Can Clinton Stand in Front of the Taj?

Los Angeles Times

India: Growing Implications for U.S.

Jim Mann

http://www.latimes.com/news/nation/20000517/t000046500.html

``India offers itself up as a possible hedge against China,`` says Zalmay M. Khalilzad, who heads programs on strategy and doctrine for the Rand Corp., a Santa Monica-based think tank. ``They think some possible balance of power between India and China would serve the interests of a country like the United States, which does not want to see a single country dominate Asia.``

Khalilzad and several Rand colleagues last year published a detailed study that challenged the wisdom of the Clinton administration`s policy of China engagement.

``Should China become hostile, our current approach of engagement will merely have made China into a potentially more threatening adversary,`` the Rand study argued.

The study concluded that the United States should pursue a more careful middle-ground strategy--avoiding the poles of engagement or containment because it`s impossible to know now whether China will eventually become a friend or an enemy.

And so, contends Khalilzad, a U.S.-Asia policy that seeks some sort of geopolitical balance between India and China makes plenty of sense.

http://www.msnbc.com/news/381174.asp

Andrew Hill

Diplomats believe Clinton’s five-day visit to India conferred regional superpower status on New Delhi, which wants a permanent seat on the U.N. Security Council and access to U.S. markets. A five-hour Clinton stopover in Islamabad followed, signaling Washington’s disapproval of the coup that ended Pakistan’s stop-go democracy and gave Musharraf power.

Clinton warned Islamabad that Washington would not mediate over Kashmir nor help douse the flames of war if they were being stoked by either side. He also told Musharraf to concentrate on the sickly economy, not the 52-year Kashmir dispute.



“Musharraf needs World Bank, Asian Development Bank aid and has a host of domestic problems. Another Kargil would be a disaster for him,” said a Western envoy in Islamabad.

An Indian offer to talk to the Kashmiri umbrella group the All-Parties Hurriyat (Freedom) Conference (APHC) has caught Pakistan off guard and revealed splits in the movement, which says its Muslim people are the target of brutal repression. But there are no signs that the militants, who have battled Indian rule of Kashmir for a decade, feel compelled to exercise restraint. With the winter snows melting, they are crossing into Indian Kashmir, just as they have for the past 10 years.

Schooled in the Muslim creed of “jihad” (holy war), they think they are God’s vanguard for a military solution to Kashmir, 45 percent of which is controlled by India, one-third by Pakistan and the rest by China.

India says they are terrorists, while Pakistan calls them freedom fighters. Whatever the label, analysts believe their hit-and-run raids are the key threat to an uneasy regional peace.

“I don’t see a fresh flare-up but I also don’t see much chance of a resumption of dialogue either,” said Kuldip Nayar, a political commentator and member of India’s upper house of parliament. “In that sense the Kargil mountains have become higher.”

Re: Sheesh Naag, #18

Brilliant! I like your style.

Krashid #127

I belong to Indian minority. And have lived there. As to your argument why minorities in Pak don`t leave Pakistan if they are being mistreated. Well do you really think Pak area was 98.5% muslim before partition. Probably not. It was only 60 to 65 percent Muslim. And just why do you think all most all the minority community left Pak. As to why the minorities do not migrate. Well they have to be expected some where. And if you consider Agha Khani, Bhahi, and Pasis a minority, then India is 35 -40 percent minorites. As to the myth that the minorities in India are mistreated by the government, I can do anything I feel like, I can hold any position I feel like, and I can say anything I feel like. HOW MANY MUSLIMS IN INDIA DO YOU THINK HAVE TO PUBLICALLY CONVERT TO A THIRD RELIGION AND PRACTICE ISLAM IN SECLUSION?



There are more Muslims in India than if Pak, and if Indians hate muslims so much, why is it that only Kashmiri sunni muslims are bent on bloody war. Why is it the most of the terrorists and yes they are terrorists are non-Indians? Why is it the your terrorists organization can`t recruite muslims from India to go to Kashmir?

Kashmiris are a bunch of selfish thugs. We gave them more rights, more funding that any other region in India. They believe that their short commings aren`t their failures but India is holding them back. They blame the failure of their state goverment on India. They blame their corruption on India. They think an Islamic system of government will be better. Well all they have to do is take a look at Pak.

For year they have been trying to emulated Pak. First killing and driving Hindus out of the Valley and now trying to dive Sikhs out too. SPEAKING ABOUT PROTECTIING OF MINORITIES.

Do you really think India is really going to let Hindus, Biddist, Shai, and Sikh be swallowed and devoured by the Sunni holocaust that is certain to occur if Kashmir goes Pak.

As for the Barbri Mosque, I believe there are criminal cases pending...Unlike in Pak where no action was taken on scores on Hindu temples being destroyed. EXPLAIN THAT? Problem in eastren India is a communist movement.

Are India`s golden day long past? That is yet to be seen. India has never said that its system was perfect. In fact, there is a lot of work to be done. But Pakistan for certain doesn`t even have any prospects for any golden days.

Tibor #16

It comes `down` in the Plains from the snow-clad mountains of the Himalayan mountain range where it sat in yoga`s lotus position for forty years.

After all that gyan dhyan, it was transformed into the uterine crevices of Dr. Iqbal and Ch. Rehmat Ali as a brainchild. It was transferred to Mr. Jinnah`s utero-crannial depths which were delivered of it on August 14, 1947 after that bat berg had thoroughly disfigured it because bat`s wife was being serviced by an Indian politician who had charmed both husband and wife as Dr. Iqbal`s Makrra wanted the fly to, and failed, but where the Indian fellow succeeded. There, now!

N.B. If you think you cannot accept the above then ``search`` on the web. Within two minutes you`d have more information than the Chowkwallas will give you in a month of Sundays.

http://newsweek.com/nw-srv/printed/us/in/a17748-2000mar26.htm

It`s Still `The Economy, Stupid`



Clinton talked mostly to the Indians about Kashmir and nukes. That was a big mistake. The more pressing issue is building their future prosperity.

Fareed Zakaria

Newsweek, April 3, 2000

That great philosopher Mel Brooks once noted profoundly, ``It`s good to be the king.`` Anyone watching Bill Clinton`s tour of the Subcontinent last week would have to admit, it may be even better to be president of the United States. Clinton swept through India in the style of a Roman emperor. But for all the fanfare, the president missed a great opportunity. He talked mostly about two issues, Kashmir and nuclear weapons. Neither will define India`s future. Of all people, Clinton should have remembered, ``It`s the economy, stupid.``

Both Kashmir and nukes are important but not really subject to a solution after a few days of meetings. The conflict in Kashmir won`t be solved until there is a marked evolution of attitudes within India and Pakistan, something unlikely to happen any time soon. On nuclear weapons, the Clinton administration is still in denial that India is a nuclear power and will remain one as long as its neighbors have such weapons. Moreover, Clinton has little moral authority on the issue since he presides over the largest arsenal of nuclear weapons in the world.

But Clinton has enormous credibility when speaking about economic issues. Around the world he is given credit—sometimes undue credit—for putting America`s fiscal house in order and being on watch while the U.S. economy has performed at warp speed. The president can talk economics with interest, expertise and passion. He should have tossed aside the State Department`s briefing papers on interim accords and confidence-building measures and spoken from his heart about the future Indians can build for themselves, if only they have the courage.

This would have been a good time to talk about the Indian economy. Reforms have stalled. The New Delhi government has not delivered on even its modest proposals. The economy, growing at 5 to 6 percent, is doing well only because of a string of good harvests—much of the Indian economy is agricultural. To lift its people out of poverty, India needs to grow much faster, around 8 percent. Most East Asian countries grew at these rates for decades (and did not have exploding populations) and only then raised living standards.

When Clinton did talk economics, he lavished praise on India`s new high-tech economy. He`s hardly alone in his exuberance. Many observers, both in India and on Wall Street, look at this sector and declare India the next Asian tiger. The facts are impressive. India`s software industry, which barely existed 10 years ago, generates $5 billion a year—an amount projected to rise to more than $80 billion in a decade.

But while the software industry is impressive, it accounts for only 1 percent of GDP. And while the Indian middle class is large—at perhaps 200 million—300 million Indians live below the poverty level. No less than 80 percent of Indians work on farms and in factories; in America, 80 percent of the economy is in the service sector. You cannot have a new economy without first having an old economy. Indians have often thought that technology—it used to be dams, now it`s computers—will be their salvation.

Clinton knows that building a modern economy requires much more than technology. And it`s not something that business can do by itself. You need an effective and disciplined state. India`s government spends a staggering 14 percent of GDP on subsidies. The annual fiscal deficit is close to 9 percent of GDP. Instead of wasting money on corporate and farm welfare, the government should invest in human capital—health and education, which are utterly neglected. India also needs hundreds of billions of dollars for infrastructure (ports, telephones, electrical plants, roads), yet foreign investment is hampered by dozens of pointless rules.

Most important, Clinton could tell Indians how to modernize their state and economy and yet maintain the support of the least fortunate in society. It is a balancing act he`s remarkably good at—and it`s what India desperately needs.

If India`s ruling class had the courage to move boldly and integrate their country into the world, many old, seemingly intractable problems—like Kashmir—might even yield to solutions. After all, it is surely not a coincidence that Ireland came closer to resolving its troubles after moving forthrightly into the European Union and experiencing the heady economic growth that came with it. And were Europe to accept Turkey into its fold, that country might handle its Kurdish minority with tolerance and tact. In other words, Clinton might even have helped the causes he talked about if only he had stayed with his strengths. Instead, he made the usual points about the usual subjects. Still, it wasn`t a total waste. The Taj is a stunning sight.

Where does the word Pakistan come from and what does it mean?

This is wonderful writing.

Thanks!

Ras

Here is something that you guys may enjoy
by Khalid Hasan in The News International
Opinion Section on Sunday May 7th.

The Faiz testament

By Khalid Hasan

Faiz Ahmed Faiz died on November 20, 1984 in Lahore and not, as he had once written, ``on the unnamed byways of an unknown land``. It is important to remember men like him otherwise they will be forgotten, and with them, will be forgotten what they stood for and
why. With Faiz the poet was the man. His life and the way he lived it was a true reflection of
what he was and what he believed in. He was like a lotus in the lake, surrounded by water
but untouched by it, as the Gita puts it.
Faiz was born on February 13, 1911 in Sialkot, the second son of Sultan Mohammad Khan
who, according to one account, ``ran away as a child from the prospect of a village
shepherd`s life and educated himself to become a senior member of the Afghan court in
Kabul``. Faiz went to Murray College, Sialkot, as Iqbal had done many years earlier and
then, like him, the Government College in Lahore where he took master`s degrees in English
and Arabic. By 1934 he was done with formal education. His reputation as a young poet of
immense promise had already been established.
The next year at the age of 24, he left Lahore to take up a lectureship in English at the
Mohammadan Anglo-Oriental College in Amritsar. He lived in that city for seven years.
Saadat Hasan Manto mentions him in one of his non-fiction pieces as an easy-going,
laid-back poet who was often seen lost in his own world. It was there that he met Dr Rashid
Jahan, a fascinating and beautiful woman who may have played a defining role in Faiz`s
conversion to socialism, a faith that he kept all his life. It is good that he did not live to see
the death of communism because it would have shocked him deeply. It was in Amritsar that
Faiz met the young English girl Alys George whose sister Chris was married to Faiz`s
principal and older friend, Dr Mohammad Din Taseer. Faiz fell in love with Alys and they
were married in 1941. I never tire of telling this story but it was in my father Dr Noor
Hussain`s house in Jammu that Faiz proposed to Alys.
It was in Amritsar that Faiz read the Communist Manifesto for the first time, courtesy one
would like to think of that splendid woman Dr Rashid Jahan. ``I read the Manifesto once
and the path ahead was illuminated,`` Faiz recalled years later. In 1942, Faiz joined the
ideologically ordained struggle against the great fascist threat, or the Second World War,
in the war publicity department of the Indian army. He stayed long enough to be promoted
lieutenant colonel. Faiz in uniform is hard to imagine but he was quite comfortable in it, his
friends from those days would say. After independence, he was given the OBE by the
Queen in recognition of his services. He must be the only poet to be honoured both by the
Queen and the Kremlin.
In 1947, Faiz was asked by Mian Iftikharuddin to become editor of the newly-founded
Pakistan Times, founded, in case everyone has forgotten, by none other than the
Quaid-i-Azam. He stayed there until he was arrested in 1951 on the largely spurious and
trumped-up charge of having been one of the arch planners of the Rawalpindi conspiracy.
If dreaming about the overthrow of existing governments can be made a ground for jailing
people, then practically the entire population of Pakistan at any given time should be in jail.
In 1962, Faiz won the Lenin Peace Prize. Almost until the day he died, the one newspaper
that claims to be the principal defender and interpreter of the ``ideology`` of Pakistan, never
ceased referring to Faiz except with the qualifier: ``Rawalpindi conspiracy case convict and
winner of the Lenin Peace Prize, well-known communist intellectual and poet Faiz…`` When
I once asked Faiz in London if it bothered him he said, ``Bhai, un loagun ka karobar bhi tau
chalna chahiye.`` Faiz never reacted to personal abuse, something one only associates with
saints.
Faiz made an inspired speech when accepting the Lenin Peace Prize. He spoke in Urdu,
ending with a verse by Hafiz Shirazi celebrating the ennobling quality of universal love. Faiz
spoke beautifully. Here is some of what he said: ``I do not find anything in my life and work
which should have made me worthy of this signal honour. However, I can think of one
reason: the fervent yearning for peace and independence which has motivated me and my
friends. Peace is reflected in the wheat fields, in poplar trees, in the bride`s veil, in the
laughing hands of children, in the poet`s pen, in the artist`s brush. Servitude kills all
qualities which distinguish us from beasts, qualities of intellect and intelligence, truth and
justice, dignity and valour, piety and forbearance. War today does mean bloody tribal
strife. Nor do we mean by peace today that bloodshed should come to an end. Today,
peace means the survival of the human race. On these two words--annihilation and
survival--depends the continuation or culmination of human history.
``Human ingenuity has taken science and technology to such high levels of efficiency that
all mouths can be fed, all physical needs can be met, provided the timeless bounties of
nature, the infinite means of production are geared not to satisfy the avarice of monopolists
or special interest groups but to ensure the welfare of all and provided that the scientific
and industrial ability of man is put to constructive rather than destructive purposes. All this is possible only under a social structure raised on the foundations of justice, equality,
independence and collective good and not on avarice, exploitation and monopoly interests.
Apart from the inevitable conflict between imperialist and non-imperialist forces, there are
violent differences among countries which gained independence recently. Such differences
exist between Pakistan and neighbouring India, between one Arab state and another, and
between one African country and another. It is obvious that only those powers can benefit
from these differences which do not like world peace and universal brotherhood. It is
essential, therefore, that peace-loving peoples should think about these differences and
help find just solutions.
``A few days ago, when the world was excited at the latest Soviet feat in space, the thought
came to my mind repeatedly that now that we could have a glimpse of our own planet from
other stars, how foolish are these petty meannesses, this desire to cut up the world in small parcels of land, this ambition to dominate tiny groups of people. We should wind up all
these military bases and throw these bombs and rockets and guns into the sea and go forth
together to conquer the universe where there is room enough for each one of us, where no
one need fight anyone else, where there is limitless space and where there are worlds
without end.``
As Faiz Ahmed Faiz, the poet of the ``land of yellow leaves`` looks down from the edge of
eternity on this piece of earth called Pakistan that he loved more than anything else, I
wonder what his thoughts are.

How about creating a ``Siachen International Park``, outside the control of any country, supervised by UN appointed Board of Governors administration contracted out and profits going to deserving non-government organizations engaged in poverty alleviation work in Kashmir?

While we are on a roll:

How about creating a ``Meditation Center`` at site of Babri masjid, similarly administered, where Muslims and Hindus and all others welcome to come and medidate among other things on the idiotic religious squabbles? Same thing with places where hindu temples once stood in Pakistan.

This article made no sense at all. Message being conveyed was less than subtle, it was non-existant. As for all who feel pride when non-muslim appreciate muslim art...get a life. I`ve lived in Indian much many years and though wasn`t impressed by Taj Mahal, always considered it a national symbol. Something that should be protected, but not worshipped. People should be more concerned about national and cutural shortcomings then feeling pride for monuments in distant lands that have little if any relations to them.

Are Egyptians proud of prymids eventhough they are from pre-Islamic era? Probably yes.

Should/Are Muslims be proud of prymids because they were built by people who later took on Islam?

Are muslims proud/embarrased of terror mugals unleashed in India or is that completely omitted from history?

Undue pride in achievment in other muslims (long and gone) should be balanced by embarassement for barbarity perpetrated by other muslims.

Unquestioned loyalty is a very dangerous thing

To ylh,

You are young, the world of tomorrow will be shaped by your words and deeds. Have no mercey, saint and sinner are two sides of the same coin. Criminal N.Mandela is a symbol of peace today, so is terrorist Y. Arafat.

Always take extreme views, be afraid of mediocracy.BR>

Regards and best wishes for an explosive life, never compromise.

jay.

PS. An rational man adjusts to the surroundings, an irrational man tries to change the surroundings to suit him. So all progress is the work of irrational people. ( It is a quote, I dont remember from who)

Re: ylh #9

My post was not about you, Yasser. I was telling you not to waste your time with ``him``. Let the stray dog bark.

Washington Times http://www.washtimes.com/commentary/commentary-200051016720.htm

Donald Devine

The real threats to American interests are not how well democracy spreads around the world but Islamic fundamentalism and, potentially, China. In fact, realistic analysis suggests the more democracy there is in an Islamic nation, the more it opposes the U.S. and its allies like Israel. Likewise, it is not nuclear ``proliferation`` that is the problem but possession by unstable regimes like North Korea or fundamentalist ones like Iran and Afghanistan, or even, someday, Pakistan, Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan and Kyrgyzstan.

How can this possible threat be contained without Russia and India? It is insane to tongue-lash these essentially inward-looking nations, which do have some interest in protecting their borders from madmen.

This is not anti-Islam. The Islamic Supreme Council of America organized a recent conference where the prime concern of the attending Muslims from around the world was the danger from Islamic fundamentalism.

While it can be avoided, China does has the potential to threaten world peace. But the present U.S. alliance system relying upon Japan and Taiwan is inadequate. Neither, nor the two together, are strong enough to balance an aggressive China, even allied with U.S. forces. In a Sino-American war, the two are likely to stay neutral if China allows them to. Only Russia and India are located strategically and are big enough to balance China. What was the reaction of national greatness` John McCain when President Clinton recently wooed India? He said the trip was too ``extensive,`` an excuse for ``photo ops.`` Mr. Clinton was right to go and should do more.

Godot ...

You wrote that about Jay .... or about me?

-Yasser Hamdani

Re: ylh #5

Don`t waste your time with him. Like his voice on Chowk, he`s worthless and useless. Let the dog bark and keep moving forward.

Good work Amitava Kumar..we need people like you on both sides of the border to resolve our decades old conflict..indeed your interpretation of what the yemani may have meant carries weight..

The policy makers on both soils should realize that these conflicts have given nothing but misery to their respective countries and the innocent populace.They should spare us(their children) the misery and let not have us go through the same.

Taimur A Malik.