The Ongoing IT Revolution and Security Implications for Pakistan

i think if right now pakkistan and india were to open trade india would crush pakistan .i feel like this cuz india produces a large quality and good quantity.

pakistan lacks both so untill we bring our selfs to the standard we should`t open trade with india.

This is a fascinating thread. I have been reading interesting exchanges between VSN and the rest. I clearly disagree with VSN`s view of not recruiting an eligible candidate because he is not a Pakistani. I have often thought of this animosity between the 2 nations as the result of a certain mindset. When the British ruled us, it was the concept of ``British Imperialism`` that was at fault. The British themselves were not a bad lot. So also,IMO,both Pakistan and India have been nurturing some bad concepts (or mindset). That Jihad can solve what diplomacy cannot,that India is to be solely blamed for 1971 East Pakistan fiasco (and hence needs to be avenged),that Kashmir problem is so paramount that everything else including trade with India can wait are some of the bad concepts that Pakistani govt. (and some Pakistanis) nurtures. Indian govt (and some Indians) may be faulted for acting like bullys at times and not being sensitive to some of the issues of neighbours (there are too many to be recounted here). This does not automatically mean people are bad. But bad policies,in at least Pakistan`s case,seem to have outlived their makers.

Having said this,it baffles me to see the route Pakistan is taking. Most Pakistanis outside their country have the advantage of being unbiased and can bring fresh insight into the problems plaguing our relationship. What is preventing the 2 countries from engaging in mutually beneficial trade? As someone pointed out in this thread,Pakistan stands to gain a lot more. There is a huge market in India that is waiting to be tapped,be it energy sector,roads,or IT or what have you. As trade improves and picks up momentum,the 2 countries will be committed to peace because it is obvious you cannot have trade without peace. Pakistan is fritting away a golden chance of earning $600 million annually by just providing safe passage of natural gas through a pipeline from Iran to India. The project is not taking off since India fears that the safety of pipelines may be jeopardised by Taliban in future. I also feel that once enough trade happens between the 2 countries, there will be vested interest on both sides of the divide who would demand peace. Finding a solution to seemingly intractable problems like Kashmir will be easier then. Pakistan govt`s big mistake is to believe that trade can wait. It`s other mistake is to try and see if Jihadis can accomplish what diplomacy has not accomplished so far. It does not realise that these Jihadis will turn against Pakistan itself one day.

So,in order for things to change,i am afraid,first the mindset of governments should change. If and when Pakistani people find a way of electing a political leader without army`s interference and trade between the 2 countries become a reality, I see only good times in store for us.

vsn

i appreciate your actions.

you don`t have to lay open your conscience before this gang of pinkoes.

what is this discussion achieving ?

buying parity between india and pakistan in IT?

better to talk of kashmir and hindu/muslim stuff and leave saner things like IT aside.

nchiket

vsn #262

A innocent child who is without authority or means to make political impact and an innocent citizen possibly without means (or inclination) to make political impact but both of whom are made to suffer for it materially, are not apples and oranges, they are equivalent.

BTW, as far as I`m concerned, you are free to invest anywhere you like or boycott what goods you like. I am happy to see you concede at least `little on the sleazy side` on the discrimination issue.

And superior morality has one advantage(which is why it is superior), you might realise, that it can be made to bring in desired results while minimizing unmanageable and undesired repurcussions. `Finer legal points` often shroud this compelling reality.

Sadhana

vsn #262:

I would say that what you are doing is NOT morally wrong. It could be professionally unethical and even counter-productive and I donot know about the legal aspect.

I am wondering if anyone can actually sue you for employing a dsicriminatory policy for hiring, though it is for your own company. Given the legal strictures in the US against the myriad forms of discrimination, can you escape the legal net, were someone to find out about your hiring practices?

I will reiterate, I dont think what you are doing is morally wrong, since though it is an injustice to each of the Pakistanis rejected by you because of his/her nationality, I think its a kind of non-cooperation with the country that is believed to be involved in all and sundry subversive activites in India. I know Pakistanis have the same grudge against India and I would not call them amoral if they were to start boycotting Indian stores or movies or any other thing Indian. If we can boycott certain cosmetic companies for unethical treatment of animals, to give an example, cant we also boycott a country because of its inimical behavior towards our country?

As for the impact of such boycott of everything Pakistani by Indians, I am not as optimistic as you are. Figuratively speaking, Pakistan is ready to eat grass to wage a thousand year war against India, as was put by Late Zulfikar Ali Bhutto. Nevertheless, it doesnt mean one shoudlnot try.

Satyavadi

sadna #261

You are comparing apples with oranges. We are talking about citizens

of warring countries in a neutral country. Don’t you expect discrimination among

them? Obviously they only place they can meet is on neutral ground, not

in each others countries. It is natural that they wont be in a very

cooperative mood. It is a natural consequence of wars. There is a

a lot of pain that comes with the territory.

As long as you obey the laws of the land, do you have a moral obligation

to cooperate or help people who have a direct connection to our enemy country.

There are lots of economic activities, which require cooperation between

people beside employment. What about doing business with Pakistanis? Can’t I spend

my dollars wherever I like? Do I have to fund Pakistani companies? Would people

come and sue me if I do not give 10Million dollars to a Pakistani even though his

idea is better than some XYZ company`s idea? I would like to fight that case:)

I concede that my not hiring a Pakistani is a little on sleazy side even

though it is for my own company and not for anyone else. But in reality

I lose more than he does, by not hiring him. The programmers

are in driver seat everywhere.

If Pakistanis count on the superior morality of Indians in saving them

from their retaliation all over the world they may be half right.The other

half suffer from moral apathy:) But there is a limit for everything.

Do we care half as much about as poor innocent lives lost everyday in Kashmir as we

argue about the finer points of law ensuring that there be no small

discomfort to a Pakistani exptraite`s luxurious life style in US? By not

taking a moral stance on issues we are only showing apathy. And are we morally

right in demanding rights from people to whom we deny the same right?

When the threshold is reached Pakistanis may not be able to stop the wave of resentment and will lose a lot economically. To preempt that educated Pakistanis should actively dissociate themselves from the military govt, lobby for democracy,

lobby for secularism and bring about pro Indian policies in Pakistan. It is

a tall order but future prosperity depends on it.

vsn #219

Your logic is spurious.

You say `` am not doing it solely because the numbers favor me. Numbers favor me to discriminate against lot of people you will surely agree. I am doing it because i want the people sitting in ivory towers to feel the heat and do something to influence the politics of their country.``

What you do in your capacity as an individual is one thing. What you do as a professional with responsibilities to his employer and to his profession (even if you are self-employed, a company cannot act with the freedom of an individual) is another. Here is an example. Suppose you had a daughter who attended soccer coaching at school. Suppose India had just tested its nuclear devices, giving the world a nasty surprise. Suppose your daughter`s soccer coach was a Cold War veteran who feels really angry at the nuclear genie being out of the bottle again and his family and country living under the nuclear threat again, reminding him of those insecure sixties when children used to have nuclear war drill. He may choose to mistreat your daughter or refuse to have her on the team saying `I am doing it because I want the people sitting in ivory towers to feel the heat and do something to influence the politics of their country.` According to you he would be justified, right? Wrong, he or you have no right to use your professional position to play politics.

If you want to guard against unfair discrimination against yourself, first you have to not resort to such unfair practices too, get it? You are not really in a position to have it only your way anywhere or anytime though you may think you are. And you are doing other Indians only disservice if you behave in an unethical manner.

As an individual if you want to organise an interest group or even a hate group, thats your business, but neither you nor your employer(where you yourself are concerned) is justified in discriminating solely on basis of your political affiliations in a field of work where these affiliations have no relevance.

``But dont you discriminate against dumb people, arrogant people, irresponsible people, obnoxious people``
When you make a blanket assumption about given nationality=arrogance, irresponsibility, whatever, you open the door for blanket judgements to be passed on yourself, too. What will you do then? And one must surely be a really bad manager if one is so prone to generalization or bias.

Sadhana

Regarding vsn and the legal discussions:

I think that there are two different things - law and morality. Something that may violate one`s moral code (eg infidelity) may not immoral but not necessarily illegal. Similarly, something that is illegal (eg littering?) may not go against a person`s moral code. Secondly, morality is individual - each person has his/her own moral code of what is acceptable and what is not (eg lying, cheating, stealing etc), whereas the law is common to all - ideally reflecting what is moral according to the majority of people.

Then again, laws differ from country to country (or even state to state), as what is moral/immoral according to the majority may differ from country to country. Eg: infidelity is illegal in India, not so in the US; sodomy is illegal in India, not so in the US; bigamy is illegal in the US, not so in India (for some communities).

So vsn`s decision to not hire Pakistanis as it would indirectly strengthen India`s enemy (through $ remittances, political clout etc) may be moral according to his code, and it certainly would not be illegal in India, but it may violate laws in the US (I am not sure). If there is a conflict between one`s moral code and the law of the land (`foreign` land in vsn`s case), it is upto vsn to decide which one he should follow.

Finally, what is moral or what is legal may not be constant over time. Slavery, bonded labour, caste system etc have been practiced in the centuries gone by, even by otherwise pious and `good` people, but have become abhorrent over time. Who knows how the future will judge us, with our abortions, killing of animals and birds for food, our jihads and so on.

Anamika,

Youre right, I`m not a lawyer. However, I stand behind my point. You dont HAVE to be a doctor to know whether something is grossly unhealthy or not.

Your argument about maintaing morale/colleguality in the office leads to a very very slippery slope.

Lets agree to disagree on this

VijayAmrit #251

The people here are busy Government of Pakistan and Government of India officials.

So better go to a lighter area.

shankar #256

Are you a lawyer? If not, please desist from straying into legal territory. There is discrimination and there is discrimination. Bad-tempered, hard-to-get-along-with persons are denied tenure on university campuses every day and not many of them win reinstatement and tenure with a lawsuit. Stuff happens. As to morality, the situation is very specific. Just because A is sort of B, etc. (the famous Sac Logic) it just doesn`t make any two random things equal. There simply is no historical discrimination or a pattern of discrimination of Pakistanis by Indians in the US. If there indeed is any discrimination - which I am aware of only through vsn`s public confessions, it probably has not been around long, not systematic and you have no case.

anamika

#212, 252, 255

You are skating on very very thin ice.

When you justify hiring or not hiring someone because it would effect colleguality or morale in the office; it smacks of racism & bigotry--pure & simple. A trial lawyer could have a lot of fun with you on the witness stand. (I`m assuming you live in the US).

The bigots made those very same arguments when the US military wanted to racially integrate itself. They say the same thing when women or gays want a job in the military.

I disagree with your logic on both, legal & moral grounds.

This level of goofup is too much even for me. I`ll correct the most significant of many. Please read (1) If you thought hiring someone will be disruptive to collegiality,

would you still hire that person who might be qualified in every

other respect? If the answer is NO, then may be we differ on

where you set the threshold. If the answer is YES, then presumably

you run a charity for South Asian workers in which case your

situation is unique and does not apply to what is being discussed

here.

Rsaxena #245, ``Good point you raise. I wonder what people think of firms throwing out resumes from students who don`t come from Ivy League or

other top-10 schools. Is that a type of unfair discrimination? ``

What world do you live in? Discrimination on the basis of race, religion, sex, and sexual orientation is constitutionally illegal and morally wrong. That is what this VSN jerk is doing. Personal characteristics such as responsibility, ability, intelligence etc are determined by the interview process. I`m sure you know this but your hatred for Pakistani blinds you into accepting vsn`s arguments as sound.

scout

Manoj,

Ah, the old cartographic aggression bit again.. been reading up on the SAAG papers or something?

Re:1971, oddly enough, Indian troops were already in East Pakistan a full 2 weeks before the `official` start of the war (started by the `Pakis`, natch). And heck, Pakistan beat India into opening the conflict in the Western theatre by what, a couple of days? We may as well have waited those tw0 days, for all the good it did us.

Pakistani commandoes were looting and pillaging who, exactly, in the Kargil mountains?

Umairr #222

I will make the following points in response to what I believe is the gist of your characteristically l..o..n..g piece:

(1) If you thought hiring someone will be disruptive to collegiality, would you still hire that person who might be qualified in every other respect? If the answer is yes, then may be we differ on where you set the threshold. If the answer is no, then presumably you run a charity for South Asian workers in which case your situation is unique and does not apply to what is being discussed here.

(2) As to the equivalence of Siachin and Kargil, pardon me, but it sounds like a *post facto * justification. The road from Siachin to Kargil (figuratively of course) is not continuous except may be in Pakistani military minds. There had been several peace overtures on the political front between the two countries, with the latest being Lahore. Your type of thinking where past actions are just as valid as present ones, peace will NEVER be possible. There are two related points.

(1) As someone else has said already, to the generation that is dominant among Indians in the valley, Kargil is a big deal. They are too young to remember other conflicts. OTOH, to a Kanwal Rekhi, Kargil may be just another blip in history and he can continue to claim to be a product of the Indus valley.

(2) Prior to Kargil, among educated Indians at least, you`d have found the feeling that continuing to hold on to Siachin at an enormous human cost is foolish. There were any number of press reports/articles on the stypidity of Siachin. It was the (Indian) military that had always deemed Siachin to be strategically important. Popular opinion, or whatever passes for it, was unconvinced but unsure now of what to believe after Kargil. Your backhanded condemnation of Kargil notwithstanding, it is hard for an Indian mind to believe that you really mean it when you say Kargil=Siachin=every other confict.

Looking at the replies, here it seems to me, Pakistanis are enjoying the vacation, while Indians are arguing. Look at the last few posts, it is all by Indians (Including this one).

sameerJB #230, crypto #249

` India went into siachen first etc etc ...`

A)

Obviously Sameer , crypto you need to brush up your military history a bit. Pakistan started sending military/civilian mountaineering expeditions into the Siachen area. This was a prelude to a Pakistani cartographic agression of the unmarked areas ahead of NJ 4982. Indians got wind of these expeditions and sent out a patrol to investigate. The patrol collected some vital info but persihed in the icy wastes. In 1983 Pakistan army (SSG company) came to a position called Bilafond La and occupied the position. It wanted to go further but becuase of approaching winter and logistic problems went no further. The operation to go ahead of Bilafond la was codenamed ` Taqbeer` or something similar sounding. The Pakistani army planned to go their in May 1984. The indian army as part of op `meghdoot` occupied Siachen in April 1984. Pakistan army took lot of casualties when they went to occupy the positions they thought were vacant but occupied by Indians. The present CEO of Pakistan was among some of the SSG who were part in these and other failed attempts.

Subsequent to 1984 Indians pushed Pakis to the Saltoro ridge. One of the most important posts to fall was the Pakistani `Quaid ` post. subedar Bana Singh of J&K LI got Param Vir chakra for the effort. benazir bhutto taunted Gen Zia for Pakistani rout at Siachen and its withdrawl ( lots of experience in withdrawls). So the current position is at saltoro and not Siachen. Howeber, the Pakistani governement made its citizens believE that the positions were at SiAchen. Pakistanis now dont own an inch of Siachen!!!!! However the name Siachen has stuck becuase the first round of fighting occured at Siachen.

For a better perspective

http://www.geocities.com/Pentagon/Bunker/5040/map7.html

a very interesting map indeed. Some vital points

a) LAC - line of actual control ( this is the position today )

b) Since LOC was not defined ahead of NJ 4982, the map somehow shows a LOC ahead of NJ 4982!!!!????

c) From NJ4982 if one were to go in a NORTHERLY ( as suggested in Simla accord) direction , you certainly cant reach Karakoram pass!!!! for that you need to go EAST!!!!

B) How about the 1965 war? The common argument is Indians attacked Pakistan first in Punjab. But what was the provocation? Pakistani regulars dressed as freedom fighters ( a la Kargil) entered Kashmir to plunder, pillage and hopefully annex. What they did not bargain for was an Indian riposte in Punjab. ( how similar to Kargil, some people dont ever learn)

C) 71, the less said the better.

Yes, it was india that occupied the heights at Siachen first in 1984. Whether that was a preemptive move or otherwise is debatable. As somebody has pointed out, the LoC is delineated only until map point NJ 9842. ``thence north to the glaciers`` - is how ceasefire line was defined in 1949 indo-pak agreement. this is suffieciently vague enough for our strategists to latch on to their own interpretation. pakistan extrapolates LoC in a straight along north-east joining NJ9842 with the karakoram pass. india - needless to say - extrapolates to the north west direction along the soltoro range.

there are different opinions among the indian political establishment about the handling of siachen. some people favour a settlement with pakistan about mutual withdrawl from siachen, as the defense of siachen comes with a HUGE price tag for india. considering the extremely hostile and uninhabitable terrain, it is not worth the while to defend it at that cost. it is also true that unlike its policy on J&K, pakistan is quite flexible with siachen. (even as recent as 1992, both the countries came close to a settlement)

some others argue for holding siachen tight at any cost, since it is pakistans`s `bleeding ground`. pakistan also drains a lot of resources in siachen, and therefore withdrawing from there would release the pressure on pakistan.

But the indian army has the last say. the army`s position is that the holding on to siachen is vital to the defense of indian forces at Leh and kargil against a chinese and/or pakistani assault. siachen is the wedge between pakistan-kashmir and aksai-chin, and as such the presence of indian forces at siachen would enable india to monitor the karakoram highway and to prevent the aksaichin highway from being connected to karakoram pass.

who`s right, who`s wrong we might never be allowed to know. fact is, it IS india that holds the key to resolving siachen. india is in sitting tight on the commanding heights of the glacier, that directly dislodging them from that position by the relatively low-lying pakistanis would be next to impossible task. may be that`s why pakistan chose the low cost kargil route to cut-off indian supply lines. many pakistanis on chowk have already convinced us of this fact ;-).

That does not take away the foolishness of the move. everything about it was stupid except the purpose. and now you guys are paying it dear.

(i remember reading a article, of indo-pak combined authorship, that pakistan considers siachen as a local issue while the J&K as an international one. may be it is true. look at the scant attention siachen gets even in paki press compared to the prominence given for indian-JK affairs. WHY ???)

PS: 97% of deaths on both sides in Siachen is caused by the harsh weather and living conditions and only 3% on combat.

shankar #243, ``I guess if there were more women leaders in this world, we wouldnt be in this sorry state.``

I once read an interesting joke:

A woman once asked God why he created man first.

God replied, ``I had to make a rough draft before making the final copy.`` ;)

Perhaps these male leaders are rough drafts of the final copies yet to come.

Once, I came across a bumper sticker that read ,

``God bless President Clinton and her husband Bill.``

scout

RE: shankar

``I guess if there were more women leaders in this world, we wouldnt be in this sorry state.``

Are you related to Barbara Streisand or Sally Struthers?

Pakistan should stop copying India if ever wants to come out ot Indian shadow. What is good for India is not necesssarily good for Pakistan. Instead of wasting precious resources in trying to find a niche in an already crowded field of IT, Pakistan should concentrate building on its areas of strength. Pakistan has advantages in textile and agriculture. World needs clothes and food more than IT. World textile market is worth 1 trillion dollars and if Pakistan can tap even 5% of world textile market, its foreign currency problems can be resolved. These sectors are man-power intensive and can provide millions of jobs. Unfortunatley Pakistan sell only raw cotton and low margin items like T-shirts and beddings. There is no effort in tapping high value market with newer designs. Pakistan can also develop its fashion industry beyond salwar-kameez era. Imagine if Pakistan had peace, multinational companies will start moving shops to Pakistan, a country with plenty of cotton/textiles and talented work force in that field.

IT is not panacea for Pakistan or even for India but India is much better placed because it has strong foundation and had a head start. I hope my comments are not construed as discouraging Pakistani efforts in IT field but in my opinion IT sector is not the right course for Pakistan`s economy. IT will benefit only few thousand but other sectors can benefit millions.

Pakistan should stop fantasising about taking advantage about strategic location. I have yet to hear about a country which is not strategically located. American spin bowlers use this term to pump up their lackeys in various parts of the world. No country prospers just on the basis of their location. Rule of law, hard work and peace within its borders is must for any development.

Just my two anna thoughts...

Re: vsn

``But dont you discriminate against dumb people, arrogant people, irresponsible people, obnoxious people,..etc in one way or the other?``

Good point you raise. I wonder what people think of firms throwing out resumes from students who don`t come from Ivy League or other top-10 schools. Is that a type of unfair discrimination?

RSaxena,

Hehehe

You cretin, I KNEW you could`nt resist swallowing my bait.

Baaaa

What a b-a-k-r-a!

Scout,

{{Hey, what about Slink and Sadhna and Jawahara and Zahra and Zehra and Fozia and Frog-goddess and Sobia and Lubna and Anamika and many many other women without whom Chowk lacks flavor and female worldliness.}}

Sorry about that:) When youre right youre right!

Aapeki maufi chaahata haun.

There are too many names (yours especially) that I included in the category of ``many, many others``.

I guess if there were more women leaders in this world, we wouldnt be in this sorry state. After all, think about what Benazir could have done for Pakistan, if it had`nt been for her idiot ``Mr 10% husband`` !

Re: shankar

``For eg, if you follow RSaxena`s posts carefully, he lashes out at India vociferously (when his guard is down).``

You sneaky little leftist...thought you`d get away with this didn`t you? Just wait and see what comes your way next...

VijayAmrit #227

I can tell you why a person reading history cannot criticize four wives.

The commandment for (a maiximum of) four wives came after Ghazwah Uhad (battle of Uhad) in which a large number of Muslims were killed. And there was a problem of widows. In Islam extramarital sex is not allowed, and that was the solution.

That is why most Muslims, particularly practicing Muslims engage in monogamous relationship, and polygamy is an exception, rather than a rule.

As far as Arab Sheikhs, their oil wealth has made their behaviour similar to their western counterparts with wealth, the difference is this that one gives it a cover of liberalism and other twists Islam.

shankar #235, ``Chowk has given me a new found

respect for Pakistanis like yourself, Bilal, tahmed, Sameer,Feroze & many many others.``

Hey, what about Slink and Sadhna and Jawahara and Zahra and Zehra and Fozia and Frog-goddess and Sobia and Lubna and Anamika and many many other women without whom Chowk lacks flavor and female worldliness.

Some men are such MCP`s.

scout

Urstruly,

Bus, sirf ``tsk,tsk,tsk`` ?!

Kuch to kaho ji

Aandey aur tamatar phekna hai to pheklijiye

I can duck:)

RE: Shankar #237

Tsk! Tsk! Tsk!

Mere pyaare Chowkwalloh,

Please forgive my numerous postings. My wife & teenage daughter are trying to drag me to the mall for shopping on this fine Labor Day weekend. I`m trying to tell them I have more important things to do. My wife accuses me of engaging in verbal masturbation about Indo-Pak relations.

I`m telling her if we cant have sex this fine afternoon, I might as well masterbate (er, verbally, ofcourse). It sure beats the heck out of going shopping. O my fellow menfolk of Indo-Pak, please support me on this point at least!

Let me bring up the issue of Kargil. Pakistanis are irritated why Indians are beating this horse to death, especially when Pakistanis on Chowk have criticised Kargil. Not to mention that we Indians are so convieniently downplaying Siachen & sweeping our other demons under the carpet.

First of all, I`m not asking Pakistanis to judge us differently. That privilege is yours & yours only. I want Pakistanis to put their personal biases aside & try to empathise where Indians are coming from. Why are we squaking so much about Kargil? that some have gone to the extent of boycotting Pakistanis & their products; especially when there is plenty of hypocracy within us.

The Lahore Peace process was not any ordinary deal for us; it was a HUGE deal.In fact it was the biggest deal in our sorry Indo-Pak relations. This was the first time EVER that an Indian Prime Minister stepped foot on Pakistani soil. Vajpayee defied the radical elements in his party & went to Pakistan. The partition generation of India (which is still in power today) has struggled to reconcile with the two nation theory. This visit was a big deal because it symbolised their emotional acceptance that Pakistan was a separate distinct country with which we have to do business with. Even though the meeting didnt produce any great results, that fact that it even happened was a major triumph that there are people on both sides who are willing to put our grudges (real or imagined) aside & talk. It set the ball rolling in the right direction.

If the Government of Pakistan was angry about Siachen & Kargil was a justifiable military strategy, then for God`s sake DONT invite Vajpayee. If you`ve taken the responsibility of being a gracious host, then you`ve taken the responsibility of being sincere about it. Either cancel the Kargil plan or cancel the invitation. You cant have it both ways. What does it say about the famous Pakistani hospitality, when you plan & execute Kargil while you are entertaining our Prime Minister?

I think what Vajpayee was most pissed about was the radical Indian fundos started squaking ``WE TOLD YOU SO!!!``

As far as Indians were concerned, it is the epitomy of the proverb ``bhagal mein churi---`` The fact that this was the first war on tv, galvanised most Indians-even those who had no interest in politics. Indian muslims were just as outraged as hindus. Few events in recent history have brought Indians behind one banner as this one. So, as much as you justify Kargil with Siachen, it doesnt mean a whole lot to us--right,wrong or indifferent. The issue of Siachen should have been dealt with in diplomacy rather than military tactics.

How did the rest of the world see it? They all sided with India. Even the ``all weather friend`` China told Pakistan to cut the crap--politely, of course. To make matters worse, Nawaz Shariff & Musharaff publicly contradicted each other. When Pakistan blames India for trying to isolate it internationally, its a joke. Indian diplomacy, govermental or NGO has`nt been effective. Its not that they havent tried, its just that they arent as successful as many think they are. Pakistan has done a great job digging its own grave.

OK, so our stalwart Pakistani brothers have been very critical of that mistake. But thats a moot point. The very honorable Musharraf STILL insists that the Pakistani military was not invovled. He STILL insists that Pakistan is only giving ``moral & political`` aid to the jehadis. He said that with a straight face when he spoke to Clinton! Do you really think Clinton bought his line? Heck he did`nt even publicly shake his hand! If the rest of the world doesnt buy it, how in the hell do you expect Indians to buy it?!

Right,wrong or indifferent, to Indians, Musharraf is the diabolical villain in this plot. He was the evil genious who refused to obey NS & refused to be present at the Lahore peace process. He was the main guy behind the betrayal of Kargil. They see him showing absolutely no remorse for his actions. They dont believe that he is giving only moral & political support to the jehadi/(terrorists in their eyes). He continues to go on the stump & rouses Pakistanis to fervor on the Kashmir issue. Then he publicly wonders why India refuses to talk to him. The Indian response is ``Mushy, youre so full of sh *t, that youre eyes have turned brown!!``

Personally, I`m in favor of talks because that is the only hope our countries have for survival. Our responsibility for the commitment to peace is something we have to undertake, for the sake of our children. Mushy or no Mushy, we have to get along ,we have no choice but let go of our grudges. Besides, who among us has`nt made mistakes or has`nt sinned?

vsn #116 I am surprised at the arrogance and exaggerated sense of self importance displayed by you and some other Indians posters. As krashid says, God finds a living for everyone. There is a lot more to the IT revolution than what you and your felllow Indian chauvinists will ever know.

sadna# 177 So we Pakistanis do not have a monopoly on bigots!

We say Kargil, you say Siachen-

You say moral duty to oppose human right abuses; we say terrorism-pure & simple.

We say tomaeto, you say tamaato!

My God this is never going to end!

India/Pakistan, hindu/muslim grudges (real or imagined) go back forever. Unless & until both sides freemly admit that both have made mistakes & there is plenty of dirt under both our fingernails & neither of us have earned the right to take the high moral ground , we are headed towards nuclear annihilation. IT/YT is not going to mean a damn thing.

Just a thought...

Umairr,

Let me take this opportunity to thank you for your kind words. I reciprocate your admiration. Chowk has given me a new found respect for Pakistanis like yourself, Bilal, tahmed, Sameer,Feroze & many many others.

The fact that you & tahmed take responsibilities as employers with the highest moral values should be an inspiration to us all. As far as I`m concerened, you guys stand for what real muslims are all about.

BTW, are you the same Umairr of the wordwallah & clickmarks fame?! I cant be sure because the name sometimes has two ``m``s & ends with two ``r``s. If you are, my hats off to you, youre a real genious! If not, it doesnt make an iota of difference. Youre a hell of a nice guy in my book, just the same. Let me know in either case:)

This is my personal opinion. I dont think the views of most Indians on Chowk completely represents what most Indians feel about their country & Pakistan. I think it just comes out that way.

In my personal experience, when Indians are by themselves & discussing India, they put down & criticise India more than what Pakistanis do here on Chowk. They also admire Pakistan`s economic accomplishments (past accomplishments) & prowess in sports. They may do it,perhaps, grudginly & enviously, but we`re only human yaar:)

For some reason, when Pakistanis are present & say the same thing about India, they start circling their wagons, and become defensive. Some of them throw gobs of mud at you because they feel that offense is the best defence.

But then, you must admit that there are enough guys on your side of the fence who splatter us with mud as well. Who throws more mud is a subjective impression & ,IMHO, an excercise in futility. After all, we humans tend to remember the gobs of mud that went splat on our face,more than the number of mud balls we`ve thrown over the fence.

I`ve learnt about this curious human phenomena from none other than my good ole mother. She would be extremely critical of her children. But if anyone from outside our family even dared to say anything critical of us, God help them!! She`d pick up the nearest sword & hack their heads off :)

I`ve also found that most of those Indians that are extremely critical of Pakistan are privately extremely critical of India as well. For eg, if you follow RSaxena`s posts carefully, he lashes out at India vociferously (when his guard is down).

Er-one last thing, please dont tell Saxena I said that about him. Otherwise we`ll have to endure his crap all over again--

GDR

(grinning, ducking & running)

RE: tahmad321 #232

Nerd!

Dear chowkwallas,

Just thought I would share a mini-IT revolution I just had after replacing phone wire with cable modem this morning at home. Cable Modem clocked at 1,519 kb (a little bit more than 40kb via phone!) which I believe is near T1 speeds. Another example of how rapidly this whole business in evolving.

ABC 20/20 Friday September 1, 2000

Why is tiny Hong Kong so rich and gigantic India so poor? One of the most common answers in recent decades has been population density: There are simply too many people in places like India, or so goes the conventional wisdom.



India does have a free press, freedom of religion and expression and a democratic government (elevating its ranking on the less economics-oriented Freedom House survey). Well it`s the largest democracy in the world.

But its thicket of business regulations and bureaucratic restrictions is so dense — and wealth so difficult to create there — that Indians endure a standard of living

as low as that of communist countries. John Stossel visits Calcutta, India interviews prominent Indians in USA Dinesh D`souza, Silicon Valley CEO Kanwal Rekhi and West Bengal politicians.

http://abcnews.go.com/onair/DailyNews/chat_stossel0901.html

Chat with John Stossel

Moderator: Why did you choose to focus on Hong Kong and India in your program?



John Stossel: Because so many people believe natural resources are the key to success and high population the root to failure. India and Hong Kong demonstrate the falsity of that.

Moderator: What are some concrete steps that nations like India and North Korea could take to improve their current conditions?



John Stossel: Stop regulating people to death.

Stingray says: Do you seriously think that economic planning, not astronomical population growth, has anything to do with the status of third-world nations?



John Stossel: Yes. Didn`t you just watch the program?

Hysterics in America do believe that population growth is the root of all evil. But Hong Kong, with greater population depth than India, demonstrates that population growth isn`t the problem. Clueless, meddling bureaucrats who think they know better how to run your life are the problem.

manoj (#225): You said [The essential differences between Siachen and Kargil are

1) The boundary/LOC ( call what u want ) was defined in case of Kargil but not in case of Siachen.]

It is true that boundary in Siachen was not well defined. That, however, does not make it right for Indira Gandhi to move in and occupy it. You must accept it as a smaller wrong as compared to the bigger wrong (Kargill bu Pakistan). You must also understand that sometimes a small mistake can lead to a blunder or a small irritant over period becomes major problem.

Not only Umairr but many other Pakistanis have thoroughly criticized Pakistani actions of Kargill. On the other hand, Saichen incident is treated as you did by most Indians. There should have been enough criticism of it as unnecessary and lead to inflammable situation. Very few Indians have openly criticized Indira Gandhi`s handling of Khalistan Movement, Operation Blue Star, its aftermath and even less are critical of Indian Military moving into Siachen. In case of Khalistan, I am sorry to say, but it appears only some Punjabis are critical of it-less than 5 percent of Indian population. You compare this with almost across the board criticism by Pakistanis from all ethnic groups, of Pakistani handling of Balochi uprising during Z. A. Bhutto`s regime.

I agree with sac`s contention of Pakistsn`s security implications of India`s IT successes. The business interests of capitalist world dictate the foreign policies and strategic relationships as reflected in the warming up of Indo-West relationships. It is a bad sign for Pakistani interests as defined by successive Pakistani govenments-the dominating anti-India segment of identity and future outlook. Although I agree with Sac about the need for Pakistan to implement IT policies on war-footing but an improvement of relationships with India is even more important. It will require a change of vision-a vision where India and Indians are not seen as a threat to the security and well-being of Pakistan and Pakistanis respectively.

Funny, all this tamasha started out with a terribly thought out piece with the logical consistency of swiss cheese.

Assad_K #220

I have confidence in the pakistanis in US. They are great at what they do - heck

if not for their govt screwing up things I would have used them and made tons

of money. Some of the great sales people I know are paki - Forget whites, they leave

tehm in the dust. All I am asking from them is not do fund raisers or lobby

politically for their govt until their govt minds its business. If things get harder here they

can start raising money for pro indian political parties back home. I am sure

they will come up with lot of ways, being the versatile people they are. You

can do it man - try harder.

Ummair #

I show ur previous posts regarding, Pakistanis criticising more India-Pak conflicts than Indian. This is the first time I saw someone saying ``Pakistan was wrong in attacking Kargil``. I would have appreciated if you would have said morally wrong. This is the reason why I say that:

1)All the criticism of India-Pak conflict from Pakistanis is based on the Idea that wether it benifited ``Pakistan`` or ``India``. It is not based on wehter it is morally right or wrong. There criticism is that now the world think Pakistan is bad so Pakistan so Pakistan is at lost, so Pakistan should not have done it. It gave India an edge.

2)Injustice to innocent people in Kashmir, is always blamed on Indian Army. If they happen to Kashmiri it is because, Indian are bad to Kashmiris. If it happen to be Hindus, than Indian army did it to give bad name to Pakistan. I might have missed, but the Post I saw were.. asking for prooves that it was done by militants and not Indian army(see Krashid previous Posts.)

3)I never saw anyone talking about Pakistan`s army direct involvement in Kashmir affair. It is more than just moral support.

3)Without knowing the actual numbers it is difficult to say that for every Indian soldier hurt, there is a Pakistani soldier hurt. I personally feel that there should be a global organisation to help families of soldiers, irrespective of the country they belong to.Long back I remember this, a hindu women in Kashmir was widowed on her wedding day. They killed her husband during marriage (not sure if it was before the marriage was complete or after).

The type of Pakistanis`s criticism does not to me in any way indicate that, Pakistani criticise Pakistan more in India-Pak conflicts than Indians do.

Regarding Siachen, and comparing it to Kargil.. is little far fetched. This is why Kargil generated so much of attention/emotion where as Siachen does not (somebody already posted Indian`s point of view on Siachen). One more thing, Indian thought that Pakistan is going to occupy that post. So they pre-empted them. Now Pakistan wants to have bilateral withdraw.. ah ha. Do you think Pakistan would have withdrawn if they had got there first?

Saying India is trying to bleed Pakistan and make it poorer. A poor country trying to make another poor. The list of complaints against Pakistan from Indians is long too, like supporting terrorism, increasing religious dis-harmony among religious group and even introducing fake currency.

It will be in India`s interest if there is peace. If there is peace, India will move forward I think at a greater rate than Pakistan. I feel that Pakistan will hate that (you see how we feel about each other and I think we are good educated common man).

Indian criticise themselves internally much more. We say Caste system is wrong and try to fix it. I have never seen a Pakistani saying hey it is unfair to say ``a man can have multiple wives``. This was just an example, I am not sure if this is written in someone religious book.

I think that if we believe that Pakistan is being harmful to India and on the wrong side, than Indians should try to see how they can change Pakistan`s attitude (Same is true if Pakistani`s also want to change Indian attitude and Indians are wrong). One reason why Pakistan behaves the way it does, is because it has nothing to loose. It does not have significant Hindu population so can preach hatredness for them. Majority are good, but they keep quiet as it does not hurt them. Indians cannot say any one religion is bad as they have ``many`` religions living together. So they have something to loose. (This is same as Germans can be racist, but Americans cannot afford to be racist. This does not mean there are no racist American). It is only now that Pakistan seems to be ``loosing`` for enemity with India. I am not sure how long this will last. First Americans helped/used them. If China gets rich it will help/use them. (Enemity always costs, but we do not always realise that).

If I believed that, boycotting Pakistani product would hurt them significantly to make the common man speak up, I would have encouraged it.

I think we all are good, but not saint. We need a reason to express our goodness. Some time it only comes out when we have something to loose. Maybe this is a case of ``No love without fear``.

The main cause for all this India-Pak problem is mis-trust among each other and not enough believe in human goodness or God.

Pakistanis think ``India is out to destroy them and wipe them out``. Honestly as an Indian, I never had these feeling neither found these feeling in other Indians. I only came to know of these when someone wrote in an article why Pakistanis fear India. It is true that Indians do not have very high opinion of Pakistan, they will laugh if someone says ``Pakistan wants peace``. I think (not sure because of Kashmir or Kargil, they feeled hurt), Indians are becoming more agressive toward Pakistan. Recent church blasts in south again were related to a group which had connection to Pakistan (this state is being ruled by Congress).

Indians think: ``Pakistan hates the idea of India moving ahead and becoming powerful. They want to divide India and weaken it``. When I see the posts here and read dawn, there is a strange sense of comparing to ``India``. In dawn there was an article comparing Jinnah to Gandhi. I do not think the two can be compared. If we live Pakistanis and Indians view aside, see how many foreign countries talk about Jinnaha or Gandhi. If I am wrong, let me know. I being an Indian may not have heard about Jinnah. Such unhealthy comparisions will generate jealousy and hatredness in Pakistanis. Trying to compare and have progress is good thing.

Vijay

All this is nothing but a feeble attempt to gain parity between india and pakistan in IT as in other fields.

what crap !!

we export 3.5 billion$ worth of s/w and the pakistani exports are no more than 30 million$.

yep. we do a lot of ``low end`` stuff. data entry, medical/legal transcription, customer support. we need the money and the jobs.

if they don`t want to open ``sweat-shops`` its their problem. with forex reserves of 1 billion$, that`s a great idea infact.

ever heard of a tech start-up from pakistan ( with all it`s `quality` contribution towards IT and science in general).

hello where are you ? (the 6 patents chap)

till date they have produced 5000 phds ( mostly islamic studies). patents. myfoot.

we have companies working in the field of optical networking, next gen. networking, bluetooth, WAP etc. tejas, alopa, xybridge, SAS to name a few.

we have got more important things to do than ``indopak co-operation`` in IT.

lets just stick to kashmir and hindu/muslim stuff

and leave sane things like IT/pharma aside.

regards

nchiket

BTW IITs are no longer undergraduate institutes. the focus now is on more research activities. hopefully we`ll be able to contribute more.

Umaair,

you make some very relevant points. However, i would like to give some clarifications.

The essential differences between Siachen and Kargil are

1) The boundary/LOC ( call what u want ) was defined in case of Kargil but not in case of Siachen.

The last point on LOC is NJ 4982 . Subsequent to this the LOC is not defined. Further to this the line was to run in a northerly direction. Pakistan was trying to redine the definition of Northerly by sending mountaineering expeditionso as to lay claim on more terriroty. The Indian attempt in siachen was to abort this attempt. So the capture of some peaks/passes was planned by both the armies. However, the Indian army reached first and so commands the area, though at a high cost. The transgression in Kargil was across a line which was agreed as per a signed document. This is why Indians potray Kargil as a stab in the back.

2) In Siachen , India never said that some ` holy warriors` had captured the peaks/passes. Quite unlike the Pakis who claimed that `Mujahids` had captured the peaks in Kargil. To boot we got illustrious/legendary Paki generals on tape. That is besides the point that not one country in the world believed the Paki version. I am not sure what the Pakistanis believe. Would be keen to know from you. So again a paki lie , which is why Indians see it as a stab in the back.

3) Last but not the least Kargil came after Lahore yatra. This was in the opinion of Indians , the medival Pakistani mentality. The timing of Kargil and role of Paki army was why Indians see it as a stab in the back

I would really appreciate a riposte from you on the points mentioned above. However, it is true that ordinary/poor men are paying for the follies of their respective governments. The so called ` mujahids ` from pakistan are really misguided POOR men, fighting aginst Indian army where the soldiers are basically POOR farmers, and between these two it is the POOR people of Kashmir who are getting squeezed.

The children of the elite are in USA/ Europe fighting their jehads/Yudh on the net in airconditioned comfort holding a Carlsberg!!!!

And if you are NOT bringing your biases in recruiting people , I salute you.

To all those who were criticizing vsn:

Did the world (including India) not boycott South Africa while it was a practitioner of apartheid? And restored normal relaations once apartheid ended?

What`s wrong with Indians boycotting Pakistanis so long as Pakistan foments militancy in India? Would you expect Indians to be lovey-dovey while their people are being killed and property destroyed?

In fact I would call upon all right thinking people of the world to boycott Pakistan and Pakistanis till their govt mends its ways.

Pankaj#213

I don`t buy your logic.

Even if it were not Kargil, there would be discrimination. I know it firsthand.

It is related to herd mentality, for other groups not to enter the market in competition.

Whites don`t rule the world for nothing. They go for what is beneficial. They even discriminate against their own people (whites from other countries) in favor of Asians, according to their policy of cultural diversity if you know their immigration laws.

So justifying the wrong attitude, in any name, is not a justification.

Pankaj #213: ``Secondly it is true that India before Kargil is not the same as India after it. With the body of soldiers killed in Kargil returning to their native place almost everywhere in India there was an unprecedented nationalistic fervour.``

Anamika #212 ``In this context, it makes immense sense that an employer would not wish to introduce discord in an office by hiring a Pakistani amongst a large number of Indians.

What seems to be the problem?``

# All other replies from Indians who are looking at only one side of the picture:

If any of you ever get a chance to come to Pakistan, I would like to introduce you to a friend of mine who is a doctor in the Pakistan army. He was in charge of dealing with the soldiers injured in the Siachen conflict. The stories he told me about the conditions of the soldiers he had to operate on, and the ones who died, were unbelievable. One officer in his early twenties had to have his leg chopped off. His fiancé left him because she did not want to marry a one-legged man. For every sad Indian Kargil story, there is a sad Pakistani Siachen story.

Yet most, if not all Indians, only seem concerned about the former, and not the later. Why?

India invaded Siachen, against all rules and regulations of the Simla Agreement (much like Pakistan did in Kargil) in 1984. Pakistan had to send its forces up there to stop the Indian invasion. It took Pakistani soldiers a while to learn and adjust to the hazards of fighting such high-altitude warfare. The result was many deaths and injuries due to frostbite (not to mention Indian firing).

For 16 years there has been, and there still is, a battle going on there in which India is the aggressor. Pakistan has been offering India a bilateral withdrawal for a decade now; but India refuses. India`s basic aim is to attempt to bleed the Pakistani economy through the Siachen conflict, even though it is costing India much more to fight up there than it costs Pakistan. So India is basically trying to bleed Pakistan at the cost of the poor people of India.

India is still attacking Pakistan in Siachen. However, Pakistan backed out of Kargil after only a few months. Kargil would not have been required had India not occupied Siachen. Read Brian Cloughley`s, ``History of the Pakistan Army`` to get more details. In any case, both were wrong.

The arrogant attitude of completely disregarding any conflicts in which one`s own country is the aggressor is quite biased, to say the least. If one follows the line of thinking that Indians here seem to be encouraging, i.e. Indians and Pakistanis should boycott each other after or during a conflict, then would you agree that Pakistanis should have boycotted Indians 16 years ago? Where exactly do you think all this boycotting would lead to? In my opinion, it is a pointless exercise.

Pakistan is offering talks to India now, even though India is attacking Pakistanis forces in Siachen. If what you say is true regarding Indians and their current post-Kargil attitudes towards Pakistan, then I am afraid Indians are practicing a great deal of hypocrisy, i.e. they support the aggressions of their own military, but oppose the aggressions of other militaries. Any honorable and principled person would either support both or oppose both.

Regarding the attitudes of the NRIs: you are correct in stating that many NRIs and NRI organizations in the USA are trying their best to harm Pakistan. This includes/included trying to stop Clinton from going to Pakistan, and trying to get Pakistan declared a terrorist state. The few US Congressmen supported by NRIs also have this on top of their agendas. All of this is to harm Pakistan; not to help India. Unfortunately NRIs, who support such points of views, have so far not seen much success. Hypocrisy rarely succeeds.

The Pakistani organizations in the US have done relatively well to defend Pakistan against such Indian organizations (without attacking India, mind you). I am quite sure there will never be enough NRIs in the US to harm Pakistanis. The US society does not work that way. It is impossible for one community to put another out of business; regardless of how hard the former tries. In comparison to the whole US economy, the Indian community`s share is, and will always remain, a minute fraction. Larger than the Pakistani community`s share; but minute, all the same. Even if all the Indians in the US joined together and decided not to hire a single Pakistani, the Pakistanis would still have the remaining 99.9% of the US economy open to them. So boycotting Pakistanis is a useless counter-productive excercise. It is more an attempt to satisfy one`s own hatred, than anything else.

Perhaps Pakistanis have become cynical and jaded, and thus rarely believe the official media in Pakistan. Indians on the other hand seem to believe Zee TV and DoorDarshan completely. Just because the Indian official media would like you to think that Pakistanis are aggressors, and Indians are angels, doesn`t mean that is an accurate description of the whole situation. If you are so enthusiastic about the Indians that were killed by Pakistanis in Kargil (in a couple of months combat), then you should also show some concern for the Pakistan soldiers` widows and families who have been, and still are, victims of the on-going aggression of the Indian military in Siachen.

In my opinion, India was wrong to attack Pakistan in Siachen, and Pakistan was wrong in attacking India at Kargil. I have yet to see an Indian who has the courage to make a similar statement? If an Indian hates Pakistanis, he/she should have the courage to come out and state it outright. It is condescending to attempt to justify the hate by one-sided views of Indo/Pak conflicts.

Despite the fact that Indians are attacking and killing Pakistani soldiers in Siachen right now (many Pakistanis soldiers die or are disfigured due to frostbite, as well), and despite the fact that one of my very close friends was shot down and killed in the recent unchivilrous and cowardly attack by an Indian fighter aircraft on an unarmed Pakistani Naval reconnaissance plane inside Pakistani borders, and despite the fact that I have had many more friends and family members killed by Indian soldiers (or have died in training to defend Pakistan against Indian soldiers) than vice-versa, I still do not hate Indians. I still go to Indian grocery stores, hire Indians, etc. Many of the Indians working for me and my employer are dependent on me to ensure that their US residency papers get processed accurately and correctly. One wrong statement or signature on my part could ruin their future, and I don`t take that responsibility lightly. The thought of making them a victim of my own frustrations, or by-product victims of Indo/Pak conflicts has never crossed my mind. I find it quite disgusting that it crosses the minds of many of the Indians who visit this site. And I find their condescending one-sided justifications based on Kargil even more disgusting.

Why is there a big difference between Pakistani thinking (mine and many others) and the thinking of the many Indians towards whom this reply is directed? Try to figure that out.

vsn#

You may be quadrillionaire.

But your pathetic thoughts, is a shame for whole humanity.

First of all, if you think you are ``Razzaq`` or giver of food because of your position, you are wrong.

Second, nobody can stop a person from achieving. If you think you are stopping one avenue, God opens 100 avenues.

Third, you are in America, and you think that you have fooled Americans (for they provided opportunity for you), but you cannot be fooled (because you only take care of your countrymen).

I can say, only one thing. My employer is a Pakistani, and he also belongs to your species.

So it is not Indian to be narrowminded, or is it?

VSN,

So by denying Pakistanis work, you`re actually trying to do our country a favour. Gosh, I`ll bet all those poor Pakis start phoning home saying that `An Indian just rejected us.. we gotta appease India somehow!`. Or do you not mention that bit to them (`Actually, lads, I won`t even read your resume, you being Paki `n` all, `til Pakistan appeases India, so get busy on those phone lines!`) No doubt those people whom Rsaxena (was it him?) mentioned who reject people on grounds of being black are also doind it for their own good.. to give them a taste of adversity and to encourage them to try harder! We thank you for your contribution towards Peace on Earth.

sadhana #217

I am not doing it solely because the numbers favor me. Numbers favor me to discriminate against lot of people you will surely agree. I am doing it

because i want the people sitting in ivory towers to feel the heat and do

something to influence the politics of their country.

Exactly. It is a dishonor, to all the people who worked hard

for equality, to discriminate against innocent people. But dont you

discriminate against dumb people, arrogant people, irresponsible people,

obnoxious people,..etc in one way or the other? If you dont how will

they ever learn to be decent people? That is just an example. I am

not blaming anyone of the above qualities.

Discrimination (vichakshana) is also a byproduct of wisdom.

Be wise who do you do business with. I just wish India is left alone so

that it can improve the quality of life for the 500 million people living

below poverty line. It is a humongous task and on top of it we are

adding population equal to Australia`s every year. Wont you feel happy

if all of them have decent living? Every human should feel sorry for them and

should help in whatever way they can. I dont understand what kind of people

go to war with countries already saddled with such burden of humanity on such scarce resources. I dont like the polocies of such countries and I am trying

my bit to influence them through my peaceful means.

Long-Distance Outsourcing Companies: Look to India -Alex Daniels, Washington Techway

http://www.washtech.com/news/internet/3474-1.html

But running an Indian outpost presents technology executives with a number of hurdles. While it`s true that workers in another time zone complete tasks while Americans slumber, it`s just as true that locals cannot call their Indian counterparts during our business day - they`ll all be asleep.



And cultural differences can be difficult to overcome. For some, the thirst for additional tech workers trumps such challenges. The demand for foreign-born high-tech workers is well documented. This year, for instance, all 65,000 H-1B visas set aside to let skilled foreigners into this country were snatched up by the end of March.



``People are going to go where the workers are, if they`re not here,`` says Tom Stohler, a lobbyist for the American Electronics Association.



Groups such as Stohler`s - along with the Business Software Alliance, the Information Technology Association of America and the U.S.-India Business Council - have not kept tabs on the exact volume of work U.S. companies send to India. But Indian government officials and industry representatives clearly see their country as an emerging IT powerhouse.



India exported software to 95 countries last year, with almost 62 percent of exports heading to North America, according to India`s National Association of Software and Service Companies. The group says software exports, which totaled $4 billion in 1999, have grown by more than 50 percent each year for the past three years.



India`s National Taskforce on Software & IT Development says more than 160 Fortune 500 companies outsource computer tasks to workers in that country. The government-run group is promoting policies such as privatization of the country`s telecommunications services that members say would boost software exports to $50 billion a year by 2008.



Zubair A. Talib, chief technology officer for i411, an 11-employee startup in Chantilly, says communication can be a problem when dealing with workers halfway around the world. Over the past two years, the company has contracted with teams of programmers in India to help develop tools that allow i411 to distribute and filter content on wireless networks. ``There are some cultural differences you have to get used to,`` Talib says. ``Sometimes when things are going badly, there`s a hesitation to communicate that right up front.``



``Any time there`s a gulf between people, there`s a challenge,`` agrees Nirmal Jain, CEO of Tata Infotech, a software developer and systems integrator in India. Jain says it is about 34 percent cheaper to produce software in India, where the majority of the company`s 4,000 employees reside.



Tata Infotech, with expected revenues of $100 million this year, employs about 25 people in its McLean office and for good reason. More than half the company`s revenues come from sales in the states. But Jain says when he e-mails his U.S. employees, communication is difficult because body language isn`t transmitted via the Internet. The key, says Jain, is to spell out every request and document everything so workers in distant locations know what is expected of them.



Amir Hudda, an Arlington entrepreneur who earlier this year sold his company, Entevo, to Houston`s Bindview for $125 million in stock, first started employing Indian workers five years ago. When he set up an Entevo subsidiary there in 1995, he benefited from huge savings on salaries. ``We used to pay someone fresh out of school there $15,000,`` Hudda recalls. In the Washington area, he says, the same position would have demanded four times that salary.



But with the cost savings came major headaches. Hudda says it was important to tailor business procedures to his overseas unit. For instance, he had to cut off the Indian subsidiary, which largely consisted of engineers and programmers, from his U.S. marketing e-mail lists. Messages passed on those lists often included requests from customers that should have been handled by the marketing staff, not code writers a half a world away. ``They might be over enthusiastic about fixing it when it might not really be a problem,`` Hudda says.



What`s more, corporate culture is different in India than it is here, Hudda says. Five years ago, ``the concept of flex time didn`t exist,`` he says. Hudda, who is now developing a new wireless applications company, Withphone, says he tried to recreate the American entrepreneurial atmosphere in India by instituting flex time and granting all employees stock options.

vsn #216
When you are not made to suffer from the effect of being a minority(a immigrant Indian among resident Americans) what exactly justifies your capitalizing on `numbers` when it favors you?

Not only that, you are dishonoring people who came before you and struggled and made your reception easier like Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar, Nobel Prize winner in Physics, who back in the `30s wouldnot get students and classes to teach because of prejudice about his Indian origin. If you are lucky to have a good work environment and fair opportunity, its due to the work ethic of those who came before you.

So if you profess to be worried about karma, you ought to be REALLY WORRIED.

Sadhana

It is elementary, srimaan tahmed: #215

Employee-Employer relationship is mutually benificial - both make money

off each other. It is a win-win situation.

When we are dealing with paki applicants we are dealing with a

small pool and the loss of access to that pool is nominal to the

employers. (About 2% of H1B professionals in US are from pakistan where

as almost half of them are from india.). So a paki employer would

suffer more from a lack of access to indian programmers than vice versa.

Similarily when we are talking about access to employers for a job applicant,

loss of access to indian owned or managed companies would be more severe.

(Fully 1/4 of all high tech companies in silicon valley are either owned

by or operated by indians or chinese). And most of the interviews would

also involve peer feedback from future team mates. I will leave that

as an excercise for you to figure out who will benifit from peer feedback.

vsn #209 Your logic is fascinating: when the IT guy is Pakistani, it is a buyers market and the Indian recruiter is in the driver`s seat; when the IT guy is Indian, it is a sellers market and the Indian is again in the driver`s seat.

Against such logic, I accept defeat.

Urstruly #204

Actually, no, I didnot understand your example. Its fine with me either way if you believe or disbelieve me personally or find me consistent or inconsistent, thats your own judgement, please do use it.

btw, here is the reference I mentioned, you may be interested in looking it up,
http://www.brook.edu/comm/transcripts/20000313.htm
Search on word `Kargil`.

Sadhana

First of all, I agree with Feroz appeal thta we should refrain from name calling. Personal attacks never help in convincing others of your perspective. The discusssions should be made with an unemotional, and receptive mindset.

Secondly it is true that India before Kargil is not the same as India after it. With the body of soldiers killed in Kargil returning to their native place almost everywhere in India there was an unprecedented nationalistic fervour. Right from the school kids to the professionals I saw everyone busy in contributing towards the war victims with unmitigated zeal. The spirit of unity and responsibility that dawned on people was amazing. All the government officials decided to give one day of their salary to the victims voluntarily. This wave of patriotism seemed to cross the national borders and NRIs all over the world donated generously towards Indian cause.

The consummation of ten years of terrorism into Kargil war turned the indifference of many Indian youth into hatred towards Pakistan. This youth was the generation which spearheaded the IT revolution in India. A natural consequence was that during Kargil war and after many Indian people started boycotting anything Pakistani. If there was a schism between both the countries prior to Kargil there is a vast chasm now. I do not know whether any perceptible change in the attitude of Pakistanis occured after Kargil but the Indian mass opinion definitely has hardened.

In any foreign land, take US for example it is painful to see that the people who are similarwith respect to language, mass culture or appearence bear so deep rooted hatred against the other. But this is a reality and we have to live with it. Unless there is a big shift in the policy of Pakistani military rulers,I dont see any hope of reconcillation in the near future. Indian politicians have developed a distrust towards Pakistan in general, and it is futile to expect them to take any new initiative towards conflict resolution.

Cheers

All right, it appears that you have to whip up paranoia of anything Indian to get Pakistanis going. Because Pakistan != India.

Kargil most definitely ruined Indians` perception of Pakistan and Pakistanis. There`s no way to get around it.

In this context, it makes immense sense that an employer would not wish to introduce discord in an office by hiring a Pakistani amongst a large number of Indians.

What seems to be the problem?

http://www.cnn.com/ASIANOW/asiaweek/technology/2000/0908/tech.net.html

``India is still not an open and competitive market,`` says Masood Tariq, Nortel Network`s Asia-Pacific president. Even if the bureaucracy were to disappear tomorrow, domestic economics make infrastructure projects a gamble, Tariq says. ``There is a dire need for basic telephony,`` he says. Fewer than three Indians in 100 have telephone service, compared to the world average of 15 per 100. The government estimates that it needs $60 billion in investments to extend service to six out of 100 citizens, yet ``there aren`t enough people who can afford even basic POTS [plain old telephone service]`` to make big construction projects feasible, Tariq says.

Look at these Paki intellectuals trying to be holier than thou with regards to vsn.

They (Pakistanis) have a country based on religious descrimination. TNT Separate Nation for Muslims. I mean on one hand it is okay to ``exchange populations`` for Islamically righteous reasons (read throw minorities in the dustbin) while it is wrong for vsn to throw a resume in the dustbin.

I bet they hire Muslims if they can. It is their nature.

Muslim is a brother and everything else is kafir. Use & abuse kafir when convenient (IT talent).

Afterall, a lot of them are raging capitalists like us (and vsn in this context).

same old story no sequel.

Mr . SAC what about the US & Israel`s prowess in IT ? What does that brood for THE MUSLIMS ?

sleep well.........

sri tahmed #201

-Thank God we shall never fall to your petty level. And thank God there is enough work to go around for those willing to apply themselves that no one needs to work for a creep like you.

This is not a pissing contest between you and me about whois a better creep.

The questions I asked are beyond you and me and are about the surival of

pakistanis and pakistan. I am trying to analyse the behavior of the groups

at macro level and their implications.



-My brother (who heads a successful independant operation in the US) keeps a number of Indian IT types busy in the US and in India writing programs.

Incase you are under any delusion, the indians at your brothers company are

doing him a big favor. In future they may not be willing to work for him at any cost. Did you consider the implications? If indians dont work for him in IT, dont

you think he will be in trouble? I have to ship lot of work offshore to India

as I cant get any people here. And if I have to hire indian programmers, they

ask me my 5 year plan for the company and I have to sell myself to them before

they even consider.

And keep your `holier than thou attitude` personal like you keep your religion.

popcorn....#199...

````Tu Hindu banega na musalman banega,

Insaan ki aulad hai Insaan banega````

very well said. but ts such a pity the not many people bother to remember this.

``And if you wanna really do something for your country, then try and improve the lot of poor back home, you would all be doing a great service to humanity as well as your respective nations. Why waste time and energy on a place like chowk, where each for you fools definitly help increase the already existing high levels of hate.``

very well said again. but popcorn,.....u see...most of the boss log`s (including me too, i must admit) here, whether indians or pakistanis are so busy trying to gain the upperhand in an arguement, that many of them forget that they are from nations whose majority of the population doesn`t get even one time meal. but u see our enlightened people here feel that arguing about kashmir and religion is much more important than the millions of hungry and naked people back home.

forget this....most of the people here are not even in their countries, and i`m sure not many of them have a willingness to go back home. if they do, and i sincerely hope they do, then possibly they will see the true state of their homelands and realise crap they were arguing about is not the real issue.

OK I am wasting too much time here. People are sidelining the

Issue. I am not racist, petty minded. That is beside the point too.

Everyone agrees that Indians by and large are law-abiding people

when they are outside India. And they are successful and increasingly

becoming influential and powerful as a group. Whether you like it

or not Pakistan’s policies will ferment some kind of resentment

towards Pakistani people in Indians all over the world. They might

chose not to cooperate with you (legally of course, don’t jump on me!).

Why are Pakistanis blind to that? Aren’t you good businessmen? Don’t

you want good opportunities for you and for your kids? Or do you

have the sucidal, self-destructive jihadist mentality too? If I were

the paki physician association I would be lobbying to get Pakistan

change its Kashmir policy, appease India and cooperate with it

in all fields and reap the benefits by touting my Indian ancestry.

You belong to the Indus region as much as we do and you have claim

to the fame of belonging to the same ancient civilization. If I

am a good marketer I would show how I am so similar to the mainstream

Indian - how we come from the same vedic land and develop the ancient

temples and monuments in Pakistan into tourist attractions. It is not

always a question of choosing this ideology or that ideology. We are increasingly

becoming multi-cultural and we chose whatever works for our people.

If today India is all the rage, you tout your Indian qualities. And if

tomorrow Arab culture is popular you tout your affinity towards them.

You don’t have to necessarily put down one for the other. You can embrace

all of them and benefit from all. You can get oil from middle east and

IT from India:) Anyway you get the point - just celebrate the multi

cultural being you are and reap the benefits.

Now my question is since I don’t see the above behavior in Pakistanis in US,

which in my opinion is rational, , is it because they believe Indian

resentment is no big loss for them? I expect to see the same rational behavior

from educated people in Pakistan too. My belief is over time the Indian resentment would marginalize Pakistanis all over the world if they don’t do something

about it just as their country is marginalized by antagonizing India.

Lot of people may think that it won’t affect them - they are sitting far from

the action and may even derive a vicarious pleasure in fermenting more trouble.

Well in this connected world what goes around comes back and you reap

what you sow.

Now please don’t talk nonsense about discrimination, racism, petty mindedness, etc.

Talk about the following points:

1) Will there be resentment?

2) If there is, Will it affect Pakistanis significantly?

3) If it affects the pakis, is it a bearable cost compared to their

Long-term objectives (whatever they are)

4) Even if there is no significant loss due to resentment, are you

foregoing significant benefits because of lack of Indian goodwill?

As for burden of proof, many companies throw out resumes if they are not from Ivy League schools or don`t have certain minimum GPAs...they have not and will never need to prove anything to anyone. As for the hoohaa about getting vsn in legal trouble, good luck!! Law firms, Wall St, consulting firms, etc. have been getting away with rejecting black candidates for years and no one`s been able to do anything about it. Laissez faire when it comes to business in America....