Desicritics Category: Politics: War

India and Pakistan - Future Scenarios

Sandeep Bansal — Tue, 2 Mar 2010 07:46:17 EST

Sixty three years ago, the two countries started their journey, torn by bitter memories of partition. The relations between the two nations have been troubled right from the start. Two similar examples from around the world the come to mind - West Germany and East Germany, and the two Koreas.

There are some basic similarities. These countries too had to go through a bitter partition. They followed different political systems and were bitter rivals of each other. One essential difference is that they essentially were one country - i.e. both East and West Germany claimed that they represented the entire Germany. Same is true in case of North and South Korea. In case of India and Pakistan, their rivalry is essentially over Kashmir. Though India was earlier a united country, it is extremely unlikely that partition can be reversed.

The German Story

After the Second World War, both East and West Germany were essentially poor and devastated. But West Germany under the allied influence, introduced free market reforms. It also benefited by large scale aid by the US. By the 1960's and 70's, there was large and visible difference in conditions on the two sides of the border. People in East Germany wanted to move to the West in search of a better life. The Berlin Wall was constructed to stop this. The difference in living standards continued to increase. Perhaps it was the aid from Soviet Union that was keeping things just about together in East Germany. In late 80's, Soviet Union was badly battered in Afghanistan. As a result, it could not continue its aid to the East. The Berlin Wall collapsed.

The Korean conundrum

The story between North and South Korea is somewhat similar. Both countries have remained bitter rivals since the end of the Korean War in 1953. Both countries have contrasting political and economic systems. While North Korea is a totalitarian dictatorship with centralized economy, South Korea is a democratic country with free markets. North Korea implemented land reforms, introduced free health care and education. At one point of time, its HDI indicators were better. However, gradually South Korea's export led economy has moved way ahead. Today its HDI indicators are much better. Its per capita income is $20,000 as compared to a minuscule $1100 in North Korea.

Sung Yoon Lee in his article in ForegnPolicy says,

In contrast, beyond North Korea's southern border lies a free and affluent Korea, one that claims sovereignty over the entire peninsula and to which millions of Northerners would move if given the choice. By its mere existence, Seoul poses an omnipresent existential threat to Pyongyang.

In his article, Lee predicts that North Korea like East Germany cannot survive forever. It will collapse at some point of time. It must be noted that it currently receives aid from China (just like East Germany did from Soviet Union) and South Korea without which vast proportion of its population would die of hunger.

Comparing India and Pakistan

Can such an eventuality occur in the Indian Subcontinent? On one side we have India, a democracy (with its own flaws), an rapidly growing economy and rising living standards.But it is also the home the largest number of poor, there is growing rich-poor divide and a growing Naxal violence. On the other side of the spectrum is Pakistan, at best is a military controlled democracy, a country that is battling with an identity crisis, is a nuclear weapon state, is said to be source of terrorism worldwide.

Small signs of such a thing are present. Pakistanis today are worldwide seen with suspicion. They are lined up and frisked separately at airport. Many Pakistanis abroad claim themselves to be of Indian origin in order to escape this. Some Pakistanis artists like Musicians also want to get hold to an Indian Passport. Of course, these people are a small minority.

But is such a thing really possible. My answer to that will be for the moment, NO. The difference in prosperity in the two countries isn't that huge. India's rank according to HDI index is 134 while that of Pakistan is 141. As per Wiki, India's per capita income $1022 while that of Pakistan is $1017. Our Gini ratio is actually higher at 36.8 as compared to just 30 for Pakistan. Historian William Dalrymple too writes that there is little difference.

On the ground, of course, the reality is different and first-time visitors to Pakistan are almost always surprised by the country's visible prosperity. There is far less poverty on show in Pakistan than in India, fewer beggars, and much less desperation. In many ways the infrastructure of Pakistan is much more advanced: there are better roads and airports, and more reliable electricity. Middle-class Pakistani houses are often bigger and better appointed than their equivalents in India.

However, he goes on to point out some major differences - landholdings. democracy and education. Soon after independence, land reforms were introduced in India. This was promised the Congress. In fact, this is often referred as one of the reasons of creating Pakistan, (protecting the interests of Zamindars). In Pakistan, this feudal system still exists and as a result there is inequality and social tension. Pakistan has seldom enjoyed Democracy. However, often freedom is difficult to directly quantify when it comes to measuring prosperity. Regarding education in Pakistan, he writes

No problem in Pakistan casts such a long shadow over its future as the abject failure of the government to educate more than a fraction of its own people: at the moment, a mere 1.8% of Pakistan's GDP is spent on government schools. The statistics are dire: 15% of these government schools are without a proper building; 52% without a boundary wall; 71% without electricity.

This education gap is the most striking way in which Pakistan is lagging behind India: in India, 65% of the population is literate and the number rises every year: only last year, the Indian education system received a substantial boost of state funds.

But in Pakistan, the literacy figure is under half (it is currently 49%) and falling: instead of investing in education, Musharraf's military government is spending money on a cripplingly expensive fleet of American F-16s for its air force. As a result, out of 162 million Pakistanis, 83 million adults of 15 years and above are illiterate. Among women the problem is worse still: 65% of all female adults are illiterate. As the population rockets, the problem gets worse.

Currently, India's literacy rate is 65% and should increase to 80-85% by 2030. One obvious concern here is what is the quality of this education and are these people employable. And I am sure even in India, there are schools that don't have proper building or electricity(particularly in the Naxal belt).

Nevertheless, India is way ahead of Pakistan in terms of education. But another concern is that a large proportion of the population receives education through the outdated Madrassa system.The so-called secular forces are merely promising reservations for them, even though in 60 years, reservations haven't made enough impact on SC's and ST's. Reservations were supposed to be an instrument that removes the caste identity. Instead it has only strengthened it. A divide based on religion is even more dangerous. Ironically, it has been the so-called communal party that has talked about reforming the madrassas, something that has been looked with suspicion by the community.

Future Scenario:2030

Where will India and Pakistan be in 2030 economically, this is an important question. Will there be any difference in the level of Indian prosperity with respect to Pakistan change?

Over the last 20 years our economy has grown consistently. In the last five years, we have grown by nearly 8%. There are rumors that we are capable of achieving 9-10% growth rates. Let us assume that we will grow at an average of 7% over the next 10 years and at 5.5% in the subsequent 10 years. The growth rates will come down because of base-effect. Despite these highly conservative estimates, India's GDP would be at least 4.2 trillion dollars. Our rate of population growth has been coming down consistently and present it is roughly 1.55% (Source). Assuming an average growth rate of 1.45% over the next 10 years and an average of 1.35 over the subsequent 10 years, our per capita GDP should be roughly 2700$ in 2030.

What would the number be for Pakistan? Under Musharraf, from 2002 to 2007 Pakistan did post impressive growth of 6-7%. But such stability in the country is rare. In 2009, the growth rate was just 2%. Assuming an average growth rate of 4% over the next 10 years and 6% over the subsequent 10 years(highly optimistic considering the frequent bomb blasts and terror attacks), in 2030 Pakistan's GDP would just be $436 billion. Assuming its population grows at 2% and 1.8% as against present figure of 2.2%, its per capita income would in 2030 would only be around $1800.

These are highly conservative estimates and the real picture might actually to be much much better than this.For example, considering current education levels in Pakistan it is highly unlikely that they can sustain such growth rates of 6% over such long periods. Despite this conservatism, India's GDP would be 10 times that of Pakistan while per capita GDP would be 1.5 times. More likely figures are that our GDP will be 14-15 times that of Pakistan and per capita GDP will be around 2.5 times that of Pakistan.

Impact of this growth

India's GDP would be at least 10 times that of Pakistan. In another five years time, India's economy would overtake China as the fastest growing economy. This should translate into enormous leverage for us. Around 10-15 years ago, China's human rights record was severely criticized everywhere. But one hardly hears that today. China's influence was very much visible at Copenhagen.

India is bound to enjoy similar influence by 2030 or even before that. By 2030, India would have almost certainly hosted the Olympics. We are not even sure whether Pakistan could host even the Asian Games by then

I do not foresee a Germany like situation which led to the reunification of Germany. But I do expect that if there is appreciable difference in prosperity and if this grow is inclusive, domestic support for terror is should come down appreciably.

Another important thing is that if there is an appreciable and visible difference in prosperity, it shall become increasingly difficult for the Pakistani Military to continue with its astronomically high defense expenditure. Presently India spends around 2.5% of the GDP on defense while Pakistan spends around 3.5-4%. Hence, in 2030 our defense budget should be close to 100 billion dollars ( 2.5% of 4.2 trillions). This would be 25% of the Pakistan GDP in 2030. Naturally Pakistan would try and match India's defense expenditure by increasing its defense to atleast 8-10% of the GDP.

There would be increasing public pressure against this and unrest among the people would rise. This would result to much more Army control over the civilian Govt and military highhandedness. Thus most probably by 2030 Pakistan would under direct Military control.Furthermore, the increasing military asymmetry would force Pakistan to lower its nuclear doctrine. Thus the sub-continent would actually become a much dangerous place in 2030.

Limitations of this analysis

The methodology of this analysis is just too simple to cover everything. First, the GDP figures are based on nominal values rather that PPP. Using purchasing parity method, the comparative figures would actually improve significantly for India.

Secondly, India has been lucky to have stable Govts. at the centre since 1999 and increasingly governance is becoming the sole criteria that is used by the people while voting. What if there is a hung Parliament. India has previously witnessed this during the 1989-91 and 1996-98. During this period, the growth was minimal and reforms were stagnant.

Thirdly, merely achieving these growth rates are not sufficient. Whether this will translate in improve in prosperity. Whether this growth will be inclusive. Whether all communities including the Muslims who are currently lagging behind in all social indicator be a part of this growth. Will the Maoists be suppressed. Will the development reach the Naxal belt.

Finally, will there be any war either with Pakistan or with China. War could change the above numbers. Of course any resolution with either of the two will also improve the numbers vastly.

These are extremely difficult questions and only time tell. However, if India plays its cards well, great glory is awaiting us. For Pakistan, it is important to understand that India's rise is inevitable. It will be their choice whether they would like to be a part of this growth or not. It is therefore important for Pakistan to understand that going forward, they will not be able to compete whether militarily or economically.

India's Influence on The World History and Economy.

Sumanth — Mon, 1 Mar 2010 07:53:34 EST

The world often views India as a country with huge poverty and most people outside India probably blame India or Indians for the same. When L.N. Mittal took over Arcelor in France, there was a major controversy in Europe as the Indian went on a buying spree to become the biggest steel maker in the world. For many people in France, Germany and Europe, this came as a shock.

So, what is India then? And who are the Indian People? And what does it mean to have an Indian identity? Is it the software engineers working as code coolies? Is it Gandhi preaching non-violence? Is it just the rapid economic growth and the new Indian markets?

The present world mostly does not know what India is. To a great extent, just like many modern Indians, I too do not know what India is. Just recently, I asked the question: what was the GDP of India in 1500 A.D. and searched the Internet for the information? I would like you to ponder this question as you slowly go through the rest of the article on Indian National identity.

Buddha preached in India almost at the same time when Socrates had inquiry sessions with his disciples during 430 B.C. As Socrates changed the western world though his thoughts, Buddha’s “science of mind” influenced the east for ages to come.

In 332 BC, Alexander captures Gaza and Egypt. Next year, he captured prosperous Babylon. In 326 BC, he defeated a local Indian king Porus in Battle of Hydaspes, even as a much bigger Indian Army waited for him somewhere near Delhi. (Hydaspes, Alexander)

Greek Sources noted:

"As for the Macedonians, however, their struggle with Porus blunted their courage and stayed their further advance into India. For having had all they could do to repulse an enemy who mustered only twenty thousand infantry and two thousand horse, they violently opposed Alexander when he insisted on crossing the river Ganges also, the width of which, as they learned, was thirty-two furlongs, its depth a hundred fathoms, while its banks on the further side were covered with multitudes of men-at arms and horsemen and elephants. For they were told that the kings of the Ganderites and Praesii were awaiting them with eighty thousand horsemen, two hundred thousand footmen, eight thousand chariots, and six thousand fighting elephants. And there was no boasting in these reports. For Sandrocottus, who reigned there not long afterwards, made a present to Seleucus of five hundred elephants, and with an army of six hundred thousand men overran and subdued all India."

Just 10 years after Alexander’s conquests in the world, a massive Indian empire () rose into prominence. Chanakya was a young professor at University of Taxila(Taxila) during Alexander’s Invasion. Studying the Greeks and Persians, he realised the political dynamics of the world at that time and he went on to alert the biggest Indian Kingdom of Magadh. Later he crafted a Machiavellian strategy and created an army led by a young man to capture Magadh just 2 years after Alexander’s death at Babylon.

This young Indian man was later known in world history as the king “Sandrocottus”(Chandra-Gupta Maurya). Most Indians know that Chanakya employed massive networks of spies, information warfare and treacherous strategies during capture of Magadh.

After Alexander’s death in 323 BC, Seleucus I Nicator got the largest area including Babylon, Indian territories near Indus River, much of Middle East, Syria and parts of modern turkey. Ptolemy I Soter declared himself as Pharaoh of Egypt. Cassander ruled Macedonia (modern day Greece). Antigonus I Monophthalmus had Turkey. (Diadochi, Seleucid_Empire )

Seleucus invaded India in 305 BC, confronting Chandragupta Maurya (Sandrocottos), founder of the Maurya empire near Indus River. It is said that Chandragupta fielded an army of 600,000 men and 9,000 war elephants. Seleucus lost and ceded large territories east of Indus to Sandrocottus.

It is generally thought that Sandrocottus married Seleucus's daughter, or a Greek Macedonian princess, to formalize an alliance. In a return gesture, Sandrocottus sent 500 war-elephants, a military asset which would play a decisive role at the Battle of Ipsus (in central Turkey) in 302 BC. In addition to this treaty, Seleucus dispatched an ambassador, Megasthenes, to Sandrocottus, and later Deimakos to his son emperor Bindusara, at the Mauryan court at Pataliputra.

However, it’s Ashoka (Greek name: Piodasses), the Grandson of Sandracottus, who influenced the rest of the world and world history. Ashoka was a ruthless military strategist and he consolidated and expanded the Mauryan empire to whole India. He had his last war in 261 against the democratic state of Kalinga, whose traders blocked his Kingdom’s access to many eastern sea ports. This was a bitter war with deaths of more than 100,000 people. (Kalinga War)

The Kalinga War was fought near this river (in Picture):

This war and the bloodshed deeply impacted him and he converted to Buddhism. He worked to propagate the principles and values to people in India and foreign countries. In the history of Buddhism, Ashoka is considered just after Gautama Buddha. Ptolemy II Philadelphus, the ruler of Ptolemaic Egypt sent an ambassador named Dionysius to the court of Ashoka.

The efforts of Emperor Ashoka to spread the Buddhist faith are described in the Edicts of Ashoka( 272- 231 BCE). The Edicts of Ashoka are a collection of 33 inscriptions on rock pillars or cave walls made by the Emperor Ashoka of the Mauryan dynasty during his reign from 272 to 231 BCE in different parts of the empire. (link,link)

Two edicts in Afghanistan have been found with Greek inscriptions, one of these being a bilingual edict in Greek language and Aramaic. This edict, Edict 13, found in Kandahar, advocates the adoption of "Piety" (using the Greek term Eusebeia for Dharma) to the Greek community.

In this rock edict, it is mentioned that Ashoka sent emissaries beyond his borders, as far as the Greek kings of the Mediterranean and it clearly mentions the names of the rulers of those times.

(amtiyoko nama yona-raja param ca tena atiyokena cature 4 rajani turamaye nama amtikini nama maka nama alikasudaro nama)

“King Priyadarshi considers moral conquest the most important conquest. He has achieved this moral conquest, repeatedly both here and among people living beyond the borders of his kingdom, even as far away as six hundred yojanas (3000 miles), where the Yona king Antiyoka rules (Antiochus II Theos), and even beyond Antiyoka in the realms of the four kings named Turamaya (Ptolemaios), Antikini (Antigonos ), Magas and Alikasudara (Alexander II of Epirus) and to the south among Cholas and the Pandyas....wherever conquest is achieved by Dharma, it produced satisfaction, Satisfaction is firmly established by conquest by Dharma.” (Antiochus II Theos,Ptolemy II Philadelphus,Antigonus II Gonatas,Magas of Cyrene,Alexander II Epirus)

The words used to describe Greeks (Ionia) are Yavanah, Yona in Sanskrit, Pali and some other ancient languages.

During 30 BC, the last Ptolemy Cleopatra of Egypt arranged the escape for her eldest son Caesarion to India from red sea port Berenice. The plan failed.

Ashoka’s son and daughter went to Sri Lanka to spread the Buddhist Principles. It is through the Central Asian sources that the Chinese got introduced to Buddhism and centuries later the Chinese monks travelled to India to get the principles of Buddhism and that finally take us to Shaolin Temple, the Martial arts, Vipassana, Zen Koans or Zazen Meditation. Buddhism also spread into South East Asia in later centuries (Suvarnabhumi). Ashoka ruled a highly prosperous country with a huge GDP compared to most other countries at that time. The volume of intellectual thought processes in any civilisation is a direct function of its prosperity.

The Indian traders were trading with Egypt, Persia and also with South East Asian countries and the Chinese. Indians and Chinese remained influential in the world economy for a very long time.

So, what was the GDP of India 2000 years ago?

From 1st Century AD till 1250 AD, India had the world’s largest GDP and it was somewhere between 25 to 30 percent of world’s GDP closely followed by China.
During 15th century (during Emperor Akbar, the Great), India’s GDP was 26% of world’s GDP and it was second largest in the world after China’s GDP. The Europe had a GDP of 21% of the world.

An estimate of India's pre-colonial economy puts the annual revenue of Emperor Akbar's treasury in 1600 A.D. at £17.5 million, in contrast to the entire treasury of Great Britain in 1800, which totalled £16 million. The gross domestic product of Mughal India in 1600 was estimated at about 22.6% the world economy, in comparison to Ming China's 29.2% share.

Annual revenue reported by the Emperor Aurangzeb's exchequer exceeded £100 million in 1700 (twice that of Europe then). Thus, India emerged as the world's largest economy, followed by Manchu China and Western Europe.

The GDPs of major countries of the world over the last 500 years (data by Angus Maddison):

Sri Lankan General Sarath Fonseka Arrested

Kalugu — Tue, 9 Feb 2010 00:39:35 EST

In a shocking new development the Sri Lankan military arrested its ex chief and retired general Sarath Fonseka who was celebrated as a national hero not long ago. The arrested retired general who lost the recent election to Mahinda Rajapaksa by 17 percentage points, was taken into custody by dozens of military police officers at his office, where he was meeting with several Parliament members to discuss coming legislative elections.

At the time of his arrest, Gen. Fonseka was having a meeting with JVP leader Somawansa Amarasinghe, SLMC leader Rauff Hakeem and Democratic People's Front leader Mano Ganeshan on the possible strategies to contest the upcoming general election and on filing a petition against the alleged election malpractices on polling day.

"They arrested him and carried him out like a dog," Mr. Ganesan said in a telephone interview to the New York Times.

Mr. Hakeem said Gen. Fonseka was taken out in a despicable and disgraceful manner "No civilized government would resort to this kind of action," he said adding that they were flabbergasted to see a military hero being treated in this manner.

Sarath Fonseka lead the ruthless military campaign against the Tamil rebels of Sri Lanka which culminated in the tragic humanitarian crisis with over 80,000 civilians killed during the last phases of the war. During this period numerous war crimes are known to have been committed by members of Fonseka's army.

Several videos have surfaced on the internet and were broadcast by leading media channels in UK, Canada, USA and India that depict the serious crimes committed by Fonseka's army members.

Earlier on Feb 02, Brigadier Duminda Keppetiwalana, aide to the former Sri Lankan army chief General Fonseka, was arrested over the murder last year of journalist Lasantha Wickrematunga.

Brigadier Keppetiwalana, who served as the former army chief's military assistant, was among 13 senior officers associated with General Fonseka who were ousted following President Rajapaksa's election victory.

With Sri Lanka's recent close alignment with countries such as China, Russia and Iran, the countries democratic norms and standards are taking a severe blow. With the Army General who commanded the ruthless army and the President who ordered the war at loggerheads, more and more human rights violation by several parties involved are likely to come to the light of international attention in the coming days.

While Sarath - the darling of most Sinhalese nationalists during May 2009, is now close to biting the bullet, Rajapakse has gained a seven year rule of the nation and remains the sole national hero for several Sinhalese nationalists today.

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 Auschwitz Album

Dr Bhaskar Dasgupta — Sun, 17 Jan 2010 08:39:32 EST

This old photo album really got me going. The power of a photograph reaches out despite decades having had passed since it was taken at Auschwitz. This album shows the people arriving at the concentration camp, getting processed into those who would be workers and those who would be gassed immediately. The black and white photographs throw a seriously blunt light on this truly horrible time.

Here’s one example of the arrivals. The faces are numb. Look at the faces of the children, innocent and uncomprehending.

Once they arrived, they were then selected according to what the SS officers felt as to their working capability, old men, women and children were more than likely to be sent straight into the gas chambers. The piles of clothing in the right back were reprocessed. In the top far left is a line which has already been processed and are heading towards the gas chambers (see air picture below).

These are 2 boys. Notice the Star of David on the greatcoat of the boy on the right, the Jews were identified that way.

Old men being led to the gas chambers, again notice the Star of David.

The same fate awaited old women and children.

Women and men who were fit for forced labour were deloused, had their heads shaven and were then moved to the labour part of the camp.

A photograph of a line of prisoners being lead to the gas chambers. These reconnaissance photographs were taken by the allied forces. In many cases, they did not even know what this was, or rather what the camps really were used for (or at least that's what was being claimed then).

and how the Germans then tried to hide the evidence.

it is all bloody painful…
The above related to the victims, but what about the Germans? Here’s another photo album from the other side.

There are more photographs of how the SS officers enjoyed their lives, as if they were on holidays, eating blue berries with cream and singing along with accordions. I get into frequent arguments with TBS about why the Holocaust is considered so extra special. Well, it's the efficiency with which this large scale killing happened, the scale and scope, the rabid ideology, and and and, which all lead us to hope that it will not happen again. And despite this, we have seen Bangladesh, Rwanda, Cambodia, etc. Some said, we need to educate people more. In one of the next posts, I will be exploring why its the educated lot who actually drive or commit these monstrous crimes against humanity.

Looking Back: Fokker Aircraft Hijack, 1971

Sandeep Bansal — Mon, 28 Dec 2009 06:11:22 EST

The year 2009 is coming to an end, and touchwood, we haven't had any major terrorist strike.Indian Home Minister recently admitted that luck played an important part in this - the Indian intelligence agencies need to be lucky every time, the terrorists need to be lucky just once.

So are Indian intelligence agencies who are often criticized and termed ineffective, really that bad? In this article, I am going to discuss a very old incident, Hijack of Fokker Aircraft, which happened just before the 1971 India-Pakistan war. Most Indians would be unaware of this incident.

Let me add a caveat before I continue with my article. This article contains my understanding of the incident and is based on my various reading I have done on this topic. This may or may not be the actual description of the events. India has never officially acknowledged its involvement for obvious reasons. It is unlikely to do the same ever, in pretty much the same way as Pakistan is unlikely to accept its support for terrorism.

Creation of Bangladesh was perhaps biggest ever success of RAW. The Fokker incident occurred before the start of the war but it proved to be an important event.

Background

India and Pakistan had been quarreling over Kashmir ever since independence. They had fought two wars in 1948 and 1965. By 1970, cracks began to appear between the West and East Pakistan - its two wings.

East and West Pakistan were separated by more than 1000 miles. Soon after independence, Urdu was proclaimed to be the national language of the wings even though Bengali was spoken by a majority of the Pakistanis. The Bureaucracy and Army was dominated by Punjabi's. There was considerable resentment among the East Pakistanis over dominance of the West.

President Yahya Khan held fair and free elections in December, 1970 in which Awami League of Shaikh Mujibur Rahman won a majority largely due to his Six-Point manifesto. National Assembly was to hold its first session in Dacca on 2nd March, 1971. It was, however, sabotaged by vested interests of West Pakistani establishment and some leading politicians, who were not willing to accept a Bengali-led government. (Source)

By March, Pakistani army resorted to use of force and decided to crush the political movement. Mujibur Rahman was arrested and sent to prison in West Pakistan. The use of force was excessive and large number of Bengalis were killed. A huge number of Bengali women (mostly Hindu) were raped by the Pakistani army. Survivors have compared it to the Nazi extermination of Jews. This led to a large number of Bengalis seeking refuge in India. India decided to extend all help to the refugees.

Strategies

India and Pakistan had two different strategies. Pakistan was aware that India could come to help the East Pakistanis. Therefore its plan was to devote more men and material for West Pakistan.

The Pakistanis would concentrate their forces in the West and thereby aim at capturing as much as Indian territory as possible. The Indians, on the other hand, would be fighting a war on two fronts (while at the same time keeping a fearful eye on the Chinese borders). Given this scenario, the Pakistanis felt that India at best would be able to capture some territory in East Pakistan and lose quite a bit in the West. In the end, the Pakistanis knew that the Western powers would intervene to stop the war and what would matter is who had the most of the other's territory. (Source)

They were hoping for a stalemate just as had happened during the 1965 War. Indian plan was essentially to liberate East Pakistan as quickly as possible. On its Western sector, it had essentially planned to defend with much smaller units and had much fewer offensive plans.

The Fokker incident

On January 30,1971, brothers Hashim and Ashraf Quereshi of the Jammu & Kashmir Liberation Front, armed with a pistol and a hand grenade, hijacked Ganga, a Fokker Friendship aircraft of the Indian Airlines (IA), after it had taken off from Srinagar for Jammu and forced the pilot to take it to Lahore.

After the aircraft had landed, Zuklfiquar Ali Bhutto, then Foreign Minister under Yahya Khan, rushed to Lahore, fraternized with the hijackers and helped them get maximum international publicity for their cause. On February 1, he persuaded them to release the crew and passengers who were sent by road to Amritsar. (Source)

Was the hijack staged

Pakistan has consistently alleged that this hijack was staged by Indian intelligence agencies. Soon after the hijack, India banned all Pakistani flights over its airspace. This meant that the distance between West and East Pakistan became three times the orginal distance and thus made it more difficult for Pakistan to transfer resources from West to East. It may have played its part in the overall outcome of the war.

The aircraft was hijacked by two Kashmiris, Butt and Hashim Quereshi. One of them was a Border Security Force man. What made the affair curious was the fact that Ganga was one of the oldest aircraft in the Indian Airline fleet and was already withdrawn from service but was re-inducted days before the 'hijack'. Even more tellingly, a deputy inspector general of the BSF based in Jammu, bristling at the involvement of one of his men in hijack, had gone public to say that he had objected to the induction of Butt into the BSF but was overruled by a 'higher intelligence agency'. (Source)

Conclusion

From the prima facie, it does appears that the hijack was staged by Indian intelligence agencies. In hindsight it appears to be clever plan that worked perfectly. Though there are some unanswered questions. Like why was Quereshi arrested by Indians when he returned back to India.

This surely is gratifying for an ordinary Indian that its intelligence agencies are capable enough to do something like that. Indian agencies have consistently maintained a low profile as compared to other agencies like CIA or Mossad. There are rarely any publicity or movies made on RAW's operations.

The reasons are best known to the people in-charge. I only hope that they are still carrying on their good work.

The Value of Surrender

Golden Boy — Sun, 15 Nov 2009 02:53:24 EST

My relationship with Yoga in the past one month has been filled with introduction to and understanding of a new philosophy; some great insights; and new experimentation with totally new concepts which has inspired, affected and changed my day-to-day living.

I have come to appreciate the fact that there was something totally wrong with my own life-style, my thinking and attitude, my philosophy of the past that had brought me to the brink of disaster. Failed relationships - personal, at workplace, and romantic; total reliance on psychiatric drugs; my hardcore adherence to certain beliefs and Cause, all this had accelerated into a final loss of will and desire to live.

This was enough indication that my Mind to whom I had listened to all this while was diseased beyond repair. I could no longer rely on this Mind, it just had no more solutions for me, no new horizons! It had failed me completely.

When this happens in one's life, when one realizes that the Mind has failed him/her totally and this cannot go on for any further, Osho advises that Surrender is the only option.

One surrenders to a greater Entity, whether a Higher Reality or another noble person - a Guru, and entitles him/her to take over his/her life totally. Then the Guru instructs how the person would live his life. And the disciple, in a sense of complete surrender listens and acts according to the instructions of his/her Guru.

Surrender is a noble act, and it takes a lot of courage and conviction. The Mind, which is the seat of one's ego, will always try to intervene and say "What are you doing? Are you out of your Mind?"

And it is actually true. You are finally out of the clutches of your monkey mind. You have suffered enough, and the time has come when you rely on a Greater Intelligence, a greater guidance to allow you to find new insights, a completely new way to live.

*****

A true Guru never makes his disciple dependent on him. In fact he wants his disciple to be independent and free. Attachment to the personality of the Guru is just another trick of the mind, to create a new relationship and start to play its own games, to bring up expectations and then be disappointed when these are not met. Attachment has to be given up. Expectations have to be given up. Only dedication to one's path helps.

Because attachment would mean knowing that the Guru will always be there to catch you if you fall, and the ego likes dependence. A true Guru will let you fall and learn through your own mistakes. He will ask you to jump when your mind will say, "this is completely crazy." And as you have surrendered your Mind to him, you will have to jump. It is a free fall. You have trusted your Guru with your life. And in that free fall you kill and transcend your ego.

Osho says that when one surrenders trust is very important. Total trust. Faith is acquired by birth: being Hindu, Muslim, Christian. So every Hindu would blindly want to defend his own religion and badmouth other religion. A person who is born to Muslim parents will not like anyone else saying anything which goes against his (blind) faith.

Trust on the other hand, is by choice. You choose in all your freedom to trust your Guru. Nobody asks you to trust him. You are not born into a family that follows a particular Guru. And when the time is not right, your mind might take you to several Gurus only to make you disappointed.

Only when it is time and when your true Guru comes on the horizon; only then you have no choice but to trust him. That is perhaps what Krishnamurti means by choice less awareness. But there is a paradox. You have the option not to surrender to the Guru and to move on with your miserable existence. It is your decision.

*****

I have also understood the fact that it is a myth that every person will have only one Guru in his lifetime. Maybe one would have a different Guru at different points of time. And each will be suitable for you at that stage of spiritual development in your life. And each Guru might be completely different from the other.

Osho says that a Master of Tantra will say, "Sex is a tool to liberation". While a Master of Yoga will say, "Sex is a hindrance to liberation". Both are true. Every disciple has a different temperament (swabhava). And what is good for one, is poison for another. So there are bound to be differences in the method towards liberation too.

This is the thing about Hinduism that "Followers of the Books" like Muslims, Jews, Christians and Sikhs don't understand. They ask how can one Hindu say that Vegetarian diet is good while the other devout Hindu enjoys non-vegetarian food? The 'people of the book' who are used to following their own books which they believe to be the Gospel Truth cannot understand this.

They wonder how a stone, which may not even have any shape and is picked up from the corner of the road, be placed under a tree and a temple come up around it? They wonder how Hindus can then bow down to that stone. In their ignorance they think that Hindus are actually worshipping that stone.

Osho says that the "people of the book" fail to understand that the Hindu is not actually worshipping the stone. For a Hindu the stone is less important than the act of Surrender. It is the act of Surrender that is more important, to let go of one's ego. To allow a Greater Reality to take over, to stop playing games around, to allow oneself to say, "Thy will be done, not mine"- it is the attitude of Surrender that is important for a Hindu.

So you may be an atheist, not believe in God, but you may have a Master. Hinduism has space for atheists too. He can surrender his ego to his Guru.

The Ego is the cause of much of our differences of opinion. The Mind is the root of all the wars. As they say that "Wars are not fought on battlefields, but in the Minds of people". What is Terrorism in the name of Islam? It is a war for a certain ideology that a significant few think is higher than any other ideology. What was the War in Iraq, the war between India and Pakistan etc. all about? They were rooted in total conditioning of a people's mind on both sides of the border that thought that they were fighting for the truth.

Mind creates these problems. And surrender of the Mind, the Ego, is the only option available to us, to go beyond our individual differences whether it be as a race, a community, or as next-door neighbours. We need to Surrender our ego to the Higher Reality without questioning to which authority (whether Allah, a Guru, a God, or Bhagwan) one's neighbour is surrendering his ego to.
The terrorists need not surrender, we need not surrender to them, the polluting nations need not surrender, because they all have valid reasons! The Mind will always have valid reasons!

It is only when the Mind chooses to surrender that peace will return on Earth.

Afghanistan: What Next?

Vinod Joseph — Sat, 17 Oct 2009 01:15:51 EDT

The Americans bombed Taliban-controlled Afghanistan in retaliation for having sheltered those responsible for the 9/11 bombing of the World Trade Centre. Since Afghanistan was already in the stone-age, having endured the Soviet occupation and a long stretch of in-fighting among various groups of Mujahideen after the Soviet departure, there wasn’t much to bomb, but that didn’t stop the Americans from dropping ordinance. Having paid the Al Qaeda and their hosts, the Taliban, back with the same coin, the Americans landed their aeroplanes on Afghan soil and set up bases with avowed intention of planting democracy in that part of the world. And that was the beginning of the current set of troubles.

When Obama campaigned for Presidency he sort of implied that Afghanistan was a just fight, though Iraq wasn’t. The upshot of that assertion has been an increase in the number of US boots on the ground in Afghanistan and a concerted effort to extricate from Iraq. Obama has also tried to get US coalition partners to commit more troops, but with the exception of the UK, no other country has been willing to do so.

In principle I agree that Obama is right in saying Afghanistan is a just cause – planting democracy in Afghanistan that is, and that Iraq is a good case for letting the locals resolve matters as best as they can. However, the ground reality is that Afghans have shown no great appetite for democracy. In a terrain bereft of democratic shoots or even roots, where most Pashtuns are either sympathetic to the Taliban or are the Taliban, the best foot the Americans have been able to put forward has been in the form of Hamid Karzai, a man who isn’t exactly a paragon of virtue.

As US and other coalition casualties mount in Afghanistan, Obama will be under increasing pressure to pack up and leave. My opinion of Obama has always been that he is a man of principles who also likes to avoid causing offence. A man who likes to please as many people as possible. If things don’t change in Afghanistan (and the Taliban show no indication of wanting to change), Obama might want to consider various options. And what could those options be?

1. It’s well known that Iran supplies funding and technology for Iraqi insurgents, especially Shiite insurgents. What is less well-known is that Iran also supplies weaponry to the Taliban, though they are predominantly Sunni and there is no love lost for Shiite Iran. The US could strike a deal with Iran whereby Iran is allowed to fulfil some of its nuclear dreams (without actually producing or acquiring nuclear weapons) and in return, Iran totally stops the flow of money and technology to Afghanistan. Iran might be allowed to conduct a nuclear test or two and Ahmadinejad will be allowed to strut and strike a pose in front of his people. Such a deal with make Israel very unhappy and there will always be the fear that if Iran is given a nuclear inch, it’ll take a nuclear mile. If this strategy is to work, Israel must not be allowed to attack any of Iran’s nuclear sites. Without Iranian support, the Taliban will suffer to some extent. However, as long as the border with Pakistan is not sealed, and it cannot be sealed, the Taliban will be able to breathe.

2. Supplement US troops with soldiers from Islamic states like Bangladesh and Indonesia which are officially American allies, but are not hated by Afghans. I’m not sure how keen the Indonesians and Bangladeshis will be to shed blood in Afghanistan. More importantly, by joining the Americans, they are likely to be tainted in the eyes of the Afghans. Of course, additional manpower will not do any harm to the coalition struggling to hold Afghan territory, but it will be very difficult and even expensive to persuade Indonesians and Bangladeshis to send troops to Afghanistan. If this can be achieved, the US might be able to get the necessary breathing space to carry out necessary reconstruction and build up the Afghan national army.

3. US troops can be replaced with soldiers from Islamic states like Bangladesh and Indonesia. If they replace the Americans rather than supplement them, the Indonesians and Bangladeshis will not look too bad in Afghan eyes. Also, people in Indonesia and Bangladesh might not resist the idea of sending troops to Afghanistan as much as they would if their soldiers are seen to be helping American troops. However, I am not sure how good a job the Indonesians and Bangladeshis will be able to do on their own. Without drones and hi-tech bomber planes answering calls for help within minutes, it’s unlikely that the Taliban can be kept at bay. In fact, if the Americans are replaced by Indonesians and Bangladeshis, there’s a very good change that the Taliban will be in control of Afghanistan very soon after the US departure. Of course, the US could give those weapons to the Indonesians and Bangladeshis and train them to use those weapons, but I doubt if the US would want to do that.

4. Persuade India to send troops to Afghanistan to help American troops. Indian soldiers will be hated as much as the Americans and may suffer as many casualties. In order to persuade India to put its soldiers in harms’ way, the US might ‘persuade’ Pakistan to accept the Line of Control in Kashmir as the international border and give up all claims on Indian administered Kashmir. US drones flying over Af-Pak might direct some of their fire over training camps for Kashmiri militants. Indian politicians might be able to sell such this solution to India’s population. However, this solution would be very unpopular in Pakistan. Any such settlement over Kashmir would be temporary and will last only as long as the Americans stay in the neighbourhood. China will not be happy with this, since a secure northern frontier will tilt the balance of power in favour of India.

However, in my opinion, if implemented, this plan has as much chance of success as supplementing US troops with Indonesians and Bangladeshis. By sheer numbers, Indian troops supported by US technology and troops will be able to keep the Taliban at bay. Let’s assume, this is maintained for a period of five years, until the next Afghan elections, by which time, a reasonably strong Afghan national army can emerge and reconstruction and redevelopment can be carried out. If the Afghans manage to elect a strong government in Kabul that is relatively progressive, stable and strong, Afghanistan might revert to the sort of peace it had when it was ruled by King Zahir Shah from 1933 to 1973. Though this option has a good chance of success, I just don’t see Obama even considering the possibility of seeking Indian troops for Afghanistan and siding with India on Kashmir.

5. The Americans and their allies could just pack up and leave, after declaring that their objective of brining democracy to Afghanistan has been achieved. After the last Soviet soldier left Afghanistan on February 15, 1989, the Soviet protégé Najibullah managed to hold on to power for a surprising four years. The only reason why he was finally finished off was because of the enormous amount of Pakistani support for the Mujahideen. If the Americans were to just leave, just like the Soviets did, it is anybody’s guess as to how long Hamid Karzai will be able to hang on to power. The Taliban are bound to expand the territory they control – but will they be able to obtain sway over the whole of Afghanistan? In my opinion, they will, over a period of time. This process will be quicker if they can convince the Pakistanis to help them. To get Pakistani help, the Taliban must be willing to renounce any plan to capture power in Pakistan.

The ISI is mostly probably cursing itself for having allowed the Taliban to shelter the Al Qaeda. If Mullah Omar hadn’t permitted Bin Laden and his fellow nutcases to use Afghanistan as a base, no one would have given two hoots about Afghanistan. Pakistan would still have its ‘strategic depth’ in the west and Kashmir would be boiling. If the Americans were to pack up and leave, the ISI would want to just turn the clock back. Afghanistan would be run by the fundamentalist Taliban, while Pakistan would be modern and free from fundamentalists. This would be a dream ending for Pakistan, especially the ISI. However, would the Pakistani Taliban who currently control large swathes of Pakistan’s North West Frontier Province be willing to give up their plans and either lead a quiet life or migrate to Afghanistan? Having tasted power, I doubt if Pakistani Taliban can ever be persuaded to give up their plans to capture power in Pakistan itself. They might pretend to do so for a temporary period till they capture the whole of Afghanistan, but sooner or later, civil war will return to Pakistan.

China will be very unhappy and uncomfortable if the Taliban are back in power in Afghanistan. As long as the ISI had control over the Taliban, very little external support was available to Uighurs in China’s restive xinjiang province even though many Uighurs have fought for the Taliban in Afghanistan. Recently the Al Qaeda openly called for a holy war against China. The Al Qaeda and the Taliban are two different entities. The Taliban are much more realistic. Will Pakistan be able to convince the Taliban to not support the Uighurs in China after the Americans vacate Afghanistan? They might be able to. It all depends on how quickly memories of the current rift fade and how quickly the clock is put back.

We currently live in a very interesting period in time. Let’s see how events in Afghanistan unfold.

Mdantsane, Poems of a Township

Amitabh Mitra — Thu, 24 Sep 2009 16:15:42 EDT

and the one legged man dreamt at
cecilia
that his prosthesis may perhaps be repaired
he probably wont get pressure sores anymore
and perhaps some socks...
come winter
he remembers a phantom leg
and the excruciating pain
more than that day
he was shot by
apla members
he still doesn't understands
why they didn't kill him
why they shot him, a black pastor
why they laughed at the end
what is liberation so precious now.

Poem and Drawing by Amitabh Mitra
APLA was the armed wing of Pan African Congress

Iranian President Ahmadinejad Denies The Holocaust Again

Hardik Ruparel — Sat, 19 Sep 2009 13:17:04 EDT

It seems like there's nothing that the world can do to convince Iranian President Mr. Ahmadinejad of the happenings of the holocaust. Recently in a political rally, he dismissed the Holocaust as a lie based on mythical claims. This provoked strong reaction from the USA and Germany, who are adamant about convincing him that the Holocaust did indeed take place.

If I were to take a dangerous digression, I would state that the history of the civilized world is itself a big farce. Well, why do I say that? Mainly because the annals of history are always written by the people who won the war. After you win the war, you can say whatever you like. Right? Multiply the strength of the enemy by a hundred times. Invent new characters and destroy existing evidence. There's no end to it. History is just a perspective. It's one side of the story, and a fascinating one indeed. It's always been one of my favorite subjects, and one can clearly see why.

Coming back, I really don't see the need to convince anyone whether the Holocaust was a reality or an urban legend (like the Royal Flush in Poker). I for one personally believe it actually happened. The evidence is overwhelming, and people really have to be dumb to declare it a myth. But, what I fail to understand is why believers get so pissed off when someone else says he/she doesn't believe in the Holocaust. It's his/her wish to believe in anything she wants to, and there's nothing that anybody can do about it. So, Mr. Ahmadinejad, I congratulate you on your successful attempt to discuss your personal views in the open, but you see, once people get pissed off enough, someone's going to get hurt, and it's not you, not Obama and not any political leader. It's going be someone like me, my friends and my family.

Whether the Holocaust happened or not, it's over. If you're someone who's affected directly by the Holocaust, we're all sorry for you, and there's nothing more we can do to help you. And no, you cannot force people to believe in the Holocaust just because you or someone you know suffered. There are a million other ways in which millions of people die, but none has been so famous. You cannot ask people to feel sorry for you. I'm tired of being told who to feel sorry for and who to worship. That's just the way it is. I'm going to be bold enough to quote George Carlin here.

"F*** Lance Armstrong. F*** him and his balls and his bicycles and his steroids and his yellow shirts and the dumb empty expression on his face. I'm tired of that a******...... Aren't you sick of being told who your heroes ought to be?"

So, please stop going about inflicting your views on other people. We have enough madness in the world to deal with for many centuries to come. History, especially the one related to the Holocaust, has left an indelible mark on our future and it's high time we treat history for what it is : History.