Mr khilnaani you appear to be from sind the part that belongs now to pakistan. Your subliminal message is but only an extention of your foriegn policy and for this your Indian pay masters have very ably guided and nuttured you. First then you must stop trying to destabilize Pakistan you havee about a dozen consulates spannining the rim line along Pkaistans border and from which your intelligence RAW is fanning all the trouble. Next under the cloak of Talibans you are sending the purchased pashtuns after necessary training to fight and keep Pakistan army busy. Rs 10000/00 per fighter is a lot of attraction. Your proxy - mullah Fazal ullah brain washes adolascent young fellows to martyr themselves for the glory of Islam. Little do they realise that their mentor is paid a heavy sum for each suicide bombing. These poor guys are heavily drugged in the terminal phases of their mission- which is akin to what was practiced by hasan bi sabah - centuries ago and who in the dictionary is known as" tha old man of the mountains". Very innocently the writer has chosen to ignore the "hindu fundlementalism" gaining grounds in India with considerable speed. He has also chosen to ignore thirteen odd seperatist movements spawning the lenght and breath of Indiia. Most significant being the Kashmir movement. They do not want to be with India. It is India trend setter to terrorism. Remember 1971 when you for the first time introduced terrorism in this region.- by training and arming the mukti bhanis or the bangladesh fighters to carry out terror activities in Pakistan. You have - in collobration with Israel- the kosher-trying to control the Kahmiris and terror operations in our Baluchistan and Swat - malakund -Bajaur areas! How come most pakistanis view that Mumbai was a project of RAW-Mossad - Modi combined and not that of Pakistan. The same is true of Attack on SriLankan taem in Lahore. Do not qoute our president because he thrives on the bandwagon of CIA!!
The Revenge Of The Near
The 11/26 attack on India was no 9/11—and India's reaction must also be different from America's.
Email To A Friend
Please fill in the following information and we'll email this link.
Urban Indians love the idea of a global, borderless world, where flows of trade and services trace virtual geographies. Who can blame them? Colonial mapmaking left India broken and flanked by two unviable, antagonistic states: Pakistan and Bangladesh. Also in the neighborhood are despotic Burma, precarious Afghanistan and war-torn Sri Lanka. It's enough to make anyone search for an escape.
Before the Mumbai attacks, that escape seemed possible. India's elites believed that free-market economics and an international outlook would let them transcend location, poverty and intractable politics. In recent years, India's prime minister, Manmohan Singh, had made this approach the core of his policies. The Singh doctrine, as it might be called, was one of nonconfrontational economic diplomacy, seeking to expand India's global connections in order to spur growth and personal affluence, which in turn would defuse internal and external conflicts.
The effort seemed to work, at least for a time. After charting around 8 percent annual growth for the last five years, last fall India became the first postcolonial state to successfully complete a moon mission. And in October, after signing an agreement with Washington, New Delhi gained admission into the world's most powerful club: that of legitimate nuclear powers.
Then came the terrorist attack that began in Mumbai on the night of Nov. 26, literally and metaphorically targeting the five-star oases where the rich network and relax. The men who arrived in India's most global city from Pakistan aboard rubber boats represented, among other things, a revenge of the near. Within hours, they revealed that India's dream of escape might be a delusion. Actual location, it turns out, still matters more than the virtual one. There are limits to economic diplomacy—and India's security will depend on recognizing them.
Halfway through the siege of the Taj and Oberoi hotels and of the Jewish Centre at Nariman House, one major TV station began headlining its reports with the phrase "India's 9/11." But the analogy didn't hold. There were some similarities—the targets were iconic buildings and the attacks captivated world attention—but the comparison oversimplified a situation whose implications are potentially much more threatening for India than those faced by the United States. September 11 was an attack by men from afar, whose message had little resonance with Americans. The Mumbai attackers came from next door, the world's largest Islamic republic and the chief global exporter of radical Islam, and they arrived in a country with just as many Muslims of its own.
The Mumbai attacks were less like 9/11 than like a man-made Katrina: a calamity preceded by many warnings (among them bombings last year in several cities) and followed by government bungling. At the time of the attacks, many Mumbai police were armed only with bamboo sticks. Of those who had guns, many didn't know how to fire them. Commandos had to be called in from the north, since none were stationed in India's financial capital.
The failure of so many public-sector agencies provoked little surprise in Mumbai's poorer quarters, where residents are well acquainted with government shortcomings. But urban elites sputtered with outrage. Though some of this was directed toward Pakistan, most of it was aimed inward. Imagine if after 9/11, New Yorkers had taken to the streets to protest against firefighters and Rudy Giuliani, and you get a sense of what this felt like. Suddenly a class that preferred to pursue its interests through connections and money, that relied on private security and electrical generators, was reminded of the need for government and the role of the state.
These protesting elites have shaken India's leaders. Singh has finally rid himself of his inane home minister and replaced him with the respected P. Chidambaram, a former finance minister, who has begun to address the disarray in India's security apparatus. He has streamlined the jumble of intelligence agencies, which report to different authorities and which proved unable to coordinate or correctly interpret intelligence in the weeks before the attacks. New Delhi has established a new National Intelligence Agency focused exclusively on terrorism, and Chidambaram plans to visit Washington to study U.S. counterterrorism strategy. A new antiterrorism law has also been passed that allows detainees to be held for up to six months without trial, denies bail to non-Indian subjects and invokes a sweeping definition of terrorism. But the task of truly reforming India's security system is too large to be accomplished before the next national election, which must be held by May. India still desperately needs improved coordination between New Delhi and the state governments and wholesale reform of its corrupt and dysfunctional police.
- 1
- 2
- Next Page »
Discuss