Pakistan faces 26/11 everyday: Mani Shankar Aiyar

[KS]

(1) The problem is that NO hard questions have been asked.

I asked..what is your national political alternative. Agreed that is not a hard question. But rather a simple one.

(2) Unless we happen to agree what the problems are, how can our solutions agree?

See I never asked you for solutions to a problem as perceived by me, but as perceived by you. Surely you would agree that the UPA is not doing a great job at running this country. So tell me what is the political alternative as understood by you to that, unless you think that the UPA is doing a very fine job at administration, ofcourse.

Again I repeat, I need not agree with you or you with me. I just want to know what you perceive to be the political alternative to this UPA or you consider UPA itself fit to run the country.

(3) Again, when there is a difference in fundamentals, how can there be an agreement on the ways forward? How can we agree on a political party without emasculating the other parties, and removing one of the essential features of a multi-party democracy?

See above.

(4) Here, too, we are talking at such abstract levels as to make a joke of any discussion of programmes. Have we outlined the features of the economy that require attention? Or how our current international relations is insufficient? Has there been an establishment of facts about the military, its doctrine, policy and objectives, in order to talk meaningfully about what my plans are for the military? Solutions to problems that are described by waving of hand will just be more waving of hands.

Yes, I thought it would be simple enough to understand but either you did not understand or understood by tried to browbeat by using different terminologies. So let me give some examples - economy (whether capitalist, mixed economy, socialist, communist models), stand on foreign investment and the extent, divestment, extent of populist measures...foreign relations...approach to different powers...whether it would introduce a new dynamism in Indo-US ties, approach to Indo-Chinese ties, dynamics of Indo-Pak ties...how Kashmir would be handled..amount of indulgence in NAM..these are some of the parameters. And all these are the same in Bengaluru or Yamunanagar or Saharanpur or Kolkata.

 

[Joe Shearer]

Surely those guys at Tahrir Square who toppled a 30 year regime through extensive use of facebook would disagree.

Welcome to 21st century.

BTW nothing we discuss here according to you has any influence on the outside world...so why not shut down the forum and each get back to his/her work...what a dumb logic (or lack of it)

Stop kidding yourself. Tahrir Square rode on the back of an Islamist Movement that in some measure spawned OBL. When Mubarak fell, was it Facebook that decided that the Muslim Brotherhood would come in? Your vision of the world seems to depend - a lot! - on chains of daisies and the stars being angel's tears. Before bursting into the 21st century, try to come out of the 9th.

And as for the importance of PDF, I have always made my views clear on this subject at least. If you don't listen when others speak, why do you shoot your mouth off when they choose to keep silent?

 

[Joe Shearer]

I asked..what is your national political alternative. Agreed that is not a hard question. But rather a simple one.(1)



See I never asked you for solutions to a problem as perceived by me, but as perceived by you. Surely you would agree that the UPA is not doing a great job at running this country. So tell me what is the political alternative as understood by you to that, unless you think that the UPA is doing a very fine job at administration, of course.(2)

Again I repeat, I need not agree with you or you with me. I just want to know what you perceive to be the political alternative to this UPA or you consider UPA itself fit to run the country.(3)



See above.(4)



Yes, I thought it would be simple enough to understand but either you did not understand or understood by tried to browbeat by using different terminologies. So let me give some examples - economy (whether capitalist, mixed economy, socialist, communist models), stand on foreign investment and the extent, divestment, extent of populist measures...foreign relations...approach to different powers...whether it would introduce a new dynamism in Indo-US ties, approach to Indo-Chinese ties, dynamics of Indo-Pak ties...how Kashmir would be handled..amount of indulgence in NAM..these are some of the parameters. And all these are the same in Bengaluru or Yamunanagar or Saharanpur or Kolkata.(5)

(1) Oh, is that all? You could have said that before. Very simple. Drive out all those not Hindu, who don't accept that they are Hindu converts (or Indic converts), and sequester their land. Demolish all mosques built within 500 metres of a temple, temple being defined as any point of worship for a Hindu. Auction their confiscated property, including land, and use the money to strengthen the armed forces. Attack Pakistan and wrest away occupied Kashmir, destroy the terrorist camps, hunt down, capture, try and imprison the leaders of terrorism, dismantle the ISI and reduce the PA to a light infantry force, enough to stop the Afghans from marching through to Delhi. Attack Sri Lanka and set up an independent Tamil Eelam. Attack Bangladesh and track down and imprison the ULFA militant leadership. Attack Nepal and re-instal King Gyanendra. Pass a law making it illegal for those who cannot show 30 generations of unbroken residence in India to seek political office. Ban all missionaries from entering India. Ban conversion from Hinduism to any other religion. Ban conversion from Buddhism to Christianity or to Islam. Ban conversion from Christianity to Islam. Pass a law making the personal laws of Hindus applicable to all other religions. Pass another law making all adhering to Dayabhaga Hindu law shift to Mitakshara Hindu law. Ban cow slaughter. Remove quotas from all categories of education or employment. Conquer Tibet and restore the Dalai Lama, with an Indian High Commissioner to guide his faltering first steps in governance. Conquer Xinjiang, just to keep the Chinese in their places. Make Hindi compulsory in north-east India. Make Tamil compulsory in north India. Abolish the UN.

The programme for the next week will follow shortly.

(2) The problem with this is that I think that the NDA did a worse job, failing utterly in its claims and pretensions to equate the communities legally, and worsening the differences between them, corrupting the text books, exploding the bomb and making Pakistan's possession of the bomb legitimate, and failing completely in its economic policies. The deadlock regarding the Army's poor provisioning continued without any relief, although the out-of-power NDA ministers spend so much of their own and everybody else's time pretending that it is exclusively an UPA problem.

Given this scenario, and the bankruptcy of the left, together with the coarse self-aggrandising approach of the caste parties, what do you think can be a good suggestion? That is why I keep saying that this is a period of flux, and only the electorate's revealing of its thinking and orientation can help intellectuals and ideologues to work out the way forward. Without the desires of the people being known, it is not possible to draw up a programme. Certainly it is not even desirable to draw up a Congress or a BJP programme.

(3) If the NDA represents Narendra Modi and his view of how to deal with communal strife, or M. M. Joshi's attitude to text book drafting and printing, anything - including Mayawati - is preferable to that.

(4) That can only mean that you will accept the fundamentals as defined by me, or that I will accept the fundamentals as defined by you. Neither acceptance is likely. But let me define the fundamentals, and all you have to do is to nod in consent.

(a) Supremacy of the Constitution;
(b) Amendment of the Constitution periodically every ten years;
(c) Amendment of Indian Penal Code every ten years;
(d) Abolition of Khap Panchayats;
(e) Guaranteed independence of the judiciary;
(f) Consolidation of powers to transfer or act on the service conditions of administrators and policemen in Administrative and Police Commissions;
(g) Review of Administrative or Police action vested in Administrative and Police Tribunals, approachable by any citizen with a grievance;
(h) Promotions after ten, fifteen, twenty and twenty-five years of service, and all individuals with greater than twenty-five years of service to be restricted to vacancies, for Administrators and Policemen and government employees;
(i) Privatising all industries not concerned with nuclear energy, space research or defence;
(j) Privatising Air India and Indian Airlines;
(k) Privatising Indian Railways;
(l) Placing IB under an independent multi-headed National Security Commission, reporting to the National Security Advisor, appointed by the President;
(m) Implementing the Subrahmanyam Committee report in full;
(n) Introduction of military history of every military arm;
(o) Publication of the Henderson-Brooks Bhagat report;
(p) Introduction of the 20-year rule: all government documents over twenty years of age to be thrown open for public and scholastic scrutiny;
(q) Indexing legislative pay;
(r) Public funding of elections to legislatures and municipalities;
(s) Introduction of proportional representation in elections;
(t) Retirement of one-third of legislature each year;
(u) Linking of legislator compensation to attendance and participation in voting, and suspension in case of disobedience to speaker;
(v) Review of all laws and legislation and elimination of obsolete sections and practices;
(w) Establishment of national commissions on Rail, Road and Air movement;
(x) Establishment of restricted ownership of land in north-east India, Jharkhand and Chhatisgarh, and restriction of legislative office to tribals only;
(y) Compulsory education for males until fifteen years of age, for females until twenty years of age;
(z) National service for all, without exemptions, on service projects for infrastructure;
(aa) Entry into military restricted to national service experience holders only;
(bb) Entry into Administrative and Police, and other government positions restricted to national service experience holders only;
(cc) Entry into first legislative position restricted to national service experience holders only;
(dd) Entry into post-school academic or professional education restricted to national service experience holders only;
(ee) Service in state legislature or in municipal corporations mandatory for seeking national representation;
(ff) Declaration of assets at five year intervals mandatory for legislators, administrators, policemen, other government officials;
(gg) Independent University Grants Commission;
(hh) Abolition of ministries beyond bare minimum to be defined;
(ii) Foreign Direct Investment allowed, subject to 26% shareholding for Indian entity, in all sectors;
(jj) Free convertibility of currency;
(kk) Privatisation of ports;
(ll) Privatisation of shipyards;

These are just the headlines; what the people will decide and empower their elected representatives to do is what finally matters. Not your wish-list of fundamentals, or mine.

(5) Your thinking is so utterly naive as to prevent any response. How can a whole national programme be set down in terms fit for discussion in the comments of an online forum?

 

[vsdoc]

(1) Oh, is that all? You could have said that before. Very simple. Drive out all those not Hindu, who don't accept that they are Hindu converts (or Indic converts), and sequester their land. Demolish all mosques built within 500 metres of a temple, temple being defined as any point of worship for a Hindu. Auction their confiscated property, including land, and use the money to strengthen the armed forces. Attack Pakistan and wrest away occupied Kashmir, destroy the terrorist camps, hunt down, capture, try and imprison the leaders of terrorism, dismantle the ISI and reduce the PA to a light infantry force, enough to stop the Afghans from marching through to Delhi. Attack Sri Lanka and set up an independent Tamil Eelam. Attack Bangladesh and track down and imprison the ULFA militant leadership. Attack Nepal and re-instal King Gyanendra. Pass a law making it illegal for those who cannot show 30 generations of unbroken residence in India to seek political office. Ban all missionaries from entering India. Ban conversion from Hinduism to any other religion. Ban conversion from Buddhism to Christianity or to Islam. Ban conversion from Christianity to Islam. Pass a law making the personal laws of Hindus applicable to all other religions. Pass another law making all adhering to Dayabhaga Hindu law shift to Mitakshara Hindu law. Ban cow slaughter. Remove quotas from all categories of education or employment. Conquer Tibet and restore the Dalai Lama, with an Indian High Commissioner to guide his faltering first steps in governance. Conquer Xinjiang, just to keep the Chinese in their places. Make Hindi compulsory in north-east India. Make Tamil compulsory in north India. Abolish the UN.

The programme for the next week will follow shortly.

I see you consider Parsis to be the "original Hindus" by default already.

Would one old civilization come to the rescue of another and march on to Iran (during or after all of the above) ?

I am also disappointed at no mention of Myanmar. It is ours, always has been, any which way you look at it.

 

[notorious_eagle]

I agree with you about the general tenor of your remarks, and also believe that we cannot trump each other by pointing that either side was older in infamy than the other.

Indeed Sir, that would just be a race to the bottom.

Second, there has been frequent mention about Indian consulates in Afghanistan. The number is misquoted, some fanciful accounts counting as many as fifteen. In fact, I suspect, far from having anything other than personal scepticism about the role and nature of Indian diplomatic representations in Afghanistan, you may not even have an idea of the number and location of these consulates! Seriously, for your own sake, not for public display, can you list the consulates? Do you think, considering their location, that we are over-represented? Would you, as a hypothetical leader of the overseas representation of India, have had less?

Sir i do agree with you that the official number might be hidden due to the espionage aspect of it. But from what i can gather; the official number of consulates are 4 (Herat, Jalalabad, Mazar i Sharif and Kandahar). I was also a sceptic like you about the role that these embassies played but last month i had the honour of having dinner a battalion commander who is deployed in the war-zone. He was quite upfront about it and told me that the interrogations they had carried out of militant leaders left no doubt in their minds that these consulates were providing arms and money to insurgent movements inside Pakistan. But than again, he was also candid enough to say that it was just a payback with interest for the insurgency in Kashmir during the 90's.

 

[Bang Galore]

Stop kidding yourself. Tahrir Square rode on the back of an Islamist Movement that in some measure spawned OBL. When Mubarak fell, was it Facebook that decided that the Muslim Brotherhood would come in?

A very under-debated & a very under-appreciated point. Which is why I believe that for true democracies to work, a basic frame of secularism has to exist. No minority(not necessarily religious), however miniscule must be left at the whims & mercies of any majority. Individual rights must be safeguarded. For all the brickbats that our founders get, their creation of the modern Indian state with the constitutional framework that they have given us, is almost without parallel, especially to a country that was as it was in 1947. My profound regret is that so many of us so completely lack in appreciation for that extraordinary gift bequeathed to us.

 

[vsdoc]

My profound regret is that so many of us so completely lack in appreciation for that extraordinary gift bequeathed to us.

Bro nothing bequeathed remains for long or sustains in the absence of appreciation and effort of those who inherit it.

What we are today is as much because of us as because of those who have passed on.

India remained secular not because our founders wanted us to be secular, but because every generation wanted to be secular.

Pakistan's founders too wanted Pakistan to be secular. Or at least paid lip service to the same depending on your point of view. But Pakistan was never secular because the people who made up Pakistan never wanted to be secular in the first place.

You cannot force something down the throat of any people.

Some people are secular and tolerant. Some are not.

Some people take well to democracy. Some do well under totalitarian/authoritarian regimes.

 

[Joe Shearer]

Indeed Sir, that would just be a race to the bottom.



Sir i do agree with you that the official number might be hidden due to the espionage aspect of it. But from what i can gather; the official number of consulates are 4 (Herat, Jalalabad, Mazar i Sharif and Kandahar). I was also a sceptic like you about the role that these embassies played but last month i had the honour of having dinner a battalion commander who is deployed in the war-zone. He was quite upfront about it and told me that the interrogations they had carried out of militant leaders left no doubt in their minds that these consulates were providing arms and money to insurgent movements inside Pakistan. But than again, he was also candid enough to say that it was just a payback with interest for the insurgency in Kashmir during the 90's.

I have said this before, in exactly the same categorical terms, and I say so again, without change: if Indian embassies or diplomatic representations are financing arms and money to terrorists, then it is worth condemning outright. Payback of terrorism with terrorism is not acceptable. Period.

I see you consider Parsis to be the "original Hindus" by default already.

Would one old civilization come to the rescue of another and march on to Iran (during or after all of the above) ?

I am also disappointed at no mention of Myanmar. It is ours, always has been, any which way you look at it.

I actually included Myanmar but then took it out. I was laughing too hard by then to continue on to Iran. But yes, it is a good thought. No forcible conversions, of course, just a gentle hint that beards - without the moustaches - were not quite as welcome as earlier.

 

[Hello_10]

A very under-debated & a very under-appreciated point. Which is why I believe that for true democracies to work, a basic frame of secularism has to exist. No minority(not necessarily religious), however miniscule must be left at the whims & mercies of any majority. Individual rights must be safeguarded. For all the brickbats that our founders get, their creation of the modern Indian state with the constitutional framework that they have given us, is almost without parallel, especially to a country that was as it was in 1947. My profound regret is that so many of us so completely lack in appreciation for that extraordinary gift bequeathed to us.

'West Pakistan' was the best part of India before 1947, while right now it has more problems from those who claim themselves to be the 'Defenders' of Pakistan itself...... a majority believe that if India desn't face 26/11 type things so frequently then its mainly because Indians dont need these defenders, nor they would let this type of daily 'target killing' Sectarian War environment imported from its neighbors also......

Don’t hold your breath: during a recent DPC rally in Karachi, speaker after speaker made it clear that their real enemies are India and America. This assembled galaxy clearly failed to notice the uncomfortable fact that over the last decade, well over 30,000 innocent civilians and 5,000 security personnel have been killed in terrorist attacks launched by jiihadi militants. Such mundane truths often escape our religious brigade.

Save us from our defenders | DAWN.COM

 

[Joe Shearer]

Wow !! Samajwadi? Must have been really impressed with you if they are planning to import from Bengal? Or maybe you impressed Akhilesh Yadav with your kannada.

Yup, especially when the poor chap gets the dress code all wrong....Brown shirt??(Oops, Oops......)

This happened when quite a number of these galoots descended on Calcutta for their annual convocation, or whatever they call it. A very senior person, Muslim, not Yadav, needed quite a minor favour, which I was glad to grant as a courtesy to a visittor, and in our subsequent meetings, appeared to think that they needed wordsmithing done, and that I might be appropriate as a wordsmith.

I have the impression that they took umbrage at my Mobutu response.

 

[Hello_10]

This happened when quite a number of these galoots descended on Calcutta for their annual convocation, or whatever they call it. A very senior person, Muslim, not Yadav, needed quite a minor favour, which I was glad to grant as a courtesy to a visittor, and in our subsequent meetings, appeared to think that they needed wordsmithing done, and that I might be appropriate as a wordsmith.

I have the impression that they took umbrage at my Mobutu response.

and I think these growing things would be kept in Calcutta only, and tackled properly before its may spread to rest of India....

one day I told you, you don't look like an Indian as you always try to find those reasons why something is wrong in India, while on the international platform, an Indian would only try to say the things which are good in India. an Indian would dream for peace and progress in India, which will help every community of India get progress while your statement always try to find out the conflicts, which may lead to wrongs with India, the nation and its people.....

 

[Bang Galore]

Bro nothing bequeathed remains for long or sustains in the absence of appreciation and effort of those who inherit it.

What we are today is as much because of us as because of those who have passed on.

India remained secular not because our founders wanted us to be secular, but because every generation wanted to be secular.

Pakistan's founders too wanted Pakistan to be secular. Or at least paid lip service to the same depending on your point of view. But Pakistan was never secular because the people who made up Pakistan never wanted to be secular in the first place.

You cannot force something down the throat of any people.

Some people are secular and tolerant. Some are not.

Some people take well to democracy. Some do well under totalitarian/authoritarian regimes.

Yes and No. For all his faults, Nehru's commanding presence for a decade and a half & his own very democratic inclinations made sure that by the time he left the arena, democracy was firmly established. We were lucky that he stayed as long as he did. Who knows how Pakistan would have turned out if Jinnah had lived longer though I remain pessimistic about any possible chance of real democracy taking hold even thenwhen the main reason for partition was that they were bothered about the effect of democracy since the numbers were not on their side. The seeds were sown in the directions the two group of founders took. India's establishment as a secular country eventually did help in instilling far more tolerance among her people. Hinduism's basic neutrality (inter-religion, not intra-religion) helped enormously but things could have gone completely awry if a different path had been followed.

 

[vsdoc]

Hinduism's basic neutrality (inter-religion, not intra-religion) helped enormously but things could have gone completely awry if a different path had been followed.

This is the crux.

You give Nehru far too much importance frankly in the overall scheme of things.

 

[Sashan]

This is the crux.

You give Nehru far too much importance frankly in the overall scheme of things.

Many do and for some some belief. There were equally idealistic leaders who emerged from freedom fighting and were far more pragmatic than Nehru who could have done more than what Nehru did for India.

Preserve democratic institutions while at the same time not bring in this stupid socialism and preserving the army(not ending in defeat with China and thereby sending Pakistan her way and both forging a strong relationship against India) and accepting whatever the powers at that time offered to India - SC seat.

 

[Capt.Popeye]

This is the crux.

You give Nehru far too much importance frankly in the overall scheme of things.

Doc; yes and no. What you have drawn attention to is social. It was given legal sanction even muscle by Nehru AND OTHERS of his generation. Actually Nehru AND his contemporaries went BEYOND what you have highlighted. That is the CRUCIAL part.

I do think that was the general import of what Bang Galore sought to say. If so, I see no reason to disagree at all. As for Nehru (warts and all- I see many warts) represented what was idealistic in Democracy that the founding fathers envisaged. In my view he was the largest symbol of that group. As well as the most widely accepted symbol. One could'nt say that of Patel, Ambedkar or Azad for example. Though they were great personalities in their own rightHence the attention. That neither diminishes or detracts from his short-comings.