China

United States of Elite versus Donald Trump : Sunni-Saudi-Anglo-Euro-Jihadi axis towards war.

Posted on August 23, 2017. Filed under: Afghanistan, Arab, Army, China, Communist, economics, economy, Egypt, Hindu, History, India, Iran, Islam, Islamic propaganda, Jihad, Muslims, Pakistan, religion, Roman, Russia, Saudi, Shia, Sunni, Syria, Taleban, terrorism, Trump, UK, Ulema, US Presidential elections, USA, Wahabi |

Postulate One: European consumption levels could historically be only maintained by exploiting resources and productivity outside the self-defined territory of Europe (as in Roman expansion dependent on Egyptian grain and “barbarian” slave labour and fecundity).

Postulate Two: USA is an extension of western Europe as shaped in British state form revised under imagined and reconstructed Roman Republic with perceptions and constructions of both what is “European” and what is not – based on cumulative claims of history, both regional and global.

Postulate Three: Europe prioritizes consumption of its elite over ideology.

Most of what is happening now in the USA, in its politics, its legislative bodies, its government and state institutions – all the way to its attitudes towards and handling of or engagement with Islam, Middle East, and Asia can be deduced from the three postulates.

The Roman Republic generated several interesting phenomena that is rarely put in perspective when analyzing modern-day politics of the “western” world. The contest between the Plebs and the Patricians was a contest for power and say in state affairs between the increasingly self-aware Plebs (stemming from their co-option into the armies under people like Marius the uncle of Caesar in turn driven by elite hunger for land and slaves in the ever-expanding “periphery”) and the “Patri-cians” claiming descent from leading founding fathers of the historical Roman colony in Italy and who thereby had hogged the material and monetary benefits of the state formation exercise over the centuries. The Romans went through a phase of submission to non-Roman “rule” as well as “kingship” to finally overthrow “dynastic royalty” but evolving or recasting a new form of authoritarianism legitimized by representative bodies of people – closely followed in essence in the process of formation of USA.

All these are pretty well-known in standard history lessons: what is less discussed is how Roman institutions also institutionalized politico-financial corruption together with formation of well-organized coteries that infiltrated, and manipulated the Roman state institutions for combined business, political and power benefits – running almost as “organized crime”. In fact the model of “mafia” now popularized by Hollywood, typically labeled as originating in remnants of old Roman empire in the medieval such as “Sicily” or “Naples”, had their roots in the system of Roman knights/captains put in charge of various zones/districts of historical Rome. The blurred lines between ambitions of impoverished Patricians like that of the Caesars or the still wealthy Patrician Sulla, the stinking rich Crassus, or the yuppie military genius of a country bumpkin-from-peasant-north maternal uncle of Julius – Marius : they all formed a politically-financially-incestuous vicious competition of various groups of “mafia”.

Thus it is crucial to drop the Hollywood imagery of the “Godfather” and expand it in the reality of US politics on the more historical Roman “mafia” of the Republic and transition-to-empire phase of Rome. Such an “extended” mafia can be both “criminally organized” and “patriotic” or more “transnationally minded” just like the ancient Roman “mafia”.

The current phase can be thus understood as a phase of competition between two domestic groups of “mafia” (in the extended “Roman” sense I am using) where one side has grown close to the Sunni-Saudi interests over a cold-war, and inheritance of Indian Ocean geostrategic burdens of defunct British “political” empire (as in every mature and jaded “empire”, the formal fall of empire-state leaves behind a network of transnational finance and elite of ex-colonies connected firmly to an integrated shared “interests” with the ex-empires successor). This means this side shares the political and hence even religious biases of the Saudi Sunni axis which grew up under British imperial patronage as a supposed barrier to restrict the Ottoman grasp over the “passage” to India. This in turn led to panic scramble by then Russia and Europeans powers wary of the British to try and gain access to Indian Ocean aligning a veritable rivalry between “western” (France/UK) and “eastern” (Germany/Russia) Europe to push to the Persian Gulf. However the ancient contest for supremacy between the west and east of Euphrates that had once ended the Greeks and Cyrus’s house allowing Rome to grow, and similarly exhausted Byzantines and Parthians to allow Islamic jihad to flourish in the “frontier” no-mans land between the two sides – continued in the Arab versus Iran contest, and was used by the completely emasculated remnants of Arab tribes to reassert claims against the “east” and try to repeat their 7th century success using the British and French need to secure the Gulf.

Discovery of oil has gradually shifted the balance of power within the front of  Sunni-Saudi-“western” axis, and WWII drew up an extended “frontier” of two hostile “fronts” running roughly North-East – South-West from Balkans through Syria-Iraq into Persian gulf.

The “western” Anglo fear of Russian breakthroughs in this sector combined with Arab jealousy of the more pre-Islamic nationhood retaining Iran with all consequent better human capital not destroyed as much as in Saudis under mullahcracy – drove the US attempt at wooing Communist China away from USSR, in return China extracting economic entry into global capitalist flow, and an attempt to ring-fence Iran and central-Asian routes from Russia down south by encouraging Islamism in Afghanistan and Pakistan.

However even if this strategy largely succeeded in weakening USSR and led to its overthrow, two problems had been created for US “mafia”: the immensely financially networked with US Saudi lobby’s growing influence among the “mafia” and China’s capture of the US consumer market using its totalitarian state economy and control over Chinese labour. After US had to necessarily engage in the mop-up operations consequent to fall of USSR and Sunni-Saudi lobby’s grasping the opportunity to expand its long-held jihadi ambitions to revive Caliphate style re-conquest of the Middle East, and beyond, parts of US mafia must have realized the growing threat of China’s economy.

However during the long cold-war era, Sunni-Saudi axis had been allowed to become politically entrenched in influencing US foreign policy and thus in the US state institutions and its political class as well as in the instruments of ideological hegemony of modern states – like the media, academics of “humanities”. The faction of US mafia that realizes the supreme importance of China as a threat to their interests (by disrupting the mafia’s finger in the global – “outside of territory” economic exploitation) was the force that allowed someone like Donal Trump to come through. Looking from this perspective, it becomes clear why he had to be “promoted” – they needed an “outsider” or “outcast” or deemed “dilettante” political actor, therefore less likely to have been compromised by the existing pro-Sunni-Saudi pro-China cliques.

That the majority of US state institutions are waging a virtual but desperate war to remove “Trump” from power is simply a manifestation of the failure of the “cold-war” legacy portion of the administration and ideological establishment to grasp the drive and perhaps even realpolitik “sense/pragmatism” of the anti-China “patriotic mafia” as the need of the hour for “US” interests just as overthrow of USSR was in then US interests.

So Trump is being driven to make superficial “compromises” while he is trying to protect the underlying agenda of cutting China down to size. However the pro-Sunni-Saudi US mafia does not want China to be cut down to size as both the Saudis and the Chinese favour each other as hedges for their respective geostrategic ambitions. Saudis do not really want Pakistan to be cut down to size as Pakistan is most helpful in delegating tasks of wahabization and radicalization that serves Saudi geo-strategic ambitions while China does not want Pakistan to be harmed as Pakistan provides a corridor to Indian ocean as well as a useful jihadi counter-balance to India whose territory and population the Chinese see as an obstacle to their own imperial ambitions.

So even if Trump announces a troop increase in Afghanistan, the reality of the situation will simply help Saudi strategy for the zone. The Sunni jihadi assets were first tested on Syria – seen as a rival Shiite state, and on Iraq – but it quickly spiraled out of control revealing the extent of jihadism that Saudis have unleashed which even they can no longer fully control. Russian backing stalled overthrow of the Syrian regime, so that means the “western/European” and Saudi-Sunni jihadi assets need to be “saved” and protected by the pro-Saudi-mafia/European elite from total destruction so they can be unleashed against the real intended targets – Iran and Russia. This means there will be an attempt to carve out a “sovereign” protectorate style enclave for those dubbed “free Syrian army” on the eastern parts of Syria, thereby giving them breathing space and regrouping recouping as well as a Sunni buffer which in turn faces a Kurdi enclave on the east – thereby balancing each other and buffering each other. However the jihadis will be most effective in the greater anonymity of northern Afghanistan and even frontiers of Pakistan to be effective against Iran and Russia. Hence the bulk of the ISIS jihadis will be “helped” by “west” and Saudi-Sunni lobby to “escape” to northern Afghanistan.

US boots on the ground , in the hands of local networks of politics remaining from British imperial days – will effectively be a force that facilitates – willingly or unwillingly – the fall of the “north” to jihadis, while a “progressive” regime will gradually shrink to the south and east of the country around the big cities in the south even while under US “protection”.

The Saudi-Sunni penetration of the US state implies that Trumps “threat” to Pakistan will in effect have little impact. The Sunni-Saudi lobby has slightly different geo-political ambitions compared to what even the pro-Saudi lobby thinks it has. The Sunnis want a repeat of their seventh century jihadi performance – they want one sweep of continuous jihadi territory from Arabia through India into Indonesia in the east, and all the way to Gibraltar in North and Sub-Saharan Africa.

For myself, I see benefit in the expansion of Sunni jihad across Afghanistan and Pakistan and towards India. Jihad destroys pre-existing nationalisms – even the artificial and opportunistically foisted ones like that of Pakistan. It will also weaken the part of the modern Indian state that is ideologically and for other reasons, similar to the pro-Saudi lobby within US “mafia” and which can use state coercive resources to protect the Islamist interests against the non-Muslim majority of the country.  Any genuine resistance to jihad can only come from the vast non-Muslim populations of India but only when their state power actively is no longer able to protect the Islamic infrastructure and allows new state forces to come up that can resist and roll back jihadis back to where it started – in the deserts of Saudis. Jihadis expanding in north Pakistan and Afghanistan will also finally roll-back Chinese presence and effectiveness in this zone.

So the future is bleak and bright.

 

 

 

Advertisements
Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

On academics and their open letters : neo-imperialism from afar

Posted on April 22, 2014. Filed under: Bangladesh, China, Christians, Communist, diaspora, economics, economy, Egypt, financial crisis, Gaza, Hindu, Historians with political agenda, History, India, Indian National Congress, Islam, Islamic propaganda, Israel, Jew, Jihad, Kashmiri Pundit, Left, Maoism, Marxism, Muslims, neoimperialism, Pakistan, Palestine, Politics, rape, religion, Salafi, Saudi, Shia, slavery, Sunni, Syria, Taleban, terrorism, Turkey, UK, USA, Wahabi |

 

A group of sixty odd academics in various UK institutions have decided to join the Indian electoral fray by posting an open letter to the “left” leaning Independent under the headline:

Letters: The idea of Modi in power fills us with dread

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/letters/letters-the-idea-of-modi-in-power-fills-us-with-dread-9273298.html

“As the people of India vote to elect their next government, we are deeply concerned at the implications of a Narendra Modi-led BJP government for democracy, pluralism and human rights in India.”

Concern is always nice. Concern about democracy, pluralism, and human rights are particularly nice to hear about. But when these concerns are raised by voice which are only selectively concerned, that troubles us. These academics are not concerned about continued Saudi rule and its impact on the middle East’s prospects for democracy, pluralism and human rights. They are completely silent about Palestinian ruling junta (that is what it is – because each one of them come solidly from military outfits, and once-dubbed-terrorist groups), or for China, or for Pakistan, or Afghanistan. But more of this at the end.

“Narendra Modi is embedded in the Hindu Nationalist movement, namely the RSS and other Sangh Parivar groups, with their history of inciting violence against minorities. Some of these groups stand accused in recent terrorist attacks against civilians.”

The slyness of academic evasiveness starts to reveal itself now. It is the same method by which so-called professional historians create new impressions of truth by weaving propositions into a narrative and creating a new narrative where propositions become blended into certainties. Note the smooth blending of “some” “stand accused”. At one smooth stroke, these academics of high integrity have made an “accusation” appear as “convicted”, and “some” is used to taint the “whole”.

By their logic, the Congress parivar (family) is embedded in a politics which has had very dubious roles, and sometimes outright bias in defacto protecting Muslim violence from Nehru’s time at power during the Partition, with selective targeting of alleged Hindu violence. Usually the Congress hides behind the legalistic excuse – again first used by Nehru to allow the Islamic violence in Noakhali, Bengal to continue while he personally and immediately intervened in Bihar where Muslims were at the receiving end – that when the Congress sees the victims as non-Muslim, non-Christians, it mumbles about law and order being a state prerogative. Whereas, when Muslims appear to be the target, Congress sees it as a union/federal/central issue. This was the cover under which Congress did not intervene in the genocide of Hindus of Jammu and Kashmir in the late 80’s because in this case it was the Muslims who were the perpetrators. The helplessness of the Hindu surviving refugees, was perhaps the root cause of the revival of the Hindutva” movement these academics so lambast – because many Hindus in the wider arena of India began to realize the selective bias of the Indian state under the Nehrus and the Congress in favour of whitewashing and allowing Islamist violence to thrive, especially if such violence was directed against Hindus.

The Congress is therefore imbedded in a movement, that has always protected Islamism and Islamist pretensions, and have at various times carried elements in its governments who are connected to or stand accused of rioting and communal hatred which amount to acts of terrorism.

“We recall the extreme violence by the Hindu Right in Gujarat in 2002 which resulted in the deaths of at least 1,000 people, mostly Muslims. This violence occurred under Modi’s rule, and senior government and police officials have provided testimony of his alleged role in encouraging or permitting it to occur.”

Recalling is a good thing, but if what happened before under a regime historically is proof of repeating the same then the Congress should be even more in the dock – for the Partition riots happened under the government of Jawaharlal Nehru, and ant-Sikh pogroms happened under Rajiv-Gandhi/Congress, and all the riots that happened before the BJP came first to power, with such spectacular ones as in Bhagalpur, were also under various Congress governments.

The academics think that by adding the word “extreme” to “violence” they can make a special case against Modi -as they perhaps feel, and rightly so, that “violence” has been the norm for anti-Hindu attacks by Islamists or Christianists too. Maybe for them those “other” violence are genuine expressions of grievances,

“Some of his close aides have been convicted for their involvement, and legal proceedings are ongoing in the Gujarat High Court which may result in Modi being indicted for his role. He has never apologised for hate speech or contemptuous comments about various groups – including Muslims, Christians, women and Dalits. His closest aide has been censured recently by India’s Election Commission for hate speech used in this election campaign.

“There is widespread agreement about the authoritarian nature of Modi’s rule in Gujarat, further evidenced by the recent sidelining of other senior figures within the BJP. This style of governance can only weaken Indian democracy. “

Different groups of people agree among themselves about different things. Concepts like “authoritarian” are so abstract, and inconcretizable, that tons of academic papers have tried to make academic careers out of hair-splitting over the very definition of “authoritarian”. Many communists are still dewy eyed over Stalin or Mao, and have “widespread agreement” among themselves over their most fortunate appearance on earth. Same goes for Hitler. Jews have “widespread agreement” in spite of a portion of Jewish origin academics hosted by various UK universities to the contrary – that existence of Israel is perfectly justified even at the cost of Palestinians. There is widespread agreement among large swathes of Muslims about the necessity and justifiability of historical violent genocidic jihad, and significant groups have “widespread agreement” among themselves about the benevolence of sex-slavery of the non-Muslim as part of jihad.

Typically when groups do not want to spell out the membership of the group, or are unsure about their numerical strength in proportion to the wider population – they turn to vagueness, or unpinnable conjectures -so that they can never be called out for lying or pretending, and claiming “widespread agreement” is one way of doing that.

The “widespread agreement” is among this tiny coterie of Indian origin academics – probably groomed and selected in the early days of their studenthood and careers by previous generations and peer groups of British interest serving academics, like the Marxist academics who desperately denied any role of triangular Atlantic slave trade in the kickstart of the British industrial revolution.

The curious bit is about somehow Modi being guilty of sidelining “senior” party members as proof of exceptional authoritarianism. All the Nehru-family members have sidelined senior party members to come to power. Does it not make them even more authoritarian already?

“Additionally, the Modi-BJP model of economic growth involves close linking of government with big business, generous transfer of public resources to the wealthy and powerful, and measures harmful to the poor.”

This is actually hilarious. For this is what actually has been happening since Margaret Thatcher in Britain, happened too even under Tony Blair, and has accelerated under Cameron. Do they want to say that all that has led UK down the drain? Or do they have not the courage to spell out those pearls of wisdom to the masters of their souls? It happens at even grander scale in China, where party-apparatchiks and their minions or progeny ruling over millions in their regional satrapys hog investments from a financial sector which is still centrally and nationally owned as well as managed. No, these academic’s can only open their mouth against the “Hindu” India, and the BJP and Narendra Modi. They have not open lettered even on the very entertaining case of Ukraine, where “right wing nationalists” have been on the rampage with alleged support of big biz and oligarchs who grew into tycoons with diversion of state investments. Naturally – since doing so is not in the current interests of the British ruling interests.

“A Modi victory would likely mean greater moral policing, especially of women, increased censorship and vigilantism, and more tensions with India’s neighbours.”

These academics never protested Muslim censorship, moral policing of women, vigilanteism in Indian Kerala, or Uttar Pradesh, or Bihar, or West Bengal, or Assam, or Christians doing exactly the same in Nagaland and Mizoram, and attempting to do the same in Manipur. They cannot mention anything about those other communities or religions or states, because they cannot afford to show these other ones in the same or worse light than the “Hindus” – then they lose the affection of the system.

Overall, then what does it show about such concerted concerns from such groups?

Let us go back to the very beginning again of their open letter. They are claiming that democracy, pluralism, human rights in a one specific distant nation, is going to be trumped if one man and his party or political alliance gets elected in a plural democracy which as yet respects human rights. One can see why they have been allowed to succeed as academics, because they can pretend an intellect which can be used to legitimize the complete lack of any logical capacity on issues that are of interest to a post-imperialist neo-imperialist state.

The west-European political dogma of the political class has now run into a fatal dilemma. They either have to accept that democracy and pluralism can be used, to subvert, overturn, or cover anti-democracy and non-pluralism – which makes themselves open to analysis as tow whether they had been doing and continue to do so themselves.

Or they have to find escape clauses that can be used selectively to target nations and regimes that they see as obstacles in the way of their agenda of global domination, within their dogma that still allows some mantle of legitimacy for their own systems.

The method being tried out in general for a couple of decades, is trying to enforce a so-called consensus or “widespread agreement”, on very vague and often duplicitous or contradictory criteria to judge if the “consensus” value system is being subverted or not. The west-European dogma thinks it has found an escape clause that can cover their selective neo-imperialist agenda – claim that a certain vague outline of democracy, pluralism and human rights exists – whose identification and verification lies solely in their own hands, which then justifies imperialist intervention in other nations, to overturn regimes, assassinate significant individuals, or economically and militarily destroy the fundamentals of that nation.

In order to find out in whose interests any self-proclaimed group of experts, academics, humanitarians, activists actually are acting for – we just need to check out what they remain silent on in contrast to what they choose to pick on. These open-letter academics do not criticize Hamas or Palestinian authority parts for their Jew-cleansing hate campaigns, torture, rape, murder, or that by the so-called freedom-fighters in Syria, or those in Kosovo and Croatia against Serbs in the 90’s, or the Bahraini state, or the Saudis, or Pakistan, or China, or western Ukraine, or Turkey, or Egypt, or even in their own backyard where the state ruthlessly cracks down with full state violence on peaceful protesters against economic destruction of the commoner.

Just compare their stances on these “other” stuff – and you can identify whom they work for, in whose interests.

 

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( 2 so far )

Counter Thoughts -2: Pakistan should be dissolved as a nation and absorbed into India.

Posted on February 24, 2014. Filed under: Afghanistan, Antisemitism, Arab, Army, China, Christians, Communist, economics, financial crisis, Hindu, History, India, Islam, Islamic propaganda, Jihad, Kashmir, Muslims, neoimperialism, Pakistan, Politics, religion, slavery, Taleban, terrorism, UK, USA, Wahabi |

[First written almost 4 years ago: updated!]

How many nations of our times are based purely on a religion and recognized by other nations as independent nations? Only two – the Vatican City and Pakistan. Ironically they share in common some traits. Both have helped in the unravelling of the USSR but not of Communism – for it still survives behind the People’s Republic of China and is still working towards global dominance. In spite of the UK and West’s blatant support for Pakistani sadism on both Afghans and Indians, for its supposed role in overthrow of USSR – Pakistan is desperately grabbing the Chinese communist hands in gratitude for having benefited from Chinese nuclear proliferation. Pakistan showed that gratitude by dealing in stolen or robbed property – so typical of Islamism, by gifting China territory Pakistan received from its British facilitated deceptive raid mounted on Indian territories in 1948.

Both the Vatican and Pakistan have been courted by the USA in its Cold War struggles. Neither has disappointed. Both exert influence on the global politics disproportionate to their actual size, economy, military capabilities, and the capacity to contribute in any meaningful way towards a modern, knowledge based, technological and information society. Both manage to do so by manipulating their historical images as projections into the future.

But there the similarities end. The Vatican’s leadership has made amends to its historical victims, and has shown its flexibility and readiness to change with the times. It has steadfastly refused to underwrite radicalism of the theological variety [the severe castigation of the Liberation Theology for example].  This may change in the future. But the leadership of the Vatican have proved themselves consummate statesmen in the concessions and compromises that they have made while never abandoning the fundamental objective of total global ideological domination. This is an objective that would have been a crime if not from the “one and only true message”, for any other “religion” in the times when the Church ruled supreme. But now in the days of “total religious tolerance”, there is nothing wrong in having a declared agenda of “harvesting all souls” and poaching on the following of looked-down-upon religious cultures. In fact, legal and state coercive machinery in liberal states can be used to guarantee protection of any proselytizer – even someone swearing by texts that recommend putting the unrepentant unbeliever to the sword, while raising no questions as to the right of the followers of those very same religions – where they are a majority – to deny exactly those very same rights to non-co-religionsists. How tolerant Christianity can be with regards to cohabiting with Islamists, and vice versa – especially where Christians have sufficient numerical strength – was and is being shown in Sudan. But no great talk is being thrown about in the liberal western media about what is going on in Sudan and why.

Where Pakistan differs is not in its protection of organizations claiming the right to practice “Dawa” or spreading of the Islamist beliefs -in parallel to Christianist demands for the right to badmouth non-Christian religions and beliefs and “spread the light” – by any and all means possible, and where even “charity” as concrete monetary benefits is kosher in a process of buying religious allegiance that in the corporate world would be condemned as criminal bribing –  but in its total lack of statesmanship. Unlike the Vatican, the Pakistani leadership never apologizes to the victims of its Islamists, never acknowledges that it has nurtured Jihadis in its madrassahs, never concedes to modernization in education and social practices, never really allows any land reforms or dismantling of feudal exploitation in its backyard.

Pakistan is basically an anachronism, a nation whose only foundational claim for identity is a religion – in a historical period where the world is leaving behind, exclusive and historical claim based religions. Moreover, that religion is not even unique to the country – it is shared by a host of other nations, some of whom have louder and more well established claims of being the centre for that religion. So Pakistan is based on a type of ideology increasingly irrelevant globally as national foundation, and moreover on an ideology based identity shared with other “nations” – and therefore has no real claims of distinction from other nations. It cannot look at history and culture, for in spite of the best sadistic efforts of generations of  “mullahs” – elements of pre-Islamic cultures lie firmly interwoven in the national fabric, and those elements are shared by its imagined nemesis – India. In fact the pre-Islamic cultural element proved so strong that a part of it broke away in reaction in 1971 as Bangladesh.

So now Pakistan finds itself in a terrible dilemma. To strengthen and give uniqueness to its national foundation, it has to become more Islamic than “others”. Becoming more Islamic means more and more unquestioning obedience to a strict and literal interpretation of the core texts. That in turns means more Jihad with violent means which accelerates the competition between the ruling feudal elite, the army, the mullahs, the commons, the militants – to become “purer” than the others. That means an almost perpetual state of national Jihad. Purer Islam can only be maintained by preventing modernization – in education, productivity, technology and above all the questing mindset. Which means Pakistan will become more and more dependent on largesse from interested external sources and be a drain on the global economy as the sources would spread the cost around.

So the West and the global community should perhaps start thinking of dissolving the entity called Pakistan. Here are the brief reasons :

(1) Dissolving Pakistan saves the West (and therefore the world economy )a huge amount of money and resources needed to keep the state afloat, and a total drain, because none of that capital goes into productive capacities.

(2) Even though the Chinese are now playing second fiddle to the West, it is uncannily similar to the Ribbentrop-Molotov handshake where both sides appear to be buying time. Eventually, Russia and China could come together with Iran (or whatever is left of it even if a so-called revolutionary liberalization and democratization takes place there under non-theologians) to which the CAR will lean. As long as Pakistan remains an independent entity, it can play the prostitute and threaten to kiss the higher bidder or the one more willing to pay.  That is both a security risk and a potential disaster, if everything given to Pakistan lands up in Russian, Iranian or Chinese hands and the West’s presence is virtually terminated in the Afghan-Pakistan frontier. Dissolving Pakistan takes away this worry.

(3)  Dissolving Pakistan and putting up new independent states in its place actually creates new multiple centres where Jihad can be protected and nurtured. One Pakistan becomes many and the western problem multiplies. One of the best bets is to allow India to absorb the populations and the territories.   India is a growing economy which can absorb the costs. It has the capability and the will to manage multicultural groups and religious animosities. Culturally Indians of the western part of the country will be closer to the Pakistanis across the border [Punjab for example shares the language across the border in spite of the state sponsorship of Urdu] compared to any other external ethnicity or country. Moreover the costs of developing infrastructure and the economy or carrying out necessary social reforms will be borne on Indian shoulders and not on the west.

(4) As the price for non-intervention in the absorption, the West could extract concessions from India that it will have assured access and facilities to reach the CAR through channels and routes maintained and developed through Pakistani territories connecting the Karakorum Highway and other CAR approach routes.

(5) The Taliban lose their foster home, and are buffered off from the crucial supply routes of Karakorums and the Arabian Sea. The so-called Kashmir problem vanishes as the Pakistani military and ISI mechanism to foment terrorists inside India vanishes.  So one of the greatest excuses for maintaining Jihad from the Pakistani side, vanishes. With dissolution of Pakistan, one of the persistent Pakistani revivalist jihad trends that periodically and insistently reappears in Bangladesh, gets cut from its roots – leaving only Saudi Arabia and other Gulf states and elements from Malaysia as remnant patrons.

(6) India can and should promise land reforms, and redistribution of concentrated big-landholding from Pakistan’s obnoxious feudal lords and the military upper echelons who are either created landlords as rewards or come from the feudal network itself – to landless and marginal farmers of Pakistan. These are the same people who are exploited ruthlessly, often sexually and through slavery, by the Pakistani elite in an obvious extension of the worst aspects of casteism, but on which no Christian or western liberal intelligentsia will comment upon as it shows Islam in a bad-light compared to eminently much more bashable “Hindu”.

If it is any consolation, MacArthur broke the Japanese feudal class’s back to an extent through land-reforms, in post war Japan. Moreover all the off-shore money laundering units that UK maintains for complete deniability from its colonial days can still harness and will definitely attract Pakistani Islamist and feudal military elite’s looted capital for parking on the prospect of imminent fall before Indian troops, and to play with for financial speculative profits and bonuses by the “city” bosses. That in itself should convince the UK and its ally across the pond, to allow the “fall” to happen.

India, because of linguistic and unique cultural history, will remain firmly in western and specifically the Anglo-Saxon or Atlanticist orbit for generations to come. There are sufficient fissures in the Indian ruling class for the west to exploit and protect western interests.

It is worth a try – at least the largest source for generating terror of the Jihadi and allied kind (through international crime and other non-religious or ethnic militancy) will be effectively liquidated. At one stroke West no longer has to face Islamist terror, pay for upkeep of Jihad, and instead can profit from a growing economy which bears all the costs, together with an alternate route to get closer to tantalizing natural resources to be looted in Central Asia and keep a nervous eye to the age-old threat – Russia! After all, the greatest threats come from those shared common ideological roots, and who are well-versed as brothers from the same family school in the tactics of robber imperialism that originated in “greater” Europe!

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( 4 so far )

CounterThoughts-1 : India’s failure in Bangladesh is a failure to understand Islam.

Posted on January 18, 2014. Filed under: Afghanistan, Arab, Bangladesh, Bengal, China, Communist, Delhi, Hindu, History, India, Indian National Congress, Islam, Islamic propaganda, Jihad, Kashmir, Left, Maoism, Muslims, neoimperialism, Nuclear, Pakistan, Politics, rape, religion, Russia, Salafi, Saudi, Sunni, Taleban, terrorism, UK, USA, Wahabi |

It is almost six years since I started writing on this blog. As with most of my intellectual forays, it was to search for root causes to phenomena on which people seem to be talking from belief, bias, preconception and conscious or subconscious agenda, and on which I seemed to find no answers of my own yet.

Six years later, and a myriad interactions with ideological friends and foes or the merely non-committed, desperately trying to appear neutral middle-roaders, I feel that the task is not only to understand but also to try and share what I have felt to be the way forward while trying to understand.

However, I should stress that I do not support the idea of final answers and incontrovertible truths. More of that later, and I will try to explain why I think so. I am not demanding or claiming that others should think like me, or that what I say or think is important. But it is a deep seated, slowly maturing urge over the years to think aloud, to borrow the cliché. What do I expect out of it? A myriad small sparks, not the incinerating brilliance of a nuclear device, but the small, fragile, light of the primitive oil lamps, or the hopeful glowing embers of the evening fires of cooking of the first human settlements.

I am starting off this sequence with a topic that appears to hog the Indian subcontinental discourse for some time (apart from supposed uniqueness of Indian propensity to rape, or supposed waiting global disaster of a Modi led “saffron” resurgence, or the glowing future of a post NATO Afghanistan, and the continuously improving civilizational status of Pakistan) – namely, the recent elections in Bangladesh.

My thoughts on Bangladesh and its society has been laid out on this blog before. So I will only briefly touch and summarize.

Bangladesh was formed in 1971 as a result of an intra-elite factional contest for power over the Islamist movement that had managed in 1947 to use tactical violence, British covert support, and Delhi-Uttar-Pradesh-Gujarat based axis of the Indian Congress’s fear of the more populous two ends of the Gangetic plains – Punjab and Bengal’s long tradition of independent counter-Delhi political undercurrent.

For the Islamist, they needed a base in which they could nurture jihad and hopefully accumulate the resources for a future “final solution” of getting rid of all Kaffir on the subcontinent, and as many mullahs openly express – more openly in Taliban land fertilized by decades of Saudi funding and tacit support from the UK and the USA through their islamist allies in power in Pakistan. Pakistan was a good starting point for their agenda, as they felt that the liberalizing, modernizing, educating world of the Indian Hindu would eventually open up Islamic society beyond mullah sadistic control.

For the British, smarting under the loss of their global dominance to the Americans, Pakistan would be boots on the ground for British interests. Such interests would include long term hope of reviving sole control over Indian Ocean ring, use American fear of Soviet expansion to simultaneously get the USA involved in regional wars of attrition so over the that long term Americans would be weakened and hated sufficiently to leave the field open again for the British, while at the same time prevent modernization, liberalization and resurgence of cultural identities that the British had hated out of racial, religious and perhaps a bit of underlying twisted obsession with the darker side of human nature.  One of the foremost targets of British hatred was anything to do with the “Hindu”. It was the “Hindu” they saw as the elusive system which sourced resistance to imperialist subjugation where as the supposedly more virulent and “martial” Islam quickly turned bootlickers. For the British – the Congress was “Hindu”, “Sanskrit” was Hindu, Hindu temple and architecture was ugly compared to the seductive feminine curves of the “domes” of Islam, Hindu texts, knowledge base and culture represented the apotheosis of all that was supposedly, pure, Christian and “white”.  The rump state of India that was left after 1947, was still “Hindu” and the galling reminder that the Hindu failed to “convert” to submission to British claims of supremacy. Thus Pakistan, in its western and eastern ends would remain the best chance to gall India into the future, and be hopefully bases of jihadism if not outright British comeback – that will continue to bleed “Hindu” India. At least that was perhaps the hope anyway.

Where the British failed was their belief in their own propaganda, invented out of a necessity to play intra-Islam factionalism to subdue the Ottomans by raising the Wahabi-Saud jihad – that somehow intra-Islamic factional fight for dominance represented the non-monolithic nature of Islam. Islam being actually a cover for blatant imperialism, every regional power within a broader spectrum of Islamic following, will try to become the centre of that imperialist claim – so that they can then use the religious imperialist authority enshrined within Islam – to mobilize the total resources of global reach of Islam for their own individual regional power centre benefit. This has been the history of the Islamic politics right from its inception.

 

Contrary to western misrepresentation, this internal drive to become the supreme imperialist claiming the loyalty and support of all Muslims behind their power hunger, leading to inter-regional fights, does not represent any actual deviation from the core genocidic, culture erasing, enslaving agenda of Islam – where it concerns the as yet non-Muslim.

Now to understand Bangladeshi politics, this above understanding is crucial. The Awami League split from the Muslim League of Jinnah, not out of secular or non-Islamist core drives – but as power seeking movement that wanted the fruits of the partition of 1947, the control over the land and in more mundane terms, the wealth, property and women of the Hindu’s of eastern Pakistan and dominance over the whole of Pakistani state structure.  The greater contiguity and inter-mingling of non-Muslim motifs and memes and the relatively later entry of Islam into the area historically, compared to the western end of India, implied a difficult task ahead for “eastern” Islamists. There were spontaneous popular movements influenced by the remnant secular, liberal and modernizing influences of pre-Partition Hindu-presence [the relative strengths were roughly 45/50-55/50 at the end of a disputed and allegedly biased-in-favour-of-the-Muslim in the last census  before Partition], which was seized upon shrewdly and tactically by the Awami League leadership under Mujibur Rehman. But the fact is often forgotten that Mujibur started his political life as a student activist for the Muslim League in Calcutta, under patronage of Suhrawardy – the architect of government supervised and protected pogrom on Calcutta Hindus that led to the notorious pre-Partition massacres.

Independence for Bangladesh was therefore just a manifestation of the intra-Islamic fight within Islamic imperialism for monopoly of the imperialist claim, it no way represents any compromise at any fundamental level with the commitment to jihadist clearing of non-Muslim cultures, seizing their property and resources and enslaving their women. It would be natural to expect that after the formal separation of power and independence for Bangladesh was obtained by necessary tactical pretension by future leadership of Bangladesh to get Indian and global support – that the core of this political movement would quickly reassert its fundamental drive by getting rid of all symbols and structures that they saw as being tainted by the need to compromise even tactically to “Hindus” or non-muslim sympathetic powers. Mujibur was the most blatant symbol of this and therefore he had to be  made an example of. Note that elements of the core of Awami League and the military which had apparently sided with the “liberation movement” collaborated in the bloodshed.

Since, Bangladesh has consistently seen expulsion and genocide of remnant Hindus, looting of their property, rape and abduction and forced conversion of their women. Islamic atrocities are also typical in the deliberate psychological cruelty or sado-masochistic practices involved – for example it is not enough to simply kill the kaffir, but make it horrific by torture of the most inventive imagination, not only rape but rape before a father or a husband and forcing them to watch – intended to not only cause psychological trauma, but also to burn into the helpless men their emasculation and ineffectiveness. This is an extremely sophisticated grasp over the psychology of coercion, ans shows that the mullah is a highly trained and conditioned psychological warrior who has almost no sense of guilt or empathy where it concerns unleashing the more twisted form of sado-masochistic tendencies in the human.

The recent elections, showing widespread torture, rape, genocide of Hindus as an aftermath, in which elements of both the supposedly winning “secular” Awami League, as well as the BNP and Jamaat combination participated – shows that nothing really has changed from the early days of Islam in that zone. Mymensingh Gitika, a collection of medieval folk tales in verse forms from a region in Bangladesh – tells the story of a Hindu housewife being forced to pleasure a Qazi. Whether a faction loses or wins, be it Awami League or BNP or Jamaat – Islamists would go out to rape Hindu women, torch their houses, and loot their belongings, be it to celebrate a win , or to grieve over a loss.

Bangladeshi core thinking is reflected in the blatant statement of academics of Jehangirnagar university (a deliberate naming done to emphasize the Mughal association, from the Mughal name given to the then town, over the more ancient Dhaka-Vikramanipur – having therefore Hindu connotations) aspiring for an unbroken new Mughalistan carved out of Northern India stretching from Punjab and Pakistan over the Gangetic Valley all he way to Bangladesh and hopefully even what is now North-Eastern India.  Academics and “intelligentsia” of Bangladesh, openly discuss on media and TV shows, the desirability of destabilizing the North-East India so that eventually it gets detached from India and become ripe for Bangladeshi and “Islamic” expansion.

It is in the interest of the core drivers of Bangladeshi society – to preserve elements of Islamist jihadism. Over the years, Saudi and UK based funding sources have developed an extensive network of madrasshas and other institutional means of preaching the Arabic, Sunni-Wahabi views, and the result has been the increasing mass-presence of younger people in extremism, and obvious support enjoyed by the organizations like Hifazat whose members have played an increasingly visibly public as well as militant role.

Indira Gandhi scored a tactical brilliance in 1971, but a strategic blunder when she helped an independent Bangladesh to form. This independent nation immediately showed its fangs of islamism, has continued to expel Hindus, abduct rape and enslave Hindu women, and welcomed all possible transnational anti-India and anti-Hindu forces. As and when Pakistan falls, this nation will provide an alternative base for jihadis to retsart their movement.

I know that many have disagreed with me on this, but I still think, that in 1971, India should have raised the stakes by tantalizing the “west” with supporting Bangladeshi independence, but prepared to compromise if allowed to conquer and re-incorporate the northern “Pakistani occupied Kashmir”, hold on to the thin corridor to Rawalpindi up to the hills of the Swat, and extract a land corridor through Chittagong in the east to the sea. Impose demilitarization of east Pakistan on the formal logic of ensuring that Bengalis were not going to be subjected to Pakistani military atrocities, and guarantee autonomy within Pakistan.  End of all manipulations by China, USA and the UK and their support for the violently sadistic societies and mullahs of jihad in both ends of Pakistan. The Indian naval presence on both sides of the mouth of the delta and demilitarization would ensure the prevention of Pakistani military presence for ever to repeat the type sex-alavery and torture camps that they ran in 1971, and end of Chinese imperialist expansion schemes and their consequent inputs in genocide on subcontinental soil. End of Karakorum highway being lucrative for geo-political sadism and an alternative and peaceful land network to central Asia, connecting to India the more liberalizable northern Afghanistan, Central Asian Republics bypassing the Pakistani/Gulf/Saudi proximity and mullahfied jihadi societies of Southern Afghanistan and starving them of the economic flow that they now hog and use to support jihad.

It sounds too cynical, too “reverse-imperialist”, “safffron-revivalist”? We have seen most of the previous liberalizing conquests. They have only enhanced the blatantly cynical, racist, and sadistic existing imperialistic implementations of the Abrahamic cults. Why not a counter offensive that has proven its secular, liberal and modernizing credentials?

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( 2 so far )

Say No to theological demands for immunity from criticism

Posted on September 22, 2012. Filed under: Antisemitism, China, Christians, Hindu, Iran, Islam, Islamic propaganda, Israel, Jew, Jihad, Left, Marxism, Muslims, neoimperialism, Pakistan, religion, Russia, Syria, Taleban, terrorism, USA |

As the so-called movie-protests continue with random and sometimes what appears as organized violence, here are a few thoughts :

  • Claim: The protests are not based on ideology/religion. They are expression of hatred against America and the West and Israel.
  • Reality : Muslims have been violently protesting against claimed insults to their religion or to their prophet, from the time of the prophet himself – according to Muslim core texts. Intolerance for any criticism of any Islamic claim is built into the theology. The case of assassinating a mother of suckling baby, for being a poet and composing verses that were irritating to the prophet – is one among many but not unique, iconic examples of the Islamic doctrine  of extreme intolerance of the spoken or written word.
  • Reality : If the protests were really against America and the West, why is Saudi Arabia or Saudi monarchy spared the loving expressions of outrage? A key factor in the West’s dominance of the globe is its linkage to Saudi oil and petro wealth. Saudis collaborate effectively with Israel against Iran. But nothing happens against those in the Islamic world who collaborate with and are helped in turn by the West.
  • Reality : Afghan Taleban and assorted islamists, Pakistani islamists, Yemeni islamists, Nigerian or Sudanese or Somali or Niger islamists, Iran and Iraq in their war against each other, or continued proxy conflicts in Iraq or Syria between Sunnis and Shias – all are about Muslims repressing Muslims, Muslims torturing, raping, massacring Muslim men, women and children. But no violent Muslim protests happen against them.
  • Claim : The reason for hating America, West and Israel, is because of their “mistreatment” of Muslims.
  • Reality : Russia “mistreats” Chechen and Daghestani Muslims. China violently represses Uyghurs. No protests happen against Russia and China.
  • Fact : Intolerance of the written or spoken word of criticism is built into the core theology of Islam. Even under the rule of the founder himself, the attested cases of execution of women are known to have been about claimed “mockers” of the prophet or Islam – as in the case of when Mecca was “conquered”.  These parts of the story – where poets- women or men were specifically targeted by Islamists, are quietly dropped in even the modern western dramatizations of these stories.
  • Fact : Islamic vitriol and denigration of other religions, primarily Christianity [even if use of Jesus in Islamic texts is always cited in apologetics], Judaism, and Hinduism – exist all over the web. The language of the vitriol range from the sophisticated to the vilest gutter versions ever imaginable. Perhaps they reflect more the state and hidden desires or psychological disorders in the repressive Middle Eastern societies, but in terms of cold hard printed or written word – they are worse denigrators of other religions and their respective beloved icons.
  • Fact : Christian leadership of the more established church organizations are and will remain ambivalent towards this intolerance, perhaps because some of them also feel the need for protection under neo-anti-blasphemy laws. Ideologies which know they have serious weaknesses in their foundations, resort to ideological as well as physical coercion to enforce their authority.  Their ultimate tool is the demand for silencing of critical voices and doubts – because the fear is that such words would expose the underlying vicious hunger for power masquerading as concern for the “spirit” after “death”.
  • Fact : Marxists too will be ambivalent towards this intolerance, because part of them look upon Islamists as a useful tool against their so-called neo-imperialists, or as potential allies against their infantile rage against their more-liberal-than-islam birth societies. Theirs is a search for the mythical golden pre-tribal age of primitive societies assumed to be egalitarian. For the Marxists who are more pragmatic, it is a case too of protecting their dogma and pseudo-religion against critical thinking – the reason Leninist party discipline was primarily seeking to gag dissent being made public, and the public getting uncomfortable ideas.
  • Fact : Fighting against the demand for this protection of intolerance, protection or immunity from the assailant “word”, is a crucial aspect of protecting all the gains that human civilization has made over the last five hundred years from the Renaissance. If we retain the right to freely criticize and express our dissent from any dogma, any theology, any ideology, any hypothesis, except the hypothesis of “right to criticize freely” – we can always regain whatever we lose through temporary reversals of the human civilization.
  • Appeal : do whatever is needful, democratically, freely, openly, publicly – to preserve the right to criticize, the right to freely speak and express, regardless of any dogmatic claim to the contrary.  Do not let any government or legislature of the free world accommodate the Islamist lobby in this regard. This is about freedom and all about not letting totalitarianism raise its head again.
Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

Rahul, Roemer allegedly and Wikipee : who is conning whom?

Posted on December 21, 2010. Filed under: Ayodhya, China, Christians, Hindu, Historians with political agenda, History, India, Islam, Islamic propaganda, Jihad, Kashmir, Kashmiri Pundit, Muslims, Rahul Gandhi, USA |

Recently, the net and the news media has been abuzz with a certain founder of a certain website that claims to release into the public domain supposed secret communications between American diplomats and Washington. Using some journalistic license in lampooning I will use the keyword “Wikipee” – since in some casually polite English circles “taking a leak” is an euphemism for a natural and essential mammalian act. Apologies in advance if anyone feels offended – both from the supporting or the opposing side.

Having said that, there is no alternative verification possible about the truth, reality or reliability of the information posted, so we can neither accept them at face value, nor reject them at face value. There are wild speculations about the possibility of these being a selected list of items which have been manufactured to create a certain opinion in favour of US foreign policy itself or help the US attain specific foreign policy objectives. Attacking the apparent source in public could then be seen as increasing the credibility of the source. On the other hand, it could also be simply a random act of omission, carelessness, negligence combined with various personal grievances and ideological dissent from among American personnel at various levels. It could even be an act of penetration and sabotage by opposing international forces like China which has been alleged many times as behind hacking attempts against national governments.

But whoever has selected the items to be released must have selected it out of some purpose, some aim at creating some impression. Here I will look at one item that has raised a huge storm in India : the alleged quote of Rahul Gandhi alleging much greater threat of supposed “Hindu Terror” compared to Pakistani or Islamist terror. The concerned text can be found here : http://cablesearch.org/cable/view.php?id=09NEWDELHI1624

5. (C) Responding to the Ambassador’s query about Lashkar-e-Taiba’s activities in the region and immediate threat to India, Gandhi said there was evidence of some support for the group among certain elements in India’s indigenous Muslim community. However, Gandhi warned, the bigger threat may be the growth of radicalized Hindu groups, which create religious tensions and political confrontations with the Muslim community. (Comment: Gandhi was referring to the tensions created by some of the more polarizing figures in the BJP such as Gujarat Chief Minister Narendra Modi.) The risk of a “home-grown” extremist front, reacting to terror attacks coming from Pakistan or from Islamist groups in India, was a growing concern and one that demanded constant attention.
Comment

If true, Rahul is actually causing some severe logical problems for both himself as well as his party.

(a) Alleged “Hindu terrorists”—who are so completely penetrated, rounded up and cases put up in a jiffy by the Indian anti-terror organizations currently under the Congress led government in contrast to the lackadaisical pursuit of cases, penetration and rounding up or even absence of proper cases by the same government agencies if a single Indian Muslim name appears in connection with any terror atrocity — are accused of bomb blasts in 2007 and 2008 in Andhra Pradesh, Rajasthan and Maharashtra that killed 17 people. According to the South Asia Terrorism Portal, the toll in India from about two dozen radical Islamic terrorist attacks since 9/11 stands at more than 950 dead and many hundreds more injured.

The principal Hindu groups accused have little or no international presence – no theological support within Hinduism similar to the doctrine of violent Jihad (yes violent, as amply borne out by the core texts of Islam, where one ambiguous citing for “conditional peaceful treatment of people of the book” is propagandized by modern hagiographers compared to numerous references where Jihad is only mentioned in the context of violence). But those alleged to have a hand behind incidents like the 26/11 Mumbai attacks, have a wide ranging support network and connections of Islamist Jihad.

No Islamist government whose territories have been used to perpetrate terror on India has seriously taken any steps at all to try and book the culprits or even properly investigate the organizations. India under the Congress on the other hand jumps up and down ardently to pin the blame on its majority community.

Nowhere in the alleged report by Roemer, Rahul Gandhi is quoted as saying similar things about Jihadi terror. Significantly there is no hint of any importance being given to the Maoist terror or Left wing radicalism, which has consistently claimed lives and property damages. No mention either of outfits in the North East with open affiliations to Christian beliefs or who appear to tout their religious affiliation as a means of attracting obvious international interest and support.

(b) Rahul is a shame on his “historian” great-grandfather, who at least selectively quoted histories existing at his time and predominantly created by colonial historians with their own imperialist agenda in mind.

He tries to blame all Islamist Jihadi reaction against India as a reaction to supposed Hindu atrocities or provocations. But then can he answer what Hindu provocation in Jammu and Kashmir provoked the violent rapes and massacres and ethnic cleansing of Kashmiri pundits in 1989 – a full three years before the supposed incident over the disputed structure at Ayodhya?

Moreover, if Islamist reaction has only started as reaction to Hindu provocation, then did his great-grandfather Jwaharlal Nehru – who became the sole and supreme leaders of the Congress, its legislative wing, and key figure in the transitional government for independence of India – provoke the Muslims so much so that they went into Direct Action (rather Direct Rape and Genocide Action) Day leading to the Partition in 1947? The majority of Hindus made up the Congress at the time.

If every violence is due to historical trauma, why cannot Hindus have a similar justification and only Muslims are allowed to use such an excuse? If every historical atrocity event has a precursor provocation  event, why does not Rahul try to apply the same logic to alleged Hindu violence?


¶6. (C) Gandhi was forthright in describing the challenges faced by the Congress Party and the UPA government in the months ahead. Over the past four years, he was an elusive contact, but he could be interested in reaching out to the United States, given a thoughtful, politically sensitive and strategic approach on our part. We will seek other opportunities to engage with him and with other promising young members of the new generation of parliamentarians. Gandhi mentioned that in the recent election 60 members of the new Parliament were 45 or younger. In a system long viewed as relatively static, the influx of new faces and the rising profile of young leaders like Rahul Gandhi provides us an opening to expand the constituency in support of the strategic partnership with a long term horizon.

What is however more seriously damaging for Rahul Gandhi and the US itself is however here. If the US feels that reaching out to Rahul will ensure securing US strategic interests, that damns both Rahul and the US and their mutual strategic interest.

(1) Rahul’s desirability for the US makes him rather dubious as a candidate to win the future trust of Muslims.

(2) For India’s Hindus, US approach to enlist Rahul on their side is discomforting. His religious affiliations have been publicly ambiguous, unlike her illustrious grandmother Indira Gandhi who at least had no discomfort in display her Hindu affiliation, and there are increasing concerns in many quarters of India about the aggressive proselytization and conversion activities of Christian missionaries funded by Evangelicals from the USA – activities often seemingly protected by state machinery whereas any attempt at reconversion back into Hinduism is treated as “violence”.

USA forgets that the record of Christian missionaries and the Churches have often been actions in favour of colonial and imperialist designs, and that perception remains in the general Hindu society although it always does not come out in the Abrahamic violent intolerance of the “other” because of the inherent pluralistic nature of Hinduism.

(3) USA also should keep in mind that if the majority Hindu is sought to be disempowered and its faith undermined or attacked, then there are two fallouts that the USA will not be able to control.

First, removal of the Hindu from India will mean that there will be no moderating influence to mediate between the Islamists and the Christians, and these two have never been able to flourish together. No country exists today where this has been so. The only known example where it comes close to co-existence is Lebanon, which however speaks for itself. Removal or weakening or attacking the Hindu will mean civil war between Islamist Jihadis and Christian Jihadis – and who will ultimately win that war – Chinese or the Russians or it will become all a part of the grand Islamic Caliphate.

Second, Hindus have never proven easily digestible. They have not always gone the Abrahamic sectarian, non-pluralistic way – but neither have they always succumbed to onslaughts. Islamics made the error of treating the Hindu as a single category to be wiped off, and the Sikhs and the Marathas were the result who practically made the Mughals their slaves. Timely intervention of British saved the Muslims to an extent, but if US lends a hand to a similar attack against the “Hindu” – will it not do the opposite of what USA or its Evangelists want? What if it only consolidates the moderates and the conservative Hindu together more?

USA has often proved its shortsightedness in dealing with nations by concentrating on individual apparently pliable fanbois. Most of the time they turned out at the head of corrupt and unpopular regimes, supporting which even the US became ultimately unpopular in that country. It would be better sense to look at the national fabric, its majority culture and framework – which in case of India will provide a much better long term security for US strategic interests in Asia.

I hope there is more sense in one of the few remaining hopes for democracy and freedom of thought and words – that is the American “conscience”.

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

Is it time for the West to plan for dissolving Pakistan?

Posted on March 12, 2010. Filed under: Afghanistan, Bangladesh, China, Communist, economy, India, Iran, Islam, Muslims, Pakistan, Russia, Taleban, terrorism, USA |

How many nations of our times are based purely on a religion and recognized by other nations as independent nations? Only two – the Vatican City and Pakistan. Ironically they share in common some traits. Both have helped in the unravelling of the USSR but not of Communism – for it still survives behind the People’s Republic of China and is working towards global dominance. Both have been courted by the USA in its Cold War struggles. Neither has disappointed. Both exert influence on the global politics disproportionate to their actual size, economy, military capabilities, and the capacity to contribute in any meaningful way towards a modern, knowledge based, technological and information society. Both manage to do so by manipulating their historical images as projections into the future.

But there the similarities end. The Vatican’s leadership has made amends to its historical victims, and has shown its flexibility and readiness to change with the times. It has steadfastly refused to underwrite radicalism of the theological variety [the severe castigation of the Liberation Theology for example].  This may change in the future. But the leadership of the Vatican have proved themselves consummate statesmen in the concessions and compromises that they have made while never abandoning the fundamental objective of total global ideological domination. This is an objective that would have been a crime if not from the “one and only true message” for any other “religion” in the times when the Church ruled supreme. But now in the days of “total religious tolerance”, there is nothing wrong in having a declared agenda of “harvesting all souls”. In fact, legal and state coercive machinery can be used to guarantee protection of any proselytizer – even someone swearing by texts that recommend putting the unrepentant unbeliever to the sword.

Where Pakistan differs is not in its protection of organizations claiming the right to practice “Dawa” or spreading of the Islamist beliefs – but in its total lack of statesmanship. Unlike the Vatican, the Pakistani leadership never apologizes to the victims of its Islamists, never acknowledges that it has nurtured Jihadis in its madrassahs, never concedes to modernization in education and social practices, never really allows any land reforms or dismantling of feudal exploitation in its backyard.

Pakistan is basically an anachronism, a nation whose only foundational claim for identity is a religion – in a historical period where the world is leaving behind, exclusive and historical claim based religions. Moreover, that religion is not even unique to the country – it is shared by a host of other nations, some of whom have louder and more well established claims of being the centre for that religion. So Pakistan is based on a type of ideology increasingly irrelevant globally as national foundation, and moreover on an ideology based identity shared with other “nations” – and therefore has no real claims of distinction from other nations. It cannot look at history and culture, for in spite of the best sadistic efforts of generations of  “mullahs” – elements of pre-Islamic cultures lie firmly interwoven in the national fabric, and those elements are shared by its imagined nemesis – India. In fact the pre-Islamic cultural element proved so strong that a part of it broke away in reaction in 1971 as Bangladesh.

So now Pakistan finds itself in a terrible dilemma. To strengthen and give uniqueness to its national foundation, it has to become more Islamic than “others”. Becoming more Islamic means more and more unquestioning obedience to a strict and literal interpretation of the core texts. That in turns means more Jihad with violent means which accelerates the competition between the ruling feudal elite, the army, the mullahs, the commons, the militants – to become “purer” than the others. That means an almost perpetual state of national Jihad. Purer Islam can only be maintained by preventing modernization – in education, productivity, technology and above all the questing mindset. Which means Pakistan will become more and more dependent on largesse from interested external sources and be a drain on the global economy as the sources would spread the cost around.

So the West and the global community should perhaps start thinking of dissolving the entity called Pakistan. Here are the brief reasons :

(1) Dissolving Pakistan saves the West (and therefore the world economy )a huge amount of money and resources needed to keep the state afloat, and a total drain, because none of that capital goes into productive capacities.

(2) Even though the Chinese are now playing second fiddle to the West, it is uncannily similar to the Ribbentrop-Molotov handshake where both sides appear to be buying time. Eventually, Russia and China could come together with Iran (or whatever is left of it even if a so-called revolutionary liberalization and democratization takes place there under non-theologians) to which the CAR will lean. As long as Pakistan remains an independent entity, it can play the prostitute and threaten to kiss the higher bidder or the one more willing to pay.  That is both a security risk and a potential disaster, if everything given to Pakistan lands up in Russian, Iranian or Chinese hands and the West’s presence is virtually terminated in the Afghan-Pakistan frontier. Dissolving Pakistan takes away this worry.

(3)  Dissolving Pakistan and putting up new independent states actually creates new multiple centres where Jihad can be protected and nurtured. One Pakistan becomes many and the western problem multiplies. One of the best bets is to allow India to absorb the populations and the territories.   India is a growing economy which can absorb the costs. It has the capability and the will to manage multicultural groups and religious animosities. Culturally Indians of the western part of the country will be closer to the Pakistanis across the border [Punjab for example shares the language across the border in spite of the state sponsorship of Urdu] compared to any other external ethnicity or country. Moreover the costs of developing infrastructure and the economy or carrying out necessary social reforms will be borne on Indian shoulders and not on the west.

(4) As the price for non-intervention in the absorption, the West could extract concessions from India that it will have assured access and facilities to reach the CAR through channels and routes maintained and developed through Pakistani territories connecting the Karakorum Highway and other CAR approach routes.

(5) The Taliban lose their foster home, and are buffered off from the crucial supply routes of Karakorums and the Arabian Sea. The so-called Kashmir problem vanishes as the Pakistani military and ISI mechanism to foment terrorists inside India vanishes.  So one of the greatest excuses for maintaining Jihad from the Pakistani side vanishes.

India, because of linguistic and unique cultural history, will remain firmly in western and specifically the Anglo-Saxon or Atlanticist orbit for generations to come. There are sufficient fissures in the Indian ruling class for the west to exploit and protect western interests.

It is worth a try – at least the largest source for generating terror of the Jihadi and allied kind (through international crime and other non-religious or ethnic militancy) will be effectively liquidated. At one stroke West no longer has to face Islamist terror, pay for upkeep of Jihad, and instead can profit from a growing economy which bears all the costs!

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( 5 so far )

TalebPak : towards the new Caliphate

Posted on October 17, 2009. Filed under: Afghanistan, China, Hindu, India, Islam, Islamic propaganda, Muslims, Pakistan, Taleban, terrorism, USA |

The new leadership of the Taleban have openly laid out their formal objectives. Once they establish “purer” Islamism on Pakistan they are going to target India. This was stated in an interview broadcast by the Sky. This fits perfectly the scenario that I have been promoting as possible- perhaps for many, a bit too paranoid.

There can be all sorts of explanations and possibilities of deception to explain this away. One of the most plausible ones will be that of the need in some school of opinion within the USA to create the impression that India should contribute towards US plans as India is also “threatened” – or that if the collapse of Pak is not staved off with Indian contribution also, India will “suffer”. UK’s inner strategy or secret services may also be interested in maintaining their own strategic asset which they had created by the Partition on the subcontinent – Pakistan. China has contributed its own towards this “save Pakistan” bandwagon by raising the spectre of a “threat” in Arunachal Pradesh. At the same time Naxals have been activated inside India.

This means that all of the non-Indian parties involved in this merry game think that for one reason or the other, the time for loss of direct handle on the Pakistani Jihadi state is imminent. The Jihadis have organized and overcome their factional divisions, to further the overall aims with which the Islamists joined the British project of creating Pakistan. This overall aim on the part of the Islamists, was a revival of the legendary and mythical Caliphate that sat astride the main economic exchange route between the main production centres of the world – East and the West. The Islamists’ extremely low intellectual and educational level, combined with the aridity and nonproductivity of the lands they occupied, implied they could only live off the produce of others. Once oil runs out or is replaced by alternatives, the temporary productivity in economic terms that allowed them to flourish – will be lost. Then they will need to go back to the Caliphate model – which was essentially a way of justifying the basically looting economy of Islam – to extract surplus from allowing trade between the east and west.

Islamists cannot allow modern educational pursuits that could have allowed them to try and climb back on to the current knowledge based economy. Modern education is typically based on open exploration and unrestricted questioning. This is dangerous for Islam – as learning to question in one direction can spill over on to questioning the very claims based on which theologians and Islamic social system imposes itself on human society. So the Islamists’ very own obsessive search for permanent and absolute power, limits their educational, research and knowledge-base improvement. This leaves them only with the old Caliphate model to extract a peace-tax on global trade between the two main regions of innovation and productivity.

The Islamists have seen their chance now. USA the main thorn in their side (as the controller and chief patron – although supportive but still restraining beyond a certain limit) has been weakened. China has come up as a competitor economy to the USA, and is willing to take up the role of the patron. Also because of the competition, China will be more lenient than the USA in allowing the Jihadis greater freedom in their murderous objectives as long as such objectives do not directly infringe on China’s own imperialist designs.

Contrary to popular speculation I  had tried to emphasize that Pakistan will not implode on its own. Instead, the basic Jihadi core behind Pakistan’s state will activate its programme of Jihadi expansion in both directions – Afghanistan and India. This is part of recreating the only economic model they can understand and which they feel will still allow them to maintain their lifestyle and power structures – that of the mythical Caliphate (in historical reality a very short period of success).

The conflict we see now is a superficial one – maintained only because of external interest and pressure. This does not mean that every part of the state machinery of Pakistan is insincere in its formal confrontation. But only those parts which are vulnerable to western pressure or believe in a middle road between the Jihadis and the west are participating actively. This is a minority in Pakistan. Over the years, Arab patronization of Wahabi radicalization through education and other sociopolitical means have practically erased all resistance to the core Jihadi ideology within Pakistan. The society itself has no firm ideological and cultural basis to resist the Jihadis.

Sooner or later, India will have to face the Jihadis. It cannot do so by imagining and trying to convince the Indian people – that Islamic ideology is completely detached from what Islamists are practising. It cannot pretend that preserving the roots and basis of Islamic culture on the subcontinent will allow peaceful coexistence of Pakistan and India. By doing any such pretension, any Indian regime betrays its people – for it creates the false impression and expectations of inherent “benevolence” that is the source of confusion in being ruthless towards Jihadis.

There is only one solution for this whole problem – dissolution of Pakistan as a state, and complete dismantling of Islamic educational system, complete deactivation of those theologians already brought up in the Wahabi tradition. These in turn can only be done if the current populations under Pakistan comes under direct  control of  a secular regime that is also firmly anti-Islamist.

One way of course is the reunification of the people and land currently under the control of Islamophile and Jihad-tolerating-supporting regime in Pakistan, with that of a firm and no-nonsense secular power based in India. That will be the opening of untold opportunities for the people now living in Pakistan in terms of health, education and an open society where voices of dissent and protest against arbitrariness cannot be silenced by fatwas and fanatical Islamist zealots. Freedom from the terror of violent and personal-greed-hiding imposition of Sharia – is something which these people have even forgotten to dream about. The Indian ruling elite has proved its secular credentials by being more ruthless on what it dubs “Hindu right wing fascism” than it ever showed the teeth against Islamic Jihad. The “Muslims” of Pakistan will actually be treated more fairly than the “native” Hindus under such Indian regimes.

Those who will oppose this objective will do so from a variety of covert and overt interests and positions. This will include excuses of humanitarian values, claims of inherent benevolence of the ideology and all blames only on “misinterpretation”, supposed positive and inseparable cultural contributions, as well as claimed inherent superiority of the ideology compared to all other pre-existing ones on the subcontinent in terms “equality/fraternity” etc. with attendant suppression of real historical experience.

Covert interests will primarily be external – with strategic interests of  continued energy, economic and territorial imperialism. These can also be tackled, if India shows the will and determination to do so.

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( 3 so far )

Indian concession at Sharm-el-Sheik : breathing time for Jihad

Posted on August 10, 2009. Filed under: Afghanistan, Army, China, India, Islam, Islamic propaganda, Muslims, Pakistan, Politics, Rahul Gandhi, Taleban, terrorism, USA |

Manmohan Singh (MMS), the economist PM of India is being buffeted from both sides of the political divide about the mysterious origins of the supposed joint statement in Egypt at Sharm-el-Sheik (S-e-S). He has apparently conceded a lot to his Pakistani counterpart.

Any strengthening of the hands of the semi-feudal elite at the head of Pakistani regime and military, means strengthening of Jihadi Islam. For only by propagating Jihad, Pakistan has been able to ransom the world, and particularly the West, to survive on a state which was, right from its paranoid conception, unsustainable.

So what really could have been the run-up to the supposed concession by the Indian Prime minister?

Suppose we have the following hypothesis :

The inner echelons of decision making within the Congress hierarchy decides in tandem with (or is persuaded by) USA and UK, that, in the short term – stabilization of the Gilani government is necessary. If the Gilani government falls, and the unreliable Pakitani Army (PA)  is left with government powers, or Musharraf makes a comeback, or the PA teams up with the Talebs, or atleast some sort of  Terrorist State of Pakistan (TSP) government pressure is not mounted against the Talebs until the Afghanistan elections are over, USA will lose all its bases in TSP although TSP will still carry on with support of China.

This could panic the Congress leadership, if they do not have much faith in the fighting ability of the Indian people. The current Congress-top-think is probably geared towards equating survival with the proximity of USA. USA could convince the Congress leadership that, it was more important to increase the prestige of Gilani in the eyes of the “commons” of TSP, since Gilani was actually on amuch weaker political basis and is only being propped up because of USA. The Congress on the other hand has been given a strong electoral mandate recently to do as they please. So some concessions, to Gilani, would be important.

As is usual in such cases, MMS might have been reassured that it would all only be verbal, and not meant concretely and as a commitment. The coterie around the dynasty however were not sure of the political fallout, and hence the “future leader” was solidly kept out of any association with this. If any negative thing comes out of S-e-S, it will be blamed on the benign ego of a well-meaning but elderly gentleman inching towards senility (no MMS is not senile – but I am saying it could be passed off as such).

I also think of  him as amenable to “persuasion”. Of course he is subject to “influence”. But he is too weak politically to take such decisions all alone. Such decisions have to come from a more protected and better hidden core. The script is definitely there – and I had been worrying for quite some time that the new Government of India seemed too “eager” and over-ambitious and was in a hurry, and for me that was a possible indication that they knew they had little time before something quite negative was possible.

My worry is that the phenomenon that happened around Sanjay, is repeating itself around Rahul Gandhi. A so-called young gun think-tank could be forming. But this time around, the interested “outsiders” will not take the risk, and will ensure that at least some of their controllers belong to this circle. Likely candidates will be those who have had long “foreign” stints – I have a certain gentleman from “God’s own” in mind.

A Bharatyia society that takes the decision to reincorporate territories currently under Government of  TSP occupation, will only do it after it has come to certain decisions about TSP and the people under it. People are not born with genes for Islamic Jihad and universal hatred for the Quafir. Children born in TSP and Afghanistan are not born with a gene for Jihad either. These are people, who are  kin of the Indic (in spite of their tall-claims of having Arabic descent) – they have almost entirely Indic roots. I, for one think of them simply as blood brothers and sisters of Indians who are forced into a crucible of hatred from birth and not given any other options to even think of other options. Incorporation under a liberal, democratic and modernizing nation of India gives them that option to be otherwise – to be different from the rabid pack of animals they seem to be headed towards.

I would consider it a civilizational duty of Bharat to create conditions under which branches of the Bharatyia civilizational family, however distant they might have become, and however wayward they might have become, are brought back to the family hold – by the ears, if need be, kicking and screaming if needs be. To be thrashed if they want to go back to the lawless streets, and loved if they behave. This is to ensure that we do not have a vicious bandit on the loose whom we could have easily controlled and made otherwise useful.

It will also be much safer for the “neighbours”.

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

Talebani Pakistani Army unleashed – the great gift of the West and China to the subcontinent

Posted on April 27, 2009. Filed under: Afghanistan, Army, China, India, Islam, Islamic propaganda, Kashmir, Muslims, Pakistan, Russia, Taleban, terrorism, USA |

The Taliban thrust towards India is now probably materializing. Those who have been dreaming for implosion of Pakistan should sit up and notice. A lot of the strategic negatives for India I had scoped for are possibly coming together now. Obama’s policy as I mentioned before was about stabilization and all his initial bluster would be simply to not be outdone by Bush’s legacy. His ultimate goal would be a compromise with Jihad, minimize US commitments and withdraw without appearing to withdraw. The US is leaving the neo-caliphate, and Obama is simply trying to buy it out by paying Pakistan lavishly.

Whether India likes it or not, my envisioned TalebaniPakistani caliphate expansive thrust from their base area in the Pakistan-Afghanistan border, into the South East will start now in earnest. They will be helped by China, who will see this as a golden opportunity to seal off India’s potential linking up with Afghanistan and blocking Chinese access to the subcontinent through north Kashmir. The Caliphate’s expansion into Kashmir is a big strategic gain for Jihad. A weak and Islam-appeasing Government of India will simply give this as proof that Indians are not doing sufficiently in appeasement. Even the unthinkable could happen – the Indian state could fall before Jihad in the North. And this would then be an unrelenting aggression from neo-caliphate jihad.

With the declared and proposed “army action” by Pakistani Army against the Talebs, one of two things is going to happen. Either the Pakistani Army command arranges for an “eyewash” of temporary retreat by the Talebs so that international pressure can be staved off a bit. But a worse future scenario would be the formal switching over of sides by the Pakistani Army troops once they are in the “contact zone”. This would lead to a very rapid “collapse” of the entire north of Pakistan.

For the moment, it is not in the interests of the Pakistani Army to reveal to the world that the entire north collapses before the Talebs or that the Talebs are simply the irregular wing of the theologian-Jihadi-military structure of the Pakistani Army. This will choke up the material resources supply that it needs to finance and support its long term Jihadi ambitions for the subcontinent. With the recent phased supply promised by the “west” it needs to formally wait until this resource is delivered. Also, China would be under pressure to and there could be concerted effort by the US to remove the nukes from within Pakistani territory. Which would be a great loss of bargaining power for the Pakistani Army.

So my guess will be a formal temporary retreat by the Talebs, and much fanfare about assembling troops for military action against the Talebs. This will never materialize fully on the ground. Any formal engagement that Pakitani Army is forced to go in with the Talebs now, is problematic. If they really have to take action, for the sake of the media and the western opinion, this would mean a war of attrition between irregulars and regulars of the same force. This is not good for the future projections and ambitions of the Pakistani Army. So there is going to be no serious fight. At most those units will be sacrificed deliberately whose loyalty to the essential Jihadi cause of the Pakistani Army leadership, is suspect. Or whose future preservation could preserve military expertise in “undesirable” ethnic communities.

The promised huge western help and the undercover help provided by China and the Islamic powers has to be built up sufficiently, as stocks have been depleted to provide for the success of the Taleb adventure in Afghanistan, and maintaining terrorist activities against India. Once sufficiently built up, the resources will be used to plan and support the next phase of Jihadi expansion – more into Afghanistan and east and north into Pakistan, and finally on to India – the ultimate target.

But any serious attempts by the Pakistanis to use the Talebs to finish their unfinished agenda of grabbing Kashmir by People’s Liberation Army, will necessitate actions on many fronts, both to the general direction of south-west and west from Srinagar. The complication can be facilitation by the PLA of the Talebs from the “north” or Karakorum highway, and any diversionary attacks or movements by the PLA in Chinese occupied sectors of India.

Hopefully the USA is not at the same time manipulated by its allies and “business interests” like UK or China, to treat this as an opportunity where the Talebs appear to be less strong in the Afghanistan sector as they appear to have moved their momentum to the east. There could be genuine agreements between the so-called good-Talebs and the USA to “shift east”. On the other hand it could all be a part of ruse and deception, where the Talebs want to appear to have moved to the east, but in reality preparing to trap the NATO forces in the west.

Some Indian political parties have promised Indian army support to tackle terrorism inside Pakistan. Promising openly, Indian soldiers to fight Taleban in Pakistan, can be a double-edged sword. On the one hand, this can activate US and western forces who have interests in the outcome of Indian elections in favour of the “promiser”. But on the other hand this will prompt the Taleb-Pakistanis to intensify their campaign against Kashmir and western India in general. Given that the grounds have been prepared for both “withdrawal to save the skin” as well as “jingo” mentality, this can lead to an uncertain outcome. There can be loud cries of, “more needs to be done to assure the communities, since all these attacks are actually because of rise of right-wing Hindutva”.

What appears to be lack of control by the government, is actually an appearance. This is partly true but represents possibly a deliberate attempt by the ISI+Pakistani+Taleb combination to delegitimize the civilian governmental structure. Behind all this facade, the combination is working towards its traditional goal – the overall subjugation of the subcontinent under an Islamic regime, and restoration of what they consider their glory days of lording it over India.

They have managed to coax Obama admin’s funds, which in-spite of all attempts to the contrary, will still be surreptitiously diverted to fund the Pakistani national project of conquering at least part if not whole of India. USA is trying to find glorious ways of covering up withdrawal from Afghanistan. Already this has led to inventing a “moderate” Taleban (Islamic Jihadis always pretend to be moderates when they think they can extract resources, or buy time). If the plan has been hatched between Pakistan+China on one side and USA+UK on the other, it can be a dangerous trap for India, if India has to divide its forces and get bogged down in a war which China and allies sponsor as a proxy war, while the entire north-west of India lies vulnerable.

Suppose, US cuts a deal with its invented “moderate Taleban” and brokers an agreement between Zardari and the Talebs for power-sharing in the North West. This will simply be a ratification, according to my thinking, of the TalebPakistaniArmy plan to coax USA into a position where, the defacto transition to a TalebPakistaniArmy Islamic state is tacitly endorsed by the USA in the “hope” of showing to its electorate and the world media that USA has retreated “ethically”. This plan could have the support of UK+China. Karazai could be brought in on this out of necessity on his weak power and resource basis. Russia+Iran could be made to wait and watch. So in that case the entire brunt of the TalebPakistaniArmy expansionist plan would fall towards India. Why India? Because of many different possible calculations.

TalebPakistaniArmy can hope to get tacit Chinese support. It can hope to get US reluctance to commit forces in this theatre as a favourable scenario. It can calculate that Government of India can be made to negotiate in an international form of “zazyia” extraction. This can be made in a form very similar to the way in which “zazyia” was extracted from the USA – by posing as “funds” required to “develop” sufficiently “to alleviate poverty and economic factors that gives rise to terrorism”. A situation can easily be developed by which India is made to look like a “miser” “who is reluctant to share her fortune” with the poor “neighbour”, and therfore must face the consequences of continuing “terror attacks”.

Internal divisions, fractured and antagonistic opinions within the “anti-Jihadi” section in India, who still agonize over the “hows” and “why’s” of Jihad and what strategy should be appropriate, can be banked upon to provide the typical scenario of lack of ruthless retaliation that probably existed during the early years of Islamic invasions into India. It can also be a military preemptive move to prevent India participating in any joint military operations in the core areas of Pakistan. China could panic if Indians start talking too much of sending expeditionary forces into Pakistan.

The asinine policy of inventing a “moderate Taleban” to cover up the eventual retreat from the Afghan theatre, is the latest in the superb series of contributions from the Anglo-US to human civilization. The help provided to Pakistani Army (the state and the army is the same in Pakistan, at least from the army viewpoint – so resources provided formally to the civilian government will be surreptitiously moved to Pakistani Army disposal or manipulation) will simply be used against remaining “divergence” in Afghanistan and the final push towards the Jihadi dream of an uninterrupted Islamic empire running from Arabia to Indonesia.

Whether that dream is realistic or feasible is an entirely different question, but the enormous pain and horror on the way even towards the eventual demise of that dream, is something that the west will forever be guilty of.

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( 3 so far )

Change of regime in the USA : strategic implication for the Indian subcontinent

Posted on January 21, 2009. Filed under: Afghanistan, China, economy, India, Muslims, Pakistan, Politics, Taleban, terrorism, USA | Tags: |

Obama’s takeover could actually be a dampener for all those hoping to see more positive action in favour of India. His primary concern will be restoration of the US economy. US strategic interests in Asia will therefore be intimately tied in with strategies for growth of the US economy. In spite of rhetoric, economic calculations will impose restrictions on where and how far Obama will go. It seems most unlikely that Obama will increase overseas military commitments and war or surgical strikes against Iran is most unlikely unless Iran deliberates provokes US into a position where it will be embarrassed internationally if it does not retaliate. Obama will try to hold the “line” rather than expand or contract. His main tactic will be to retain the bluster to outshine Bush in foreign affairs but basically do nothing. He will try to achieve more with bluffs and diplomatic pressure and nerve wars rather than do anything that escalates military commitments. He will be under pressure to be seen not to retreat compared to Bush’s legacy, which will be a dampener for those within and outside US who hope that Obama will reverse many of the aggressive Bush moves.

For the subcontinent, Obama’s main strategic steps will be to reassure and to a certain extent increase cooperation with India mainly in the economic arena. Obama will also see to it that Indian regimes are not penalized at the elections by not taking aggressive retaliatory measures against Pakistan. Obama’s tactic will be to increase public visibility of military collaboration with India, and a declared programme of strengthening defence capabilities of India, and maybe even some kind of enhanced NATO type guarantee of alliance/protection in case of third party aggression. Similarly Obama will see to it that any Pakistani regime is not penalized by the people, by holding off India from POK. If India can bargain here properly, it can wrangle out an agreement to station troops on the eastern border of Afghanistan as part of a strategy of anti-terror and disruption of Taleban supply lines to the POK.

The key here again will be to stabilize rather than expand. This is here where Obama and US policy will begin to unravel. The situation in the Afghan+Pakistan front needs expansion and dynamic rather than stabilization. Stabilization of control would mean the beginning of loss of initiative on NATO part and the turning point of the campaign. The reason static war would be disastrous for the US, is because of the peculiar ground situation. So far the anti-US forces have been fighting Chinese Red army style mobile warfare. Such war style can only be matched by continuous positional movement and encirclement of mobile warriors. As soon as this movement is lost, the mobile warriors gain advantage. For now, in an unfamiliar and unaccustomed territory, positional static NATO can be picked off at ease by its opponents.

Obama’s concentration on economic affairs out of necessity, is likely to lead to less stress on foreign affairs that are seen to be expensive and without direct long term benefits. This in turn is likely to lead to less clarity on strategic military objectives, and a corresponding confusion in the military command over operations. It will not be as if Obama himself will be directly responsible, but his preoccupation with internal affairs and priority to world economic manipulation will lead to a neglect of military expansion and therefore adoption of stop-gap stabilization tactics. Obama will try to get India onboard for the US economic recovery programme, and formulate joint policies to counter China. Strategically, this can benefit the entire Indian subcontinent, especially those economies in a position technologically and educationally to benefit from such US-India relationship – especially India, Bangladesh and SriLanka. But this will also be a great opportunity for India to push through in strategic initiatives of its own about the central Asian republics. India can shrewdly play around to force US acceptance of Indian military presence, if India offers to provide substantial military and economic help directly to the Afghan government. Most diplomatic pressures are only effective when the other party realizes that the pressurizing party will go ahead and do something anyway – and that it is better to join in before it is too late to appear to be a reliable “friend”.

US current needs coincides with India’s on the economic front, primarily against Chinese capture of world markets, and I think there will be no problems in the evolution of collaboration here. But overall this economic movement will subtly and in a very complex way, leave its mark on the military/political strategic scenario, whereby the US and the NATO will ultimately retreat from the Afghan front. This is both a danger as well as an opportunity for India, if it has the correct leadership.

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( 2 so far )

Mumbai’s Jihad in Dhul-Quadah- hidden message from the Quran and the Hadiths to India and USA

Posted on December 3, 2008. Filed under: China, Hindu, India, Islam, Islamic propaganda, Muslims, Pakistan, Politics, religion, Taleban, terrorism, USA |

Mumbai’s recent Jihadi terror attack is big media story now. Pakistan has played its cards well – its military and secret service has long been in alliance with the Islamic theologians to promote Islamic Jihad all over Asia. This definitely has been going on for a long time with full knowledge and resourcing by the West from the days of the Cold War – and it is these same leaders of the West  who are now desperate to see to it that India does not militarily retaliate. Pakistan has warned already with great alacrity that it will move the Pakistani Army to the Indian border if “tension” increases due to “India” and its fight in the North West against Talebani/Al Qaeda terror will “suffer”! This is hilarious for it simply covers for the complete lack of effort and effectiveness or will to fight against the Islamic Jihad on behalf of the Pakistani state, obvious for years now.  It is practically impossible for the Pakistani establishment too – for its primary reasons for existence since its formation by the British was to subjugate India once again in the name of Islam – nothing else, absolutely no other goal exists for Pakistan. Islam imposes unquestioning obedience to Islamic theologians who are increasingly unable to cope with the intellectualal complexity of modern science and society and knowing fully well that only the retrogression and imposition of primitive 7th century Arabian desert culture of looting kafelas and women and property of neighbouring tribes in Ghazwas was the only safe bet to continue in power. Pakistan’s state establishment and its theological establishment know that as a failed state and a gift of blind British shortsightedness, the only way to extend their existence is to live off the wealth and productivity of India. Wherever the Muslims invaded in its historic past, it looted and destroyed without even understanding the basics of sophisticated economies – and inevitably ruined these invaded countries over the long run – leading to their vulnerability against European colonization.

Pakistan’s state promoted the Taleban with Western blessing, and the madrassahs were utilized to brainwash and train generations of Jihadi males – the resources were a heaven-sent for the Muslims since the western support could be used to radicalize more of the youth in Jihad and ultimately use it to carry out “Ghazwa-e-Hind” – total liquidation of the “Hindus”, looting their wealth, land and women – the lucrative incentive to participate in Jihad for the millions of products of only feudal Islamic preaching and nothing else. The military-secret service establishment, probably already moved a major portion of the army to the Indian border knowing fully well about the planned attacks on Mumbai. This army movement would have served a dual purpose (1) the brainwashed Jihadi tutoring of the younger generations most likely to provide the lower ranks of the army are in all likelihood collaborating with the Taleban in the North Western provinces or deserting to them, or supplying the products of the ordnance factories of Pakistan to the Taleban. Moving the remnant under the control of the government to the eastern borders separates them from the Talebani contagion (2) since the elected government (but not the army) has already lost control over the north-western areas and the tribal belt, and failed to contain the Taleban and Al Qaeda, this attack provides a good excuse for abandoning the sham fight against “Jihad” from Afghanistan altogether, and practically leave it in Talebani hands. All these indicate that the theologian-elite nexus of Pakistani society has already come to an agreement with the Taleban-Qaeda to form an alliance to takeover the Pakistani state, and turn it into a hardcore Islamic regime able to strategically extract support from Iran and China and the blindly shortsighted opportunist imperialist elements within European elite  to liquidate the only thorn in Islam’s side in Asia and the Indian Ocean region – India. Once India can be subjugated to Islamic sadism, the pan-Islamic belt runs in an uninterrupted belt from Africa, middle East, through to Indonesia – the weak and pacifist societies of Myanmar and Thailand will be mere tasty morsels before Jihadi Islamic greed.

What was the hidden Quranic and Hadithic message within the Mumbai attacks ? This was more a message for the remaining terror modules within India and their support bases within Indian state protected Islamic communities, networks and theological establishments.

22nd-27th of November must be the second half of the Islamic month of Dhu’l Qadah – and as far as I can remember, this is a very significant month in the Islamic calendar. This is the first pilgrimage or Umrah that the Muslims made after the migration/hijra to Medina under Muhammad. The Muslims came on the morning of the fourth day of Dhual-Qadah, in the 7th year after migration, after the treaty of Hudaybiyyah the previous year. The entire event lasted for three days. Any pilgrimage during the month of Dhul-Qadah is named a “major pilgrimage”, or just “pilgrimage” (Hajj), while pilgrimages on all other month are called “minor pilgrimage” (Umrah). The Muslims were armed even though the prevalent practice was not to carry weapons on pilgrimage. The treaty had provided for temporary abandonment and evacuation of the town of Mecca, by the Qureysh when the Muslims entered it, and was primarily meant as a show of strength by Muhammad to the Qureysh.

I find it highly significant in the context of Islamic viewpoint to mount the attack on Mumbai at this date -we have to consider actual terror activities described unemotionally and compare with Mumbai outcomes. A highly significant incident in this month was the destruction of the Banu Quraiza Jews. The Banu Quraizah Jews were originally part of an alliance of Jewish tribes who managed and cultivated the oases farms in the desert of northern Arabia who had been alarmed at the systematic expulsion, sudden ambush and slaughter, and looting of all their camels, women and children. They tried to form alliances with expelled Jews and defend themselves against the Muslim raids. There is hardly any evidence of their having done any atrocity on the Muslims even by Islamic chroniclers – their only crime seems to have been resisting ethnic cleansing, eviction from land which they had worked hard on, and defend their women and children – typically described by the chroniclers as “conspiracy against Islam and Allah’s messenger”. After a siege lasting for 25 days, the Jews surrendered:

Sahih Bukhari records: [Original Sahih Al-Bukhari]
The women and children were then separated from their husbands, others were put under the care of Abdullah, a renegade Jew. All the goods and possessions of the B. Qurayzah Jews, their camels and flocks were all brought as spoils of war. The B. Qurayzah Jewish men were handcuffed behind their backs with their women and children having already been separated. They were placed under the charge of Mohammad ibn Maslama, the assassin of Ka’b ibn Ashraf, to be sent to Medina before their execution in batches. A long trench was dug in the marketplace of Medina. The Prisoners were then taken there, made to kneel down and beheaded in a group of five or six. Muhammad was personally present to witness this slaughter. Ali and Zubayr cut off the heads of the Jews in front of Muhammad. Sourcing from Al-Waqidi, Tabari writes:
“…the messenger of God commanded that furrows should be dug in the ground for the B. Qurayzah. Then he sat down, and Ali and al-Zubayr began cutting off their heads in his presence.” Ibn Ishaq writes that they were taken in groups to Muhammad for beheading in front of him.

Tabari further writes:
‘The messenger of God went out into the marketplace of Medina and had trenches dug in it; then he sent for them and had them beheaded in those trenches. They were brought out to him in groups. Among them were the enemy of God, Huyayy b. Akhtab, and Ka’b b. Asad, the head of the tribe. They numbered 600 or 700-the largest estimate says they were between 800 and 900. As they were being taken in groups to the Messenger of God, they said to Ka’b b. Asad, “Ka’b, what do you understand. Do you not see that the summoner does not discharge [anyone] and that those of you who are taken away do not come back? By God, it is death!” the affair continued until the Messenger of God had finished with them.’

The Sahi (authentic) Hadith of Abu Dawud: Book 14, Number 2665:
Narrated Aisha, Ummul Mu’minin: No woman of Banu Qurayzah was killed except one. She was with me, talking and laughing on her back and belly (extremely), while the Apostle of Allah (peace_be_upon_him) was killing her people with the swords. Suddenly a man called her name: Where is so-and-so? She said: I I asked: What is the matter with you? She said: I did a new act. She said: The man took her and beheaded her. She said: I will not forget that she was laughing extremely although she knew that she would be killed.”
The very old Jewish man Az-Zabir had saved the life of a Muslim convert, Thabit b. Qays in the Bu’ath war. When Az-Zabir was about to be beheaded Thabit requested Muhammad to save the life of Az-Zabir and his family as a return to his favor. Muhammad agreed. Az-Zabir then asked Thabit b. Qays about the Jewish leaders such as Ka’b b. Asad and Huayy b. Akhtab, as he preferred to die rather than to live without them. Az-Zabir replied, “Then I ask you for the sake of the favor I once did for you to join me to my kinsmen, for by God there is no good in living after them. I will not wait patiently for God, not even [the time needed] to take the bucket of a watering trough, until I meet my dear ones.” So Thabit brought him forward, and he was beheaded. Abu Bakr commented “He will meet them, by God, in the Gehenna, there to dwell forever and forever.”
[this is the battle that gives explicit culling of all adult males including those that had begun to show pubic hair] Hadith from Sunaan Abu Dawud: Book 38, Number 4390: Narrated Atiyyah al-Qurazi: I was among the captives of Banu Qurayzah. They (the Companions) examined us, and those who had begun to grow hair (pubes) were killed, and those who had not were not killed. I was among those who had not grown hair.
After executing all the adult male Jews, Muhammad sent Sa’d b. Zayd al-Ansari with some captive women and children from the B. Qurayzah to Najd to sell them in the slave market.  Among the captive was a young woman called Rayhanh bt. Amr b. Khunafah [all her male relatives including her husband were executed under personal supervision of the prophet of Islam] and took her as his concubine. It is said that when Muhammad offered to make her his wife by embracing Islam, she declined. She preferred to remain a concubine to becoming a Muslim and said, “Messenger of God, rather leave me in your possession [as a concubine], for it is easier for me and for you.” [Some biographers claim that Rayhana eventually accepted Islam].

I think this is highly relevant as the terrorists were perhaps trying to send a message not only to non-Muslim Indians but more so to the Muslims of India who would connect the significance better than non-Musilms. If the reports of supposed torture [comment by Dr. Aaron Abraham, physician friend  of the slain Rabbi in Mumbai on Indian media, who has claimed the Rabbi’s body] on the Jewish family, separate execution of the women, and deceptive negotiation with the commandos about hostages when they had already been executed, are confirmed then this will tie in exactly with the significance of this raid in Islamic theologian eyes.

For the Taleban-Qaeda and their various backers all over the middle-east, China, Iran, theologians of Saudi Arabia – this is the start of the signal for Muslims in the subcontinent, that those who are really “faithful” should see this as the command of the final offensive towards annihilation of the Jews and the “Qureysh” of the modern world – the Americans. The month of Dhul Quadah was used to attack Mumbai so ferociously and target Israelis because of Islamic historical significance of notorious Jew-liquidation campaigns by the prophet of Islam and show of strength to his opponents at Mecca in this “sacred month”. The genocide of the Banu Quraizah Jews by the Muslims in this context came immediately after the battle of the “trench” in which the leader of Islam was almost killed and was only saved by “falling into a ditch” and another Muslim resembling him becoming the centre of wrath of the enemy and being killed in error. This could be a message to the remaining terror modules and community support networks of Jihad within India to the effect that recent advances and attacks by the NATO forces with elimination of key commanders, is like the temporary setbacks of the “battle of the trench” and that the “faithful” should take this as the signal for the final campaign – to eliminate all “tribes” (read India, Israel etc) allied to the “Meccan Qureysh” (read Americans) before “conquering Mecca” (read USA).

But, I hope, the Islamic Jihadis get this message clearly into their heads – that they have made a tremendous blunder. Since many from the middle east do visit this site – they should clearly understand, that they have fallen a victim to propaganda from a certain section of regime sponsored historians of India and colonial neo-imperialist historiography of European origins, that “Hindus” are soft targets, and that they can be beaten to a pulp without much damage to Islam. Reality was that “Hindus” managed to survive, still maintaining all their liberal practices compared to Islam, over more than 1300 years of brutal fighting and resistance – a history of conflict and resistance that brought successive Islamic regimes to their knees, completely erased out of public discourse by Indian official historians under Western pressures for tactical reasons of the Cold War. What Islamists have done in Mumbai, has set in motion a process, by which the Hindu will galvanize into a nation and regime that will visit terrible retribution and possible complete eventual liquidation of Islam in most parts of Asia – this time around no imperialist regime will succeed to keep it in check.

It will be the height of political stupidity to think that this is going to be led by this or that party of Indians, the Congress or the BJP – not really, it will be a political force in the making from the grassroots that will coerce even the BJP if necessary to pursue a less opportunistic line, and will leave the shattered remains of both parties by the roadside in its march towards an extreme rightwing reaction against all things Islamic. I already feel sorry for the “common” Muslim who will have to bear the brunt of this reaction if they do not liquidate their theologians and reject the Jihadi core of Islam as ant-Islamic and not just un-Islamic – an outcome most unlikely I think!

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( 2 so far )

A large, if not the final nail in the coffin of Islam in India – Mumbai blasts signal the end of an era of Islamophile regimes

Posted on November 28, 2008. Filed under: Bangladesh, China, Hindu, India, Islam, Islamic propaganda, Muslims, Pakistan, Politics, religion, Taleban, terrorism |

What Islamic Jihadis have done in Mumbai has been micro-covered by the world media now. It is not my task to repeat what cameras and anchors have been ranting about. However, it is a day of great sadness as well as a day of great hope. For with this attack Islam has sealed its fate in India. It will continue to survive for years but its end has begun. The Hindu has now essentially broken its final shred of shyness and philosophical disregard of its own relentless annihilation. I have warned in this blog before that this is one community that appears docile on the outside, but with great resilience, persistence and determination that had fought the Islamic hordes for more than a 1000 years – this is how nearly 80% still survive within the borders of India.

The media under the overwhelming influence of a leftist political correctness imposed by almost 60 years of Islamophile and blatantly anti-Hindu propagandist regime dependent Thaparite school of Indian history, will continue to do damage control in favour of Islam, and the Indian political establishment will try to divert attention by hinting at “foreign hands”. But this is one damage that cannot really be covered. The bulk of the Indian population has disjointed itself psychologically from everything Islamic – including every element in the apparatus of state and civil society that appears to have sided with Islam, protected Islam or patronized Islam. If the BJP fails to give shape to this disjunction, the momentum of the “Hindu” will not stop, and we will see a new nationalist avowedly Hindu movement taking birth.

The Taleban, the Al Qaeda, Pakistani state and security apparatus that supplies and sources terror outfits and outrages in India, the ideological backbone from which modern Jihad took its inspiration – the return to orthodoxy movements of the Tabliqi Jamaat and the Deobandis in the subcontinent, in spite of all their tactical show of condemnation of terrorists as unIslamic (but not antiIslamic and not punishable like sexual offences by stoning or death), the communist imperialism of China which sponsored both Iran and Pakistan, all will now be clubbed together by the “Hindu” as the enemy – and anyone, any force in the world that sympathises, patronizes, justifies Islami Jihad will be silently assigned the status of enemy by the “Hindu”. The Congress’s political future is doomed, the BJP may not fare much better if it does not reflect this rising silent rage in the Hindus. The Congress will still survive in the next general elections but its political pre-eminence is now on inevitable decline.

As I have tried to warn many times in this blog, once this Hindu consolidation takes place, the days of Islam on the subcontinent are numbered. Once India itself frees itself of Islam, the new “Hindu” India will turn its attention to Pakistan and Bangladesh and the next round of retaliatory and liquidation moves against Islam will take place. Its start of the endgame in the  Indian subcontinent at least for Islam – a faint glimmer of hope in an otherwise overwhelming gloom.

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( 3 so far )

If Obama wins Islamic regimes have every reason to celebrate

Posted on November 4, 2008. Filed under: China, Communist, economics, financial crisis, Islam, Islamic propaganda, Muslims, Politics, terrorism, US Presidential elections, USA |

Obama’s rather rash remark about Pakistan should not be held against him by the Islamic Jihadist world. Democrats usually make such statements on the heat of the moment, but they have almost always turned out to be the greatest patrons and protectors of Islamic fundamentalism, alongside Republican manipulations in favour of strategic utilization of Islamic Jihad to settle international and domestic political scores – like that by Reagan in the case of Iran. In fact some of the greatest friends of Islamic Jihadi progress have come from the most vociferous of their “expected” ideological enemies – like Kissinger of Jewish origin, the friend of Turkey, Indonesia, Pakistan, and one who claims to have even “opposed” his own administration over its support to Israel in the Yom Kippur war. Similarly the communist Soviet Union, or the socialists and leftists of various shades where Islam is non-dominant, in spite of posturing about themselves being the only legitimate “progressives” of the world, (except in the Islam dominated countries like that of the middle-East, in Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Iran, or Indonesia, Pakistan, Bangladesh where the leftists were dealt with in true Islamic style – Sadistic enjoyment of physical torture and liquidation of ideological opponents) turn out to be staunchest of friends and protectors of Islamic Jihad until they are themselves wiped clean off by Islam.

If he wins, he will scale down US military involvement against Islamic Jihad to a certain extent, although the traditional military-industrial-business complex’s interests will oppose this scaling down if it threatens their existence.  Also I have a feeling that the financial situation will suddenly “ease up” if Obama wins, and a short term miraculous return of “confidence” will take place, with loosening up of apparent financial flows. The restriction of financial flows coincided with a timeline that is intimately connected with the US presidential elections, and without going into a lot of technical discussion about international capital flows from “hot sources” like the oil-profit flush mainly Islamic countries or trade-surplus flush China, we can apply a very old principle in crime detection – who benefits from the “crime”, in this case who benefits from the “financial crisis”? The immediate tying up of the “crisis” with “Bush” and the “Republicans”  is perhaps an important pointer. This will become more obvious, if “confidence” and financial flows “return” on the election of Obama. In that case this “high” will continue for some time, probably for the next financial year, and then the western economy will be in for another shock. The reason for this short term recovery and subsequent further damage and financial mayhem, is the essentially political motivation behind capital that is generated and controlled under state regimes with strong ideological leanings and commitments. Capital from such regimes will be used for political purposes, and it is in both the oil-rich OPEC and China’s interests that the financial system of the West is weakened sufficiently for their initial targets of removing western penetration into Asia.  For these forces, a short term revival of the financial situation will be conducive to ensuring that the west turns its attention inwards and relieves the military pressure on Islamic Jihad. The rolling back of US pressure on the middle east will give time to the Jihadis to recuperate and recapture “lost” ground both in a military and ideological sense – a situation similar to the one following the withdrawal of US helpers of Mujahideen after withdrawal of Soviet forces from Afghanistan – paving the way clear for PakistanI and Saudi Jihadi takeover of the region.

In the long run however, it is not in the interests of Islam and China to continue to allow the west to flourish “financially” as strengthening of the economy of the west will in its turn revive Western interests in blocking Jihadi takeover of Asia. So eventually the financial crisis will return to the west.

What are the ways out?

(1) The west has to make its single societal obsession to be self-sufficiency in energy, and food.

(2) Be “patriotic” in spending – buy “local” and produce, produce, produce – all the basic necessities of life, food, clothing, shelter. Stop buying products sourced from Islamic countries or China – this will at least partly address the huge trade gap problem. Rather cooperate and take community initiatives to “produce” locally and develop local economies and markets, and not depend on international trade and exports for prosperity.

(3) Address problems of racial, ethnic and other forms of discrimination within western societies that provide opportunities for propaganda and misrepresentation of ulterior motives and agenda of aggressive and retrogressive ideologies like Islam.

(4) force governments to make “capitalism” social – bring the real “free market” conditions of Hayek by preventing concentration of capital in the hands of the few, and instead of socialist largesse or benefit, provide access and capability to use capital to the “lowest of the low” and encourage individual initiative.

(5) Reject and boycott politicians or political forces that compromise with or protect Islamic or Chinese propaganda and interests out of greed for profit from otherwise non-productive huge accumulated capital of the small elite groups that support such political entities, or out of greed of capital from middle eastern oil profits.

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

The US bailout – was Hayek and Friedman wrong afterall?

Posted on September 26, 2008. Filed under: China, Communist, economics, USA |

A frustrated and dejected Hayek had once returned to his home country of Austria, leaving the Chicago school of economics alone to fight for the acceptance of their theory of the superiority of “free market forces” over that of centralized or planned/controlled economies which were constantly being intervened in or needed intervention by the Government or financial regulatory authorities. Hayek’s eventual rehabilitation started with the fascination that the Iron Lady had for his interpretations, and of course the Iron Lady’s success [perhaps with a heavy dose of Lady Luck smiling through the success in the Falklands war – or was it not so much an “accidental” war after all?] in deregulating most of the UK’s economic sectors. Friedman was the face of “free market” in the USA, the focus of intense vilification as the “devil’s advocate” who thought nothing of the heavy human cost of “reforms”, and the man who visibly flinched at the abuse hurled at him from the galleries while even receiving the Nobel Prize.

The association of the Latin American dictatorships with these reforms were not a help to the Hayekists. The Chilean example would be a permanent blot on the Hayekists, because of the fascist methods of torture and liquidation of political opposition, especially those who could be  represented by the authorities as “leftist”. European countries who recently appear to pander to “leftist” demands to “equate anti-Islam” with “fascism”, never uttered a single word of censure against the Chilean regime in defense of the Chilean “Left” then.  This was consistent with their behaviour when similar barbarities were being carried out on “Leftists” in the middle-Eastern Islamic countries. The only European country to have opened its mouth on humanitarian concerns about the atrocities in Latin America, appears to be the post-post-Franco Spain, still too deeply agonized and guilt-ridden over its spectacular achievements on the human-rights front under Franco. However, utilization of or experiments with spontaneous market forces to revive stagnating economies had started not only in the USA under Reagan following Thatcher, but unknown and unpublicized in the western media, had been going on in the “Communist” world surreptitiously. Communist China had never really fully given up on markets, with records showing existence and encouragement of local markets from the beginning of Communist power. With the admirable strategic and tactical flexibility shown by the Chinese communists as always,  the CCP showed its grasp of economics quite early – when it used a combination of markets and hedging against real commodities to slash down on inflation. Subsequently it retreated quickly as and when necessary from disastrous experiments with centralization, and did not believe in continuing on an error because of pride or ideological commitment.

In contrast to Keynesian theory, which at least gave a crucial importance to the role of the Government spending in jump-starting a stagnant or crisis ridden economy, and was taken up with enthusiasm by FDR leading definitely to the recovery from the Great Depression of the 30’s in the USA, a simplistic reading of Hayek indeed gives the impression that Government intervention only leads to further chaos.  There are two important objections to this simplistic reading of Hayek.  When Hayek is talking of leaving markets forces to adjust themselves, he is talking of small departures from equilibrium – this is the reason, where there had already been cumulative large departures from equilibrium, the adjustments were extremely costly in human terms. The US case is the case of a large departure. But then inevitably the question arises as to how large is “large”?  And this is where the second objection comes in.  Hayek was essentially formulating his theory in the framework of national economies, and to a certain extent we still cannot completely come out of the implicit conditions in Hayek’s theory. The fundamental problem is because our mechanisms of financial and economic accountability is still tied primarily with the political boundaries and institutions of the nation state, whereas financial capital is no longer national.  Global capital now flies where it senses profit, with very little of the actual market forces being integrated between the source and sink of this capital.

Taking the very simple example of the US mortgage crisis, which probably resulted at least partly from the ruthless exploitation of endemic vulnerability of non-dominant racial and ethnic and social groups in having access to resources, to pump up prices and profit rates. This not only creates a fictitious commodity in economic terms, [a value which cannot be supported in reality by a real commodity of utility – especially peculiar commodities like land or buildings which do not generate new buildings or lands on their own, unlike other material input into industrial processes] but also definitely needs increased money supply. Now in the older framework of national economies, this increased money supply and therefore inflationary pressures could have been controlled by tightening the national money supply itself. However in the strange modern world economy, money supply itself cannot be controlled within the national economy itself, as finance capital flows constantly in and out  of the national economy. The nations have no real control over the global money supply, and the crucial equilibrium factors of a tight money supply, free movement of labour and other factors of production [as would have more or less naturally been obtained for a “free market” system within a single “national economy”] are practically absent in the international economic exchanges between national economies.

Exceptionally high prices for basic housing could only be sustained if there was unusually large financial capital on the money supply side not really balanced against the productive capacity of the national economy and  development of monopolies and cartels in the housing provider market also with the help of excessive accumulation of finance capital in the hands of a few – both conditions not conducive to a Hayekian “free market” self correcting mechanisms.

There are two components to solving this problem over the long run – (1) go for a solid, international fully integrated monetary regime not constrained by national boundaries, but subject to overall control of money supply, backed up by a freeing of the crucial market forces of free movement of labour and technology (2) include a basic social security net that still is consistent with encouragement of performance and the role of incentives. Even in the USA, the land of “opportunities”, the ideas of “microcredit” or “community land trusts” should not be “untouchable”!

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

Delhi blasts and Jihadi takeover of government building in NW Pakistan – Islamic war is coming close to India

Posted on September 14, 2008. Filed under: China, India, Islam, Islamic propaganda, Kashmir, Muslims, Pakistan, Politics, religion, terrorism, USA | Tags: |

After the latest in the string of blasts in India by Islamic militants at New Delhi, India’s capital, and with the consistent failure of the current ruling Indian government and its administrative setup to crack these cases and prevent Islamic Jihadi activities, Indians should start seriously thinking of what really lies ahead of them. Non-Muslims of India have already seen the strategy of Islam at work for a long long time. Communities remember by oral tradition what the Muslims have been doing for the last 1000 years – looting, raping and abducting women, converting under pain of death or crushing taxes, and massacres under any flimsy excuse. Non-Muslims survived by sheer number, determination and by militarily fighting back. In spite of the fact that some of Hindu elite were bending over backwards in the boot-licking of Islamic rulers to maintain their lands or their wealth, and collaborated in the inhuman torture of their “lower classes”, Hindus have survived – in this they were helped by the vastness of their country and the remoteness of many parts where they escaped into deep forests from the clutches of Muslim armies and in many instances carried on a guerrilla struggle that later on gained momentum into recapture of lands from Islam under the Mahrattas, the Sikhs, and some of the Rajputs.

The scale of blasts in India should make Indians realize that at least three crucial factors are needed for such terror activities to be carried on without any disruption – (1) the military training and material support of the army of  some militarily “modern” nation (2) deep community support to provide both material and intelligence cover (3) good connections within the administration and political setup that leaks crucial information and provides protection from any negative reaction.

The impression that is consistently gaining ground is that the UPA government is Islamo-phile, either because of historical reasons as a legacy of Nehru’s sole dominance of the Congress organization with the help of the British and Gandhiji – who combined their mettle in removing or neutralizing all potential rivals of Nehru within the organization, or because of growth of deep penetration of Islamic elements within the networks of the Congress and related parties, or a combination of both. Bengal terrorists during the British Raj did not succeed because the Bengali community as a whole did not support the “armed insurrectionists”, and this lack of support is indicated by the consistent emergence of detailed information from even the most insignificant of meetings by the revolutionaries – it was the Bengali community itself that was helping the British with intelligence.  The Punjab separatist insurrection in the 80’s did not ultimately succeed because the Sikh community decided to go against it. The Muslim community has so far not shown any indication of a similar sentiment against their Jihadi brethren. This is typical everywhere in Islam, because the core texts of Islam always teach about the necessity and “validity” of violent militant Jihad against non-Muslims – a fact now carefully suppressed both by Islamo-phile non-Muslims as well as Muslim theologians themselves in their public face towards non-Muslims – but intensively and authentically carried on within their own Islamic circles.

Now we come to the first factor mentioned above – that of the basic infrastructural support that can only be provided by the technological knowledge and sophistication of a modern army, [not necessarily that of a “modern” nation]. The most direct source of this for Indian Jihadis is that of Pakistan, and indirectly from groups operating in Pak-occupied Kashmir, Bangladesh, as well as eventual links back to the middle-East and Afghanistan, as well as possible indirect material help from China, Iran and funding from sources tolerated tacitly by Saudi Arabia. The ultimate source of all this is money from oil and natural gas, and the investment of the resulting capital in various non-Muslim economies.

Pakistan’s sole national project and now the only driving reason for its existence appears to be the capture of entire Kashmir, and subsequently as much of India as possible under the banner of Islam – as acknowledged by the dominance of public statements and debates by Pakistan’s politicians both inside and outside its legislature – whereas we would have expected more time devoted to making statements about combating terror within its borders. This campaign also helps Pakistan to gain support from the orthodox Islamic regimes sitting on oil wealth, and countries like China which have their own imperial axes to grind on India. As I have written before, Kiani would have sacrificed Musharraf, his mentor, only if the “elected” democratic government promised continued and perhaps even increased support for Kiani’s original organization, the ISI’s promotion of Jihadi Islamic violence across the border with India. The Pakistani government has recently concluded an understanding with the Taleban, and it is incapable or unwilling to fight back and annihilate the Islamic Jihadis based around the gateway to the Indian subcontinent – the Afghan-Pak border area known commonly as the NWFP or NW Pakistan. By all accounts, the Jihadis are gaining ground and they have already occupied a government building for some time before retreating. The official Pakistan government’s writ does not run in this grey-zone, and thsi perhaps necessitated a missile attack by the US led coalition leading to loud protests by the Pakistani army – either from loss of pride, or from the actual loss of “allies” with whom the Pakistani Aarmy has already come to an understanding to turn over Pakistan firmly into Jihadi hands.

India’s recent tie-ups with the USA has led to a panic in the Wahabi Islamic Jihadi expansionist agenda for the subcontinent – and they are striking back with the only weapon taught in the Quran and the Hadiths – Islamic Jihadi violence, surprise attacks and assassination on the innocent populations including women and children of non-Muslims whose lands, wealth and women are desired by the Muslims.  The islamic forces think that time is running out, and their Islamo-phile allies within India are perhaps no longer reliable enough to slow down the growth of Indian non-muslim’s power and further lapse of time will simply make it impossible for them to conquer India in the name of Islam. They are banking on the support from Muslim populations within India, who have always served as the fifth-column of invading Muslim armies in the historical past of India [ read my series on How Islam came to India]. The Pakistani army, whose lower ranks are being recruited from the society at large which has been increasingly radicalized with the worst form of Islamic Jihadism sponsored by oil-money through the madrassahs, and therefore increasingly sympathetic to the Jihadi cause, will collaborate and “appear to collapse” before the Talebani-Al Qaeda onslaught from the Afghan border. Pakistan stands to be dismembered not by the USA or India, but by the Army from within itself allied with the Taleban and Al-Qaeda. The entire northern Pakistan will fall, including NWFP and the Punjab. The war with India will take off from this point.

The non-Muslim Indian should immediately realize the weakness and essential betrayal of the Islamo-phile parties [who repeat the role of the Brahmin minister to Prithviraj Chahman, the minister who advised Prithviraj not to collaborate with the Chalukyas of Gujarat in annihilating the forces of Muhammad Ghori the very first time]. In the international arena, a military alliance should be formed by India with the USA and Russia. China should be kept out of this, as China will only betray, and leak information to the Pakistani forces. India should not buy into the pretensions of the current Pakistani government to offer “good news” on Kashmir – this is simply a tactic to buy time and deceive – in classic Islamic style of “deception is war, and war is deception”.  War is coming into India, whether India behaves like the proverbial turkey burying its head into the sand or not.

Delhi explodes

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( 2 so far )

Of Lipsticks, pigs, Presidents, and south Asia – the Right way forward?

Posted on September 12, 2008. Filed under: China, Christians, Communist, Hindu, India, Kashmir, Muslims, Nuclear, Pakistan, Politics, religion, terrorism, USA |

The American electorate is being fabulously entertained. It is fascinating to watch what the movers and shakers of American opinion demand that the American mind should think – lipsticks and pigs dominate proceedings – and with all adult-o-teens and perhaps half the unborn population deemed trained Freudian psychiatrists – lipsticks and pigs are just two words that spawn a billion networks of interpretations and interpretations of interpretations. But no one has told them that what the therapist interprets is also a revelation of the therapist’s own obsessions and paranoias, and in the patterns and passions of your looking for “others” secrets, your own secrets come out – especially about secret pleasures. Why should it matter whether a woman Vice-Presidential candidate has an affair or not or whether her daughter is pregnant or not? What should have been more relevant is whether she is good for what she is being asked to do – play the role of a deputy leader to the highest executive post in the country – if having an affair or her daughter’s supposed pregnancy doesn’t interfere with her state responsibilities  why should we bother? It is ridiculous to accept the pseudo-logic that her daughter if pregnant  represents her lack of control and leadership, given the fact that Americans champion personal freedoms and individual responsibilities especially in the realm of sex. And as for affairs, should we forget the two illustrious White Christian examples of ladies at the top seats of their realms – Queen Elizabeth I of England, and Tsarina Catherine the Great?  By most historical accounts, both ladies had their fill of affairs while proving themselves to be some of the best things that could have  happened to their nations in the very practical terms of statesmanship. Isn’t it time that opinion builders of America decide to grow up a bit? What should concern Americans more is what is happening in South Asia and the middle East. The Indo-US nuclear deal has drawn a lot of attention, and it comes as no surprise to me that the Democrats failed to send a woman as a Presidential candidate, and that all Democrat Presidents have gone against strategic strengthening of India at the cost of India’s Muslim neighbours. If we analyze the regimes that have put up women for the top post, they have invariably been leaning towards the Right, whereas the Left, from the Communists to the “Democrats” in spite of all their libertarian rhetoric always shy of women for the top posts and always land up ultimately in the camp of Muslims. Ex President Carter while in the USA is vehemently anti-Indian as far as nuclear strengthening of India is concerned, and frankly ridicules both India’s nuclear capabilities as well as its security concerns which he dubs “ambitions”. The same President Carter while in India however feels no shame in associating his name with remote Indian villages claiming that the Indian connection had been “good for him”.  Ex President Clinton, on his visit to India, demanded that both “India and Pakistan” respect the LOC, and pointedly refused to acknowledge Pakistani responsibility for the typically Islam recommended “deceptive” war of killing 35 Kashmiri Sikhs -one of many massacres of non-Muslims of Kashmir towards the ethnic/religious cleansing by the Kashmiri Muslim militants wearing Indian army uniform. Obama is aware of this pattern perhaps and has already consciously tried to neutralize the edge gained by the Republicans through the Indo-US nuclear deal, by highlighting Indo-“phile” Biden  and accusing Pakistan of diverting funds meant to fight “terror” towards preparing for war with India.

The coalition forces are not having a very good time in Iraq, or in Afghanistan, and the west should now realize that the centre of power of the Islamic Jihad is firmly in the middle East, with financial and ideological support maintained by the wealth of oil, and Wahabi Islamic fundamentalist clergy, and at least one unsupervised strategically important military establishment that has dubious attitudes to the Taleban – and has already come to an understanding with this patron of Al-Qaeda in the North Western Frontier Province of Pakistan – the corridor that connects Muslim Jihadi insurgents in Afghanistan through northern Pakistan right into Pakistan occupied Kashmir. Fall of India to Islam, either by cooperation or weakness from some of its Islamo-phile centre-left political parties or by outright aggression facilitated or spearheaded by Pakistan with tacit help from China, would mean the establishment of a continuous band of Jihadi Islam from Egypt, and Sudan through Arabia, Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, Pakistan, India, Bangladesh, Malaysia, Indonesia (the smaller non-Muslim majority nations of Myanmar or Thailand may not prove a strong bulwark against Islam because of their Buddhism) establishing a stranglehold over the Indian Ocean and virtually over Asia itself, making American presence and control in the middle East virtually impossible..

It is crucial, that no weakness of the “leftist” sort comes in the way of consolidation of all non-Muslim ideologies and forces. Christians and Hindus have the potential of forming an effective alliance in this game of survival. The Right way forward…?

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( 3 so far )

India gets NSG waiver – looking beyond the drama

Posted on September 6, 2008. Filed under: China, India, Muslims, Nuclear, Politics |

It was high drama and almost the typical unnaturally concocted Hollywood thriller at the NSG meeting that finally saw through a waiver specific for India, mainly under possibly a lot of arm-twisting led by the USA and also perhaps a good deal of contribution to this arm-twisting on a much more subtle level by the UK, France, Russia. The Indian Foreign Minister’s statement that this will solve India’s energy requirement problem, can at best be dubbed hogwash. Any new proposed nuclear reactor design takes around one and half years to be approved by the IAEA, and around five years to set up. So India is unlikely to get direct benefits in the power sector from this NSG agreement until about seven years from the present. The last significant opposition will now be coming from within the USA, by representatives of interests both within the country as well as from outside ranged against India. The reason these attempts will only perhaps be able to delay the final ratification of this agreement but not prevent its eventual clearance through the US Congress, is because of the political realization of the ruling elite in the Western circles of the importance of bringing India under its strategic control.

What does India gain after all? It does not gain much in terms of nuclear power or nuclear weapons technology. India had already developed quite sophisticated technology of its own during the first tentative engagement by the USA of India after the 1998 tests by India. Current projections of India’s power supply sources assign only around 3-4% of total production capacity, compared to almost half being produced by hydel, and nearly half being produced by coal. India has one of the largest publicly known reserves of Thorium, which can be reprocessed to bring it to usable fissile forms. On its own India would perhaps have needed a much longer time to achieve this, which may, just may be shortened using technological collaboration from some NSG countries. Apart from this India can only benefit from multilateral trade of nuclear substances and technologies, as an exporter and processing hub. There will be some cosmetic benefits perhaps too in the areas of dual processing technologies and access to space technologies, and perhaps some cascading effect in subsidiary technology such as computer chips etc., but it has to be remembered that in many of these latter areas, India is quite advanced on its own.

India now has accepted serious virtual limitations on its weapons programme. The 1954 Acts of the US Congress and the Hyde Act is binding on all US administrations until a future Congress repeals or reforms these acts – and it has to be remembered, that non-proliferation  concerns appear to come along only when India is seen to be gaining in weapons technology – such as the formation of the NSG specifically after India’s first tests, and not after the first tests by China, UK, or France, or the passage of the Hyde Act specifically targeting India.

India’s main benefits will be strategic. India is now firmly in the Western camp, and is going to be a virtual ally of the USA in the latter’s strategic concerns in Asia. India will probably play a balancing role between Russia and the USA, its already well-known concerns about China making it a blocker of Chinese imperialism, and serve as a strategic heavyweight in the extremely volatile current climate of Jihadi Islamic aggression  in the entire Middle and South Asian region. But it is China and Pakistan who have been primarily responsible in pushing India to ally itself with the USA. In Pakistan’s sole national project of destabilizing India and spread Islam, with tacit and sometimes not so secret help from China, and both country’s continuing aggressive actions against the territories of India – lies the main reason for what has ultimately led to the NSG meeting. But to take India beyond this meeting, and on its own feet, requires a superhuman effort on the part of its leaders and its people – as nothing will come out of even the strategic aspects of this agreement unless India outpaces the Chinese economy, modernizes its society and comes out of the influence of retrogressive religions like Islam, and becomes a fully capable military establishment able to take on China, a country which will now help the Islamic aggressors against India much more surreptitiously and at an increased rate, if necessary.

Postscript: Apparently the Indian government will convey its “disappointment” with Chinese “behaviour” to China!! The various spokespersons acted so surprised on media, as if they never expected such “behaviour” from China! I simply find it unbelievable that such “intelligent” people pretend so much ignorance. Did they think that by simply doing everything to gag the Dalai Lama and the Tibetan refugee protesters, India will have given enough sops to China to please it? Politicians and diplomats who are “surprised” should not at least be given the responsibility for security of a nation. On my post dated 1st August, I had clearly written

“USA’s diplomatic efforts ably seconded by India, almost had made it a foregone conclusion that IAEA would pass this safeguards by consensus. More difficult will be getting consensus at NSG, where some EU countries as well as China can cause significant trouble for India. It will be USA’s networks and dependence of these countries on the USA that can only see India through. Passage of the 123 agreement through the Congress may also hold some hiccups as there can be strong last-ditch lobbying by Pakistan as well as other interest groups within USA who from various considerations of race, religion, etc as hidden motivations can try to put restrictive conditions in the hope that India will be sufficiently provoked to reject the whole agreement altogether.”

What, I, not-a-politician, not-a-diplomat could see more than a month ago, surely these “professionals” cannot pretend not to have seen! Who are they trying to hoodwink – the Indian people?

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( 1 so far )

India’s N-deal shenanigans : US congressman’s leak – brinkmanship or utter lunacy?

Posted on September 3, 2008. Filed under: China, Christians, Communist, Hindu, India, Muslims, Nuclear, Pakistan, Politics |

Indian and US media have flashed the news of the leak of a “secret letter” by a senior US-Congressman, that reportedly promises (1) to stop all N-trade with India if India ever tests (2) to force other countries in NSG also to stop N-trade with India if India ever tests (3) there is no guarantee of perpetual N-fuel supply to India. If true, coming from a senior US-Congressman, this is wonderful news about the maturity and statesmanship of US politicians. If it was a “secret letter” which had apparently been sent 9 months ago from the Presidential administration, the Congressman or his sucessors and associates have broken several clauses of the confidentiality regulations, and in a country which often jails people for 5 lifetimes or more for “treason”, he should be liable for some penalties.  If the politicians were hoping to provide some fuel for the murmurs of dissent within NSG, then it is not of much help as the only way it can work in favour of the Congressman is if the “promises” in the “secret letter” are now taken up by the “dissenters” within NSG as a demand to be publicly declared and included by the USA in the revised draft proposal for N-trade with India.

In reality what mostl likely happened was that the Bush administartion deliberately kept the draft agreement “vague” in full knowledge and consultation with its Indian counterpart, so that both administrations could “explain” away and satisfy their respective detractors in their countries and politics. Having  seen that the N-deal was being hotly pressed forward, this Congress-lobby panicked and wanted to play up the opposition he hoped would arise against India. It is also possible that the State Department itself leaked the document in the hope of reassuring the dissenters that it will indirectly take stern “action” against India if the latter departs from “Western control”.

Why would a senior US-Congressman or his successors be so obsessed with preventing India’s maintaining and upgrading its nuclear weapons capability by testing as and when required in the face of nuclear weapons capable hostile countries like Pakistan and China? There are two sources of opposition and hatred for India within the USA. The first comes from a very narrow interpretation of Christianity aligned and meant to support and justify racial supremacy concepts, which associates the “best form” of Christianity with a certain “skin colour” and inverts historical quirks such as the success of European colonial land-grabbing as a justification for megalomania. The danger in such logic for Americans themselves is that it masks the real factors that led to European success, and the short term historically specific nature of these factors, which are most unlikely to recur in the future. As the history of warfare amply shows, no society could monopolize and maintain its “military” success forever after using “surprise” once – either a technological “surprise” or a “strategic surprise” – once used these are known to others. Europeans can never again hope to dominate the world on their own as they had done during the colonial period, when they could use the complacency and philosophically sophisticated relaxed attitude of more advanced civilizations, to extract capital from them. The second comes from strong lobbying by and commercial connections with China, as well as the influence of heavy capital investments circulating in the US economy from oil-rich Islamic countries.

The anti-India [anti-Hindu pro-Islam??] lobby in the USA is showing its ignorance of Indian society by not realizing that what it is trying to do is only consolidating the position of its hated foe which it so fondly dubs “the Hindu Right” – the BJP for example, which has consistently claimed that the N-deal as negotiated by the UPA government is a sell-out of crucial national strategic interests of India. The question will obviously arise as to why a senior US-Congressman is obsessed and paranoid with India maintaining its nuclear weapons capabilities – and is determined to abort its crucial defense capabilities in the face of known militarily aggressive and nuclear weapons capable hostile neighbour countries – is this a first stage in the grand eventual Islamo-Chinese coalition to finish off non-Muslim India? India should stick to its right to test at most under the concession that testing of nuclear weapons delivery systems or any nuclear testing by neighbours will immediately prompt India to test both delivery systems as well as nuclear warheads. No European country came to India’s defence when Pakistan attacked it or China invaded it, and even in the future they will only express their “righteous indignation” if the Islamo-Chinese alliance invaded India, but never come to preserve India’s non-Muslim cultures [as for a strong driving force within the European elites, commercial interests come first and Islam would still be preferable to the “hated” pagans].  In the end, in the greater interests of preservation of non-Muslim cultures all over the world, preservation of India as primarily and distinctly non-Muslim and non-Communist is of utmost importance – Christianity may prove unable or unwilling to tackle Islam, the West’s dependence on and greed for Islamic-oil and capital can make it rather soft to any aggression on India from Islamic or Chinese sources.

previous post on N-deal

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

India’s NSG fever : the China-Islam-Europe axis

Posted on September 2, 2008. Filed under: Bangladesh, China, Communist, India, Islam, Muslims, Nuclear, Pakistan, Politics, Russia |

In my previous posts on this subject, I had repeatedly tried to dampen the apparent euphoria in Indian circles about the passage of the Indo-US N-deal through the IAEA. Like many others, I had tried to point out that the greatest difficulty would be at the NSG. This was predictable from at least two different angles: the first was that at that time China was preparing for the Beijing Olympics, and needed all possible cooperation from the international powers to suppress the Tibetan protests, secondly the powers that are most likely to be opposed to any significant increase in India’s strategic defence capabilities because of their own designs on Indian territories would be misled by their ignorance of how far India has changed in recent years to hope that internal dissent would prove sufficiently strong to scuttle the process anyway from within India. Once the IAEA passage went off relatively smoothly, these powers were likely to be panicking, and would begin lobbying in earnest to delay the passage through the NSG if not scuttle it altogether. The three natural allies in this game against India would be the forces represented by China, the Islamic expansion movement within Asia, and the smaller countries in EU. Each has its reasons, and we can analyze them one by one.

China has yesterday come out with a statement in its official mouthpiece [ and therefore of the state and therefore of the Communist Party of China] that passage of the N-deal with India would represent “a blow to non-proliferation”. This coincides uncannily with the apparent views of the leading non-proliferation groups within the EU. This could be a calculated move on the part of China to utilize the dissent from within EU, or a coordinated move. China’s real reasons for opposing this deal has as much to do with the “geo-strategic” interests it accuses India of – China was the aggressor in 1962, and invaded Indian territories without warning or a formal declaration of war – a-la-Islam. China knows that even historically they have had to fight with indigenous Tibetans for control over Tibetan territories – we have concrete evidence for this at least from the 1st millenium CE. China occupied Tibet by force and desperately wants to push through to the Indian Ocean. It sees India as the largest obstacle to its dominance in South Asia. After Mao’s split with the USSR mainly due to Russia’s formal split with Stalinism, Mao was quite worried at the growing ties between the Russia he did not understand or thought a betrayer to the “Stalinist cause” and India, as well as the protection nd asylum given to the Dalai Lama by India and decided to bring in pressure on India. China still holds on to Indian territory in the East and the North, and its main objective is to isolate Tibet from Indian reach [thus it helped the Nepali communists to come to power]  and sever any strategic land connection that India can possibly have with Russia.  China very possibly helped Pakistan with Nuclear and missile technology, as Pakistan has not shown any other independent parallel comprehensive development in indigenous technology and scientific research in other areas that could justify its “sudden” and “miraculous” nuclear weapons capability. China has also consistently tried to cultivate the Muslim nations, and especially Pakistan and Bangladesh who it knows to be vehemently opposed to the existence of a “non-Muslim” India. Chinese communists encourage Islamic movements against India since in the limitations of Communist ideology they think that they can “manage” Islam, whereas the Islamic forces use China according to their successful tactic as revealed in the Quran and in the Sunnah of the prophet – ally and use one “unbeliever” against another, until they are all weakened and ripe for subjugation. By China’s statement against India, China shows that it is now a completely blinded fool driven only by its imperialist ambitions and blind also to the growing Islamic insurgency in its own backyard. China also knows its economic importance for the smaller countries of the EU. so it may be more than a coincidence that these countries and China appear to speak in the same language as regards India.

For the smaller EU countries, their considerable markets in both the Islamic world as well as China, for dairy and meat products, as well as other manufactured exports [as so aptly evidenced by the retreat of certain North European countries over “freedom of expression” as applied to Islam, because of a boycott of products from that country in the Middle East], it is understandable that the non-proliferation argument will appear to be strongly appealing and most important. In this it will not be convenient for them to remember that many of them as a part of  NATO are installing a missile defence system in anticipation of attacks from a country which has had no history of attacking them and is much farther away geographically compared to both Pakistan and China from India – two countries which are both nuclear missile-delivery capable and have already militarily attacked India and still hold on to Indian territories. Their economic dependence on the oil from Islamic countries, and Chinese markets will obscure them to the real defence needs of India in possible future testing and upgrading of nuclear weapons capabilities  as deterrent and strategic neutralization of danger from aggressive Chinese imperialism and Jihadi Islamic aggression.

As for the Muslim countries, their theologians are always baying for non-Muslim blood and non-Muslim lands and women. With immense physical coercion this theocracy has managed to indoctrinate its subjects in an atmosphere of physical violence which is used to root out physically any alternative idea, of science, of modernization, of liberal modern humane ideas of equality between genders or of freedom of speech and thought. India’s vibrant much freer culture is a thorn on the sides of the Alims and the Ulemas of Islam whose flock are being constantly tempted by the visions in the neighbouring country of the “pagans”. In this their natural allies are “sympathetic” admirers of Islam in EU countries and business or governmental strategic interests, as well as the extreme paranoid jealousy of the Chinese communists who like Muslims do not like ideological competitors who can tempt their flock and therefore undermine their narrow selfish megalomania.

In the end, I personally feel that Europe with its classic shortsightedness that gifted the world with the horrors of colonial looting and destruction of civilizations, will only be concerned with the Islamic horror as and when it threatens its own gates, and not otherwise. Thus they may even help indirectly the Islamic cause by proving mostly a reluctant ally of the USA in the latter’s bid to neutralize  the Jihadists, and may even decide to oppose strengthening India in order to preserve their commercial and strategic interests with the Islamic countries and China. It is already known that the EU exports to the Islamic middle East is three times that of the USA to the same region.

It is important for Europe to realize that China’s rise to importance started with its formal role in tying up a large Japanese occupation force in the Pacific theatre during WWII. However this importance was simply formal as the internationally recognized Chinese government and an ally of the Western allies, was the so-called Nationalist government under Chiang-Kai-shek and the Kuomindang – a government which consistently failed in preventing the Japanese advance, but consumed a huge amount of resources as supplied by the USA. Even the Communists in the North were not much of a success although they at least managed to carry on a guerrilla fight against the Japanese near the coastal areas of occupation. There was a time towards the close of the Pacific war, when USA toyed with the idea of supporting the Communist Red Army and suddenly Mao waxed eloquent about US friends. Turn of political climate in Washington removed the pro-Chinese element in US state policy, and Mao went back to his “anti-imperialist” stance. It is significant to note that Chinese success in recovering their country only gained momentum after the surrender of the Japanese, and Stalin did not initially allow the Communists to occupy Manchuria  which surrendered to the Russians and not to the Chinese. The Communists could only make their major moves to occupy the whole of China after 1948, when Soviet support turned in their favour due to Stalin’s realization of the process of Cold War. Throughout the war, the Chinese were more an absorber of military resources and money from the Allies rather than an effective contributor. Contrast this with the tremendous amount in men and material supplied by India, and its contribution to winning the war for the Allied forces, which remains rarely acknowledged.

Not India’s current policy-makers, but the future generations should start thinking of who they can really rely on in their strategic plans to exist in the face of determined Islamic expansion programmes.

a related post

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( 4 so far )

The N-Deal in a Mess, Left in West Bengal in a mess, Congress in Kashmir in a Mess

Posted on August 22, 2008. Filed under: Bengal, China, Communist, India, Kashmir, Muslims, Nuclear, Politics |

The N-Deal is in a Mess now, and as I had predicted the greatest difficulty would be getting agreement at the NSG. The strongest opposition will come from EU member states who have strong economic ties with the Middle East and China. Europe’s extensive economic ties with the Middle East have been seen as a key reason for differing U.S.-European approaches. The EU is the primary trading partner of the Middle Eastern Islamic countries and overall European economic interests are more integrated with the region than the US. EU exports to the Middle East were roughly three times the size of U.S. exports. Some analysts think that many European countries are primarily motivated by the need to protect these commercial ties with the region, and often do so at the expense of security concerns.  Most experts agree that European countries’ extensive trade and economic ties with the Islamic heartland heighten their desires to maintain good relations with Arab governments and makes them wary about policies that could disrupt the normal flow of trade and oil.  Recent overtures to China from some of these strong protesters could also be indirectly related to their opposition to the passage of the deal. All these countries are either members of or virtually protected by the NATO, they do not hesitate to intervene and use overwhelming military force in their neighbourhood as in Yugoslavia, or put up long range missile attack/defence systems in Poland. These are countries who never protested the Chinese invasion into India in the 60’s or Pakistan’s invasions in 65 and 71, and choose to ignore the fact that at least two Nuclear weapons states are also antagonistic neighbours of India, and EU will never come to India’s defence in a military emergency – for a variety of racial, religious, economic, political and strategic reasons. The very possibly nuclear weapons capable country against whom the NATO is deploying missiles in Poland is actually far closer to India than to Europe. India should take lessons about where Europe’s sympathies will lie if it is forced to choose between India and the Islamic heartland or China. India should expect a delaying tactic so that the key passage through the US Congress can be successfully jeopardized.

In West Bengal the Left Front government is in a mess as its Chief Minister is at a complete loss as to what to say about the premier industrial house of India, the Tatas’s intention to pull out their Nano operation from the disputed site of Singur. I had discussed a long time ago that Mamata Bannerjee in her eagerness to put herself forward as the new and real power centre in West Bengal will adopt exactly the strategies the Left had used almost 30-35 years ago to come to power and want the Tatas to negotiate with her directly. At that time it was the Left which had championed crippling strikes, and its consistent slogan was that “Tatas and the Birlas” were the enemies of the people, against whom the agrarian labour and workers of the weakened industry should fight.  Combined with the arrogance and reliance on sycophants that the Left leadership has practised in West Bengal for a long time, it was a matter of time before the upcoming generations got psychologically detached from the “Left”. The Tatas have little to do but pull out, unless Mamata Bannerjee is prepared to swallow her pride, which in her impatience to get a piece of the cake seems most unlikely. By insisting on her conditions Mamata will also prove that she is just a small politician like Buddhadev and not a statesperson.

Some bloggers who criticize armchair politicians think holding free and fair elections is necessary and sufficient to solve the Kashmir problem and isolate the separatist Hurriyat. This sort of daydreaming comes out of a complete failure to understand what Islam is all about – its is a complete system of politics, and it is shrewd enough to realize that wherever it manages a foothold it has to completely erase all traces of pre-Islamic identities, cultures and independent or rational thought not dictated by the theologians. The basic social institution through which a new born citizen learns social and political behaviour is the education system. This made the Islamic leadership target the secular schools established under the general Indian pattern in Kashmir, but the Madrassahs were left intact, so that children would be forced to get only Islamic brainwashing and nothing else. A whole generation in the Kashmir valley has grown up indoctrinated in the most primitive and violent aspects of Islamic ideology, that of pretending “peace” as long as weak in numbers and launch violent expansion against non-Muslims as soon as sufficient numerical strength is reached. By allowing this to happen and protecting Islamic erasure of the pre-Islamic cultural roots of the Kashmiri’s the Congress has now brought India to a point where separatist support is widespread. Just as the British left no longer capable of coping with the mess they created in India the Congress too will retreat, leaving the non-Muslim people of India to suffer the brunt of their mismanagement.

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

Musharraf’s departure will signal increased Pakistani support of terror in India, and Jammu agitators will be disappointed.

Posted on August 9, 2008. Filed under: China, Communist, India, Kashmir, Muslims, Pakistan, Politics, terrorism |

It is possible that Kiani can decide to “divorce” his patron, Musharraf. Kiani rose through handling the ISI at a period when ISI had been the key inspiration, motivator, and maintainer of terror in India through Islamic militants as well as indirect connections to other separatist and insurgent groups. At the moment, Musharraf is perhaps just one man to be sacrificed and offered on a plate to the politicians in return for a free hand in “dealing” with India, with sufficient resources diverted from the tight domestic budget to support any expensive cross-border terror activity.

If Musharraf goes, it will only be a signal for further escalation of terror in India.

Why is the conquering of the Indian part of Kashmir so important for the Muslim elite of Pakistan?

The main reason is of course the geo-strategic importance of Kashmir for the jealous regional superpower China. Getting this region out of India’s hands allows China a a wider base and corridor through Pakistan to the Indian Ocean, cuts off India from the proximity to the Central Asian Republics, Afghanistan and Russia. For Pakistan this also means fertile river valleys with agricultural land, since Islam needs agrarian economy as the preferable mode which reduces the risk of “contamination” from modern science. China’s backpatting of India for its role in keeping the Tibetans under tight wraps should not be taken as sincere. China will negotiate and put pressure on India more to gain recognition of the Indian territories it had militarily occupied, as well as liquidation of the Tibetan independence movement – these could be secret conditions for China’s non-opposition at the NSG.

Kashmiri Muslims who now shout of Kashmiri nationalism, will quickly shut their mouths up once Pakistan manages to conquer the rest of Kashmir – since it is not nationalism but Islam, and a recent 20th century version of Wahabi/Sunni Islam and not the diverse historical and “diffuse” versions of Kashmiri Islam, that the Kashmiri Muslims want to establish. It is so significant to note that in none of emotional speeches of the Hurryiat leader’s mouths we hear anything about the “demographics” of “Muslim” Kashmir before the Islamic militancy, no mention of the Hindus living among Muslims forced to leave. It is the modern post-cleansing “demographics” that they are so “concerned” about “preserving” – obviously, it pays to be silent about “pre-Islamic” history as everywhere in modern Islam (or at most concede, that it was all a period of “absolute darkness”).

Once Indian Kashmir is occupied with Chinese help, Pakistan’s Muslim elite will promote Islamic militancy in adjacent areas of China, probably already even started secretly promoting militancy in Mao’s and CCP’s beloved Muslim tribal allies of Yunnan during the “Hunan” days. It will be great fun to watch the stolid beaming faces of the Chinese leadership as Islamic militancy increases in North-West China. Tibetans were easy to crush as they were spiritually motivated and tamed by Buddhism gaining respect for the human rights of “non-followers” of their religion. But these will be Muslim militants, who are exhorted to adopt any terror tactic they can think of in their core texts and not shy away from any relentless sadistic activity that can subjugate a “non-believer” with desirable resources – land, property, women. Communists have never managed to fight off Islam – let us see the “Sinification of Marxism” try and do it!

The “peace conference”, with the Amarnath Sangharsh Samity will probably end inconclusively. The UPA has strong components of pro-Islamic forces, but with the classic detachment of Indian non-Muslim elite from their own underclasses, which had always prompted them to rely on foreign powers more than their own communities, the UPA leaders will fail to understand the phenomenon in Jammu. They will now try the “ABCD” of management, “Avoid, Bypass, Confuse, Delay”, as they will be too scared in their fear that any concession to the Samity will go against the UPA prospects in elections – by appearing to strengthen the “Hindu” and by “alienating” the Muslims.

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

Liked it here?
Why not try sites on the blogroll...