Doomed If They Do, Doomed If They Dont

Yo Udayakumar.

What is your problem with the Bomb-Iyers?

I will tell you what it is. It is that, despite 55+ years of quotas for the mentally-retarded (aka Dalits, SC/ST. BC, MBC, OBC, etc.) in India, a few brahmins still manage to get an education in a subject that you don`t want (you guys grab the medicine and engineering seats in colleges, leaving the brahmins with Physics, Chemistry, Mathematics) and the brahmins then manage to do something that you CANNOT and HAVE NOT done with your education. They build nuclear weapons, which is the world`s most-guarded secret. You guys cannot build a bicycle without foreign collaboration.

Aren`t you the least bit ashamed of yourself?

Why don`t you go back to your caste`s (I know who you are, you are a frikking Shaanaan) traditional occupation, tapping toddy from the palmyra palm trees? Drink enough of it and you wouldn`t bother the rest of the Indians who are trying to accomplish something.

These interacts are soooo GAY-FUL, i am speechless.Time to kill dis board!.

#62 by Romair

[As I said, give me about a year or two..........By that time, I will either be bankrupt or will have the most efficient IT company in Pakistan, and a role model for Indo-Pak IT cooperation........If it doesn`t work out, then you and I can go into the Victoria Secret`s business together. ]

It is not in India`s interest to cooperate with Pakistan in IT Or in anything else, for that matter. What is it that India stands to gain? A strengthened enemy.

People like this Romair guy are the ``decent`` face that Islamic terrorism in Kashmir shows to the world. He is part of the quasi-civilian network that nurtures and perpetuates terrorism in Jammu & Kashmir. It is his stated goal to get all of J&K under Paki rule. These people have robbed thousands of Indian lives, created thoudands of widows and grieving parents. Strengthening his hand is like strengthening the hand of the enemy.

I hope anil you will not join hands with this character.

All replies that include personal attacks will be filtered across articles. Interactors are requested to focus on the message and content of the article. Misuse of the Interact process will result in removal of that reply. Repeated misuse will result in removal of the interactor.

Anil #58: Thanks for the detailed reply.

You and I have not been interacting on this site, long enough, so I think you maybe somewhat unclear on my views. It is difficult to put my views into any of the, ``Black and White`` categories on this site. they tend to be different from nearly everyone`s here.

``I may be wrong, but you seem to pay more attention from military perspective.``

Quite the opposite. I am a strong supporter of demilitarization of South Asia. I have written against it many times. I have strongly supported Pakistan`s freeze on its defence budget. My concern is India`s gigantic increases in its defence budget. And the widespread support that seems to exist for such increases in amongst the Indian public.......

``You are ready to concede an active role for Church (= Mosque in case of Pakistan) of Pakistan.``

Once again, ``No.`` I was opposed to the BJP, when it was impossible to criticize the BJP on this site. I have always opposed anything, including the current Iraq war and Bush, that has been thrown up by the USA Religious Right. Within Pakistan, I have always opposed the MMA.

At the same time, I don`t immediately support secular parties in Pakistan, either. I think most of them, are dominated by regressive feudals, who have robbed the country completely. This is something most Indians do not understand about secularism in Pakistan.

What I do support is good governance, based on some sort of sound policy and human rights. That to me, preceeds religion and secularism, and is far more important than both. For Pakistan, I value that more than democracy, even, at the moment. Unfortunately, too many people in Pakistan, set aside human rights when maulvis are being targeted by the state, or when secularists are being targeted by the state.......

At the moment, my family actively supports Imran Khan`s party, which is non-secular, by the way. I would support it equally, if were secular...........

As for the future of South Asia, I think our views on the economic side are quite similar. I have been arguing for free trade in South Asia for ages. Way before it became the fashion on this site. As you know, I am myself trying to get into that arena, between India and Pakistan. Hence my views do not need any justification in that area. Since I am actually putting my money (or at least my time) where my mouth is.

So on the whole, I think you and I agree on most issues (I think, though not sure). Perhaps there is one area where we disagree. To me trade, economics, etc. are a means to a solution. They are not the solution, in itself. Long-lasting solutions have to be based on a human rights of the people involved. It is that component that I see missing in long term solutions for South Asia.........Perhaps, and hopefully, I am wrong..........

Anil #58: ``I have a feeling you have spent too much time sifting thru statistics, and not enough in sharpening your vision, before articulating it and presenting it to others. Who knows you could the entreprenuer who would take 38% of somone like Victoria Secrets business. Personally I would go with you to Farooq Kathwari to get Ethen Allen`s IT business. Do you think he would ever refuse? I don`t think so. I hope you do not mind my post sound pedantic or preaching.``

I don`t consider this preaching, at all. In fact, I welcome such advice. This is why I started interacting with you in the first place. I am all ears, when it comes to learning from people, who know more than I do in certain areas.

You need to keep something in mind. My experience in the business area, though larger than most people on Chowk, is far less than yours. I thus, cannot evaluate and see ideas as easily and clearly as you can. It will take me some time (perhpas five to ten years) to get to that stage. Though on the technology side, I am quite experienced, on the business side, I am, at the moment, just a beginner.

Give me some time to put these ideas into place. I am still working on it. Pakistan`s IT environment is very immature, in comparison to India`s. It may be hard for you to visualize how immature it is, at the moment. Hardly anyone can understand the ideas I am pitching to them (inlcuding what you have mentioned). People just want to be in land, stocks, textiles, and manufacturing business (all of which are booming). On the technology side, they will only look at telecommuncations.

My family is actually very influential in Pakistan`s Kashmir. Everyone from the Prime Minister of Kashmir down are known very well to us, and visit us regularly. I have followed Farooq Kathwari`s career quite closely. I think he actually lost a son in Kashmir (though he says Afghanistan). Quite an entrpreneur. Do you know him?

As I said, give me about a year or two..........By that time, I will either be bankrupt or will have the most efficient IT company in Pakistan, and a role model for Indo-Pak IT cooperation........If it doesn`t work out, then you and I can go into the Victoria Secret`s business together. I am surprised that out of all the possible businesses, you picked this one as an example. Was that a Freudian Slip (no pun intended) on your part :-)

Re: #58 by anil

Pssssssst!

hey anil!

Pssssssst!…..Who do you think you are arguing with?

The wheel’s spinning, but the hamster’s dead….

Give it up! It’s too late…..

Re: # 58 ,

So Captain Clueless now has a career counsellor ...funny ;)

Re: # 50

Romair:

The long list that I provided were the series of bi-lateral trade agreements signed in 60s - 80s between the governments of Canada and the U.S. which eventually became the basis of NAFTA, and were ratified as such. It would not really hurt to read these developments. I can tell you more about the precursor of EU - ECM European Common Market as well. I was student in England in those days when the debate to join or not to join was very hot. Labor in England was most aggressively againt ECM and then turned around to become the most vigorous supporter and held first ever referandum in Britain.

I may be wrong, but you seem to pay more attention from military perspective. Anyway I do not. The military must only a chowkidar and cannot be the Lord of the house. You are ready to allow Chowkidar to be the Lord. You are ready to concede an active role for Church (= Mosque in case of Pakistan) of Pakistan. To me the role of mosque (= religion) is ZERO beyond the mindspace. These are basic and ideological differences between us, as I see it.

In my vision, the modern nation-states (Canada, U.S. from the richey rich, and yes India from the poorest of the poor), and union of nation-states (EU) came into existence and continue to evolve for greater economic reasons.

Not for armed reason, and certainly not for religious reasons. I have a great book written in early 90s by the head of McKinsey & Co., Japan, who later became the Prime Minister of Japan. He titled this book ``End of Nation-State``. I would suggest a reading for you to see how my thought processes have evolved. I have been ready to adopt a village in Kashmir and try these, if ever I can. I have successfully started, grown and managed bigger enterprises than the GDP of a village.

Now to your question, what is fair and just solution? The question itself is so subjective that answers too controversial that it is not even worth wasting the time. Socialist would have said, Roti, Kapda aur Makan to be fair, TNTist would have said religion. These are old and be over with slogans.

Modern slogan is level the playing field - flatten the earth - and then play your unfair advantage over the competition. Let me ask you when Wasim Akram and Imran Khan roughened one side of the bowl and bowled reverse swing to win on otherwise level playing field to gain unfair advantage over the competition, what was it? Would you call it fair and just? Even Imran accepted doing it. That is what I was talking about ``win without trusting`` rule.

Your question about South Asia. A couple of years back, one of my essays on South Asia was published on Chowk. One day I was googling something, and came across it being discussed by a group of students in Asam in the class of great autonomy for states. Completely unknow to me.

In India, I can tell you, 50% of the contribution to GDP already comes from individual states, and the center has no control over it whatsoever. Thus Bihar cannot get it if it did not create it. This devolution is real, and you can witness it today, just visit Bangalore and Patna.

The first alliance of regional parties ruled the full five year term under BJP. In this process evolved a framework of Common Minimum Program (CMP or somthig). This framework became a vehicle to use Indian democractic system to bargain and get benefit for party`s regions.

The present coalition has follwed the same vehicle. Thus there are atleast six or seven years of experience in the devolution process that is going on in India. Without a whimper, or without a shot being fired.

Another interesting phenomenon, as I see, the latest terrorist attack on Ayodhya did not start the violence against the muslims. Instead resulted in warning to Pakistan that the such attack would derail the peace process. In it I see a good sign that nations economic interests takes precedence over raw emotions. Although you could take a view that India is back to the old tricks of blaming Pakistan. The choices are available to the individuals. We don`t have to agree, neither do our choices must be the same. In plural and democratic set this is acceptable.

This lead to the point of my statement on India`s neighbors. Recenlty I concluded my interactions and exprienced dealing with CEOs of two of the finest companies from South Asia. None of them is Indian. One privides 38% of all intimate apparels manufactured and sold by Victoria`s Secrets, the other grew to dominate that country`s stock market and is very diversified.

The first is obviously very entreprenuerial and at the first opportunity penetrated India without a flutter or noise to set up probably the best technology intensive manufacturing operations in non-technology sector anywhere. They realized the Indian market is so huge that it is only a matter of time, if they don`t do it then some Indian company will do it, and take away 38% of the Victoria`s Secret business.

The other proudly and openly touts itself and the city it operates as the third best option to Bangalore, and Chennai. Not a single word about LTTE - or SHATTA as a Punjabi would say, no nonsense just and fair would call?

These examples are all about regional block that ex-McKinsey ex-Prime Minister of Japan predicted in his book about 10 years ago.

I guess you missed my posting for you in another board that you might consider setting up an IT operation in Srinagar with the help of Kashmir University faculty staff to handle Pakistani contracts. Can you imagine the support and media publicity you would get?

It is again creating unfair advantage over competition after leveling the playing field. I have a feeling you have spent too much time sifting thru statistics, and not enough in sharpening your vision, before articulating it and presenting it to others. Who knows you could the entreprenuer who would take 38% of somone like Victoria Secrets business. Personally I would go with you to Farooq Kathwari to get Ethen Allen`s IT business. Do you think he would ever refuse? I don`t think so. I hope you do not mind my post sound pedantic or preaching.

You believe in God, so let me say this way that God has given 24 hours in a day to everyone from a pauper to the president. It is how we use is what we become. How do you use your 24 hours?

Anil Kapuria

Just to conclude.
Discovery of India is explicit on Nehru`s vision. I agree.

As for armed forces, Nehru well understood Praetorianism, and tendency on part of post colonial armies in such indulgence. There is a school of thought that Nehru deliberately reduced the prestige of the armed forces to deter then from intervention.Yet to put the defence policy on right lines, he hired a British expert in operational research and system analysis, Mr. Blackett whose report was the basis of the Indian Force Structure. Even in modern countries, Civil experts over rule military recommendations. It was not that he had a likewarm attitude towards defence.

Perhaps one day we would be fortunae to exchange views tete a tete.

Cheerios

Ijaz:

I was thinking of ending this conversation but then thought otherwise because we still do have some differences. I agree that defence and foreign policies are linked but in Nehru`s case it was his international vision that drove his defence policies rather than the other way round. Close cooperation with China was the key to his international vision. India was the first country to recognize China and sponsored its acceptance by the U.N. Nehru is reported to have rejected Western offers for India to replace China in the Security Council. When China absorbed Tibet in 1949 (?), the Indian army perhaps was more disciplined and better armed than China`s PLA. Many Indians at that time wanted Nehru to oppose China`s action to remove Tibet as a valuable buffer state between India and China but he instead accepted Chinese suzereignty over Tibet without protest. In addition to this Hindi-Chini bhai-bhai slant, Nehru was perhaps also not too favourably disposed to the Tibetan Lamadom, which to him was a combinaion of the two things he hated most - feudalism and religious obscurantism. Even when the Dalai Lama was given asylum, he was told that he would be given full support for providing modern education to Tibetan youth but none for his political aspirations.

His defence policy was basically what Romair is advising to Indians - namely, he thought only in terms of a credible deterrence against Pakistan and anything more than that was a foolish waste of precious resources. He relegated the defence to the babus - even today, a lowly deputy secretary in the Defence Ministry can totally ignore an army general at the army headquarters. He preferred the advice of a military nincompooph like Krishna Menon over that of the most admired Indian soldier, General Thimaya, and when General Thimaya complained, he was given a dressing down.

Nehru was driven by an idealist vision, not by Kautalya or realpolitik.

Ijaz_Gul #51: ``Romair, I do not want to get into a nuclear debate.``

Hmm....I was actually looking forward to such a debate with you. I am quite interested in the subject, and I think Pakistan should use it as the core of its defence and foreign policy, thereby moving away from conventional policies, and freeing up that capital for economic development..........

Romair

Look, we went over this before once. We are speaking here of highly motivational but `completely irrational goals.`

Pakistan`s irrational goal from day 1 has been to the leader of the Unmah. India`s irrational goal is to be one of the many great players in this world.

Just because these goals are irrational, they don`t stop being real.

Re: # 50

Romair

Go get a life.Be grateful you live somewhere in the west and make sure you save some till they come and get you and your kind.You will then be in our backyard.We have no time for petty little pissers and their peeves.You guys had your chance.We are moving on and the whole world is our theater of operation.India has gone global.We are well on our way.

#43 by Romair

[I think it is quite ridiculous for any country in South Asia to start thinking of itself as a, “Player” in the Great Game of superpowers. We need to open our eyes and realize that South Asia is the second-worst area to live in the world. We are dirt-poor. The average South Asian is around 80 places below Russia, Cuba and Libya on the Human Development Index. We are even lower than the PLO areas………….If India wants to get involved in this Great Game, best of luck. I would certainly suggest Pakistan just keep a bare minimum deterrence and concentrate on economic development………. ]

Per capita income might be low, but middle class India is potentially the second biggest consumer market in the world, and will be biggest in the not-so-distant future.

We inherited a huge uneducated population from the British govt, with not even the capability of making salt in our own country. And add to that the ball and chain of the accursed country, Pakistan.

With all these impediments, India is one of the few countries that can put a satellite in polar orbit, can manufacture a supersonic jet from scratch, has a far greater number of trained and skilled man and brainpower than the USA, for example, and manufactures almost everything under the sun indigenously. Indians power the American economy to an enormous extent. India is increasingly indispensable to the world economy.

The general population in India has started moving. It is a huge ball, and has started rolling, and will not stop easily.

It will be slow, but within your own lifetime, you will be horrified to see India emerge as a prosperous nation, where the benefits of prosperity reach even the lowest economic strata and with a permanent seat in the UN council. Just wait a few years. And keep memorizing the Koran. Allah will do all that for you guys too, magically. Maybe if you can tax the infidels in the prescribed manner, you can make a buck.



[Not a single country in South Asia is willing to voluntarily accept India as a leader. Not only that, nearly all of them feel very threatened by India, and will do everything in their power to ensure India does not become the leader….This includes Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh, Nepal etc. ]

Pakiland – muslims.
Bangladesh – ungrateful muslims (sorry for repeating the same word in one sentence).
Sri Lanka – Of course they’ll resent us. Our PM died at the hands of the terrorists there for helping the Sri Lankan Govt. No wonder they will dislike us.
Nepal – Yes, China-inspired Maoist guerilla-induced propaganda has harmed our image there. But they can resent us ALL they want to.

[It would be good, if our Indian colleagues asked themselves, why? Why is the USA (not including the current George Bush phase) accepted as the leader of North America (and of the Western world, to a great extent), while India is not accepted as a leader in South Asia?]

Because of the above countries, and the increasing islamification of nations like Malayasia, Indonesia etc.

[A country that is not accepted as a leader in its local geography can never attain leadership position in the world arena. It is impossible. ]

Don’t you wish. Heh heh heh. Just wait a few years.

[However, leadership requires behaving like an elder brother, not like a, “big brother.” Being an elder brother requires sacrificing and compromising, usually in favour of the younger brothers. It requires giving the younger brothers a feeling of security. Not a feeling of insecurity. It demands initiating genuine peace. Not attempting to force peace on one’s own terms. It demands buying defensive weaponry to defend itself against external threats. Not piling up offensive weaponry, which can only be used against its younger brothers. It demands a secured maturity against the younger brothers’ insecure immaturity. ]

India is piling up offensive weaponry for potential use against countries like China. Pakistan is insignificant as far as conventional warfare is concerned.


If India had settled its border conflicts with its smaller neighbours (including Pakistan) decades ago; even if it had to be done in favour of the smaller neighbours; if it had not interfered in the internal affairs of its neighbours (Sri Lanka, Bangladesh, Nepal and Pakistan)]

Lies, as usual.


[I don’t know what South Asia will gain by India trying to become a pawn in the Great Game, which is about to occur between USA and China. I think Indians are greatly over-estimating their importance in that game. India can only be a player in that game; if it’s close geographic neighbours support it. China will be defining its area of influence in the world soon. And it will want it to stretch from Japan to Australia to South Asia to the Middle East. And, like any superpower, it will not tolerate any competition. ]

Chini bhai is your only hope at some satisfaction regarding India.

But increasingly, trade between India and China is taking off (now it has grown to $1 billion a month) and your dreams will remain dreams.



[Unfortunately, South Asia will be screwed in this scenario, with India supporting USA and Pakistan supporting China.]

Hmmmm…Let’s look at the parity here:

USA :: China (big brothers – almost equivalent)

India:: Pakistan (little brothers – yup, equivalent too)

Yeah, I see your point.

Heh heh heh….



[Both pawns to somebody else, much at the expense of their own citizens. And specifically because, India – a country that should be the natural leader of South Asia – is unwilling to act like an elder brother and is hell-bent on acting like the Big Brother…]

Yup. We’re unwilling.

Dost,thanks for agreeing with me. I will add that defence and foreign policy are instrincally linked on the same spectrun of policy, cooperation-conflict.

Yea I agree on Kargil. Pakistan`s timings were wrong and the nuclear factor and the Mujahideen card proved diplomatic liabilities. In fact Pakistan was under sanctions and isolated even before the conflict took place.However, there was nothing immoral about it, as politics are never built on morals. Remember, that the crop of senior officers were the people who as very young men had seen the humilation of East Pakistan.

Romair, I do not want to get into a nuclear debate. The very essence of deterrance is to prevent War and ensure peace. Escalation was long time ago discarded and gave way to other nuclear strategies including SDI. SALT and START had a major component of Nuclear Defence as negotiating points.
Cheerios