INTERNATIONAL TERRORISM MONITOR---PAPER NO. 720
by B. Raman
The Faisal Base of the Pakistan Air Force (PAF) located about 10 KMs from the Karachi internationl airport is what the PAF calls a Joint User airfield. It is used by the PAF and the air arms of the Pakistan Army and Navy as well as by the VVIP squadron. All air surveillance movements over the sea --- whether by the PAF or by the Army or by the PN--- are controlled from this base.
2. Since 1975, the operating base of the Naval Air Arm, called PNS Mehran, is located inside this airfield. All senior officers of the Naval Air Arm operate from PNS Mehran. The Naval Air Arm at PNS Mehran is headed by Commander Naval Aviation (COMNAV). Under him there are four Heads of Department (HOD) designated as Commander Air (Cdr Air), Commander Air Engineering Department (Cdr AED), Commanding Officer MEHRAN (CO MEH) and Officer Commanding Naval Aviation Training School (OC NATS).
3. The squadrons of the Naval Air Arm are stationed in PNS Mehran. These are the P3C Orion Squadron (28 Sqn), the Atlantic Squadron (29 Sqn), the Fokker Squadron (27 Sqn), the Seaking Squadron (111 Sqn) and the Alouette Squadron (333 Sqn).
4. While the Naval Air Arm was raised primarily to provide maritime surveillance capability against India, it has been playing, in addition, a counter-terrorism role since the U.S. started its Operation Enduring Freedom in Afghanistan in October,2001. This counter-terrorism role consists of air surveillance to prevent any sea-borne intrusions of Al Qaeda and to detect any terrorist plans for attacks on ships bringing supplies for the NATO forces in Afghanistan. The supplies are landed in the Karachi port and then moved by trucks to Afghanistan.
5. While the Pakistani Army and Air Force have no operational role to play in the U.S.-led military operations in the Afghan territory against Al Qaeda and the Neo Taliban, the Pakistani Navy is a member of the U.S.-led international naval force which patrols the seas to the west of Pakistan to prevent any hostile activity which could hamper the operations in Afghan territory. The Combined Task Force (CTF) 150, established at the beginning of Operation Enduring Freedom in 2001, comprises naval forces from France, Germany, Italy, Pakistan, the United Kingdom and the United States. The task force conducts maritime security operations (MSO) in the Gulf of Aden, the Gulf of Oman, the Arabian Sea, the Red Sea, and the Indian Ocean. The leadership of the Task Force is rotated amongst the participating navies. A Pakistani naval officer has been commanding it off and on when the turn of the Pakistan Navy comes.
6. On November 16,2004,the U.S. Defense Security Cooperation Agency announced that it had accepted Pakistan’s request to buy seven P-3C Orion aircraft with T-56 turboprop engines, communications equipment, training devices, medical services, support and test equipment, engineering technical services, supply support, operation and maintenance training, documentation, spare/repair parts, publications, personnel training, training equipment, contractor technical and logistics personnel services, and other related support elements. The estimated cost would be $970 million.
7.The DSCA announcement added: "The command-and-control capabilities of these aircraft will improve Pakistan’s ability to restrict the littoral movement of terrorists along Pakistan’s southern border and ensure Pakistan’s overall ability to maintain integrity of their borders. Pakistan intends to use the proposed purchase to develop a long needed fleet of maritime and border surveillance aircraft. The addition of these aircraft will provide Pakistan with search, surveillance, and control capability in support of maritime interdiction operations and increase their ability to support the U.S. Operation Enduring Freedom Operations; anti-ship and anti-submarine warfare capabilities; and a control capability over land against transnational terrorists and narcotics smugglers. The modernization will enhance the capabilities of the Pakistani Navy and support its regional influence and meet its legitimate self-defense needs. Pakistan is capable of absorbing and maintaining these additional aircraft in its inventory.”
8. The first two of these aircraft were delivered in April 2010 and officially inducted into the Naval Air Arm at a function held at PNS Mehran on June 2,2010. Some more of the remaining five have since been inducted, but their number is not known. These planes are generally kept in hangars belonging to the Naval Air Arm and operate from the joint user airfield.
9. The active role played by the Pakistani Navy in support of the NATO operations in Afghanistan has attracted the anger of the Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP). On March 4, 2008, two unidentified suicide bombers, operating in tandem, attacked the prestigious Naval War College located in a high security area of Lahore. They were both on motor-cycles. One of them rammed his motor-cycle against the security gate at the rear of the building breaking it open. The other drove through this opening into the parking area and blew himself up. Their target was the naval institution and not any particular individual or individuals inside. They wanted to demonstrate their ability to penetrate the campus and cause damage. Six persons were killed--- one of them a naval officer, three members of the security guards at the gate and the two suicide bombers.
10. On December 2,2009, an alert official of the Pakistani naval intelligence in plain clothes and a naval security guard in uniform deployed outside the building of the Pakistan Navy Headquarters in Islamabad prevented what could have been a major terrorist strike against the Naval Headquarters by an unidentified suicide bomber. Spotting a suspicious-looking individual outside the NHQ, they stopped him and searched him. He turned out to be a suicide bomber wearing a concealed suicide vest. However, they could not prevent him from activating the explosive device in the vest. One person was killed on the spot and another succumbed to his injuries later.
11. Two Pakistani naval personnel--- a commissioned officer of the rank of Sub-Lieutenant and a sailor--- were among four persons killed in two separate but coordinated explosions in Karachi on April 26, 2011. The explosions targeted two buses of the Pakistan Navy which were transporting naval personnel to their places of work. According to available indications, the improvised explosive devices, which struck the buses, had been planted along routes normally taken by the buses and activated through mobile telephones.
12. According to the "Daily Times" of Lahore ( April 27,2011), the Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP), as the Pakistani Taliban is known, claimed the responsibility for the blasts, and threatened more attacks on security forces. The claim was made in a telephone call to a foreign news agency by a person who identified himself as Ehsanullah Ehsan, a spokesman of the Taliban. He reportedly said: "Security forces will be targeted in the future as well, because they are killing their own people in Waziristan and elsewhere at the behest of the United States.”
13. Since the raid by the Pakistani military commandos into the Lal Masjid in Islamabad in July,2007, there has been a number of retaliatory attacks by the TTP against the Army, the Air Force, the Special Services Group (SSG), the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI), the para-military forces and the police. It is, however, believed that the attacks on the Navy were connected to its role in providing maritime support to the NATO forces in Afghanistan. The Navy had no role to play in the Lal Masjid raid. The Pakistani authorities have been apprehending a surge in these attacks on the security forces, including the Navy, in retaliation for the raid by U.S. naval commandos into the residence of Osama bin Laden at Abbottabad on May 2,2011, in which OBL was killed.
14. At around 10 PM on the night of May 22, an unidentified group of about 15 terrorists armed with explosives, rocket-propelled grenade launchers and assault weapons was reported to have managed to infiltrate into the PNS Mehran base through a side of the Faisal PAF base where a PAF museum is located and engaged in a fire fight with naval and other security personnel after destroying at least one----according to some other reports two---PC 3 aircraft kept in the hangars. The fire-fight was still going on at 3 AM on the morning of May 23 when last reports came in.
15. It has been reported that the survivors among the attackers have taken some hostages and taken shelter inside a building in the base. According to unconfirmed reports, among the hostages are one or more Chinese military personnel working in the base. It has been further reported that some Americans and Turks were also working in the base. It is not known whether any of them has been taken hostage. At least 11 naval personnel are reported to have died in the fire fight so far. No one has claimed responsibility till now.
16. The daring attack and the inability of the Navy to prevent it are likely to add to the feelings of humiliation in the Pakistani Armed Forces which have been prevalent since the Abbottabad raid. To deflect anger over the security failure at PNS Mehran, attempts could be made to divert suspicion against India. Extra vigilance and extra security would be required along our coast in general and in the Mumbai area in particular. Instructions should be issued to all concerned to avoid any statements and comments which could aggravate the paranoia of the Pakistani Armed Forces and to refrain from exhibiting any sense of glee over the discomfiture of the Pakistani Armed Forces.(23-5-11)
(Bahukutumbi Raman is Additional Secretary (retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt. of India, New Delhi, and, presently, Director, Institute for Topical Studies, Chennai, and Associate of the Chennai Centre For China Studies. E-mail: seventyone2@gmail.com)
Showing posts with label India. Show all posts
Showing posts with label India. Show all posts
Monday, May 23, 2011
Friday, May 20, 2011
View from India: TERROR LIST GOOF-UP
by B.RAMAN
In March, our Ministry of Home Affairs had given to its Pakistani counterpart a list of 50 terrorists----Indian as well as Pakistani nationals--- who were suspected to have been involved in acts of terrorism in India. The Pakistani authorities were requested to have them arrested and handed over to India for trial.
India had been giving such lists to Pakistan ever since the Khalistani terrorists hijacked some aircraft of the Indian Airlines to Pakistan in the 1980s. Initially, the lists included mostly the names of Khalistani terrorists who were operating from Pakistan. Subsequently, the lists were expanded in the 1990's to include the names of some terrorists from Jammu & Kashmir and the absconding accused of the 1993 blasts in Mumbai, including Dawood Ibrahim and his associates.
Till about 2004, this list had a total of about 20 names. It has since expanded to 50 due to the search for the absconding accused in post-2004 jihadi acts of terrorism. Pakistan used to deny the presence of any Indian national in its territory. In respect of the Pakistani nationals figuring in the Indian lists, its response used to be that India had not been able to produce any evidence regarding their involvement in terrorism.
This exercise had been going on for nearly 30 years without Pakistan taking any action to trace those wanted by India and arresting and handing them over. Before handing them over to Pakistan, the lists used to be vetted by a joint committee consisting of officers of all agencies and the State Police. A senior officer of the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) used to chair this committee. The representatives of the State Police were required to confirm that the lists were correct.
No errors in the preparation of these lists had occurred in the past due to the systematic vetting of the lists by all agencies sitting jointly for the purpose before handing them over to Pakistan.
This procedure does not appear to have been followed in the case of the latest list of 50 wanted terrorists. As a result, the names of at least two suspects, who had been arrested in India and hence were not absconding, found their way into the list which showed them as hiding in Pakistan.
The U.S. naval commando raid into the hide-out of Osama bin Laden at Abbottabad on May 2 and his death during the raid have given rise to considerable criticism in the U.S. regarding the alleged role of Pakistan in sheltering wanted terrorists. Presumably to capitalize on the growing public criticism of Pakistan for giving shelter to terrorists, the MHA apparently decided to make the latest list available to the media in order to highlight Pakistan’s non-cooperation in tracing and arresting terrorists wanted in India.
Journalists of the “Times of India” and NDTV, who scrutinized the list, found out that two of the terrorists shown in the list as hiding in Pakistan were actually in India.
This has created considerable embarrassment for the Govt. of India. Though there was no mala fide intention on the part of the MHA, its failure to detect these errors before the list was handed over to Pakistan indicated a certain casualness in the maintenance of records relating to absconding accused in the Govt. of India and in the preparation of the list. The usual process of vetting of the list by a joint committee of the officers of the agencies and the Police was apparently not followed.
There was an unwise haste in preparing the list, handing it over to Pakistan and releasing it to the media in order to capitalize on the growing suspicions in the international community about Pakistan’s non-cooperation in counter-terrorism.
The embarrassment faced by the Government of India cannot be easily undone. The professional and diplomatic faux pas is likely to damage the reliability of our professional standards regarding investigation and documentation. It is going to take us some time to have the damage to our credibility repaired.
The episode will also enable Pakistan to reinforce its argument that Indian allegations of Pakistani support to terrorism are motivated propaganda and hence cannot be relied upon.
Three corrective steps are required to avoid a repeat of this embarrassment. Firstly, to act against the officers who have contributed to this embarrassment by their sins of commission and omission. Secondly, to revamp the process for the preparation of such documents in future to rule out errors. Thirdly, to avoid undue haste in preparing such lists and going to the media with them, in the hope of thereby embarrassing Pakistan.
If the international community has to be convinced about the correctness of our allegations against Pakistan, it must develop confidence in the reliability of our documentation and in our due diligence process in preparing such dossiers. ( 20-5-11)
(Bahukutumbi Raman is Additional Secretary (retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt. of India, New Delhi )
In March, our Ministry of Home Affairs had given to its Pakistani counterpart a list of 50 terrorists----Indian as well as Pakistani nationals--- who were suspected to have been involved in acts of terrorism in India. The Pakistani authorities were requested to have them arrested and handed over to India for trial.
India had been giving such lists to Pakistan ever since the Khalistani terrorists hijacked some aircraft of the Indian Airlines to Pakistan in the 1980s. Initially, the lists included mostly the names of Khalistani terrorists who were operating from Pakistan. Subsequently, the lists were expanded in the 1990's to include the names of some terrorists from Jammu & Kashmir and the absconding accused of the 1993 blasts in Mumbai, including Dawood Ibrahim and his associates.
Till about 2004, this list had a total of about 20 names. It has since expanded to 50 due to the search for the absconding accused in post-2004 jihadi acts of terrorism. Pakistan used to deny the presence of any Indian national in its territory. In respect of the Pakistani nationals figuring in the Indian lists, its response used to be that India had not been able to produce any evidence regarding their involvement in terrorism.
This exercise had been going on for nearly 30 years without Pakistan taking any action to trace those wanted by India and arresting and handing them over. Before handing them over to Pakistan, the lists used to be vetted by a joint committee consisting of officers of all agencies and the State Police. A senior officer of the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) used to chair this committee. The representatives of the State Police were required to confirm that the lists were correct.
No errors in the preparation of these lists had occurred in the past due to the systematic vetting of the lists by all agencies sitting jointly for the purpose before handing them over to Pakistan.
This procedure does not appear to have been followed in the case of the latest list of 50 wanted terrorists. As a result, the names of at least two suspects, who had been arrested in India and hence were not absconding, found their way into the list which showed them as hiding in Pakistan.
The U.S. naval commando raid into the hide-out of Osama bin Laden at Abbottabad on May 2 and his death during the raid have given rise to considerable criticism in the U.S. regarding the alleged role of Pakistan in sheltering wanted terrorists. Presumably to capitalize on the growing public criticism of Pakistan for giving shelter to terrorists, the MHA apparently decided to make the latest list available to the media in order to highlight Pakistan’s non-cooperation in tracing and arresting terrorists wanted in India.
Journalists of the “Times of India” and NDTV, who scrutinized the list, found out that two of the terrorists shown in the list as hiding in Pakistan were actually in India.
This has created considerable embarrassment for the Govt. of India. Though there was no mala fide intention on the part of the MHA, its failure to detect these errors before the list was handed over to Pakistan indicated a certain casualness in the maintenance of records relating to absconding accused in the Govt. of India and in the preparation of the list. The usual process of vetting of the list by a joint committee of the officers of the agencies and the Police was apparently not followed.
There was an unwise haste in preparing the list, handing it over to Pakistan and releasing it to the media in order to capitalize on the growing suspicions in the international community about Pakistan’s non-cooperation in counter-terrorism.
The embarrassment faced by the Government of India cannot be easily undone. The professional and diplomatic faux pas is likely to damage the reliability of our professional standards regarding investigation and documentation. It is going to take us some time to have the damage to our credibility repaired.
The episode will also enable Pakistan to reinforce its argument that Indian allegations of Pakistani support to terrorism are motivated propaganda and hence cannot be relied upon.
Three corrective steps are required to avoid a repeat of this embarrassment. Firstly, to act against the officers who have contributed to this embarrassment by their sins of commission and omission. Secondly, to revamp the process for the preparation of such documents in future to rule out errors. Thirdly, to avoid undue haste in preparing such lists and going to the media with them, in the hope of thereby embarrassing Pakistan.
If the international community has to be convinced about the correctness of our allegations against Pakistan, it must develop confidence in the reliability of our documentation and in our due diligence process in preparing such dossiers. ( 20-5-11)
(Bahukutumbi Raman is Additional Secretary (retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt. of India, New Delhi )
Tuesday, May 17, 2011
Category Error: Attacking Norway for Pearl Harbor
Bahukutumbi Raman, in a recent dispatch labeled “PAK ARMY & ISI: DANGEROUS MIX OF HUMILIATION & DESPERATION”, warns that Pakistan may be planning to redeem itself by orchestrating a successful strike against India, especially in the contentious Kashmir region.
No doubt, Pakistan’s citizens are seriously concerned about the ability of their government and armed forces to protect them. No doubt there has been talk on the streets of intelligence failure at best or illicit collusion with the Americans at worst.
Yet, all this follows a familiar pattern. Most military incursions into sovereign territory for any reason are done in stealth. The inevitable questions and accusations follow. Did Roosevelt know about Pearl Harbor in advance? Did Bush know about 9/11? And in her column in yesterday’s Jerusalem Post, Caroline Glick accuses Ehud Barak, Israel’s Defense Minister of failing to anticipate trouble along the country’s Syrian border on Nakba Day.
The truth is, no government can promise ironclad security to its citizens. A successful strategy, however, must involve the threat of consequences for anyone intending such a move. If Pakistan were to attack India in the wake of its so-called ‘humiliation’, such redemption would be short lived. For one thing, India had nothing to do with the bin Laden raid.
President Bush underwent a hell of tortures for his decision to attack Iraq in the wake of 9/11. His opponents constantly labeled it as “the wrong war”. In the end, rightly or wrongly, it proved to be his undoing.
My own sense of Pakistan’s leadership is that it is too mature to attack India as a direct consequence of the U.S. bin Laden raid. It has far better options: Turning its focus away from Washington to cooperating more with China is one. If India is attacked, it will not be because of anything that happened in Abbottabad.
I wish I had a similar degree of confidence in America’s foreign policy.
Sunday, May 15, 2011
View from India: PAKISTAN —TALK, TALK, HIT, HIT
by B.RAMAN
Senator John Kerry, Chairman of the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee, is presently in Afghanistan on his way to Pakistan. His visit to Pakistan has been triggered off by the discovery of Osama bin Laden living for six years in a safehaven at Abbottabad, the cradle of the Pakistan Army, where he was killed by U.S. Naval commandos on May 2,2011. Tensions in the relations between the U.S. and Pakistan, which had already worsened before the clandestine U.S. raid into OBL's hide-out, have been further aggravated by the defiant refusal of the Pakistan Army and its Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI), to agree to any independent enquiry into the circumstances under which OBL managed to live undetected for nearly six years.
2. The U.S. suspects, with valid reasons, that OBL could not have lived that long in a garrison town without local support---- official or unofficial or both. Identifying and neutralising the sources of local support would be an important step forward in the fight against jihadi terrorism. The Pakistan Army and the ISI have dismissed suspicions of local support and are stonewalling demands----made in Pakistan as well as in the U.S.--- for an independent enquiry.
3. Kerry, known in the past as a well-wisher of Pakistan and as a strong advocate of long-term aid commitments to Pakistan, has been showing signs of skepticism after May 2. He has been quoted as saying that it was “extraordinarily hard to believe” Osama could have survived in Pakistan for so long without any knowledge.
4. This skepticism seems even stronger now, nearly two weeks after the death of OBL. He has been quoted as saying on May 14 at Mazar-e-Sharif in Afghanistan, where he had gone on a visit before proceeding to Pakistan: “Washington will consider all its options if it found out that Mullah Omar (Amir of the Afghan Taliban) was living in Pakistan. The United States government will always reserve all of its options to be able to protect our people. Other plots have been conducted and organised and planned out of Pakistan. It is really critical that we talk with the Pakistanis as friends. The United States wanted Pakistan to be a real ally in combating militants inside its borders, but serious questions remain in relations between the countries after Osama’s killing. We obviously want a Pakistan that is prepared to respect the interests of Afghanistan, and to be a real ally in our efforts to combat terrorism. We believe there are things that can be done better. And there are serious questions that need to be answered in that relationship. But we’re not trying to find a way to break the relationship apart, we’re trying to find a way to build it.”
5. Can Pakistan ever be a real ally against terrorism? That is a question that even well-wishers of Pakistan in the U.S. have started posing----not in secret, but in public. Can it be trusted to fight sincerely and genuinely against terrorism? All those, who were talking of a transformational moment in the history of Pakistan in the wake of May 2, would have been disappointed by the details of the in camera session of the Pakistan Parliament held on May 13, to discuss the OBL affair. Not the slightest sign of a feeling of shame that Osama was living unmolested in a Pakistani army garrison town for over five years. Not the slightest sign of a determination to find out the truth.
6. The fact that the world’s most dreaded terrorist was found living in an important garrison town did not seem to embarrass the Pakistani leaders and their Army and the ISI. What has embarrassed them is the fact that the U.S. managed to find that out and carry out a clandestine raid to kill him. They have decided to hold a commission of enquiry only into the security failure and not into the intelligence failure. That is, they want to find out how the U.S. carried out the raid. Nothing more.
7. Kerry has referred to other plots conducted, organized and planned out of Pakistan. Many of those plots targeted India and Indian nationals in different cities of India and in Kabul working in the Indian Embassy there. Three of those plots---all in Mumbai—involved mass fatalities---in March 1993, July 2006 and November 2008. No other city in the world has suffered so many acts of mass fatality terrorism. Pakistan has been able to carry on this policy of using terrorism as a strategic weapon because of the reluctance of the U.S. and other members of the international community to act against it.
8. The time has come for sustained action against terrorists and their hide-outs in Pakistan. If Pakistan will not act, the international community has to. Pakistanis talk of a violation of their national sovereignty----whether at Abbottabad or in respect of the Drone strikes in the two Waziristans. Of course, they constitute violations of national sovereignty---- but they are justified violations in exercise of one’s right of self-defence.
9. There are UN resolutions that describe the state-sponsorhip of terrorism as amounting to indirect aggression against the targeted country. This indirect aggression gives one the right to exercise one’s self-defence in the territory of that country if left with no other option. Till now, Pakistan managed to get away without any negative consequences because no country was prepared to take the right of self-defence into its territory.
10. Now that the U.S. has shown the way and taken the lead, it is important for India to follow its lead----not by doing a copy cat of Abbottabad, which would be messy between two neighbours--- but through other means, which would not be spectacular, but effective without involving any civilian casualties in Pakistan and without the use of Indian security or para-military forces or commandos for that purpose.
11. Options, suited to our needs, are available. We have to identify them, acquire the capability to use them and use them. As we acquire the capability, we have to educate the international community, particularly the U.S., on the serious dimensions of the problems faced by us, on our right of self-defence and on our determination to exercise that right even outside our territory if left with no other option.
12. I have endorsed strongly our Prime Minister’s initiatives for talks with Pakistan . Talks do not mean we renounce our right of self-defence. The two have to go together. I have always advocated a policy of “Talk, Talk, Hit, Hit”----keep talking so long as the talks promise results, but be prepared to hit if the talks prove counter-productive. ( 15-5-11)
(Bahukutumbi Raman is Additional Secretary (retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt. of India, New Delhi, and, presently, Director, Institute For Topical Studies, Chennai, and Associate of the Chennai Centre For China Studies. E-mail: seventyone2@gmail.com)
------------------------------------------
It goes without saying. Not sure how much John Kerry - a Robert Redford Red - adds to the conversation.
Senator John Kerry, Chairman of the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee, is presently in Afghanistan on his way to Pakistan. His visit to Pakistan has been triggered off by the discovery of Osama bin Laden living for six years in a safehaven at Abbottabad, the cradle of the Pakistan Army, where he was killed by U.S. Naval commandos on May 2,2011. Tensions in the relations between the U.S. and Pakistan, which had already worsened before the clandestine U.S. raid into OBL's hide-out, have been further aggravated by the defiant refusal of the Pakistan Army and its Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI), to agree to any independent enquiry into the circumstances under which OBL managed to live undetected for nearly six years.
2. The U.S. suspects, with valid reasons, that OBL could not have lived that long in a garrison town without local support---- official or unofficial or both. Identifying and neutralising the sources of local support would be an important step forward in the fight against jihadi terrorism. The Pakistan Army and the ISI have dismissed suspicions of local support and are stonewalling demands----made in Pakistan as well as in the U.S.--- for an independent enquiry.
3. Kerry, known in the past as a well-wisher of Pakistan and as a strong advocate of long-term aid commitments to Pakistan, has been showing signs of skepticism after May 2. He has been quoted as saying that it was “extraordinarily hard to believe” Osama could have survived in Pakistan for so long without any knowledge.
4. This skepticism seems even stronger now, nearly two weeks after the death of OBL. He has been quoted as saying on May 14 at Mazar-e-Sharif in Afghanistan, where he had gone on a visit before proceeding to Pakistan: “Washington will consider all its options if it found out that Mullah Omar (Amir of the Afghan Taliban) was living in Pakistan. The United States government will always reserve all of its options to be able to protect our people. Other plots have been conducted and organised and planned out of Pakistan. It is really critical that we talk with the Pakistanis as friends. The United States wanted Pakistan to be a real ally in combating militants inside its borders, but serious questions remain in relations between the countries after Osama’s killing. We obviously want a Pakistan that is prepared to respect the interests of Afghanistan, and to be a real ally in our efforts to combat terrorism. We believe there are things that can be done better. And there are serious questions that need to be answered in that relationship. But we’re not trying to find a way to break the relationship apart, we’re trying to find a way to build it.”
5. Can Pakistan ever be a real ally against terrorism? That is a question that even well-wishers of Pakistan in the U.S. have started posing----not in secret, but in public. Can it be trusted to fight sincerely and genuinely against terrorism? All those, who were talking of a transformational moment in the history of Pakistan in the wake of May 2, would have been disappointed by the details of the in camera session of the Pakistan Parliament held on May 13, to discuss the OBL affair. Not the slightest sign of a feeling of shame that Osama was living unmolested in a Pakistani army garrison town for over five years. Not the slightest sign of a determination to find out the truth.
6. The fact that the world’s most dreaded terrorist was found living in an important garrison town did not seem to embarrass the Pakistani leaders and their Army and the ISI. What has embarrassed them is the fact that the U.S. managed to find that out and carry out a clandestine raid to kill him. They have decided to hold a commission of enquiry only into the security failure and not into the intelligence failure. That is, they want to find out how the U.S. carried out the raid. Nothing more.
7. Kerry has referred to other plots conducted, organized and planned out of Pakistan. Many of those plots targeted India and Indian nationals in different cities of India and in Kabul working in the Indian Embassy there. Three of those plots---all in Mumbai—involved mass fatalities---in March 1993, July 2006 and November 2008. No other city in the world has suffered so many acts of mass fatality terrorism. Pakistan has been able to carry on this policy of using terrorism as a strategic weapon because of the reluctance of the U.S. and other members of the international community to act against it.
8. The time has come for sustained action against terrorists and their hide-outs in Pakistan. If Pakistan will not act, the international community has to. Pakistanis talk of a violation of their national sovereignty----whether at Abbottabad or in respect of the Drone strikes in the two Waziristans. Of course, they constitute violations of national sovereignty---- but they are justified violations in exercise of one’s right of self-defence.
9. There are UN resolutions that describe the state-sponsorhip of terrorism as amounting to indirect aggression against the targeted country. This indirect aggression gives one the right to exercise one’s self-defence in the territory of that country if left with no other option. Till now, Pakistan managed to get away without any negative consequences because no country was prepared to take the right of self-defence into its territory.
10. Now that the U.S. has shown the way and taken the lead, it is important for India to follow its lead----not by doing a copy cat of Abbottabad, which would be messy between two neighbours--- but through other means, which would not be spectacular, but effective without involving any civilian casualties in Pakistan and without the use of Indian security or para-military forces or commandos for that purpose.
11. Options, suited to our needs, are available. We have to identify them, acquire the capability to use them and use them. As we acquire the capability, we have to educate the international community, particularly the U.S., on the serious dimensions of the problems faced by us, on our right of self-defence and on our determination to exercise that right even outside our territory if left with no other option.
12. I have endorsed strongly our Prime Minister’s initiatives for talks with Pakistan . Talks do not mean we renounce our right of self-defence. The two have to go together. I have always advocated a policy of “Talk, Talk, Hit, Hit”----keep talking so long as the talks promise results, but be prepared to hit if the talks prove counter-productive. ( 15-5-11)
(Bahukutumbi Raman is Additional Secretary (retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt. of India, New Delhi, and, presently, Director, Institute For Topical Studies, Chennai, and Associate of the Chennai Centre For China Studies. E-mail: seventyone2@gmail.com)
------------------------------------------
It goes without saying. Not sure how much John Kerry - a Robert Redford Red - adds to the conversation.
Friday, May 13, 2011
Sheer Madness
My dander goes up when I hear people say, “Everybody does it.” Or, “Republicans are the same as Democrats.” It’s like saying, “Everybody is at fault,” when what you really mean to say, “Nobody is at fault.” If there is indeed fault, we need to get specific.
As pertains to the Middle East in particular, it is often said that Islamists target all who are not followers of Islam alike. Therefore, India, Europe and Canada all are in the crosshairs. This trope is spread by Israel for obvious reasons. It is, to my mind, is a simplification; when, in fact, the truth is even simpler than that.
I am an American. I have seen and heard people targeting America for destruction. Likewise, I have seen and heard people targeting Israel for destruction. I’ve seen and heard it as clear as a day in September. I’ve heard it said that anyone with ‘links to America’ must be destroyed. (This is important to understand: ‘links to America’.) I’ve dug a little deeper and learned that primary reason they hate us is because we have a history of supporting Israel. And suddenly, we arrive at the nub of it. It means that if Europe and Canada had no links to America, they would be safe. It means that if America did not have a history of supporting Israel, America would be safe.
These very same people (you all know who they are) have now partnered with the communists. This muddies the picture somewhat. Communists don’t care a whit about Israel. All they care about is that capitalism falls. They are using the first group of malcontents to see to it that it does. After that has been accomplished, the Islamists and the communists will fight it out. We will no longer care what happens, because we will no longer be around.
I’m not saying that we should abandon Israel. My posts have been consistent in their support of Israel; even now, when such unequivocal American support - as Israel has enjoyed in the past - appears to have eroded at the highest levels of our government. For me, Israel has always been a reliable bellwether to forecast our own situation. But, it has become more crucial than ever for us to define our terms precisely if we are to have any chance of prevailing in this struggle that has put our very identity at risk. Israel is a part of our identity.
To seek easy solutions – such as sacrificing Israel – or worse, ignoring the core problem all together, would be sheer madness.
http://pkoelliker.blogspot.com/
Saturday, May 7, 2011
Why Not Again?
There is a house in Thiruvanmaiyur along the beach road where I usually take my morning constitutional – a big house of indeterminate color, with all kinds of frills, picture windows and Rapunzel towers; one, that stands out and would catch the eye of sidewalk artists and movie audiences – that seems mostly abandoned. The yard is choked with weeds and refuse; neighbors heaving their trash over the wall. It is said to be used occasionally for photo shoots for some of the oodles of movies the highly successful Tamil film industry cranks out on a daily basis.
One time I was out there early morning, watching the fishermen unloading their catches and I noticed a helicopter hovering over that particular place. I didn’t think too much about it at the time; but lately, I’ve been thinking that it could also very well function as India’s version of our witness protection program or as a safe house for Tamil Tiger plotters. Hide in plain sight. Why not make the lie so big, so obvious, that no one will question it?
Mockery is one of the most potent weapons in the human arsenal. It has always been so. Christ on the cross was said to have been mocked. Obviously, Bush was mocked constantly. Since Obama’s election, mockery has been pretty much off the table as the president has shown himself to be far more adept in the art (of mockery) than any of his critics.
Besides, it’s in bad form to mock a black man. One might be accused of racism. Though, this too might be dependent on other factors as we are discovering that black or white may not be the issue at all. Justice Thomas, for instance, might be mocked and no one will say much about it. It’s only Obama that cannot be mocked. What’s the difference? Both men – last time I looked – are black. Here we come to the nub or it: only certain black men can be mocked while others can’t. The modifier that explains all this appears to be ‘conservative’.
Note how liberals strut around, routinely mocking tea parties, Republican lawmakers and presidents, popular talk show hosts and commentators, second amendment supporters, presidential aspirants, religious leaders and their congregations, etc. Make no mistake, these are attacks and they do damage.
You might say that Limbaugh (and some others) mocks the Left. The difference is that Limbaugh gives reasons for his mockery. The Left gives no reasons. Ordinarily, the press would step in to mediate. But, we all know that the media tilts the playing field to favor the Left. Limbaugh’s words and audience are routinely treated as if they do not exist. Instead, people like the girls on ‘The View’ are given star headline treatment.
The day after Osama’s killing, Limbaugh went on air and mocked Obama. There it was! The Left was outraged (if they said anything). What was supposed to be America’s proudest moment since the start of the war on terror, was being mocked unabashedly. Other talk show hosts, known for being critical of the president, refrained from doing so. Not Limbaugh!
Maybe it’s just me, but I too found the whole deal somewhat hollow. For me personally, it did not seem to rise to the status of a significant event. And any attempt to see it as such seemed somehow contrived and cheap, and quite worthy of mockery – an ‘emperor has no clothes’ moment, if you wish. A proper trial would have sat well and settled it. The subtext is, of course, that we can no longer expect a proper trial in this country. Obama has taken that from us as well.
It should have been a moment of quiet restraint and reflection. It needed to be handled with much greater fineness than simply dumping a corpse into the drink. Mike had it right, I think: ‘Defeat snatched out of the jaws of victory’, he wrote. Neither does it impress that al-Qaeda confirmed the kill publicly. I seem to remember AQ websites being largely supportive of Obama winning the election in 2008. They got their wish. Why not again?
http://pkoelliker.blogspot.com/
Thursday, May 5, 2011
View from India: ABBOTTABAD RAID: A RECONSTRUCTION THROUGH TWEETS
by B.RAMAN
Chirpstory is a website that facilitates reconstruction of events through a study of Tweets relating to that event. It has put out at: http://chirpstory.com/li/1294, a compilation of "on-the-ground tweets from Abbottabad, Pakistan, compiled with very well-informed journalists/researchers' tweets." Most of the Tweets discuss the coming down of one of the helicopters participating in the raid. They discuss the following questions without being able to come to definitive answers: Was it an American or a Pakistani chopper? Did it come down due to technical reasons or was it brought down by ground fire? What was the source of the explosions heard around the same time?
2. One interesting thing that stands out is that the choppers which participated in the raid were very noisy, to the point of irritating some of the Tweeters. One of the Tweeters says: "It was too noisy to be a spy craft, or, a very poor spy craft it was." He again says: "I started noticing the helicpoter when the noise got irritating." This Tweeter was interviewed by Barkha Dutt of NDTV in her "The Buck Stops Here" show on May 3. A transcript of her interview is available at http://tinyurl.com/6kr8tyv. If the helicopters were so noisy, how is it the local security people including those in the local police stations and in the Military Academy did not hear the noise and try to make enquiries about the source of the noise?
3. There are also references in the Tweets to a black-out in the town, roads being blocked, telephones going dead and sirens being sounded. It is not clear whether these things happened during the raid or after the choppers had left with the dead body of Osama bin Laden. A taxi-driver has been quoted as saying as follows: "The army has cordoned off the crash area and is conducting door-to-door search in the surrounding." This was possibly after the raiding party had left. A sweeper has been quoted as saying as follows: "A family also died in the crash, and one of the helicopter riders got away and is now being searched for."
4. There is also a reference to a plane flying over Abbottabad, but it is not clear whether this was a Pakistani or a U.S. plane and whether it was during or after the raid.
5. During his media briefing on May 2,2011, John Brennan, Assistant to President Barack Obama on Homeland Security, was asked about the incident involving the downed chopper. He replied as follows: "Seeing that helicopter in a place and in a condition that it wasn’t supposed to be, I think that was one -- at least for me, and I know for the other people in the room -- was the concern we had that now we’re having to go to the contingency plan. And thankfully, they were as able to carry out that contingency plan as they were the initial plan." Which was that place and what was the condition in which one of the two helicopters found itself to be, forcing the Navy Seals to move from the initial plan to the contingency plan? How did the contingency plan differ from the initial plan? Brennan did not give these details; nor did the media personnel pose these questions to him.
6. Where did that chopper find itself to be which forced its being destroyed and abandoned? Was it in the court-yard of the house in which OBL was living? Or was it elsewhere? The Tweets give differing locations for the chopper crash. One of the Tweets says it was very close to the Pakistan Military Academy.
7. According to U.S. official briefings, Pakistan was not associated with the planning and execution of the operation to prevent any leaks. It was informed of the raid after the raiding party in its remaining chopper had crossed back into Afghanistan. To quote Brennan: "We didn’t contact the Pakistanis until after all of our people, all of our aircraft were out of Pakistani airspace. At the time, the Pakistanis were reacting to an incident that they knew was taking place in Abbottabad. Therefore, they were scrambling some of their assets. Clearly, we were concerned that if the Pakistanis decided to scramble jets or whatever else, they didn’t know who were on those jets. They had no idea about who might have been on there, whether it be U.S. or somebody else. So we were watching and making sure that our people and our aircraft were able to get out of Pakistani airspace. And thankfully, there was no engagement with Pakistani forces. This operation was designed to minimize the prospects, the chances of engagement with Pakistani forces. It was done very well, and thankfully no Pakistani forces were engaged and there was no other individuals who were killed aside from those on the compound."
8. The raiding party itself went in two choppers one of which found itself in a place where it was not supposed to be and hence had to be destroyed. The other chopper brought the raiding party back to Afghanistan with OBL's body and those captured. Brennan said that Pakistan was not informed till "all of our aircraft were out of Pakistani airspace" This would indicate there were other U.S. planes and/or choppers in the Pakistani air space during the raid.
9. One U.S. claim can be accepted without any problem----that it was purely a U.S. operation with no involvement of Pakistan in the planning and execution. The problem arises with reference to the U.S. claim that Pakistan was informed only after the raiding partry had re-entered the Afghan airspace. The entire operation in Abbottabad itself lasted at least an hour: 40 minutes of the fire-fight and at least 20 minutes for the time taken by the choppers to manoeuvre themselves. During this period there was the heavy noise made by the choppers as they came down near OBL's house, the noise made by the crashing chopper and the noise of the fire-fight. How come during this entire period none of the security personnel posted in Abbottabad for the protection of the PMA and the senior Army officers living in the town and in the campus of the PMA noticed that there was something wrong and alerted the local units of the armed forces, para-military forces and the police.?
10. Only two explanations are possible: either there was total security incompetence at Abbottabad or the local security had been told by the Pakistani military leadership not to worry and keep quiet. If the second explanation is correct, the Pakistanis must have known of the impending raid before it took place. ( 5-5-11)
(Bahukutumbi Raman is Additional Secretary (retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt. of India, New Delhi, and, presently, Director, Institute For Topical Studies, Chennai, and Associate of the Chennai Centre For China Studies. E-mail: seventyone2@gmail.com)
------------------------------------------------
My comment: Very little is being made of the crashed helicopter here in America. It does not even seem a part of the story. Could be that the helicopter was deliberately crashed to create a diversion and give Pakistan a reason to close off roads? Also, if the crashed helicopter is mentioned at all, it's mentioned within the context of it having been one of our most advanced models and will likely be going to China for them to examine. The Tweets seem to indicate that it was junk.
Chirpstory is a website that facilitates reconstruction of events through a study of Tweets relating to that event. It has put out at: http://chirpstory.com/li/1294, a compilation of "on-the-ground tweets from Abbottabad, Pakistan, compiled with very well-informed journalists/researchers' tweets." Most of the Tweets discuss the coming down of one of the helicopters participating in the raid. They discuss the following questions without being able to come to definitive answers: Was it an American or a Pakistani chopper? Did it come down due to technical reasons or was it brought down by ground fire? What was the source of the explosions heard around the same time?
2. One interesting thing that stands out is that the choppers which participated in the raid were very noisy, to the point of irritating some of the Tweeters. One of the Tweeters says: "It was too noisy to be a spy craft, or, a very poor spy craft it was." He again says: "I started noticing the helicpoter when the noise got irritating." This Tweeter was interviewed by Barkha Dutt of NDTV in her "The Buck Stops Here" show on May 3. A transcript of her interview is available at http://tinyurl.com/6kr8tyv. If the helicopters were so noisy, how is it the local security people including those in the local police stations and in the Military Academy did not hear the noise and try to make enquiries about the source of the noise?
3. There are also references in the Tweets to a black-out in the town, roads being blocked, telephones going dead and sirens being sounded. It is not clear whether these things happened during the raid or after the choppers had left with the dead body of Osama bin Laden. A taxi-driver has been quoted as saying as follows: "The army has cordoned off the crash area and is conducting door-to-door search in the surrounding." This was possibly after the raiding party had left. A sweeper has been quoted as saying as follows: "A family also died in the crash, and one of the helicopter riders got away and is now being searched for."
4. There is also a reference to a plane flying over Abbottabad, but it is not clear whether this was a Pakistani or a U.S. plane and whether it was during or after the raid.
5. During his media briefing on May 2,2011, John Brennan, Assistant to President Barack Obama on Homeland Security, was asked about the incident involving the downed chopper. He replied as follows: "Seeing that helicopter in a place and in a condition that it wasn’t supposed to be, I think that was one -- at least for me, and I know for the other people in the room -- was the concern we had that now we’re having to go to the contingency plan. And thankfully, they were as able to carry out that contingency plan as they were the initial plan." Which was that place and what was the condition in which one of the two helicopters found itself to be, forcing the Navy Seals to move from the initial plan to the contingency plan? How did the contingency plan differ from the initial plan? Brennan did not give these details; nor did the media personnel pose these questions to him.
6. Where did that chopper find itself to be which forced its being destroyed and abandoned? Was it in the court-yard of the house in which OBL was living? Or was it elsewhere? The Tweets give differing locations for the chopper crash. One of the Tweets says it was very close to the Pakistan Military Academy.
7. According to U.S. official briefings, Pakistan was not associated with the planning and execution of the operation to prevent any leaks. It was informed of the raid after the raiding party in its remaining chopper had crossed back into Afghanistan. To quote Brennan: "We didn’t contact the Pakistanis until after all of our people, all of our aircraft were out of Pakistani airspace. At the time, the Pakistanis were reacting to an incident that they knew was taking place in Abbottabad. Therefore, they were scrambling some of their assets. Clearly, we were concerned that if the Pakistanis decided to scramble jets or whatever else, they didn’t know who were on those jets. They had no idea about who might have been on there, whether it be U.S. or somebody else. So we were watching and making sure that our people and our aircraft were able to get out of Pakistani airspace. And thankfully, there was no engagement with Pakistani forces. This operation was designed to minimize the prospects, the chances of engagement with Pakistani forces. It was done very well, and thankfully no Pakistani forces were engaged and there was no other individuals who were killed aside from those on the compound."
8. The raiding party itself went in two choppers one of which found itself in a place where it was not supposed to be and hence had to be destroyed. The other chopper brought the raiding party back to Afghanistan with OBL's body and those captured. Brennan said that Pakistan was not informed till "all of our aircraft were out of Pakistani airspace" This would indicate there were other U.S. planes and/or choppers in the Pakistani air space during the raid.
9. One U.S. claim can be accepted without any problem----that it was purely a U.S. operation with no involvement of Pakistan in the planning and execution. The problem arises with reference to the U.S. claim that Pakistan was informed only after the raiding partry had re-entered the Afghan airspace. The entire operation in Abbottabad itself lasted at least an hour: 40 minutes of the fire-fight and at least 20 minutes for the time taken by the choppers to manoeuvre themselves. During this period there was the heavy noise made by the choppers as they came down near OBL's house, the noise made by the crashing chopper and the noise of the fire-fight. How come during this entire period none of the security personnel posted in Abbottabad for the protection of the PMA and the senior Army officers living in the town and in the campus of the PMA noticed that there was something wrong and alerted the local units of the armed forces, para-military forces and the police.?
10. Only two explanations are possible: either there was total security incompetence at Abbottabad or the local security had been told by the Pakistani military leadership not to worry and keep quiet. If the second explanation is correct, the Pakistanis must have known of the impending raid before it took place. ( 5-5-11)
(Bahukutumbi Raman is Additional Secretary (retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt. of India, New Delhi, and, presently, Director, Institute For Topical Studies, Chennai, and Associate of the Chennai Centre For China Studies. E-mail: seventyone2@gmail.com)
------------------------------------------------
My comment: Very little is being made of the crashed helicopter here in America. It does not even seem a part of the story. Could be that the helicopter was deliberately crashed to create a diversion and give Pakistan a reason to close off roads? Also, if the crashed helicopter is mentioned at all, it's mentioned within the context of it having been one of our most advanced models and will likely be going to China for them to examine. The Tweets seem to indicate that it was junk.
Wednesday, May 4, 2011
View from India: DEATH OF A JIHADI FRANKENSTEIN’S MONSTER
by B.RAMAN
(Written at the request of the Editor of the “Economic Times”, New Delhi)
Osama bin Laden (OBL), the head of Al Qaeda, was killed by the U.S. Special Forces during a past midnight chopper-borne raid on his hide-out at Abbotabad, a garrison town, about 100 kms from Islamabad, on May 1. He influenced thousands of young Muslims, who grew to adulthood in the 1980s and the 1990s, to take to jihadi terrorism as a weapon of defiance. He wanted them to use this weapon to correct what he looked upon as the historic injustices done to the Ummah by the non-Islamic world.
Among such instances of historic injustices to the Muslims, he cited the Jewish occupation of Palestine and the occupation of lands, which, according to him, had historically belonged to the Muslims by non-Islamic forces. He also wanted the Muslims to take to arms against ideological influences that tended to corrupt Islam.
He initially fought against the corrupting influence of the Marxist ideology in Afghanistan against the Soviet and Afghan troops in the 1980s. He saw nothing wrong in accepting the assistance of Western ideological forces for countering Marxism and to force it to quit Afghanistan.
He might not have acquired the iconic image which he developed subsequently but for the use of him by the Central Intelligence Agency (CIAS) and the agencies of Pakistan and Saudi Arabia which projected him as a jihadi fighter par excellence in order to use him for mobilising Muslim youth of the Arab world for the jihad against the Soviet troops and the Marxist ideology.
With the assistance of these agencies, he forced the Soviet troops to withdraw from Afghanistan and helped to bring Afghanistan under the control of medieval Islamic forces in the form of the Taliban. His medieval version of Islam, which is condemned today by the U.S., was encouraged by the U.S. in the 1980s to use it as a strategic weapon against Marxism .
Having tasted success in Afghanistan, he and his force of Arab youth, trained and armed with the help of these agencies in secret camps in Pakistan turned against their Western benefactors and mentors and transformed their jihad against Marxism into a new jihad against the Crusaders and the Jewish people in the 1990s. The icon of the 1980s, toasted by the U.S. because of his success against the Marxists, became the dreaded Frankenstein’s monster of the 1990s and thereafter.
This jihadi Frankenstein’s monster, jointly created by the agencies of the U.S., Pakistan and Saudi Arabia, became the world’s most dreaded terrorist who spread death and destruction across the world through his Al Qaeda and International Islamic Front (IIC) starting from 1996. The 9/11 terrorist strikes in the U.S. Homeland made the U.S. realize that the reach of this monster of its own creation had extended up to the U.S.
The slaying of this monster became the driving force of the so-called war against international terrorism. It has taken nearly 10 years and an expenditure of billions of dollars to slay this monster. At the end, the death of this monster came at the place where it was born, namely, in Pakistan. After 10 years of search the monster was traced .
The monster was found hiding in the place where the Pakistan Army was born and where its new officer-recruits are trained every year. Abbotabad is the cradle of the Pakistan Army and in that cradle was found the monster. There were indicators of a cosy relationahip between the monster and one of its original creators----the Pakistani Army and intelligence.
The death of the jihadi Frankenstein’s monster in the cradle of the Pakistan Army has thrown the spotlight even more intensely than till now on another Frankenstein’s monster --- namely, the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) of Pakistan.
Since the 1980s, the ISI was was pampered, fed and fattened by the U.S. along with the Pakistan Army. The U.S., which closed its eyes to the pernicious role played by this State Frankenstein’s monster in sponsoring terrorism of various kinds against India, Afghanistan and other countries, is confused and does not know how to act against this State Frankenstein’s monster after having killed the non-State monster.
The end of OBL will not be the end of international jihadi terrorism. The non-state head of international jihadi terrorism may be dead, but the State of Pakistan, which continues to use this terrorism, lives in a denial mode. Neither the State of Pakistan nor its civil society is prepared to admit that Al Qaeda and its surviving leaders have managed to escape arrest, prosecution or death so far, because of the support extended to them by the State of Pakistan. The same is the case with the Lashkar-e-Toiba (LET) and other jihadi affiliates of Al Qaeda.
Unless the U.S. and other members of the international community are prepared to draw the right lessons from the discovery that OBL had been living and surviving in an important garrison town of Pakistan and force the State of Pakistan to stop using terrorism as a weapon of the State, OBL’s death may not mark the beginning of the end of international jihadi terrorism.
OBL may be dead but jihadi terrorism in some form or the other will survive so long as it enjoys the support of the State of Pakistan.( 3-5-2011)
(Bahukutumbi Raman is Additional Secretary (retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt. of India)
(Written at the request of the Editor of the “Economic Times”, New Delhi)
Osama bin Laden (OBL), the head of Al Qaeda, was killed by the U.S. Special Forces during a past midnight chopper-borne raid on his hide-out at Abbotabad, a garrison town, about 100 kms from Islamabad, on May 1. He influenced thousands of young Muslims, who grew to adulthood in the 1980s and the 1990s, to take to jihadi terrorism as a weapon of defiance. He wanted them to use this weapon to correct what he looked upon as the historic injustices done to the Ummah by the non-Islamic world.
Among such instances of historic injustices to the Muslims, he cited the Jewish occupation of Palestine and the occupation of lands, which, according to him, had historically belonged to the Muslims by non-Islamic forces. He also wanted the Muslims to take to arms against ideological influences that tended to corrupt Islam.
He initially fought against the corrupting influence of the Marxist ideology in Afghanistan against the Soviet and Afghan troops in the 1980s. He saw nothing wrong in accepting the assistance of Western ideological forces for countering Marxism and to force it to quit Afghanistan.
He might not have acquired the iconic image which he developed subsequently but for the use of him by the Central Intelligence Agency (CIAS) and the agencies of Pakistan and Saudi Arabia which projected him as a jihadi fighter par excellence in order to use him for mobilising Muslim youth of the Arab world for the jihad against the Soviet troops and the Marxist ideology.
With the assistance of these agencies, he forced the Soviet troops to withdraw from Afghanistan and helped to bring Afghanistan under the control of medieval Islamic forces in the form of the Taliban. His medieval version of Islam, which is condemned today by the U.S., was encouraged by the U.S. in the 1980s to use it as a strategic weapon against Marxism .
Having tasted success in Afghanistan, he and his force of Arab youth, trained and armed with the help of these agencies in secret camps in Pakistan turned against their Western benefactors and mentors and transformed their jihad against Marxism into a new jihad against the Crusaders and the Jewish people in the 1990s. The icon of the 1980s, toasted by the U.S. because of his success against the Marxists, became the dreaded Frankenstein’s monster of the 1990s and thereafter.
This jihadi Frankenstein’s monster, jointly created by the agencies of the U.S., Pakistan and Saudi Arabia, became the world’s most dreaded terrorist who spread death and destruction across the world through his Al Qaeda and International Islamic Front (IIC) starting from 1996. The 9/11 terrorist strikes in the U.S. Homeland made the U.S. realize that the reach of this monster of its own creation had extended up to the U.S.
The slaying of this monster became the driving force of the so-called war against international terrorism. It has taken nearly 10 years and an expenditure of billions of dollars to slay this monster. At the end, the death of this monster came at the place where it was born, namely, in Pakistan. After 10 years of search the monster was traced .
The monster was found hiding in the place where the Pakistan Army was born and where its new officer-recruits are trained every year. Abbotabad is the cradle of the Pakistan Army and in that cradle was found the monster. There were indicators of a cosy relationahip between the monster and one of its original creators----the Pakistani Army and intelligence.
The death of the jihadi Frankenstein’s monster in the cradle of the Pakistan Army has thrown the spotlight even more intensely than till now on another Frankenstein’s monster --- namely, the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) of Pakistan.
Since the 1980s, the ISI was was pampered, fed and fattened by the U.S. along with the Pakistan Army. The U.S., which closed its eyes to the pernicious role played by this State Frankenstein’s monster in sponsoring terrorism of various kinds against India, Afghanistan and other countries, is confused and does not know how to act against this State Frankenstein’s monster after having killed the non-State monster.
The end of OBL will not be the end of international jihadi terrorism. The non-state head of international jihadi terrorism may be dead, but the State of Pakistan, which continues to use this terrorism, lives in a denial mode. Neither the State of Pakistan nor its civil society is prepared to admit that Al Qaeda and its surviving leaders have managed to escape arrest, prosecution or death so far, because of the support extended to them by the State of Pakistan. The same is the case with the Lashkar-e-Toiba (LET) and other jihadi affiliates of Al Qaeda.
Unless the U.S. and other members of the international community are prepared to draw the right lessons from the discovery that OBL had been living and surviving in an important garrison town of Pakistan and force the State of Pakistan to stop using terrorism as a weapon of the State, OBL’s death may not mark the beginning of the end of international jihadi terrorism.
OBL may be dead but jihadi terrorism in some form or the other will survive so long as it enjoys the support of the State of Pakistan.( 3-5-2011)
(Bahukutumbi Raman is Additional Secretary (retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt. of India)
Monday, May 2, 2011
View from India: OSAMA BIN LADEN'S DEATH
by B.RAMAN (questions and answers)
Question: Was the operation that was carried out by the U.S. Special Forces against Osama bin Laden resulting in his death at Abbotabad in Pakistan on the night of May 1 an exclusive U.S. operation or was it a joint U.S.-Pak operation?
Answer: Till now the indications are that it was an exclusive U.S. operation. Since it involved the ingress of the U.S. specal forces into Pakistani territory by air in helicopters, it was likely that Gen. Ashfaq Pervez Kayani, Pakistan's Chief of the Army Staff (COAS), was informed before the helicopters with the special forces took off from Afghanistan for the raid even though U.S. officials have reportedly been asserting that Pakistan was informed only after the helicopters had taken off at the end of the operation. When Bill Clinton's Administration launched the Cruise missile strikes on the training camps of Al Qaeda in the Jalalabad area of Afghanistan in 1998 they followed a similar procedure. Gen Anthony Zinni, the then Commanding Officer of the U.S. Central Command, flew to Islamabad from a U.S. naval ship and informed Gen. Jehangir Karamat, the then COAS, about the impending raid. The U.S. did so to make sure that Pakistan did not interpret that the missile had been launched by India and order a missile strike against India. A similar precaution was likely to have been taken this time too. Moreover, Abbotabad, an important military garrison town, has high air defence cover. It was important to prevent a messy air defence action by Pakistan against the U.S. helicopters if its radars had detected their approach. The entire operation lasted a little over two hours. During this period, one of the helicopters crashed. It was blown up and destroyed by the special forces. A newsletter disseminated by a retired U.S. naval officer says: "Source says actual crash sight was on Kakul Road, Abbottabod, Pakistan just down from the Pakistan Military Academy exercise grounds. See image for road, which was reportedly blocked off by local security after the incident. Folks in the city mentioned on Twitter at the time that the action was very, very close to the PMA." This would indicate that during the entire operation on the ground, which lasted over 90 minutes if one excludes the time taken by the choppers for their to and fro journey, the Pakistani security forces did not intervene and try to find out what was going on. The local police blocked the stretch of the road where the helicopter had crashed to prevent onlookers rushing there till the Americans had destroyed the chopper. All this clearly shows that the Pakistanis must have had advance knowledge of the operation and had instructions from above not to intervene.
Q: Has the U.S. undertaken similar operations deep inside Pakistan before?
A. Yes thrice before. Twice in 2002 in Faislabad and Karachi to capture Abu Zubaida and Ramzi Binalshibh respectively and once in 2003 in Rawalpindi to capture Khalid Sheikh Mohammad (KSM).
Q: How did those operations differ from the latest operation to kill OBL?
A: The three previous operations were joint U.S.-Pakistan operations with the Inter-Service Intelligence (ISI) playing the leadership role. The raids were organised on the basis of technical intelligence (TECHINT) collected by the U.S. agencies due to the careless use of mobile telephones by the three arrested persons. The latest operation against OBL seems to have been an exclusive U.S. operation with the prior knowledge of Pakistan, but with no Pakistani role in its planning and execution. Since OBL was not using any communication equipment such as mobile telephone, Internet etc in his hide-out, no Technical Intelligence would have been possible. It seems to have been mounted purely on the basis of Human Intelligence (HUMINT). The success of the operation speaks very highly of the improvement in the HUMINT capability of the U.S. agencies.
Q: Wherefrom could the HUMINT have come?
A: Abbotabad is a Hazara town. The Hazaras are strongly against Al Qaeda and the Afghan Taliban because of the massacre of the Hazaras, many of whom are Shias, in East Afghanistan when the Taliban was in power in Kabul. It is likely that the local Hazara community might have played a role in assisting the U.S. in its OBL hunt. In fact, it is surprising that OBL took shelter in that town despite the strong presence of the Hazaras there. No explanation for this has been forthcoming so far.
Q: Is it possible that the ISI might have played a role in the collection of the HUMINT?
A. Difficult to answer this question.
Q: How come the huge mansion in which OBL was reportedly living did not attract suspicion as it was being constructed in 2005?
A: Difficult to explain it unless the mansion had been constructed by a retired senior General of the Army as his farm house and then given on rent to OBL's family with or without the knowledge that it was the family of OBL.
Q: For how long OBL must have been living in the mansion?
A: According to U.S. media reports, the house had been under watch by the U.S. since Auguat last year. Obama gave the order for the operation on April 29 on the receipt of precise information that OBL was inside the mansion. This would give rise to the possibility that Osama's family had been living in the mansion at least since last August, that OBL had been visiting them off and on and that Obama gave the order for the operation after receiving information in the last week of April that OBL had come to visit his family. This is what happened in the case of Baitullah Mehsud, the Amir of the Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) who was killed in a Drone strike. His wife and children were living with her father. Baitullah was visiting them off and on. The Americans had reportedly managed to find out the details of the car of Baitullah. One day they received information that Baitullah's car was parked outside his in-laws' house. They directed a missile strike at it. Baitullah was among those killed. In the case of OBL, they did not make a missile strike. Instead, they sent a special forces team to kill OBL in a fire-fight.
Q: Was there an official Pakistani complicity in OBL's living in Abbotabad?
A: The evidence till now is circumstantial and not direct. Why did OBL choose to live in Abbotabad despite the presence of a large number of Hazaras there? The only possible answer is because he felt confident his security would be assured there. He could have got this confidence only if had the support of some sections of the local security agencies and/or the police and also of some local elements of the non-Hazara segment of the population. This is more speculative than of any evidentiary value. The direct evidence could come from the interrogation of those arrested alive from the mansion by the U.S. special forces.
Q: What impact this will have on U.S. relations with Pakistan?
A: The U.S. already has considerable suspicion that Pakistan has been playing a double game by dragging its feet on the issue of action against Al Qaeda. This suspicion will now be further strengthened. The smoking gun in the form of OBL's dead body has clearly established that OBL was living in an urban town of Pakistan. Was he living there with the knowledge or collusion of the Pakistani security agencies? There is no smoking gun on this yet. Unless that becoms available, the U.S. would find it difficult to act against the State of Pakistan. The relations will continue as before with ups and downs and with alternating praise for action taken and reprimands for actions not taken.
Q: Will the death of OBL be the end of Al Qaeda?
A: No.Since 9/11, Al Qaeda is already a weakened organisation due to repeated Drone strikes on its hide-outs and capture of some of its leaders on the ground in Pakistan. This process of weakening that has been there since 2002 could acquire pace and strength as a result of the death of OBL. Despite this, Al Qaeda, by itself, will remain a potent force for some years to come until it suffers more attrition.
Q: Will it have any impact on Obama's plans to start thinning out troops from Afghanistan? Will it enable or tempt Obama to accelerate the process?
A: No. Obama's decisions relating to Afghanistan will depend on the evolution of the ground situation in Afghanistan and on the proved ability of the Afghan National Army to withstand pressure from the Taliban.
Q: What are the dangers of reprisal attacks by Al Qaeda and its affiliates?
A: High in the Af-Pak region. The Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) and Al Qaeda affiliates like the Lashksar-e-Jhangvi (LEJ) and the Jaish-e-Mohammad (JEM) will presume that the Pakistani security forces must have co-operated with the U.S. Acts of suicide terrorism against the Pakistani security forces and U.S. nationals and interests in Pakistan could increase.
High against U.S. nationals and interests in other countries.
Medium to low in the U.S. homeland. ( 2-5-11)
(Bahukutumbi Raman is Additional Secretary (retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt. of India, New Delhi, and, presently, Director, Institute For Topical Studies, Chennai. E-mail: seventyone2@gmail.com)
Question: Was the operation that was carried out by the U.S. Special Forces against Osama bin Laden resulting in his death at Abbotabad in Pakistan on the night of May 1 an exclusive U.S. operation or was it a joint U.S.-Pak operation?
Answer: Till now the indications are that it was an exclusive U.S. operation. Since it involved the ingress of the U.S. specal forces into Pakistani territory by air in helicopters, it was likely that Gen. Ashfaq Pervez Kayani, Pakistan's Chief of the Army Staff (COAS), was informed before the helicopters with the special forces took off from Afghanistan for the raid even though U.S. officials have reportedly been asserting that Pakistan was informed only after the helicopters had taken off at the end of the operation. When Bill Clinton's Administration launched the Cruise missile strikes on the training camps of Al Qaeda in the Jalalabad area of Afghanistan in 1998 they followed a similar procedure. Gen Anthony Zinni, the then Commanding Officer of the U.S. Central Command, flew to Islamabad from a U.S. naval ship and informed Gen. Jehangir Karamat, the then COAS, about the impending raid. The U.S. did so to make sure that Pakistan did not interpret that the missile had been launched by India and order a missile strike against India. A similar precaution was likely to have been taken this time too. Moreover, Abbotabad, an important military garrison town, has high air defence cover. It was important to prevent a messy air defence action by Pakistan against the U.S. helicopters if its radars had detected their approach. The entire operation lasted a little over two hours. During this period, one of the helicopters crashed. It was blown up and destroyed by the special forces. A newsletter disseminated by a retired U.S. naval officer says: "Source says actual crash sight was on Kakul Road, Abbottabod, Pakistan just down from the Pakistan Military Academy exercise grounds. See image for road, which was reportedly blocked off by local security after the incident. Folks in the city mentioned on Twitter at the time that the action was very, very close to the PMA." This would indicate that during the entire operation on the ground, which lasted over 90 minutes if one excludes the time taken by the choppers for their to and fro journey, the Pakistani security forces did not intervene and try to find out what was going on. The local police blocked the stretch of the road where the helicopter had crashed to prevent onlookers rushing there till the Americans had destroyed the chopper. All this clearly shows that the Pakistanis must have had advance knowledge of the operation and had instructions from above not to intervene.
Q: Has the U.S. undertaken similar operations deep inside Pakistan before?
A. Yes thrice before. Twice in 2002 in Faislabad and Karachi to capture Abu Zubaida and Ramzi Binalshibh respectively and once in 2003 in Rawalpindi to capture Khalid Sheikh Mohammad (KSM).
Q: How did those operations differ from the latest operation to kill OBL?
A: The three previous operations were joint U.S.-Pakistan operations with the Inter-Service Intelligence (ISI) playing the leadership role. The raids were organised on the basis of technical intelligence (TECHINT) collected by the U.S. agencies due to the careless use of mobile telephones by the three arrested persons. The latest operation against OBL seems to have been an exclusive U.S. operation with the prior knowledge of Pakistan, but with no Pakistani role in its planning and execution. Since OBL was not using any communication equipment such as mobile telephone, Internet etc in his hide-out, no Technical Intelligence would have been possible. It seems to have been mounted purely on the basis of Human Intelligence (HUMINT). The success of the operation speaks very highly of the improvement in the HUMINT capability of the U.S. agencies.
Q: Wherefrom could the HUMINT have come?
A: Abbotabad is a Hazara town. The Hazaras are strongly against Al Qaeda and the Afghan Taliban because of the massacre of the Hazaras, many of whom are Shias, in East Afghanistan when the Taliban was in power in Kabul. It is likely that the local Hazara community might have played a role in assisting the U.S. in its OBL hunt. In fact, it is surprising that OBL took shelter in that town despite the strong presence of the Hazaras there. No explanation for this has been forthcoming so far.
Q: Is it possible that the ISI might have played a role in the collection of the HUMINT?
A. Difficult to answer this question.
Q: How come the huge mansion in which OBL was reportedly living did not attract suspicion as it was being constructed in 2005?
A: Difficult to explain it unless the mansion had been constructed by a retired senior General of the Army as his farm house and then given on rent to OBL's family with or without the knowledge that it was the family of OBL.
Q: For how long OBL must have been living in the mansion?
A: According to U.S. media reports, the house had been under watch by the U.S. since Auguat last year. Obama gave the order for the operation on April 29 on the receipt of precise information that OBL was inside the mansion. This would give rise to the possibility that Osama's family had been living in the mansion at least since last August, that OBL had been visiting them off and on and that Obama gave the order for the operation after receiving information in the last week of April that OBL had come to visit his family. This is what happened in the case of Baitullah Mehsud, the Amir of the Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) who was killed in a Drone strike. His wife and children were living with her father. Baitullah was visiting them off and on. The Americans had reportedly managed to find out the details of the car of Baitullah. One day they received information that Baitullah's car was parked outside his in-laws' house. They directed a missile strike at it. Baitullah was among those killed. In the case of OBL, they did not make a missile strike. Instead, they sent a special forces team to kill OBL in a fire-fight.
Q: Was there an official Pakistani complicity in OBL's living in Abbotabad?
A: The evidence till now is circumstantial and not direct. Why did OBL choose to live in Abbotabad despite the presence of a large number of Hazaras there? The only possible answer is because he felt confident his security would be assured there. He could have got this confidence only if had the support of some sections of the local security agencies and/or the police and also of some local elements of the non-Hazara segment of the population. This is more speculative than of any evidentiary value. The direct evidence could come from the interrogation of those arrested alive from the mansion by the U.S. special forces.
Q: What impact this will have on U.S. relations with Pakistan?
A: The U.S. already has considerable suspicion that Pakistan has been playing a double game by dragging its feet on the issue of action against Al Qaeda. This suspicion will now be further strengthened. The smoking gun in the form of OBL's dead body has clearly established that OBL was living in an urban town of Pakistan. Was he living there with the knowledge or collusion of the Pakistani security agencies? There is no smoking gun on this yet. Unless that becoms available, the U.S. would find it difficult to act against the State of Pakistan. The relations will continue as before with ups and downs and with alternating praise for action taken and reprimands for actions not taken.
Q: Will the death of OBL be the end of Al Qaeda?
A: No.Since 9/11, Al Qaeda is already a weakened organisation due to repeated Drone strikes on its hide-outs and capture of some of its leaders on the ground in Pakistan. This process of weakening that has been there since 2002 could acquire pace and strength as a result of the death of OBL. Despite this, Al Qaeda, by itself, will remain a potent force for some years to come until it suffers more attrition.
Q: Will it have any impact on Obama's plans to start thinning out troops from Afghanistan? Will it enable or tempt Obama to accelerate the process?
A: No. Obama's decisions relating to Afghanistan will depend on the evolution of the ground situation in Afghanistan and on the proved ability of the Afghan National Army to withstand pressure from the Taliban.
Q: What are the dangers of reprisal attacks by Al Qaeda and its affiliates?
A: High in the Af-Pak region. The Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) and Al Qaeda affiliates like the Lashksar-e-Jhangvi (LEJ) and the Jaish-e-Mohammad (JEM) will presume that the Pakistani security forces must have co-operated with the U.S. Acts of suicide terrorism against the Pakistani security forces and U.S. nationals and interests in Pakistan could increase.
High against U.S. nationals and interests in other countries.
Medium to low in the U.S. homeland. ( 2-5-11)
(Bahukutumbi Raman is Additional Secretary (retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt. of India, New Delhi, and, presently, Director, Institute For Topical Studies, Chennai. E-mail: seventyone2@gmail.com)
Sunday, May 1, 2011
S. And the Christmas Pig (with a name)
I understand the purpose of the last remaining stricture - against political assassination - left standing, even in the chaos of war. It is a concept also reflected in the game of chess. Assassination goes beyond mere killing. It targets a leader – the head the snake, in some cases – a man (or woman), nevertheless with a recognizable name. It violates the last law of civilized behavior after which there is no telling.
S. was a little boy living in Goa. It wasn’t the place of his birth or even where he grew up. His parents moved around a lot due to the nature of his father’s job. S. used to like watching the yard from his second floor window. He watched the cow being milked and the chickens. His very favorite was the pink piglet with the curly tail. He gave it a name and it would follow him around when he went down to the yard to play.
Came Christmas, there was much activity down in the yard. S. had been struggling to stay awake the night before. Midnight mass seemed to drag on endlessly. Around daybreak he finally fell asleep. Consequently, he awoke late. It was already time for the holiday feast served on a festive table at midday. When S. came downstairs, the heavily laden table was the first thing he saw. In the center was his pig – the one with a name. It had an apple in its mouth.
S. ran back upstairs weeping. He could not eat that day.
The assassination of a leader is considered by some to be the most effective way to rid oneself of an adversary. And perhaps it is. But it flies in the face of any shred of doubt one may still harbor as to the rightness or wrongness of one’s intent. There must always be doubt. Without doubt, there is no countervailing force to mitigate madness, and it’s off to the races. Why not target Ahmadinejad, Mugabe, or Kim Jong-Il? We know where they live.
Of all the palpable threats that are facing our nation, I consider Barack Hussein Obama to be at the top of the list. Still, I would shudder if he were to be assassinated. It would mean that we have stepped over and obscured a very delicate line. It would be difficult – if not impossible – to find our way back to any semblance of normal.
Targeting Kaddafi is wrong. I know the sainted Reagan did it. He was wrong as well. Kaddafi may have been tipped off as he might have been tipped off also this time around (I should like to believe so).
http://pkoelliker.blogspot.com/
View from India: Beginning and End
by Parvathi
Last week saw a beginning and an end. The beginning was the wedding of Kate and William, the current sweethearts of Britain, and the end was the death of Sathya Sai Baba, spiritual guru to millions around the world.
Both sparked endless chatter on the tube and on the virtual networks. My son told me in disgust "They are still showing the wedding on most of the channels!" and it is now two days after the event. Well, there are enough and more people who want to watch it! "Colonial hangover" you might call it; but, no, it is something much deeper than that. Sai Baba's funeral was watched live over the television, again, by millions who mourn his passing like they would their own kith and kin. It is time now to ask why, and let us then like the Red King says "Begin at the beginning."
Kate and William stand for romance and love both very elusive values in this increasingly rushed present life styles where only money really calls the shots. Anything that simply exists for the pure beauty of itself is quickly swept aside for gains, so there go love and romance unless they come with the grinning sidekicks of power and pelf. The royal sweethearts are dream symbols that "love will find a way" in the tradition of Diana who turned away from a cold, loveless marriage. Princess Katherine, Kate as the Brits are wont to call her in their very Anglo Saxon way, is a commoner and therefore the romantic angle gets another boost. Then of course there is the done to death pageantry of the House of Windsor. Rationalization seems to have slowly killed the joy of celebrations in the developed world. Not so in this part of the planet, we still have much to hope for and more to celebrate in hopes of better things to come, and therefore we are a celebratory people. Good for us. Every festival is a huge celebration of colors, smells, sound and taste. Here, religion is a living breathing tradition and God ceases to be abstract and is part of the medley of life: a young impish boy, a dutiful son and husband, a faithful and beautiful wife, a lovable glutton ...the list is endless. They all fit into the normal register of life, and therefore represents a transaction with God on a personal basis.
This is where Sathya Sai comes in. The tirade against him has been there for decades and it is mostly from the rationalists who seem to hate his guts for performing miracles. What's wrong with miracles? Does only rhetoric have value? Don't we all want miracles in one way or the other? And also, if Sathya Sai had not performed miracles, could he have manged to catch the attention of the masses? The miracles are NOT important inasmuch the loaves of bread and the water to wine at Cana are not the pivot on which Christianity turns.
People get curious, they come to scoff, see, and as we saw, remained en masse to pray. When there is darkness at noon, one needs faith that the sun will come out again, and that is the surety that Sai Baba gave millions around the world and they are the better for it. Better because there he was a living breathing, smiling, talking entity you could tell your troubles to, and he had answers. What is faith if it is not a psychological crutch? Why berate it? Look at the practical efficacy of confession among the Roman Catholics. It does one good to go every week and confess everything to the good and holy father in the confessional. The wonderful thing about it is that you don't see each other. Anonymity helps clear the air. So, you confess and are pardoned; told to say a dozen Hail Marys and you come out having got it off your chest. Never has anything more practical been ever thought of. They knew, those crafty cardinals and popes the psychological angle of faith. Today the confessional has been replaced by the psychiatrist's couch, but are there enough takers? Does it really help?
Do the rationalists bother to mention Sathya Sai's charity? What matters the most is that Sai Baba gave enormously back to society.
His epitaph should read: "You receive but what you give."
Last week saw a beginning and an end. The beginning was the wedding of Kate and William, the current sweethearts of Britain, and the end was the death of Sathya Sai Baba, spiritual guru to millions around the world.
Both sparked endless chatter on the tube and on the virtual networks. My son told me in disgust "They are still showing the wedding on most of the channels!" and it is now two days after the event. Well, there are enough and more people who want to watch it! "Colonial hangover" you might call it; but, no, it is something much deeper than that. Sai Baba's funeral was watched live over the television, again, by millions who mourn his passing like they would their own kith and kin. It is time now to ask why, and let us then like the Red King says "Begin at the beginning."
Kate and William stand for romance and love both very elusive values in this increasingly rushed present life styles where only money really calls the shots. Anything that simply exists for the pure beauty of itself is quickly swept aside for gains, so there go love and romance unless they come with the grinning sidekicks of power and pelf. The royal sweethearts are dream symbols that "love will find a way" in the tradition of Diana who turned away from a cold, loveless marriage. Princess Katherine, Kate as the Brits are wont to call her in their very Anglo Saxon way, is a commoner and therefore the romantic angle gets another boost. Then of course there is the done to death pageantry of the House of Windsor. Rationalization seems to have slowly killed the joy of celebrations in the developed world. Not so in this part of the planet, we still have much to hope for and more to celebrate in hopes of better things to come, and therefore we are a celebratory people. Good for us. Every festival is a huge celebration of colors, smells, sound and taste. Here, religion is a living breathing tradition and God ceases to be abstract and is part of the medley of life: a young impish boy, a dutiful son and husband, a faithful and beautiful wife, a lovable glutton ...the list is endless. They all fit into the normal register of life, and therefore represents a transaction with God on a personal basis.
This is where Sathya Sai comes in. The tirade against him has been there for decades and it is mostly from the rationalists who seem to hate his guts for performing miracles. What's wrong with miracles? Does only rhetoric have value? Don't we all want miracles in one way or the other? And also, if Sathya Sai had not performed miracles, could he have manged to catch the attention of the masses? The miracles are NOT important inasmuch the loaves of bread and the water to wine at Cana are not the pivot on which Christianity turns.
People get curious, they come to scoff, see, and as we saw, remained en masse to pray. When there is darkness at noon, one needs faith that the sun will come out again, and that is the surety that Sai Baba gave millions around the world and they are the better for it. Better because there he was a living breathing, smiling, talking entity you could tell your troubles to, and he had answers. What is faith if it is not a psychological crutch? Why berate it? Look at the practical efficacy of confession among the Roman Catholics. It does one good to go every week and confess everything to the good and holy father in the confessional. The wonderful thing about it is that you don't see each other. Anonymity helps clear the air. So, you confess and are pardoned; told to say a dozen Hail Marys and you come out having got it off your chest. Never has anything more practical been ever thought of. They knew, those crafty cardinals and popes the psychological angle of faith. Today the confessional has been replaced by the psychiatrist's couch, but are there enough takers? Does it really help?
Do the rationalists bother to mention Sathya Sai's charity? What matters the most is that Sai Baba gave enormously back to society.
His epitaph should read: "You receive but what you give."
Saturday, April 30, 2011
China Watch: INDIA'S REJECTION OF U.S. AIRCRAFT
by B.RAMAN
Chinese netizens interested in strategic issues have been showing interest in India's reported decision to go for European jet fighters for its Air Force in preference to the aircaft offered by U.S. companies. They see this as a possible reflection of India's unhappiness over the continuing U.S. restrictive policies relating to the transfer of high technology to India. Another point being made is that the U.S. support for India's permanent membership of the UN Security Council was as a quid pro quo for the Indian selection of the U.S. aircaft. Now that India has rejected the U.S. aircraft, will the U.S. still support India's permanent membership of the UNSC?
2. Annexed are some comments carried in the People's Forum section of the party-owned "People's Daily" online on the subject on May 1,2011. It is not clear whether these comments are of the "People's Daily" readers or have been lifted from non-Chinese sources. Normally, when the comments are lifted from non-Chinese sources, the sources are identified. In this case, no source has been identified for the post as a whole. ( 1-5-11)
(Bahukutumbi Raman is Additional Secretary (retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt. of India, New Delhi, and, presently, Director, Institute For Topical Studies, Chennai, and Associate of the Chennai Centre For China Studies. E-mail: seventyone2@gmail.com)
ANNEXURE
(Text of a post in the "People's Forum" section of the "People's Daily" online carried on May 1,2011)
India arms contract spurns U.S. fighters
India has shortlisted European jet fighters, in preference to U.S. and Russian rivals, in a hotly contested $11bn competition to supply the Indian air force with advanced combat aircraft.
At stake is a deal to equip India with 126 multi-role fighter jets in one of the world’s largest military contracts. The winning bid is expected to shape India’s air power for the next three decades and serve as the bedrock of a strategic partnership.
After trials, India selected France’s Dassault Rafale and the multinational Eurofighter Typhoon – both currently operating over Libya – to compete in the next stage of the competition, according to India’s defence ministry. A spokesman told the Financial Times that a final decision would be taken within a year.
The move will be a blow to the U.S. Washington strongly lobbied India to buy its aircraft as payback for the landmark Indian-U.S. civil nuclear deal in 2008. The agreement – brokered by Manmohan Singh, Indian premier, and then-U.S. president George W. Bush – brought India’s nuclear programme out of decades of global isolation.
Timothy Roemer, U.S. ambassador to Delhi, said the U.S. was “deeply disappointed” by the decision not to select U.S. defence companies. Earlier on Thursday, Mr. Roemer, a personal friend of Barack Obama, U.S. president, announced his resignation.
While Mr. Roemer said he was leaving India for personal reasons, as ambassador he had heavily promoted the U.S. bids. He said he had “accomplished all of the strategic objectives set forth two years ago” when he took the job.
Top Indian officials and politicians had indicated that they wished to buy U.S. military hardware to improve a fast-warming relationship between the two democracies in the wake of the transformative nuclear deal.
Are U.S. export policies to blame?
Defense contractors and industry experts are trying to come to grips with India’s decision to exclude The Boeing Co. and Lockheed Martin Corp. from its $11 billion competition for a new fighter jet.
"India's decision was very surprising", says Tom Captain, vice chairman of global and U.S. aerospace and defense leader at Deloitte LLP. If the selection was based on technical merits, "it is difficult to explain how those two very capable aircraft were eliminated."
In the absence of factual information about how the selection was made, speculation is growing that restrictive U.S. export policies may have played a significant role in India’s evaluation of fighter jet candidates.
India is projected to spend $80 billion on new weapons and space systems over the next five years. It’s only a small fraction of what the United States spends, but the industry still regards it as a promising region where, once you get a foot in the door, opportunities could blossom.
Defense industry analyst Byron Callan contends that “technology transfer was a major consideration in this competition.”
Larry Christensen, an export controls attorney at Miller & Chevalier, in Washington, D.C., believes the Indian decision will have lasting implications for U.S. industry, even though, he says, he has not seen any proof that India’s choice was influenced by ITAR, the International Traffic in Arms Regulations that restrict exports of sensitive U.S. technology.
"The fact that an emerging power such as India would snub U.S. advanced weaponry offers further evidence that the current export control system — which dates back to the Cold War — has outlived its effectiveness", Christensen says. “The U.S. government cannot repeal the laws of economics,” he says. As the United States denies access to some of its best technology, it leaves a market void that, sooner or later, another country will fill. “When that happens, the U.S. export control policy of denial, or policy of heavy restrictions, become ineffective” for the purposes of barring potential enemies access to advanced weaponry."
It's a surprise for many analysts that U.S. fighters didn't win out. In recently years, America has been trying to court India by asserting its supportive stance over India's aspiration for a permenant UNSC seat. America arms makers are one of beneficiaries in the improved bilateral ties. They even got deals from India with big number without competing with rivals in public bidding. Some defense experts said the embarrassing result indicates that India's wariness toward America...
------------------------------------
My comment: Too many strings attached; U.S. economic and political stability questioned.
Chinese netizens interested in strategic issues have been showing interest in India's reported decision to go for European jet fighters for its Air Force in preference to the aircaft offered by U.S. companies. They see this as a possible reflection of India's unhappiness over the continuing U.S. restrictive policies relating to the transfer of high technology to India. Another point being made is that the U.S. support for India's permanent membership of the UN Security Council was as a quid pro quo for the Indian selection of the U.S. aircaft. Now that India has rejected the U.S. aircraft, will the U.S. still support India's permanent membership of the UNSC?
2. Annexed are some comments carried in the People's Forum section of the party-owned "People's Daily" online on the subject on May 1,2011. It is not clear whether these comments are of the "People's Daily" readers or have been lifted from non-Chinese sources. Normally, when the comments are lifted from non-Chinese sources, the sources are identified. In this case, no source has been identified for the post as a whole. ( 1-5-11)
(Bahukutumbi Raman is Additional Secretary (retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt. of India, New Delhi, and, presently, Director, Institute For Topical Studies, Chennai, and Associate of the Chennai Centre For China Studies. E-mail: seventyone2@gmail.com)
ANNEXURE
(Text of a post in the "People's Forum" section of the "People's Daily" online carried on May 1,2011)
India arms contract spurns U.S. fighters
India has shortlisted European jet fighters, in preference to U.S. and Russian rivals, in a hotly contested $11bn competition to supply the Indian air force with advanced combat aircraft.
At stake is a deal to equip India with 126 multi-role fighter jets in one of the world’s largest military contracts. The winning bid is expected to shape India’s air power for the next three decades and serve as the bedrock of a strategic partnership.
After trials, India selected France’s Dassault Rafale and the multinational Eurofighter Typhoon – both currently operating over Libya – to compete in the next stage of the competition, according to India’s defence ministry. A spokesman told the Financial Times that a final decision would be taken within a year.
The move will be a blow to the U.S. Washington strongly lobbied India to buy its aircraft as payback for the landmark Indian-U.S. civil nuclear deal in 2008. The agreement – brokered by Manmohan Singh, Indian premier, and then-U.S. president George W. Bush – brought India’s nuclear programme out of decades of global isolation.
Timothy Roemer, U.S. ambassador to Delhi, said the U.S. was “deeply disappointed” by the decision not to select U.S. defence companies. Earlier on Thursday, Mr. Roemer, a personal friend of Barack Obama, U.S. president, announced his resignation.
While Mr. Roemer said he was leaving India for personal reasons, as ambassador he had heavily promoted the U.S. bids. He said he had “accomplished all of the strategic objectives set forth two years ago” when he took the job.
Top Indian officials and politicians had indicated that they wished to buy U.S. military hardware to improve a fast-warming relationship between the two democracies in the wake of the transformative nuclear deal.
Are U.S. export policies to blame?
Defense contractors and industry experts are trying to come to grips with India’s decision to exclude The Boeing Co. and Lockheed Martin Corp. from its $11 billion competition for a new fighter jet.
"India's decision was very surprising", says Tom Captain, vice chairman of global and U.S. aerospace and defense leader at Deloitte LLP. If the selection was based on technical merits, "it is difficult to explain how those two very capable aircraft were eliminated."
In the absence of factual information about how the selection was made, speculation is growing that restrictive U.S. export policies may have played a significant role in India’s evaluation of fighter jet candidates.
India is projected to spend $80 billion on new weapons and space systems over the next five years. It’s only a small fraction of what the United States spends, but the industry still regards it as a promising region where, once you get a foot in the door, opportunities could blossom.
Defense industry analyst Byron Callan contends that “technology transfer was a major consideration in this competition.”
Larry Christensen, an export controls attorney at Miller & Chevalier, in Washington, D.C., believes the Indian decision will have lasting implications for U.S. industry, even though, he says, he has not seen any proof that India’s choice was influenced by ITAR, the International Traffic in Arms Regulations that restrict exports of sensitive U.S. technology.
"The fact that an emerging power such as India would snub U.S. advanced weaponry offers further evidence that the current export control system — which dates back to the Cold War — has outlived its effectiveness", Christensen says. “The U.S. government cannot repeal the laws of economics,” he says. As the United States denies access to some of its best technology, it leaves a market void that, sooner or later, another country will fill. “When that happens, the U.S. export control policy of denial, or policy of heavy restrictions, become ineffective” for the purposes of barring potential enemies access to advanced weaponry."
It's a surprise for many analysts that U.S. fighters didn't win out. In recently years, America has been trying to court India by asserting its supportive stance over India's aspiration for a permenant UNSC seat. America arms makers are one of beneficiaries in the improved bilateral ties. They even got deals from India with big number without competing with rivals in public bidding. Some defense experts said the embarrassing result indicates that India's wariness toward America...
------------------------------------
My comment: Too many strings attached; U.S. economic and political stability questioned.
Tuesday, April 26, 2011
View from India: 700 Shades of Brown
by Parvathi
M looked at herself in the mirror. All she saw was her dark skin. She did not see the enormous eyes and winged eyebrows. She wanted to be fair like the others in the family---"Why am I so dark?" she agonized looking at her darkness thrown up in relief by the light blue cotton dress. She tore at the sleeve in a rage and then froze thinking of the explanations she would have to offer. Anger welled up in the small chest and she planted a few punches on the window grill, her mouth open in a silent scream.
Everyone remarked on the color of her skin--- just everyone! Even the house helps: "What a pity this one is dark," they clucked in sympathy, chucking her under her chin. "How are we going to find you a husband, little one?" they would ask as she tagged along behind them for want of company.
She was the youngest, and she was dreadfully lonely. Her nieces and nephews were almost her age. They were all very light skinned---M saw only that. Oh the unfairness of it all! Once her niece tripped up to her in a black dress with butterfies printedon it. M loved that dress1 "What a lovely dress,P!" she said feeling the silky texture with her fingers, "where did you buy it?"
"My father's present when he came back from his tour!" sang P skipping around M. "Do you want to borrow it?"
M was in heaven. "Can I?" she asked thrilled. "Of course!" said P and promptly peeled off the dress standing there in her slip. M ran behind the mango tree and tried on the dress.
"How does it look on me P?" she asked excitedly. P burst into peals of laughter and ran around her pointing her finger at M.
"Look at M! Look at M!" she said loudly in her high pitched voice. People came out of the house and were aghast at what they saw: M standing there wearing P's dress, all askew, and P hysterically dancing around her.
"She wanted to wear my dress! Look how it looks against her dark skin! She looks like the maid's daughter!" P's cheeks were flushed pink and she ran up to M and stood with her rosy cheeks against M's nut brown one. "Don't I look better than her?" she asked with the cruel vanity of a child.
M's eyes filled with tears," I hate you!" she hurled at P and pushed her down, and ran sobbing inside tugging and tearing at the dress.
What a fuss they made over P! "Why did you allow M to take your nice new dress?" "Against her dark skin, why she looked clownish!"
"Come little one, let me wash you and get you another dress to wear."
M sat huddled under the cot in her room and sobbed miserably. Her mother came looking for her. "M! where are you, child?" she heard the tiny sob come from under the cot. she bent down and saw the little form all bunched up, sobbing her heart out,wearing that dress with the butterfly print. "Come my little one," her mother said gathering her in her arms, "It will all pass. Everything will be alright."
"Never!" said M choking on her words. "No one will ever love me because I am so dark!"
"Hush", said mother. "That is nonsense. You will know that in time."
But M , looking past her mother 's shoulder with teary eyes, saw nothing but shame and sadness.
"No one will ever love me!" she repeated to herself.
In India, I read somewhere, they recognize seven hundred shades of brown ----in skin color.
M looked at herself in the mirror. All she saw was her dark skin. She did not see the enormous eyes and winged eyebrows. She wanted to be fair like the others in the family---"Why am I so dark?" she agonized looking at her darkness thrown up in relief by the light blue cotton dress. She tore at the sleeve in a rage and then froze thinking of the explanations she would have to offer. Anger welled up in the small chest and she planted a few punches on the window grill, her mouth open in a silent scream.
Everyone remarked on the color of her skin--- just everyone! Even the house helps: "What a pity this one is dark," they clucked in sympathy, chucking her under her chin. "How are we going to find you a husband, little one?" they would ask as she tagged along behind them for want of company.
She was the youngest, and she was dreadfully lonely. Her nieces and nephews were almost her age. They were all very light skinned---M saw only that. Oh the unfairness of it all! Once her niece tripped up to her in a black dress with butterfies printedon it. M loved that dress1 "What a lovely dress,P!" she said feeling the silky texture with her fingers, "where did you buy it?"
"My father's present when he came back from his tour!" sang P skipping around M. "Do you want to borrow it?"
M was in heaven. "Can I?" she asked thrilled. "Of course!" said P and promptly peeled off the dress standing there in her slip. M ran behind the mango tree and tried on the dress.
"How does it look on me P?" she asked excitedly. P burst into peals of laughter and ran around her pointing her finger at M.
"Look at M! Look at M!" she said loudly in her high pitched voice. People came out of the house and were aghast at what they saw: M standing there wearing P's dress, all askew, and P hysterically dancing around her.
"She wanted to wear my dress! Look how it looks against her dark skin! She looks like the maid's daughter!" P's cheeks were flushed pink and she ran up to M and stood with her rosy cheeks against M's nut brown one. "Don't I look better than her?" she asked with the cruel vanity of a child.
M's eyes filled with tears," I hate you!" she hurled at P and pushed her down, and ran sobbing inside tugging and tearing at the dress.
What a fuss they made over P! "Why did you allow M to take your nice new dress?" "Against her dark skin, why she looked clownish!"
"Come little one, let me wash you and get you another dress to wear."
M sat huddled under the cot in her room and sobbed miserably. Her mother came looking for her. "M! where are you, child?" she heard the tiny sob come from under the cot. she bent down and saw the little form all bunched up, sobbing her heart out,wearing that dress with the butterfly print. "Come my little one," her mother said gathering her in her arms, "It will all pass. Everything will be alright."
"Never!" said M choking on her words. "No one will ever love me because I am so dark!"
"Hush", said mother. "That is nonsense. You will know that in time."
But M , looking past her mother 's shoulder with teary eyes, saw nothing but shame and sadness.
"No one will ever love me!" she repeated to herself.
In India, I read somewhere, they recognize seven hundred shades of brown ----in skin color.
Monday, April 25, 2011
Cornered Dogs Bite
Every human thought leaves an imprint. When I look across my front lawn in the morning after a freshly fallen snow, I see it crisscrossed with animal spoors. Each one is different. It is not the difference in the appearance of the tracks that is significant; rather, it is the fact that there was movement: each animal wanted to get from one place to another. It is doubtful that two or more animals ever met because each track was likely made in its own time. If there had been some threat, all the tracks would show the animals running in one direction – away from the danger. In the absence of a threat, the pattern is quite random.
Reading this morning’s headlines, we find that the stampede against the U.S. dollar continues, now with the IMF chiming in. We read that long-standing alliances are rupturing with nations fleeing U.S. entanglements and influence, seeking something more stable, more predictable. They do not make a value judgment as to what’s right, wrong or fair. They simply look to attach themselves to what they perceive as power that would serve to protect them.
The USS America is sinking – whether by benign neglect, sabotage or by deliberate design – and the whole world is running away from the disaster that has become rap America. The pattern in the snow is now discernible. Argentina is now embracing the Venezuelan model. Venezuela has adopted the Tehran model (as have Turkey, Syria, Egypt, etc.) Israel remains undecided. She finds herself cornered. What Israel is likely to do remains a mystery. India too is at a loss to know which way to turn. China faces internal problems. She is keeping her powder dry, knowing that chaos will arrive at her doorstep soon enough. She is doing her best to shore up her defenses (while the West views it as aggression). Japan has her own problems.
We can sit here and evaluate each turn of the screw within its own frame. Every happenstance is quite worthy of a tome or two – even an entire library of tomes. We can go back in history and learn what has happened before, how it developed and the ultimate result - all of it, simply to keep the blogs pumping out words like the ash from a volcano that obscures its source.
The source is America’s continuing disintegration. It’s not true, as some would proclaim that America’s sinking would leave nary a ripple. It has and will produce wave after wave and the result is all but certain: chaos, dislocation and bloodshed. Cornered dogs have been known to bite. We all will be tempted to bite in a last-ditch effort as we dig deeper and deeper down into our emptying pockets to appease those with tyrannical intent - the ones with the biggest clubs and the willingness to use them. Thoughts of freedom and liberty – even dignity - will become subservient to our will to survive.
http://pkoelliker.blogspot.com/
Sunday, April 24, 2011
View from India: US-PAKISTAN: A STRATEGIC PERMANENCE
by B.RAMAN
There has been an unwarranted satisfaction and even glee among sections of our analysts over recent indications of difficulties in the relations between the US and Pakistani Armed Forces and between the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) and the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI).
2.The articulation of US dissatisfaction and concern over Pakistan's half-hearted action against terrorists operating from North Waziristan, over its continued support to the Jallaudin Haqqani faction of the Afghan Taliban, which was previously operating from North Waziristan, but now operates from Kurram, over the collusion of Pakistani military and intelligence officers with the Afghan Taliban and over the difficulties created by it in allowing Raymond Davis, a member of the technical and administrative staff of the US Consulate-General in Lahore, allegedly involved in the murder of two Pakistanis, to go back to the US have created perceptions of serious difficulties in the US relations with Pakistan.
3. Speculative stories and negative public comments about Pakistan emanating from US officials and sources during the recent visits of Lt.Gen Ahmed Shuja Pasha, the Director-General of the ISI, and Salman Bashir, the Pakistani Foreign Secretary, to the US and Admiral Mike Mullen, Chairman, US Joint Chiefs of Staff, to Pakistan have strengthened these perceptions.
4. Periodic emergence of difficulties in the relations between the two countries has been there ever since the Soviet troops withdrew from Afghanistan in 1988. One saw such spells of difficulties after then President George Bush Sr invoked the Pressler Amendment against Pakistan post-1988 and imposed economic sanctions because of Pakistan's clandestine acquisition of a military nuclear capability, when then President Bill Clinton placed Pakistan on a list of suspected State-sponsors of international terrorism for six months in 1993 and forced Nawaz Sharif, the then Prime Minister, to sack Lt-Gen.Javed Nasir, the then DG of the ISI, and some of his senior colleagues for allegedly not co-operating in the re-purchase of the unused Stinger missiles from the Afghan Mujahideen, when Clinton imposed additional economic sanctions after Gen.Pervez Musharraf seized power in 1999 and publicly snubbed him during a visit to Pakistan next year, and when then President George Bush forced Musharraf to remove Lt.Gen. Mahmood Ahmed, then DG of the ISI, from his post and transfer Lt.Gen.Mohammad Aziz, the then Chief of the General Staff, from the GHQ to Lahore because of their suspected links with the Afghan Taliban before the US started its military operations against the Taliban in October,2001, and when Bush repeatedly turned down a Pakistani request for signing a civil nuclear co-operation agreement with it similar to the agreement signed with India.
5. The US did not allow such difficulties to affect a certain strategic permanence in its relations with Pakistan arising from its strategic location, the long years of military-military and intelligence-intelligence relations between the countries which have served to some extent the national interests of the two countries and the important role which Pakistan could play in maintaining stability in Afghanistan. This permanence has been further strengthened by the US realisation that co-operation from Pakistan is essential for maintaining homeland security.
6. The enhanced Drone (pilotless plane) strikes against terrorist hide-outs in the two Waziristans since Barack Obama came to office in January 2009, have highlighted two ground realities. Firstly, the US has the capability to achieve significant success in its counter-terrorism operations on its own even without the co-operation of the Pakistani Army and the ISI. Secondly, despite this, it cannot achieve complete success without the effective co-operation of Pakistan.
7. The US has always followed a policy of carrot and stick for making Pakistan co-operate. While it does not hesitate to use the stick when it considers it necessary in its interests, it takes care to ensure that the use of the stick does not seriously damage the strategic permanence in its relations with Pakistan. The US will maintain this strategic permanence whatever be the temporary tactical difficulties in the relationship. ( 24-4-11)
(Bahukutumbi Raman is Additional Secretary (retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt. of India, New Delhi, and, presently, Director, Institute For Topical Studies, Chennai, and Associate of the Chennai Centre For China Studies. E-mail: seventyone2@gmail.com)
------------------------------------------------
My comment: If I were a foreign power, I would be very careful about just how much I could rely on the word and faith of present U.S. leadership. U.S. foreign policy, in my view, is at the moment indecipherable.
There has been an unwarranted satisfaction and even glee among sections of our analysts over recent indications of difficulties in the relations between the US and Pakistani Armed Forces and between the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) and the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI).
2.The articulation of US dissatisfaction and concern over Pakistan's half-hearted action against terrorists operating from North Waziristan, over its continued support to the Jallaudin Haqqani faction of the Afghan Taliban, which was previously operating from North Waziristan, but now operates from Kurram, over the collusion of Pakistani military and intelligence officers with the Afghan Taliban and over the difficulties created by it in allowing Raymond Davis, a member of the technical and administrative staff of the US Consulate-General in Lahore, allegedly involved in the murder of two Pakistanis, to go back to the US have created perceptions of serious difficulties in the US relations with Pakistan.
3. Speculative stories and negative public comments about Pakistan emanating from US officials and sources during the recent visits of Lt.Gen Ahmed Shuja Pasha, the Director-General of the ISI, and Salman Bashir, the Pakistani Foreign Secretary, to the US and Admiral Mike Mullen, Chairman, US Joint Chiefs of Staff, to Pakistan have strengthened these perceptions.
4. Periodic emergence of difficulties in the relations between the two countries has been there ever since the Soviet troops withdrew from Afghanistan in 1988. One saw such spells of difficulties after then President George Bush Sr invoked the Pressler Amendment against Pakistan post-1988 and imposed economic sanctions because of Pakistan's clandestine acquisition of a military nuclear capability, when then President Bill Clinton placed Pakistan on a list of suspected State-sponsors of international terrorism for six months in 1993 and forced Nawaz Sharif, the then Prime Minister, to sack Lt-Gen.Javed Nasir, the then DG of the ISI, and some of his senior colleagues for allegedly not co-operating in the re-purchase of the unused Stinger missiles from the Afghan Mujahideen, when Clinton imposed additional economic sanctions after Gen.Pervez Musharraf seized power in 1999 and publicly snubbed him during a visit to Pakistan next year, and when then President George Bush forced Musharraf to remove Lt.Gen. Mahmood Ahmed, then DG of the ISI, from his post and transfer Lt.Gen.Mohammad Aziz, the then Chief of the General Staff, from the GHQ to Lahore because of their suspected links with the Afghan Taliban before the US started its military operations against the Taliban in October,2001, and when Bush repeatedly turned down a Pakistani request for signing a civil nuclear co-operation agreement with it similar to the agreement signed with India.
5. The US did not allow such difficulties to affect a certain strategic permanence in its relations with Pakistan arising from its strategic location, the long years of military-military and intelligence-intelligence relations between the countries which have served to some extent the national interests of the two countries and the important role which Pakistan could play in maintaining stability in Afghanistan. This permanence has been further strengthened by the US realisation that co-operation from Pakistan is essential for maintaining homeland security.
6. The enhanced Drone (pilotless plane) strikes against terrorist hide-outs in the two Waziristans since Barack Obama came to office in January 2009, have highlighted two ground realities. Firstly, the US has the capability to achieve significant success in its counter-terrorism operations on its own even without the co-operation of the Pakistani Army and the ISI. Secondly, despite this, it cannot achieve complete success without the effective co-operation of Pakistan.
7. The US has always followed a policy of carrot and stick for making Pakistan co-operate. While it does not hesitate to use the stick when it considers it necessary in its interests, it takes care to ensure that the use of the stick does not seriously damage the strategic permanence in its relations with Pakistan. The US will maintain this strategic permanence whatever be the temporary tactical difficulties in the relationship. ( 24-4-11)
(Bahukutumbi Raman is Additional Secretary (retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt. of India, New Delhi, and, presently, Director, Institute For Topical Studies, Chennai, and Associate of the Chennai Centre For China Studies. E-mail: seventyone2@gmail.com)
------------------------------------------------
My comment: If I were a foreign power, I would be very careful about just how much I could rely on the word and faith of present U.S. leadership. U.S. foreign policy, in my view, is at the moment indecipherable.
Tuesday, April 19, 2011
SOMALI PIRATES SAY THEY ARE AT WAR WITH INDIA
by B.RAMAN
According to the Wikipedia,Information Dissemination is a weblog covering international and United States naval affairs. It was founded in 2007 by Raymond Pritchett, who edits it under the pseudonym "Galrahn", and has been called "one of the most-read Navy blogs".
2. Under the title, "Somali pirates Target India", this web log has disseminated the following report on April 16,2011:
Somalia Pirates Target India
Somali pirates have raised the ante for operating ships operating with crews that have nationalized citizens of India.
India has been cleaning up territorial waters and piracy operating in their EEZ with a great deal of success lately, and after several successful actions going back to February, India has apparently pissed off some of the pirates a great deal.
This is the latest incident:
Somalia pirates said on Saturday they would keep any Indian nationals from freed ships as hostages until fellow pirates held by India are set free.
Somali pirates, who make millions of dollars ransoming ships hijacked as far south as the Seychelles and eastwards towards India, on Friday released MT Asphalt Venture, but held some of its Indian crew.
"We are holding eight of Asphalt Venture crew. It was a joint understanding among us not to release any Indian citizens," a pirate who gave his name as Abdi told Reuters from pirate stronghold Harardhere.
"India hasn't only declared war against us, but also it has risked the lives of many hostages," he said.
Basically a multimillion dollar ransom was paid for the release of MT Asphalt Venture, and the ship was released, but the pirates kept 8 Indian nationals and are claiming they will keep all Indian nationals hostage until pirates that the Indian Navy and Coast Guard have captured are released. Pirates are no longer operating under normal rules, the spokesman in Harardhere is specifically using the word WAR, meaning they now feel they are in a state of war with India.
In the language of war, the pirates appear to be offering some sort of prisoner exchange.
Harardhere is the pirate stronghold in the south that many news sources have claimed direct financial agreements exist between pirates and Al Shabaab. ( a pro-Al Qaeda organisation )
India has over 35,000 nationals who are employed globally as seamen on commercial ships flagged from a number of countries, and there are some very powerful maritime unions that work to protect the rights of those workers. We might also see some issues raised with insurance payments, because if a ransom payment is not valid for an Indian seaman, that could create a pretty big problem for piracy insurance premiums for ships with Indian nationals as crew members.
It will be interesting to see how this unfolds over the next few days."
3. "The Hindu" of Chennai has reported as follows on this incident on April 19:" The Navy has sent a warship towards the Somali coast to keep a vigil on the hijacked merchant vessel on which seven Indian sailors are being held as hostages, despite payment of ransom by the owners of the ship. INS Talwar, currently deployed on an anti-piracy patrol mission off the Gulf of Aden, was diverted towards the coast. The move is being seen as an aggressive posture by the Navy. During an informal interaction, Defence Minister A.K.Antony refused to comment on whether the warship would launch action to free the hostages. Sources in the Navy and the Government maintained that the move was to ensure that the merchant vessel was not rendered further vulnerable and that the warship would not leave the area unless the hostages were released."
4. "The Hindu" has further reported as follows: "According to latest figures, 53 Indian sailors are being held hostage on five different ships. Of them, 17 have been held for the longest on MT Savina Caylyn, an Italian ship which was seized on February 8,2010."
5. The tricky incident has two dimensions ---tactical and strategic. The tactical dimension relates to securing the release of the Indian sailors who are still held hostages in order to apparently force the Government of India and our Navy to agree to a swap deal for the release of the Indian hostages in return for the release by India of some of the Somali pirates arrested by the Navy in the past, The Indian naval ship sent to the area would most probably have the following objectives: Firstly, to collect reliable intelligence. Secondly, to persuade/pressure the pirates to release the Indian sailors without harming them. Thirdly, to prevent the hostages from being transferred to land in Somalia from the ship, which could come in the way of rescue operations. Fourthly, to launch rescue operations involving minimal risks to the hostages if all other options fail. Since the Somali authorities have very little control over these pirates, the question of the Government of India using intermediaries may not arise.
6. The strategic dimension relates to how we are going to prevent similar incidents in future and to examine what kind of scenarios we might face in future and what kind of proactive and reactive options are available to our Navy. In view of the activist role of the Indian Navy in dealing with Somali piracy, the targeting of Indian nationals, interests and Indian naval and other onshore establishments by the pirates---with a steadily lengthening reach towards the Indian coast--- could become more frequent, more virulent and more aggressive.This would call for a re-look at our counter-piracy strategy. ( 19-4-11)
(Bahukutumbi Raman is Additional Secretary (retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt. of India, New Delhi, and, presently, Director, Institute For Topical Studies, Chennai, and Associate of the Chennai Centre For China Studies. E-mail: seventyone2@gmail.com )
According to the Wikipedia,Information Dissemination is a weblog covering international and United States naval affairs. It was founded in 2007 by Raymond Pritchett, who edits it under the pseudonym "Galrahn", and has been called "one of the most-read Navy blogs".
2. Under the title, "Somali pirates Target India", this web log has disseminated the following report on April 16,2011:
Somalia Pirates Target India
Somali pirates have raised the ante for operating ships operating with crews that have nationalized citizens of India.
India has been cleaning up territorial waters and piracy operating in their EEZ with a great deal of success lately, and after several successful actions going back to February, India has apparently pissed off some of the pirates a great deal.
This is the latest incident:
Somalia pirates said on Saturday they would keep any Indian nationals from freed ships as hostages until fellow pirates held by India are set free.
Somali pirates, who make millions of dollars ransoming ships hijacked as far south as the Seychelles and eastwards towards India, on Friday released MT Asphalt Venture, but held some of its Indian crew.
"We are holding eight of Asphalt Venture crew. It was a joint understanding among us not to release any Indian citizens," a pirate who gave his name as Abdi told Reuters from pirate stronghold Harardhere.
"India hasn't only declared war against us, but also it has risked the lives of many hostages," he said.
Basically a multimillion dollar ransom was paid for the release of MT Asphalt Venture, and the ship was released, but the pirates kept 8 Indian nationals and are claiming they will keep all Indian nationals hostage until pirates that the Indian Navy and Coast Guard have captured are released. Pirates are no longer operating under normal rules, the spokesman in Harardhere is specifically using the word WAR, meaning they now feel they are in a state of war with India.
In the language of war, the pirates appear to be offering some sort of prisoner exchange.
Harardhere is the pirate stronghold in the south that many news sources have claimed direct financial agreements exist between pirates and Al Shabaab. ( a pro-Al Qaeda organisation )
India has over 35,000 nationals who are employed globally as seamen on commercial ships flagged from a number of countries, and there are some very powerful maritime unions that work to protect the rights of those workers. We might also see some issues raised with insurance payments, because if a ransom payment is not valid for an Indian seaman, that could create a pretty big problem for piracy insurance premiums for ships with Indian nationals as crew members.
It will be interesting to see how this unfolds over the next few days."
3. "The Hindu" of Chennai has reported as follows on this incident on April 19:" The Navy has sent a warship towards the Somali coast to keep a vigil on the hijacked merchant vessel on which seven Indian sailors are being held as hostages, despite payment of ransom by the owners of the ship. INS Talwar, currently deployed on an anti-piracy patrol mission off the Gulf of Aden, was diverted towards the coast. The move is being seen as an aggressive posture by the Navy. During an informal interaction, Defence Minister A.K.Antony refused to comment on whether the warship would launch action to free the hostages. Sources in the Navy and the Government maintained that the move was to ensure that the merchant vessel was not rendered further vulnerable and that the warship would not leave the area unless the hostages were released."
4. "The Hindu" has further reported as follows: "According to latest figures, 53 Indian sailors are being held hostage on five different ships. Of them, 17 have been held for the longest on MT Savina Caylyn, an Italian ship which was seized on February 8,2010."
5. The tricky incident has two dimensions ---tactical and strategic. The tactical dimension relates to securing the release of the Indian sailors who are still held hostages in order to apparently force the Government of India and our Navy to agree to a swap deal for the release of the Indian hostages in return for the release by India of some of the Somali pirates arrested by the Navy in the past, The Indian naval ship sent to the area would most probably have the following objectives: Firstly, to collect reliable intelligence. Secondly, to persuade/pressure the pirates to release the Indian sailors without harming them. Thirdly, to prevent the hostages from being transferred to land in Somalia from the ship, which could come in the way of rescue operations. Fourthly, to launch rescue operations involving minimal risks to the hostages if all other options fail. Since the Somali authorities have very little control over these pirates, the question of the Government of India using intermediaries may not arise.
6. The strategic dimension relates to how we are going to prevent similar incidents in future and to examine what kind of scenarios we might face in future and what kind of proactive and reactive options are available to our Navy. In view of the activist role of the Indian Navy in dealing with Somali piracy, the targeting of Indian nationals, interests and Indian naval and other onshore establishments by the pirates---with a steadily lengthening reach towards the Indian coast--- could become more frequent, more virulent and more aggressive.This would call for a re-look at our counter-piracy strategy. ( 19-4-11)
(Bahukutumbi Raman is Additional Secretary (retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt. of India, New Delhi, and, presently, Director, Institute For Topical Studies, Chennai, and Associate of the Chennai Centre For China Studies. E-mail: seventyone2@gmail.com )
Sunday, April 17, 2011
View from India: Election Day (in Thiruvanmaiyur District, Chennai)
By Parvathi
Last week Tamil Nadu (state) elections were held. I was beside myself because I had just received my ID card from the Election Commission. Of course, it was due a good two years ago.
2009 saw me running to and from the Corporation Office in my part of the city trying to get myself on the electoral rolls. My name had previously been registered at Mumbai-West, and I was determined to get myself moved to Chennai. My son, who was just back from Leeds, had set himself up all nice and cosy for voting in Mumbai and he did it through Jagore! I tried the same, but was not very successful.
General elections arrived in the summer of 2009 and I had no voter ID no slip from the electoral rolls, nada. I do not concede defeat very easily, an irritating aspect of my personality no doubt - almost a bulldog-like doggedness once something plants itself in my brain. So the 2009 elections saw me out checking the rolls for my name with my driving licence and passport as IDs. No luck. I came back furious at not being able to exercise my franchise. Yet another trip to the Corporation office!
I must add that the people in that office were extremely helpful and spent a whole lot of time checking the lists for my name. They told me that the new voters' list ran literally into ten of thousands of new names, and they found it physically impossible to deal with it. They assured me I would have it when the next elections rolled around. I made polite noises to them but grumbled inside.
Well, they were right and I was wrong. This time around I got it all; but hey! human error still showed its pesky face. My mother who was on the rolls these past two decades, did not receive her ID card, and neither was her name was there.
Well, anyway, I took off from work that day, and decided to get over there bright and early just in case I had to stand forever in the queue. I felt almost obnoxiously civic that morning of 13th April, as I went around asking my neighbors if anyone needed a lift to the polling booth. I was there around quarter to eight and the queue was not at all threatening.
Everything went quietly; smoothly, like a well oiled machine. Oh yes, the police were there, clutching very lethal looking guns. No, the Election Commission was not going to take any chances.
There were separate lines for men and women; there were volunteers who checked our slips and directed us to our booths; chairs were set out for the elderly who braved the heat and came out to vote.
There was such a wonderful cross section of people right there in the compound of that small Corporation school. Right behind me was a woman from the fishing village who could neither read nor write, and who wanted to know if she was in the right place. Next to her was a young woman talking on a cell phone. With me, of course, was this very old lady, a neighbor, who refused to sit down saying there were others who needed that seat more than she did.
In the line parallel to us, where the men stood, there was a sudden commotion; and the cause for it was the actor Ajith who is also a neighbor of mine (though we almost never see each other). He stood smiling in the blistering heat in his three-piece cotton suit, not heeding the milling press!
A pregnant woman was allowed in first; the volunteers were polite. My finger was marked with the notorious indelible ink; I cast my vote pressing the button on an electronic voting machine. I came out proud to be part of a system that ensured such efficiency (at least where I voted).
This is exactly what we need and want in this country: a fuss-free, efficient, corruption-free electoral system. Never mind the fact that the school badly needed a paint job; never mind that some of the benches were broken and windows needed replacing - all's forgiven.
We know the difficulty of volumes in this country. Generally everything gets blamed on the teeming millions, but this one time I saw our 'teeming millions' as our strength. They came out in droves to exercise their right, and did it with dignity and pride (of course I'm projecting). This is their country, they have had enough of people selling them down the river. They are not fools to be tempted by paper money and trivia. It is an awakening that I see, a true democratic awakening that is exciting and bodes good for this sovereign democratic republic.
---------------------------------------------
My comment: How will we view our civic duties in 2012. Note: Parvathi made no mention to party or politics. Results will be announced next month.
Last week Tamil Nadu (state) elections were held. I was beside myself because I had just received my ID card from the Election Commission. Of course, it was due a good two years ago.
2009 saw me running to and from the Corporation Office in my part of the city trying to get myself on the electoral rolls. My name had previously been registered at Mumbai-West, and I was determined to get myself moved to Chennai. My son, who was just back from Leeds, had set himself up all nice and cosy for voting in Mumbai and he did it through Jagore! I tried the same, but was not very successful.
General elections arrived in the summer of 2009 and I had no voter ID no slip from the electoral rolls, nada. I do not concede defeat very easily, an irritating aspect of my personality no doubt - almost a bulldog-like doggedness once something plants itself in my brain. So the 2009 elections saw me out checking the rolls for my name with my driving licence and passport as IDs. No luck. I came back furious at not being able to exercise my franchise. Yet another trip to the Corporation office!
I must add that the people in that office were extremely helpful and spent a whole lot of time checking the lists for my name. They told me that the new voters' list ran literally into ten of thousands of new names, and they found it physically impossible to deal with it. They assured me I would have it when the next elections rolled around. I made polite noises to them but grumbled inside.
Well, they were right and I was wrong. This time around I got it all; but hey! human error still showed its pesky face. My mother who was on the rolls these past two decades, did not receive her ID card, and neither was her name was there.
Well, anyway, I took off from work that day, and decided to get over there bright and early just in case I had to stand forever in the queue. I felt almost obnoxiously civic that morning of 13th April, as I went around asking my neighbors if anyone needed a lift to the polling booth. I was there around quarter to eight and the queue was not at all threatening.
Everything went quietly; smoothly, like a well oiled machine. Oh yes, the police were there, clutching very lethal looking guns. No, the Election Commission was not going to take any chances.
There were separate lines for men and women; there were volunteers who checked our slips and directed us to our booths; chairs were set out for the elderly who braved the heat and came out to vote.
There was such a wonderful cross section of people right there in the compound of that small Corporation school. Right behind me was a woman from the fishing village who could neither read nor write, and who wanted to know if she was in the right place. Next to her was a young woman talking on a cell phone. With me, of course, was this very old lady, a neighbor, who refused to sit down saying there were others who needed that seat more than she did.
In the line parallel to us, where the men stood, there was a sudden commotion; and the cause for it was the actor Ajith who is also a neighbor of mine (though we almost never see each other). He stood smiling in the blistering heat in his three-piece cotton suit, not heeding the milling press!
A pregnant woman was allowed in first; the volunteers were polite. My finger was marked with the notorious indelible ink; I cast my vote pressing the button on an electronic voting machine. I came out proud to be part of a system that ensured such efficiency (at least where I voted).
This is exactly what we need and want in this country: a fuss-free, efficient, corruption-free electoral system. Never mind the fact that the school badly needed a paint job; never mind that some of the benches were broken and windows needed replacing - all's forgiven.
We know the difficulty of volumes in this country. Generally everything gets blamed on the teeming millions, but this one time I saw our 'teeming millions' as our strength. They came out in droves to exercise their right, and did it with dignity and pride (of course I'm projecting). This is their country, they have had enough of people selling them down the river. They are not fools to be tempted by paper money and trivia. It is an awakening that I see, a true democratic awakening that is exciting and bodes good for this sovereign democratic republic.
---------------------------------------------
My comment: How will we view our civic duties in 2012. Note: Parvathi made no mention to party or politics. Results will be announced next month.
Monday, April 11, 2011
Bretton Woods' Smoke-Filled Rooms
The Indian media jumped on it and splashed it all over the country, and the entire population – particularly its youth – mobilized to force the government to confront various issues. [Kudos to the Indian university professors who must have exerted considerable (positive) influence over their legions of ‘skulls-full-of-mush’ scholars.]
May I be so bold as to suggest that the corruption that has come to light in India so far – bribery, money laundering, dipping into the public trough, influence peddling; trial fixing, cover-up, etc. – is peanuts when compared to what’s going on in the United States today? Bluntly put, there is a cadre of crafty individuals who are working on stealing no less than an entire nation - lock, stock, and barrel. (Let’s just call a spade a spade.)
For a long time now, we’ve had a feeling that something is terribly wrong. It first showed up in policies that seemed utterly insane. It snowballed into the dubious results we are seeing today. These were entirely predictable but are somehow being summarily ignored. People who were beginning to smell a rat were systematically neutered, ridiculed and marginalized.
The things we presently argue about on blogs and on talk shows – the usual Democrat/Republican divide – are now utterly beside the point. This is pure diversion and blame-shifting fun. Even the Islamic vs. infidel argument, as well as the Socialism/Democracy debates we endlessly engage in, are hardly worth mentioning anymore. What is truly important is routinely hidden or swept into inaccessible places - like what’s happening as we speak up at Bretton Woods.
None of the usual left-wing rabble showed up to protest – only a handful to ‘tea party’ people. They were barred from the (closed door) proceedings.
What is going on in New Hampshire is a long way from having to hand a judge a few thousand rupees to get a favorable ruling in a traffic dispute. Though annoying to the individual parties involved, the outcome would hardly determine the fate of a nation.
We often wonder how it is possible to shred our Constitution in plain sight; how we can ignore our border security; how we can nullify contracts with the stroke of the executive’s pen; how we can allow our dollar to slip into oblivion; how we can elect a man to the highest office in the land about whom next to nothing is known; how we can tolerate a Congress that is predominantly ineffective except when it comes to rubberstamping outrage after outrage; how – with all that is happening around us – our media remains silent.
I’m not saying that the kinds of solutions to come out of Bretton Woods palaver are necessarily bad. It may well be the best thing since sliced bread. What is suspect, however, is that the public has been excluded. We are being shaped, and herded into taking positions without explanation. Thanks to our media, which have become pure, unadulterated left-wing propaganda mills; our universities, which have become (in essence) madrassas promoting hatreds and Pavlovian response – thanks to our educational system overall, critical thought in our nation seems to have run its course. We’ve all become victims of an uncertain scheme that, by my calculations, can only end up in servitude for most of us. This is not how it was supposed to be.
It is significant that the one man who had both an inkling of what is going on and the skill to impart its essence, has now been forced from the stage. His departure is being heralded by professional left-wing and right-wing talkers alike. Now, tell me again that we’re not being played by both sides; that there is not effectively only one side: Soros’ side.
Watch closely the choices we will be presented with in our next election charade. The whole thing will hinge on what Republicans manage to come up with. As it looks now, they’ll serve up losers. And even if some standard-issue Republican should catch the public’s fancy, he’ll most likely turn out to be a ‘schlemiel’ like the rest.
Look too at the ones who draw the lion’s share of the Left’s condemnation (Palin, Trump). It is they who, if given even half a chance, are most likely to buck the trends that have been carefully mapped out, and promoted for years - that are only now coming to fruition.
http://pkoelliker.blogspot.com/
Sunday, April 10, 2011
View from India: Anna And The Power of One
by Parvathi
In a sense, independent India came of age last week. I am talking of Anna Hazare's fast unto death spearheading the campaign against corruption. After 90 hours Anna broke his fast, as the government issued a gazette notification to draft an effective Lokpal Bill. The government did not know what it was that hit them. Right there on the eve of the general elections, the vox populi seemed definitely threatening. No way in hell could the present government avoid issuing the notification. They were damned anyway, and wasn't there something good old Dante said about the way to hell being paved with good intentions? I am not trying to be clever by half, just that it looks as though our very venerable Prime Minister and his men personally scripted and acted out their endgame. The writing was on the wall.
Anna's fast precipitated the simmering discontent and anger against corruption rampant in every aspect of everyday life in India. So much had it become part of local color, that the not so informed and educated, spoke resignedly of it being the the matrix itself. This after sixty years of hard won independence? A crying shame to say the least.
When I needed a death certificate for my father, the cryptic answer I got from the tehsildar's office was, that as my father passed away in America. I would get the certificate if I coughed up INR 7,000! Oh yes, we then bargained and brought it down to a more user friendly INR 5,000, but less than that they would not budge. The reason for such behaviour? Well, it sits on vertical thinking: if my parents had the money to holiday in the United States, my mother could definitely come up with the five thousand. Had my father died in India, we might have had to pay just a paltry whatever it is you pay for a death certificate. And this is just the benign face of the malignancy that has grown so huge, we literally cannot not see it!
Anna targeted this. And better, the youth rose as one with him and therein lies the moral of the tale. The very young alone --- with their unclouded vision and their untarnished idealism --- can take a nation forward. At this point in India's history, what we desperately need is idealism in the face of a decadent and decrepit political system. Sixty years ago, one man galvanized the nation and took us forward into freedom and independence.
Like in the wonderfully allegorical Animal Farm, we now find ourselves submitting to the tyranny of the very people ( or parties) that rode us to freedom. "All animals are equal but some are more equal than others." This is not what Gandhi dreamed about or gave his life for. We stand among the rubble of moral authority, but there's hope yet, as I see it.
There's hope in the young of India, who have chosen to remain here and fight the bitter battles, not trade it in for creature comforts elsewhere. Anna's call was to the conscience of the nation, and the conscience answered with a roaring cry that echoed in the corridors of power and frightened the power mongers. We are still alive and kicking, people, we care about this country never mind how bedeviled it may be. We still have dreams, we need the young to inherit our dreams, and "We shall overcome......."
My comment: Applies to us here in America as well.
In a sense, independent India came of age last week. I am talking of Anna Hazare's fast unto death spearheading the campaign against corruption. After 90 hours Anna broke his fast, as the government issued a gazette notification to draft an effective Lokpal Bill. The government did not know what it was that hit them. Right there on the eve of the general elections, the vox populi seemed definitely threatening. No way in hell could the present government avoid issuing the notification. They were damned anyway, and wasn't there something good old Dante said about the way to hell being paved with good intentions? I am not trying to be clever by half, just that it looks as though our very venerable Prime Minister and his men personally scripted and acted out their endgame. The writing was on the wall.
Anna's fast precipitated the simmering discontent and anger against corruption rampant in every aspect of everyday life in India. So much had it become part of local color, that the not so informed and educated, spoke resignedly of it being the the matrix itself. This after sixty years of hard won independence? A crying shame to say the least.
When I needed a death certificate for my father, the cryptic answer I got from the tehsildar's office was, that as my father passed away in America. I would get the certificate if I coughed up INR 7,000! Oh yes, we then bargained and brought it down to a more user friendly INR 5,000, but less than that they would not budge. The reason for such behaviour? Well, it sits on vertical thinking: if my parents had the money to holiday in the United States, my mother could definitely come up with the five thousand. Had my father died in India, we might have had to pay just a paltry whatever it is you pay for a death certificate. And this is just the benign face of the malignancy that has grown so huge, we literally cannot not see it!
Anna targeted this. And better, the youth rose as one with him and therein lies the moral of the tale. The very young alone --- with their unclouded vision and their untarnished idealism --- can take a nation forward. At this point in India's history, what we desperately need is idealism in the face of a decadent and decrepit political system. Sixty years ago, one man galvanized the nation and took us forward into freedom and independence.
Like in the wonderfully allegorical Animal Farm, we now find ourselves submitting to the tyranny of the very people ( or parties) that rode us to freedom. "All animals are equal but some are more equal than others." This is not what Gandhi dreamed about or gave his life for. We stand among the rubble of moral authority, but there's hope yet, as I see it.
There's hope in the young of India, who have chosen to remain here and fight the bitter battles, not trade it in for creature comforts elsewhere. Anna's call was to the conscience of the nation, and the conscience answered with a roaring cry that echoed in the corridors of power and frightened the power mongers. We are still alive and kicking, people, we care about this country never mind how bedeviled it may be. We still have dreams, we need the young to inherit our dreams, and "We shall overcome......."
My comment: Applies to us here in America as well.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
