|| Satyameva Jayate ||

Devoted to “Bharat” and “Dharma”

With “allies” like these, who needs enemies?

This analysis of attitudes that the communist parties have towards vital matters of national interest reveals why they are probably the most dangerous element in the current political landscape…

Excerpts from Red Star over South Block (emphasis mine)

As the Manmohan Singh government enters its last year in office, the contradictions in the approach to national security and foreign policy issues between a mainstream national party…on the one hand and the communist parties, which appear determined to make India a client state of China on the other, are becoming increasingly evident…There are…other serious differences between the approach of the communists and virtually all other national parties on crucial issues of defence, national security and foreign affairs — differences that cannot be papered over any longer.

In its 2004 election manifesto, the CPM has advocated talks between India and Pakistan for a “denuclearised environment” in South Asia. This CPM formulation would result in India acceding to the Non-proliferation Treaty (NPT) by the back door and in China to becoming the only nuclear weapons power in Asia.

Interestingly, this formulation coincides with what China has constantly advocated since 1998, when it demanded that India should give up its nuclear weapons, sign the NPT and agree to UN intervention in Jammu and Kashmir, as demanded in the UN Security Council Resolution 1172 of 1998. These demands have been reiterated when China speaks of its reservations on the Indo-US nuclear deal.

The real reasons for Chinese opposition to the Indo-US nuclear agreement were voiced in an article in the August 2007 issue of the influential Renmin Jiabao magazine, which stated: “The US-India nuclear agreement has strong symbolic significance (for) India achieving its dream of becoming a powerful nation…The CPM finds fault with the India-US nuclear agreement for precisely the same reasons as China.

While decrying India’s nuclear weapons programme and making China the sole guarantor of nuclear security in Asia, the CPM overlooks the entire China-Pakistan nuclear nexus. Pakistan’s nuclear weapons are of Chinese design. China has, over the past three decades, clandestinely provided Pakistan with nuclear weapons designs and technology, including plutonium facilities for manufac-turing thermonuclear warheads. Even if we sign a bilateral agreement for a denuclearised South Asia as the CPM proposes, how do we deal with clandestine Chinese proliferation to Pakistan? Moreover, the Shaheen-I and Shaheen-II missiles that Pakistan periodically tests, which are capable of striking at cities across India, are of Chinese origin.

Despite this, the CPM joins the Chinese in expressing opposition to missile defence systems. Does the party want Indian population centres to be defenceless against attacks of nuclear-tipped missiles? Have CPM leaders ever voiced concern about the Pakistan-China nuclear and missile nexus to their Chinese comrades during their visits to the Middle Kingdom?

In its manifesto, the CPM steadfastly avoids any reference to Pakistan-inspired cross-border terrorism, while championing the cause of India-Pakistan dialogue, primarily to contain American influence, while Chinese influence in the region grows. One has yet to hear a CPM leader unequivocally condemning Pakistan-sponsored terrorism.

…virtually every political party in India has been forthright in condemning continuing Chinese claims to Tawang and indeed to the entire state of Arunachal Pradesh. The communists alone continue to waffle on Chinese border claims and maintain that it was India and not China that was guilty of aggression in the 1962 conflict!

I wonder if Shri Yechury or Shri Karat - who otherwise wax eloquent on a range of issues - have any comment.

June 14th, 2008 Posted by B Shantanu | China related, Current Affairs, Geo-Strategic Issues (incl. Nuclear, Oil, Energy), India & Its Neighbours, Pakistan related, Politics and Governance in India, Post Independence History, Terrorism in India | one comment

“Who is this Ram?” - Will Thiru Karunanidhi look at this evidence?

I doubt if this piece will ever find its way to Hon. Thiru Karunanidhi but if it does, he will have good reasons to re-consider his earlier remarks (emphasis mine) 

Who is this Ram?

From which engineering college he graduated? Is there any proof for this?

What follows is by far one of the best (and most extensive) piece of research I have yet come across on the historicity of Ramar Sethu and Lord Shri Rama.

It is a fairly long post (even though I have only taken excerpts) - but please do read when you have the time.  The points made are compelling and have been put together cogently. Considered within the overall context, they make a strong case for the preservation of Ram-Setu or Sethubandha Rameshwaram (Thanks to Dr S Kalyanaraman-ji for alerting me to this; Pl note that there are several instances of the word “Aryan” in this essay - I would like readers’ views on this theory vis-a-vis AIT)

*** CAUTION: Long Post ***

Excerpts from Ramsetu – myth or fact by Dr. Nishit Sawal, M.D. (Medicine), April 2008 (emphasis mine).  Dr. Sawal begins his essay with the following preface re. the historical basis of Ramayana:

“The recent Sethusamudram project controversy has again brought in limelight the Ramayana and the question of it being an historical fact or a plethora of myths and fables.

The UPA government filed an affidavit stating that ‘mythological texts such as the Ramayana cannot be said to be historical record to incontrovertibly prove the existence of characters or the occurrence of events depicted therein’. Since this affidavit has cast doubts about whether Lord Rama actually existed or was just a hero of various myths whose fame increased to such an degree with the passage of time so that he came to be worshipped as God by succeeding generations , let’s evaluate the evidence we have of existence of lord Rama.

The foremost question is whether Lord Rama actually ruled in India and if yes, at what period. This is not an easy task for around Lord Rama’s life has grown a tangle of pious legend , through which it is very difficult to penetrate to the flowers of historic truth.”

Dr Sawal then examines the lives of Lord Buddha and Lord Jesus Christ (and the evidence surrounding them) and states:

Keep Reading…

June 14th, 2008 Posted by B Shantanu | Ancient Indian History, Current Affairs, Distortions, Misrepresentation about Hinduism, Ram Janambhoomi, Ayodhya, Saraswati-Sindhu Civilization | 9 comments