Desicritics Category: Politics: Pakistan

LTTE-China or LTTE-Pakistan Partnership Possible?

Kalugu — Mon, 5 Jan 2009 06:42:11 EST

Your enemy's enemy is your friend is a popular saying. The recent setback the Tamil Tigers of Sri Lanka have been facing is largely credited to the clandestine support extended to the Sri Lankan government by India much against popular public opinion of India's citizens from the southern Indian state of Tamil Nadu. Tamil Nadu is home to 80 million ethnic Tamils who have integrated very well with India and have a thriving economy.

Results of recent surveys conducted in Tamil Nadu - India by two different press groups Indian Express and Kumudam have revealed very interesting opinions. "Majority Tamil Nadu is pro-LTTE" : 81 percent said that LTTE is good for India's security. Over 55 per cent favoured a separate Tamil homeland for Sri Lankan Tamils as the only solution for the conflict in the island.

A student group belonging to Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi, demanded unconditional declaration of ceasefire from the Sri Lanka government and a stop to the genocide of Tamils. Based on Marxist-Leninist principles of self-determination, it called for support to the Eezham Tamil independence.

The Tamil Tigers were banned in India 17 years ago and despite several protests from various political and non political groups, the Congress government of Indian headed by Mr. Manmohan Singh has refused to lift the ban on the Tamil Rebels. Several politicians from the Tamil Nadu state are questioning the validity of this ban and are quoting the removal of ban on RSS - a Hindu group that assassinated Mahatma Gandhi and was subsequently banned for only two years since the assassination.

In recent times, the Sri Lankan military has made very impressive progress, including the capture of Kilinochchi - the symbolic capital of the Tamil Eelam territory. However, Sri Lanka scored several negative points with respect to Human Rights.

A 400+ page model indictment charging Sri Lanka officials for genocide against Tamils has been prepared by a US based Tamil group. This group is represented by Mr. Bruce Fein, a lawyer in the United States who specializes in constitutional and international law. Under President Ronald Reagan, Fein served as an associate deputy attorney general and as general counsel to the Federal Communications Commission. The indictment will be ready to be submitted to the U.S. Justice Department first week of January, With the new President elect Barack Obama assuming office in January the case is being closely monitored by Sri Lankans worldwide.

The genocidal acts Bruce Fein have chronicled in the draft indictment surpasses by far the genocidal evidence in the charges against former Bosnian leader Radovan Karadzic.

Further, this week New York-based Genocide Prevention Project has included Sri Lanka as one of the eight "red alert" countries where genocide and other mass atrocities are underway or risk breaking out.

While the Tamil Rebels have made several attempts to establish a friendly relationship with India, the calls have been rejected or rather neglected by India. While the Tigers were solely relying on India alone for strategic partnership, Sri Lanka went ahead and established relationship with China, Pakistan and also Iran.

China and Pakistan have a strategic interest in Sri Lanka as a presence here allows them unprecedented geographic advatage over reaching very strategic and economic centers of India. Both LTTE and Sri Lanka can be valuable partners to China and Pakistan. More than Sri Lanka which has very less influence over India, LTTE can be a more attractive and valuable partner due to its strong ethnic and religious ties with India. A strong relation with the Tamil Tigers will give these countries unprecedented inroads into southern India. How ever the Tamil Tigers do not seem to have taken benefit of this unique advantage they posses.

Several analysts do not understand the reason behind LTTE's un-staunched alignment and dependence on India and the reason behind ignoring China or Pakistan as strategic partners. LTTE for some reason has ignored the safety of its very own people it represents over a friendly relation with India.

Will the Tamil Tigers realign and save themselves from further humiliation by the Sri Lankan army?

Book Review: Vishnu's Crowded Temple: India Since the Great Rebellion by Maria Misra

Vinod Joseph — Wed, 31 Dec 2008 12:18:15 EST

Having liked Maria Misra’s first book on managing agencies so much, I got hold of her second and much more recent one, a couple of weeks ago. In Vishnu’s Crowded Temple, Misra undertakes the challenging task of analysing India’s history from the time immediately after the mutiny (1857) till the present. Misra proves herself equal to the challenge. Her 450 odd page tome is not only a very thorough examination of India’s history during this period, it is also crammed with Misra’s analysis of the prominent events and personalities. Irrespective of whether you agree or disagree with Misra’s various assessments, you can’t help appreciating that Misra knows her history very well and has all relevant facts at her finger tips.

Misra’s stand out achievement in this book is in examining every issue from multiple points of view. For example, when discussing partition, she explains how each of the actors, the Congress, the Muslim League and the British, performed their roles and did what they did in a manner that is entirely comprehensible, though with the benefit of hindsight, many serious mistakes were made. Equally brilliant are Misra’s description of the Emergency and the raise of Hindu nationalism in the 1990s. The personalities of Gandhi, Nehru, Indira Gandhi, Laloo Prasad Yadav, V.P. Singh and Mayawati are dispassionately analysed and laid bare. Their contributions to India are examined ruthlessly without any drama. Also of great interest (to me at least) was Misra’s examination of the (failed) attempts to have a Uniform Civil Code for India and to make Hindi India’s national language.

Misra’s language is simple, to the point, non-melodramatic, slightly sarcastic at times and in short, it’s just right for a book of this sort. For example, while describing the Congress’s (unsuccessful) attempt to remain uncorrupted and keep India unified as it neared the goal of Independence, she says, ‘By the end of the 1930s, it was clear that much of Congress politics was fast degenerating in an unedifying scramble for the spoils of office. Gandhi had not woven the tough, rough-textured and inclusive fabric he had originally designed. Rather, the Congress nation was silk not khadi. Threads from the prosperous peasantry, urban petty bourgeoisie, the progressive intelligentsia and big business had somehow been woven into a single cloth. But it was distinctly frayed at the edges. Skeins of regional, Muslim and low caste politics hung loose and it would prove difficult, if not impossible, to weave these back into a united and independent Indian nation.

Cricket does not find a mention in the post-independence part of this book and neither does Bollywood, though Sholay is discussed as are film actors turned politicians MGR and NT Rama Rao. The implied assessment here, I assume, is that neither Bollywood nor cricket has influenced post-independence India. In a sense, I would agree with Misra that Bollywood is not as much of a nation unifier as it is hyped out to be. For example, people in Pakistan, Nepal and Bangladesh enjoy Bollywood movies though anti-India feeling runs high in these countries. Cricket does bring Indians together and alleged Muslim support for the Pakistani team is the cause of much tension and quarrel. I do wish Misra had commented on the impact of cricket on Indian society.

Misra makes a few minor mistakes which do not have any impact on the overall quality of this book. She says that A.O. Hume, the founder of the Indian National Congress was an Englishman (when he was actually Scottish). The Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK) is translated as “Dravidian Forward Federation”, something which will bring a smile to any Tamil speaker. In my opinion, it ought to be the “Dravidian Upliftment Party”.

Misra’s book has a very detailed bibliography. Since I am not a qualified historian, I am not going to comment on it.

Misra ends her book with the story of how Laloo Yadav, long considered a maverick and joker, reformed the Indian railways and made it profitable. However, Laloo has no qualms about having his in-laws travel ticketless in a first class railway compartment. Misra tells us in the epilogue that her objective was to explain India’s peculiar form of modernity, one which is a mix of so many contradictions. I would say that Misra has admirably succeeded in her endeavour.

I am setting out here a few of Misra’s theories and assessments which I found to be interesting and a few facts I ‘discovered’ from this book, which the average desi doesn’t easily get to read elsewhere.

Impact of British Rule: The role of the British on the subcontinent should not be exaggerated. According to Misra, the subcontinent is too vast and too ancient and the British presence too brief and microscopic to be seen as a leading player. Initially I shook my head in disbelief, but then as I thought about this, I started to feel that Misra might have a point. However, this is a very moot point on which it will be possible to canvass a variety of views.

Caste: Till the British arrived, Indian society was very fluid. Castes were not frozen. However, the British found it easy to understand the Varna system as hard and fast. Also, the educated Brahmins were the ones the British turned to for tutorials on India. It made sense for the Brahmins to explain the caste system in such a way that they were on top, though in reality, the intermediate castes were the property owners and the generally, especially in southern India, the most powerful. Misra says that there’s a great deal to be said for the view that untouchability was an institution initially confined to some locations. As India industrialised, the poorest and lowest castes migrated to the cities where they did the dirtiest jobs and the stigma of untouchability grew.

Aryan Invasion Theory and Pre-Aryan Dravidian Utopia: The Aryan invasion theory came into vogue between 1901 and 1911. The proponents of this theory found it very convenient to explain the caste system and the hierarchy within. Soon census takers were carrying ‘nose callipers’ to measure the length of Indian noses and categorise people. The Theosophists propagated the Aryan invasion theory and the upper castes gratefully seized upon it to show that they were superior to other Indians and were linked to Europeans. Please note that Misra does not at any point express her own view on the Aryan invasion theory. I wish she had.

In the south, a British preacher Robert Caldwell pioneered the study of southern languages. Caldwell wanted to destroy the influence of corrupt priests and Brahmins in order to make conversions easy. For this, he propagated the view that the Aryan invasion had destroyed a pre-Aryan Dravidian utopia and that southern languages are totally autonomous from Sanskrit and Hindi. Tamil intellectuals accepted Caldwell’s theories, though they did not convert. They also took them further by saying that pre-Aryan Tamil possibly existed prior to the movement of the tectonic plates when Asia, Africa and Australasia was a unified landmass called ‘kumarikantam.’

Changing British attitudes to India and Indians: Prior to the mutiny, the British wanted to modernise and reform India. After the mutiny, the British only wanted to preserve the existing order, and use it to strengthen their own presence in India. The British set up a College of Arms which would produce for various Indian princes various assorted ensigns, emblems and other signs of power. The Statutory Civil Service was an attempt to make bureaucrats out of the scions of Indian aristocracy. Sons of Princes were enrolled in this service as a birth right and trained to be bureaucrats in order to avoid having middleclass Indians rule India through the Indian Civil Service. Colleges such as the Mayo College at Ajmer, modelled on Eton, were established. This attempt ended in a dismal failure since Indian princes were too much fun loving and lacked the necessary discipline to become mandarins.

British attitudes to different Indian ethnic groups is one of the topics covered in Misra’s first book. Misra takes up the same topic in this book as well. The Afridis, Dogras and Sikhs were believed to make good soldiers, since they physically resembled Europeans more than other Indians. Sikhs especially were the apples of the British eye. The British were so keen to keep the Sikhs pure that Sikh recruits to the army had to be baptised, have uncut hair, bangles, a dagger and have ‘Singh’ as the last name. The British maintained Sikhism in the army at a standard higher than it was elsewhere. Bengalis were considered effeminate and non-martial, though they had formed the bulk of the British Indian army prior to the mutiny. It was only during the Second World War that stereotypes such as these were abandoned.

The British also condemned many communities as criminal classes. In the south, the British started to prop up the Dravidian parties to fight the Brahmin dominated Congress. Reservations were made for non-Brahmin communities. British - Hindu – Muslim relations: Misra devotes a lot of time and space to explain how Hindu and Muslims came to be poles apart. Initially, the British were very tolerant of Hinduism. This morphed into contempt. With regard to Islam, the British were closer to the Muslims till the mutiny, after which there was a period of bitterness. Later, the British grew to develop cordial relations with a few select Muslims, like Syed Ahmed Khan, who benefitted a lot from their closeness to the British. Such select Muslims got British largesse and protection from Hindu domination, as the British played one community against the other. The bulk of the funding for the Aligarh University came from the British

Occasional Hindu-Muslim violence did take place in the 19th century, but such violence was local. In 1809, there were riots in Banares. British reports classified these as religious violence that erupted when a Muharram procession insulted Hindus, though in reality it was the result of a land dispute.

Till the early 19th century, Hindus and Sunnis celebrated Muharram along with the Shias. Similarly, Muslims participated in Ramlila celebrations. Towards the end of the 19th century, Tilak started to promote the Ganapati festival and made it a lavish and public affair. With that, Muharram processions and Ramlila festivities ceased to attract people from other faiths.

Regionalism among Indian leaders: At the Indian National Congress’s Lahore session in 1893, the great leader Bal Gangadhar Tilak boarded and lodged with his fellow Maharashtrians Gokhale and Ranade who were moderates and his ideological adversaries since he didn’t want to mix with Bengali leaders who subscribed to his own extremist views. South Indian leaders, almost entirely Brahmins, were fussy eaters and would not eat with others.

Ramakrishna Paramahamsa, a leader of Hindu renaissance in the 1870s, attracted the cream of Bengal’s intelligentsia and preached the rejection of western values and advocated a return to a rustic lifestyle. He was a gender bender who liked to dress as a woman and flirt with his largely male followers, at times sitting on their laps. Keshub Chandra Sen was a westernised Brahmo Samaj leader who reverted to Hinduism under Ramakrishna Paramahamsa’s influence. Ramakrishna Paramahamsa advocated child marriage and Keshub Chandra Sen gave his 9 year old daughter in marriage to the ruler of Cooch Behar

Fitness First

Since the British were busy portraying upper caste Hindus as non-martial and effeminate, the Hindu renaissance brought in its wake a great deal of interest in exercise and fitness. Various akharas were started. Wrestling became a favourite pastime for many Indians. The great Indian wrestler Gama was said to live entirely on milk, ghee and almonds which he consumed in vast quantities. These were supposed to be all that was needed to make a man strong.

Max Muller was a German orientalist who promoted the theory of the noble Aryan race which migrated to India and from whom the upper castes were said to have descended. The Aryans were said to have founded in India the greatest civilisation the world has ever known, though they weakened themselves by marriages with the lower castes. Muller opposed woman’s liberation which he said would weaken the fabric of Indian society.

Bankim Chandra used to be a proponent of women’s rights, till he took a sharp U turn. After his change of mind, he went about advocating that women should not behave like babus. He advised such women to rid the earth of their useless weight by applying ropes to their necks.

The Age of Consent Bill: In 1891, the Age of Consent Bill was proposed after many child brides died after sex with their husbands. This bill made intercourse with a child below the age of 12 years statutory rape even if the girl was married to the accused. Bankim Chandra opposed this bill tooth and nail. He said that if this bill was passed “Bengal would be plagued with females in groups hanging from door to door, begging men to gratify their lust”. Many Indian dailies opposed the Bill. Anand Baraz Patrika changed from a weekly to a daily to meet increased subscriber demand. The Bangabani saw its subscription soar to 20,000, whilst Sanjivani which supported the bill had only 4,000 readers. Bal Gangadhar Tilak too opposed the Age of Consent Bill.

Aurobindo Ghose was a Hindu revivalist and Swaraj advocate who studied at St. Paul’s and Cambridge. He advocated revolutionary violence though his goals were quite vague. He talked about the golden age of the Vedas and declared that his ultimate objective was the ‘Aryanisation’ of the world

Annie Besant was a Theosophist who believed that high caste Hindus were Aryans who ought to be given the power to unify India as they had done earlier. She had a controversial attitude to non-Brahmins. She wanted to “humanise them because, as in Britain, the lower classes are a menace to civilisation and undermine the fabric of society.”

The Gurgaon experiment: Frank Bryne was a civil servant who carried out an experiment in Gurgaon to change the ‘bad’ habits of the Indian peasantry who were given to idleness and filth. To fight idleness, he made them give up canal irrigation and switch to inefficient Persian wheels. To make them conserve fuel, he promoted a magic ‘Bhoosa’ box. For disciplined defecation and fighting filth, he got them to dig latrines, though the latrines became traps for mosquitoes. Though none of his experiments really worked, a few successful monsoons meant that Gurgaon showed progress. Bryne’s books became standard texts for Indian bureaucrats.

Bombay Pentangular: So named for the five religious communities who took part, namely the Parsis, Hindus, Muslims, Europeans and the rest. In the initial days of this tournament, the Parsis refused to play the Hindus since they thought only the British were their equals. In 1939 the Hindus won the tournament and their supporters sang the Bande Mataram, which the Muslims found offensive.

Congress’s Hindu tilt and rift with the Muslim League: On many occasions Misra says that, at its lower echelons, the Congress was very much Hindu nationalist. Membership of the RSS and Congress overlapped to a considerable degree. Hedgewar, the founder of the RSS was a disciple of the Congress leader Tilak. From the 1920s , there was practically no Muslim participation in Congress led agitations. The 1930 civil disobedience movement which led to a sharp fall in the demand for imported fabrics, disproportionately affected Muslims, since most importers of foreign cloth were Muslims. Misra blames the Congress for breaching its relations with the Muslim League. Jinnah was willing to renounce his demand for separate Muslim electorates if the Congress would agree to more Muslim majority provinces in Sindh and the North West Frontier Province. The Congress refused. In the 1937 provincial elections, the Muslim League cooperated with the Congress, but the Congress reneged on a deal to share ministerial posts.

Frontier Gandhi: Khan Abdul Gaffar Khan and his Khudai Khidmatgars followed Gandhian principles when fighting the British. However, their fight was mainly for the reunification of the North West Frontier Province with Afghanistan and had little to do with the national movement.

Subhash Chandra Bose and the INA: Subhash Chandra Bose established contact with Nazi Germany through the Kabul office of Siemens Company. He did not really get along with Hitler who refused to delete a few bits from his Mein Kampf which Bose considered insulting to Indians. Bose then went to Japan and Singapore and took over leadership of the INA. “Relations between the INA and the Japanese were appalling. The Japanese regarded the INA troops as turncoats, inherently untrustworthy and cowardly. At best they were a propaganda unit for spreading pro-Japanese stories among Indians and at worst as coolie corps.” The INA was not particularly effective and Subhash Chandra Bose himself was regarded by the Japanese as “incompetent and stubborn”. Misra says that this view was not totally unjustified since Bose kept insisting that a march on Delhi was possible in the midst of a catastrophic retreat.

Allied Army atrocities: During the Second World War, the enormous allied army in Eastern India misbehaved. There were many cases of rape, arson and looting.

Gandhi’s approval for Indira Gandhi’s marriage: Indira Gandhi’s marriage to the Parsi Feroze Gandhi was controversial. Mahatma Gandhi gave his approval, but said that the marriage should be celibate.

Awaking a Sleeping Man

BangaloreGuy — Tue, 30 Dec 2008 13:41:25 EST

<i>You can only awake a sleeping man, and not one who pretends to sleep.</i>

-Mahatma Gandhi

In a pointed response to how good this government, the Prime Minister and the new Home Minister are at securing us, is the information that the expanded NSG is to expand to 4 more (metro) cities Mumbai, Kolkata, Chennai & Hyderabad. That the "metros" definition needs a big lookover aside, it underscores the fact that these bozos do not have their head over anything that relates to governance, or security.

When was the last time Kolkata even had a terrorist attack - yeah, that is the kind of question that keeps the mind ticking, doesnt it?(2003, American Embassy) How about Chennai. Umm, the closest, is attacks in 98 at Coimbatore and in Bangalore. But, in their infinite wisdom they've a hub in Chennai too.

Attacks on Chennai may impact the Indian economy - but its not on the World radar, neither does it face a threat perception of that level (or impact the economy on a big enough scale). Attacks on Kolkata will not hurt the economy either - the last time West Bengal had a decent chance of impacting the Indian economy positively was with the Nano project, but that wasnt based in Kolkata either! (and the techs there are about the same as most Tier2 Indian cities)

No NSG for Guwahati which faces attacks here, there everywhere. No NSG for Bangalore which gives on an average 25 billion US$ to the government buckets, and has faced 2 terror attacks in the space of a year. 300,000 tech workers reside in bangalore - most employed in hubs around Electronic City or Whitefield areas. But nope, Bangalore doesnt get a NSG hub. Nearest will be in Chennai (and given the chaos in travel to the BIAL airport, travelling by road's faster - but the NSG might get Volvos if, god forbid, they'd need to be deployed in Bangalore)

Listen to this damning piece of Information (from the ToI link):

As soon as Prime Minister Manmohan Singh had announced setting up regional NSG hubs in the wake of Mumbai attacks, chief ministers of several states including Andhra Pradesh, Assam and Maharashtra had met home minister P Chidambaram and pitched for setting up such units in their states.

Do Chief Ministers need to meet the Centre, towel-in-hand for an NSG hub to be there? What is the rationale for setting up a NSG hub? Prestige status for that state?

Or what this news report quotes:

The tech city was the favourite for stationing the elite anti-terror commando force, but it has now given way to the neighbouring Hyderabad and Chennai.

Under fire after the Mumbai terror attacks, the Centre had stressed its intention of creating more NSG hubs, and Bangalore —high on the terror radar for years—was billed as one. However, when it was announced early this week, the garden city was missing from the list. Those that bagged the NSG centres, apart from the two southern cities, were Mumbai and Kolkata.

When Deccan Herald sought to find out the reason, Home Ministry sources indicated it was mainly to deal with lobbying. “Karnataka failed in it both politically and bureaucratically. On top of it, Karnataka is an Opposition-ruled state, while Tamil Nadu and Andhra Pradesh are not.

Is it little wonder that Pakistan repeatedly spouts its "Baseless" remarks, and runs hoops around our government, while asking for"evidence"?

Is Terrorism a Vice born out of Patriotic Virtues?

Suresh Naig — Tue, 30 Dec 2008 13:36:20 EST

Patriotism, as per the dictionary, conveys a person’s loyalty, devotion and readiness to defend and guard a country, to which one belongs. From time immemorial patriotism is extolled, as a supreme virtue. Since patriotism is more emotional than rational, the benignity of patriotism could easily be converted into malignant terrorism, by stoking emotions.

A nation or a country has different dimensions, other than its geographical boundaries. It has its economic, social, and cultural dimensions too. A country is united by its cohesive cultural identity, which supersedes every other factor – geographical, economical or political. When this cultural identity is uprooted, mere geographical intact-ness of a country loses its relevance. Or to put it the other way, a country cobbled up on apparent lines of similarity, other than cultural cohesiveness, cannot stay intact in the longer run.

Break-up of USSR into different fragments, could be attributed to different reasons and the major being cultural disconnect. The same cultural bondage saw unification of Germany, on the 3rd of October, 1990. Break-up of USSR into fragments and re-unification of East Germany and West Germany, were almost simultaneous. Communism as a philosophy lacked the cultural cohesiveness in neither uniting nor dividing countries.

In spite of different kingdoms existed in our mother land, due to geographical convenience, economic viability, territorial advantage and individual avarice, Bharat was united culturally. Adi Shankara in 5th Century BC (those of you who want to dispute the period of Adi Shankara to 6th Century AD, pl wait) could not have established his mutts in different directions, North, East, West and South, but for the cultural connectivity existed in our land.

This cultural connectivity of our great nation was beyond religions, for our cultural uniqueness, accepted every religion into its fold, without antagonising any religion or sect. In addition to Hinduism; Buddhism, Islam, Sikhism and Christianity continues to co-exist in our great land, since our culture is basically polytheist in nature. But for the cultural cohesiveness of our land, British would have failed to create a single political entity as India. Without understanding our basic strength, many attribute our sovereignty to English, whereas British were more known for their dividing capabilities than unifying credentials.

Many a time, religion and culture are misunderstood, to be overlapping to each other; experiments in that direction also failed; sterling example is the split of Pakistan into two. Pakistan was born out of apparent similarity of religion, but bereft of cultural cohesiveness and hence it was not able to stay as one political unit. Without proper understanding of this phenomenon, disgruntled elements in Pakistan are seeing a demon in India, which had engineered the split.

Patriotism is apparently misunderstood in Pakistan, by encompassing religion into its patriotic firmament, since the country originated on religious grounds. Because of this confused logic, select few inside Pakistan want to avenge India on religious lines, attributing assumed reasons of religious suppression in Kashmir and for causing the split of Bangladesh. However much diabolic or manic the design might be, because of its sanctification from the religious patriots, the feeble voices of reasonable persons in Pakistan have been dinned by the noises of radicals.

The radicals, however miniscule in number, wield enormous political and religious clout; they have absolute power of destruction. Political power centre in Pakistan had lost its control over these rogue elements since long and hence they continue to deny the presence of terror elements in their land.

Overt operations such as war or economic sanctions would hurt only the section in Pakistan which does not have anything to do with these terror elements and it is better for India to think of covert actions, aimed at hitting these modules beyond recovery.

Skeletons in the Closet

Vinod Joseph — Mon, 29 Dec 2008 14:04:59 EST

This thought has been lingering in the back on my mind for a long time. The people who planned the Mumbai attacks must have had help from the local underworld, maybe the local representatives of Dawood Ibrahim’s gang.

It is well known that services offered by the underworld, especially money laundering services, are used by the rich and well-connected in India. If investigators are on the trail of Mr. X who provided credit cards or cash to the attackers, Mr. X might be able to call on someone high and mighty, say Mr. Y, to protect him. Mr. Y might be just a businessman with good connections who has nothing to do with terrorism. Mr. Y might or might not suspect what Mr. X is up to, but would protect him nevertheless, since Mr. X might otherwise spill the beans on him. In short, as long as India has such a vibrant parallel economy that puts the legit one in the shade, India will be vulnerable to terrorist attacks.

Jawed Naqvi, the Dawn’s correspondent in Delhi, one of the smartest Indian journalists today, has written a brilliant piece on this issue:

Here’s an interesting piece in the Independent which says India has not been passing on information to Interpol about the Mumbai attacks or the results of its investigation.

It makes sense for Indian investigators to want to keep their findings to themselves if sharing facts with Interpol or other foreign investigators will raise too many uncomfortable questions for India’s high and mighty, who might have had dealings with criminals and terrorists. Funnily, the Independent news report above does not say that India has been hiding its findings. Instead, it says Indian investigators have been regularly feeding the media, though not briefing Interpol

The Indian investigation into the Mumbai attacks now seems to bear a startling similarity with the way Pakistan has been investigating the Bhutto assassination. Even though Bhutto’s own party, the PPP, is in power, the investigation into the murder has made little headway. It’s been over a year since Bhutto was assassinated, but the truth behind who was responsible, is yet to emerge. Is this because if the truth were to be found, many respectable players will have to run for cover? Is this because the guilty are being shielded by those in power who have been hand-in-glove with them in various other nefarious activities?

Corruption, black money and a parallel economy are some of the things India and Pakistan have in common. Now it seems that both countries have too many similar skeletons in their closets.

Raj Thackeray Creeping Out

Manoj Khatri — Sun, 28 Dec 2008 15:19:38 EST

Raj Thackeray is back in business. He’s “banned” all Pakistani artistes from performing in Maharashtra and warned music stores not to stock/sell cassettes/CDs/DVDs featuring them. Shiv Sena too issues a similar statement just a day before, according to PTI.

I call this the Thackeray brand of politics, which is always about fuelling hatred. It thrives on the vulnerability of the common man who doesn’t understand that politicians like Raj don’t have his interest in mind. All they want is to exploit the sentiments of the masses to further their own agenda. Over the past few months, Raj has also been cleverly using the media to gain popularity.

According to our politicians, we, the people of India, are dumb fools. We do not know what is right for us. We can’t decide, for instance, if a film should be watched, a book should be read or a painting exhibition should be patronised. We need Raj and his men to educate us, tell us good from bad.

The Mumbai terror attacks did something unprecedented. It made the ordinary man realise that politicians like Thackeray only come out when they can further their own agenda. Raj’s anti-north Indian campaign has backfired in wake of the terror attacks. So he was lying low for a while…and I suppose, all the while thinking which issue to rake up to get the attention of the media and to prove that he is the son of the soil.

I have a question to ask Raj: While banning Pakistani artistes may find favour in the present circumstances when there is so much anger against Pakistan, are there no other pressing issues that his state faces? Is Maharashtra’s, or indeed India’s, biggest problem Pakistani singers or actors? What exactly will he achieve by banning their performances and their CDs?

If I were Raj, I would ask every MNS member to offer their services to the Government of India in some way…say, to collect intelligence about the terror attacks being planned across the nation?

Any suggestions?

Pakistan Can't Bleed Us to Death With a Thousand Cuts

BangaloreGuy — Wed, 24 Dec 2008 13:31:03 EST

It's not because we've corrupt nincompoops for politicians, not because our bureaucracy is a parasite eating at the Indian state's core, not because criminals get away scot-free.

It's Not even because our intelligence gathering mechanisms arent well-oiled or well co-ordinated. And definitely not because of something stupid called "Mumbai spirit" or "Bangalore spirit" or whatever spirit that people spout on the telly.

It's because safety and security is inherently not a priority of the Indian population. The aam aadmi just doesn't care a hoot for safety.

It is not a one-off incident related to terrorism in Mumbai, or anywhere else in the country. But pretty much on a daily basis.

The aam aadmi doesn't give a hoot for life insurance unless it's meant as a tax-saving or as a money-growing device. The aam aadmi doesn't do anything better than snigger about safety, on the road. Notice the number of seat belts worn, the number of helmets properly fastened (if worn), the lack of road manners - and the infuriating overloading of vehicles beyond capacity.

Or when the aam aadmi walks calmly across the road when a truck 300 times her/his weight is bearing upon them.

Or when a prominent mall is so unsafe that 3 children die there (falling between parapet and wall), apart from few people trapped in the lifts. Mall cleans up, makes some noises and goes about its business without a thought - no one even thinks it merits discussion, or thought!

Safety is just not a concern.

So, when Sheila Dixit said that her government won because terrorism is not an election issue, shock is replaced with an all-knowing calm - we are like this wonly!

People can come out in marches, people may light candles, but here's the thing - an average of 40 lakh commuters travel on Mumbai's trains. Crammed worse than sheep at times - if they don't give a shit about improving safety on trains, improving capacity on trains - things which affect their lives every day - what are the chances of them making terrorism an issue - not too much.

So Pakistan gets to play its game, US asks India to keep restraint and Indian government (which again gives a hoot for security) plays ball knowing public anger about terror only exists in pockets and doesn't last.

What's to be Done With Kasab?

Vinod Joseph — Tue, 23 Dec 2008 10:16:37 EST

The Indian government has decided to appease the public’s craving for revenge. All weapons captured from the terrorists are to be put inside a large cauldron and melted down. The molten steel will be used to construct steps for public lavatories in Mumbai. “Victims of Terror To Be Avenged”, says a popular tabloid, which manages to pass for a respectable daily.

Okay, I made that up, but going by the decibel levels generated by those baying for Kasab’s blood (without a trial, mid you), one gets the impression that weapons captured from terrorists will also be punished. It is not only the general public that’s baying for Kasab’s blood. Even members of the Bombay Bar Association (a non-statutory association of lawyers in Mumbai), have passed a resolution that none of them will represent Kasab in court. This despite the fact that the Bar Council of India Rules specifically say that:

“An advocate is bound to accept any brief in the Courts or Tribunals or before any other authorities in or before which he proposes to practise at a fee consistent with his standing at the Bar and the nature of the case. He shall defend a person accused of a crime regardless of his personal opinion as to the guilt of the accused, bearing in mind that his loyalty is to the law which requires that no man should be convicted without adequate evidence.”

Somik Raha has written a beautiful article explaining how every accused has the right to legal representation and a fair trial.

In all probability, Kasab (is that his real last name or did the Police make it up?), will be sentenced to death by hanging. Capital punishment is not inappropriate for the heinous crime Kasab is responsible for. However, we need to ask ourselves, is capital punishment the best possible response Indian society can come up with? Before we answer this question, we ought to understand that India and the rest of the world are in the midst of a global war against Islamic fundamentalism. The Islamists are fighting to create a global Islamic order. All over the world, they have recruited Muslim fighters with local grievances and harnessed their energies to the global cause. There is a clear distinction between the Islamic fundamentalists of today and the Arab/Turkish invaders of the past who came to India for loot and plunder. The latter were interested only in looting India and taking away its wealth. The former want India and other secular democratic societies destroyed and replaced with an Islamic state. Pakistan is the breeding ground for many of these Islamic fighters. However, Pakistan itself is not the enemy. There are many, many Pakistanis who do not want Pakistan to be talibanised. They might have a grudge against India over the Kashmir issue or the loss of Bangladesh, but they are India’s allies in this war against Islamic fundamentalists. Not only are they our allies, they are also the frontline fighters against these Islamists.

India has received enormous sympathy from the rest of the world subsequent to the Mumbai attacks. US pressure on Pakistan has forced it to place some leading Islamists under house arrest. Though Pakistan is yet to genuinely crackdown against the Lashkar-e-Tayba, the organisation most likely to have organised the Mumbai attacks, Pakistan has been expanding its war against Islamic fundamentalists to include more and more terror groups. There are two reasons for the western sympathy and support, something we did not always receive in the past. One reason is that the West recognises India to be a fellow victim of Islamic terrorism. Secondly, India is considered to be a democratic country, unlike Pakistan, where there is greater respect for the rule of law. The last thing we ought to do is to blur the distinction between India and Pakistan.

Our fight is against an ideology, the ideology of Islamic fundamentalism, and not against a state or a group of people. How do you fight an ideology? With another ideology of course! With the ideology of freedom, democracy and respect for human life.

Twenty two year old Kasab was recruited by Islamic fundamentalists when he was a teenager, indoctrinated and trained and sent over to Mumbai. The terrorists did not have much of an escape plan, since those responsible for sending them to Mumbai did not really expect them to survive. They used weapons which could easily be traced back to Pakistan, the intention being to make it clear to India that Pakistani Islamists are responsible for the attack. The organisers would have been very happy if India had retaliated against Pakistan, as India almost did in 2001 following the attack against the Indian Parliament. A war between India and Pakistan would be a blessing in their eyes.

Hanging Kasab (by his neck, until he is dead, as the Indan Penal Code decrees), would make him a martyr for the Islamists. All over the world, public opinion is building up against capital punishment since it reduces the state to the same animal level as those sentenced to death for a heinous crime. In my opinion, not only should Kasab be given a fair trial, the courts should also take into account the fact that he was recruited when he was a teenager and brainwashed, without ever having the opportunity to listen to a different point of view. Hanging Kasab would not be much different from melting the weapons used in the attacks. Instead, Kasab should be sentenced to life. While in jail, he should be treated humanely and given the opportunity to appreciate how a democracy functions. Under the Indian Penal Court, a life sentence runs for fourteen years. Kasab will be a free man when he reaches his mid-thirties and should be sent back to Pakistan. In the eyes of his Islamic handlers, he would appear to be brainwashed by secularists. This approach will not only win us brownie points from fellow western and Pakistani allies in this war on terror, but would also be the right thing to do.

UPA Government and Mumbai: Election Posturing or Statesmanship?

Chandra — Tue, 23 Dec 2008 01:47:51 EST

The last few days have been really interesting. Our foreign minister has been talking about all kinds of 'options', we have submitted a 'letter' to the Pakistanis from Kasab, Condy Rice talks about Terrorism destroying Pakistan and the Pakistanis themselves have become even more defiant (apart from Air exercises).

In some circles, it appears we are inexorably heading towards war and in some circles, the feeling is nothing is likely to happen (2001-2002).

My opinion is that the current congress government is just posturing. They are incapable of doing anything. This is evidenced by two major news stories over the last one week.a. The demand to hand over Masood Azhar

There are four names that are floating around with respect to the attack on Mumbai - Yusuf Muzammil, Zaki-Ur-Rehman Laqkhvi, Hafiz Saeed and Dawood Ibrahim. So the question is why are we demanding that they hand over Masood Azhar? Well, that is because the previous (equally spineless) BJP Government had handed over this clown during the Kandahar Hijacking. They want to get him back so that they can parade him during the next elections. Yes, Ladies and Gentlemen, this Government gives a rat ass to the attack on Mumbai, they are worried about the next elections.b. The inability to deal with AR Antulay

All of us are now familiar with AR Antualy's comments. AR Antulay is a marginalised politician in Maharashtra. Once a powerful CM, he has now dissolved in the background. He claims, he represents many Muslims when he says Hemant Karkare was sent in the wrong direction to his death. I think he is being coy.

The fact of the matter is that out of the 15 policemen who were killed on the 26th-28th, five of them were killed in that single Qualis. Whoever killed the 3 top ATS men, the fact of the matter is that as a Govt minister, there is a time and place to bring about these allegations.

To do it openly means one of the two things. a. A fear that the Govt will sweep these under the carpet and b. Why lose an opportunity to garner a few votes? A simple analysis of the situation is that seasoned politicians like these give a rat's ass to the truth, so (b). is a more likely reason. That brings us to how the Government has responded to his statements. They have two options - a. either agree with or b. disagree with him. Instead of doing either, they have spent the last 3-4 days doing focus groups to understand the impact of his dismissal. It is ironical that the original ATS investigation (and daily leaks) by Mr. Karkare had won them so many Muslim votes and now in his death there is a possibility that they will lose many of these votes. Anyway, the time they took to arrive at the decision indicates the level of seriousness within the congress in dealing with the attack on Mumbai.

It is frustrating to see the way our Govt is handling an obvious attack from across the border. As an Indian citizen, Dec 31, 1999 was the most humiliating day of my life. This Govt is doing it’s very best to reach that nadir. Somebody save us. Jai Hind!

Mumbai Musings And Talking Terrorism

Kavita Chhibber — Mon, 22 Dec 2008 14:24:48 EST

The past weeks since the terrorist attacks on Mumbai, have gone in round the clock interviews with people from India and Pakistan from different walks of life, talking to Dr Deepak Chopra, Pakistani cricketer politician Imran Khan, counter terrorism experts, UK businessman Sir Gulam Noon, who defied death for the fourth time when he escaped from the burning Taj in what seemed a miracle in just the way the events built up in his case and of course a cross section of people in India and Pakistan.

While you can read all the outstanding interviews and some other really thought provoking articles on my website (www.kavitachhibber.com) in the latest issue, I remember when the initial reportage came in, having read about the previous attacks, and the flooding that left Mumbai paralyzed and other similar attacks across India, I didn't pay much attention to the headlines for a couple of hours, thinking it was indeed some gang war as the media was reporting; until my brother's email that one of his close friends was missing on the 6th floor of the Taj came in and that his last contact with her was at 2 a.m. The friend was well known journalist Sabina Sehgal Saikia and sadly her body was found 2 days later. Just 10 days earlier, she had gone to Ustad Amjad Ali Khan's house to gift her new book to his wife Subhalakshmi Khan, said the Sarod maestro to me as he was about to leave for her funeral.

Soon burning questions and a burning city captured the attention of both the national and international media. Never, said terrorism expert Dr Robert Friedmann to me, has he seen such prolonged international coverage for an attack in India-not just that, he had not even seen that kind of coverage when Benazir Bhutto was assassinated in what was a clear case of political terrorism.

As I called people from all over, to get their impressions, one thing emerged with crystal clear precision-while the political leaders in India jumped the gun and immediately started pointing fingers at Pakistan, the people of India were really angry with the breakdown of the political and intelligence system in their own country.

I saw a volcanic anger that I had not seen earlier when a breakdown of infrastructure has happened in any part of India.

While there were some people from the Indian and Pakistani community that sent inflammatory articles, emails and comments to my website, by and large the majority of Indians, no matter what their background, understood that there is a need to separate the state and the government from non state perpetrators of the crime. Most Indians also made the point that they have deep love for the people of Pakistan and recalled the unparalleled hospitality they have been offered every time they visit India. They also said that they realize the Pakistani government is too weak, being run with the blessings of the Military and that the country is now as much a victim of ingrown terrorism: but most Indians were adamant that they cannot excuse the apathy of the state in eliminating these terrorists or those members of the Pakistani government or ISI, that is training these terrorists.

On the Pakistani side, the memories of the ravaged Marriot in Islamabad still fresh in their minds, people were shocked and sympathetic at what happened in India. But that shock and sympathy turned into anger and defensive defiance when the blame game began. The media reporting from India was by and large a prime example of tabloid TV and yellow journalism and a blatant attempt at garnering the highest ratings. Even veteran journalists jumped in the fray-and many people turned into self appointed experts passing judgment, giving an analysis and jumping to all kinds of conclusions while the siege was still on, and little concrete information to base those opinions on.

The Pakistan bashing brought retaliation from Pakistani news media and many Pakistanis I spoke to in the first few days, told me they were convinced the terrorists were Hindus from RSS and BJP paid to create mayhem just before the elections. One told me that Geo TV had specifically conducted an investigation and that the lone captured terrorist wasn't even from the village in Pakistan as claimed. All these presumptions of course have been refuted, and even more so when former Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif acknowledged that indeed the terrorist was Pakistani and his family has been isolated from everyone a few days ago in an interview.

Condoleezza Rice arrived and added fuel to the fire by jumping on the "blame Pakistan" wagon. Rice reprimanded the government like a school Principal scolding an errant child, instead of trying to cool tempers and act as a mediator, and as a representative of a global super power, that would in times such as these, be expected to want peace in the subcontinent and would work towards that-especially when the two countries are nuclear powers. And of course accept that US has to accept a lot of the blame for the current chaos in Afghanistan which has flowed into Pakistan.

But then the reason why a large part of the world, hates America, is because America, said Dr Deepak Chopra to me in a conversation - has only self interests and no allies or friends. He made a lot of sense when he said to me "Right now America's interests are the World's interests; our economic system, the economic melt down is telling us now that there is only one economy, the weather patterns are telling us that there is only one ecology; when are we going to learn that there is only one humanity?"

There were many discussions on global terrorism and its Islamic face. Imran Khan the cricketing legend and now the only Politician people of Pakistan and India respect, because of his honesty and integrity, said for the umpteenth time that terrorism has no religion - a sentiment shared by many across the board. He also added that the youngsters many of whom are university graduates, and from middle class families don't even fit the stereotypical image of the so called Islamic terrorist with a beard. There is a lot more to learn why things are the way they are today.

The spirit of Mumbai was invoked by some, and dismissed by others who said every big city has a similar spirit, where people want to get back to normal, but what remained simmering was an anger at the political system that nurtures corruption and is caught napping again and again at times of need.

The good thing, said one interviewee is that the elite have been hit this time, and so those who fill the coffers of these politicians, especially the corporate head honchos are now taking a second look at security and terrorism. There are also lawsuits asking for regulation and a strong criticism of the way the media handled coverage, disclosing crucial and sensitive information, that may have caused the death of many in the two hotels as their location and how many security personnel was involved in counter attack came tumbling out on real time reporting.

There was a conciliatory email by Barkha Dutt, a journalist I used to admire once upon a time, but who has joined the ranks of tabloid reporters, where she said that the media reported only what was told to them. At no point were they briefed to keep things off record. While she has a point and this opens a new discussion on how to train the media and have a close relationship with it in case something of this nature occurs again-it does not take away from the disservice Dutt and similar veteran journalists like her have done. Someone with her experience, should instinctively know when crucial information if reported, can endanger the lives of others and not wait to be spoon fed by those in authority at what she should and should not say. Unfortunately, her apology came a bit too late and as a preventive measure because public opinion against her may make her head roll as well.

I would like to share some lines from 3 of the interviewees that sprung out at me when the interviews were being conducted.

Dr Deepak Chopra:

The first important question is- why is global terrorism predominantly an Islamic phenomenon? Secondly, what is it that radicalizes young Muslim men in relatively middle class families in Europe, Britain and other places? Where is the money coming from? It's very obvious this takes a lot of training, this takes a lot of organization and it is clear that the money pipeline starts in Saudi Arabia in which case we should be asking- what role does the US play in this,

So as long as America thinks only of its own interests, its never going to have a complete understanding. Right now America's interests are the World's interests and they don't understand that; our economic system, the economic melt down is telling us now that there is only one economy, weather patterns are telling us that there is only one ecology; when are we going to learn that there is only one humanity?

Imran Khan cricketing legend and Pakistani Politician:

Terrorism has nothing to do with religion. All root causes of terrorism lie in politics

When they say Islamist terrorists and start looking for a cure in Islam, they are surprised to find that these young terrorists don't fit the stereotype of the Islamic terrorist with the big beard. Then they are even more shocked when they find that most of the suicide attackers-one half of them according to one estimate-are university graduates. What is happening is that Muslims are getting radicalized and it's not because of Islamic extremism, it's because of political issues which are unresolved.

You can always talk about moderate Islam but the struggle between Israel and Palestine is not going to go away unless there is a political resolution; All religions-not just Islam, preach about compassion and justice-no religion wants anyone to kill innocent people or patronize injustice.

To blame a religion is the biggest injustice we do on people of a certain religious community. So when you say Islamist terrorist and try to find solutions in religion you actually make the situation much worse because among the Muslims this war on terror after 9/11 is being perceived as a war against Islam, and when it is perceived as a war against Islam, there will be no shortage of Muslims willing to kill themselves may be to protect their religion. So terrorism needs to be de linked from religion.

Dr Robert R Friedmann: nationally renowned expert on criminal justice and counter terrorism:

The implication then is that just because someone is poor they have a justification to become a terrorist. That is atrocious and a tremendous mistake to suggest that. One has to look at political interests, ideologies, who benefits, what are the strategies; just because someone is poor they become terrorists is simply not backed by any facts.

The first distinction is that all terrorist groups have local interests, though I hesitate to say that about Hamas and Hezbollah because if you look carefully at their writing and ideology they clearly veer into the globalization of terrorist objectives.

Society cannot afford to let terrorism become a part of normal living and treat it like vehicular fatalities and do not do too much about it.

I don't believe that US, Europe, South Africa or Australia, for that matter anyone else can influence Islam and I don't think it's their duty either. I would shy away from religion or religious wars. I think what needs to be done is to let moderate voices within Islam carry that battle inside and not to have outsiders tell the Muslims what to do.

Today there is no safe place in the world....While the public safety community understands the threat, I don't think the public does, in any part of the world-even in Israel."

While questions, allegations continue, I believe that in the end it boils down to personal responsibility whether it's a journalist or a politician or the common man who chose the corrupt or inept politicians who rule, who adds to the ratings of sensational programs by watching and listening to them, the rich who pay to get things done. We have in the end become victims of our own apathy and our own disability, to be , as Gandhi said, the change we want to see in the world.

The buck begins and stops with us all.