On Hate

re: Hobbyty # 374

If the US policy changes, India will have to take that factor into consideration. The principle remains the same - India or Pakistan - both should and hopefully will adjust their strategic stances to fit demands of the times.

There is no ego involved here, only cold rational strategic analysis.

hobbyty

``No I can`t quote from the article ``Super 7 in Pakistani Marks`` - I tried to find additional stuff on emeralddesign and on kanwa - but no help there either``

So you admit you have no evidence: none, zilch, nada?

So on what basis did you make that remark?

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

Reply Hobbyty # 372

“And I think you are generalizing when you suggest that caste and gender discrimination do not, in an essential sense, differ.”

In the subcontinent caste, and gender and religious discrimination all spring from essentially the same root because the basis for this discrimination is something people are born as, not something they chose, believe or become. (Sociologically, religion and caste certainly function identically. Gender similarly.)

For this reason I think that dealing with these discriminations requires a similar approach, which boils down to: who you are born as should not diminish, or augment, your human rights relative to other people.

Human rights are not dependent on economics.

Human rights are not dependent on whether you are going to heaven or not.

I didn’t know that we were debating whether discrimination on this basis is good or bad, but since you ask, I think it is bad. Now my turn: do you think that discrimination based on caste, religion or gender is good? Without qualifications?

Bong_Dongs #367, 369; Hobbyty various posts from #348 onwards; Prem #366

Will respond to all your posts in a couple of days. Have a great weekend!

Arjun, Alphanell, Dost, Prem

Contours of US policy - and compulsions for India

Talk is better than threatening nuclear war and ``brinkmanship``n - what are your thoughts?

``Rice says India should talk to Pakistan

AFP

New Delhi, May 3

US national security advisor Condoleezza Rice said India should resume a dialogue with Pakistan and work to reduce months of border tension, following steps by Islamabad to ease the stand-off between the two nations.

``There is a sense in which as the Pakistanis have tried to be responsive--and they have tried to be responsive, we do believe they are doing some things--that it would be good for India to take some steps too,`` Rice said in an interview with a national daily.

``The important thing, though, is that everybody stay away from brinkmanship, that nobody use force here and that we give diplomacy and the anti-terror campaign and the dismantling of the terrorist organisations time to work,`` she said.

Rice said the United States wanted to work closely with India on the anti-terrorism campaign, just as it was doing with Pakistan.

At the same time, she said Washington expected Pakistan to address the ``legitimate concerns of India over cross-border terrorism.``

``We have been very clear with Pakistani President General Pervez Musharraf that we expect to see actions to follow up on his January 12 speech that said Pakistan will end support to extremists.``

India has blamed Pakistan for masterminding a December attack on its parliament by terrorists, following which a million troops from the two countries were deployed to their common borders.

``It would serve no one for India and Pakistan to come to military blows. We need time to work the anti-terrorism agenda,`` Rice said.

``We have urged the Indian government to give diplomacy the primacy here and to give us all time to dismantle the terrorist networks, to begin dialogue over the issues that are at the root cause here and we think that is the way ahead.``

Rice praised Indian Prime Minister Atal Behari Vajpayee for showing restraint after the parliament attack.

``It could not have been easy to do what they have done, to keep talking, but we really believe this is the way forward.``

Vajpayee has refused to end the border build-up until Pakistan hands over named terrorists allegedly on Pakistani soil and ends the infiltration of Islamic terrorists into Kashmir.``

Alpahanell, Prem - Arjun

As predicted - with a made by Musharraf and US all over it:

``Hizb offers dialogue to India

ISLAMABAD: A major militant group fighting India`s rule in Kashmir said on Thursday its suggestion for a dialogue to end the 12-year insurgency should not be taken as a truce offer.

Saleem Hashmi, spokesman for the Hizb-ul-Mujahideen, told Reuters that armed struggle and peace talks could go side by side. ``Ceasefire cannot be made basis for dialogue.

War and dialogue can go side by side,`` he said. His remarks came after the group`s deputy commander, Moin-ul-Islam, said that the group would give up arms if India began a ``genuine`` peace process.

``Once India takes an initiative with good intentions, she will find us 10 steps ahead of her one step. We will at once give up guns and observe a real ceasefire so that a solution-finding path receives headway,`` Moin said in an article in the Greater Kashmir.

Hizb-ul-Mujahideen declared a ceasefire and started peace talks with India in mid-2000 but they broke down after New Delhi refused to include Pakistan in a three-way dialogue. Hashmi said his group was not averse to dialogue to end the insurgency. ``But the talks should be tripartite (including Pakistan) and open,`` he added. ``We had tested ceasefire but it proved a failure. It has been a bitter experience for us.``

``Let India bear in mind that unless a genuine peace process precedes, Hizb-ul-Mujahideen and other United Jihad Council (UJC) constituents would remain wedded to armed struggle,`` Moin said.

``However, if today India begins a genuine process of settlement and peace, we will not wait till tomorrow, we will give up our defensive operation right now.`` The United Jihad Council is an alliance based in Pakistan of most of the militant groups fighting Indian forces in Kashmir and is headed by the Hizb-ul-Mujahideen.``

Better start digging

``Caste based discrimination is not so different from religion based discrimination in situations (such as in India, Pakistan, Bangladesh) where an individual’s religion is in the vast majority of cases a function of descent rather than conviction. That’s also the similarity between caste/religion based discrimination and gender based discrimination. What an individual is born as affects their relative social worth, through no conscious action or decision of their own.``

I think this is a generally descriptive statement

- you do not wish to offer a judgement on these? If we don`t offer a judgement of these, these are issues of ethics, of a moral sense, can we shape them? rather, should we shape them? - If we don`t offer a judgement on these, won`t we be agreeing to continue the way these operate in society or in our lives?

And I think you are generalizing when you suggest that caste and gender discrimination do not, in an essential sense, differ. I agree that the case that Caste and gender discrimination effect the lot of men and women - but I am unconvinced that while this similarity exist, it means that they are the same or esentially the same. I do take your point about discrimination of women between each other, as different class or professional groups - but neither of these has a religious component nor does it have any implications for the concept of redemption - nor it does any implications for the notion of basic equality of persons - any chance you could also comment on the moral or judgement that, in my opinion, your statement does not deal with - and I do think that we cannot move further on the issue, if we do not make a judgement about it - if it`s good, why change it - if it`s bad, how does it operate, how can it be countered?

On Quoting the ``Declartion`` instaed of ``Constitution`` - you might have missed it, but I do agree that I was quoting ``Declaration`` and not ``constitution``.

Reply Hobbyty # 361

[``Given the current situation of women in most of the world (and in all Muslim majority countries) that is debatable. Why else do women face gender based discrimination if not for the fact that they are born female?``

This statement does not help us understand caste any better]

Obviously. The statement is about discrimination against women. Point???

“ for instance women do not face discrimination from other women –“

Of course they do. Rich woman: poor woman. Native born:immigrant. English speaker:non-English speaker, majority religion:minority religion, white:black, married:unmarried, with children:childless and (this is where you smile) upper caste:lower caste.

The question is, does the nature of this discrimination fundamentally differ from situation to situation? In real, as opposed to theoretical, terms? I don’t think so. If you think it does, let me know why. (Remember, in real terms, NOT theory.)

Limiting our discussion of discrimination to that based on caste in traditionalist Hindu society seems to be pointless. These discussions only take on any meaning if we can discern the common pattern of events being played out in different situations – that’s where the insights can be found. Otherwise, why would one bother?

For example, I find it tedious and trite when Indians focus their comments on Honour Killings in Pakistan without seeing the connection of the underlying pattern with Dowry Deaths in India. Whereas if we can see the connection to our own lives/countries/societies we might actually have something valuable to say (ie not trite and tedious), and gain some insights into things which we can actually affect. Sahih?

Caste based discrimination is not so different from religion based discrimination in situations (such as in India, Pakistan, Bangladesh) where an individual’s religion is in the vast majority of cases a function of descent rather than conviction. That’s also the similarity between caste/religion based discrimination and gender based discrimination. What an individual is born as affects their relative social worth, through no conscious action or decision of their own.

Zafar

PS Agree to disagree with you re: chuch and state sep. I still think you quoted the Declaration of Independence instead of the Constitution, but jaane do.

alphanell

I came across this editorial from the ``Daily Times`` - help me understand why ``federalist`` parties not popular and why regional or provincial parties, are? - And what does this mean for caste as a political variable?



``More trouble ahead in India

The result of the vote in India’s Lok Sabha where the governing coalition of Mr A B Vajpayee defeated a motion to censure the government for its abysmal handling of the pogrom in Gujarat should surprise no one. Even the fact that the BJP government won the vote with a sizeable margin — 276-182 with eight abstentions — should have been expected. Why?

Two main strands need to be identified here. The first relates to the nature of politicking in India; the second pertains to the evolving nature of the Indian polity. Let us consider both. Since the early eighties, India has been steadily moving away from the context of federalist parties with an all-India outreach to regional political groupings and state parties. This movement has corresponded with the decline in the political fortunes of the Indira Congress. It has also given rise to a plethora of parochial political interests. The Bharatya Janata Party (BJP) did move into the political space vacated by Congress(I) but that development had little to do with its offering of a superior all-India, cohesive political ideology. The BJP’s appeal was simply a reaction to the voters’ growing apathy towards Congress and to the BJP’s communal agenda, though within the political, social dynamics it was difficult to view these two separately and distinctly. In the later phase, especially since 1998, the BJP has been losing its ‘federalist’ sheen without being able to retain power in certain states. Yet that development may strictly be seen in terms of its loss to parochial political interests rather than in terms of any ‘defeat’ for its communal agenda.

This is where the evolving nature of Indian polity comes in. The secularists in India correctly assessed that secularism, the separation of religion from politics, is not an option that can either be exercised or rejected but an absolute necessity. This means that the Indian polity could face fearsome consequences were it to operate on any basis other than secularism. Yet the BJP’s agenda flies in the face of this truism. It is interesting to note here that the BJP, with Mr Vajpayee at its head, has always had a difficult dialectical relationship with the far-right Hindutva parties and groups that are subsumed under the rubric of Sangh Parivar. But the difficulty did not pertain to any ideological differences. Far from it. It related to the BJP’s political imperative of sugar-coating the saffronisation of India and presenting it as an Indian rather than as a Hindutva creed, one on which rested the entire edifice of Indian nationalism. For a time it even succeeded in selling this concept and in the process gathered in its camp Christians, Sikhs and even Muslims. The minorities even thought that states under BJP rule would generally witness a sharp drop in communal violence, a belief that lies shredded and bloodied in Gujarat like the corpses left behind by the pogrom. But this basic contradiction was bound to come to the fore and it has. The Sangh Privar represents the purity of the Hindutva discourse. No attempt by Mr Vajpayee can dilute that discourse or hide the dark reality of it.

The fact that the Gujarat pogrom was perpetrated and is being perpetuated with active connivance of the state government as well as the union government — the latter for not having exercised its authority under article 355 — proves beyond doubt that a combination of rascally politics and Hindutva ideology will ultimately result in the kind of tragedy witnessed by Gujarat. But why has the BJP government survived the vote?

At one level the event relates to the downside of democracy, especially when it is reduced to a game of numbers within a complex political configuration where most players’ first instinct is to survive. Related to this is the fact that even as the BJP’s fortunes have declined, there has been no corresponding rise in the stock of Congress, the only other party which originally had an all-India outreach. Additionally, while some of the BJP’s political partners may not agree with the NDA government’s handling of Gujarat, neither do they want the government to fall because that would mean losing their spoils and perks in addition to preparing for another election. And no one wants another election, including perhaps the opposition. Even though the motion was not a no-confidence vote and could not have resulted in the fall of the BJP government, if passed it could have been a major setback, possibly triggering a process that might have led to the government’s fall.

As things stand, it is clear that the Indian democracy has shown its flipside, not just in terms of the vote but also in terms of the majoritarian consensus that increasingly seems to run along communal lines. True, there has been much protest, but equally true is the fact that it has not resulted in a real headache for the BJP and its allies, frayed though that alliance may be today. In a country that is a congeries of ethnic, sectarian and communal groups, the primacy of one ideology couched as democratic majoritarianism can only breed more trouble.``

Bong Dong

No I can`t quote from the article ``Super 7 in Pakistani Marks`` - I tried to find additional stuff on emeralddesign and on kanwa - but no help there either.

hobbyty

``You did not read any of the material in ``Air Forces Monthly`` about FC1/Super7 - if you had you would have realized that the aircarft is being flight test ``

I find no refernce in that article that says its being flight tested, can you quote?

AlephNull

``As for the J-10, it uses the Russian Lyulka AL-31 engine (also used in the Su-27/Su-30 family of aircraft). The Chinese have not been granted a license to build it, let alone pass it along in aircraft destined for the PAF``

Well, there are some reports of a Chinese development of two new engines (i dont know how credible), the WS-10 is a low bypass turbofan (probably for the J-10) and WP-12(?), a pure turbo (probably for the FC-1).

So it is possible that the Chinese probably intend to manufacture the first batch of J-10`s with the AL-31F (given the 50 engines they have ordered) while pursuing the WS-10.

So maybe sometime in the distant future we may see a Pak J-10.

re: AlephNull # 350

A great post. A couple of thoughts:

There are only two explanations for the kind of decisions Pakistani army has repeatedly made: an institutional incapacity to analyze facts objectively and think long-term, and a deliberate policy of bluff and blackmail using feigned (a better term than ``clamimed``) madness. My casual obervation suggests that both processes operate.

There is plenty of evidence (other that what postings of romair and hobbyty - two admirers of the military - provide in ample measure) for the former. In all of Indo-Pak wars and skirmishes the Pakistani military badly underestimated Indian military`s willingness to hit back. Although this is a theory that I can back up only with some research, I have a feeling that there exists an institutionalized racist/culturist mindset within Pakistani military that views Indians to be incapable of matching their fair ``martial races`` in war. Pakistani army, it seems to me, sometimes begins to believe its own propaganda, propaganda it has to prepare for the healthy consumption of Pakistani people over whom it rules.

With a racist mindset like that, it is difficult to know whether one behaves irrationally because one is truly irrational or feigns irrationality as a bargaining chip. However, Pakistani army (or the government) has long followed the state policy of deniability in both Kashmir and Kabul - a tactic I am sure you are well familiar with. That suggests to me at least SOME attempt at a ``rational`` a cloak and dagger policy not born entirely out of stupidity. I was not old enough to analyze the actions of Zia when he was in charge, but Musharraf does appear to have a penchant for puerile theatrics and kargil-like operations designed to gain him some short-term advantages. Nowhere has his game been more apparent than in his dealings and misdealings with the religious right in his country (although IMO he may be losing his touch there).

Musharraf is, what I call, a secular jehadi. That is, he does not really like religious extremists at all as far as Pakistan is concerned. But he recognizes the enormous power religion can excercise in whipping up popular anger, funnelling money, organizing street protests, and accumulating cannon fodder for his Kashmir war. He very well knows how fundamentally his keeping safe of those 20 terrorists asked for by India is for his continued operations in India. Notice also how caliberated were the protests by religious parties against the US intervention in Afghanistan. Just enough for Pakistan-based American journalists to file reports about the threat they posed to the stability of Musharraf`s hold on power.

Thus what I seem to see is a history of both institutionalized incapacity for rational analysis as well as cloak-and-dagger, too-smart-by-half operations that then invariably come back to haunt Pakistani people (not the military, which awards itself two extra stars everytime).

AlphaNull # 355

``As far as I`m concerned, armed foreign insurgents found in Indian Kashmir by India`s forces are entitled to a plot of land measuring six feet by two, six feet underground; nothing less, nothing more.``

I do hope they are buried all stacked up under ONE plot of land measuring six feet by two feet. We can`t waste too much precious land burying animals.

Alphanell

You did not read any of the material in ``Air Forces Monthly`` about FC1/Super7 - if you had you would have realized that the aircarft is being flight test - and further you would have noted that variants are being developed to target particular export markets.

On whether or not F7PG are an enhancement - Again, Pick up ``Air Forces Monthly`` magazine - June issue will have a special section dealing with the introduction of this aircraft - The May issue of the magazine, also provides coverage of the introduction of F7PG and retirement of F6.

The introduction of F7PG and squadron formation will not take two years, recall we are talking about the PAF not the IASF - One squadron has been formed and by the end of June both squadrons will be operational - why so fast? PAF already operate a variant. By the way if if are interested this month`s issue has a write up of training in the IASF. Also you may be interested to note that PAF instrucutors have arrived in Sri Lanka to train the Lankan Air force - Once the FC1 is ready, I think Pakistan will offer Lanka and Bangladesh the opportunity to participate in training and operation. Pakistan navy have held exercises with Bangla navy and joint Air and naval exercises should be the order of the day in the near future - ceratinly it would mark the beginning of a historic reconciliation.

On a comparison of SU30MK and F7PG - these are very different aircraft used in very different roles. The Flanker variant IASF will use is a high superiority and attack role - the avionic suite IASF intend for their aircraft is also a highly capable suite - F7PG cannot boast the avionic suite of the Indian Flanker - however; whereas the Indian flanker as a threat is a few years away - the F7PG is here and now and in this way it`s introduction is an enhancement. By the time Indian flanker will be ready in force, PAF pilots will have trained against it by studying the Chinese variants envelope.

Re Kashmir, your post was interesting for the ommissions you chose - the captive kashmiri, as far as you are concerned, seems not to exist, yo are of course welcome to such a point of view. A more realistic evaluation would have to conclude that where there is smoke there is fire. But time will tell if the struggle of the captive kashmiri will exist or not - If present atmosphere mitigates against the promotion of the freedom struggle - is it conscieveable that this atmposphere will change again and if it turns out that the struggle of captive kashmiri does get a sympathetic hearing the court of international opinion, or in the councils of international powers - what then? Perhaps a process of a negotiated settelement ought to be promoted.

A seat on the UNSC will be available for a delegate from Asia, for the coming session - do you think the UNSC can facilitate a process of negotiation bewteen the three parties?

Dost Mittar, anybody else interested

Proof? as in ``documented``? maybe this will help:

``India: Gujarat Officials Took Part in Anti-Muslim Violence

New Report Documents Complicity of the State Government ``

http://www.hrw.org/press/2002/04/gujarat.htm

Dost, make sure you go through the picture gallery as well.