Quote:What the Norway Attack Could Mean for Europe



July 22, 2011

At least 17 people have died and more have been injured in an explosion in downtown Oslo and a shooting at a Labor Party youth camp outside the Norwegian capital. Norwegian police arrested the shooter at the camp and believe he is connected with the explosion, though others could be involved.



The significance of the events in Norway for the rest of Europe will depend largely on who is responsible, and the identity of the culprits is still unclear. However, STRATFOR can extrapolate the possible consequences of the attacks based on several scenarios.



The first scenario is that grassroots Islamist militants based in Norway are behind these seemingly connected attacks. Grassroots jihadist groups are already assumed to exist across Europe, and this assumption — along with previous attacks — has bolstered far-right political parties' popularity across the Continent. Many center-right politicians have also begun raising anti-immigrant policy issues in order to distract from the ongoing economic austerity measures brought about by the European economic crisis. If grassroots Islamist militants are found to be the culprits in Norway, it will simply reinforce the current European political trend that favors the far right. That said, some far-right parties, particularly in Northern Europe, could get a popularity boost sufficient to push them into the political mainstream, and possibly into government.



If an individual, grassroots or organized domestic group with far-right or neo-Nazi leanings perpetrated the attack, the significance for the rest of Europe will not be large. It could lead to a temporary loss of popularity for the far right, but long-term repercussions for the far right are unlikely since these parties have begun tempering their platforms in order to attract a wider constituency.



There is also the possibility that the attacks are the work of a skilled but disturbed individual with grievances against the Labor Party. This possibility would have few long-ranging repercussions beyond a reworking of domestic security procedures in Norway.



Another scenario is that the attack was carried out by an international group which may have entered the country some time ago. Regardless of the time frame, if the culprits crossed a border to get into Norway, other European countries will feel very vulnerable; Norway is Europe's northern terminus, and if international militants can get to Norway, they can get to anywhere in Europe. This vulnerability could severely damage the Schengen Agreement, once a symbolic pillar of Europe's unity, which has been under attack in the last several months. The agreement allows visa-free travel between the 25 countries in the Schengen Area (most of which are EU members, but the Schengen Area does include some non-EU members like Norway and Switzerland). The agreement came under pressure when Italy threatened to allow migrants fleeing the Libyan conflict and Tunisian political unrest to gain temporary resident status in order to cross into France. It was Rome's way of forcing the rest of Europe to help it with the influx of migrants. The solution proposed by France and Italy was to essentially establish temporary borders "under very exceptional circumstances." Later, Denmark reimposed border controls, supposedly due to an increase in cross-border crime.



The attack in Norway, if it involved cross-border movements, could therefore damage or even end the Schengen Agreement. Other European countries, particularly those where the far right is strong or where center-right parties have adopted an anti-immigrant message, could push for further amendments to the pact.



A transnational militant plot against a European country in the contemporary context could also be significant for European defense policy. When the 2004 Madrid attack and 2005 London attack happened, many in Europe argued that the attacks were a result of European governments' support for U.S. military operations in the Middle East. This is no longer really the case for Europe, although European forces are still in Afghanistan. It is much more difficult to blame Europe's alliance with the United States for this attack. As such, Europe could very well be motivated to take ongoing efforts to increase European defense coordination seriously. Current efforts are being led by Poland, which is doing so mainly because it wants to increase security against Russia's resurgence, not because of global militancy. The problem with Warsaw's plan is that it has little genuine support in Western Europe, other than France. An attack on Norway could, however, provide the kind of impetus necessary for Europe to feel threatened by global events.



The last scenario is that the attack is linked to Norway's involvement in the campaign in Libya. If the Libyan government is somehow connected to the bombing and/or shooting, the rest of Europe will rally behind Norway and increase their efforts in Libya. This scenario would essentially close off the opening in negotiations prompted by a recent move by Paris and other European governments saying they would be open to Moammar Gadhafi's remaining in Libya.

Quote:but long-term repercussions for the far right are unlikely since these parties have begun tempering their platforms in order to attract a wider constituency.

Quote:Hiding in plain sight: Germany's Neo-Nazis ditch skinhead look

Far-right groups are hoping to win votes by blending in with mainstream society – but they are still clinging to the hate crimes.

Tony Paterson reports in Berlin



Tuesday, 5 July 2011



[image caption:] The political mainstream of the far-right NPD is keen to distance itself from violence, and supporters are changing their looks to improve the party's election chances





The summer fete was well under way in the normally sleepy village of Lübtheen in the Mecklenburg region of eastern Germany. Locals tending stalls outside low red brick houses offered home-baked bread and smoke-cured sausage. They hardly noticed the group of well-groomed young men in orangeT-shirts mingling with the crowd and distributing balloons and leaflets.





"The shirts they were wearing were exactly the same colour as those usually worn by Chancellor Angela Merkel's conservatives at campaign rallies," Ute Lindenau, Lübtheen's mayor, told The Independent. "Nobody had the slightest idea that the men were all neo-Nazis until after they had left and people had time to study their vile propaganda."



The new and almost covert style of canvassing was being practised by Germany's neo-Nazi National Democratic Party (NPD), which is fighting to retain parliamentary seats in key elections in the eastern state of Mecklenburg-Vorpommern this autumn. The party first won seats there in 2006 after mounting a virulent campaign against foreigners. It also has seats in the east German state of Saxony



For Mrs Lindenau, the tactic was not much of a surprise. As a committed anti-Nazi and the mayor of a town known as a far-right stronghold of the east, she has watched the NPD gradually shed its skinhead image in an attempt to appeal to more voters. "These days the neo-Nazis are almost invariably polite and they make an effort to look respectable. They seem to have realised that the skinhead look is a vote loser," she said.



Mrs Lindenau's observations have now been borne out by Germany's Office for the Protection of the Constitution (BVS), the equivalent of Britain's MI5. In a report published last week, the domestic intelligence agency concluded that the country's far right had all but completely shed the aggressive skinhead image it was renowned for in the 1990s. "Members of the far right scene prefer to wear clothing or brands that orient themselves more towards general trends in youth fashion," the report noted. "The more noticeable skinhead culture is becoming increasingly less interesting for far right extremist youths."



But the less aggressive image adopted by the German far right has not resulted in a corresponding drop in violence. On the contrary, the BVS found that the number of neo-Nazis prepared to use extreme violence to convey their political message had increased dramatically, from 5,000 in 2009 to 5,600 last year. The report put the total number of far right extremists at 25,000 and noted that the number of far right crimes in the former communist east had risen by an alarming 40 per cent.



The kind of violence meted out by Germany's growing "autonomous nationalist" groups was graphically illustrated in March this year at the trial of members of a banned neo-Nazi group called Sturm 34. In a style reminiscent of the campaign mounted by Hitler's Nazis to make German towns and villages "Jew-free", Sturm 34 set about trying to make the east German town of Mittweida "insect-free and brown".



"Brown" is a German byword for Nazi. By "insect-free", the group signalled that it was out to rid the town of anyone who held a different opinion to its own. The court heard how the gang patrolled Mittweida and set about "insects" – mostly punk rockers and vagrants – with baseball bats and boxing gloves filled with sand to double the effect of face punches.



Sturm 34 persecuted the town's inhabitants for months before police finally intervened. In one particularly brutal incident the gang appears to have practised a favourite form of neo-Nazi assault called "kerb biting" in which the victim's lower jaw is smashed against a kerbstone with a kick from a steel-capped boot.



Experts on the far right say that in public the NPD's political core goes out of its way to distance itself from such behaviour in public. Many of its members have exchanged skinhead haircuts and boots for an almost preppy look.



Michael Weiss, the author of a new study on neo-Nazi dress codes entitled Hide and Seek, says the increasingly ordinary appearance of far-right extremists means they can often blend in at left-wing demonstrations or in sports stadiums. "These people no longer stand out," he said.



To recognise each other, neo-Nazis now resort increasingly to an array of about 150 secret codes, according to Mr Weiss. These include the number 88 on T-shirts or other garments. The eight represents the eighth letter of the alphabet, so 88 corresponds to HH, for Heil Hitler, a phrase banned in Germany along with the swastika.



Neo-Nazis have also started to wear the black and white Palestinian Kaffiyeh scarf – a garment once the preserve of the far left at demonstrations – in an attempt to signal that they are against Israel. "Their style incorporates elements from rock and pop culture. Neo-Nazis now have piercings," Mr Weiss said.



In Mecklenburg, where the NPD's popularity may be just enough to enable it to stay in parliament after this autumn's state election, the party's attempts to garner support have not been confined to a new dress code. The Social Democrat-run state government recently became so concerned about the party's attempts to infiltrate schools and youth groups that it insisted teachers sign a declaration pledging their commitment to democracy.



However some of the far-right party's politicians have not managed to hide behind the new guise of respectability. Sven Kruger, a building contractor who is also an NPD politician, has been exposed for using a sign to advertise his company which shows a sledgehammer smashing what looks like a Star of David. His premises were searched last year and prosecutors discovered photographs of German Jewish community leaders which were suspected of having been used as targets for pistol shooting practice.





Finding new support



* Germany banned Hitler's National Socialist Party in 1945, but the neo-Nazi NPD was allowed to form in West Germany in 1964 and made some short-lived political gains during that decade, although it has never entered a national government.



The party found new support in east Germany after the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989 and has since won seats in eastern state parliaments.



The government tried to ban the NPD in 2001, but the constitutional court overruled it.



The NPD merged with another far-right party, the German People's Union (DVU) last year. It is estimated to have 6,600 members and 25,000 supporters, many of whom belong to other neo-Nazi groups.

Quote:SUNDVOLLEN, Norway (Reuters) - Norway mourned on Sunday 93 people killed in a shooting spree and car bombing by a Norwegian who saw his attacks as "atrocious, but necessary" to defeat liberal immigration policies and the spread of Islam.



In his first comment via a lawyer since his arrest, Anders Behring Breivik, 32, said he wanted to explain himself at a court hearing on Monday about extending his custody.

"He has said that he believed the actions were atrocious, but that in his head they were necessary," Geir Lippestad said.



The lawyer said Breivik had admitted to Friday's shootings at a Labour party youth camp and the bombing that killed seven people in Oslo's government district a few hours earlier.

However, "he feels that what he has done does not deserve punishment," Lippestad told NRK public television.



"What he has said is that he wants a change in society and in his understanding, in his head, there must be a revolution."

Oslo's acting police chief Sveinung Sponheim confirmed to reporters that Breivik would be able to speak to the court. It was not clear whether the hearing would be closed or in public.



"He has admitted to the facts of both the bombing and the shooting, although he's not admitting criminal guilt," Sponheim said, adding that Breivik had said he acted alone.

....

Quote:If there is a God I will be allowed to enter heaven as all other martyrs for the Church in the past." (p. 1345)

Quote:From Breivik's "manifesto"

Quote:If there is a God I will be allowed to enter heaven as all other martyrs for the Church in the past." (p. 1345)

Quote:the rascal pope, benedict, who really does not give a damn about jesus but does care about "Europe".

Quote:No justification of unified Europe (within Christendom) is required as in times past; this is already the commonplace notion after 2000 years of forceful "unification" by the Church.

Quote:The UK never gave up the ambition of subjugating India anew despite handing over power to native rule, which had little to do with Gandhi’s non violent protest. It was Britain’s exhaustion in the aftermath of World War II and bankrupt economy, combined with fear of revolt by its colonial Indian troops that persuaded a malicious flight. However, Britain presided over a bloodbath to establish the Pakistan it had cynically incited, which is now haunting much of the world. The Americans quickly understood how important India was for the assertion of global power with the onset of the Cold War. As Lord Curzon had explained long ago, Britain would be nothing without India and its vast human and material resources. India offers virtually unlimited manpower for fighting wars, increasingly difficult to find from among their own pleasure-seeking citizens. Americans and Europeans also have smaller families nowadays and are therefore unwilling to sacrifice their fewer offspring. In addition, India is large enough to assure vast wealth for any ruling elite, domestic or foreign, even if the majority of the population remains mired in destitution. This has happened throughout Indian history, whether during Islamic, Christian or contemporary déraciné Hindu rule, bequeathing Pharaonic wealth and life styles of luxurious excess for the few and poverty for the many.



The subordination of India for the pursuit of world power is therefore a necessity for the incessantly born-again, Christian US and its European allies.

Quote:[...]

The first important step in Europe towards self-description came in 2002 from Pope John Paul II and the then Cardinal Ratzinger, now incumbent Pope; in America, around the same time the process of self-description was marked by Samuel Huntington’s Who are We? The Challenges to America’s National Identity (Simon & Schuster, 2004) and a renewed national debate over whether the Pledge of Allegiance (not to be confused with the Oath of Allegiance) was mandatory for all students in American schools.



[...]





As the European Union was emerging from its chrysalis, the Pope had to speak up, as others had, to emphasize Europe’s Christian-ness before Multiculturalism was made Europe’s defining virtue.



Q: There is a debate over the inclusion of the word ‘God’ and references to Europe’s Christian past in the preambles of the future [European] Constitution. Do you think there can be a united Europe that has turned its back on its Christian past?



A: I am convinced that Europe must not just be something economic [or] political; rather, it is in need of spiritual foundations.



It is a historical fact that Europe is Christian, and that it has grown on the foundation of the Christian faith, which continues to be the foundation of the values for this continent, which in turn has influenced other continents.

(I.e. to Ratzy and his predecessor JPII: Europe = christendom. It certainly was so in the medieval christian past.)



It is imperative to have a foundation of values and, if we ask ourselves what that foundation is, we realize that, beyond the confessions, there are no others outside the great values of the Christian faith. And this is why it is imperative that in the future Constitution of Europe mention is made of the Christian foundations of Europe. (Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger from an interview given on 1 December 2002 to a group of journalists at the Catholic University of St. Anthony, Murcia, Spain)



Europe is a cultural and not a geographical continent. It is united by its culture which gives it a common identity. The roots which formed … this continent are those of Christianity. (Josef Ratzinger prior to his election as Pope Benedict XIV, in an Interview in Le Figaro, August 2004, putting the case for the exclusion of Turkey on religious grounds)

(Note how heathen nations - in particular Bharatam - are not allowed to be *heathen* civilisations even though that is exactly and innately what they are. Instead, heathen nations are described by the christowest and christos inside the country as having no history, no religions, not defined by religion, only random geography and happenstance. I.e. as blank slates awaiting conversion, and whose history can be claimed for christianism, such as via the late St Thomas fables imposed onto factual history.

Note also how there is no recognition of the traditional Roman Empire and all things Ancient Greek being [i]Hellenistic. They too are turned neutral, as if there is a phenomenon to be called "GrecoRoman civilisation" without mentioning how this is exclusively owing to Hellenismos and identical with it.

In contrast, what's now called "Europe" was originally no more than unrelated geography shoved together by an alien ideology foisted on its various inhabitants - as Dhu said: 'No justification of unified Europe (within Christendom) is required as in times past; this is already the commonplace notion after 2000 years of forceful "unification" by the Church.')



Turkey [is] an Asiatic nation, its capital is not in Europe, 95% of its population is outside Europe. Turkey has a different culture, a different approach, a different way of life. Letting it in would be the end of the European Union. (Valéry Giscard d’Estaing, French President 1974-1981, President of Commission for drafting the EU Constitution set up in 2002. Widely taken to mean he doesn’t want Turkey to join because it is a majority Muslim country)



Europe’s founders, like Adenauer, De Gaspari and Schuman, put their Christian [Catholic] faith at the centre of their political lives. How can we underestimate, for example, the fact that in 1951, before beginning the delicate negotiations which would lead to the adoption of the Treaty of Paris, they wished to meet in a Benedictine monastery on the Rhine for meditation and prayer? (Pope John Paul II, 7 November 2003, Audience with members of European Christian Democrat Foundation, appealing to have Christianity mentioned in the EU Constitution)



We will be joined to a Europe in which the Catholic religion will be the dominant faith, and in which the application of the Catholic Social Doctrine will be the major factor in everyday political and economic life. (Shirley Williams, British Labour Minister and later co-founder of Social Democrats)[/i]



Besides turning the Genesis on its head by attributing human Founders for Europe and besides giving short shrift to geography, the following ideas emerge unambiguously from these statements –



+ The then Pope, the incumbent Pope and important political leaders in Europe declare firmly that Europe is Christian

+ The bare-faced lie that Europe grew on the foundations of Christianity

+ That Europe is not a geographic but a cultural entity and Europe’s Founders put their Christian faith at the centre of their political lives

+ The Generic Church will not acknowledge, much less legitimise any pre-Christian past or roots for Europe

+ The incumbent Pope and a former President of France (the spectre of Algeria was haunting France) do not want Muslim Turkey within the Christian European Union which would effectively make Turkey a European country



[...]

Quote:This is not the only instance when the Church has rejected multiculturalism on its turf. The Church closed ranks and rejected the Muslim demand to build a mosque adjacent to the Basilica of Annunciation in Nazareth. The Basilica of Annunciation is built on the site where the Church claims Angel Gabriel told Mary she would give birth to Jesus.



Muslims claim that the site is important to them too historically because it is the final resting place of Shahib-al-Din, nephew of Saladin who commanded the Jihadi army which defeated the Crusaders in 1187. The Israeli government at first permitted the Muslims to build the mosque and the marble cornerstone was unveiled with much fanfare on November 23, 1999.



The Christian world reacted with anger over the Muslim demand and over the Israeli government’s decision to allow the mosque to come up next to the Basilica. This notwithstanding the fact that Nazareth is important to both Christians and Muslims; that the site in question is historically important to both communities; most significantly, notwithstanding the fact that Muslims today constitute two-thirds of Nazareth’s population.



Considering the lectures on pluralism, freedom of religion and rights of minorities which the U.S and the Vatican have given to India’s Hindus, this makes interesting reading –



A special Israeli government committee is debating whether Nazareth officials should allow Muslims to continue building a mosque alongside the famous Basilica of the Annunciation.



Israeli officials created the committee in response to a new wave of international appeals. Israel decided in 1998 to allow the mosque’s construction, despite protests from Nazareth’s Christians. The Vatican, the White House, and an international coalition of Catholic and Protestant Christian church groups have opposed construction.



Critics have said that the new mosque could physically overwhelm the adjacent church site and threaten the delicate status quo between Nazareth’s Muslim Arab majority and Christian Arab minority.



The mosque might contain multiple spires that would tower over the black-coned dome of the basilica, says Dave Parsons, a spokesman for the International Christian Embassy, one of the groups protesting the construction.



“It will demean the basilica and force Christians to run a gantlet from the main street to the church,” Parsons said. “We want the city authorities to restore the public plaza and establish a buffer zone against any future encroachment attempts.” (http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2002/march11/27.33.html)

Quote:America fares no better than Europe at self-description and dealing with multiculturalism. Samuel Huntington, like President Kennedy before him described the United States of America as a Nation of Immigrants. For “an anguished, frantic, over-burdened academic producing scholarly works”, the description was a travesty of truth which condemned Native Americans and African Americans to non-existence by leaving them outside the pale of this popular description.



Native Americans were native or indigenous to the continent and Bering Strait theory notwithstanding cannot be termed immigrants; and the forcible transportation of Africans to the American continent can hardly be termed immigration. If we discount from Huntington’s description the blatant falsehood of calling European Christian genociders, invaders, freebooters, settlers-by-force, slave holders and slave traders as immigrants, what remains of the American populace – Germans, Irish, Scandinavians, Latin Americans and Asians – fits the description. America is a nation of immigrants.

Quote:[color="#FF0000"]Malnourished India gifts $2bn to the EU – M.D. Nalapat[/color]



“Tragically, India’s leaders are generous only with the money of the common citizen. They themselves continue to live in the same luxury as did the British colonial rulers in the era before “freedom” came to the Sub-continent. The top leaders travel in special aircraft, at huge cost, while 300 million people in the country starve each night. Each of them has a retinue of several hundred security personnel, most of whom are there only to “shock and awe” the ordinary citizen with the might and majesty of the powerful.” – Prof. Nalapat

[color="#800080"](Cost of christianism in India.)[/color]



Although India’s ruling politicians ignore the fact, especially during their frequent travels abroad, the reality is that more citizens of the world’s most populous democracy go to bed hungry each night than do in Sub-Saharan Africa. More than 300 million Indians are malnourished, a testament to the fact that nearly seven decades in power has not been enough for the country’s leaders to wipe away the poverty that descended on the country during British rule. While several Mughal emperors were cruel, and more than a few of them rapacious, yet in 1820 the Indian sub-continent accounted for 23% of global output. Indeed, the very battleship in which Lord Nelson defeated the French at Trafalgar was made in India. However, colonial policy was designed to choke off local manufactures so as to encourage the import of goods from the UK. Hence by the time the Union Jack was lowered from Delhi for the last time on August 14,1947, the sub-continent was contributing less than 1% to global output. Churchill had further succeeded in ensuring the death of 9 million in famines that rolled across North India during the 1939-45 war with Germany and Japan.



Wealth was drained from India to Europe – principally the UK – for many generations. And now, once again, a similar process is unfolding. While there has been some comment on the Commonwealth Games scam, the reality is that for years, practically every major procurement has been a scam. In the case of the “modernisation” of large airports, for instance, equipment has been sourced mainly from suppliers in Europe, and there is talk within the bureaucracy that a particular political family with close links to a European country was behind several of the contracts. While Home Minister Chidambaram has forbidden the security agencies from monitoring the activities of this family and its relatives abroad, concerned officials say that the latter are acting as middle persons in facilitating mega-deals between Indian government and private agencies and suppliers based in the EU. Altogether, the volume of such transactions is reported to have crossed $ 6 billion in as many years. Only in the case of the Commonwealth Games procurements has there been any official enquiry into such purchases, and even here, the Central Bureau of Investigation is more concerned about protecting those higher up than the jailed MP, Suresh Kalmadi, from exposure than it is in finding out the truth. Small wonder, as selection to the CBI is made from among those officials most pliable to political and other pressure.



With all the money flowing from India towards the EU economies – cash earned not by a dysfunctional government nor even by corporates but by the sweat of millions of Indian nationals toiling in foreign countries – it would seem that there was no need for Sonia Gandhi and Manmohan Singh ( the duo who run India) to fork out $2 billion in what is in effect a cash dole to the EU.[/color] Even schoolchildren are aware that the money so generously being given to European countries by the IMF will never come back, given the fact that not only the PIGS (Portugal, Ireland, Greece and Spain) are bankrupt, but Italy and in fact, France, as well. Only by bluff is the EU avoiding default, a bluff in which international rating agencies are playing a shameful role. These have consistently sought to artificially raise the cost of borrowing in Asia by giving low scores to local economies, while keeping borrowing costs low in Europe and in North America by giving scores that are absurdly high. The US, for example, has a Triple A rating when the country is bankrupt and is relying on China, Japan and the GCC to avoid a slide into financial chaos. China in particular, based mostly on the advice given to the Chinese Communist Party by economists and others trained in the US and Europe, has invested a dangerously large amount in the US dollar and in the Euro. This $3 trillion hoard would have been better invested in real resources across the world than in money assets that have weak fundamentals.



It is understood that both Sonia Gandhi and Manmohan Singh have been eager that India show itself to be a “responsible stakeholder” by forking out cash to the stricken European economies. Generosity to other countries has been a hallmark of the gentle Prime Minister of India. In 1993, he agreed to allow Russia to convert its worthless roubles at a rate many times in excess of what the market – that he constantly talks about – was decreeing. As a result, India has ended up paying a subsidy of nearly $15 billion to Moscow. Tragically, India’s leaders are generous only with the money of the common citizen. They themselves continue to live in the same luxury as did the British colonial rulers in the era before “freedom” came to the Sub-continent. The top leaders travel in special aircraft, at huge cost, while 300 million people in the country starve each night. Each of them has a retinue of several hundred security personnel, most of whom are there only to “shock and awe” the ordinary citizen with the might and majesty of the powerful. The VVIPs stay in huge colonial bungalows, each of which costs upwards of $50 million, while just a few kilometers away are festering slums denied the amenities needed for a proper existence. It is in this spirit of waste for VVIPs and starvation for the poor that $2 billion has been gifted, and with more to follow. The indications are that the total asked for from India is $5 billion, so that the country can be “fully responsible”.



Bureaucrats known for their loyalty to political dynasties have been placed in key posts, so that they may continue to protect their patrons. There is therefore little chance of accountability. Meanwhile, the Sonia-Manmohan team go about seeking to shut down Indian business by constantly raising the cost of borrowing. In just the past year, interest rates for Industry have gone up by nearly 4%. Given that the profit of most enterprises is only about 7%,this means that a higher interest bill has wiped out the bulk of profit. As a consequence, investment in fresh plant and machinery has been stopped, and hiring has slowed down. Under the Sonia-Manmohan team, annual increase in productive employment is less than 10% of what it was under Vajpayee, despite the shrill sounds of “concern for the poor” with which political speeches are so liberally peppered. Should the Reserve Bank of India continue to follow the Sonia-Manmohan line of ever-rising interest rates ( which is the policy favoured by the EU, China and the US for India, as it ensures that Indian companies get handicapped in competing globally), then several sectors of the economy are going to get sick within a year, especially Telecom and Infrastructure. The result will be a loss of confidence in the banking system, because of a huge increase in loans that the companies will no longer be able to repay.



On the one hand, companies are ordered to purchase expensive equipment sourced from abroad because of the secret pressure of political families with links to foreign suppliers. On the other, the cost of money has been raised to a level that is making commercial activity un-economic. Not that any of this is of concern to Finance Minister Pranab Mukherjee, the man who in the 1980s – again as Finance Minister – argued against colour television technology being developed in India, “as citizens should make do with black & white television”. Of course, it would be wrong to blame Mukherjee, for the inhabitants of Raisina Road ( India’s Beltway) now that the hapless Finance Minister can do little other than obey “orders from the top”. Meanwhile, foreign suppliers based in Europe have worked out an effective way of competing with cheaper products sourced from Asian countries. They ensure that their intelligence and security agencies pass on warnings about Asian suppliers to their Indian counterparts. Seven decades after “freedom”, India’s security agencies still believe implicitly in what they are told by UK, French and other agencies. As a result, while European suppliers are getting Red Carpet treatment, Asian suppliers are being blocked from competing,” on grounds of national security” which of course no one can argue about, and the reasons for which are never made public. And with good reason, for the fact is that several such decisions have been taken for commercial reasons rather than on genuine grounds of national security. It is a sad development when the Hidden Hands behind mega-procurement from abroad can manipulate agencies so as to ensure the success of the suppliers that they have links with. These same foreign companies also use Indian agents to blacken the reputation of those few Indian agencies that refuse to cooperate in their selfish designs. Recently, there has been a campaign of calumny against selected security agencies, carried out by known agents of foreign countries and enterprises, a campaign in which an unsuspecting media has participated In the midst of all this confusion, perhaps a further $3 billion gift of cash will be sent from starving India to well-fed Europe via the IMF. Truly, the world is an amazing place! – Pakistan Observer, Islamabad



» Prof. Nalapat is Vice-Chair, Manipal Advanced Research Group, UNESCO Peace Chair & Professor of Geopolitics, Manipal University, Kanataka State, India.

Quote:The UK never gave up the ambition of subjugating India anew despite handing over power to native rule, which had little to do with Gandhi’s non violent protest. It was Britain’s exhaustion in the aftermath of World War II and bankrupt economy, combined with fear of revolt by its colonial Indian troops that persuaded a malicious flight. However, Britain presided over a bloodbath to establish the Pakistan it had cynically incited, which is now haunting much of the world. The Americans quickly understood how important India was for the assertion of global power with the onset of the Cold War. As Lord Curzon had explained long ago, Britain would be nothing without India and its vast human and material resources. India offers virtually unlimited manpower for fighting wars, increasingly difficult to find from among their own pleasure-seeking citizens. Americans and Europeans also have smaller families nowadays and are therefore unwilling to sacrifice their fewer offspring. In addition, India is large enough to assure vast wealth for any ruling elite, domestic or foreign, even if the majority of the population remains mired in destitution. This has happened throughout Indian history, whether during Islamic, Christian or contemporary déraciné Hindu rule, bequeathing Pharaonic wealth and life styles of luxurious excess for the few and poverty for the many.



The subordination of India for the pursuit of world power is therefore a necessity for the incessantly born-again, Christian US and its European allies.