news details |
|
|
| J&K to figure at upcoming Mukherjee-Kasuri talks | | | NEW DELHI, JAN. 7:
Minister for External Affairs, Pranab Mukherjee, is ready to
discuss all subjects, including Jammu and Kashmir, with his Pakistani counterpart,
Khurshid Mehmood Kasuri, in Islamabad next week. Mukherjee, according to
authoritative sources, has equipped himself with "all relevant data" on
Pakistan-aided ultras as part of New Delhi's strategy to try, once again, to make
Islamabad understand that complete tranquility and peace cannot be expected in the
face of "freedom" enjoyed by anti-India militants and terrorist outfits in Pakistan and
Pakistan occupied Kashmir (PoK).
Pranab Mukherjee, these sources said, would be visiting Pakistan with "an open
mind". His attempt would be to enlist Islamabad's unflinching support and cooperation
in positively addresing India's concern vis-a-vis the continuance of recruitment of
anti-India subversives and ultras in the terrorist training camps across the Line of
Control (LoC) in Jammu and Kashmir.
The External Affairs Minister, sources added, would also take up the issue of
unabated cross-border terrorism and cross-border infiltrtation during his talks in
Pakistan. Pakistan's Foreign Office in Islamabad expects the two countries to sign
four agreements during Mukherjee's first offical visit to that country. These
agreements will be aimed at building confidence.
Indications are by no means uncertain that a key agreement on ‘reducing risk of
nuclear accidents or unauthorised use of nuclear weapons’ which had been under
discussion since August 2005 is quite likely to be initialled by the Foreign Ministers
of the two countries. The two sides had finalised the agreement during the Foreign
Secretary-level talks in New Delhi in November last.
Other agreements that are on the cards relate to revised visa regime, speedy
repatriation of inadvertent border-crossers and quarterly flag meetings between
sector commanders at the Line of Control. Mukherjee is also likely to indicate dates
for Prime Minister Manmohan Singh’s visit to Pakistan that many believe would be a
major confidence-building measure.
Mukherjee will be leading an eight-member delegation to Islamabad to discuss
with his Pakistani counterpart the vital issues of peace and security as well as
Jammu and Kashmir. The delegation will comprise senior officials of the External
Affairs Ministry including Foreign Secretary, Shivshankar Menon, Joint Secretary
(Pakistan, Iran & Afghanistan) Dilip Sinha, Joint Secretary SAARC and the Ministry’s
spokesperson, Navtej Sarna.
It has been officially stated in Islamabad that during Pranab Mukherjee’s meeting
with Kasuri, detailed discussions would be held on the various proposals for a
settlement of the Jammu and Kashmir dispute and the Siachen issue to narrow down
differences. Trade, trans-Kashmir truck service, terrorism, issue of prisoners and
re-opening of consulates in Mumbai and Karachi would also figure in the discussions.
Mukherjee is scheduled to arrive in Islamabad midday on January 13 and would
leave for Delhi around same time the following day. During his stay in Pak capital, he
will call on President, Gen. Pervez Musharraf, and extend an invitation to him to
attend the 14th SAARC Summit being hosted by India in April. He will also call on
Prime Minister, Shaukat Aziz.
===========================
(For immediate use)
Muslim extremists under watch in UK
Some 5 million pounds earmarked by British Govt
BL KAK
NEW DELHI, JAN. 7: Several Kashmiri expatriates living in different parts of Britain
are said to have been placed under discreet watch by intelligence sleuths. This,
according to a report from London, follows the flow of monetary aid to a group of
Muslim radicals by three Kashmiri expatriates in recent times.
Another report has divulged that British Communities Secretary, Ruth Kelly, will
later this month unveil a controversial plan whereby thousands of council (municipal)
workers across the United Kingdom (UK) will effectively be asked to spy on Muslim
radicals and extremist organizations in their midst. The Daily Mirror, one of Britain’s
top tabloids and a staunch supporter of the ruling Labour Party, has confirmed in a
report quoting Kelly, the former Education Secretary, that the government will give 50
local authorities some 5 million pounds in special funding “to be the ears and eyes of
the police” about possible risks and to keep a watch on suspected Muslim extremists
in the major metropolitan areas of Britain.
Reaction from British Muslim organizations were slow to filter out given the
weekend. However, Muslims were divided about the initiative. Some stressed that
the lookout for extremists within communities of all sorts was already prevalent.
Other Muslims warned that such racial and faith profiling of Muslims could backfire
and hinder the very integration and social cohesions which the Blair government
was trying to inculcate. Local council trade unions across the UK also expressed
concern that Kelly’s plan may endanger council staff because they could be targeted
by extremists.
The aim of the plan, according to Kelly, is to help pre-empt an outrage such as the
one on the London transport system in July 2005 when some 56 innocent passengers
lost their lives and over 700 commuters were injured. Four Muslim radicals — three
of Pakistani descent and the fourth a Jamaican convert to Islam — carried out the
attacks, the first suicide bomb attacks on British soil.
Speaking to the left-leaning tabloid, Kelly stressed: “Extremism is an issue for all of
us. Local authorities must rise to the challenge, too. They have a pivotal role in
winning the battle of hearts and minds in local communities. This funding will
enable us to harness the long-established expertise of local authorities in developing
deep insights into their areas in order to meet the challenge of tackling violent
extremism”.
British Prime Minister, Tony Blair, Home Secretary, John Reid, and Kelly have over
the last two years warned that Britain remains a primary target for terrorism. This
has been regularly reiterated by senior police and intelligence officials including Sir
Ian Blair, the Metropolitan Police chief commissioner.
Critics including some members of Parliament in the Labour Party’s own ranks,
opposition politicians and Muslim groups and individuals such as the Muslim Council
of Britain, the British Muslim Forum and Lord Nazir Ahmed, the Labour peer, have
warned that British foreign policy especially in Iraq and Afghanistan and its close
cooperation with the Bush administration in launching the invasion and occupation
of Iraq must bear much of the responsibility in radicalizing home-grown British
Muslim youth. This charge has been strongly dismissed by Blair, stressing that the
9/11 attacks preceded the war in Iraq.
The money will partly be used to set up organizations to identify and root out groups
deemed to be brainwashing young Muslims. Staff of these organizations, according to
Kelly, “would be asked to establish systems to share potential risks or concerns at the
local level with councils and staff acting as the eyes and ears for police in countering
threats".
===========================
(For immediate use)
NEWS ANALYSIS
Musharraf takes an edge over his rivals
Ambitious Benazir Bhutto keen to be next PM
BL KAK
NEW DELHI: Today's Benazir Bhutto is totally different from what she was yesterday.
And tomorrow's Benazir Bhutto will definitely be different from what she appeard to be
today, if her growing ambition to be Pakistan's next Prime Minister were any guide.
Politics has often been described -- and aptly so -- as the art of the impossible.
Nothing is ever ruled out in politics, though that is sometimes interpreted by some to
mean that there are no principles in politics.
However, this has more to do with the fact that in many situations, compromises
have to be made by political entities if they wish to enter into government.
Sometimes, however, things can be stretched to an extreme which can be unhealthy
for a state's body politic, and this happens when such compromises are made not to
further the collective or public interest but rather for personal gain. With election
year upon Pakistan, the question on many people's minds is what kind of political
arrangement will emerge after the polls. It is in this context that almost on a daily
basis one gets to read all manner of stories and reports.
The main topic of discussion these days seems to be whether the opposition PPP
(Pakistan People's Party) will strike a deal with the government. The facts are, well,
at times contradictory and unless one keeps track of everything and is an astute
political observer the whole pre-election scene can seem quite confusing. For
example, it would be fair to assume that some level of back-channel contact has been
initiated by the government -- read the Parvez Musharraf camp -- with the PPP.
However, the chief of the PML-Q, who has never seen eye to eye with the PPP and its
ideology has been consistently denying any such deal. There are also several Pak
government ministers who from time to time issue statements saying that a deal
could well be on the cards with the PPP. In fact, the day that even the Prime Minister,
Shaukat Aziz, dismissed talk of any such arrangement, the Parliamentary Affairs
Minister himself publicly said something that directly contradicted his boss's
remarks.
The fact that some in Pakistan's ruling party are clearly not united on whether to
enter into a working relationship with the PPP (and vice versa) is only to be expected
given the divergent ideologies espoused by the two parties. Also, it has to be said --
with a pinch of salt -- that politics in Pakistan is often based not on issues but on
personalities and/or personal loyalties and this has been reflected by the PPP-deal
matter as well. The reason being given -- implied by none other than the President
himself though he has never mentioned any potential ally by name -- for a deal
between the PPP and the government is that the former's views are in synch with the
President's policy of enlightened moderation and of taking the country on a
progressive and liberal path.
However, the question that comes to mind in this context is the following: does a
deal need to be necessarily struck between the present government and the PPP for
the country to be taken successfully on the road to a progressive future? Would not,
hypothetically speaking of course, a PPP government be able to do that on its own
without prodding from other quarters? Shouldn't the emphasis be on ensuring that
the President seek re-election as a civilian, shouldn't the polls be free and fair,
shouldn't the Election Commission carry out its responsibilities to the best of its
abilities and shouldn't all political parties be given a level playing field and heads of
all major parties who are in exile allowed to return?
The leader of the Pakistan People’s Party Parliamentarians (PPPP) and former
Prime Minister, Benazir Bhutto, says she is ready to participate in general elections
under President Gen. Pervez Musharraf. But she has warned that “all opposition
parties would unite and quit Parliament if Gen. Musharraf tried to get re-elected as
President from the present Assemblies”. She “hoped” that the leader of the Pakistan
Muslim League Nawaz (PMLN) and former Prime Minister of Pakistan, Nawaz Sharif,
too would take the same decision because his party had taken part in the 2002
elections.
Last week Benazir Bhutto dined with the PML chief, Chaudhry Shujaat Hussain, in
the United Arab Emirates (UAE), but would like the public to know that the meeting
was “accidental”. However, this was sufficient to nudge the mMinister of
Parliamentary Affairs, Sher Afgan, into declaring that she had not only accepted
elections under President Musharraf but also said yes to his remaining in uniform in
his next tenure. As if to prevent Afgan’s oracular declarations, Benazir Bhutto has
now warned that if President Musharraf tried to get himself re-elected as President
for another five year term from the current Assemblies, the entire opposition would
resign and protest on the streets of Pakistan. She has also said that her party’s
repeated proposals sent to the Election Commission for free and fair elections had not
evoked a reply, therefore, she was not too hopeful that there would be progress in this
direction.
Benazir Bhutto’s statement has taken on the status of a political initiative on the
part of the PPPP and has sent the party leadership in Pakistan scurrying to Dubai for
consultations. Needless to say, the strategy on which the statement is based is sound
and keeps the door open to promising developments in the post-election period when
a new kind of leadership will be needed in Pakistan.
===========================
PM thanks Indian American community for Indo-US nuclear deal
New Delhi, Jan 7 : Prime Minister Dr. Manmohan Singh on Sunday thanked the
Indian American community for their role in the adoption of legislation on Civil
Nuclear Energy cooperation with India.
Inaugurating the Fifth Pravasi Bharatiya Divas (PBD) here, Dr. Singh said: "I would
like to take this opportunity today to express a special word of thanks to the Indian
American community. We are happy that the United States has adopted a legislation
that will enable the US to engage in cooperation with India in the field of Civil
Nuclear Energy".
"And, I thank the Americans of Indian origin for the stellar role that they played in
ensuring that this legislation was passed through the US Congress," he added.
Lauding the landmark July 18, 2005 civilian nuclear deal with the US, Dr. Singh said
it would increase the range of options to secure India's growing energy needs.
"This is an important step forward not just in India-US bilateral relations, but also an
essential first step that will enable India to engage in cooperation in the civil nuclear
field with other countries that are members of the Nuclear Suppliers Group. This
process will increase the range of options available to secure our country's growing
current and future energy needs. This initiative is, therefore, a vital input to the
critical process of enlarging our developmental options," he said.
Dr Singh appealed to overseas Indians to actively participate in the saga of great
adventure and enterprise of building a new India.
Urging them to take full advantage of the existing opportunities in the country, Dr.
Singh said, "I would like you to reach out and invest in a new India. Invest not just
financially, but intellectually, socially, culturally and, above all, emotionally".
"Your roots are what bring you here. Your branches are what will keep you engaged
year after year here in India's developmental saga. Come engage with the new India,"
he added.
Dr Singh said India looked forward to bolstering its relations with South-East Asian
and East Asian countries.
"We are committed, therefore, to explore an option to foster closer multi-faceted links
with South-East Asia and with East Asia to usher in a new arc of prosperity in this
extended region and extended neighbourhood of India," he said.
The Prime Minister announced that a proposal to establish an Indian Overseas
Facilitation Centre, which will be a source of investment advisory services, is
presently being developed and examined.
He also announced that the Government is examining a proposal to constitute
Central Council for the Promotion of Overseas Employment.
Singapore Deputy Prime Minister Prof. S Jayakumar, Minister for Overseas Indian
Affairs Vayalar Ravi, Delhi Chief Minister Sheila Dikshit, CII President R.
Seshasayee, attended the event, which is held to coincide with the day marking the
return of Mahatma Gandhi from South Africa on January 9, 1915.
Over 1200 delegates from 47 countries are attending the three day event being held
from January 7-9 is aimed at promoting a better understanding between the Indian
Diaspora and the country's political leadership.
The convention will focus on education, healthcare, youth development, women's
empowerment, technology, media, private international law, etc. Special focus will be
directed on attracting 1.5 trillion dollars in capital investment to India.
The Divas' theme, Rooting for the Roots, has been developed to inculcate a sense of
pride about their Indian origins among the new generation of overseas Indians.
The Ministry of Overseas Indian Affairs has been working with several associations
of Indians abroad to achieve this. It has reached out to the Global Organization of
Persons of Indian Origin (New York and Mauritius), the American Association of
Overseas Indians, the Indian Malaysian Congress, the Asian American Association
to contribute to the success of PBD.
President A P J Abdul Kalam is scheduled to give the valedictory speech at the Divas.
Dr Kalam will also present the PBD Samman Awards.
The union ministers who will address session include Finance
Minister P Chidambaram, External Affairs Minister Pranab Mukherjee, Commerce
and Industry Minister Kamal Nath, HRD Minister Arjun Singh and Minister of State
for External Affairs E Ahamed. Other senior government officials include the Deputy
Chairman of the Planning Commission. The chief ministers of six states will speak
at the respective state sessions.
The delegates include six ministers from abroad and large delegations of over 200
NRIs are coming from Malaysia and USA. The event will feature a three-day
convention and trade and industry exhibition.
Several eminent overseas Indians have been invited to attend PBD 2007. Some of the
notable names who have since confirmed their participation are Sam Pitroda,
Chairman, Knowledge Commission, Government of India, Apurv Bagri, Chairman
Tie, UK, Karan Billimoria, Co- Chairman IBP, UK, Dr. Denison Jaisurya, Executive
Director, Social Strategic, and Mr Dato G Palanivel, Deputy Minister of Women,
Family and Community Development, Government of Malaysia.
On each evening, there will be cultural programmes highlighting traditional and
contemporary music and dance. Exponents like Shobana and Ustad Amjad Ali Khan
will be key performers at the cultural programmes. Popular choreographer Shiamak
Davar along with his troupe will entertain the guests after the closing of the
valedictory session
Noida serial killers to undergo narco-analysis test today
Gandhinagar, Jan 7: The two accused involved in the serial killings of children in
Noida's Nithari village are likely to undergo narco-analysis test here today, police
sources said.
Moninder Singh Pandher and his servant Surendra Koli are being subjected to
various tests at Directorate of Forensic Sciences (DFS) since Friday when they were
brought here. They underwent polygraph and brain-mapping tests yesterday.
DFS officials are tightlipped about the outcome of their investigation but have hinted
the two were cooperating during the tests.
The duo underwent detailed medical examination yesterday at the Gandhinagar Civil
Hospital after they were taken out from the DFS campus stealthily from the prying
eyes of mediapersons.
DFS sources said the medical tests were a prelude to conduct the narco-analysis or
truth serum tests on the two. During the tests it was revealed that Surendra is
diabetic.
Police sources said on the first day of the forensic tests the prime accused Pandher
had revealed his high-profile connections with UP politicians and others who used to
frequent his house in Noida, from where skeletons of children were recovered.
General elections in Pakistan will only be a farce
The farce of holding general elections in Pakistan will be enacted on
January 15, 2008. The announcement in this regard made by Tariq Aziz,
the State Minister for Information and Broadcasting at a press
conference, giving precise date for the elections, for the first time,
is aimed at placating the political parties in Pakistan and the West
who have been demanding restoration of democracy in Pakistan. Pakistan
presently is having its fourth phase of military guided democracy. The
elections to be held in mid January next year, are in no way expected
to restore real democracy in Pakistan. President Parvez Musharraf
would be reelected to the highest political and executive post before
the holding of general elections in the country, by the current
legislatures both federal and provincial, that had elected him as the
President earlier also. That the President of the country should be
elected twice by the same legislatures is a highly contentious issue
not only with the politicians, but also with the legal and
constitution experts in Pakistan who question whether a legislature
can be an electoral college to elect the President twice in its single
tenure. The presidential elections would be held between September 15
and October 15, 2007. This schedule is in keeping with Musharraf's
repeated hints that he would seek a second term in the presidency and
also decide when he would give up his army uniform as its Chief since
1998. He has also argued that the country needs him in the dual role.
Under these circumstances the holding of general elections in Pakistan
in mid January next year will be only a farce. The two former Prime
Ministers of Pakistan, Benazir Bhutto and Nawaz Sharrif as well as
Altaf Hussain Chief of the Mutthaida Quami Movement have already
questioned genuiness of such a schedule. The holding of elections will
also be a farce in the light of a fact that Musharrah has declared
that Bhutto and Sharrif cannot contest the forthcoming elections. Some
other political parties in Pakistan, specially Muttahida
Majlis-E-Amal, the principal Islamic alliance has been threatening to
get its law makers to resign from the legislature en mass to prevent
Musharraf's reelection gambit. In fact full democracy has hardly
prevailed in Pakistan during these last 58 years of its creation. The
country has been for most of the time ruled by military dictators, who
usurped power through coupes. In between guided democracies with
actual powers concentrated in the hands of a virtual dictator have
come into being in the country. Even during the periods when there
were democratic set ups in Pakistan as during the government led by
Zulfqar Ali Bhutto, Nawaz Sharrif and Benazir Bhutto, the army with
the backing of Islamist Clergies was the real center of power. Ever
since his assuming power in 2000 through a coupe dethroning Prime
Minister Nawaz Sharrif, Army General Parvez Musharraf, has been under
tremendous pressure from USA to restore democracy in his country. But
the crafty General, who has become President of the country through
rigged elections, even after diluting the democratic constitution of
the country, has been circumventing the US demand for restoring
democracy in the country through one or the other maneuver.
ARTICLE
INDIA’S FOREIGN POLICY OPTIONS ON PAKISTAN 2007
By Dr. Subhash Kapila
Introductory Observations
India’s foreign policy establishment continues to be overly obsessed with diplomatic
formulations which have borne no fruit especially during the military regime of
General Musharraf. Even earlier too, it was the same case with all Indian
Governments irrespective of their political hues.
Pakistan by its size, resources and military threat potential does not merit the
bestowal of such over-sized obsession. Then why does this politically illogical
obsession persist?
Obviously, there are strong external and domestic pressures at play on the Indian
foreign policy establishment. Externally, the Indian Government is said to have been
under intense United States political and strategic pressures to modulate India’s
foreign policy towards Pakistan in consonance with United States strategic interests
in Pakistan. It desires that India should contribute towards the survival in power of
General Musharraf in Pakistan.
Domestically, a fair section of the Indian foreign policy analysts advance the United
States agenda and voice formulations which advocate and extol the Pakistani
military dictators so called “out-of-box” solutions on Kashmir, Siachen etc. Such
analysts, unmindfully even advocate Musharraf’s line of “free-lance” Pakistan
terrorists operating against India, when it comes to defending Musharraf’s proxy war
against India.
The year 2006, as it comes to a close, clearly indicates that Pakistan under General
Musharraf in all the seven years of military rule has not responded in any
substantial and meaningful manner to buy peace with India. His “out-of-box”
solutions approach is a mere subterfuge to confuse the issues and do not merit
serious consideration by India.
It is most inappropriate for India aspiring to be a global power to go out of the way to
appease Pakistan’s military dictator who today stands besieged within his own
country and the Pakistani people want him out. The much advocated Indian Prime
Minister’s proposed visit to Pakistan falls within this category.
In terms of India’s foreign policy options on Pakistan for the year 2007, the core
issues at the end of 2006 boil down to two, namely:
Should India Assist the Perpetuation of a Military Dictatorship in Pakistan?
OR
Should India Adopt Pro-active Stances in Support of Restoration of Democracy in
Pakistan?
Following the above examination, India’s foreign policy options on Pakistan in 2007
will also be spelt out.
But before examining these two “core issues” a brief look at the contextual factors
that need to be taken into account while determining India’s options.
Contextual Factors That Should Determine India’s Foreign Policy Options
India’s foreign policy options towards Pakistan need to be viewed from the two
determinants of national security interests and economic interests. In terms of
India’s economic interests, Pakistan refuses to budge at all towards any economic
cooperation with India. In terms of national security interests, Pakistan even in the
year 2006 has not exhibited any signs of stepping back from her conflictual and
adversarial propensities.
To any realistic foreign policy analyst, it should be abundantly clear that the
Pakistani military dictator has been using Kashmir and trade issues as “pressure
points” against India to extract the objectives that he presumes would make him
popular in Pakistan. His “out-of-box” solutions are cheap tricks of any street-corner
magician – all illusions and no substance.
India needs to recognize the following contextual factors that hover in any dealings
with Pakistan:
Pakistan’s next General Elections are due in November 2007. It is widely believed in
Pakistan that the General will rig these elections like he did the 2002 elections to
perpetuate himself in power. Only the United States can stop him from doing so.
General Musharraf has continued to be both President of Pakistan and also as
Pakistan Army Chief. Constitutionally he lacks legitimacy in both appointments.
To perpetuate his rule, Pakistani media indicates that he is likely to get himself,
re-elected by the outgoing National Assembly, before the elections. A constitutional
break-down could occur if the new National Assembly does not recognize the
manipulation so inflicted by hoping to ensure another term of office as President.
General Musharraf therefore is “illegitimately” in power in Pakistan. It he enjoyed
the popular mandate of the Pakistani people he would not have resorted to “out-of-box”
political chicanery in Pakistan.
Pakistan’s political stability and security is in India’s national security interests.
But is Pakistan today politically stable and externally and domestically secure when
the following are take into account:
Pakistan externally is at odds with both its neighbors, namely, Afghanistan and India.
Pakistan continues with its proxy war against Afghanistan and India.
Pakistan is besieged domestically. Its Western frontiers are explosive and the
Government is militarily challenged in Baluchistan, Waziristan, NWFP and Northern
Areas.
Pakistan Army’s domestic image has taken a beating in the above named regions.
Domestic turbulence is expected to grow as the 2007 elections draw near.
Military suppression of political discontent is a distinct probability.
So this is the likely picture in Pakistan in 2007, which India has to take into account
in its foreign policy formulations and we now can examine the two “core issues” spelt
out initially.
Should India Assist the Perpetuation of Military Dictatorship in Pakistan?
India ever since 1999 has virtually assisted the perpetuation of military dictatorship
in Pakistan under intense pressure from the United States. One has written enough
on this website ever since pointing out the pitfalls.
Some of the glaring examples that needed to be pointed out from my earlier papers
are:
India’s invitation to the Pakistani General for the Agra Summit was a policy blunder.
The Americans wished to impart political legitimacy to General Musharraf and India
obliged by extending this invitation.
India backing down from its proclaimed stand of no talks with Pakistan until
terrorism ceased and then indulging in parleys with the Pakistani military dictator.
The present Indian Prime Minister’s certification of General Musharraf as a man
who could be trusted and with whom business could be done.
The Havana Declaration was a political sell-out this year.
Composite Dialogue and peace process with a military regime perpetuates the
according of unjustified political legitimacy to General Musharraf.
Any proposed visit by the Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh to Pakistan in an
election year would be stamping further political legitimacy on the military dictator.
Clearly, the answer to the question: “Should India Assist the Perpetuation of Military
Dictatorship in Pakistan?” is a big NO.
So far the Pakistani public has perceived that it is the Pakistan Army and the United
States which have stood against democracy in Pakistan.
Surely, India does not want to be perceived as perpetuating a military dictatorship in
Pakistan by a continued political engagement with a military regime in Pakistan’s
election year of 2007.
Should India Adopt Pro-active Stances in Support of Restoration of Democracy in
Pakistan
Actually, the flat answer to this question flows from the preceding examination and
that answer is a resounding “YES”
India must adopt pro-active stances in support of restoration of democracy in
Pakistan for the following reasons:
India cannot be seen in South Asia as employing "double standards” in terms of
restoration of democracy.
In 2006, India even at the cost of her national security interests, worked pro-actively
for restoration of democracy in Nepal.
In 2007, India cannot be seen as impeding the restoration of democracy in Pakistan
by continued legitimization of General Musharraf.
A democratic Pakistan, however imperfect and wobbly to begin with is India’s national
security imperative.
Pakistan’s anti-Indian confrontationist approaches arise from Pakistan’s foreign
policy being under the control of the Pakistan Army, India has to pro-actively work
against this stranglehold.
It is a puerile Indian policy establishment argument that the form of political
dispensation in Pakistan is a Pakistani domestic matter and that India should deal
with the Pakistan government of the day. If that be the case, then how does the
Indian Government permit visiting Pakistani dignitaries including General
Musharraf to have political meetings with Kashmiri secessionists like the Hurriyet
leaders in New Delhi and their meetings with Pakistani diplomats during Hajj
pilgrimages.
India cannot also be a party to the suppression of democracy in Pakistan when for the
2007 elections, the Pakistani General has announced that he will not allow former
Prime Ministers Bhutto and Nawas Sharif to return to Pakistan to participate in the
2007 General Elections.
Further, Pakistan’s former Prime Ministers Bhutto and Nawaz Sharif and other
Opposition parliamentarians be invited to India and be given forums for propagation of
democracy in Pakistan.
India must launch a sustained public relation campaign all over the world and
especially in Washington, propagating the return of democracy in Pakistan.
India’s Foreign Policy Options on Pakistan in 2007
India has only one justifiable foreign policy option on Pakistan for 2007 and that is to
work pro-actively for restoration of democracy in Pakistan.
India needs to view Pakistan from the prism of Indian national security imperatives
and not through the United States prism. It is strange that when it comes to India’s
policy towards China, we view it through the prism of China-Pakistan relations but
have a different standard when it comes to viewing USA-Pakistan relations through
the American prism and not through the Indian National Security prism.
To the above end, India must adopt the following policy approaches:
All India-Pakistan CBMs and the peace process be frozen till 2007 election are over.
All this should await the return of a democratic government in Pakistan enjoying a
popular mandate through internationally supervised elections,
During the interim India should cease all political engagement with Pakistan’s
military regime. Only diplomatic protocol engagement be maintained.
In short, India should freeze all political dialogue and engagement with the Pakistani
military regime as a declaratory policy.
Should General Musharraf contrive to come back to power by domestic rigging and
external strategic support, India should continue the above declaratory policy even
after 2007.
Concluding Observations
India as the predominant power in South Asia should work towards the emergence of
a stable, secure and economically vibrant neighbor. To this end, Pakistan needs to be
pro-actively assisted by India to break free from the shackles of military regimes.
India should also impress on the United States as part of the US-India strategic
dialogue that it cannot adopt double standards when it comes to restoration of
democracy in Pakistan. It is rather strange that the United States maintains that
the emergence of a moderate, Islamic democratic state of Afghanistan is its prime
aim and yet next door it perpetuates a military dictatorship in Pakistan.
Pakistan’s restoration of democracy is one case where India can fittingly adopt the
moral high ground as part of its foreign policy options for 2007.
A TREATISE ON GOVERNMENT-An Essay
Guest Column-by Gaurang Bhatt
There has always been an unresolved problem of how to structure government, ever
since the first human societies invented agriculture to produce surplus necessities,
to allow other human beings to indulge in arts and crafts, or other directly
non-productive, or necessity for survival based occupations. This was the genesis of
culture, a never before conceived engine of human development and progress. From
the evolutionary standpoint, the development of speech and resultant
communication, according to some evolutionary thinkers (on the basis of gossip), lead
to the development of status, resulting in more access to female seduction and thus
increased progeny with increased statistical chances of survival, is the basis of
culture.
The Lamarckian origin of culture allows a speaking individual to instruct progeny
and warn them of the dangers of certain actions that a cow or lion are unable to do.
The birth of culture and excess agricultural sufficiency, necessitated some
organization to protect agriculture by appropriate irrigation projects and the
development of military capability to resist aggressive hunter-gatherer societies from
threatening the survival of more division of labor based conglomerations, with higher
chances of survival based on the complexities of organization.
The Indian caste system despite its terrible modern consequences was perfectly in
concordance with Adam Smith’s first founding principles of economics of division of
labor. There are ancient verses in the Rig Veda, proclaimig the fluidity of these
socially beneficial divisions, before their rigidity led to ossified discrimination and
the resultant indifference of a vast majority, as to who the rulers were, because it
made no difference to their oppression or exploitation. This set the scenario for alien
exploitation and conquest due to the marginalized majority population, whose dismal
lot and miserable future was unrelated to who ruled.
From the time of the Licchavis, in ancient India to the era of Greek States after the
overthrow of tyrants, a form of democracy prevailed despite the exclusion of slaves in
Greece or the effective exclusion of Shudras in India. The lack of unity with divisive
tendencies based on the evolutionary beneficial fears of strangers and xenophobia,
which even today are evident in the development of any child in every culture, led to
the inevitable wars and rivalry between the city states of Greece and India. A sort of
amicable polity developed in India after the aggressive but later enlightened rule of
Ashoka, just as it flourished in the then contemporary China. There is a
fundamental problem with a unified benevolent and considerate approach resulting
in a utilitarian good for the greatest number. This is because human nature is
selfish, greedy and corrupt, interested in individual benefit, progress and welfare to
the detriment of the greater good, as Hobbes realized. It is this inherent weakness or
flaw in human nature, that is the basis of evolution within the constraints of natural
selection. And that lead to the failure of communism. This flaw is not immune to the
ills of capitalism with its unequal opportunity, that led to the invention of god by
humanity, tired and disgusted with the inequities, nepotism and corruption of
current life. If that were not the case Hinduism, Buddhism and Jainism would have
succeeded beyond belief or borders, for they all aim to control and rein in desire, the
primary root cause of evil. This is why Christianity, a religion never practiced by
anyone other than its founder, has failed to take root in the heart of human beings.
As Richard Dawkins and other evolutionary pioneers have emphasized, it works not
at the species level but at the individual level, where destructive behavior for
personal survival, glorification and aggrandizement supercedes any altruistic ideal of
the survival of the species. This is why Plato, a perspicacious, but cynical philosopher
laid down undemocratic, oppressive and impossible ideals for the guardians of society
destined to be philosopher-kings, but despite tyrannical roots, constrained to guard
freedom for the rest. It is philosophically reminiscent of Godel’s Theorem and other
self-referentially false and logically fallacious arguments. Thus the quintessentially
essential dilemma of Plato, "Who shall guard the guardians"?
The Indians have taken their philosophy to a more practical evolutionary valid point
of view. They believe that at some point in this life or even consistent with their
philosophy of rebirth and metempschycosis, in another life, a thinking and defeated
person, however ineducable or recalcitrant he be, cursed with individual or repeated
mortality, will reach a point of satiation, where with bitter experience, futility or
hopeful enlightenment, he will reach the point of "Vasudhev Kutumbakam".
Unfortunately, this is a futile hope because the mass of unenlightened people in any
era far exceeds the minority of enlightened and constitute a recurring majority ad
infinitem and ad nauseam, and the wisdom of experience is denied to the majority,
who are further constrained by the immediate exigencies of survival, a far more
motivating philosophy, essential for individual survival and a dominating factor
despite the strong religious underpinnings of India, however misguided, wrong or
beneficial they may be.
The American experiment, guided by the most enlightened individuals for the era,
was still tainted by the bias of the prevalent intellectuals, who necessarily were of the
haves. Adams in his correspondence with Jefferson, a hypocrite by all contemporary
and then prevalent standards, which were substantially of his own grandiose but false
making, emphasized that privilege was the curse of humanity and it stemmed from
wealth, education and intellect in men and beauty or desirability in women, a sorry
confession of the inequities for humanity and the subservient but desirable, passion
poisoned weakness of men, combined with the ultimate goal of propagation of the
individual by which women have been subjugated due to their less aggressive nature,
common goal and the biological constraints, not to mention lack of freedom and
uncaring aggression.
Thus democracy has the advantage over tyranny and totalitarian government, that it
factors in the will of the people and curtails the rule of anyone. It is still cursed by the
irremediable curse of the basic stupidity, ignorance and indifference of the
uneducated masses, who have neither the time, interest, intelligence or ability to
decide and discriminate better. Even more so by the unprincipled selfishness of
incumbents with their insurmountable privileges and gerrymandering
manipulations. Present America is the best example of a self-centered, ignorant,
poorly informed and uncaring public, fooled by jingoistic lies, to connive at policies
detrimental to their own future.
Democracy, the best of the worst, as Churchill described it while hypocritically
denying the same privilege to the British Empire in general and India in particular,
is the best compromise. It still has built-in seeds of destruction due to the ignorance,
apathy and idiocy of the masses. The loaded dice, which give the benefit of
incumbency to the crooked and privileged, by manipulation of a corrupt, conniving
and dishonestly self-serving concentrated media, a handmaiden to incumbent power
are beyond the rectification of the masses. The resultant unlimited capacity to raise
large sums of money from vested interests, due to the benefits of incumbency and the
apathetic ignorant stupidity of the general public, all perpetuate a regime of corrupt,
uncaring, self-serving politicians, irresponsible enough to lead the country to ruin,
oblivious to decency or responsibility.
India is the worst of all worlds, because despite its obsessive peeve with religion and
decency, it has failed to put any principles in practice and has had a succession of
governments bent on enriching privileged individuals at the cost of grave detriment
to the nation, as the recent deals with Enron in Dabhol, and the privatization of the
Delhi sewage and water supply prove.
There comes a time in every nation, where a hard choice is imperative and essntial.
America and India have difficulty making the right choice, but America has the
capability to fight and wish differently. Unfortunately it suffers from the intoxicating
blind Chutzpah, more than any other nation and thus destined to a fall from hubris
and pride. A democratic government is irreversibly trapped to the destiny of demise,
because a selfish, but informed public makes unacceptable fiscal demands, oblivious
of national bankruptcy. An un-harassed by the voters, Democratic government, falls
prey to the machinations, manipulation and plunder of corporate resources. The
evolutionary dominant philosophy of enriching executives at the cost of the common
debt and stockholders is the newest chapter of a Ponzi Scheme destined to succeed to
the detriment of the proverbially stupid and uninformed American Public.
THE ISI'S MOLES IN THE ARMY
by B. Raman
The two non-commissioned officers (NCOs) of the Army---one posted in Leh and the
other in New Delhi-- arrested by the Delhi Police during the last three days on a
charge of passing on classified information relating to the Army to Pakistan's
Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) are not the first moles of the ISI to be detected. Nor
will they be the last. Penetration of the Indian Armed Forces and other sensitive
establishments such as the Ministries of Defence, Home and External Affairs, the
Atomic Energy and Space Departments has always been a top priority task for the ISI.
2. All intelligence agencies undertake penetration operations in other
countries---whether friend or foe---for intelligence collection. Even while posing as
India's strategic partner, the USA's Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) penetrated the
IB, the R&AW and the National Security Council Secretariat (NSCS). Even in the
unlikely event of an improvement in India's relations with Pakistan, the ISI's
penetration operations for intelligence collection will continue. We have to be on
guard.
3. The ISI has three roles --intelligence collection, counter-intelligence and covert
action. As an intelligence collection agency, it collects intelligence of relevance to
Pakistan's national security from India and other countries. In its
counter-intelligence role, it is responsible for preventing India and other countries
from collecting intelligence in and from Pakistan. In its covert action role, it is
responsible for clandestine procurement of nuclear material and for assisting the
jihadi terrorists in India and the Neo Taliban in Afghanistan.
4. In India, while it focuses on Muslims for carrying out acts of terrorism, it
concentrates on Hindus for the collection of intelligence. This is because it thinks
that the Hindus, being the majority community, will have more access to secret
intelligence than Muslims. That is why, more often than not, the ISI moles in the
Armed Forces and other Government Departments detected by the IB, which is
responsible for counter-intelligence, and arrested by the Police are generally Hindus.
This is so in respect of the present arrests also.
5. While the CIA and other Western intelligence agencies try to recruit officers at
senior levels, the ISI's successes are generally at lower levels. This is because senior
officers, who understand the serious implications to their career and social prestige
if they fall into an ISI trap, are careful to keep away from it. Officers at the lower
levels, particularly those who have financial problems, easily fall into the trap of the
ISI, which offers them large amounts of money in return for intelligence and secret
documents.
6. There were many instances in the past too when military --army, air force and
navy-- officers at the lower levels were found passing on intelligence to the ISI. In the
1980s, a senior naval officer posted abroad was found having a personal relationship
with a Pakistani woman, who was suspected to be from the ISI. He was removed from
service. This was a rare instance of a senior officer falling into a honey trap set up by
the ISI.
7. Only the interrogation of the two arrested army men and a comprehensive damage
assessment will bring out whether these were agents acting alone or whether they
formed part of a network. It is generally presumed that for every mole detected, there
must be one or more, which remain undetected. One has to find out whether the ISI
recruited them after they had joined the army or recruited them first and then
encouraged them to join the army.
8. Such penetrations are prevented through internal departmental security and
counter-intelligence. Departmental security involves security of the set-up where
public servants work, security of the classified documents kept there, physical
checking of the personnel as they leave office to prevent their carrying out classified
documents and monitoring the contacts of the employees with foreigners and their
standard of living in order to check whether they are showing sudden signs of
prosperity. In each department, this is the responsibility of the department. Thus, the
army is responsible for its internal security to prevent penetration by foreign
intelligence agencies.
9. The large-scale computerisation of the Armed forces and other Government
Departments and the availability of means such as pen drives have made the task of
ensuring departmental security very difficult. The CIA's moles in the NSCS were
reported to have passed on hundreds of pages of classified information to a woman
officer of the CIA posted in the US Embassy in Delhi through pen drives. The same
modus operandi has been used by the two moles of the ISI in the Army. This speaks
poorly of the state of computer security in the Government departments, which has
been taken advantage of by the CIA and the ISI.
10. Counter-intelligence refers to identifying suspected foreign intelligence officers
working in India and keeping a physical and electronic surveillance on them and
their contacts with Indians occupying sensitive positions. This is the IB's
responsibility.
11. Only when the Army's internal security set-up and the IB's counter-intelligence
set-up work effectively in close co-ordination with each other would it be possible to
prevent such instances of penetration. The fact that such instances keep taking
place shows weaknesses in internal departmental security and counter-intelligence.
12. The ISI has till now been using Kathmandu for its clandestine meetings with its
Indian moles so that these meetings are not detected by the IB. One of the arrested
NCOs reportedly was visiting Kathmandu repeatedly for meeting his ISI controlling
officer and passing on the documents without being detected till now. The fact that
this time he was intercepted at the Delhi airport before he could go to Kathmandu
would indicate that the IB had been tipped off by somebody or some intercepted
message of the ISI.
13. The ISI has recently set up a base in Colombo. It is to be expected that in future
it will use Kathmandu for clandestine meetings with its moles in North India, and
Colombo for its clandestine meetings with its moles in the South.
14. Since 2004, there has been a detection of three major instances of
penetration---of the R&AW by the CIA in 2004, of the NSCS by the CIA earlier this
year and of the Army by the ISI now. This shows that all is not well with the state of
our internal departmental security and counter-intelligence. As a result, foreign
intelligence agencies have been able to operate with impunity. Identification of the
loopholes and their rectification should be given very high priority.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
