Letter to the Editor - ToI Excerpt

There is a superb letter to the Editor in today's Times of India (Page 13, column 6) that I just HAD to post here...

to clarify, this IS NOT a letter written by me, but it certainly does make one think:

Congress is destroying the secular fabric of India.

While the attacks on the churches and Christians is condemnable, what is really surprising is that none of the "secular" leaders of the UPA and the Congress have questioned how missionaries have granted themselves the right to degrade Hindu gods. It is as though Hindus dont have any sentiments. The Congress has time and again resorted to stamping on the sentiments of Hindus. The action taken by the Centre in issuing an advisory to the BJP government is immediate. But why wasn't a similar advisory issued during Raj Thakeray's anti-Bihari terror, during Hurriyat's anti-India tirade or during anti-Hindu attacks in Kerala?

The Congress confidently declared that Lord Ram never existed. Can it (or will it) similarly question the existence of other religion's gods? This central government seems to be only interested in trampling on the sentiments of lakhs for Hindus for vote-bank politics. This Pseudo-secularism is adding fodder to the agenda of the Bajrang Dal and the VHP. It is a shame that Hindus get such a raw deal in India. More than the BJP, it is the Congress which is trying to destroy the secular fabric of India.

- Hullas Jain, VIA E-MAIL

A most brilliant letter I'd say, although I'm not sure that the BJP govt in Karnataka can be let off the hook that easily... they are guilty of sitting back and watching (and through their justification, indirectly aiding) the Bajrang Dal violence.

However, the Congress' fleetfootedness in coming to the rescue of their votebank is admirable. If only they could continue that protective streak for the rest of the country's 1200 million people.

Tickling a feinting dragon

Apologies for the outdated post you'll be reading... I'd planned to post it after the 2nd day of the NSG meet, but as things so often happen, I found myself looking at the train as it passed me by. Still, even though the deal is now done (Hurray??), I didn't feel like putting this piece to the trash, so here it is, a whole 3 days late.... Please give me your opinions.


The goings on in the NSG and out are laughable - and not in a good sense; more in the sort of laugh that movie characters end up giving when victory turns to impending doom, when there isn't any hope, and they're amazed at the unbelievable turn of events.

I'm talking of course about China's "U-turn" on the Nuke deal, after "expressing its support" for our Nuclear Ambitions earlier (goddam desi media can't read a thing right, can they?).

TimesNow called this stance "nuanced". Not so I say. CNN-IBN has termed it a "broadside". Not so again, Sir. I'm now expecting some half-assed TV opinionator to call it a betrayal.

Except that in the case of China's "turn-around" on the Nuke Deal issue, it really wasn't unexpected to close watchers of the game. Ajai Shukla has an excellent analysis of Chinese thought process on his blog (China's strategic thinking: A gold medal for mental gymnastics). That somewhat unrelated report has a lot of insights to apply to what our government is now facing.

Chinese thought, deeply influenced by Sun Zhe's classic on warfighting and strategic thinking, has a few principles that underline its actions. First, never fight a battle you aren't ready for - The "Hot Peace" is a common feature (a concept also elucidated by Chanakya). Second, don't do something (eg. lead a war) when someone is already doing it for you. And, if it does require, never hesitate to attack with all your might. And lastly, no promise can stand against an iron fist (as indicated by their repeated disregard for laws, treaties, and promises in their single-minded pursuit of national pride, strength and greatness).

Unfortunately, our own South Block Mandarins, hamstrung by their own personal problems, failed to read the Chinese, or if they did, weren't able to come up with a suitable battle plan. And all indicators say that they did anticipate such a move by the Chinese. Any reasonably regular reader of the diplomatic winds would have been able to see the storm coming.

The Battleground:

1. China is absolutely wary of any nation being able to challenge it in any respect. As the new leader of the third world, it is trying desperately to bring nations into its warm, tight embracing fold of renmenbi (yuan for common folk), guns, aircrafts and technology and secure its energy and mineral needs for the coming 50 years.
   
   The last thing they'd want is a challenger to any of these, and certainly not one with such a strong hold over the energy routes as India, and even worse, a neighbour and an old leader of the poor (although that nehruvian idealism was both flawed and useless, and is now, dead).



2. The US has already signaled its wariness of a powerful China in no uncertain terms. China already sees the US as an enemy (and an ideal of power that they look up to as well). Any tie up with India will (and already has) set alarm bells ringing in Zhongnanhai, PRC's corridor of power.
   
   Beijing's alarm of US doesn't extend to India, which it views with a more patronizing and condescending viewpoint (read any internet forum populated by Chinese posters, and you'll see the picture pretty soon, even among the civil and friendly ones too). That condescension only increases their eagerness to keep Indian interests far away from their (expanding) sphere of influence.
   



3. Pakistan is a friend China needs, and not just as an enemy's enemy - the land route afforded to Xinjiang and energy security gained by removing the need to traverse the US-infested Malaccas is attractive to China, as is the foothold that Pakistan affords due to its standing among Muslim nations. And anything that is bad for the Land of the Pure is of concern to its leige-lord.

Still, China cannot take on India head on - not because of what India could do (honestly, with such a weak system, Indian responses to provocations have only made for dinnerside humor at the tables in Beijing and Islamabad), but because of what a spat between two heavy-weights will do to an image-conscious China. Their aim right now, and for the next 10-15 years is to keep quiet, maintain good relations, grow, become powerful, and then roar to subjugate the world, and report with China and dispute on the same page is bad. Neither would they like to take on the US, whose markets are sustaining Chinese manufacturing growth for the time being, and whose opinion matters to a whole load of Chinese business clients.

Hence, their reticence to come out with an open opinion about the Nuke deal. Till now, that is. However, this wasn't unexpected. As their sabre-rattling in 2005 alarmed our government into appeasement (whitewashing of the incursions in Sikkim, a flurry of official visits by the high and mighty among the Indian leadership, ignoring China's strategic throttling of our bilateral relations with neighbouring countries, courtesy their "string of pearls" doctrine, and eyes shut to Chinese barks on various issues).

The Game Plan:

1. From the very beginning, it was China that had our guys worried. Early grumblings notwithstanding, the Chinese silence after that probably got a few hopes up, as did the improving bilateral relations (our perception as always). But a Chinese silence is no comfort, not to us anyway. Repeated attempts to get a clear opinion from them failed - coaxing, prodding, even wrong news reports (in the hope that Chinese reaction would shed light) couldn't move China to show its cards that early in the game (Patient waiting - another Chinese trait).
   
   It was here that we should have taken a slightly stronger line. Press China for a response. Heat up things a bit on the border issue as well as with our defense capabilities, while at the same time showing China what it had to gain by supporting us. Even better, get America to do that. Its a risky game - too little pressure and they wouldn't budge; too much and the opinion would only turn against us. Instead, we did the Indian thing and decided to leave things till they boiled - escape from the task at hand. And China was happy too. Wait and watch - strategy for battles, applied to statecraft.



2. China didn't really need to talk or be heard till now - after all, they were able to ride on their lapdogs, the Indian Left's antics to scuttle the deal, and before that, the certain political wranglings within the Indian system. What they probably hadn't counted on was the Congress' determination to get the deal pushed, even at risk of death. Then again, they achieved a one years delay. Then, there wasn't much to be gained by talking at the IAEA, where only a simple majority was needed. Why do that when a no vote at the NSG would be a veto.



3. The NSG was where China had planned to set up its ambush point. Classic military tactics here too - instead of meeting the enemy on level ground, attack and choke him where the road is narrow and chance of escape is slim; where you have a huge advantage.
   
   Again, if there were signs from the small nations that they would oppose the deal no matter what, perhaps China wouldn't have needed to open out. I guess Prez. Bush's decision to personally lobby for the deal with the dissenters and possible signs of easing off by them spurred the leaders to take control.



4. The People's Daily piece and the Chinese spokesperson's comments are not aimed at India... they're aimed at the nations which would take solace in the knowledge that they'll have a strong nation to support them if matters came to a head. It was also a way of reminding people about possible reasons they'd have to say nay to the deal - Non-proliferation (however flawed and hypocritical the concept may be), hatred of US's overbearing attitude, or simply a way for them to squeeze something. Notice the clever way in which the piece talks about the reason why the NPT was created in the first place (India's '74 tests).
   
   Mind you, the game isn't over yet - the Chinese have a lot of cards yet. They'd still take the backseat, and not oppose the deal any more than they already have, nor take leadership in the issue. Leave the barking and fighting and suggesting changes to the smaller countries, and wait for India to say enough is enough and draw the line. That way, they can paint us as the stubborn ones, the ones to blame.
   
   Alternatively, they can quietly support a whole range of overbearing conditions. And in case all other nations decide that its not a bad thing at all, they may CONSIDER vetoing the deal. Remember, NSG is not an organization - its a cartel, where every member can veto an agreement.
   
   But this option will be dangerous for China, and one they'd very carefully consider before implementing. Chinese torpedoeing of the deal will bring them the unmitigated animosity of India and the US (although that will depend upon how the next administration looks at it). It will not be easy for them to destroy whatever progress they've made with India. More importantly, such an action could cost them the goodwill and support of some nations, which they've painstakingly earned after the Olympics. But that seems like a relatively mild prospect.
   
   In all likelihood, China will not keep itself at the forefront of this. It may back the smaller pomeranian nations that are barking away at the NSG, and have secret meetings to support them. But if America does step up its backdoor negotiations and probably give a tough word or two to the Chinese, they should grumble, but will most likely back off and abstain... either way, there is no way we can expect a Chinese yes vote for the 123 Deal.
   

But certainly, if China plays an instrumental role in destroying almost 8 years of painstaking embroidary, it will only earn them the animosity of the Congress Party. I see that as a good thing - a bright sliver in a very very dark cloud; for it will give us, a eunuch nation, a chance to act and think decisively (much like the Chinese). Take the strong line and act on it, unlike our previous all-talk-and-no-action farces.

If the deal goes through, China will be a big loser - not only will it have lost all its good relations with India and a good deal of support in US, but it will lose the trust of the nations it has been supporting. Its a zero sum game - India's win is China's loss; China's gain will be an Indian disaster.

My only hope is that if the deal does go bust, we will not think of it as a small disappointment. And if it does go through, we'd better make the Chinese know exactly what we think of them - in diplomatic style, of course!

A translation of the latest Chinese re is available at:
http://svaradarajan.blogspot.com/2008/09/peoples-daily-commentary-on-indian.html

For those who think that this was unexpected, read this Chinese release from 2005:

http://english.peopledaily.com.cn/200510/27/print20051027_217234.html

Tank Comparisons

Here is a comparison chart of Modern Main Battles Tanks that I've been working on. You're free to use, modify and share it according to the license listed in the document.

The license is as below:

As the creator of this work, I own the copyright to this document. I allow redistribution, copy and use this work with or without modifications is allowed under the following conditions:

1. Redistributions must retain the above copyright notice, with my name (Sniperz11), and this list of conditions;

2. Redistributions in modified form must explicitly state the fact that the document has been modified.

Any other rights are released by the author.

Some points to note:

1. I have tried to make it as comprehensive as possible, but not being a subject expert, the parameters for comparison elude me.

2. I have also strictly adhered to taking data only from authentic sources, preferably only the user or manufacturer websites. The source of this data has been indicated in the comments on each cell, and in the sources worklist. If you are also modifying this, I request you to do the same.

3. The information for some parameters, for eg, Armor ratings are highly classified; while there is no information for other tanks, like the Chinese Type-99.

4. Please ensure that you give data relating to the most common version of the latest variant of the tank. For eg, for Merkava, provide data for the Merkava Mk.4, or M1A2 SEP for the Abrams, and Leopard 2A6 variant.

5. As you will see, there are huge blanks in the document. I look forward to your assistance in this regards. If you are creating a new version, or modifying any information, please ensure that this is mentioned in a disclaimer/license text at the back of the excel sheet.

6. I request you to also create a seperate worksheet in the file, and list the alterations to the original file. This will make it easier to create a common version from many.

You can upload your version (please make sure that the filename contains the date updated and your name) on any site in the net (box.net is a good one; rapidshare is the among the most popular), and give a link to the URL on a comment to this post.

Thanks

Download links:

Please let me know if there are any problems with the download or viewing. Thanks.

1. Box.net - Tank Comparisons_July 24 2008_Sniperz11.xls

2. Rapidshare - rapidshare.com/files/132615218/Tank_Comparisons_July_24_2008_Sniperz11.xls.html

Sick and Tired

Aah, the Arjun fiasco continues. One lacks the patience or endurance to care any more about what happens next. Even if the Army does accept the tank, it will do so grudgingly, defeating the whole purpose of inducting a cutting edge tank. The Arjun has given the Army a perfect opportunity to usher in a Revolutionary in Military Affairs (RMA) , and create a new operational doctrine for their armored Corps who have till now been working with old, Soviet Era tactics.

But it appears that with the T-Series, the Army is following the "Familiarity breeds contentment" logic. Look at the most vehement and mindless opposition to any opinions or directives to conduct an impartial evaluation of the Arjun.

Things will not change till new minds inhabit Sena Bhavan. Till that day comes, I can only wait and watch and gnash my teeth at the destruction of our indigenous technology and a potent weapon. We can only hope that DRDO doesn't feel the same and comes back with a vengeance with a far better Mk.2 tank that the Army cannot ignore.

Masterful Butchery and Rapier wit

The whole blogosphere seems to be heaving a collective sigh of relief at the Left-UPA divorce after 4 years of matrimonial horror (make that 3, counting out the first Honeymoon year). Doubtless that most of them fine folks favour a centre-right viewpoint (my observation in general), but even the most objective student of our present situation will agree that this cut is a good thing.

First of all, it took a long time for the UPA to realize that the Left parties were taking a free ride on both the pro-govt and opposition backs. By cowardly giving only outside support, they ensured that they could take their own viewpoints on different agendas and gather votes. I'm sure that when he made that momentous decision in 2004, Surjeet Singh would have also salivated at the electoral prospects of acting as a peacemaker and mediator between both sides of the spectrum.

Unfortunately, the great Carrot seems to have got his head spun backwards; sticking to hopeless dogma and strict overseas instructions in not budging. If UPA-Left relations soured in 2005, don't blame the nuke deal for it, the tension had been building the moment Karat put his fingers into the Central Governance pie and found the pudding soft, malleable and tasty.

And given the amount of pliability the Congress has shown the Left in agreeing to all their demands just to keep the ruling Dynasty in power, its not hard to figure out the reason for Karat and Cos' smugness. Unfortunately for them, the beam snapped, as beams are wont to do when pushed too far.

It is here that I admire the masterstrokes that 10, Janpath has wrought to the political Picasso over the past month or two. Regular readers of this blog would probably know that I'm not a great fan of the Congress party. While do think their local leaders are among the best there are, the micromanagement from the Central Dynasty has ruined it all. I'm certainly skeptical about Sonia Gandhi's administrative capability. The next generation of princes too worry me.

But for all the criticisms, We've got to admit, Sonia-ben is a dab hand at political masterstrokes, and regularly shows glimpses of her mother-in-law's cold, calculating ruthlessness (who can forget the coup that kicked out Kesri and brought her in).

In appeasing the Commies over the past year by keeping the Nuke deal in the background while gaining leverage from their co-operation during local polls, the UPA probably made a calculated decision to cut off the relationship before it became a millstone in preparing for the polls, and pushing through the related policies.

In effect, by wooing the SP close to them, and making the announcement in Tokyo rather than back in Delhi, the Congress upset the Left's well-laid out plans, and in one sweep of the blade, cut their leverage to nothing. Seize the advantage, and you win. It was a move worthy of Don Corleone.

Not only has Sonia's strategy defanged the BJP's assertion that the government is weak, but, with the SP in its pocket, has removed the Left's chances of cobbling together a Third Front next year. And if the inflation situation does ease out, we may very well see the Congress coming back to power with a similar, if not slightly higher number of seats.


As I see more of Sonia Gandhi, one's respect for her grows. Not for her idealism or administrative prowess (for she has little aptitude for the latter, and even less of the former), but her tactics. She has proven to be an excellent player at the game of intrigue, and a clever operative. Its Godfather meets James Bond. I can't think of any other leader who plays this game better. Advani may be a good mass mover, and Arun Jaitley a great strategist in planning polls, Sonia is more than a match for both in silent killing.

Unfortunately, The problem arises when she puts the family position ahead of the Party, refusing to yield power to the local leaders, and creating a web of local, infighting satraps. Karnataka was the best example of this disastrous policy. Perhaps then, its time that Sonia starts looking out for her Party rather than family.

Till then, lets pop the champagne at the removal of the Red boulder in the country's path, and pray that it doesn't come crashing down on the UPA during the next Lok Sabha Session

Good riddance, Go left!

Today is the second independence day. India just got independence from China. The resident Chinese commissar CPI(M) General Secretary Prakash Karat has no where to go back except the land of Mir Jaffers. Left parties today withdrew support to the UPA government.

Left parties accuse Congress of betraying. They say don’t believe Congress. They are right, 3 decades of my life and I have learnt to distrust Congress. But I have learnt to believe Communist. I always believed that they are anti-India and expect them to sell India to their beloved Papaland China.

Left parties say don’t vote for Congress in a nationwide campaign because of the Indo-US nuclear deal. Let me inform them that I never voted Congress into power and I do not intend to vote back them back in power. One of the main reasons is that they brought the anti-national communist to center.

The commies cohorts with national tax collector P. Chidambaram and his Italian master have made the common mans life miserable. The so called anti-imperialist commies were very comfortable working with the citizen of imperialist’s Italy. The only person the commies could not get along with is the Indian sardarji.

The commies say that communal parties are biggest threat to India. I say, I prefer suffering communilasim than commuist.

Today is a red letter day, the reds are out.

Adm. Arun Prakash about the 6th Pay Commission

Shiv Aroor has posted an excellent piece by Adm. (retd.) Arun Prakash about the 6th Pay commission on his blog, LIVEFIST. It is an excellent analysis and a definite must read.

Check it out at http://livefist.blogspot.com/2008/06/exclusive-reflection-by-admiral-arun.html

After removing poverty, Congress guns for common man

After the Congress (I) removed Poverty (Garibi) in India, they are set out to mend the common people (Aam Admi). Since there are no poor people in India left and naturally Congress (I) has to look for some other lesser mortals to liberate. Prudent policies under the watchful eyes of The people loving Communist parties, Aam Admi has been gifted with high inflation, ricing prices and of course the latest, the hike in cooking gas, diesel, petrol etc.

We thank you Congress (I), poverty is not an issue now. US president say’s that Indian middle class is rising and Congress (I) has legitimised it by increasing prices and inflation. Are the people dying of hunger like the farmers have suicided? No! It shows that Congress (I) has liberated the Aam Admi too!

Of course the Left, especially the CPI-M, which is a party of intellectuals and stands for text book communism are partners to the great Congress (I) achievement. Together they have managed to keep a fascist Hindu party out.

Read the rest of it