The Sangh and I

My first consciousness of the Sangh is as a boy, waiting for the school bus on Delhi's Ring Road. It was a quieter time and Ring Road was not the snarly mess it is today. I distinctly recall being startled by a throng of bicycles flooding the road - men in khaki shorts speeding away to who knows where. Someone at the bus stand hobbled one of the bikes, then forcibly let out the air from its pneumatic tires. Its rider in khaki shorts looked small and sullen, protesting helplessly.

I remember being shocked by the violence of the moment. Summoning my courage, I asked what this was all about? I was told, in a tone of unmistakable warning, the man in khaki was RSS - keep away from him.

I was a curious child. No doubt I must've asked my quite conservative Hindu family what RSS was. Whatever the response, it surprisingly didn't make an impression. All I remembered of the Sangh was the small, sullen, and helpless man in khaki shorts.

In retrospect, it feels odd that I didn't pay real attention to RSS till I was a young adult. There were relatives, I discovered, who were part of it. A senior ideologue even came to our family weddings. It was always around me in some form but simply wasn't relevant to my life.

I felt secure in my identity so wasn't looking for a group to validate it. I didn't fear any other faith, so wasn't looking for muscular friends to protect me from them. I was - and remain - relatively religious & literate on my faith, so wasn't looking for someone to lecture me on it.

Only as an adult, did I see RSS as a political entity. This vague organization, that kinda' hovered around my life but I knew virtually nothing about, was - in a quirk of history - important to the destiny of my nation. Perhaps it was the small, sullen, & helpless man in khaki, perhaps it was the bigoted relatives who said they were in RSS, or perhaps it was the blood-curdling rhetoric of the ideologue who came to our family weddings - whatever it was, I didn't like the Sangh. The shrillness of its Twitter supporters has only served to validate & strengthen this feeling.

As RSS comes back in view, somehow linked (allegedly) to reprehensible bombings that I usually associate with Pakistani terrorism and Indian naxalism, I wonder if there isn't something profoundly wrong with it. How is it possible that it was defined for me - a conservative Hindu boy who I'd think would've been a prime recruit at one time - by serendipitous interactions & distasteful memories? Worse still, how is it possible that the Sangh has let itself be painted, in fairly negative hues, by those who don't like it? Worst of all, how is it possible that its own anglophone supporters on social media have squandered the unique opportunity to redefine it as a modern, civil, and engagement-worthy entity versus an aggressive, angry horde that attacks, attacks, attacks?

I have no idea if the Sangh is involved in any way with the terrorist attacks it is being linked to. But I know this: either the Sangh is comfortable with or is a really poor manager of its public image. If the former, then very little needs to be said beyond the usual critique. If, as I suspect its defenders would argue, it gets a bad rap - surely it needs to do a lot better image management. Whatever its purpose is, surely it must be possible to articulate it in an intuitive manner. Whatever its achievements are, surely it must be possible to describe them in a straightforward manner. Whatever its outreach strategy is, surely it should be better than browbeating people into somehow accepting its version of reality?

This organization that apparently has been around for a long time, yet is somehow unable to do as basic a task as protecting its public image, is hardly the competent protector of the broader faith its rather aggressive supporters assert it is. Given this, I suspect, for me it will likely always remain the small, sullen, and helpless man in khaki shorts. Quite an image, isn't it?

People Like Us

Twitter is abuzz about Binayak Sen. Mostly outraged that the good Doctor has been condemned to life in prison for crimes against the Indian State.

His case intrigues me. The confused volley of arguments made in his favor suggests a deeper reason for why his case has so exercised the anglophone Indian mind. I want to briefly address these arguments then talk about why it is that we feel such empathy for him and why this is profoundly dangerous for our republic.

First the arguments. From reading of twitter, I see at least six arguments that have been made.

First, that he is a good man caught in bad circumstances. Well, he put himself in these circumstances willfully. He deliberately built links with people who are responsible for extreme acts of violence not just against the State but anyone even among the people they seek to represent who opposes their ways. He knew full well that the Maoists have declared war on the Indian State and that past experience suggests the State will eventually crush them. This is not a valley of flowers he was entering but a war zone. Bad things happen to even good people in war zones. Cry me a river.

Second, he has done a lot of good for a lot of people. I salute him for this. But good people do bad things all the time. His good deeds may eventually be an argument for mercy and commutation but are not evidence of innocence. Indeed, his guilt is compounded by the fact that he rashly risked all the good he was doing on the ground to pursue a selfish political agenda. Did he not see that his patients in the tribal areas needed him more than the Maoist elite? I bet he did, but delusions of grandeur made him pawn his healing touch for the steel of the gun.

Third, the State's evidence is lacking & even fabricated. This is entirely plausible in today's India. But, surely, those of us here who haven't seen such evidence can't opine on it. The only legitimate venue for making this argument is the courts (both sessions and appeal). Only they see the entirety of the evidence and can arrive at appropriate judgements based on it. We can't possibly second guess the court based on fragmentary and agenda-driven tweets or magazine articles. Trial by media would end whatever semblance we have of the rule of law.

Fourth, our justice system is compromised. Sure. This is a major sore spot in India for we aspire to be a nation of laws. This is something that does require all of us coming together, regardless of our political belief. But turning this specific case as a trial of the justice system seems weird. Lots of people are railroaded every day by our justice system - what is so profoundly unique about this case that requires an extraordinary intervention by the civil society? I don't see anything myself.

Fifth, others in politics & bureaucracy are equally guilty or worse. OK - let's go after them all. What's that got to do with Dr Sen's guilt? Surely, the fact that others are getting away does not imply that the guilty in the net ought not face consequences.

Lastly, sedition is itself a crime that should be outlawed. Perhaps so. But that is again an argument to be made in the parliament (if & when it's in session), not in the wild west of twitter & our compromised media.

These arguments are interesting not only because none of them stands up to scrutiny but that there are so many of them. It's as if Dr Sen's defenders are making a volley of arguments hoping one or more may stick and that his simple to understand guilt is diffused by the complex veil of sophisticated arguments.

Why does India's anglophone elite feel such empathy for this man that they engage in such argumentation? I'd posit it's because he is like many of us but much more. Well schooled and articulate, he shunned the comforts of urban life to go into less privileged communities. He inspires guilt in many of us for our lack of similar initiative. At core, most of our elite is left-leaning and his is in many ways the ideal life they aspire to in their inspired moments. Hence, the inevitable outrage when the hero falls apart because his feet are made of clay. The outrage is less about Dr Sen but about themselves - it allows them to assuage their guilt and move on tomorrow to the next episode of BB4 or Munni or whatever else it is that amuses them in their comfortable but guilt-ridden lives.

This is unremarkably kitschy conduct except for the danger it represents for India. Maoists are not Gandhians with guns. They are waging war on our State and their vision for the future affirmatively is not freedom. Indeed, they are guilty of keeping the regions where they roam shackled to poverty. There is limited investment that would create jobs, no law and order that's crucial for day to day life, and a traumatized generation growing up in the midst of war. Not only is the present awful, the future has also been poisoned.

Maoists need to be crushed but they can't be unless the Indian elite sees them as the enemy. By "them" I don't mean the local foot-soldiers they send out to kill and die. I mean the people like us - like Dr Sen - who inspire empathy in the people of twitter and media. This empathy at a personal level prevents us from seeing through to the evil that they represent. How can we defeat it if we see the devil as the victim?

This is what we must all ponder. There is war ongoing and we need to take a black & white stand. The grey will get us all killed.

Kashmir

For polemicists, pundits, & politicians Kashmir is a career - a gift that keeps on giving. For people on the ground, it's their home that's on fire.

In a recent Hindustan Times essay on the topic (http://bit.ly/c0iozE), educator Sabbah Haji of Doda emotionally asserted her Kashmiri identity, and said she doesn't feel Indian. Her words mean a great deal more than those of interlopers like Arundhati Roy who use the issue to principally further their celebrity or shrill voices on the internet for whom Kashmir is yet another stick with which to attack the Indian State.

Sister Sabbah, this is written for you by a fellow Indian. 

Compliments for courageously laying out your thoughts & feelings for the world to react. Forgive the tardiness of my response but I was busy with gulshan ka karobaar :p

This may sound strange but, while not exactly persuaded by what I read, I empathize completely. We may disagree politically but I believe engagement with voices like yours is crucial to moving forward.

You made three points in your essay each of which I'll respond to briefly.

First, you spoke about India's "heartless governance" and the heavy boots of our troops. When in Kashmir recently, I saw first-hand the unbearable suffocation that's become daily life for folks. It bothers me to this day and I don't even live there.

I'd suggest, however, that this is a tragedy not just in Kashmir but in many parts of India. We require significant reforms in the governing infrastructure of our State and the blunt force approach of our security mandarins. Instead of making this a cause for separation, however, shouldn't we come together to make things better for all of us? Leaving the world better for those who follow us is what politics is all about, isn't it?

Next, you spoke about being from a "generation of anger". Who wouldn't be? I can never walk in your shoes but have walked on your earth and fought my own rage. Regardless of what other good India may have done or that our anger is better directed at the retrogressive leaders of the secessionist movement, the fact that there is such anger is ultimately a mark of our collective failure. You have the right and the privilege to express this anger - like a sister does with her brother. But, eventually, you must let it go because anger is the most self-corrosive of all emotions. As you do so, believe me, your siblings from India's vast plains & plateaus will stand with you.

Finally, and most crucially, you wrote about your Kashmiri identity. You love India but don't feel Indian. Of course, no one can force any feelings on you. I respect your sentiment and don't see that as a reason to call you names. The cool thing about India is that all manner of sentiments are perfectly fine. Your Kashmiri identity is not one iota in conflict with Indianness. Greater conflict, I'd submit, would be between your Kashmiri identity and the Arabic desert that Mr Geelani wishes to impose on your verdant valley.

I don't write this to persuade you to change your notions but do want you to know that even hawks like me consider themselves your brothers and offer our understanding. This is no substitute for the angry years gone by but, hopefully, is a good start for happier years to come.

Let me be transparent. I don't support the notion of Kashmiri Azadi nor of any autonomy that would dilute the secular character of our republic. I don't believe Pakistan, or any other State, has any business poking its nose in what are internal matters among us. And I am convinced that, while there is understandable anger among Kashmiri people as acknowledged before, the violent jihad and stone pelting are manifestations of a Pakistan-sponsored psychopathy that must be crushed.

I say all this in candor so you can see that engagement with people like me is not only possible, it's the only way forward. Provocateur polemicists like Arundhati Roy who exploit your anger to further their fame and fortune may parrot your words, but they are not invested in resolution. What would they do with their time if this cause celebre were to fade away? Likewise futile are the shape shifting mobs on the internet who, in the name of liberalism, embrace any number of illiberal causes as long as these stand opposed to the Indian State. These voices too may echo your anger but they aren't really invested in your peace. Suffering of people on the ground is, at best, a tertiary issue to their madcap ideologies and purposes.

It may sound ironic but the best allies of the Kashmiri people in their quest for modernity and advance are people like me. We seek an honorable resolution because we gain nothing from extending anyone's misery - of the good people on the ground, of the security forces who toil in impossible circumstances, and of your progressive polity that needs time & space to find its voice. And we have far greater credibility with the broader Indian nation than the shrill activists would ever have.

So, what is this honorable resolution? Whatever its contours, it must preserve the best elements of your Kashmiri identity and India's liberal ideal. This is entirely possible - indeed significant elements of this have already been sketched out in the background. In broad strokes, the resolution would acknowledge Kashmiri political aspirations by granting the people greater say in running their affairs, recognize Kashmiri yearning to reunite with lost siblings across the LOC by simplifying people-to-people contacts, and preserve the sovereignty of the liberal and federalist constitution of India. Northern Ireland shows such a complex resolution is entirely practical.

What remains, frankly, is the dirty business of horse trading among key stakeholders to ensure their respective political interests are preserved in the new dispensation. This makes the present a very delicate moment that enemies of peace seek to sabotage. Inflaming passions at this stage by people like Ms Roy is counterproductive - something she herself, in her self-righteousness, may not fully recognize.

This is where we are, at a perilous moment of possibility. It may be that our reach exceeds our grasp but we sincerely reach for peace. We need impassioned young Kashmiris like you to stand with us to make it happen. You alone can leave behind obstacles to peace like victimhood, anger, and narrow notions of identity. Instead, if you find a way to feel empowered, forgiving, and at once Kashmiri and Indian, believe me, this will change the world.

This moment is a test for your generation - a stark choice between the haunting of the past and the calling of the future. Carpe Diem.

Terrorism

Surprisingly little has been written in the Indian blogosphere about Mohammad Haneef, charged in Australia as having -- recklessly but without intention -- supported terrorism in the UK. As a forum that has written forcefully against Islamic terrorism, it seemed appropriate for this blog to make an observation on this matter.

Haneef is a cousin of a vicious terrorist to whom he gave a SIM card. He was also hurrying to leave Australia in the immediate aftermath of the failed UK attacks.

These facts make it imperative that he be thoroughly investigated. Australia is well within its rights to ensure the safety of its citizens.

If Haneef is found guilty of willing and knowing complicity, we would support the harshest possible punishment for him. Further, even if the investigation leads to little in terms of any real complicity, it would be prudent for Australia to deport him back to India. We would likely do the same if there were a Pakistani cousin of the terrorist Sheikh Omar found in odd circumstances, however explainable, in India.

What India must not accept (and what will undoubtedly damage our nascent strategic relationship with Australia) is Haneef's imprisonment notwithstanding any absence of evidence that proves his willing complicity in the abhorrent UK terror attacks. The Government of India needs to be proactive in making this crystal clear to John Howard.

We must provide all needed support for Australia and the UK to complete a thorough investigation of the horrific affair. We must not, however, silently tolerate innocent Indians being railroaded by overzealous Australian prosecutors and politicians cynically playing to the understandable fears of their people.

Pygmies For President

The President of India is mostly a ceremonial position -- yet, somehow, one feels that its contenders should not inspire the question: who?

Mr. Kalam is an unpolished man -- a President by serendipity -- but he has shown that the Presidency can inspire India in ways otherwise impossible by a political system that merits only contempt from our citizens.

Given this, the Presidency is evolving in the public mind to something akin the Bharat Ratna -- greatness in life being a prerequisite for Presidency.

How utterly disappointing it is then to see pygmies jockeying for the position -- yet not surprising from a political system that specializes in disappointing India.

Too bad.

Justice, Not Vengeance

Just a few words supporting the commutation of Mohammad Afzal's death sentence.

This blogger has no personal view on Afzal's guilt except to note that he has been convicted through our process of law -- which is how we settle such issues in democratic India.

Afzal's guilt, therefore, is not an issue at all.

The the only issue is the manner in which we should treat such terrorists.

Executing Afzal does little to advance justice any more than his lifetime incarceration. Why then should his evil blood be on the hands of the good citizens of India? For vengeance?

Forgiveness is surely a greater virtue than vengeance. This blogger hopes that India will act accordingly -- with greatness and mercy.

Let's also join most leading democracies by abolishing capital punishment in India.

What Price Ambition?

India's response to repeated terror attacks has been sickeningly predictable.

Official outrage and vows of vengeance are followed by a quick moving on. The most that we appear capable of is a temporary drama-queen delay of our so-called "peace" process with Pakistan.

This is largely because India has global aspirations which compel it to act "responsibly", no matter the cost to our people.

The paradox of this posture is that we end up pleading with the world to recognize our new-found "power" even as terrorists castrate what little remains of our tattered mojo.

This is, therefore, not about whether India should or not talk to Pakistan (it doesn't really matter, does it?) -- rather, this is about India's structural misunderstanding of the nature of power in our world.

Whereas great powers use muscle to assert their influence, India seems to be intent on acquiring its geo-political weight through permission and charity of others.

As long as this remains the view of our political elite -- across the ideological spectrum, it needs to be emphasized -- Indians will continue dying while our elite express unfelt regret then continue chasing their mirage of faux-power.

To this retired blogger, it's clear that sensible Indians will now quit celebrating meaningless adulations in the world media, quit talking about great power status, quit our obscene and unearned swagger, and quit talking big while carrying a really small stick.

Instead, we need to get back to hard work, back to our democratic revolution for throwing overboard this pussilanimous elite-- we need to get back to reversing, in Gore Vidal's words, the overturning of our real history by their made-up myths.

This is what we owe the dead of Mumbai and Delhi and Akshardham and Ayodhya and Kaluchak and Kargil and Kashmir as also Godhara followed by its viciously evil whirlwind.

Let's begin by acknowledging how extremely weak our state is presently and how unbelievably far we have yet to go. There is surely no shame in beginning with the truth about ourselves.

As Faiz wrote, Aaiye haath uthaein hum bhi.

Lonely in Louvre

Odd post this.

This lapsed blogger finally found himself in Paris this past weekend where he stole precious time for Louvre and Versailles between heavy swatches of work.

At Louvre, three icons were on the wish list.

Of course, the Mona Lisa -- much too small and locked up with too many people all around her.

Then, the magnificent Venus de Milo. Just like one had imagined having seen a cheap replica way back in the innocence of childhood.

But most important, the law codes of Hammurabi. Few people around, fewer still understanding its colossal significance. There it stands, lonely in Louvre, like a rock.

Have concluded the ancient is far more interesting than the medieval. This is a change of heart -- had not felt the same awe of the distant forbearers while in Egypt many years ago. This rethink must be, what Eliot called, one of the gifts reserved for age.

Mona Lisa and Taj Mahal feel ridiculously pretentious now -- come look at me, how clever I am, how gifted, how very metrosexual! In contrast, those who chiseled out the law codes in Akkad or moved the Earth to shape the Great Pyramids and the Great Wall, or those who invented Zero were surely the real men among men.

Then, Versailles -- where Marie Antoinette lived at the end of one metrosexual age and the beginning of another. Impressive in a profoundly gaudy sense -- no wonder the nouveau riche are drawn to it as a venue for their children's weddings!

The best part of being in Paris was watching the local Portuguese celebrate their team's world cup victory over England. Seemed like the entire nation of Portugal had congregated at the Arc de Triomphe. Then France won -- Champs Elysees overflowed with emotion and libation. Fascinating stuff.

Odd post this. From a lapsed blogger and political junkie. Now, returning to hibernation.

I have moved.

Colleagues

I now post at http://cynical-nerd.nationalinterest.in/. Do visit sometime. Here are three posts on the Indian Navy, Nepal and China with a co-blogger.

Best regards - Vaikasi 1, 5108

Sayonara

I was informed last week that this blog will be shut down. I had started to blog in October, 2005 and enjoyed the experience. The thrill is in the readership. I must thank each of you.

I will continue to post elsewhere as "Jaffna".

Let me end my stint here with a quote from the 6th century BC Chinese classic, the Tao Te Ching.

"The wise leader knows,
When enough is enough.

Stretch a bow too far
And it will snap.

Sharpen a knife too much,
And its edge will not last.

Fill your house with gold and jade,
And you can not defend it.

Exalting in your success,
Invites a certain fall.

When your work is done,
It is time to move on".

Tao Te Ching - verse 9.

Reservations

The issue of caste-based reservations has been a controversial one in India. Part of the disillusionment can be attributed to the blatant electoral motives of the Congress party. Its objective to garner more votes at the next polls will fail since caste-based policies reward casteist, not national parties. However, the concept of reservations in itself is not flawed.

Some maintain that educational standards will decline with reservations. Others allege that state interference in the private sector's ability to hire and fire individuals will compromise the open market.

Let me reflect here. The UPA had widened the ambit of reservations to include private fee-levying educational institutions. It exempted minority religious schools from the new policy - a poll tactic to not alienate the minority religious vote. It then endeavored to extend reservations to Muslims but failed due to judicial intervention. It now plans to introduce legislation to make it mandatory for the private sector to hire a fixed proportion of the backward castes, scheduled castes and scheduled tribes.

While I do not care for India's Prime Minister, the policy of reservations does have its merit. Education and employment standards might not necessarily be compromised. However certain caveats are in order.

India is a pluralist land with many languages, ethnic groups, caste configurations and religions. It is a county poised for economic and military take off. It is only correct that different caste groups share the best education opportunities available and the fruits of economic development. A policy of reservations would ensure greater representation of marginalized groups and would help integrate them into the national mainstream.

While not all "backward" castes are marginalized, they are under-represented in the modern urbanized economy. Integration through socialization, inter-marriage and close bonds would take place once they are fully represented in education and employment. This can only strengthen India, not weaken it.

Would this compromise the quality of education in the elite IITs and IIMs that have churned graduates only to lose them to the United States? I think not, provided rigorous admission and graduation standards are retained. Only the most qualified amongst the backward castes, the scheduled castes and scheduled tribes should get admission into the elite institutions of higher learning. And only the most qualified should be allowed to graduate. The admission and graduation standards can not be compromised. Quotas to ensure adequate representation of different caste groups would integrate India's myriad castes provided rigorous standards of admission and graduation are retained.

Some would argue that this would strengthen caste through university admissions and employment. But one can not deny that caste is already a social reality that strikes one in the face. Its existence can not be denied. Integration would only follow once different caste groups are represented in the mainstream. I provide the example of Andhra Pradesh, Karnataka, Kerala and Tamil Nadu.

Reservations are in keeping with the Indic historical tradition. The Panchayat (five castes) or the basic structure of local government in ancient and medieval India was a forum where the five broad caste groups convened to jointly decide on village affairs. The five groups were the Brahmins, Kshatriyas, Vaishyas, Shudras and the "Untouchables". All five had to jointly anoint the king upon his coronation.

This is not to deny the reservation pitfalls. The current UPA administration has arrogated the right to interfere in private university entrance fees. It excluded minority religious institutions once again in the most cynical manner. This is a dangerous precedent. Interference in the fee structure undermines private education.

The administration should instead set up an endowment to provide scholarships to India's neglected and marginalized. It needs to invest in grass-roots education to ensure the improved competitiveness of non-elite caste groups over time. Nehru failed to do so and it is high time to rectify this anomaly. Until then, caste-based reservations are needed to ensure national integration. India can only emerge stronger.

Hanging Up

Blogging has been slow lately.

This blogger's time's been at a steep premium and he's been traveling much on work. But more importantly, his zest for blogging has faded.

Why?

Because nothing ever changes and politics' become a bore.

Because summer is here, finally -- convertibles and surf trump politics and prose!

Its been fun talking with you all, and reading your views. Its been a useful experiment. But this is where the road ends for this amateur blogger. Maybe a future guest post or two, here or there, but that's really it.

Cheers.

Misery All Around

Yet another murderous outrage in Kashmir, another in Afghanistan, and the passing of John Kenneth Galbraith -- there's misery all around this Monday.

On Kashmir, one wonders when Indians will turn their rage at our Government that has clearly failed to secure our people even after 17 years of waging war. Where's the accountability? How come we haven't yet crushed this terrorism in Kashmir and smashed its infrastructure in Pakistan?

On Afghanistan, we know who the Taliban is a proxy for. Why are we not at war with the terroists who rule Islamabad?

Siachen Sell Out?

The 49 mile long Siachen Glacier forms part of the watershed that separates Central Asia and the Indian subcontinent. The Indian Army has been deployed on the commanding Saltoro Ridge since 1984. The line of deployment is known as the Actual Ground Position Line (AGPL). India and Pakistan appear to be currently negotiating troop reductions in Saltoro. The agreement might entail a redemarcation of the ground position. It is difficult to assess the proposed deal as the negotiations are being conducted in stealth.

M.K Narayanan, National Security Adviser to the Manmohan Singh administration indicated that India and Pakistan were about to reach agreement on the mutual reduction of troops and troop withdrawal in Siachen. In contrast, the Indian Army Chief of Army Staff, General J.J. Singh has expressed concerns that "We have conveyed our concerns and views to the Government and we expect the composite dialog between the two countries will take care of all these concerns" and added that "demilitarization is not on the horizon"

The United States might have facilitated discussions on the vexed subject. It is in American interest that Indo-Pakistan relations improve so that the strategic objectives of the United States can be better met in the extended region. Any settlement on Siachen should not compromise India's long term interest to ensure a corridor to Central Asia. India needs to retain its presence to prevent further consolidation of the Sino-Pakistan axis across the Karakoram pass.

This is not to deny the value of mutual troop reductions in Siachen. The current deployment of troops is not cost effective. However, the rumored redemarcation of the AGPL (even if accepted by Pakistan) is not in India's interest. Writing in the Asian Age, former Vice Chief of Army Staff Lt. Gen. Vijay Oberoi says that "while the Indian Army is not averse to vacating the AGPL, if the nation so desires, but wants that what it secured with great effort and many sacrifices, and which it has held safely for the nation, in the face of enemy action, as well as the severity of the climate and the treacherous terrain, for the last 22 years, should not be sacrificed at the altar of expediency, merely to notch up one more CBM towards the ephemeral peace process". He added that "if India withdraws from Saltoro and Pakistan captures it, the situation then becomes irreversible".

Nehru had erred in "conceding" ground control over Baltistan and Gilgit to Pakistan in 1948. That terrain had enormous geopolitical significance given its proximity to Central Asia. Mrs. Gandhi recaptured Kargil - one of three districts of Baltistan - in 1971. India occupied Siachen in April, 1984. Pakistani troops under a certain Brigadier Musharraf unsuccessfully endeavored to undo this in 1987 and in 1999. Recall that before the Kargil aggression of 1999, Siachen was an unoccupied zone since 1949 with the positions of LoC clearly delineated as per the 1972 Simla Agreement. Yet the Pakistani Army had no scruples in violating these borders. There is a good reason not to trust them today since the mastermind of that war is still the ruler of that country.

There are reports that India might even drop its insistence on marking a AGPL in Siachen before withdrawing to show its 'eagerness' for the peace process during Prime Minister's upcoming visit to Pakistan in July. This is an unwise move devoid of strategic considerations. It is in India's long term interest to annex the restive region of Baltistan when Islamabad is preoccupied with domestic insurrections and Beijing focused elsewhere. Any compromise on the line of control could foreclose future options. Moreover, New Delhi can not forego its de jure claim on the territory.

The reported deal benefits Pakistan. Pakistan currently has 80,000 troops stationed in Balochistan to crush an insurrection there. It has another 80,000 troops tied down in the North West Frontier Province/Federally Administered Tribal Areas. Its military is stretched and it needs to urgently redeploy troops. Islamabad now requires a stable eastern frontier to tackle domestic issues to its west. India can use this to leverage better terms. For one, it should not concede on the line of control in the Siachen segment. While Pakistan would find this difficult to accept, India is not pressed for time.

The lack of transparency vis-a-vis the current negotiations is disturbing. India is a democracy where the executive is held accountable to the elected legislature. The authorities in New Delhi need to take Parliament into confidence on an issue of such importance. The Government must realize that its only constituency is the local one, not foreign interests.

Further reading:

Subhash Kapila, India: Government set to repeat strategic blunder of Aksai Chin in Siachen?,South Asian Analysis Group, 2006.

Vishnu Makhijani, From Haji Pir to Siachen, it is deja vu for the Indian Army , IANS, 2006.

Co-authored by Jaffna and Cynical Nerd

Nepal On The Mend?

Via Stratfor:

What India will likely do is employ a two-pronged approach in dealing with the Maoists. Existing fissures among the Maoist cadres over the future of the movement are waiting to be exploited by New Delhi and Kathmandu. The personal hatred between Prachanda and Baburam Bhattarai, another leading figure in the party, is widely known, and their differences will only deepen once the group faces the critical issue of disarming and merging with the Nepalese army in exchange for political representation. By reopening these fissures, India can work with the Nepalese government to divide the Maoist movement and undercut its ability to deadlock the entire country through blockades and attacks.

And the Maoists may not be the only ones suffering from internal divisions. It is questionable whether the unprecedented unity of Nepal's political parties will succeed in holding out for much longer without the king as a common enemy. Moreover, the political parties want guarantees from India that they will not come under attack from the Maoists down the road. As the parties proceed with their own political agenda, their alliance with the Maoists is likely to come under serious duress when the Maoists begin to feel like they are being sidelined out of the political process. With King Gyanendra slowly retreating into the background, the difficulties in maintaining the alliance among the seven parties and weakening the Maoist movement will only add to New Delhi's task list for maintaining order in its own backyard.

Sri Lanka

Known for its tenacity and grit, the LTTE is now at the cross roads. It fought fierce conventional battles, captured major army bases and significant swathes of land, and attacked Colombo in the late 1990s and early 2000s. This affected investor confidence, tourism and forced the incoming Government to enter into a Norwegian mediated cease-fire with the LTTE in February 2002. The cease-fire is now at breaking point.

While the LTTE retains the ability to wreak havoc with the Sri Lankan economy, it has few real options. For one, it has been increasingly sidelined in the international arena given its human rights record and terrorism. Australia, Britain Canada, India and the United States have designated it a terrorist outfit. The European Union is likely to ban it should the current cease-fire be broken. This restricts their international fund raising capability. Financing constraints would prevent a return to prolonged conventional warfare.

The fighting capacity of the LTTE that once allowed it to take on the Sri Lankan military might now be dented. Reports suggest that Indian intelligence had instigated the revolt of Eastern/Batticaloa LTTE cadre led by Karuna in March, 2004. The Northern command of the LTTE crushed this but in doing so lost one of its most capable strategists. Karuna defected to the military. The LTTE has a Northern/Jaffna leadership that controls the sea tigers, the incipient air tigers, its intelligence, its finances, its international procurement and its mercantile shipping. However, many of the foot soldiers hailed from the poverty stricken East. While the LTTE has not lost the East, its ability to recruit fighters there has been dented. It now faces a shortfall in cadre.

The close ties forged between Karuna and the Army under Indian sponsorship resulted in snipper attacks on LTTE leaders. The LTTE retaliated with claymore mine attacks on army convoys. The military responded with the murder of Tamil civilians. Last afternoon's attempted assassination of the hard-line Army Commander deep within the fortified Army Headquarters in Colombo and the subsequent Sri Lankan Airforce bombardment of Tamil villages in Trincomalee indicate that we might be in for turbulent weather.

The LTTE retains the capacity to attack Colombo and destroy investor confidence. Any terrorist attack in Colombo would send the economy into a tailspin. Even if there were to be a return to conventional war due to trigger-happy hard-liners on either side, both parties realize that they lack the means to sustain it. There would be the inevitable peace talks after a swift territorial redemarcation of areas controlled by either side. As in the past 25 years, Sri Lanka remains in a stable equilibrium of continued uncertainty.

Nepal At The Edge

Nepal just might have been rescued from the brink as King Gyanendra announced at 11.30 PM yesterday that he had reinstated the lower house of parliament. He apologized for those killed in three weeks of pro-democracy protests which he went on to describe as a "people's movement". The monarch had transferred executive power to the political parties last Friday. The Seven Party Alliance of Parties dismissed that as insufficient demanding the restoration of the legislature. He has now done so. Pressure from the European Union and the United States in light of the intensifying protests helps explain the King's about turn.

By contrast, the Indian role has not been altogether benign. The Indian Foreign Secretary - Shyam Saran- announced over the weekend that India had abandoned its "Twin Pillar" policy of supporting a multi-party democracy and a constitutional monarchy. He added that it was for the Nepalese to define their political system. New Delhi appears to have had a tacit understanding with the Maoists.

The Maoists might still consolidate their hold in the emerging political vacuum. To quote, United States Ambassador Moriarty "My real concern is that the successor Government may end up being dominated by the Maoists. The Maoists under the current situation swing a lot of weight because they have the weapons and the parties do not".

Others confirm the not so hidden clout of the Maoists. Maoist cadre had directed the street demonstrations in Kathmandu and provided the manpower. The SPA had no real control on the streets. A significant number of the protestors appeared to be from Maoist controlled rural areas.

Hundreds of Maoists had stormed the Nepalese town of Chautara 75 miles east of Kathmandu attacking the local hospital, the post office, the education office and administrative buildings yesterday. The Maoist insurgents destroyed the communications network. Military reinforcements had to be airlifted in. Kathmandu was under curfew for five days. Protestors had already occupied the 17 mile long ring road. The Communist Party of Nepal (Unified Marxist Leninist) had announced plans to march to the royal palace today to declare a "Democratic Republic". Let's hope that the politics of reconciliation now sets in.

The Maoists control one third the territory of Nepal. They have set up local government authorities. They have built a 55 mile road through the mountains that might eventually link up with China. The Maoists collect taxes. They run collective farms, riverine fisheries and livestock. They retain links with Indian Maoist rebels in Bihar, Chhattisgarh, Jharkhand and Telangana.

New Delhi blundered with its sponsorship of Tamil militant groups in Sri Lanka in the 1980s. It has no coherent policy in Nepal either. The current deal in Nepal owed more to European and United States proactiveness than to any initiative in New Delhi. It might be intended to contain the Maoist insurrection and ensure political space for Nepal's moderates. Let's hope that the restoration of democracy last night leads to peace and economic growth in the Shangri-La that once was Nepal. We need to watch events today to see whether this would indeed materialize.

Chinese civil nuclear plans

The United States Congress passed legislation in 1985 to permit full civil nuclear cooperation with China. The Congress approved this notwithstanding official testimony that China had then been covertly assisting Pakistan's nuclear program. China became a NPT signatory in 1992. The Sino-American civilian nuclear deal was delayed by 13 years. It took effect in 1998 after the Clinton administration lifted the sanctions imposed in the aftermath of the Tiananmen protests.

Reuters had an interesting blurb on the subject datelined April 21, 2006. Chinese leaders view nuclear energy as a counter to increased reliance on hydrocarbon imports, not to mention the environmental pollution in Chinese urban areas. China intends to quadruple civil nuclear capacity by 2020. And yet, this would only provide 4% of Chinese energy needs. Opponents warn of challenges that include waste disposal and the steep cost of new generators.

China had opted to rely on a mix of American, Canadian, French and Russian civil nuclear technology designs. The objective was to keep China up to speed on the latest development in the technology realm in different countries. However, the nine nuclear reactors currently in operation barely contribute 2% of the nation's power today. This is a mere one-eight of the global average. The plan is to raise this to 4% over the next 15 years by building 30 new reactors. Many doubt whether this target could be met given the difficulty in constructing 2 major reactors each year. The reliance on fossil fuels is thus set to remain.

The Chinese are moreover pursuing designs that use less uranium as international uranium prices have tripled since 2004. The financial challenge ahead is daunting and China hopes to tap into the power utilities listed in its share market to help fund the nuclear expansion. This would be an interesting development to watch.

China Hu?

Even as President Bush greets President Hu at the White House, Washington's elite wake up to Jim Hoagland's essay reminding them of Bush's Indian Ally -- our visionary Prime Minister.

Great timing indeed.

Supporting Democracy in Nepal

This blog has long supported the idea of India being the enforcer of political modernity in our neighborhood.

This means recognizing the simple fact that India's emergence as a superpower is constrained by our (politically and literally) bombed out neighborhood. Also, that our long term interests are in alignment with those of the people in our neighboring countries -- not with their frequently autocratic rulers.

Therefore, in Nepal, we should be squarely with the people demanding democracy. The King's fortune has run out and there is little gain in including him in the next chapter of Nepal. It's time for him to retire in exile.

What we need to do is to find a way of sidelining the Maoists. This is possible if India can persuade the Nepalese Army to join the democracy bandwagon -- and the political parties to accept an India-backed Nepalese Republic in exchange for their pledge to crush the Maoists.

Hopefully, this is precisely the prescription Shyam Saran and Karan Singh have taken to Kathmandu.