Desicritics Category: Politics: United Kingdom

Abusing the British Welfare State

DesiGirl — Wed, 17 Mar 2010 07:38:59 EDT

The BBC’s Famous, Rich and Jobless (telecast at 9.00 pm on March 10, 2010) seems another in the long list of “Celebrity tourism”, as the Guardian puts it, to grace our television. A bunch of “celebs” visited various members of the public who are living purely on benefits to see if they can help them.

That the rationale behind the show was shaky as hell is another topic altogether. What I want to discuss is the issue raised by one of the celebs, Diarmuid Gavin, as he visited a big family receiving £29,500 a year from the state. 28-year-old Mum and 29-year-old dad are both jobless and mum is pregnant with her sixth child. They live in a massive six-bedroom detached house and the dad hadn’t had a paying job in seven years.

Of course, this small fact doesn’t deter him from having more and more babies, that the taxpayer pays for. When Diarmuid asks the wife what she feels about sponging off the state, she points to her husband and goes “it is his fault! He wants a big family.”

That left me speechless.

How can you have a child without figuring out how you are going to provide for its future? When you yourself do not have a job, how can you have more and more children?

Answer: Quite easy. Get the state to pay for it.

There was some sob story in the offing, of course, why the dad hadn’t got off his backside and found himself a paying job in 7 years but I don’t buy it. Both husband and wife used to do menial jobs before and chances of them pulling in £30000 a year are slim. But now, thanks to the gazillion kids, they not only have the money, they even have other perks like rent, council tax etc that are paid by the state, aka, taxpaying mugs like you and me.

Apparently, the sick bastard labelled ‘British Fritzl’ was “driven by child benefit greed” and kept raping his daughters and having babies with them because he got child benefits! Ba$tard wants a plush lifestyle and instead of going out there and working his butt for it, he impregnates his daughters repeatedly and bills the state for the childcare.

If these are not examples of gross abuse of the British welfare state system, I do not know what is.

I say give the benefits to the old, the infirm, those who cannot fend for themselves. The OAPs who die every winter because they cannot afford to pay their heating bills, give them the money. The disabled person who cannot go out there and earn her daily bread, give her the money to look after herself. The others, able-bodied ones who are sitting in the comfort of their six-bed taxpayer-funded life, get over yourself and go out there and get a paying job.

I used to work for a social research agency and one of my projects was working on the incapacity benefits – who was receiving them, how much and what was their status. The findings made my blood boil. Whilst there were genuine applicants, there were many who, despite their claims to go out there and work if given a chance, would rather sit comfortably and watch the benefit cheques come in month after month.

I say the simplest way to reduce the massive deficit is to completely rehaul the benefits system. If guys like the father-of-five-with-one-on-the-way had to pay their own way, I am sure they would stop whingeing and get a vasectomy first and a job next.

Shaikh Dr Tahir ul-Qadri Issues Anti-Terrorism Fatwa Without Teeth

Jamal — Thu, 4 Mar 2010 16:16:45 EST

Regarding Shaikh Dr Tahir ul-Qadri’s Anti-Terrorism Fatwa, recently launched in London, I guess any steps forward in fighting terrorism should be considered a good thing. However, these initiatives can be read in many ways and I’ll give you a few points off the top of my head, replicates what many others are thinking in the Muslim community.

Firstly, I doubt this will have the clout envisaged by one of it's apparent key promoters the Quilliam foundation (a counter-terrorism think tank) as the fatwa itself does not have the unanimous backing of the most prominent scholars and Sheikhs, although the opinions and rulings of some prominent scholars do appear to have been involved in drawing it up. Also this is not the first fatwa to condemn suicide bombings/terrorism, and Qadri is not the first ‘important/eminent’ Sheikh to issue such a fatwa, as many more prominent scholars and Sheikhs have done so already, and these are ignored by those idiots that seek to commit suicide bombings and terrorism anyway. Furthermore, most Islamic scholars and Imams have already consistently condemned killing people in the name of Islam for a long, long time. There is simply minimal publicity about these earlier efforts and therefore the time spent promoting Shaikh Dr Tahir ul-Qadri’s Anti-Terrorism Fatwa would have been better spent promoting that Muslims have already been condemning terrorism for some time.

Secondly, regarding Qadri's status, the Sheikh in question appears to head a Sufi organisation and as such there will be many branches of the Muslim community that will not recognise his rulings. In fact, its likely that most of his own followers will accept his fatwa but then as his followers they are likely to not support terrorism or suicide bombings anyhow. Furthermore, another reason he is not a universally accepted figure by all individuals and branches of the Muslim community is because in the past has made segregating comments about some other Muslim communities such as Wahabbis and Deobandis. So I’d suggest that this fatwa is not really groundbreaking apart from inside his own organisation and will never be widely acknowledged apart from by his own followers.

Thirdly, although it is important that such a Fatwa has been publicised, the importance and reach perceived by the press, Quilliam foundation, etc, does appear overrated/overestimated. Why? Because those that commit such crimes have already heard existing Fatwa’s stating it to be wrong and ignore them, those that do not recognise this Sheikh would have already heard existing Fatwa’s stating it to be wrong, those that follow this Sheikh should already be clear terrorism is wrong and do not need a Fatwa to tell them this, and those non-followers that already know it to be wrong do not need another Fatwa to remind them.

I’ve read a cross-section of interesting views which collectively place this Fatwa in it’s correct context and weight it’s relevance.

"The fatwa, running to 600 pages, has been written by Muhammad Tahir ul-Qadri, founder and leader of a Muslim sect based in Pakistan, and highlighted in a press release from the Quilliam Foundation, an anti-extremism thinktank which last year received £1m funding from the British government." (Guardian)

"It (the fatwa) plays on a widely-held (and sometimes willful) misperception that Muslim leaders have not spoken out against Islamist violence. Large numbers of Muslim leaders have denounced violence, suicide bombs, 9/11, 7/7 and many other bloody attacks by Islamist radicals (check out a long partial list here)." (Reuters)

"Tim Winter, a lecturer in Islamic studies at Cambridge University, said while ul-Qadri’s step of declaring "miscreants as unbelievers" was unusual, it was unlikely extremists would take notice of his edict." (Al Jazeera)"I dont think any Muslim will disagree with his fatwa .. Whoever has killed an innocent human beings regardless of religion , colour , race , nationality is a terrorist. At the same time he should have mentioned American and its allies are also terrorists (including govt of pakistan ). They have also killed millions of innocent human beings in Iraq , Afganistan … We cant say one side is terrorist and other is fighting for so called democracy." (Islamonline forum)

"The scholars of K.S.A have been condemning terror and issuing fatwas since the 70’s (maybe even before then) and no one took any notice…" …"The barelvis and assorted sufi councils are flavour of the month with the UK government to spread division, hate and doubt among Muslims." (Ummah.com forum)

"What’s funny is that the Government have money to waste in what’s supposed to be a recession. They give money to the Quilliam Foundation to elicit fatwas from men who have virtually no influence on the Muslims in the UK. How ironic that these munafiq "scholars" are seen as a joke by the very Muslims they are meant to be deradicalising." (Islamic Awakening forum)

So thinking more about the 'Qadri Fatwa' and The Quilliam foundation there are some concerns that need to be raised.The Quilliam foundation is headed by Ed Husain, a former religious extremist, and actually has minimal support from Muslims. I’ve said previously that his book, The Islamist appears to be another Wafa Sultan type attempt to profit off the back of Islamophobia and the fear of ‘Islamism’. As Craig Murray also has said, Husain has realized that, having tried to make a mark in the world through religious fanaticism, that he can make more money and career progress by instead jumping on the anti-Islamist gravy train.

When Husain’s not traveling the world lecturing on the threat of ‘Islamist ideology’, he benefits from the fact that the UK government has had Ed Husain up in the Quilliam foundation and has thrown more than £1 million of taxpayers’ money at it.

It’s about time the public (including Muslims) begin questioning and criticizing these self-proclaiming fatwa writers and the barrage of advice they give to the police and security agencies on counter-extremism methods that only serve to further demonise and stereotype Muslims.

The Robin Hood Tax - A Crock of Brown Organic Matter

Dr Bhaskar Dasgupta — Wed, 24 Feb 2010 17:04:37 EST

Look at the Robin Hood Tax website. See the main statement:

This tax on banks – not you or I - has the power to raise hundreds of billions every year. It could give a vital boost to the NHS, our schools, and the fight against child poverty in the UK – as well as tackling poverty and climate change around the world.

Let's unpack this, shall we? And in the interests of disclosure, I am a banker and I am talking about this in my personal capacity, nothing to do with my current or past employers.

Thisis tax on banks, not you and I. Banks obviously live on another planet. So that taxes on banks have no impact on you and I. Here’s the first example that the authors don't know their head from their toes. Banks are intermediaries between you and I, who place deposits and it is you and I, who take loans to purchase a house or buy a pension. When you place a tax on the intermediary, you are reducing the interest rate that I get paid as a saver and increase the interest rate that I have to pay to get a house. See the economic illiteracy of not understanding how basic financial and economics work?

Secondly, why are they claiming to have big power to raise hundreds of billions every year? I mean, that is a silly statement, Why not raise trillions by imposing 100% tax on all earnings? You will raise even more. What’s the point of this silly statement?

Thirdly, give a vital boost to the National Health Service. Very good. Why? What happened to the taxes that you already levy on us? Is that not enough? Obviously it is not enough. So why don't you boost that tax? Oh!!!!!, let me see if I understand. You do not like to boost income tax, because somebody might get pissed off enough to fly the plane into the tax building or throw out the blood sucking people out of government. There is a word for this, Stealth Tax.

Fourthly, haven't you realised that the UK public sector is already showing a debt of 56% of the GDP and could reach 93% in 4 years? Instead of taxing more, shouldn't you be thinking about reducing spending? How about the fact that more than 2/3rds of the 1.2 million extra jobs created in the UK cities were in public administration, education and health. Don't you think this is a tad top heavy? And then you want to impose a tax on savers, job creators and intermediaries to increase the number of jobs even more? Same thing applies to school funding. Oh, fight against child poverty!

Then they obviously throw in poverty and climate change as well. I think they missed out making apple pies for pensioners, helping lollipop ladies with better shiny vests and feeding nuts to squirrels!!!

And this is a highly regressive tax, which will proportionally impact the poor even more than the rich. For example, if this applies to all financial transactions, then a poor man will have to pay 1 pound in tax (for example) for every 10 quid he withdraws, versus say a 100 quid for a richer man who withdraws 1000 quid. When you are faced with the choice of eating beans on toast, then that 1 pound makes more of an impact than the 100 quid when you are eating caviar and drinking champagne. So this tax is actually going to exacerbate poverty.

Finally, if you say that taxes help improve behaviour of the banks, then why don't we start imposing taxes on government departments who do not perform? How about imposing taxes on train companies whose trains are late? How about charities who spend more than say 5% on administration and marketing? Talking about charities. Here is a list of charities who have signed up to this interesting idea. Charities are supposed to rely on the philanthropy of ordinary people. They rely on the good nature of people who contribute towards society. But this bunch of charities are asking for forcible contributions. In other words, they are demanding, under force of law, for everybody to contribute to them. This is theft!

Robin Hood, after all, was a thief and a robber. And for all his noble efforts, his thefts effectively lead to the authorities actually increasing the amount of taxes levied on the common man. In this particular case, if you increase the level of taxes, then you are in effect increasing the public sector and then you will need more taxes to support them in the end, leading to the public sector taxing itself to spend on itself, a snake eating its own tail.

Also look at the list, quite a lot of unions are in there, and most of them are public sector unions. Hmmm, very good indeed, I like the way you want me as a taxpayer to give you more money so that you can have more employees. And the churches got into the act as well, thank you for robbing us! Robin Hood also robbed the public authorities and churches who were grasping, thieving, robbing clerics. It’s nice to see that they haven't changed a wee bit. So I like how confused they are by saying that they are like Robin Hood, when they are exactly like the enemies of Robin Hood. How about charities also paying tax then on their earnings? Oh? What you get are gifts, unlike us money grabbing taxpayers who get our money after squeezing just whom? We earn our money and you are asking the government to tax us and then you will come to us again for more money. Money grubbing and theft combined with chutzpah and hypocrisy.

Then they say this is only going to be applied to speculative banking transactions. Just how they will define speculative is unclear. Will this involve people who take out mortgages for buy to let? Or how about me taking out money from my bank account to buy shares? How about taking out money from my bank account to speculate on horses? No? Yes? What?

This really bugged me. I don't mind paying taxes because we get services in return. But to go about actively proposing taxes without making the case for it reminds me of the Boston Tea Party. And when people think that they are being unfairly taxed, they start protesting or committing suicide bombing terrorism. So here we have a campaign, they don't know what it is for, they don't know what previous tax amounts were used for, they don't know how it will be applied, they dont know what the implications will be, they don't know who will get charged, but everybody is having a big song and dance about it.

Hindu Nationalism in UK and the VHP

Dr Bhaskar Dasgupta — Fri, 5 Feb 2010 00:56:49 EST

This was a very curious paper that I read. It was even more curious, because just a day before I got this paper, I read this note which was published in Outlook. I have to admit that I am in some sympathy with the views of Roover, but how it is taught in the west is something that I find a bit strange. At the very least, I would have expected some reasonable facsimile and similarity in the ways it is taught compared to Judaism, Christianity, etc., but this is specially in the USA, much less in the UK. I have personally had several experiences of this. Anybody saying anything good about Hinduism or its philosophy or any thing like that is almost automatically considered to be a raving Hindutva casteist rage boy. I have seen this happen far too many times. I strongly suggest you read that article and here’s a quote:

In one sense, then, the picture for students of India is even grimmer than the one Tripathi sketches. In another sense, there is hope, because times of turbulence also hold the potential for intellectual change. As students of India, we will have to take seriously the growing discontent among Hindus about the ways in which their traditions have been depicted. Some of this is inspired by an attempt to sanitise the Hindu traditions according to the model of Islam and Christianity and the prudishness of middle-class morality. However, other strands express a deep sense of grievance towards the secularist hegemony and the academic allergy to Hinduism. As long as reasonable and well-educated minds do not address these grievances, Hindu nationalism will be able to tap into the growing anger among Hindus and manipulate this to its own benefit. To address such problems, one needs to work towards a climate of intellectual freedom that has too long been absent from the study of India.

So while I am quite interested to read about the scholarship that is done about Hinduism and India, I am not 100% sure about the academy. Do not get me wrong, I think the Hindutva chaps are a bunch of goons themselves and they come up with serious stinkers. In any case, they and their bunch of merry men are most certainly against academic freedom (witness the cases against the beef book, etc. etc., read my friend’s book on this issue. I can't say much more than this, as I think I am biased in favour of Salil’s book.

Usually my net scraper for the “Hinduism” keyword throws up very few scholarly alerts but this article piqued my interest. The author is assessing the role of Hindu nationalism in the development of Hindu identity in Britain. And to do that, he delves into the VHP UK organisation. After some 10-15 pages, I am not very sure where he ends up. This is the abstract:

This paper assesses the role of Hindu nationalism in the development of Hindu identity in Britain. Some accounts argue that the authoritarian network of Hindu nationalist organisations apparent in India is reproduced in Diaspora contexts, especially in the west. The paper argues that this degree of organisational intentionality is not always borne out by evidence in the UK. Although Hindu nationalist organisations have achieved some success in establishing their presence, in national arenas they frequently give way to umbrella organisations such as the Hindu Forum of Britain (HFB) and the Hindu Council UK (HCUK). The paper argues that Hindu nationalist organisations nevertheless operate vigorously in multilocal contexts, fuelling a 'Hindutva effect' which has a broader ideological influence. The paper examines some of the positions taken by the HFB and HCUK to demonstrate how this influence is played out in national arenas, before reflecting more broadly on the implications of these dynamics for the development of diaspora identities.

There was one event that the VHP organised 20 years ago, but since then, it has been remarkably quiescent. Their website is basic, its members aren't represented in the organisations which deal with civil society, etc. So he talks about all this and then says that the VHP is a serious organisation spreading a nebulous underground version of Hindutva. He called the VHP arranged sammelan as a tamasha. That was a cheap shot frankly, not worthy.

Then the chap starts talking about conversion. And I am seriously surprised that the author does not understand the importance of conversion to a Hindu. I mean, isn't this obvious? We are talking about a religious identity, and a factor which goes directly against this identity and reduces it will be considered to be a threat. So when the Hindu elders in the UK were raising their concerns about Muslim gangs converting Hindu (and Sikh) girls, the British Police considered that as a legitimate problem. But the author thinks that this objection to conversion is an expression of Hindu Nationalistic thought. Erm, no!

Then furthermore, he goes forward and says that this is a subterranean inflection towards Hindutva. I totally disagree. This is going to the core of a Hindu’s identity and it has no political leanings at all. So I am not sure where he is getting the subterranean bit from or where he is seeing Hindutva. It's like seeing a commie under every bed.

The next result that he finds is that to protect against the threat of conversion, one has to “wake up” Hindu Unity. This apparently demonstrates the presence of Hindu nationalist ideology. Again, this is a massive over reading into the word “wake up”. If I say that we need to do jagran, then it is the same. It is making visible, bringing up, to awaken, to rise up. Obviously he doesn't link this to Swami Vivekananda who said, “Arise, Awake! And stop not until the goal is reached”. Or how about his poem? I quote:

The Song of the Sannyasin

Wake up the note! the song that had its birth
Far off, where worldly taint could never reach
In mountain caves and glades of forest deep,
Whose calm no sigh for lust or wealth or fame
Could ever dare to break; where rolled the stream
Of knowledge, truth, and bliss that follows both.
Sing high that note, Sannyasin bold! Say –
    ‘Om tat sat, Om!’
Strike off thy fetters! Bonds that bind thee down,
Of shining gold or darker, baser ore;
Love, hate; good, bad; and all the dual throng,
Know, slave is slave, caressed or whipped, not free
For fetters, though of gold, are not less strong to bind;
Then off with them, Sannyasin bold! Say –
    ‘Om tat sat, Om!’
Let darkness go! the will-o’-the-wisp that leads
With blinking light to pile more gloom on gloom.
This thirst for life, for ever quench; it drags
From birth to death, and death to birth, the soul
He conquers all who conquers self. Know this
And never yield, Sannyasin bold! Say –
    ‘Om tat sat, Om!’
‘Who sows must reap,’ they say, ‘and cause must bring
The sure effect; good, good; bad, bad; and none
Escape the law. But whoso wears a form
Must wear the chain.’ Too true; but far beyond
Both name and form is Atman, ever free.
Know thou art That, Sannyasin bold! Say –
    ‘Om tat sat, Om!’
They know not truth who dream such vacant dreams
As father, mother, children, wife and friend.
The sexless Self! whose father He? whose child?
Whose friend, whose foe is He who is but One?
The Self is all in all, none else exists;
And thou art That, Sannyasin bold! Say –
    ‘Om tat sat, Om!’
There is but One – The Free, The Knower – Self!
Without a name, without a form or stain.
In him is Maya, dreaming all this dream.
The Witness, He appears as nature, soul.
Know thou art That, Sannyasin bold! Say –
    ‘Om tat sat, Om!’
Where seekest thou? That freedom, friend, this world
Nor that can give. In books and temples vain
Thy search. Thine only is that hand that holds
The rope that drags thee on. Then cease lament,
Let go thy hold, Sannyasin bold! Say –
    ‘Om tat sat, Om!’
Say, ‘Peace to all: From me no danger be
To aught that lives. In those that dwell on high,
In those that lowly creep, I am the Self in all.
All life both here and there, do I renounce,
All heavens and earths and hells, all hopes and fears.’
Thus cut thy bonds, Sannyasin bold! Say –
    ‘Om tat sat, Om!’
Heed then no more how body lives or goes,
Its task is done. Let Karma float it down;
Let one put garlands on, another kick
This frame; say naught. No praise or blame can be
Where praiser praised, and blamer blamed are one.
Thus be thou calm, Sannyasin bold! Say –
    ‘Om tat sat, Om!’
Truth never comes where lust and fame and greed
Of gain reside. No man who thinks of woman
As his wife can ever perfect be;
Nor he who owns the least of things, nor he
Whom anger chains, can ever pass thro’ Maya’s gates.
So give these up, Sannyasin bold! Say –
    ‘Om tat sat, Om!’
Have thou no home. What home can hold thee, friend?
The sky thy roof, the grass thy bed; and food
What chance may bring, well cooked or ill, judge not.
No food or drink can taint that noble Self
Which knows itself. Like rolling river free
Thou ever be, Sannyasin bold! Say –
    ‘Om tat sat, Om!’
Few only know the truth. The rest will hate
And laugh at thee, great one; but pay no heed.
Go thou, the free, from place to place, and help
Them out of darkness, Maya’s veil. Without
The fear of pain or search for pleasure, go
Beyond them both, Sannyasin bold! Say –
    ‘Om tat sat, Om!’
Thus, day by day, till Karma’s powers spent,
Release the soul for ever. No more is birth,
Nor I, nor thou, nor God, nor man. The ‘I’
Has All become, the All is ‘I’ and Bliss.
Know thou art That, Sannyasin bold! Say –
    ‘Om tat sat, Om!’
— Swami Vivekananda

Composed at Thousand Island Park, New York, July 1895.

I mean, if just the term “waking up” got him so excited, I wonder what he will do with the song of the Sanyasin? Will he consider Swamiji as a raving Hindutva militant revolutionary? He also says that the 1993 Global Vision 2000 conference in Washington DC was “ostensibly” a centenary celebration of Vivekananda’s visit to the USA, but he thinks this was a key moment in the development of the US Hindu nationalist movement. But he does that without any follow-up explanation, and we are supposed to swallow it.

In other words, the author simply does not prove that Hindu identity is nationalism at all and even lesser are the links to the VHP. There might well be Hindutva effects, but he does not consider the other factor which in many ways is more powerful than the Hindu identity factor. This is the linguistic/cultural factor. Hindus in the UK are more defined by their Asian Gujerati or Punjabi background or their Indian background, rather than something that is a broad based tent. For example, there is a shed load of professional (doctors, accountants, nurses, technology professionals, etc.) Indians who have come over directly from India who do not belong to any of these groupings of Punjabi or Gujerati chaps.

So no, I am not impressed with the forced identification by the author. There is no such thing as an overarching British Hindu identity. The Hindu organisations in the UK are primarily religious and cultural, and very rarely do they step into the political area and for the author to try to attribute Hindutva to this society is simply not borne out by the facts that he quotes. The people on the left and in the academy must realise that they really cannot go about publishing pap like this. Like the climate science academic research imbroglio brewing, their reputation is suffering significantly.

Photo-Essay: HMS Belfast: The Ship That Came in From the Cold

Dr Bhaskar Dasgupta — Mon, 1 Feb 2010 19:01:29 EST

The HMS Belfast is something that is very close to my heart and mind. One of the books that has made a very deep impression on me is HMS Ulysses, by Alastair Maclean. It is about about a similar light cruiser which is on the Arctic Convoy run during World War II. It really really made a very big impression on me and was a big reason behind my choice to join the Navy. The book talks about the Arctic camouflage of broken light blue, grey, white paint, it talks about the high speed of the cruiser, the search lights, the torpedo tubes, the director tower and the pom poms - but these are just the physical manifestations of some steel and few licks of paint. What made an impression on me was the combination of utter physical extreme conditions in the freezing cold weather of the Arctic combined with mind numbing tiredness coated with fear and terror of falling bombs, falling shells, ice all around, hunger and constant constant constant gongs of action stations. How Captain Valery dies, and how the ship staggers on till the end when it fails in its mission to kill the bigger German ship.

When I first saw the ship from tower bridge many many years ago, I immediately fell in love with the ship because I could finally put myself in my bibliographic dream. This shot is not as good, as you have scaffolding all over the ship and the silly gangway breaks up the lines, but it is a sleek and beautiful ship. It is a lethal nimble ship. Sailors love some ships, and this is one of them. My HMS Ulysses came to life for me, real life. I was walking around with my mouth open, the book flicking in my mind and imaging this ship pitching and rolling in the massive Arctic Ocean Murmansk runs. The bow (now covered by scaffolding) slicing and hissing through the mountainous waves. Just look at the ship, it just looks dangerous, ready to leap into actions under bone jarring sounds of action stations even though it is moored inside a very civilised urban area in a river.

Here are the fore main turrets. 6 inch guns capable of belching out a shell which can go up to 20 kms, and the ship has 12 of these big suckers, two triple turrets in the fore and two in the aft section. Automated munitions handling (see the left side of the photo below where you can see the rows of red painted shells in the automated magazine belt) meant that the ship could lay down some serious fireworks on the designated target, guided by some pretty good (for that time) calculators, radars and other equipment, the chances of these banshee shrieking shells landing on the target was quite high.

There is a photograph on the ticket hall which shows a sea man curled up in a hammock. Looks quite cosy, but think back to those times when central heating was really not available on these steel monsters. Heating was almost nil, the steel walls would mostly be weeping condensation and coupled with the high humidity and leaks in these ships, it would be ferociously cold, high humidity, rolling and pitching, not enough food (can't really cook or distribute food when the ship is pitching and rolling up to 20-30 degrees). And then you get to sleep for 1-2 hours before the klaxon wakes you up for another action station call.

This is the aft end of the ship showing the two main turrets, the 4 inch and pom pom guns which could be used against surface and air borne targets. The round mushroom thing in the middle is a searchlight. In many ways, the searchlight was as much as a weapon as a cannon as it would help in highlighting enemies, searching for survivors or U-boats or lighting up ships which have been torpedoed. Vital piece of equipment. But imagine yourself being placed in one of these locations during the arctic convoys, out in the open, with spray reaching up to you, wet, icy, totally freezing but unable to relax as you are supposed to be one of the eyes and ears of the big ship. What a job!

The anchor chains.

A lifeboat on the right and the ship’s crane in the middle.

The main mast with radar, radio antenna, sensors, lights and the vast paraphernalia of equipment that no self respecting warship in the WW II was without. But again imagine biting cold, freezing wind, spikes and shards of ice flying almost horizontally and you are an able seaman asked to climb up to fix anything that is broken or to make signals. In extreme cold, metal becomes weak and brittle. Back in the WW II times, metallurgy was not that advanced and one would still find metal components breaking off, which meant that frequently people would have to climb up the tower to repair the equipment. This is not considering the impact of ice formation on all these moving parts. Lubricants would freeze at the sheer horribly low temperatures of the Arctic and they would use alcohol thermometers to measure the temperature, mercury would have long since frozen solid. Here is a great photo of what the ship looked like totally ice encrusted during an Arctic Convoy.
The ship also participated in other theatres of WW II, the Korean War and flew the flag in a variety of other oceans. It would have been destined to become a scrap heap oe ended up as razors but thankfully, it was protected. It is now part of the Imperial War Museum and still thrilling the millions of people who visit this famous British landmark. While you cannot visit all parts of the ship, it is well worth it to poke around, will take you about 2-3 hours. But before you visit the ship, do see if you can read the book HMS Ulysses. It will make the ship come alive for you.
Lord bless the ship and all who sailed in her. The full slide show here.

The 1818 Battle of Koregaon - The Beginning of a Casteist War?

Dr Bhaskar Dasgupta — Sat, 30 Jan 2010 23:26:58 EST

I received the following email on new year’s day:

ON 1ST JANUARY 1818, MERE 500 BAHUJAN SOLDIERS COURAGEOUSLY FOUGHT AGAINST 50,000 TYRANNICAL FORCES OF MANUWADI PESHWAS AND GAVE THEIR LIVES TO END THE OPPRESSIVE MANUWADI REGIME

EMPIRICAL RULE OF BRITISHERS IN RECOGNITION OF THE GREAT BRAVERY OF BAHUJAN SOLDIERS UNDER THE CAPTAINCY OF SIDNAK MAHAR, ERECTED A MONUMENT AT KOREGAON-BHIMA, PUNE ON THE BANK OF RIVER BHIMA.

DR. B. R. AMBEDKAR, THE BODHISATTVA WHO FOUGHT THROUGHOUT HIS LIFE AGAINST THE AGE OLD MANUWADI OPERATIONS, INVARIABLY USED TO VISIT AND SALUTE THE "VIJAY STAMBHA"- MEMORIAL OF BAHUJAN WARRIORS

LET BAHUJANS NOT FORGET THEIR MARTYRDOM AND OFFER THEIR SALUTATIONS TO THE GREAT MEMORIES OF THOSE GREAT BAHUHAN SOLDIERS WHO RELENTLESSLY FOUGHT TO BREAK THE SHACKLES OF OUR AGE OLD SLAVERY.

LET'S NARRATE THE HISTORY TO FUTURE GENERATIONS SO AS TO MAKE THEM STRONG ENOUGH TO WITHSTAND MANUWAD.

Very impressive. I had never heard of this before, so went looking for more information. Here’s another site where there is more background. Hmmm, fascinating stuff. So if I understood the essence, it was a group of 500 Dalit soldiers who fought approximately 25000 Brahmins. And why is this important? I quote:

First, the British army fought this battle with a minuscule army expecting the worst, especially after their experience of the Pune Regency. Secondly, the battle of Koregaon was one of the most important events which helped tear down the Peshwa Empire and subsequently the Peshwa had to abdicate. Thirdly and most importantly, it was an attempt by the untouchables of Maharashtra to break the shackles of the age-old caste order.

That sort of didnt really jibe with what I had read about the Maratha Wars. So I went to do a bit of poking around.

1. The Maratha Wars:

While I can understand the desire of Dalits to home into that skirmish and claim that to be the be all and end all of all, skirmishes like this have to be grounded in the greater framework. The Maratha Empire brought to life by Shivaji attained its greatest strength by 1760 as shown in the image below.

And I should point out that Shivaji was not a Brahmin. While they claimed Kshyatriya status later on, there are some arguments that he was originally a Dalit, a Shudra to be precise. See here for an overview of this argument. Finally, Shivaji’s army was largely composed of people like him, so it was a Dalit Army anyway which got promoted, so to say. Then comes the first Anglo Maratha War 1777-1783 where first the Maratha’s won and then the British won. In both cases, native soldiers were far too frequently Dalits. Anyway, more land was captured by the Brits and the power of the Maratha’s was further reduced. Peshwa Baji Rao II and his father basically got up to no good. In 1802, BajiRao went and sucked up to the British after being defeated by Holkars in the Battle of Poona. This pissed off the other Maratha warlords and they got into a bit of a fight with the British which ended with more loss of territory for the Marathas. Then comes the crucial 3rd War which our Dalit friends might now appreciate.

This relates to the 3rd Anglo Maratha War 1817-1818 or the Pindari War. The Pindari’s were highly mobile cavalry units which were not on the payroll of any ruler but associated with rulers in return for protection and permission to plunder. Guess what? These Pindari’s were low caste, Ladul and also had quite a lot of Muslims (mainly Afghans and Pusthun). Anyway, all this plundering was not good for the British and a really very big army of 120,000 men and 300 artillery pieces was put into gear by Lord Hastings to exterminate these Pindari’s. The attacks happened from the east in Bengal, from the South in the Deccan and from the west from Gujarat and Bombay. Look at the map above and see who is the nut in this 3-way nutcracker? The Marathas.

2. The immediate predecessor to the 1st Jan 1818 Battle of Koregaon.

Once the British invaded Maratha territory to go after the Pindari’s, there were skirmishes between the Peshwa’s forces and the British forces such as the sack of the British Residency in Pune, and then the British routed another Peshwa force at Khirki. Then the main battle was fought in the Battle of Khadki on November 5, 1817 where the Peshwa Baji Rao was routed pretty much comprehensively and then the British took over the Peshwa’s seat at Shaniwarwada by November 17, 1817. The Peshwa, by this time, was running ragged. There was another battle between the Nagpur forces and the British at Sitabalsi on November 27 1817. The next battle to be fought was the Battle of Mahidpur on 20th December where the Holkar’s fought and lost to the British, after being betrayed by one of the Pindari (who killed Tulsibai).

3. The Battle of Koregaon:

A good description of the battle can be found here. This is a book by WC Taylor, A Popular History of British India published in 1847. See page 268-269 for details of the battle. Sounds like a pretty good bash. Taylor says that the Peshwa’s forces numbered about 25,000 although it should be noted that counting was pretty vague at that time. Still, it wasnt 50,000. But here’s the crucial thing, the Peshwa’s forces then retreated not because they were defeated by Captain Francis Staunton’s forces, but because they got to hear that British reinforcements were coming over. The British forces lost 200 soldiers out of 500, and 6 out of 7 British officers. Good defensive battle without food or water at this village. You can see the layout of the land here although there are no records extant of how the battle actually went, the defences and the lay of the land.

4. The soldiers.

The soldiers who did most of the dying were Mahars. And again ironically, they got their start in being soldiers by no other than Shivaji to become scouts and fortress guards. They were highly mobile light infantry, which is the reason why they were in the 2nd Battalion, 1st regiment of ‘Bombay Native Light Infantry’ as part of the Maratha Light Infantry. The Peshwa’s soldiers were also by and large lower caste soldiers including Mahars, in any case, not Brahmins. So the fighting basically was between lower castes, only the people who were ordering them around were the British and the Peshwas. This Mahar Regiment still exists and has provided two of the most brilliant Indian Army Chiefs: Gen (Retd) K V Krishna Rao and Gen (Retd) K Sunderji. Also, there is no caste element to the regiment from 1963 onwards and it is now a fully mixed regiment.

5. The aftermath of the Battle of Koregaon:

There was another fight between the fleeing Peshwa’s forces and the British at Ashti on February 20th 1818 and he remained under pressure till he surrendered to Sir John Malcolm on June 3, 1818 and was given the pension of an annual payment of 8 lakhs rupees. The Battle of Koregaon was celebrated by raising of an Obelix which commemorated this.

So all in all, I am afraid what my research threw up was in sharp variance with the mythology is being provided. It was frankly a small battle / skirmish in a much bigger war, the Peshwa’s forces were not defeated in this skirmish, the British Army did not fight this battle expecting the worst because they had been winning every battle in this war, this battle of Koregaon was not really that important as fighting kept on happening for months after this battle and I am afraid there is absolutely no evidence that any kind of caste based ideology was involved in the fight.

So all in all, good myth but a rather more calm reading of the historical record tells differently. I can also see why the Dalit hotheads want to use this battle to burnish their credentials. After all, all revolutions need their battles. Google for “Battle of Koregaon” to see how this myth is being built up, but I am afraid the reading is slightly different. If they do want to celebrate the success of lower caste soldiers, they should celebrate Shivaji, the Indian Soldier, the bravery that these soldiers showed to whoever paid them. See here for the campaigns that the Maratha Light Infantry got involved in. But to bring this casteism into the Indian Army? Not really cricket, old chaps. But I am very happy to be corrected if I have not referred to any other source or documentation. Happy to learn more.

Photo Essay: Baker Street Underground Station

Dr Bhaskar Dasgupta — Sun, 3 Jan 2010 19:14:11 EST

While trundling around London with a camera, you get to capture the commonplace but still great sights. Here’s my take looking at Baker Street Underground Station. Baker Street already resonated with me because of the association with Sherlock Holmes, but the fact that it was the first underground train station obviously excites an amateur history buff like me. Plus I always wanted to be a train driver but ended up as a bloody boring banker. How the mighty have fallen. Anyhow, I am not planning to give you the history of this station here, for that you can go check the wiki entry. Only my thoughts and commentary are here.

This is the main ticket hall. Quite an interesting arrangement on the roof with the beams. Very nice patterns are formed.

Moving towards the Circle and Hammersmith line platform, you can see the World War I memorial. It is made out of marble, with a lion on top killing some kind of a serpent like monster. Pretty good work. The inscription on the top says:

“The men from the service of The Metropolitan Railway Company whose names are inscribed below were among those who at the call of King and Country left all that was dear to them, endured hardness, faced danger, and finally passed out of sight of men by the path of duty and self-sacrifice, giving up their own lives that others might live in freedom. Let those who come after see to it that their names be not forgotten.”

This year is the sad year when the last WWI British veteran died. Quite poignant. It was supposed to be the great war, the war to end all wars and still men are dying to this very day.

This is a 12 inch artillery shell, presented by the Vickers (remember the references to this firm’s guns in Biggles? or am I showing my age?). It has a slot for donations.

The signage shows the way to the other platforms as you can see. The interesting bit was the railway clock on top.

The ironmongery on the round window shows the motif for the Metropolitan Railway. You see the M and R.

There’s the platform where I need to get to. The water damage can be seen in the frankly mouldy and leprous white marking on the wall and the buttress support. Looks faintly like you are descending into a World War time interrogation chamber, with the harsh light and dingy brick walls, no?

So why am I showing you manky old roofs and arches? Well, they are pretty old for one and secondly, you can see the old iron supports and scaffolding that were originally put up. Could do with a good clean, i tell you.

These were previously gas powered, but now they are tungsten lamps. They emit a pretty bright light. These are the original light fitting, see the

Between the platforms you have wood panelled corridors, go figure. Something that wouldn't be out of place in an old corporate setting is quite eye catching here. This corridor crosses over the tracks.

Looking up the tracks, a train is approaching, but on the other side, you can see wooden cupboards. No idea what’s in them, but it is so surprising to see wooden furniture in a station like that.

Looking up the empty tunnel. On the left, where you see the sodium orange light, is the spur line which moves into the metropolitan line. Its very grimy but you can see the tunnel curving away to the left, nicely highlighted by the train traffic and signalling lights.

On the left is a Chromolithograph dating back to 1863 comparing how the station looked almost 100 years ago and how it looks today. Can you see the ventilation and lighting shafts? they are still the same (more about that lower down). Obviously the clothes are a tad different, but the platforms are now much higher than before.

The platform has lots of plaques and posters showing the history of the construction and how it was made.

There are these crimson drum like speakers across the platform which are used for station announcements. Ok, why that colour? doesnt match with anything, but anyway. I was trying to figure out why on earth would somebody actually put a damn sticker on a speaker which has been disconnected? Weird.

These tile lined holes were originally meant for ventilation and to let light come in, but have now just been boarded up. This is how the ventilation holes look now. Look vaguely like upside down urinals, if you ask me. Very strange bizarre.

But we are but the people who travel these trains...

Sitting in front of a damp, water splotched wall and absentmindedly picking their nose while waiting for the train. Puzzled looks on the right.

How on earth did this lady manage to get a phone into her back pocket? Besides surgery, I cannot see how.

Somebody is reading a newspaper, somebody has luggage and two friends are busy gabbing away.

Totally bored out of their mind while waiting. Then the lady got tired of waiting for the tube and then decided to plonk herself on her friend’s lap.

How progress moves, even Sherlock Holmes with his characteristic pipe will not be allowed to smoke down here. It does not make any difference that his museum is located opposite the street of Baker Street Station and that perhaps the pipe smoke could have curled itself towards the station in older times, now there is no exception, not even for him. Here is the full slide show.

Photo Essay: Marble Arch, London

Dr Bhaskar Dasgupta — Tue, 29 Dec 2009 00:05:33 EST

I was a bit early for my meeting at Green Park, so I decided to nip over to Marble Arch and take a closer look around. It was bitterly cold, but the sun was slowly coming in from Hyde Park. The arch is not very imposing when observed from the other side of the street, mind you. Crossroads had geographical significance in ancient history. The history of this site goes way back to the early Roman times, where this place was the cross roads of two great Roman roads, one to Colchester in the West and St. Albans to the North. Plus you have to realise that the land where it stands was a place for public hanging for centuries called as Tyburn - blood soaked land from an estimated 50,000 executions from 1300 to 1783AD. Strange why so many executions happened on crossroads, eh? Better publicity I guess.

Overshadowed by the buildings behind it, it looks fairly ordinary. And I am not surprised, this wasn't supposed to be the final original location. It was supposed to form the major entry into Buckingham Palace. John Nash, the designer and architect, made this in 1827, to commemorate the Napoleonic Wars victory at Trafalgar and Waterloo. Nash based his design on the Arch of Constantine in Rome. A very poor copy, I have to admit, but as I understand, he was planning to knock the socks off Constantine’s Arch, but he ran out of money. The monument has many flag posts around it specially the flags of the Commonwealth nations. who have contributed soldiers at various times to the assorted British Wars in the past 3 centuries. But not very impressive, when you compare it to Nelson’s Column or the other Napoleonic War memorials dotted around the country. Not impressive at all.

Anyway, the Arch was moved as Buckingham Palace was extended and then placed here, opposite of the Speaker’s Corner in Hyde Park. According to British law, this is the place for free speech, where you can say what you want - anything ay all - at the Speaker’s Corner. Can you see the area in the centre? That’s the Speaker’s Corner. It's a very nice place in the summer. Free Speech requires good temperatures, you really cannot speak that much when your jaws are chattering away with cold. Not that you will have anybody to listen to you.

On closer inspection, it doesn't change much either. The structure is made out of white Carrara marble. The same material which has been used by Michelangelo to carve his David. The Pantheon and Trajan’s Column in Rome were also carved out of this marble. Its pretty rich (although the building has been through a relatively recent £75,000 restoration and cleaning. As you can appreciate, the monument is surrounded with heavy traffic and all those horrible exhaust fumes, not to forget the droppings of the flying rat, didn't do this monument any good.

This sculpture represents a winged Peace (on the left) holding a long flower and Plenty (on the right) holding a sheaf of food grains in one hand and a bunch of grapes in the other hand.

A Roman/Greek Naval (See the link with Trafalgar? Some say this is connected to Nelson) warrior/officer on the left and a figure of Justice on the right, holding a rolled up bunch of presumably legal documents.

An allegorical group standing for Peace and Plenty. It has 2 faintly chubby cherubs (one holding roses and apples) gambolling around this lady who is holding a branch in her hand, and is standing on top of a whole bunch of armour pieces, battle axes, helmets, spears.

These 3 figures stand for England, Scotland and Ireland. One lady holds a harp (Ireland), another holds a shield behind her (Scotland) and then the lady in the middle has a pretty imposing head dress (England).

The two gates on the sides are meant for hoi polloi and peasants.

But the centre gate is meant only for royalty and if you wanted to break the law, you can walk through it to show your rebellion.

The gates are substantial bits, made out of bronze. The gates show the Lion of England, the Cypher of George IV, and the figure of St. George and the dragon. Its surrounded by chrysanthemums (I think…) around the sides.

The central keystone on the left and right arches has this bearded fellow carved on the end. And the way it has been discoloured sort of shows that he has a bad runny nose. He does look very miserable, doesnt he? Well, so would I be if my head was hung up on the keystone for centuries breathing in damn traffic fumes.

There are pretty imposing lanterns on top.

Lovely long columns of marble. See the door on the right hand side photo? It's the entrance to 3 rooms on top of the arch. Of all the things, these 3 rooms were used as police stations!.

The windows on the top were used by the policemen to peek out over the landscape..

It was frightfully cold, but that didn't stop these pigeons from sunbathing! Can you see how they are all fluffed up and sitting in a line?

They were also all over the benches. Looked very cute, but damned the feathered rats.

But what am I blaming the pigeons for? This lady was sitting on a bench, in front of a whole pile of ice and snow and slush. She was sitting there on her own, with her bag reading for at least 20 minutes in this freezing cold. She must be MAD! You get all kinds..

Full slide show here.

The Shadow of the Great Game: Partition of India & British Strategic Interests

C R Sridhar — Sat, 19 Sep 2009 13:12:16 EDT

Mr Jaswant Singh’s book Jinnah - India, Partition, Independence reopened old wounds of India’s Partition in 1947. His central argument was that Jinnah- an epitome of secular values- was unfairly demonised in India and that the blame lay squarely on Indian leaders like Pandit Nehru and Sardar Vallabhai Patel. Stung by the ‘quirky’ views of Mr Singh the response of the BJP was swift: Jaswant Singh was expelled from the primary membership of the BJP. Explaining the decision to expel Jaswant Singh from the party Rajnath Singh- the party chief- tetchily told the members of the Press, “Views expressed by Jaswant Singh in his book 'Jinnah -- India, Partition, Independence' does not represent views of the party. In fact, the party completely dissociates itself from the contents of the book."1

While it may be tempting to think that Jaswant Singh committed political hara-kiri by praising Jinnah and denigrating Sardar Patel an icon of BJP, nothing could be farther from the truth. As far as political fortunes go, Mr Singh’s political career was in irreversible tailspin. The BJP had been humbled at the recent General Election and for the urbane polo playing princeling from Rajastan the future looked bleak and uncertain.

Ironically enough for Jaswant Singh, the political fortunes revived unexpectedly when his book was banned in Gujarat by the BJP strongman Narender Modi. His book became the toast of book launch at five star hotels where the jaded glitterati vied with each other to have them photographed in the presence of the distinguished author. Mr Singh was seen in cocktail circuits wearing his quasi- military attire (epaulettes and all) and basking in his secular aura. In his baritone voice he held forth on the secular credentials of the enigmatic Mohamed Ali Jinnah and the tortuous history of India’s Partition.

Guilty Men of Partition

But his book only flatters to deceive. Lacking the effervescence of bubbly champagne his book can be best described as a vapid rethreading of other people’s books. In fact, Maulana Azad in his book ‘India Wins Freedom’ blamed Nehru and Sardar Patel for their inflexibility over the Cabinet Mission Plan, which eventually paved the way for the Partition of India. The theme of lost opportunities and narrow vision of Indian Nationalist Leaders was taken up by the formidable Ram Manohar Lohia who in his book Guilty Men of India's Partition criticized the Congress leaders like Nehru and Patel for their failure to seize opportunities to prevent the Partition. Lohia in his book, which was published in 1960, also strongly condemned the role of fanatical Hindu extremism for the partition. As he said “The opposition of fanatical Hinduism to partition did not and could not make any sense, for one of the forces that partitioned the country was precisely this Hindu fanaticism.”2

Other historians argue that it was the intransigence of Muslim separatist leaders like Muhammad Iqbal, the ideological founder of Pakistan, who as early as 1930 preached, “The religious ideal of Islam, therefore, is organically related to the social order which it has created. The rejection of the one will eventually involve the rejection of the other.” Thus the religious basis of the two-nation split goes back to 1930. Iqbal urged Jinnah who led a separatist movement as early as 1937 that it was imperative to prevent the domination of Muslims by Non-Muslims. Jinnah in his discussions with Congress leaders and British officials made unreasonable demands for equal representations in the interim Government as envisaged in the Cabinet Mission Plan of 1946. The Congress leaders countered the proposal of Jinnah by arguing that the Hindus represented 75% of the population while the Muslim constituted only 20% of the population and hence the proposal was unworkable. As a compromise the Congress leaders offered Jinnah a 12-member cabinet having 6 Hindu, 5 Muslim and another representative from remaining religious groups. But Jinnah, some historians allege, wanted to grab full power and pushed India to the bloody Partition. As the gaunt and ascetic looking Jinnah said, “We shall have India divided or we shall have India destroyed.” 3

India was divided but it did not save the horrific carnage that was to follow. Hundreds of thousands were slaughtered, millions mutilated or raped and tens of millions lost their homes. The religious segregation of India and Pakistan exacted a terrible toll, which continues even today from the riots of Babri Masjid to the dangerous nuclear arms race between these two countries.

But is the history of India’s Partition to be viewed from the narrow perspective of failure of the key players, namely, British, Hindu and Muslim leaders to prevent the Partition? Or were there larger geopolitical interests as a hidden agenda of the British Empire, which dictated that the Partition was a foregone conclusion?

The Wells of Power

In his book ‘The Shadow of the Great Game: The Untold Story of India’s Partition’ Narendra Singh Sarila, an ADC to Lord Mountbatten and who later served in the Indian Foreign Service, explores the perspective that there was a critical link between the partition and the British fears that USSR under Stalin had expansionist ambitions of gaining control over the oil wells of the Middle East. In the twilight years of their rule in India the British realised that they needed partners and military bases to acquire influence in the area lying between India and Turkey.

What made the British governing elites nervous was that to the Soviet Union’s southern border lay the region of the Persian Gulf with oil fields – the wells of power- that were of vital interest to the West. “ Britain could ill afford to lose control” says the author, “over the entire Indian subcontinent that had served as its military base in dominating the Indian Ocean area and the countries around the Persian Gulf for more than half a century.”4 The British fears about Stalin’s ambition were heightened when he announced in 1946 that his country’s dependence on oil had doubled since 1941.5

The British shrewdly realised the Indian Nationalists like Nehru and his close confidante V.K.Krishna Menon would have no alliance with Britain to protect her wells of power and be a pawn to counter the looming Russian Bear from gaining control over the Persian Gulf. The British needed willing partners in the Great Game to thwart Soviet Union influence over the area. In the cynical exercise of manipulative politics the British used the Islam card to encourage Jinnah and the Muslim League to press for a separate Muslim State.

Lord Wavell, the Viceroy of India from 1943 to early 1947, was the British strategist who saw clearly that the breach caused in Britain’s capacity to defend the Middle East and the Indian Ocean area could be solved if the Muslim League were to succeed in separating India’s strategic northwest from the rest of the country. The cosy ties that Lord Linlithgow developed with Mohammad Ali Jinnah during the Second World War had the objective of influencing Jinnah to side with the British by offering military bases in the separate Muslim State.

Churchill an ardent imperialist expressed his contempt for ethical values when he explained “We do not think that logic and clear-cut principles are necessarily the sole key to what ought to be done in swiftly changing and indefinable situations… We assign a larger importance to opportunism and improvisation seeking to live and conquer..”

These were prophetic words for what was conceived by Churchill with scrupulous disregard for ethical values about the partitioning of India had to be implemented by the Labour party under Clement Attlee. On 14th August 1947 the new Islamic Republic of Pakistan was born and on 15th August 1947 saw the birth of India ending 350 years of British rule.

Poisoned Chalice

The New State of Pakistan kept her word and formed a bulwark against Communism. She joined the Baghdad Pact together with Iran, Turkey and Britain and later the CENTO of which US was the prime mover. These strategic moves were meant to counter the Soviet Union in the Middle East.

In 1954 Pakistan entered into a bilateral pact with Britain’s ally US and allowed the CIA to have an air base in Peshawar. The U2 spy planes took off from Peshawar and kept a close watch on Soviet Russia. In the 80’s Pakistan took the fateful step of helping US to eject Russian troops. This involved a tie up of its intelligence agency ISI with CIA to train the Mujaideen to fight the Soviet troops in Afghanistan. The US, which replaced Britain as a dominant power to stem the Soviet influence also played the Islamic card with devastating effect. Funds were diverted to ISI to radicalise Islamic schools to fight godless Communism. A genie called Islamic Radicalism, which escaped the bottle, haunted US for years to come. Several acts of terrorism were conducted against US assets all over the world culminating in the 9/11 bombing of the World Trade Centre. The reason for this anger was that the Islamic Radicals perceived that US had used them and did not care for the oppression of their Muslim brethren in Palestine by the Israelis.

On the domestic front Pakistan fared badly with a corrupt Military oligarchy seizing power. She had civilian governments from time to time but did not last long. Some of the prominent politicians were either assassinated or judicially executed without fair trail. The military Generals attired in splendid military uniform took bribes from US- UK axis. The shaky economy is propped up by military aid from US and drug running. The plight of the decent people of Pakistan has deteriorated to the point that there is seething discontent in the streets. The government and the military are widely perceived to be unrepresentative of the people’s interests and acting as hired mercenaries to protect US geopolitical interests in the region. The State of Pakistan is unravelling with extremist violence spilling over in the streets of Pakistan.

India has emerged from the Partition slightly stronger but there should be no room for complacency. The relationship with Pakistan has been tense and uneasy. There have been military conflicts in Kashmir for which India has strongly accused Pakistan for creating most of them. The war over East Pakistan (now Bangladesh) was a bloody one. The conflict in Kargil was another fierce struggle, which soured the relationship between India and Pakistan. Most sensational and grisly was the recent terrorist attack in Mumbai for which Pakistan was blamed by the Indian government. The long shadows of the partition are seen in religious conflicts of Babri Majid and the Godara riots.

India has taken dangerous steps to cosy up to US and support her hegemonic interests in the world. On June 28, 2005 the Indian Defence Minister signed the ‘New Framework of Defence Relations’ with US. On July 18, 2005 the Indian Prime Minister issued a joint statement with the US President Bush on a wide range of issues including India’s nuclear programme. On September 24, 2005, India voted against Iran in the meeting of the Board of governors of IAEA. These measures are construed as a tilt towards US foreign policy.6

The US on its part has played up India’s Global status, which is a psychological ploy to change public opinion in the upper classes and considerable sections of the middle class who are in the dollar zone (through relatives in US, family members who work for US firms in India and US). There are carefully planted stories in the newspapers that US would make India the next global power. It is all a matter of fighting terrorism together and spread democracy in rogue states like Iran and North Korea.

Now the Great Game for US is not so much as to curb the expansionist ambitions of Russia, which collapsed with the Berlin wall. There is a new enemy called China which many political observers feel may be the next superpower. There are worrying signs that India may be used as a foil to Chinese ambitions. There are murmurs of discontent in the Sino-Indian relationship, which may brew into a full-scale war. India could become another pawn in the deadly game of chess played between US and China.

Would India drink from the same poisoned chalice as Pakistan did when she first served Anglo-US interests instead of her own? Would the same fate of Pakistan await India when she does so?

If the past were any indication, then inexorably, the events would hurl the ‘midnight children’ towards a future equally bleak and terrible.

1 Times of India News- BJP expels Jaswant Singh over Jinnah remarks- 19-09-2009.

2 Yahoo News- The BJP’s self-inflicted wound- 30-09-2009

3 Jinnah or Nehru: Who’s Responsible for India’s Partition? - M.A. Khan- islam watch.org

4 The Untold Story of India’s Partition- page 9-Narendra Singh Sarila.

5 The Untold Story of India’s Partition- Narendra Singh Sarila- page20.

6 India’s Place in the US Strategic Order-www.rupe-india.org

British Government in Bind Over Release of al Megrahi

DeeptiA — Mon, 31 Aug 2009 13:12:44 EDT

How many of you would have heard of the name of 'Abdelbeset Ali Mohmed al Megrahi'. This is the person who is behind a scandal that is shaking Britain, and is causing a huge amount of negative publicity to Gordon Brown. Al Megrahi was convicted for involvement in the bombing of Pan Am Flight 103 in 1988, that killed 270 people. The incident happened primarily over the Scottish town of Lockerbie, and hence Al Megrahi is also known as the Lockerbie bomber. In a complex deal when he was prosecuted, he was prosecuted in a city in the Netherlands under Scottish law and sentenced to life imprisonment in a Scottish prison in 2001, a good 13 years after the crime (and this after a lot of pressure on Libya, since he was a Libyan intelligence agent).

As a part of the prosecution, any role of Gaddafi's Government was glossed over, although Libya spent around $2.7 billion in compensation to the family of the victims (259 people on the plane, including 189 Americans; and 11 people on the ground).

And now suddenly, a huge amount of controversy. The Scottish Government, that is semi-independent, release Al Megrahi on compassionate grounds since he was suffering from prostrate cancer, and his condition was supposed to be terminal, with only months left to live. The decision was supposedly taken by the Scottish Justice Minister, Kenny MacAskill, since under Scottish judicial customs, a person with only months to live can be released on compassionate grounds. However, it would be naive to assume that such a decision could not be taken without due counsel by the British Government because of the raw emotions involved. The United States has protested vehemently over this decision, since it sees a person who had committed mass murder being released legally, and getting a hero's welcome when he arrived back in Libya (apparently against an understanding that the Libyans would make this a low key event). Link to article

The government was responding to reports that the British government wanted al Megrahi to be eligible for release in order to smooth the way for the British oil giant BP to win exploration rights in Libya. But Justice Minister Jack Straw acknowledged Sunday that a key element of the story was correct -- that Libya had demanded al Megrahi be included in a prisoner transfer agreement, and that, after initial resistance, the UK agreed to the demand.

The Sunday Times claimed that Libya had insisted that al Megrahi be freed before it would approve an enormous contract with BP. BP announced the deal in May 2007, promising an initial investment of $900 million to explore two Libyan areas -- one the size of Belgium and the other as large as Kuwait. But Libya did not approve the deal until after London dropped its objection to releasing al Megrahi, the Sunday Times alleged. Libya's parliament approved the BP exploration deal four days after the alleged Straw letter was dated.

This controversy about whether the British Government made the deal to win a commercial agreement can be damaging, and is something that a large number of people would be willing to believe (actually, I consider that this might actually be true, even though there is no actual confirmation). Political opponents to Prime Minister Gordon Brown must be smelling blood, seeing a way to tar him with the feather of 'terrorists-for-trade', and given the recent political problems of Gordon Brown, it could place him in an uncomfortable position if further media research reveals more such secrets in this area.