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.

Marvin Gaye

Dedicated to Dominique Strauss-Kahn.

Checkmate!

It has since come to my attention that Mr. Strauss-Kahn was the front-runner socialist candidate to oppose France’s Sarkozy. It occurs that socialists – like moderate Republicans - have a difficult time of it these days. On one hand, they are still wedded to the notion that money (paper) equals power. On the other, they are tasked with maintaining this illusion even as the power of money seems in decline. They find themselves between a rock and a hard place, attempting to satisfy two opposing currents: conservatives, who tend to be supply-siders, clamoring to save the system by next-to-impossible cuts in government spending; and Communists/Islamists, demanding that we jettison traditional economic theory altogether.

Between saving the system and jettisoning it is where socialists make their home. They represent the moderates – the wavering and undecided - in a war that one side or the other is destined to lose. Either way, socialists are already road kill. If the incident making headlines this morning on the front pages of virtually every daily [save the (Hometown) Coffee News] has been engineered, it might have been done by either side.

Socialists are especially vulnerable because of their inability to commit. Academe is full of them and so is the media. If there should come a conflagration, socialists will be the first to feel it. They will be targeted by both sides. They will be forced to proclaim their allegiance. To them, that will be akin to stripping naked. Some will refuse to do it.

I’d like to think that an actual shooting war can still be avoided; that we will fight it out on a political and economic level. If this be the case, Bush Derangement Syndrome was the prelude. Virtually everybody in America and around the world fell for it and drunkenly played along. It brought us Obama. Now that we’re well into the first movement, the stakes are already higher.

Winning this war will not depend on who we are against. It will depend on whom we are for. We have arrived at the heart of the matter. People are attacking us throughout the world. Why? Because we – America – are perceived as being supportive of Israel. All over the world, Israel has become the pariah of our time. Even many of us have begun to waver. It has become chic to support revolution in the Middle East and promote the idea of a Palestinian (terror) state on Israel’s doorstep. We do not realize that by supporting these things, we chip away at Israel’s ability to defend itself. We can no longer afford to laugh when Israel is attacked or made fun of the way we stood back and allowed it to happen to Bush.

No use crying over spilt milk. We’ve already lost too many battles. Our educational system is in ruins; our Constitution barely exists; our government barely functions; our economy limps along. The next battle will be fought over Israel. The final phase started with the demonization of Bush to which we all happily acquiesced. After Israel has fallen, the next and final target will be America.

The last shoe to drop before America falls is Israel. And almost nobody talks about it. George Mitchell has quit. Hillary is off in Pakistan. Our president plays golf.

If we commit now to standing by Israel in its hour of need, we still have a chance of saving America. It’s not going down in the way one may think. The last battle – as all the others - will be won by attrition. It is my contention that if Israel falls, it will rip the soul out of our nation and we won’t be inclined to raise even a finger in our own defense.

http://pkoelliker.blogspot.com/

View from India: ALL EYES ON GILANI’S VISIT TO CHINA

by B.RAMAN

All eyes in Pakistan are on the four-day visit to China from May 17, 2011, by Prime Minister Yousef Raza Gilani. The dates of the visit were finalized some weeks ago to enable him to participate in the year-long observance of the 60th anniversary of the establishment of diplomatic relations between the two countries. It has since acquired special significance in the eyes of Pakistani analysts as it is taking place at a time when Pakistan has come under severe criticism in the U.S. for failing to detect the presence of Osama bin Laden for over five years at Abbottabad, the cradle of the Pakistan Army, where the Pakistan Military Academy is located. OBL was killed by helicopter-borne U.S. naval commandos on May 2.

2.According to Chinese sources, the documents and computer records seized by the raiding party at OBL’s residence do not appear to have yielded any evidence so far to indicate that Osama was in touch with any of the Pakistani agencies. However, the examination of the records and computer documents is still on. In the meanwhile, the Pakistani political leadership, at the urging of the Army and the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI), has kept the focus more on the security failure which enabled the U.S. naval commandos to raid OBL’s place without being detected by the Pakistan Air Force and the Army than on the intelligence failure that enabled OBL to live at Abbottabad for over five years.

3. The anger over the clandestine U.S. raid has been widespread in Pakistan and has led to demands for a re-examination of Pakistan ’s relations with the U.S. and of the intelligence and counter-terrorism co-operation between the intelligence agencies of the two countries. A resolution passed during an in camera session of the two Houses of the Pakistan Parliament on May 13 has also reportedly threatened to stop the flow of logistic supplies to the NATO forces in Afghanistan from the Karachi port if the U.S. continued with the Drone (pilotless plane) strikes in the two Waziristans and carried out any more unilateral raids by its commandos in other parts of Pakistan.

4. According to reliable Pakistani sources, Gilani is expected to raise with Chinese Prime Minister Wen Jiabao two issues which were not originally on the agenda---namely, the possibility of an increase in Chinese economic assistance to enable Pakistan to resist the U.S. pressure and Chinese military assistance for the strengthening of the air defences near the Pakistan-Afghanistan border. Even though Pakistan Air Force officials have attributed the non-detection of the intrusion of the U.S. choppers to the USA ’s superior stealth technology, there is also a feeling that the air defences on the Afghan border were not as good as they are on the Indian border and hence there is a need to strengthen them.

5. In the present estranged atmosphere, the U.S. is unlikely to help Pakistan in this regard. The Pakistani sources say that Gilani is expected to request the Chinese for urgent assistance in this connection. Pakistani expectations of an enhanced Chinese role to enable Pakistan to reduce its dependence on the U.S. have put the Chinese in an embarrassing position. Though they would like to oblige Pakistan to the extent possible, they would not like to do anything which could come in the way of the fresh initiatives under way for improving China ’s military-military relationship with the U.S.

6. After a gap of seven years, Gen. Chen Bingde, the Chief of the General Staff of the People’s Liberation Army (PLA), is on a week-long visit to the U.S. from May 15. The Chinese would not like any jarring note in the military-military relations with the U.S. during Gen. Chen’s visit due to any special gesture shown by them to Pakistan. The Chinese are also keen that the U.S. Drone strikes should continue since some of the strikes in the past were directed at the training camps of the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan (IMU) and the Islamic Jihad Union (IJU) in the Waziristans, which were also training Uighur jihadis from the Chinese-controlled Xinjiang province of China .

7. Since the May 2 Abbottabad raid, the Chinese have maintained a high level of oral support for Pakistan on the counter-terrorism issue, highlighting the sacrifices allegedly made by the Pakistani security forces in the fight against jihadi terrorism. At the same time, they have avoided any dramatic gestures of a concrete nature such as increasing significantly their economic assistance to Pakistan or giving additional military assistance.

8. While they may give some concrete assistance of a limited nature during Gilani’s visit, they are likely to advise Pakistan to cool it and not to let its relations with the U.S. and its counter-terrorism co-operation with the U.S. reach a breaking point. (16-5-11)
------------------------------------------------
(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)

Less Time To Flatten

Emotion – not reason - drives policy. Reason only serves in support. If we are to understand policy, we must first understand emotion. We use a variety of terms to describe emotion. Often such terms are misapplied. It happens quite innocently in the course of common occurrences: The wife asks, “Do you want okra or green beans for dinner?” I say, “Green beans.” She responds by saying, “I know, you hate okra.”“So why did you ask?” I say, and we’re off to the races.

In truth, I’m indifferent to both. Just because I have voiced a preference does not mean I have strong feelings either way. Yet, the word “hate” has been introduced into the conversation.

It’s no secret that Obama does not have a firm grip on the details that define the Middle East. He sees all Muslims as Muslims and all infidels as infidels - black and white. Simple. It is the same view “The Nation of Islam” here in the U.S. holds. Given such scant knowledge would be enough for any average American president to conduct foreign affairs. Unfortunately, Obama is on the wrong side.

Hatred is often mislabeled as ‘fear’. Islamists in the ME fear the West. They see their culture in danger of being diluted by western ways. That’s why they fight. Islam in the West hates the West as an expression of its own self-loathing. There is a difference.

Islam takes fear and envy and wraps them all in the same cloth and sets it on fire. For simplicity’s sake we call it ‘hatred’. They constantly misrepresent the enemy; to make him out worse than he appears. It is for this reason that Islamic nations do not welcome guests – and if they do, these are treated separately – all to maintain the ridiculous notion that all guests are pollutants.

Israel is seen as a pollutant on what Islam perceives as its land. They do not fear Israel (as Israel poses no existential threat); they fear the influence of a modern, successful, western nation in their midst. They fear not being able to maintain close theocratic control over their own, whom they view as chattel – easily distracted from the straight and narrow and apt to chase anything that glitters. They feel their hold slipping. As such, they will go to increasing lengths to see to it that their sheep, goats, camels and women stay in line.

The frustration that mounts within their populations is building to explode. Even that - by careful, systematic manipulation - can be directed to serve the theocratic regime. All the rage is channeled against Israel and the West (for protecting Israel). In this way the Islamic theocracy shields itself from having to answer for its own failures.

On Aaron Klein’s radio show today, not much was made of NABKA Day. It’s a day like any other for a nation under constant siege. What was interesting, however, was Aaron’s exchange in his last segment with Hussein. Hussein finds it inconceivable that anyone would question Obama’s legitimacy. He asks, how it could be possible for every one of America’s official high legal authorities (plus the media) to give Obama a pass without an adequate background check and takes umbrage at Aaron’s suggestions? He went on to accuse Aaron of fueling hate for hate’s sake.

We have seen other hoaxes before. Some have exploded (‘global warming’), some have not and are ongoing. Maybe freedom and liberty; rule of law; capitalism; a nod to representative governance all are hoaxes. But these are our hoaxes - hoaxes that Americans have chosen to live by. Obama’s hoaxes are entirely different. These are unwelcome. These were introduced into the body politic by stealth. They seek to tear down and destroy everything we’ve ever held dear. All we have to do is just look around: economy is in tatters, foreign policy in tatters; education in tatters; Constitution in tatters; government in tatters; etc.

The long knives are out for talk radio as well. Avlon’s article is one of these. Smerconish’s show is another. Both seek to pour oil on troubled waters. Unfortunately, I have heard, there’s not enough oil. (Can’t you just picture us throwing windmills and batteries into the drink?)

Emotion drives policy. If you hate that sandcastle on the beach with the penis shaped towers, you go over and you level it. It’s that elementary (my dear Watson). Chances are that it will take you a lot less time to flatten it than it took to build.

http://pkoelliker.blogspot.com/

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.

Outside The Gulag

The principal difference between the Left and Right as pertains to fiscal policy is to strip money of the concept of ‘value’ and replace it with the concept of ‘rights’. The whole movement is animated by the Utopian vision of ‘collective salvation’. In most countries of the world they wouldn’t give you a plug nickel for a beggar’s carcass - dead or alive. You would nevertheless have to pay a certain sum for a freshly killed chicken. A chicken has value in that it can be eaten.

There are, of course, excesses on all sides of the argument. Why should some people be living in the lap of luxury while others are starving? And, what happens when ‘rights’ are extended to animals as some purists demand?

The logic, as always, breaks down on its fringes. The ‘rights’ advocates already find themselves on shaky ground in that what they advocate does not and has never existed (successfully). Their vision boils down to pure rhetoric. The ‘values’ people are constantly on the defensive having let the gulf between excess and need get out of hand.

The recurring question (and problem) concerning the latter is: Who would administer the standard to which we could all agree? Clearly, none of us are the same. We have different talents and are burdened with different vices. Some are creative; others are drones. Some sound compelling on the radio; some do not. Some can play basketball better than others. Should each one be treated the same – as is appropriate under the law – in fiscal matters as well?

The Leftists would concur that this is indeed their goal. It is the sum total of their Utopian vision. All they would need to implement it is the mandate and power to overturn the present system.

Even Leftist would abandon their vision if they could grasp the consequences of their quest. Their vision assumes that by exchanging a (perhaps) relatively minor part of a car’s engine, all the other parts would continue working just the same.

When Jaguar rolled out its E-Type in 1961, several publications ranked it as the most beautiful car of all time. And that it was. I remember coming out of a Chinese restaurant in New York City one night and seeing one for the first time. A sizable crowd had gathered around it. I was mesmerized.

Almost immediately, owners started complaining about the car’s Lucas (British) electrical system. Later, this issue was said to have been solved by swapping out Lucas for Bosch (German). In this case, the swap turned out for the best.

When talking economics, however, the swapping out ‘value’ for ‘rights’ does not augur well. It would likely mimic a body rejecting a transplant. ‘Value’ will always be a key component as long as human beings are allowed to make choices. ‘Rights’ can only extend to the degree that choices exist. The very logic that the Left is asking us to accept is incompatible with human experience outside of the gulag.

http://pkoelliker.blogspot.com/