maverick

An open letter - A need to moderate extremists on the forum

2011-10-24T12:21:00.000-07:00

Dear Friends,

I hope this post finds you all in good health.

I am writing to you to draw your attention towards what I feel are the falling standards on the forum. I am sure you are well aware of some of these things but I fear the magnitude of this problem is poorly understood.

My sense of discomfort with this reached a peak with that behead4peace list that a poster put up. I watched in great dismay that so many people actually added names to the list and patted each other on the back before finally *one* member said something bad about it. This is where the forum is now.

Scarcely a day goes by without a serving or retired government official being abused on the forum. Even those in the highest offices of the land are accused of all manner of treachery without a shred of proof. The most common norms of decency and decorum are completely rejected in favour of passion and vituperation.

The exact posters who persist in such bad habits are well known. They have made a name for themselves by politisising debate on key issues pertaining to national security. Everything is being turned into a Congress v/s BJP drama, and frankly people like me don't care for that.

To sensible people, the forum is a place to come and read interesting tidbits of news - a place to come and learn, possibly have an interesting discussion on matters of a topical nature. It is also a place to come a celebrate the act of being Indian. There are very few places left where this can be done now - the destructive media culture in India has wiped most of the places out. And so that is why - the forum to most of us is such a vital space.

Having the malcontent keep talking is always a good idea - that way if something utterly nasty is boiling underneath - we can first hear it from the horse's mouth - and I understand that point of view.

However allowing a form of destructive debate to dominate the forum, indeed force sensible posters to leave is not a good idea. It creates a situation where the lunatics are given the key to the asylum. (copyright Dilbert)

We in India are a very liberal people - we tolerate all manner of misbehaviour - but we all understand when someone goes too far.

Allow me to briefly recall the case of the assembly elections in Punjab in 1990. As I am sure you remember the GoI had declared a general amnesty and terrorists, criminals and history sheeters roamed the streets canvassing for votes and demanding all manner of money from ordinary people. Prior to the election the levels of violence reached truly staggering levels and the GoI was forced to cancel the election because too many candidates were killed by extremists. At that point in time, Prime Minister Narasimha Rao, instructed the relevant secretaries of the cabinet to take whatever action was necessary to prevent a repeat of the cancellation. Not long after Sri. K P. S. Gill was given a green light to undertake police operations necessary to reduce violent crime in the region.

I think we are at a similar point on the forum. A clean up is overdue. Too many good posters have been driven off by a steady stream of nonsense from the extremists and the idea of keeping the extremists talking has reached the end of its utility.

Balance has to be restored.

To borrow the phrase of Inspector Pandit in the movie Maqbool... "Shakti ka santulan avashyak hain sansar mein... aag ko pani ka dar bane rehna chahiye..."

Jai Hind,

Maverick

ps.Blogger is malfunctioning. Here is a link to the latest comment on this topic.

I am a well-wisher of Pakistan

2011-09-09T07:24:00.000-07:00

Despite what may have been rumored before - I am not anti-Pakistan.

I just dislike it when the Pakistani Army and Jihadi top brass do certain things. These people know exactly what upsets me and they know it is time to stop acting like that. The world knows the Pakistani militarists are capable of doing terrible things - we don't need constant reminders of their potential for senseless violence.

I have no problems with any other Pakistanis. From their perspective - I am a well wisher of Pakistan and I believe in being a sensible person. At times I feel I comes across as a more patriotic Pakistani than someone like Zaid Hamid (not that it takes much effort to do something like that).

It is this aspect of my thinking that prevents me from suggesting that India's posture at the border and along the LoAC be revised rapidly.

To recap - during Parakram we moved a significant amount of war material to the border. I don't want to go into how much was moved, however, I do want to say that it is not cost effective to move this stuff back to peacetime stations.

By using this material up in exercises in Rajasthan and Gujurat, we are able to achieve the dual goal of reducing the stockpile and maintaining a high level of training among our troops. As the Pakistani military attache has already witnessed, our armed forces are keen to develop into a truly networked modern strike force. This is the best way for us to achieve our national security goals without expending any excess funds.

As things stand today - we are still experiencing cross border terrorism. Some of this is on account of terrorist groups not responding to the Pakistan Army's pleas to cease violence - yet other parts are due to factors beyond anyone's control - i.e. the lure of the conflict economy. Clearly the lack of progress in the prosecution of LeT members involved in the 26/11 attacks is a sign of the struggle deep within Pakistan. Somehow it is still considered "okay" to kill Indian civilians in Pakistan - people like Ajmal Kasab still enjoy a great deal of moral support in Pakistan.

I understand that not all Pakistanis feel this way and under the Pakistani Army's leadership a struggle is underway to change mindsets. As things stand now - the possibility of a decisive confrontation between Islamists and the Pakistan Army still looms large over Pakistan.

As a well wisher of Pakistan, the most horrible scenario that comes to mind is where the Islamists take control of Pakistan's nuclear arsenal and precipitate a nuclear war that kills millions of Indians and Pakistanis.

Clearly the Indian armed forces have to be prepared for that eventuality.

Obviously - we do not want to alarm the Pakistanis to the point where they lose focus from their national problems - ex. their war on terror - but we have to do some things to be prepared for the most terrible things happening.

So now you know where I stand.

In the spirit of cooperation, lets move forward.

Anna's Brahmaastra

2011-08-15T14:24:00.001-07:00

On that fateful night in the first week of June, the late Smt. Indira Gandhi confronted the sum of all her fears. If she gave Gen. Brar and Col. Israr's men their marching orders, she would be committing to a level of coercion that had never been attempted in the history of the Republic. If she told Gen. Brar and Col. Israr's men to stay their hand, she would be effecting a moral surrender by the Government of India.

Sadly, given the intensity of emotions that this event brings up in India, we seldom discuss the calculus that went through the late Madam Prime Minister's head. And most of us do not know how she passed through that long dark and stormy night.

Today - we are faced with a similar choice.

A weapon designed for the defence of the defenceless is being pointed at the Government of India.

No form of government is perfect - democracy is not without its flaws. Protest is always welcome, but Sri. Anna Hazare has flashed the brahmastra - his willingness to carry out a fast unto death - in the Government's face.

This singular act conveys a degree of moral supremacy and commitment that is unquestioned in modern India. In the US - if someone like Rosa Parks or Rev. Martin Luther King had indicated such a desire - the President would simply have sent in a bunch of DevGru or SFOD-D people to stick a saline drip into their arm. In the UK they would simply have sent some SBS/SAS types to deal with the person.

You can't do that in India. It will be an assault on the moral foundation of the nation. India earned its freedom through precisely such fasts and such sacrifices. The GoI cannot turn on its own roots.

It is unlikely that Annasaheb will be deterred from his quest. Anna knows this is a suicide mission and he has accepted it. Anna walks the same path that countless martyrs of India's security forces have marched. Like them, Anna took an oath - and now the oath binds him to the path of no return.

Yet the Government of India can no more agree to Annasaheb's demands than it could agree to Jarnail Singh Bhindranwale's demands.

The threat of moral force does not intimidate the Government of India. The Government of India is duty bound to protect the life of a person - however disinclined the person may be to save their own life. And as long as a suicidal person does not threaten the life of another person, the Government has no cause to use coercive force.

Bombay - July 13 2011

2011-07-16T09:02:00.000-07:00

There is no point in beating around the bush here - there are no leads at all. We have absolutely nothing .

I have no idea what Sri. Maria is talking about - everything we had two days ago is turning out to be a dead end. The well is completely and utterly dry.

When the terrorists stuck in November 2008, that was bad - but what appears to have been worse - was that the deaths of the police officers went unavenged. I had feared this would happen, but at that time there was a compelling case to simply use the threat of force as a lever to secure Pakistani cooperation, and I went along with that scheme because it seemed promising.

That scheme however is insufficient to maintain the balance of terror needed to keep the city from falling apart. I deeply respect the IPC and the CrPC, these form the closest thing to a policeman's Bible, Gita or Koran in India - but what holds the peace is not the IPC or CrPC, it is what my Pathan friends would call "badal" - the law of inseparable consequence.

When the deaths of the flag officers in the police department go unavenged - it creates a highly destabilising opportunity for criminal enterprise.

The lesser Jihad of Pakistani groups is simply a criminal enterprise. I had brought this up in the posts after the 2008 attacks, but groups like LeT want to advertise their ability to "resolve conflicts" in Bombay. This means exactly what it says - there is a thriving market in murder-for-hire in Bombay and the LeT wants a piece of the action. The LeT is like a big MNC that is entering the Indian market trying to out compete all the local supari wallahs by selling their brand of paan, gutkha, tambaccu or chuna to any available bidder.

Thanks to the thriving outsourcing business in Bombay - the LeT can outsource most of its operations to local players - and if everything is locally sourced - there is no need to for any connection back to the LeT. There is plausible deniability.

I don't like this kind of MNC, and I don't like this kind of outsourcing.

I think the time for delay is past.

Even if it is only an aging Kapothka - we still need it in the air.

And it is high time "Bhai" came home.

The Abbotabad Venture

2011-05-03T11:04:00.000-07:00

I would like to start by stating plainly that India had absolutely nothing to do with this operation. The operation appears to have materialised solely on account of collaboration between the US and sections of the Pakistani establishment. The exact manner in which this operation was conducted reflects the complex and highly dynamic relationship that the US and Pakistan have. I also strongly suspect that there is a quid pro quo in place - and from a strategic perspective India should be mindful of such a possibility.

It comes as a surprise to most people that the Pakistani establishment, the pillar of the castle of Islam, would allow the Americans to kill the Jihadi leader, Osama Bin Laden on their soil. I am not too surprised. I tend to keep an open mind where the Pakistani establishment is concerned, after all we all know what happened in Amman on September 15th, 1970, and again in the Holy Harams on November 20th, 1979, and again in the July of 2007. Basically I would put nothing past the folks of Islamabad.

It is a well known fact that the US did not have sufficient evidence to link Osama Bin Laden to the Sept 11 attacks in a court of law. It did however have enough evidence to nail him in the case pertaining to the embassy bombings. It appears that a section of Pakistan's establishment accepted the evidence collected by the US as being genuine. It is very difficult to get the Pakistani establishment to do such a thing. There is a hope that Pakistan may have genuinely turned a new leaf on this and is open to examining the evidence obtained by foreign police services of criminal actions by persons residing on its soil. This kind of acceptance was impossible in the age when Jihadi fervour blinded the Pakistani establishment.

Here is why I think Jihad (and Jihadis) may have lost their shine in some sections of the Pakistani establishment:

Over the last three decades, the Pakistani establishment has watched the power of religious institutions grow to the point where it can visibly challenge the military.
There is visible criminalisation of most religious tanzeems, a fact that cannot escape anyone's notice in Pakistan.
In the last decade the Pakistan Army has fought a terrible civil war against various tanzeems in Pakistan and lost more men to Islamist violence than to any war with its so-called arch enemy - India.
The ability of the tanzeems to provide protection for key narcoeconomies is limited and the profitability of these economies is on the decline.

While this may be obvious to most in the Pakistani establishment, at least some within the establishment probably do not share a dim assessment of this situation. A good number in my opinion still cling to Hamid Gul/Aslam Beg era ideas of a wider collaboration with Islamist radicals that brings benefits to the Pakistani military. If Stephen Cohen is reading this, he may want to comment in greater detail on this aspect of things.

I do not know where the men of Miyan Company (a.k.a Musharraf's men) stand on this issue - I suspect they are probably not too keen to make their views known. Finding out their thinking on the issue is really important.

The mere presence of Gul/Beg era ideas in Pakistan is certainly good enough reason for the Americans to keep most Pakistanis out of the loop. I feel that is probably what guaranteed the success of the Abbotabad venture.

As Osama Bin Laden remains a cynosure in the eyes of many young Muslim men the world over, he sits today - even in death - at the center of an enormous "stand alone complex". The damaging potential of this "stand alone complex" should not be underestimated.

That being said, I feel any immediate repercussions of the Abbotabad venture will most likely visit upon the Pakistani establishment, the American outpost in Kabul and only then other parts of the world. I believe the Pakistani establishment will try to deny any role to play in this in front of the Jihadis, but at the same time seek credit where it can on the international media stage. In that environment, and it is likely that neither the Jihadis nor the international media will find the Pakistani statements on this issue very credible. And the Jihadis will do whatever they naturally do.

As always when the Pakistani establishment finds itself in hot water, it feels the need to splash some towards India's direction. They get off on the notion that making India suffer is a way to ease their own pain. I think the recent comments by ACM PV Naik on what lies in the realm of possibilities should be seen in this light. India seeks friendly relations with Pakistan and would really like to be left out of this sort of thing.

I feel the average Pakistani probably feels the same way that India does right now.

Unfortunately unlike India - the average Pakistani can't summon up squadrons of Su-30MKIs and legions of Para(SF) troops and Delhi Class guided missile destroyers to persuade the Pakistani establishment to pay heed to his concerns.

The Pakistani establishment is uninterested in transformational leadership

2010-12-10T06:35:00.000-08:00

When one looks at Pakistan, one sees little of comfort. Pakistan is a poster child for what not to do in a modern nation state.

I am the first to admit India is far from perfect and yet most Indians I know see Pakistan as a living example of what would happen if India went very badly wrong. Other Indians I know even suggest that we study Pakistan to find out how things could go wrong in India if we become that careless.

Leadership of society in Pakistan remains hostage to a feudalistic thinking. Irrespective of whether it is the militarised bureaucracy or mainstream democratic parties or the supposedly high-minded religious leadership - they all think like corrupt landlords and treat the Pakistani people like serfs and cattle.

The people of Pakistan, who outnumber their feudal lords by about a million to one obviously resent this state of affairs. They want a more equitable social order where they enjoy the same rights and respect as other human beings in this world. When these desires are not satisfied, the ordinary Pakistani's mind (again quite naturally) wanders into the darker spaces of the human soul.

The Pakistani establishment deliberately exploits these forays into the moral abyss . By transforming the natural frustration of the Pakistani people into an outright hatred of an external enemy, the Pakistani establishment fashions a weapon out of domestic public opinion to hold at the international community's throat.

What ordinary Pakistanis want more than water or food or medicines is a leadership that treats them with honour and provides them with basic sense of human dignity - a leadership that allows them to feel a sense of pride that revolves around who they are - and not around who they are supposed to be.

This is a gigantic shift from the way things were/are done in Pakistan.

I feel the Pakistani establishment as it currently stands cannot provide this kind of transformational leadership. The establishment is far too status quoist. The entire setup is simply keen to keep engineering terrorist acts inside or outside Pakistan to keep itself in power.

I cannot bring myself to sympathise with such behaviour.

The recent State Department cables released on the Wikileaks site bring into focus the growing sense of weariness in American observers in the region. This clarity is beneficial from India's perspective.

What is however even more telling is the Pakistani response to Cablegate. The newspapers have run every cable leak story that discredits anyone but the Pakistani military. And when confronted with the fact that the cables offer an extremely candid view of the Pakistani military and its sordid relationship to terrorist groups - the Pakistani establishment has responded with a pathetic attempt at psyops. The establishment asked its mouthpieces to go town pretending that there were cables there that were highly critical of the Indian Army and its human rights record in Kashmir. The plain stupidity of this kind of behaviour was apparent to all when these people got caught faking the cables.

Sadly even this humiliation is going to do little to change the mindset of the Pakistani establishment.

It is unclear what if anything is ever going to bring them around to the path of sanity.

The Parable of Munir Chacha

2010-08-03T04:25:00.000-07:00

I am inspired by Khalid Hosseini to write a story in his style. Needless to say - it is all fiction - do enjoy.

My first meeting with Munir chacha was when I was very young. I am told that Munir chacha, Abbu and Ammi went to school together and when I was born Munir chacha and chachi came to visit. Munir chacha's daughter was born later that year, and Abbu and Ammi went to visit. I didn't realise at that time that I would come to idolise Munir chacha or that I would join his trade. I saw him more frequently as I got older, and in each meeting we spoke longer and longer about the delicate nature of reality, the beauty of symmetry and how it implies conservation, and how merely looking at the densities can tell you so much about how things will turn out. Slowly but surely, over many years, I learned the basics from Munir chacha, and I became stronger in the faith. I think I only made the connection when one day out of the blue, Ammi remarked that she was yet to see anyone as strong in the faith as Munir chacha.

It was hard not to be drawn to the faith. When I was in school, I met Daddu. He knew I was Abbu's son, but I knew from the instant I met him that he was something quite apart from the others. We only spoke for a few minutes about how sound travels in air but it was clear that even at something as boring as a school function, Daddu never lost the sharpness of his mind. Abbu and Ammi were great followers of Daddu. They were unhappy with the way that Asef Mian ran the company and when Daddu succeed him, there were celebration among the cognoscenti.

Daddu's time at the head of the company was unfortunately too short to make a real difference, and he was eventually succeeded by Altaf Bhai. I knew Altaf Bhai's son, he was a good fellow, very down to earth, also very strong in the faith. During Altaf Bhai's time, the company actually made progress in what many thought would be it twilight years. Our neighbour Ajju once told me that he feared that the company would simply shut down altogether. Ajju was very close to Daddu, and the Daddu's star was not on the ascendant.

I learned much later that Daddu and his friend Thevar had gone up to the Polymath and spoken their mind. Thevar had gotten carried away and said something that was not his place to speak about and the Polymath had become offended. The Polymath and his nagging wife who he refused to ignore had different priorities, and they simply did not have time to deal with the issues that Daddu and Thevar brought up. Perhaps this was the cause of all ills.

Then suddenly one day the dawn came, the Polymath and his wife went home, and Altaf Bhai was replaced by Guruji. I had never met Guruji but Abbu and Ammi were suddenly all smiles. They said a ray of hope had emerged from the darkness and the path of light had emerged. In his first khutba jumma, Guruji had read out the riot act to the idolators and the kafirs parading as momeen. He warned that the company would do well to return to what it was supposed to be doing in the first place and not waste time on frivolities. Clearly the company had a long way to go before things were fixed, but once Guruji spoke, there was no choice in the matter. Abbu and Ammi returned home that day convinced that the heir to Jehangir had finally emerged.

I saw Thevar occasionally in my college days. He had the most painful habit of reading from his diaries instead of carefully weighing his words in measured speech. It was stream-of-consciousness writing, made for interesting material if you were attempting psychoanalysis but was dreadfully dull otherwise. Unlike so many of my classmates, however, I kept silent - I knew who Thevar really was. My classmates weren't that bright and openly spoke of their impatience with this. To them- Thevar was another old man trying to lead a congregation that was fast losing its faith. On that terrible day, Thevar directly offered a job to the best students in our college and to my disgust, they turned him down on his face. I loved my college and my friends, but this was intolerable insolence. Only someone of Thevar's pure soul could withstand such humiliation -a lesser man would have the offenders strung up on the university gate.

Little did anyone know that all perceptions of Thevar would change soon. For while my classmates zealously sought minor positions in firangi madrassas, Thevar and Daddu were laying the ground work for a show of faith unlike any that people had seen before. I learned much later that Sikandar Mian, Munir Chacha, Ajju, Shijju, Amina bibi, Kainad bibi, and many others were already told to prepare for the zarb-e-momin. I saw less and less of them now as I was away from home. Abbu and Ammi were either clueless as usual, or perhaps they knew and didn't see it fit to tell me.

Finally in the hottest days of summer, when Firdausi felt the winds blew in the right direction - he gave Thevar and Daddu the go-ahead. Guruji, Munir Chacha, Ajju, Shijju etc... worked night and day to make it happen. There was one other person in all this, Maulviji. Nominally Maulviji was Thevar's right hand. Some said Maulviji was close to Asef Mian's cousin, others said Thevar trusted Maulviji completely. I believed they were all wrong, you see - Maulviji had once been Agha Sahab's man.

Men are mortal, and it is never a good idea to compare them to things more permanent but sometimes I feel it does help. If the world is like the night sky, Thevar was the Southern Cross, Guruji was Polaris and Daddu was the Moon. But Agha Saheb - he was the Sun. Once you become Agha Sahab's man, you simply never stopped being one. I feel that summer, Daddu and Thevar worked largely in the night and confided in very few people. I feel whatever was really done in the dark, it was known probably only to Guruji, Sikandar Mian and Munir Chacha. The rest - even Agha Sahab were probably in the dark.

When the ground shook, Firdausi composed a poem and recited it from the minibar . The world looked on awe. Whatever Thevar and Daddu's plans were, I suspect Agha Sahab had his own plans and Maulviji set them into motion almost as soon as the ground stopped shaking.

Ofcourse as with anything else, there was a debate. It cropped up when Sikandar Mian, Munir Chacha and the rest were at Firdausi house for tea. Sikandar Mian and Munir Chacha felt debate is good, I agree with them that our faith strengthens when we question it. But in such debate, misfortune saw opportunity. Soon tongues began to wag that something unfortunate had happened and we were all living in a world of illusions. A day after the meeting with Sikandar Mian and Munir Chacha, Altaf Bhai and Asef Mian invited themselves to poet's house and recited to him all sorts of stories. Unfortunately for them, Firdausi had seen many summers and many winters. He was not one to be shaken by doubt, he politely listened to what they had to say and when they were done with their tea, he showed them the door.

Tragically most others were not so strong as Firdausi. Doubt began in a single breath but spread like a wildfire. The consequences of this fire were most terrible. All of them, Sikandar Mian, Munir Chacha, Ajju, Shijju, Amina bibi, Kainad bibi, and the hardworking others all got royally shafted. Despite their efforts, all they got was nominal acknowledgment. There was no reward for their actions, where ilm should have ruled, siyasat took hold. Sikandar Mian was exiled, sent to work outside Hamid Seth's house, Munir Chacha was shunted to a corner of the company. Abbu and Ammi looked very unhappy again and all this while Marikh hung boldly in the night sky. It was as if Allah was mocking us - "So you think you have faith? well let's see then - shall we..."

Some years ago, Agha Sahab died and I can only imagine how terrible that must have felt for Maulviji. The mantle of the Sun now fell on Agha Saheb's old friend, Masood Saheb. Not long after, Firdausi left and his place was taken by the Polymath's nagging wife. Fears that had been gnawing at people insides began to find voice. Eventually a proposed marriage with the scion of a distant imperial lineage brought everything out into the open. Now even the random rowdies in the Mohalla knew about the concerns that had heretofore remained in the khanqah.

I was appalled at the way things were proceeding. I can't stand matters of the spiritual nature being discussed in public by pretenders of knowledge. I didn't know what to do and when possible I simply ignored what was being said - hoping (incorrectly as it turned out) that all this would simply go away when the awam tired of it.

On the face of it, the marriage proposal to the khan-i-khanan's son was sound, but so were the fears that it raised. This created a difficult situation. As it turned out that unlike his predecessor, Masood Saheb had many enemies and when the debates became public, knives came out and the blood-letting began. The absence of Agha Sahab and Firdausi was strongly felt, but I wonder if either could have controlled this carnage.

Maulviji now openly led the charge and random mawalis began to contribute to his words. A strain of vituperation entered the debate, and with Altaf Bhai and Asef Mian egging people on, Daddu, Guruji, Thevar, Munir Chacha, and Sikandar Mian became targets of public ire. I don't know what was right, but I felt that after all they had done for the faith - all they got was abuse at the hands of an enraged public stoked by those with vested interests. Daddu, Guruji, Thevar and Sikandar Mian were all forced to defend themselves.

In time the rage subsided, and the faithful returned to the mosque to hear the words of the faith spoken, but the damage was done. Guruji and Daddu faded away. Sikandar Mian continued to work outside Hamid Seth's house but even more quietly than before.

Ajju, Shijju and Kainad bibi retired around the time that Ammi did. Now Ammi and Kainad bibi are planning to spend their retirement studying the faith together or perhaps shopping together in the bazaar - whichever catches their fancy.

And Munir Chacha decided he had enough. Much as he respected Daddu and Guruji, he had joined up to become strong in the faith. Siyasati maamlat were not something that interested him. He could have stayed on if he wanted, but he too left - before his time. No accolades, no parties... nothing. As quietly as he could, he went to his home in the that tiny mountain town to live out the rest of his days with his family.

Perhaps that is why I respect him so much more now.

The Upside Down of Nuclear Power

2010-05-19T04:55:00.001-07:00

Thanks to the magic of Google, anyone with basic internet skills can write a guide book. During the recent debate on the Indo-US nuclear deal, a cottage industry of self-appointed experts churned out opinion editorials on all sorts of things from technical matters to economics to security. A soup of acronyms boiled over and the result was a terrible mashup of misconceptions, bad ideas and unviable rubbish.

I wish to be very clear for the benefit of jaded readers in this field - The Upside Down of Nuclear Power - is NOT like that.

Someone who knows what they are talking about, can take facts and opinions, and place them in the context of a workable plan of action. The author of The Upside Down of Nuclear Power has done exactly that. He has put in a lot of effort into keeping the vocabulary clear - but there is an unbroken chain that connects all the words in the book - the basic policy statement that - nuclear power is the best form of baseload generation for India .

Those of us who are familiar with GoI literature on such topics will instantly realise that this policy idea is completely independent and distinct from anything the DAE has said on this issue. The DAE's public posture on this issue has been limited to positions set out in the Nehru-Bhabha era i.e. the department only seeks to reduce the technology gap between India and the developed world by building new energy solutions that are responsive to the country's needs.

Very little is known about how India's present electricity needs will evolve. Currently a wide disparity exists between electricity consumption in the urbanised, industrialised, Indian rimland and the rural, agricentric mainland. Everyone acknowledges that this kind of disparity is also echoed in the developmental differences and everyone wants the developmental disparity to heal. However no clear ideas exist on the impact of developmental reforms on electricity needs. Against that backdrop a robust reliable baseload generation option based on locally available "green" fuels makes sense.

However the debate on nuclear power in India is hostage to public perceptions of the DAE's competence to deliver on stated goals. Heretofore the DAE has had difficulty importing nuclear fuels and faced severe technology development hurdles. The lack of fuel and technology development problems have conspired to reduce the quality of nuclear generation low. This has ensured that the position of nuclear power's place in the generation pecking order remained low.

The author appears to have realised that DAE's own efforts on the technology side in last fifty years, and the improved situation vis-a-vis fuel supplies after the Indo-US nuclear deal have completely changed the game. Also growing sci-tech competence in India will significantly reduce the time associated with technology development cycles. This fact is missed by most advocates of renewable energy generation in India.

Despite enthusiastically advocating nuclear power generation in India, the author does not shrink away from discussing the concerns about health safety and environmental degradation. While there is obviously no prescriptive approach that will sufficiently address all the issues that have been raised, there is no attempt being made to hide them. The discussion on nuclear liability issues is quite stark. Try getting such honesty from the sea of people that advocate carbon energy usage.

Similarly the book acknowledges the development costs that come with the advanced fuel cycles proposed in India. However as the author is an economist, the costs of this are subtly contrasted with costs of similar initiatives to reduce emissions from carbon energy sources. That is the kind of thinking that allows you to look past the usual "sticker price" appeals.

All in all, I found the book to be a refreshingly honest affair, written in a style that can be read by ordinary people. Keeping a complex discussion on this topic readable by non specialists without resorting to hype is very difficult and I feel the author has succeeded in that task.

My only minor gripe with this book is the cover, which is somewhat quirky. I feel that it distracts the reader from the book.

That said, I enjoyed the book and I hope you will too.

Links between tribal structures and the Jihadi organism in Pakistan

2010-03-18T07:14:00.001-07:00

I am told that the "Jihadi Organism" in Pakistan, (the suicide bombers, the fidayeen, their handlers, and their bosses in the Tanzeems) is composed simply of homicidal sociopaths or maniacs bent on confronting the authority figures and imposing their brand of Islam on Pakistan. These people are preying on the poor or misguided youth in Pakistani society and luring them into a life of violent crime.

This seems to be kind of true. It is self evident that Pakistani society is weak and that a number of extremist organisations have sprung up in cracks left by ill conceived government schemes in Pakistan. Also over the past decade, the post 9/11 flip-flop on the role of Islam in Pakistan has left most people disoriented. After Lal Masjid, the traditional authority structure - comprising the Deobandi Ulema and the Pakistan Army is broken. The economy is collapsing and inflation in Pakistan is out of control. The Pakistan Army is using increasing levels of coercion against anyone who confronts it.

However then I ask myself the following question:

"Why have has the "Jihadi Organism" - not gone all out against the Pakistan Army?"

Whenever I ask this question, I am told by all sorts of people - that the ISI has a way of moderating the actions and dynamics of the "Jihadi Organism". I am told that this regulation scheme that the ISI uses involves some sort of control over the availability of information, arms and finances for the various tanzeems.

I find it curious that such a rudimentary mechanism alone is sufficient to control the jihadis - these are people who are willing to blow themselves up why would they care about material goods.

Neither the accounts of jihadi lives in India, Pakistan and elsewhere, nor the through numerous accounts of jihadi activity in Pakistan, nor books on the role of Islam in Pakistani society seem to really explain how the ISI might control these people.

I was reading my copy of Crossed Swords the other day, and I came across Shuja Nawaz's words on the role of tribal dynamics in the Pakistani Army. It set me thinking about the role of that same tribal structure in the jihadi organism in Pakistan.

It may be recalled that the tribal narrative is very strong in Pakistan. Everyone is a part of a kabila - a small group of people that traces its ancestry to some Islamic personality of note. Every member of the tribe is interdependent on the others, and the small group commands the loyalty of all individuals. With the threat of excommunication it enmeshes them in a localised conflict structure. Everyone is a participant in the tribal fight and partakes in the war booty. The tribes are largely self sufficient and only build into a nation when they come together for a joint attack against an external hostile.

This peculiar notion of unity in the face of an external threat, uniquely predisposes the tribes towards accepting only a militarised society *external* to the tribe. A weird consequence of this is that in the eyes of the tribes, the military legitimises the state (as opposed to the other way around elsewhere). Sans an external threat, there is no reason for the state to exist.

Traditionally tribes are male dominated, and so the militarised Pakistani identity structure emphasizes the male ego. From this perspective, the Nazariya Pakistan, Jinnah and other Pakistani icons are irrelevant. What matters is family first, kin next and then the local tribal affiation, and so on and only the notion of a Jang (a war) keeps us all together. This order exists irrespective of whether the person is a soldier in the army, or a jihadi in a tanzeem.

Each member of the tribe seeks a higher placement within the tribe - their apparent position in any external (to the tribe) structure is merely a reflection of the position inside the tribe itself. Each tribe fights for a higher place in the militarised organisation of the state.

It is reasonable to say that the suicide bombers and fidayeen are urban or rural social dropouts - i.e. people who on account of some defect lost all social mobility. However the people that recruit and train these suicide bombers and fidayeen are *not* dropouts. These people are in fact quite the opposite - they are social well developed and contextualised individuals from relatively well placed tribes in Pakistan.

Another way of seeing this is that no one remembers the name of the suicide bomber or fidayeen, but the Tanzeem members are well known persons. While their exact operational history is a secret, their social power is flaunted in the open. Their tribes are socially dominant, have better access to land and water resources and their kin demand large dowries from prospective brides. Any success on part of the Tanzeem member begets a monetary baksheesh and social prestige for their respective tribe.

I sense that this would be the natural point for the ISI to locate its control mechanism. Using its position in the militarised superstructure of the tribes, the ISI would simply reserve the right to discredit any person in the tanzeem organisation. This loss of credit would be felt instantly by the individual and his tribe and that would serve as a major deterrent to a person deviating from a tight script or acting out their personal frustrations with the Army's way of doing things. This is why all that talk of "3000 suicide bombers ready to be launched at the TTP's command" will remain essentially empty.

As long as the Pakistan Army is able to maintain a semblance of dominance of national affairs, the tribes will naturally look towards it as their preceptor. If the Army can't maintain the appearance of a death grip on national affairs, the tribes will not respect them - and the disaffected Jihad generation will move in for the kill.

I wish to state that this idea I am posing here is my own and it is still in the realm of pure conjecture. It may be possible for national services to examine the validity of this idea by studying existing data on tanzeems and tribes in Pakistan.

I welcome comments on the same.

Send Shuja Ahmed Pasha to New Delhi

2008-11-28T17:43:00.000-08:00

that is not a request.

The perils of not taking responsibility for your actions

2008-08-01T06:38:00.001-07:00

You get a call from your friend, and he says stir up trouble on my account. So you do it - you call your contacts in a website, you call your acquaintances in the media and tell them things that they need to hear in order to stir up trouble. They hear you and they go ballistic with their hype.

Soon the pot of trouble comes to a boil.

In all the excitement of doing things - you lose sight of why your friend wants you to stir up trouble in the first place and you get carried away.

Between you and your friend - the lack of attention to detail - ensures that the pot of trouble boils over and now you and your friend have more trouble than either of you are worth.

So tomorrow by some chance your friend does manage to sit on a high chair.

Having lavishly decked himself in robes that rival Shah Jahan's, he sits in regal splendor upon the peacock throne - atop a mountain of endless flattery and ridiculous exaggeration.

Now from this peak of power - he lets forth the words of his first imperial firman " Bismillah ur Rehmaan ur Rahim - I am the nasir e-amir al mumin and in his name I rule this powerfully armed kingdom ...".

Within the ranks of the courtiers, a murmer ensues and a voice in the back calls out "Alampanah, no ... from what we have heard on the internet - your friend who stirred up trouble on your behalf - says - we have no arms and everything fizzled ".

Your friend on the peacock thone nervously fidgets with the pearls in his necklace cautiously adjusting the Kohinoor as it sits atop his crown - and replies "well... my friend who stirred up trouble also said that it is possible to make them unfizzle".

Now the voice in the back of diwan-e-khas says "Sarkar - your friend who stirred up trouble - says the country is filled with incompetents - perhaps you should ask your friend who has stirred up trouble to come and unfizzle it himself - since he knows so much from reading the internet...but Jahapanah, until such a time as that is done - you have no arms and no legs".

Now your friend is taken aback - the comfortable malmal ki razai under him has just been uncermoniously pulled out and the Great Emperor's tashreef now sits on the floor of the Diwan-e-khas - worse than naked - without dignity and shorn of power.

The problem is that the pot of trouble cannot be unstirred.

So ultimately - those that start trouble must be consumed by it.

I say again - take responsibility for your actions.

Admit publicly that you allowed political considerations to overcome your judgement and that you lied to service a private political agenda and in doing so forefeited the moral authority that accompanies your position as a moderator - and for God's sake resign your moderation privileges.

This only gets worse from this point on - fall on your sword and spare us the task of watching a far more grisly sight - the your friend - the Emperor-wannabe - drawing and quartering you to save his own skin.

A sensible way to run a website dedicated to debate about India's national security affairs

2008-07-14T15:07:00.001-07:00

I have been thinking about this issue after exchanges with several of my readers on the last thread.

Presently, we are confronting the aftermath of a terrible moderation failure inside the forum. However in the context of discussions on the moderation failure, a number of issues have come out - pertaining to the role of politics, to the role of the "original conception" of the website, and the addictive nature of power - just to name a few.

Though I confess my heart is heavy after this episode and I feel a lot of my own dreams about the forum and website have been crushed - I would like to have something positive come from this mess.

Needless to say - these are my views - not those of anyone I may or may not know.

To begin - the problems we are seeing are the direct result of a lust for power. Power corrupts, it removes the sense of balance that keeps personal ambition in check. In order to run a website like this - one must create instutional safeguards against power lust.

A relatively simple scheme to guard against this tendency is to have a single fixed time period for forum administrators. The knowledge that the stay in a position of power is a limited one time affair, will deter abuse.

While this places great pressure on the system to select new moderators, there is a way to mitigate this. If one creates a tenure scheme by which any poster who has posted for longer than a certain number of years, and has made certain (significant) contributions to the website in the form of publications, organisation etc... will automatically be up for promotion to moderator rank.

Once such a poster has accepted moderator rank - they will be bound by a rigid code of conduct which will cover their public utterances on political, sectarian and ethnic issues. The power of such moderators will be clearly defined and administrative actions will have to fit a transparent format. A transparently moderated debate will eliminate the need for special management procedures that have hitherto been in vogue.

The next question is - what will happen to the old moderators and founding fathers?

I propose that the founding fathers form a board of governors. A governing board like this could focus on the development of the wider interests of the website. Barring extreme situations, there would be no reason for the members of the board to intervene in the running of the website or the forum though they would be free to contribute in any way of their choosing as ordinary members. If the founding fathers can remain on the forum as ordinary members - then surely the newest of the newbies will learn a great lesson in humility - a lesson they will carry forth into their stay as moderators.

I suggest that upon retirement the former moderators and site administrators (if they so choose) be invited to stay on the forum as ordinary members. Having renounced their moderator rank - they would be free of the burden that it carries. Their presence on the forum, would effectively create a large local pool of knowledge and enrich the collegiate atmosphere necessary to mentor newer and younger members joining the forum.

With adequate mentorship and moderation - I do not see why such an experiment would not succeed in producing a vibrant environment for sensible debate on India's national security issues.

On the practice of "Isharaabaazi"

2008-07-04T14:14:00.001-07:00

Hi,

A discussion has come up in the earlier thread about the use of "isharaas" or indirect suggestion/speculation/comment to convey points in the debate on the forum. The "isharaa" technique is particularly powerful because it holds out the implicit claim of detailed and verifiable knowledge. Backed by a serious body of research and peer reviewed publications, a speculative framework can be constructed and in the right place and time - a speculation can open new fields of thinking. However on the flip side - a poorly constructed argument can also be inflated with "isharaas" to seem substantial.

Despite this drawback - I don't see how one can avoid this practice as a whole as speculation is a very big part of debate.

I do have the following concerns:

1) I don't like the idea of this "isharaa" technique being used against GoI. I recall a NPA blogsite that carried "isharaas" about the similarity between compounds used by DAE to refine fissile material and compounds used to make methamphetamines. While I do not doubt that an NPA blogger could be very well versed in both those things - i.e. making meth and making fissile material - the "isharaa" was aimed to suggest that DAE was in the drug trade. I fail to see how this kind of "isharaa" is useful to Indians. Can the supporters of this technique please comment on how such a pitfall is to be avoided?

2) The text of the "isharaas" often targets Western MNCs and indirectly accuses them of unfair and improper business practices. While the indirect nature of the comments makes a libel charge difficult to sustain, it may be recalled that Indian MNCs can be subject to a similar campaign of villification. This campaign is likely to be even more effective given that most Indian MNCs can't buy the kind of publicity that western MNCs routinely do. Can the proponents of the "isharaa" technique please provide a prescription against such a use?

3) The sum of several "isharaas" can add up in unintended ways. For example, someone makes an "isharaa" to indicate that Agni has X-range with Y kg warhead. Someone else steps in and "isharaas" that a *computer* simulation suggests that the Agni's range can be extended from X- X++ with a Y-- warhead. Then someone else comes in and "isharaas" that with X++ range and Y-- warheads, an entire city in a land far far far far away can be wiped off the face of this earth provided a Y-- capability warhead can be built. Soon the security services of this nation far far far away develop a sense of concern about all these "isharaas" flying around and when Secy to the GoI visits this country, the security people ask him/her "so what is with the Agni, we hear you are planning to hit us?". Can the people who use this "isharaa" technique please tell me how they intend to contain a widening of the "isharaa"sphere?

I am confused as to how this "isharaa" technique is entirely harmless.

I remain open minded on this issue.

Where should the lines be drawn on internet discussions of strategic affairs?

2008-06-18T11:07:00.000-07:00

Dear Friends,

I have been asked to summarise my views on this topic by an old friend.

What I present here is my opinion alone and not that of anyone I may or may not know.

I feel internet debates tend to get very heated and it is possible for people to lose sight of important things. In the recent fiasco on the forum, we have had a small taste of the kinds of problems this can cause. With this incident in the background and I want to say something that people can remember going into the future.

I think any public discussions which use/provoke the use of unsourced information or invite speculation or comments from non-specialists about the detailed functioning of a nuclear, biological, or chemical device, warhead or delivery system are detrimental to India's national interests.

I say this because I believe such discussions are bad because :

1) they promote personal attacks on the scientists in India,

2) they delve into issues where the GoI cannot respond due to proliferation sensitivity and national security issues, and

3) they make it look like Indian techies in the US are secretly learning how to build a nuclear bomb while dreaming of challenging the US with it.

Recently on the forum, unsourced information was used to attack the credibility of the Indian scientists who made the bomb. While we have no answers to "why this was done" - we do know that this generated tremendous friction inside the forum. A barrage of personal insults and degrading language was used to address the DAE, the PMO and the members of the National Guidance Council and an attempt was made to assault the credibility of the scientists who worked on the bomb in India.

Not long after this assault, a group of people tried to tease out details about India's nuclear options with very leading discussions on the issue of non-explosive testing and weapons related computer simulations.

After watching a number of posters on the forum doing the NPA's work for them, we saw a large number of Indian technolgists talking about knowledge they had gleaned while in the US, about the workings of a WMD and all the while there were a number of posters who simultaneously talked about "360 degree deterrence" and "Agni Long Range". These posters appeared to be completely oblivious to the message such a discussion was sending - that Indian techies in the US on various pretexts were "figuring" out how make big bombs that challenged the US . The implications of such talk for thousands of Indians earning a living in the science and technology sector in the US was completely ignored by irresponsible forum leaders and excitable posters who all claimed to be well-meaning Indians.

Frankly, as an Indian, I found this situation disgusting and shameful.

I attribute the bulk of this mess to a moderation failure on the forum, specifically, the moderation team failed to grasp the damage that this kind of thing does to India's national interests and there appeared to be a lack of checks and balances inside the forum to deal with situations arising from an administrator acting in an imbalanced fashion.

Moderation failures of this kind greatly diminish the forum's value as a place for constructive debate.

I do not know what the future holds. I hope we learn from this mistake - and come up with better ways of debating our national interest.

Nuclear Power Options For India

2008-06-08T08:53:00.001-07:00

Everyone wants to see nuclear power in India.

It is a known fact that we do not have proven reserves of Uranium to do this even with a closed fuel cycle.

Ultimately anything we do - right now - is going to have to involve import of Uranium.

We have two choices:

- Import LEU from somewhere and they pay for the PWRs to run it. Done this way - everything from the LEU to the PWR will be under international lock-and-key.

- Import Natural Uranium from somewhere and run it in existing/expanded PHWRs. Done this way - the fuel and the spent fuel rods will have to be maintained under lock and key but the technology required to make electricity will be entirely under our control.

At the end of the day, as long as we plan any sort of independence in the nuclear arena, the NPA are going to come after us and there are *always* going to be technology control norms in place.

Today with people from the Carter Adminstration still calling the shots inside the NPA community - outdated ideas like stalling reprocessing projects internationally are still in vogue. As soon as the American reprocessing facility gets off the ground, I imagine these ideas will give way to new thinking in the NPA and a more permissive attitude will emerge towards reprocessing.

We need to be placed to secure international market access at that point. With spent fuel rods sitting in India and with proven FBR and AHWR technology, I think we will be able to offer competitive pricing on reprocessing related services.

It is too late to fix the "temporary short fall" with reactors running at 50% capacity factor - we are bang in the middle of it - led here by the utterly self defeating debate on places like the forum.

Technical comments relating to testing, and simulation

2008-05-22T08:03:00.000-07:00

I am attempting to parallel the discussion on the forum. I will add to this list as the discussion progresses.

I am reproducing my comment from a previous thread.

Usually in an high energy physics experiment, you have a beam and a target and then you have an array of detectors situated around the event site. Whenever the beam is turned on - the accelerated particles in the beam strike the target and produce exotic conditions that do not exist in normal matter.

Such collisions create a spray of nuclear fragments which strike the detectors surrounding the target. In order to figure out the details of the collision - data collected from various sets of detectors has to be carefully reconciled and usually this requires a really complicated audit of each detector and its performance.

In any high energy physics experiment - there is an immensely involved theoretical framework to describe what sorts of fragments will be created in a collision. Usually theories of the physics underlying a collision are tested using computer simulations. People who do these simulations usually act and talk like they know what is going to happen when the beam collides with the target. However, at the end of the day - everything they say is just the result of a simulation - which could be wrong or right.

At the end of the day - every simulation only very delicately mirrors the experimental conditions and it is a highly involved and time consuming task to reconcile the results of the simulation with experimental signatures obtained from the detector.Typically - this sort of work takes many many years at places like CERN or Brookhaven or Fermi lab etc... Often times promising theories of what really happened are rejected by new suggestions that emerge in hindsight.

In each experiment - the physicists charged reconciling the results of the experiment to the results of the simulation are hostage to the amount of time the beam is up and running. The longer the beam stays on - the more accurate is the statistical sampling of the collision processes. Reconciling theory and experiments with with low statistical data require decades of experience in this kind of work and no amount of computer modelling is a substitute for experience in picking out good physics.

In general, anyone can poke holes in the detection scheme, the simulation results, and the data analysis. That is easy to do - the hard part is to suggest viable alternatives to interpret the data or suggest a way to use the existing experimental setup to gain insight into the underlying physics. Usually making that kind of commentary requires a lot of experience and exposure to experimental physics and someone who does a PhD in theoretical physics does not necessarily *automatically* have the background needed for this kind of work. Please understand a kid in 1st standard will tell you - "you need to do this experiment again" or "you need a bigger accelerator" etc... but this does not constitute a scientific peer review of any kind.

Ultimately I feel a nuclear test most analogous to an HEP accelerator experiment where the beam can only be turned on intermittently due to cost issues and where only a limited number of people have access to all the information needed to interpret the results fully. In any lab there are usually as many theories of the experiment as there are physicists willing to sit over a cup of coffee. This is the hallmark of a good lab - motivated people indulging in spirited discussion. It is all too easy for scientists in their excitement to demand more beam time and more detectors but ultimately the big boss of the lab has to reconcile the costs of this kind of stuff to the needs of the political system. That is the Boss's job description.

*** Start of comments on present discussion ***

1) Taking soil samples from the area does not imply "doubting the results of the test".

Typically you maximise the amount of information that you can collect from a test event and the soil samples represent an indirect gauge for what happened in the event. You combine information from various measurments to draw a consistent picture of the physics of the event. This is not unusual - this is infact extremely sensible experimental practice. As to whether this is/not done in other countries where tests are conducted - I cannot comment on that.

Per R.C's article on SAAG

" The post - shot radioactivity measurements [22] on samples extracted from the thermonuclear test site have confirmed that the fusion secondary gave the design yield."

Here reference 22 is : “Post-shot radioactivity measurements on samples extracted from thermonuclear test site” by S.B. Manohar, B.S. Tomar, S.S. Rattan, V.K. Shukla, V.V. Kulkarni and Anil Kakodkar, BARC Newsletter, No.186, July 1999.

" From a study of this radioactivity and an estimate of the cavity radius, confirmed by drilling operations at positions away from Ground Zero, the total yield as well as the break-up of the fission and fusion yields could be calculated. A comparison of the ratios of various activation products to fission products for the 15 kt device and for the 45 kt thermonuclear device also shows that these ratios are in agreement with the expected fusion yield in the thermonuclear device."

Furthermore the article also says:

"As mentioned earlier, we have not given the fusion-fission breakup and, since we have not given the composition of the materials used nor their quantitites, for reasons of proliferation sensitivity as mentioned earlier, no one outside the design team has data to calculate this fission-fusion yield breakup or any other significant parameter related to fusion burn."

2) The claim that a boosted fission *device* was tested is made in R.C's article on SAAG.

"The thermonuclear device tested on May 11 was a two-stage device of advanced design, which had a fusion-boosted fission trigger as the first stage and a fusion secondary stage which was compressed by radiation implosion and ignited. For reasons of proliferation sensitivity, we have not given the details of the materials used in the device or their quantities. Also, our nuclear weapon designers, like nuclear weapon designers all over the world, have not given the fusion component of the total yield for our thermonuclear test."

We did not have the luxury of testing the FBF core separately from the two-stage device.

The article then goes on to say

"We tested our thermonuclear device at a controlled yield of 45 kt because of the proximity of the Khetolai village at about 5 km, to ensure that the houses in this village will suffer negligible damage. All the design specifications of this device were validated by the test. Thermonuclear weapons of various yields upto around 200 kt can be confidently designed on the basis of this test."

Furthermore,

"Thermonuclear weapons of various yields upto around 200 kt can be confidently designed on the basis of this (my comment Shakti I) test."

The Hon. Webmaster is technically correct that per GoI official statements, what was tested on May 11, was a two stage device with a boosted fission device as a primary, and not a "boosted fission warhead".

There is no information available in the public domain that sheds light on what RC's comment about scaling up the yeilds means. You could say that the boosted fission primary design could be optimised to achieve ~ 200kT of yeild by achieveing a cleaner fission burn or you could say that that India needs to light up the second pure fusion stage and get to ~200kT.

Consequently Indian nuclear weapons development remains a black box to external observers.

I think the debating position that the Hon. Webmaster has been taking is - we need a pure fusion burn to get to higher yeilds. I am opposing that point of view.

There is no debate on the fact that no *warhead* of the "200kT" yeild has been tested. There is also no disagreement on the fact that no *device* exceeding 40-50kT has been tested.

3) Discussions of the depth of burial, size of crater/retarc, teleseismic estimation are too sensitive to the seismic details of the site.

The seismic details of the site, the height of the water table etc... at Pokharan have never been released to the press. No discussion has been made public regarding the evironmental impact of nuclear tests in the region. What exact impact these may have had on the choice of the burial depth cannot be stated at this time. In his article on SAAG, RC alludes to a number of considerations - eg. the welfare of Khetolai residents, venting of the cavity etc... playing a role in the determining the depth of burial. It is therefore unreliable/not a trivial matter to extend things like the depth of burial to notions of what the design yeild of the devices may have been.

The point about the shaft having been dug earlier is well made. It could also be that the considerations at the time of digging the shaft and the considerations in 1998 were different.

4) The term "wargaming" is too vague.

It means any number of things. A game can have a detailed, intricate and involved calculation (of questionable accuracy) involving hundreds of weapons. A game can also have a fairly simple (perhaps "overly simple") calculation involving only one notional nuclear weapon.

Within the framework of deterrence - a publicly played wargame has utility in a specific context.

For example, if a government chooses to publicly entertain wargames involving large nuclear arsenals vis-a-vis a specific adversary - they will make public the detailed information necessary for the adversary to reach the conclusions it wants.

Alternatively, if a government wants to only have a simpler game played in public, it will release information consistent with only one notional nuclear weapon.

It is not a simple matter to transit between these two game scenarios in a serious academic exercise and it is a very nauseating to go back and forth between these in a single conversation.

4) B. K. Subbarao's point about interference effects is incorrect.

Interference effects are detectable in a particular wavelength range and are sensitive to the coupling between the surrounding medium and device yeild. Unless you know all those things, you can't make any seismic estimates of the events nor can you make statements about the nature of interference effects.

5) V. Sunder's analysis was corroborative regarding demonstrated yeilds but not sufficient to make statments about the design yeild.

I was one of the people who reviewed the paper by Ramana, Thundyil and Sunder. The paper was an accurate survey of available literature on the yeilds. V. Sunder's analysis supported the idea that the yeilds stated by DAE were achieved. It is not possible with the available information to refine the analysis beyond this point to make accurate guesses as to what designs were actually comprised of.

Ramana, Thundyil and Sunder may have had guesses about the design yeilds, but at the time they chose not to include it in the publication. If he has subsequently changed his mind, the thought process that led up to that work is (afaik) not reflected in published work.

Also it may be noted that the paper by Ramana, Thundyil and Sunder was poorly recieved by the NPA community as it contradicted their basic contention that the tests were a complete failure.

If the authors are keen to revise their previous publication, they should consider writing up a complete manuscript and submitting it to Current Science.

The Jaipur Carnage: Search for Answers Will Take Time

2008-05-17T09:09:00.001-07:00

I wish to start by offering my condolences to the families of the people who suffered in the recent blasts in Jaipur.

A police investigation is underway, and from available media reports on the investigation - it appears that perpetrators shifted some elements of the modus operandi. It is not clear to me if this was simply a ruse to throw off investigators or if this is an actual shift in the network of groups that form "Terror Inc."

Establishing the actual chain of responsibility for such events is always difficult at best and it will take time - I urge people to be patient.

I wish to remind people that if this terror is perpetrated from Pakistan - the overall aim will be to polarise the Indian public opinion. There is very well established Hindu-Muslim divide in India and there is an industry of sorts dedicated to exploiting that. Old timers may recall that during the 1993 blasts in Mumbai - the objective of the Pakistani participation was the same - to exploit the Hindu-Muslim divide to secure a more positive disposition towards Pakistan among India's Muslims. If one is serious about defeating the perpetrators of Pakistani sponsorred terrorism - then one has to remove religious animosity and hatred from one's heart.

Let also put it in a more practical way - targetting India's Muslims does not make the police's job easier. It only create more mistrust and breeds animosty - on the whole it does not help us fight this problem.

I note that people in their rush to discuss things are forgetting that press coverage is the oxygen that most terrorist groups thrive on. There is talk of devising "comprehensive strategies" to deal with the "problem of terrorism" and deal with things on a "war" footing. Perhaps a media silencing strategy should form a part of the comprehensive solution. I think CM Raje's idea of setting up mechanisms to enchance the communication between State and Central counter terrorism resources is a reasonable one. It may be worthwhile for the IT gurus to think about that.

Aside of that there are a few more serious questions that I feel need to be asked at this point -

1) Has the degradation of the Pakistani Army-Mullah relationship after Lal Masjid - led to a decline in the ability of the Pakistani Army to control the Jihadi groups? and

2) Is the declining political stature of the Pakistan Army inside Pakistan being interpreted by as incentive for independent acts by terrorist groups?

The two questions sound similar but there is a subtle difference between them and I leave it my readers to debate this aspect.

Valid and Invalid Criticisms of the DAE

2008-04-28T06:30:00.000-07:00

Hi,

I have decided to try and put across my opinions about what constitutes valid and invalid criticisms of the DAE. These are what I think is right - I am open to changing any or all of these

I do not wish to clutter this post with details of why I think these things are valid and invalid but only briefly state that I feel a criticism is valid when there is verifiable information in the public domain which can accessed to make/face it. Pushing the debate into realms where the DAE or any other government organisation cannot answer on account of secrecy issues makes a criticism invalid - in my opinion.

I am happy to answer any questions that my readers may have about this in my comments section. Again this is just my opinion, I will defend it because I have put it up here - but I am not averse to changing it.

So here is what I think.

Valid Criticisms

1) DAE has focussed on high volume electricity generation for industry. Very little work at the DAE has focussed on rural electricity needs. India's rural agroeconomies need electric power to navigate increasing constraints from limited land and water resources.

2) DAE's projects given their sheer size have long cycle times i.e. the projects require quite a bit of investment and it takes a very long time to get from the design board to the prototype and to the final product. The India's industrial R&D needs a partner in the GoI with greater flexibility and agility.

3) In the 1998 tests, the DAE demonstrated designs that achieved 40-50kT and could be *scaled* to reach yeilds in the 150-200kT range. It is unclear if this is sufficient to meet the nation's shifting deterrence needs even within a credible minimum deterrent framework.

Invalid Criticisms

1) The DAE's efforts at developing the bomb have denied India technology vital for India's industries to be internationally competitive.

2) The DAE has not been honest about its capabilities in the bomb arena. This is harming the country's ability to frame deterrence arguments.

3) The DAE does not appreciate the need for peer review of its performance. It is operating without any checks and balances.

And yes, to prempt any questions in this regard - I am desperately trying to recover from that utterly disasterous mess that the debate on the forum has turned into.

Feel free to attack me - I am an anonymous fellow with a mouth the size of the planet Jupiter - and I have no connections to GoI - but as a citizen of India, I request you to kindly leave GoI personalities out of it. You think Mr/Mrs. big-famous-person in India has balls/noballs/toomanyballs etc... I don't want to hear it. Feel free to insult me as much as you want - I will not hold it against you - but leave big people out of it. We are all little people - lets act like it.

Democracy in India needs a vibrant debate - but please keep the debate to a level where even fools like me can follow it.

I request that you trust me - if I don't get it - then the change that the average Abdul comfortably sipping a cutting of chai alongside me at the Rambharose batata vada stall outside Vikhroli station is unlikely to get it either.

For the record - I am not for or against the Nuclear Deal with the US.

CAT has nothing to do with the bomb.

2008-04-09T06:39:00.000-07:00

There is no LIF capability at CAT Indore.

CAT merely designs and builds various laser systems and no - it has not invested in anything that remotely resembles an LIF experiment.

Just because words like "hohlraum" or "equation of state" turn up in a CAT annual report does not mean they are investing in an LIF capability. Making anything that CAT already does look like an LIF experiment will not serve India's interest or CAT's interests.

It costs an ungodly amount of money to do these LIF experiments - it is simply cheaper to test a few designs and see what happens. The only reason one would justify doing this work is if there was fusion based energy generation option that we were developing. The Americans have clearly indicated that they are going to do everything in their power to prevent fusion from being an energy source. We do not have the strength to fight them on this issue at this time and there are significant technology barriers to fusion based energy generation happening in India right now. For us the Thorium route is more feasible at this time.

People on the forum constructing imaginary bomb related LIF experiments at CAT is no different from Pakistanis inducting imaginary F-22s into the PAF.

CAT cannot validate any thing related to the bomb design. That is outside of its capability.

CAT's role is to develop high end laser, electron beam, and x-ray technology with an eye on the industrial market for lasers in India. There are two emerging laser markets in Indian industry - high stability frequency narrowed lasers as aids for various measurments and high power lasers for cutting applications. Another sector that will take off in the next five years, is biological spectroscopy - as you know India is emerging as a hub for a lot of bio related R&D and most government planners have anticipated a need for locally developed and maintained x-ray/electron beam, and laser sources.

CAT has a small group of people who work on interesting physics problems because that is the only way to create benchmarks for the laser technology it does develop. Ultimately you have to demonstrate the quality of your product and a physical phenomena serves as natural calibration point. And that is all it does.

I can understand it if some American or German company wants to hegde against a potential peer competitor for the Indian laser market by fucking CAT's chances at producing technology India's industry can use.

I can completely understand it if some foreign company wants to have CAT blacklisted to hobble its potential for profitable international cooperation.

This is normal behaviour in the business world.

What I do not understand is a how a bunch of people who call themselves rakshaks are falling for that sort of thing.

When the BJP government tested in 1998, the yeild was questioned by the NPA for two reasons - firstly to publicly reassure the Pakistanis by feeding their notions of Indian incompetence and secondly to gain as much information as possible about the Indian bomb. This is a good fraction of what the NPA are paid to do and they did what they were paid for. After the Pakistanis felt reassured the NPA stopped asking questions and the controversy over the yeilds died down as the NPA asked the media hounds to back off.

Now the nuclear deal on the anvil and the NPA's false god is under threat - the NPA are once again acidly provoking a discussion on India's nuclear capabilities. They are keen to find out how the proposed transfer of technology and nuclear fuels will affect India's nuclear weapons capabilities.

The position of the Indian national security setup is that the proposed ToT and fuel is purely civilian in nature and does not affect the Indian nuclear weapons program. Per the Indian point of view, conveyed via several channels, India's nuclear weapons options are completely dictated by its perception of its general security needs. If the US wants India to pick a fight with China to get the Chinese to cough up more loans for the failing US economy - India will need to pursue larger yeilds and ICBM development. If on the other hand the US wants India to help it loot Iranian oil, India will have to expand the size of its arsenal to hedge against potentially damaging proliferation scenarios in the Islamic World.

The US can't expect India to partner up on their screw-China/ screw-Iran ideas and simultaneously cut down on its weaponisation options.

This fact is known to the NPA - and so they are out fishing to find out what we are really capable of. If the find out what we are capable of - then US negotiators peddling screw-China/Iran ideas can gain traction point.

I simply point out that we are under no obligation to tell them.

There is no love lost between us and the NPA and frankly, we are disappointed by the NPA's inability to arrest proliferation in the US. One simply does not see the RRW becoming a replacement for older warheads - as far as any one can tell the US simply intends to make more warheads and call them "Reliable Replacement Warheads" without actually dismantling the old "unreliable" ones. This is a proliferation far in excess of Iran's 1-2 bombs and Saudi Arabia's 10 bombs and the NPA have no say in this. It seems the NPA are completely useless when it comes to stopping real proliferation and their only purpose is to make informed sounding noises about irrelevant shit.

The OFBJP types are very keen to block this deal because of legacy issues and most of them are a little too susceptible to the "sky is falling" type stuff. The NPA appear to have convinced them to pursue the idea that India somehow needs a bigger bomb. They are aiding the NPA fishing trips.

The relevance of the Mahabharat and the Ramayana in the present day

2008-04-04T07:07:00.000-07:00

When one reads Indian epics, one comes away with a sense of a "glorious" but somehow "lost" past. As readers today, we seem distant from the developments of an age gone by ... a much simpler time when everything worked the way it was "supposed to". Some of us relate to personal aspects of a character in the story and attempt to model ourselves after their conduct - so begins the Cult of Arjuna, or Sita and so on. The "rationalists" among us quickly dismiss these cults as being irrelevant in the modern age.

Yet it seems obvious that while the structure of personal choice may have been different in an age gone by - the manner in which personal choices interact with social dynamics are largely ... unchanged. If one does something that society finds positive/negative one gains its approval/disapproval. The net social approval one gains in any act decides ones' social capital.

At the end of the day... both the great epics of India, the Ramayana and the Mahabharat revolved around the question of legitimacy in a complex and highly structured social order. Legitimacy is a measure of social capital. In each epic, the personal actions of the characters, as depicted by the writers of the epics, colour the reader's perceptions of the character's claim to legitimacy.

In order to understand the relevance of the great Indian epics, I ask you to journey with me into the distant land of the Khans.

The Khan-i-Khanan has been plagued since his first day in office by questions of legitimacy. Those close in often look upon him as an usurper - who took the legacy and rightful place of another. Yet others somewhat further away see him as an unlawful leader who played with the ideas of justice to secure his access to power. A still further away, an utter disdain manifests among those that care to speak of him, a veritable cult of disfavour has built around him. His only supporters appear to be a small group of clerics whose loyalty he secured in the early days of his political career. Among the waqia nahvis is considered polite to describe him as affable but incompetent.

It is said that these limitations were well recognised in the past and the choice of succession weighed heavily on Abbaji. Rumour has it that a Prince was consulted by Abbaji and it is the advice of the Prince that decided the matter of succession. It is also rumoured that Abbaji allowed the Khan-i-Khanan as much freedom as was reasonable and so the Khan-i-Khanan picked people that thought themselves to be comparable in competence to Abbaji himself. Perhaps the Khan-i-Khanan thought that surrounding himself with wazirs of Abbajis calibre would protect him from harm, but it appears that this has unanticipated results.

In any case, it is too late to change that now. There is a real problem that the potnahvis cannot simply hide in his books. The Amir-al-Umara is convinced that the predictions of the jyotish are correct and Shani will remain firm in its place in the charts. Abbaji's khaas, who is currently the Wazir-ul-Harb was sent to sort things out but instead he returned bearing bad news that the Amir-ul-Umara was largely "spinning his wheels" and "burning gas" - the consensus between the Wazir-ul-Harb, Amir-al-Umara and the Potnahvis was that wasteful expenditure was rising.

Rather than do the obvious, the Khan-i-Khanan, decided instead to send his vice regal to Ctesiphon, and manged to arm twist them into releasing more fuel. This necessitated a rearrangement with followers of Ali.

At the time this was going on, the Waqia nahvis were asked by the Khan-i-Khanan's men to keep silent. It is here that the idea of illegitimacy has come to plague the Khan-i-Khanan again. As the Waqia nahvis are susceptible to the idea of illegitimacy - the Khan-i-Khanan cannot silence them without a visible gesture. As the waqia nahvis put pen to paper, their lack of silence will completely colour perceptions of the legitimacy of the Khan-i-Khanan throughout the land.

A growing sense of illegitimacy among the people at large will not benifit the Khan-i-Khanan.

Understand Writings on India-Pakistan Relations

2008-04-03T07:22:00.001-07:00

A lot is being said about Indo-Pak relations by various commentators and frankly the sheer volume of opinions can be overwhelming and confusing.

At this point, I offer my readers the following way of organising the views that are out there.

I personally tend to organise views on Pakistan into four broad regimes,

1) Emergent Situations: Views that highlight sudden unexpected dynamics inside Pakistan that departs from the prevailing consensus on Pakistan's trajectory eg. assasinations, shifts in the drug market, accidents etc... I tend to place a lot of the views on emerging patterns of terrorism in this category - these assessments are given high visibility in the media, but honestly their reliability varies. Most of this material comes from eyes on the ground - news reporters who try to bring out as much information as rationally possible from an event that seems unanticipated.

2) Short Term: Usually, relating to the next two-three years. This is comparable to the timescale on which we anticipate dynamics in the "civilian" authority system that now being put into place in Islamabad. Shifts inside the military's leadership are also relevant. A lot of these views come from people who meet the key personalities - reporters, diplomatic staff, "travellers through the region" etc...

3) Medium Term: Typically on the three-ten year scale. This is typically the timescale for any serious military research and development project in Pakistan, and so any security policy that controls a proliferation risk has to be sensitive to this sort of time frame. It is also the timescale on which any major problem inside Pakistan vis a vis resources distribution (eg. water or land) will become prominent. This kind of view usually comes from "think tanks".

4) Long Term: This is the ten-thirty year timescale. It is here that one can look for the effect of changes in perceptions among the general population eg. the effects of Islamisation, "Roshan Khayali" etc... This view is usually shared only between the Sons of Mother India, and it is usually never really released to the aam junta - however a crude reflection of it may be found in the mood of the analyst community in general.

Most of the newer analysts out there tend to pick a category and contain their comments to a specific time frame. This is because they are "new" and don't have a sense of how their little picture gels with the larger picture. Sometimes, governments and others tend to push analysis of a particular time frame into the media in the hope that public opinion is prepared for the most relevant dynamics inside Pakistan (I only sparingly approve of such conduct). The US is currently inundated with "new" analysts and that kind of thing tends to have predictable consequences - and I understand the US desire to put all their product out there - this way they get the "new" folks reviewed for free.

The "old hands" have seen it all - they know how to carefully interlace the writings with comments relevant to each time frame and please understand the "old hands" have been writing about Pakistan for *decades* now - they have had time to see the long term - the newer lot simply hasn't - so you can't expect them to write about it.

This leaves the people in the "middle" - not so "new" analysts tying to get into the "old hand" category. There are really two kinds here - ones who will become "old hands" and ones who won't. I personally find that a "new" analyst who tends to carefully preface her/his writings with a defined time frame and carefully segregate opinions and speculations from verifiable facts has a better chance of becoming a "old hand" than someone who does not do these things.

That sets the stage for me to tell you all my feelings about the present state of things.

With regards emergent situations, I feel that it is best if India retains the ability to seek out more information if it chooses to. I realise that this means ties have to maintained at a level where communication is easier and yes I do appreciate the potential risks that entails.

As short term dynamics is concerned, again, there must unfettered access to the sources - the key persons themselves and to this end, a little courtship is necessary given the situation that has prevailed in the last two decades - we have become so distant, that needs to change.

The medium term is quite obvious to everyone - Pakistan is going to run out of water, land and food, population pressures on the land and going to create unsustainable patterns of immigration from rural belts to Pakistani cities, and the lack of emphasis on urban industrial growth will come to haunt Pakistan. For a lot of this kind of analysis, we can rely on stand-off information gathering, lately, as you all know, India has made considerable advances in stand off surveillance technology and after Kargil, a good bit of emphasis was placed on training new people to do this kind of work. A precise application of these tools should enable us to remain aware of relevant developments.

That leaves the long-term stuff. I don't want to comment on the specifics as it is not my place to do so - but broadly speaking, stress in India-Pakistan ties was at its highest during the Partition. Subsequently, stress in this relationship has only risen in response to stresses inside Pakistani society. In my opinion this is perfectly normal - India and Pakistan - are part of the same cultural landscape - one affects the other. An ideal long term situation in Indo-Pak ties would be if the coupling between India and the stresses in Pakistani society (and vice versa) is kept to a manageable level.

Interlinkages between the food and fuel crisis emerging in India

2008-03-25T05:50:00.000-07:00

Important points from a recent discussion among acquaintances.

Land and water resources are experiencing population pressures in India. This is manifesting the lack of growth in the amount of arable land and a gradual decline in rural living standards. Expanding access to water is feasible on a ten year timescale, however a massive investment of this nature would only significantly boost agricultural productivity at a very high ecological cost. A most direct expression of the ecological cost would be in the form of a dropping water table and a gradual but consistent reduction in forest cover. Biodiversity issues are also likely to present on a far larger timescale than earlier anticipated.

A trend that has become more pronounced over the last ten years has been the manner in which sizable tracts of arable land are being acquired by leveraging buyouts from farmers living in debt. The objective of such acquisition is not the construction of new industry or power stations, but rather the development of high end real estate. In these developments, the locals are deliberately driven out of their lands to make way for mahals and havelis that suit the tastes of the modern Indian princes.

This sort of thing creates two major problems. Firstly loss of arable land adds to a growing deficits in food production and secondly, we add to the rural-urban migration trend creating severe resource problems inside cities.

As the shortfall in food production can only be met via food imports - we become *more* reliant on global trade patterns and out overall trade deficit rises. Additionally, in order to move the food from the sources in foreign lands and from the port of entry to our hungry citizens we consume more carbon fuel resources - especially diesel -which we only have a very limited refining capacity for.

The sale of their ancestral land also shifts farmers out of the land based social security system to a paycheck based economy which they are not adequately trained to function in. The collapse of this social security system creates a large pool of internal migrants that are disconnected from their roots and traditional identity structures.

In Pakistan we have seen what happens when this sort of thing is allowed to get out of hand. The vacuum created in the identity structure is filled by new expressions at the individual and social level. In India we can reasonably anticipate the growth and hardening of caste and religion based conflicts in such a migration environment. Perhaps the biggest lesson that India can draw from Pakistan in this context is that using a social polarisation model improperly or incorrectly (i.e. without thought to the consequences) will result in a persistent and bloody internal conflict.

As you are all aware, in Pakistan, a religious model was used to consolidate Sunni youth in the 80s. The full extent of the exact consolidation protocol was never discussed publicly and a cost benifit analysis was abandoned in favour of a pursuit of expedience. The result is that mess that we are seeing today - where no one - not the Army, the Islamists or the Feudals can restore order over any meaningful timescale.

Given the overall similarity between Indian and Pakistani society, it is imperative that we take proactive steps to prevent a repeat of such events in an Indian context. Most specifically, religious indoctrination techniques developed in the 90s in India, should be discarded as a tool for social or political mass mobilisation. Marxist models that have gained currency over the last decade need to be seriously toned down as well - there is no point getting people up in arms over their lack of economic opportunities if no direct relief - even in the internim term is possible.

What's in it for us?

2008-03-22T14:32:00.000-07:00

An important question that people must learn to ask - especially the DCH.

Some 50,000 or so Indians have lost their lives to Pakistani inspired violence. If that was not enough reason for us to slice their throats ... why should a few thousand non-Indian casualties in Afghanistan matter to us?

If someone can't "occupy" Pakistan with the Army's help, how would they successfully occupy it without the Pakistan Army's help?

Why should we sit around and watch valuable global oil resources be expended to drive humvees in Pakistan, when the same oil could be used to make electricity that powers schools, universities and factories in India?

For the past thirty years, a military dictatorship sat on our borders and talked down to us about human rights and self-determination and democracy. Why would we want a self-declared global hegemon on our borders lecturing us on the same things?

Look if you don't have enough fuel to carry out your military operations in Afghanistan - you need to find ways of doing more with the fuel that you do have.

Look start small ... just turn the airconditioner off and then don't use the helicopters to ship toilet paper... and then scale back pointless artillery barrages.

Coming up with more fuel expensive military ventures is not a sensible approach and no it isn't going to scare the Pakistanis.

Added later:

It is immature to expect a border across a continous cultural landscape to be sealed.

A few notes after a silent week.

2008-03-17T09:57:00.000-07:00

Some notes after a period of silence.

The American economic plunge has gained momentum. A major bank had to be rescued by its friends in government. The price of gasoline continues to rise. Ever expanding discussions continue on the withdrawal of troops from Iraq. No one quite knows where the bottom is - though hopes that there is a bottom run high. It is unlikely that public pressure over Iraq will deflate soon, however it is likely that public support for a presence in Afghanistan will remain even after a US withdrawl from Iraq. One also notes the curious effort at scaremongering in a closed session of the American parliament recently. One also sees lust in the eyes of those looking north towards Canada and Alaska.

In Pakistan a calm introspection over the prospects of facing the Islamists without the Army's support will dampen provocative gestures vis a vis Musharraf the Magnificient. The Pakistani public at large wants to see a demonstration of "accountability". Some demonstration will have to be arranged to appease the masses, but I doubt it makes sense to try this with someone called Pervez. At the end of the day - Pakistan's problems stem from its poorly developed industrial sector, and the Army with its allies in the Fauji, Shaheen, and Bahria foundations, represents the bulk of Pakistan's industry. The feudals cannot hope to create a stable feeding trough inside Pakistan without the Army's support. The Khilafa Coastal Refinery will ultimately "save" Pakistan - and the refinery will not be built without the Army's support to whoever is in power. The Feudals will have to content themselves with a game of musical chairs. The Pakistanis need to articulate the problems arising out of a collapse of their agriculture sector. It has been conveyed to them that India has a limited ability to resolve contentious water distribution issues *inside* Pakistan. The wheat crisis of today, is merely a preview of things to come unless Pakistan gets its act together on the water management issue.

In India we are only now gaining the first insights into how the crisis in the US will affect us. The dollar's problems directly impact the Indo-US nuclear deal in ways that go beyond KT's next paycheck. I have held my peace on this for long enough - with a recesssion looming in the US economy, I think the time has come for me to speak clearly. A collapsing dollar creates a climate that does not necessarily favour us. The US cannot expect us to purchase anything from them while simulataneously restricting our market access. Without a structure to offset losses due to the fall in the dollar - we cannot be expected to proceed towards anything on this deal. Setting all political considerations aside, one has to confront this issue.

Added later:

As predicted - the next wave of assaults (after the attacks on the SciCom) on Sri. Vajpayee have begun. An entirely circular logic is openly displayed - yet again - the results of the Shakti series are being questioned solely to justify the need for a gigaboom. No rationale is presented for a gigaboom - only drumbeating is indulged in. A time will soon be upon us when Sri. Vajpayee is blamed for not doing enough to make a gigaboom.

I now sadly await the public humiliation of Sri. Vajpayee at the hands of the very people he helped bring into the national mainstream. This will be a truly disgusting spectacle - watching a bunch of utter morons insult a man who is too weak to raise even an arm to defend himself. Tragically, as far as I can see, this is the only way in which these people will finally realise that without Sri. Vajpayee to do their thinking for them - they have no appeal to the rest of India. Only after humiliating Vajpayee and burning their bridges to the rest of India will these people realise their utter irrelevance in today's India.

As the US economy plunges, the US NRIs will become more vituperative and lacking the ability to project their angst in the US, they will turn on India. The angst of the NRI SuperHindus will feed the fight for succession in the BJP. This is one of those tragic cases of blowback - and I can do nothing about it.

Tis' a grisly affair we are about to witness, a very long night of very long knives.

On another note:

It appears Secy. Paulson has had no sleep recently - the word "depression" is making an appearance. The search for a "bottom" to this mess has begun.

So it is time for me to show *my* cards on this issue.

I *personally* think the following:

This is - at the end of the day - about manageability.

Human nature is troublesome at best - if everything seems fine - then no one will want to change. Even when everyone knows change is necessary - the bigger the change - the less is the incentive to actually do it. The more you shield people from the bad news, the less they feel the need to change.

On the other hand, if you make people feel like crap - albeit temporarily and when things are actually still really fine - you can induce them to change.

A sudden sharp shock following a period of brief semi-shielded exposure could achieve rapid swings of the desired variety. You will be able to reach ahead of the curve and drive the system at the desired rates.

That said.. it has to be done just right. It needs extreme attention to detail - I am not saying this is easy - it is easier than the alternative i.e. trying to fix everything at once.

And now I will go back to being silent on this issue.

The Gigaboom and Other Stories

2008-03-04T06:44:00.000-08:00

I wrote this reply to an email, but then the topic was relevant so I decided to share it with all my readers.

****

The 1998 tests proved that we have a high degree of reliability in our fission based designs.

There was no "failed thermonuclear test" in 1998 - that is an NPA invention. The NPA are simply exploiting information compartmenting inherent in every nuclear test - the fact that no one outside the actual team knows what the exact device is and that there is a large crowd of people who think they know what the device is. The NPA know that we have fed them crap about our design via the usual gang of idiots and since they are paid to go houbara hunting - this entire "failed test" thing is their way of making the real Indian houbara run.

The FBF was deliberately tested because it was a more challenging design idea and because the site itself limits the yeilds that can be safely tested underground. The FBF kept the yeild low while ensuring a demonstration of the mastery over the same physics that goes into a much larger bomb. This ensured that the Indian houbara stayed underground and the air sampling black shaheen returned empty handed.

If the arsenal were to be defined in narrow terms - i.e. the same terms that the Americans used to murder the Japanese into submission (the only proven usage of nuclear weapons in the battlefield) - then we have a credible arsenal of fission and fusion based weapons. Remember the Americans had only tested their designs once - ergo the two tests of each design are sufficient to achieve narrowly defined aims.

If the arsenal is to be defined in wider terms - i.e. the same terms that the Americans used to allegedly beat the Russians into submission (the use of the size of the arsenal as a device for rhetorical escalation - though I do not consider this a "proven" use), then mere tests do not inspire credibility in the arsenal's value as a robust economy does. The Americans had a robust economy based on unfettered access to oil. The Russians did not - and that is where they "lost". If the Americans can't keep their economy under control, they will "lose" also - i.e. be pushed into a situation where their arsenal becomes an unsustainable expense.

One would think that if India intends to become a "big power" - and "talk like the big boys" do - it has to have an economy that backs up its talk.

Talking about "gigabooms" is not going to scare anyone.

Doing a few tests may prove the technical ability to field an arsenal of this kind, though one wonders what the point of proving the same thing that was proven in 1998 - again. The 1998 tests prove that despite whatever the sons of Mother India say - a suave looking jackass in a suit on television will tell the DCH that the test was a failure and then the DCH will agitate for another test. Every test - as the American "natural allies" will never admit - risks the security of the arsenal. It reveals just that much more about what our exact capabilities are.

I am not saying whether India should test or not. I do not have the authority or the competency to advise on those matters. That is purely the responsibility of the Prime Minister and the Council.

I am merely pointing out that if a cost benifit analysis is done - as I am sure it is done before every test - then I personally feel that the "appease the DCH" aspect is likely to be outweighed by a desire to preserve the security of our capabilities.

The cost benifit analysis that goes into a decision to test is very complicated and the DCH and its "heart's desire" are a very small fraction of that. Beyond that I am not keen to comment on this - as I am not a party to the process and even if I was it is not something I would talk about in public.

*** unrelated note to sparsh - have I captured the earlier discussion on "bigger v/s smaller"?

***

Another unrelated note on information compartmenting strategies allegedly pursued in a major democracy which many people in India seem to like and (not-so) secretly admire. Typically in this country no one knows all the exact details of the warhead design. Everyone who comes into contact with the warhead is only cleared to know a small chunk of the information that is relevant to what their role is. For example, the person charged with releasing the weapon on the target does not know anything about the details of actually designing the warhead. They are simply told which sequence to push the red buttons on the black box in front of them. If by some accident the person tasked with the release becomes aware of some other details of the weapon's operation - they are immediately subject to a very painful and time consuming clearance revision protocol.

Similarly in this country the scientist who designs the warhead casing does not have to know the details of the nuclear reactions that make the explosive charge work. Unfortunately unlike man-made technology which can be specifically engineered - natural physical laws do not lend themselves easily to security - anyone can design experiments and gain information about these things. Most physicists are pretty generally trained, so it is not difficult for a physicist to "figure out" how something works - and usually if you know one piece of the puzzle you can make intelligent guesses about what the other piece looks like.

In order to keep a check on this tendency of physicists to do things ... that are well ... less than wise... this country has devised the concept of the "born secret". Per this concept - any information that sheds deep and meaningful insight on the functioning of the explosive core of the weapon is a "born secret" - i.e. irrespective of whether you enjoy a specific security clearance - if you "figure out" something that sheds light on the functioning of a nuclear explosive - you are automatically charged with the responsibility for keeping that information from spreading to the wrong hands.

A very tiny fraction of the people preparing the compartmenting protocol actually know all the details of the weapon - and their identities are obviously not public knowledge.

Another example of a compartmentation scheme is also available in the history books - where it is alleged that a foreign government asked two teams to simultaneously pursue weapons design. One was told to work with plutonium and another to work on uranium and the two were kept completely in the dark about the other.

A corollary to this - is that the military is kept out of certain kinds of information. Ofcourse every military in the world has chafed under the manner in which non-combatant civilians seem to control the nuclear thing. Indeed many a military man questions whether the weapons he brandishes with such zeal actually work at all. Any military man would be a fool to not atleast ask himself whether he has simply been given a dud to parade for public amusement.

I do not know the answer to such questions, but I point out that whatever the answer is - it is quite simply the way Allah has willed it.

It is said that the seekers of martyrdom are seldom denied their wish in Allah's court, however I feel, in their own best interests, eunuchs and handmaidens of the men-at-arms should refrain from questioning the will of Allah.

The DCH and their pied pipers will do well to know such things.

The Peculiar Situation in the US.

2008-03-03T13:35:00.000-08:00

Flipflopping, backpedalling, indecisiveness etc... are not things we associate with American policymaking but those seem to be abundance lately.

After having opposed the India-US nuclear deal, the Democrats and the NPA are now running in circles trying to avoid blame for the failure of this deal.

In the Senate and Congress, when the deal was first discussed, the Democrats used the occasion to vent all their pent up anti-Bush sentiment and in the process ensured that the Bush admin's attempt to change the American relationship with India was completely destroyed.

Now faced with the prospect of perhaps inherting the White House, the Democrats are moving to put themselves into a negotiation with the Indian government or whoever they think they can talk to in the Indian government. I mean literally - this is exactly - "maan na maan - main tera mehmaan".

God forbid the Indians lose interest in the deal - how will the Democrats demand "expressions of support" from India to move the moth eaten deal across the floor of the Congress and the Senate?

Without at least an Indian nod, there is no question of the Americans making a dime in the next round of negotiations over the deal - because well... as Allah miyan knows, there is will simply be no next round. Without a next round - the entire game fails horribly for all those highly paid lobbyists in Washington DC. Arre bhai many of them probably have debts that rival Ken Lay's "profits" and at the very least everyone has at least one mortgage to pay... I mean seriously not everyone can die of a heart attack before the creditors come calling.

The problem is that the Democrats really do not know anything about foreign policy. Foreign policy is what they think they hear when they listen to "experts" like the NPA or read that magazine they call the "New York Times". Most of them would not know foreign policy even if it was dropped on their head. So even when they actually want to come and beg the Indians to pay them bribes, it only comes out sounding like commands and orders - which most Indians find tiresome.

One might think that a repeat of the Jaswant-Talbot talks could happen - i.e. where a wily Indian overtly massages his American "interlocuter's" ego and mumbles "shiboleths" and talks from every "azimuth" in his body. One might even expect that the well "vibed" American then writes a book about how he saved the world from "nuclear destruction" - complete with a foreword by George Perkovich.

And very sick people - you know the behuda badzaat haramis - like me would simply delight yet another self serving account from D.C.

I mean then we can once again show up the Man of Steel next door who claimed to have been hugged by Clinton in Jordan - can he claim that he was the topic of a self serving pat-on-the-ass-cheek account? ... see even our lowly foreign minister has a bigger claim to fame than those of high office elsewhere.

Another account of this kind would be a major badge of honour for total kameenas like me.

And for all I know this might be what will happen. As they say in my city - dekhna ek din hum iske baare mein bhi Hindi film banayenge.... kaun chahiye director? - Karan Johar, Mani Ratnam... etc...

However there are a few things one must keep in mind.

The proximity of the Republican Party to key/core industrial groups in the US is undeniable and only someone with the right name - Abbaji ka khaas - is likely to know what parameters are acceptable in the deal - as only such a person would be capable of polling the opinions of the people that matter in the US and communicating accurately with them.

A layer of think-they-know-it-all types from the Democratic Party are not really going to assist in this negotiation. I mean they might go some distance in providing comic relief now and then, but beyond that one should not look get our hopes up.

At the present time the bulk of the core power brokers inside the US are heavily invested in carbon based energy. These people effectively control global utilisation of such energy via various pricing mechanisms. They are keen to invest in the growth of nuclear power in India purely because they want to hedge against possible competitive pressures on their *existing* investments. Until a stable investment structure is reached for these people - where India's interests are safeguarded against any unfortunate errors of judgement (i.e. monopolistic tendencies) on their part - negotiations will remain protracted - regardless of what window dressing sits in a house somewhere.

The Democrats are preparing for a change of drapery in D.C. - all this deadlining and interlocuting is all in aid of the getting ready to answer the phone when it rings at 3 AM when the children are asleep etc....

Yawn...

Kya kya dekhna padta hain bhaiyon...

*** Can't resist ***

Inspector Pandit - Shani... arre rey yeh kya kar rahe ho?... tum Shani ko kha rahe ho?....

Inspector Purohit - Shani? kyon.. is mey... ?Hain..?

Inspector Pandit - Arre Shani toh... aadmi ko kha jaata hain....

scene outside Abdul Chacha Ka Dhaba near Minara Masjid...
-- from the movie Maqbool

Warm breeze heralds the "Pakistani Spring"

2008-02-21T08:24:00.000-08:00

The elections were rigged to reduce the Islamist footprint inside the political structure. This could only be achieved at the cost of encouraging regionalism. No prizes for guessing who did this.

It is wrong to say that Musharraf the Magnificent did not have his way. This election proves that only Musharraf the Magnificent can secure 99.99999% of the Pakistani national vote. Everyone else has to be content with less than 0.0999% percent each.

The great fear in the ... well.. you know where... was that the unwashed masses of Pakistan would rise up in a tumultous anger and drive the Magnificent one from power. In the vacuum created, a number of strange unpredictable creatures would appear possibly wearing many hues of green. Today, with the establishment of a bulwark of "moderates" in the Parliament, the Islamists will find themselves fighting an "elected parliament" - instead of a "military dictatorship" - in that terribly semantic way that is so popular these days.

Cohabitation is a sensible choice - since ... you know who... has been unable to conceptualise an alternative to Magnificient One. As you can see the army has begun its long and arduous march towards the barracks. Agitating against cohabitation will simply bring the "Pakistani Spring" to an end.

Might as well sit on the beach and enjoy the breeze.

Needless to say a storm brews just o'er the horizon.

Dr. Rajiv Kumar speaks about the recession in the US economy

2008-02-20T07:02:00.000-08:00

I have recently been emailed this article in the Hindustan Times written by Dr. Rajiv Kumar , currently a member of the NSAB.

The article succinctly states that the crisis in the US lending market is wider than expected and that the US economy's ability to support import-export deficits will decline sharply. As Indian exports to the US constitute a significant source of wealth, the decline in the US economy will affect India's exports.

Should a recession in the US slow down the global economy - then India's ability to sustain a high
growth rate will be adversely affected.

Dr. Kumar suggests infrastructure development to create demand inside India and opines that a rising domestic demand in India will compensate for falling consumption in the US.

Though Dr. Rajiv Kumar's writings have absolutely nothing to do with it - I wish to use this opportunity to provoke a discussion on our economic dependence on diesel.

Usually when you develop infrastructure you increase your dependence on diesel. All the machinery required to make and run infrastructure consumes more diesel. We already import an ungodly fraction of our oil and we only have one place in the country that can refine large enough quantities of it to secure us against an upstream market fluctuation.

I want to ask you all if you can come up with ways in which to develop infrastructure so that our national diesel usage efficiency is boosted?

I also welcome comments at this point about the wider implications of the fiscal meltdown in the US.

HE Amb. Mulford talks about the nuclear deal

2008-02-10T08:58:00.000-08:00

Karan (a.k.a VOA) gives us this interview with HE Amb. Mulford.

It appears His Excellency is mightly pissed that India has turned this deal down and threatens all manner of things if this doesn't go through right now. To the rest of us, who don't live in an ivory tower ... this comes as no surprise.

HE Amb. Mulford, had earned fame in India for speaking at inopportune moments about matters that should never be discussed in the media. Perhaps he does not grasp the fact his highly overt and obvious style probably right at home in the US corporate world - with its power talks and power naps - actually grates on Indian sensibilities, or perhaps he simply does not care

After having spent most of his tenure trying to sabotage the deal and the bulk of India-US relations, he now paints himself as the great saviour.

It is unclear to me who in Chanakyapuri or Foggy Bottom will be impressed with this.

If the Hon. Ambassador wants to know why India rejects the deal - he need look no further than the consequences of his own utterances on the non-proliferation aspects of the deal and the repeated contextualisation of the deal into India-China rivalry and support for US initiatives vis-a-vis Iran. Ofcourse as with any good diplomat when confronted with his actual utterances the good Ambassador distances himself with great speed from any unintended connotations.

It is precisely this double-speak before a pliant media circus that has lent wings to suspicions in India about the US's angle to this deal.

Tragically even in his limited view of the universe, the Hon. Amb. Mulford is right - this deal will not be offered again.

The next time the US comes to the table it will be from a very different position. As the energy crisis in the US expands to the point where it the core sectors of the US economy - eg. transportation and power production get strongly affected - the American posture in the deal negotiations will shift.

If you note - HE Amb. Ronen Sen is not giving interviews of the "now or never" variety.

We Indians are used to haggling over the price of the bride. His Excellency will do well to go shopping in the real India - beyond the richly decorated facades of the fixed price malls. Perhaps it is just the Indian in me who sees that a US with a declining dollar will be unable to enforce any discipline in the NSG.

In some ways the Ambassador's utterances showcases the exact opposite of what George Perkovich has been saying all along - it does seem that the US needs this deal more than India does.

Lets see who handles economic pain better - does India handle a diesel shortage better than the US handles stagflation.

The American National Debt - Breakdown of the American Grand Narrative

2008-02-03T06:02:00.000-08:00

Most of us have been struggling to get a handle on the implications of the growing American national debt and the falling dollar. I am going to take a stab at fleshing out the most obvious consequence of this mess - the collapse of the American grand narrative.

Very briefly - the American grand narrative states that people came to America seeking refuge from persecution. After coming to America, they found a land that offered opportunties for advancement and throught their hard work and perseverance they built up wealth and left behind a better life for their children and grand children.

Unfortunately with a 10 trillion dollar debt and a collapsing dollar on the international currency market - that is no longer possible. Instead of doing well and building up wealth - the current generation of Americans are leaving their children and grand children mountains of unpaid bills and debt obligations. It is unclear if their descendants will ever be able to pay these off. Should the US hit upon some revolutionary technology that the world simply cannot do without - then quite possibly a careful marketing of this technology may service some portion of the international debt - but it seems unlikely that such a technology will be able to pay a debt of this size off or even wipe out the internal portion of this debt.

Developing such technology will require manpower. This will cost money - i.e. investment. However most R&D manpower in the US is currently tied up in developing weapons or servicing existing ones. As an outward projection of military strength is necessary for the US to maintain its economic reliance on global resource channels and access to global markets - it seems unlikely to me that the US will be able to retrench manpower from weapons R&D to civilian R&D very rapidly. This is ofcourse ignoring a vast number of specific issues - eg. personal debt obligations, entitlement attitudes, etc... in the American workforce that often contribute to its high price. Those are beyond my ability to comment upon.

In the absence of local manpower, the US will have to rely on imported manpower. Again leaving aside the loss of status problems faced by US "bhoomiputras" due to such an import of manpower - for anyone to leave his or her homeland to come work in the US - the US has to appear attractive. The person coming here has to buy into the US grand narrative - and if that collapses the US will no longer seem the land of opportunity to people doing research and development. I am ofcourse ignoring the fact that the US has traditionally sought to filter out foreigners entering its economy - even the R&D types, but with the economy steadily slipping into a hole - I think this attitude will shift. I note among other things the shift of Microsoft Corporation to Canada - I don't know of anyone in congress who can ignore that.

Assuming that a source of manpower exists - can the US generate investment to develop the high technologies it needs. That question does not have a simple answer. Traditionally the US has led the world in innovation cycle times. If you have an idea and it looks like it works, the time required to turn it into a mass produced item is the lowest in the US. However the flip side of this is that the low innovation cycle time has led to a great number of bad ideas being put into production too - most American cars being an excellent example. In fact some observers argue that the American desire to push through innovation often overpowers their ability to think its overall viability through. It is the "will give an arm and leg to gain a extra thumb" philosophy. The end result is often a very expensive innovation cycle.

I remain somewhat skeptical of the US ability to generate funds for this kind of innovation. I think between the dollar falling and the pressure to reduce taxation, the viability of an kind of investment in a treasury bond type financial instrument will diminish too rapidly for most investors' liking.

Put simply, at the present time the American economy has to shift to a new equilibrium between the flows of resources, financial instruments and finished products. This is hard even for super agile populations like India and China. For something as ungainly as the US economy - frankly speaking - this going to be very hard - it is not going to be pretty or smooth.

I do not envy the person who sits in the chair after the incumbent. They are going to haul a enormous amount of shit.

The Pakistani Army confronts its declining moral mandate

2008-01-31T13:25:00.000-08:00

As I am sure you have all heard already, a group of retired Pakistani military general officers have apologised to the Pakistani nation for past misdeeds.

This move comes close on the heels of an other suggestion that this group offered to General Pervez Musharraf to resign from his post as President and restore civilian leadership.

As I am sure you recall, the Pakistani Army had lost its standing with the Deobandi ulema of Pakistan after the Lal Masjid incident and without a single religious cleric to back their political maneuverings, the Pakistan Army gradually lost its position of dominance on Pakistani affairs. Already in the NWFP, a number of Islamist radical groups have gained an upper hand, and an increasingly hemmed in Pakistan Army is now fighting a losing COIN battle there. In Sindh and Punjab, the PPP and PML cadre are openly questioning the Army's authority.

In my opinion these are attempts by sections of the Pakistan Army top brass to regain the Pakistan Army's moral mandate. Due to the very nature of these efforts - a simulated distance has to emerge between Musharraf and the people making these efforts.

It is important to reflect on why that is so.

The Pakistan Army at the end of the day - relies on its ability to murder people at will to project its leadership of Pakistan. To some extent the legitimacy conferred by the religious elite on this license-to-kill is benificial but not essential. This apparent independence carries with it a flip side - when one uses violence with such a limitless sense - an adamantine chain of consequence links one to the consequences of the specific acts of violence.

Any attempt by the Pakistan Army to seem penitent for these acts will be seen as an admission of guilt by the people who were at the recieving end. This implication of guilt will serve as just cause for them to seek vengeance on the Pakistan Army itself. Any open apology from the army will carry with it the guarentee of a righteous retaliation.

And so the apology must be made in a veiled fashion - as coverty and as deniably as possible.

That - in my opinion - is what is going on right now.

Will the people of Pakistan - specifically the religious elite - find this apology credible? I do not think so. I fear that yet again the Pakistan Army is seriously underestimating of the extent of polarisation within the population.

Pakistan: Gen. Karim's article on ORF

2008-01-23T06:03:00.000-08:00

Gen. Afsir Karim has written a piece about the impact of events in Pakistan on India.

There is a comprehensive discussion on Islamic radicalism in Pakistan. This is by far the most mature commentary on this topic I have seen anywhere.

The author very astutely notes that "presently there is no militant cleric group strong enough to dictate terms to the powerful urban elite in Pakistan" - the emphasis is mine.

The author also points out that the number of young people inside Pakistan have reach a critical mass - exceeding half the population of the country. While the nature of grievances in Pakistan is not very different from those in India - the lack of viable means of airing grievances in Pakistan has created a growing trend towards radicalisation.

Gen. Karim - in my opinion - quite correctly points out that the most of the present radicalisation of Pakistan society is driven to a great measure by US intervention post 9-11. The Pakistan Army's policy of running with the hares and hunting with the hounds is creating a massive disorientation inside society and this is feeding support for the radicals. Even if the support base for the radicals does not expand dramatically, the Pakistani population at large is unlikely to remain receptive to the idea of American puppets leading it for much longer. This creates a situation not very different from Iran in 1979.

Gen. Karim highlights the economic disparities between the urban rich in Pakistan and the people that they claim to represent the interests of. It seems unlikely to me that the feudals and their urbanised or secularised hand maidens would really appeal to the Pakistani population at large. I was skeptical of the late Benazir Bhutto's abilities in this regard, and quite frankly I do not see anything different about the others. Their appeal among the vast numbers of underprivileged youth is limited, and quite frankly their ability to engage increasing numbers of them in constructive social dialogue in my opinion is very poor. I doubt most of these urbanised clowns amount to anything - they may speak English with the right accent, but honestly speaking their communication skills *inside* Pakistan are poor.

There is a large discussion on the nature of the Tehrik-e-Taliban and its link to black world financial channels inside Pakistan. The ability of such forces to access the under-economy of Pakistan especially outside of the Pakistan Army's surveillance capacity - creates all manner of complications. The author also discusses the rising popularity of Jihadi icons inside Pakistan - the effect of icons on the spread of radical ideas is often greatly underestimated.

At the very end of the paper, Gen. Karim fleshes out some of the implications of all this for India. As with many Indian writers, Gen. Karim describes the problems of Pakistan in great detail but deliberately hides most of the information about the impact of this radicalisation on India in the sub-text. It takes a practiced eye to spot the details.

I do not want to deny my readers the potential to develop such an eye, but in the interests of time let me drop the following hint - broadly speaking, we in India have a naive view about Islamic radicalisation. We remain of the opinion that key the indigenous Indian schools of Islamic thought will retain an ability to communicate with their Pakistani descendants. This is largely true, however it is incorrect to say that this is a one way street. There is infact a very complicated cross flow of ideas between Islamic thinkers in India and Pakistan. Given the manner in which radicalism is infusing into Pakistani Islamic institutions, and the manner in which moderates have been steadily marginalised in Pakistan - our ability to insulate India's Islamic ideosphere from these memes will be heavily strained. The Kashmiris are done with their war - they do not have the will to fight - their ability to add a layer of insulation to the spread of such memes is limited and that is all I have to say for now.

I very strongly recommend that my readers go over Gen. Karim's article with a fine tooth comb - I see a great many things worth thinking about in there.

A Comment on the Shultz-Perry-Kissenger-Nunn article

2008-01-21T06:23:00.000-08:00

The article in WSJ appears to indicate a shift in the US strategic mainstream that a world order based on certain notions of nuclear deterrence is unstable.

This article goes straight to the heart of what India has been saying now for the better part fifty years. It also implicitly suggests everything I have been talking about on this very blog.

A vital part of this from the perspective of Indians keen on disarmament is the segment of this article which proposes that the US "discard any existing operational plans for massive attacks that still remain from the Cold War days".

Such a move would undercut the need for large stockpiles of weapons in the US and Russia. From the point of view of the nuclear fuels industry it would create a huge stockpile of highly enriched Uranium and Plutonium. This stockpile - if properly downblended could yeild a fuel resource that the world finds useful in the future. For the Americans too this is benificial as it would turn their economically unsustainable nuclear weapons arsenal into a fuel resource that the world could then buy with all the "excess" dollars the Americans have been palming them. In time one hopes that at least some people in the US think outside of the Greenspan era ideas of a world that is forgiving of America's debts and devise ways of paying back those debts. Such a world order is unsustainable - no matter how many nuclear weapons you have.

A global trade based on nuclear fuels from downblended weapons grade material would aleviate the competitive pressures building up on the US drug research and development industry. Current plans to "save the American economy" rely on using US dominance in the field of drug related r&d and health technology to build new markets. This policy can only offer short term relief to the US economy as the American pharma sector like the US IT sector relies heavily on a globalised manpower base to minimise development costs. Even with strict IPR controls, the ability of the US to retain its dominance on health related technologies would be limited to perhaps a decade or less - especially if key companies in India and China decide to aggressively indigenise drug development.

Which brings me to another issue about global trade -the India-US nuclear deal - and as you all know it is - dead.

It died the day the NPA shot a stream of venom at the Indian public consciousness. The venom was designed to ignite India's fears of loss of soverignity. Dimwitted as they may be, the NPA know enough about India to get it riled up about something. By routing their venom via Indian intermediaries, the NPA have lit a blaze of anti-deal sentiment that no one can quench.

Today Indian opposition to the deal is driven entirely by "political compulsions" which cannot be overcome. The BJP opposes the deal because if it lets the Congress (I) do this, then BJP will suffer a tremendous loss of legacy. The BJP paraded itself as the party that most aggressively sought out the interests of the capital owning classes. If the Congress (I) brings uninterrupted electricity to the Indian industrial groups, then BJP will lose its power base. The Left Front, does not care for legacy issues, as the Left's political models are closer to those of slumlords - as long as economically marginalised segments exist in India - we will never cease to have a Left Front. The Left opposes the deal because it fears a loss of leverage to Indian Industrialists. The Left has successfully used its presence in the media to convince others in the Indian political spectrum that the industrialists of India are a political threat that needs to be contained before it becomes too large for anyone to handle. The combined effect of these factors is political paralysis.

It is unclear if the carbon mafiosi that paid the NPA to hit the deal understand the full implications of this paralysis. Perhaps they remain under the illusion that by curtailing India's access to nuclear fuel - they will be able to promote India's reliance on diesel and natural gas. Or perhaps they believe that deal can be held in suspended animation until the carbon mafiosi in the US have had time to retrench their long term investments in carbon energy to more lucrative ones in the nuclear/alternative fuels sector. I do not seek to imply that President Bush was somehow remiss in the manner he proceeded down the road to the India-US nuclear deal but it does appear from the tone of the American press that somehow his attempt to open doors to India alienated a large faction of the American carbon mafia. I can't imagine any other reason for so much anti-Bush publicity would accompany the anti-deal rhetoric in the US media. It is crystal clear that at least some extermely powerful carbon groups in the US were very upset with the manner in which the India-US nuclear negotiation was conducted. Given the manner in which this group relies on the idea of keeping nuclear fuel reserved exclusively for use in weapons - the sudden shift away from this idea (which the India-US deal implied) created a major stir inside the US. The deal became identified with President Bush and worse still - a Ken Lay-esque pursuit of opportunity.

It is difficult to draw a firm conclusion about the thoughts of the American carbon mafiosi - especially regarding US domestic politics but the naive notion appears among some of these people to be that countries like India will put up with this kind of harassment and shakedown forever.

I do not know if the special interest groups in US will be able to salvage this deal at a later date by somehow reversing the impact of their own psywar campaigns. I am some what pessimistic in this regard - I do not think it is possible to reverse the effects of this.

I anticipate a slowdown in India's real growth rate. This increasing growth rate has been the key to ensuring that the national import-export deficit remains manageable and a balance of payments crisis is avoided. With a slowdown of the growth rate - this deficit will assume importance as will any unanticipated costs within the economy - especially in the energy sector.
We will become extremely sensitive to shocks on oil market!

The Tata Nano: The Not-So-Subtle Implications

2008-01-11T13:44:00.001-08:00

More on the Nano and its implications

The Nano will presently not be sold in the US because it will not meet US safety norms.

The US is about three times the area of India and it has about one-fourth the population. This means that the US population density is about a tenth of India's population density. In the US, everything is very far from everything else, - vehicles typically run up 15000 miles a year in the US. If you want to get from point-A to point-B in the US in a reasonable amount of time - you have to travel faster usually at around 60-80 miles/hr. This is not how it works in India - things are simply closer together, you don't drive as much or as fast. This has nothing to do with infrastructure, it simply has to do with the size and population density of India. An Indian car drives about 3000 miles a year at a relatively sedate pace of about 30-40 miles/hr.

As the average speeds in the US are higher, most cars bound for the US market have to meet higher safety norms. The occupants have to be able to survive at least an 80 mile/hr collision. This means the American cars are heavier. A heavier car implies a bigger engine, because if you are on a highway ramp in the US and you have to accelerate to get up to 65 miles an hour - the average speed needed to enter the highway traffic safely you need acceleration - you need *engine* power.

The Nano does not have the size to provide the kinds of crush depths needed in the US market. It is simply too small to accomodate a larger more powerful engine and it cannot safely enter an American highway. A Nano can probably be used as a limited mobility solution in certain urbanised parts of the US - may be places like Manhattan, parts of Philadelphia, Washington D.C., Seattle etc... could use the Nano as way to minimise congestion and pollution, but honestly I don't think most Americans would fit in the Nano - it is just too small for them.

The Nano will not be sold in Europe at the present time - not because it will not meet safety or pollution norms, but because the European manufacturers will oppose its entry. All major European manufacturers are already cranking on their R&D machines to produce clones - we have seen the enthusiasm for collaboration with Tata in France, competitiveness in places like VW, and to our European friends, I say ... best of luck!

The Nano is going to really scare the Japanese and the Koreans. They are used to being the home of industrial innovation in Asia. They were expecting a comfortable ride in India - continually using Maruti Udyog and Hyundai India to control the Indian small car segment. Their ride just got really rough and to top it off - the Indians went and did something they didn't think was possible at all. Major heartburn, worrying and concern will dominate these places - both countries are only just getting used to being second fiddle to China in Asia- neither will enjoy being viewed as below India in anything like this. We will have to deal with this loss of status type fear building these two countries. As things stand, the Japanese and Koreans have some of the best technology development cycles in the world. They should definetely consider developing a powerplant that costs $700 or less, gives out 35-60 hp and is completely emissions free. To our Japanese and Korean friends I say... look what happens when you ignore the needs of your brothers in Asia.

The Chinese are going to copy the Nano, this is just how they react to things like this. They copied the Migs they got from Russia, the rockets they got from America, the motorcycles they got from Japan etc... one should think of it as a Chinese way of learning. Sure, in Shanghai with America-like roads and highways - the Nano will be out of place, but in the cities inside China, the Nano clones will rule the roost. To the Chinese - I really don't have anything to say, if I say something I am worried they will simply repeat it and then claim Chairman Mao said it and then I might be accused of being a Maoist!

As Nano clones gradually takeover the earth - the impact of such a large number of cars will be felt on global oil supply. The urban planning issue in India will get sorted out, but the long term implications for oil demand - say on a twenty year scale are worth looking at. This needs real brains... not the kind that we have auditing Carbon use in India lately.

Which brings me to the Cabron Dioxide "nightmares" that some people are having. One needs to put this in perspective - the Nano driven for about 3000 miles will emit about 0.7 tons of Carbon dioxide. That is about 20 times less than the annual emissions from a well tuned Hummer H3/Chevy Suburban/Chevy Caprice (US Yellow Cab). There are about 100,000 taxis in the US (and about twice that number in service with police and US GSA), about 100,000 Hummer H3s and as many Suburbans in the US, (and a comparable number with the US Army). So all in all just Hummers and Caprices in government and private service constitute about a million vehicles. We should be able to populate the earth with atleast 20 million Nanos before we get to the amount of carbon dioxide these guys are currently emitting.

The Nano emits about 6 times less than the Toyota Prius Hybrid. There are about a million of those around today. Assuming that we take the 1 million Hummers and Caprices and replace them with Prius hybrids, we can still sell about 14 million Nanos and remain at the same emissions level globally.

Yeah... wow.. didn't expect that did you?

BTW.. are you all pissed about the number of enviro-experts that are mouthing off about the Nano? - this is not an isolated occurance. Welcome my friends to the new age of the Carbon Proliferation Ayatollahs.

The Tata Nano: Some Subtle Implications

2008-01-10T07:36:00.000-08:00

The Tata Nano heralds the start of a new economic race to exploit the emerging markets in Asia and Africa. Thanks to western advertising and propaganda, the car is seen a status symbol all over the world. A vast majority of the lower middle classes in India, China, South East Asia and Africa are keen to purchase this status symbol.

As usual, the western observers are dismissive of the Tata effort - they see it as nothing great - technologically speaking and they fail to see why anyone in the world would want a car without power windows. They are incorrectly comparing it to Western cars - when they should be comparing it to alternative transport options in Asia and Africa i.e. the moped, the public transport bus etc... This kind of attitude on their part showcases the key problem that Western industrial groups and MNCs face - locked up by layers of bureaucracy in high towers they are out of touch with the nature of the world market. They now find themselves losing out to more flexible, informed and adaptive Asian competitors.

The electronically loaded and fuel inefficient cars of the West are out of place in the Asian and African markets, the poor people in Asia and Africa cannot afford them. Also the poorer regions of the world are characterised by overpopulated urban spaces where the high performance engines of Western cars are utterly useless as the driver never gets above 30 miles an hour in city traffic.

Tata has hit the right nerve, and for better or for worse, Bajaj, and Maruti will follow. Where these three go - others cannot afford not to follow. The emphasis on small, energy efficient cars without luxury fittings, and low maintenance costs is the core of Tata's approach. Tata's approach will bring mobility to the masses in a far more economically and fuel efficient way.

If Western car manufacturers want stay economically relevant in the long term, not only will they have to focus on building cars that sell in the Americas and Europe - they will have to gain a market share in Asia and Africa. The Tata Nano and the philosophy it represents simply cuts Western car manufacturers out of those markets.

To a great extent the Western philosophy of car design which centers around fuel inefficiency and luxury - is held aloft by governments that keep the price of oil artificially low in the West. As Asia and Africa start to consume more oil, the ability of the Western governments to artificially support low oil prices will decline precipitously. The very same oil companies that have been bribing Western governments to kill energy efficient cars will now turn their backs on those governments and jack up the prices at the pump without care for the socio-economic consequences.

The end result is that the Western philosophy of car making will die and with it a way of life will go as well. Given how infectious Tata's idea is, it is very plausible that the Americans will have to go to India to buy cars then sell the Tata Nano - in the US with a GM, Chrysler or Chevy label.
While the senior management in these places which is tired of running the red might welcome that change - it is unlikely that ordinary Americans and Europeans will welcome this.

The Tata Nano effectively puts the entire Western auto world on notice. It tells them their way of doing things is completely out of sync with global economic realities. I can't imagine how they would feel about that sort of thing - at the very least it going to add to that long list of complaints they have over their loss of status.

What Shakti-1998 did to the global nuclear order - the Tata Nano does to the global automotive order.

IGMDP Completed

2008-01-08T14:24:00.001-08:00

Yes, it is official, IGMDP has been closed down.

The IGMDP has reached a natural closing point - the objectives of the programme have been achieved. The core of the programme was aimed at development of propulsion (solid and liquid fuel systems) technologies, and certain guidance systems (reliable INS). All the systems that were developed under this program are now in production at various PSUs.

On the reseach side, there have been no new personnel hires for the IGMDP and most of the people originally hired for these projects have been reallocated to downstream (Nag,Akash,Prithvi,Agni etc...) projects or retired from service over the last ten years. All the new personnel hires have been for downstream project specific developers and technologists. The money that has been allocated was also directed at specific platforms *not* at technologies related to the core programme. The core of all these missiles is the same thing that kalam and Project Devil folks worked on some thirty years ago - yes I remember everyone who made fun of them.

The IGMDP will be eventually replaced with a new program aimed at intelligent guidance (read UAVs, cruise missiles,GPS-guidance), flight control (far from stability flight, high maneuverability) and advanced propulsion technologies (high efficiency, high speed, novel fuels, ultra high endurance etc...). The conclusion of the IGMDP has been hinted at in several utterances by top level science policy people. There has been talk of new propulsion systems for over a decade now and over that same time scale, UAV/intelligent guidance related development has been undertaken at DRDO with collaboration with a number of foreign countries.

The low innovation-cycle times of these "collaboration" programs and their relative immunity to sanctions regimes have been praised so often in science policy circles that many neutral observers have tended form the association that this strategy of "collaboration" and "tie-up" is the "way of the future" at DRDO. There is a naive belief among some people that the west will easily yeild its technology lead built up over three centuries to an India flush with cash. The prevalence of this feeling among external observers, has sparked a misguided notion that the IGMDP closure reflects a shift in Indian scientific thinking towards a "collaborative" or "participatory" approach.

Saner voices in India have privately pointed out that there are things money can't buy - but the external observers are so high on media hype - that they are failing to see the obvious.

Henry Sokolski misses the point!

2007-12-30T05:41:00.000-08:00

One of my readers pointed me to an article by Henry Sokolski.

Henry is on his usual anti-nuclear deal kick, and is keen to use the possibility of proliferation at the Pakistani end as a result of the deal. Frankly given the reception to the deal in India, I cannot at this point say that India wants the deal anymore than Henry Sokolski does. Needless to say I speak only for myself and not for anyone else I may or may not know.

What I have an issue with however is that I feel, Henry's lack of understanding of Pakistan is glaring and I think this needs to be fixed right now.

Henry is under the impression that he is smarter than the American State Department, and for all I know that is true. I am not well placed to tell you how smart the State Department is or how smart Henry is.

However I do know the following things are true:

Pakistani Armymen believe that America is forcing them to kill their Pakistani Islamic Jihadi brothers and
America is using "democracy" as a way to curtail the Pakistan Army's influence on politics in Pakistan.

Taken together, these ideas hold the natural implication that America is trying to drive the Pakistan Army from power in Islambad. I speculate that this "natural implication" is gaining currency inside the Pakistan Army.

When you interfere like this in a nuclear armed military dictatorship, you create use-or-lose type pressures on the regime.

A fractious leadership within the regime makes an accurate analysis of the effects of such pressures difficult and consequently, it becomes exceedingly easy to invite a failure of deterrence.

So while Henry Sokolski is busy worrying about the possibility of a larger nuclear arsenal in Pakistan some five years down the road, I am worried that the Pakistani leadership has an increasingly itchy finger on the big red button!

Henry's view of Pakistan relations is in sync with the history of US-Pak ties, but it appears to me to be out of touch with the reality in Pakistan right now!

US-Pakistan ties despite their rich history - are in a very different and difficult place today - and I feel - Henry and his friends completely miss that point.

If America as a whole shares Henry's lack of understanding, then the consequences of that - i.e. a mishandling of the "transition to democracy" in Pakistan will in my opinion produce disasterous consequences for the World.

A world where deterrence has demonstratably broken down is beyond the ability of American spinmeisters to fix. Such a world will find America's claims of global leadership lacking in credibility. That may be the "New World Order" that a scared and disoriented regime in Pakistan pushes us towards.

The Tragic Death of Benazir Bhutto

2007-12-29T06:09:00.000-08:00

After reviewing the information available from various sources, I have concluded that Benazir's death in the bomb attack on December 27 2008, was most likely an unintentional and exceedingly tragic coincidence.

I have difficulty imagining that a long suicide bomber with explosives strapped to his/her body could be expected to succeed against an armoured vehicle like the one Bhutto was travelling in. I cannot imagine that a capable officer like Rehman Malik would allow her to travel without a BPJ - so I think bullets in her chest cannot be the cause of her death.

At the end of the day, incredible as it may seem, the Pakistani government's bloody handle theory seems plausible.

Was Musharraf responsible for her security? or was Rehman Malik and Zardari Clan?. Are the Islamists responsible for bombing her convoy in the first place? or should she not have stuck her head out the vehicle? etc... etc... these things can be argued endlessly.

Conspiracies like - Was she killed because America wanted her to be the Eid ki Bakri? was she killed because she said something that offended Musharraf? Was she killed because she alienated the Islamists in her public utterances? etc... that will swirl in the minds of observers endlessly as well..

I care little for such speculations, for me, some things are beyond argument, such as -

Participating in Pakistani elections or politics is not a joke - death is .. well.. an occupational hazard. If you get careless or try stupid stunts, you will die. People play rough out there, if you aren't serious about this, now is a good time to quit (Hint Hint Imran).
The PPP has no second rung leadership capable of holding the party together at this time. It will need time to organise itself into an effective electoral formation. They need to have time - time which they will have to beg President Musharraf to give them. Yes, there is a need to vent the anger welling among its cadre, but if in the process the PPP alienates itself from Musharraf and the Army, that is not going to help their electoral chances. The PPP knows this, and in a week or two, the "Oh My God - BB is dead" feeling will go away - the crowds will tire of burning buses and chairs and refridgerators. Even the Shia and Sunnis will tire of killing each other. Boredom can and will move mountains.
It is true that "ultimately" Musharraf bears responsibilty for all things that happen in Pakistan. It has become very fashionable among the glitterati that float in and out of TV screens to spew venom on Musharraf. But honestly, do these people have an alternative to Musharraf? Can they tell the rest of us what that is? because for the last seven years these same people have been telling us - "there is no alternative to Musharraf". And today in all their talk I still see no such thing as an alternative.
Without a pretty face like Benazir at the helm, the Pakistan Army will be unable to retain the support of the image conscious American political crowd. This will make releasing monies from US congressional sources difficult and that side of things - coupled with President Bush's own unpopularity in the halls of Congress, will act as a powerful motivator for the PA to seek out a window dressing that suits America's eyes. Please understand the moment the window dressing goes up, the same voices that are railing against instability in Pakistan will rush to tell us how America must give Pakistan trillions of dollars to "stabilize" a fledgeling democracy. This is the extent of the "Pakistani Spring".
The Pakistan Army and President Musharraf will have to seek new engagement points in D.C. especially now that the Bush presidency is reaching its end.

To the people of Pakistan, members of the family of Benazir Bhutto, and the members of her political party, I offer the following comments.

Many of us in India liked Benazir, and we are all very very very sad about what has happened. Benazir was a familiar face to us, a fixture at every major treaty we signed with Pakistan since the Shimla Agreement of 1972. Yes, we will miss her and many will only have positive memories of her.

Please ignore the utterances of fools and young people in India who tend to speak before they think. They say senseless and hurtful things. We in India do not hold grudges against the dead. Our political issues with her ended with her passing, and we are all left poorer by her death.

Most people I know in India will sympathize with the people of Pakistan during this tragedy and time of trial. Please do not interpret this as a desire on our part to intervene in Pakistani internal affairs, we merely want to tell you that we understand and feel some fraction of your pain.

On the possibility of "Clerical Error" in the India Pakistan Context

2007-12-23T07:26:00.000-08:00

An article by Jawed Naqwi on the ABM related developments in India came to me by way of email.

I think the article is quite perceptive and in the spirit of things found abundant in environs of Neemrana Fort, I wish to add a few comments.

When faced with a situation where the political authority in an adversary state is unstable, the path to reinforcing deterrence becomes complicated. The traditional idea of finding some object critical to the adversary leadership and posing a credible threat of guarenteed retaliation to that specific object becomes tricky to implement. As the leadership in the adversary nation is unstable, the idea of what is dear to them is unstable also, so a simple point and shoot philosophy becomes somewhat moribund and the possibility of escalations rises.

When two political groups tussle for control over nuclear weapons in a failed state, the only thing that both groups can agree upon is that the ability to project a nuclear threat is the key to gaining political prominence. This makes the entire deterrence regime extremely escalation prone as every little internal political shift acquires a nuclear deterrence related implication. By posing a credible threat to the ability to deliver nuclear weapons on to your soil, you diminsh the escalation potential inherent in such a situation.

In the more traditional context ( US-USSR or P5), this idea appears counter-intuitive. There the possibility of preventing the enemy's missile creates an escalation. The adversary simply increases the number of missiles in the arsenal or fields their own ABM system. This all pushes things towards a new equilibrium where neither party can field another ABM systems or ballistic missile. For this reason, perhaps, in the traditional context, political instability is never allowed to become so extreme that it shakes the very foundations of deterrence. However the India-Pakistan scenario significantly departs from the traditional mould in many ways, and I feel one cannot become too attached to ideas that have worked elsewhere.

As long as a deterrent exists to using weapons, no political leadership in a failed state, however desperate or short term in its thinking, will seek out nuclear adventurism. In my opinion the biggest deterrent to nuclear weapons use is the possibility of failure. No one wants to go down in history as someone who used a weapon of this magnitude and failed to deliver it to the target. Such a person or persons would be consigned to the dustbin of political history very quickly.

Much is made of the possibility of a religious zealot getting his finger on the button. To some extent the negative publicity accorded to this possibility comes from the incumbents who wear suits and pants but fear being displaced by those that wear pyjamas ans shawls. This is at some level, a form of elitism or perhaps it is simply a show being put on.

The "zealots" of Pakistan are not an unknown quantity. In the last seven years alone, they have been intensively studied in the West. In places like India, the exposure to these men is quite high. In India derogatory terms like "zealot" are rejected in favour of a direct recognition of the scholarship and erudition in social and political science that these men possess. The suits and pants have appeared in the last 60 years, by contrast, the others we have known them for centuries now, can one really expect us to be afraid of them? Especially when the men in suits have refrained from talking sense for the better part of the last 60 years but we recall the men in pyjamas and shawls speaking sense throughout the centuries?

Or do the men in suits now want to suggest that Shaykh Sirhindi and Shah Waliallah were not making sense at all?

"Clinical Discussions" and "Guarentees"

2007-12-22T07:06:00.000-08:00

I see BC has come up with a "clinical discussion" of the MEA's statements.

The US was not a signatory to the Non Proliferation Treaty in 1954, and the NPT is not specifically mentioned in the Atomic Energy Act - AEA (1954) . The NPT's impact on US laws was covered via a separate act - Nuclear Non Prol. Act, -- NNPA of 1978.

The AEA of 1954 was amended in 1978 to suit the conditions imposed in the NNPA of 1978.

Since the US concieved the "NPT" to keep other nations in check, the letters "NPT" find utterance in every US bureaucrat's statements about the nuclear affairs of India and other states.

In terms of US law, the provisions of the law in the letter are in completely consonance with the requirements of the NPT via the NNPA. For example, the US AEA (1954) frequently uses the words "non-nuclear-weapon state", a term only defined in the NPT and accepted by the US via the NNPA to address all issues related to transfers of nuclear technology.

The application of US law has also been in agreement with the NPT, until that is, President Bush went and signed a 123 agreement with us.

I can understand if the DCH are sufficiently clueless to grasp this, but one wonders if this subtlety really has to be explained to BC and if it does, what does that say about BC?

There are no guarentees with regards to the US not changing its laws - just as there are no guarentees to Russia changing its laws or France or UK or anyone else - lets face it folks - this is the real world - there are no guarentees!

Prafool Bidwai is celebrating the obstacles he thinks we have encountered at the IAEA. BC is celebrating how much smarter he thinks he is than the MEA mantri.

I am wondering how much longer will we continue to have career troublemakers provoke problems in parliament.

How much longer will be before sensible people realise what comes from allowing people like this to dictate your ideas of right and wrong?

Will the DCH and their pied pipers have to learn from the school of hard knocks?

Our perceptions of General Musharraf have changed over the years

2007-12-17T16:35:00.000-08:00

In the aftermath of Kargil, we did not think well of Gen. Musharraf. The manner in which Gen. Musharraf conducted the Kargil operations while Mian Nawaz Sharif, the Pakistani Prime Minister, was initialing a peace treaty with Sri. Atal Bihari Vajpayee left everyone in India angry. We felt betrayed... and Gen. Musharraf's actions were an open challenge to the Prime Minister of India. There was only one language in which it could be answered.

Perhaps this act of insolence on part of the General was the reason why the 1999 coup was greeted with distaste in India. Strictly speaking Indians do not have strong feelings about Pakistani internal affairs, but when General Musharraf removed Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif from power, Indians as a whole felt very unhappy - after all a known and friendly face had been replaced by an unknown one.

Now as the years have passed, India's eyes have grown accustomed to General Musharraf and his flamboyant style. Indian observers have learnt what to ignore and what to pay attention to. It was this growing confidence that allowed the escalations of 2001-2002 to proceed with minimum friction and despite overt animosity a great deal of progress was achieved where it mattered - in the business of restoring trust.

As trust was slowly rebuilt, one step at a time, the Vajpayee government's policy vis-a-vis Musharraf's Pakistan was smoothly handed over to the Manmohan Singh government, an extremely understated foreign policy success. The last six years have seen a steady march towards normalisation of relations, expanded people to people contact and the restoration of key lines of communication.

It is no surprise the pace of positive motion has accelerated in the post 9/11 era and ofcourse things have proceeded with visible speed only under the stewardship of General Musharraf and his Army. One can now almost believe what Stephen Cohen foretold about this venture. It is not to say that India disbelieved Stephen Cohen, for if it had, it would have never taken the path he pointed out - but India's sense of skepticism about this had its roots in the stark reality of the Kashmir. And frankly none of us could have believed the damage that one earthquake would cause. Perhaps Stephen Cohen foresaw the earthquake too - who knows. He is after all - as my Chinese friends would say - even more mysterious than mysterious itself.

After the confrontation at Lal Masjid, it became clear that the bridges had been burned and there was no turning back. It is at this point that Indian minds began to see the full extent of this confrontation and what it was shaping up into. Having seen the complexities of this drama, the "grudging respect" that Sri. Narayanan speaks of, developed in India's minds for General Musharraf. Before our very eyes, Gen. Musharraf, the perpetual guerilla, the perennial commando, now fights a battle on an open plain like an ordinary infantryman. Gone is the Janus face and in its place is a sombre, determined and yet melancholy stare that occasionally glistens with freshly shed tears.

Perhaps herein lie the roots of India's change of heart? Who can say with certainity, but one thing is certain, ultimately, every post 1971 soldier in Pakistan had seen the images of defeat and the crushing consequences of the loss of national respect. As it stands today - General Musharraf - howsoever grudgingly has earned that respect from India.

While we still do not understand why our Pakistani brothers persist in seeking more than heavenly power permits - Pakistan today is a great deal more transparent to us than it was in the late 1990s. Its Arabistani flirtation is over, and Pakistanis are no longer strangers to us.

Should transparency be maintained, the path of sanity will only grow wider.

India-US Nuclear Deal: Clearing up Myths

2007-12-13T10:08:00.000-08:00

A lot of new myths have cropped up to take the place of old ones. Although I know this will have no effect on the blowhards, I list them below in the hope of putting this *information* (as opposed to the bullshit) out there.

1) Coal is India's lifesaver

No, not quite. India has a lot of poor quality coal. Transporting poor quality coal requires a tremendous amount of electricity or diesel. The economics of this does depend on the price of diesel or electricity, but ultimately the profitability of transporting coal to a TPP requires that the amount of ash content in the coal be small - we have up to 40% ash in our accessible coal deposits. The ability of Coal to secure India's energy future is in doubt unless a cheap source of electricity or diesel is found.

2) Coal can be burnt with advanced pollution control technology to avoid Greenhouse Gas Emissions

There are no currently available economically viable pollution control technologies to sequester Carbon Dioxide from burning coal. In a carbon audited world, the price of coal utilisation will be quite high. Lets face it - Carbon Dioxide sequestration is not cheap.

3) Hydel Power can be tapped more aggressively in India

If you weren't injecting opiates during the entire Narmada Bachao Andolan saga, you will realise that is complete bullshit. The high population density of India makes large land acquisitions very difficult. Hydel projects can be justified in lieu of TPPs if carbon emissions are taxed, but land acquisitions are going to become progressively more and more expensive.

4) Wind, Solar can save the day in India

Wind and Solar have very low volume generation. This may be suitable for Indian villages where consumption control measures might be able to restrict the loads to something that Wind and Solar generation may be able to meet. That is something the people inside GoI might be giving quite a bit of serious thought but unless it can generate 100 MWe - it is useless from the perspective of industrial generation. You have an SEZ and you want to supply it power, Wind and Solar cannot give you that - you need Coal, NG or Nuclear.

5) Coal Bed Methane, Unconventional NG, etc... can give us power

This technology is in the exploratory stage, if we pursue it for another 20 years, we *may* be able to develop a domestic production wedge against NG imports. It all depends on where the consumption patterns take the country. If the country as a whole shifts away from firewood to hydrocarbon fuels, our import dependence is going to remain a serious issue.

6) Biomass will save us from poverty

Do the numbers for this. Biomass cannot currently yeild anything that remotely resembles heavy oil. The conversions demonstrated have very poor efficiency and cannot be properly costed. Without an alternative source of heavily oil, we can't free ourselves from a 70% import bill.

7) Natural gas exploration and liquification is a priority

Yes, sure and to make this happen in any time frame that is useful - most of technology for this has to be imported. We do not have the capacity to make anything of size indigenously. Don't take my word for it, ask your friends at Jamnagar.

8) We don't need to import nuclear reactors or fuel

Sure... if you are willing to put up with expanding blackouts you don't need anything. If you don't want to breathe, then you don't need air either.

But if you want electricity in the *next few years* you are going to have to import fuel - you import fuel - the P5 will want you to buy reactors also. If that surprises you then think it through it will become obvious. The entire nuclear deal is hung up right now because the leader of the pack America is offering us a good rate on the fuel and reactor package. But whoever sells the fuel+reactor package to you will demand all sorts of ancilliary rubbish to ensure some kind of IPR protection. The Americans simply have the annoying habit of dressing up their IPR protection as some kind of "save the World from the nuclear proliferation" rubbish - the rest of them have more subtle ways of doing the same thing.

9) Our Uranium is good enough and can be mined to meet our needs

If you actually read the DAE's numbers instead of just mouthing off about them you will see that our *proven* and *accessible* Uranium reserves are poor quality and we have not found a single vein of high quality ore in India. By contrast other nations have proven reserves of quality ore. We can keep looking but it does not look good for the price of mining Uranium domestically. Imports are the key to shoring up the local Uranium market until fresh sources (i.e. Thorium based extraction) becomes viable.

10) Soverignity is the most important thing!

And just you absolutely understand what I am saying - you are okay with importing natural gas and petroleum related infrastructure from the same Americans but then you don't want to import nuclear reactors? - Were you all asleep when the US and its friends refused to supply the Iranian refinery at Abadan last year? Did you just miss this crippling petrol and diesel shortage that the Iranians endured in the July this year? Or are you magically hoping that somehow Jamnagar will not be harmed by this kind of "negotiation"?

Let me sum this up those people in India who have a short *comprehension* span.

If you want your electricty to be uninterrupted and secure the domestic Indian diesel market against shocks from "sudden and unanticipated events", you *HAVE* to have fuel imports to existing reactors. This can only happen when the NSG obstacles are cleared and since America has created most of this NSG bullshit you have to deal with the Americans and their bizarre ideas of the world.

So instead of spending your time spewing venon on India's elected representatives, put your American passports, you American visa applications and your American supplied paychecks down and look carefully at what America really wants out of this deal.

Don't ask India's representatives stupid questions like "Why would America give India such a nice deal".

Find out for yourselves.

The DCH (and their pied pipers) must go beyond the Cold War psyops about America and go deeper into its national desires. Try to get a sense of why America does what it does and then open your mouth.

Because of your irresponsible behaviour the nation's political parties have to stage an unprofitable drama in parliament. This has already massively eroded the credibilty of the office of the Prime Minister and cost *India* hundreds of crores. This drama needs to be toned down before it actually costs us thousands of crores of rupees. The sooner you DCH (and the pied pipers) sort out your ignorance issues, the sooner this drama ends.

On this Malaysia Thing.

2007-12-10T06:56:00.000-08:00

Hi,

Yes, I am aware of the problems faced there, and frankly I am extremely reluctant to get mixed up in this. If you start in Malaysia you will have to eventually follow that stream to KSA itself because conditions there for Indians even Muslims are pretty bad - far worse than Malaysia. I have absolutely no intention of going down that path.

In very very brutal plain speak - there are many marginalised Indians in India I would rather spend money on.

As Sri Raman has already indicated, we can't get mixed up in this without damaging our relationship with the Malaysian leadership, and absolutely honestly, no one I know wants to do that. The Malays and us go back a long way, and I am not going to push that aside. Heck, when the Taliban were in power and that whole drama happened in Kandahar, I was against doing anything that damaged our ties with them and that affected India way way more directly.

I accept Ashok Malik's contention that the Malaysian leadership is trying to send the Indian government a message with its statements in this matter. However I would await a more nuanced reading of the message before rushing to make suggestions about what to do here.

There has been immense friction between Malaysia and the US in recent times. The footage provided by western media services to these events tells me an entirely different story. Do I really believe that these services suddenly give a crap about the marginalised Indian origin people in Malaysia? No I don't.

The HINDRAF's high profile media campaign brings forth memories of a colour revolution.

My instinct is to give this a wide berth.

And the DCH and their pied pipers need to give this a rest.

Understanding the role of diesel in India.

2007-12-06T12:29:00.000-08:00

I had said earlier that diesel was India's lifeline.

Let me put some numbers on it.

India imports 70% of the oil it uses. This is about 100 Million Metric Tonnes (MMT), with crude trading at about $100 per barrel, we get a bill of about $70 Billion.

India consumes about 50 MMT of Diesel.

The Indian Railways and the road transport sector consumes about 80% of that.

Coal accounts for about 30% of the total transport activity.

So basically to move the coal around to our (Thermal Power Plants) TPPs we consume approximately 10 MMT of diesel a year.

That is almost exactly how much the DOD burned during the year 2006 for the operations in Iraq and Afghanistan. The only way to logistically hedge against supply disruptions from KSA/Iraq, is for the US to turn to India for this specifically Jamnagar for things like Diesel and ATF.

Now the question is, what is the size of the US fuel hedge? they are going to come and ask us for 5-10 MMT of heavy oils, then can we really spare that much? at a time when we need to move more coal for our TPPs?

If we don't move more coal to our TPPs, how are we going to make up the short fall due reduced capacity factors on our Nuclear Power Plants?

Ofcourse you all remember that our Nuclear Power Plants are running at lower capacity factors due to anticipated fuel shortages?

Mind you I have left out the impact this could have on other things like pump sets, agriculture related transport etc...

But does even such a simple calculation enter the DCH consciousness?

India US Nuclear Deal: An irretrievable state of debate

2007-12-04T08:44:00.000-08:00

The debate on the India US nuclear deal is in an irretrievable state. No matter what one says or does, one cannot force a conclusion.

A number of hyper-active and extremely vocal groups have filled the air with inaccurate rubbish. These groups fall on the right and left extremes of the political spectrum and are driven exclusively by a desire to dominate the national debate in the media than any real national interest. If the nation burned to the ground, these groups would be happy, because then they would have more to whine about. They have set up a fantasical notion of India which can never be achieved in a measurable amount of time, and we are all to aspire - nay pine for it and in its absence, per their vision of things, we are to heap abuse on India and its leaders, and thus reject what little happiness we can have in India.

The sheer volume of material emerging from these polarising influences is so high that the entire political system is forced to respond to it and pretend it is somehow accomodating these people and their views. This paralysing resources within the political system.

A creative use of government propaganda resources could in theory be applied to subdue these groups, however this does not seem to be worth the effort at this time. A bare minimal exertion required to contain such views is obviously necessary but I really don't see any point in going to great lengths to shut these views down for the sake of the nuclear deal.

There was a limited window in which the deal could have been profitably operationalised from India's point of view. In this period, the dollar was about to drop and that gave India tremendous bargaining power. Now the dollar has dropped and India's bargaining power is considerably less. The deal can now only be operationalised in a way that benifits India less and perhaps benifits US corporate energy interests more. That should tell you a lot about who paid for all this media nautanki on this issue.

As alluded to in pieces by Sri. Vikram Sood and Mme. Arundhati Ghose, in its current state, the debate is a political struggle that is disconnected from the harsh economic realities confronting us. At this point as Sri. Sood carefully implies, even if the India-US deal were to go through, no pricing stability could be guarenteed on the electricity produced. Mme. Ghose goes one step further to indicate that the concerns of soverignity raised by hyper reactive types are completely hollow and that the technical and economic reality of the deal is lost on most who debate it.

The statements by Sri. Yashwant Sinha, represent the best anyone in India can do at this time : issue a carefully worded assurance to the US that India will renegotiate the deal at another time. Though the US will publicly say that it has no interest in a renegotiation, its actions will say otherwise. Needless to say this kind of talk will drive India into a confrontation with the US. However there appears to be no alternative to a confrontation at this point.

Without a nuclear deal of some kind energy shortages will occur in India and our dependence on heavy oil will become an extremely sensitive matter. As I said in an earlier post here, Coal may be India's great energy reserve, however heavy oil (i.e. diesel and kerosene) is our lifeline. In the short term, we are going to see a reduction in nuclear power production. If the diesel prices fluctuate excessively, these costs will propagate into costs of electricity from the grids. It is also likely that the grids may not be able to bear the additional load, and we will have to introduce fresh energy economisation measures to keep our industries functioning. This will mean more blackouts in the residential areas and a deeper reliance in the small scale sector on heavy oil based generation.

Dear readers, one will do well at this point to forget about the nuclear deal and carefully start watching the nation's fuel gauge. As the needle on the gauge strains towards empty, the problems will multiply. A pissed off and angry energy lobby in the US will making handling these issues very difficult.

Added later:

I suppose it is natural to ask if this kind of shift on our part constitutes a breach of trust. I do not think so but other may not agree with me.

I feel trust is important when you have an absence of information regarding intentions. In our case, we had to trust the Americans. The Americans use extremely advanced encryption and security on their internal government communications. This is beyond the ability of our intelligence agencies to penetrate. Thus, we had to rely on President Bush's word that the US possessed no ulterior motives with regards to the nuclear deal. This is where "trust" came in as far as we were concerned.

The Americans with the enormous intelligence gathering resources and numerous penetrations in India did not need to trust us. They had all the data intercepts they needed to form valid conclusions about our intentions and those intercepts should clearly show that we were sincere in our efforts but that circumstances beyond our control - specifically the unusual effectiveness of NPA inspired counter-deal propaganda has made it impossible for our side to achieve our stated aims.

That said - pulling away from the deal will negatively colour American perceptions of India. There is nothing we can do about this. While it is unlikely that the perceptions will fall as low as the did when a certain American ambassador remarked that India was good for nothing save exporting communicable diseases, it is likely that an extremely pissed off energy lobby in the US will force a degree of heavy handedness from the USG. If there is no US invasion of Iran, I suspect the hostility will remain muted and under wraps but if the US invades Iran, I think the sense of hostility will break out into the open.

Another important consequence that may be of relevance to a number of US NRIs who tend to believe ridiculous fantasies about India becoming a great power. What door may have laid open to India to attain great power status by piggybacking a US agenda - like for example - the Chinese in 60s and 70s is now closed.

India will have to find its own way.

There are a number of consequences to such an event. I leave it to my readers to work those out.

Iran: US presses the pause button.

2007-12-03T15:09:00.000-08:00

The US appears to be attempting posture shift vis-a-vis Iran.

The public pronouncements of the US National Security Advisor appear to be aimed at discouraging both speculators and the media pack on a US invasion of Iran.

If the idea in the USG is to ensure that all talk of an invasion of Iran is scotched, then one such utterance is not enough. More such pronouncements will be required to bring the situation back from the brink. Whether the USG recognises it or not, the media has already told the Iranians that a US attack could occur at any time. This has added to whatever advantage the Iranians might have gained from watching the US "talk-to-walk" time in Iraq. If the US seeks to genuinely avoid war with Iran, it will have to do more to gain Iranian confidence on this issue.

If the idea in the USG is to ensure that no one save those designated by the Bush Admin speaks out of turn about a US invasion of Iran - then it is likely that one such utterance will be sufficient. Most of the talking heads in the media rely on some degree of consonance with the official line and by deliberately redrawing the official line - the pool of people on US TV yammering about the war with Iran will dry up. Though this will do nothing to reassure the Iranians, it will ensure that the debate in the US itself - does not overheat.

Either ways it appears for now that the invasion of Iran has been postponed.

Though this kind of thing is quite stunning, it is not clear what has prompted this change of stance in the US. It is possible that

- the profitability of the invasion of Iran declined with the dollar i.e. the net damage to the dollar via Iranian actions became a small fraction of the damage caused by a decline in international confidence in the dollar following the sub-prime crisis or

- US public opinion was against getting into another long drawn out counter-insurgency campaign in a foreign land and this raised electoral costs for the Republican party. The US also largely failed to gain support for its anti-Iran actions in Russia, China and Europe. It is likely that the absence of interational support made US expressions of unilateralism unsustainable or

- the deteriorating situation in Pakistan made an action in Iran dangerous and so it had to be postponed or

- Iran did something to deflect the blow. Though from the way the debate was being shaped by the US at every level, it seemed highly unlikely that there was anything the Iranians could have done to avoid getting thrashed by the US. From the way they were talking about it, the Americans seemed all too keen to get into a fight with Iran.

Whatever the reason, from the Indian point of view, it is unwise to accept this development as a sign that this US-Iran issue is over.

Though India has enough coal reserves, it may be recalled that heavy oil is India's real lifeline.

The Indian Railway transports coal around the country using diesel fueled locomotives. Without diesel, coal will never reach India's TPPs. Diesel is used in a majority of agricultural activities (pumps, tractors, trucks - food production, harvesting and transport). A vast number of critical vehicles (i.e. GOI/security forces) rely on diesel. Another heavy oil, kerosene is used in a majority of urban Indian households for cooking. A refined version of Kerosene (Jet A) is used as jet fuel. Heavy oil is used in electricty generation vital to India's smaller industries.

Fuel substitution projects are underway, for example Jatropha based biodiesels are being used in the Indian Railways, however this effort is in its infancy and cannot provide security of supply.

A US attack on Iran (and a host of other instabilities in the Middle East) could cause unacceptable fluctuations in the domestic price of heavy oils in India.

India will remain vigilant to that possibility.

On the political maneuverings inside Pakistan

2007-11-27T07:16:00.000-08:00

I have been asked to comment on this and I have the following things to say.

The confrontation with the Islamists at Lal Masjid ended badly for the Pakistan Army. The incompetent conflict resolution by the Zarrar Company of the SSG resulted in the murder of some 700 children, mostly young girls. The Zarrar also assasinated Maulana Abdul Rasheed Ghazi and the mother of Maulana Abdul Aziz, the khatib of the Lal Masjid. To make matters worse, Musharraf's media managers publicly humiliated the former Khatib by projecting his efforts at a negotiation with the ISI as an attempt to escape from the mosque by dressing as pious woman. This shameful conduct by the Pakistan Army and Musharraf's men resulted in a complete rupture of the cosy relationship that Deobandi Ulema and the Pakistani Army had enjoyed since 1947. The Ulema effectively withdrew the approval they had given the Army in 1999, and with it, the real legitimacy of the Army's rule in Pakistan ended. The aftermath of the Lal Masjid seige was a brutal confrontation between the Islamists and the Army which has left a thousand or so Armymen dead. The Pakistan Army's hamfisted efforts at counter insurgency have only succeeded in turning the general public against the Army.

Most observers judged that having been so betrayed, the Islamists would make a lunge for power. Pakistani Corps Commanders openly opined that the Islamists would turn against the Army as an institution, and American analysts worried about the possibility of Islamists seizing the Pakistani nuke. Driven by these fears an elaborate drama was staged, Musharraf pretended to loosen his grip on the army as an act of contrition - he named a successor - Gen. Ashfaq Pervez Kayani. Gen. Kayani quickly opened a number of communication channels to the Islamists and made veiled gestures of regret over the events that had transpired between the Islamists and the Army. Gen. Kayani also made several revisions to Gen. Musharraf's counter terrorism strategy. These revisions gradually pulled away from the excessive proximity that Gen. Musharraf had portrayed to American whims. By distancing the Army from Gen. Musharraf and the Americans, Gen. Kayani sought to soften the blow. Additionally the ISI sought to engineer a breakup of the Muttahida Majlis-e-Amal - through a careful use of threats and money, factional strife inside the MMA was amplified.

This approach by itself was not sufficient to contain the possibility of an Islamist lunge for power. The Islamists still possessed tremendous street power. In Pakistan, street power is everything and the cities where it mattered the Islamists could put large numbers on the street.The Police had indicated that controlling such large numbers would be impossible and the Islamists had indicated even before the Lal Masjid fiasco, that they were having a very hard time keeping overzealous and angry young Islamic men and women from doing nasty things. Some way had to be concieved to try and deflect Islamist enthusiasm in the general population and to this end another drama was arranged with the help of the US, UK, and Saudi Arabia. Per the script of this drama, Benazir and Nawaz were allowed to return to Pakistan and stage a political boxing match of the 1990s variety. Both had lost considerable amounts of money in the last decade of military rule. In order to prop them up as viable candidates in Pakistan, they need a huge amount of money, this money came from the US and Saudi Arabia.

It is important to note that both Benazir and Nawaz had their channels of communication to the Islamists that were modulated by the Pakistan Army. It is unclear if either of them will be able to prevail against the Islamists in an environment where the Pakistan Army is unable to being stability to their communications. Without real support on the ground via Pakistan based economies, neither of them is likely to be particularly effective in containing the ground swell of public support for the Islamists. If anything both are likely to be percieved as candidates that are completely supported by foreign interests.

In my opinion, sweeping Islamist sentiments under the rug in this fashion, makes it very difficult to audit the true nature of their extent. There is the added concern that sweeping too much under the rug may simply result in a very big mess that has to be cleaned up at a later date. While it is true that the Islamists are in a very direct confrontation with the US, it is also true that they have a staggering presence inside Pakistan. In many cases the Islamists provide basic services in parts of Pakistan where even the Army does not dare to enter. While most of the so-called secular politicians of Pakistan have spent the last two decades soaking up free liquor at various embassies or eating pork in London and Washington D.C. , the Islamists have spend the last twenty years in the trenches with the Pakistani people facing their day-to-day problems and helping them cope with struggles. Whether anyone likes it or not, the Islamists have a finger on the pulse of the Pakistani people and despite what minimal popular appeal that the so-called "secular" leaders of Pakistan project - they will remain wedded to a highly feudal style of economic authoritarianism that is out of place with the needs of Pakistan.

When the obvious stares you in the face... sometimes you just have to accept it.

The Declining Power of the US NRI

2007-11-25T13:58:00.000-08:00

As the dollar falls, the fortunes of people that remit to India in dollars will fall with it.

I am not saying India will not want dollars, but that the buying power of the dollar *IN* India will decline and with it, the influence weilded by those who deal solely in the dollar will fall.

For NRIs in the Gulf (or elsewhere) this is simply a question of changing currencies. You earn in Dinars or Dirhams, convert to Euros before you move the money back to India. Also worst case scenario, you can simply buy gold in the souks and take it home.

But for US based NRIs things are not going to be so simple - they simply do not have this flexibility. Their businesses earn money directly in dollars. They cannot demand payment in Euros.

Many US based NRIs have been at the centre of the global technology revolution, however only a small fraction of these people returned to India and shared their technological gains with India directly. Most were content to earn in dollars and periodically wire some money home to India. This inflow of capital allowed India to pretend that in someway the intellectual property deficit created by the outflow of trained labour to US industries, was being redressed.

Now that pretence will have to end.

The US NRI will have to bring his or her skills back home if they are to remain relevant from an Indian point of view.

Many US based NRIs will find this transition very difficult. Most have acclimated to their adopted homeland and will find returning to the motherland almost impossible. The few brave ones that leave after having stayed in the US for long will find that their ideas of India are outdated.

Among those that I pity the most are the American "SuperHindus". Their ideas of "Hinduism" revolve around notions of using religion to "bind" a community together against an external cultural influence. Such ideas are a byproduct of cultural friction between Indian immigrants and local populations in the US. These have no relevance in India. Like the "SuperSikhs", (the main supporters of Khalistan) before them, the "SuperHindu" will find the India of their fantasies simply does not exist. It is unclear to me how they will make such a transition.

The Endless American Addiction to Self-Serving Hype!

2007-11-20T09:13:00.000-08:00

In his latest article, George Friedman demonstrates the addiction that the US suffers to self-serving hype.

He claims,

As we have discussed a number of times, the United States delivered a very clear ultimatum to Musharraf after 9/11: Unless Pakistan allowed U.S. forces to take control of Pakistani nuclear facilities, the United States would be left with no choice but to destroy those facilities, possibly with India's help. This was a fait accompli that Musharraf, for credibility reasons, had every reason to cover up and pretend never happened, and Washington was fully willing to keep things quiet.

This is complete news to me.

What I recall is that Stratfor claimed that Pakistan's nukes were safe and that India lacked the competence to execute surgical strikes to destroy them. Stratfor routinely reminded its readers that India's intelligence agencies were no good in Pakistan and that India should pursue the state department's lead and make peace with Pakistan. During the entire Parakram episode that followed the events of 9-11, the overall tone in Stratfor and elsewhere in Foggy Bottom or the Pentagon was one of disdain for India's conflict resolution capabilities inside Pakistan.

So I ask you, my gentle readers, would a US which had such a low opinion of the Indian military, this very same US which sent a Pentagon delegation to India only to discover flaking paint on the walls of Kashmir house and a "precariously hanging" light bulb outside the COAS's office.... turn around and ask India for help in dealing with the emergent threat of Pakistani nuclear weapons falling into Jihadi hands?

Or were they simply expecting us to "automatically" do their work for them - while they continued to badmouth us?

Quite honestly, Mr. Friedman, if you are thick enough to believe such rubbish, that is one thing, but assuming that Musharraf the Magnificent will be equally gullible is downright dangerous.

Since you seem to be in the "think tanking" business given the healthy fees you charge for peddling stuff I can overhear at any dinner conversation in D.C... you may want to take a few seconds of your valuable time to consider the following questions:

- What are the consequences of a direct threat to Pakistan's nuclear weapons?
- What will be the Pakistani response to that kind of thing be?
- Is there some reason why India never ever makes statements of that kind?

Then ofcourse, George Friedman's talent for self-contradiction shows up vividly in the next few lines of the article,

The timing of the New York Times article, then, is interesting -- we would not be surprised to find that certain opposition elements were involved in the publishing of this article in an attempt to throw another hand grenade at Musharraf.

The US obsession with visible appearances of democracy in its client states is well known. Clearly per Mr. Friedman's statements, the Pakistanis also know that the US is keen to push Benazir to the fore in Pakistan and that these disclosures regarding US led nuclear security measures inside Pakistan are embarassing to the Pakistani Army. Infact the public release of this information *now* is most likely the work of the "secular" Pakistani opposition to undermine Musharraf.

Ofcourse those of us that read Pakistani newspapers, recall that the Islamists themselves had made several such allegations in the 2002 period. At that time professional know-it-alls in D.C. like Stratfor had dismissed the allegations publicly as an Islamist ploy aimed at discreding Musharraf.

So which is it?

Is the US threat to Pakistan nuclear weapons real? or ..

Is it a figment of the anti-Musharraf opposition's imagination?

I find that after 9-11 the US was very keen to showcase Musharraf the Magnificent as a great ally of the West and to that end they overprojected his political longevity. Today for reasons best known to them, they are keen to reinvent Musharraf the Magnificent as a likely adversary of the US and to that end they are underestimating his political lifespan. Like the Najibullah government, Musharraf the Magnificent is likely to fall within seconds of the US withdrawing its support in the media - we are told.

Tiresome as it is, the changing tune that now dominates this exceedingly bizarre public diplomacy exercise, is key to feeding America's appetite for self-serving hype.

I have one small request to the know-it-all brigade - please leave India out of this.

A collapse in US-Pakistan relations is beyond India's ability to salvage. It may even be beyong Jesus' ability to salvage, and I don't know about Jesus, but I am quite sure India has absolutely no intentions of offending, Musharraf the Magnificent.

Musharraf be Praised!

Musharraf the Magnificent

2007-11-19T12:32:00.000-08:00

Dear Friends,

The Pakistani Supreme Court decision heralds the arrival of Musharraf the Magnificent, in our midst.

I ask you to join me in bowing low to His Majesty.

Repeat after me:

Country is more important than Democracy,
Musharraf is Pakistan, Pakistan is Musharraf,

Allahu Allahu Allahu Allahu
Musharraf is Great! Musharraf is Great!

I was blessed to watch the following video on Youtube.

The words of the song were particularly insightful..

Juda ho key poonchtey hain, judai kya hoti hain
Nikah hua hain mujhe azam sey,
Main kisi ka nahin,
...
Aye Khuda suraj dooba dey, agar main nahin..
Aye Khuda mujhe *jalaa* dey, agar main nahin
....
Ek rooh hoon main, jisey kuch nahin mila.

Yaar, the last time I heard that sort of thing was in rural Iran in the late 90s, when young girls would set themselves on fire to die in the most irreligious way possible. By deliberately causing their own death by fire, the worst possible death imaginable to a Muslim, they would rid themselves of the burden of resurrection and accept an eternal condemnation.

But the visuals say everything that you need to know about what lies in store for people who don't bow before Him.

Added later:

After watching a number of fearsome SSG videos, and episodes of Alpha Bravo Charlie on Youtube, I have decided to join Amritraj and Mr. Honduras in forming an international "Joint Cowering In Fright at the sight of the Pakistanis" team.

You will find us all hiding under our beds with our pillows and stuffed animals.

India US Relations: A "Rough Patch" Ahead

2007-11-17T08:30:00.001-08:00

It does not look good.

The Americans want us to move faster in India but they can't pay for the speed up.

In order for this to happen, they have to pay off both the Left and the BJP. That is simply too much of a down payment. Only Americans living abroad who have to pay for services are in a position to immediately understand the real downside of currency instability.

American dealings with India are heavily leveraged to preserve their market access. There is no payoff they can make to get this nuclear deal through without losing out elsewhere. In fact there is no understanding of the sheer waste the US had laid of its NRI based leverage in dealings with India. As the dollar drops, the social status of the NRI who bargains for the US, will drop precipitously. The consequences of this are obvious.

Most people in the US do not get that the escalation in oil prices is seen as an inflation in the rest of the world.

Some people are talking about this "international law" v/s "domestic law" change that the US can make in the deal. The idea being that this would give India - an equal status to China.

This idea misses the fact that India cannot have the same deal as China, because the Chinese will pay enough people in the US to make sure that is not the case.

The US expects the Chinese to reinvest their reserves into the US and somehow rescue the failed US credit system. This transition is going to be hard on the US, and that is why the Federal Reserve leadership is talking about a "rough path". The Chinese leverage with the US exceeds what India can presently manage.

I also suspect that a majority of those talking do not understand the reality of the uranium market today. The prices in the market are ballasted by that weapons grade downmixing racket that the charming gentleman from Atlanta put together with some Russians. There is pressure that we join that initiative and buy from there because of percieved non-proliferation gains.

This is good in theory, complicated in practice, the problem is that a small limited fuel stock with a rising demand is a recipe for rapid inflation. If you do it this way, the nuclear renaissance will die in a few years. The only way we can ensure that this reniassance continues and nuclear fuel actually reduces pressure on the carbon fuels market (critical for India's fuel security) is if the US agrees to downblend fissile material from its own weapons and add to the international fuel pool.

Unfortunately one does not see any credible moves towards this in the US. If the tone of public debate in the US is anything to go by, the US public seems completely oblivious to the fact that American consumption of oil has go down by 80% rapidly over the next five years. Anything less than this will result in unbearable inflationary pressures on the dollar.

The difference between the Americans and the Russians is that the Russians have had over a decade to realise that the large number of their nuclear arsenals are an economic liability. It is a lesson they have learnt through blood toil and tears through a decade of high domestic instablity.

The Americans are now where the Russians were in the mid-80s - perestroika period - when the need to change is slowly becoming undeniable. It could be at least a decade before the desire to change finds reflection in intelligent actions. For a decade we will most likely see Americans make bad judgements and then compound the errors of judgement with incompetent implementation.

It was difficult to watch Russia do this in the late 80s and 90s. It will be difficult to watch the US do this now.

Wither Pakistan US Relations?

2007-11-16T17:58:00.000-08:00

So it has come down to visible criticism and open threats. That is really bizarre.

Usually this kind of behaviour in public suggests that

1) You have lost! you have no options and making a fuss publicly is an admission of failure or
2) You have major ... major... "drama queen" tendencies.

and that... does not make sense in this context.

We put up with quite a bit more from the Pakistanis, and we *never* do this. I mean wow.. we went to war with them thrice and we never publicly said a harsh word about them. The nastiest we ever got verbally was when Vajpayee composed a poem about storms and lightning while visiting Kupwara.

I know the Americans really like looking good on TV, but if they keep this up and the Pakistanis will really not like America very much. And that won't be very good -- especially with the dollar going the way it is.

Publicly pushing the "moderate" is the surest way to ensure the Pakistani people reject the "moderate" - the studied ignorance of this fact suggests that the US wants this Benazir drama to fail spectacularly.

I like Mr. Benchpress as much as the next guy, and Mr. Honduras, he is a great guy, but man... but why would one want to put them in a position where Miyan has to ignore them?

In addition to "sacrificing" the goat, is the strategy also to piss of Miyan? or is this some strategy to discredit Mr. Benchpress and Mr. Honduras?

The word... bewildered.. does not begin to describe how this makes me feel.

Democracy in Pakistan: A Private Joke

2007-11-11T07:51:00.000-08:00

I was reading this, and I fell off my chair laughing!

My first thought was "Who is Gerald Warner?" then I realised I really I don't really care to find out, he is just another idiot in the west trying to come up with a way to rationalise for the western audience the US policy with respect military dictators in Pakistan. The only thing decent about him is that he appears to have discovered there simply is none.

The fact remains that US and other Western nations cannot conceptualise a Pakistan without military rule. They fully realise that this completely contravenes everything they advertise domestically and internationally about their commitment to democracy and justice.

Gerald Warner is pointing out that this inability to comprehend Pakistan will not come in the way of "solving" the problem. By carefully resurrecting the spectre of "Al Qaida Nukes" anything can be sold as "pragmatic" and "firm" policy. Ofcourse if this excites people too much, then one can always make the obligatory big-talk about precision airstrikes on the Pakistani nuclear arsenal whose location most US officials admit to only having a vague idea about. How exactly a precision strike will be effective in an environment of ignorance is a question I suppose the public in the West is unlikely to ask.

Or perhaps that last bit about the "whole military caste feeling threatened" or "the diversionary war over Kashmir" is supposed to keep pesky questions about the accuracy of precision strikes at bay.

It all seems pretty clear really, now the only question in my mind which I can't seem to get my head around is ... what the devil is "running like wet hens".

The Energy Crisis: A summary of discussions with a friend

2007-11-05T09:20:00.000-08:00

I spoke to a friend who has a birds-eye view of the energy world. Here is a summary of what I came away with:

1) Carbon utilisation will prove difficult in a market where the pricing structure is shaky due to uncertainity of supply, growing demand and an outdated pricing structure that promotes escalation and inflation. We are witnessing a preview of the likely outcomes of these forces. Environmental concerns are (currently) secondary to carbon energy pricing, however monitoring emissions represents a way of measuring and possibly creating controls on carbon utilisation on a global scale. Additionally in the future it is unclear if environmental concerns over Carbon utilisation will create constraints on carbon energy pricing, and in the event that it does, emissions monitoring could become critical to the maintenance of a new world order.

2) If a cap structure on carbon utilisation is created, enforcement of the cap will be possible only through a system of consumption control. Available technologies for alternative energy insufficiently economical to promote fuel substitution as a means of consumption control. Consumption levels have to come down for any substitution to be effective.

3) Nuclear sources offer the greatest promise of high volume energy generation, subject ofcourse securing key technologies and fuels against adverse market fluctuations. Non-traditional sources like Wind, Wave, Solar and Biofuels are currently hostage to improvements in storage technologies.

4) In general, the utilisation of all alternative sources and higher consumption efficiencies is dependent on the ability to maintain a strong presence in the high technology field. It is impossible to do this without a robust scientific community and aggressive research and development programs in the government and private sector.

5) An information system will be needed to permit effective policy making. Surveillance on carbon energy consumption, emissions levels will have to be rapidly enhanced in the next five to ten years.

Pakistan: Musharraf Coups Himself.

2007-11-04T12:05:00.000-08:00

As you know a second "coup" has happened in Pakistan, and General Musharraf has just "couped" himself, i.e. he has thrown into jail, the very politicians he himself spent all this time gathering into a parliament of his choice.

The fighting in Waziristan and the entertainment in Supreme Court and all the demands from America to control Jihadi sentiments, have become a bit much for el Presidente Dictator in Chief etc.. etc... and he has asked for a time out.

As you know a suicide bomber came by Majid's house,and who knows where the suicide bomber will go next.

It is an internal matter of Pakistan.

On Testing Things.

2007-11-02T06:23:00.000-07:00

I think there has been endless commentary on testing issues.

One has to keep the following subtle points in mind.

1) You have to test your ideas out - otherwise there is no way to know if they really work. This applies to Indians, Americans, Japanese, Chinese, Pakistanis, Martians, people from Jupiter etc...

2) Unlike your high school physics experiment where everything the theory, the physics, the result, the procedure, the answer, the classroom where it will be conducted etc... is well known... a real test is a much less comfortable environment. Everything is only "sort-of-known", and you have to use your instinct and experience to draw conclusions. If you don't have either of those, then you spend your time learning about things like that - each kind of test is different.

3) Before you draw conclusions - one *has* to have information. Now this is where it gets tricky in the matter of testing things. If the access to information is restricted for any reason, someone who knows half the story will reach a different conclusion from someone who knows the entire story. That is why the interpretations of test results may differ.

4) This kind of differences of opinion are common in real inquiry and a scientific debate on the interpretation of the test results is a very standard thing - though I admit that it is almost never a public affair. What is told to the public is the consensus or average conclusion of the debate - there are always extreme positions that are taken in the debate by people but these are not necessarily accurate positions. It could easily be that the people who took extreme opinions were not fully aware of what done in the test.

5) You can keep testing something, but in general, the more complicated it is, the more ways it can fail in. Testing again and again is good if you want to mass produce something because you want to know every which way it can fail, but if the intention is not to mass produce then there is no sense in wasting energy doing repeated tests. However if the details of the test are known only to a select few, the possibility that this information is compromised is higher - each time you test. It is exactly as Szilard said to Byrnes, when you test, you let the biggest secret out - i.e. you tell everyone - it can be done.

6) Protecting such secrets is the biggest job on hand, even in my opinion superceding the primary function of the test - i.e. specific communication with someone.

7) What to test, well in general one tends to have more ideas than time to try everything out properly, so one has to pick from a set of ideas. Every idea has to be evaluated on its merits and demerits, for example, is bigger really better? or is simply better - better? etc... dirtier better or cleaner better? etc... frankly the ability of people without a technical background in issues to participate in this is limited, and to be perfectly honest I don't have an opinion about this. Knowing what idea is possible to try out properly, is something that is beyond my abilities.

These are very subtle points that one can easily forget in the heat of the debate.

Everyone should say what they want but one should keep points like this in mind - it helps avoid that horrible tendency we all have to go overboard with our imagination.

India US Nuclear Deal: A Provocation Strategy

2007-10-21T12:34:00.000-07:00

The NPA have consistently opposed the India-US nuclear deal.

Most of this opposition comes from the fact that India sees through the NPA. We don't buy their BS about being serious about non-proliferation agendas. We do not buy into their rubbish about the NPT, we do not think very much about their CTBT. Whenever possible we routinely mock them and their lack of intellectual rigor.

India's perception of the NPA does not extend to "Americans" in general and its relationship with the rest of America is driven a completely different set of interactions which are mostly positive and despite innumerable occasions for misunderstandings, India's relationship with the US is bereft of overt hostility.

In such an atmosphere, bereft of overt hostility, the NPA have it rough. They can't force their fellow countrymen to share their distaste of India. Most Americans are indifferent to India, or have a vaguely positive opinion of it. This makes the NPA feel ... threatened.

As the discussions of the India-US nuclear deal gained ground - the NPA threat radars began to sing loudly. Without an India to berate and rail against publicly, NPA sermons seemed to lose their sense of purpose. Without powerful sermons, who would take the NPA seriously? NPA fears crystalised when the Bush Administration began reorganising the State Department Non-Proliferation Bureau and the NPA fought back.

However the NPA with their deep knowledge of "Nuclear Missiles" and "Megaton Warheads", seemed to be increasingly out of place to deal with current proliferation scenarios. India's enthusiastic participation in the PSI and other counter-proliferation initiatives seemed to have won India many new friends in Washington D.C. Under these circumstances, the NPA did the best they could. They tried to get everyone to see that the PSLV could become an ICBM and the GLSV could be used to do something really dangerous ... no one bought it. The idea was so absurd, that even the people in Congress who are very easily swayed by NPA sermons, found the idea hard to swallow.

Having failed in the US to generate the basis for an overt hostility with India, I feel the NPA may have turned to their friends in the Indian Left front.

The Left Front as a whole suffers from a reflexive sense of hostility towards all things American. However a small segment of people inside the Left Front had pragmatically built bridges to the US, after the USSR fell. These people embedded themselves into the NPA led initiatives after 1998 to make the Indian nuclear tests look bad.

The rest of the Left Front had a vested interest in this, the nuclear tests of 1998 gave the BJP a kind of political insurance policy. No one would turn to them and say... that they were ineffective on the national stage. The Left by contrast felt more than little useless as the liberalisation of the Indian economy in the early 90s had led to the public erosion of the Left's cherished ideals. As time progressed the money poured into the Left via NPA enhanced American sources grew in size and the Left invested in an outreach programme where it made inroads into sections of Indian society still recieve the trickle down benifits from the growth in Indian economy. The Left also made strong efforts to court Muslims and other groups that felt alienated by the BJP government. In this way the Left was able to leverage its monetary earnings through US sources into a political poise in the Indian Parliament, despite the fact not a single industry or business inside India was keen to see the Left remain in any form of fray.

Ultimately when the Indo US nuclear deal emerged in the public. The Left was in a quandary. If the US emerged as the sole source of Uranium supplies to India, this would leave the Left Front strongholds in West Bengal and Kerala vulernable to pressures from US Uranium suppliers. Also the rise in trade with the US would mean that the Left Front's political stock inside India - based as it was on anti-capitalist rhetoric and slum lording in areas where they had themselves induced developmental stagnation - would drop like a rock. The Left would be seen as an archaic entity, an anachronism and the economies of places like West Bengal would be left in the dust. The Left also surmised that the deal would most likely involve some form of cooperation against China and Iran and probably involve some additional guarentees that would assuage American concerns about India's nuclear weapons. All these thing would make the Left irrelevant as a political force in India. The Left as a whole had thus a very serious sense of hostility towards the India-US nuclear deal.

The small segment of the Left Front that engaged the NPA in 1998 suddenly emerged as a communication channel of renewed importance.

The NPA for their part were keen on provoking what they felt was a manageable sense of hostility between India and the US. From that perspective, it seems irrelevant where the hostility originated - so long as it was manageable. The Left Front as a whole in India, seemed to fit that bill well ... that is if one assumes that the small group of collaborators between the NPA and the Left Front can function as a reliable communication mechanism.

In a simple scenario from the NPA perspective, the Left Front will simply make hollow, anti-US statements on the Indian political stage and add delays to the deal. The delays will spark the legendary American impatience and a sense of hostility will develop between India and the US. In their anger, US corporations keen to open business opportunities in India will pay the NPA to spout anti-India garbage that soothes their ears.

For contrast, another extreme scenario is where the Left Front realises that it is being lured into a trap by its NPA allies, and goes off script. The small group of collaborators between the NPA and the Left Front becomes ineffective. In the event that the Left Front as a whole proves to be difficult to control, the situation will quickly spiral into overt hostilities between India and the US, ex. denial of bases, India supports Iran etc...

As the NPA surely know, the Left Front's commitment to nuclear non-proliferation is about as serious as the NPA's commitment to disarmament. In the event that the Left is provoked on the nuclear front, they will respond in an overtly aggressive fashion, perhaps test a few missiles or pull some other vintage DPRK style stuff! This kind of behaviour will encourage a deeper atmosphere of hostility between the US and India. An atmosphere of hostility where free trade between India and the US is frustrated, and the language of missiles and megatons suddenly becomes en vogue.

Either ways a win-win situation for the NPA.

Or so it seems...

Unfortunately, such a calculation is flawed because of the precarious situation of the dollar and the rising cost of oil. The underlying motivation behind the India-US nuclear deal at the US end was *not* some imaginary gain in non-proliferation - it was instead to create a stable investment environment for US capital groups in India, so that the cost of America's transition from oil to nuclear power could be defrayed through investments in a highly productive economy. By operationalising this kind of provocation strategy with regards to India at this time, the door to such investments has closed. The NPA have frustrated their nation's transition away from oil. This may be something they can take their friends with deep pockets in the American carbon mafia as a sign of the success of funding the NPA, however it now increases the need in American foreign policy to stabilise the global carbon fuels market. This only increases the pressures on the dollar.

One must carefully weigh the costs and benifits of such a situation.

Nuclear Deterrence:"Calling the Bluff"

2007-10-20T08:45:00.000-07:00

Whenever people talk about deterrence, they come away with the idea that this is a game of bluff. This is easy for people to grasp, because most children play a card game with a similar name and the key to winning the game involves calling the other player's bluff.. and some people think somehow the two things - the game of cards and the game of nuclear deterrence are related.

They are not.

In the game of nuclear deterrence, people cannot call your "bluff". Once you have overtly demostrated nuclear capability of any kind - even a test of a small nuclear bomb - no nation on earth can call your bluff.

Once this threshold is crossed, any additional testing only serves to nuance the language of your choice of deterrence regime. For example, You demonstrate a warhead with a higher yeild. This proves to a percieved adversary that you can make a bigger bang. If you deterrence regime involves scaring your enemy with that kind of ability, then there is a chance your tests will give you more linguistic flexibility in your deterrence regime.

So what is the gain in demonstrating you ability to make a bigger bang?

This question needs to be answered before one attempts such an enterprise.

In 1974, India conducted a nuclear test which demonstrated the ability to build and detonate a simple fission device. The yeild was 8-15 kT per the government's estimates. This was a first test - an announcement of India's nuclear status.

In 1998, India conducted 5 more tests which demonstrated the ability to build more complicated devices and achieve a yeild of 5-50 kT.

A very logical line of questioning which emerged from various sections of the Indian polity - was - Is it necessary to demonstrate a higher yeild. A number of people that thought that there was no need to demonstrate a higher yeild, opposed the tests and questioned the yeilds calculated by the Department of Atomic Energy.

Though the data available to the Department supported the conclusion that the device had achieved a higher yeild, the debate over the yeild being of a more political nature - dissociated itself from the experimental evidence obtained from close in measurements at the test site.

A valid criticism of the "bigger is better" argument with respect to yeild in India, was that it would encourage Pakistan to more aggressively pursue options that would enhance the ability of its Army to survive a nuclear strike. The aggressive pursuit of these options in Pakistan would force India to pursue similar options and this would lead to a local arms race which would increase the burden on India's poor.

This criticism is partially valid, post 1998 both India and Pakistan have aggressively pursued military modernisation and while the Pakistanis are still behind India when it comes to survivability of conventional assets in a nuclear environement, both nations have spent quite a bit of money on this capability. However the burden to India's poor has been mitigated by a growth in the economy and despite suffering staggering natural disaster and a near war with Pakistan, India has not suffered anything like the crippling shortages and famines that are routinely seen in places like North Korea. It appears that whatever resouce reallocation has occured inside India to facilitate this enhancement of conventional military potential, it does not appear to have significantly disrupted the economy. The same cannot be said of Pakistan.

So on a more general note, if the economic costs of an enhanced yeild can be kept contained, there can be no disruptive influences to the rest of the economy.

Alternatively understanding that "bigger is better" does not necessarily work is important, and frankly ... very very honestly... only "better" is "better".

If India is expected to cap the size of fissile material for military purposes, then it is natural to expect India to pursue all options to achieve the highest impact with the reserves it has available. This implies investigation of *all* possible avenues of optimisation including higher yeilds and more advanced designs.

Going forward from here, the Left will dominate the discussion on all these issues and it is important to understand all the details of the Left's position on these issues.

The India US nuclear deal - Dead.

2007-10-17T09:30:00.000-07:00

Hi,

Many of you have been asking me to comment on the state of the Indo US nuclear deal.

I am afraid it is dead.

Some of you may recall that in 1998 the NPA in America and the Left Front in India had joined hands to oppose the Vajpayee government's decision to test nuclear weapons at Pokhran. The NPA and the Left were unanimous in describing the test as a "Hindu" bomb, developed by India's "macho" scientists and "rambos" in the research community. Both the NPA and the Left openly insulted the capabilities of India's scientists and both questioned the competence of India's technologists in the field of nuclear reactor technology.

During this period the marriage between the NPA and the Left Front blossomed. Leading Leftist luminaries were invited to lecture at US universities, and other US fora about the what a "Hindu Nationalist BJP" was doing to harm the world and how "Hindu Nazis" were bent on committing a "Muslim Genocide". Upon encouragement from people in various organs of the US government, these left wing writers spat out standard agitprop material against the BJP. Thanks to the media support provided by an American media that can't resist printing tripe about India, the books these people wrote went on sell and made them millions. In this and other ways the US fed millions of dollars into the Left Front and artificially bolstered its election prospects. The Congress (I) could not secure a majority and was forced to make a deal with the Left and form the government with their support. After the Left became part of the government, their demands on any major expenditure became severe. Every single major contract issued by the GoI had to be padded in ways that suited the Left more than it suited the UPA. Rumour mills in Delhi suggest that the Left Front now sits on a large pot of "political capital" which it can use to swing an additional 30 seats in the Lok Sabha if it chooses to.

When the India-US nuclear deal became public in 2005, the NPA mounted a vociferous campaign in the US to stall its progress in the US Congress. And miraculously, the Left Front which had opposed the nuclear tests, expressed its desire to stop the deal because it may be interpreted as India giving up the right to test nuclear weapons. Doubtlessly the NPA are rejoicing at what was an apparently effortless victory. Some would even go further to say, the NPA engagement with the Left has paid off big-time.

They may be right in more ways than they care to realise.

The Left now rules India.

Soon they will ask for India to sign an India-China Nuclear Deal. There are many things that a India-China nuclear deal could be based on, for example - a Uranium for Thorium exchange, possibly auxilliary deals where Chinese companies would build PWRs in India and Indian companies would build FBR/AHWRs in China. China as a member of the NSG has consistently demonstrated its ability to circumnavigate NPA bullshit emanating from the US. India doesn't care as long as it has enough Uranium to fuel its reactors.

Given the precarious situation of the US Dollar and the fact that every 5 year old in America is at this very moment putting a Chinese manufactured toy in his/her mouth or sleeping in a crib made in Guizhou or perhaps drooling on a pair of pyjamas which were made in Shanghai.... one realises that the US will be able to do absolutely nothing to stop an India-China deal. I mean they could put some sanctions on India or China or etc... but frankly they will be completely ineffective.

Ofcourse once the India-China deal is inked, and the first shipment of Australian mined Chinese packed Uranium lands up in India, the Americans will have to deal with the unfortunate circumstance where it will be cheaper to use a dollar bill in place of a sheet of imported toiletpaper.

I suppose the Americans could always immediately invade Iran to look good before the American media but then that would only leave them with the joy of occupying two countries that share a "long porous border" with Pakistan. They could just invade Pakistan, but then they have to deal with the joy of stabilising a country with 150 Million poor and hungry zealots.

If any NPA actively encouraged the Indian Left to block the deal, I wish to congratulate them on having successfully knocked the America off the high table of Asia - it seems that is what the NPA wanted all along. Perhaps they were planning on sacrificing America's seat at the high-table of Asia to gain "moral" brownie points with space aliens? I don't know, NPA thinking has always been a puzzle for me.

If the NPA did not actively encourage the Indian Left to block the deal, I wish to ask them to reflect upon my earlier suggestions that the NPA should simply shut up instead of filling the air with suspicious utterances. The NPA disregarded my warnings about misusing channels of communication between India and the US for pushing personal agendas. The atmosphere of anxiety in India over the Indo-US nuclear deal which the Left successfully used to its political advantage is a direct byproduct of the NPA war dances before the Indian media.

I now sit back and watch as the NPA run around trying to convince their American audience that India alone is to blame for this disaster.

I would love to point out in detail how the NPA are lying, but I am too busy learning Chinese. I am also digging around for my copy of Mao's Red Book and hopefully when I see the Chinese Ambassador at the party in Chanakyapuri, he will appreciate that my bandgala-pantaloon combination is at the very least a poor imitation of Chairman Mao's suit.

All hail the United Peoples Republic of Ch-in-dia!!
Long Live Chairman Mao, Long Live Chairman Karat!!

Kayani: Musharraf's "successor".

2007-10-16T05:43:00.000-07:00

Wilson John at ORF has a biography of Gen. Ashfaq Parvez Kayani . It makes for interesting reading.

Operation Rakshak: We Look Forward To Better Days

2007-10-14T19:05:00.000-07:00

Shekhar Gupta does something no Indian reporter seems to have time to do these days, an actual interview with Gen. (r) J. J. Singh.

The title of my post "We look forward to better days" is a direct quote from Gen. J. J. Singh in response to Shekhar's questions about the situation in Kashmir.

This relatively simple statement succinctly states everything I have been trying to get across in my comments in Kashmir.

Pakistan: ORF General Officer list.

2007-10-12T06:23:00.000-07:00

Here is the latest list of Pakistan Army Generals from ORF.

Lal Masjid: Musharraf's Political Response

2007-10-08T06:41:00.000-07:00

The disasterous seige of Lal Masjid created an explosive rift between the Army and the Mullahs. Specifically it broke an unwritten contract between the Deobandi religious elite and the Army and publicly humiliated the Mullahs. What made matters unimaginably worse was the murder of hundreds of children in the seige. This caused the Mullahs' grasp on their jazbati followers to weaken and violence in the NWFP spiralled towards a total free for all. At the present time the Pakistan Army as a whole is at war with the tribals in NWFP and chunks of the Pakistan Army are falling off - armymen are either being murdered like cattle or units are defecting to the tribals' side. The spread of violence in NWFP is causing the rift to widen immeasurably.

Musharraf's political maneuvering is aimed at containing this rift.

The first step in this process of containment was to acknowledge that Musharraf no longer had the right to rule the Pakistan. Given the praetorian nature of society, the only way to do this was to create an artificial barrier between Musharraf and the Armed forces. This is where the drama over "shedding his uniform" comes in. The most important thing in this is to ensure that despite what everyone can see with their eyes, Musharraf never make it seem that he has lost. The likely impact of that kind of a surrender would be severe fissures within the Army structure itself. Whatever happens the "unity of command" concept has to hold in the Army otherwise no one will be able to control anything. Another vital point is to make sure pliable persons sit on posts in the Army that Musharraf has hand-picked and that any replacement for Musharraf does not undermine him personally. To this end "a quiet man" or a "loyalist" or a "go-to guy" is being given a leg up.

The second step is to create a barrier - composed mainly of "secular" feudals like Benazir and Nawaz etc... between the Mullahs and their march to power in the National Assembly and Senate. The key factor here is to bring the feudals back with enough money that they can seize control of a substantial fraction of the electoral resources - i.e. pay off enough nazims to get the electoral outcomes of their choice. A fact that some may forget is that as long as Musharraf decides who becomes a nazim, he can influence which feudal gets what in the political arena. Feudals probably believe their "friends" in the western media will able to drum up adequate international support for their claims to Pakistani leadership. To this end the "Chief Justice Chaudhary" drama is being enacted. In my opinion, these feudals are being led like lambs to the slaughter, and understandably so, as neither the Army nor the Islamists, with their belief in "meritocracy" care much for the feudals. Also as the days when the feudals dominated the economy of Pakistan are gone, the "friendship" of western media houses is hardly something that should be seen as permanent.

The third step - perhaps the final step - is to create an incentive package for NWFP, i.e. an effective system of bribes. Such a package will serve two purposes, firstly it will act as "blood money" to the families of those killed in the Lal Masjid seige and secondly it will engage elements of the NWFP political class that will somehow paper over the divisions within NWFP society and restore the Pakistan Army's claim to leadership in the region. At the present time the Islamist political alliance, the MMA holds NWFP. As long as the MMA's grip on the province is unquestioned, there is no way such a political initiative will get off the ground. A key element of this step may be a reworking of the streams of the narco-economy in the region. Pakistan may even have to cooperate with Afghanistan to contain opium production.

This three step process is extremely delicate and painfully difficult under the best of circumstances. Carrying this out while struggling to maintain escalatory controls on violence levels inside NWFP is indescribably hard. Frankly speaking, I would be very surprised if this works, especially given the near complete unpredictability that surrounds Pakistan's urban populations and Pakistan's tribal belt. Such a plan would naturally garner support when presented with tea and biscuits on fine china in Islamabad, but will it fly in Orangi? will it fly in Nazimabad? in Wana? That is difficult to say and only time will tell on that.

Despite what idiots are saying about mangoes on forums that are losing their credibility, sensible people in India do not see any gain in interfering in a very complicated internal affair of Pakistan.

Lal Masjid: The Stages of Escalation

2007-09-25T11:20:00.000-07:00

I see three stages of escalation in the fight between the Pakistan Army and the Islamists. I have listed them below:

Stage 1: The Army's excesses against the Mullahs are met by targetted assasinations of Army officials (in and out of uniform). This amounts to effectively declaring the Army men as kafirs. The Islamists will also conduct a highly focussed assasination campaign against those specific groups within the Army that conduct "anti-jihadi" operations. At this point, the men of "Musharraf's Army" will be at war with the Islamists.

Stage 2: "Musharraf's Army" will respond to such assasinations by using their seniority in the ranks to order the rest of the army to conduct high intensity attacks on islamist sympathisers. The deliberate slaughter of women and children through artillery and heavy calibre weapons by the Pakistani Army will break the unwritten rule of combat in the Indian Subcontinent - "family members are not to be targetted". The Islamist response will be to target family members of Pakistani Army officials. At this point the Pakistan Army as an institution will be at war with the Jihadi groups as not will the Jihadis have declared the Army men as kafirs, they will have declared the relatives of the Armymen as war booty.

Stage 3: The Pakistan Army will bring the entire force of its organisation against the Islamists. The Islamist organisation built for assymetric warfare will take the hit and buckle - but it will not break. Frustrated Pakistan Army units will unleash a reign of terror where they will walk the streets of Pakistan killing anyone they don't like. In a bid to undermine the Pakistan Army's enthusiasm for bloodshed, the Islamists will attempt to loosen the Pakistan Army's grip on nuclear weapons. Quite rightly, the Islamists will assume that whoever controls the bomb in Pakistan will call the shots.

I feel we are currently between stage 1 and 2.

If the reports from NWFP and FATA are anything to go by, the US and the Pakistanis have joined hands in launching artillery barrages on villages suspected of supporting the Islamists. This indicates the onset of stage 2.

I do not see any controls in place inside Pakistan to prevent the slide into stage 3.

ORF Pakistan Update: New Generals on the Block

2007-09-17T06:56:00.000-07:00

ORF's Wilson John has a new article on likely contenders for COAS.

Lal Masjid: The Tarbela Ghazi Incident.

2007-09-15T14:20:00.001-07:00

As you have heard from Sri. Raman , the Zarrar Company officers were murdered in their own mess at Tarbela Ghazi by a fellow SSG officer.

The Zarrar company and the SOTF are Musharraf's problem solving force.

The Tarbela Ghazi complex is one of the SSG's largest training facilities. It has traditionally been home to a number of conflict resolution and political stabilisation forces. In the late 90s when sectarian violence in Karachi boiled over, snipers trained at the Tarbela complex were seeded into Karachi and they killed a number of sectarian terrorists and brought the situation under control. Their actions created the incentives needed to bring ISI engineered armed groups back to the negotiating table.

The murder of 19 SSG officers will ensure that the Zarrar company is largely leaderless. Also the fact that they were killed in a suicide attack by one of their own officers means that the fallen officer simply cannot be replaced and the Zarrar company can no longer be effective in conflict resolution.

In a phone conversation with friends, I had mentioned that a revolt was brewing within the SSG.
In the incident at Tarbela Ghazi we are seeing the first deadly spark of this revolt.

Yes, this is only the beginning.

Atomic Energy: Health Safety and Environmental Security

2007-09-06T07:12:00.000-07:00

There is a suggestion doing rounds that if this nuclear deal actually goes through, India could emerge as a major centre for nuclear material and technology production. A vision that is being paraded around is that of India playing the same role in nuclear trade that South Korea plays in the semiconductor trade. This is a pleasing vision, certainly one that is in line with the energy self-reliance goals set by generations of nationalist thinkers.

There is however a few key issues that must in my opinion recieve greater scrutiny.

Firstly, handling of nuclear materials, especially nuclear fuels poses a significant health risk to personnel at site. Currently the DAE has certain protocols that have evolved to deal with exposure of its workers. However, it is important to note that given the DAE's program was quite small. It is unclear if such procedures will necessarily be stable if there are hundreds of reactors at work. The problems facing us at this end are compounded by the fact that a number of the breeder reactors will require the development and handling of highly radioactive and chemically hazardous fuels and materials. This means that a safety regime that is currently working at the DAE will have to be heavily evolved to keep the workforce safe. Additionally, the AERB, DAE's surveillance arm will have be considerably beefed up if it is to be effective in managing hundreds of reactors, especially ones that may be run by private operators.

Secondly, the DAE has successfully managed waste from its programs. However due to the limited size of the program, this has been a relatively easy affair (relative that is ... to actually developing the technology). Most of the waste management technology is small scale, and it will require scaling up if long-term environmental costs are to be minimised. The DAE has shown considerable foresight by choosing a fuel cycle that greatly reduces the number of long-lived by-products, but storing the intermediaries and any highly radioactive substances produced in the fuel cycle requires a considerable expansion in the current waste management infrastructure.

A related goal in both contexts is surveillance over likely breaches in the health safety regime or detection of illegal dumping of wastes. Presently, due to the small size of the DAE's operations, maintaining such surveillance has been easy. Also as the DAE is a monolith and directly responsible to the PMO, people who break the law can be disciplined very strictly using laws related to the preservation of national security. Such a harsh regime internally has ensured a very strong deterrent to unsafe practices with hazardous materials. Any private companies that will participate in the generation of nuclear power, will not be bound by the DAE's harsh internal laws. In order to ensure that any private players entering the nuclear technology and power market in India play by the same high standards that the DAE has set - a series of extremely harsh laws will have to be put in place to deal with potential offenders. A relatively simple measure that could at least in theory ward off unsavory actors (and possibly prevent a repeat of the Bhopal tragedy) would be the requirement that the private party place a sizable "safety deposit" in the care of the RBI for "unanticipated environmental and safety costs". The size of the deposit could be adjusted to match the operators projected needs and quite possibly such deposits could in principle be matched by government contributions to create a super-fund to deal with environmental and health safety issues.

It is a known fact that radiation can cause cancer. As things stand today, over 80% of all cancer related research in India, is funded by the DAE. Also the DAE manages and funds almost 100% of radiation based cancer treatment activity in India. The DAE is directly responsible for the development of all radiation dosimetry technology currently in use in India. It is very much in the DAE's interest to do this as these issues affect its highly trained workforce. The attitude at the DAE on these issues has always reflected the sense of maturity originally conveyed in Dr. Bhabha's holistic vision of a nuclear India. In the nuclear powered future of India, cancer related surveillance and treatment options will have to expand to keep with the rise in the cumulative dose to radiation workers. In order to ensure that treatment options use resources efficiently, a larger regime of cancer related R&D will have be created. Come to think of it, I do not think that manufacturers of other products that cause cancer - like cigarettes or bidis - do anywhere near as much to cure it! Its time these guys pitch in some money and work with the DAE to create a safer and healthier future for India. I think India's pharma sector will certainly want to be a part of this too, so there is serious potential for economic growth here.

While all this pastes a somewhat cautiously optimistic picture, I note with considerable sadness however that a majority of environmental groups in India are ... well... what I politely call "provocations". Their sole purpose appears to be to generate bad-press about the DAE (India in general). Their hostile intentions are as plain as their sources of funding. Clearly they do not care about the health and safety of Indian people. In support of this argument, I point out to you the way in which the narmada andolan was deliberately hijacked and twisted to become a pulpit for some people. Every effort was made by so called environmental groups to frustrate a negotiated settlement between the Gujurat Government and various tribal groups. The NBA activists were happier to see the tribals get screwed by the dam, and they seemed to get off on the fact that the tribals were suicidally depressed. Rather then help the tribals negotiate a reasonable settlement with the government of Gujurat, the NBA chose to oppose the dam itself and then attempted to create a tribal army that if need be would carry out an armed struggle against the "Hindu Right Wing Facist Modi" government. This is the mockery that passes for environmental activism in India. It is time to get some new blood in there - people that actually care about India - not just about a blank check from from some foreign power. The GoI has carefully slanted the educational syllabus (through organisations like the NCERT) to increase awareness of environmental and health related issues. This initiative needs to be met by aware people taking to an informed sense of environmental activism at the private level. It is time that some more nationally responsible evironmental groups took centre stage in the struggle to protect India's interests.

Lal Masjid: Bomb attacks in Rawalpindi

2007-09-04T05:22:00.001-07:00

It appears that ISI and Signals Intelligence personnel have been targetted in suicide bombings.

A bus carrying ISI personnel was targetted in a suicide attack and then almost simultaneously, another suicide attack was carried out on Army personnel in the Royal Artillery Bazaar area. This area is home among other things to a signal intelligence center. It is unclear if any Signals intelligence personnel were killed in the RA Bazaar blast.

I suspect that someone is targetting Musharraf loyalists in the intelligence agency, sure with a bomb it is difficult to ensure that only loyalists are killed but then... people who do things like this seldom worry about collateral damage. Another way of looking at it is, the Jihadis just blow them, Musharraf automatically does the job of filling the next bus with loyalists - ultimately anyone who rides a bus to work in the ISI is a loyalist. The old Vietnam adage... if it runs.. its VC.. and that includes those buffaloes.

Collateral damage is not without its value for the Islamists, even when the average Pakistan army fellow or his dimunitive colleague in the administrative services dies, the result is the same - it tells everyone that even Rawalpindi, the home of the Great and Good GHQ is not safe and the Islamists can kill anyone - anywhere at will.

This systematically robs the Pakistan Army of the only right it has left - the right to kill people at a time and place of its own choosing. Remember the Pakistan Army has no moral authority left - Musharraf sacrificed that when he killed Maulana Abdul Rasheed Ghazi.

The Rawalpindi attacks occuring as they are - on the footsteps of GHQ - deprive the Pakistani Army of the apparently exclusive right to commit murder on Pakistani soil.

I have no doubt that the attack itself was carried out by Jihadis eager to avenge the Pakistan Army's innumerable insults to Islam, but the very fact that such an attack should should succeed points to the involvement of people inside the Pakistani intelligence community itself. At the very least someone ensured that the attempt itself would remain invisible to the very people tasked with seeing something like this coming.

My dear readers, I feel we are seeing the beginnings of a fairly serious bout of infighting in the Pakistani intelligence community. I suspect that a number of these feuds have been brewing for a while now, and Musharraf has been able to paper over differences here or even leverage them and continue smooth functioning. However with the slow and deliberate erosion of his power - the factions are going at each others' throat and the result is the precipitous decline in public security we are now seeing in Rawalpindi.

I note with some interest how Western newspapers are rushing to cover the event. One could infer so many things from that.

Lal Masjid: The British begin to distance themselves from Musharraf

2007-09-02T06:50:00.000-07:00

The negotiations with Benazir are stalled yet again. The British are slowly learning their irrelevance to events in Pakistan. The pretence of being relevant is becoming ever harder. So out of spite, the British have stuck at General Musharraf. In an article in the Times British anger pokes out:

Britain had privately been pressing America to tell Musharraf it had to stop. In October 2003 MI6 uncovered Pakistani nuclear material on a boat heading for Libya. But the consensus in Washington was that saving Pakistan’s vulnerable (and valuable) president mattered more than prosecuting the guilty. A senior British Foreign Office source explained: “He would come up with his own framework for survival and we would help him get through it, as long as the dirty deals were wound up. It was a compromise struck in the world of realpolitik.”

All sorts of allegations are leveled against President Musharraf himself and against those close to him.

The truth was that Musharraf had been reducing Khan’s role in the nuclear enterprise and had pushed him into official retirement. The nuclear programme and trading were – and are – completely under the military government’s control. And proliferation did not stop.

And then we have these allegations

General Khalid Mahmud Arif, formerly in charge of the nuclear programme and still an influen-tial figure in military circles, said: “Once we skulked around. Now we have a new generation of men and the technology. We have labs and the industry to rival the West.”
He said Pakistan was producing super-strength maraging (low carbon) steel which is primarily used for making centrifuges with which Pakistan enriched uranium to weapons grade. It was also making high-frequency inverters which regulate power to the centrifuges.
“They used to come from the UK and now we are selling them ourselves,” he said. “Maraging steel too – once we struggled but now, finally, we are manufacturing it at the People’s Steel Mill and exporting it. It is better than you can get outside.”

And then there are these wonderful lines

Musharraf has consistently hidden bad news from his American backers. Two particularly worrying incidents were recently disclosed by sources close to those involved. In 2001, Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI), Pakistan’s powerful intelligence agency, had proof that Osama Bin Laden had received in person two retired Pakistani nuclear scientists at his secret HQ in Afghanistan. Both had become Islamist radicals in retirement. According to the son of one of them, Bin Laden told them he had succeeded in acquiring highly enriched uranium from the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan and he wanted their help to turn it into a bomb. Amazed, they explained that while they could help with the science of fissile materials, they were not weapons designers. Soon afterwards, a secret army audit discovered evidence that 40 canisters of highly enriched uranium (HEU), the feedstuff for a nuclear bomb, were missing from the Kahuta enrichment labs outside Islamabad after A Q Khan retired. Dr Muhammad Shafiq ur-Rehman, an insider who is the son of one of Khan’s former key aides, revealed: “They could only account for 80 out of a supposed 120 canisters.” The ISI reasoned that some of the drums had probably gone to North Korea, and some to Iran and probably Libya, according to a former ISI officer. Enough highly enriched uranium remained at large to fuel 1,000 dirty bombs or a sizable nuclear device. All it would take for a doomsday scenario is 100lb of HEU – a mass the size of a sugar bag as the material is heavier than lead – to get into the hands of terrorists with the right expertise. Split into two loads to prevent accidental fission, it could be machined into semi-spheres, loaded into a cannon-style device, and driven in the back of a van to a western target.

This is the first time - deliberate incompetence by Musharraf - is being linked to a WMD attack on "Western" soil. This is a complete shift from the traditional propaganda line, which stated that Musharraf was the only thing that is standing between the West and a Jihadi nuclear bomb.

This is the first time Musharraf is being accused publicly by a reputable western newspaper of being duplicitous on the issues of Jihadi WMD access.

I watch with some amusement as the number of americans visiting Gen. Haq grows with each passing day... but at what point will we see a similar admission of irrelevance from the Americans.

An appraisal of the situation in Hyderabad

2007-08-28T07:14:00.001-07:00

I wish to start by expressing my heartfelt grief for those who have lost near and dear ones in this tragedy. I note with pessimism that an increasingly younger India is restless for some action by its government. As the older people sit and consider the options, they grow weary of the youngsters breathing down on their necks. Perhaps the young do not yet understand the need to abjure from Roman style blood sport - but the old know what sorrow comes from getting addicted to the habit of killing.

In the hope that I have the limited attention span of the youth, I point out the following. It is physically impossible to secure the country against attacks on soft-targets. To disperse security forces in that manner would be detrimental to national security. We must, therefore, focus what little resources we can spare from existing duties to cope with this situation.

The evidence suggests that an attempt at mass casualty terrorism was carried out in Hyderabad. The trail of evidence points towards Pakistan, however given the disproportionate presence of Pak-centric groups in the illegal arms trade and drug trafficing/financial networks it is not entirely surprising that such links have emerged.

The question now is about the intentions of the people who organised these events.

From what we see, the intent does not appear to be punitive. Mass casualty attacks by groups are usually carried out as a punitive or retaliatory measure for strikes on their top leadership or for behaviour that threatens the group's survival. India does not do such things, so I venture that intent is not punitive.

As things stand today in Pakistan, the Musharraf regime is rapidly crumbling. What little control it had over the actions of Jihadi groups is failing. The Jihadis are becoming more and more assertive, as you have all seen they are murdering Pakistani armymen in broad daylight - the method of execution is identical to that used in slaying non-muslims. For all practical purposes the Pakistani Army has lost all moral authority - it is seen as little more than an army of crusaders.

It is plausible that this attack was organised by someone in the hope that it forces India's hand in the events in Pakistan.

For example, a member of the Musharraf regime may have organised these attacks in the belief that it would poison India's relationships with the Jihadi groups and create the threat of an Indian invasion. Such a threat could in theory be leveraged by the Pakistani Army to promote its grip on power - remember the Pakistan Army projects itself as the only thing keeping India at bay - any confrontation with India works to its benifit.

Another possible scenario is that someone in a Jihadi group may have become convinced that Indian intervention was necessary to remove Musharraf, and to that end a deliberate provocation was slipped our way. Such a person would hope that in our anger with Musharraf, we would force him to do something, and that something would serve as the trigger for the anti-Musharraf coup that has been boiling away under the surface.

A third possibility is that an external power seeks to know what exactly India's cards are in the upcoming turmoil in Pakistan. India as you know has assiduously maintained communication channels to all segments of the Pakistani popultion. However as is typical of most PMOs, this PMO despite all the harassment has kept its views and intentions to itself. It is anyone's guess whether we support the Pakistan Army, the Jihadis, or some other brand of Pakistani politics.
The process of investigating the blasts could in theory reveal some of GoI's intentions. Such a revelation could possibly be the intelligence coup of century.

All three scenarios would have the perpetrators relying on India's cautious reluctance on intervening in Pakistan internal affairs as a crude escalation control.

While such matters are up for debate and investigation, it is possible to say with certainity what the consequences of these terrible events are. We are witnessing a polarising effect within Indian society. Muslims are increasingly identified as perpetrators without specific proof. It is one thing for a police officer investigating a crime to identify a perpetrator - this is part of his/her job. It is completely something else for random people to start point fingers without proof or investigation. That is prejudice. Prejudice exists everywhere and it is rearing its ugly head in this case too.

Allow me to extend the line of thinking proposed by Sri. Vikram Sood in his earlier article on the threat posed by Pakistan - i.e. the ability of Pakistan to intice communal polarisation in India. What Pakistan can do others can as well.

Another completely independent line of thinking is that an external power has chose to deliberately accentuate communal divides in India in a bid to influence a critical decision. As you all know crucial debates are underway on the nuclear deal with NPT states, and a concern has been expressed by India's muslims that getting too close to the US may be detrimental for India's relationship with the Muslim world in general. There is considerable hostility towards this suggestion already as Indians of all religions are suffering under the heavy prices imposed on carbon fuels by so-called Muslim states. A situation where further communal polarisation occurs is undesirable as it adds to the difficulty associated with the aforementioned discussion.

The Nuclear Deal: Politics Takes Center Stage

2007-08-24T07:47:00.000-07:00

I have been repeatedly asked to comment on the situation in India.

I can't comment on an internal political matter.

From a somewhat pale technical perspective, ultimately energy is energy, whether it comes from Saudi oil, Iranian oil, Chinese Uranium or Spent Fuel, or American/Australian Uranium, it is still energy.

Diversification is the ideal way of securing the proposed fuel bank and to that end *whatever* needs to be done... **will** have to be done. It is true that our American friends have suggested that they will help us seek out alternatives if there is a disruption, but why take chances?

I do wish to inform our neighbours that I am making a note of their desire to test. Ofcourse the foreign office statement was pretty clear that the test would in response to an Indian test and I make note of that as well.

It is very interesting to see Pakistan still talking like this. With each passing day - the exact price of indulging in bottomless "India-Hatred" is becoming obvious. The military - which prides itself on holding the Pakistani state together - is itself falling apart. And yet - the Pakistani establishment shows no signs of learning from its mistakes.

Even today the LHCBA seeks to appoint Dr. A. Q. Khan as the President in place of Musharraf. The Pakistani establishment still believes that projecting this nuclear taveez (talisman) in the face of its people is going to somehow protect Pakistan from the apocalypse that it is headed towards. Somehow by shouting the word "NUCLEAR" in a crowded room - Pakistan will become immortal.

It does not pay to insult death like this.

Lal Masjid: Feudalism v/s Democracy

2007-08-23T08:47:00.000-07:00

Too much is being made about the Judiciary and its role in challenging Musharraf. I was asked questions about the seriousness of this Judicial activism by people I expected would know better and that is why I am posting this up here.

The Judiciary today is largely a vehicle for feudalism in Pakistan. After independence the feudals (most prominently the Punjabi clans) seized control of the government. Through that control, they made absolutely sure that their large land holdings and unhealthy labour practices were protected from the reach of the law. The feudals established a firm grip on legal affairs ensuring that no one would be able to truly challenge their economic or social power bases.

A small fraction of the feudals used the capital generated in this fashion to set up industries and a few of these did very well. Yet others leveraged their industrial production to set up banks and engage workforces in the urban areas of Pakistan. The feudals of Pakistan used the social position to secure the access to information in both the agricultural and industrial centers. If you wanted a job - you had to get a feudal family to sign off on it - otherwise you had a minimal chance of success.

However as the urban populations of Pakistan grew in the last 50 years, the power of the agro economy shrank. Initially this shrinkage was small, and could be ignored or compensated by investments in industrial activity. It was in this period that the feudals appeared to have a very tight hold on power in Pakistan. However over the past 30 years, the power of the agro economy has shrunk dramatically. The Heroin boom (of the 80s and 90s) and the rising level of industrialisation have to some extent diminished the influence of the feudal elite, but it is mostly the growing population of Pakistan that has marginalised them.

You see neither the agro-economy nor the meagre industrial sector can adequately employ the people of Pakistan. There are some 60 million men in Pakistan and most of them are unemployed. Without employment either agricultural or industrial, the feudal political models cannot function. A very serious threat has emerged to the success of this model. Things have reached a point where Pakistanis openly talk about applying for jobs in India.

In the last 20 years, the feudals attempted to use their presence in the Army to try and deflect all this excess manpower into all manner of narco-trafficing inspired Jihads. To that end they enlisted the entire Army and the religious elite of Pakistan. Now the shortcomings of this policy are in plain sight.

The Army has become a power unto itself - as Ms. Ayesha Siddiqa Agha describes in her books - the Army is now allocating large amounts of land, water and power resources to **itself**. You may be a big Chaudhary somebody-something but you have to stand in line behind a no-name Army jamadar to get anything you want. Bizarrely enough, the Army with its perverse sense of right and wrong, is creating a kind of land and resource reform by taking away the exclusive right of the feudal classes to decide who gets what piece of land, or how much water or how much electricity.

The religious leaders are now in possession of military resources that far outnumber those of the fuedals. The feudals relied on control of key shrines and control over small-arms trafficing to create a small military force. With the madrassas becoming amouries, and students becoming soldiers, the feudals do not have an effective muscle. Man for man, gun for gun, the Islamists are better organised and equipped than any feudal army or political party. In a straight shootout - the feudals would lose - quite possibly as was recently demonstrated in a high profile assasination in Islamabad itself - the feudals' own security guards would turn their weapons on their so-called lords. I am sure the Army could protect the feudals in a pinch... but you have to pay big-time for that protection. And what do when a feudal falls afoul of an Armyman? I am sure Moonis from Lahore can tell us loads about that.

So why not pay the Jihadis themselves.. you ask?... an interesting question indeed that I am sure many feudals might consider.

Ofcourse then there is the awam, who the feudals see as slaves. The awam today, in the grip of a pervasive fear - thanks to the continuous propaganda of the last 30 years, they think more like a qaum and less like an awam. Will a quam invite a bunch of feudals to be their leaders? if the feudals invite themselves, will the quam accept it? Especially when they accepted a Fauji leader on the premise that the feudals were a bunch of complete shits to begin with? Or will they prefer a Jihadi? This is a question the quam will be asking itself.

Under such circumstances, will the "free and fair" election serve as a way of deflecting Islamist sentiments into more mainstream political action?

If all the feudals seek to do is to return to the seat of unaudited power under the guise of an American sanctioned democratic exercise - will such a government be any more effective at curbing Islamism than say that other American inspired democratic government - the Maliki regime in Iraq? how will they be more representative than Musharraf's referendums?

Will a nation of 60 million Islamic men who hate Musharraf because he killed a high ranking Islamic cleric, now blithely accept a woman as their Prime Minister? Do people remember what Pakistanis used to say in the 90s ... "please pray for Pakistan, we have a woman Prime Minister".

Will the Punjabi feudals accept a Sindhi Wadera as their leader? What exactly is one to make of Ghulam Mustafa Khar's refusal to accept the return of Benazir?

Questions.. Questions... Questions...

Lal Masjid: An attempt to split the MMA

2007-08-20T11:18:00.000-07:00

The Grand Jirga organised by the Karzai government and the US ended with Qazi Hussein Ahmad and Maulana Fazl ur Rehman publicly stating their displeasure with the proceedings. Both went on record to say that the only way to solve this problem was for the US to leave the region.

Not long after this, according to Hamid Mir Chaudhary Hussein attempted to get Maulana Fazl ur Rehmaan to support the extension of the present national assembly (essentially the continuation of the PML-QA's position in national affairs). Fazl refused to settle for anything less than "free and fair" elections and for the first time indicated that he had no interest in whatever Benazir and Musharraf were up to. This contradicts the position he seemed to have taken a few weeks earlier where he seemed to quite okay with Musharraf and Benazir getting together.

Hamid Mir has lots to tell us in his latest column on Rediff. The most important point that caught my eye was a report of a meeting between Maulana Ghafoor Haideri and Richard Boucher where according to Mir,

This time the US has no objection on engaging Rehman. US Undersecretary of State for South Asia Richard Boucher met a close aide of Rehman, Ghafoor Haidri, a few days ago in Islamabad. Musharraf's advisers want Rehman to break away from Jamaat-e-Islami President Qazi Hussain Ahmad and form a new alliance with the Awami National Party to work towards normalising the situation in the tribal areas. But Rehman is not ready to break his ties with Qazi. Rehman believes that if there is no understanding between the government and the Opposition, the country faces martial law and a bloody civil war.

It is not clear from Hamid Mir's article what the focus of the talks between Maulana Haideri and Richard Boucher was, however the suggestion that Musharraf's people now want to split the MMA is interesting. The JeI and JuI(F) are the main powerhouses inside the MMA. The entire MMA was constructed with Musharraf's blessings by high ranking Deobandi ulema. The desire to split it now speaks volumes for the bankruptcy of ideas that pervades Islamabad these days.

An article by Sri. Vikram Sood.

2007-08-20T07:03:00.000-07:00

Sri. Vikram Sood has written a piece on 60 years of Independence in Pakistan ..

The article has many valuable insights into the present situation in Pakistan, I would greatly appreciate if my friends here were to carefully read the article and grasp all the nuances. This is the basis of a great perhaps insightful discussion on the Pakistani's state of affairs.

In this piece Sri. Sood also lays out what I feel is the core of domestic countersubversion efforts in India for the foreseeable future.

There is another important aspect that is sometimes overlooked. In India, Muslims have begun to realise that the largest number of Muslims who live in democracy anywhere in the world are here. There is also a realisation that this has been possible because of an independent, secular media and the liberal class, most of whom are Hindus. True, there have been horrible slippages but it is this class of Indians that seeks to expose and protect them against injustices on the basis of religion. The mullahs of Pakistan seek to institutionalise this discrimination and even the moderately enlightened General asserts that there can be no secularism in Pakistan. For anyone to break the Indian equilibrium he must, therefore, Wahhabise the essentially Sufi Muslim and radicalise the Hindu by enticing the former and simultaneously provoking the latter. India of the 21st century must guard against such inroads from Pakistan and from Al-Qaeda indoctrination. Our response cannot be by creating quotas for vote-banks. This only builds zones of vested interests and ghettoises the nation.

Most people in India talk about insulating the country from terrorist attacks and Pakistani incursions, but do not seem sensitive to the psychological assaults, the growing polarization that Pakistan induces in Indian society.

We all know polarization is a useful political device, but excessive polarization could cause lasting social damage. Pakistanis have clearly not learnt this point, but perhaps they will learn in the years to come as Pakistan painfully turns on the very Islamic ideals that help found it.

Though Sri. Sood speaks in the specific context of Pakistan, the point he makes about "breaking the Indian equilibrium" can be extended to a wider context.

I ask my readers to reflect on this.

Lal Masjid: The rolling stone

2007-08-18T06:36:00.001-07:00

Gen. Mirza Aslam Beg has another letter.

Regime change has become inevitable. On a quiet moment, one can hear the rustling sound of the raging storm, which would break the military bondage and will pave the way for a peaceful transition to the rule of law and peoples’ power – the quintessential elements that lend grace and dignity to the nation. Ameen.

Wow... I never thought I would live to see a day when that would be printed.

Here is another speech, this time by Ameer Lashkar Tayabba

Referring to a statement by the Parliamentary Secretary for Defence in the Senate, Saeed said that the Pakistan Government has adopted policies against Islam, and the wind of change has started blowing.Saeed said the statement of the Parliamentary Secretary signified changes at the top, and added that it was the inner voice of the whole nation. He warned that if the rulers did not change their policies then they themselves would have to be changed. He further said that policies of the rulers had already created serious hatred against the Pakistan Army and the present situation resembled that of 1971, The News reported.

It is unthinkable that Amir Lashkar e Tayaba would openly say things like this.

It has begun.

The Kaoboys of R&AW: Down Memory Lane

2007-08-15T14:52:00.000-07:00

The friend who published this book was kind enough to send me a copy of it. It arrived last week, and I read it as quickly as I could. Then I allowed a few days for my thoughts to settle and today finally I decided to pen down what came to mind.

A trip into the pensieve
(with apologies to J. K. Rowling)

As you all know the agency is turning 40 next year, and so some introspection is natural and even healthy. Others can publish institutional histories or "Vision-2020" documents or even websites with lots of jpegs and mpegs. In this way they can have a debate on their needs, expectations, aspirations and so on. The agency is bound to a silent service and so such actions are impossible. This creates an (albeit artificial) obstacle to debate and makes any introspection difficult and that can't be good.

Ultimately, what is history? Setting aside the pretence of objectivity, etc... in the final cut, it is the reminicenses of the people that lived through it. If a few people publish their memiors, however candid they may be, we automatically gain a sense of history. It is true, that ultimately nothing is secret, it all comes out in the end. And newspapers do exactly that, they bring us the information but lacking a perspective, we are left wanting. A sense of history help us develops our perspective.

The business of the agency, I am afraid is rather complicated. Everything has to be adjusted to political taste and fashion. What is salacious gossip one day, is prime product on another. How does the eye discern? how do we know what to keep and what to lose? - this is the question that confronts the professional. A candid discussion may seem scandalously amusing to the untrained ear, but to those in the business, this is a matter-of-fact affair, after all it is their profession to handle information others cannot be bothered with.

So much of ones' life is conflict. History is littered with it, so why should one man's memory be any different? The squabbles, the odd scrapes, and the scratches, all perfectly normal - perfectly human. Sure in theory - we would all live perfect lives without it, but can a frictionless state truly exist? I don't think so . Friction is the human condition, so why focus on it to the exclusion of everything else? - this is reality - and I know I am asking a lot, but just accept it.

We all know that to err is human, and yet how many of us have the ability to own up to our errors in public? Surely in this dog-eat-god world, admitting an error would be death? And yet this memior freely admits to errors made in the past and deficiencies in the present. Despite all the negativity that comes from admitting error, a tremendously positive feeling also appears. Once the demons in the past are confronted the way of the future lights up.

In 1999 the blame for Kargil fell at the agency's door, and a lot of the euphoria that was felt after the Buddha Jayanti of 1998 vanished. Folks like me were left religiously clutching our copies of Asoke Raina's book, wondering if the dark rumours of knives being driven deep were indeed true. After all nothing is impossible and one never truly knows.

From the memoir it appears as if the moment of uncertainity passed and something quite confident and enthusiastic emerged from all the darkness. The calm and reassuring tones heard in those days now make sense.

So what can we say in summation?

Well as it is obvious, we are now playing in a much bigger field and our resources have just barely kept a pace with our needs. It is all good and fine to say we need to gather more information, but how do we ensure that what we gather is useful? can we at least search it? can we store it? can we interpret it? These are not easy questions to answer.

The memoir is predictably silent on all these - after all it is only a memior - a trip through a pensieve. I have asked the questions that come from perusing the imagery from an age gone by... the search for answers now begins.

The excellence of General Mirza Aslam Beg

2007-08-14T06:31:00.000-07:00

True masterpieces are rarely reproduced by humble unbelievers like oneself. To see greatness in its purest form, you have to seek out a true master...

The greatest general of Pakistan's mighty army speaks such great wisdom.

This simply has to be reproduced as is...

"US and India signed the Strategic Partnership Deal in 2003, with the declared objectives, “to contain and curb the rising military and economic power of China and the increasing threat of Islamic extremism in the region.” "

What deal would that be? but never mind such technicalities...

"We have enough information to identify this intelligence network inside Afghanistan, fairly accurately, to determine the dimensions of this Great Game, of the civilised world. The nerve centre is at Jabal-us-Seraj, manned and operated by CIA, Raw, Mosad, MI-6 and BND (German intelligence). It’s a huge set-up with concrete buildings, antennas and all the modern electronic gadgetry one can conceive of. Its out-posts are Sarobi and Kandahar against Pakistan. Faizabad, against China; Mazar-e-Sharif, against Russia and Central Asian States and Herat against Iran, as indicated in the map."

Dear Sir, when was the last time you looked at a map?

• Sarobi is the nerve centre headed by an Indian General officer, who also commands the Border Road Organisation (BRO). Its forward bases are, Ghazni, Khowst, Gardeyz, Jalalabad, Asadabad, Wakhan and Faizabad. BRO has built an all weather road from Sarobi to Asadabad to Faizabad. Sarobi network, targets the province of NWFP, Pakistan. Dissidents from Pakistan, are trained at Sarobi for missions inside NWFP. Wakhan salient has been infested with dozens of electronic outposts, covering Pakistan, China, Uzbekistan and Tajikistan.

Okay, I think he just named all the major Border Roads Organisation offices in Afghanistan. Ofcourse if General Beg's uncle's third brother had got the contract for building the roads instead of BRO, then maybe these camps would not have figured on this list.

Ofcourse what a BRO civil engineer can do to operate a high-tech signals intelligence post, I don't know... but I take it someone actually read the fine print in Gen. V. K. Singh's book or perhaps there is some residual here from the earlier book by another Signal Officer in Chief that was published in late 80s.

• Kandahar has its forward bases at Lashkargah and Nawah. Their target area is the province of Balochistan. The dissidents from Balochistan are trained at Lashkargah for undertaking missions in Balochistan as well as in support of the Balochistan Liberation Army (BLA). One of their tasks is to target Chinese working in the province, particularly at Gwadar, Sandak and Hab. The American anchorages, on the Pakistani coast at Jiwani and Kalamat, jointly plan operations with BLA inside Balochistan. They also use the Pakistani out-posts at Mand, for operations inside Iran. The American warships in the Arabian Sea and their intelligence base in Muscat, provide the back-up support. The facilities at Jiwani and Kalamat were provided by Pakistan, as logistic support bases to the Americans for operation in Afghanistan, but the same are now being used, to destabilise Balochistan and Iran.

Okay wait now... if "they" use lashkargah to train the Baloch militants, why does the Pakistan Army let "them" use "Pakistani out-posts in Mand" and "American anchorages at Jiwani and Kalamat" to conduct operations against Iran?

Against China. The set-up at Faizabad (Badakhshan) holds over 350xpersonnel mainly Muslim soldiers, engineers and workers from India. It serves as the training camp for the Chinese dissidents from the Xinjiang province. Indian Ulemas impart motivational education, giving the impression that the entire out-fit at Faizabad was run by Pakistanis.

Wow.. this is beyond my league to comment on.. Indians posing as Pakistanis to foment trouble in China's muslims. BTW... why doesn't Pakistan show its customary zeal in helping its fellow muslims in Xinjiang? Is Pakistan afraid of China? I thought the nuclear armed Islamic Republic of Pakistan was not afraid of anyone. I mean if it has the big bomb, what does it have to be afraid of? Why does Pakistan keep advising Chinese muslims to be "good chinese" before they are "good muslims"?

It seems that if Pakistan were to act against China to appease .. oh say the Americans... then it would want to do so deniably... but who on earth is going to believe that these are Indian Ulema posing as Pakistani Ulema? would the Chinese really be that dumb to buy into that? Given that Pakistan relies on Chinese missile and nuclear imports for its security, Gen. Beg seems to have a curiously low opinion of Chinese intellect.

The recently acquired facility for military deployment by India, across the border in Tajikistan at Kalai Kumli, adds a meaningful capability to India to operate inside Tajikistan, as well as Uzbekistan.

Kalai-Khumb (not Kalai Kumli) is a Russian dominated area, not Indian, we are guests of Russia in Tajikistan and its outlying areas. Unless now you are suggesting that India and Russia are not collaborating against Russia... which would defy even Pakistani imagination... I fail to see how this is against Russia or Iran or China.

Against Russia. The intelligence base at Mazar-e-Sharif is run jointly by CIA, RAW, Mossad and BND. Chechnyan dissidents and agents from Turkmenistan are trained for operations in these countries. Rasheed Dostam and Ahmad Zia Masood are very active supporters of such activities in Uzbekistan and Tajikistan.

Against Iran. The forward base at Herat and Farah are manned by CIA, RAW and Mossad for subversive activities inside Iran. Jointly operating from these bases and the bases inside Pakistan, such as Kalamat, Jiwani and Mand, they have been able to undertake actions inside Iran, killing a number of security forces personnel in the last few years. The terrorist organisation named Jandullah has been used for conduct of such operations inside Iran.

I think the word RAW can safely be replaced by ISI in this above sentence and then it starts to make total sense.

Pakistan and Iran are being blamed for supporting terrorists in Afghanistan, whereas Afghan territory is being violated so blatantly to destabilise the neighbouring countries of Afghanistan, by nations, who claim to be the flag bearers of the ideals of international norms of justice and fairplay. This is the worst kind of ‘Terrorism Through Consensus’, by the so-called civilised nations, in occupation of Afghanistan. The brutal violation of Afghanistan’s sovereignty for the shameful purpose of destabilisation of Pakistan and the regional countries, is condemnable.

I think President Musharraf just publicly admitted that Pakistan's action (or if you prefer the American term - inaction) in the FATA is the cause for terrorism in Afghanistan. It appears that at least General Musharraf has realised the error of pretending that Pakistan is not responsible for terrorism in Afghanistan.

I fear Gen. Beg is behind the times...

Was this the purpose of the strategic partnership deal between India, United States and NATO”?

Oh for the last time there is no strategic partnership deal between India, US and NATO.

The only one with any ties to either the US or NATO is - Pakistan - the Major Non-NATO Ally of the US.

My argument is based on the research and study, which may not be as accurate as the information held by the government of Pakistan. Yet it is surprising that after so much of suffering at the hands of foreign saboteurs, the government of Pakistan has woken-up now, to say that “foreign hands are involved in the recent killing of the Chinese.” And on the floor of the assembly, the finger was pointed also to CIA. Why this announcement has come so late? Why such culpable lack of responsibility to protect our national interests, while our enemies have spun a web of espionage and conspiracies, which undermines our national security. Someone rightly said: “The peak of tolerance is most readily achieved by those who are not burdened with convictions.” (Alexander Chase)

General, there is no way you can blame India for a highly complicated mess of international espionage treaties that the Pakistani government itself has signed.

If I understand anything currently

1) Pakistan is in a treaty with the US to contain the Jihadi groups in Afghanistan.
2) Pakistan is in a treaty with China to keep the US bogged down in Afghanistan so as to provide China a competitive advantage in Central Asian markets.

3) Pakistan is in a treaty with the US to contain Jihadi groups inside Pakistan
4) Pakistan is in a treaty with Saudi based oil interests to keep Anti-US jihad activity on a high inside Pakistan.

5) Pakistan is in a treaty with the Iranians to help them build their nuclear program
6) Pakistan is in a treaty with the US to destablise Iran

7) Pakistan is in a treaty with the Russians to keep the US suffering in Afghanistan.
8) Pakistan is in a treaty with the US to keep the Russian off-balance in Chechnya

9) Pakistan is in a treaty with the US to provoke the Uighers so as to deny a stable energy corridor to Central Asia
10) Pakistan is in a treaty with the Chinese to develop a southern route for Chinese energy traffic via Gwadur.

I have done my best to organise this mess of Pakistan's relationships with the so called great powers... but honestly my analytical powers fail me. I am not a graduate of the PMA .. only Kakul can provide the world with "a dangerous intellectual" with this kind of brain power.

India cannot be held responsible for the Pakistani Army's flair for making an unmanageably large number of tactical alliances!

Youm-e-Azaadi Mubarak Pakistan...

Lal Masjid: Crisis Point

2007-08-08T14:25:00.000-07:00

Musharraf was supposed to attend a meeting with Karzai to allegedly sort out the border issues. It was supposed to a major photo op.

Musharraf cancelled his trip and no public reasons were given.

Reports are now emerging of a declaration of an emergency in Pakistan.

It is unclear what emergency powers he will assume (i.e. ones he does not already have).

I am sure you have all heard the politicians shouting asking him to resign and I am sure you have seen that the Lahore High Court Bar Association "elected" world famous nuclear smuggler, Dr. Abdul Qadeer Khan as the president in its "referendum".

No seriously people, jokes apart, it appears that the discontent inside the Army has reached a crisis point.

A declaration of an emergency at this point only means one of the following:

1) A revolt within the SSG praetorians against Musharraf. It is possible that the SSG revolts against Musharraf to restore the Ulema's faith in the Pakistan Army as an institution.

2) Extreme dissatisfaction within the Commanders, this is the sort of thing that happens a planned "reshuffle" becomes a game of musical chairs which someone (who is sufficiently powerful and close to Islamabad) does not want to play.

3) Someone is messing around with the nuclear command and control chain. This might happen if someone in the US got a little to serious about that misguided threat to invade Pakistan.

Lal Masjid: The US pulls out all the stops

2007-08-08T06:12:00.000-07:00

The US is now getting desperate to insulate itself from the events going on inside Pakistan.

The open threat of cutting US aid to Pakistan is being held out. This threat by itself is utterly meaningless. The US depends on Pakistan for sustaining its troops in Afghanistan and if the US cuts aid to Pakistan - it will do at great cost to its posture in Afghanistan. While a shift in focus of this nature may seem sensible from the perspective of that global war on terror, from the perspective of economics, this is not desirable. Afghanistan is the world's largest producer of opium and it sits astride a new pipeline route to Central Asian energy reserves. Afghanistan is the key to ensuring American dominance over the trade in opiates and energy. Additionally Pakistan is one of the biggest players on the illegal arms market - the US cannot afford to lose Pakistan as an ally.

This is the geo-political reality of our time - all ever so feeble protestations about democratic traditions in the US non-withstanding.

While tough talk from someone like presidential hopeful Senator Barak Hussain Obama may suggest that a political reformation is in the works in America... similar such talk from more credible congressional leaders of the US invading Pakistan, cutting off aid, etc... this signifies a desperation the US. This desperation can be traced back to this sense of helplessness that accompanies a loss of leverage in Pakistan.

Perhaps this a reaction to the recent suggestions from the Pakistani Army top brass to Musharraf that he should pursue a course of action that ensures that the Islamist anger does not turn against the Pakistan Army as an institution. We all know that the US has invested heavily in propaganda aimed at projecting Musharraf as a great American ally. Most of the propaganda was aimed largely at the super-gullible American audience which believes anything it sees on TV. However due to a highly misguided policy of trying to dictate the news in Pakistan, large portions of this propaganda has leaked out and spilled on to Pakistani audiences.

The end result is the singular identification of Musharraf with all things American. Hostility towards Musharraf is indirectly splashed on to American interests.

This is an association that American leadership cannot sustain. American leadership cannot be held responsible for their own mistakes, why on earth would they want to be held responsible for Musharraf's mistakes?

America cannot risk having the Pakistan Army turn against them as an "institution".

Lal Masjid: The Way to Dusty Death

2007-08-01T06:34:00.000-07:00

The US is now openly holding out the threat of airstrikes on Pakistani territory as a deterrent to its interests in Pakistan being compromised.

The negotiations with Benazir are stalled as Benazir wants to come home with enough money from the Army that she will be able to bale Musharraf out and ensure her hold on her own party. I am not sure the beleagured Army Chief has that much money to spare. Benazir probably believes that dictators may come and dictators may go, but she will always remain popular in the West, as a woman who was once the Prime Minister of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan - a woman who defied the Mullahs. What status that can bring, no British or American can take away from her.

Quite openly Maulana Fazl ur Rehman has asked the Pakistani parliament to allow General Musharraf to be elected for another term. In his words, this will help prevent a repeat of 1971, he is pretty explicit that no general will be allowed (by the US) to remove Musharraf, and that Benazir's return has been adequately scripted to the point where he has no objection to it.

Maulana Fazl-ur-Rehman's speech is an acknowledgement of the fact that none of the Deobandi top brass have a clue as to how to deal with this peculiar situation: a dictator they have legitimised is bent on debasing Islam and humiliating them in the most direct and visible of way.
And the very students, they have trained, are proving harder and harder to control.

Despite what dreams may come to those who sleep peacefully in the US, there is *no* way in which actual US airstrikes will aid in stabilising Pakistan. It is pure fiction to think that unrest will pave the way for legitimising Musharraf's dictatorship. The failure to protect Pakistan's borders from US intrusion despite all the effort Musharraf put in ... will not be recieved well. Maulana Fazl-ur-Rehman is right - 1971 will repeat.

In that sense supporting Musharraf's re-election and Benazir's return seems like the easiest thing to do. Neither will make the slightest bit of difference to the situation in Pakistan. The progression towards a 1971 type scenario where the military has lost its legitimacy is relentless and no amount of American pressure can change that.

Lal Masjid: I fear a "Shia Holocaust" is in the works

2007-07-30T07:33:00.001-07:00

After the Lal Masjid confrontation and the assasination of Maulana Ghazi and the ritual humiliation of the Deobandi clergy by the Pakistan Army here is an unfathomable sense of anger in the radicalised population of Pakistan. A majority of this population is Sunni and a number of the tanzeems have a long history of sectarian violence. Some experts even suggests that a number of the Pakistani Islamic tanzeems were originally concieved as ideological defense mechanisms against Shia radicalism emanating from Iran.

The ground is very fertile here.

For centuries now, the regime in Iran has acted as the protector of the Shia. The present Islamic revolutionary regime has been at the forefront projecting power on behalf of minority Shia all over the world. In a world where nuclear potency is regarded as a demonstration of international relevance, a predominantly Sunni Pakistan possessing a nuclear bomb has caused concern in Shia Iran. The concern that Sunni Pakistan may be sharing nuclear weapons knowledge with Saudi Arabia, Iran's ideological adversary in the Middle East, is cause for alarm in Iran. An atmosphere of relentless confrontation with Saudi Arabia's ally, the United States of America, does not help Iranian comfort levels either.

An undesirable change from the US point of view, in the Iranian nuclear status is not impossible and if such a change does occur the US will have no choice but to move against Iran. If the US moves against the revolutionary regime in Iran, at least until a new power center emerges and establishes itself agains the US, the Shia the world over will have no protector.

Needless to say that in places like Pakistan, the radicalised population will express their dissatisfaction with an American takeover of Iran and most of their anger will be directed at the Pakistani Army which is propped up as Pakistan's ruling class by American support.

In a bid to save themselves, the Pakistani Army is likely to deliberately sow the seeds of sectarian violence. This will in turn deflect mainstream Sunni anger on to the Shia population. In the face of heavily organised radicalism, and lacking institutional protective support from a regime in Iran, the Shia will stand no chance. They will be decimated.

Like the Jews of Europe in the 30s and 40s, the Shia will be a lost cause, an unanticipated consequence, an unwitting victim of global machtpolitik.

Lal Masjid: The Battle of the Potohar Plateau

2007-07-28T08:54:00.000-07:00

The MMA has stuck its neck out and grabbed the Lal Masjid from Musharraf's people.

The MMA has requested for assistance from the people to rebuild the Jamia Hafsa itself. In ceremonies held there on Friday, MMA leader Maulana Siraj ul Haq led the prayers and prior to the prayers a large group of people collected debris from site of the Jamia Hafsa as some sort of spiritual memior of the events there. A group of people passed around a mound of dust from the site and many faithful dipped their fingers in it and ate some it as a mark of respect for the dead Jihadis.

The mood turned ugly when the government appointed Khateeb of the masjid entered the premises. The crowd chased him away and the atmosphere continued to deteriorate causing the Police to use standard riot control measures to contain the situation. The police continued to be active until a blast occured killing a dozen or so policemen. Currently news coverage emanating from the "authorities" in Pakistan suggests this was the work of a suicide bomber. The Masjid has now been closed indefinetely.

The Pakistanis "authorities" appear to have failed to grasp the significance of debris from the mosque. This debris is currently being transformed into relics of martyrdom - relics to which only the MMA's friends have access.

The battle for the minds of the simple men of the Potohar plateau has begun in earnest.

We have agreed to agree.

2007-07-28T06:29:00.000-07:00

We are now subject to a barrage of positive media pressure on the Indo-US nuclear deal. There is the sound of the Champagne corks popping... etc... even on the disreputable forum, the disreputable are celebrating a sense of victory.

And yes I do agree that we have... a.. well.... a sense of victory.

Yes... as the wiser sages amongst you have surmised from the guarded tone of Sri. Narayanan's comments and the absence of acts of self-immolation among the NPA... a great many questions remain unanswered.

Thanks to the tireless efforts of our negotiating team, and the efforts of the Bush Administration's lawyers, we have we now have a piece of paper that says "we have agreed to agree".

Please understand I mean no disrespect to those in India who fought hard to get it to this level. After the utter fiasco that followed the NPA's breast-beating and irresponsible behaviour in the media, there was a lot of pressure on both sides to make it look like we still had an agreement. The cumulative prestige and trust accrued by interlocuters on both sides over decades was nearly destroyed by the NPA antics. The "Agreement to Agree" has saved us from utter catastrophe, but we still stand periliously close to the edge.

For reference now let us look at the balance sheet:

India needs this agreement because it seeks an energy solution. India's scientists have laboured hard for half-a-century to find an evironmentally safe, proliferation proof system of utilising nuclear fuels to generate energy. The current desire - given rising concerns about global warming - is about making it sustainable in the Indian context. That is where the entire effort of DAE has been concentrated. To make this sustainable, India needs to do two things, first it needs to interact with the global market in nuclear fuels and technologies to buy what it needs, and secondly it needs to create the necessary information control structure to preserve its intellectual property.

The United States (and the western world) is not mentally prepared to see India implement an energy solution based on nuclear technology. Nuclear energy technology in the US is very primitive and the fact that India - a country of 200 million starving people - could make such high technology - makes the US feel very insecure. At the heart of America's insecurity is a pervasive fear, that someone will do to the US what the US did to Japan at Hiroshima and Nagasaki, but this is simply an peculiarity of the US. Over the past 300 years, the Western world in general has gotten used to being on top of the global technological order.

300 years ago, India and China used to be the dominant economies of Asia. All records of history in these places suggest that was the "natural state" of the world. However the burst of industrial activity in Europe that followed the exploitation of resources on the American landmass changed all that. Europe was able to pull itself out of the Dark Ages and build a foundation of technological progress that allowed it to surpass India and China as the global center for innovation. The populations of Europe proved unable to handle such rapid change, and horrible wars occured with sickening frequency. These wars debiliated the European economy and over time Europe lost its top position to the United States of America.

We can endlessly debate the causes, but for the last 300 years, the economies of China and India were depressed. In this state they could not support innovation and as a result they heamorraged intellectual property to the more developed Western economies. This is no longer the case, after half a century of guided economic growth, Indian and Chinese economies are nearing a full recovery and capital reserves are reaching a stage where large amounts of technology innovation can be sustained. This is the "natural state" of things, the economies of India and China cannot remain reliant on imported technologies if they are to grow.

Unfortunately the manner in which Western grand narratives have been structured, Asia is seen as a very passive terms. The Western narrative rejects the notion of an active Asia. Perhaps this has the benifit of filling Westerners with a sense of confidence or even possibly a positive enthusiasm to do something, but it also leaves the average Western mind unprepared for any form of activity in Asia.

The West is completely unprepared for an Asia that no longer simply passively accepts Western dominance over high technology. In the absence of any real thinking on the issue a deep seated hostility is taking hold. While the US has rather peculiar concerns, other countries especially those that are not too far from the bottom of the global technology ladder, the "middle countries" if I can call them that, are sensing an imminent loss of status. This kind of feeling is more likely to make them do ... well... unreasonable things. With luck however we may be able to contain this matter in the NSG, but I am not holding my breath here.

The NPA for their part have assidiously courted these "middle countries", wherever possible they have offered up the suggestion that these countries would become disaffected with the US and its sudden change in posture. They have implicitly held out the possibility that these countries might become unreceptive to US goals on nuclear proliferation if India is given a special pass.

I am unsure of the merits of such an approach by the NPA. Courting this kind of behaviour could easily be misinterpreted as encouraging it. At the very least being supportive of this kind of thinking could artificially prolong the endurance of negative views about the technological rise of Asia.

I sincerely doubt if any of the current NPA savants actually grasp things as I have just laid them out. A reformation of the NPA clergy is long overdue. In Indo-US ties, this is the next real milestone.

Lal Masjid: An "honourable exit"?

2007-07-27T10:21:00.000-07:00

The Supreme Court's decision on the CJP's reinstatement is being seen by some as a possible road block to Gen. Musharraf's re-election. There are now rumours floating around that General Musharraf had a meeting with his top military aides. This is most likely a euphemism for the CJCSC Gen. Ehsan ul Haq and VCOAS Gen. Hayat. There are others, but these two have the most to gain immediately from his departure. This kind of talk is code for the army saying that it will not support "martial law".

I feel the Army is being realistic, it simply does not have the ability to sustain both a strong campaign against the now-disaffected Islamists while enforcing "martial law". It is difficult to ignore that this level of maturity has emerged only after the reports of fatal attacks on Pakistan Army officers who were travelling civilian clothes, but then "this is Pakistan"... so it really shouldn't be that surprising.

There has been a suicide bombing at the Lal Masjid complex and the newly appointed khatib of the facility has fled after crowds of "students" surged into the complex and seize it again. This strongly suggests that there are people at Aabpara that are not happy with the way things have proceeded so far or the direction which this is taking. They attempting to recreate the elements of a drama that scared the country and put so much pressure on Musharraf.

The trip to UAE is allegedly to meet Benazir Bhutto who hopes to gain re-entry into Pakistan. To that end she is being very supportive of President Musharraf even if it means alienating her own party which wants to lead the charge against the General. This act of courting Benazir has effectively checked the possibility of action by the PPP to counter Musharraf.

The trip to Saudi Arabia is interesting, if Musharraf is refused in Saudi Arabia, then perhaps I will say it may be time to think afresh about the "honourable exit" issue, until then.. where is the rush?

Lal Masjid: Providing the "Operations" legitimacy in a deniable fashion

2007-07-26T14:47:00.000-07:00

When you want to do something, but don't want to be seen actually doing it, you have to resort to some complicated contortions.

The Islamists in the MMA are now jammed up against a wall. The Pakistan Army wants them to legitimise the operations in NWFP. The line being taken is that the MMA "owes" its seats to the Pakistan Army i.e. if the Pakistan Army decided otherwise, the MMA would "lose" its seats. You understand what I am saying? the Pakistan Army controls the ballot box, so the MMA must dance to its tune. However if the MMA dances to its tune and supports the NWFP operation, then it ends up losing political space in the rest of the country and in NWFP as well.

So what choice does it have? ultimately the NWFP is under a MMA Chief Minister, Durrani. Technically he has to sign off on it, otherwise the absence of his approval becomes a legal issue. Musharraf's name is not so good these days in the courts. If Durrani tries any stunts the Pakistan Army probably has a coffin with his name printed on it. Durrani has to say yes... but also he has to be seen saying no.

That is a lot of jugglery.

That is what was going on when somewhere something went wrong, and Qazi Hussein Ahmad of the Jamaat-e-Islami was "not consulted"... so he put up a token protest. The MMA chair has taken note of the token protest and asked him to "show cause". Wonderful isn't it? now the Qazi can tell the world how the MMA leadership is being coerced by the Army.

In the meanwhile there is a parliamentary drama under way, some musical chairs with the PM's seat in the middle. Some rubbish like appointing Chaudhary Shujaat Hussain as Temporary Prime Minister.

Lal Masjid: The US attempts to support itself

2007-07-25T08:51:00.000-07:00

I am getting a lot of emails about the US talk of attacking Pakistan.

I feel the US is trying to tell everyone in Pakistan that they have to be mindful of US interests in their internal drama that will soon be staged.

To demonstrate its endorsement for Musharraf, the US has offered the use of air and artillery support in FATA. There is an unwritten unspoken quid pro here..."we will back you up when you need it in there, but you let us walk in and kill whoever we want".

And therein lies the rub, allowing the Americans killing rights in the FATA area is precisely what Musharraf cannot allow. Sure there are people in the Pentagon who are tired of being killed by Pakistani infiltrators in Eastern Afghanistan, and quite frankly having them occasionally jump across the border for a little fun and games of their own isn't such a bad way to keep them off your back. No.. I mean it... seriously by the time they realise that their hot pursuit is a waste of time, they will be dead anyway. But... if something they do in the zeal undermines the entire fabric of cooperation with Musharraf... then it is going to be all Pakistani fun and games in Afghanistan.

Do you all understand this? there is a big difference between when an Indian military officer talks of "hot pursuit" and when the American military officer talks about it.

Quite simply the Indian military officer is intelligent enough to know that all his critical supply LOC/MSRs don't lie inside Pakistani held territory. An American military officer who sits in Kabul sipping American coffee that has been transported all the way from Karachi by Pakistani trucks, is not being terribly smart if he insists on cross border strikes to "avenge" the odd patrol being erased.

I would not care to stop someone who insists on biting off more than they can chew but given how this Afghanistan-Pakistan-India system is actually coupled, I am compelled to speak.

There must be a more sensible way of doing the US bolstering its own posture in Pakistan. Given that I think it has to prepare the Pakistani audience for an eventual American invasion of Iran, I think something this aggressive - i.e. cross border strikes into FATA... may be ... shall I say.. overkill? Shirin has already taken to hammering out the line that the entire ummah is under attack. Now if you find that surprising I ask you.. wtf were you expecting her to say? what do you think that the "silent majority" Pakistanis are going to say?

We all know that force has to be applied to solve problems of such a nature... but there is such a thing as overdoing it and I think the need of the hour to avoid overdoing it.

US and Iran: Alea Jacta Est

2007-07-25T06:59:00.000-07:00

The political fortunes of President Bush are in a decline. Anger over the inability to pursue a "winnable war" in Iraq is finding a focus on the President himself. Across the board there are signs of widespread disapproval of his leadership. The numbers have never been this bad, not even when Bill Clinton and Monica Lewinsky had their little cigar party.

The Iranians are in a major internal fuel crunch after their refineries shut down for lack of adequate spares. The US unwillingness to sell the spares provoked the Iranians to push the envelope. The Iranians are now attempting to break the Bretton Woods Agreement. There is more than just talk of trading oil in Yen instead of the Dollar. The choice of the Yen is remarkable, of all the countries that they could have chosen, the Iranians picked the one country that the US nuked. No prizes for guessing what the Iranians are counting on...

In response to this, the US has moved by arresting arms merchants that are supplying Iran with US spares. It requires only the slightest bit of imagination to ask how it is that anyone, especially a Pakistani in the post 9-11 world, can purchase US made F-14 parts and sell them to Iran without anyone noticing before now. When you consider that Iran is the only country other than the US to use the F-14, one would think that the private export of any F-14 parts outside the US would attract attention automatically. Please read between the lines to get the rest.

US based pension funds, managing the retirement monies for some five major US states have decided to dump their investments in Iranian companies. By dumping their stock, the US based pension funds are merely falling into line with Congressional guidelines on trade with Iran, but the market analysis suggests that this move wil cause the value of key Iranian companies to drop and a run on the Iranian markets is not out of the realm of possibility. And all this while various Bush Admin. mouthpieces are going to great lengths to say Iran is the cause of the violence in Iraq and that a stay in Iraq is absolutely essential to keep Iran in check.

Escalations like this are not uncommon between nations that have strained relations. It is also possible to use an escalation to create an atmosphere of fear that perpetuates your brand of leadership. However this is a very very very slipperly slope and escalations of this nature are very hard to control.

A direct attack on US currency by Iran is an invitation to others like President Chavez of Venezuela to try the same thing. If President Chavez does this, other major players in South America like the Cocaine Lords or Meth Kings will be tempted to seek out avenues for similar opportunities. There is no way the US financial sector will ignore the implications of the Iranian action.

It is now a race to see if President Bush can put Iran out of action before the US financial leaders - the real bosses of the American economy - start calling in his own loans.

So as the great Emperor once said on the shores of the Rubicon, "Alea Jacta Est"

There is however a few technical problems to which I find no easy answers.

The US armed services have traditionally required a decade or so to recover from a particularly bloody engagement. The 2001-2007 period has seen something in the range of 15-20,000 American casualties (if you include servicemen, "private" contractors, special forces etc...) This is a high number per year, comparable to the numbers from the Vietnam War. That war left the US out of high-casualty combat operations for a decade after the end of hostilities.

The current level of troop commitments do not permit the deployment of an additional 300,000 troops needed to secure Iran after the Islamic revolutionary regime has been deposed. It is possible that such troops could be raised from Hispanic immigrants, but that would require dealing with the highly complicated immigration issue which frankly no one has the political capital to really craft manageable conflicts out of. Hispanic speakers are a sizable minority in the US but less than 1% of the political class in the US even speaks spanish, many of these people actually cling to the notion that somehow speaking English is the key to maintaining their social status. Unlike the blacks who were brought as slaves, the Hispanics are free migrants, they have no history of communication with their American "owners" nor are they willing to sacrifice their culture to accept that of their "masters". The communication gap is severe, this makes managing conflicts very troublesome.

Alternatively, troops from Iraq could be sent to pacification operations in Iran, but then pacification of Iraq itself would have to rely solely on private armies. It may be possible to recruit such armies out of US prison populations or even perhaps Iraqi ones, however their effectiveness in pacification operations remains open to debate. Lacking even rudimentary discipline, it is quite likely they will create more problems then they solve and questions will remain over their controllability. The US will be very thinly spread on the ground and I really doubt that the military in its current state of mind will want any more of that.

Even if we assume that the Iraqi oil reserves are "donated" the US military effort on Iran. It will still create pricing pressures on oil. There is no way that any major oil company will not want to use that kind of environment for indulging in price speculation and it is difficult to see India or China or Japan or even Europe reacting positively to higher oil prices. There are any number of things that these nations can do to make life difficult for Americans, but even if they simply accept the rising oil prices as a fact of life, the Americans still have to deal with a global inflation in oil pricing. That degrades the effectiveness of the US strategic fuel reserves to act as an anti-inflationary bulwark. The run on the dollar will begin shortly afterwards.

Please remember all this has to be done while ensuring that General Musharraf is propped up, an increasingly difficult proposition in the present times. Sure I know many Americans do not understand the importance of Musharraf, or perhaps do not appreciate what will happen if they try to stop caring about Musharraf's survival... but surely the Adminstration does not share this lack of awareness. Surely they above all else know what sorrow the slightest shift in General Musharraf's loyalties can bring.

All these are fairly sensible seeming reasons for anyone not attempt stunts with Iran. However people, or nations do not always act sensibly. What remains in such a situation, apart from the mountains of dead, is the indelible implication of sensless behaviour, imprinted on the minds of billions, something no propaganda campaign can truly erase. In short it will cost the earth and then some to whitewash this even in the US controlled media.

Lal Masjid: The Judiciary carefully positions itself

2007-07-23T09:01:00.000-07:00

Another desperate attempt has begun to save Pakistan from a descent into complete chaos.

The Judiciary has carefully positioned itself on the Lal Masjid issue.

This shift in posture is visible on what appears to most eyes to be an unrelated affair, the reinstatement of the Chief Justice.

By over ruling Musharraf's decision to remove the Chief Justice Iftekhar Mohammad Chowdhary, the Supreme Court is attempting to place itself astride of the public resentment against Pervez Musharraf.

This will allow the court to pretend to be neutral in a drama that will soon be staged in Pakistan. In this drama that will propel itself to the top of the national agenda in Pakistan, the Islamists will attempt to confront the America backed Musharraf regime. Sure a legal proceeding of this nature will provide yet another platform for anti-Musharraf discontent to spray itself into the air but by ensuring the appearance of neutrality, the Judiciary will attempt to ensure that the fight between the Army and the Jihadis remains confined to the narrowly defined legal terms. Enmeshing both sides in a legalistic framework might shift the battle off the streets.

Frankly I think this is a long shot, we are all beggars for options right now and beggars can't be chosers. That may be what prompted Musharraf to accept the verdict, despite the appearance it gives of providing an alternative power center in the country.

Lal Masjid: Some questions about the violence in Pakistan

2007-07-18T08:49:00.001-07:00

As I said in a response to one of the readers;

"The over-reliance (of Pakistani leaders) on choreographed violence to promote their brand of social leadership steadily destroys the very society they want to dominate. In a misguided effort to display their power to light a controlled fire, they manage to burn the house down. "

As we all gather to watch this choreographed fight between the Jihadis and the Pakistan Army, for those of us who keep track of violence and its use as a language of communication, a few questions naturally come to mind.

If a brigade size Pakistani Army formation finds itself overwhelmed (due to attrition or infiltration) by Jihadi groups on Pakistani soil what if anything can be said about the security of Pakistan's nuclear weapon caches? Surely even someone as smart as Alex Stolar knows that if the formation protecting the cache is compromised then there is cause for concern?

Alternatively if a flag officer is murdered or defects to the Jihadi side, then what if anything can be said about the loyalties of those critical in the chain of nuclear security?

Ofcourse so far General Musharraf has survived many assasination attempts, thanks in no small measure to the loyalty of his personal staff. General Musharraf has the capacity to fix almost anything or so we are repeatedly told, but what if he is shall I say "incapacitated" in some way? what can be said about his effectiveness in controlling the overall situation?

Generally the Islamists ofcourse have been given to rhetoric. I for one felt that this was deliberate on their part, perhaps even done at the behest of their allies in the Pakistan Army. Will the Islamists now eschew escalatory rhetoric in favour of a more rational and reasoned voice?

There is censorship in place in Pakistan today. Without a free flow of information, how will anyone make decisions about the state of things? This is the paradox of information control, the more you try to hide, the less you can predict.

Lal Masjid: Misguided Behaviour

2007-07-16T08:50:00.000-07:00

In a bid to discredit the Lal Masjid leadership, a number of court cases are being registered against the Khatib. To craft a deterrent against possible attacks on the families of Pakistan's finest, the family of the Khatib is also being targetted with criminal proceedings.

These court cases are poorly constructed without due thought to the lack of evidence or the even the slightest thought to sustainability of a prosecution. In the case of Omar Saeed Sheikh in the Pearl murder case, something similar was done to save the "image of Pakistan". Now the that same miguided legal drama is being staged with a more pressing aim .. i.e. to demonstrate the legal credibility of the regime. All this is being done by Musharraf's men under the belief that the Pakistani supreme court will rule in Musharraf's favour.

That anyone can believe that the very court that this regime brutally humiliated will not pass up an opportunity to stick it to Atapak is possibly the Eight Wonder of the World.

The attacks after last friday have left well over a hundred Pakistani Armymen dead. The openly acknowledged casualty tallies are lower but that is understandable given the circumstances. The truce in FATA is dead and many Pakistani Armymen are going to follow. There is an exodus from government pasand tribal belts, because already a sustained campaign of violence has already begun against them. If there are repraisal attacks against other tribes for any assaults on the Pakistan Army, the cities of Pakistan will host a new wave of violence.

A number of the children killed in Lal Masjid operation hailed from the Pakistan Army's recruiting grounds, their relatives are in the Army, it is unclear how soon it will be before their anger over these events manifests. Qazi Hussain of the JeI has already asked that Musharraf personally be punished for the fiasco at the Masjid, even if the court of Pakistan does not take him up on that, others will. There is no way that this claim that only 10 odd children died in the seige is going to hold water for very long. Once news of this gets around, which should be a week or so from now, I suspect that there will be defections in the Pakistan Army, Punjabi speaking soldiers will simply desert their units with their arms and ammunition.

Lal Masjid: The Politics of Confrontation

2007-07-13T09:34:00.000-07:00

In politics a confrontation is useful.

For example, the present state of affairs with the Lal Masjid and the Islamist anger is not entirely without its uses.

The war on terror now has a new and visible front line, the streets of Pakistan. What was originally on the periphery of the American global vision is now center stage. Even if the US "withdraws" from Iraq, as long as Pakistan keeps boiling, no American President can ever call off the War on Terror. Do you see where I am going?

Musharraf is even more indispensible now. Having fired the first shot in the war against Islam in Pakistan, he is now in the thick of the fight. The Americans cannot abandon him now even if it is a huge pain in the ... to actually support him. The more Pakistan boils, the more Musharraf gets whatever he wants, F-16s, UAVs, you name it, he gets it... after all if the US doesn't support him, someone else might cause him to lose his war on Islam in Pakistan.

The Mullahs are even more indispensible to Musharraf now than they were in the past. In this confrontation he needs someone to keep repeating that he is a good muslim. If some high ranking Mullah can be "induced" to do that, he will be able to show everyone else that they are wrong. From the Mullahs perspective, indispensibility in this age of modern irreligiousness is a good thing.

When one talks like this it becomes easy to lose sight of one thing. The ability to choreograph violence is limited. No state, not even a highly militarised, jihadized state like Pakistan can be maintained at this level of conflict. Beyond a point society cannot support the weight of so many contradictions and even the slightest provocation boils over into bloodletting on a serious scale. This is the flaw in all conflict economic models, they work only as long as the conflict remains controllable, if the conflict becomes uncontrollable, the economic activities associated with the conflict become unsustainable.

The problem with dictatorships is that everything looks great until it catastrophically collapses. So yes Musharraf's "Pakistan" looks like it will "make it through" this confrontation in one piece until that is.. it doesn't.

Lal Masjid: The Friday After

2007-07-13T06:12:00.001-07:00

The demonstrations have started and they simply will not stop.

In late october 2001 the Pakistani Army "ambushed" Jihadis on the run from Afghanistan at a small town in NWFP... err.. more correctly, at a check point on the border, Pakistani Armymen loaded a bunch of Jihadis leaving Afghanistan in the wake of the American bombing campaign in a bus and drove the bus to this town. Near the edge of the town, they stopped the bus and attacked it, killing every Jihadi inside. The town of Hangu burned for months as clerics ordered retaliation for the carnage. The Pakistani Army men who did this were Shia, and the Shias of Hangu ... well they paid a price.

Hangu is ablaze again.

People cannot believe that there were only 73 dead - that lie simply has no takers. The MMA is saying what is on every cleric's mind, "it could be your mosque next" ... you all know the next part of that sentence... "Islam khatre mein hain..."

Friends of Musharraf in the Western press are filling the pages with positive editorials in a half-hearted effort to sound supportive but I don't think it really helps. This kind of talk only strengthens the perception that Musharraf has killed the Jihadis in Lal Masjid to appease America. Why are these idiots expressing surprise about the "large arms haul" found in the "basement" of Lal Masjid? WTF is hard to grasp about that? Someone entered a part of the Aabpara stockroom.

At the funeral of Maulana Abdul Rashid Ghazi, his brother speaks openly of an Islamic revolution. It seems the Supreme Court did not accede to a request to see the face of the body, because at the funeral protesters smashed through the cordon and tore off the lid and removed the shroud to see the face... They wanted to be sure it was really him... this shot was taken at that time.

A "madrassa", Jamia Khadija Tul Kubra, run by the Ghazi family at Janokhel village (Dher Umaid Ali Shah, Mianwali Lat/Lon 32.83/71.57) was raided by the Pakistan Army yesterday. The "madrassa" is most likely an ammunition dump.

By the way, a positively stunning interview by the Javed Ahmad Ghamidi , member of the Council of Islamic Ideology, Ministry of Religious Affairs, Haj, Zakat and Ushr.

Quotable quotes:

"The country is facing this bitter reality as a result of the government’s past mistakes. These [clerics and militants] are the same people the state prepared and used in the name of Islam for many years."

"The Pakistani establishment thought these human beings could be turned into robots. That never happens....In Pakistan, militants like the ones in the Lal Masjid were funded and sponsored by the establishment through external sources. The politics of jihad is the real reason for the bitter crisis Pakistan is facing today."

"Everyone knows that the Lal Masjid and related madrassas are located on illegal land. The mosque’s administration admitted as much. The question is, who provided this space to these clerics in the first place? Everyone knows that the father of the Ghazi brothers, Maulana Abdullah, was funded and given perks during General Ziaul Haq’s regime to foster the concept of jihad as conceived by the establishment. The establishment has brought us to where we now stand."

This gentleman is talking like a member of the disreputable forum.

Lal Masjid: A Parting Of Ways

2007-07-12T06:48:00.001-07:00

The Pakistani Deobandi religious leadership comprising the Mufti-e-Azam Pakistan, the heads of the Wifaq Board, the heads of the key Islamic universities (the Dar ul Uloom Akora Khattak, the Dar ul Uloom Karachi, the Jamia Binoria and the Jamia Ashrafia) and the Deobandis in the MMA top brass are in a difficult position.

The madrassas they teach at are filled with angry students. In the old days this righteous anger was turned into acts of violence on the direction of the Pakistan state. However now the Pakistani state itself is the cause and the target of the anger. This is not a furtive assasination that could be papered over as factional infighting. This is a full blown assault on the face of Pakistani Islam itself. The very men who legitimized military rule as divinely justified in the past are now being publicly humiliated by it.

The messge here is obvious, if the Maulanas attempt to break with the military overtly, the Pakistan Army will simply kill them.

But the flip side is less obvious, if the Maulanas attempt to stick with the Pakistan military, the students will revolt and the Maulanas will lose their authority and not just them personally, but entire institutions built over decades will lose their standing. This is the consequence of a common error made in analysing Pakistani Deobandis, their softpower is underestimated.

This latter cost in my opinion outweighs the former.

By authorising the attack on Lal Masjid, an unwritten unspoken compact (that I suspect was) drawn up in the early years of Pakistan, around the time of the passing of Maulana Ashraf Ali Thanvi has been broken.

The Deobandi Ulema and the Pakistani Army have reached a parting of ways.

Lal Masjid: Bodies Bodies Bodies everywhere

2007-07-11T18:17:00.000-07:00

How does one make hundreds of bodies disappear before dawn?

Lal Masjid: That Troublesome Credibility Issue

2007-07-11T08:09:00.000-07:00

In Pakistan, the traditional sense of respect that accompanies age and apparent scholarship in Asian societies was conflated with various Islamic traditions to create an authority structure.

Per the workings of this authority structure, whenever someone who was old and steeped in Islamic scholarship asked someone who was young in Pakistan to do something in the name of Islam, the younger person would automatically assume that the elder was speaking in the best interests of Islam and do their bidding.

Crucial to maintaining this illusion of credibility, was a public display of piety and Islamic values. Without a believable display of this nature, it was impossible to exercise any such authority.

All the Mullahs are now sitting on the sharpest part of the divide here. They have to make an overt show of piety otherwise they will lose their authority among the faithful.

That is where Musharraf has taken a big hit. By acting publicly against the proponents of Islamic piety, he has degraded his claim to being a good muslim. People may have been keen to look the other way on his other minor indiscretions (for example, in his autobiography, he published a photo of himself that seems to have been taken seconds after he came out of the black blanket that wraps the Kaaba Sharif, etc... normally you would be hanged for that... but I guess if you are the only nuclear armed Islamic state, you get privileges? I suppose...). People might even buy into the idea that it is okay to sell out a bunch of Arabs/Chechens/Uigher/Afghans... (after all, who cares, Pakistan can't be sacrificed for a bunch of refugees). People can be understanding in ways we can seldom appreciate.

However this Lal Masjid thing has no way of sitting well, a fight between the Jihadis and the Pakistan Army will erupt and even if the Jihadis don't seize control of the government or the nuclear weapons, they are going to give the Army such an intense thrashing that the Army is going to turn on Musharraf and tell him "You don't pay us enough to take this kind of crap!".

Please understand the difference here, the Indian Army is a fighting army (a retired national security personality once succinctly said "they are paid to die"). But the Pakistan Army (by contrast) is a very finely tuned military machine. Over the past sixty years it has specificially engineered for the purpose of raping, pillaging, land-grabbing, drug smuggling, money laundering and other important things. This fighting and dying reduces the Army's ability to do what it was designed for. No Pakistani Army commander wants to do this, it takes too much out of his "me-time" at the local massage parlour.

It will not be entirely surprising if the Army tells Musharraf that he is "not worth their time".

At that point a sane person would take the hint and leave. Only the fantastically stupid would cling to memories of the glorious days of old.

Lal Masjid: The Death of Maulana Abdul Rashid Ghazi

2007-07-10T13:03:00.001-07:00

Maulana Abdul Rashid Ghazi was found dead in the "basement" of the Mosque. Incidently which residences or mosques in the subcontinent have a "basement"? This is total rubbish.

Ghazi was "found dead" in the tunnel that links the Lal Masjid with that most wonderous and magical underground world that exists beneath the Aabpara office.

Accounts of his death vary, the Pakistani Army claims he died at the hands of militants when he tried to surrender to the Army. Others believe that the Army killed him when he refused to surrender.

What he knew about this crisis, he takes to his grave, but we do know that by current estimates a hundred people are dead in Operation Silence so far and at least a dozen of those are SSG personnel.

There is an attempt being made by US friendly folks in the Pakistani media to turn this utter fiasco into a platform to go after Ghazi's friends in the ISI. These friends of America in the media are pushing the line "what were the (intelligence) agencies doing". They are essentially putting the blame for this mess on the script writers of Aabpara.

I want to ask these friends of America in the Pakistani media, do you really think that the ISI is going to take the blame for this? are you really that naive? Exactly how much heroin do you have to shoot up before you start believing bilge like that?

In an earlier post or perhaps a reply to one of the readers I had said that we will never know if it was a deliberate move by Aabpara to allow things to boil over, or whether it was an accident of history. Regardless of the truth, people will believe what they want to and students in madrassas across Pakistan are conditioned to believe only one version of things. Revenge attacks will soon follow and it will not be entirely surprising if something quite terrible happens in the next few days.

With high-ranking retired Pakistani spymasters openly stating that Musharraf's credibility (as someone who is capable of ruling the country properly) has declined, the obvious stares one in the face.

Lal Masjid: Musharraf makes his last assault

2007-07-09T18:02:00.001-07:00

Both sides are now locked down into a fight to the finish.

Musharraf cannot let these men go free after they have defied him publicly. He has to order the assault else he will have to accept that his time as dictator is over. Any visible signs of confidence aside, he has already shown his hand the day he requested the media to "not show the bodies". It is unclear who assured him of the media's loyalties. By giving the Americans permission to hit bases in the NWFP, Musharraf has effectively created a two front war for any that defy him there.

The Jihadis holed up inside the mosque are at looking at death either way they play this. Their best hope is that if they sit inside public pressure on Musharraf will mount to a level where he will have to abdicate instead of launching an attack on the mosque. They know Musharraf will not abdicate and he will order the assault. As long as there are little girls in the mosque, the Jihadis can buy time through negotiations for their release but when the assault comes, the Jihadis will prefer it if the hostages are killed alongside them. The end result will be a carnage Musharraf's publicity machine cannot possibly hide.

A number of the girls in this madrassa are relatives of Pakistani army servicemen or ex-servicemen. There will be no way to keep this resentment out of the services.

Watch the video of the funeral of Col. Haroon, see his brother's expression as he hugs Gen. Musharraf. That says it all.

Lal Masjid: The core issue in Pakistan's current crisis

2007-07-09T09:07:00.000-07:00

I had alluded to this in replies to readers elsewhere, but I just want to get this out in the open.

The problem in Pakistan is the youth. In Paksitan the young outnumber the old and the economy is simply not in a position to satiate them and the socio-political environment provides them with no clues about their identity or world view. Over the last 20 odd years a large majority of these young people have been deliberately fed (by the State machinery) a steady diet of intolerance and militarized Islam. This is making them difficult to handle.

Lacking any democratic institutions, young Pakistanis do not have a way of expressing the disaffections through channels that are more readily available elsewhere. Left with no other outlets they are prone to violent self-expression and because of the indoctrination in militaristic Islam, they are easy prey for Islamists.

A number of the foot soldiers of the Jihad were young Pakistani men who gave up everything in the pursuit of an Islamic superstate. They listened to their "elders" in the Pakistan Army and followed the teachings of their religious leaders, as could be expected of them in any civilised part of the Indian Subcontinent.

Unfortunately they have found absolutely no tangible returns on their efforts. Their Islamic dreamland, the Taliban controlled Afghanistan is no more. What is worse is that it was betrayed by their own Pakistan Army "elders" to the very same adversaries the young Jihadis had been taught to hate. They are angry and distrustful of their traditional leadership. This is degrading the effectiveness of the Army-Mullah combine that traditionally kept these sections in check.

Most of the Jihadis are desensitised to violence and will use it in far greater quantities than mainstream political outfits can manage. A number of them have operated in environments where heavy weapons have been used and this makes their mindset completely different. Despite any rubbish you may hear elsewhere, no Pakistani political outfit is capable of meeting them head on.

There are number of Pakistanis in the army who sympathise with the Jihadis and their plight. This confrontation is the Masjid will rapidly spiral to a loyalty crisis in the Army itself.

If the youth cannot be controlled by the Army-Mullah combine, the urban centers of Pakistan will implode in an surge of violence. We will see a Somalia type situation emerge where armed gangs will rule the street randomly assasinating people at will.

That is what hangs in the balance here.

Lal Masjid: A desperate attempt to avoid an utter catastrophe gets underway

2007-07-09T06:28:00.000-07:00

Now efforts have begun to avoid a catastrophe. After rejecting offers from Maulana Abdul Rasheed Ghazi, to provide safe passage to the militants holed up inside the Mosque, the Musharraf government has back tracked and is re-entering negotiations with him via various intermediaries. Once again we have a ringside view of the machinery of the innards of the Pakistanis state.

Leading Deobandi Maulanas , has entered the fray. The very same Deobandi ulema that hedged their bets by indirectly supporting the Maulanas and directly supporting the Government are stepping up their efforts to appear as if they are resolving the crisis. By intervening in this fashion, they hope to regain some of their lost credibility both in the eyes of the Jihadis who were angered by their betrayal of Maulana Aziz and Ghazi and in the eyes of the Pakistani people who are being subject to Musharraf inspired propaganda about the Mullahs making trouble.

The Pakistani Supreme Court is moving to intervene in the crisis. This kind of public intervention in the functioning of the executive, especially when the executive is already at war with the judiciary will only inflame passions among the legalists opposed to Musharraf. If the situation could have been resolved without such an intervention, Musharraf would have preferred it, but the sense of opportunity here is simply too great. Unless the court involves itself now, it will be irrelevant in all future political discourse in Pakistan.

The Americans have chimed in with a desire to see a peaceful resolution of the crisis. This is a departure from the "domestic issue" posture taken a week earlier. I suspect that the American eavesdropping networks in Pakistan are picking up all sorts of information about possible attacks in the event the seige ends badly. I would not be surprised if the Islamists decide to the stick it to the Americans for foisting Musharraf on them.

Pakistani Prime Minister Shaukat Aziz is going around begging other political parties to avoid "politicising the Masjid issue". This after all the footage his people cut "negotiating" with the Masjid management. I never understand this about Shaukat, exact who does he think believes him?

In doing so these third parties will end up degrading Musharraf's absolute control over the state.

There has been a suicide attack in Dir. Four troops including a Major and Lieutenant were killed when a suicide bomber allegedly from the TNSM attacked their convoy.

I want you all to take note of a statement by Maulana Rafiuddin Usmani

“It is like one more time that the two brothers should be pardoned as they have unequivocally announced to shun militancy apart from renouncing their control over Lal Masjid. They want to resettle themselves in their native village along with their mother for a peaceful life. Pardoning them is once again in the best interest of the country saving it from further bloodshed and looming danger of civil war and as such pardoning would not be an exceptional and exclusive incident in the history of country,”

I have never seen a leading Deobandi aalim use such words in the context of Pakistan.