What's new

[Obama's visit] Why India's realty scam should interest President Obama

Wiki says Pakistan's population density is 212 to India 362 with a a much higher fertility rate closing this gap down every year.Not sure if these numbers are right though.

Population/sq km yields the following:

346.78 per sq km for India
208.65 per sq km for Pakistan

So the population density in Pakistan is about 65% of India, not half. The macro point holds, though. As for the "much higher" fertility, it will never close the gap with India. If you look at the decrease in Pakistan's fertility rate, India's own growth and the considerable 35% spread, it will not happen. Pakistan will always have higher resources per capita than India.

The US is not weakening at all.. at least not because of China. The American economy has certain inherent issues running within it(social security and medicare) which are the main reasons for the trillion dollar deficits.This is an American problem and America will take care of it in the end.

As for the Yuan and her value...the the federal reserve has finally woken up to play the Chinese at their own game.
BTW IIRC Japan is the largest holder of US debt not China.
[/quote]

Yes, I hope the US doesn't weaken, but unfortunately things don't look good at the moment. If America is to resolve the internal issues you allude to it has to adjust the standard of living and the base assumptions the US economy has been operating under thus far.

Please see the following:

United States public debt - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

China appears to be the largest holder of T-bills. I think they are also accumulating them at the fastest rate.
 
Ah, turbines, engines, planes... all the stuff you've been getting from Russia for the past 60 years. So does the Russian stuff suck, or what? I've heard/read Indians defending Russian goods and their quality for decades... are we about to see the super-duper switcharoo? :-) I feel for the Russians :-) I heard they didn't give the Obama trip to India much coverage at all... certainly RT, which I get on my dish here in Lahore, had nary a mention. Do you suppose they're feeling betrayed? Et tu Brute?

Surely you can do better than that! This except for the C-17's were all orders from private Indian companies. Reliance power ordered $2.2 billion of equipment from GE. It also ordered $10 billion worth of power generating equipment from Shanghai Electric Group Co., so don't be counting those Chinese chickens yet:D. Spice jet ordered 737-800 planes from Boeing for about $2.3 billion. There are no Russian planes in the Civilian sector in India. It's either Boeing or Airbus. GE also got an order for engines to power the LCA. Its competitors were the French(Snecma) & the European consortium(Eurojet). The C-17's do not have a Russian equivalent & essentially had no competition. Btw, don't feed sad for the Russians. Their President is coming to India not to buy beef or do something that your partners do. He is coming because there's plenty more of what we just gave the Americans.

And as for sending your PM to do the rounds, wasn't he in DC very recently?

Yeah, last year for a state dinner; not a begging bowl in sight. Btw, you did mean our PM, right?



So far, China hasn't found itself desperate enough to send its President on a sales call.

But they are sending their PM Wen Jiabao later this year. Not too bad, me thinks!



I'll try to make sense of the confused diatribe above as best I can...

Much of what you are buying from the US *is* available elsewhere. It's available from Russia, for example, as it is from the EU. Aren't Russian aircraft included in the MMRCA contest? Do you think they'll end up winning?

Does Russia not offer nuclear technology considerably more advanced than what India has at the moment?

So let's call a spade a spade. It is not that you are buying goods unavailable from anywhere else (at least not the bulk of your shopping list).

Actually the confusion is all yours. The Americans did all the heavy lifting on the nuclear issue & they will get our orders along with our gratitude. The Russians have already stolen a march on them as also the French, something that seems to have escaped your notice. The MRCA contest was primarily to allow India to diversify away from an all Russian basket so the Russians are unlikely to get a look in. They however expect a humongous order on the 5th generation plane of which we are expected to buy about 250(so says our defence Minister). So, unlikely to be hard feelings there.

But anyway, no point in arguing hypotheticals, soon enough this is all going to play out on the world stage. You and I can sit and watch the show. Here's some popcorn, if you'd like

Yup, plenty of popcorn & if you don't mind(what with me coming from the Pub city:D) plenty of beer. Would be happy if it's Murree though I hope the taliban haven't blown up the brewery by then.:frown:
 
I stopped reading Javed Naqvi's articles a while ago.This guy has problems with India regarding even the most minor issues .His articles are just to please Pakistani readers that's all.

I love reading Naqvi and Arundhati roy....The detractors of India put spotlight on India's development agenda both economically and also as a nation-state.Yesterday, Roy's article on Kashmir was carried in NYT.

I disagree with Roy's emotive commentary on Kashmir..she makes it seem like its a one way street. Its not. It never is..

Its better to introspect, make changes necessary rather than defend indefensibles.Ofcourse, both the writers suffer from the disease of looking at the glass half full only wrt India.But they do raise valid questions at times.As a democracy, there are always going to be some who will be extreme leftist or rightist. Its important to hear them out rather than suppressing them.

Both create flawed pictures based on their the illusion of looking at a city from 10000 ft.Mumbai matches to an extent Manhattan visually from 10000 ft. It doesnt mean 80 story sky scrappers are commonin Mumbai as they are in Manhattan..in the same way the picture painted by them is full of flaws...and leaps of faith.
 
Bang Galore said:
Surely you can do better than that! This except for the C-17's were all orders from private Indian companies. Reliance power ordered $2.2 billion of equipment from GE. It also ordered $10 billion worth of power generating equipment from Shanghai Electric Group Co., so don't be counting those Chinese chickens yet. Spice jet ordered 737-800 planes from Boeing for about $2.3 billion. There are no Russian planes in the Civilian sector in India. It's either Boeing or Airbus. GE also got an order for engines to power the LCA. Its competitors were the French(Snecma) & the European consortium(Eurojet). The C-17's do not have a Russian equivalent & essentially had no competition
:agree:

Russia didn't have much of a civilian aerospace sector to start with. They have launched a civilian plane recently though: The Sukhoi Superjet. We'll definitely be interested in that ;)
 
one Indian army scandal and he calls Indian army dangerous, where as in pakistan every thing from politics to real state is controlled by army, what will you say about that.......
 
Think about it in isolation and not wearing a nationalistic hat. Its not only demeaning but also sad that being called a terrorist haven doesnt mean anything to Pakistan.

Whats sadder is that Pakistanis consider this a victory that the American president called Pakistan only a safe haven for terrorists and not something even worse.. :azn:

Why think about them in isolation? You can say what you want to about him saying this and not something worse, but we've heard it so often now that these things are pretty much irrelevant now. It's almost like it didn't happen.
 
The only thing I smell burning are GoI expectations. And they will continue to burn nice and bright in the coming months as it becomes crystal clear that both the "camps" and UNSC statements that you are too eager to hang your hat on, are completely inconsequential and will not be followed up with tangible action.

As for these sales-oriented business delegations visiting Pakistan, no, I don't think it is in our interest to host them. Why? Because the primary issue for us is market access to promote exports. We have made some headway in those areas over the last few years and this was a key issue that came up in the second annual US/Pakistan strategic dialogue held in DC a month ago. The businessmen who came to India came to sell you stuff. At the moment, we are more interested in buying from China due to their preferential pricing, openness on credit terms, transfer of technology etc. and selling to the EU and the US.

But of course, an export promotion oriented visit suits us just fine. For example, the Turkish PM and President were both in Pakistan recently and they brought plane loads of Turkish businessmen who signed substantial deals in Pakistan... the kinds of deals that benefit us. Similarly, a large Malaysian trade delegation was in Pakistan to discuss agricultural and infrastructure projects. We identified a very interesting opportunity there. Malaysia presently imports much of its Halal beef from... surprise, surprise... India. The Chief Minister of the Punjab assured the Malaysians that they would be much better off importing halal beef from Pakistan instead. An agreement was signed, the first tranches have already been shipped and now Pakistan has begun to replace Malaysia's existing meat imports.

Just buying stuff to create jobs in the US is not something a country like us, with a little over $1000 in per capita income, should be doing. Perhaps India has a far higher per capita income which allows it to create jobs for a country which presently enjoys $50K per capita income itself.

We shall see who's expectations burn nice and bright for sure, by the looks of it Pakistan's expectations were burned off ever before they took off. India's expectations mainly center around access to technology which it is already getting. In terms of the UN seat, such changes take years, atleast the intent is there which is good enough to get the process going. In regards to Obama's comment on Pakistan, the same was said by the British Prime minister so its nothing new. The Russian president's visit next month will again emphasize on the same point and its a great diplomatic win for India. We made the leaders of the two most powerful nations talk down Pakistan, it does not matter if there is any concrete action after that, Pakistan's place in the world hierarchy has been well shown here. Sometimes words do greater damage than your think.

First of all there is a huge difference between a strategic dialogue and a trade mission. India has many such dialogues every month with multiple countries so its nothing new. The delegation that visited India had a set requirement and a mission that had to be met. I cant speak for other companies but as the company I work for Textron also had a rep on the team, i can tell you the transactions were equally beneficial for both sides. Textron finalized some significant deals including the finalization of a research center in Navi mumbai which will actually create jobs in India and bring high level tech to the country. Such numerous deals do not make it to the media mainly because they are overshadowed by larger transactions, so if your saying that only US gained from this visit then your wrong totally.

Sorry but your reference to Beef trade is first of all a one off case and cannot be verified. Secondly in terms of a trade mission from a western first world nation, no country will commit to one for Pakistan. In terms of business opportunities, the Pakistani economy has way too many informal elements and unknown market identities to attract any significant investment. The story was a bit different in the Musharaff years when they sincerely tried to revamp the trade regulation but after his departure things are back to normal. You will again quote one off cases of this and that investment but the fact of that matter is that Pakistan currently does not present the business world with any significant opportunities. You buy from China not because the goods are nice but because you have no option. No other country will give you the super flexible payment options that China can and frankly why would anyone ? In terms of technology Chinese goods are atleast a generation behind the world and if you had the option im sure you would also love to buy from somewhere else. The Chinese will catch up soon also in the tech aspect but for how long their dealers will maintain such favorable payment options is not known. Countries can never be friends, there are only diplomatic relations.

Your analysis is too short and point based, your are not grabbing the whole issue and focusing on small bits and pieces. I recommend you look past petty media reports and study the workings of world economic more closely. India is not stupid enough to not realize something that a internet forum poster can tell everyone.
 
Population/sq km yields the following:

346.78 per sq km for India
208.65 per sq km for Pakistan

So the population in Pakistan is about 65% of India, not half. The macro point holds, though. As for the "much higher" fertility, it will never close the gap with India. If you look at the decrease in Pakistan's fertility rate, India's own growth and the considerable 35% spread, it will not happen. Pakistan will always have higher resources per capita than India.

The fall in fertility is much more in India and Bangladesh compared to Pakistan but I am not sure how density matters anyway..and a blanket statement like Pakistan will have always have higher resources per capita does not make sense if the net sum of resources India has is more. For example throughout the first 55 years of independence Pakistan always had a higher per capita income than India and your statement held true. India has managed to overcome the gap and has slightly edged ahead the last 10 years and with a higher growth rate right now India will continue to get ahead.Population density by itself means nothing..productivity is what matters. Japan is a prime examples.

And the smaller the population the easier it is to raise per capita income..for example Sri Lanka has about 2 times India and Pakistan's per capita income inspite of going thro 2 decades of full blown civil war.But no one will say Sri lanka has a better economy than India.

Yes, I hope the US doesn't weaken, but unfortunately things don't look good at the moment. If America is to resolve the internal issues you allude to it has to adjust the standard of living and the base assumptions the US economy has been operating under thus far.

Please see the following:

United States public debt - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

China appears to be the largest holder of T-bills. I think they are also accumulating them at the fastest rate.

Ok..looks like China has edged ahead again.I doubt they will start to accumulate T-Bills at a high rate now considering that the Fed reserve has decided to sink the dollar by printing money and keep interest rates at near zero.

Social security and Medicare will have to be revamped and it will lead to less consumerism and more saving in America. It is a bullet to be bit but it is nothing America cannot absorb and will lead to high growth rates again.

America will remain the predominant power in our lifetimes.
 
Last edited:
No, I was just pointing out that your allegation of hypocrisy was a bit hypocritical.
Which I showed was not the case since the comparisons were not relavent.

No more obfuscation, please! Are you saying that Jawed Naqvi is not an Indian citizen? Why are you hiding behind the fact that the article was published in DAWN? The author of the article is not DAWN, but a living, breathing Indian citizen who is simply pointing to facts... facts which you are unable to counter or even respond to short of the "Hypocrisy, hypocrisy" chant we've heard repeatedly.

Where have I said that JN is not an Indian citizen?. However, a newspaper is the primary party and owner of a news article published in it. Jawed Naqvi as an Indian citizen saying this is within his rights to offer his individual opinion. Dawn (A Pakistani Newspaper), publishing it to ridicule India is simply a case of pot calling kettle black many timmes over..;)



As for "thousand times worse", is that an objective comment established by some verifiable metric that can be agreed to or is it another subjective slur as you continue to grasp for a counter point with merit?
Its an objective but hugely understated metric if you consider the areas of flats allegedly misappropriated by some officers of Indian army vs the area of whole of Pakistan that has been annexed multiple times by Pakistani Army over last 60 years..


Are you trying to deliberately miss the point? It is not democratic because it is bloodless. It is democratic because it has the support of the vast majority of the people of the country. And as a consequence, since it is democratic and widely supported, there is no opposition. And since there is no opposition, there is no bloodshed. Hopefully you will have a slightly harder time missing the point this time.
Well even a successful bank robbery that goes unopposed because the robbers hold guns is bloodless. Democratic?? Its a little tough opposing when the new dictator has thousands of armed to teeth supporters on his side. Never saw that being used as the evidence of a democratic coup :). I was confident that atleast you would know that removing a govt via popular support does not require army generals capturing the democratic bodies and throwing democratically elected leaders in jail and sometimes murdering them..

Perhaps that is the way you chose to see it. I see it differently. I think name calling is a tool often used to pressure countries. In the case of Pakistan, this tool has been employed for several years now with no results to speak of. Pakistan continues to pursue its own national interest and despite the "training camp" mantras has called India's bluff twice by deploying troops eyeball to eyeball across the border (2002, and then 26/11).


Once again, it is your perception. You are free to have it. Other people may have formed their perceptions of India based on the brutal killings of Kashmiris, the Naxalite rebellion, Slumdog, poverty, Tamil terrorism and much more. Let's not get into that. What do they say about opinions? They are like your rear-end and everyone has one...
As I said, your country, your interests, your labels. If you are happy with it I am good.. As far as perceptions go, all you need to do is pick up the transcripts of meetings between India and the world community and compare them with similar meetings that Pakistan has. (You can btw leave out the latest American sales meeting that is being discussed). Unlike some of us, you are fairly smart enough to make out the distinctions.

And about opinions, well, thats what we do here.. Dont we? And we all know who's rear end did the article that started this thread came out of :azn:




Wasn't it the republicans that were in favour of amping up military assistance to Pakistan? Wasn't the republican sanctioned military assistance condition free? Wasn't that the most major criticism of the republican approach to Pakistan in certain circles?

Yes, we shall see. And as for what will be extracted against this aid, don't Indians complain about the fact that nothing has been extracted with any of the billions of assistance and weapons given to Pakistan? Can't have it both ways :-)
And it was a republican president who twice planned to invade Pakistan by his own admission. They started this war after all. The war that all the Paksitani people in this forum blame for the dismal state of affairs Pakistan is in today. I call that a fair amount of extraction. May be some section of Indian political community has a sadistic streak and are looking for more to be extracted. But ,I agree.. we shall see..


Hmm. So that would mean that were it not for American money, Pakistan would not have gone after these people? Let's see now... Sufi Mohammad in Swat, that was one of the biggest Army ops. When was the first time the Army acted against him and his organization? Try the 90s. Then let's take the "Punjabi Taliban", aka Sipah-e-Sahaba. When were they first targeted? Once again, try the 90s. Operations against these groups have been going on over time. They have never been in the international limelight, however. Now they are. But that doesn't change history.

Now let's consider the flip side of this. If Pakistan is taking money to bomb its own citizens, then you would think that Pakistan is doing America's bidding. If that's the case, how do you explain NWA?

Once again, you can either say Pakistan is protecting its interests/assets in NWA and going after only those elements which it deems to be unacceptable OR you can say that Pakistan is simply taking US money and bombing everyone the US asks it to. But you can't straddle the fence and play it both ways.

I think even you know that the "bombing citizens for money" argument is utter nonsense, but you are free to continue the pretense.

I think you misunderstood. I was refering to USA bombing Pakistani citizens in Pakistani territory and Pakistani govt allowing that . What PA is doing is just fine. Should have done it a decade or so back, but better late than never..



Haha! Good one! Since you flipped my statement around, I am glad you recognize Pakistan and India's influence in this regard at parity.
The Indians have been saying it since donkey years.. Its a bilateral issue.. Its mostly Pakistanis that keep asking for US mediation. USA is pretty powerless in this regard..


Downward spiral how? As defined by you or some objective metrics. Has the Pakistani economy grown only 2-3 years since 9/11? Has our military power grown only during 2-3 years? Have our exports increased, or remittances gone up only in this period?

Please get off your high horse. India and Pakistan are roughly at the same level of per capita income. If Pakistan has done so badly, then up until this day, India has done equally badly. If it had done so much better, then there wouldn't be a trivial difference in per-capita income.

All you have to do is to look at the trend of GDP growth year on year (with Inflation adjustment) since 1990. You will see that the growth rate is on a downward trend. By this I dont mean that its negative growth, but the its a downward trend in GDP growth. I agree that India and Pakistan are at almost same level of Per Capita GDP, but if you consider that barely 20 years back, the per capita of Pakistan was 50% higher than that of India and today, India is a few percentage points ahead of Pakistan, the fact who has done badly is pretty evident.
btw, my point was not purely economic in nature, but on the side of the overall socio economic situation in the country and its key drivers being religious fundamentalism and not lack of money that can be handled through sweetners. If however you believe that the situation has been improving since 1990's, you, like Jawed Naqvi, are entitled to your opinion ;)



Now, you talk about the future and 8% growth and this and that... well, let's see. The future is yet to unfold.
No disagreement. Though I did not talk of future and 8% growth..

Agreed. Nothing tangible coming out of it. Glad we can see eye to eye on this at least.
:cheers:
 
Maybe a little less hypocritical than the Indian press which relegates news of its own domestic Naxalite insurgency, raging over 7-10 times the land area and involving a far greater number of people than anything the Taliban have been able to pull off, to the inside pages, while providing prime banner space to the Pak-Afghan border :-) Or perhaps significantly less hypocritical than an India that talks about the presence of anti-india "terrorists" in Pakistan, while over more than two decades it played host to and was the principal source of funding for Tamil terrorists and the LTTE.

From your response, I can see you got worked up in a tizzy, but let's not get into name calling please. That can cut both ways and it serves very little purpose in advancing the discussion.

Also, it may be your view that the Army has "scammed the whole country into dictatorship", but that would just mean you know nothing about Pakistan, unfortunately. While their measures were extra constitutional, Army takeovers in Pakistan have never been undemocratic. They have always enjoyed the overwhelming support of the masses, to the point where these takeovers have always been completely smooth and bloodless. This is not your typical coup, and characterizing it as such exposes either incompetence or byzantine intent.



His best friend and roommate from college, a Pakistani, does claim to know them. Obama has reflected on his association with Pakistan/Pakistanis himself. Net-net, he is not inimical towards us and will not do anything tangible to advance India's agenda against Pakistan either.



Perhaps you are hearing what you want to hear, because I can't find a reference to Obama calling Pakistan a failed state anywhere in the transcript(s). Why exaggerate to make a non-existent point? It just looks desperate.



Good. But, the USA is certainly interested in these crimes. Enough to make a major motion picture out of the story :-) Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama and the entire top US military leadership have accepted and acknowledged the US role in all of these "crimes", and they also understand that shirking their responsibility for the second time is not in their own national interest. That was the whole justification for the long term nature of KL and other programmes the US initiated with Pakistan.



India was a terrorist safe haven for Tamil separatists who killed thousands of people in Sri Lanka. Many on the world stage railed on about that. India ended up sending troops to Sri Lanka, an exercise whose conclusion was disaster. Net-net, large countries with regional and extra regional interests pursue their interests despite name calling. Ditto for Pakistan. What is important is not the names we are called, but whether what happens is in our interest or not. The US were called all sorts of names when they decided to march into Iraq. They felt it was in their national interests so they did it despite everything. Let's not get so caught up in rhetoric that we fail to distinguish meaningful developments from the two bit crap spun together by some hack to placate the average idiot on the street.

So far, on this issue of "safe havens" the US' interests are *not* aligned with India. The US is only concerned with NWA. The end game there is nigh and the recent infusion of $2B of military aid suggests that things are going well, despite what is said or written.

India's interests concern Kashmir and associated groups. What was characterized by an Indian scribe as the new "Intifadah" in Kashmir should give you a clue as to whether US, Indian or Martian pressure has changed the ground reality in Kashmir... and please, no segues on Kashmir here. The point is that the US is not going to pressure Pakistan tangibly to do anything which would be beneficial for India. That is the implication people in India are drawing from Obama's comments and I think it is horse manure.



I see your point. And certainly if you listen to the superficial conversation, it is all about Zardari-this and Nawaz-Sharif-that. In other words, stories concerning politicians and their idiocies occupy the airwaves. I might add, that while Pakistanis are certainly pretty "hard on themselves", to borrow a quote from the outgoing US Ambassador to Pakistan, ala Rod Blagojevich, politicians will be politicians in the most developed of countries. What interests me more, and I think what counts more, is the strategic direction Pakistan is presently headed in.

In that respect, I see certain defining variables:

1) In its own right, Pakistan is the world's 6th most populous country,and one of the few nations at the cusp of benefiting from a tremendous demographic dividend. Moreover, with less than half the population density of India, Pakistan can deliver far greater resources per-capita than its neighbor. Over the long term, I don't care whether Pakistan develops 5 years faster than India, at the same time or 5 years later. The fact is that with at least twice the per-capita resource availability, the intrinsic potential in Pakistan is far greater in terms of delivering a higher quality of life to its citizenry. These are facts which stem from geographic and demographic realities, not transient factoids that change from week to week on the back page of The Economist. Net-net, Pakistan cannot be ignored. Despite the currently in vogue bad-boy image, everyone is doing business with Pakistan and will continue to do so. Moreover, this business will be done on mutually acceptable terms. Exhibit A, NATO supplies. Exhibit B, the development of weapons despite the wishes of an unnamed "lobby" and hundreds of "Oooo Islamic bomb" articles and books being published in the west. The list is long, but you get the point.

2) China is the ascendant power and this is the Chinese century. Yes, India is also growing, and so are Brazil, Indonesia and Russia. But it is not possible for any of these states to match China, nor do they appear to be interested in taking on China, with the exception of India.

3) The US is slowly weakening. They will need significant - and I mean *significant* - financial support, help with job creation and trade imbalance assistance. As it stands, the US is going to be running trillion+ $ deficits as far as the eye can see. Short of the Arab countries who have trillions parked in their coffers, China is the only country that holds a serious solution to these problems. The value of the yuan is an incredibly important lever and control of it rests 100% with the Chinese. With over $2T in dollar reserves, and as the largest buyer of T-bills, they have the greatest ability to finance the US economy. As the country with which the US runs its greatest trade deficit, China can help mitigate imbalances more so than any other country. And so on... so China is going to be far more critical to the US than any other single nation. I doubt the US will take China on in deference to the interests of a third country.

4) In its growing "assertiveness" (not my word), China is making very significant strategic moves, many of which hinge on Pakistan. For example, when it was met with hemming and hawing on the issue of supplying Pakistan with 300/350MW nuclear reactors, it announced that it would up the ante and provide a 1GW reactor. And then it raised the stakes further by announcing a fifth nuclear plant that would be exported to Pakistan. The Gwadar port is going to be handed over to the Chinese pending the Supreme Court's decision on the incorrect award to a Singaporean company. These days the Karakoram highway is being widened to a super-highway and extended all the way down into Gwadar... these are things that are happening this very second. And finally you have the "Pakistan is our Israel" comment which has been discussed in quite some detail here. So, Pakistan's interests are well looked after for the next 100+ years.



Actually, no. Because it isn't "4 down" at all. You are repeatedly missing the point. There is no independent resolution or standalone modification designed to integrate India alone into the SC. If that were the case, then yes, you would be right about "4 down 1 to go". As it stands, the US, China... heck everyone... is hinging India's integration into the SC on overall structural reforms. These reforms will be multidimensional, complex and will involve additional players obtaining SC seats, not just India. So therefore, since even a straw-man for these structural reforms has not yet been articulated - much less agreed to - there is no "4 down". Hypothetically, if China or Russia argue for an Arab League seat, or an OIC seat, and make that part of the reform, and say the US or UK are uncomfortable with this, then what? Do you have 4 votes or 3 votes or no votes? If France has a problem with Germany getting a seat, then what? If Russia or China veto Japan (with whom they both have territorial and otherwise fairly nasty disputes), then what?

The question on which Perm Members will deliberate and vote has not even been *framed* yet. So to count their votes is ridiculous.






I dont know how it works in Pakistan, but for India, I am pretty thrilled that the president of the strongest country in the world travels to India to sell its wares. Speaks a bit about the growing economic might of India.

Anyway, any country i know of will prefer the president of America coming in to sell American products instead of sending in his generals to ask it to do more about removing terrorist havens from its borders.
[/QUOTE]

TL, you make some good points but I am afraid Pakistan may never achieve its true potential primarily as a result of the actions of past governments (and the general population through its tacit complicity) which allowed religion to permeate every aspect of the Pakistani state and individual's existence. History teaches us that every time religion (especially teleological interpretations of it) leaves the personal realm and preoccupies itself with matters of the state, it inevitably ends in tears ( Papal Rome for example). Mixing religion with politics leads to autocratic regimes, which do not allow democratic and pluralistic values to take root and a more liberal society to evolve subsequently (as a small, corrupt religious- miltary oligarhy remains in power and alternate forms of governance are dismissed as lacking sanction of 'god')

I think the post Zia regime (when I believe is when Pakistan well and truly metamorphosed into an Islamic state) had a detrimental impact on Pakistan's ability to emerge as a more modern and prosperous society and the consequences can be observed in many aspects of today's Pakistan be it in the fields of education, judiciary or (lack of) governance,for instance,my interactions with Pakistani colleagues have convinced me that the standard of 'Western' education in Pakistan is significantly poorer than that in India, possibly due to the emphasis on religious education in early years. (PS: I am not a product of the Indian educational system, well at least not since high school)

I have had the dubious privilege of visiting certain countries (Iran and KSA) with high birth rates and the much touted 'demographic dividend' (KSA) which have followed similar political trajectories (mixing religion with politics) to Pakistan. Due to its Sunni faith and closeness to the US, KSA could be regarded as a closer approximation of Pakistan and we all know KSA remains a regressive society, with hugh inequalities in wealth distribution, despite having the largest oil revenues in the world and a relatively small population. I am afraid the damage done similarly to Pakistan by the toxic mix of relgion and obsession with security will take decades to unwind...

With regards to Pakistan's much celebrated friendship with China, well, nations have no friends but only interests. Spend a minute thinking about what Pakistan has in common with China apart from a small border and the dislike of India (oh and extreme racial prejudice exhibited by some forum members here)??Thought so..no cultural, linguistic, culinary (Pork is a fav food of the Chinese) or religious (the Islamic faith that is so integral to Pakistan's identity) commonalities bind the two countries and sooner or later, trade ties with India will outweigh whatever notional benefit China perceives in its 'friendship' with Pakistan. Maybe the Pakistani members on here should reflect on this before proclaiming eternal brotherly love for the Chinese..

Pakistan would have to do a 'Turkey' (and soon) if it is not to be relegated to the status of a client state of the US and China which, judging by the poor aid response to the recent floods, only manages to hold the world's vague collective attention due to anxieties about terror plots originating from it.
 
Last edited:
Surely you can do better than that! This except for the C-17's were all orders from private Indian companies. Reliance power ordered $2.2 billion of equipment from GE.

Baal ki khaal... and a crap shoot at that.

The point being discussed was purchases being used to influence policy. Saudi Arabia has placed a $70B arms order being a country much smaller than India. India's 10 or $20B is not going to outdo, say a Saudi, much less a China, in influence procurement. To the exent China's interests, or Saudi interests, run counter to India's, then India will take the back seat by your own logic of money = influence.

about $2.3 billion. There are no Russian planes in the Civilian sector in India. It's either Boeing or Airbus. GE also got an order for engines

It doesn't matter what's in the civilian sector in India. Your claim was that the goods available from the US are not available elsewhere, and that's nonsense.


Yeah, last year for a state dinner; not a begging bowl in sight. Btw, you did mean our PM, right?

Yes, I meant your PM. As for begging bowls, all generations up until the current one in India have been raised on rice and wheat thrown into their begging bowl. If it weren't for foreigners throwing some grain your way, millions in your country would have died due to starvation. You are welcome to continue your uncivil tone, by the way.

But they are sending their PM Wen Jiabao later this year. Not too bad, me thinks!

Will India be stamping a visa in his passport or on an attached piece of paper? Will India be asking him to please stop Chinese troops from dumping garbage over the border?

however expect a humongous order on the 5th generation plane of which we are expected to buy about 250(so says our defence Minister). So, unlikely to be hard feelings there.

Nice to see you making the Russian's mind for them. But I doubt they agree given that, as I cited earlier, they haven't acknowledged Obama's lollypop drop to India much.

Yup, plenty of popcorn & if you don't mind(what with me coming from the Pub city:D) plenty of beer. Would be happy if it's Murree though I hope the taliban haven't blown up the brewery by then.:frown:
[/quote]

Man up and don't be too scared of the Taliban... I wouldn't be surprised if the Indian media has already reported the Taliban taking over the Murree brewery, but we all know the difference between indian press reports and happenings in the real world.

And as for popcorn, we have plenty to give you, so no worries. And why stop at the beer? We'll slaughter a few cows in your honour and we can enjoy some lovely steak too.
 
We shall see who's expectations burn nice and bright for sure, by the looks of it Pakistan's expectations were burned off ever before they took off.

Yes, we shall certainly see. It's quite comical to see how two statements from your Obama saab have pumped you up so :-) Lagta hay bari hasrat thee. I am glad to see you are so easily pleased...

India's expectations mainly center around access to technology which it is already getting. In terms of the UN seat, such changes take years, atleast the intent is there which is good enough to get the process going. In regards to Obama's comment on Pakistan, the

What a naive view of things! "At-least the intent is there"? Really? You couldn't have done better? The intent for what? For UN reform? Well, what kind of UN reform? Once again, NO ONE is supporting an independent track for India's entry to the UNSC. This being the case, India's entry to the UNSC is contingent upon wider reform in which many things will happen, and numerous participants will enter the UNSC. Since there is no consensus even on who these participants are, there is no *intent* at all. There is just a meaningless back patting which is clearly enough to get you lot super excited. Everyone has their standards... yours are pretty clear.

leaders of the two most powerful nations talk down Pakistan, it does not matter if there is any concrete action after that, Pakistan's place

Wah wah! And to put things the way you did above, we are proud that we "made" the leaders of every powerful nation give us weapons, technology, assistance and more. Perhaps to you it does not matter whether there is "concrete action", but to most rational people, that is all that matters.

First of all there is a huge difference between a strategic dialogue and a trade mission. India has many such dialogues every month with multiple countries so its nothing new. The delegation that visited

Really? Many dialogues on the scale of the Pak-US strategic dialogue every month? Please give me citations for the last couple of years along with delegation size which would help establish if the engagement was on the level of the US-Pakistan strategic dialogue from last month.

because they are overshadowed by larger transactions, so if your saying that only US gained from this visit then your wrong totally.

Clearly, if your definition of success is two meaningless statements on which - by your own admission - you don't even care if there's any tangible action, then yes, India gained a lot!! Like I said, everyone has their standards and now I understand yours.

Sorry but your reference to Beef trade is first of all a one off case and cannot be verified. Secondly in terms of a trade mission from a

The Chief Minister of the Punjab gave a speech at the Royal Palm Golf and Country Club in Lahore (11/30/2010) at the occasion of the annual TiE (The Indus Entrepreneurs) event. All these details were presented, including the fact that he was considering a trip to Malaysia to personally receive some of the larger meat shipments. There's verification for you.

In terms of business opportunities, the Pakistani economy has way too many informal elements and unknown market identities to attract any significant investment. The story was a bit different in

Thanks for sharing your expertise on the Pakistani economy, but the various Saudi, UAE, Turkish, Malaysian, Omani and Chinese investors pumping significant money (billions) into real estate development, dam contruction, airport development, skyscraper development and other projects in progress at the moment may not see eye to eye with you on this.

that matter is that Pakistan currently does not present the business world with any significant opportunities.

You buy from China not because the goods are nice but because you have no option. No other country will give you the super flexible payment options that China can and frankly why would anyone ? In terms of technology Chinese goods are atleast a generation behind the world and if you had the option im sure you

Now this is a load of crock! In your mind if China is a generation behind the rest of the world, then you must be in the stone age.
China is one the US' largest training partners... all the most cutting edge electronics products are imported from China, and you call their industry a generation behind the world? What are you on? No country has advantages across every industry vertical, but China cannot be characterized the way you are characterizing it.

As for why we buy from China, I already gave you a list of reasons. If we don't have any choices why are we getting F-16s from the US? UAVs from Italy? Subs from France? Power generation equipment from Japan? Joint venture/technology transfer for LCD manufacturing from Samsung? Agricultural technology from the EU and the US?

Your opinions here, as elsewhere, are at best fanciful and not grounded in fact. And at worst, well, let's skip those adjectives...

l maintain such favorable payment options is not known. Countries can never be friends, there are only diplomatic relations.

Countries can be friends, but that friendship has to be predicated on strategic alignment. If you can't see China's strategic alignment with Pakistan then I can't help you much in this dept.

Your analysis is too short and point based, your are not grabbing the whole issue and focusing on small bits and pieces. I recommend you look past petty media reports and study the workings of world economic more closely.

Thank you for your recommendation, but based on the utter crock I've just responded to, I'll skip it. You need to get a clue and then perhaps one could have a meaningful discussion.

India is not stupid enough to not realize something that a internet forum poster can tell everyone.

That may be your opinion. It is not everyone's :-)
 
Which I showed was not the case since the comparisons were not relavent.

You appear to have convinced yourself, but I think that is the extent to which your argument seems to have been effective. I continue to think that if you feel it is hypocritical for a Pakistani newspaper to publish news of the Indian Army's corruption, then it is far more hypocritical for an Indian newspaper to even print the word "human rights" given what goes on in Kashmir or what has gone on in Gujrat and numerous other places in India. And it is equally hypocritical for Indian newspapers to talk about "terror camps" in Pakistan when the Tamil terrorist movement was trained and funded on Indian soil.

I can understand your continued obfuscation, but at least don't pretend you've "shown" anything.

Where have I said that JN is not an Indian citizen?. However, a newspaper is the primary party and owner of a news article published in it. Jawed Naqvi as an Indian citizen saying this is within his rights to offer his individual opinion. Dawn (A Pakistani Newspaper), publishing it to ridicule India is simply a case of pot calling kettle black many timmes over..;)

You continued to refer to the article being published in a "Pakistani newspaper" not acknowledging that it was written by an Indian. Now, he may be a "lesser" Indian in your eyes for sharing the facts he shared, but as we discussed earlier, that is your opinion.

As for pots calling kettles black, you mounted the high horse of self righteousness and started chanting "hypocrisy, hypocrisy". I'm afraid far greater hypocrisy is on display in the daily fare from India's news sources.

Its an objective but hugely understated metric if you consider the areas of flats allegedly misappropriated by some officers of Indian army vs the area of whole of Pakistan that has been annexed multiple times by Pakistani Army over last 60 years..

Really? The Pakistan Army annexed "the whole area of Pakistan"? Against whose will? Were they fought off by not, 159 million, not 15 million but even by 1 million Pakistanis? After all, according to your media, Pakistanis have no problem taking on armies, whether they are Indian, American or Soviet :-) The truth is that mithai was distributed in the streets at each one of these instances. The most recent one is still fresh in my memory, when Gen. Musharraf replaced Nawaz Sharif. Lahore, which is supposed to be a bastion of support for PML-N, was ecstatic. Folks were out on the streets dancing and celebrating. Mithai stores did phenomenal business.

You can concoct these ludicrous, form-fit "dictatorship" stories and try to sell them to people who don't have a friggin' clue about this region, but your absolutely nonsensical statements above, and the ludicrous characterization of the Pak Army "annexing" Pakistan is utter hogwash.

Well even a successful bank robbery that goes unopposed because the robbers hold guns is bloodless. Democratic?? Its a little tough

Again with the "bloodless"? I sketched out the chain of logic for you, but you didn't get it. Sorry, but I am not going to draw you a diagram.

Yes, if the bank teller, owners and board members want to hand over the cash to the "robber", then he isn't a robber anymore.

opposing when the new dictator has thousands of armed to teeth supporters on his side. Never saw that being used as the evidence of

Oh, but I thought Pakistani citizens were supposed to be armed to the teeth? I thought ordinary Pakistani citizens were responsible for fighting the Indian Army in Kashmir, the Americans and Soviets in Afghanistan and God knows who, where else. Where did all these citizens go and where did all the "openly available" arms and ammunition selling in shops all over Pakistan, go?

Drop this one, Karan, unless you are particularly excited at the prospect of being facetious. The vast majority of ordinary people in Pakistan have always supported the Army coming into power. And by the way, the Army has always had a very good idea of popular sentiment. You can call Army takeovers in Pakistan "coups", but unless you change the meaning of the word "democracy" to be something other than "The power of the people", you can't sell these takeovers as anything but reflective of a majority sentiment.

As I said, your country, your interests, your labels. If you are happy with it I am good.

My country is an immense source of happiness for me... and always will be.

. As far as perceptions go, all you need to do is pick up the transcripts of meetings between India and the world community and compare them with similar meetings that Pakistan has. (You can btw leave out the latest American sales meeting that is being discussed).

With which countries? The Pakistani dialogue with Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Malaysia, Indonesia, China, Japan etc. is completely different from our dialogue with the US, which in turn is quite different from our dialogue with the EU.

Since this entire thread is premised on an article written in context of Obama's India visit, let's just go with how Obama characterized Pakistan in response to one of the questions he was asked in Bombay about why Pakistan "is so important an ally to America" [sic]:

Obama said: "Pakistan is an enormous country. It is a strategically important country not just for the US, but for the World. It is a country whose people have enormous potential but it is also a country that has some of the extremist elements present within it. That is not unique to Pakistan. And the Pakistan Government is very well aware of that."

Thus, the slant one often hears Indian's take, that somehow Pakistan is out of the mainstream of the international dialogue, is hogwash. Perhaps, as the Indian who asked the above question, this itch is due to why pakistan continues to be "so important an ally" [sic]... God only knows. But hogwash it certainly is.


And about opinions, well, thats what we do here.. Dont we? And we all know who's rear end did the article that started this thread came out of :azn:

Yes, as we've clearly established, it came from the rear end of an Indian journalist.

And it was a republican president who twice planned to invade Pakistan by his own admission. They started this war after all. The

It was also a republican president who called the Indian Prime Minister a "*****" and characterized the Indian people using, shall we say, less than civil terms.

I might add, that the "invasion" you are alluding to, i.e. some NATO troops crossing the Pak-Afghan border, did happen on two occasions and both times the response was very stern and unapologetic from Pakistan. This is the apology that was heard loud and clear after the most recent such event:

US officials apologize for Pakistani troop deaths

Note that supplies were not resumed to NATO even days after the public apology. The $2B in mil aid did come after the apology though... you can figure out the connection. So there you have the track record of "success" for the "invasion" policy...

May be some section of Indian political community has a sadistic streak and are looking for more to be extracted. But ,I agree.. we shall see..

See, we shall :-)

I think you misunderstood. I was refering to USA bombing Pakistani citizens in Pakistani territory and Pakistani govt allowing that . What PA is doing is just fine. Should have done it a decade or so back, but better late than never..

By "bombing Pakistani citizens", you mean the US drones based in Pakistan under joint oversight of the Pak-US intel team that is helping take out criminals and terrorists? The same drone strikes for which humint is provided by the ISI?

Thanks for your concern, but I think US help on this front is a good thing.


All you have to do is to look at the trend of GDP growth year on year (with Inflation adjustment) since 1990. You will see that the growth rate is on a downward trend. By this I dont mean that its negative growth, but the its a downward trend in GDP growth. I

Growth rate from 1990 is on a downward trend??? Wasn't it doing pretty well through 2007?

Please remember that India grew at the "Hindu rate of growth" - the term that economists used to describe slow growth - for decades. A few years of good growth and things appear much better. The same applies to Pakistan or any other economy for that matter. If you were to remove any one of two or three variables, you will see that the real growth rate in Pakistan has been much higher than the 4.3 percent for 2010. (Business Recorder [Pakistan's First Financial Daily])

For example, the most obvious one is the campaign in Afghanistan (not just US presence, but *campaign*). The other two are the floods and the earthquake. In both cases, acts of God are acts of God and can happen at anytime, anywhere. Other than tabloid jockeys simply trying to get a rise out of the audience, no one with a sane mind believes that 4.5% is the forever-more growth rate for Pakistan. According to the IMF, 8+% in a few short years is the likely scenario.

agree that India and Pakistan are at almost same level of Per Capita GDP, but if you consider that barely 20 years back, the per capita of Pakistan was 50% higher than that of India and today, India is a few percentage points ahead of Pakistan, the fact who has done badly is pretty evident.

India did badly for 50+ years. Pakistan has done badly for the past 5 or so years. Once again, per capita income and GDP growth rates change every year... nothing is set in stone.

btw, my point was not purely economic in nature, but on the side of the overall socio economic situation in the country and its key drivers being religious fundamentalism and not lack of money that can be handled through sweetners.

Based on objective metrics, Pakistan is better off today than it was in 1990. Nuclear deterrent, higher per-capita income, much improved infrastructure, significant developments in manufacturing capacity, increased agricultural output and ongoing agricultural modernization, significantly larger number of universities etc. are just some of the metrics.
 
This coming from a Pakistani whos countrymen dismiss any negative news about Pakistan in ANY media as a "RAW-MOSSAD-CIA" nexus, or "propoganda" or "work of paid agents"...HA!

Hell forget media....intelligence reports leaked from your own allies are not proof enough!

Or should I point you in the direction of the Extra judicial killing thread where your countrymen claim the videos to be staged by Taliban?

How many media reports before you decide to accept some semblance of responsibility for your country and countrymen's actions...LOL!

Talk about killing the messenger and his his delivery truck...LOL!

And you have the audacity to talk about criticism.....
Dude, i dont speak for my countrymen, i do it for myself.

What i said was based on the first 17 posts of this thread which were rants, yaps and blind denial by your COUNTRYMEN!

Now the way i see you defending them i am indeed compelled to believe that you no more are guud than any other indian ranter around here.


BTW, what did you people say about the vid where Kashmiris were made to walk naked even before announcing an investigation? May be i should quote more, right?

Dont you dare think of trying being a smarta$$ with me.

P.S. i would like you to quote me countering an article with hilarious rants (and not logic) as being done by you and your likes around here.
 
Last edited:

Latest posts

Pakistan Affairs Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom