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

[TechLahore]

In dear old SMC's words.. A diversion.. ??

No, I was just pointing out that your allegation of hypocrisy was a bit hypocritical.

Your Srilanka example is as out of context here. In India Pakistan case, a Pakistani newspaper is preaching to India about an internal aspect of Indian armed forces where the record of Pakistan on the same aspect (corruption in army) is a thousand times worse.

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.

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?

Thats the worst kind of self serving logic that I have heard. Because the coup is bloodless, its democratic. There is a way to

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.

The issue is not if in the heat of the moment, Pakistan is called a safe haven for terrorists or the source of terrorism cancer. The thing is that so many people have called it so many times that its no longer a statement of impact but a statement in passing. The type cast is so

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).

strong that its stuck. National interests are good, but at the cost of becoming an international symbol for terrorism.. I am not so sure..But then your country.. your call...

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...

The aid is not yet finalized.. The US govt is going to propose it next year to a republican congress. Lets see how that goes down and the returns extracted against this aid. As I said, I would rather have the

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

American president selling me stuff against my money instead of giving me money in return for bombing my citizens in my territory..

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.

This I totally agree to. US is a non entity in the game of Pakistan sponsored insurgency in Kashmir. Every new tactic by Pakistan

As it is in the game of Indian sponsored terror in Pakistan. Poor US. So powerless.

Its a pipe dream that USA will pressure INdia to tangibly do something that is beneficial to Pakistan on the Kashmir issue or any other..

Haha! Good one! Since you flipped my statement around, I am glad you recognize Pakistan and India's influence in this regard at parity.

Specific to the billions of dollars of aid from USA, my point was that despite those sweetners, the situation for Pakistan since 1990's has been on a downward spiral except 2-3 years immidiately after 9/11. So I believe the issue is more intrinsic than something that can be sweetened by a few billion dollars of military aid.

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.

Now, you talk about the future and 8% growth and this and that... well, let's see. The future is yet to unfold.

I think you didnt get my point.. What does a UNSC seat get India? Not a solution to Kashmir certainly.... Its simply a power play.. More of a prestige issue.. The UN reforms are a decade if not 2 away.. Till then its more of an endorsement of a country's importance on the international scene than anything else. As I said before..Nothing tangible coming out of it

Agreed. Nothing tangible coming out of it. Glad we can see eye to eye on this at least.

 

[RobbieS]

Silly fellow! The Lamb Pasta in vodka sauce would have gone nowhere.

Yeah? A Punjabi trusts no one with his food.

 

[Spring Onion]

May be Dawn is using him to balance its otherwise anti-radical, anti-hatred stance which is unacceptable to most Pakistanis.

You surely has no insight or even oversight on Dawn at all.

So nevermind

 

[Bang Galore]

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.

Kindly tell that to your government, they seem to have different ideas. Also tell it to Sarkozy & Medvedev who are coming with their own inconsequential visits. I like this kind of burning.

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.

Mind boggling! You make the point that the Americans came to India to sell us stuff. I don't know about Pakistan but we need turbines,engines, planes & other stuff that is required to keep our economy running. They buy plenty from us, we have no issues there. India-US trade is not particularly imbalanced. We don't even need to send our PM there for them to buy from us. Since you are buying from China(for whatever reasons), you really can't question our buying stuff from where we prefer. Btw, ask the Chinese, we buy plenty from them too.

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.

I have no beef with that though I find it amusing that they visited your country to buy stuff from you & not vice versa.

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.

Too much sarcasm since you have no problems with creating jobs in another country, only your choice of the country as specified by you in your first paragraph is different. It's also disingenuous since most of what we are buying is not available anywhere else or in some cases does not match up to our requirements.

 

[The HBS Guy]

I like this kind of burning.

You're not alone!

 

[The HBS Guy]

You surely has no insight or even oversight on Dawn at all.

So nevermind

I request everyone to check the IQ of Mr. Javed Naqvi yourself in this video in which he, while participating in a pakistani debate, clearly states that Obama made no such announcement on permanent UNSC seat and in fact he was talking about the temporary UNSC seat that India is set to get from January.

http://pakistanherald.com/Program/Views-on-News-November-08-2010-Shahid-Masood-5382

Do watch the video before replying back.

 

[Bang Galore]

Lets actually do some dissection of Mr.Javed Naqvi's arguments.

Why India's realty scam should interest President Obama

A UNDP report released last week has presented a damning picture of the country’s social health, evidently rooted in its grinding poverty and political callousness. The report equates the country’s most populous states with shocking social indicators of sub-Saharan Africa. It is difficult to say if the hurriedly acquired wealth or the intractable poverty is the bigger scandal.

Absolutely no connection to the subject he wants to bring up. Standard extreme left wingers hand wringing that some lesser mortals with lesser intelligence than himself make more money than he does.

If the highest ranking officers of the Indian army could be involved in a corrupt transaction in Mumbai, short-changing the government and the Indian taxpayer under public glare, what havoc could the lower ranking soldiers be wreaking in Kashmir, where they enjoy unbridled immunities?

Silly argument, the counter to which would be as follows - if we know for a fact that some journalists can be bought out, it should be fair to surmise(since Mr.Naqvi makes that leap) that so can a journalist who happens to get his bread from a Pakistani paper(maybe a more reputable socialist cheque) be accused of selling out for money. Not making that accusation, just drawing the analogy.

The Indian defence establishment was shaken over revelations by a newspaper that its officers on duty in the glacier had routinely stage-managed encounters with imaginary Pakistani troops.

The idea was to paint the Indian officers with false glory that would fetch them coveted gallantry awards. The army promptly admitted to faking encounters with “enemy personnel” in Siachen last year and ordered “administrative action” against a colonel and a major and disciplinary action taken against another major.

I don't know the point here exactly. Firstly he mentions that the defence establishment was "shaken" which can happen only if it was an aberration. Then he points out that action was taken against some of those involved. What gives? Is he complaining that action is being taken? How does this fit in with his contention that the Indian army's senior-most officers are all involved in some scam or the other?

The Adarsh scandal surfaced recently after India’s Western Naval Commander Vice Admiral Sanjeev Bhasin wrote to the defence ministry seeking action against the building promoters for disregarding security concerns over army land handed over for the multi-storeyed structure.

More idiocy! The western Naval commander complained not some fantastic journalist like Mr.Naqvi! Hardly supports his contention that they are all a corrupt bunch.

The rest of his article is just more wailing opposing Indian policy on the Kashmir issue & has as much relevance to the headline as his ranting has to GoI policy. Any surprise that you don't even find one of us taking this guy seriously. He thinks that he is a Mr. Arundhati Roy but without the fig leaf of a booker, is just condemned to live out his life as an obscurantist, writing for his daily bread.

 

[notsuperstitious]

I request everyone to check the IQ of Mr. Javed Naqvi yourself in this video in which he, while participating in a pakistani debate, clearly states that Obama made no such announcement on permanent UNSC seat and in fact he was talking about the temporary UNSC seat that India is set to get from January.

Views on News | Shahid Masood - November 08 2010 Talk Show @ Pakistan Herald

Do watch the video before replying back.

LOL, he actually said Obama did not endorse India's UNSC permanent seat but he was talking about the temporary seat (which India already won a few days back)

Is Jawed Naqwi one more name of Ahmed Qureshi???

Real sad, this guy. Also the other three gentlemen were having their own litte diljale party That was satisfying

 

[The HBS Guy]

LOL, he actually said Obama did not endorse India's UNSC permanent seat but he was talking about the temporary seat (which India already won a few days back)

Is Jawed Naqwi one more name of Ahmed Qureshi???

Real sad, this guy. Also the other three gentlemen were having their own litte diljale party That was satisfying

lol yeah! Now any Pakistani who ever cites this Javed Naqvi, you know which post to quote

 

[TechLahore]

Kindly tell that to your government, they seem to have different ideas. Also tell it to Sarkozy & Medvedev who are coming with their own inconsequential visits. I like this kind of burning.

Pakistan's foreign policy architects already understand that the SC bone thrown during Obama's trip was one of those plastic pacifiers. Not the real thing. So I don't think I need to tell them anything. Once more, Najam Sethi's views on the immateriality of this statement were well expressed in his talk show. (Search forum)

Mind boggling! You make the point that the Americans came to India to sell us stuff.

How quickly your mind is boggled! Yes, that is the point I choose to make because that is precisely why they came. Not according to me, but according to almost all the leading US newspapers.

I don't know about Pakistan but we need turbines,engines, planes & other stuff that is required to keep our economy running. They buy
plenty from us, we have no issues there. India-US trade is not particularly imbalanced. We don't even need to send our PM there for them to buy from us.

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?

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

Since you are buying from China(for whatever reasons), you really can't question our buying stuff from where we prefer. Btw, ask the Chinese, we buy plenty from them too.

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

I have no beef with that though I find it amusing that they visited your country to buy stuff from you & not vice versa.

Really? I find it gratifying. It's great if they visit us and buy...

Too much sarcasm since you have no problems with creating jobs in another country, only your choice of the country as specified by you in your first paragraph is different. It's also disingenuous since most of what we are buying is not available anywhere else or in some cases does not match up to our requirements.

[/quote]

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). You are trying, as best as you can, to land yourself pat in the US' lap because your leadership thinks its strategic agenda can be advanced by the US. Please note that there is a difference in the US coming to you and asking you to do a, b or c to advance American interests, vs you trying to buy stuff from the US and then thinking that this will somehow make them beholden to you.

Whatever India is buying from the US is a drop in the bucket as compared to what, say, Saudi Arabia has recently bought. If you are contemplating a $10 or 12B defence deal, they have just done $70B. So do the Saudis have 7 times the influence that India would procure? Have the Saudis been able to shape US policy in the Middle East in compliance with all their wishes? No and no. I won't even get into the China analogy...

Fast forwarding some time ahead, I think India will quickly find that the US is unable to give India what it really wants, and countries like Russia, Iran and others with whom India has tried to forge close relationships, will drift apart as a consequence. Finally, China will continue its "assertive" approach toward India and the US will not sacrifice its relationship with China for India's sake.

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.

 

[sensenreason]

Techlahore - I agree that Obama has tried to play this trip into a business trip.But for a good reason as he explained in the Presser.. its becoz US people were bombarded with outsourcing stories for the last 3 years.He is building space for India to wriggle into..strategically.

The issue isnt US people or Indian people. Indian Govt has already refused to a change in policy towards Iran, Myanmar in return for a promise of a seat.No one is naive here. However the statement in Indian parl made by Obama was as everyone agrees strong statement of commitment.

Why Obama has changed tack?

The elections in US gives him support in the Congress to keep troops in Afghanistan for a longer period. Further, Gen Petraeus has anyways indicated that he might be there for a long time.UNSC promise will be used as leverage with Pakistan, Japan and Germany. All are opposed to India getting the 'promise'.(Japan has US support for it but its base in that country is about to be shunted out...).Lastly, Indian support at G-20 is useful if not critical for the US to push through a bank tax and giving currency manipulator tag to China.

As far as Russian arms go....post 1990 when USSR collapsed. US's relations with India have grown and reached a point where Indian people, media and politicians are okay with the US and trust it to an extent...(defence forces and babu's dont trust US still btw).India has always been a independent country from a strategic perspective. Even during Indo-Soviet days..India never leaned totally against US interests and at times was pro-US. The non-aligned movement was a policy of India during 50s and 60s and even 70s.But all major powers had interest groups in India and hence influence.

In other words, post 90 India got the chance to diversify its arms imports to hedge bets and it did so with Israel, US & France emerging as competitors to Russia.It is important for India to hand goodies to all these countries to stay strategically neutral..though leaning towards the US alliance more than the Chinese.

The fact that US stuck a deal of 50-60 Billion USD before Obama visited India is another reason why the 15 billion USD business deals were an important part of the visit but not the main one.The lifting of export controls is the single most important result.This might allow the struggling DRDO to import key tech from US to balance the Chinese edge in the military arena.The UNSC announcement was a good to have. The education deal in January and ongoing Civil nuclear deals are the other one's.

The reason Obama visited India and not Pakistan is not purely down to Indian sensitivity or even India's preponderance to US but the fact that Pakistan is a close ally of China.
Pakistan was sent two messages that it should make peace with India or India might get more leeway in Afghanistan and also that aligning with China is not okay with the US.This is the main reason for Obama's positive tilt towards India...which I must say only corrects the tilt against it..around 2 years back exactly.

The whole trip is designed to indicate to China that US is back in Asia.It indeed is. Hillary was in Australia and went to other countries. The message for Pakistan was not to go ahead with Chinese nuclear reactor deal (thats why India will be part of NSG now)...Its a hint to Pakistan to make peace with India and not act as part of Chinese alliance.It was also a message to China to back down on the Yuan issue and also not play big brother with Japan, India and others in the region.

I wont be surprised, if China makes overtures to India and gives a tough message to Pakistan post G-20 summit.Ofcourse...the overall balance of the situation remains the same.

 

[Ganga]

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.

 

[mikey]

Interesting. So India allows Pakistani companies to hire direct employees in India?

oh!ji he is a international correspondent , if he get paid to write something against india then why not ,else uske ghar ka choola nahi jalega..

 

[Ras]

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.

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.

.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.

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.

 

[mikey]

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.



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.

sir!why pakistani member so serious about your economy and never missed a single chance to compare with china such as oooh!look look americans are weak and nimble,china is truly rising.. And to be practical china is just a new powerplayer and still decades behind USA and this is also 4 india. ..