An Eulogy For The Hawks

It is a very poorly written article, hence it lacks credibility (thank goodness.) The author has no command of the English language. Seems as if he taught it himself through second rate books (Teach Yourself English) and did not learn it by living in the English speaking environment.

Too long and too boring. I give credit to anyone who bothers to read the entire article without going out of his/her mind with boredom.

I hope this is a joke!

This looks like something Aslam Beg (ex-COAS) of Pakistan would write. I always considered him one of the worst writers from amongst the varoius, retired/fired/kicked out senior Pakistan govt. officials who turn to journalism, category of individuals. He attempts to use big words and complicated scenarios to describe simple concepts. While the true merit of a good writer and political commentator should be exactly be the opposite, i.e. he/she should be able to use small words and simple scenarios to describe complicated concepts.

Anyways, I hope India follows the agenda described in this letter, specially

(1) Increased Defense Spending.

(3) Encouragement of anti-Pakistani state factors, ranging from tactic support to secessionists, encirclement of Pakistan geographically with the Central Asian Republics, Iran, Qatar

(7) Increase Naval Presence to controlling a sea-supply isthmus for Pakistan.

(9) Electrification of Indo-Pak border.

(10) Strategic Pro-US, Pro-India media used to change the tone, from indictment of Pakistan it must be the indictment of their Government and not the people.

(11) Neutralization of Pakistan’s efforts to redefine its government.

(12) Systemic extermination of Jehadi networks within India – in a manner a la Waco or Ruby Ridge.

(15) Neutralize the Hurriyat politically and reduce them into irrelevancy.

(17) Strengthen the RAW/IB/Military Intelligence with a coherent external agenda and specialist directors.

Too a great extent, India has been doing the above for decades, and hence despite Nehru`s strong belief that Pakistan would crumble back into India, Pakistan is still around. Had India followed a different non-Pakistani-centric agenda, India may have been able to excercise the kind of control over Pakistan that any country should be able to excercise over a neighboring country 1/6th its size (Pakistan would have completely dominated India by now, had India been 1/6th Pakistan`s size; China is proportional to India, and traditionally as poor as India, yet it completely dominates India).

Of all the things that surprise me about India, the one that ranks near the top is India`s obsession with Pakistan. India is a genuine threat to Pakistan, since it six times the size of Pakistan, with five times the defense budget, with a Hindu Nationalist party running the show. Not the mention the fact that it has already assisted in breaking up Pakistan. Pretty good reasons for Pakistanis to be paranoid about India, if you ask me.

However, why does India fear Pakistan? The ratios between India and Pakistan are similar to the ratios between Pakistan and Sri Lanka. How many Pakistanis would ever be obsessed enough with Sri Lanka to take a Sri Lankan threat seriously (no offense to Sri Lankans).

If Vajpayee follows the advice in this letter, within twenty years or so, India and Pakistan will be back to the pre-90s scenarios, with Pakistanis once again way ahead of India in economic growth rates and infrastructure.

I hope the writer is a kid. Otherwise he/she is no better at political analyses and their explanation, than Aslam Beg.

On the other hand, if this is satire, then it`s not too bad.

Romair #1

Very true, one must seek to simplify intricate political issues... which is not what we find here.

Sasidharan:

There is something about the way you write that I like. However you need to understand a few things before you assume authority to comment on it. Although its not forbidden for one to comment on something that they are not part of...nonetheless You are devoid of ground realities.

I have never felt antagonism against India until I came to the US. All the time I stayed in Pakistan, apart form the cricket matches nothing I saw or indulged in socially kept India as #1 enemy. Maybe the news during the nuclear tests, but even that never got me to realize the relation. I was oblivious to the technicalities behind the deals and hence no negative emotion seeped through as such.

Now, at this point in life, when I come across people like you, I am pushed against the wall to defend my right to my existence. When you are not attacking, you sharpen your knives and look at us from the corner of your eyes, with a subtle smile on your faces. And still expect us to meditate.

I wish you would use whatever you have in that Machiavellian mind of yours, and hope you`d know that there is something called human greatness, that springs out of the need to be authentic over lies, the desire to develop than to disintegrate and that only comes when one is to serve beyond one`s self.

There is noting original you suggested in your long write up. This peace is long overdue, then why prolong war? It costs the people who have little interest beyond their next meal. So let us as intellectuals find creative ways to stop it.

You will never like Musharraf. Because he is the embodiment of discipline your dicey politicians can ever possess. It is clear with such articles who is obsessed and who isn`t.

May your wrinkled skin, heal form marinating in your bile of me-ism.

Aisha Fayyazi Sarwari.

keerthik:

..a good write-up (forget some of those snipes), though there are several things one could disagree with..

..i think Pokhran was one of our major mistakes and no amount of american or international non-isolation changes that..the act, the time and the country- everything about it was wrong..we had made a radical change from several years of consensual foreign policy and a very vulgar one..

..and the second one now- with this invitation to Musharaff...having thought about all the factors that could have led to it, it seems to me it is vajpayee`s awareness of his own mortality and hence desire to do something significant that has led to this unthought-out proposal (i had this hope that something might have been agreed on via Track 2 with the Bukhari trip and all that but subsequent events dont support such a conclusion)....a country and a general which/ who was planning the Kargil effort while we in india were getting all sentimental about Indo-pak friendship etc. should be allowed to remain in the pit it has dug itself into...

`` Our long term goal must be the dismantling of the present Pakistani state apparatus, into smaller units of self governance. Nothing less than that will ensure our long term business and security interests.``

...i do not think a fissiparous pakistan is in india`s interest, either economic or strategic, but that is where it is headed anyway- without any help from India

`` Trenchantly planned excursions will be unleashed by President Musharraf’s regime in face of growing frustrations and hostilities that the following years inevitably will elicit from the Pakistani public – as all efforts at national restructuring does.The entire existent machinery will, to invoke John Wayne, “itch for action.” History will, inevitably repeat. This is of course, President Musharraf’s trump card; his reverse swing that he would employ if situations get worse for him domestically.``

..you bet..

``(13) Create an appetite for power amidst local “serfs” within Pakistan’s feudal landscape``

...if most pakistanis do not feel the need for any such power and are content with a heritage of political shamocracy and in agreement with a feudally defined and limited ``pakistani nationalism`` (with their intellectuals like ayesha jalal constantly telling them that its about the same as democracy in india)- theres little india can do

``If it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck and acts like a duck – it must be a duck.``

..true...

..btw, you write pretty well for a 19 yr old (as i gather from your previous articles/interacts)...

I am surprised that the writer is being criticized for his command over the English language. The author is presenting a point of view, not scoring brownie points in an essay competition, and therefore the criticism should be directed at the views being presented.

It is pertinent to look at the question that is being brought up, rather than the solution. As a nation, have we ever taken a long term point of view of what Pakistan means for us in purely pragmatic terms. It is a cliche and a foregone conclusion that Indians and Pakistanis can and do get along on individual levels. So what? Are we to formulate our policy on the basis of humanitarian goodwill or pragmatic national interest? It would be erroneous to assume that Kashmir is the be all and end all problem bedeviling India-Pakistan relations. Can any one of us state with certainity that had Kashmir not been an issue, India and Pakistan would have seperated amicably and developed ``normal`` relationships with each other.

The 64 million dollar question is, `` Where do we go from here?`` As Indians,it is important for us to develop a coherent, viable and independent policy towards Pakistan. Currently, the pendulum seems to swing wildly from the Bhai-Bhai to the Jaani Dushaman mode, and is almost always reactionary rather than proactive. One only has to read the press archives from the days of the Lahore yatra to Kargil to the upcoming Agra summit to test the validity of this statement.

A casual look at interactions on the Chowk board reveal how deep the intellectual divide between India and Pakistan is. We have a common culture, history, language etc., and yet we look at the same history from opposite ends of the mirror. Their victories are our defeats, and vice versa. Their heroes are our villains and vice versa. I am not talking about individual opinions here, which vary across the board, but the general tenor of views most accepted by the establishments of both countries.

It is the ambition of the Indian establishment to be the predominant power of South Asia. We want our writ to run in our part of the world, and as we grow and develop as a nation, our ambitions will expand. On the other hand, Pakistan will not countenance or acknowledge Indian predominance, even if it is benevelont ie. does not threaten the territorial integrity of the current Pakistani nation state.

Therefore, what are we to do about the current as well as future state of affairs between India and Pakistan? It is the duty and moral obligation of the Indian establishment to define this view in terms of supreme national interest, and not on the morality of right and wrong, good or bad. Are the national interests of India and Pakistan a zer-sum game? Would increasing prosperity result in a desire by the Pakistani establishment to mantain the staus quo thereby agreeing to disagree on certain aspects of our historical, geographical and political boundaries. Or would a prosperous Pakistan just be a prosperous enemy, equally determined but better equiped to wage war against our national interest.

If it is the latter scenario that seems to be the more plausible, then it is essential to further examine the author`s paradigm, not in terms of morality and right and wrong but pragmatic achievability. On the other hand, if the Indian establishment decides that a dismembered Pakistan in the shape of an unstable collection of poorly administered nation-states or even a unified but socio-economically weakened Pakistan would be far more harmful to Indian national interest than a prosperous one, than as a bigger nation we need to be benevelont.

This article is pertinent not for the solution it provides, but the question that it throws up. Currently, the Islamic Republic is an enemy. Is it an enemy that can be brought around, or is it`s destruction the only answer? Our national interest lies not in jingoistic statements that lack validity, but in asking ourselves the right question and then formulating a viable long term policy.

Stuka

Er... that would be `A` Eulogy not `An`.

Words that start with `vowel sounds` have the infinite article `an` in front of them and not every word that literally starts with a vowel.

Ever heard of `an European vacation`? Or `an Universal appeal`?

Romair:

A couple of quick comments with no malice intended:

Do you really think China dominates India? How? Economically? Indo-Chinese economic interaction is minimal at best, and therefore a scenario of domination does not exist. Militarily? The last Indo-Chinese flare-up took place in 1986 with regards to the Sumdorong Chu sector. This was followed up by Deng`s visit to India and the establishment of the Joint Working Group. Infact, the resultant lack of threat perception has enabled the Indian Army to move its mountain divisions to Jammu and Kashmir. Culturally?? well yes there is a version of Chinese food available in India, and yes Jackie Chan and Bruce Lee movies are popular, but I would hardly call that dominance. Politically? I would venture to say that Pakistan dominates the political conciousness of India far more than China. Yes we blamed them for nuclear testing, but gimme a break, who else could we blame.

Does India dominate Pakistan? I`d suggest that you ask yourself that question. Isn`t it your foreign minister who goes around telling the whole world that the only reason Pakistan won`t sign the CTBT is coz India doesn`t. And the only reason you guys went for nuclear testing is coz we did. So who seems to have the reactive foreign policy?

Aisha Sarwari:

I guess my background is very different than yours. My childhood and youth was spent on airforce bases across India, and Pakistan was always considered the enemy. Black and White, and no two ways about it. But when I came to the States, and started coming across ``people like you``, that I realised that its okay for our countries to not get along, but as individuals we do and can get along. Our getting on as individuals does not mean that we have to shy away from the fact our two nations have important political differences and our respective national duties may lead us along different paths. You do what you have to do as a Pakistani, and I will do what I have to do as an Indian, and that does not make either of us a bad human being...I think????

Yes Mussharaf may be the embodiment of discipline our dicey politicians will never posess. But thats not saying much is it?? Our Generals are the embodiment of discipline that your politicians will never posess. Why compare apples and oranges? It is a universally known fact that you have to have the soul and a temperament of a right b`stard to be a politician in the first place.

BTW, by your statement, is it it okay for me to infer that you would prefer a military takeover in India, and that our respective Generals do the talking in their disciplined way?

Give the author a break guys....I agree with stuka Reply #: 7.We shouldnt look at the authors english rather we should look at what he is saying.And anyway waht does it matter if his english is poor..our first language is urdu (and if the author is an indian) then his first language is hindi so what does it matter if he cant write proper english...its nothing to be embarrassed of or be criticized for...so plzz give the author a chance and criticize his views rather than his command over the english language.

latif chappu # 6

..i noticed the mistaken `an` too..

stuka:

..you put several things in perspective...

sarwari # 4

``However you need to understand a few things before you assume authority to comment on it.``

..such trivialities dont seem to have stopped you from commenting on a variety of things..

``and hope you`d know that there is something called human greatness, that springs out of the need to be authentic over lies, the desire to develop than to disintegrate and that only comes when one is to serve beyond one`s self.``

..such dovishness is a real change, coming from you...

``May your wrinkled skin, heal form marinating in your bile of me-ism.``

..does a lot of bile cause wrinkled skin?...you should know...

Re: Stuk-up #7 & Klutz #9

How one expresses himself determines his command and depth of his knowledge, and hence determines his credibility. It is not only important what one has to say, but more importantly how he says it. This article is a total waste of disk space and one`s time if one bothers to read it. Shame on Chowk for publishing this infantile writing. I know 3rd graders who can write better than this.

And Klutz, you did pick a pretty good alias for yourself!

Now off to Stuk-up and Klutz Greatest Adventure! Dude!!!

Finally, an Indian who makes no bones about Indian hostility towards Pakistan - a Neo Hindu?

All Pakistanis who read this article should be grateful to the author for awakening them from the hyponosis of ``we are the same people``, ``we are one``. The fact that we are not the same does not, however; mean that a state of continuous hostility should prevail between us.

The author suggests the reasons for the hostility, it`s inate, it`s built into the structure. OK - This is an Indian, insufficiently armed with facts:

1. Mr. Author, the Americans or West were not born yesterday - they know and understand the psychological needs and strategic ambition of the Indian - and they will use it as long as it also serves their purpose. In a recent lecture series, Mr. Henry Kissinger has stated that America was correct to challenge the nation that sought to dominate Asia, but she is wrong to prejudge which nation it was that was seeking to dominate Asia.

2. Indian defense spending has always, compared Dollar for Dollar, been higher than Pakistan`s Can a arguement be made that such levels of spending has earned India proportional dividends?

Compare American investment in China, with American investment in India - Has the dime dropped yet?

3. Just examine who is it that is being encircled (talk is cheap) : Pakistan to the West, A reconstructed Nepalese polity evolving to the North, Pakistani naval exercises, for the first time since 71, in the Bay of Bengal - with (oh no!)Bangladesh navy, Chinese influence and Pakistani weapons in Lanka - Pakistan Navy in Myanmar - soon Chinese Navy in Gwadar

Examine the following: India and China and East Asia will be major consumers of a source of energy that is as significant as the change over from coal to oil - this change is oil to gas -examine where all the cheapest land route gas supplies to Asia will transit?

4. A ceasarian birth? - Again, the Muslims broke our country? Bad Muslim! Our country is 5000 years old? when it was called...? The ISI network in India? The same ISI whose network in Pakistan can not even guarantee a facade of democracy in Pakistan?

Author, I sincerely appreciate your honesty and your pride and your hostility. Peace can only be made with those such as yourself, but only after you get to go around the block a couple of times; has the effect of seasoning reason and tameing pride.

An Indian fascist sidewinder writhing through intellectually barren desert with an undulating serpentine prose.

Sasi,

In a labyrinthian way, seen never since the days of `Castle`, the author has asked the most pertinant question. Muslim countries from the philippines to the west asia have been in conflict with nations of different religions. The invasion at Kargill by the pak jihadists is the final proof that the children of TNT have come to positions of influence in pakistan. 150,000 armed jihadists are there at present, ever increasing, and any indian action has to take this into account.

Kashmir is only the symptom of a larger conflict that takes place at jihadic frontiers. The deweaponisation in pakistan is primarily in karachi and will not affect the jihadists. Indias only longterm hope is to arrive at situation like in isreal where the desire of the jihadists can be delivered at his door step. Iraquisation is the only long term option.

No comments! :)

Trade between India and China has grown since the grant of mutual MFN treatment in 1984. Over the last six years between 1994-1999, the trade volume has more than doubled from US$ 895 million to US$ 1987.68 million.

(from http://www.indianembassybeijing.org.cn/ES1T3BilateralTrade.htm )

(

Total Indian foreign trade (imports and exports) were of the order $85 billion in 1999.)

-Arun Gupta