The Candid Eye

October 19, 2009

BPL families pay 16 crore rupees as bribe to our goverment servants!!

Have you ever gotten your driving license or family card or voter’s id or any thing on time,from a government office without paying anything ?You can consider yourself lucky if you have/get any of these things without paying any money as bribe.Jharkand goverment officials are the ones who are welathier than their counterparts in the world.These leeches suck the blood not only from wealthier people but also from the downtrodden people of the state.

Jharkhand State

Jharkhand State

Jharkhand government employees do not spare even people living below poverty line (BPL) when it comes to extracting bribes. The extent of greed can be assessed from the fact that the total bribe paid by BPL families in Jharkhand in 2008 was around Rs 16 crore.

This revelation was made in the annual survey report of Transparency International India (TII). To ensure that the results of the survey holds ground at the time of any verification, TII had documented complaints of every person who paid bribe. TII project director Vineeta Singh said the amount of bribe paid to the officials was small because the affected people paid the same from their pocket.

TII executive director Anupama Jha shared the findings during the launch of `Pahal’ for improving governance in rural areas of Jharkhand. “Anyone can gauge the extent of corruption in the state by the total bribe paid by the poorest of the poor in Jharhand. In 2008, the total bribe paid by BPL households was around 16 crore,” Jha said. The number of BPL households in the state is around 25 lakh.

Corruption in India

Corruption in India : Image Courtesy - http://www.thehindubusinessline.com/

The finding shows that corruption was highest in basic services which are free for BPL families like health, school education and water supply. Corruption is also rampant in police department and schemes under NREGA, land record and banking.

Another surprising fact that came out during the survey was that less than 5% of BPL families were aware of Right to Information Act. Director general of state administrative training institute AK Singh, a Cabinet secretary-rank officer, admitted that most government employees accept bribes.

“`Jharkhand is perhaps the only state in the country where even ministers demand a bribe and the percentage is fixed. I have worked in Bihar but there the ministers do not fix any fixed percentage for bribe on every tender,” Singh said.

Singh referred to an incident of building construction department where he was asked to pass the estimate of a building before floating a tender when the work was over. “I was surprised when my colleagues brought the file for approval of estimate of the building which was already complete,” Singh said.

Source: TOI

Advertisements

August 31, 2009

Spread terror,get reward !

An article on recent supreme court judgement on Sohrabuddin’s case by Sandhya Jain.The supreme court has asked Gujarat government to pay 1 million as ex-gratia to Sohrabuddin’s family. In India, terrorists  and their family are safeguarded in the name of justice.

Sohrabuddin Sheikh & Kausar Bi ; Image Courtesy - PTI

Sohrabuddin Sheikh & Kausar Bi ; Image Courtesy - PTI

The Supreme Court’s startling decision to award a staggering Rs 10 lakh as compensation to the family of underworld character Sohrabuddin Sheikh bodes ill for India’s battle against jihadi terror and its native accomplices. Sohrabuddin and his wife, Kausar Bi, were killed by Gujarat Police in November 2005.

On August 11, a Supreme Court bench comprising Justices Tarun Chatterjee and Aftab Alam ordered this ex-gratia payment to Sohrabuddin’s mother and three brothers. It deferred the issue of transferring the case for further investigation to a special panel headed by former CBI director RK Raghavan to September 2.

Some immediate questions arise — should compensation be awarded for known criminals when the state has the legitimate right to use force for public good? Should compensation be given before relevant cases are disposed of by the courts? Is the quantum of compensation determined by the ‘earning capacity’ of the criminal, and his family’s addiction to the wages of sin? Have the victims of such criminals received comparable compensation? If victims are invisible to the judiciary, what quality of justice can citizens expect from the honourable courts?

Sohrabuddin hailed from a village near Ujjain and was an ordinary truck driver who shuttled between Indore and Kandla when contacted by underworld gangs from Kutch. He began carrying smuggled goods from Kutch to India’s interiors, and soon rose to taking orders from Dawood Ibrahim for kidnappings, extortions and killings in the Gujarat-Rajasthan border area. His targets were marble mine owners in both States, remote from urban centres and easy targets. He evaded the Rajasthan and Gujarat Governments and spread the tentacles of the Dawood kidnap industry to Andhra Pradesh.

As expected, the Gujarat, Rajasthan and Andhra Pradesh police cooperated to trap him. The police in Hyderabad tipped their Gujarat and Rajasthan counterparts that Sohrabuddin and his wife were travelling by a luxury bus to Pune. They were intercepted on the highway and taken to Gujarat for questioning. Both were killed under circumstances being established in court.

When Sohrabuddin’s body reached his home village, it was received by hundreds of followers, several wielding AK-47s, and firing openly. This is the man for whom the apex court has gifted Rs 10 lakhs of public money.

The Supreme Court has created an unwarranted precedent, and one can only shudder at the inevitable repercussions. The family of a criminal with trans-national links to designated enemies of the Indian state — Dawood Ibrahim tops the list of wanted persons India is seeking from Pakistan — is compensated grandiosely; his victims are thus dishonoured by none other than the apex court; the nation’s tax-payers are outraged by this gross misuse of their money; and the police officers who risked their lives to capture the crook and maintain law and order, prevent gun-running and smuggling for the ‘D Company’, are jailed and hounded by the judiciary. There cannot be a graver travesty of justice.

In an era when the Indian nation and society are constantly exposed to terror, it is perverse to argue that diehard terrorists can or must be captured alive, or treated like ordinary criminals, much less as respectable citizens! The Batla House encounter, in which a brave policeman died trying to capture jihadis, shows the extent to which the lives of our policemen are constantly in danger, and how little we are conscious of this truth. There is a limit to how many trained officers we can sacrifice to criminals and the foreign-funded human rights industry. India should take a leaf from the Chinese book and force all NGOs to re-register as companies, open to governmental scrutiny in the matter of funding and mentoring.

As things stand today, a man caught planting bombs and killed while trying to escape can be dubbed the sole breadwinner of his family and compensated to the tune of a million rupees! It is pertinent that the notorious bootlegger and Dawood associate, Abdul Latif, who extorted money from builders even when lodged in Sabarmati Jail, through readily accessible mobile phones, was shot down while trying to escape “after midnight” from a police jeep.

There is, it seems, no other way to eradicate such menaces, and instead of hounding police officers, we must quickly legitimise the ‘licensed to kill’ regime for all those with established underworld, and especially jihadi, connections. Compensation must be given only for wrongful killings — that is, mistaken identity leading to the death of innocents, as in the Connaught Place killing in Delhi some years ago.

Some LeT terrorists of Azamgarh were reportedly hiding at Batla House, and Gujarat intelligence tipped off the Delhi Police. Inspector MC Sharma was shot at point blank range from an AK-47; one criminal escaped in the melee. Many shameless politicians and professional human rights-wallahs called it a ‘fake encounter’. No apology has been forthcoming even after the National Human Rights Commission (an otherwise derelict body that maintained resolute silence in the face of the lawless treatment meted out to Sadhvi Pragya) exonerated the police. Now some Muslims are communalising the issue by demanding a CBI probe. And if that also goes against their desired outcome, they may want a UN mandate over India!

What has the ruling UPA, the NHRC, the Supreme Court and the jholawallah brigade given to the security personnel who died defending Parliament House? Sadly, the judiciary is perceived to have become so aligned as to be almost indistinguishable from the NHRC-jholawallah brigade.

This was glaringly established when the Supreme Court accepted unsigned papers forwarded by the NHRC at the behest of Ms Teesta Setalvad and transferred Gujarat riot cases to Mumbai, where she could personally mentor the witnesses and monitor the cases.

Nor is this the end of judicial absurdity. On August 13, the Gujarat High Court formed a panel to probe the killing of 18-year-old Ishrat Jehan. This 18-year-old Mumbai teenager became involved with terrorists and was killed by Gujarat Police in 2004 while accompanying three male accomplices on a mission to kill Chief Minister Narendra Modi! All were linked to the Pakistan-based Lashkar-e-Tayyeba and were hailed as martyrs on its Website, which established police claims about their identity and associations.

August 19, 2009

Film Piracy, Organized Crime and Terrorism

Think before you buy next time that 40-60 Rs pirated CD/DVD from Streets- you might be funding terrorists who could bomb your city risking your/your friends/your relatives lives.
The RAND Corporation is a nonprofit institution that helps improve policy and decision making through research and analysis. The RAND corp. has conducted a research on the Film Piracy, Organized Crime and Terrorism. The complete report is available here.MG742 The research was conducted and the findings validated independently under the joint auspices of the Center for Global Risk and Security, part of the RAND Corporation’s National Security Research Division, and the Safety and Justice
Program in RAND Infrastructure, Safety, and Environment. The study was made possible by a grant from the Motion Picture Association (MPA).

Though some readers question the validity of study because of its funding from a movie industry, it is evident that the connection exists, and if one goes through complete report, one can see the extensive research undergone. In their study,
some 2,000 pages of primary documents were analyzed, and interviews were conducted with more than 120 law enforcement and intelligence agents from more than 20 countries.

Low cost legal dvd selling companies have already highlighted the connection between piracy and terrorism in their advertisements. While the connection may or may not exist to the extent depicted, it is clearly a copyright violation, and has to be shunned down by intellectual property law reinforcement menthods. Particularly, when it is happening in such a large scale, in public places. A simple calculation:- in front of A2B restaurant, Indirangar,Bangalore, 6 vendors were noticed selling pirated DVDs. Each vendor had approximately 900 DVDs. Assuming average selling price of 50, each vendor’s turnover will be 45,000 Rs, over a duration of may be maximum of 3 months. For a youngster who is not employed, this is an easy money. One of them mentioned that manufacturing company is in Mangalore. When a citizen can get this much information easily, why our police is not taking a stern action against such frauds? Continuing the calculation, 45000×6 = 2,70,000 Rs are generated by just one location. There are definitely atleast 50 such locations in the city, and turnover goes above 1 Crore. In recent times, the rise in such vendors has gone up, and their source of supply of the DVDs needs to be tracked down.

August 18, 2009

Jeopardizing our social security?

Government’s first and foremost job is to give social security to its people. How secure do you feel in your city? Be it daytime/evening or night:- incidences of theft, robbery, murder and planned explosions have shown that the Government has miserably failed in strict security of the society. 

So, when they cannot offer security, they start bringing down the social practices – no late night discos, no late night eat-outs, and now no late night movie shows even. And what is definition of late night? 11 pm? If the trend continues, people would stop going out of homes at times after 8pm- since the shops are anyways closed, so also food joints and social activity centers, where they would want to go out for?

This rule of last movie show by 8:30 pm is just an example of how weak the social security system is. In other words it says “we cannot guarantee you safe travel post 11pm to your homes.” Isn’t that ridiculous in the free country like India? Are our lives at stake in our own country? Where is the law and order establishment of the Government working then?

They started with curtailing the timing s of social activity, and started frisking each and every citizen that enters malls and theaters for any socially harmful carriers. It all stems from the terrorists attacks that occurred simultaneously in several parts of the city. Not once, but again and again. What do terrorists want to convey? That you are not safe, and your lives are at our mercy, and hence you succumb to our demands. 

By not nipping these activities at the bud, the Government is doing a great sin towards the citizens of this country. A stern and clear closure of all boundaries of the Nation is an urgency. Strict action on all local agencies supporting foreign terrorist intentions is a must. A bright and confident portrait of the Country’s outlook to the neighboring Countries is necessary, so that they do not even think of harming the citizens of this country.

August 10, 2009

Worst case scenario threatening Indian survival

The tradition of statecraft is weak in India though most Indians are apt to name Kautilya proudly to suggest otherwise. But the proof of the pudding is in the eating and Indians have habitually stumbled in their international relations. Local Indian kingdoms in the region failed to unite adequately in the face of medieval Islamic invasions that brought them catastrophe on an unimaginable scale. Medieval Indians might be forgiven for not anticipating that Abrahamic invaders would attempt to erase their cultures altogether and enslave them en masse since local pluralist custom and consanguinity of their traditions ensured that military defeat did not mean extinction. There can be fewer excuses for subsequent failings and the affectations to superiority, combined with childish unrealism, which continued to dominate later Indian history.
The Maratha successors of the great warrior-king Shivaji were betrayed by their own French officers to the formidable Arthur Wellington, admittedly a great general who also saw off the redoubtable Napoleon. And a broken backed Pakistan continues to routinely outwit India today. Fundamentally, Indians refuse to acknowledge the brutally predatory nature of the wider world and persistently adopt the path of least resistance in the apparent hope that difficult problems will go away or can be finessed by compromises.
The Gandhi-Nehru era is considered by many to have been the most dismaying modern example of boundless self-confidence and stupidity in dealings with other countries. In defence of the Mahatma it might be said that his supposed whimsical counsel to surrender and/or commit mass suicide, which is what he advised the Bengali Hindu rape victims of Noakhali, may not be the entire story. Although he reputedly espoused non violence, almost unconditionally, the same Mahatma Gandhi also wrote in The Doctrine of the Sword, “I do believe when there is only a choice between cowardice and violence, I would advise violence… I would rather have India resort to arms in order to defend her honour than that she should in a cowardly manner become or remain a helpless victim to her own dishonour”. When Nehru apologetically informed him of India’s armed defence of Kashmir against Pakistani marauders, engaged in rape and looting, he agreed that there was no choice, but to fight. But Gandhi’s theme of non-violence was handsomely embellished by India’s Anglo-Saxon enemies as a means of befuddling the natives though some among them had their own reasons for choosing befuddlement. Jawaharlal Nehru, though a worldly statesman was another kettle of fish, wildly misconceiving Indian interests at every juncture, choosing the worst possible advisers and ignoring counsel that warned of impending national disaster. Ambassador K. M Pannikar, his evil courtier, led him up the garden path while Nehru banished the formidable Mr. Sinha abroad because the latter insisted on warning of the impending 1962 Chinese attack.
Even Indira Gandhi, who displayed great courage, was failed by a medley of dim-witted advisers, apt to misconstrue their privileged origins as some sort of certification of innate wisdom. And if they could use a knife and fork, unlike the rest of their hapless fellow countrymen and compose adolescent English prose, they were unstoppable. This was the reason why she took the decision to invade Bangladesh without the enthusiastic support of those around her. But she was lucky to have, in General JFR Jacob, one of the great soldiers of the twentieth century and that according to the Times of London, which unfailingly wishes India harm. The fruits of the historic victory were lost because India declined to offend the USSR since it provided critical diplomatic support for its famous military victory. The Soviet leadership pressed India not to demand from Pakistan what might be considered humiliating terms because the US made that a condition for the SALT talks between them scheduled for 1972, which the USSR regarded as crucial. Quite clearly, India should have insisted on a treaty renouncing all Pakistani claims to Indian Territory before agreeing to the cessation of hostilities, even if it offended the USSR. The expression of gratitude in international relations is situational and should be withheld if its does not serve important national interests. It is not the counterpart of an inter-personal relationship that encapsulates inviolable mutual honour!
The most immediate danger for India is a simultaneous military attack by Pakistan and China. Despite apparent Indian military preparedness for such a dire eventuality it is unclear if India could sustain a prolonged engagement with both of them. China is in a position to produce sufficient hardware and ordnance for its own and Pakistan’s military assault against India. India is unfortunately likely to remain dependant on foreign supplies of hardware and possibly ordnance as well for the foreseeable future if the engagement proves long-lasting. Of course the threat of a nuclear factor should enter into the calculations of both aggressors, but India has done everything to convey a message that it is unlikely to resort to nuclear weapons, even in the face of military and political catastrophe. It may be assumed that Russia will not deny India supplies and spares, but there is a high probability that it will press for Indian concessions to keep its own fragile relationship with an increasingly empowered China tolerable. The Israelis are not in a position to substitute Russia and are unlikely to be enthusiastic about enmity with China by helping India. The Americans will do exactly the same, judging Indian territorial losses and humiliation an insufficient cause to jeopardise its historic friendship with Pakistan and offend China, with which it is evidently fashioning a global condominium. On the contrary, India in disarray in the aftermath of defeat might be considered ripe for subordination as a prostrate ally like Pakistan and rapid Christianization.
Indians enamoured of the US are likely to be grievously disappointed when their supposed friendship is tested by the harsh realities of international diplomacy. The US faces no direct threat from China while its ICBMs retain their awesome superiority in variety, accuracy and numbers. While India and Japan may be seen as useful counterweights, in order to elicit an acceptable understanding with China over their respective interests in Asia and elsewhere, actual conflict with it would be considered a failure of US policy. The loss of some Indian territories to China and Pakistan, being ardently sought by both in a war against India, might be regarded as unfortunate, but clearly not a casus belli that should bring it into direct conflict with either aggressor. The obverse does not hold true in the event of the US finding itself in a serious military engagement with China, arising out of an unavoidable dispute with it. In such a situation, Indian bases would be sought and Indians regarded as useful cannon fodder to ensure a satisfactory outcome for the US. There are some within the supposed Indian nationalist constituency that might even be willing to acquiesce in such an unfavourable role for India because they have compromised themselves with the US and are vulnerable to blackmail.
In addition, India’s minor detractors in the region might regard setback suffered by it an opportunity for achieving any territorial ambitions they may have harboured. The enmity of its smaller neighbours stems mainly from a lack of respect for India, which means that although India is pilloried by them as an alleged bully it is precisely because India does not wield a big stick that they complain and needle. Of late there has been a measure of attitudinal change in this motley group of failed states because Indian economic advance, though irksome to them, cannot be altogether denied. In addition, the Cold War incitement against India fuelled by the Anglo-American imperial predators has waned somewhat in the past decade. But India should be under no illusion that if it were to find itself in serious political difficulties they would wish to take advantage with alacrity. India must therefore make provision for this potentially costly eventuality in much the way the USSR did before the onset of war with Nazi Germany in relation to the truculent Finns and Baltic States to secure its strategic perimeter. Such preparations would entail sealing the border with Bangladesh and Nepal and securing the Palk Straits to prevent its use by a third party, aided by Sri Lankan perfidy. In all these cases the threat of devastating Indian fire power should suffice to deter opportunism.
A more complex and disastrous problem lurks inside India itself in the potentially treasonous conduct of Indians themselves and a foreign fifth column embedded discreetly within it. Many of the thousands of foreigners residing legally and illegally in India, including ostensibly accredited journalists and apparently innocuous visitors, are almost certainly agents of foreign powers who will implement pre-existing plans to undertake political and military sabotage. Assorted insurgencies, ranging from ULFA to the Naxalites, are completely controlled by Sino-Pak agencies and will no doubt endeavour to tie down India’s paramilitary forces. It would be a logical goal for them to seize territory and especially small towns, even cities and decapitate the established authority within it. If the military debacle suffered by India is severe whole swathes of Muslim India within its cities, which already enjoy virtual de facto sovereign autonomy, will revolt to assert de jure independence. The Hindus in these cities, especially Kolkata, Hyderabad and other areas adjacent to its borders in Assam, Kashmir and elsewhere will simply flee, precipitating a further effective partition of India. Depending on the scale of the catastrophe, some states like Tamil Nadu, Andhra Pradesh, Assam, Punjab and J&K and indeed even West Bengal, which have already been subverted politically by foreign interests like evangelical business corporations, could secede and are likely gain immediate political recognition from India’s enemies.
If India’s feeble political leadership showed any sign of deploying nuclear weapons in order to deter Chinese aggression massive public demonstrations, instigated by Left parties and myriad foreign-sponsored NGO activists are guaranteed to oppose it. It may also be hazarded that weak coalition partners at the federal centre, inexperienced and motivated principally by lucre would panic and fold quickly if India’s armed forces suffered a major reverse or local revolts threatened the viability of their own regional party. Most of the leaders of such coalition partners are preoccupied with the personal fortunes of their families and party and their very participation at the federal centre is primarily intended to promote their parochial regional aspirations. India may face the threat of extinction as a political entity if matters get out of hand, but its opinionated Chatterati will no doubt congregate in the capitals salons in the meantime to reflect on the IPL and other assorted matters of substance. The armed forces alone would remain interposed between annihilation and Indian survival. By the time such dire choices are posed, though unlikely, but not inconceivable, it would be too late to work out a strategy in response to them. It is therefore indispensable for India’s armed forces and what remains of its dismayingly politicised and subverted establishment (including its bureaucracy, intelligence services and key players within civil society) to consider what actions they may need to take in the event of a primordial threat to India’s survival.
Seizure of political power by India’s armed forces in such circumstances would be imperative and justified. It would be need to be followed by ruthlessly neutralising saboteurs and foreign agents operating inside the country. The same treatment would have to be meted out to a significant number of the comprador political class under the sway of foreign powers and those groups threatening secession. In order for this to be achieved effectively plans need to be drawn up in advance, covertly, with the help of India’s intelligence agencies, to identify individual candidates for elimination. But the gathering of this information needs to proceed in the greatest secrecy, involving the fewest possible senior personnel of the armed forces and only on a need-to-know basis. Perhaps, this particular task might be best left to retired senior personnel of the agencies concerned. Revolts within cities would need to be crushed immediately and pitilessly to demonstrate the will of the Indian State. A few harsh examples would constitute a salutary deterrent. But most of all, the Indian armed forces would need to wrest control of India’s nuclear weapons from the political class. And with the help of India’s formidable scientific establishment prepare low-yield battlefield nuclear warheads for use, with the menace of escalation to a ballistic level if India is threatened by the nuclear armouries of its adversaries.

The tradition of statecraft is weak in India though most Indians are apt to name Kautilya proudly to suggest otherwise. But the proof of the pudding is in the eating and Indians have habitually stumbled in their international relations. Local Indian kingdoms in the region failed to unite adequately in the face of medieval Islamic invasions that brought them catastrophe on an unimaginable scale. Medieval Indians might be forgiven for not anticipating that Abrahamic invaders would attempt to erase their cultures altogether and enslave them en masse since local pluralist custom and consanguinity of their traditions ensured that military defeat did not mean extinction. There can be fewer excuses for subsequent failings and the affectations to superiority, combined with childish unrealism, which continued to dominate later Indian history.

The Maratha successors of the great warrior-king Shivaji were betrayed by their own French officers to the formidable Arthur Wellington, admittedly a great general who also saw off the redoubtable Napoleon. And a broken backed Pakistan continues to routinely outwit India today. Fundamentally, Indians refuse to acknowledge the brutally predatory nature of the wider world and persistently adopt the path of least resistance in the apparent hope that difficult problems will go away or can be finessed by compromises.

The Gandhi-Nehru era is considered by many to have been the most dismaying modern example of boundless self-confidence and stupidity in dealings with other countries. In defence of the Mahatma it might be said that his supposed whimsical counsel to surrender and/or commit mass suicide, which is what he advised the Bengali Hindu rape victims of Noakhali, may not be the entire story. Although he reputedly espoused non violence, almost unconditionally, the same Mahatma Gandhi also wrote in The Doctrine of the Sword, “I do believe when there is only a choice between cowardice and violence, I would advise violence… I would rather have India resort to arms in order to defend her honour than that she should in a cowardly manner become or remain a helpless victim to her own dishonour”. When Nehru apologetically informed him of India’s armed defence of Kashmir against Pakistani marauders, engaged in rape and looting, he agreed that there was no choice, but to fight. But Gandhi’s theme of non-violence was handsomely embellished by India’s Anglo-Saxon enemies as a means of befuddling the natives though some among them had their own reasons for choosing befuddlement. Jawaharlal Nehru, though a worldly statesman was another kettle of fish, wildly misconceiving Indian interests at every juncture, choosing the worst possible advisers and ignoring counsel that warned of impending national disaster. Ambassador K. M Pannikar, his evil courtier, led him up the garden path while Nehru banished the formidable Mr. Sinha abroad because the latter insisted on warning of the impending 1962 Chinese attack.

Even Indira Gandhi, who displayed great courage, was failed by a medley of dim-witted advisers, apt to misconstrue their privileged origins as some sort of certification of innate wisdom. And if they could use a knife and fork, unlike the rest of their hapless fellow countrymen and compose adolescent English prose, they were unstoppable. This was the reason why she took the decision to invade Bangladesh without the enthusiastic support of those around her. But she was lucky to have, in General JFR Jacob, one of the great soldiers of the twentieth century and that according to the Times of London, which unfailingly wishes India harm. The fruits of the historic victory were lost because India declined to offend the USSR since it provided critical diplomatic support for its famous military victory. The Soviet leadership pressed India not to demand from Pakistan what might be considered humiliating terms because the US made that a condition for the SALT talks between them scheduled for 1972, which the USSR regarded as crucial. Quite clearly, India should have insisted on a treaty renouncing all Pakistani claims to Indian Territory before agreeing to the cessation of hostilities, even if it offended the USSR. The expression of gratitude in international relations is situational and should be withheld if its does not serve important national interests. It is not the counterpart of an inter-personal relationship that encapsulates inviolable mutual honour!

The most immediate danger for India is a simultaneous military attack by Pakistan and China. Despite apparent Indian military preparedness for such a dire eventuality it is unclear if India could sustain a prolonged engagement with both of them. China is in a position to produce sufficient hardware and ordnance for its own and Pakistan’s military assault against India. India is unfortunately likely to remain dependant on foreign supplies of hardware and possibly ordnance as well for the foreseeable future if the engagement proves long-lasting. Of course the threat of a nuclear factor should enter into the calculations of both aggressors, but India has done everything to convey a message that it is unlikely to resort to nuclear weapons, even in the face of military and political catastrophe. It may be assumed that Russia will not deny India supplies and spares, but there is a high probability that it will press for Indian concessions to keep its own fragile relationship with an increasingly empowered China tolerable. The Israelis are not in a position to substitute Russia and are unlikely to be enthusiastic about enmity with China by helping India. The Americans will do exactly the same, judging Indian territorial losses and humiliation an insufficient cause to jeopardise its historic friendship with Pakistan and offend China, with which it is evidently fashioning a global condominium. On the contrary, India in disarray in the aftermath of defeat might be considered ripe for subordination as a prostrate ally like Pakistan and rapid Christianization.

Indians enamoured of the US are likely to be grievously disappointed when their supposed friendship is tested by the harsh realities of international diplomacy. The US faces no direct threat from China while its ICBMs retain their awesome superiority in variety, accuracy and numbers. While India and Japan may be seen as useful counterweights, in order to elicit an acceptable understanding with China over their respective interests in Asia and elsewhere, actual conflict with it would be considered a failure of US policy. The loss of some Indian territories to China and Pakistan, being ardently sought by both in a war against India, might be regarded as unfortunate, but clearly not a casus belli that should bring it into direct conflict with either aggressor. The obverse does not hold true in the event of the US finding itself in a serious military engagement with China, arising out of an unavoidable dispute with it. In such a situation, Indian bases would be sought and Indians regarded as useful cannon fodder to ensure a satisfactory outcome for the US. There are some within the supposed Indian nationalist constituency that might even be willing to acquiesce in such an unfavourable role for India because they have compromised themselves with the US and are vulnerable to blackmail.

In addition, India’s minor detractors in the region might regard setback suffered by it an opportunity for achieving any territorial ambitions they may have harboured. The enmity of its smaller neighbours stems mainly from a lack of respect for India, which means that although India is pilloried by them as an alleged bully it is precisely because India does not wield a big stick that they complain and needle. Of late there has been a measure of attitudinal change in this motley group of failed states because Indian economic advance, though irksome to them, cannot be altogether denied. In addition, the Cold War incitement against India fuelled by the Anglo-American imperial predators has waned somewhat in the past decade. But India should be under no illusion that if it were to find itself in serious political difficulties they would wish to take advantage with alacrity. India must therefore make provision for this potentially costly eventuality in much the way the USSR did before the onset of war with Nazi Germany in relation to the truculent Finns and Baltic States to secure its strategic perimeter. Such preparations would entail sealing the border with Bangladesh and Nepal and securing the Palk Straits to prevent its use by a third party, aided by Sri Lankan perfidy. In all these cases the threat of devastating Indian fire power should suffice to deter opportunism.

A more complex and disastrous problem lurks inside India itself in the potentially treasonous conduct of Indians themselves and a foreign fifth column embedded discreetly within it. Many of the thousands of foreigners residing legally and illegally in India, including ostensibly accredited journalists and apparently innocuous visitors, are almost certainly agents of foreign powers who will implement pre-existing plans to undertake political and military sabotage. Assorted insurgencies, ranging from ULFA to the Naxalites, are completely controlled by Sino-Pak agencies and will no doubt endeavour to tie down India’s paramilitary forces. It would be a logical goal for them to seize territory and especially small towns, even cities and decapitate the established authority within it. If the military debacle suffered by India is severe whole swathes of Muslim India within its cities, which already enjoy virtual de facto sovereign autonomy, will revolt to assert de jure independence. The Hindus in these cities, especially Kolkata, Hyderabad and other areas adjacent to its borders in Assam, Kashmir and elsewhere will simply flee, precipitating a further effective partition of India. Depending on the scale of the catastrophe, some states like Tamil Nadu, Andhra Pradesh, Assam, Punjab and J&K and indeed even West Bengal, which have already been subverted politically by foreign interests like evangelical business corporations, could secede and are likely gain immediate political recognition from India’s enemies.

If India’s feeble political leadership showed any sign of deploying nuclear weapons in order to deter Chinese aggression massive public demonstrations, instigated by Left parties and myriad foreign-sponsored NGO activists are guaranteed to oppose it. It may also be hazarded that weak coalition partners at the federal centre, inexperienced and motivated principally by lucre would panic and fold quickly if India’s armed forces suffered a major reverse or local revolts threatened the viability of their own regional party. Most of the leaders of such coalition partners are preoccupied with the personal fortunes of their families and party and their very participation at the federal centre is primarily intended to promote their parochial regional aspirations. India may face the threat of extinction as a political entity if matters get out of hand, but its opinionated Chatterati will no doubt congregate in the capitals salons in the meantime to reflect on the IPL and other assorted matters of substance. The armed forces alone would remain interposed between annihilation and Indian survival. By the time such dire choices are posed, though unlikely, but not inconceivable, it would be too late to work out a strategy in response to them. It is therefore indispensable for India’s armed forces and what remains of its dismayingly politicised and subverted establishment (including its bureaucracy, intelligence services and key players within civil society) to consider what actions they may need to take in the event of a primordial threat to India’s survival.

Seizure of political power by India’s armed forces in such circumstances would be imperative and justified. It would be need to be followed by ruthlessly neutralising saboteurs and foreign agents operating inside the country. The same treatment would have to be meted out to a significant number of the comprador political class under the sway of foreign powers and those groups threatening secession. In order for this to be achieved effectively plans need to be drawn up in advance, covertly, with the help of India’s intelligence agencies, to identify individual candidates for elimination. But the gathering of this information needs to proceed in the greatest secrecy, involving the fewest possible senior personnel of the armed forces and only on a need-to-know basis. Perhaps, this particular task might be best left to retired senior personnel of the agencies concerned. Revolts within cities would need to be crushed immediately and pitilessly to demonstrate the will of the Indian State. A few harsh examples would constitute a salutary deterrent. But most of all, the Indian armed forces would need to wrest control of India’s nuclear weapons from the political class. And with the help of India’s formidable scientific establishment prepare low-yield battlefield nuclear warheads for use, with the menace of escalation to a ballistic level if India is threatened by the nuclear armouries of its adversaries.

Source : Vigil Online

July 12, 2009

RTI lands SAI employee in hospital

 

Check out this article. Seems like personal security becomes an issue for  anyone who files RTI, since many people come under torchlight for having committed corruption. Check out the previous article on this.

July 8, 2009

Plunder of India

India was so prosperous before 1835 that these statements were required to be given in the British parliament:


MacCauleyThere are debates of the historical validity of these statements, however, it contains the essential attitude.

I attended a presentation on India by Sri D. K. Hari, in Vishalakshi Mandap, International Center of Art of Living in Bangalore. The title of the presentation was “Plunder of India“. Like what is mentioned in the MacCauley’s talk above, in British Parliament, India was a country which was urbanized, Literate, Rich and full of arts and crafts- which can prosper only in a peaceful, well established country. Sri Hari presented evidences from travelogues of tourists to India from Europe, Gulf, and other parts of the world. Marco Palo, was so thrilled by India’s plenitude, that he wrote everything about it in terms of Millions:- there are millions of diamonds, millions of jewels and so on.. He was even termed “Millionaire historian”! Much of this wealth was generated by merchandise of food grains, spices, fine silk – India didn’t need to have a gold/silver mine. There were 3200 cities. The entire country was filled with canal system for farming. Vasco da Gama did not find the route to India on his own! He was not used to traveling in open sea, he would navigate only close to shores. So starting from Europe he reached to south Africa, where he met a Gujarati Salesman. In his own records Vasco da Gama has mentioned of how huge and much bigger the ship of this salesman was, compared to his own. This Salesman took Vasco da Gama to India!

The East India company which started business in Bengal region, was actually a failure company in England. They entered here with mere investment of 72k. The ransom collected on the villages and territories they started governing, was huge and kind of extracting the entire wealth from the place. The taxation was for running their company, funding it, rather than governing the local administration. As the British took more and more hold on India, the taxation grew out of bound. There were 18 Famines in India in a span of 24 years. These were caused artificially by excessive taxing in terms of export of 3,20,000 of tons of grains that the farmers grew here. The local people were left with no food to eat, as whatever was grown was taken away as tax. Then Mr Lytton, then British governer of India, banned any relief work, and made any donations to affected area punishable. The famine caused deaths called as “Late Victorian Holocausts” and in four quarters from 1800 to 1900, 10k, 5lac,5lac and 2crore respectively, people died in India. All these news were reaching in the front pages of British papers. However no action was taken about it.

« Previous PageNext Page »

Create a free website or blog at WordPress.com.