News thats really not *news*
Pakistan still training terror outfits: India
“….National Security Advisor M K Narayanan recently said one of the greatest dangers India faced was terror camps being run on the Pakistan-Afghanistan border by the Al-Qaeda and the Taliban.
He said Pakistan continued to acquire missiles and other weapons and its military strategy remains India-centric.
…The Home Ministry said terror attacks like Samjhauta blast, Mecca Mosque attack, twin explosions in Hyderabad and incidents at the Dargah Sharif in Ajmer, besides the blasts in court premises in Uttar Pradesh ‘have been committed by externally based and sponsored terrorist outfits with some local help’.
A senior MHA official said some recent incidents suggested that outfits like LeT and JeM used territory and elements in Bangladesh and Nepal for movement of men and material. The involvement of HUJAI-Bangladesh has come to notice in some of the recent incidents of terrorist violence, he said.
He said Indian youth were recruited by LeT and HUJAI-BD, which has links with LeT and JeM, for training in Pakistan and Pakistan occupied Kashmir, and re-launched into India ‘for sabotage and subversive activities’….”
but there may be some hope (or we may be disappointed once again with empty platitudes):
Pakistani PM vows to fight terror
“…Pakistan’s new Prime Minister, Yusuf Raza Gillani, has told parliament in Islamabad that his top priority will be the fight against terrorism.”
China the ‘bully’ is threat number one: Fernandes
“…Describing the National Democratic Alliance government’s decision to recognise Tibet as a part of China as an ‘error’, former Defence Minister George Fernandes has said the Communist nation was the ‘potential threat number one’ to India and flayed the United Progressive Alliance dispensation for allowing it to be ‘bullied’.
…”It was not a mistake but an error. It should not have been done,” he said about India’s decision to recognise Tibet as part of China during the previous Atal Bihari Vajpayee government in which he was the Defence Minister.
Fernandes told Karan Thapar’s Devil’s Advocate programme on CNN-IBN that China is ‘still the potential threat number one’ and ‘could become an enemy’, as he recalled his statement on similar lines years ago.
…”I have a feeling that what happened in 1962 is still affecting people’s mind and they can’t get out of it,” he said.
Fernandes also took exception at the Chinese government lauding India for its handling of the Tibetan protests in the country.“It is a disgrace that China should say that India has done well,” he said.”
The full interview is here: http://www.ibnlive.com/printpage.php?id=62286§ion_id=3
Related Posts:
We know its Pakistan but we hope its not!
Pakistan, Taliban & the “War on Terror”…yawn
and the whole category of Pakistan related posts
While on China, read this excerpt from Tarun Vijay’s excellent column in TOI:
From: The 2 am call
I wish people would not blame secularism for many of the issues that we face today.
Secularism is the concept of separating the Church (i.e religion) from the State (i.e governance). It came into prominence in France, after the French revolution primarily due to the collusion of the Catholic Church with the French royalty (the sun kings) to suppress the people of France. It was earlier elucidated (but in a much weaker form) by the English General Cromwell.
Since the French Revolution, and followed by the American revolution, most modern nation states have been build on the premise that religion and state authorities have to kept separate.
And, I fully support that. We can NOT have religious “leaders” meddling in state matters. Religion is a personal subject. The state is a collective subject. The twain can NOT mix except with disastrous consequences.
And, that is Secularism. I want India to be a truly Secular Republic, not the diluted mess that passes for it today with its minority-ism, different laws and pandering to vote banks. Again, nor do I want what the RSS (and its affiliates want) which is to mix its own version of religion in matters of governance.
And, I think it is up to us to ensure that the baby does not get thrown out with the dirty bath water.
RE: the original post –
It is a national disgrace that we are not standing up to be counted when it matters (and I can also still remember our wishy-washy attitude to the Russian invasion of Aghanistan).
We should say this loud and clear that Tibet and Tibetans want to be free of Chinese rule – and we support this and are in solidarity with Tibetans.
Unfortunately, our muddled thinking on Kashmir prevents our politicians, with the notable exception of George Fernandes, of course, from taking the honourable path.
It is a national shame.
Dear Patriot,
Atta boy! That is the way to go. Hit them hard where it pains and do not pussyfoot.
I fully agree with you with the concept of seculartism. The state should be seperate from the religion that is available on the shelf. Leave it for the buyers and sellers.
The concept is fine, but is it implemented truly in word and spirit anywhere?
The French Revolution and the American Revolution took place way before the British ruled here. We “Bharatiyas” never thought about “Secularism” or otherwise. It became a byword only when the British INSTITUTIONALISED Religion with Rule.
The possible way out is get rid of the words, DEMOCRATIC< SOCIALISTIC<SECULARIST and Bingo we have a totally new world opening before us!
I really appreciate your comments and support for Tibet and our as usual weak kneed response to it.
Regards,
vck
Hi VCK,
I was being “entertained” by prince on other posts, and could not reply to you earlier.
Actually, secularism *is* practised in word and spirit in many parts of Western Europe, more specifically France, all the Nordic countries and even UK. Many of these societies are now “post-christian” societies (as called by the Economist). Religion plays no part or very little part in the collective culture or behaviour of these societies. (which is another reason why countries like France and Netherlands are very worried about the behaviour of their muslim immigrants, but that is another story).
While the French and American revolutions pre-dates the consolidation of British rule in India, our revolutionaries borrowed a fair bit from them. The British, although christian, did not actually care that much about religion …. they were more concerned about profits. You will first find the concept of equality and separation of state from religion in the words of Chandrashekhar Azad and Bhagat Singh. They were later picked up by Nehru, although he twisted the concept beyond recognition. Gandhi, OTOH, was a not a votary of secularism. He believed that a state divorced from religion was an immoral state.
Cheers
Dear Patriot,
A very pithy set of words. I think it makes more sense to look at the outlook of the Nordic countries. Religion is seperate from the State, agreed, but a way of life should not be.
That is where I reiterate what I said earlier. The British did not leave only with the destruction of the economy by creaming away the profits, but also brought about a subtle method of linking religion with the state.
I may be wrong and hence need to be corrected for what I am going to say.
The British gave lavish spending money to the priests imported from the west and gave them huge tracts of land, running to hundreds of acres of land to encourage the spread of their religion by introducing a seperate education system at the cost of the existing education system.
This I think it did not in anyway seperate religion from the state at any stage.
I think one should admire the spirit of Shri. Azad and Shri. Singh that they could understand the underlying concept of an “Orchestrated dogmatic and controlled way of life, which is the religion that they wanted to seperate from the state.
I think the way of life as was existing and that what we current advocates of Sanatana Dharma are shouting hoarse about is what Gandhiji wanted to bring to focus.
This concept was totally lost to the thinking of Nehru, as Gandhiji was an evolved soul and he was not.
Regards,
vck
Dear VCK,
When I said “post-christian” society, I meant that religion plays little or no part in these countries (the Nordic countries, France, Germany, UK), whether at a state level or a personal level. Maybe, the personal disassociation is what it takes to get to a really secular state. That would be an interesting discussion!
However, I do not believe the British or rather the English and the Scots introduced linking of religion to state in India. In India, even in the pre-British and pre-Mughal days, religious figures have always interfered or acted in statecraft in the form of raj-purohits or astrologers or whatever. There may have been a valid reason for this in those days as the brahmins were the best-educated of all classes and the kings depended on them for their “wisdom”. But, there is no reason for such interference today.
Coming back to the English, I am at least grateful that the English were the colonisers of India, rather than the Portuguese or the Spaniards. The reason for this is two-fold – one is, of course, the spread of the English language, which has become the defacto business language of the world. This colonial legacy has enabled us to leapfrog many others in economic growth and this will enable to us to move to the centre of the world, economically speaking.
Second, the English (and the Scots) were Anglican Protestants. They do not have the proselytising urge that the Catholics have (the portuguese/spaniards). The portuguese and the spaniards destroyed the local language, culture and religion in whichever place they colonised – south america, parts of asia and Goa. The English, on the other hand, mainly cared about profits from their Empire. This is why you will find that the christian community in India is mainly catholic and not protestant, which is what you would expect if the English were serious about conversion. And, the community is concentrated in Goa and Kerala (both non-English colonies) and in latter days, north-east (which was outside the inner-line of the British government)
The English brought in their system of education for reasons of governance – they wanted english understanding (and at least partially speaking) clerks to run their bureaucracy. At the same time, the Jesuits (part of the catholic church) wanted to set up “modern” schools in India. There was a co-incidence of interests, although first causes were different.
And, the English did not give the Jesuits money (they could barely tolerate them) but they did give them land for setting up their schools. The money came from Rome.
However, today the point to consider re: the English education is that the Law of Unintended Consequences has come into play. India is well set on its way to becoming a major world power thanks to a colonial innovation. So, let us use the English education system to its best to payback our colonial ex-masters!!!
cheers
Olympic torch extinguished thrice in Paris, today
http://www.expressindia.com/latest-news/Olympic-torch-extinguished-thrice-in-Paris/293659/
Yesterday, the torch relay was interrupted in London
http://www.indianexpress.com/story/293290.html
Meanwhile, pusillanimous India plans to cut the torch relay from 32 kms (for Athens) to 3 kms – only along the Rajpath, where the police can “secure” the torch.
http://www.indianexpress.com/story/292352.html
And, the Chinese want to send in their own guards.
http://www.indianexpress.com/story/293113.html
SHAME, INDIA.
BRAVO, BAICHUNG.
Dear Patriot,
That is precisely the point that I wish to make. State and religion were never seperated. They have always played a role in the lives of the rulers, so let us not make any “SAINTLY” exceptions. let us learn to live with it.
As I have stated be it “ROME” or any “PLACE” it is the support that plays a part.
Let us understand that we stand one step ahead of everything, both in the past and in the prersent. In the past we never made any bones about the statecraft of the astrlogers and the advisers. “IT WAS THERE”.
Only when we bring in the graphical description of all the bunkum of “THE SUITING SECULARISM” that my hackles are raised.
Let us accept it and continue with our process of growth rather than playing double fiddle for being more “BRITISH THAN THE BRITISH” as the saying goes.
The “MODERN” educxation has note made any great impact on the lives of people, except maybe breaking up of society in the garb of “BEING EDUCATED” and a monstrosity of a “CLERICAL SOCIETY” devoid of any independent thinking.
May be I will await the time when we can payback our “masters’. But all that depends on the $$$ rather than our education!
Regards,
vck
Dear VCK,
I will have to disagree with you on this – My opinion is that organised religion has always played an adverse role, especially when mixed up with statecraft. It has rarely, if ever, been a positive force. So, I, for one, do not want to see any religion mixed up in state affairs.
Religion should be your personal matter.
I also have to disagree with you about the education system. I think it has done a decent overall job, despite its limitations, in creating a vibrant, modern India. And, I think the key limitation for many Indians today still remains being able to get access to quality institutions.
Since, I never studied under the “ancient” model and since there are inadequate data points to figure out its advantages/disadvantages, any discussion about the modern vs ancient system can, at best, be based only on opinions.
Cheers
Besides Baichung Bhutia, someone else with gonads:
Autonomous Yashwant defies BJP line, calls for ‘complete freedom’ for Tibet, Dalai Lama
http://www.indianexpress.com/story/293857.html
BRAVO, YASHWANT SINHA!
Dear Patriot,
I fully agree with you. let us agree to disgree on this matter as everything is a matter of conjecture as you put it.
I may not be in agreement with good education is as I value, customs, values, structure more than anything, even with being conferred a HONORARY DOCTRATE from the elitist of the elitist institution of the world.
I agree with you on the matter of religion, as a personal matter, but a way of life is not a personal one.
Regards,
vck
Dear VCK,
As a counter, I would like you to consider the following:
I think that a lot of our social mores, values, rigid structures and the blind worship of gray hair have a lot to do with the lack of innovation in modern Indian society .
As a case in point, look at all these bright Indian engineers who left India to work in Silicon Valley, and see the various innovations (albeit, mainly in the technology space) that they have come up with, including the development of the Microprocessor, which has changed the world as we know it. So, I think there is some anecdotal evidence to suggest that it is not the education model in India, but the overarching social system that is probably more to blame for what you call the “clerical society”. As India keeps growing and getting more self confident, my firm belief is that you are going to see a lot more of innovations coming out of India.
Another interesting thing that struck me while I was writing this – Indian English Literature has become a very significant genre now, standing on its own, and very differentiated from the past where NRIs waxed nostalgic and bitter about India.
As far as “way of life” is concerned, how is it not personal? It is your way of life, but may not be mine or anyone else’s. You have every right to lead your way of life as I have to do mine, and we also have every right not to expect any imposition of someone else’s way of life on us, right? As long as we are doing so, without infringing on anyone else, it is a personal thing.
When people start forming collectives and wanting to impose their thoughts and way of life on others, it becomes interference and intolerable.
Cheers
Pl. see news-report below in the context of Pakistan’s links (and support) to terrorists in India…
Of course such things are far from the mind of our Honourable EAM as he visits Pakistan…
http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2008/04/06/asia/AS-GEN-Pakistan-Militant-Chief.php
Pakistan: Militant chief vows to fight on until Kashmir is liberated from India
The Associated Press
Sunday, April 6, 2008
ISLAMABAD, Pakistan: An Islamic militant leader vowed Sunday to keep battling India until it grants independence to the Himalayan Kashmir region and urged increased backing for Muslim fighters in conflicts elsewhere in the world.
Syed Salahuddin, chief of the Hezb-ul-Mujahedeen militant group, also said rulers of Muslim nations “have become facilitators of the enemy” ? an apparent reference to collaboration with the United States.
Salahuddin spoke at a gathering of about 500 people who chanted “Our way of life, jihad, jihad!” and “God is great!” Organizers said they included militants from India’s part of divided Kashmir and Afghanistan as well as relatives of those killed in the two conflict zones.
Signs promoting jihad, or holy war, were displayed inside a hall in a mosque in Rawalpindi, near the capital Islamabad. Video CDs purportedly showing militant operations in Afghanistan, Kashmir, Iraq and Chechnya were on sale.
Hezb-ul-Mujahedeen is the largest of about a dozen rebel groups that have been fighting for Kashmir’s independence from India or its merger with Pakistan since 1989, a conflict that has killed more than 68,000 people, mostly civilians. Pakistan has denied that Hezb-ul-Mujaheedeen operates on its territory.
Salahuddin, one of India’s most wanted men, delivered a speech in which he repeatedly branded U.S. President George W. Bush as “satan.”
“Jihad will continue in Kashmir as long as a single Indian soldier is there,” Salahuddin said.
“Muslim nations…are not supporting the mujahedeen in Kashmir, Afghanistan, Palestine, Iraq and Chechnya,” he added. “Muslim rulers have become the facilitators of the enemy. Muslims have been labeled as terrorists and handed over to the enemy to receive dollars.”
Kashmir is divided between India and Pakistan, but the territory is claimed by both countries. The two archrivals have fought two of their three wars over the disputed territory since their independence from British rule in 1947.