India no angel in dangerous neighbourhood
By Annie Banerji
Perhaps the finger-pointing at neighbouring Pakistan and the talk of Afghan militancy destabilising the region that New Delhi so often rolls out should be reconsidered. The neighbourhood may well be dangerous, but India is no model pupil.
According to the 2011 Global Peace Index, an initiative of the Institute of Economics and Peace, which evaluates 153 countries based on the level of ongoing conflict, safety and security and militarisation, India is the world’s 135th most peaceful country, falling seven positions from last year.
This year’s rankings, which indicated a decline in the levels of peace for the third consecutive year overall, placed Iceland in the top spot as the most peaceful country and Somalia as the world’s least.
India’s performance is high on some of the indicators, for instance, level of organised internal conflict, political instability, and relations with neighbouring countries, for which reason India is a part of the 20 least peaceful countries in the world along with Pakistan, Iraq and Afghanistan.
India’s unfortunate state of safety and security not only emerges largely from religious conflict with active groups like Lashkar-e-Taiba and the Students’ Islamic Movement of India, but also Naxalism, an ideology of militant Communist groups. Terror activity is not concentrated in a particular region in India, but it has poisonously seeped into almost all areas of the country.
Starting from the north, with the perennial conflict of Jammu and Kashmir due to political and religious imbalances to the north-east, where there are tensions between state governments, the central government and the tribal people. Central India is infested with Naxalist insurgency, which in the past week caused the death of nine police officers.
Diplomatic disaster deja vu for incensed India
“Once is happenstance. Twice is coincidence. The third time it’s enemy action,” so wrote Ian Fleming in his James Bond thriller Goldfinger.
With the reported frisking of Indian U.N. representative Hardeep Puri at a U.S. airport coming just days after a similar incident involving a senior Indian diplomat, the outraged Indian foreign ministry may well be considering the third option. After expressing its anger at the pat-down of Indian Ambassador to Washington Meera Shankar on Thursday, the emergence of Puri’s incident has India feeling unfairly victimised.
Protests have been lodged and strong words issued out of New Delhi. In response, a review of protocol has been promised by Washington.
But are these back-to-back incidents merely an embarrassing coincidence or confirmation of improper procedures?
The Americans ought to be frisked at all Indian Airports. I wonder if they inspect Ambassadors from Pakistan, China, the UK, Russia or other such Nations? I dare say no.
from Pakistan: Now or Never?:
Between the lines: Obama’s comments on Kashmir
President Barack Obama's words on relations with Pakistan were always going to be carefully scripted during his visit to India, where even to say the word "Kashmir" aloud in public can raise jitters about U.S. interference in what New Delhi sees as a bilateral dispute.
So first up, here's what he had to say during a news conference in New Delhi with Prime Minister Manmohan Singh in response to a question about what role the United States could play in resolving the Kashmir dispute (NDTV has the video).
"With respect to Kashmir, obviously this is a long-standing dispute between India and Pakistan; as I said yesterday, I believe that both Pakistan and India have an interest in reducing tensions between the two countries. The United States cannot impose a solution to these problems but I have indicated to Prime Minister Singh that we are happy to play any role that the parties think is appropriate in reducing these tensions. That's in the interests of the region; it is in the interests of the two countries involved and it is in the interests of the United States of America.
"So my hope is that conversations will be taking place between the two countries; they may not start on that particular flashpoint; there may be confidence building measures that need to take place, but I am absolutely convinced that it is both in India's and Pakistan's interest to reduce tensions and that will enable them I think to focus on the range of both challenges and opportunities that each country faces."
"I do want to make this point though, that I think Prime Minister Singh throughout his career and throughout his prime ministership has consistently spoken out both publicly and privately on his desire, his personal commitment to reduce tensions between India and Pakistan and for that I very much commend him. I think Prime Minister Singh is sincere and relentless in his desire for peace. And so my hope is that both sides can, over the next several months, several years, find mechanisms that are appropriate for them to work out what are these very difficult issues."
A quick reading between the lines suggests that he is unfraid of referring to Kashmir in public and keeping it on the agenda, while also acknowledging that resolving the dispute may take years rather than months, and that the two countries might need to build confidence by agreeing on other issues first. He also steered a middle course between Pakistan's insistence that Kashmir is the core issue, and India's demand that "cross-border terrorism" must end before it will agree to talk.
Obama has moved quite some distance since his 2008 election campaign, when he raised hackles in India by suggesting a resolution of the Kashmir dispute could help in the war in Afghanistan by convincing Pakistan to focus on tackling militants holed up on its border rather than its traditional enemy.
Rex
I do not expect anything concrete from you. So don’t sweat.
Have fun!
Going global in India’s chaotic way
India is globalising, but not the way much of the world wants.
That rather contradictory thought nagged at me one morning during the chaotic Commonwealth Games here in New Delhi.
On the road to the media venue’s gate, I trudged past a squatter’s family living in a tarpaulin. The mother was helping her son pee on my left. Rubbish, the smelly, sickly kind, lay to my right. My shoes sunk in mud from an unfinished pavement.
Hardly the stuff of a showcase international event meant to rival China. But after four years in India, the scene appeared normal. So was news during the Games that stocks had hit a near three-year high and that the Economist had predicted India’s economy would soon outpace China.
For the umpteenth time, a centuries-old history bubbled under the surface of this emerging global power, a pressure cooker of India’s own eccentricities and ills that seem to avoid blowing up, despite straining at the seams.
Indian history is littered with the mistaken predictions of sceptical foreign correspondents who have underestimated the ability of this country, with one sixth of humanity, to confound its critics despite massive social, communal and ethnic problems.
Over 30 years ago I did an 11 month training course where about 20% of the trainees were foreigners. While the Asians understood and accepted what they saw it was those from the West who kept telling us how because of wide disparities, India would be wiped out when the social revolution took place in the very near future. They are still waiting and anticipating that event. Only the tone is slightly different. Now there is a touch of envy, previously there was only scorn and condescension.
Yes there is abject poverty but what the author didn’t see in those villages was scooters, cell phones and motorbikes where even bicycles were a luxury earlier. There is much, too much in fact, that is wrong in India. Yet in spite of that lives are improving. When poverty and illiteracy exist in such large numbers, progress will always seem tardy and slow. The problem is that so many commentators unfortunately simply miss out on noticing the progress. How come we don’t have anyone telling us that in $ terms India has more millionaires than all of Europe combined? There are none so blind as those who have eyes but will not see.
Is New Delhi working on Kashmir solution?
At least 64 people have been killed across Kashmir during anti-India demonstrations, one of the worst outbreaks of unrest since a separatist revolt against New Delhi broke out in 1989.
Frequent curfews, security lockdown and separatist strikes have kept the Muslim-majority Kashmir valley on the boil, shutting down much of the region for the past two and a half months.
New Delhi has been criticised for failing to respond to violence that has wounded hundreds, closed down schools and colleges also.
But now Kashmir’s chief minister, Omar Abdullah, has hinted at a political solution of the crisis by New Delhi in the coming days.
“The Union government is actively working for a political solution,” Abdullah said and expressed hope that an “amicable and peaceful” settlement would not be too far off.
After several failed rounds of peace talks between separatists and the Centre in the past two decades, India will find it difficult bridging the “trust deficit” between New Delhi and Kashmir, a region seen as key to the stability of a broad zone ranging from India to Afghanistan.
Abdullah expressed hope that New Delhi will take positive steps in addressing the political issues of Kashmir in a sustained dialogue process avoiding the “re-occurrence of mistakes done in the past.”
i doubt if India is really serious about resolution as there is no leader of that caliber who would take risks involved in such resolution as politics of India at this time is not statesmanship oriented…..but let us watch what India is going to offer????????
Moral brigade, media trials and law
In what is being seen as a significant judgement, India’s apex court recently dismissed all charges against south Indian actress Khushboo for her alleged remarks on pre-marital sex in a 2005 magazine interview.
The Supreme Court said her comments were her personal view and that she was entitled to express them.
Many in the country believe the verdict heralds a welcome but a difficult and slow change. Nevertheless, it reinforces our claim to democracy, secularism and above all freedom of speech and expression, of course with its riders.
But an offshoot of the same verdict also highlights prevalence of two active groups in the country which are substantially contributing to its brand and image.
One is media which drives to act as a facilitator of democracy, welcoming the evolution of society and bringing about changes. Other is the moral brigade which claims to be the preservers of rigid cultures and ethos and refuses to embrace any change.
In its judgement copy of the Khushboo verdict while quashing all 22 criminal cases and denouncing litigators’ plea, the apex court criticises media as well.
The judgement text says the three-judge bench in the Khushboo case was misquoted by electronic and print media on live-in relationships, and that there was no such observation made.
Media today need to get over its obsession with the reporting and highlighting of the negative and the controversial. It need to focus more on development and constructive issues. I have discussed on this need for an image make-over in my blog http://chapter18.wordpress.com/2010/05/1 4/the-mosquito-syndrome/
Thanks
Narayanan
from Afghan Journal:
The price of greater Indian involvement in Afghanistan
U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates is heading to India, and one of the things Washington is looking at is how can regional players such as India do more in Afghanistan. "As we are doing more, of course we are looking at others to do more," a U.S. official said, ahead of the trip referring to the troop surge.
But this is easier said than done, and in the case of India, a bit of a minefield. While America may expect more from India, Pakistan has had enough of its bitter rival's already expanded role in Afghanistan since the fall of the Taliban in 2001. Indeed, Afghanistan is the new battleground on par with Kashmir, with many in Pakistan saying Indian involvement in Afghanistan was more than altruistic and aimed at destabilising Pakistan from the rear. Many in India, on the other hand, point the finger at Pakistan for two deadly bomb attacks on its embassy in Kabul.
Against such a difficult backdrop, what can New Delhi possibly do without complicating things further?
Several proposals are afoot but the one that the Afghans are pushing for and which is equally likely to stir things up further is an expanded training programme of the Afghan National Army by the Indian army. A small number of Afghan army officers have been coming to Indian defence institutions, such as New Delhi's National Defence College, for training under a programme that India has been running for years for several countries.
But this is a nation at war at the moment, and as retired Indian major general Ashok Mehta points out in this article for the Wall Street Journal, the Afghan army chief General Bismillah Khan is keen on sending combat units for training in India's counterinsurgency schools. The Indian army has been battling insurgencies for six decades in terrain as diverse as the hills of Nagaland in the northeast to Kashmir in the north. None of these have been snuffed out, save for the Sikh revolt in the Punjab in the 1980s, and you could argue about the success of their campaign. But they have held firm, developed tactics along the way, and rarely ever seemed to be losing ground against insurgents even at the height of the Kashmir revolt. Their experience is obviously something the Afghans would like to draw on.
But isn't this going to antagonise Pakistan further? Running courses for a few officers is one thing, but training a whole combat unit is another. A deepening military relationship between Afghanistan and India would be an uncomfortable prospect for any security planner in Pakistan. Imagine, for a moment, the Pakistani army training strike formations of the Bangladesh army.
Sanjiv,
It is not proper to mention this term as ” India’s Expanded Role” , in fact this should be known as : revival of centuries old relationship with Afghanistan. India’s role in Afghanistan is that of development , building schools, hospitals, parliament building etc , where Pakistan has been helping the terror groups and religions fanatics in Afghanistan for decades .
Pakistan has been exposed as Terrorist state and has become a nuisance before international community . All these talks of India’s expanded role in Afghanistan suffers from gross inferiority complex. A survey done by BBC and other reputed media organisations, revealed that a large majority of Afghan people not only approve but highly commend Indian role in Afghanistan. When people of Afghanistan approve Indian role, why must it bother Pakis ?
Pakistan is sponsor of global jehad and terrorism , presence of nuclear weapons in Pakistan pose great threat to survival of humanity . The international community should not be misled by false Pakistani propoganda , instead must concentrate its efforts to secure them .
26/11 – Lasting images, limited impact?
Ahead of the first anniversary of the Mumbai attacks, India’s financial hub is on heightened alert.
Metal detectors and scanners “beep” in office blocks and malls, snipers and sniffer dogs keep guard at hotels, and barricades are in place around high-profile locations. And various talking heads have made power point presentations to show the city is now safer.
In the past year, several measures have been put in place to tighten security in Mumbai, including a hub for elite commandos, and new weapons, armoured vehicles and speedboats for the police.
But how safe is the city that has been a target of bomb attacks before and remains a magnet for militants bent on hurting India’s status as an economic powerhouse?
Home Minister Palaniappan Chidambaram has said India remains just as vulnerable to another attack, but that our capacity to deal with them has improved.
But some security experts say little has changed, and the fact that there have been no major attacks in the last year has little to do with India’s improved ability, and more to do with the greater pressure on Pakistan. That it is only a matter of time before the Lashkar-e-Taiba launches another attack in India. That the revamping of the police force that is needed to secure the city has not been done.
Even in Mumbai, at the main train station where militants gunned down the most number of victims last year, door-frame metal detectors stand unmanned and bags go unchecked. And the coastline, which was easily breached by the gunmen, remains largely unprotected.
If post 9/11 USA can go in Afghanistan,bomb the country throw Taliban out all in the name of securing their homeland.. my question is y cant we Do the same thing wid all d camps in PoK and inside Pakistan? – our army knows where exactly these camps r! We also have a right to protect our homeland right?It is not an eye for an eye!Its only a slap for an eye. Pak is lucky we dont bomb them like USA
Will ban on pre-paid mobile connections further alienate Kashmiris?
Rebel violence in Indian Kashmir has fallen to its lowest level since an insurgency began nearly two decades ago.
But the central government has banned pre-paid mobile connections in the strife-torn state, leaving nearly three million subscribers disconnected over security concerns.
The ban, which comes days after Prime Minister Manmohan Singh offered fresh talks with Kashmiris, has annoyed local residents while troops deployed in the state are also distressed over getting disconnected from their families.
The ban also put around 20,000 youths in danger of finding themselves without a job.
Is the ban justified at a time when rebel violence is at its lowest and New Delhi is trying to win the hearts and minds of Kashmiris?
The ban follows reports that neither vendors nor service providers carry out thorough identity checks on buyers when issuing a connection.
Until five years ago, intelligence officials resisted attempts by the central government to lift a ban on mobile phone services in the region, fearing they could aid militants in planning attacks.
Ganesh
you should be made security consultant for chidambaram… brilliant idea ma. why I never thought about it before. keep posting mate.
Is the media going overboard in its coverage of the Ambani feud?
The war of words between the billionaire Ambani brothers took an unexpected turn when younger sibling Anil offered an olive branch to elder brother Mukesh in a bid to resolve a feud over the split of the Reliance business empire in 2005.
The widespread coverage the Indian media has given to the squabble between the brothers has led to a debate on social networking sites such as Twitter, with some accusing news organisations of playing host to a reality show or soap opera that stars the Ambani family to boost ratings.
Prominent columnist Vir Sanghvi wrote through his Twitter account virsanghvi: “Do you think some network should plan a reality show on the Ambani battle? Or are they doing it already on the news?”
But the battle between the billionaire Ambani brothers is not a manufactured product for mass entertainment, as it involves two of the world’s wealthiest men and could pose a stumbling block to India’s goal of achieving energy security.
The siblings have been involved in several disputes since the family business was split in 2005 following the death of their father, Dhirubhai Ambani, a legendary Indian business tycoon who built Reliance from scratch.
The latest of these disputes is over a deal for Mukesh Ambani’s Reliance Industries to sell gas to Anil Ambani’s Reliance Natural Resources at below-market rates as agreed in the 2005 family settlement, brokered by their mother Kokilaben.
The dispute has drawn in the government, which claims it is the rightful owner of the gas. The government can also decide who can buy gas and at what price, but it has been accused by Anil Ambani of supporting Reliance Industries.
all said & done, the name “reliance” tends to be anything but reliable…!
the media is, as well, trying to make delicious hay of trp rating while the feud goes on..on..& on.
the ultimate sufferer is alas the investor(s)-as always.
btw what was the govt doing until the brothers’ feud was heard in the court?
I do not know how authentic these studies are. There is no clear information on how the information was obtained, the sources of the information and whether any verification was done at all. Most of these surveys are done by Western countries where they inject their perceived bias and apprehension into these surveys, thereby projecting a demoniacal image of countries that do not entirely agree with their vision of the world. I’d say, based on this survey, Antarctica is the most peaceful place on earth.
If one takes a country like the USA, gun culture is legally permitted. People can own automatic and semi-automatic weapons, grenade launchers and what not. Once in a while people get shot in shopping malls and work places by frustrated or mentally deranged individuals. Safety is a big concern there. People get shot when getting mugged by school kids. Drug gangs have proliferated across big metros. Cops can shoot and kill anyone. They just have to make up the evidence. In places like Australia, racial attacks have increased. Indians are targeted and attacked. If the world is gauged from an Indian standpoint or that of an African, the rest of the world does not appear that safe.
I do not deny India’s own problems. Things were much worse before compared to now. Every country has its criminals. Therefore I am not so worried about these surveys which are amateurish at best.