From: DR AWATAR SINGH SEKHON <assekhon@shaw.ca>
Date: Wed, Dec 15, 2010 at 8:29 PM
Subject: [bangla-vision] Re: [Pakistan Post] The US is all set to make India global power
To: asif haroon <asifharoon7751@yahoo.com>, Malik@lisauk.com, Yousafzai49@gmail.com, usmankhalid@lisauk.com
Cc: New Nation <n_editor@bangla.net>, charlesgraves@vtx.ch, Imtiaz <pakcyber@gmail.com>, globalnational@canada.com, hk@muslimthinktank.info, States Times <info@statestimes.com>
Dr Awatar Singh Sekhon* comments:
Brigadier Asif Haroon Raja
Piare Bhai Sahib Asif Haroon Raja ji,
Aslaam O Alaikum!
I enjoy your writeups on India alias the 'Brahmins-Hindus Incorporation', hereafter termed as the Incorporation. The present one entitled, 'The U S is all set to make India a global power'. Indeed in the times we are in, one may agree with your title, especially since the state visit to India alias Incorporation'. The incorporation which looks more like a police state than a 'global power'; as referred by the Congressman Dana Rohrabacher of the United States. Congressman said "as far as the Sikhs and non-Hindu minorities are concerned, India might as well be a Nazi Germany. There has been a behaviour change evident in the relations between the U S and the Incorporation since the visit. Undoubtedly, both the international news media and the state-controlled Incorporation's news media tried their utmost to raise the image of the latter; unfortunately, relations failed to sustain effectiveness as seen during the days of visit, although they are described cordial in the diplomatic terms. There have been many situations, which are pre-requisite for a country that has 50% hungry mouths or more and to be called a 'global power' or a country highly anxious to enjoy the status of a global power. Before I put my views on a global power, I would like to invite your attention and the readership as well to consider critically whether a country deserves to be called a global power where the 'Brahmins-Hindus' parliament or Lok Sabha's business remains virtually at the time of this writing. Besides, more than 70% parliamentarians, with the criminal records (see The Economist, July 15, 1995) have no trust on each other, seeking answers from the Chief, Council of Minister, the New Delhi administration, Manmohan Sinh (a non-elected member of parliament, but serving the agenda of his Madam Sonia Maino alias Gandhi, the Congress and more so of the Brahmins-Hindus political parties at large), of the Ghotalas or corruption at mass, is mum and speechless, having no tongue to speak or appoint committees or commissions after the committees or commissions. He walks by the state-controlled news media without uttering a word of their concerns or questions. My question here is how could the Incorporation be a 'global power' where the chief of cabinet is 'non-elected' person and has not been elected by the electoral from any corner the global power, so-to-speak. I have been asking questions whether there has been a head of state, prime minister or president, in any democratic country, who is a non-elected of any democratically elected parliament or congress (i. e., the Congress of the United States of America) in our world. As far as the author is concerned, unless he is proven wrong, the head of a democratic institution has to be elected by his/her people. Neither in the history of the U K, USA or any other democratic country, there appears to be any example in the history of these nations that their chief of stateinstitution was an non-elected person. As far as the Chief, Council of Ministers, of the Incorporation is concerned, the criminal (70%) or non-criminal electorates, a great majority of them are the Brahmins-Hindus, despite their merely 4% of the total population of 1.2 billion, have been abusing or even raping the 'democracy' of their Incorporation. Under these circumstances, how could the U S make the Incorporation a 'global power'?
Indeed, the U S needs a friend in South Asia to do some work(?) or look after its interests. I could agree with this notion, but the Incorporation cannot be trusted for the political matters. The U S desperately needs a so-called friend but it has not to be a 'global power'. U S had friend(s), but has lost in the global arena, especially in South Asia to take care of its (U S) interests need it badly. How could the U S find a friend now when their own appointed person, as the President of Afghanistan, Hameed Karzai, has failed to look after the interests of those who appointed him? At the time of this writing, the US knows perfectly well that (i) it has remained unsuccessful to suppress the Afghans, the people remains to be undefeatable in the history of South Asia, and (ii) the U S knows, even its policy makers advised the administration to "Break up the Afghanistan's neighbour, Pakistan," from the world map (see National Post 11th September, 2010, FP 21; J Sikh Affairs 20(2), 2010 ISSN 1481-5435), a highly ill-advised proposition; and (iii) remotely to call a person known as 10 – 25% of Pakistan to Washington, DC, highly hated by the people/Awam of Pakistan,. The latter option is not worth considering, or worth the paper to write on it, because whenever this person visits the U S, will ask bluntly, what is for me (to the U S administration) in the author's opinion? He has nothing to offer to his people, but certainly he would like to have for himself. It is not that the Islamic Republic of Pakistan lacks sincere and highly competent politicians, diplomats, political scientists, and other professionals who will, once again, take their country to play the game in the 'World Arena of Politics'; even much better than the hopeless foreign personnel of the Incorporation (Brahmins-Hindus).
The global problems have been created by the Incorporation (a country of more than 50-60% of hungry mouths and more than 70% its people do not have even toilet facilities), the dismemberment of Pakistan in 1971, for the introduction of democracy in Afghanistan, problems in the middle-east, etc. Rather than working against the will of the people, it would have been worthwhile to work with the people of the country(ies) and their honest administration to help them, assure them a nice living status, provide shelters, education, health, etc. The Incorporation cannot provide it, it has not provided these amanities since it became only sovereign in the past 3,500 years, before 15th August, 1947. Since 15th August, 1947, the Incorporation has been committing gross human rights violations. For example:
1.it has killed more than 32 to 34 million Sikhs since 15th August, 1947. Besides, it waged an 'Undeclared war in the form of a brutal military "Operation Bluestar" of June, 1984 (The Sikhs: Sovereignty To Slavery 2010 ISBN 0-978-0-9811360-8-0). This undeclared war took a toll of no less than 2-million innocent Sikhs and more than 30,000 military personnel of the Incorporation, when it waged the undeclared war on the Sikhs' holy, religious and historic places like the Darbar Sahib Complex, in Amritar, along with the Supreme Seat of Sikh Polity, Akal Takht Sahib, and every Gurdwara in the 'Landless Sikh Nation, PUNJAB, Khalistan (under the occupation of the Incorporation and its blessed State administration since 15th August, 1947).
2. The Incorporation made the 'Landless Sikh Nation, PUNJAB, as a 'CONCENTRATION CAMP' in the days of "Operation Bluestar of June, 1984." There have been more than 8000 to 55,000 Sikhs kept in the high security jails, without trials and cases registered against them, in the Landless Sikh Nation, PUNJAB or outside.
3. More than 500,000 Muslims have been killed by the Incorporation. The reason, every Sikh, Muslim, and non-Brahmin-Hindu is the enemy of the Incorporation (Brahmins-Hindus).
4. More than 12,000 Assamese, 7-sister of Assam, Manipuris, etc., have been exterminated by the military personnel of the Incorporation.
5. Tens of thousand of Dalits have been eliminated by the armed personnel of the Incorporation.
When such genocide (educational, social, political, religious, etc.) have been carried out by the Incorporation, how could the United States, U K, France, China and Russia could grant a permanent seat to the Incorporation, regardless what sort of the political environment prevail in the Security Council of the United Nation?
Further, merely 'trade relations' are not a criterion to overlook the 'Gross Human Rights' committed by the Incorporation. In fact, finding a permanent peace is far more important than any bilateral/multilateral trade relations or making a country (of hungry mouths) the 'global power', so to speak. Any country whhich wants to be a champion of peace has to work for the betterment of humanity.
Thank you.
Best wishes and warmest regards.
*The author is Associate Professor (Retired), Medical Microbiology and Immunology, and Editor in Chief, International Journal of Sikh Affairs ISSN 1481-5435
*****
----- Original Message -----From: asif haroon <asifharoon7751@yahoo.com>
Date: Monday, December 13, 2010 4:14 pm
Subject: [Pakistan Post] The US is all set to make India global power
To: New Nation <n_editor@bangla.net>, Imtiaz <pakcyber@gmail.com>
Cc: globalnational@canada.com, hk@muslimthinktank.info, States Times <info@statestimes.com>
>
> The US is all set to make India a global power
>
> Asif Haroon Raja
>
> Holy Quran distinctly spells out that Jews and Christians can
> never be trusted friends of Muslims. Holy Prophet Muhammad
> (pbuh) had stated well over 1400 years ago that the entire world
> of non-Muslims is a single band that works on one frequency. His
> prediction is coming true when seen in context with present day
> global geo-political environments. The armies of the whole non-
> Muslim world have ganged up against the Muslims and are
> persecuting them since 2001. Even non-Muslim countries which
> were enmeshed in centuries old enmity and have been drawing
> blood of each other have forgotten their hostility and have
> joined hands and picked up cudgels against common enemy. Jewish-
> Christian alliance against Islam when seen in historical
> perspective needs no emphasis. Country like India which till
> 1991 had remained in the forefront of non-aligned movement
> during the Cold War has made a u-turn on its policy of anti-
> western imperialism and has got aligned with
> imperialist USA. This is notwithstanding that Indo-US
> friendship and collaboration to an extent is restricted to terrorism.
>
> Soon after partition of India in August 1947, India had tilted
> towards Moscow. This tilt was much to the chagrin of USA.
> Despite its wooing, India under Nehru dynasty refused to move
> out of the lap of Moscow and befriend Washington. Eisenhower,
> President of USA from 1953 to 1961 had tried to convince Nehru
> to make India part of anti-communist alliance but failed. He
> paid an official visit to India in 1959 to somehow convince
> Indian leadership to join up with USA to contain growing power
> of China but didn't solicit encouraging response. John F Kennedy
> made concerted efforts to pullout India from Soviet camp and to
> make it stand up against China but couldn't make any headway.
> Although India had come fully under the umbrella of USSR, but it
> never strained its relations with USA the way Pakistan had
> spoilt its relations with USSR after it joined western defence
> pacts. Even when India supported Soviet invasion and occupation
> of Afghanistan in December
> 1979 and castigated US policies, it didn't mar Indo-US
> relations.
>
> The 1965 and 1971 Indo-Pak wars also didn't cast adverse effects
> on working relations of India and USA. The US should have
> ethically provided all out material and moral support to
> Pakistan since it was its ally and member of SEATO and CENTO. On
> the contrary, it stopped flow of defence items which were in the
> pipeline and imposed economic and military sanctions. In the
> 1971 war, the US gave false hopes to Pakistan that its 7th Fleet
> was on its way and would come to the rescue of beleaguered Pak
> military troops in erstwhile East Pakistan but it never came.
> Gen Yahya regime naively kept waiting not realizing that a non-
> Muslim ally would never come to the aid of a Muslim country
> particularly when it is fighting against a non-Muslim country.
> Conversely, Soviet Union provided full support to India before
> and during the war to breakup Pakistan into two halves.
>
> India benefited a great deal from its closeness with USSR in
> terms of development of its economy and military strength.
> Moscow became the biggest supplier of arms to India and in
> expanding its defence industrial base. Indo-Soviet intimacy
> remained unbroken till the collapse of Soviet Union. Even after
> India shifted into US lap, their relationship remained cordial.
> Defence, economic and nuclear deals are still being signed and
> 70% of Indian forces weaponry is Russian origin. What is however
> noteworthy is that when the Soviet empire was on deathbed and
> gasping for breath, India didn't even wait for its demise. It
> hastened to abandon the sinking ship and climbed aboard the ship
> of USA. In order to develop intimate relations with the sole
> super power which it had been criticizing, India thought it
> necessary to build relations with Israel and European Union.
> Indo-US collaboration in various fields nurtured throughout the
> 1990s.
>
> When India under extremist Hindu party BJP led by Atal Bihari
> Vajpayee carried two nuclear tests on 11 May 1998 and three more
> on 13 May, it created a stir in the world. A visible change came
> in the attitudes of Indian leaders towards Pakistan and they
> started behaving arrogantly. Temporary economic sanctions were
> levied by USA and Japan on India to show to the world that USA
> was evenhanded in its dealings; however sanctions were removed
> in September 2001 since India was not a Muslim state and was a
> secular state. One doesn't have to recount the anger of US
> leadership when Pakistan conducted similar tests.
>
> India could not have risked carrying out five nuclear tests
> without tacit understanding of US President Bill Clinton. In
> fact, nuclear tests led to further warming of Indo-US ties. This
> was evident from visit of Clinton to India in March 2000 who
> laid the foundation of Indo-US strategic relationship. It was
> the first step to make India a regional power and pave its way
> towards attaining big power status.
>
> 9/11 came as God given opportunity for India to become a key
> country for USA in its dealings with this region. It managed to
> convince Washington that like USA India was also a victim of
> terrorism. Israel played its role in assigning a key role to
> India in future regional affairs particularly in Afghanistan.
> Afghan adventure lent strength to Indo-US-Israeli nexus. So-
> called champions of democracy and human rights who had earned
> the notoriety of worst abusers of human rights decided to sail
> in one boat and jointly execute the slaughter of Muslims under
> the guise of terrorism and to attain their common strategic and
> economic objectives.
>
> In January 2004, Indo-US relationship crossed another milestone
> in the field of defence collaboration. In 2005, process of joint
> Indo-US naval exercises commenced. In order to protect US-
> Israeli commercial interests in Indian Ocean and to keep an eye
> on activities of Muslim countries, George W Bush declared India
> as the policemen of Indian Ocean. In this context, it was
> planned to entrust Indian Navy with the responsibility of
> protecting sea lanes from Suez Canal up till
> Singapore.
>
> In April 2005, another Indo-US agreement termed as 'open sky'
> was signed. Purpose behind the deal was to remove all
> restrictions imposed by Israel and USA and to open avenues for
> two-way free transactions. Cooperation in the fields of defence,
> civil nuclear technology, space and high technology were
> strengthened during the state visit of Indian PM to Washington
> in July 2005. On the visit of Bush to India in March 2006, tens
> of defence, economic and trade deals were inked and a commitment
> for awarding civil nuclear technology given. In December, the US
> Congress approved the nuclear deal despite knowing that India
> had not signed CTBT.
>
> Award of civil nuclear deal by Bush Administration was meant to
> convert India into a global power. IAEA Board of Governors
> meeting in August 2008 gave a go-ahead signal to Nuclear
> Suppliers Group to supply nuclear material to India. Barack
> Obama has now reconfirmed that India has emerged as the regional
> and global power. Contracts worth $10 billion were signed during
> his visit to India in November 2010. India has also been given
> proxy power in Afghanistan against Pakistan. All the three US
> presidents have played a part in upgrading the standing of India
> and in projecting it as a counterweight to China.
>
> The US Civil nuclear deal has allowed India the right to
> reprocess spent nuclear fuel of US origin. Whatever restrictions
> imposed on transfer of technology was removed by Obama. The US
> is all set to welcome India in the nuclear club of five and to
> make it permanent member of UNSC. The US will support India's
> admission in four multilateral export control regimes including
> Nuclear Suppliers Group and Missile Technology Control Regime.
> All these are clear signs that Washington has made up its mind
> to make India a global power.
>
> Our leaders are however still convinced that the US is
> Pakistan's trusted friend and will not take any direct or
> indirect step to harm Pakistan's interests. They seem to have
> accepted US decision to make India a global power.
>
> The writer is a defence analyst. Email: asifharoon7751@yahoo.com
>
>
--
Palash Biswas
Pl Read:
http://nandigramunited-banga.blogspot.com/
No comments:
Post a Comment