An Indian salute for President Musharraf

Mr Hobbyty:

``Is that fear I smell?``

Ok, to prove your competence on issues you tired to pass judgements on lets see how much you know about the following:

1)What are supercomputers?

2)Which kind`s of computers has the US allowed exports of?

3)What are Pakistan`s contributions in the design of Super-7 (lets talk about the Type 90 aka Al-Khalid later). I mean which universities, which institutes are tackling which problems?

4)What kind of design problems in fighter design are amenable to computational solutions?

5)What aspects of Pakistani involvement in Super-7 design will be influenced by greater access to greater computing power?

Lets talk about this first (I shall expect a minimum of a 550 line post)

and then we`ll discuss my fears :-)

Prem #510 I think Arab countries are like other third world countries, except more so perhaps, isofar as rules apply differently depending on your ``status``, ``gravitas``, whatever. In Saudi Arabia for example, if you are on a business trip, your host will send a ``protocol officer`` to meet you before immigration, take your passport and baggage tags so you dont have to burden yourselves with such details, and you then walk grandly past your deeply impressed fellow passengers who are standing in the immigration line, past the immigration booth as if it didnt exist. If, on the other hand (same country), you are a laborer trying, a ``protocol officer`` of a different kind (this one waving a stick) will be there to ensure you learn some humility in case no one ever taught you.

Your nationality etc. does not matter. There are only two nationalities in the world - the haves and the have-nots. All other distinctions - nationality, ethnic, whatever, are nothing compared to this one.

re:Reply #: 510

Prem,

I met an American nurse during my rotation in Joint Diseases Hospital, Manhatten, New York. She had been to Saudi Arabia and told me how badly Indians were treated there. I told her that the day India became a global player, these Saudi jerks will have much to answer. Saudi Arabia surivives because of OIL. Once US and western interests find enough oil in central asia. they will tap that oil for their own purpose. The same oil and gas will find ready market in India and Pakistan. Arabia will not be so important. US will have no reason (in view of so much local opposition and duplicity of Saudi rulers) to station its troops there to guard its (oil)interests. Once Saudi Arabia ceases to be of any interest to western powers, it will be time for India to twist its arms. If i were a saudi. i will be buying more camels right now!

Sridhar

re:Reply #: 509

Ras Siddiqui,

Your post was interesting. I hope it never comes to that (nuclear exchange). For this to happen, Pakistan has to give up support of terrorists and seek dipomatic solution to Kashmir issue. Attacks like the one on Indian parliament are not an option anymore.

Sridhar

Reply #: 507

Romair

Sorry again for butting in. I need to put some sense into your deluded minds (you and Hobbyty or one of a kind; both suffer from delusions of grandeur, i think).

``I doubt India will ever agree to the US having any presence in Kashmir.``

You got that right buddy, but your reasons were wrong. India objects to US presence because India is a fiercely independent nation that will not tolerate presence of any country on its soil. Of course, nations also keep their security interests in mind. You pakistanis have not realised that your lives have been changed for ever. US is in Pakistan for a long haul. Even at the best of times when US needed you (early days of war against terrorism), you were not able to convince them about so many things that went against your national interest eg they did not heed to your request that the war on Taliban in Afghanistan should be short (Mushy said it should be over in a week in the first press conference he gave). US did not heed your request that attacks should be stopped during Ramadan in deference to wishes of muslims. Now, US is telling you that Mushy has to reign in the Kashmiri terrorists. Do all these things bother you at all? What makes you think US mediation is going to be in your interest. Big powers act only in their own self-interest. India recognises this and has not allowed mediation in Kashmir by US. However, some sort of mediation is taking place already behind doors. Pakistani ruler has earned the goodwill of western countries by co-operating with them. This however does not give him much leverage to dictate terms in Kashmir. India is still too important on economic terms to antagonise. Latest eg of this are the meaninless mutterings of the UN secretary general who was in Pakistan (and who was not allowed inside India!). He said nothing substantial and took care not to hurt India`s concerns.

The world already recognises LOC as a border,at least covertly if not implicitly. That is why when Kargil happened, there was so much diplomatic pressure from US on Pak to take its mujahideens back to LOC. LOC has become sacrosanct. It is a matter of time it will become an international border. India can live with that. Can Pakistan?

``Crossing a border with a military will be the end of South Asia. Once a war starts, things get out of control.``

War is usually a last resort. Democracies like India do not go to war unless all diplomatic options have been exhausted. Coercive diplomacy by India seems to be working. Mushy is already cracking on pro-Kashmiri terrorist organisations. India has amassed all the troop on border not just to show off its strength. It is mending relations with China even while it is telling Pak that its patience is running out. It will be wrong to think India will not go to war if everything else has failed. This coercive diplomacy has also given GOI sufficient time to prepare a public opinion in favor of war if need arises. India has no reason to back off. It has nothing to prove. OTOH, Pak has to prove that it has stopped cross-border terrorism (see the implication of this term, often used by the international media).

UP poll is not the main reason though Pakistani newsmedia seem to think so. If UP were the main reason, i should have rather seen some action on the temple issue rather than this war hysteria. Babri masjid issue has emotional appeal mainly in UP. The happenings in the Indo-Pak border has an emotional appeal even down south.

``The only other motivation I can see is that India wants to get Pakistan in a state of economic warfare. It costs millions and millions of dollars to deploy full Army. This effects Pakistan more than India, since it has a smaller economy. This is what is happening in Siachen. This may make strategic sense for India, unfortunately at the expense of the poor in India.``

The financial reason is a spin-off of the whole process but not something that was primary. Primary aim is to force Mushy boy to look closely at his Kashmir policy and make some hard choices. US, for all the good things that it has to say about Musharraf, has not so far pressurised India to move back its forces. It understands India`s compulsions. Also, with a million forces at border, if cross-border terrorism is unabated, India can say with some justification that Pak has not changed its policies on ground.

``The US now is really interested in long term relations with Pakistan. It even wants bases in Sind now. I think, along with Turkey, the US is hoping Pakistan becomes the second Muslim country to take an anti-religious extremism stance in line with the desires of the USA. In the short term, and maybe in the long term also, this will be beneficial for Pakistan.``

We are on the same wavelength here. However, what are the long term implications? Will there be a backlash? Will there be other resistance groups (that do not like what Musharraf is doing)springing up all over Pakistan. Will Taliban regroup itself at a later stage to fight another day and another war, this time from the Pakistani soil? These are tough questions.

``Most Arabs racially discriminate against Pakistanis. Pakistani labor is treated like dirt in most Arab countries. India`s army is standing 100 yards from the Pakistani border, and not a single Arab country seems concerned.``

Right on dot again. What does it tell you? Nations act in their self-interest. Religion comes a poor second in these matters.

Why this enchantment with Israel? Again, what interest they have of supporting Pak if it were to upset India.

If Pakistan were to be a secular country, at peace with India, Indians will love that. I do not think Mushy or the Army will give up power. The elections are a cosmetic exercise. Mushy will continue to wield substantial power. If he flushes all the jehadi elements in his army, changes madrassas so they do not recruit for jehad, changes his militant posturing in Kashmir, India can learn to live with him in power. We can still be good neighbours.

Sridhar

re:Reply #: 502

hobbyty,

Your posts are always interesting. They are about wishful thinking: ``it should be``, ``it might have been``, ``Oh, if only it were!`` types.

``nothing prevents them from research and development, just in case.``

Since when has Pakistan produced even one item on its own. ``R and D`` in present situation in Pak, when the world is trying to put some sense into its ruler to behave and pushing Mushy to put his house in order, is a laugh.

Let us be realistic. Baby steps, one at a time. Take care of the mess that Taliban has left in your backyard, take care of the ruin wrought by your financial (always foreign educated)wizards. Then think of R and D and the rest.

I will not comment on rest of the post which i believe is the result of self-delusion. You actually think you have the power to convince US or western world of anything? They have nothing but praise because for Musharraf he has made their job so much more easier by falling in line. If he really cracks down on Kashmiri terrorists, he would have made India`s task easier too. Gone are the days when Pak can claim it is giving even moral or diplomatic support to Kashmiris. Madrasaas are being monitored. Pro-Kashmiri militant groups are being targeted in Pak. Heck, the US is well entrenched in Pak soil, getting facilities in Karachi naval base, other bases in Pak. Your airspaces are being controlled and monitored. The question is: will there be a backlash or is the silent majority lapping it all up and applauding Mushy? Is this what Pakistanis want? To be a client state of US of A. At least i do not know the answer.

Sridhar

re: something to be proud about

I was a 8 or 9 year old kid when India first send its satellite ``Aryabhatta`` to space with the help of Ariane (French). India has come a long way since them. Today, it not only makes its own satellites (both light and heavy duty types)but has the capablility to put them into space from its own facility in Sriharikota. India`s missile program has also grown in tandem with its space program. India made many mistakes that US and Russia made but has been able to put those disasters behind. Whether or not India sends a man to moon or a probe to circle moon is immaterial. It is sufficient that they have the technology. Another thing that few know is that India (like in IT)is a leader in Satellite imagery and shares the informantion regularly with NASA. Something to be proud about.

``India keeps its sights set on moon

Nadeem Ahmad

HindustanTimes.com



With Thursday`s triumph of INSAT-3C, Indian space scientists feel on top of the world. But they want much more. They want to be on top of the moon -- literally.

A national co-ordination committee is discussing threadbare India`s much-hyped `voyage to moon` proposal which was first floated in 1999, an ISRO spokesman said.

And looking at India`s giant strides in space technology, the proposal and is certainly not ``all moonshine`` as dubbed by skeptics.

``We just require a government nod. An unmanned lunar mission can be launched by 2008-9 if we start now,`` ISRO spokesman said.

``However, all aspects have to be taken into account before taking up the mission. These aspects include setting priority of our resources and a national commitment to sustain such a programme,`` an ISRO spokesman said quoting the agency`s chairman Kasturirangan`s views on the matter.

Such a mission is expected to cost at least Rs 3.5 billion, the spokesman said.

``A final discussion will be taken when the committee submits its report,`` they said.

INDIA`S CAPABILITY

ISRO engineers and scientists have done a preliminary study covering feasibility and capability aspects and are putting together a concrete project report.

ISRO has the option of sending either a fly-by mission or an orbiter. The latter would allow scientists to study the moon more closely by orbiting it instead of flying past.

The cheapest and most feasible option for ISRO will be to send up an orbiter and the proven technology of India`s PSLV can come in handy in this regard, aerospace experts say.

PSLV, which has launched many satellites, including a German and South Korean satellite, can be modified to send a 530 kg spacecraft as a fly-by mission or a 350 kg spacecraft to orbit the moon.

Alternatively, the cryogenic fuel-driven GSLV can send an 850 to 950 kg spacecraft as a fly-by mission to the moon or a 600 kg orbiter, they say.

While the Ahmedabad-based Physical Research Laboratory, the cradle of space science research in India, is well equipped to fabricate the experimental package for the mission, the ISRO Satellite Centre with its most advanced infrastructure is capable of designing and developing a lunar orbiter indigenously.

Indian scientists have been debating the moon voyage since 1997 but they held their first public brainstorming session in this regard in October 1999.

A successful moon mission will put India in the elite space club with Russia, United States and Japan. ``

Sridhar

Re: Havildar Romair trapped in contradictions of his own making

``...It (Pakistan) should declare that if Israel agrees to a viable Palestinian state...``

Dude, when you were taught history in school, did they teach you about the UN Partition Plan of Palestine of 1947 in which Israel accepted a viable Palestinian state (see map at http://www.israel-un.org/peace/maps/history_7.htm and read text at http://www.mfa.gov.il/mfa/go.asp?MFAH00ps0) with the choicest parts of the territory going to Palestine, and Israel getting the southern desert? The territory that would have gone to Palestine would have been much larger than what Arafat was willing to settle for in 2000. Guess who rejected both plans? Not the Israelis.

Well, that is the cost of perennial conflict -- the Palestinians have amongst the worst leadership of any nation (supported the losing Ottomans in WW1, the losing Germans in WW2, the Soviets in the Cold War, Sadaam in the Gulf War, and so on). These decisions are not without consequences.

Re: Stuka

``...due to parallel processing supercomputers are now obsolete...``

Dude -- supercomputers ARE massively parallel devices -- today you can string together a supercomputer from Xeon chips -- fairly widely available everywhere.

Ref Romair #: 507

[Crossing a border with a military will be the end of South Asia. Once a war starts, things get out of control.]

But crossing a border with mujahideen is what? Death of a thousand cuts? Well, the thousand cuts is the billions of rupees Pakistanis have to spend keeping their army at battle readiness at the border.

[This may make strategic sense for India, unfortunately at the expense of the poor in India.]

You worry about the poor in Pakistan and let Vajpayee worry about the poor in India.

[Musharraf`s change in policy on Afghanistan caught India completely by surprise.]

Yeah, we were surprised at how quickly Musharraf caved in to American pressure.

[The last ten years of pressure it had built up against Pakistan came falling down.]

Falling down on whm? Pakistan.

[The change in policy on religious extremist organization has had even a bigger effect on India. It was totally unexpected. Now, India is stuck in two minds.]

The effect on India is simple: it taught India to keep the pressure up on Pakistan, like it is now doing with the army at the borders.

Re: Romair

``...I doubt any Arab country would agree to de-recognize India, or break trade relations with India...``

Feeling jilted by Arabs? Not to worry -- your government`s policies have a way of winning steadfast friends -- from Afghanistan, India, Bangladesh and Iran -- all neighbors who are enamored by the love and affection sent daily across Pakistan`s borders. Keep up the good work.

Shammi, Bong Dongs, Romair

Shammi

THE Indian, shammi, will just have to learn to deal with it.

Bong Dongs

Is that fear I smell? why must the Indian always expose his insecurity, especially to Pakistanis? don`t Indians like America?

Romair

Most Indians will not admit that their attitudes with regard to Kashmir are doing to them what our attitudes with regard to Taliban did to us. The Indians like Pakistanis before them, are making a psychological bargain in which political and religious masters will propagate the myth of the invincible, the glorious past, all the while not just Kashmir but civic society in India unable to deal with the dissonance created by repeated failure and the invincible, glorius past, turns on itself.

War - I remain concerned but I don`t quite see it going nuclear immediately - actually, I`m more impressed by the irrationality they have displayed. The public statements of their uniformed services, in my opinion irrational. Their decision to blackmail the US into a public posture has resulted in the US passing satellite imagery and intelligence on their troop movenements to Pakistan - but of course it got the Indian in the streets to feel he was ten feet tall. This will have consequences that we must prepare for. While it is true we will be going by past performance, the future may hold more of their irrationality.

After 9/11, I had stated that US will not allow it`s relations with major Muslim countries to remain in stasis - cannot afford to. I think, so long as the Indian and the English will not subsidise certain politicians - and as long as Musharraf can seriouly deal with the Sardars and feudals - our bread will buttered on both sides. It is imperative that Sardar Bugti and all tribals be ``pacified`` - they can have a great future as captains of industry - so long as that industry is not holding the Pakistani nation hostage to their violence and economic blackmail.

I agree with you completely with regard to Israel. There have been numberous contacts and at one time I believe the contacts were rather regular. I understand the Israeli were rather keen to establish relations with the father of a Pakistani politician who lives in Dubai (rhymes with rich). As a matter of fact immediately after Desert Storm I had an opportunity to correspond and meet some - to my suprise, my interlocutors spoke Urdu and were very familiar with Pakistan and expressed a warmth and regret that two nations that had so much in common were not closer.

romair-507

Your contention that India will never allow US

inside Kashmir, has been validated in rediff.com.

on 25th Jan.2002.The brush off to Farooq Abdullah`s statement,by Jaswant Singh is worth noting.



``India has `politely declined` US insistence that American troops conduct joint operations with their Indian counterparts to flush out Al Qaeda terrorists, who have sneaked into Jammu and Kashmir, according to a top government official.

The official, who is presently interacting with American leaders on counter-terrorism, told rediff.com that American officials started putting pressure for joint operations after Jammu and Kashmir Chief Minister Dr Farooq Abdullah said that Al Qaeda militants have sneaked into the state.

He said that Francis X Taylor, the US state department coordinator for counter-terrorism with the rank of ambassador-at-large, told the Indian leadership that US forces should be involved along with their Indian counterparts to eliminate the terrorists.

He also said that Taylor wanted key US counter-terrorism personnel to be stationed in Srinagar.

However, according to the official, External Affairs Minister Jaswant Singh told Taylor that Dr Abdullah`s remark was an `off-the-cuff one` and made in his personal capacity.

Singh also argued that with the Indian forces on alert along the Line of Control, it would not be easy for the Al Qaeda militants to sneak into India.``

Romair # 507

Have had the joyous privilege of being in an arab country, and of being treated like dirt. The only thing more shocking was to find that they did not distinguish an iota between me - a Hindu and an Indian, and my Muslim fellow travellers from Pakistan. There was an older lady from some influential family in Pakistan. She tried to tell them who she was...all to no avail. Indians, Pakistanis, Bangladeshi, all of us might as well be cattle for them.

And here we are, making a big deal about arab and non-arab.

Indians and Pakistanis,

A must read article in the Washington Post today
at:


http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A6820-2002Jan19.html


Think about it!

Ras

hobbytv #502: I doubt India will ever agree to the US having any presence in Kashmir. For exactly the reasons you have mentioned. US presence will bring the international press along with it. Which is the last thing India wants. So far, no one has been allowed into Indian Kashmir openly. No mediators, no international press, no human rights organizations. Every now and then, a journalist is able to make it in, or is allowed in on the periphery.

According to the India`s current law minister, 61,000 people have been killed in Indian Kashmir. He blamed all these killings on Pakistan. Someone did kill these people. I wish India would expose Pakistan or allow the international press to expose Pakistan. If Pakistan did kill 61,000 people, then it should be made public to the world. The policy of blaming Pakistan, without agreeing to expose Pakistan, is what has put Kashmir in a deadlock situation.

I would be more than happy if India opened Kashmir to everyone, and proved that Pakistan is the guilty party. It would end this conflict once and for all. I would also be happy if it was discovered that India is the guilty party, and it was exposed. That would end the conflict also. The main idea should be to expose the guilty party, whomever it may be. However, India is not allowing either of these two things to happen. It says that Pakistan is evil, but is unwilling to allow anyone to confirm it. That is like saying that the WTC was attacked, but hiding ground zero from the public.

The Indian attack was never going to come. Any war between India and Pakistan will be doomsday. I think the Indian high command realizes that. Crossing a border with a military will be the end of South Asia. Once a war starts, things get out of control.

I think once the UP elections are over, Indian military will move back to peacetime positions. The only other motivation I can see is that India wants to get Pakistan in a state of economic warfare. It costs millions and millions of dollars to deploy full Army. This effects Pakistan more than India, since it has a smaller economy. This is what is happening in Siachen. This may make strategic sense for India, unfortunately at the expense of the poor in India.

Musharraf`s change in policy on Afghanistan caught India completely by surprise. The last ten years of pressure it had built up against Pakistan came falling down. The change in policy on religious extremist organization has had even a bigger effect on India. It was totally unexpected. Now, India is stuck in two minds.

If India does not attack, then it will be a watershed point in South Asian military equilibrium. It will indicate that in the post-nuclear area, Pakistan has finally achieved, after fifty years, a credible deterence against India. If it does attack, the world will blame India for aggression.

The US now is really interested in long term relations with Pakistan. It even wants bases in Sind now. I think, along with Turkey, the US is hoping Pakistan becomes the second Muslim country to take an anti-religious extremism stance in line with the desires of the USA. In the short term, and maybe in the long term also, this will be beneficial for Pakistan.

Things are really getting interesting. I think Pakistan needs to make one more important and surprising move. It should declare that if Israel agrees to a viable Palestinian state, than Pakistan will happily recognize Israel (this does not mean we will support their policies against Palestinians; just recognize that the country exists on the map). Egypt and Jordan have already recognized Israel. No point in Pakistan trying to be holier than the pope.

Most Arabs racially discriminate against Pakistanis. Pakistani labor is treated like dirt in most Arab countries. India`s army is standing 100 yards from the Pakistani border, and not a single Arab country seems concerned. I doubt any Arab country would agree to de-recognize India, or break trade relations with India, if India were to attack Pakistan. Its about time, we adapted the same attitude towards the Israelis that the Arabs have towards India, i.e condemn their policies, but recognize the country.

If Pakistan indicates that it is considering recognizing Israel, the Israeli leadership will ensure that the US Jewish businessman send in a few billion dollars into Pakistan every year.