.


Anand 2 hours ago

Oh Arundhati....

You wished you could be a martyr, yet you chose to pay a Rs. 75 fine rather than spend 3 months in prison. At least Medha Patkar had more conviction and dedication to her cause- mindless it may seem.

You wished you could be the voice of the oppressed against the evil corporate and money-greedy oligarchy, but couldn't resist building a huge hilltop bungalow on PROTECTED forest land, so you and your spouse could canoodle like junkyard rabbits in solitude.

You wished you could be a writer, and yet your Booker prize winning story reeked of plagiarism from "To Kill A Mocking Bird" and you haven't really written anything significant in a while.

You wished you could be the voice against imperialism, but we often hear you cavorting with our former colonial masters in Britain- enjoying lavish dinner at conferences and what not.

No, Arundhati....One shouldn't pity a nation trying to make things work the best it can despite inherent corruption and burgeoning poverty. One ought to pity hypocritical intellectuals like you who congregate with a segregationist idiot with an IQ of a "gushtaba" like Geelani- he of the "don't send your kids to school" and "protest from 7am to 7pm and work from 7pm to 7am" fame- just so you can hog some spotlight. Idiots (I mean, Intellectuals) like you don't realize that the people whom you tend to vociferously fight for won't hesitate to put the likes of you in the front of the line for a mass tree-hanging session, when they come to power. Does Pol Pot ring a bell?

So, yes...please do enjoy the freedom of speech that you've been allowed so far. I am not for silencing you nor charging you for sedition. You see, despite your rank stupidity and willful ignorance of history, I respect the notion of free-speech, even if a lowlife-turd were to avail that freedom. Despite your comments, not a single hair on your precious skull-cave has been harmed, and that's saying something.

Lastly, I just wish that people of India learn to ignore you, and you're left with nothing but your tiny horde of bleating sheep- much like the KKK in USA or Rush Limbaugh's fans. Or maybe it's just that your genius is so bright that us "bhookha-nanga" Indians don't deserve to bask in it. Who knows? That said, I'm sure you're looking into paying a (small) fine and getting away with jail-time for sedition.

Good luck with that!




Dilip M. Sarwate 10 minutes ago

Arundhati Roy is a confused person. Rather than pitying the nation which tries to silence the authors, she should feel happy that she is in India which is ignoring her stupid statements and is not taking any action. She is plain anti-national and anti-development. She has not done anything worthwhile for the society. She is a one book wonder, that to trash, in my opinion. If she thinks that there are supporters for her stupid statements, she is mistaken. Her rightful place is in jail for making remarks against the nation. -- Dr. Dilip M. Sarwate (Author of 23 books)


Rajeev Suri 21 minutes ago

Yes, we should pity India now because it gave birth to a burden like you Arundhati. You can hear what millions are saying but deaf to what billions are saying. Please go away from my country, which includes pok and Tibet too.


Sayan 1 hour ago

well Arundhati roy has never spoken about the treatment her fellow writer Taslima Nasreen got from the muslims in Bangladesh or from Indian muslims.The other lady is being forced out of her country and trying to get a citizenship of India for far too long but the govt wary of agonising muslims is not willing to grant her citizenship.The fact is Arundhati and people like har will never speak against muslims but will go to any extents to demean Hindus and Since India is a naton where hindus are in majority,now she has gone an extra mile to brand India as a occupier..Bravo Ms Roy..


Sunday, October 24, 2010

Miracles

Miracles
 
~There are two ways to live: you can live as if nothing is a miracle; you can live as if everything is a miracle~ Albert Einstein

~One of the great undiscovered joys of life comes from doing everything one attempts to the best of one's ability. There is a special sense of satisfaction, a pride in surveying such a work, a work which is rounded, full, exact, complete in its parts, which the superficial person who leaves his or her work in a slovenly, slipshod, half-finished condition, can never know. It is this conscientious completeness which turns any work into art. The smallest task, well done, becomes a miracle of achievement~ Og Mandino

~Miracles happen everyday, change your perception of what a miracle is and you'll see them all around you~ Jon Bon Jovi

~A miracle is an event which creates faith. That is the purpose and nature of miracles. Frauds deceive. An event which creates faith does not deceive: therefore it is not a fraud, but a miracle~ George Bernard Shaw

~Miracles are God's way of saying, "I'm still here!" Since every moment, every person, and every thing is a miracle, we can be sure that God is ALWAYS here~ Dexter W. Francois(QuoteGuy)

People always come into your life for a reason, a season and a lifetime by Brian A. "Drew" Chalker

People always come into your life for a reason, a season and a lifetime by Brian A. "Drew" Chalker

 
People always come into your life for a reason, a season and a lifetime. When you figure out which it is, you know exactly what to do.

When someone is in your life for a REASON, it is usually to meet a need you have expressed outwardly or inwardly. They have come to assist you through a difficulty, or to provide you with guidance and support, to aid you physically, emotionally, or even spiritually. They may seem like a godsend to you, and they are. They are there for a reason,you need them to be. Then, without any wrong doing on your part or at an inconvenient time, this person will say or do something to bring the relationship to an end. Sometimes they die, Sometimes they just walk away. Sometimes they act up or out and force you to take a stand. What we must realize is that our need has been met, our desire fulfilleed; their work is done. The prayer you sent up has been answered and it is now time to move on.

When people come into your life for a SEASON, it is because your turn has come to share, grow, or learn. They may bring you an experience of peace or make you laugh. They may teach you something you have never done. They usually give you an unbelievable amount of joy. Believe it! It is real! But, only for a season. And like Spring turns to Summer and Summer to Fall, the season eventually ends.

LIFETIME, relationships teach you a lifetime of lessons; those things you must build upon in order to have a solid emotional foundation. Your job is to accept the lesson, love the person/people (anyway);, and put what you have learned to use in all other relationships and areas in your life. It is said that love is blind but friendship is clairvoyant(clear vision). Thank you for being part of my life.......♥♥♥

Author Brian A. "Drew" Chalker

Tennessee. mosque opponents say Islam violent U.S. News

Tennessee. mosque opponents say Islam violent

U.S. News

Published: Oct. 23, 2010 at 9:37 PM

courtesy: http://www.upi.com/Top_News/US/2010/10/23/Tenn-mosque-opponents-say-Islam-violent/UPI-47341287884229/

MURFREESBORO, Tenn., Oct. 23 (UPI) -- Much of a hearing on a proposed Tennessee mosque has focused on whether Islam is a religion and whether the mosque's backers want Shariah law.

Three residents of the area around the Islamic Center of Murfreesboro challenged a Rutherford County planning board decision to allow its construction. County Chancellor Robert Corlew began a hearing in September and has presided over six days of argument and testimony, The Murfreesboro Daily News Journal reported.

On Friday, Lisa Moore, one of the three plaintiffs, said local officials should investigate the people behind the mosque.

"The problem is with Shariah law," she said. "The religion part is less than 30 percent. The rest of it is about killing non-believers."

When her lawyer, Joe Brandon, asked her if she knew Islam was responsible for 278 million executions since its founding, she responded, "Yes."

Sheriff's detective Randy Groce testified that a burial at the mosque site in which a biodegradable bag was used instead of a coffin was legal.

"They have a belief in a deity," Groce replied when Brandon asked him if Islam is a religion.

The hearing continues Nov. 12.

If Pakistan splinters... By Bharat Verma

If Pakistan splinters...
By Bharat Verma

Issue: Net Edition | Date: 20 October, 2010

COURTESY: http://www.indiandefencereview.com/military-/If-Pakistan-splinters.html


The Chinese will suffer major setback, if dysfunctional Pakistan splinters in the near future.

Many Malaysian Muslims will hasten to tell you that their country should not be compared to Pakistan. Or the migrant Muslims in West Asia (Middle East) while introducing themselves take pains to assert that they are Muslims from India and not Pakistan.

Impaired Pakistan is a cause of deep worry for Beijing, since Islamabad’s capability to tie-down India by launching terrorist attacks will also suffer.

Serious contradictions within Pakistan have pushed it in the pit of despair from where; it is almost impossible to recover. It is reported that many young Pakistanis out of sheer frustration are repudiating Islam and converting to other religions.

Possibly, majority of the Pakistan’s dominant community, Punjabi Sunni Muslims living in their isolated world of self-destruction do not realize the damage they are doing to Islam.

Pakistan is appears to be hurtling towards self-destruction.

Beijing treats Pakistan as an extension of its war machine and a surrogate colony. The likely breakup of Pakistan in the near future will stall expanding Chinese footprints.

Impaired Pakistan is a cause of deep worry for Beijing, since Islamabad’s capability to tie-down India by launching terrorist attacks will also suffer.

If Pakistan splinters, there will be enormous gains for India.

PoK will revert back to the Indian fold and peace will prevail. This is the singular reason for Chinese to move their troops into PoK. The strategy is two-fold. First, occupy or gain influence over as much occupied Indian Territory as possible, incase Pakistan breaks up.

Second, to keep up the pressure on Indian borders since Pakistan is no position to do the same, given its present internal disarray. Further, China does not want India to be emboldened to mount an attack on Pakistan, which is already gasping for oxygen.

With the break-up of Pakistan, ISI activities like export of fake Indian currency and infiltration of terrorists through Nepal will cease. Anti-India rabble rousing by ISI inspired elements in Bangladesh against India will no longer be possible.

If Pakistan splinters, there will be enormous gains for India.

The Union of India’s consolidation and integration as a nation will get a new fillip, as the distraction created by Pakistan in the name of religion is eliminated.

India then will be able to concentrate on the principal threat posed by China.

Fragmented Pakistan will lesson the heavy financial burden placed on India’s economy with drastic reduction in the security apparatus. This will enable young India to make rapid economic strides that can outpace ageing China in a short span of time.

Similarly, colossal gains accrue to the West, if Pakistan splinters.

The West led by America is losing the plot in Afghanistan because the problem is the Pakistan Army and its Irregular Forces led by General Kayani. Washington was forced to admit recently this worst kept secret, when its supply routes to Afghanistan were snapped by GHQ Rawalpindi and NATO convoys carrying fuel to Afghanistan were conveniently torched by the ISI controlled Ghost Army of Jihad with impunity.

American attempts to unhook Pakistan from China will continue to fail despite the dangling of carrot of modern weapons and technology as Islamabad’s strategic dependency on Beijing is now irreversible.

The ‘real estate’ of Pakistan was created so that the West could monitor and manipulate the former Soviet Union, China and India.

However, if Pakistan falls apart, Sind which has very strong democratic yearning is certain to charter its own independent path but in consonance with Indian value system.

Independent Baluchistan with its rich resources will be definitely against the Chinese, who in conjunction with Islamabad are exploiting its resources. Denial of Gawdar port will preclude Chinese navy from the warm waters of Indian Ocean and direct access to West Asia.

Afghanistan will gradually witness unhindered growth of democracy; the spoilers Pakistan Army with ISI would have disappeared.

Therefore, democracies will find many friendly places to operate from and access the resources of Central Asia to the mutual benefit of all players.

The biggest gain for the democracies will be that China’s expanding authoritarian influence will be sharply curtailed. Also the Jihad fervor being orchestrated in this part of the world by the Punjabi Sunnis will die a natural death due to fatigue and lack of resources.

The spread of two authoritarian streams, Chinese communism and the Islamic fundamentalism, in combination or otherwise, threaten the survival of democracies in Asia.

Similarly, colossal gains accrue to the West, if Pakistan splinters.

If Pakistan splinters, one of the threats will be substantially neutralized.

This in turn will make Central Asia a safer place where Pakistan aims to attain strategic depth with the help of Islamic fundamentalists.

If Pakistan splinters, Sinkiang in China will face renewed instability and the Chinese flank in occupied Tibet will come under severe pressure.

With independent Sind and Baluchistan, the Chinese supply lines from Gawdar would not be possible. This will force China to revert to ‘peaceful rise’ instead of laying claim on territory or islands of other nations.

The power of the Shias will increase, thus creating a balance with some of the Sunni sects that are mainly responsible for terrorist acts worldwide. Two successive British Prime Ministers have stated Pakistan accounts for 75 percent of all such acts.

If Pakistan splinters, this percentage will drop to abysmal levels.


Most often remarks on Pakistan are prefaced by, “ Just like you Indians cannot live with Pakistan...”

This premise is false. An average Indian can live with Pakistan, as long as Islamabad does not interfere in internal affairs or connive against India. It is irrelevant whether India dialogues, trades or maintains diplomatic relationship with Pakistan; growth of the Indian economy or the growing status of India is not even remotely connected with failure or success of Islamabad. The ‘Pakistan Story’ failed because of the inherent flaws in the values professed and not because of “Kashmir”! The “Indian Story “ shows success because of its belief in secular democratic values.

The truth therefore is that “Pakistan cannot live with India.” The converse is absolutely preposterous.

If Pakistan splinters, it will hit the biggest stakeholder and benefactor China. In order to safeguard its strategic interests, Beijing therefore will make every endeavor to prevent the breakup of Pakistan, even to the extent of military intervention in support of the Pakistan Army.

If Pakistan splinters, forces led by Barak Obama will win. On the contrary, if China is successful in its intervention, authoritarian regimes will hold sway in Asia.

Who wins the great game in Asia, will depend on the finesse with which the cards are dealt by the contending sides.

Rate this article





About the author



Bharat Verma, a former Cavalry Officer is Editor, Indian Defence Review, frequently appears on television as a commentator, and is author of the books, Fault Lines and Indian Armed Forces

Fight the Terrorist Like a Terrorist By Bharat Verma

Fight the Terrorist Like a Terrorist
By Bharat Verma

 
Issue: Vol 16.3 July-Sep 2001 | Date: 22 October, 2010

COURTESY: http://www.indiandefencereview.com/military-/Fight-the-Terrorist-Like-a-Terrorist.html

The Ghost That Came Back to Haunt. These statements are true. First, While exiting Afghanistan, America left behind 5 billion dollars worth of sophisticated arms in the hand of terrorists. This ultimately fanned the Islamic fundamentalist movement against us. Make no mistake about it. That we and we alone have been fighting this menace of jehad for the last twelve years without outside support.

Second. America organised narcotics traffic to defeat the former Soviet Union. Result: Annual estimated income of twelve billion dollars accrues from narcotics and drugs trade to Afghanistan and Pakistan. This is the single critical factor which has disallowed the collapse of Pakistan’s wobbling economy so far.

Destruction of the Jehad Factory in our backyard will effect a set back of at least twenty-five years.

Third. Jehad is nuclear tipped because of America turning a blind eye to the activities of its former ally over the years.

Fourth. Pakistan has been propped up against India by vested interests in a variety of ways in the past decades. To enmesh and weaken India. Fifth. Finally the ghost of Terrorism came full circle to haunt America.

Yet, this extraordinary tragedy on the American soil (though we have paid a much bigger price on our Western Front in the last twelve years) calls for global war on terrorism. No single country (including America) is capable of uprooting it on its own. Thus, while protecting and furthering our interests, New Delhi must convert this into an opportunity. Let’s not shy away from waging a decisive war against growing threats. By attempts to dictate what women are allowed to wear or a child is simply shot to convey the message that India must desist from aligning with America against Taliban.

In Agra. This is a direct challenge to the individual freedom guaranteed by the Indian Constitution. Are we going to live in fear? Therefore, this is not the time to score debating points. But an opportunity to lend support to the Gal so that it may finally firmly resolve to deal with terrorism.

Between the Rock and a Hard Place. Unlike New Delhi, Washington was not amused when Musharrafs Freedom Fighters landed directly at the Twin Towers. The turn of events on 11 September placed Pakistan between the rock and a hard place. If it ignores American demands for cooperation and military facilities, the fury of the American military and economic might will be directed against it in addition to Afghanistan.

Unlike New Delhi, Washington was not amused when Musharrafs Freedom Fighters landed directly at the Twin Towers.

On the other hand, Islamabad’s assent will create an unprecedented turmoil internally between the Mujahideen groups and Musharraf, as well as within Afghanistan and Pakistan. The self appointed President already faces dissent within the military establishment. Either way, it’s a no-win situation. ISI’s (which controls Islam’s Army of Terror) mischief making capabilities will be degraded considerably.

In the unfolding scenario (and in spite of China’s support) Islamabad’s wings are about to be clipped. But, then Pakistan has been in a self-destruct mode for decades.
Fight the Terrorist Like a Terrorist

To win the war against terrorism, America will need to judiciously combine its technological prowess and military superiority with countries that have experienced and trained manpower in Low Intensity Conflict. Operationally this is a manpower intensive task as human intelligence (HUMINT) will deliver more for the buck than mere satellite imagery.

Similarly, to prevail upon the enemy Special Forces will need to fight the terrorist like a terrorist. This again calls for deployment of large human resources scarce in the United States.

Capture of Osama the individual may provide good sound bites but the danger comes from Osama bin Laden as a motivation to thousands of Islamic terrorists. The direction of war waged should aim to deconstruct this lethal mindset.

The countries that can assist America are India and Russia, latter for the influence it commands and intelligence operations it can conduct. China will neither interfere nor extend help due to close links with Pakistan and Taliban. However, the key to this war remains in thinking like a (or ahead of the) terrorist. Infiltrating his networks, denying fuel and food supplies, causing rifts, sowing suspicions between groups, extending support to dissent, disrupting communications, by taking the war into the enemy heartland, inflicting destruction which raises the cost and launching of the psychological warfare. American action in the aftermath of 11 September is a recent example of conduct of psywar.

... but the danger comes from Osama bin Laden as a motivation to thousands of Islamic terrorists. The direction of war waged should aim to deconstruct this lethal mindset.

While the United States marshals its resources, it has through calibrated statements put on notice the Islamic fundamentalist outfits. Even before Noble Eagle is operative, relationships between Afghanistan and Pakistan stand ruptured and the groundswell against Musharraf regime is snowballing into a fireball. The enemy is in disarray.

It is difficult for America and allies to simultaneously focus military-cum-intelligence attention to demolish the large terrorist network girdling the globe at one go. The counter strategy, therefore, ought to hinge on going for the jugular.

Destruction of the Jehad Factory in our backyard will effect a set back of at least twenty-five years. Hence America and allies should carry out clean surgical air strikes over Afghanistan and induct troops to occupy strategic high ground. Dismantle the terrorist networks and install a liberal regime like the Northern Alliance. Deinduct the ground forces at an appropriate time. Bring to justice terrorists from Afghanistan and Pakistan. Security implications for India in the evolving matrix are no worse or better than they were earlier.

However, if New Delhi can stiffen its political spine, put its military muscle where the mouth is and activate a counter proxy war policy, it can succeed in developing a strategic corridor to resource rich Central Asia. Conversely, a nation that does not dare to wage a ruthless war against terrorism can never win.


Rate this article





About the author



Bharat Verma, a former Cavalry Officer is Editor, Indian Defence Review, frequently appears on television as a commentator, and is author of the books, Fault Lines and Indian Armed Forces

The Winnable War By Bharat Verma

The Winnable War
By Bharat Verma


 
Issue: Vol 21.3 Jul-Sep 2006 | Date: 01 January, 2007
COURTESY: http://www.indiandefencereview.com/military%20&%20space/The-Winnable-War-.html


On a scale of 1 to 10, an American editor of a defence newspaper told me that his threat perception on terror attacks inside the United States would merit an eight. A German minister rated it at four adding that war against terrorism was difficult to win “as they were far too many”. An Indian General engaged in fighting terrorism exported from Pakistan in Kashmir for past few decades responded nonchalantly with ‘May be two!’ These responses exhibit that farther the theatre of war, higher was the paranoia.

We have withstood the onslaught for the past two decades without nation’s morale plummeting while the West that joined the war on terrorism fairly recently is skeptical and despondent. On the other hand, the responses also show that the former imperial powers go for military overkill at the drop of a hat, while we on the other end of the spectrum, are so utterly reticent that even when our parliament is attacked, we display indecisiveness and inertia. The war against terrorism is indeed winnable provided these two extreme positions on the spectrum and the disparate strategic approach to the challenges posed by asymmetric warfare is reconciled.

It is not possible for any country including the super power to win this war on its own accord. Terrorism has not spared any continent including the geographically isolated Australia. Hence, basic cohesion is an imperative for victory over terrorism.

The jihadi forces irrespective of their state sponsors do not have the reach through blue water navies or air power.

By alienating China and Russia, who do not pose any near term threat, and going whole hog on Iran and North Korea-far too many sizzling agendas have been taken up simultaneously that are beyond the American capability. Ignoring and bypassing of the UN by the US have further exacerbated this. In any case, the US enjoys overwhelming influence and leverage over the world body and hence, it marginalizes its clout by making UN defunct.

Further, by opting for another military front in Iraq without consolidating the general area comprising of Afghanistan-Pakistan, which remains the epicenter of Islamic terrorism, Washington has been dissipating away its political, diplomatic, and military energies. In Iraq so far it has neither managed to lay its hands on the oil nor was able to establish democracy. In fact, on the oil front, Russia that was barely comfortable with oil prices pegged at US $ 22 a barrel, now enjoys economic boom with the current price of US $ 70-plus a barrel.

The Bush Administration unwittingly resurrected an old adversary giving the specter of the world being remodeled on the patterns of the Cold War era. On the other hand, today an American citizen who is so deeply wedded to his four-wheeler, ends up paying double the price for oil and gas, while many of the oil producing nations, flush with funds invest heavily in their irregular forces against the democratic societies.

The avowed objective of supplanting western model of democracy met stiff resistance due to cultural and social norms, as also compulsions of governance. Democracy cannot be sledge hammered into an alien society overnight. The US regime that insists on support to a dictator in Pakistan, who has forced two former prime ministers to live in exile – and is trying to push democracy down the throat of Iraq next door – is a huge contradiction and diminishes US credibility.

The wheel has made a full circle-ISAF and NATO is now pitted against the same irregular ‘jihadi‘ forces that they created to fight the Soviet might in Afghanistan. Pakistan is deploying them covertly to expel ISAF, NATO, and Karzai from Kabul while overtly extracting millions of dollars from America speciously in the aid of waging war against terrorism. The false excuse of WMD to attack Iraq and at the same time, overlooking proliferation activities by Islamabad provided adequate incentives to Iran to test the potency and efficacy of nuclear weapon agenda for self preservation and as a tool of diplomatic blackmail.



By removing Saddam’s regime, the Shia groups, which constituted the non-dominant class within Islam, have been radicalized. Their growing writ now runs from Iran to Iraq and threatens Saudi Arabia and beyond. Flush with petro-dollars and military wherewithal, the Shia groups such as Mehdi Army in Iraq and Hezbollah in Lebanon have become irregular forces to reckon with.

On their own most of these groups lacked potency, but became formidable with the guidance and support of the nerve center located in the Pakistan-Afghanistan region.

The biggest and most unsuspecting casualty in this counter-productive war devoid of an appropriate military strategy, notwithstanding the availability of most modern and awesome firepower, are the American and British democracies who are forced to circumscribe the freedom of their citizens through new draconian internal security laws. The hunters have become the hunted leading to extreme paranoia. Reportedly there are terrorist camps flourishing within the United Kingdom.

The most adverse consequence of the strategic folly committed by Bush is the uniting of diverse Islamic groups and sects against the West, providing added credibility to the much-touted theory of Clash of Civilizations. Pakistan indeed is an example of fissures that exist within the Islamic world. Even after sustained ethnic discrimination and cleansing of minorities, it is now turn of the Shias, who constitute seventeen percent of Pakistan’s population as the new untouchables. If America the symbol of free world stumbles, there will be cascading effect on other democracies that may not be able to counter it.

Therefore, it is imperative to galvanize the military and intelligence assets of the free and liberal world and redirect the effort to nuetralise the very core of the problem of terrorism. Looking purely from an American prism, this war against terrorism can be won, if waged intelligently, notwithstanding the heavy losses incurred so far, provided military deficit is converted to military surplus.

To regroup its wherewithal Washington needs to reduce its strategic and military stretch even at the cost of temporary loss of face. If its leadership does not display acumen in redrawing its strategy, it will not succeed on either front i.e. Iraq or Afghanistan-Pakistan. Instead the US and its alliance partners will continue to bleed on both the fronts. The choice is between pulling out from Iraq or Afghanistan. Shelving the Iraq agenda is recommended on multiple counts.

First, it is widely perceived as an unjust and unnecessary occupation. Second, the epicenter of terrorism is located in Afghanistan-Pakistan and is orchestrated by ISI.

This is the breeding ground of terror. From here terrorism radiates to India, Afghanistan, Central Asia including Chechnya, to South East Asia and West Asia and EU and the US.

If Afghanistan-Pakistan (particularly Pakistan) area is sanitized, the intensity and reach of terrorism will reduce at least by sixty percent. Non-Talibanisation of Pakistan-Afghanistan and Central Asia is the only way to ensure the security of existing and proposed energy routes.

Therefore, the resources and focus must shift from occupation of Iraq. Let it fall on account of its own ethnic imbalance and contradictions of Shias, Sunnis and Kurds. The vivisection of Iraq due to ethnic contradictions in any case is imminent and would be a better bet than the dismal internal scenario that currently prevails. Kurds may become restless and are likely to create problems for Turkey with demand for greater Kurdistan but that scenario would be far more amenable and manageable. Americans could still retain a foothold in the Kurdish area. In the long term, Iran will act as a natural counterpoise against the Sunni terrorism.

For the US, this would convert the current strategic deficit into substantial strategic surplus. The surplus thus accrued will prove a formidable force for the epicenter i.e. Pakistan-Afghanistan area. The temporary loss of face due to calibrated strategic retreat would be more than compensated in the long run.

It would also be a sound move on the international chessboard considering that the United States and the West can boast of resources other than a young demographic profile. Besides, technological, military, and financial means, wars at some stage do become manpower intensive- especially in the consolidation phase.

The jihadi forces irrespective of their state sponsors do not have the reach through blue water navies or air power. They in addition, suffer from landlocked mentality and medieval outlook in their approach to warfare, which is essentially irregular. Nevertheless, they boast of sufficient manpower that irregular warfare and terrorism entails. Similarly, while the coalition forces hold Baghdad and Kabul, public perception is that Iraq and Afghanistan are under occupation of the West.

The truth is that the writ of the Western forces led by America beyond Baghdad and Kabul is tentative. The jihadi forces have the requisite manpower and retain the element of surprise natural to a guerrilla army and are capable of targeting the capital cities as well. Therefore, a stalemate persists as neither side is in a position to vanquish the other.

India and the US need to militarily cooperate on a quid-pro-quo basis in busting the epicenter of terrorism i.e. in Pakistan-Afghanistan region, whose reach is till the US, and the sweep is 360 degrees.

Hence, it is important to vacate Iraq, leaving the guerrilla factions to indulge in internecine warfare and concentrate on Afghanistan-Pakistan region to tackle the main breeding ground and the supply reservoir of the jihadi factory. Apart from the destruction of the nerve center of terrorism, it will automatically counter balance China by stultifying its one proxy out of the two.

Similarly, India for the past two decades or more has been fighting terrorism all alone, but in a reactive mode. Unlike the Western Alliance, India with a young demographic profile is indifferent, continues to dither, and remains inconsistent in its approach, instead of being proactive. While America’s geographical location lends it a secure environ, India is located in the midst of jihadi churning. Hemmed by Islamic countries on its North, West, East, and Southeast, India has witnessed unrelenting invasions from its Northwestern borders that originated from as far as Central Asia over centuries.

Therefore, it is vital for it to maintain high level of influence, both economic as well as military on the most critical axis New Delhi-Kabul-Tehran-Moscow for its strategic well being. If New Delhi even today remains confused over the fact, whether it is India which is a victim of terrorism or is it Pakistan, that is understandable since there has been a reluctance to face the nature and reality of the conflict. The actuality is that India’s land frontiers, east to north and north to west, are being violated with relative impunity and are characterized by infiltration, exported insurgencies and terrorism, and creeping demographic invasions, which on most counts originate from the Pakistan-Afghanistan region or as a byproduct.

Between 1990 and 2005, in J&K alone India has lost 16000 civilians, 6000 security personnel, as against 20000 terrorists. The ratio of troops to terrorist killed is approximately 1:3. To the champions of human rights, the figures could not be more revealing. On the other hand, the Pak Army has not been loosing personnel in this low intensity conflict in J&K. They have been selfish and manipulative enough in infusing the misguided youth with so called jihadi rationale and then using them as canon fodders.

How many more casualties and for how long India should suffer? New Delhi must seize the initiative to deliver a decisive blow to terrorism sponsored by Pakistan. India should be willing to fight its own war, if necessary, in standalone mode. This war for New Delhi is also winnable by developing a sound offensive-defence strategy by incorporating lethality of covert and overt methodology.

Pakistan, whose geo-strategic location has come to its rescue from the brink of collapse on many occasions in the past, has never been so strategically vulnerable as it is today. It has been compelled to disown its creation- Taliban. Its nuclear assets according to Musharraf’s admission in the aftermath of US led war in Afghanistan were in jeopardy on account of US pressure and concerns.

The nuclear proliferation activities in the past by Pakistan have forced it on the defensive. It is also under increasing pressure to tackle the remnants of Taliban and Al Queada in cooperation with the NATO forces.

In fact, it is the past misdemeanors of Islamabad that has contributed to the deployment of NATO forces for the first time in the history of the region. India must realize that this is the most opportune strategic moment post 1971 to deal with Pakistan decisively. Pakistan has never let go of any such strategic opportunities. It exploited its frontline status during the war against Soviet forces to embark on low intensity conflict and terrorism against India particularly in J&K. Also Pakistan has never faced a more precarious internal security situation after 1971.

The volatile Wazaristan and Balochistan province are on boil, compelling the deployment of more than 1,00,000 Army personnel.

The strategic objective of US and India with regard to Pakistan-Afghanistan region converges at present. India and the US need to militarily cooperate on a quid-pro-quo basis in busting the epicenter of terrorism i.e. in Pakistan-Afghanistan region, whose reach is till the US, and the sweep is 360 degrees. India has excellent manpower resources, as also the unparalleled experience of fighting the jihadi elements in J&K for about two decades. The US and the western world have the financial muscle and technological prowess. If these could be combined it would make the most lethal combination.

While acting in military concert, the US and India together should undertake to:-
Isolate the jihadis ideologically.
Destroy jihadi recruiting infrastructure and training camps.
Compel Pakistan to supplant madrasas with modern institutions.
Create fissures within the jihadi groups.
Neutralize drug money and other financial and arms channels of jihadi groups.
Neutralize fundamentalist and terrorist leadership.
Expose the vulnerabilities and double standards of the jihadi groups.
Disallow Pakistan to gain foothold in Afghanistan, as this will ultimately consume Central Asia in jehadi fervour.
Sandwich Pakistan between their forces so that Kabul and Kashmir may live in peace.

In the war against terrorism, victories are difficult to be judged. There are no definable territorial objectives as in the case of conventional wars between states. It is not to suggest that terrorism, which India and the world are combating, would be eliminated. But it can be brought to a tolerable level. Remnants of terrorism will be there; nevertheless, it would be reduced to the level of “law and order problem”. What in fact Osama bin Laden achieved was that he managed to coordinate and combine the activities of various jihadi organizations active in different parts of the world. On their own most of these groups lacked potency, but became formidable with the guidance and support of the nerve center located in the Pakistan-Afghanistan region. The sum of parts was therefore more than the total. If the epicenter is busted, the various parts are bound to loose teeth and fall apart.

This war is winnable if Washington and New Delhi wage it intelligently with display of good generalship.

Rate this article





About the author



Bharat Verma, a former Cavalry Officer is Editor, Indian Defence Review, frequently appears on television as a commentator, and is author of the books, Fault Lines and Indian Armed Forces

Saturday, October 23, 2010

Is the nation in a coma? by Mohan Murti


Is the nation in a coma? by Mohan Murti
Business Daily from THE HINDU group of publications
Monday, May 31, 2010

 
courtesy: http://www.thehindubusinessline.com/2010/05/31/stories/2010053150300900.htm

Europeans believe that Indian leaders are too blinded by new wealth and deceit to comprehend that the day will come when the have-nots will hit the streets.


A few days ago I was in a panel discussion on mergers and acquisitions in Frankfurt, Germany, organised by Euroforum and The Handelsblatt, one of the most prestigious newspapers in German-speaking Europe.

The other panellists were senior officials of two of the largest carmakers and two top insurance companies — all German multinationals operating in India.

The panel discussion was moderated by a professor from the esteemed European Business School. The hall had an audience that exceeded a hundred well-known European CEOs. I was the only Indian.

After the panel discussion, the floor was open for questions. That was when my “moment of truth” turned into an hour of shame, embarrassment — when the participants fired questions and made remarks on their experiences with the evil of corruption in India.

The awkwardness and humiliation I went through reminded of The Moment of Truth, the popular Anglo-American game. The more questions I answered truthfully, the more the questions get tougher. Tougher here means more embarrassing.

European disquiet

Questions ranged from “Is your nation in a coma?”, the corruption in judiciary, the possible impeachment of a judge, the 2G scam and to the money parked illegally in tax havens.

It is a fact that the problem of corruption in India has assumed enormous and embarrassing proportions in recent years, although it has been with us for decades. The questions and the debate that followed in the panel discussion was indicative of the European disquiet. At the end of the Q&A session, I surmised Europeans perceive India to be at one of those junctures where tripping over the precipice cannot be ruled out.

Let me substantiate this further with what the European media has to say in recent days.

In a popular prime-time television discussion in Germany, the panellist, a member of the German Parliament quoting a blog said: “If all the scams of the last five years are added up, they are likely to rival and exceed the British colonial loot of India of about a trillion dollars.”

Banana Republic

One German business daily which wrote an editorial on India said: “India is becoming a Banana Republic instead of being an economic superpower. To get the cut motion designated out, assurances are made to political allays. Special treatment is promised at the expense of the people. So, Ms Mayawati who is Chief Minister of the most densely inhabited state, is calmed when an intelligence agency probe is scrapped. The multi-million dollars fodder scam by another former chief minister wielding enormous power is put in cold storage. Prime Minister Manmohan Singh chairs over this kind of unparalleled loot.”

An article in a French newspaper titled “Playing the Game, Indian Style” wrote: “Investigations into the shadowy financial deals of the Indian cricket league have revealed a web of transactions across tax havens like Switzerland, the Virgin Islands, Mauritius and Cyprus.” In the same article, the name of one Hassan Ali of Pune is mentioned as operating with his wife a one-billion-dollar illegal Swiss account with “sanction of the Indian regime”.

A third story narrated in the damaging article is that of the former chief minister of Jharkhand, Madhu Koda, who was reported to have funds in various tax havens that were partly used to buy mines in Liberia. “Unfortunately, the Indian public do not know the status of that enquiry,” the article concluded.

“In the nastiest business scam in Indian records (Satyam) the government adroitly covered up the political aspects of the swindle — predominantly involving real estate,” wrote an Austrian newspaper. “If the Indian Prime Minister knows nothing about these scandals, he is ignorant of ground realities and does not deserve to be Prime Minister. If he does, is he a collaborator in crime?”

The Telegraph of the UK reported the 2G scam saying: “Naturally, India's elephantine legal system will ensure culpability, is delayed.”

Blinded by wealth

This seems true. In the European mind, caricature of a typical Indian encompasses qualities of falsification, telling lies, being fraudulent, dishonest, corrupt, arrogant, boastful, speaking loudly and bothering others in public places or, while travelling, swindling when the slightest of opportunity arises and spreading rumours about others. The list is truly incessant.

My father, who is 81 years old, is utterly frustrated, shocked and disgruntled with whatever is happening and said in a recent discussion that our country's motto should truly be Asatyameva Jayete.

Europeans believe that Indian leaders in politics and business are so blissfully blinded by the new, sometimes ill-gotten, wealth and deceit that they are living in defiance, insolence and denial to comprehend that the day will come, sooner than later, when the have-nots would hit the streets.

In a way, it seems to have already started with the monstrous and grotesque acts of the Maoists. And, when that rot occurs, not one political turncoat will escape being lynched.

The drumbeats for these rebellions are going to get louder and louder as our leaders refuse to listen to the voices of the people. Eventually, it will lead to a revolution that will spill to streets across the whole of India, I fear.

Perhaps we are the architects of our own misfortune. It is our sab chalta hai (everything goes) attitude that has allowed people to mislead us with impunity. No wonder Aesop said. “We hang the petty thieves and appoint the great ones to high office.”

(The author is former Europe Director, CII, and lives in Cologne, Germany. blfeedback@thehindu.co.in.)

 

Popular Posts

Search This Blog