Assessing Pakistani Science

#320 by omar_r_quraishi

[ramanajun fukface -- thanks but no thanks -- i wouldnt go to the cia fact book but gave you the figure quoted in the Economic Survey of Pakistan -- if morons like you must in any case must quote the `cia factbook` then quote the other figure as well -- in fact quote the whole chart as well which puts Pakistan (according to purchasing power parity at $385.2 billion) ranked at no. 28 overall ]


ANOTHER product of the Paki Madrassa-math system of education.

Listen dickhead - you compare apples to apples. If the Indian IT industry figure is not adjusted according to the real amount/PPP amount ratio, then the Paki GDP should not be either, when you are comparing the two.

I wonder how many cretins like you are produced every year from the jehadi Madrassas.



[-- since the NRI/RSS lovers here seem to have a weird fetish for links here is the link to this as well http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/rankorder/2001rank.html
seems to be a huge discrepancy in the figure that you quoted -- now i wonder what could be the reason for that -- perhaps it may have something to do with your pathological hatred for everything pakistani hmmm...

Dickhead says - ``i wouldnt go to the cia fact book``, but checks out the website in detail. Not that the idiot comprehends any of it.

The site ``http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/rankorder/2001rank.html`` lists out the GDP by PPP. India is at #5, Pakistan at #27.

Also, India`s per capita PPP is $3400, compared to Pakiland`s $2400 from the same website.

Take some time out from rocking back and forth with God`s manual in hand and make an effort to learn simple things like elementary school math.

But maybe that is asking too much from fuc kheads like yourself.



[but as a matter of rule moron, you should quote from your own govt statistics -- i would rather believe the budget speech of the indian finance minister or india`s own economic survey than the cia factbook -- but then a shithead like you wouldnt understand that -- ]

Which part of the Indian Finance Minister`s budget speech contradicts what I said, shithead?

Do the world a favor - go blow yourself up. Who knows, you might actually get 72 little raisins.

:-D

#321 by omar_r_quraishi on February 28, 2006 2:57am PT


in any case, the rule is to quote from one`s own govt stats


ADB says most FBS data unreliable

Staff Report

ISLAMABAD: Most economic data compiled by the Federal Bureau of Statistics (FBS) is not reliable and there is a need to make the data based on facts so that the future line of action could be drawn more realistically, said the Asian Development Bank (ADB) here on Monday.

``The economic data of FBS is, often, not based on facts. It is often contradicted by senior officers of the government,`` said ADB official Ghulam Qadir while replying to a question at a briefing in the presence of the ADB country director Peter L. Fedon.

He said the FBS had given data recently that had suggested that the country`s exports were growing by 28 percent. While the fact was that Pakistan`s exports were growing at around 13 percent in the first six months of the current financial year, he said.

Mr Qadir hoped that the government would take notice of this serious flaw and everything will be streamlined by December this year.

shri ramanujan jee -- ever look in the mirror ? what did you see? now even manmohan singh is saying human rights violations in Indian administered J and K will be investigated so who to believe now ? most paki interactors laugh and pity the low lifes here like shri arjun jee, shrimati sadna jee, shri mannyd jee and so on -- i suspect many paki haters tend to take this site too seriously and they obviously dont like it if they are shown the mirror -- i didnt take issue with you on J & K anyway but your distorted pakistani GDP figure will seems to low -- in any case, the rule is to quote from one`s own govt stats -- for example i rather believe the indian pm or finance minister on what india`s GDP is -- or india`s annual economic survey -- it is usually moronic NRIs (are you one? -- an NRI that is) who tend to run to the CIA factbook for everything like a security blanket -- Pakistan`s economic survey of 2004-05 placed last year`s GPD at well over 100 billion -- and in any case even going by the cia factbook it`s strange that you didnt quote the PPP figure which is universally used these days according to which Pakistan`s GDP is around 382.5 billion dollars making it no. 28 overall -- now why would you do that shri ramanujan jee ?? hmmm

rsridhar jee -- you said it right when you said that science cannot work in an ideologically riven atmosphere -- take a look at this bro :

COMMUNALISM

A saffron assault abroad

NALINI TANEJA

The Hindu Right`s attempts to rewrite school textbooks on India and Hinduism in California meet with stiff resistance from renowned historians and scholars in the U.S. and abroad.




THE connections between communalist political strategies and textbook revisions were explored in detail in the media when the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) went about changing the syllabus of the National Council of Educational Research and Training (NCERT) and getting school history textbooks rewritten while in government. But few would imagine that the Rashtriya Swayamsewak Sangh (RSS)-linked organisations were in a position to put their stamp on school textbooks in California in the United States. The partial success of the ``education`` wings of the Hindu Swayamsewak Sangh in getting many of their revisions approved by the Curriculum Commission (CC) of the California State Board of Education has caused a virtual ``international scandal``.

The State Board of Education, California, is currently engaged in approving the history/social science textbooks for grades six to eight in schools, an exercise undertaken periodically. The Hindu Education Foundation and the Vedic Foundation (based in the U.S.) have used the occasion to push through ``corrections`` in the textbooks approved. Shiva Bajpai, who constituted the one-member ad hoc committee set up by the Board, succeeded in getting virtually all the changes requested by these organisations incorporated into the textbooks. Professor Emeritus at California State University, Northridge, and a Hindutva-leaning adviser to the Board, Bajpai was proposed as expert by the Vedic Foundation. That the Hindutva groups have not had a walkover is thanks to the vigilance and commitment of the many academics involved in Indian studies all over the world. Intervention by Professors Michael Witzel and Steve Farmer in the form of a letter, signed by 50 other scholars, presented at a public hearing on November 9, resulted in the Board reversing its initial approval of the pro-Hindutva changes. Prof. Witzel is a well-known Indologist and has often taken up the cudgels against Hindutva ideologues such as David Frawley, N.S. Rajaram and Konrad Elst in the West.

Witzel`s letter, endorsed among others by renowned Indian historians Romila Thapar, D.N. Jha and Shereen Ratnagar, to Ruth Green, President, State Board of Education, California, on behalf of ``world specialists on ancient India``, voicing ``mainstream academic opinion in India, Pakistan, the United States, Europe, Australia, Taiwan and Japan`` on the issue, is now part of a concerted campaign encompassing well-known scholars and hundreds of teachers and parents in California.

These scholars make the important point that the ``corrections`` proposed by the Hindu Right in the U.S. reflect political agendas discriminatory to millions of people in India, especially the minorities, `lower` castes, and women; and that such revisions have already been debated thoroughly and rejected by academics and progressive political opinion in India. Besides, they ``do not reflect the views of majority of the specialists on ancient Indian history, nor of majority of the Hindus``.

Asserting that ``the proposed revisions are not of a scholarly, but of a religious-political nature and are primarily promoted by Hindutva supporters and non-specialist academics writing about issues far outside their areas of expertise``, the scholars have called on the Board to ``reject the demands by nationalist Hindu (Hindutva) groups``. From India, 12 historians have written to the CC to reject the changes proposed by the RSS-linked organisations in the U.S.

Signatures opposing the sectarian changes have been pouring in by the day and the Board, now alert to the issue, has constituted a new Content Review Committee (among its members are Professors Witzel, James Heitzman and Stanley Wolpert), which has put together a list of recommendations that ``allow for only such changes as meet the standards of objective scholarship``.

On the other side, the Hindu Education Foundation and the Vedic Foundation protested the constitution of the Content Review Committee and the inclusion of Witzel on it. They launched a campaign that the ``corrections`` were incorporated through a proper procedure and claimed that Witzel knew little about Hinduism and ancient Indian history. They also asserted their right to represent Hindus in the U.S. and their authority to decide what is the `authentic` depiction of Hinduism and ancient Indian history.

Frantic mobilisation by Pranawa C. Deshmukh, a professor of physics at the Indian Institute of Technology, Chennai, in support of the changes suggested by the Vedic Foundation and the Hindu Education Foundation, and the pressure of a host of organisations that constitute the `parivar` in the U.S. resulted in many of the proposed changes in textbooks getting the approval despite scholarly opinion being heavily weighted against it.

The details of how this was achieved remind one of the way in which RSS-sponsored revisions of textbooks were pushed through during the BJP`s tenure in power at the Centre. During the meeting for the adoption of the recommendations of the Board by the CC in the course of a public hearing on December 1 and 2, 2005, the members of the Commission actually flouted the mandate of the Education Board. Of the total 156 edits requested, the CC accepted 97 that conformed to what the Hindutva organisations had proposed.

According to Witzel, ``the proceedings of the CC meetings were highly skewed, irregular and contravened the mandate given by the Board``. The Board had directed that the Commission approve only edits that ``improve the factual accuracy of materials``. Instead, matters were so arranged that several Commissioners had already left in the afternoon of December 2, by the time this was voted on. Others abstained as they did not know about the matter at hand (but with stacks of related papers in front of them which they apparently had not read, including the letter by more than 100 U.S. professors of Indian background and others by groups of concerned Indian Americans). All were tired, and one Commissioner, Stan Metzenberg, Professor of Biology at California State University, Northridge, took the chance to push through aggressively the Vedic Foundation`s agenda. ``The CC redefined their mandate repeatedly, contravening the mandate of the Board that the Commission should approve only edits that `improve the factual accuracy of materials`; they allowed additional changes made from the floor by Hindutvavadins to be inserted; they pushed through a sectarian agenda that redefines Indian history and Hinduism,`` Witzel said.

The Hindu Education Foundation appreciatively quotes Metzenburg as saying: ``I`ve read the DNA research and there was no Aryan migration. I believe the hard evidence of DNA more than I believe historians.`` However, finally it had to be agreed as: ``Some historians believe in the theory of an Aryan migration.`` He insisted that ``Hindus should at least be able to recognise their own religion when they read these textbooks``. In short, the textbooks must reflect popular common sense rather than strive to mould/challenge popular common sense on the basis of objective historical facts or the gains of scientific enquiry.

Witzel puts it thus: ``California has been hijacked by a saffron agenda, worse by a sectarian saffron agenda. In this case, a strident Vaishnava one that excludes Shaiva, Devi, Tantric, Lingayat and other forms of Hindu worship and Darshana... The new CA [California] history textbooks will reflect that.``

Going by the ``corrections`` approved, the word ``murti`` means ``God`` (the CC agreed to the Hindu request to change ``statue`` to ``deity``), the translation of ``brahman`` is ``God``, and all Hindus believe in God whose name is Bhagwan.

The ``corrections`` demanded by the Hindutva organisations are integral to the Sangh Parivar`s political agenda in India, and similar to what the BJP government was trying to do with the NCERT syllabus and textbooks in social sciences, particularly history.

For example, among the ``corrections`` suggested is a clear attempt to deny the integrality of the caste system in ancient India; it was proposed to delete the reference altogether in one textbook. In another, it was proposed that the picture of an untouchable be removed. In yet another book, a reference to caste system as part of Aryan society was replaced by: ``During Vedic times, people were divided into different social groups (varnas) based on their capacity to undertake a particular profession.`` Another reference to caste is to read as: ``A late hymn of the Rg Veda describes the interrelationship and interdependence of the four social classes.``

On women, it was suggested that the references to gender bias in ancient India were incorrect and insulting to Hindu society. Therefore the line, ``Men had many more rights than women`` was to be replaced by, ``Men had different duties (dharma) and rights than women. Many women were among the sages to whom the Vedas were revealed.``

In another textbook, the changes included a specific addition that ``the recent archaeological proofs are negating the Aryan invasion theory. The new theory suggests that Aryans were not the outsiders``. Elsewhere: ``They [Aryans] were part of a larger group of people historians refer to as the Indo-Europeans`` is replaced with the statement: ``Some historians believe the Aryans were part of a larger group of people known as the Indo-Europeans.`` ``The Vedas came to form the major beliefs of the religion called Brahmanism`` is replaced with: ``The Vedas constitute the source of Hinduism.`` Early Aryan religion is to be replaced with references to early Hindu religion.

Still other corrections follow the familiar pattern of ante-dating the Rg Veda, confusing dates of Indus and Harappa city-based civilisations with the Vedic civilisation, conflating Brahmanical practices with Hinduism, describing the Vedas as the source and basic texts of Hinduism, denying the plurality of gods worshipped through history in favour of one God in different forms, depicting sudras as ``serving all classes`` and doing ``labour-intensive work`` rather than serving `upper` castes and so on. The current Hindutva preoccupations such as asserting the sacredness of cows, vegetarianism and the Saraswati civilisation myth have also found their way into the textbooks.

Tolerance is shown as ``usual`` for the time of Asoka in ancient India; the references to technology, science and mathematics in ancient India have been modified to enable suitable glorification; and negative aspects of society are either deleted or presented as cultural specificities rather than as oppressive ones.

THE moves by the Hindu Right in the U.S. are no flash in the pan. The web sites of two of the organisations spearheading the Hindutva campaign - the Hindu Education Foundation and the Vedic Foundation - expressly state the revision of school textbooks in the U.S. as part of their political agenda. They regularly ``interact`` with State Education Committees that define school curriculum, conduct seminars and training programmes for teachers and ``create resources`` for parents who ``wish to provide such opportunities for educators in their own areas``. There are fora of all kinds offering entertainment, educational services and social support to youth. Alternative social networks through bhajan mandalis, yoga centres, discussion groups, special programmes and publications devoted to children, answer the yearnings for roots and culture among immigrants. The RSS-linked organisations have penetrated all these and are creating new ones all the time. The entire effort is part of the RSS` larger goal to ``educate`` Hindu children brought up in the U.S. to be ``good Hindus`` and to ``learn the truth about Indian history and culture``, and ultimately to finance their ``social work`` in India.

Not long ago, citizens` groups in India and North America exposed the nexus between funding of charities in the West and the hate campaigns and the expansion of communal networks of the Sangh Parivar in India. Infusing hatred directly or through the educational set-up is not as easy in the U.S. as it is through the Vidya Bharati schools and the Ekal Vidyalayas in India. The strategy of the Hindu Right is different in the U.S. It does the next best thing: it creates innumerable social networks where prejudices are nurtured and fascist solutions to problems legitimised, and glories of ancient India and Hinduism rule the roost.


ballu khan -- stop being such an uncle tom man

ramanajun fukface -- thanks but no thanks -- i wouldnt go to the cia fact book but gave you the figure quoted in the Economic Survey of Pakistan -- if morons like you must in any case must quote the `cia factbook` then quote the other figure as well -- in fact quote the whole chart as well which puts Pakistan (according to purchasing power parity at $385.2 billion) ranked at no. 28 overall -- since the NRI/RSS lovers here seem to have a weird fetish for links here is the link to this as well http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/rankorder/2001rank.html
seems to be a huge discrepancy in the figure that you quoted -- now i wonder what could be the reason for that -- perhaps it may have something to do with your pathological hatred for everything pakistani hmmm...


but as a matter of rule moron, you should quote from your own govt statistics -- i would rather believe the budget speech of the indian finance minister or india`s own economic survey than the cia factbook -- but then a shithead like you wouldnt understand that --

btw frothing is strictly for the paki-haters here --

behram et al

This is addressed to those of you who have expressed outrage at the way Indian posters seem to continuously mock Pakistan and all things Pakistani.

If it seems unfair, and people like Behram seem to be the ones that are ``defending`` their blessed country, remember this:

Every time I, or most Indians I think, see a post by babbling incoherent idiots like Zeena, for example, about how the Indian Army is burning and raping Muslim women, or how Jammu and Kashmir should be an integral part of Pakistan, or independent, I feel like that one post deserves about a hundred anti-Pakistani hate-posts.



So get a handle on your self-righteous frothing-at-the-mouth indignations.

#317 by omar_r_quraishi

[abey ramanujan -- interesting the figure u got of pakistan`s gdp -- and that too official -- gdp per capita $730 (not purchasing power parity) with population of 150 million plus -- you do the math einstein -- stop giving us fudged figures ]

Listen idiot. I am not at this site to impress imbeciles like yourself that chronically infest this website.

Go to www.cia.gov, click on the link for ``The World Factbook``, choose the hallowed country of Pakistan from the dropdown, and see for yourself. USA is not run on the whims of a dictator. They have to post stuff that tallies with figures from International organizations.

Idiot!

abey ramanujan -- interesting the figure u got of pakistan`s gdp -- and that too official -- gdp per capita $730 (not purchasing power parity) with population of 150 million plus -- you do the math einstein -- stop giving us fudged figures

behram ji -- i recently went on a thirty six hour round trip train journey through the thar desert from karachi to rajasthan and back -- that is not a drawing room or is it -- why should we necessarily print your letter on mahir ali and what does that have to do with my `authenticity`? you want to fight against dawn or other papers, be my guest -- and if you think me and my editor are idiots why bother sending us letters to print -- as it is your case is not very strong now with your personal and may i add quite unfounded insults against us -- as for sending someone to houston to do a story on pakistanis, with our limited resources we rather do stories on pakistanis in pakistan first --

re:beharam`s post 302
(Pakistan is always going to remain friend of the US, no matter the MNCs claim.)
Did u listen to the link i sent u? It was a Paki who blamed US for treating Pak like a whore.
Anyway, here is some more for your viewing pleasure, from a Paki`s mouth:
http://www.jang.com.pk/thenews/feb2006-daily/26-02-2006/oped/o6.htm
(Neither here nor there

Masood Hasan

Where are we going if we are going anywhere at all?President Bush, addressing the Asia Society just prior to leaving for his trip to India and Pakistan, spoke at considerable length on February 22, forcefully and emphatically. The first half of his speech -- no, it was more like 85 per cent of his speech -- was focused on India as he reviewed our neighbour`s remarkable progress. Fact after impressive fact came forth and the US president made it very clear that here was a nation that was a serious and committed partner in fields too diverse to cover in this column.

What came across was a partnership of two great nations, trading and exchanging technology and products across the board, both committed to a long-term partnership – some initiatives going beyond the year 2050. This was not the senior partner talking down to the junior partner -- this was a partnership of tremendous promise and respect. The US president made it abundantly clear that the US saw India as a great and lucrative market, and the exchanges between the countries a way forward for both the people of India and the United States. It was a clear, candid and strong commitment that the president expressed, with pride and satisfaction. One can perhaps only imagine how the Indians who dominate the Asia Society must have felt as indeed the millions who saw the address live on television.

But we are not Indiansnot yet anyway and as a buffeted, confused believer in Pakistan whose slender faith in this nation is put to the test every day, it was with great trepidation that I waited for the president to turn to Pakistan. As was to be expected, there was virtually nothing to show for the great trading partnerships between our country and the United States and there was no mention of any significant gains made in the fields of economic activity, technology transfer or rising trade graphs. Instead, predictably, Pakistan`s reference point was only one as far as the United States was concerned -- terrorism. The president spoke about this one single factor alone and traced the brief sequence of events from the time we recognised the Taliban, then quickly ditched them (strategic turnaround I recall was the euphemistic term coined by Islamabad) at the time of that famous phone call post-9/11, when we caved in and became front-line allies (again) in the US war on terror.

This was the core subject that the president`s address to the Asia Society touched on and there was a thin bit of icing on the cake here and there, but to any one listening to the broadcast, the difference was even starker than chalk and cheese. The tenor of his voice, the open admiration in his assessment of India, the excitement at the rapid strides India has made and continues to make was as clear as the pure water they serve in crystal goblets in Islamabad. In one reference, the president mentioned Air India`s order of 68 wide-bodied aircrafts from Boeing, the largest single order in the history of civil aviation in India. This was a business partner talking with pride about his business partner. The Indians eat Domino pizzas, wash clothes in Whirlpool machines, use GE technology and run an IT empire that is the stuff dreams are made of. What do we do? We burn KFC, steal the food, trash the restaurants, loot Citibank ATMs, torch Japanese motorbikes and cars, burn Norwegian investments, destroy four ambulances and a fire tender, set on fire our Assembly building -- a veritable historical icon of our past -- and create economic mayhem in a country where sugar sells for Rs40 per kg and gasoline at God knows what price last week. As far as the US president`s tight summarisation was concerned, and he did not have to mention it, there is simply no comparison between the two countries. Depressing stuff.

But relax and rejoice because the hardworking moral brigades are not sitting around belching after another round of cholesterol-loaded halwas and puris. Twenty-two parties, no less, are taking to the streets on February 26 to join in the MMA march against the publication of the caricatures or whatever the wacky Danes printed and then reprinted until the whole world sat up and took notice. Not only are these boys going to cruise on every street they can find but they are going to do it peacefully, which is akin to asking camels to start looking pretty. The protestors want the government to send back all the ambassadors of the countries where the caricatures were printed and while they are at it, to kindly hand over all the people involved in this ghastly business, to be arrested and sent to an Islamic country (of their choice?) where they can be appropriately beheaded. However, the good news is that rumours about Qazi Hussain Ahmed abandoning his US properties, asking his children to renounce their green cards and return home to serve the motherland are highly exaggerated. The good Qazi has instead told them to keep the flag flying high and stay on to fight Satan.

Mr Butt, not of Butt Sweets, has announced in Lahore that the government should free all those picked up the other day, drop all charges and make no attempt to block their processions or else the local government would be held responsible. This is good thinking because there is nothing nicer than holding someone else responsible. The funny thing is that the way the Pakistan government has behaved so far indicates that perhaps it is, after all, the sole guilty party that published the caricatures. The MMA has vowed to carry on protesting until all the newspapers apologise and promise never to repeat this again. Strikes have been announced for just about most days of the week with a biggie on March 3 -- beware the ides of March and a `million march` on March 5. After that, since you can`t have too much of a good thing, the MMA Supreme Council will repair to Quetta and have another session there to plan more strikes.

In the meantime, the country continues to lose face and suffer very heavy losses. Every Muslim is angry about what happened and we have done all the protests we need. What is the point of more? Is it that there are people who still think the message hasn`t gone through? The joke doing the rounds is that all that the enemies of Pakistan have to do is print one caricature a day and in a few weeks` time Pakistan will be wiped off the map. There is a law of diminishing returns at work here -- the more these strikes go on, the more we will damage ourselves. While I applaud the MMA and its related brethren for their fire-belching defence of their religious creed, it would be a dream scenario were they to exhibit the same passion for the rising poverty, the pitifully small allocations given to education and health and the absence of justice in the country where they also live and thrive. On such issues there is stony silence -- and that is why all this public show of piety does not cut much ice with anyone at the end of the day.)
Sridhar

Re: # 309

{If Behram is typical of engineers coming out of Pakistani education system than Pakistani education system is in real crisis.}

There is nothing wrong with the Pakistani educational system. Everything is wrong with the writer of this article who is going overboard with his temper tantrums and repeats his useless mantra constantly. Our engineers are doing just fine in the west.

re:#307 by viewer
The most brilliant Paki scientist Abdus Salam had to struggle to do something worthwhile in Pakiland and spent most of his time outside Pakistan. An ideological state is not a place where science can thrive. If u believe that everything is in Qoran and there is nothing much to discover, can u really be blamed if u have not innovated anything.
Sridhar

re:#310 by the_patriot
(Interestingly, I hear as an alumni of MIT, Prof. Hoodbhoy has been sending some excellent Pakistani talent there ... I wonder how many have actually returned to repay Prof. for his kindness..)
I have been in US for 15 years now but i have not yet met a single Paki of any consequence. Those who are in MIT would be crazy to go back to Pukiland.
Sridhar

re: Passage to India: a special report in Times magazine
http://www.time.com/time/asia/covers/501060306/story.html
(Let`s Be Friends
When George W. Bush lands in New Delhi this week, India and the U.S. hope to seal a transformation from cold war antagonists to strategic partners

By Alex Perry

Posted Monday, February 27, 2006; 20:00 HKT
If you want a snapshot of a changing world, look at pictures of last May`s ceremony in Moscow to mark the 60th anniversary of the end of World War II. At what was one of the largest gatherings of world leaders for years, Germans shook hands with French, Japanese with British, and an American President allowed his Russian counterpart to treat him to a display of martial power, topped with hammer-and-sickle flags, while they sat and chatted amiably in front of Lenin`s tomb. As well as burying old feuds, the summit was a chance to forge new friendships. At a banquet that night at the Kremlin, George W. Bush made a beeline for Manmohan Singh. According to Singh`s press adviser, Sanjaya Baru, Bush told his wife Laura, ``This is the Indian Prime Minister.`` Singh later told Baru that the President then launched into a mini-presentation to the First Lady. India was growing fast; India had an energy crunch; India had the world`s second-largest Muslim population and not one belonged to al-Qaeda. Baru says that Bush then turned to Singh and said: ``You and I need to talk civilian nukes.``The Indians were impressed. Says Baru: ``We realized this was coming from the top.``

``This`` is one of the more dramatic geopolitical realignments of recent times. Back in the days of the cold war, India was a Soviet ally. New Delhi and Washington supported different sides in the 1971 Bangladeshi war of independence; during the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan, when the U.S. and Pakistan armed the mujahedin resistance, India backed the Moscow-imposed Afghan government. And the U.S. was furious over India`s 1998 nuclear test, when New Delhi detonated three bombs under the Rajasthani desert. That test was followed by a similar one in Pakistan, and the U.S. slapped a raft of sanctions on both nations. As former U.S. ambassador to India Robert Blackwill noted in his farewell speech in New Delhi in 2003: ``India was not seen in Washington as an essential and cooperative part of solutions to major international problems. India was one of the problems—a nuclear renegade whose policies threatened the entire nonproliferation regime and which had to be brought to its senses.`` Visits by American officials, said Blackwill, ``were about as rare as white Bengal tiger sightings.``

No longer. This week Bush lands in India for a three-day stay—a top-level follow-up to Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice`s visit last March, when she told Singh that Washington`s broad aim was ``to help India become a major world power in the 21st century.`` Besides creating goodwill, Bush also hopes to deliver something concrete to the Indians: a deal that promises Delhi access to the highly restricted trade in nuclear fuel. The agreement would lift the remaining sanctions and offer access to the world`s nuclear expertise to help build India`s atomic-energy program. In return, India would pledge to use the imported nuclear fuel only to generate power. It would also have to split its existing 23 reactors into military and civilian stations. Washington wants most of the reactors—including a fast-breeder program that`s under construction and which produces more fuel than it consumes—to be placed in the latter category and opened to U.N. inspection.

The U.S. offer takes place against the backdrop of a shift in the world`s nuclear landscape. Many developing countries such as China, Brazil and Iran are launching or stepping up their nuclear-power programs, either to diversify their sources of energy or as a matter of national pride. But such an expansion of nuclear power could encourage the illicit trade in plutonium and uranium, the essential ingredients for nuclear weapons. In the 1980s and `90s, Pakistan`s chief nuclear scientist A.Q. Khan built a thriving trade selling nuclear secrets to Iran, Libya and North Korea. To better police the flow of nuclear materials, the White House has unveiled a proposal for a Global Nuclear Energy Partnership, in which a core of approved supplier nations would provide nuclear fuel to users. The trade would be done under international monitoring and on condition of non-military use, and the suppliers would recycle the waste rather than let it be diverted to weapons programs. The proposal would supplement, and require changes to, the two key instruments of arms control: the 28-year-old Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty (NPT), banning the supply of nuclear fuel to states with atomic weapons, and the Nuclear Suppliers Group, a 44-nation nonproliferation body set up in 1974 in reaction to India`s first nuclear test. At a speech to the Asia Society last week in Washington, Bush said that the U.S.-India deal was the vanguard of this wider restructuring. ``We are starting with India,`` he told reporters. ``We`ll bring India`s nuclear program into the international mainstream and strengthen the bonds of trust between our two nations.``

Beyond the nuclear initiative, the U.S. and India are beginning to see each other as kindred spirits. Both are democracies. Both have thriving—and increasingly integrated—technology sectors. Both speak English, and enjoy the same yoga gurus, the same escapism in movies and even the same food. ``Young Indians are acquiring a taste for pizzas from Domino`s and Pizza Hut,`` Bush told the Asia Society. Washington and Delhi also both fight Islamic militancy and share concerns over China`s rising power. Indian Foreign Secretary Shyam Saran tells Time his U.S. counterparts are explicit about a desire for a strong and lasting alliance to act as a ``bulwark against the arc of Islamic instability`` running from the Middle East to Asia, and to create ``much greater balance in Asia``—in other words, for India to act as a counterweight to China.
Relations between Washington and New Delhi took a marked turn for the better in the second term of Bill Clinton. The spark was a friendship between Strobe Talbott, Clinton`s U.S. Deputy Secretary of State, and Jaswant Singh, the then Indian Minister of External Affairs. The pair first met at a time of crisis, after India`s 1998 nuclear test. But the men developed a strong bond. They met every two months during Talbott`s time in office and swapped ideas for better ties, as Talbott related in his memoir of the period, Engaging India. In particular, they fretted that a U.S. President hadn`t stepped on Indian soil since 1978. So on his swan-song foreign tour at the end of 2000, Clinton made a trip to India and did what he does best: charm. For five days, the newspapers were filled with images of the Clintons in Ranthambore Tiger Reserve, the President eating kebabs, and his daughter Chelsea shopping for pashminas in Delhi`s markets. To this day, carpet traders, hoteliers and restaurants in New Delhi claim a personal relationship with America`s former first family as proof of their standing. ``People loved it,`` says Lalit Mansingh, a former Foreign Secretary. ``The Americans were playing ball with the Indian public for the first time. That was the big change.``

Over the next few years, relations improved. Blackwill decoupled U.S. ties with India and Pakistan, and strove to end a long period in which Washington felt that if it pleased Islamabad it would only annoy New Delhi—and vice versa. That allowed Washington to engage simultaneously with India and pursue its anti-terrorism goals in Pakistan. Then, in May 2004, the man who opened up India`s economy in 1993 as Finance Minister returned as Prime Minister. Singh`s first foreign trip was to the U.S. On the eve of his departure, he told Time that India had been slow to wake up to the post-cold war world, but added it wasn`t sleeping any longer: ``It has taken us quite some time to realize there is no other option but to align ourselves with the modern global economy.``

Blackwill says India has long held a personal fascination for Bush as a living and breathing embodiment of his ideals. ``A billion people in a functioning democracy,`` he recalls then governor Bush saying in 1999. ``Isn`t that something?`` Once Bush was in power, Blackwill and Rice encouraged the President to pursue his instincts and build an alliance of substance. Blackwill`s successor in New Delhi, David Mulford, former Under Secretary for International Affairs at the Treasury in George H.W. Bush`s administration, soon found himself knee-deep in talks on a range of deals from joint military exercises to aids research to space exploration. Top of the list was the nuclear deal.

In neither country is support for the new relationship complete. ``This is not an easy decision for India,`` Bush told the Asia Society, ``nor is it an easy decision for the United States, and implementing this agreement will take time, and it will take patience from both our countries.`` A fundamental change in policy on the control of nuclear materials is a hard sell. Antiproliferation campaigners say the deal means that the U.S. would be helping India to build more bombs. Congress must approve any change to the NPT and in testimony to the House International Relations Committee, Henry Sokolski, executive director of the Nonproliferation Policy Education Center, argued against the new proposals. If the U.S. opposes Iran`s atomic program because it suspects civilian nuclear facilities would be used to make bombs, said Sokolski, then surely Washington was now freeing up India`s existing capacity to produce plutonium and enriched uranium for weapons, and so ``helping India expand its nuclear arsenal.`` Daryl G. Kimball, executive director of the Arms Control Association, warns of the possibility that the nuclear deal will spark an arms race with Pakistan and China. Last year, the Pakistani Foreign Office, says one of its officials, submitted a paper to President Pervez Musharraf urging him to enhance nuclear cooperation with China, calling it a ``must for the country`s nuclear deterrent.``

In India, nationalists, nuclear scientists and communists oppose the idea that India open its programs to inspections on the say-so of a foreign power. They accuse Singh of pawning national security for ties with the U.S. and allowing an implicit cap on its nuclear deterrent. ``India cannot compromise,`` said India`s most senior nuclear scientist, Atomic Energy Commission chief Anil Kakodkar, over the U.S. demand to allow inspectors to view its fast-breeder reactors. So far, India and the U.S. have been unable to agree on what proportion of India`s nuclear program should be declared civilian, and opened up, and what kept as military and secret. But even if a deal is not finalized by the time Bush lands in India, the visit ``will not be a failure,`` says Robert Hathaway, an India expert at the Woodrow Wilson International Center in Washington. ``There`s a multiplicity of interests with India at this point and I would not want to judge a trip on the lack of progress on a single issue.``

Bush, of course, is not the only person to spot India`s potential. In the last 18 months, New Delhi has hosted the leaders of Russia, Japan, China and Britain. Bush`s visit comes a week after the departure of French President Jacques Chirac, who signed France`s own civilian nuclear-cooperation deal with India before he left, and a few days before the arrival of Australian Prime Minister John Howard. But the U.S. has an edge. Outside official links—in the diplomacy of the heart—ties between the two nations are growing every day. There are 2 million ethnic Indians in the U.S., and India has become the largest source of foreign students there. The U.S. is India`s biggest business partner, with bilateral trade worth $20 billion in 2004, three times the 1992 figure; the largest foreign investor in the Indian stock market, accounting for 40% of equity inflows between 1993-2005; and the biggest foreign backer of Indian business. In 1991, U.S. direct investments in India were worth just $11 million; in 2004, $620 million flowed in. And then there`s Silicon Valley. ``You can`t underestimate the impact of the technological revolution that took place in the U.S. in the late 1990s and the huge number of Indian entrepreneurs who contributed to that,`` says Narayana Murthy, chairman of Infosys, one of India`s leading technology firms. ``Politics is driven to a large extent by economics.`` Bush regularly scores higher approval ratings in India than in the U.S.

The biggest hurdles to a bright future are the habits of the past. Sensitivity to foreign interference in its internal affairs is high in India, where a history of opposing imperialism has produced one of the proudest nations on earth. No Indian government could accept a relationship with the U.S. in which it was obviously the junior partner. Some in the U.S. are wise to the dangers of being overbearing. Last year, Rice warned India not to pursue a plan to build a gas pipeline from Iran. When she was ignored in New Delhi, the U.S. quietly dropped the subject. ``We`re not trying to strong-arm them in any way,`` says the deputy chief of mission at the U.S. Embassy in New Delhi, Robert O. Blake. ``It`s counterproductive.`` Some U.S. Congressmen insist, however, that in return for accepting Washington`s help for its nuclear program, India must back the U.S. in its efforts to shut down Iran`s. Last summer, Tom Lantos, a Democrat from California, called then Indian Minister for External Affairs Natwar Singh ``dense`` for not grasping the quid pro quo on Iran.

Old attitudes live on in India too. The nation`s communists scored their best vote ever at the 2004 general election, and Singh relies on them for his parliamentary majority. Though the economy is opening fast, on matters like privatization India still lags—this month New Delhi, Bombay and Calcutta airports were buried in garbage and sewage as 23,000 workers went on strike over sell-off plans. However much the Indian public may love the U.S., Indian intellectuals are overwhelmingly left-of-center and anti-American. ``Nobody`s supposed to be nice about Bush,`` laughs New Delhi-based nuclear expert C. Raja Mohan. ``My friends get terribly upset when I say he`s offering us a good deal.``

Prakash Karat, leader of the Communist Party of India (Marxist), says his party does not oppose America on principle. But he is outraged that Singh is sitting down with the man he considers Imperialist Nemesis No. 1, and grumbles about a sinister-sounding ``pro-American lobby in the Indian establishment.`` The timing of Bush`s trip, which is expected to wrap up March 3—just before a vote at the International Atomic Energy Agency at which India must decide whether to support referral of Iran`s nuclear program to the U.N. Security Council—have redoubled Karat`s anti-Bush instincts. Tens of thousands of communist supporters, he says, will dog Bush`s visit with mass protests.

But Karat`s world is being changed for him. India`s revolutionaries are a ragtag bunch who have no real shot at derailing its economic boom. Karat himself admits the old Soviet Union was never the aspirational focus the U.S. is today. And whatever the size of the protests Bush meets, bitter hostility towards the U.S. is now only found in demonstrations, not in government. Karat runs his campaign from a sparsely furnished office in a dusty side-street on the edge of the central government sprawl in New Delhi. The walls are hung with a small portrait of Lenin and a faded Soviet propaganda poster from the 1920s, exhorting workers to build better steam railways. Asked about the welcome Bush will receive, he says: ``When [BRACKET {Soviet leader Nikita}] Khrushchev came here in 1955, the hugest crowds turned out to meet him.`` The message is unmistakable, if unintended. That was then. But this is now.

With reporting by Matthew Cooper and Elaine Shannon/Washington and Talat Hussein/Islamabad )
Sridhar

Re: # 309

I`m not Simmi. The ``S`` is for Sadanand.

I agree with you on the education system in India. The government backing for most universities and schools did help a lot of people. Perhaps a little more attention to primary education would have made it even better.
The other advantage was having a civilian government. Pakistan may have been a little handicapped by the succession of military rulers. By it`s very nature a military government has other aims than providing a good educational and industrial infrastructure that could be put to use for the civilian section.
I have met good Pakistani engineers and doctors here. They place the same premium on good academics that any Indian would. I wonder if the competition to survive there is as high as in India. That is what pushes most of the people to study.
It`s either get a good education or get consigned to the rubbish heap.

306: viewer, i agree with you on that part. If the group really was honest abt it, it shouldnt have broken up.

But Prof. Hoodbhoy is looking at the bigger picture here ... even if you have a dozen einsteins working in pakistan, unless and until the status quo in education isnt changed, they wont be able to do much or even survive. Take the example of World War II for example, many scientists were forced to flee to countries like the US to escape Nazi persecution for example. Even brilliant scientists need a good environment to work atleast, and that is exactly wat Pakistan is lacking.

Interestingly, I hear as an alumni of MIT, Prof. Hoodbhoy has been sending some excellent Pakistani talent there ... I wonder how many have actually returned to repay Prof. for his kindness.

swarrier #293

``However in terms of Behram, his posts are not very accurate. He`s like the ``Nowhere man``. He writes what he wants to write. And in truth, vituperation aside, I find his posts mildly amusing and sometimes boringly repititve.``

Simmi,
I do not know anything about Pakistani education system, and hence won`t comment on that. However, I can safely convey my gratitude my satisfaction towards Indian education system where I could study in a Rs 12 per month government school, and than could get educated from world class professors at less than Rs 300 per month. I can state with confidence that I am not an exception. A large percentage of my friends are from rural background. God bless our education system in India..

If Behram is typical of engineers coming out of Pakistani education system than Pakistani education system is in real crisis.

Old men spewing abuse, mildly amusing at first but can get tedious later on. So much for interact guidelines being followed. Call me when they start talking about science again.