The Nuclear Noose Around Pakistan’s Neck

An interesting copy and pasted article.
1. Make-Believe Capital???? I thought Islamabad was a real capital, I grew up in good-ole Islo (Young in human years but not in Dog) ….. and I feel like I was living in the wonderland/Disneyland …. This is earth shattering Khabar for me ….. Or was S. Hersh just trying to pre-conceive the notion of Banana Republic in to the audience (By the way Bananas in the Make-Believe capital don’t taste the same anymore, as they used to when I was a Young Lad … I wonder why).


“For two decades, journalists and American and European intelligence agencies have linked Khan and the Pakistani intelligence service, the I.S.I. (Inter-Service Intelligence), to nuclear-technology transfers, and it was hard to credit the idea that the government Khan served had been oblivious”

2 decades, let’s see that would make it around 1983/1984 when the journalists/ I agencies started linking Dr. Khan with nuclear Tech. transfer, so he must have started it prior to the above mentioned years …. That is very impressive of Dr. Khan that with in 7 to 8 years of returning to Pak from the Netherlands he was able to develop nuclear technology for Pak and then transfer it …. This man must be real good at what he does, don’t you think?

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

Harimau


Quote:


It is stupid to dismiss the area as a wasteland ``where not a blade of grass grows`` as Indira Gandhi once said.

---

A minor correction here...It was not Mrs Indira Gandhi who said but it was her father Pt Jawahar Lal Nehru said that.

Another interesting thing about this incident/quote is ( not that well known to majority ) response by Piloo Modi, one of the wittiest Indian parliamentarian (though in 60s his sources of finance with regard to party affairs ( Swatantra party?) were bit questionable)) in the Parliament. He said something to the effect that.. not a single hair grows on Panditji`s head, does that mean that it is of not much ...

Musharraf`s latest Press release:

``Agar Ghaas Bhi Khaani Pare
To Ghaas Bhi Khayenge
Magar, Meri Hifazat Ke liye
Bomb Hatane Hi Parenge``

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Just a discourse from interesting debate....about the two AQ/AK `s


Libya and North Korea have vehemently denied Pakistani Involvement in their Nuclear Programs...

Libya denying giving out/or rating out on AQ ...and North Korea...completly denying his involvemnet...


...so Iran ....?? becomes the RAT..


.....and Pakistans sudden TOO HONEST approach ...!! raises some very interesting question.....can any body guess...????

ironman
Re makar-vilakku

What I heard was that it was the KSEB and/or forest tribals.

Thanks for the brief primer. I reiterate that I only commented on the propulsion of the missiles, since the SA-2 and the Prithvi are completely different missiles in terms of function and as such are not at all likely to share other characteristics (and wouldn`t you know that a person would *be* a rocket scientist).

And that`s *if* the rocket motor is the same in the Ghauri. God knows, it may well be. But then why do the Iranians have problems with their missiles that the Pakistanis and N Koreans do not have (since the comment is that they are all the same).

I wonder.. given that (as far as I know) many components of the LCA that was being designed by India were coming from abroad, such as the engines (and yes, I googled again.. the Kaveri engine doesnt look anywhere close to completion) can that be correlated? Obviously not, IF one assumes that the LCA is purely indigenously designed and the Ghauri is just a knock off with no indigenous mods. And can we take any meaning from the so far unsuccessful Indian MBT - which should be considerably easier! - compared with the Al_khalid (which, of course, uses a Ukrainian power plant!).

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

One good thing about Prof. Hoodbhoy is that he doesnot feel victimised because posters disagree with him. This could be because he is absent, but so what, a person`s good qualities should be appreciated whatever the cause of his/her displaying those qualities.

Layman #323 If Kalam is indeed as you and freethinker before you say (and I have no reason to think otherwise), then certainly he could be a useful to us in Pakistan as well, for the following reason:

a. Kalam kept his country`s defense secrets to himself. Qadeer sold his nation`s defense secrets to all callers in the arms bazaar for personal gain.

b. Kalam lives simply. Qadeer lives like a high roller.

I am glad that both PPP/PML(N) - these being the main opposition now in Pakistan to the Military Mullah Complex that is protecting Qadeer - are speaking out loud and clear in questioning the pardon given to Qadeer and calling for a full and open investigation into the matter. No doubt they could point to Kalam as an example of how Qadeer SHOULD have behaved if he was indeed loyal to Pakistan, rather than loyal to his bank balance and personal ego. I dont think we have heard the last of the Qadeer affair - I have no doubt his career is finished. But whether Mushy will manage to ensure full justice is done here remains to be seen.

re:#323 by Layman
Most, if not all, Pakis would not like what they read about Abdul Kalam. He is not the kind of hero they associate a muslim with. Pak`s heros are Md Ghazni, Tipu sultan, OBL. They have not even given any prominence to the best scientist they have ever produced (or shall ever produce) viz Prof Abdus Salam, just because the latter again does not fit the description of an Islamic Hero. Heck, they do not even think he is a muslim! Instead, that highest place was reserved for a thug and a proliferator with no scientific merits whatsoever. No country outside Pak has bestowed any award on Abdul ``Xerox`` Khan while sometimes ago in another forum i had posted a list of numerous awards that Abdus Salam won outside Pak (even India bestowed on him a few awards; such was his caliber).

Someone who can quote sanskrit verses as easily as Qoran, who can recite poetry in Tamil and has little knowledge of Urdu or Arabic and above all has worked for India`s security interests is not going to be liked by Pakis. I do not blame people like tahmed and others.
It is great that Indians of all hue can accept Abdul Kalam as a hero. It goes to show that Inidia, at its core, is a secular nation.
Sridhar

``If you`re a rocket scientist, I`ll accept your critique to laypeople throwing terms around that they have no right using``

That was my official designation a few years back (sigh)...before the lure of lucre turned me into a code coolie.

- - - -

OK, on to business.

Both the SA-2 and the Prithvi use solid-propellant boosters to get them off the ground quickly and safely and then use a liquid-propellenat for the refined control a goodly accurate missile needs.

There the similarities end.

Now, you`ll see a ***LARGE*** number of SAMs with this same general design.
Check out: http://www.designation-systems.net/dusrm/app1/index.html ...if you have the time.

(Hey, even our space rockets use this idea).

So its gratuitous to say that the prithvi is designed after the SA-2.

- - - -

Things like choice of `stage design` and `propellants` hve been perfected long ago. So theres little to `choose` for a designer in that. For example RFNA (red fuming nitric acid) and kersone are standard choices for oxidizer and fuel.

The real problems start when you test ***your particular configuration***: chamber size, flow rate, splash plate design, etc, etc, etc. Its impossible to have an off-the-shelf design. You HAVE to do all tests, make modifications...till the design is perfected..or abandon it and start again.

Every once in a while the rocket explodes on the test stand just because it feels like it.

- - - -

So if the ghauri has somewhat reduced external dimensions, but its rocket motor is the exact same as the nodong...that doesn`t count as reverse-engineering.

Why the heck am I educating the enemy??? Oh, well... ;)

In case you`re interested, get this book by John D. Clark (Ignition). It has a humorous but informative description of rocket fuels and the life of a rocket engineer.

#319 by Assad_K
``And who the frell cares? If we reverse-engineered the No_Dong thats a feat of its own.``
Ha, Ha, Ha.
Dude,
Are you out of your mind? You say: who cares? The world cares. Every responsible country outside Pak cares. May be you as a Paki do not care. But then, you must have figured out by now, no one outside of Pak gives a rat`s a$$ to what a Paki thinks.
The latest Shaheen has a 2000 km range, so said your dictator proudly in his news conference. Do you think the Israelis would not care about that bit of news?
Nobody would have begrudged Pak its nuclear deterrance vis-a vis India. But Pak proved that it is not a responsible nuclear state. That is the crux of the matter. Megalomaniacal Abdul ``Xeorx`` Khan thought he can teach west a lesson by proliferating to irresoponsible dictatorial regimes like North Korea, Libya. Now that is something the world very much cares.
Sridhar
P.S: I doubt Pak reverse engineered anything. They just changed the shape and length of the missile. Rest is all borrowed technology.

Agreed, Layman, in terms of scientific qualifications there is no comparison betwixt the two Abduls. On the one hand an egomaniac claiming all manner of qualifications to which he is not entitled (though yes, an organizer par excellence), and on the other hand a person of genuine intellect and genuine interest in his country rather than himself. For the benefit of Aleph, Harimau, ironman etc - I mean AQ as the former, Kalam as the latter. Your entire post is spot-on.

Sigh.. as always, people reading so much more into posts. I didnt say anything like that, Ironman. I was talking solely about the Ghauri and the No-Dong. And yes, what a tremendous feat of deduction.. I used a Yahoo search, but since its the same engine, I suppose you could say a Google search. It was, in fact, the same FAS site. And propulsion technology, I assume, the means by which the rocket, she go fly bye bye into da sky? I didn`t comment on the other technology, guidance etc, that went into it (though, that said, I hear the guidance technology is not too hot.. I know, I know, `what do I mean by guidance technology`. If you`re a rocket scientist, I`ll accept your critique to laypeople throwing terms around that they have no right using).

Or did you mean that India went back to first replicate on its own the principles of flight, rocketry etc before the Prithvi came about? Well, why not. Given that maths and rocketry both come from India (right) it was those pesky Boche that were copying Indian technology. The cads.

Surface-air missiles? Like the Anza, you mean. Which, yes, is a derivative of one of those Arrow missiles, right? Red or Green, I forget. Naval missiles? Not to worry, if we need one, we`ll touch up a Silkworm with a dab of green paint, christen it `Hamza` or something and light the fuse.

#312 tahmed32:
``MaheshG #303 Perhaps Kalam is a scholar-statesman - he is your president and as long as he doesnt threaten at every opportunity (as some of your other BJP-types like to do) to teach us pakistanis a lesson, then I wish him all the best. India has indeed had some fine scholar-statesman as presidents, Dr. Radhakrishnan notably. Kalam did come to prominence on account of his missile-making skills and not on account of a political career - I think you will agree. After all, I am sure there are other muslim members of the BJP too.``
Tahmed, I would urge you and other Pakistani chowkies to read up on Abdul Kalam. He is as far removed from AQKhan, as he can be. Abdul Kalam is not a nuclear scientist, but a missile technologist. An extremely simple man, he used to live in a one-room place (no, not a one-bedroom) before he moved into Rashtrapati Bhavan (the Presidential palace). When he was elected President, his extended family came to visit him (by second class train) all the way from Rameshwaram in Tamil Nadu, and he paid for their tickets. The man himself is a bachelor. He is genuinely interested in India`s progress, and has written a couple of books (one his autobiography and the other how to make India a developed country by 2020). I have had the privelege to listen to his speech when he came to my city for a visit. He is a simple guy in speech, manners and no ego, but has high ideals and aspirations for India.
I think the BJP totally misused him in making him President, it was a political act after Gujarat riots. But he is the ideal Indian Muslim from the sangh parivar point of view, as he is interested in the Indian holy books, Indian classical music and is a (egg-eating) vegetarian.
I am slightly disappointed in Kalam, because he failed to criticise BJP or even the communal forces in general for Gujarat. He has not made any politically strong acts (like refusing to dissolve the Lok Sabha prematurely), but that is not expected of our Presidents anyway. He is a total political novice, but a major inspiration for all Indian youth, irrespective of their region or religion.
One more thing, Kalam refused to make his first official trip abroad till he has visited every state and Union Territory in India.

Assad_K #319,

Good try!

So pakistan is more or less on the same technological level as india as far as missile techinology is concerned...right?!

So we`re all adding a little bit here and there to Von Braun, eh?!

So...then....when are you pakis developing Surface-Air and Naval missiles...next week???
Its so easy right? I mean put in some masala into the chamber and light it...and off it goes...whoooosh!

- - - -

I know you know next to nothing about missile design...but let me ask you anyway...what did you mean by this:

``The Prithvi uses propulsion technology derived from the Sov SA-2.``

(I know you probably got that with a google on prithvi.
Just want to see how much you actaully know)

Harimau: you write about me `` Instead of arguing about India`s defence policies with ``jingoistic Indians`` like you, I think he needs to ask someone whom he holds in high esteem, namely that complete fraud Soysauce``

You just lied above.

If you do not accept the fact that you lied in your above statement, kindly cut and paste from any post I have ever written on chowk where (a) I have called fountainheader a ``jingoistic Indian``, and/or (b) I have demonstrated high appreciation for anything Soysauce has written that you consider to be a fraud (I incidentally do not interact much with Soysauce anyway).

PS: Here is a radical concept for you: The thing to hold in high esteem is the facts. If something doesnt ring true, reject it regardless of where the cookie crumbles. If something appears false, reject it. This keeps life simple. Try it sometimes. You might find you can live perfectly well without lying, as you just did above.

Coming back to the subject of this article.

Here is an indication that there is life yet in the secular parties in Pakistan (from today`s Dawn):

``ARD chairman Makhdoom Amin Fahim, disputing Gen Musharraf`s authority to pardon nuclear scientist Dr A.Q. Khan after holding him guilty of nuclear proliferation, demanded on Friday that the matter should be taken to parliament for a final decision. ...He said the nation must be apprised of the inquiry report and the justification for waiving the punishment...Amin Fahim was of the view that it was unfair on the part of the relevant authorities to exonerate the military people and hold the civilians guilty...He said the dubious proceedings of the entire episode had no credibility and the matter should be referred to the bicameral legislature...``

A globalsecurity site is http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/china/cv.htm, which includes the IDSA article as one of its references. However, even the IDSA article far from states a Chinese carrier as a certainty in the imminent future. A relevant quote from the globalsecurity article is

``The PLA Navy has studied the acquisition of an aircraft carrier since the mid-1980s, and there are persistant reports that China has plans to launch a 40,000 ton class aircraft carrier by 2010. While the navy has lobbied for a carrier for many years, their proposals have been overruled by the Central Military Commission. This decision may have been motivated by a desire not to be seen to be adding a major new capability to China`s maritime forces, with consequent adverse regional reaction. From a purely military perspective, a Chinese aircraft carrier would be expensive to operate, and carrier would be vulnerable to attack by aircraft, fast surface vessels and submarines.``

Of course, it goes on to point out the benefits that could be obtained by having a carrier. Nontheless, given that its 2004 and there seems to be no carrier being constructed, its unlikely that any indigenous Chinese carrier would emerge by the 2010 hypothesized deadline. One could of course be purchased between now and then if the Chinese decide to go back into the force-projection mindset, but that doesn`t seem to be the direction that they are going in, being more interested in economic dominance. Thats where the Chinese-Indian fight-to-the-death is going to be.

Personally, given that Indian analysts are as self serving as Pakistani ones, I certainly would hesitate to believe IDSA, SAAG or their ilk. And AlephNull, given that he is candid enough to point out his feelings towards Pakistan (literally seeing us as sons-of-bitches!) comes out as a more articulate Jay.

Regarding the perpetual Ghauri/No-dong (and as an aside.. the fact that people choose to mock the Korean language by jeering at the No-dong`s name is quite.. fascinating), a 1998 article is
http://www.fas.org/news/pakistan/1998/05/980512-ghauri.htm

A relevant quote is

``If the mass figures reported for the Ghauri are correct, the missile appears to be somewhat smaller than the North Korean Nodong missile. The Nodong mass (about 15 tonnes of fuel and 18.5 tonnes total mass if the body is made of aluminum)[15] is estimated to be a couple of tonnes larger than the reported Ghauri values. The Nodong with a similar fuel fraction (85%) would give a longer range than the Ghauri for the same payload-1200 to 1250 kilometers for a 700-kilogram payload.

Similarly, from the photos of the Ghauri launch that were released by Pakistani television, one can get a very rough estimate of the size of the missile based on the trucks in the background.[16] From this, the missile appears to be very roughly the same size as, though possibly smaller than, the Nodong, which is reported to be 15.2 meters long and 1.2 meters in diameter.[17]

Thus, the available information appears to be consistent with a missile that uses technology and a configuration similar to the Nodong, but which is somewhat smaller than a Nodong. ``

Perhaps it is reverse engineering rather than the usual jeers of blue-and-red being painted over with green-and-white. Though from the FAS website, side-by-side stats of the Ghauri and No-dong are identical. Interestingly, though the Iranian Shahab-3 is also a No-Dong variant, the comment on it having problems with the spin-up technology to prevent tumbling of the warhead, the Ghauri does not have that problem.

And who the frell cares? If we reverse-engineered the No_Dong thats a feat of its own. The Prithvi uses propulsion technology derived from the Sov SA-2. We`re all copying and improving on Werner von Braun.

So.. um.. what exactly is your question about the Mina incident? I don`t think it was set up by the ISI, and I don`t think you can convince me that it was.

arjun #315 I am not advocating pakistan increasing its defense spending - in fact, i am calling for a reduction in conventional military (we dont need all these generals and colonels floating around in Pakistan) AND maintaining nukes to serve as a cooling system for the Advanis of India when they start overheating with their rhetoric.

So please try not to misrepresent my views.

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

Ref fountainheader #306

[Taiwan is the main reason America is not letting anyone sell China a carrier. Russia is selling it to India, but not China, because America says so. This is not USSR, tahmedjee, this is Russia, which follows American diktats. America does not mind India having a carrier because it sees India as a friendly state, even a potential ally in the Indian Ocean, and if need be, in the Pacific rim.]

A minor fact that people overlook is that the US sold India naval aircraft (Vought Aircraft Corporation`s A-6, if I am right) in the 60s for use on INS Vikrant. The denial of the A-7 aircraft for the INS Viraat (for political reasons) led to India buying Harrier VTOL/STOL aircraft. The US did not attempt to block the sale of the Harriers by Britain.

So the US has never been against India operating an aircraft carrier. They have in fact encouraged it.

For all his supposed reasonableness, Tahmed falls into the knee-jerk anti-Indian brigade where most issues are concerned. Instead of arguing about India`s defence policies with ``jingoistic Indians`` like you, I think he needs to ask someone whom he holds in high esteem, namely that complete fraud Soysauce, what he thinks of the incident in Mina when Hajj pilgrims trampled people to death while attempting to throw stones at a stone pillar. If and when Soysauce answers that question, our reasonable Pakistani is likely to re-classify Soysauce as a kaffir guilty of blaspheming Islam.

But no danger of that happening. Just like the US winks at Pakistan`s selling of nuclear equipment and secrets, Tahmed will wink at Soysauce`s running away from answering questions that will expose his hypocrisy.

fountainheader #306

1. You write ``As someone said before, the intent was to drag Pakistan, kicking and screaming, out of the nuclear closet.`` How was this bad for Pakistan? Indeed, things improved dramatically in a number of ways for Pakistan, as follows:

(a) Instead of Advani issuing threats to Pakistan (as he did prior to Pakistan`s nuclear response), Indian policy towards Pakistan became pacifist and we soon had Vajpayee visiting Lahore declaring Pakistan was here to stay. What a difference a bit of muscle makes!!;
(b) Last year musharaff could openly respond to India`s threats of overrunning Pakistan by declaring Pakistan`s intent to use the nuclear option in case of war.
(c) Military and economic sanctions that been imposed under the Pressler amendment the hurt pakistan much more than india in the 1990`s were lifted.

With enemies like Advani, Pakistanis dont need any friends. :-) You may consider Advani`s remarks brilliant, I consider them ill-informed, arrogant and self-defeating and find it appalling that a man of his poor judgement remains unquestioned and at the helm of affairs in India and could well come to power if Vajpayee (who is indeed a statesman) were to retire.

On China: I suppose we can agree to disagree on our views concerning China as being a threat to anyone. I just think it would be totally out of character for the Chinese to be anything but a source of stability in the world. The truth will come out in due course anyway.

MaheshG #303 Perhaps Kalam is a scholar-statesman - he is your president and as long as he doesnt threaten at every opportunity (as some of your other BJP-types like to do) to teach us pakistanis a lesson, then I wish him all the best. India has indeed had some fine scholar-statesman as presidents, Dr. Radhakrishnan notably. Kalam did come to prominence on account of his missile-making skills and not on account of a political career - I think you will agree. After all, I am sure there are other muslim members of the BJP too.

Anyway, I just hope this entire indian-pakistan relations take a turn for the better (as they are beginning to do), and that we all get rid of our nukes and reduce our conventional militaries and start focussing on the long-neglected Abduls and Saimas and Nathu Rams and Shridevis who live their lives walking the dirty streets of lahore and delhi. THAT is the real battleground - and that is battle where indians and pakistanis are on the same side and against a common and most cruel of enemies - the dismal poverty in which most of our people live out their lives.

Mahesh #302 one more thing, you write ``Man is inherently selfish ``. Agreed. And that is exactly the reason why man (unless blinded by hatred or arrogance) will seek the path of peace rather than the path that (with today`s weapons) leads to self-annihilation!!

The age of the Great Nations is over. And the sooner the newly wealthy chattering classes of delhi and islamabad realize that in the subcontinent, the better off poor Abdul and Nathu Ram (who can only admire the fine houses of the chattering classes from a distance), will be.

Letter to Daily Times, 02/07/04:

Damage control

Sir: The recent disclosures about A.Q Khan’s nuclear proliferation have created a serious situation. Pakistan will be under severe pressure in the coming weeks and months. The demands will range from permitting international inspections to perhaps a rollback of the nuclear programme. But Pakistan has simply invested too much in the programme to abandon it at this juncture.

President Pervez Musharraf should be cognisant of the international community’s scepticism of Pakistan’s official position regarding this issue. Keeping in mind the seriousness of the charges, President Musharraf and the army must conceive of a comprehensive plan to mollify the concerns of the international community and convince them of the security of Pakistan’s nuclear assets. This is both in the interest of the army as well as Pakistan.

More worrying is the reaction in Pakistan, where a majority thinks the entire episode is some sort of a cover-up by the Pakistan Army to hide its own involvement in the affair. This growing schism between the Pakistan Army and the people does not bode well for the future and can have dire consequences if nothing is done to arrest this trend.

It is in Pakistan’s interest to end this issue as soon as possible. However, a story such as this will not end easily and events like AQ Khan’s controversial pardon and confession will only lead to more speculation. President Musharraf would do well to be a bit more forthcoming about the role of security agency officials who worked at KRL.

In the end, while it is important to reassure the international community, it is even more important to win over the trust of the people of Pakistan.
TAIMUR MASUD KHAN
USA

Fountainheader #306

{{links from the Global Security site that talks about the PLA`s efforts to get a carrier. Alephnull...or someone else, has also posted another link later on.}}

Here it is once again– a copiously footnoted article from IDSA on Chinese efforts in the direction of acquiring aircraft carrier capability (incidentally provides some coverage of Chinese naval thought and rebuts those notions about China supposedly lacking blue-water ambitions).

Dragon`s Dragonfly: The Chinese Aircraft Carrier

Here is a relevant quote:

“You Xu and You Ji have noted that in the second phase of the development (2001 to 2020), the PLA Navy `would gradually break away from the west Pacific and enter the oceans around the world` . Beyond 2020, China would have the capability of a major sea power.”

Faced with such an article, one can of course refuse to read it, pleading lack of time or some other excuse – and come back in a month, or six months, or a year, repeating the same old lame arguments. There is also the tactic of incomprehension.

{{If despite this, you stick to your opinion, that China`s choice of sticking to coastal navy is not a Hobson`s choice, I can`t really say much more.}}

You are now encountering the Egyptian phenomenon that many of us are already very familiar with.

{{Taiwan is the main reason America is not letting anyone sell China a carrier.}}

Taiwan is one of the sole superpower’s unsinkable aircraft carriers – like Japan. But there are more fundamental reasons for the Americans impeding Chinese efforts towards a blue-water navy. A basic pillar of American global strategy for the last 60 years was that the defence of the US mainland would be carried out on the extremities of the Asian continent - i.e. in Western Europe in the west of the continent, and in East Asia – Japan, Korea, Taiwan, etc. in the east of the continent. The Pacific and the North Atlantic were going to be American lakes. No other power would be allowed to challenge American maritime dominance – not the Soviets, certainly not the Chinese. So the Chinese wannabe Mahans are stuck facing the overwhelming power of the US Seventh Fleet in their own backyard pond. Despite the expense to the US that policy is well worth it in terms of control over global trade.

That has not prevented the Chinese from buying old Western (HMAS Melbourne), old Soviet (Minsk, Kiev) and never-completed Soviet (Riga – renamed Varyag) aircraft carriers, and studying them closely before scrapping them or converting them into floating theme parks. There is some carrier-related technology that they will have a great deal of trouble acquiring or mastering. For instance, the US is the only country that makes steam catapults – without one, you are restricted to STOBAR or VTOL operation of fixed wing aircraft, with resultant restrictions on payload/range. Still, there is good reason to believe that carriers are going to be a part of future Chinese naval doctrine – it is a question of when rather than whether.

It makes little cademic sense that a man of Hoodbhoys stature and academic qualifications in physics and backed by many felloships in Strategy from USA indulge in conspiracy theories.

First,``Thirty years ago, fearful of India`s newly acquired nuclear weapons, Pakistan set out on its own quest to become a nuclear weapons state.``
Well Threat Perception is a very vital component of any country`s policy making and Pakistan was correct. 1971 had been a humilating lesson for Pakistan while the world including the Ummah had chosen to look the other way. India went nuclear in 1974 followed by the Indira Doctrine. If ever, there was any awakening and redressal to 1971, it came in the form of Pakistan`s nuclear Program. In Threat Perception, Control and Fear are diagramatically opposed and meeting points between the two create a perception followed by a response. Fear is becoming yellow and Hoodbhoy is wrong.

Second ``But spectacular revelations beginning late last year by Iran, and later Libya, have forced Pakistan`s president, Gen. Pervez Musharraf, to launch an investigation of Pakistani involvement in secret transfers of vital nuclear weapons information and equipment to Iran, North Korea and Libya. Musharraf has conceded the existence of ``an underworld of people`` in Pakistan who, out of ``personal greed,`` could have sold nuclear secrets``
What is so spectecular. Why Hoodbhoy feels so happy to use such an adjective. In any case there is nothing new to it. The whole world knew that Pakistan`s Program is Covert. Perhaps, Hoodbhoys excitement lies in the assumption betrayed by the tiltle of the article ``NOOSE AROUND PAKISTAN`S NECK``. Well ironically there was a noose around Bhutto`s neck in 1979, the true Father of Pakistan`s Nuclear Program. It is a noose no more, but more responsibility.

Yes like all sensible Pakistanis I agree that Khan may well have blackmailed the Nation in return for his expertise and now stands disgraced. Its nothing ununusual. Gen Douglas McArthur was belittled and an even worse dispensation awarded to Mussa Bin Nusair and Khalid Bin Walid. No individual is greater than the nation.

Boy Boy Boy!!! I just saw Tom Brokaw of NBC reporting from Pakistan. This country is being humilated in the world. He was on big screen on Times Square, New York. He said Paki nuclear program is in US`s control. US media is after Pakistan and there does not seem to be any end to it. Tom Brokaw will be in Islamabad for a week reporting.

tahmed32 #291

Response to your point a)
- Okay, I am not yet sure about your views on China`s desire to build/buy aircraft carriers. Even now, you are insisting that China is being ``realistic`` and hence ``focussing`` on a coastal navy. Aleph and I have said time and again that China has been trying to build a blue water navy, but has been thwarted by American pressure. And these are not just guesses as you doubted in one post. Please read my #221 where i have given links from the Global Security site that talks about the PLA`s efforts to get a carrier. Alephnull...or someone else, has also posted another link later on. If despite this, you stick to your opinion, that China`s choice of sticking to coastal navy is not a Hobson`s choice, I can`t really say much more. Maybe you doubt the veracity of the links.

Taiwan is the main reason America is not letting anyone sell China a carrier. Russia is selling it to India, but not China, because America says so. This is not USSR, tahmedjee, this is Russia, which follows American diktats. America does not mind India having a carrier because it sees India as a friendly state, even a potential ally in the Indian Ocean, and if need be, in the Pacific rim. America has blocked Russia`s sale of the cryogenic engine to India in the past too, remember?

China has not ruled out force as a way of annexing Taiwan. Read this report -

Communist China`s Taiwan Invasion Threat

The first line itself says - On January 30 1996, Communist China`s Premier Li Peng emphasized that in trying to absorb Taiwan as ``a region of China...in the final analysis, we cannot promise to give up the use of force.``

The whole report will tell you many facts that will clear up the misconceptions you have about China. And you will appreciate why, even while working to resolve all issues with China, India has to at least make an effort to keep up with it militarily, for the sake of deterrence.

About Vikrant, glad you mentioned the Seventh fleet. Sending the Ghazi was the right move in my opinion. The Vikrant was sure to be used in the attack on EP through the sea-route. Had the Ghazi been successful in sinking Vikrant, it would have made a big difference.

Response to your point 2)
- I guess our views on militarisation are quite different. let us just agree to disagree on this point. However, regarding Japan and Germany opposing militarisation after WW2, again, it was a Hobson`s choice.....where Hobson = USA.

Responding to point 3)
Pakistan needs to keep its guard up. It needs to possess all weapons necessary for defence as well as counter attack(missiles), even if tomorrow the country is ruled by a perfectly democratic government. i am not opposed to there being a strong military in pakistan. It is a country of 15 crore people, it should have a strong military. I am just opposed to the military ruling the country and being in control of the policy-making. Let Pakistan build n-bombs, missiles, everything. You never know what might happen tomorrow. India may have a jingoistic leader who decides to attack POK. USA might just decide to ``liberate`` Pakistan. So I agree Sir, in fact I heartily support your view that pakistan should keep its guard up. I just don`t understand your classification of Pakistan and China`s militarisation as necessary, defensive , realistic, etc and that of India`s as jingoistic, aggressive unnecessary, wasteful and paranoid.

About Advani`s comments after the 1998 Pokhran blasts. well, though this has been stated by other posters before, I shall paraphrase. Pakistan`s nuclear weapons did not become a ``deterrent`` on 29th May. Pakistan nuclear weapons became a deterrent the day that Pakistan acquired/built them. In the minds of the Indian government, the nuclear-deadlock has existed since the 80s. All that Pokhran-Chagtai did was give Pakistan the ability to rattle the nuclear sabre in public. While from the viewpoint of a pacifist, I can understand why you thought Advani`s comments were dumb, from a strategic as well as tactical point of view, they were brilliant. As someone said before, the intent was to drag Pakistan, kicking and screaming, out of the nuclear closet. And he succeeded. Sanctions were imposed on pakistan as well, whom they hurt much much much more than us.

And tahmed, dont forget that Pakistan in 1998(or even now) was not this benign country going about life peacefully. It has been waging proxy war against india for 2 decades, created the Taliban so that it could ``outsource`` the proxy war to Afghanistan....or to use jargon, for ``strategic depth``. Think of things in the right perspective and you see why the nuclear tests were a brillaint move.

Tahmed,

You asked us to view how things look from across the border. Pakistanis are paranoid. Does it mean that Indians should always address their paranoia or do what they think is required?

Re: Vikrant, people have already pointed out how Vikrant helped defeat Pakistan in record time. Keeping that in mind why would you think Vikrant was a waste of money. It served the purpose it was bought for.

Re: Kalam, thank you for finally stopping calling him ``bomb maker``. But you are insisting that Kalam was made the president because Indians are jingoistic and hence have rewarded his service of making missiles with India`s presidentship. Indians have made him the president not for his role in DRDO but because of his progressive, honest, intelligent views. He is one of the most articulate, educated presidents India has ever had. Recognize the man for his abilities not for his role in DRDO.


Re: Buddha, you say ``I would restate Buddha to say: When nations stop stop competing and start cooperating, they create conditions for a lasting peace. ``. That`s plain poppycock. Buddha was more intelligent than Karl Marx. Man is inherently selfish and Buddha was very intelligent in recognizing that fact (says a lot about Buddha).

Germany and Japan have reassessed their military/political ambitions precisely because they were faced with powerful adversaries. Thank you lucky stars that there were other nations as powerful as Germany and thank your lucky stars for WW-II. If there was only one mighty nation then we wouldn`t have had World War-II but million holocausts all over.

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

harimau #290
IMO, the country most likely to suffer a nuclear attack is India. IMO, India seemst o be the `most threatened with nuclear attack` if you go by the US officials own descriptions of conflicts we nearly had with Pakistan in late 80s, in 1990 and during Kargil. It could be all be a big bluff of course.

Perhaps as you say, helping China`s adversaries along the nuke route was the more intelligent way for India to tackle the longstanding proliferation double standard than this `suffering in silence`.

But we came out of our nuclear self-abnegation very late and IMO, are still apologetic about it. Perhaps there is good reason to be, because nuclear weapons are horrible things and you become more unsafe when you pass them on to others to do as they choose. India may be safer if the world has fewer nukes overall, among allies and enemies both.

Tahmed,

You asked us to view how things look from across the border. Pakistanis are paranoid. Does it mean that Indians should always address their paranoia or do what they think is required?

Re: Vikrant, people have already pointed out how Vikrant helped defeat Pakistan in record time. Keeping that in mind why would you think Vikrant was a waste of money. It served the purpose it was bought for.

Re: Kalam, thank you for finally stopping calling him ``bomb maker``. But you are insisting that Kalam was made the president because Indians are jingoistic and hence have rewarded his service of making missiles with India`s presidentship. Indians have made him the president not for his role in DRDO but because of his progressive, honest, intelligent views. He is one of the most articulate, educated presidents India has ever had. Recognize the man for his abilities not for his role in DRDO.


Re: Buddha, you say ``I would restate Buddha to say: When nations stop stop competing and start cooperating, they create conditions for a lasting peace. ``. That`s plain poppycock. Buddha was more intelligent than Karl Marx. Man is inherently selfish and Buddha was very intelligent in recognizing that fact (says a lot about Buddha).

Germany and Japan have reassessed their military/political ambitions precisely because they were faced with powerful adversaries. Thank you lucky stars that there were other nations as powerful as Germany and thank your lucky stars for WW-II. If there was only one mighty nation then we wouldn`t have had World War-II but million holocausts all over.

Hip hip hurray.

Post # 300 (tripple century, sort of a milestone) was reached by an excellent, excellent, excellent post from Ijaz_Gul.

Ram teri Ganga Meli or iss Meli ganga main sabb nangay hain

I normally don`t do this, but with due apologies I am copying and pasting News` editorial for only an easy read of the Chowkies. For days to come, Chowkies should hold their breaths for names of other European countries and underworld from across the globe, including India.

IAEA’s probe

The investigation launched by the International Atomic Energy Authority (IAEA) into the Europe specific nuclear black market will strengthen Pakistan’s case that the vast illicit market in Europe dealing in nuclear components needs to be mainly blamed for proliferation. President Pervez Musharraf had repeatedly pointed in this direction as it was unfair to blame any country when there already was a thriving clandestine nuclear market. IAEA’s probe, therefore, admits to a reality that had long been overlooked by the western countries in their zeal to blame states, Pakistan specially.

The IAEA’s letter to European governments seeking information regarding illegal transfer of nuclear technology to the so-called ‘rogue states’ should provide necessary information about the European individuals and firms. This information would be used by the Authority’s investigators as evidence of their involvement in trafficking of nuclear components to Iran and Libya. While this measure needs to be welcomed it does raise a question as to why the United Nations nuclear watchdog organisation did not exploit the information it already had before it started pointing a finger of guilt at Pakistan. In fact, The News’ European correspondent quoted sources as that ‘the IAEA is already in possession of some preliminary information about these European companies which will lead to further investigation into the affairs of some German, British, Dutch and French companies known for their dealings with Urenco, the European consortium which first designed nuclear enrichment.’ IAEA’s investigation aims at identifying the real culprits in the scandal in Europe.

It is to be seen to what extent will the Authority be ready to go in admitting its errors in wholly blaming Pakistan when it was already aware of the nuclear scandal extant in European. However, what will be still more important is that will the IAEA publicly reprimand those European states whose companies it finds were involved in illicit nuclear technology transfers in the manner it did while dealing with Pakistan’s involvement as alleged by Iran and Libya. There is urgent need to clear some of the confusion and reduce the level of alleged guilt.

It is unfortunate that the IAEA became cognisant to the massive nuclear black market in Europe only after Pakistan had raised the issue. The Authority’s chief Mohamad El Baradei has admitted that ‘considerable light on the global network has come from the IAEA’s verification of nuclear programmes of Iran and Libya.’ The point is that if it is open season for blaming states for involvement in the dirty business of proliferation then the nuclear watchdog must also drag the names of European states whose corporate sector’s hands were tainted. It might be recalled when the UN inquiry commission started probing Iraq’s secret weapons programme after the Desert War, the trail lead to several well known European and even American suppliers. The present nuclear scandal is not much different.

:-)

> so that you go through the Eco course in first year, where they use a Samuelson textbook.

That helped me not a whit. I am as clueless now about economics as I was then.

I have followed Hoodbhoy`s pacificm in Pakistan for a very long time. He is indeed an avid PACIFIST and entiltled to his views but ought to also understand the meaning of independence. It ends where the other`s nose begins.
Just when this fiasco had just begun to unravel, I saw Hoodbhoy on a TV show hell bent on convincing that Pakistan as a State and Establishment were knee deep in Proliferation. Well there may be many who may think so but why damage the image of your country in the name of Value Neutrality. His solo in an internationally realist paradigm will neither do good to him nor to the motherland. It would have been more admirable if he had provided guidelines and inputs on how Pakistan should get out of this TWISTER.

I for one feel that the Government of Pakistan by admitting that its program was covert has taken a very bold stand. Declaring that the program is now ouvert means that Pakistan has commited itself to non proliferation rules of the game and hence scrutiny, which in any case was always there.

Perhaps many doomsday psuedos miss the point that Dr. Khan`s sole responsibility was enrichment and not weaponisation. That role was played by an entirely different organisation under the PAEC. Ouvert declaration perhaps also implies that Pakistan has also mastered the PU route and is now self sufficient. There was a big message when the President said that our capability has moved beyond the Minimum Deterrence.

I agree that the case is not closed and there will be tremendous pressure on Pakistan in the days to come. There will be caliberated, covert and coercive attemts to tame the Tiger. We as a nation will have to stand to it and not melt way like Saddam, Iran and Libya. I feel that given that Pakistan demonstrate responsibility and firmness on proliferation, route out of the woods would not be afar.

jay #292 you are misrepresenting my views on Qadeer - where do i call Qadeer a hero? Indeed, i think he has done grave damage not just in terms of making the world a more dangerous place through nuclear proliferation, but in terms of jeopardizing what i (as a pakistani) consider to to be the sacred cause of the defense of pakistan as well. And all this for purposes of increasing his personal wealth!! His apology is as hollow as is musharaff`s pardon.

Please criticize me for what I say. Not for views I oppose = you merely weaken your arguments when you are not careful with sticking to the facts.

It never ceases to amaze me how low we can stoop whilst playing this one-upmanship game that is countinually repeated at chowk.
Pakistan V. India is, as usual the constant theme-rerun below each and every article.
For example- gujjubania has more than 200+ anti pakistani posts to his credit, but not a single article, his contribution to chowk is limited to engaging in mind-bogglingly inane posts. Indeed, there are many more like him, on both sides.
dont you guys have anything else better to do?

foutainheader
(ayn rand?)
``North Korea is not being attacked because it has nukes that will blow Korea, Japan and Taiwan to smithereens if USA does something. ``

NK, although rattles its sabres, is known as real weak, and not sponsoring any problems for the US dierectly. Even close neighbor japan or SK does not face any present problems (e.g. terrorism). Unlike middle-eastern counties, NK is unlikely to cause problems in status quo of world energy markets. That is why US is happy to contain it. Its not the nukes.

Fountain Header:#279, GOOD POST.

TNT minds,

tahmed is a classic example of the TNt mind. He knows that khan is a pak hero because he created the bomb, he has given pakistan a means to prosecute the doctrine of jihad under mushroom clouds. There is no considerations for the personal qualities, he made the hbomb consstant with the TNT. Abdus salam also was a great scientist, but his achieve,menys wre not consistant with TNT, he was not a muslim, no one in pakistan honours him, the ere is no laboratory named after him, while khan gets a lab.

Tahmed can only think in TNT terms, abdul kalam is made prsident because he made the missile. He can only extrapolate in his own terms, in TNT terms. He3 cannot recognise the human qualities, he cannot even imagine that very simple man, never married, always wore sandals till he became president, a non corruptible man could becom the president of india. It is the most disgusting m,anifestation of TNT mind that prompts comparison of khan with abdul kalam.

mantolives, aka YLH, post 281

heard of fiction. That book is a piece of fiction and not an academic book. He is trying to be another lecarre - hey who knows guys like you and tahmed32 will make him one - since you guys are the ones who seem to be more excited about it than your average ram in india.

dear boy get those grey cells working - rethoric is fine but occasionally it makes look like a fool that you really are not!

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

Nasah at 278:

``poor mr. musharraf...... ``

Would you please elaborate on your prophetic statement?

Emotionalism on part of Pakistanis and extremism on part of Chowk`s resident fundoo Indoos aside, the news from the daily News closes the chapter and lays out a promising future for Pakistan as follows:

ISLAMABAD: President General Parvaiz Musharraf has pardoned Dr. Abdul Qadeer Khan on the recommendations of the Federal cabinet.

Earlier, the Federal cabinet, accepting the clemency application, recommended to President General Parvaiz Musharraf for pardoning the originator of the Pakistani nuclear programme, in view of his services rendered by Dr. Khan for the nation
The cabinet, which met in Islamabad with Prime Minister Zafarullah Jamali in the chair, thoroughly debated over the clemency application with regard to the transfer of atomic technology.

President Musharraf also informed newsmen that the atomic programme won’t be rolled back at any cost. The president said that Dr. Qadeer Khan was a national hero and he personal take him in high esteem, however national interests were more important than any individual. General Parvaiz Musharraf maintained that Dr. Qadeer was directly monitoring the Nuclear proliferation and a total of 11 persons were involved which include seven scientists.

Musharraf accepted the scientist`s plea for mercy after he admitted the leaks in a televised apology.

``There`s a written appeal from his side and there`s a pardon written from my side,`` Musharraf said at a news conference. On Thursday, Musharraf said he had sought to balance Pakistan`s domestic interests and international demands that proliferation activities be brought to light.

``Whatever I have done, I have tried to shield him,`` Musharraf said of Kahn, a national hero. But the president said ``one has to balance between international requirements and shielding.``

``You cannot shield a hero and damage the nation,`` he said.

Musharraf refused to give further details about the pardon, a decision that he said was made on the recommendation of the National Command Authority _ which controls the country`s nuclear assets _ and the Cabinet. Asked about Khan`s motives, Musharraf said: ``What is the motive of people? Money, obviously. That`s the reality.``

He said Pakistan wouldn`t submit to any U.N. supervision of its weapons program, and that no documents would be handed over to the U.N. nuclear watchdog, the International Atomic Energy Agency. He also ruled out an independent investigation of the military`s role in proliferation.

However, he said the IAEA was welcome to come and discuss the proliferation issue with Pakistan. ``We are open and we will tell them everything,`` Musharraf said.

The president reiterated Thursday there was no official involvement in proliferation. ``The reality is that the government is not involved and that the military is not involved,`` Musharraf said. ``It`s only the media that are saying this.

`` In order to become a nuclear power and address the imbalance of military power with rival India, Musharraf said Pakistan had needed people like Khan _ who operated covertly from the 1970s until the country`s first public nuclear test in 1998. ``In the covert period there was autonomy,`` Musharraf said. Khan was tasked to do something and he did it. One could not be that intrusive in case what you desired was not accomplished,`` he said.

Pakistan began its investigation in November after Iran told the U.N. nuclear watchdog it obtained nuclear technology from Pakistan.

An add from my side``: The President`s honesty can be determined from his outright `Khiraj-e-Tahseen` to Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto on starting the nuclear program.

gujjubania

Everything is fair if done keeping the country`s interest in mind . In my very humble way , I have tried to do that.

Even if one puts down your ``humble`` use of vulgarity to your overenthusiastic patriotism, your repeated insistence in quoting Purchasing Power Parity figures and extrapolating the Q3-FY04 8.4% growth shows your limited knowledge of macroeconomics. And your arrogant persistence shows your unwillingness to learn the right thing.

I hope you get into an IIT, so that you go through the Eco course in first year, where they use a Samuelson textbook.

Maybe you will learn that a GDP of $500 billion growing at 6.5-7% is quite impressive as well. And you shouldn`t quote the 3-trillion-ppp figure especially while referring to defence purchases.

Refsadna #258

[I remember a Burmese colleague describing a (then) Burma-China face off at their borders. He said it didnot matter how hard the Burmese fought and how many Chinese soldiers they killed. They were so overwhelmingly outnumbered by the Chinese that all the Chinese had to do to invade the country was simply walk over the border.]

They already have done that. The Burmese government`s writ doesn`t run all over the country and the border areas with China are peopled by various rebellious tribes anyway. The Chinese (civilians) have settled in large numbers in border villages and towns and there is no way they are going to be dislodged.

All countries bordering China are stupid for not to have secured their borders first. The first order of business for the Chinese was to reach the border and start nibbling -- as India found out in Aksai Chin. It is stupid to dismiss the area as a wasteland ``where not a blade of grass grows`` as Indira Gandhi once said. Who knows what mineral deposits are there that might be worth billions?

As usual, Indians have missed the boat. When it was known that China was feeding nuclear weapons know-how to Pakistan, India should have delivered similar data to the Taiwanese, totally frustrating Chinese ambitions to take over Taiwan by hook or crook. Instead, the stupid Indian government played by the rules of the West (which of course is conveniently changed to suit the times) and did not proliferate. If Taiwan had the bomb now, Japan and South Korea would have developed the bomb by now and we would have some tamasha in China`s northern border. If there is one thing the Chinese fear, it is a re-armed Japan.

Now it is going to be well nigh impossible to pay the frikkin Chinese back in their own coin. At least the Pakistanis tried and I for one am thankful that the Pakistanis did what the Indians didn`t have the guts for.

fountainheader #279 thanks for an informative and well-reasoned post. here is my response:

a. On aircraft carriers: You say ``China has no choice because it does not have the technology yet to build aircraft carriers, and USA does not let anyone sell that to them.`` I am not too sure of that since (a) I dont think there is any explicit US ban on sales of weaponry to China, and (b) there is no reason why the russians would sell to the indians and not to the chinese. Indeed, the chinese navy today has more ships, I understand, than the US Navy does - but these are focussed on coastal defense.
There is no doubt that as China casts a longer economic shadow (as it rapidly is, with even Australia and the far east becoming sources of raw materials for China`s expanding manufacturing capacity), China will switch from its navy from ``green water`` to ``blue water``. However, it does seem to me that China is being much more realistic than India is. By focussing resources on coastal defense, it gets a bigger bang for its buck, and the chinese navy has more ships than the US navy.

As for Vikrant, the only possible use it could have been in 1971 would have been against the US seventh fleet. Sending the PNS ghazi (about which Fuzair I notice has written an interesting post further down on this board) seemed as purposeless a mission (to my mind) on the part of the pakistan navy as was investment in the vikrant itself on the part of the indians.

2. On buddha`s view: you quote the following from buddha ``Buddha sighed that perfect peace would never come until all the nations of the earth were equally mighty. ``

I beg to differ (with all due respect to buddha, whom I consider to be among the worlds greatest men, and who had the same profound idea of nonviolence that Gandhi promoted). When all nations are equally mighty, they create conditions for a terrible war.

As examples of what I mean: (a) witness what happened in WWI which was the result of Germany trying to become ``equally mighty`` as britain; (b) Witness WWII: when the Germans and Japanese became militarily even mightier than the US and UK were on the eve of the war. It took only a couple of wrong steps (the attack on Poland) to trigger this disastrous war; (c) the Cold War, when the americans and russians were fighting proxy wars across the globe for almost half a century, and brought the world on the brink of nuclear disaster at least once in 1962.
I would restate Buddha to say: When nations stop stop competing and start cooperating, they create conditions for a lasting peace.

If the above sounds like a dream, it is not: (a) Japan and Germany have learnt this lesson the hard way, and are now most ardently opposed to militarism. (b) the United Nations and other international agencies are examples of nations cooperating. And this cooperation is bound to grow, since they fit the structure of the emerging global economy much better than the 19th centry mold.

3. On Kalam vs. Qadeer: Thanks for correcting me on Kalam (his specialty is missiles, as you say and as i think rsridhar also pointed out earlier, and not nuclear bombs). And the quotes you provide certainly are from a positive and insightful thinker.

While the above certainly presents Kalam in a more positive light than my summary characterization of his being a bomb maker. However, if you see the points I am making in my earlier post, they are slightly different: After all, missiles and bombs are both part of the same broader tendancy towards aggressive militarizatin (as is the aircraft carrier) that I point to when I say that pakistan needs to keep its guard. I will in due course read up the links on Kalam you provided, and no doubt the positive impression you provide will be reinforced.

On your other points, please try to see things the way they look from across the border: someone pointed out that the rajasthan desert is the only viable location for india to test nuclear bombs. I realize that. However, that should have been all the more reason for India to assure Pakistan that these tests were being conducted not as a threat to Pakistan. Instead, the Indian government followed up those tests with direct threats to Pakistan concerning the ``changed military situation`` as Advani put it. That has to be the dumbest thing I can think of, and no doubt tilted the balance in Pakistan and resulted in the Chagai response (it is no secret that Nawaz Sharif was under tremendous pressure from within the country to respond to the Indian nukes, and from tremendous pressure from the US - including direct phone calls from Clinton to Sharif - to take the ``high road`` and not respond in kind). The fact that Advani, far from being disgraced removed from power (as would have happened in the US in a similar situation) for his dumb behavior after pokharan, remains the number two man in India.

The spirit of Gandhi will never die, and will one day no doubt emerge triumphant in South Asia, not just in India but in Pakistan as well. Till that happens, I hope you will understand why, when seen from a pakistani perspective, we need to keep our guard up.

TO OTHER POSTERS: Sorry for not responding. Will try to respond to at least some posts. But thanks to rsridhar and bongdongs for well reasoned posts, and hopefully the above responds to some points you make as well. Thanks YLH for your words of support. As for the trash and idiotic statements that gj tosses around dont bother me - i dont claim to be a saint, and indeed could outdo him on this if i wanted to.

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

For secular [ read pagan:KUFFAAR] HoodlumsBhoy and his bleaters.
(gay no longer means joy--secular no longer means mere temporal: I`ll never be 1984-ed again)

They ARE coming. They WILL ask you : ``are you with us or with `them`?. Time to accelerate arse-licking of your masters O Hoody DUMBO.

---

This is to remind the ignorant-ones still leeching on to colonised mindset. The ones who were unfortunate not to get a madressa learning.

Distribute to muslims especially the near-muslims, afar-muslims, and anti-muslims.

Hand-delivered to President Chirac of France.


An Open letter from Hizb ut-Tahrir to President Chirac, President of the Republic of France

uploaded 08 Jan 2004



بِسْمِ اللهِ الرَّحْمنِ الرَّحِيمِِ
An Open letter from Hizb ut-Tahrir to President Chirac, President of the Republic of France

Monsieur le President,

We were hesitant to write this letter and there were two reasons for this hesitance:

Firstly; we do not represent a State. We are a political party whose ideology is Islam working for the resumption of the Islamic way of life by establishing the Islamic State, the Rightly guided Khilafah State in the Muslim lands. Since we do not represent a State we felt that you might find it inappropriate that a party writes to you rather than a state writing to a major power such as France.

Secondly; we do not write to any ruler who we believe will not accept the demands of our letter. We heard your speech on 17th December 2003 regarding the wearing of the Hijaab by Muslim women in France. We heard you say explicitly that France adopts secularism as a system and ideology and that you will not allow any religious symbolism in your institutions. We also heard you say explicitly that the Hijaab, i.e. the headscarf worn by Muslim women, is a religious symbol like wearing a cross and other such symbols, whereas in Islam the headscarf for a woman is considered a divine obligation like prayer and fasting. Thus, we understood from your speech that this matter has been decided by you and that you will not reconsider your recommendation to pass a law banning the Hijaab. Consequently, had we written to you there would have been little chance of you accepting our request.

In consideration of two points we decided to write to you:

Firstly: 480 years ago in the sixteenth century, we, the Muslims, undertook an act of goodwill towards France.

Secondly: Historically, France has a tradition of chivalry and reciprocating acts of goodwill.

It is our expectation in writing this letter, that the France of today will reciprocate the act of goodwill undertaken towards the France of yesterday. The French king Francis I was captured at the battle of Pavia in 1525. France felt humiliated by the capture of her king but her army was unable to rescue him from captivity. She made recourse to the Islamic Khilafah state, under the Ottomans, at that time, and she sent a messenger on behalf of the king of France on 6th December 1525 seeking help from the Islamic State. The messenger met the Ottoman Caliph Sulayman al-Qanooni who responded to his call. Sulayman gave the messenger a letter which read: “…we have received the letter delivered by your messenger, and in which you stated that your enemy has attacked your country and you are imprisoned and seek our help in respect to securing your release. We have answered your request so be at ease and do not worry…” This is how Sulayman responded. The Khilafah state used its international weight and military power to rescue the king of France and made an effective contribution towards his release.

The Caliph of the Muslims helped France without compensation, without occupying a part of France or colonising any region of France in return. Rather he did the action as an act of goodwill. Furthermore, the Treaty of Constantinople that was concluded in 1536 between the Caliph of the Muslims, Sultan Sulayman al-Qanooni and the king of France, Francis I, granted France concessions in the Islamic State which were granted to no other state.

Monsieur le President,

This is the act of goodwill that our State, the Islamic State, the Ottoman Khilafah State, undertook for the France of yesterday. Will the France of today reciprocate this act of goodwill to the Muslims and annul the decision to ban the wearing of the Hijaab by Muslim women in France?

We will wait and see - if France today reciprocates this act of goodwill then this will be a good gesture towards the Islamic Khilafah state when we re-establish it by Allah’s leave.

Kindly accept our greetings.

Hizb ut-Tahrir
9 Dhul Qa’dah 1424 AH

National Duty!

Gujjubania`s national duty is to bash Pakistan and to prove to us stupid Pakis how great India is.

Dear tahmed,

You may have point there about India`s attempt to fashion itself as a great world power in the mould of the 19th century colonialists.

There is a book that is being launched at a Gala event in New Dehli this thursday ... it is called ` Writing on the wall: India checkmates the US 2017`... it is by the now retired Indian Army chief, and the chief guest is none other than George Fernandes.

It talks about using the NRIs as a fifth column, Cyber warfare, and India`s ability to bring down the US by 2017. Surprisingly the General is in favor of better ties with Pakistan so that US doesn`t use Pakistan against India.

What is really disturbing is that many amongst the Islamic parties in Pakistan are indulging in fantasy of better ties with India so that they could put up a United front against the `evil` US.

-YLH

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

tahmed

Let me start off by saying that in the short period that I have been a part of chowk, you have been among my favourite posters. Which is why I share Bongdong`s feelings on your interactions on this thread. Now going point by point

a) You said even China is not going in for a blue sea navy, why is India wasting its money? Alephnull and I said, that China has no choice because it does not have the technology yet to build aircraft carriers, and USA does not let anyone sell that to them. You asked me if I was just guessing that USA had blocked the sale of an aircraft carrier to China. I provided a link which gave details of two deals that USA scuttled, one being the purchase from Ukraine.

b)You have said that india has gained nothing by buying Vikrant or by going nuclear.
-About Vikrant, I have already posted info. Firstly, Pakistan thought it was important enough to destroy it in 1971, so important that the Ghazi, instead of protecting the waters around Dhaka, was lured to Vizag, just so it could sink the Vikrant. they knew what a major asset Vikrant be for India for blockading east pakistan and carrying out raids. Ghazi was finally sunk while in hunt for Vikrant. After that, as is widely documented, it was Vikrant that served as the base for the attacks from the sea-side on Dhaka. Despite this, you keep claiming that the Vikrant was a waste of money.
- Going nuclear. Okay, it prompted Pakistan to go nuclear and thus create a deterrant. however a look at those times will show that Pakistan was not really a cause of concern for India. India started developing its nuclear program in the 60s. Now consider this. In 1962, we had been in a war with China over issues, that were still unresolved after ceasefire(they still are unresolved). In 1968, China went Nuclear. Was it not the logical step to go nuclear as well? I have already said that Pakistan was justified in going nuclear in response to India, just after a war. That you accept. But when I say that india was justified in going nuclear because a country with whom it had been in a war, and with issues pending, just 6 years back,went nuclear. You scoff at it, and ask what we have ``achieved`` by going nuclear. We have achieved, sir, what is called a deterrent.

You have said on another thread that Buddhism is as good as Islam. Let me recount you a story from Buddha`s life to show my point -

Five centuries before the Christian era the powerful and
ambitious Ajatasatru attacked the Licchavi confederacy led by
Vaisali. Hearing of this conflict between his Magadhan disciples
and his Sakya kinsmen, the Buddha sighed that perfect peace would
never come until all the nations of the earth were equally
mighty.

Someone - probably Dr Raja Ramanna -remembered the tale twenty-
five centuries later, in 1974. The famous coded message, `The
Buddha is smiling, wasn chosen at random. It referred to the
fact that Sakyamuni`s motherland had reached a parity of sorts
with the mightiest nations.

This is an excerpt from an article by TVR Shenoy in the Indian Express.

So if you want to go ask what was achieved by going nuclear, ask the question to the ghost of Albert Einstein. Ask it to the Americans. The moment they set up Project Manhattan, every nation in the world, from Russia to Rhodesia, gained legitimate right to build nuclear weapons too. Almost all countries that have gone nuclear have done so with the intention of having deterrence. Russia, China, India, and yes, even Pakistan. It is America that kept talking of a right to first nuclear strike if the Russkies attacked with conventional military . Even now, it is America that talks of using ``small`` nuclear weapons in the battlefield. Even after the attack on Iraq, you don`t see what nuclear weapons can achieve? North Korea is not being attacked because it has nukes that will blow Korea, Japan and Taiwan to smithereens if USA does something.

If USA is so interested in a nuclear free world, why does it not come out with a treaty that destroys ALL nukes? Why stop proliferation? That is like institutionalising monopoly.

c) Time and again we are telling you that Kalam is an aeronautical scientist, and time and again you call him ``bomb-maker`` or ``father of the bomb``. By hyphenating Kalam with AQK, you are committing a severe judgemental error. Thinking that Kalam is better than Qadeer Khan only because he didnt sell secrets to rogue states, is oversimplifying it. Even if Qadeer Khan had kept the secrets to himself, one would still rate Kalam several notches higher. the man is a gem. And he is not a ``hero`` in the jingoistic way. He does not go around yelling ``I made Agni for India. If I wasnt there, Agni wouldnt be there``. His simplicity, his erudition, his humility, and his vision are what make him popular. Read his books - ``Wings of Fire`` and ``India 2020``. He has plans. Do you know that he utilised materials used in missiles to develop prosthetic limbs?

Have you read speeches by Indian and Pakistan.....or even Western head of states on occasions like I-Day or R-Day or National-Day? They are so full of rehtoric and bullshit. The same ``agreebi hatani chahiye`` crap. Have you read kalam`s speeches? Amazing!!

You will find his speeches at this site - India Vision

An excerpt from his latest speech, delivered 10 days ago -

Agriculture and Agro food processing

With farmers in focus, farming technology as their friend, and food processing and marketing as partners is indeed the second green revolution. From now on to 2020, India would have to gradually increase the production to around 400 million tones per annum. The increase in the production will have to be done under the reduced availability of land from 170 million hectares to 100 million hectares with reduced water availability using technological inputs.

Pharmaceuticals

Institutions of Pharmaceutical sciences and Pharma industries need to evolve an integrated and comprehensive National Pharma Vision to meet the challenges of design to drug development, production and marketing. The major challenge before the Pharma community is to prevent the entry of spurious drugs and eradicate it’s presence in the market.

Space

With our self-reliance in our Space programme it is time we should enter into the global market aggressively. The exploration of the moon through `Chandrayaan` and keeping our sight on the Mars will electrify the entire country, particularly young scientists and children.