The Pak-China and USA Algorithm

The USA can do more to put pressure on Pakistan to act on terrorists. One way of doing so is by involving China in the equation.

The news about a certain level of breakdown in the Pakistan-China ties has been in the newspapers for the last couple of days. Despite the excited editorials in every daily about the issue, this crisis, excuse the exaggeration, is far from anything anybody should be excited about. The consequences of deteriorating Pak-China relations, when studied keeping in mind the various geo-political and economic factors, are not positive globally.

One of the most important geo-political factors that needs to be kept in mind is the decision of the United States to showcase a close relationship of sorts with Pakistan to the international media. The prime reason for this is, of course, the continued reluctance on the part of the Pakistani administration to take concrete action against the terrorist havens which still continue to exist in the country resulting in an increase in the number of drone attacks carried out by the USA on Pakistani territory.

A major roadblock to the Pakistan government's resolution to eliminate terrorism is the conservative view of world affairs held by many in the top brass of the Pakistan Army, the de-facto decision-maker at times. However due to this insistence on non-acknowledgement of the existence of terrorist havens in the country, the relations between Pakistan and its once upon a time all weather friends are certainly being tested.

New reports indicate that, along with the many anti-India and anti-West terrorist havens that operate in the south-east Asian country, many Uighur sympathizers have also set up havens for the struggle against the Chinese government in the province of Xinjiang.

The Chinese government has repeatedly made its displeasure over the existence of such anti-China institutions in the country known to the Pakistan government. Yet, due to rampant corruption and sympathizers within the administration, not much has been done in this regard resulting in a continued anti-China resistance in Xinjiag with majority of the support received by the protestors being traced back to Pakistan.

Though this is primarily an area of conflict between Pakistan and China, the US authorities must also keep a keen eye on the developments surrounding these incidences. Despite the inability of many western countries to convince Pakistan to cancel terrorism as a state policy, China has to an extent succeeded or at least performed better than the other western countries, considering the drop in the number of terrorist/freedom struggle incidences now reported in China which can be traced back to Pakistan.

Adopting such an approach of being convinced that there has been a drop in the above mentioned activities appears optimistic considering the lack of information coming out of China. However, when we look at the situation in the context of national security, there has been a slight shift in allied positions from the USA to China under President Zardari's regime. Though the shift is not absolute, it is easily noticeable.

Thus, despite the numerous long term concerns that the White House may have regarding Pakistan's closeness to China, it is only sensible in the short run to encourage greater Pakistan-China engagement on terrorism as that might be the only possible way to deter Pakistan from hosting terrorists on its soil. The fear of being isolated internationally, withdrawal of US and western world's support from major contracts and treaties internationally without adopting sanctions as a means of approach and at the same time portraying China as a reluctant ally of Pakistan would be the most surrealistic of all possible methods to get the Pakistani administration started on its fight against terrorism.

However as surrealistic as the above scenario may sound, it is possible for the United States to manipulate its positions a bit to get a more positive response from Pakistan. An example of such a manipulation would be to stress the importance of banishing terrorism from all forms of practice to the new Chinese Premier and President (both Mr Jiabao and Mr Jintao handing over power to their successors during the year) while at the same time steering clear of the human rights aspect of the situation in Xinjiag. Such a manoeuvre by the USA would ensure that enough pressure is put on Pakistan to curb terrorist activities while at the same time, it won't be seen as the US stepping back on its demand for human rights and their implementation all over the world.

Though idealistic, only such manoeuvres have been known through out time to change the course of history as we know it.

Why India must work on its Foreign Policy

Given the status that India currently enjoys in the diplomatic world, it is only natural that India be required to make tough decisions.

The diplomatic power of a country can be analysed by simply taking together factors that act for and against the state at the international level and the state's ability to work out a plan to balance out the negatives that it may face. United States can be considered to be a country that is more or less able to balance out the negatives at the international level (recent 'stand-off' with Russia and China on the Syria and Iran issue can be considered to be a negative that it hasn't balanced out in the UN). 

If we look at India under the same lens, then a couple of inconsistencies do crop up which are common in countries which are still developing their diplomatic power (i.e focus more on the soft power). One of the major  problems that the current foreign policy of India has is the inability to move out of the neutrality sphere. 

After the end of the Cold War, the diplomatic world underwent a period of 'secondary power vacuum' wherein, the west was able to take major decisions without being challenged in a manner that would threaten its dominance in the diplomatic world. Yet soon countries like Russia, China and India caught up and three together are no able to form a major opposition to the west at the international level.

Thus while the three are able to form a formidable opposition, India's foreign policy still hasn't evolved enough to take a stand with one side and through out the course of the event remain on the same side. One of the major example of this would be the recent decision by the Indian government to send a diplomat to attend the Friends of Syria meet which is considered to be an anti-Assad and a pro-change forum. This decision has certainly raised a few eyebrows towards the effectiveness of the Indian bureaucracy and government in formulating a foreign policy meant for the long term.

While at the same time, this can be considered to a successful practice by India of its principle-based foreign policy. However such a practice cannot be considered to be an exactly ideal path to follow at the international level and thus a certain reworking of the foreign policy is in order as India tries to analyse the pro-cons of its relationship with various countries in this every changing world.

Democratizing the Nuclear Neighbour

Despite the fears of a coup, India must ensure that conditions are maintained to retain some state of democracy in its nuclear neighbour.

Historically, relations between the Pakistan Army and the Indian government haven't exactly been friendly. Since Independence, they have bordered at extreme paranoia and complete distrust. Attempts to start/maintain peace between the two neighbours has seen the civilian government in Pakistan asking for the "go-ahead" from the Army. In case the above hasn't been done, the efforts to achieve peace have been scuttled at the very basic stage.

Thus, it is not in India's interest to allow the Pakistani Army into power. But any attempt to do so by using "unacceptable" methods would only ensure that the public opinion tilts in favour of the Army (something that has for the last couple of years prevented the army from coming to power). A more intelligent approach would involve encouraging the civilian institutions in Pakistan to maintain their grip on power mainly by covering them in the mainstream Indian and international news media. 

Also covert funding to moderate pressure groups in Pakistan would be an ideal path that the RAW (India's spy agency) can take in order to ensure that the public opinion remains in favour of the civilian institutions while at the same time ensuring that a balance is attained with the extremists. A situation resembling the current Indian state of affairs (extremely active civil society) would provide democracy the much needed boost that it requires in the country which has a history of democracies being overthrown by military coups.

For India, a military government is not acceptable considering the fact that all the wars that India has fought against Pakistan happened during the military rule. Thus any attempt to install an army government in Pakistan can only succeed if the 'terror of India' is created in the minds of the Pakistani people. The paranoia regarding India has always been the stepping stone that the Pakistan Army has needed to hoist itself to a position of direct power (indirect power involves tremendous amount of influence on the civilian government while refraining to portray itself as a major political power in the public eyes).

A face off with the US (though highly unlikely) would certainly create the buzz that the Pakistani Army needs while at the same time uncomfortable relations with India would certainly put the civilian government in an uncomfortable position. Thus attempts to improve ties between India and Pakistan should be on the top of the priority list for Pakistan.

Closer trade ties involve direct interaction between the people and thus the mistrust on either side is reduced every day little by little. It is only through such attempts of improving ties while at the same time not 'bowing down' with/to other countries in the public eye can the current government in power hold on to its present position and last till the next elections where the verdict might or might not go against them.

On the other side of the globe, it would be ideal if USA took steps so as to improve the ties with the current government in Pakistan at least till the elections are over. A civilian government in power is the only way the USA can attempt to get rid of the Taliban and terrorism which has time and again proved to be a strategic asset for Pakistan against its rivals in the Indian subcontinent.

Why India needs to intervene

Despite the anger in Pakistan regarding the NATO strike, it would be a wise decision for India to play the peacemaker between Pakistan and USA.

With the emotions of the populace boiling up, it is rare to see the leaders of a country take the right decision instead of the popular one. The leaders in Pakistan are faced with the same puzzle at the moment. With anger against the NATO and the USA rising, it would be wise for the Pakistani leadership to look at their present situation in a whole some manner and not overlook one aspect just because the pressure on the other aspect to be viewed is greater.

All the warnings, talks and decisions that are being given/taken by the civilian government/army in Pakistan would have tremendous consequences not only for Pakistan but also for the region as a whole. The US-Pakistani relationship has had a lot of bumps ever since the Abottabad raid but since then, this can be said to be the single worst incident in the relations of the two country. 

US presence in Pakistan and Afghanistan is essential for India's national security and also the security of the Indian interests is heavily dependent on the US presence there fore the time being at least, as India starts to play a greater role in Afghanistan and have a greater say in matters. Thus, the removal of the US boots from Pakistan would be a major blow to India and its interests. With the vacating of the Shamsi Airbase (if that happens), the entire incident would be a major strategic victory for the Taliban, which has many sympathizers in the Pakistan Army, which is making attempts to come back to power in Afghanistan.

India would now require to act in order to protect its interests. First of all, the Indian administration must ensure that Pakistan gets the message that India sympathizes with them and then slowly and steadily work would need to be done to ensure that the US do not vacate the Shamsi Airbase. Many in Pakistan have already viewed this 'accidental' attack as a direct attack by USA and India on their sovereignty, which has already been an issue of contention between the once upon a time allies (USA and Pakistan) for quite some time. Any more fuel into this fire would only result in consequences for the entire region including China, who want the US to exit from the region in order for them to achieve a greater level of influence on the struggling Afghan civilian government.

With the exit of the US troops from the region it would be very easy for the Taliban to take back control of the areas near the North-Western border of Pakistan and Afghanistan, which has very limited government presence with majority of the area being tribal in nature guaranteeing a firm base for the Taliban to make a comeback into the region and the regional politics.

India would need to bring the two allies to the table and ensure that both of them engage in a healthy discussion and sort out their differences at the earliest, if India wants to ensure a peaceful and stable neighbourhood. Manmohan Singh could play a major role in bringing the two to the table using the respect and influence that he has earned in the government circles of the both, the US and Pakistan.

Till then it can be expected that with the pressure on the government and the army in Pakistan building up to take a strict action against the US, the relations between the two allies can only expected to go downhill, if there is one. The US would need to play calmly at the moment in order to prevent the situation from worsening. But it sure isn't going to be a easy journey to keep track of unless and until India does not intervene.

The Indian and International politics on Anna Hazare

NOTE: This article was written on 9th September 2011. Thus some facts might not be correct. Any error is deeply regretted.

News channels do not seem to be tired of airing virtually the same content everyday. Every channel that you switch to, there are discussions by expert panellists on the future of JanLokpal and whether Mr. Hazare should be ending his fast. There seems to be a unanimous response for the latter with almost everybody saying that Mr. Hazare should end his fast. Some people rather critical of Mr. Hazare pass comments on how it is unconstitutional, which it is, while the others urge him to end it as the idea behind the fast has been accomplished.

What was the idea behind the fast and all that followed? The real idea behind the entire event seems to now be lost in the cacophony of theories of government conspiracies against the 'civil society', opinions on how this entire event is now turning into an anarchist display of anti-corruption façade and proposals of alternative bills. The people at the moment seem to be disconnected with the real idea. They have caught onto a definition of the event which is a work of minds angry at the lack of government action on issues of corruption, terrorism and other events.

Individuals are singing vande-mataram slogans at the moment while allowing themselves to be intoxicated by the talk of this being the second freedom struggle, which it certainly isn't. This struggle which started off as a journey by a single individual, Mr. Hazare, against the government's inaction on corruption now seems to have acquired definitions and thoughts which are miles away from any initiative to get the country rid of corruption and other such malpractices generally thought to be performed by public servants.

Yes, this entire event had been sparked by the anger of one person over the ever increasing corruption that India seems itself to be surrounded with. The individual in question, Mr. Hazare, went on a fast and it soon garnered public attention. What I feel is that where public is there, it is imperative that news channels be there for that is the only way that they will be able to establish a connection with the wider society. Thus media crews descended upon the site and soon there were high-TRP shows on every news channel that was on air.

As the coverage increased more and more people flocked to the place and to their television sets. Soon the government found itself in the midst of a storm and they tried their best to fight it. Arrangements and settlements had to be made and thus the government and the civil society came to an understanding and the movement for the time being ceased. A Drafting Committee was formed to look into the matter. However, there was no further concrete action by the government on the issue which resulted in Mr. Hazare once again threatening to go on a fast on the 16th of August this year if the bill wasn't passed till then.

In the meanwhile, Baba Ramdev also went on a hunger strike. He demanded that all the black money that was stashed abroad in tax havens by Indian citizens be brought back. Followers gathered at Ramlila Maidan, the location of his agitation. The crowd grew. Kapil Sibal, a cabinet minister, asked him to stop the agitation. However, Ramdev continued on and even hardened his stance. Till now, tremendous public awareness had been generated on the issue and even the youth started taking to their various forms of protesting be it online or forming groups and marching. 

Around midnight the Delhi Police entered the place and resorted to 'lathi' charge to disperse the mob. The government came under fire and the common man took the stage. There were mass-rallies against the government and it was said that the government was being autocratic, a charge which I find ridiculous when we look at the real situation.

The real situation was that, had the police not started the crackdown at Ramlila Maidan than in the morning the place would have been an anarchist's heaven for people gathered and aggressively pitched their anti-government stand. The very basic right to freedom of expression was being manipulated over here to suit the  anti-government supporters. There was simply no sense of sensibility in the people that night at Ramlila Maidan to put it frankly. 

Mr. Hazare was arrested on 16th August just before he was about to commence his fast. Neither the opposition party and nor his supporters took kindly to this decision and there were wide spread protests across the country and at places, people voluntarily courted arrest. Under heavy pressure the government released him. 

The protests continued and so did Mr. Hazare's hunger strike. The government and the civil society tried to negotiate over the text and other provisions of the bill but there were repeated break-downs in talks and later on the parliament passed a resolution agreeing to the demands of Mr. Hazare and decided to  reffer the matter to a standing committee. 

INDIA

I am disappointed looking at the manner in which the citizens of India have responded to this entire event. As per a survey done by a newspaper, only 2 out of 5 JanLokpal supporters were actually even aware of what the bill proposed. This apathy towards political institutions, be it the government or 'civil society' is saddening. Individuals came out with the national flags. Waving it as if with every thrust of it, they were proving their  patriotism which existed in their hearts for the country.

How is a person waving the national flag going to stop corruption in its track is a phenomena that is beyond the understanding of my rather practical mind. Yet the supporters of this media hyped campaign claimed that it was changing the mindset of the people. Sure it was, but how was it really going to manifest itself in the daily day to day happenings in the lives of these individuals?

While having my morning breakfast one day, my grandma raised an interesting point. She said that if everybody (almost the entire country as claimed by Mr. Hazare and Co.) in this campaign was not corrupt then, who was corrupt? It was quite interesting to note this point which I had seemed to have overlooked. Even as I pondered on this topic, I couldn't help but think about the real situation that was unfolding.

Groups of people were surrounding the houses of MPs (Members of Parliament) demanding that this bill be passed, without as much as even a proper discussion. This group consisted of people, half of whom I wouldn't like to see near my house. They were the simple common youth who had been simply brainwashed into believing that Mr. Hazare was the only individual against corruption and that the political and elite class would not be benefited if this bill were to pass. Thus the 'struggle of the common man', as the news channels had suggested, continued with a fierce boost.

According to me, these groups that were forming chains and surrounding the houses of the MPs were resorting to harassment. Had I been a MP then I would have gotten appropriate action taken against all of them because that is not the way of asking something from your elected representative. The individual is a representative and not a servant of the people. If people need to demand something from him, they should go through the appropriate mechanism of doing that. It would involve first taking an appointment with the representative and then addressing the issue at the appointment that you wish to make your representative aware of. At a point of time, there were even calls to surround the house of the Prime Minister. The Prime Minister? He is the most important person in the country. Terrorists could have easily taken advantage of such a situation and then assassinated him. What would the consequences have been? They would have been severe. Curfews and complete police control over activities.

Although such a thing did not happen while the government tried to unsuccessfully stop the protesters from surrounding the house of the PM by stopping the metro train services in nearby areas and by cordoning off the area. I think that there is no explanation whatsoever to justify such an activity that was carried on by supporters of Mr. Hazare. Common sense and normal practice says that these picketers should have been arrested on ground of disturbing peace and acting as a threat to the PMs security and should have been dealt with accordingly.

As these events were unfolding it was very much evident that the common man had simply lost his ability of reasoning and the anger over the government poor handling of situations involving corruption and terrorism was flowing down the pot and was acting as a boost to the already racing adrenalin. These situations arise very often in democracies and need to be dealt with in a manner that is neither harsh nor soft but sets a tone for the proceedings.

Thus even though Mr. Hazare like a true gentleman said that all the proceedings should happen in a non-violent manner, it is difficult to ensure that people's excitement won't get the better of them and that they won't turn violent. It needs to be noted that very many of these non-violent protests end up becoming violent when a single individual loses his control and attempts to act as the legal guardian of the law through ways that are not legal and a clear violation of the provisions of the constitution.

Hence, the lesson that the political class and the people should get from this entire event should be that of being legal in whatever they do. Of course many from the political class can find loopholes in the current slightly outdated legal structure but what they must keep in mind is that though they may get away for the time being without being caught but a time may come when they may find themselves in a corner and the anger of the people flowing towards them like molten lava. Thus, the political class must take the responsibility of acting in a manner that is clean and fair towards the country. There should be zero tolerance for unfair advantage which the politicians use to create a better lifestyle for themselves.

While at the same time, the people should also not be allowed to get away with any and every practice that they may follow. What they should do should be within the legal framework of the constitution and the UN Charter on Human Rights and should not be a manipulation of the duo. The people are the most important element of the state and thus it is essential that they follow the correct path for if they as much as even get slightly distracted from the correct path then there will be chaos, pandemonium and anarchy. The people cannot take everything into their hands. They need to utilise the correct provisions, procedures and mechanisms as provided to them by the legal bodies for the overall good.

PAKISTAN


Pakistan is an example of the path that one country should not head for. However, it is not in the hands of individuals to stop or change the direction of the route that they have taken. They can only manipulate it to either suit themselves (example Mr. Gaddafi's earlier practice used for suppressing rebellions, now rather unsuccessful) or the country. Pakistan has been in a state of chaos for a long time now. Every other day individuals opposed to the stringent laws that are established by a certain religion are killed, journalists investigating into the frauds of the government suffer the same fate and the people there are scared to openly criticize the government or the extremists. It's basically a no man's land.

However, there is no authority that can take over and try to control the situation and ease the stress. Here is where the Indian connection comes in. The country though has a human rights body but it is more or less like a body set up to ensure that the provisions of the constitution are maintained. Though it has no authority over the happening of the country and due to the extremist state of affairs that is prevalent in the country, there is a lot of fear.

Here, now a powerful body, something like what Mr. Hazare is proposing can be brought in. But what needs to be taken care of is that this body should be primarily for the Human Rights of the citizens as an all powerful body like the JanLokpal (as proposed by Mr. Hazare) can become autocratic in its functioning. Thus over here only the police force should be under this department and there should be no political interference in the matters it deals with. However to ensure that it does not become autocratic in nature, provisions, mechanisms and many loopholes would need to be worked on.

Such a body can easily function in matters related to Human Rights in Pakistan and once the people are not afraid then it is the government that would be afraid. In India due to the vast presence of Human Rights activists, the governments are scared to take steps which may be deemed as anti-human rights and try to avoid them as much as they can. But for a country like India an all powerful body to deal with matters related specifically to corruption would be like inviting a lion for a feast. The lion may enjoy the feast and become your best friend or you may become its feast with the chances of the latter being higher.

CHINA


China can be best described as a country that is still waiting for a spark. Thus it is no surprise that the party is trying to do everything that it can to improve its image that has taken a beating after the train accident which took place recently. Though however much the party tries to come across as a non-corrupt set up whose sole purpose is the betterment of human life in China. It is exactly the opposite that most people believe.

People in China have since long identified the party as corrupt at the grass root level. Senior leader in the party are thought off as non-corrupt and honest individuals but yet it is the grass root politics everywhere which influences the people. No revolution takes place because the country as a whole is doing bad but because every region as a whole is doing bad and a similar situation though however much exaggerated it may be by the Chinese critics is slowly but steadily developing in China.

People have started questioning the motives behind the party's continuous attempts to remain in power. Though the party may try to come across as working for the people but the question is that how long will the people be contend with this face that the party is showing. Soon there will be protests. Its a matter of time that some incident takes place and the entire country erupts. In this modern age of the internet, it is difficult to segregate a group of people by simply cutting off the internet connect and this is fairly evident from the situation that we can see in Libya.

However, what can the party do to improve its image? One of the suggestions that people give is set up an anti-corruption body with ultimate power but every where it is the same issue that ensures that talks fail. That issue is of the amount of power that can be allotted to this body. No government in its right mind would be favorable to giving unlimited power to such a body for the simple reason that the power of the government might become weak in front of it.

While at the same time, it is said that China has been funding these events that have been happening in India. However, there has been no proof of this theory yet it is a theory that dominates the discussions of the conspiracy theorists. If it were to be true, then though there won't be any major effects on the relationship that the two countries, India and China share but this will certainly act as a thorn.

India may not directly take any action against the Chinese for this reason but behind the doors a lot of action may happen such as India providing excess funding to groups hell bent on creating troubles for the party in China. However this is a very remote possibility since any such action by the Indians would have direct repercussions due to China's growing assertiveness.

Thus the Indians may just stop supporting China all the time on issues in the international sphere and may take positions at times which may not please the Chinese. Hence all in all this is a very complicated issue which for all one knows may not at all result in anything and might just end up being ignored by the Indian Government which is ever ready to promote peace and stability in the region.

USA


USA is considered to be the most successful democracies of all time and it is true. And hence it is only justifiable that the US would do things to help the democratic setup in other countries and we can see that it is doing work in Afghanistan and ensuring that the new Afghan set up continues to get the much needed oxygen. However there have been allegations by some members of the Indian National Congress (party in power) that the USA was indirectly funding the Anna Hazare movement.


So serious were the implications of this statement that the US came out with an official statement that it in no way was supporting Mr. Hazare. It is true that at the moment, the US cannot afford to have its ties with India strained, especially at a time when most of the middle-east takes an unfavorable view of the US, India is the only friend that the US has who has the ability to influence policy-makers in the middle-east.


Apart from that, Indian co-operation is something that India would soon need desperately in the UN and other International bodies as China starts to flex its muscle and counter the US and at the time being, India is the only counter balance that USA has to the mighty dragon. However, there is a major conflict of interests in this regard.


India and China are seen as the face of the developing world and that is a fact. In every major convention or event, the developing countries look up to these two giants for support so that their demands are looked at and seriously considered instead of being dropped and lost in the bureaucracy. And thus it is quite essential from point of the developing world that India and China continue to show the same co-operation that they had shown in Copenhagen.


While from the US point of view, it is essential that the US try to get India to tilt even if by just a few degrees to its side if it is to maintain its position in Asia and the Pacific.


Thus all in all, so great was the Anna Hazare episode that it promoted almost all the countries which share a special relation with India to respond or to act in a particular manner. Only time will tell how the world economy and the politics take shape as more and more countries slip into the euphoria of the Jasmine Revolution and demand greater freedoms.

The Era of Poker Diplomacy

The world political scenario can at any given point of time be viewed as a game of poker – with a difference. The participants (countries) are playing not for money, but the ability to influence decisions at a regional as well as global level. For long the players have been recurrently changing with each player being replaced by a new one. Thus there is a constant continuity in this whole cycle along with greater participation by different countries which prevents an unrivalled uni-polar system from being established.

Since the Soviet Union’s fall, world diplomacy has been entirely dominated by the Western Hemisphere. As true as this fact may be, an entirely different situation is unfolding right before us. With the US Budget Deficit crisis continuing, it’s expected that Uncle Sam might replace its expensive military programs with a new policy which excludes active US involvement during a crisis.
For starters, US has been giving pro-active assistance to rebel groups in enemy states like Iran. Modern weaponry is being supplied to nations like Saudi Arabia in the middle-east as advance policing fee for the region when USA exits from Iraq. Critics of this theory highlight the increased US involvement in Pakistan as a counter theory but the fact remains that this involvement of the US is not at a proactive level. This role that the US is trying to fit itself into is that of an observer state. To maintain its domination while staying an observer state, it must forge excellent relations with the countries that counter-balance its enemies - and one of the biggest threats at the moment for Uncle Sam is the growing clout of the People’s Republic.

What constitutes the pot?

Accumulating absolute power is often the reason for these ‘international’ poker games. Migration, an international economy that is in danger zone and acquisition of arms by both legal and illegal entities are crises faced by modern nation states. Enhanced awareness of human rights and improvements in the regional as well as the global economy, political and security scenarios are the only remedy to this problem. These collectively determine the path that a country may take for the acquisition of resources to achieve its ends.

China can be quoted as an example of a state that has adopted an active-aggressive approach in order to address its ends. This hypothesis is based on past positions adopted by the Chinese government on various issues like Chinese claims of ‘indisputable sovereignty’ over the South China Sea, treatment of citizens of Jammu and Kashmir and incursions by Chinese troops beyond its borders. All these actions have directed negative attention on China and disturbed policy-makers in distant countries. Of the various solutions devised, none seems as effective as portrayal of India as a counter balance.

In order to counter the Dragon, the Indian Elephant is being portrayed as the future global power. This has led to certain questions that have certainly puzzled the western policy makers and have even started to baffle them (read the Copenhagen scenario). The question that is being repeatedly asked is: Is the West trying to push its luck a bit too far by pitching India against China?

Playing a bluff a little too often?

“The most likely scenario is that of a competitive relationship, unbuffered by extensive economic ties, but without a significant possibility of armed conflict.” (Frankel and Harding, 2004)

Despite being pitched against each other repeatedly, the two Eastern giants have also come together to act as a counter balance against the US. This counter balancing act practiced by India and China is based mainly on issues of development and environment with respect to the developed and developing country differences. Thus as the western hemisphere retreats, the two Asian giants have started following their respective policies in order to generate a clout for themselves.

China has followed a policy of what is known as ‘flexing their might’ which involves showing off the military strength of the country and thereby subduing the opponents. They are doing it in a manner which has caused some brows to sweat in Washington DC, New Delhi and even Tokyo. The rapid Chinese military build up along the borders is seen as an act of aggression. Some neighbours try to counter it, as in India’s case by bolstering the military capabilities while countries like Japan approach Washington for support where they are given the same reassurances of assistance in case of a crisis.

However, “South Asian states are concerned about the fallout of a potential conflict between the Unites States and China if Beijing becomes more assertive or Washington decides to adopt a more aggressive containment policy towards Beijing.” (Cooney and Sato, 2009) The Dragon perceives its aggression only as a precaution against encirclement by the US and its allies. Almost all countries neighbouring China have some form of close ties with NATO (a major US ally). Be it Philippines, Thailand, Japan, South Korea, Vietnam, Australia or India, all share a close relationship with the US with some having a kind of a treaty with the US guaranteeing US assistance during crisis.

Thus it can be said that the Chinese fear of America is not an irrational thought made up by a government which is trying to divert attention from its internal problems. At the same time, the Indian fear is that of a total Chinese controlled South Asia which would be the biggest challenge to achieving a status at par with the US in the future; and India also has its fair share of theories of how the Chinese are expanding their support base.

The present Look East policy of the Indian government seems to lack that excitement which had originally resulted in success. For example, there has been little publicity regarding the work that India is doing in the countries which are a part of the Look East policy. It was only after the Chinese started advancing into Myanmar that the Indian government opened its eyes and stepped up its efforts to reach to the people of Myanmar. However, there’s been very little progress after that. Thus India has been taking a less pro-active stand on how it wants to go about making inroads into other countries except the West and Russia.

Nations close to both India and China have naturally been wary of their ambitions. However, this is more so the case with China as many countries fear the Chinese expansion dream i.e. the Greater China dream and this is where the US comes in. It has given these countries many guarantees regarding their safety.

However, how long will these assurances last?

Which player will call a fold?

As the pot keeps on getting bigger and bigger, the chance of kicking off a row also gets bigger. The important question, however, is: who will be the first to call a fold. A fold in this game has tremendous effects which affect both the political and economic functions of the country. For instance, the demise of the Soviet Union saw many socialist or communist economies shifting to the capitalist fold. Hence, if any shift is to take place, the consequences will be bigger than what they were when the Soviet Era came to an end.

The diplomatic power of a country is vastly affected by the monetary condition of the country. For starters, an increasing budget deficit means that other countries are a little wary of buying its currency bonds which dries up a source of finance to manage unsustainable expense. This results in spending cuts across the board in order to reduce this deficit and regain the confidence of those other countries. Certain departments like Defence are the first to be hit by budget and spending cuts which directly impacts the military might and thereby the arm-twisting strength. Inevitable budget cuts to other areas like Development Aid also reduce the clout of the country as nations shift their allegiance to more generous nations.

The West has been suffering from a self-created economic crisis. The current double-dip recession, for instance, can be attributed to the Bill Clinton Administration. Emerging countries like India and China don’t face such problems. A large amount of sustainable fund will always be easily available to them. Creation of efficient and sustainable infrastructure is the problem they face. Despite credible advances in infrastructure, they still lack sustainability and the problems like the recent China super-fast train crash only add worry.

Another aspect that adds shine to a country at the international level is the respect for human rights shown by the country and the amount of freedom that its citizens have been given. India triumphs over China in this regard, having been recognised by the International Community as a true Democracy. This gives India its fair share of positive light on the International Stage along with the constant pressures of upholding the functioning of democratic institutions in a nation which is becoming home to active participation of citizens in various matters of policy, be it economic or political in nature.

Hence if we were to look at this game of poker in a holistic manner, we can say that the developed countries can still take calls on diplomatic matters only if their internal politics allows them to take significant decisions. At the same time, India and China perform better than their counterparts despite their fair share of problems, provided both are on the same side of the table.

The conclusion of the events down at South China Sea might help us in coming up with an answer to the question India or China but until then, I would as an investor like to invest in both of them equally.

To use Wall Street lingo, one should not expect any gains or losses, but in the long run, as the players revaluate their strategies and come up with the perfect consumer pitch, the sight of the bull and the bear will become common. Till then, let’s allow the speculators to earn their bread.

Thus for the time-being as players work on their strategy and the speculators operate the market, the game stretches on to infinity.

Bibliography

1. Frankel, F.R and Harding, H, (2004), “The India-China relationship: what the United States needs to know”, Columbia University Press.
2. Cooney, J.K and Sato, Y, (2009), “The rise of China and international security: America and Asia respond”, Routledge

Violence Is Not Preached In Religion

Few days ago a politician wrote an article trying to analyse and finding a solution for Islamic Terrorism and it was published by a reputed newspaper which now I feel has lost that reputation at least in my eyes for the simple reason that even though people get angry at various situations and don't know what to do except just blame others but they engage in self-control and self-censorship for the fear that what they do might have repercussions in the future, for their country, for their kids or for people in general and that is what is humane. However neither this 'reputed' newspaper and nor this politician seem to be on the same page of the dictionary.

      It’s been happening ever since the twin tower attacks. Since then people have been linking a particular religion as a synonym of terrorism. This way of thinking is not at all rational. Recently Norway had its share of terrorism when a fundamentalist Christian bombed a building and massacred people with his gun in cold blood. I would like to know what this esteemed politician would want to say to that or what would he say when he is asked about the nuns in Odisha who were raped by people who supported their 'saffron' leaders. What would he say about those Sikhs who were killed by the mob just after Indira Gandhi was assassinated? There are no limits to the number of examples that I can give of barbarism that has been committed by people of nearly all religions. 

      Even Ashoka the king attacked and killed people but then he learnt of his folly. He looked in the eyes of the mothers whose sons he had killed, he looked at small children who played unaware that their father was being taken for cremation and how would a wife feel when she is to know that the man she loved for years has been killed in this fight for land. These question are relevant even today, it is only the reason behind this new 'war' that has changed everything else remains the same. Even now kids would be made orphaned; even now parents would just look on as the child who played on their laps is laid to rest before them. Earlier people fought over land and today they fight over god.

      It is strange how people think that only their religion is right and that it their birth right to ensure that others bow down to their way of thinking and follow their religion. Not many thankfully think like that. However there are elements whose ultimate objective is to simply kill of the opposition or ensure that they convert to their form of thinking. That is exactly what that article of this politician hinted at. 

      The sad part of this form of democracy in India is that, even thought people may fight for their rights and talk about more freedom and protest if the state as much as tries to clamp down on even a single right of theirs, the people in India are simply not ready for this form of multi-party democracy. And they won't be until and unless they stop voting on the basis of religion, caste, gender, region etc. This has to stop. How is a country to progress if the people themselves are divided on the basis of these small thing which at the end of the day won't even play a minor role in shaping my future?

      Everybody talks of progress and growth but when will the people themselves grow up and look at each other as humans and not as individuals from a different religion. Humans are supposed to evolve into intelligent life-forms. They are meant to make miracles happen. And miracles do not happen unless one does not think beyond himself/herself. They only happen when an entire community is to be benefited; for even if there is a god, he won't want only one of his kids to have his wish full-filled. He would want the wishes of the entire community's be full-filled. That child who was about to die of a disease survive thanks to a transplant. As the sun is about to set on his life when he is in his seventies, that same kid in him would ignite and he would look around him and ask, how has my existence helped those around me? And as he says this his eyes will first go to the picture of a dog whom he saved from coming under a car. He would look at his family and see that they are crying and he would know that in his life, he has done thing, good thing, for the grave of a bad man does not get any visitors, as Mr. Scrooge had dreamed.

      Thus similarly it is true that whatever religion you may follow you want to end up in heaven. And the gates to heaven do not open for people who have done bad things in their life.  A mother in a movie explains to her son when the son unknowingly talks about killing people of another religion, she says "There are two kinds of people in this world. One who do bad things and the other who do good things. It is up to you who you want to be." This line is absolutely true in life. I for one can never ever even think of killing another human let alone do it for ethnic cleansing. Its the way I have been brought up. My mother used to tell me the same thing that they said in the movie. I have decided who I want to be life. Now it is your chance to decide.

Master of Disguises

Source

      The critics have dubbed it a Failed State, the security agencies have named it a Terrorist State and the human rights activists have called it a Military State. So many names for one state of Pakistan. Well that is certainly the result of the many disguises that the Pakistani agencies work in. No need to say what half of them are. Yes they are some terrorist outfit plotting their attacks on innocent civilians from at times ISI safe houses. So what is it that has happened? Has Pakistan done too much for these terrorists for the terrorists to call Pakistan their home. Well so it seems. However I won't be talking about terrorism on this post. This article is dealt towards understanding the dual policy that Pakistan is following.

      Pakistan has warned the United States against any further drone strikes conducted within its borders and also any unilateral military action taken inside its territory. But is this a farcical show of strength? Is it just a statement issued by the weak civilian government to please the people and the army. The army would be more than happy with that statement because it would help them to get higher budget while at time same time show the public that they still exert influence on the government which it most desperately needs to show due to the rising criticism for them. Thus there are many different angles to this one play that is being stage on the world arena.

      If reports are to be believed than according to them, Pakistan had a pact with USA that if the US finds Bin Laden in Pakistan's territory than they shall be allowed to take unilateral action while Pakistan will be allowed to criticize them and give them warnings just to show the public that they are against such violations of their sovereignty. Now if that is true than I am not quite sure about Pakistan's future as a sovereign country. How can it be that an operation is carried out by another country within the territory of another country and that country doesn't even do anything about it? Because they simply can't. One must not forget the one very important that Pakistan needs at this time and that is 'AID'.

      Almost all the aid that Pakistan gets from the USA is spent on the military but some of it is utilized to keep the economy afloat. Yes, ladies and gentlemen, the Pakistan economy cannot survive long without continuous economic aid from the United States. The reason why the economy is in shambles is because of the negligence of the government. Pakistani Government never invested smartly for the country's future and if you come to think of it they got the most fertile land in the country after the partition.

      However there are certain sectors that are threatening to boycott the US aid but that may just turn out to be nothing but a publicity stunt being done by an extremist candidate up for elections. If the military is mum and not doing anything about it than there isn't much that can or will be done. And as time goes, the Pakistani people will forget about the incident but the extremists and the terrorist funded by the ISI will not. Thus the ongoing proxy war against the US planned and put into action by Pakistan will go on.

      So in short they can't do much except criticize the US and fund terrorist networks to increase attacks on Americans because after all money talks. So in short we will only be hearing statements made by the Pakistan leadership and acts of terrorism against the US and that is all that there is to it. After all statements can be forgotten but actions cannot and the US is one country that will never forget it if Pakistan does something against them. So in the end, it is the "you give me money, and I won't do anything 'publicly'."

The Concept of Clean Politics

Source

      Politics has always been a key element of our society. Without it, it would be hard to even establish whether a society even existed or not. Its a concept that is said to be as important to society as oxygen or water is to mankind. Everything that has ever defined us and the world that we live in has been influenced by this eight letter word. On the one hand it started two world wars and on the other insured the peaceful settlement of the Suez Canal dispute. So now that you come to see of it, politics is morally colourless i.e it can result in wars or solution of disputes peacefully.

     The concept of politics became famous thanks to Shakespeare and his play Caesar. I was taught the play in tenth standard and it was also my first brush with this concept. Since then the concept has fascinated me. It is so intriguing that you can achieve so many things with this one word and its careful usage. Its a tactician's dream. For ages people have planned and conspired against each other, no wonder the world is in shambles today. We have to deal with multiple threats like terrorism, rival countries and a relatively new concept known as rogue countries which I can use to describe the failed state of Pakistan which uses a dual policy. One that is anti-terrorism and the other pro. Of course it is a hide and seek game to prove the latter.

Source

      So has politics ever been clean or has it always involved those small dirty tricks that seem to be white on the outside and black like a kettle on the inside. It is confusing while at the same time we have the answer in front of us. It is like asking whether a man has ever lied in his life. Now we don't know about everyone but we can make the most likely assumption that every man has lied in their life at least once. And so it is. We take two possibilities and choose an option that is more likely and that is that politics had been a dirty business since the very start. And there is no better example to start with than that of Caesar himself.

      Caesar was murdered because he was becoming too big. He was overshadowing others and was starting to seem like a threat. Thus he had to be done with and so he was murdered, murdered by his most trusted comrades, Caesar's story went onto become epic. However there is one thing that is worth a mention here. As we see that as Caesar became powerful, the number of his enemies also increased and this is true to every individual who rises high and has a massive public support system. So he was murdered for political gains and thus it proves the fact that since ancient times politics has been a dirty business.

Source

      We are further convinced of this when we look at the recent examples of Libya and Syria. I have explored Libya in a previous post and thus I won't be discussing it and instead I would take Syria as an example. Syria has been a dictatorship for a long time and it's people have been denied their rights for a long time. Hence it was quite natural that a tipping point be reached and thus at this tipping point the public anger overflowed from the pot. Widespread stirs and agitations took place and they were put down. The authorities used every resource that they could to fight the very same people whom they were meant to help in their quest for progress. Its a tragedy if you look at it closely.

      So we have the answer that we wanted. Yes politics has always been a dirty business. Always some interests are involved. But does it mean that this black and white picture of politics can't be given a make over and turned colourful like the rainbow maybe. Well I would say that this black and white picture can't be turned into a rainbow-colourful but it certainly can be lightened. Colours can be added and the baggage attached to the word 'politics' can be lost. But it doesn't start just like that. No one individual can do it. It has to be a community's work. It is like a society garden. Everybody needs to plant the seeds, water them and take good care of them if flowers are to bloom and happiness to come.

      How can one do it? Well it is simple. Grab your paper and get your pen, and pen your worries on it. Just direct your feet to the sunny side of your mind. I took that line from a song but how does it matter, the message goes out loud and clear. It means that you should write what worries you. Put it down on a piece of paper while at the same time suggest things or steps that can be taken to improve the situation and that would be you doing your bit. So as I finish this article I look at my TV screen and see the farmer agitation and I hope that I can do something about it. With that hope I shall again take to my laptop and pen another article but till then this is me signing off and hoping that things come out well.

Justifying the crackdown at Ramlila Ground

      On June 4th as the clock ticked form 11:59 PM to 12:00 AM the Delhi Police stationed itself at the Ramlila Maidan. What was to follow was to be dubbed as one of the worst incidents ever to happen in a democracy like India. Allegations were made against the government. People warned that we were returning to the Emergency Era. The Delhi Police had raided the maidan, many protesters were injured and Baba Ramdev was taken to Dehradun. 

      The crackdown received criticism far and wide. BJP President Nitin Gadkari said, "Home Minister P Chidamabaram has replaced General Dyer who had massacred peaceful agitators in Jallianwala Bagh during the freedom struggle". LK Advani termed this police crackdown as "naked-fascism". Human Rights groups demanded answers from the government.

Source

      All in all the government was cornered but not even for a moment did anybody think about all of this from the government's point of view. Maybe it was the sudden excitement that people found themselves surrounded by or maybe it was the collective anger that people had for the government. Nobody was happy. Rising prices, corruption and what not. Something had to give. And thus the government found itself to be a lone woodcutter in the forest, surrounded by hyenas ready to tear apart the woodcutter. 

      I admit that the crackdown may have been a little too harsh but it was what was needed. I believe that the constitution grants the government the right to crackdown on such protests if it feels that it may disrupt civil peace or cause civil unrest. I feel what the government did was totally justified. If you come to think of it all, if any damage had been done to public property had the protest gone out of hand thenn who would have had to pay for it? We would have had to pay for it from our pockets. Our taxes would have been used to pay for it all and I for one refuse that my money be used to pay for damage caused because of a Baba whose total net worth is over a 1000crore Rupees. 

      Another argument that the people raise is that 'Women and children were harmed'. I find this argument to be the dumbest of them all. Doesn't everybody go about claiming that women and men are equal? So why this special reference to women alone. It's a bit strange now that I look at it carefully. And the children. It is unfortunate if any children were hurt but at the same time only the parents are to be blamed. I have to still meet a single parent who would take their child along to such a place when they know that the issue is going to get very political. Of course many would defend the parent's action by saying that the parents took the child because their future was at stake. OK fine if at all the future of their child was at stake even then I would say that not a single person I know would take their child to such a place. They would go themselves but not a single parent would allow any harm to come to their child.

      After the crackdown, we saw BJP protesting against it. A clip of Sushma Swaraj was being aired by news channels which showed her dancing to supposed patriotic tunes at Rajghat. She defended herself aggressively by asking whether it was a crime to dance and sing patriotic songs at a place like Rajghat where the father of our nation was cremated. Even if we allow patriotic songs but still dancing at a place like that is condemnable. That is a place where one should remain silent and show his respect for Bapu. And however much you claim that you were simply singing and dancing to songs in praise of the motherland, it does not explain why you had the urge to dance to whatever patriotic song that you were dancing to at Rajghat. There is a time and place for everything. I for one regard it as a clear cut insult to me and to every Indian because of the special place that Bapu holds in our society.

Source

      Many critics of the government compared the India under UPA to China. I for one find this comparison both silly and childish. It is strange that people are able to criticise the government like that and still say that they are living in China. I really doubt if in China people are even seen or heard of after they have made such a statement against the government. Comparing this incident to the Tienanmen Square protest or to the Tahrir Square protests is nothing but an insult to those protesters who bravely fought their regimes in the hopes of having a better tomorrow. I don't think that this crackdown evoked any feeling of being that helpless that one compares it to the those valiant protests that happened in China and Egypt respectively. People claimed that all the politicians had Swiss bank accounts. That statement too is dumb. Did they go and get the bank statement of those individuals? Why do people insult politicians just like that? Agreed that politicians are public servants but still you do not own them. Our democracy can be best described as a restaurant where the Prime Minister is the waiter and he has to come at one call as soon as he is summoned by any Tom, Dick and Harry. What the people do not understand is that he has got much more important things to attend to like administrating this huge country of ours.

      One of the many factors that makes me critical of Baba Ramdev's protest is the fact that the man travels in private jets even though he has taken sanyas. This one thing alone makes me not want to believe whatever he says. Besides, what is left of a fast after you have taken some honey and lemon juice? Also not to forget all this fasting was like holding the government to ransom. I for one wonder what would happen if an unstable person tomorrow undertakes a fast saying the government must bomb some country for all the atrocities that it is committing on India by means of terrorism. If the fast gets good publicity then many idiots would also join the protest. At that time a crackdown would be needed. We can't simply bomb a country and then hope that they won't nuke us.

      This fasting incident made my Grandma nostalgic. She told me that when she lived in West Bengal, almost every single day there would be a strike or a fasting by a group of workers wanting a rise in salary. They claimed that they were being made to work a lot and not being a paid a fair amount. What was the result? At times when the strike would go on, the company would go bankrupt and shut down. Hence all of them would lose their jobs while the Union Leaders were taken care of by political parties with vested interests. A similar thing is happening in India. Every single day somebody goes on a fast for some issue or the other. He is endorsed by celebrities who at times simply fail to understand the fact that adding their name to such a campaign would have a broad effect and many people would join in the fasting without actually being aware of what the core issue is.

      Thus all in all, promoting such things is not going to be beneficial to anybody despite whatever people may claim. I hope this article succeeded in telling you guys that if you want to protest against something then fasting is not the way to go. You can do rallies. Sit at the pavements and shout slogans, protest. But this thing of holding mass protest is not good. It won't do the country any good. Police forces would be diverted to ensure that these protests don't turn violent or to ensure the safety of the leaders from things like ensuring the security of the common man, terrorism and robberies. So even though the constitution grants us the right to protest but it is up to us to understand, be reasonable and to protests in a way that does not hurt the economy, administration or anything for that matter. If we are to all grow old together in this great country of ours then we must find ways to let out our anger against the government in respectable and acceptable ways.

Earth in 2011: Humans and Nature

Source

      Disasters. Man-made and natural. None of the two are new, they are age old words but they should now be said with a lot more fear. Everywhere you look there is despair that hangs in the air with humans being the rope and the devil himself being the Hangman. Egypt, Tunisia, Libya are the most recent and the most intense examples of man-made disasters. It was man who created the system of ruler. It is a time tested one but it also has its negatives. These negatives are mostly the result of poor leadership. Unlike the earlier days, now a days the leaders give a lot more importance to their own state of well-being.

      The best example of this sort of leadership is that of the infamous Col. Gaddafi. Every news paper has something to report about his banks accounts which are spread all over the world and which the world powers are doing their desperate best to freeze but then we, civilians, don't know the ground reality. We are simply the infant which is fed by the mother, the government being the mother here. Educated, politically aware and smart though we are but it is only those handful of people in the villages, rural areas or the not so developed regions who are asking the questions. What are we doing then? Isn't it our responsibility too? Being responsible global citizens shouldn't we offer help to our brothers who are struggling to achieve some sense of democracy?

Source

      We aren't doing that but how is it that even with so many educated people in the world, individuals like Gaddafi are able to get away after killing civilians or rebels as he may have labelled them. The US which is the supposed 'Big Brother' of the international community is having trouble in trying to find a quick and efficient solution to the problem. They are trying to get NATO to play a bigger part because they have got their 'own bigger problems' such as the one in Afghanistan. There are about 200 countries in the world and yet only one (read USA) is staking its claim to be a 'Moral Superpower'. Of course it is a claim that is resisted by many.

      US has its own self-interests to take care of first, the most important being OIL. Hence, we can term that claim of theirs as questionable, but who doesn't want to look after their self-interests? China is playing brother to Pakistan to counter India, USA is backing South Korea to counter North Korea. There are many more examples of countries getting involved in the bigger picture to secure their interests. However, what does this lead to? An Afghanistan, if I may say so. It was the US that declared war on Afghanistan with its allies to get the world rid of the Taliban and Al-Qaeda. A praise-worthy venture indeed but what happened? Did the dream come true? No. All that remains in Afghanistan is a slightly crippled Taliban getting its money from poppy cultivation opposed by a few warlords here and there.

Source

      Thus it was a failed operation. It was an operation that cost the tax-payers billions of dollars each day that it continued, yet it still continues. Now we hear that the US is going to slowly and steadily pull out of there. What then? The only thing that is stopping the Taliban from overthrowing the decadent government is the presence of the US troops. Thus, we are heading back to the almost similar past scenario. A half-hearted operation won't do the trick and this is what leaders have realized and hence, we can see the rebels surviving the Libyan Civil War.

      The entire middle-east is in turmoil currently. Each day media reports about protests in different countries. The fight for freedoms has spread like a wildfire. What I feel is that the time has come when military or other dictatorship would be shown the door from the entire middle-east and people would prosper in a free middle-east. Yet there is another aspect of human life that we haven't explored yet. And that is the natural aspect. I wrote about power hungry despots but we are still left with Mother Nature, a topic so vast that even if I type a billion blogs, I won't be able to explain it entirely and do it the justice that it deserves.

NATURE

Source

      In the last couple of months, we saw earthquakes, horrendous ones. We saw New Zealand suffer and we also saw Japan in despair, a situation that is hadn't been in since the world war. What is all this that is happening all around us? Revenge by mother earth? Is this the beginning of the end? These are some of the questions that 'pollute' the dreams of many. What I feel is that this is not the end. It is merely the start of a new beginning. The earth is starting the process of cleansing. It is cleansing itself from all the harm that we have done and when it does so we will go back to the golden age.

      The process would be tough on all of us. But it is needed. I don't know what it would be like but it would certainly involve earth releasing colossal amounts of energy lying dormant in its dark interiors. Thus we may see a rise in the number of earthquakes, volcanoes and tsunami but it is all for the good.

      There are many more aspects that need to be analysed but I can't do so in one post so hence I will write another post about this and it will be posted on the next Sunday.

TO BE CONTINUED....

The US-Pakistan Relationship: Friend or Foe?

    For a long term relationship to last, trust needs to be there. But in the case of the American-Pakistan partnership trust has not been something that was meant to be there. The Americans changed their interaction with Pakistan when the Iron Curtain fell and they started becoming Pro-India but they later had to change this position of theirs due to the 9/11 terrorist attacks which resulted in the US declaring war on Afghanistan.

    Afghanistan was a poor third world country that was far away from them and which had witnessed numerous political events in the past decades. But now that they had invaded the landlocked country it became important for the US to strike a partnership(short-term) with Pakistan in order to prevent terrorists from entering Pakistan and escaping the 'American Wrath'. But that was never meant to be.

    Though the partnership was struck but Pakistan under the dictatorial regime allowed the Taliban to enter and hide in Pakistan. The Pakistani Government thought that they could now get the best of both worlds. They would terrorize India using the vast number of terrorists who had arrived in Pakistan and also by threatening India by the weapons gifted by Uncle Sam. But in doing so they did not realize that they were on the wrong road and had to change.

    The result: Pakistan was soon being regarded as a 'terrorist state' with more than 80% of the global attacks being traced back to them. The Americans could not do anything. They could not attack Pakistan as it had got its own weapons of mass-destruction which ironically had been acquired by Pakistan as the US turned a blind eye to the Pakistani Nuclear Program.

    Now the Americans are in a tight spot. Years of bad foreign policy have come back to haunt them. The US does not have a clear way out to get out of this mess that they have got themselves in. All they can do is wait. Wait for the time to pass and for the region to become stable. Only then can they decide on their next course of action to deal with the 'Terrorist State'.

The Cyber Wars

Internet is now a national asset. It has helped in connecting people and also in a lot more things. But as they say, there is always another side to things. And yes indeed there is. Along with the pros of the internet come the cons. But these two elements are there in everything. In some cases the pros are more and in some it’s the other way round. But this here is a unique case.

Internet has had a lot more than its 15 minutes of fame and it is still on it. Internet here is a unique case of how something can be so good and yet so bad. The threat that comes with internet is something major. Something so major that it threatens the entire world as now a days many things are computerised if not all.

Recently the bill ‘Protecting Cyberspace as a National Asset’ which was approved unanimously by the US Homeland Security Committee attracted some negative attention with people raising concerns over their privacy on the net. This bill will give the US president the authority to ‘kill the internet’. Some claim it to be the President’s ‘Internet Kill Switch’. This bill would be put to vote on the Senate floor shortly. But it has brought forth the major problems of the net to the public.

The problem is Hacking and identity thefts. These problems are a relatively new thing. Last year and even this year we read many news reports about the hackings that were taking place with the main source being China. Reports claimed that China had its own Cyber Hacking Army. I do not know whether I should believe it or not but the recent hacking carried out from the Chinese Territories gives me reason to believe so.

Many countries have built their own Cyber Army with the US and China leading the pack. But the thing to note is that this might result in the onset of new types of wars, the wars which will involve no bloodshed. They would be called ‘The Cyber Wars’ where one country would hack into the other country’s confidential database and take out information that is of interest or paralyse the entire internet facility within that country.

The worst of these attacks is called ‘A Fire sale’ wherein everything within a country is hacked and rendered useless or paralysed or even controlled. It is best shown in the movie Die Hard 4.0 where the cyber infrastructure of the United States is hacked and controlled by the terrorists. In such a situation, everything in the country that is computerised is controlled by the hackers. And that involved the Traffic Signals which are now days are controlled by computers. Furthermore the entire internet infrastructure can be paralysed which means that people will not have access to the internet.

Then the hackers can get on with damaging the economy as many of the economic activities are carried out via the internet. This may result in losses of over a Billion and more and at times might lead to the worst and that is another Great Depression. Another aspect is the mass media which is by far one of the most important. If they have control over the mass-media then they will have control over what we are seeing. The TV shows and all would be controlled by them. They will show us what they want to show and we will be seeing it.

Seeing the above scenarios it does not come as a big surprise if many more countries adopt laws which control or monitor the internet. But a problem with the internet being controlled or monitor would be the complete loss of privacy. The government would have the right to control the things that we do when on the net. In some of the less democratic countries it might lead to Government tyranny. The government would block access to sites which criticizes them or which it does not feel is appropriate for the internet community to view. And this has already happened in many countries example China and is happening in countries example Pakistan where sites like Facebook and YouTube were blocked for sometime as they were deemed to be immoral.

Thus there are two sides to everything. These two sides prevent us from coming to firm conclusions to such issues. At one hand is the security and on the other is privacy. Thus we are on the tip of a mountain and it would be are decision which would either lead us to a new world or to doom. But the thing to note is that both the decisions are sensible. I being a netizen prefer security but also being a blogger makes me want to choose the right to expression. But whatever is done should not be done to the extreme. As taking any decision and going to the extreme will cause both unhappiness and dissatisfaction.