The cover of the 9 August 2010 issue of Time magazine. For a change, all four editions—US, Europe, Asia and South Pacific—have the same cover story.
Time‘s choice is doubtless provocative, one reason journalism exists.
Yet, such eagerness and such a desire to provoke isn’t visible on home turf, where squeamish self-censorship kicks into play each time news organisations ponder the possibility of printing the pictures of US marines killed while killing others , or the bodies of victims of 11 September 2001 attack on New York City.
***
The leakage of 92,000 secret military intelligence documents is sensational anywhere any time. When the documents pertain to the war against Taliban-Al-Qaeda, it is also disturbing because it shows (a) that America is in a trap and is unlikely to win this war, and (b) that India is in for trouble, big trouble.
Let’s not forget that the information now leaked is new only to us, the lay public.
To the top echelons of leadership in America, the facts were known all along. They also knew that the records had leaked. Two months ago, in May, the US Army criminal investigation command had arrested an intelligence analyst in the army and charges were filed against him early this month, well before the leaked documents hit world headlines.
The arrested man, Bradley Manning, is 22 years old. If he is indeed the man who leaked the secrets, he must have done so as a matter of conscience, appalled by the atrocities American troops were committing. This is a “problem” with American democracy. One man with conscience will always be around to do the unexpected.
Remember those pictures of Iraqi citizens being humiliated and tortured by fun-loving American soldiers? Earlier Vietnam war secrets were published by Daniel Ellsberg, another military analyst then working for the Rand Corporation.
The latest documents had much to reveal about Pakistan’s complicity in terror network in the region. This led to some patriotic drum-beating in India—as if Pakistan had been caught with its pants down and now America would be forced to act.
Nothing of the kind will happen.
America has been seeing Pakistan with its pants down for quite a while. For example, it said more than once in recent weeks that Osama bin Laden was living in Pakistan. Blandly Pakistan denied it. And America let it rest at that. Pakistan is for America a pill that is too bitter to swallow and too sweet to spit out, a classic diplomatic trap.
Pakistan’s military leaders, especially the smart strategists of the ISI, know this very well, hence their audacious policy of helping al-Quaida and the Taliban. Some of the terror outfits the ISI trains and equips are fighting America. Knowing this, America goes on giving Pakistan one billion dollars in aid every year. That is how smart the ISI is.
By contrast, India gives America everything America wants—nuclear treaty clauses as stipulated by the American Congress, favouritism to companies like Union Carbide, virtual immunity clauses in the event of future industrial accidents, even a false declaration to ex-President George W. Bush that the people of India loved him.
What does India get in return? Repeated verbal declarations that Pakistan must do more to contain terrorism.
Why doesn’t America do more to contain Pakistan?
The fact is that today’s political dispensation in India has no clearcut strategy about countering Pakistan’s known terror tactics. It does not know how to call Pakistan’s bluff or how to tell America and its allies that enough is enough.
There are unofficial strategic experts in India who have been proposing covert action to counter Pakistan’s covert action. This makes sense in a volatile theatre where everyone is engaged in shadow-boxing. If India can mobilise the kind of strategic brilliance the ISI displays, it can hit Pakistan where it hurts. It may even get the tacit support of the CIA and M16.
What is required is an iron will on the part of policy makers.
Perhaps Indira Gandhi would have found that will.
If softness and diffidence continue in Delhi, eventually the Taliban will replace the Americans in Afghanistan, then the Taliban will have a say in the running of Pakistan, then Pakistan will become the operational headquarters of al-Quaida and all allied groupings.
When someone finally scores a hit in New York or London, the West will wake up—too late of course. What of Bombay and Delhi, Bangalore and Hyderabad? The ISI’s singleminded focus is India and that’s where the maximum danger lies.
Photo portfolio: The Big Picture
I think the man doth despair too much.
Let’s not forget the Mrs. G’s dealings with Pakistan was from a position of much much greater strength than now. One half of “Pakistani” citizens were on our side.
No such luck these days.
Let us also remember that the most audacious and daring act in India-Pakistan history was the decision of mildest and meekest Gandhian to occupy the gaddi in Delhi: Lal Bahadur Shastri’s decision to counter-attack in Pakistan in 1965. This was after 1962, with inferior equipment and possibly, inferiority complex.
The Taliban’s success in Afghanistan is not a foregone conclusion either. Let us remember that we are reading memos from the worst period of the war for NATO, 2004 – 2009 when Afghanistan was generally ignored. There’s also an ethnic element to the Taliban that cannot be forgotten and we have to remember that they were in control of only half the country at the best of times. Even if the US pulls out of Afghanistan, but continues to support non-Taliban governments through arms and aid, the Taliban takeover of Afghanistan is not inevitable.
Fully 50% of pakistan thinks India is a threat (the other placed India a little lower on the list but I doubt if few thought India was mostly harmless). The real reasons why have no bearing on the issue because this has to do with a combination of paranoia, media hype and flawed education system that we really cannot do anything to rectify. But the picture is more complex. Pakistanis routinely come to India for medical treatment not to mention cultural exchanges and the like.
We can of course use every tool in arsenal, economic, diplomatic, what-have-you to corner and impoverish Pakistan even more, but we’ll only turn it into a South Asian North Korea; even more dangerous, paranoid, crazy and unstable than before.
Hmm.. the classic quandary. Is it in our interests for the Pakis to be ‘stable and democratic’ or is it in our interests to see them descend into chaos? Considering that the more stable the Pakis are, the more viciously they promote the anti-India and covert war agenda, on the whole I feel it’s better if they degenerate into a mass of warring factions. I feel our intelligence apparatus should focus on dismembering Pakiland through support of secessionist movements in Balochistan, NWFP, and others.
As long as action is covert they are not likely to gamble with overt nuclear threats. The world has become used to seeing the Pakis negotiate with a gun pointed at their own heads – essentially the national equivalent of a suicide bomber!! Net-net, I feel an ‘unstable’ Pakistan is more beneficial to us than a stable democratic one.
I fully endorse the viewpoint of Mr.TJS George taking the proposal of unofficial strategic experts in India that we should carryout covert action to counter Pakistan’s covert action. And really this makes sense to me and I am surprised at why the Indian government is soft peddling the issue of ghastly damage caused to Mumbai-India by Pakistan since more than a year . Majority of Pakistani population ( irrespective of their educational , economic , political and ethnic background) is anti-India and religiously fundamentalist who whole heartedly but tacitly support terror acts of Taliban, LET, Al Queada against India. TOI’ s “Aman Ki Asha” is just a trash now in light of results of recent survey done in Pakistan. In fact such anti-India sentiments are strong among highly qualified, Oxford/Cambridge graduated people of Pakistan. If anybody wants to verify the veracity of this statement one can go to the Archives of Opinion column of Pakistan’ daily “The News International” (http://www.thenews.com.pk/). Here one can find lengthy and ‘masterful’ writings of people of all walks of life in Pakistan .And one of the most venomous persons of them is the disgraced nuclear scientist Dr. A.Q.Khan This being the fact, India should make all attempts to retaliate Pakistan by engaging in shadow-boxing and in this regard we can also draw a leaf out of ISI’s strategic skills .And I again endorse the viewpoint of Mr. TSJ George that ‘if India can mobilise the kind of strategic brilliance the ISI displays, it can hit Pakistan where it hurts. It may even get the tacit support of the CIA and M16.
Alok:
>impoverish Pakistan even more, but we’ll only turn it into a South Asian North Korea;
There are two views to this.
1. Act as a catalyst : In this view, Pakistan is doomed and is going to split into 3-4 different formations anyway, as Pakistan hasn’t been able to forge a single nationwide development agenda. So, it’ll go through a painful super-nova. It’d be better for India to act as a catalyst to speed this up, so that the pain of the super-nova will be lesser. Splintered Pakistan may be troublesome for a while, but then it’ll be easier to manage than the current one.
2. Keep Pakistan’s integrity: This view takes into account post splinter situation of the region more realistically. The existing Nuclear weapons will fall in to the hands of two or more splinter nation states, which are bound to be unstable, even if they are more pliable. So, the situation is bound to be worse than having a single entity called Pakistan.
It is indeed not a simpler decision like the one faced by Indira Gandhi. The price to pay for adventure these days is too huge.
I personally want Pakistan punished for its acts of war against India, but fully recognize it may not be in the best long term interest of India to do so.
So, best course of action right now perhaps is – DO NOTHING. Focus our energies on development/growth like China did. Treat Pakistan like a small mosquito biting you on a harsh summer night.
:(
Chance for India was lost in the week following 9/11. Pakistan had been isolated and it was once a life time opportunity for Indian nation to solidly take down Pakistan and defeat the mullah army to stone age.
No body would have intervened at that hour. Indian leaders let go that opportunity to appease mullahs amidst us. Every Indian knows which political party did not want to attack Pakistan.
I am not sure if RAW can reignite MQM and Altaf Hussain. At the moment that seems to be best option and whenever next terrorist act happens India should make use of the opportunity to attack like USA does.
” The Wheel that Squeaks Gets the Grease ”
You run for some distance and its your left leg thats aching. So its the massage, cream and preferential treatment. Remember, your right leg has done the same hard-work but its doesn’t get any treatment since it didn’t complain.
Pakistan’s ISI has mastered ‘the art of being left’. India has appointed itself as the beacon of righteousness. So it won’t get any treatment for putting with pain.
One problem I find with Indian parentage is that they never teach their kids to complain ! So we have a populace who is happy whatever meted out to them !!
Epilogue: If I were PM of India, I will ask for $2billion in aid to fight terrorism in India. Why 2? Because Pakistan got 1.
Instead of wondering along with TJS, why don’t we just ask our kid from Somanahalli to explain the conundrum? Or the former Deputy Secretary General of the U.N. from Kerala? Or H. D. Devegowda? I wonder if anyone asked HDD what his foreign policy was when he was the accidental king of Bharathavarsha for a full three hundred days.
Much as I hate the thought, I sometimes feel another major terror attack on the US will make them sit up and act firmly against Pakistan. Unless Obama and co are such morons that they will follow up such an attack with more aid to Pakistan “so that the Pakis can act on the terrorists.”…Honestly (and with a tinge of guilt), I think it is too bad that the New York plotter didn’t succeed.
@ ppl supporting covert ops
If our govt did sponsor or fund covert ops why would they let the public/local populace and last and most importantly, let the media know about it? Wouldn’t that kind of defeat the purpose of the op being “covert”?
Narayana:
>opportunity to attack like USA does.
You forget one thing. Pakistan is a neighboring state with missiles that can hit delhi even before the army can alert the civilian leadership. USA is 10000miles away and Pakistan has nothing that can reach it. Russia could, and even Cuba could (with its vastly inferior missiles supplied by Russia). USA never attacked either of these countries.
The bottomline in fighting a war is – you don’t get in to one, unless you are fairly certain you can limit your damages. Currently, the ratio of doing something vs Do-Nothing is a no brainer.
yes, it is irritating, troubling, annoying and infuriating to have a pesky neighbor who keeps taunting you with his thumb on his nose. best way to deal with him is to ignore, rather than get into an ugly fight, unless you know you can prevail with least damage.
In any case, best response to terrorism is not counter terrorism as proposed by George. Gandhi was wrong in his economics, but was dead right in his social thinking – You can embarrass and tire your enemy with patience, tolerance and non-violence. Lets keep growing, and Pakistan will break-up in its own contradictions.
People who are for covert operations in Pak, you are seriously ill informed. Ask any Paki, all the ills that plague them is a CIA-RAW-MOSSAD conspiracy. They have elevated RAW to the level of CIA :)
@harkol,
” You can embarrass and tire your enemy with patience, tolerance and non-violence. Lets keep growing, and Pakistan will break-up in its own contradictions. ”
This won’t work with the brain washed Pakis. “Water terrorism” is the new propaganda piece there and is building up significant momentum. A simple ” india’s is growing because they are stealing our water” is enough fpr Mohammad to strap on “the vest”. The longer we don’t do anything, the more dangerous it is for us.
Angry Young Man:
>Much as I hate the thought, I sometimes feel another major terror attack on the US will make them sit up and act firmly against Pakistan
yeah, US is in a far better position to attack Pakistan, as opposed to India, by virtue of the distance! Pakistan can do nothing to hurt Americans. In fact, US may not even need to attack Pakistan – It just needs to insist that it dismantle ISI and handover the main crooks, if it doesn’t want its cities to be bombed..
Truth be told, it’s no more about India or Pakistan or US or Iran or Palestine. It’s radical Islam vs rest of the civilization.
@abhi
one can never put this crap in as a clear outright one statement as there are always 2 or more sides to this coin.
here you are saying it is radical islam against rest of the civilisation. I presume, out there in the “radical camps” they are saying the exact same statement in a diff sequence, i.e. the rest of the radical civilisation is trying to destroy our system of belief and hence we should destroy them before they can destroy us!
It is the same statement from two different sides, the key statement being the groups have issues with accepting the other! and unfortunately this seems to be a conundrum with no solution
Karihaida:
>The longer we don’t do anything, the more dangerous it is for us.
More damaging than Maoists? More damaging than our own corrupt Political class?
Unless we are provoked in to a war (not some small skirmishes or a couple of terror attacks) we shouldn’t enter one, without knowing with some certainty how it’ll end.
Risk of having a city (or a few) nuked is too huge one to take just to teach someone a lesson. Pakistan will loose all sympathy of the world (Except perhaps that of China) in the long term, and it’ll break up on its own… My sense is, we don’t need to act the catalyst as some argue.
***
————
>This won’t work with the brain washed Pakis.
There is an inherent instability in any social system, and it is normally kept going with a lot of energy (spent in the form of social structures like legal institutions, Education, Information, transformations etc). Remove that from a system, it will start decaying and go to a point of being unsustainable. This is the theory of ‘social entropy’.
Pakistan went thru this in 1971, when its social systems collapsed and it split into two. We can see the process again in Pakistan (to a some extent in India too). Pakistan blamed India for 1971, but most Pakistani commentators today agree that its own inability to keep the country together caused the breakup.
Today, Pakistan seems to be expending energy (in the form of $$$ it gets from US etc.) trying to keep the system from entirely breaking up. Remove that energy and it will breakup. This is precisely why US keeps giving it money – Fear of the unknown called ‘splintered Pakistan’.
But, US can’t keep doing this for long. At some point it’ll tire of giving money to Pakistan. Most of the world will stop doing so too. Then Pakistan will naturally breakup and disappear as an entity (just as the soviet Union did). It took many decades of cold war for that to happen in USSR, same may be the case with Pakistan… But, collapse it will, unless it changes track. We don’t need to go to war to cause that.
Post-Collapse a new system will emerge, with a different social structure, perhaps a medieval one that will be a bigger problem for the world with its nuclear weapons. Can’t predict, but USSR broke up and its nuclear assets were somewhat managed. Same can happen with Pakis.
Alternatively, it is possible for Pakistanis to see the Indian progress and wake up just in time to pull themselves back together. But, for that India has to fight its own social entropy.
Don’t you think we are better off making sure we don’t breakup?
@Abhi – Don’t communalize the issue. It is Pakistan which is fiddling in Kashmir, it is Pakistan which is trying to destabilize India. And by making comments which alienate muslims in India, you are supporting Pakistan.
Pakistan will be very happy to have people like you who can support their cause.Check out the below link:
@Tanveer:
>@Abhi – Don’t communalize the issue
I think you misread Abhi.. He was referring to ‘Radical Islam’ not Islam as a whole.
I don’t think there are any other radical formation, currently as organized and as willing to cause massive, large scale massacre of innocents as worldwide movement of Radical Islamist groups or loose web of individuals.
Stating that shouldn’t be alienating Indian Muslims!
Maulana, in the video here, seems to be a fine example of Muslims who are fighting the radicalism within Islam.
***
@Prajwal
>It is the same statement from two different sides,
You are accepting what Abhi said – it is “Radical Islamists vs the rest”. Irrespective of who thinks who is right, what Abhi said is indeed a fact.
The difference is, you are trying to rationalize an irrational mindset/movement. Radical islam gives a very conservative, violent interpretation to islam and wants everyone (muslims or otherwise) to accept/conform to it.
The Radical groups don’t say rest of the world is out to get them, what they say is ‘anyone who doesn’t accept my version of islam is an enemy, worthy of being killed’.
There lies the fundamental difference. Rest of the world doesn’t want to kill radical Islamists, they just want to reform if possible or co-exist peacefully if not possible. But Radical islamist groups will go out of their way to attack/kill those who don’t agree with them. because they believe it is their religious duty to do so!!
Prajwal – Definition of radical from dictionary.com: a person who holds or follows strong convictions or extreme principles; extremist. Now it is upto you to tell me whether its radical Islam vs rest of the civilization or radical rest of the civilization vs Islam.
Tanveer – I see your world view and nothing more I need to answer than just showing it again. Wasn’t the last comment yous? – http://churumuri.wordpress.com/2010/06/21/the-curious-case-of-zakir-naik-shekhar-gupta/#comments
Your fetish for ZN and retrofitting kuran with modern science is the very definition of radical.
Harkol – We liberals often make one mistake, i.e. to put Islam in the same scale as other religious craps such as the rest of it. I think past 20-30 years have given us enough to keep Islam in a special moronic category. In my interactions with muslims, both online and offline, I am yet to have one single encounter who speaks sense when it comes to religion. That’s the whole problem, in other religions you have majority mainstream and minority radicals. In Islam, its the opposite and hence Islam vs rest problem. Earlier Islamic world recognizes it, unlike needing to have it realized the way Germany did through a world war, the better. Both for Islam and rest.
Abhi:
>I am yet to have one single encounter who speaks sense when it comes to religion.
I am yet to come across any religious person who makes sense. Muslim, Hindu or other..
But, I have come across many Muslims (in fact, some of my close friends are Muslims), who aren’t radicals. Coming from Mangalore, which has the highest percentage muslims in Karnataka, and having interacted with many, I know that Muslims (and christians too) are more religious than Hindus, and follow their faith more rigorously.
However, I haven’t come across many radicals. i.e. people who hold the view that My religion is right, and if you disagree then I’ll fight you (like Zakir Naik does). Perhaps it is the Indian democratic spirit – they agree to disagree.
But, I reckon, were India to be a Muslim majority nation, the same may not hold true. Your example of Germany in many ways is apt for most Muslim nations.
@Abhi
-“In my interactions with muslims, both online and offline, I am yet to have -one single encounter who speaks sense when it comes to religion.”
My my somebody sure is really pissed off. You have classified everyone, how would you classify yourself..a right wing superman?
-“Your fetish for ZN and retrofitting kuran with modern science is the very -definition of radical.”
I am not a Zakir Naik follower, nor am I retrofitting Quran. Who am I to retrofit the Holy Book. I am a simple muslim who is trying to be a practising muslim, who is trying to be good to neighbours, who is trying to be able to give Zakath, who is basically trying to be a practicing muslim.
And i still feel that you have not understood Islam at all.
“I know that Muslims (and christians too) are more religious than Hindus, and follow their faith more rigorously.”
Harkol – that’s the problem :)…religion is good as long as no one takes it seriously. Read Sam Harris on this for some interesting perspective. He puts all religious people under scrutiny to an extent that they are all without logic and proof. Essentially Tanveer (and lot many more) and Osama Bin Laden are the same in believing that kuran is the eternal science journal etc. Its the behavioral difference like blowing up people that makes them seem nonsensical but harmless.
Tanveer – “And i still feel that you have not understood Islam at all.”
I am glad I have not wasted my time as a human reading some 6th century dogma. Universe and life are way too grandeur than any of your narrow minded books.
@abhi
Going by your deifinition/the dictionary definition of radical here is my reply to you…
Your definition of “radical islam” is correct, I never questioned it. I questioned the validity of a one sided statement.
Anyway to justify my point further,
USA is also “radical” because they strongly stick to their BELIEF that they have the authority to set the world right; the extreme idea here being defined as the “right/correct world is the one found in the USA”.
the United Nations is an extremist/radical organisation for believing completely that the US is always right. The belief here comes from the action almost 10 years ago, when the entire world urged USA not to go to war with afghanistan,… But USA did go there chanting the chants of democracy and free peoples bullshit. The rest of the world followed under the belief that it was the right thing to do. They went against their own good logic of not going to war. A decade later we have a never ending war, a completely destroyed country… sorry that is 2 completely destroyed countries if one counts Iraq. The latest being 3 other countries being under the gunsights of “Extremist Democracy” (the 3 countries are Pakistan, North Korea and Iran). India is also playing along as we also have troops and missions in afghanistan, we have also decided to play along the US chant of free people and decided to go against our allies in Iran instead of supporting them.
Feminists who believe all women should be able to dress how they want anyway they want are also radicals in that sense as they try to educate women of the world etc. The catch is I have met quite a few women who were in their right minds I suppose (as we had a decent straightforward open discussion about this) who believe that not just women but also men should have limits on freedom. The limits should be decided keeping the context in perspective, such as if a woman walks into a job interview for the post of a business manager in a bikini, she is obviously going to face the consequences of not getting the job. There are certain codes of propriety which are required, else there is no semblance of society at all. And in that case we can chuck away all our borders and constitutions as all these are meant to up hold a social construct!
Further examples of radicalism:
Indian cricket fans attacking players houses when India loses… probably prompted by the belief that only the Indian team is worthy of winning a competition… dunno
Claiming equality for all and then making unlimited never ending reservations under the BELIEF that allowing legal privileges for some groups will bring in equality is also a radical idea!
Monsieur… Any idea can be described as radical, it is all a matter of perspective… and that exactly was the point I was trying to make! Coming back to afghanistan, initially maybe it was kaafirs etc. But the moment USA attacked and the rest of the world followed suite, WE GAVE them the statement to use in their arsenal of propaganda… that the “rest of the world wants to destroy our way of life!” … That is the “radical”‘s version of the same statement you are using to justify your war!
Abhi:
>behavioral difference like blowing up people that makes them seem nonsensical but harmless.
That’s a huge difference!
I welcome anyone being religious and following any faith/cult/guru blindly as long as they keep it peaceful, and within the framework of law.
As to prajwal’s observation that rest of ‘radical civilization’ (call them secularist, democrats, liberals whatever) also imposes their belief on people – It does not.
All secular laws do is to allow people to follow what ever faith they want as long as it doesn’t impinge on other’s right to others to follow their faith peacefully as well.
As they say, ‘your right to swing your fist stops where other man’s nose begins’.
@Abhi
Now u think i am same as Osama..ha ha I don’t know whether to laugh or cry. I think you are behaving like Hitler. Hope u don’t end up like him.
I really pity your thinking.
@ Harkol
However best the miniscule right fringe reacts, the majority population of this country knows the truth. It retains the secular fabric of democracy and knows the way forward is through brotherhood and friendship. I see more and more people of different relegious backgrounds mixing up and sharing common platforms. Very good for our country.
India is really on an economic revival, need of the hour is commitment to work harder to achieve the common goal rather than infighting.
Prajwal – Good and bad are not all that relative as you are saying. Try finding out the story of the Afghan lady on Times cover, how she lost her nose and ears. Its clearly a clash between civilized modern world and primitive 6th century ideology. You can bring in 101 arguments for the heck of it but the facts are evident.
Harkol – Absolutely. Not blowing up people is a HUGE difference. But if we ever to get rid of it completely, we probably need to kick the irrationality out.
Tanveer – read the context in which I compared you (and other religious people – Hindus and Christians included) to Osama. That’s not my original thought either, read Sam Harris if you ever get tired of Quran.