Sure, rytha.
Kaushal also should let me know when he is next in Bharat. I will request Sathiyamurthy to arrange a talk by Kaushal in the ORF. Kalyan
[quote name='Viren' date='Oct 8 2003, 11:09 AM'] [quote name='Viren' date='Oct 3 2003, 09:14 PM'] I'd love to see them do a missile test everyday <img src='http://www.india-forum.com/forums/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='  ' />
Go Mushy Go, Paki Pain da Bad [/quote]
Someone's been snooping around on my posts <img src='http://www.india-forum.com/forums/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/laugh.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':lol:' />
[url="http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20031008/ap_on_re_mi_ea/pakistan_missile_test_7"]Pakistan Has 2nd Missile Test in a Week [/url]
How about one more please?  tupid [/quote]
[url="http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/45183455-5DD2-4D17-BBB1-DA2768E9C33B.htm"]Thanks Mush.[/url] One more next week please. <img src='http://www.india-forum.com/forums/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=' ' />
Looks like Mushy is facing major internal problem or US had given him lot of money to use it as Diwali rockets. This rocket cost over million each and he is blasting empty.
[url="http://www.sulekha.com/redirectnh.asp?cid=319141"]Saudi Arabian delegation seeks to boost trade [/url]
[url="http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost/JPArticle/ShowFull&cid=1064989335264&p=1006953079845"]Jerusalem Post article (Oct 1st)[/url]
Quote:Good-bye Cairo, hello New Delhi.
Since 1948, Jerusalem has advanced an "outer ring" regional foreign policy doctrine, whereby it seeks to advance ties with non-Arab countries nearby in order to counterbalance the hostility of the "inner ring" neighbors. In the past, Iran and Ethiopia were linchpins of this policy, now the stars are India and Turkey.
Twenty years ago few would have imagined either country in this role. Back then New Delhi was firmly in the Soviet orbit, implacably hostile to Israel. Ankara, too, was in the throes of a pro-Arab policy.
But the end of the Cold War and the Middle East peace moves of the early 1990s - Madrid and Oslo - gave both countries an excuse to upgrade relations with Israel. Once they did, Turkey and India felt the benefits of the ties, and - even as Madrid fizzled and Oslo died - things took off.
What makes this even more impressive is that Turkey is a Muslim country, and India - with 140 million Muslims - has the second largest Muslim population in the world. Not only is Turkey Muslim, but its new governing party has strong Islamic roots (in the same sense that Shas has strong Jewish roots). Yet the ties remain strong because the ties are to Turkey's - and India's - advantage.
These benefits have ensured that Ankara and New Delhi continue to want to foster their ties with Israel, despite their traditional sympathy with the Palestinians, and despite their close ties to the Arab world.
What are these benefits? First are the arms sales. Israel provides both countries with quality military hardware they are currently hard-pressed to find elsewhere.
Turkey is unable to buy certain weapons systems in the US because of strong Armenian and Greek lobbies that place riders and amendments on all kinds of arms deals to Turkey. And India is still, to a certain degree, the victim of a US arms embargo clamped down after New Delhi detonated two nuclear devices in 1998.
Israel is more than willing to fill the breach.
Furthermore, both countries - until recently not reflexively thought of as part of the West - are trying to shore up their Western credentials. Israel provides a good entry point. No only do ties with Israel go over well in Washington, but ties with Israel improve relations with Washington.
Fears that India or Turkey's close relations with Israel would damage their relations with the Arab world have not materialized. Turkish officials argue that they never got anything tangible from their support for the Palestinians anyway, and Indian officials maintain that since India is such an important strategic state, the Arab world will not want to endanger ties with New Delhi by making them conditional on a cold shoulder to Israel.
Israel, of course, is overjoyed, only too eager to help. Defense pacts have been established with Turkey, and counterterrorism working groups established with India. The ties provide financial oxygen for the military industrial complex - oxygen needed for Israel to retain its qualitative edge in arms.
And, no less importantly, the relationships have relieved the country's sense of diplomatic isolation.
Who knows, India and Turkey may even one day join the US and Micronesia in voting against anti-Israel motions in the UN.
For lack of better thread, am posting this here.
[url="http://www.nypost.com/postopinion/opedcolumnists/8001.htm"]India in OIC?[/url]
Quote:One idea coming from these countries is that the OIC should invite India, China, Russia and France, each of which has substantial Muslim minorities to join the organization as associate members, thus boosting the anti-American alliance.
Most Indians I know don't have a opinion about India being in OIC or care for the same. However thought it was very interesting to note that now they want India in OIC to "boost the anti-American alliance". What a sorry bunch.
Might be interesting to see MEA plays this card in future.
But you missed one point Mushy want OIC member to contribute some percentage of GDP to OIC account. It is a clever tactics.
[quote name='Mudy' date='Oct 15 2003, 12:12 PM'] But you missed one point Mushy want OIC member to contribute some percentage of GDP to OIC account. It is a clever tactics. [/quote]
How nice <img src='http://www.india-forum.com/forums/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/blink.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':blink:' />
So we join OIC to "boost the anti-American alliance" with our hard-earned $$ while Mush contributes few cents (that Bush gave him at Camp David) to "boost the anti-American alliance". :friusty
If India doesn't join OIC, OIC is the biggest looser.
Brig.Usman Khalid has been trying to plead unethical,illegal and forcilble
occupation of Pakistan on it's relevant part of Kashmir (POK) by highlighting
the issues and killings in Indian held Kashmir, and when some one uncover the
black deeds of Pakistani rulers ,it makes him enraged as he is holding weak
point of view over Kashmir dispute. Without arguments one can becomes easliy
emotional.
By throwing mud and putting ridiculous allegations on the leaders of IKA ,he is
disclosing his hidden frustration. He is expecting that Kashmiris should join a
state ,a failed state,like Pakistan which has a following record in history :-
1- Pak army dismemberd country in 1971, slaughtered countless own
muslim brothers,rape numbers of muslim women in East Pakistan.
They had already been treated as 2nd class muslims and citizens.
Then Pakistan recognized Bangla Daish as a seperate country.
2- Pak army never allowed elected Govts to complete their tenure.
3- Drugs , arms culture was introduced in Pakistan during military regime.
4- Sia Chin & Glaciar areas were handed over to Inida during the era of
a military ruler by saying that " even grass does not grow there".
5- Poverty , lawlessnes , sectarianism,unemployment and suicide ratio
grew high during military regime.
6- During military , FBI is picking pakistani citizens from the streets
and take away them for investigation without informing local authorities.
Pakistan army broken constitution many times , but till today no one
was punished for this crime.
There is no accountability system in Pakistan for those broke
conuntry , Law and constituion.
Out side Pakistan : -
7- 1st started and supported a war in Afghanistan on the name of islam and
strengthen fanatic elements and called them as the hero of muslims,
but ;
8- Now another pak army ruler turned his face and declared them terrorist
and join hands with America to overcome terrorism,during cold war era these
terrorist
activities were called as holy war.
9- Pakistan supported imperialist forces to slaughter own muslim brothers
in Afghanistan ,declaring them as terrorist.
10- On the question of sending troops to Iraq , India has made it clear that she
will not send troops there without the consent of UNO, while Pakistan
is seeking any excuse to fulfill the wishes of America ,some time
Pakistani
ruler says that he will do whatever is in "National Interest" or will
obey UNO or OIC, etc. while it is clear that OIC is a dead horse and UNO future
is a question mark while America captured a free country of world overnight by
putting one side the prestige of UNO.
11- Pakistan has been claiming the sole leader of "Muslim Ummah" but when bad
time came on "Ummah" this self styled leader has become worry about it's own
future and security and turned face from other muslims by declaring that " 1st
Pakistan & then others" but even it could not protect its own citizens from
America.
12- Pakistan is not ready to recognize the right of self-determination of
Kashmiris by different excuses.
It was expected, and soon they will abandon claim on the remaining
Kashmir and accept LOC with some minor chanages. New thinking 'Pakistan
First' will prevail.
Pak not claiming whole of Kashmir: Musharraf
DUBAI, Oct 13 (UNI): Pakistan president General Pervez Musharraf has
said that that his country was not claiming the whole of Kashmir,
although it should have come to it under the 1947 partition.
"Kashmir, like the Israeli-Palestine dispute, is subject to United
Nations resolutions and the issue can be solved through a dialogue
between Islamabad, New Delhi and the Kashmiri people," Gen Musharraf
said in an interview in the "Khaleej Times".
"We are doing our best to show much flexibility," he said and blamed
India for the SAARC stalemate and the cancellation of SAF games.
On India s secularism, the president said thousands of muslims were
burnt down in Gujarat. "Muslims left their houses and are not allowed
to come back now," he said citing reports in "India Today."
Gen Musharraf, on establishing diplomatic relations with Israel, said "
if the Palestinian issue is settled, Islamabad might consider
establishing ties with Tel Aviv."
He said public opinion was against ties with Israel. "We are part of
the muslim world and we are on the side of Arab muslim brothers," he
added.
--
Dr Shabir Choudhry
Quote:Gen Musharraf, on establishing diplomatic relations with Israel, said "
if the Palestinian issue is settled, Islamabad might consider
establishing ties with Tel Aviv."
Since Kashmir issue too is not 'settled' why is the gola and his goons not consistent in application of this doctrine? tupid
Somebody dreaming- Read carefully
The E.U. and a South Asian "superstate"
> ---------------------------------------------
>
> Judging from what you have written in the past, I presume that you
> feel that South Asia can be integrated along the same lines as
> Europe; i.e, the same techniques that were used to create the
> European Union can be used to create a S. Asian "superstate". I beg
> to differ:
>
> We have to keep in mind the fact that the - successful - drive
> towards European integration only took place in the aftermath of
> World War II, AND in the shadow of the danger that Soviet
> expansionism posed to Western Europe. Proposals had been written by
> various intellectuals before World War I and during the interval
> between the two World Wars on the issue of creating some sort of
> European federation, but, they were unsuccessful, as the necessary
> INCENTIVES - the devastation of a continent-wide war, AND the
> looming presence of a relatively gargantuan (whether real or in the
> minds of many Western Europeans) COMMON enemy - were absent.
>
> Well, the situation in South Asia, today, is very similar to the
> situation in Europe BEFORE the World Wars;
>
> (1) Pakistan, India, and Bangladesh have no common enemy (except
> poverty itself), in fact Pakistan and China maintain very close
> relations (while India and China are wary of each other), and China
> takes every opportunity to drive a wedge between India and
> Pakistan. All of the countries of the S. Asian subcontinent
> maintain relatively close relations with the United States.
>
> (2) Also, part of the purpose of creating a S. Asian "superstate"
> is to forestall the outbreak of a nuclear war on the subcontinent
> (and any conventional conflict between India and Pakistan will,
> probably, lead to an exchange of nukes): A nuclear conflict will
> not only destroy lives (through the direct effects of nuclear
> blasts, and things such as, radiation poisoning-related diseases
> such as cancer etc, starvation - since food supplies will be
> destroyed, and agricultural land, especially in Punjab, will be
> poisoned) cultural artifacts (the Taj Mahal comes to mind), the
> economy and infrastructure (the economies of India and Pakistan
> depend a great deal on the contribution of urban centers such as
> Bombay, and Karachi) of the two countries, but, it will also invite
> foreign intervention (and who knows how long they will decide to
> stay), and WILL completely destroy SECULARISM in the subcontinent.
> After all, the Sangh Parivar has consistently tried to present
> Muslims as being the 'other'(S. Asian Muslim fundamentalists are
> doing the same thing with regards to Hindus), what a chance they
> will get in the aftermath of a S. Asian nuke war! Partition was a
> fillip to the cause of S. Asian fundamentalists, now the "war on
> terrorism", but, a nuclear war will be a VICTORY for S. Asian
> fundamentalism. Just imagine, all those pictures of dead bodies -
> with the skin torn off their backs etc - in Indian and Pakistani
> cities being distributed by Sanghis and Muslim fundamentalists. We
> will have communal riots, and 'ethnic' cleansing, the likes of which
> will make it seem as if what happened during partition were mere
> schoolyard fights. So war is out of the picture, that can't be used
> as an incentive for integration in S. Asia.
>
>
> THREE - Nationalism
> -------------------
>
> I'd suggest that India and Pakistan (and, in my opinion, Bangladesh)
> are failed nations (not failed states), what we have in India and
> Pakistan, today (and during the freedom struggle), is nationalism
> without a nation (see, "Nationalism Without a Nation in India" by G.
> Aloysius and "Pakistan : Nationalism Without a Nation?" edited by
> Christophe Jaffrelot).
>
> Here, for the benefit of members who are not familiar with these
> terms, I will quote Ernest Gellner who was (now, deceased) one of
> the foremost theorists of the causes and nature of
> nationalism: "Nationalism is primarily a political principle, which
> holds that the political and the national unit should be
> congruent." Nationalism as a sentiment, or as a movement, can best
> be defined in terms of this principle. Nationalist sentiment is the
> feeling of anger aroused by the violation of this principle, or the
> feeling of satisfaction aroused by its fulfilment. A nationalist
> movement is one actuated by a sentiment of this kind" ("Nations and
> Nationalism", Chp 1). And what is a nation? Well, this concept is
> rather controversial, and a bit ambiguous, but, things like a common
> culture, identity, language, history, territory etc are often quoted
> as indicators of a shared nationhood. Recently, some "progressives"
> have also made distinctions between "civic nationalism" and "ethnic
> nationalism" (in their view, the former is "good" nationalism, while
> the latter is "bad" nationalism"). A definition of civic
> nationalism would be; it "maintains that the nation should be
> composed of all those - regardless of race, colour, creed, gender,
> language or ethnicity - who subscribe to the nation's political
> creed. This nationalism is called civic nationalism becuse it
> envisages the nation as a community of equal, rights bearing
> citizens, united in patriotic attachment to a shared set of
> political practices and values" (Ignatieff, M. 1994. "Blood and
> Belonging: Journeys into the New Nationalism", pp. 3-4). In ethnic
> nationalism, on the other hand, things such as "race, colour, creed,
> gender, language or ethnicity", history etc come into the picture.
> France is usually held out as the epitome of a civic nation. Well,
> the reality is very different. The French government -
> historically - has always used strong elements of ethnic nationalism
> in its nation-building initiatives. Governmental resources and
> steps were taken to ensure that French became the common, and
> dominant language, a particular version of French history was taught
> to students, a common culture was imposed on all citizens of the
> French state. Peasants and others were turned into Frenchmen
> (see, "Peasants into Frenchmen: The Modernization of Rural France
> 1870-1914" by Eugen Weber). Well, basically, what this means is
> that the idea of "civic nationalism" has no real basis in historical
> fact, it is ethnic nationalism that has really been the norm in all
> nation-building states. Also, read:
> [url="http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/foreign/divers.htm"]http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/foreign/divers.htm[/url]
>
> Ethnic nationalism is always predicated on the notion of
> an 'other'. This basically means that categories are created to
> divide the world into "us" and "them", "insiders" and "outsiders"
> (hence my use of the footer that mentions the HUMILIATIONS since
> Plassey. I understand you're point that the "logic of redressing
> historical humiliations has had grave consequences for South Asia
> over the last few decades", but, in my views, the critical
> difference is that the "humiliations" that the Sanghis seek to
> redress never really occurred, and their pursuit of this goal
> DIVIDES South Asians. What I have put in the footer, in fact, seeks
> to UNITE South Asians, and redress their humiliations not through
> militaristic goals etc, but, by bringing economic prosperity,
> progressive social mores, etc to the region). The Sangh Parivar and
> Muslim fundamentalists are trying to do exactly this, today. And,
> unfortunately, as I have show in past messages at this forum, it was
> not only Jinnah, and the Hindu Mahasabha, but, also the Indian
> National Congress that 'set this ball rolling' (see,
> [url="http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Mahajanapada/message/2729"]http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Mahajanapada...da/message/2729[/url],
> [url="http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Mahajanapada/message/2672"]http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Mahajanapada...da/message/2672[/url],
> [url="http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Mahajanapada/message/2925"]http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Mahajanapada...da/message/2925[/url],
> [url="http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Mahajanapada/message/2882"]http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Mahajanapada...da/message/2882[/url],
> [url="http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Mahajanapada/message/2916)"]http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Mahajanapada...a/message/2916)[/url]. Also,
> since 1947, the Indian government has Sanskritized Hindustani, I'm
> not sure whether the Pakistan government has tried to further
> Persianize Urdu; well, the words of the Pakistani "national anthem
> were intentionally written in Persianized Urdu to set it apart from
> [the] common Urdu of [the] Lucknow or Allahabadi variety": see, "The
> Long Lost Brother Finally Cometh!" by Abul Kasem, "The Daily
> Observer", Dhaka, Bangladesh (July 28, 2002), para 2. Also, this
> extract (para 10):
>
> [url="http://www.duncanchowdhury.com/belavista/culture_heritage/language_qu"]http://www.duncanchowdhury.com/belavista/c...age/language_qu[/url]
> estion.htm
> "Communalism had entered the languages as well. The Hindu middle
> class had tried to Sanskritize Bengali; in reaction the Muslim
> middle class wanted to persianize it, if possible. The attempts
> often took on an absurd character. For example, over-enthusiastic
> believers in the religion-based nationalism of Pakistan tried to
> introduce the Arabic script for Bengali on the plea that the
> existing script was of Sanskrit origin. Their efforts included
> editing even the works of Kazi Nazrul Islam, who they had declared
> to be very dear to their hearts, in the light of Pakistani
> nationalism. They would have loved to introduce a division in the
> cultural history of Bengal on the religious line."
>
>
> FOUR - Secularize South Asian Culture
> -------------------------------------
>
> So what are our options? I'd suggest that we need to create a South
> Asian nationalism, and in the process of doing so, we need to rob
> Hindu and Muslim fundamentalists of their 'other' (i.e, we need to
> erase cultural - as opposed to fundamental religious - differences
> between Hindus and Muslims in the subcontinent).
>
> (1) For example, it would probably not be very difficult to use a
> fused and slightly altered version of the Devanagiri and Nastaleeq
> (or Naskh) scripts to write the language that is spoken by so many
> people on both side of the border. Also, people (in India and
> Pakistan) can be familiarized with the Persian and Sanskrit loan
> words that are currently used in Urdu and Hindi. I don't think that
> we would need the co-operation of our governments to do this, if
> secularists start a strong organization that can promote the use of
> this modified language... Of course, we have to make sure that
> people understand that the 'new' language is the logical end result
> (thwarted by the advent of British imperialism) of pre-(Delhi)
> Sultanate South Asian and post-Sultanate South Asian linguistic
> elements, NOT a linguistic fusion of the 'linguistic symbols' of two
> diametrically opposed religious communities (the latter
> understanding would have the same detrimental effect as the use of
> the phrase "Hindu-Muslim" unity by Gandhi).
>
> (2) Also, places of worship throughout the subcontinent could be
> built in a similar architectural style (again, a fusion of the
> styles used in building mosques, gurudwaras, and temples of the
> North and the South Indian variety) - a powerful symbolic testament
> to the unity of the subcontinent.
>
> (3) We also have to secularize South Asian names, and destroy the
> fact that the religious affiliation of people in the subcontinent
> can be identified by their names. Instead, foreigners should be
> able to tell that a person is South Asian by glancing at their
> names. "Umair Deepak", "Deepak Muhajir", "Sabahat Choudhary"
> and "Satinath Ashraf" - this should be the wave of the future in S.
> Asia (at least as far as 'name-giving' goes).
>
> (4) We should also deal and get rid of religious dietary
> restrictions such as injunctions against the eating of beef and
> pork, the wearing of the hijab (and other religiously-motivated
> differences in dress). Perhaps, the pracice of circumcision should
> be stopped. After all, if, during communal riots, people are
> stopped by mobs, asked to eat beef or pork (and don't refuse), their
> lungis are torn off to determine whether they are Hindu or Muslim
> (no difference in ...), then where will religious fundamentalists
> find their 'other'?
>
> FIVE - Cultural Pluralism, the Sangh Parivar etc
> ------------------------------------------------
>
> I know that you have a strong conviction that the preservation of
> South Asia's cultural pluralism is a desirable thing, and that "once
> one compromises on pluralism, then intellectually one hardly has a
> legto stand on when it comes to opposing Hindutva, or other
> authoritarian and oppressive ideologies"(msg # 1754). However, I'd
> argue that you're wrong on both counts. First, there are plenty of
> other concerns that one can raise to oppose Hindutva; concerns, that
> in my opinion will resonate far more deeply with the vast majority
> of moderate Hindus in India, than the notion that it is necessary
> that Andamanese and Naga cultural distinctiveness be preserved in
> order for secularists to be successful in the war against Hindutva
> (I'd like to point out that the Nagas and the Andamanese may be
> culturally different from other South Asians, but, that most other
> South Asians share A SINGLE CULTURE, with many SUBCULTURES embedded
> in that single culture). There is the fact that a lot of the ideas
> and practices that the Sanghis are selectively dredging up from
> South Asia's cultural past are/will be detrimental - in the long
> run - to India's quest for great power status (and the acquisition
> of a relatively high standard of living for the vast majority of its
> citizens); things like
> (1) The promotion of Vedic astrology and 'Vedic math' in India's
> educational institutions (see,
> [url="http://groups.yahoo.com/group/RisingIndia/message/2747"]http://groups.yahoo.com/group/RisingIndia/message/2747[/url]
> [url="http://groups.yahoo.com/group/RisingIndia/message/2771"]http://groups.yahoo.com/group/RisingIndia/message/2771[/url]
> (2) The erosion of the country's democratic institutions (witness
> what has happened in Gujarat; even the courts there are no longer
> impartial); this will be bad for India's political stability.
> (3) A rise in gender inequality and the denial of rights etc for
> Dalits.
>
> Also, more importantly, industrialization ENTAILS cultural
> homogenization. I'd suggest that you read "Nations and Nationalism"
> by Ernest Gellner (perhaps, the most respected and widely-quoted
> theorist on the phenomenon of nationalism); in it he argues that the
> emergence of cultural homogenization is a necessary part of the
> structural change from agro-literate to advanced industrial
> society. Its no wonder that Gujarat and Maharashtra, the most
> industrialized states in India, are also the most religiously
> polarized ones. What this basically means is that South Asians will
> not have the freedom to choose either (1) the preservation of
> cultural pluralism and (2) a Hindutva-Muslim fundamentalism driven
> homogenization, they only have the freedom to choose between (1) a
> secular-driven homogenization and (2) a Hindutva-Muslim
> fundamentalism driven homogenization. Of course, South Asia will
> never be as homogeneous (in linguistic terms) as say, France, or
> Poland. We will never have only one language in South Asia (like
> French in France), but, what we should have in the South
> Asian "superstate" is a (2 +/- 1) language constellation (i.e, major
> regional languages such as Tamil, Bengali, the Devanagiri and
> Nastaleeq fusion, Punjabi, Sinhalese, Pushto, Assamese etc, and a
> new indigenous national language (not Hindi or Urdu) - to be spoken
> by every South Asian - created out of a 'mix' of these major
> regional languages). Minor languages such as Nagamese, Andamenese
> etc should be erased. English, of course, should not assume a place
> as the de facto national language of the "superstate". The benefits
> of all this? Well, right now the use of the current language
> constellation (with English at its head) has led to a wide
> divergence in world-views between India's english speaking elite
> and the vernacular masses; and secularists cannot hope to sway the
> Indian masses away from Hindutva without being fluent and at ease in
> the language that the masses speak:
>
> [url="http://www.littlemag.com/viamedia/robinjeffrey2.html"]http://www.littlemag.com/viamedia/robinjeffrey2.html[/url]
> (excerpt; 4th para from the end)
> 'The mass politics, which grow with mass markets and the newspaper
> revolution, will favour Hindu chauvinist exponents until those who
> have other ideas find an effective vocabulary in Hindi. It appears
> that not enough of those of the `secular' persuasion write well
> enough or often enough in Hindi. I was once at a seminar where,
> after listening to a very distinguished scholar from one of India's
> finest universities, an exasperated hill Brahmin, who was a teacher
> of Hindi overseas, said, "But Professor Blank, you never write in
> Hindi, and when they translate you, it doesn't read well."'
>
> I hope you reconsider your position on the footer issue, or, at
> least post a rebuttal of the points that I have raised here (if you
> still don't reconsider your position). Everyday, when I read news
> about the growth of Hindutva and S. Asian Muslim fundamentalism on
> the web, I get alarmed, and I never fail to recall Churchill's
> words: "We must act decisively and we must act now"..."If we do not,
> history will cast its verdict with those terrible, chilling
> words, 'Too late.' "
>
> Sincerely,
> Deepak Modak
It's not just dreaming. The ideology behind this is totally sick.. :furious
This SA superstate is from yahoo groups called "Mahajanapada". The famous satinath choudary is also in this group. This puts everything in context. <img src='http://www.india-forum.com/forums/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=' ' />
who is this "Deepak Modak "? :furious
Has he lost it? I haven't read such cr@p even on Paki forums.
This doc is important to analyse how their thinking has been moulded by the secular/leftist and south asia dept in US.
It will need some time but I will start with some here.
1. First thing you find out that they look at the people of the sub-continent as some experimental guinie pigs whose culture, religion can be changed at the whims of their imagination.
This is very importnat to understand how they look at the people similar to what a firangi will look at south asian.
they can create 'secular nationalism' and change the religion of Hindus to make them accpet other religions etc.
[url="http://www.sulekha.com/redirectnh.asp?cid=319266"]http://www.sulekha.com/redirectnh.asp?cid=319266[/url]
Report: India and China propose negotiations on free-trade pact
Canadian Press
Monday, October 13, 2003
ADVERTISEMENT
NEW DELHI (AP) - Encouraged by their improving relations, India and China want to start negotiations on a possible free trade area, a news report said Monday.
Indian Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee and Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao have agreed to set up a joint study group for this purpose, according to the Times of India. Vajpayee and Wen met on the sidelines of last week's summit of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations in Bali, Indonesia.
India and China, which attended the Bali meeting as "summit partners," are already negotiating free trade pacts with the 10-country ASEAN. The Times report said the India-China blueprint for free trade will emulate their negotiations with the ASEAN grouping.
Last year, China and ASEAN agreed to bring a free trade pact in force by 2010, and at last week's Bali meet it was India's turn to lay down a roadmap for a free trade area with its East Asian neighbours by 2015.
New Delhi and Beijing say they are committed to making the India-ASEAN-China trade axis the world's fastest growing economic zone.
Already, India and China are among the world's fastest growing economies and both countries aim to double their bilateral trade to US$10 billion by 2004. India's exports to China are increasing about 100 per cent annually.
Efforts to intensify their economic exchanges follow their leaders' initiative to expedite resolution of border disputes and other political differences.
Much of the animosity between China and India, stemming from a border war in 1962 and a limited clash across the disputed border in 1986, has evaporated. But lingering differences remain over how to define sections of their shared border.
India says China still holds 38,000 square kilometres of its territory at Aksai Chin in Kashmir. China lays claim to 90,000 square kilometres of land in India's far eastern state of Arunachal Pradesh.
During Vajpayee's visit to Beijing in June - considered a turning point in the relations of the nuclear-powered Asian neighbours - he and Wen agreed to appoint special representatives for early resolution of these differences.
The two countries are also increasingly co-operating on international issues such as the situation in Iraq and negotiations at the World Trade Organization.
The Times of India report quoted Vajpayee as saying his meeting with Wen at Bali reviewed the "substantive forward movement in our bilateral relations" since June.
[url="http://www.sulekha.com/redirectnh.asp?cid=319272"]OIC toes Pak line on J&K; talks of 'self-determination'[/url]
[url="http://www.sulekha.com/redirectnh.asp?cid=319282"]India moves on Central Asia [/url]
By Kumar Amitav Chaliha
India has launched a number of new policy initiatives in the Central Asian states and their vicinity. The economic and strategic initiatives now being implemented are shaped by several factors, including Delhi's vision of playing a broader Asian role commensurate with its rising economic and military power. The strategies are also meant to extirpate Islamic terrorism from South Asia, Afghanistan and Central Asia; to checkmate Pakistan and restrain China's growing power and influence; to prevent India from falling into energy dependency on any one source; and to have access to new trading opportunities.
India has joined the "New Great Game" being played in the Central Asian region, where competition for economic and strategic positioning is intensifying. The ensuing conflict of interest in the area between India's longtime ally, Russia, its newfound strategic partner, America, nuclear rival China, and Iran, is fueling Delhi's "forward" Central Asian policy. Since India is unable to insulate Central Asia from such power politics, it has decided to become a part of it. Its size, military and nuclear capability makes it a significant part of the complex jigsaw.
Pakistan, as part of its ongoing challenge to India in Kashmir and South Asia generally, has consistently tried to establish strategic depth in Central Asia. It tried to implement its agenda from the 1990s by supporting the Taliban, and through them the myriad extremist and terrorist groups that have destabilized Kashmir and Central Asia. The events of September 11 and especially the attack on India's parliament in December, 2001, has awoken India to the urgent need of devising a comprehensive strategy to stabilize Central Asia and prevent it from becoming a haven for terrorism and a strategic platform from which Pakistan could threaten Indian interests.
As a strategic measure, India in May 2002 established its first military facility outside its territory at Farkhor in Tajikistan. A bilateral agreement was also signed in April to train Tajik defense personnel, and service and retrofit their Soviet and Russian military equipment similar to that of the Indian armed forces. A similar pact between India and Kazakhstan is expected to be signed soon.
Tajikistan, Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan and Kyrgyzstan, besides Russia, have supported India's case for entry into the Shanghai Cooperation Organization. The six-nation organization, which also includes China, was set up six years ago to deal with border issues, combat ethnic and religious tensions in member countries and to safeguard against the spread of Islamic terrorism. While Beijing has been silent on the issue of India's entry and encouraging Pakistan's membership, security officials feel that China would not oppose India's case as part of its long-term policy of "keeping its friends close, but its enemies closer".
Indian officials and entrepreneurs have been looking to explore the immense possibilities that lie with increased interaction with the five Central Asian republics. Most of these countries have enormous oil and natural gas deposits. India, which has so far been over-dependent on oil from the Persian Gulf states, is keen to tap into Central Asian energy reserves. There is also a huge market in this region for Indian pharmaceuticals, heavy machinery, tea and information technology.
To achieve these objectives, India has launched a regional "people-to-people" initiative by inviting diplomats, parliamentarians and opinion makers from Central Asia to visit its industrial and technological centers and also to interact with politicians, officials and businessmen.
Posted with permission from KWR International, Inc, (KWR), a consulting firm specializing in the delivery of research, communications and advisory services.
|
