Custom Search Engine - Scans Selected News Sites

Loading

Wednesday, 30 June 2010

From Today's Papers - 30 Jun 2010









JJ Singh takes Raj Bhawan closer to people
Bijay Sankar Bora Tribune News Service  General (retd) JJ SinghGuwahati, June 29 Arunachal Pradesh Governor General (retd) JJ Singh’s endeavour to bring the Raj Bhawan closer to people of the bordering hill state has elicited overwhelming response from all sections of the common people as well as the researchers.  An official source in Itanagar informed that over a thousand common people, including schoolchildren, visited the Raj Bhawan in Itanagar since the Governor decided to open it for commoners on every Sunday afternoon for two hours. The process started since the Arunachal Pradesh Statehood Day on February 20 last year.  Every Sunday between 3 pm to 5 pm, the common people have the opportunity to visit the Raj Bhawan compound. To make their visit more interesting, the Raj Bhawan officials organises games like air rifle shooting, flower name writing and basketball.  According to Raj Bhawan sources, more than thousand visitors have visited the compound. Along with visitors and schoolchildren of the capital city, people from faraway places like Doimukh, Oyan, Pasighat, Daporijo and Tawang and even from neighboring state of Assam have visited it.  The Raj Bhawan is located on a hillock close to a historical monument known as Ita-Fort (Eastern Gate), on an area of 27 acres. The compound is characterised by a lush green lawn with decorative trees, beautiful flower gardens, a kitchen garden and fruit trees which sooth one’s soul and spirit.  The beautiful nine-hole golf course which has been set up in a record time of six months under the initiative of the Governor, imparts a majestic look to the surrounding.  The orchid centre, Hornbill cottage, fish pond, bee keeping unit and the country chicken farm are very popular among visitors.









Navy gets two warships 
Visakhapatnam, June 29 Giving a boost to the Navy’s defence capabilities, two state-of-the-art high-speed warships, INS Cankarso and INS Kondul, were commissioned here today into the naval fleet.  Andhra Pradesh Governor ESL Narasimhan commissioned the ships in the presence of Commanding-in-Chief of Eastern Naval Command Vice-Admiral Anup Singh and other senior Naval officials.  The indigenously-built ships use water jet propulsion technology and can achieve speeds in excess of 35 knots. They will be based in Goa and tasked with the role of detecting, locating and destroying small, fast-moving enemy surface craft engaged in covert operations, a Navy spokesman said.  INS Cankarso and INS Kondul are fitted with 30-mm CRN-91 gun built by Ordnance Factory, Medak, and Igla missiles and set of machine guns ranging from light to heavy. "These features are an improvement over the previous fast attack craft (FAC) ships," the spokesman said.  These two ships are the first lot of the ten similar ships that the Navy proposed to induct in its fleet. They belong to the Car Nicobar class V and VI in the FAC series.  "In addition to their primary role, the ships will be tasked with the role of policing, anti-smuggling and fisheries protection in India's coastal waters. In the long run, these ships could help in ensuring stability in India's maritime zones of responsibility," the spokesman said.  INS Cankarso is named after an island near Goa while INS Kondul derives its name from an island near Nicobar. Kolkata-based Garden Reach Ship Builders and Engineers, headed by Rear-Admiral (retd) K C Shekar, built these ships in two years.  Water jet technology has rapidly gained acceptance as the leading means of propulsion for all types of high-speed marine craft, including ferries, work boats, patrol crafts and pleasure boats.  Recent advances in water jet technology have put them ahead of conventional propulsion systems in high-speed performance and reliability, the Navy spokesman said.  INS Cankarso is commanded by Arun Bahuguna and INS Kondul by Shashidhar R Patil. The two crafts that have 45 sailors and four officers on board, are equipped with a reverse-osmosis technology drinking water plant and sewerage treatment plant. — PTI










Army training CRPF men to fight Maoists
Bijay Sankar Bora/ TNS  Guwahati, June 29 Large contingents of CRPF personnel are undergoing month-long training on fighting Maoists guerrillas. The training is being imparted by Army personnel at two locations in Assam. The effort is part of a larger programme to train paramilitary force across the country.  The massacre of CRPF personnel at Dantewada by Maoists guerrillas in April compelled the Centre to engage the Army for training paramilitary forces deployed to combat Maoists guerrillas.  Defence sources said 540 CRPF jawans and eight officials had assembled at an Army base at Agia in Goalpara district of Western Assam for the training that would conclude on July 24. The training would focus on weaponry, tactical drills, ambush, raids, patrolling, IEDs and psychological operations. CRPF men would also be trained in winning hearts of the people that formed a crucial aspect of the overall strategy to fight Maoists guerrillas.










Army to get electronic interceptors soon
Vijay Mohan Tribune News Service  Chandigarh, June 29 With signal interception playing a major role in the intelligence operations within the emerging information warfare spectrum, the Military intelligence is in the process of acquiring electronic intercept receiver to boost its ability to monitor hostile air waves.  Apart from voice and data intercepts, the Army also wants to keep a tab on various radars and other equipment emitting radio frequency (RF) signals that could help detect and deduce enemy capability, movements and possible motives.  “There are various RF emitters, including various types of radars apart from the one used for communication system used by our neighboring countries. There is need to monitor these emitters by our security forces to obtain required information. Hence, a RF Intercept Receiver is required that can monitor these non-communication emitters,” a request for proposal issued by the Directorate of Military Intelligence said earlier this month.  Battlefield surveillance radars, artillery fire control and detection radars, the GPS systems, man-portable tactical radars, radio jammers and ground sensors are examples of equipment besides communication sets that are in use with the military forces. Militant groups are also known to use some electronic gadgets like the GPS and remote triggering devices. Signal interception is heavily used by the security forces in Jammu and Kashmir.  The Army also wants system configurations that support manned, unmanned, remote and autonomous continuous operations in harsh environments over long period of time. The system should also have means of storing intercepted data.









Lt Gen chargesheeted in Sukna land scam 
New Delhi, June 29 Senior Army officer Lt Gen Avadesh Prakash was today chargesheeted in Sukna land scam case with the army accusing him of trying to help secure defence land for a private realtor to set up a school near Siliguri West Bengal.  After the reconvened Court of Inquiry (COI) was completed earlier this month, the Army initiated the summary of evidence against him at the Eastern Command headquarters in Kolkata from today and Gen Prakash was slapped with five charges.  “In the summary of evidence, the Army has charged Prakash with visiting Jodhpur and Ajmer to help the Geetanjali Educational Trust to get affiliation from Mayo college, visiting Chumta tea estate before recommending to the 33 Corps commander to consider his friend Dilip Agarwal's proposal to build an educational facility at the proposed site and trying to help him to get his proposal cleared by the Army,” sources said.  If the summary of evidence finds Prakash guilty, he would have to face a court martial in the case, they added.  An earlier COI had indicted Praksh along with three other generals, including Lt Gen P K Rath, 11 Corps commander Lt Gen Ramesh Halgali and Maj Gen PK Sen. — PTI









Maoists attack CRPF party in Chhattisgarh, 26 jawans killed 
NDTV Correspondent, Updated: June 30, 2010 00:21 IST  Raipur:  Twenty six CRPF jawans have been killed and seven injured in what is being seen as another major Naxal attack in Chhattisgarh.  Sources said at least 90 Maoists ambushed a 63-strong CRPF road-opening party in an area under Dhaurai police station, 3 km from the CRPF camp in Narayanpur district of the state, at about 3 pm on Tuesday.  The CRPF men from 39 Battalion, E and F company, were securing the area ahead of a two-day Naxal-sponsored bandh starting tomorrow.  Home Secretary GK Pillai says that the injured have been evacuated. (Watch: Injured have been evacuated, says Home Secretary)      IAF helicopters would be used bring back the dead early on Wednesday morning, sources said.  In the country's worst Maoist attack ever, at least 75 Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF) and a state police personnel were killed in an ambush on On April 6, in the thick Mukrana forests of Chhattisgarh's Dantewada district. (Read: 76 security men killed by Naxals in Chhattisgarh)  Barely a month after the deadly attack on the CRPF, Naxals triggered a bus blast on May 17 in Dantewada in which 31 people were killed, mostly civilians.









New ISI-Lashkar plan to keep Kashmir on boil 
Nitin Gokhale, Updated: June 29, 2010 14:13 IST  New Delhi:  Government sources have revealed that trouble-makers in Jammu and Kashmir are being instructed by their mentors in Pakistan to keep the Kashmir valley on the boil by instigating people to confront security forces.  The sources say the latest strategy of the Pakistan's ISI and the Lashkar-e-Toiba is to combine renewed infiltration attempts by heavily-armed militants with the unleashing of civil unrest to ensure Kashmir remains in a state of chaos.  The aim is to make create the kind of situation that had prevailed during the 2008 Amarnath Yatra agitation, the sources said.  One of the main elements of this new strategy is to instigate people to confront security personnel and force them to react violently. Over the last couple of weeks Kashmir has indeed witnessed violent protests with agitators often attacking security forces.     The new strategy to foment trouble has been devised following the failure to push an adequate number of militants across the Line of Control in the past few months, the sources said.




Tuesday, 29 June 2010

From Today's Papers - 29 Jun 2010






Indians pioneered missiles, Tipu Sultan used similar weapon
N Ravikumar/Tribune News Service  Coimbatore, June 28 Indians are pioneers in missile technology, since Mysore ruler Tipu Sultan used a weapon resembling these missiles, when he fought against the British rule, said Sivathanupillai, a leading scientist.  The small launchers, packed with explosives, moved forward using a similar technology that is being used now, he added. Since this technology was in its inception stage and the materials available were not sophisticated, the missiles could only hit the target at a distance of 1 to 2 kilometers, he added. He also explained the underlying principles behind BrahMos, Agni and the Nag and the small rockets developed by Tipu Sultan.  Attending a session titled “Scientific Tamil” at the World Classical Tamil Conference that concluded yesterday, the scientist said a few warriors in the northern districts of Tamil Nadu manufactured these missiles. Tipu’s arms godowns were located at Dharmapuri and Arcot. It was at these places that the missiles were manufactured. The British rulers, who defeated Tippu Sultan, finally raided these godowns and were amazed at the new technology. The rockets were taken to England and were on display at London Museum, Sivathanupillai said.









6 militants, 3 Armymen killed in J-K gunbattle 
Jammu: Six armed foreign militants were killed and three Armymen lost their lives in a fierce gunbattle along the Line of Control (LoC) in Kupwara sector of Jammu and Kashmir on Monday.  Acting on a tip off, troops picked up the movement of a group of infiltrating militants in 104 forward location along LoC in Kupwara belt and launched an operation, triggering the encounter, a senior Army official at Udhampur-based Northern Command said on Monday. The gunbattle was on when reports last came in from the area. — TNS








Tinkering with AFSPA will be dangerous
The political masters of this country are bent upon diluting the 52 years old time tested AFSPA. All for short term political gains. CJ: Brigadier Arun..   Mon, Jun 28, 2010 16:36:49 IST Views:                20    Comments: 0 Rate:  1 out of 5 2 out of 5 3 out of 5 4 out of 5 5 out of 5 0.0 / 0 votes     OTHERS DAY a leading news paper of India on its front page had published a photograph showing an armed to the teeth paramilitary personnel using catapult to throw back the stones being pelted at the CRPF and their vehicles being burnt on the streets of Sopian town in J&K State. If this is how the vote bank oriented Indian Netas want to curb the mounting armed rebellion in various parts of the country then only God may help Mera Bharat Mahan.  Now, it is the turn of the army. The political masters of this country are bent upon diluting the 52 years old time tested Armed Forces Special Powers Act (AFSPA). All for short term political gains. This is happening at a time when India’s 223 districts and 40000 square kilometer of area has been literally liberated by the Naxals, Pakistani ISI and Jehadis have openly joined hands to destabilize India and North East India is simmering with palpable discontent.  The paradox is that Jammu & Kashmir and Manipur, the two Indian states demanding this dilution, are the ones maximum affected by terror. It is this very act and the Army that has brought this terror level down to the acceptable limits. Our netas who want this dilution in the name of giving this Act a human face, a demand also shrilled by the Human Rights organizations of these states, are refusing to notice the truth that it is the separatists and terror organizations of these states that are the hidden face behind this demand.  The question which our Good Samaritan political masters must answer to the Indian public is that why should Army, an organization trained to shoot to kill an external enemy, be used against our own country men? If these countrymen of ours have been forced to take up arms against the State, it was because the Politicians and Babes refused to listen to their problems. It is the long time misgovernance; corruption and nepotism duly abetted by the insensitive Indian police having crossed all limits that have forced the aam admi to take up arms against the state. Now why do our Netas want to let loose Army against them? Our armchair intellectuals and human rights activists should be pondering on this issue.   Army is the last resort. If it fails then the country will break. Realizing this the Indian Parliament under the leadership of India’s greatest Prime minister Pandit Nehru, a world renowned democrat and statesman, passed this Armed Forces Special Powers Act in 1958.   At that time there were no Jehadis, no Naxals, no human bombs and no AK-47 or AK-56 rifles. The destructive technology had also not developed to the level that a single terrorist could cause great collateral damage as they do now. Besides the only armed rebellion India faced was in Nagaland and Mizoram. Even Supreme Court of India has upheld this Act in their judgment on 27 Nov 1997.So why dilute now when law and order problems in the country have gone from bad to worse?   When the tall politicians of India of those days enacted this Act in Indian Parliament they never wanted this act to have human face. They desired this Act to be a deterrent. They were sure of their own governing capability and were confident that Army will seldom be required to work in internal security duties, this job being basically of Indian Police. Today, army is deployed in J&K, Manipur, Assam, and Nagaland. But for the resistance from Army, our current political class would have deployed them against Naxals also with no questions asked. No wonder they want this act to be diluted. After all the elections also have to be won, let country go to dogs.   The AFSPA allows army to fire upon and even cause death against any person working in contravention of law and order in an area declared disturbed by the state government. They can arrest any person without warrant but will have to hand over the same to police within 48 hours. They can destroy any arms dumps, terror training centers etc. No prosecution suit or legal proceedings can be initiated against Army Personnel without the sanction of the Central Government. These clauses irk the local politicians because unlike police, Army is not answerable to them.  Once this Act gets diluted the terror organizations will force the local population to launch false cases against the Army. With the way our judicial system functions, which Army Officer will like to get involved in the never ending judicial hearings? Thus defocused and demotivated the Army will also be another police force with no results.   Answer does not lie in diluting this act. The need of the hour is to better train, equip and provide better leadership to the Indian police and Paramilitary forces and use only them in Internal Security duties. Army should be called in extreme conditions where there is no room forcivilian interface. The prolonged use of Army should be avoided at all costs. Instead give better governance a chance. The Indian Police reforms on the lines of Supreme Court directions of 2006 will pay better dividends. The time tested AFSPA-1958 does not require any tinkering and should be left alone.











Will call in Army if the need arises: J&K Government 
NDTV Correspondent, Updated: June 28, 2010 23:44 IST  Srinagar:  Kashmir is tense. Two more civilians, including a young boy, have died in firing by the CRPF on Monday and the Valley is seeing widespread and violent protests. The state government has now said the Army may be called in to control the situation.  However, security sources have told NDTV that they don't forsee this happening and that the situation should be under control by Tuesday. The sources also said that additional Central forces, and not the Army, were being inducted in Sopore and along the Srinagar-Baramulla-Sopore highway.  Sopore has seen the worst of violent clashes between frenzied protesters and security forces. This morning, a crowd had gathered for the funeral of a youth, 20-year-old Bilal Ahmad Wani, who was killed on Sunday, allegedly hit by a rubber bullet fired from a CRPF picket. Raising anti-government and pro-freedom slogans, nearly 4,000 protestors carried Bilal's body and marched on the streets of the town.  The funeral procession turned violent and five people were injured in CRPF firing. Soon, protesters marching near Sopore clashed with the police. As they headed towards a CRPF post, a jawan fired from the picket killing another 20-year-old, Tajamul.      Some time later on Monday came the incident that shook the Valley. A young boy, Tauqir Ahmad, was allegedly killed when CRPF personnel opened fire on a protest march at Dalina in Baramulla. (In Pics: Tension in Kashmir) The last two weeks have seen eight civilian deaths in the Valley.  The CRPF has, however, denied reports that it fired during the funeral procession. Vikram Srivastava, Director General, CRPF said, "No ammunition has been fired by CRPF at the funeral procession. Our basic position is that we are there to assist state police." (Watch: CRPF denies firing at protesters in Sopore)  Separatists had called for a protest march on Monday after the overnight tension in Sopore over the use of force by CRPF against agitators in the region. Hundreds of policemen were deployed and barricades erected on the Srinagar-Baramulla highway to prevent separatists from marching to Sopore.  Police forces also reportedly used teargas and lathicharge on protesters who refused to stop.  Several leaders of the moderate Hurriyat Conference, including its chairman Mirwaiz Umar Farooq, were placed under house arrest. (Read: Hurriyat leaders placed under house arrest)  Schools and colleges in the Valley will remain closed for two days to prevent student protests. (Read: Militants attack Sopore police station)  Jammu and Kashmir Chief Minister Omar Abdullah spoke with Home Minister P Chidambaram on Sunday night and voiced strong concern over civilians becoming victims of action by paramilitary forces. Asking him to intervene in the matter, Omar asked the Home Minister to visit the state. The visit is likely to take place in a day or two.









Navy war room leak: Shankaran's extradition process begins
NDTV Correspondent, Updated: June 29, 2010 01:08 IST  London:  Proceedings to extradite one of the main accused in the infamous Naval war room leak case, Ravi Shankaran, have begun in London.  Ravi, who fled India and had an Interpol notice against him, was arrested in London in April. He is accused of accessing classified and sensitive information from the India navy and selling that to companies bidding for naval contracts worth billions of dollars, damaging the security and integrity of the country.  His lawyer claimed Ravi Shankaran was not arrested, he chose to go to the police himself.  "He voluntarily went to the police... want to correct some facts about him. He is free and has no armed guards as you can see," said Solicitor Henri Brandman.        A well attired Ravi Shankaran seemed nervous at the beginning but then smiled and laughed a fair bit during the hearing. The hearing lasted nearly three hours as the prosecution outline the alleged fraud and lies he and his accomplices perpetrated.  The next hearing is on September 1 but the extradition could take months.  The prosecution talked about how Ravi had used inducements including a honey trap to obtain classified information from the Indian Navy and sold that to companies bidding in tenders for naval equipment contracts worth billions of dollars.  Shankaran is on bail in London and has hired one of Britain's top lawyers to resist extradition.









Army foils infiltration bid, 6 militants killed 
Press Trust of India, Updated: June 29, 2010 00:51 IST  Jammu:  Six armed foreign militants were killed on Monday and three Armymen lost their lives in a fierce gunbattle that broke out along the Line of Control (LOC) in Kupwara sector of Jammu and Kashmir.  Acting on a tip off, troops picked up the movement of a group of infiltrating militants in 104 forward location along the LoC in Kupwara belt and launched an operation, triggering the encounter, a senior Army official at Udhampur-based Northern Command told PTI tonight.  Six foreign militants and three Army jawans were killed in the gunbattle, which was on when reports last came in from the area.   Read more at:









Ajai Shukla: McChrystal-gazing What India can learn from Obama's unceremonious dismissal of his military commander in Afghanistan last week
Ajai Shukla / New Delhi June 29, 2010, 0:05 IST  Last week’s unceremonious dismissal by US President Barack Obama of his military commander in Afghanistan, Lt Gen Stanley McChrystal, should be carefully studied in this country. In contrast to India, where civil-military relations remain mired in wary mutual watchfulness, America has demonstrated a robust civil-military structure with a healthy tolerance for risk. This was evident from the joint political-military decision to prosecute an “Afghan-friendly” strategy despite the politically nettlesome issue of higher US casualties; and from Obama’s swift decision that the general had unacceptably violated propriety in making public the fissures between top US policy-makers.  For those who missed last week’s drama, General McChrystal and his personal staff — styling themselves in the macho moulds of The Dirty Dozen and Inglourious Basterds — committed the breathtaking mistake of embedding a writer for Rolling Stone magazine into their inner circle for a month, letting him listen in on formal and informal conversations with apparently everything on the record.  Although McChrystal’s sacking will be a studied chapter in US civil-military relations, Obama’s was an easy decision compared to the dismissal of General Douglas MacArthur by President Harry Truman in 1951. MacArthur, the hero of two world wars, a winner of the Medal of Honour (America’s Param Vir Chakra), and the de facto ruler — American Shogun — of Japan from 1945-50, had been recalled from Tokyo in 1950 to command the UN forces in Korea. Angered by China’s intervention in the war, MacArthur publicly challenged Truman’s restraint by planning nuclear attacks on Chinese air bases. An outraged Truman rejected warnings that MacArthur might beat him in the 1952 presidential elections. Overruling support for MacArthur from the Secretary of Defence, General George Marshall, and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Omar Bradley, Truman ended MacArthur’s career.  All of this is unthinkable in India, where the system produces generals (and that includes flag officers of the navy and the air force) who would never dream of functioning like Stanley McChrystal. That might indicate a healthier civil-military relationship in India, but only if one were to look superficially at just the Rolling Stone fiasco. Looking deeper — especially at McChrystal’s, and now Petraeus’ selection as commanders in Afghanistan based on clear strategies that they brought to the table — India could learn much from the US civil-military structure, based as it is on meritocracy, responsibility and accountability.  Consider how India would have selected a commander for a hypothetical Afghanistan mission: the MoD would have asked the Indian Army to “post” a suitable general. In the US, the president nominates key commanders, based on their achievements and abilities, and Congress ratifies those appointments. General Petraeus, for example, was nominated as US Central Command chief, superseding several compatriots, after framing a widely acclaimed counter-insurgency doctrine for the US military. American generals routinely leapfrog less talented officers while being appointed to higher ranks.  But, in the poisoned relationship between India’s military and the bureaucratic-political elite, the armed forces reject US-style “deep selection”. India’s military suspects that political interests would run rampant, promoting well-connected officers rather than competent ones. The army remembers Lieutenant General B M Kaul, whose connections with Nehru allowed him to drive India to defeat at the hands of China in 1962.  This would be valid reasoning, were it not for a growing phenomenon: increasingly mid-ranking and senior officers are seeking political and bureaucratic patronage. The media has already reported instances where the Akali Dal and certain UP parties have lobbied on behalf of senior military officers. Bureaucrats too often approach the MoD to push the cases of nephews, nieces and country cousins. So, allowing an institutional gulf between the military and the political-bureaucratic class, even as patronage thrives below the radar, amounts to getting the worst of both worlds: condoning patronage while preventing partnership.  The Indian military’s insularity —with officers carefully shielded from outside influences, and shaped instead by a numbing professional uniformity — prevents the development of commanders who can operate confidently at political-strategic levels. While US generals like Petraeus and McChrystal gain credit for doing PhDs and MPhils, and for being cerebral academics, India’s armed forces give no credit to an officer for non-military qualifications. And the question of seconding officers to other government and non-government organisations to obtain a wider perspective is dismissed with: the MoD will never allow it.  There, the military may have a point. Political and bureaucratic elites fear, deep down, that allowing officers out of the cantonments could open the door to a rampantly political military. And so the two arms of government — civil and military — occupy separate worlds in India, glowering at each other across an abyss of distrust. Interaction is minimal, even in formulating national security policy; bureaucrats and diplomats do that for elected leaders who remain, for the most part, strategically unschooled. Bred in the tradition of the freedom struggle, they see political agitation as a more potent and familiar instrument than military power — a confusing and technical subject that is the preserve of an English-speaking elite that they don’t identify with.











Brace for two-front war, Army told 
Rahul Datta | New Delhi  In an unprecedented move that has confirmed India’s concerns about China’s growing military might, the Government has for the first time given a directive in writing to the armed forces to enhance their military capabilities vis-a-vis the neighbouring country and prepare for a two-front war scenario with China and Pakistan.  Asking the armed forces to prepare themselves to fight simultaneous wars on the eastern and western fronts with China and Pakistan, Defence Minister AK Antony has directed the chiefs of Army, Navy and Air Force to rapidly modernise and upgrade their weapon systems and tone up operational preparedness.  The Services have been assured full support from the Government in this endeavour, sources said.  Explaining the significance of the directive, the sources maintained that it came against the backdrop of the armed forces’ apprehensions about the rapid modernisation programme of their Chinese counterparts. The directive will allow the armed forces to build capabilities to rapidly move troops from one theatre of war to the other by procuring more transport planes and improved rail and road network for ferrying weapons systems.  Modern warfare was all about speed, lethality and mobility and the directive would go a long way in helping the armed forces achieve this objective as soon as possible, the sources added.  The directive follows the Cabinet Committee on Security’s (CCS) nod to the Army to raise two more mountain divisions (each division has 10,000 troops) on the China front. With the focus on improving infrastructure, the Army was last year allowed to raise two mountain divisions. It means that in the next four or five years, it would have four divisions on the China front.  The Government has also removed the 10-year cap on recruitment and permitted the Army to go for fresh intakes. Coupled with this important development, the Government has cleared the proposal to acquire more than 200 Howitzer guns for these divisions through the foreign military sale route from the US.  “The Howitzer guns are light. These can be dismantled and carried on horseback or by helicopters to the remote and rugged terrain of Arunachal Pradesh and other such regions in Jammu & Kashmir where road infrastructure is non-existent,” sources said.  While the two-front war concept was in public domain and being discussed in seminars and TV debates, the political leadership had so far refrained from joining the debate. The recently-issued directive clearly indicates that the Government has finally heeded the concerns of the armed forces and given them unambiguous orders to go ahead and do the needful, sources said.  This decision would give the necessary momentum to the security establishment to improve the infrastructure, including all-weather roads right up to the Line of Actual Control (LAC) and airports and helipads in remote regions of States like Arunachal Pradesh. In fact, the armed forces are already engaged in upgrading nearly 25 airports in the North-East and the project is likely to be over within the next two years.  India and China have a 5,000-km-long disputed border and the Chinese have over the years rapidly improved their logistical lines by building roads right up to their side of the LAC. India is in a disadvantageous position as the terrain on its side is hilly and building roads there takes more time than in the plains, sources said, adding that the slopes on the Chinese side are gentler.




Monday, 28 June 2010

From Today's Papers - 28 Jun 2010






  Indo-Pak engagement Terror must be tackled for sustained dialogue
 India and Pakistan are now back in dialogue mode after the peace process between the two got snapped with the 26/11 Mumbai terrorist attack. During the exchange of views between Union Home Minister P. Chidambaram and his Pakistani counterpart Rehman Malik on Friday, and between Foreign Secretary Nirupama Rao with her opposite number in Pakistan Salman Bashir the previous day, both sides avoided taking aggressive postures, reflecting a welcome change in their attitudes. Interestingly, the two Foreign Secretaries talked of “working together” to remove the “trust deficit” and resolve the “outstanding issues”. The focus on Thursday, as expected, was on “deliverables” like people-to-people contacts, trade expansion and humanitarian issues, which are likely to be taken up during the July conference of the Foreign Ministers.  Despite the attempt to speak in a conciliatory tone, terror emanating from Pakistan was in focus on both days. Mr Chidambaram was more specific when he pointed out that Pakistan would have to deliver on the front of terrorism in the interest of peace in the subcontinent. This is essential for any government in India to remain engaged with Pakistan. Islamabad’s positive response does not mean much unless the results are seen on the ground. It has to answer nagging questions related to 26/11. Why are only two of the many masterminds of the Mumbai attack being proceeded against? Lashkar-e-Taiyaba founder Hafiz Saeed, the key plotter, continues to remain free. Why? Why has Pakistan not honoured the commitment it has been making, as it did during the Thimpu SAARC gathering recently, that it will not allow its territory to be used for carrying out terrorist attacks on India?  This, however, does not mean that the dialogue that has begun is an exercise in futility. India and Pakistan talking to each other is always better than their remaining incommunicado. The issues that have been the cause for tension between the two can be resolved only when they remain engaged. If it is not possible to settle issues like Kashmir these should be kept aside to make India and Pakistan move ahead on the road to normalisation of relations. There is a large peace constituency on both sides which must be allowed to expand.







  Gen. McChrystal's ouster
The dramatic dismissal of the US General has lessons for both military and civilian authorities, writes P.R. Chari  General McChrystal General McChrystal  President Obama cannot be faulted for taking the harsh decision to accept General Stanley McChrystal's (forced) resignation after the latter made derogatory references about the American civilian leadership in an interview to the left-of-centre magazine Rolling Stone. The magazine cited General McChrystal saying President Obama seemed "uncomfortable and intimidated" during their first meeting, referred to Vice President Biden as "Bite Me," and called the Chairman, Joint Chief of Staff, General James Jones, a "clown."  No Government-civilian or military-can afford to let its serving officials-civilian or military-speak out in public mocking the leadership and thus display insubordination or criticising national policy. Accepted bureaucratic practice, however, allows debate, often acrimonious, within the confines of the government. But debate cannot proceed in the public space; otherwise the anonymity required for objective decision-making would get compromised. Besides, discipline within the bureaucracy would collapse, a crucial requirement for the armed forces, given its hierarchical command structure. More significantly, the hallowed tradition of civilian control over the military would be eroded, which is the basic principle on which democratic societies are designed to function. All these are settled issues, and can hardly become the subject of a new debate.  US troops in Afghanistan US troops in Afghanistan  Within the American experience itself, the cases of Generals Patton, Stillwell and MacArthur have been recalled to illustrate these settled principles. All of them were removed from office after making indiscreet remarks or questioning the decisions made by the civilian leadership in public. General McChrystal and his staff officers were hardly unaware of these rules of the game.  Why then had General McChrystal and his aides deliberately made these derogatory statements that had rightly inflamed the American leadership? How can their conduct be rationally explained? Pique? Frustration at not being able to press their viewpoint? Concern that the logistic support required for the American war effort in Afghanistan was faltering? All of the above? Or, was the reason something quite different, relating to the hiatus that had developed between the military and civilian authorities in their understanding and approaches to the Afghanistan imbroglio.  The President's special envoy, Holbrooke, for instance, is known to be abrasive and overbearing and very difficult to work with. It is possible that the on-going Marja operations in Afghanistan having met a stumbling block, the existing differences between the civilian and military leadership had dramatically widened. No doubt, more authentic accounts to explain the aberrant conduct of General McChrystal and his aides will surface in the fullness of time. General McChrystal might also feel impelled to pen his memoirs in the established American tradition sooner or later.  The more relevant operational issue is that changing the military leadership during the Afghanistan operations conveys the wrong message to both friend and foe. President Karzai and elements in the Pakistani leadership have already voiced their dismay. The Al Qaeda and Taliban, it can be assumed, would sense confusion and demoralisation in the American ranks and that would boost the morale of their militant followers.  Significantly, General McChrystal was executing a new counter-insurgency policy in Afghanistan devised by General Petraeus; which seeks to restore normalcy in Afghanistan and permit a withdrawal of the U.S. forces by 2011.  However, replacing General McChrystal with General Petraeus is most appropriate, since the latter is the architect of the strategic policy that was devised for Iraq, and is being currently pursued in Afghanistan. .  And, what is this Petraeus strategy? One, the population has to be won over by living among them, and by respecting their rights, including those suspected of being insurgents. He believes in following the doctrine, "Live your values." The damage done by Abu Ghraib is permanent; since "The human terrain is the decisive terrain." The theater of operation thus becomes the whole country, Such "Full Spectrum Operations" require all available resources to be utilised, including the military but also the civilian agencies, armed militias and NGOs.  Apparently, the figures for Americans killed in Iraq and violent incidents have fallen dramatically in Iraq after this new strategy was put in place. Basic utilities have been restored and life is returning to normal. Quite evidently, suicide bombings continue in Iraq and the Al-Qaeda remains a disruptive presence. But, President Obama is confident that he can shift out American troops from combat missions and reduce their overall numbers by end-August, which is a fair indication of the success achieved.  Can this success be repeated by General Petraeus in Afghanistan ? The Marja offensive in February was premised on these principles in action. It was announced months in advance to allow civilians to leave the impending theatre of operations if they wished. Civilian deaths could not be avoided, which is unavoidable in urban fighting but were much less than what could otherwise have been expected.  Moreover, these casualties could not be exploited by the Taliban to channel public opinion against the United States. Currently, the Marja operations can only be considered a partial success since the Taliban are staging a comeback. But, it could be reasonably expected that the U.S. operations in Afghanistan will gain new vigor with Petraeus replacing McChrystal, although it should be assumed that the Al Qaeda and Taliban have also learnt their lessons.  So, what are the wider implications of the McChrystal ouster? The most obvious is that policy differences within the higher command apparatus for defence should not be aired in public. The 'No Comment' modality has its uses in conflict situations. The military should also realise that it will always come out second best in public encounters with the civilian leadership, particularly in democratic cultures. Nevertheless, this does not justify the civilian leadership displaying insensitivity towards the military's problems and their advice.  The strange aspect of the McChrystal affair is that nobody from the civilian side has been indicted for letting matters deteriorate to reach this pass. Civilian control over the military cannot mean civilian dictatorship over the military.  ( The author is associated with the Institute of Peace and Conflict Studies )










Uphill task for US General in Obama's Vietnam
US troops are in Afghanistan for almost nine years By Patrick Cockburn  David Petraeus David Petraeus  General David Petraeus has a deservedly high reputation with an acute sense of US politics combined with a realisation of the importance of understanding the politics of Iraq and Afghanistan. His great achievement in Iraq was to persuade Americans that they had won the war when, in fact, they were withdrawing with little achieved.  He was able to sell the "surge" as a triumph of military tactics when in reality its most important feature was that Sunni insurgents allied themselves with American forces because they were being slaughtered by the Shias.  Some US diplomats are astonished at the willingness of Congress and the US media to accept the Pentagon's version of what happened and the belief that the same success could be replicated in Afghanistan. One American diplomat said: "I am appalled ... It is like going back to pre-Vietnam days, when Americans accepted that what the military said was true."  An important aspect of the Iraq and Afghan wars is the degree to which US foreign policy has been militarised, with the State Department and civilian agencies playing only a limited role. This helps explain the lack of caution shown by General Stanley McChrystal in openly bad-mouthing civilians from President Barack Obama to the US ambassador in Kabul.  I first met General Petraeus in January 2004, when he was commander of the 20,000-strong 101st Airborne Division based in Mosul in northern Iraq. He was one of the few Americans in Iraq who showed any inkling about the ethnic and communal minefield in which the US had landed.  In Baghdad, the US envoy, Paul Bremer, had banned Baath party members from state employment, which meant that thousands of former Iraqi officers were ready recruits for the growing insurgency. General Petraeus was quietly sabotaging official policy. He was getting former officers to turn up in batches and renounce the Baath party and all its works.  He made other astute moves. He prevented returning exiles from getting positions of power. I asked him what would be his most important advice to his successor and he replied that it was "not to align too closely with one ethnic group, political party, tribe, religious group or social element".  This is what will be so difficult to do in Afghanistan. Already, suggestions that the Afghan government should talk to the Taliban is frightening members of the administration in Kabul who are not Pashtun. Last year, General Petraeus gave the impression that the Iraq troop "surge" could be restaged in Afghanistan. But conditions are very different in the Pashtun south and east of Afghanistan.  A problem for General Petraeus is that the Taliban appear to think they are winning and that their own "counter-surge" has been successful. General McChrystal's heavily publicised takeover of Marjah did not evict them permanently. When the US ambassador, Karl Eikenberry, and US envoy, Richard Holbrooke, both maligned by General McChrystal in the Rolling Stone article, visited Marjah a few days ago, their helicopter was shot at and suicide bombers blew themselves up.  In Iraq, General Petraeus was able to take advantage of local political conditions to claim success for a military strategy that was mostly an illusion. In Afghanistan, the problem is not that the Taliban is so strong but that the government is so weak.










PLA behind Sino-Pak nuclear deal?
 Ashok Tuteja/Tribune News Service  New Delhi, June 27 Worried over the increasing engagement of the US in the Af-Pak region, the Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) may have compelled the leadership in Beijing to strike a civil nuclear deal with the country’s ‘all weather friend’ Pakistan that has triggered a fresh debate world-wide over Sino-Pakistan nuclear nexus.  It is quite well-known in diplomatic circles that China has not been comfortable with the domineering role Washington has been playing in South Asia, posing a challenge to Beijing’s geo-political interests in the region.  Officials here say the nuclear agreement under which China will construct two 650 MW nuclear reactors in Pakistan’s Punjab province appears to be just one more significant step Beijing has taken at the instance of the PLA to strengthen the strategic ties between the two countries and hit Washington where it hurts.  While the US has questioned the Sino-Pak nuclear deal, Washington is unlikely to go too far in opposing it since it needs both China and Pakistan for different reasons - Beijing for implementing UN sanctions against Iran and Islamabad to pursue its agenda in Afghanistan.  It is in public domain that China has been assisting Pakistan in its clandestine nuclear programme for years. However, questions have been raised about its latest deal with Pakistan since China has now become a full-fledged member of the NSG while the Sino-Pak agreement is not in line with the guidelines of the 46-member nuclear cartel.  A meeting of the NSG in New Zealand earlier this week ended with uncertainty about Chinese plans to sell nuclear reactors to Pakistan. But the group’s annual meeting revealed sharp divisions in international response to the development. China appeared hesitant to spell out its intentions in view of stringent NSG rules which prohibit the export of civil nuclear technology to countries like Pakistan that have not signed the NPT.  Several governments were highly sceptical about any further nuclear trading with Pakistan given its poor track record in the field of nuclear disarmament.  It is precisely for this reason that India has expressed concern over the deal while not publicly opposing it. Indian officials, accompanying Prime Minister Manmohan Singh on his trip to Toronto for the G-20 Summit, are believed to have taken up the Sino-Pak agreement with their counterparts from some of the important nations attending the summit.  Key members of the European Union (EU) are also not enthused over the China-Pakistan deal. “The EU has no problem with peaceful uses of nuclear energy. Whatever arrangements are to made have to be within the purview of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA),’’ according to Catherine Ashton, EU’s High Representative for foreign affairs, who was in New Delhi for talks with Indian leaders.  But many European countries and those vehemently opposed to nuclear proliferation are now blaming India and the US for furthering the Sino-Pak nuclear cooperation. A Western diplomat, speaking on condition of anonymity, wondered how anyone could stop civil nuclear cooperation between China and Pakistan after the US bulldozed all NSG members to secure a nuclear waiver for India in September 2008 for undertaking nuclear commerce. “There can’t be different yardsticks for different countries,’’ he said, suggesting that the NSG might not be able to do much in the matter.









Jawan killed in encounter
Tribune News Service  Kolkata, June 27 A CRPF jawan and Maoist were killed during a gun-battle between Maoists and the joint action force in the Jangalmahal area, near Jhargram, west Midnapore today. The police, however, claimed altogether three Maoists had been gunned down, though only one body could be recovered from the jungle area after the operation. The suspected two other Maoists’ bodies had been carried away by their companion inside the jungle across the Orissa border.  According to reports reaching the state government at Writers Buildings, in the morning, the joint action force conducted a combing operation in the Jangalmahal area, near Jhargram, following an information that a group of Maoists had gathered there for launching attack on the police camp. Soon followed an exchange of firing between the two groups which lasted for about an hour.  In the clashes, one CRPF jawan was killed and several others received bullet injuries. Later, the police recovered a bullet-ridden body of a Maoist activist.









Army clarifies Chief’s remarks on AFSPA 
New Delhi, June 27 In a damage control exercise, the Army today sought to explain away its Chief Gen V K Singh's controversial comments on the Armed Forces Special Powers Act (AFSPA) by claiming that these had not been "understood in the correct perspective".  Even as the Centre prepares to make AFSPA, that gives sweeping powers to the Army in Jammu and Kashmir and Northeast, "more humane", the General has gone on record to voice his opposition to any changes, saying demands for dilution of the act were being made for "narrow political gains".  His comments come in the backdrop of Prime Minister Manmohan Singh's promise to make the act more humane. Union Home Minister P Chidambaram has already sent a note to the Cabinet on diluting the Act.  Affirming that "all those who ask for its (AFSPA's) dilution or withdrawal, probably do so for narrow political gains," Gen Singh had said that any dilution "will lead to constraining our operation".  The Army said that the General had told a defence journal in April that "AFSPA must be understood in the backdrop of trying conditions a soldier is operating in the militancy-infested areas in Jammu and Kahmir and North East." The statement said that General Singh's comments were "primarily in context to the local politics in J and K with special reference to the separatist forces. Their sole aim is to demoralise the security forces." — PTI









Can’t silence Hafiz: Pak  ‘Freedom of expression in Pak as in India’ 
Islamabad, June 27 Pakistan has virtually ruled out barring Jamaat-ud Dawa chief Hafiz Saeed, mastermind of the Mumbai terror attack, from making inflammatory speeches targeting India.  “In a democracy, there is freedom of expression in Pakistan as in India. There are all sorts of people making all kinds of speeches. There are people with extremist views in both India and Pakistan and there is nothing you can do about it. There are views being expressed in Pakistan that I can do nothing about,” Pakistan Foreign Minister Shah Mehmood Qureshi told reporters here.  He, however, said the “positive” thing was that the views of extremist elements did not reflect that of the majority opinion, either in India or in Pakistan. “The overwhelming majority of people do not agree with hate speeches. They want normalisation, they want peace, they want growth, they want development,” he said.  He termed as “presumptuous” India’s contention that enough was not being done in the Mumbai attacks case, saying the two countries would understand “each other’s challenges and difficulties” only through engagement.  In an interview, he pressed for a common approach to deal with terrorism and promised to take action against any handler of 26/11, insisting that Islamabad would not sleep over leads forwarded to it.  The pace was slow because of “complications” arising from the fact that the crime was committed in a different country and exchange of information was a “cumbersome” process, he said.  He said India and Pakistan should work together to send out a message to the terrorists that they could not “drive a wedge” between the two countries.  “If you say Pakistan has not moved, it will be unfair,” Qureshi said when pointed to India’s refrain that enough had not been done by Islamabad in investigating the 26/11 case and bringing to book all those behind the carnage. “Do not question our sincerity. We want to move on because terrorism is hitting us as well,” he said.  India has been complaining that Pakistan is not taking action against Mumbai attack mastermind and JuD chief Hafiz Saeed and several other identified handlers continue to be at large. When referred to this, Qureshi said, “This is being presumptuous. You are presuming because we are not talking. You are presuming because we are not in contact.” He said when the two sides “sit, meet and talk, these presumptions will disappear and the reality will surface. When the reality surfaces, we will be able to understand each other’s challenges and difficulties”.  On India’s warning that any repeat of Mumbai attacks would lend a serious setback to the bilateral ties, Qureshi said such statements amounted to giving handle to terrorists to dictate the agenda. “We feel, by making such statements, you (India) are playing in the hands of those who want to scuttle (improvement in relations). The minute you say that, terrorists feel they control the agenda,” he said. — PTI









Mahindras aim big in defence
JAYANTA ROY CHOWDHURY Growth drive  New Delhi, June 27: Mahindra & Mahindra (M&M) and UK’s BAE Systems will soon start manufacturing the RG-31 — a mine-proof vehicle — in the country for the Indian Army and police forces operating in Maoist strongholds.  Sources in M&M, which has entered the defence automotive business, said the automobile major was also looking at producing the FH77 B05 Advanced Howitzer, already in use in the country.  BAE Systems has supplied 165 mine-proof vehicles to the Indian Army and another 600 to the US, UN and Canadian forces. The monocoque hull of the RG-31, made of welded armour steel, is supposed to protect occupants against anti-tank mines and has a modular interior layout. The vehicle can be configured as an armoured personnel carrier, ambulance and surveillance vehicle. The air-conditioned vehicle can carry up to 10 people.  Maoists have often targeted police vehicles with mines planted deep inside highways and jungle tracks, which normal minesweepers fail to detect. Jharkhand, Chhattisgarh, Andhra Pradesh, Bihar, Orissa and Bengal have been impacted by Maoist attacks.  Though M&M officials have targeted the army as the principle buyer of the vehicle, the company will also chase possible orders from paramilitary forces as well as limited orders from state police forces, especially specialised anti-Maoist squads such as Andhra Pradesh’s Greyhound.  “We are also looking at bringing in a battle tank for the army through our joint venture with BAE but bringing in restricted technology will be possible if we are able to offer them a 49 per cent stake in the venture,” M&M sources said.  At present, FDI rules allow foreign investors a 26 per cent stake in Indian defence. The M&M-BAE venture is complying with the norm.  However, the commerce ministry has put forward a proposal to increase FDI in defence to 74 per cent, a move which domestic firms such as the Mahindras, L&T and the Tatas have opposed.  They maintain that a 49 per cent stake will suffice to attract top firms in defence business and join Indian partners.  M&M has entered the lucrative defence automotive sector with Defence Land Systems Ltd — the joint venture with BAE — and the manufacturing of bullet-proof and customised vehicles. Among others, it makes the Rakshak, a bullet-proof Scorpio, and Marksman, a customised war vehicle.  The joint venture is expected to make an initial investment of $21.25 million over three years. Defence Land Systems India will have a facility in Faridabad, just outside Delhi.









Pak Armed Forces not unaware of country’s defence: FM 
ISLAMABAD: Foreign Minister, Shah Mehmood Qureshi has said that the armed forces of the country are not unaware of country’s defence and have full ability to defend the country.  Talking to a private TV channel, the Foreign Minister said that wars are not solution of any problems but if Indian Army is ready then the Armed Forces of the country know their responsibilities.  Welcoming the initial talks held between Pakistan and India, the Foreign Minister said that these talks would improve relations between the two countries.  Responding to a question, Shah Mehmood Qureshi said that India came on the negotiating table and it is a success of Pakistan, adding both countries should take steps in the best interests of the country.  The Foreign Minister said that talks were suspended after Mumbai incidents, however, after meeting of Indian Foreign Secretary Nirupama Rao with her Pakistani counterpart, Salman Bashir, Indian Foreign Minister S.M. Krishna would visit Pakistan next month and all issues to be discussed.  The Foreign Minister urged that both Pakistan and India should solve all their outstanding problems through negotiations as war is not solution of any problem.  On war on terror, Shah Mehmood Qureshi said that Pakistan played role as Front Line State and rendered unprecedented sacrifices in the war and the international community should help Pakistan. He said that no country can alone eliminate the menace of terrorism and it is the collective responsibility of all.







Dire need to counter RAW’s terrorism 
June 27, 2010 posted by Michael Leon · 3 Comments  Share  By Asif Haroon Raja  It is now an established fact that no South Asian state has ever indulged in covert operations or cross border terrorism against its neighbors. The only culprit is India which resorts to this evil practice against all its neighbors, be it Pakistan , Sri Lanka , Bangladesh , Nepal , Maldives , Bhutan , China and Myanmar.  It has dovetailed clandestine operations into its war strategy to apply it against its foes during peace time for harassment, intimidation and blackmailing purposes and for weakening them from within. Afghanistan has been used by Russia and India to raise the bogey of Pashtunistan, render support to Pakistani runaways and rebels and to launch covert operations against Pakistan. Karzai has belatedly assured Pakistan that it would not allow its soil against Pakistan. Hopefully he sticks to his commitment. Marching orders given by Karzai to his intelligence chief and interior minister, both venomously anti-Pakistan and favorites of Washington are positive signs though some more steps are needed to scatter away clouds of distrust built over nine years.  The US military has starting packing its bags to wind up its business in Afghanistan and go home starting July 2011. The US and Karzai’s tilt towards Islamabad are ominous developments for India vying to have complete sway over Afghan affairs after the departure of coalition forces. The entire Indian leadership is in a state of depression. Its spin doctors are at a loss but are still scratching their heads how to retrieve the situation. Indians are feeling out of place since they are akin to traits of a scorpion which stings compulsively.     Indian Foreign Secretary Nirupama Rao and Home Minister Chidambaram were here in Islamabad to renew talks. An Indo-Pak talk is a drama staged by India at the behest of USA . India loses all and gains nothing out of composite dialogue, which she had purposely stalled after Mumbai attacks. She stubbornly clung to her one-point agenda of no talks without Pakistan tackling India ’s concerns about terrorism. After intense pressure from USA , stuck in Afghanistan and urgently requiring Pakistan ’s services for a bailout, India has reluctantly relented and agreed to resume talks. However, the entire focus of talks was on terrorism. Chronic issues such as Kashmir dispute, Siachin and Sir Creek problems, water problem, RAW’s [Research and Analysis Wing (RAW), India's external intelligence agency's] support to terrorists in Balochistan and in FATA were skipped. India wants solution to Kashmir as suggested by former President Gen Musharraf. It had been mutually decided to sideline UN resolutions on Kashmir , convert Line of Control (LoC) into soft border and to put the dispute in cold freezer as had been done during Simla Agreement in 1973.  But for lawyers movement which weakened Musharraf, the sellout plan would have been implemented in 2008. It is for this reason that Indian leaders fondly remember Musharraf and pray for his return. President Zardari was also in favor of this plan as was evident from several statements he had made on Kashmir and the so-called ‘good news’ he wanted to give to the nation. Had the Army under Gen Kayani not taken a firm stand and had Zardari not lost his reputation and credibility, he would have given a go ahead signal to the plan.  Zardari’s inability to open up nuclear program for US and IAEA inspection, bring ISI under Interior Ministry and to implement Indian dictated Kashmir solution has disappointed USA and India . To twist his arm, he is off and on subjected to barrage of vilification campaign, most of which is based on facts.  Pakistan had been led up the garden path by India through much hyped composite dialogue in early 2004. It was pledged that all issues including Kashmir would be resolved through dialogue. Four rounds of talks were held but nothing concrete came out of the meetings. While Pakistan lost a lot, India gained a lot. Under the garb of friendship, India successfully completed fencing of LoC, defanged armed resistance in Held Kashmir, redirected all Jihadi outfits towards Pakistan, made Balochistan, FATA and large parts of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa restive, lowered the image of Pak Army and other institutions through propaganda campaign, consolidated tentacles of RAW within Pakistan, disturbed law and order situation, built several dams over rivers Chenab, Jhelum and Indus and reduced flow of water into Pakistan. India not only enhanced its presence in Afghanistan significantly but also spread hatred amongst Afghans against Pakistan to keep the two neighbors perpetually hostile to each other. Through these acts, it impoverished the economy of Pakistan.  While preaching friendship, Indian military feverishly built up its strength and former Indian chief Gen Kapoor hurled threats of Cold Start and limited war under a nuclear overhang. Pakistan quietly digested all the insults and harms inflicted upon the body of Pakistan under the skewed policy of appeasement and under a misperception that Kashmir issue would be resolved. In return, India didn’t budge an inch over any of the disputes and continued to maintain its pre-2004 rigid stance on all issues. It showed its ugly face after Mumbai carnage and reverted to its old policy of antagonism.  Having gained on all fronts, India is unprepared to dole out any concession to Pakistan . It still wants more from Pakistan . It wants Pakistan not to oppose its key role in Afghanistan , its right for a land route to Afghanistan via Wagah, and its membership to UNSC. It also wants Punjab based banned Jihadi groups like Lashkar-e-Taiba, Jamat-ud-Dawa, Jaish Mohammad and Sipah-Sahaba to be crushed and Muredke religious centre to be dismantled. India is keen to extend physical support to help Pak security forces to tackle these outfits. Punjab being the only stable province, it has become an eyesore for India and it desperately wants its destabilization. The likes of Salman Taseer and RAW sponsored Tehrik-e-Taliban are helping India in its nefarious designs.  RAW is among the leading terrorist organization which is bleeding South Asia but surprisingly no finger has ever been raised on it. The US and western think tanks and newspapers never tire of concocting stories against ISI but see RAW, Mossad and CIA chaste and spotless. This is because they are birds of same feather and are flocking together in pursuit of common objectives.  Pakistan and other South Asian countries have remained the victims of intrigues and conspiracies of India for the last 63 years. It pretends to be well meaning and friendly but it always carries a dagger under its armpit and strikes whenever opportunity comes its way. It is principally responsible for impeding the growth of SAARC because of its habit of hegemony and selfishness. It is high time for SAARC countries minus India to get together and collectively combat the Indian menace. Awareness drive should be initiated by Pakistan to expose true face of India .  I propose immediate establishment of a joint intelligence centre at Islamabad or Colombo on the pattern of the one working in Jabal-al-Siraj, north of Kabul . Both are well trained in the art of counter terrorism and have successfully fought RAW sponsored terrorism. The new intelligence setup should have tentacles in all the affected South Asian countries to share intelligence and monitor activities of home based and foreign based terrorists, spies and double agents. Assistance of China may be sought or it may be co-opted. Intelligence Centre should maintain close liaison with intelligence agencies of selected Muslim states which follow independent foreign policies and are not close to India . Intelligence can be exchanged with CIA, FBI and MI-6 prudently and on need basis only.   Besides, a joint media and publicity cell should be opened to counter Indo-US-Israeli propaganda. In addition, each country should raise a counter terrorism force fully equipped with requisite firepower, mobility and technology superior to what the terrorists possess to be able to dismantle terrorist networks, disrupt supply routes and sources of funding. Collective efforts should be made to beat RAW in its own game.










Mute’s the mantra for armed forces  
Anantha Krishnan M               / DNA Sunday, June 27, 2010 9:31    US president Barack Obama recently sacked his top commander in Afghanistan General Stanley McChrystal for remarks against the US administration in the latest issue of Rolling Stone magazine.  Media reports said General McChrystal was given his marching orders in just under 20 minutes following a one-on-one with Obama at the White House. While this piece goes to print, General Mchrystal’s items are being shipped out of Afghanistan.  While an efficient general was being given the boot for making headlines, back in India, many service heads were watching the events with interest. One senior IAF Air Marshal at AIR HQ, said that there are certain unwritten rules that the service chiefs fall under.  “Anything related to the security of the country, we can’t open our mouth about. We can’t speak on government policies, rules and regulations. It’s a strict ‘No, No’. We may express our thoughts privately, but it’s unethical to do so in public. But it happens quite often in the US. There have been many such instances there. In India, the one that has hit headlines was that of Admiral Vishnu Bhagwat,” the official said. On whether Obama’s decision was right, the official said: “Anything unethical needs to be punished.”  Former chief of naval staff Admiral Vishnu Bhagwat was removed by the Vajpayee government in 1998 after he refused to accept the Cabinet Committee on Appointments’ decision to make Vice-Admiral Harinder Singh his deputy. His displeasure became an open debate and the media made merry with the admiral’s displeasure. In the end, the admiral lost his job and title, and even the supreme court dismissed his plea.  According to I Ramamohan Rao, former Principal Information Officer (PIO) at the Centre, the service chiefs have to convey their views to the defence minister. “On general matters and issues of sensitivity, the chiefs are generally not supposed to talk. Neither can they comment on the relationship with our neighbours. At times, credibility demands that the person in uniform explain the developments during war and other conflicts. It’s an exception and Kargil is an example, when the media was briefed regularly,” says Rao, who has worked closely with four prime ministers.  Recalling an instance, Rao, now 76, says former army chief General KS Thimmaiah had briefly resigned from his post in 1959 following differences with then defence minister VK Krishna Menon. “Parliament objected to a statement made by the general, forcing him to quit. But, then PM Jawaharlal Nehru refused to accept the resignation letter.”  On occasions like Services’ Day, Commanders’ Conference and at historic armed forces’ events, the chiefs do speak to the media. According to Sitanshu Kar, additional director general (Media & Communication), Ministry of Defence, policy guidelines clearly mention that the services chiefs should not speak to the media often. “However, in some rare cases, if the chiefs need to interact, then the defence minister needs to be informed. I regularly brief the media on behalf of MoD,” says Kar, who is also the MoD’s official spokesperson.  Sources said that the service chiefs were recently told not to comment on issues that didn’t come directly under MoD, like the Naxal attacks in Dantewada when some opinions were expressed.  The Defence Technical Publicity Rules (DTPR), 1940, acts as the bluebook for interaction with the media. “This has undergone several changes over the years with the last being in 2004. This clearly specifies who can speak, under what circumstances, when, where, and why,” adds Kar. It is learnt that the Kargil war and the technological advancements of Indian defence establishments forced MoD to make amendments to DTPR in 2004.







 

Mail your comments, suggestions and ideas to me

Template created by Rohit Agarwal