India: The Hanuman Syndrome

Discussion in 'Politics & Society' started by Oracle, Jun 3, 2010.

  1. Oracle

    Oracle New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2010
    Messages:
    8,120
    Likes Received:
    1,541
    Location:
    Bangalore, India
    Rajeev Srinivasan on how India has managed to make itself much smaller and less important in the world's eyes than it really is.

    Several events in the recent past have been emblematic of the problems that India faces: on the one hand, India gets no respect from anybody. On the other hand, it may well not deserve any -- any Rodney Dangerfield fans out there?

    Pakistan's supreme court found Mohammad Saeed, founder of the Lashkar-e-Tayiba and suspected chief instigator of the 26/11 attacks on Mumbai, innocent of all charges. Startlingly, a few days later, India released 25 jailed terrorists (members of the Lashkar, Jaish-e-Mohamed and Hizbul Mujahideen) and returned them to Pakistan.

    Second, some low-level official in Canada's embassy in India has been, it turns out, telling Indian armed forces members that they are violent terrorists and therefore ineligible for a visa -- this has been going on for two years.

    Pakistan's behaviour in exonerating Saeed -- the supreme court must be influenced by their government's, and army's wishes -- suggests that they do not take India seriously. All the fine war-like words uttered by the government of India after 26/11 (and after every blast in the past six or seven years), that there would be a stiff price to pay for any further mischief and so on, turn out to be total bluster.

    India has metaphorically thrown in the garbage-bin the 200 or so victims of 26/11. It is safe to kill Indians, and there are no consequences whatsoever. (Communist terrorists and their sponsors are taking note, which explains the 150 ordinary, apolitical, normal Indians massacred due to rail sabotage in Bengal).

    Pakistan has called India's bluff. They have observed that the Indian establishment is labouring under the illusion that there are only two things that can happen between the two countries -- 'peace talks' (sic) or war. Pakistanis like the so-called peace talks because that means India will continuously make unilateral concessions to keep the alleged dialogue going -- after all, this is exactly what India has done for 28 years with China, with China escalating its demands on Indian territory all the time and never giving an inch in the discussions.

    Pakistanis also believe that Indians are too cowardly to actually go to war, and that anyway sugar daddy American can always be called upon to put pressure on India. Astonishingly, Indian planners do not comprehend that there are shades of grey -- it is not a binary affair between war and talks. There are other ways of imposing costs on a recalcitrant foe -- it is not for nothing that the aphorism goes 'diplomacy is the continuation of war by other means'.

    There are other means India has at its disposal, for instance monkeying with water supplies to the lower riparian Pakistan (once again, the clever Chinese have shown how to do with downstream states for rivers originating in occupied Tibet by building dams and even using river-bombs such as those in the Sutlej when they suddenly release massive floods).

    Trade sanctions are also possible -- instead of which India gives generous Most Favoured Nation status to Pakistan with no reciprocity. Covert operations, including judicious interference, are also used by all nations as part of their strategy.

    But the bottom line is that the original end -- peace and cooperation in exchange for stopping terrorism -- has fallen by the wayside. The means -- the so-called peace talks -- have become the end, and the UPA cannot see beyond them.

    Pakistan has realised that the UPA will appease them and give peace, cooperation and all the trade they want, and there is no penalty to them for continuing their terrorist attacks on India.

    In Afghanistan as well, Pakistan has got its way. The world at large sees India as superfluous in Afghanistan, despite the highly-lauded humanitarian and infrastructure-building activity that Indians have pursued there at significant cost in blood and treasure.

    India was conspicuously excluded from the talks on Afghanistan. Pakistan has convinced the world that India is a liability and a hindrance to US President Barack Obama's plans to declare victory and run like mad from Afghanistan.

    The release of the 25 captured terrorists, in the very wake of Saeed's exoneration, sends a startling message. Orders came from the home ministry apparently as a peace offering prior to the home minister's and external affairs ministers' visits to Pakistan. How come no Indians in Pakistani prisons are being released in return? What about Sarabjit Singh, falsely accused, on death row, and continually harassed in Pakistan?

    Why does Pakistan not feel the need for 'goodwill measures'? Because it is India that is desperate to continue the charade of the 'peace talks'. That confuses the impartial observer -- it is Pakistan which needs that fig-leaf. So whose interests are being protected here? Pertinently, who is pulling the strings?

    Second, the Canadian mess is a metaphor for the fact that India has no credibility. After all, Canada (like Australia and Britain) are generally mere appendages for the US. They tend to have little individual clout, but follow the US's policies. For instance, it is Australia that has been the loudest in threatening India with bloody murder if it didn't sign the NPT. It is not for nothing that the word 'poodle' is sometimes used in this context.

    Now comes Canada with a sterling act of friendly diplomacy. The fact that this insulting of serving and retired Indian army and police officers has been going on for two years is simply astonishing. Why wasn't the low-level flunkey accused of doing this declared persona non grata and given 24 hours to leave, bag and baggage? Why wasn't the Canadian ambassador summoned and given a demarche? These are the things real countries do -- let us remember how the noxious Chinese, in a gratuitous insult, woke up then Indian ambassador Nirupama Rao at 2 am to deliver a complaint.

    It is particularly ironic coming from Canada. I wrote a few years ago in The Pioneer in 2007 about how Canada had been criminally negligent in ignoring warnings about the events that led to the bombing of Air India's Kanishka aircraft, with the loss of 329 lives. Furthermore, their investigation -- still incomplete after 25 years -- shows racism, incompetence, callousness, dilatory tactics and virtual State compliance in terrorism.

    Indians are afraid -- of what I do not know -- to give uppity foreigners a dressing-down. In fact, this would be highly salutary. If India had immediately expelled the obnoxious Chinese diplomat who said that Arunachal Pradesh was part of China, the Canadians would have been more circumspect.

    In that vein, it appears Obama is going to make another totally empty gesture, which will give goose-bumps to the usual suspects. It seems he is going to 'drop in' on the external affairs minister's discussions with Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. And why, pray, is this significant, unless he is actually bringing David Coleman Headley along (thanks, B, for that insight)?

    It's style over substance -- let us remember how the Indian prime minister was not among the world leaders that Obama telephoned when he first took charge, but there was the nonsense of the First State Visit over which the Indian media and officialdom went ga-ga. Nothing whatsoever came of that, other than that a good time, and biryani, were had by all.

    The world has taken its measure of India, and found it to be a second-tier nation. Hence they will continue to insult it subtly and openly. There is no consequence. India does not realise that it is, at least as an economic entity, a desirable partner, and that when the world is in the depths of a financial crisis, the threat of withholding access to the Indian market would immediately encourage snooty Canadas and Australias and Britains to fold. We have seen how the British absolutely grovelled a few years ago when Malaysia's prickly Mahathir Mohammed cancelled orders with British companies when they said something rude. I have never seen such kowtowing and mea culpas and brown-nosing.

    India is a heavyweight acting like a featherweight. There may be a Hanuman Syndrome in effect here: A country not knowing its true worth. On the other hand, I am afraid it's worse -- the rulers do not pursue India's national interests to the best of their ability, despite their solemn oath to do so.

    Rajeev Srinivasan

    http://news.rediff.com/column/2010/jun/02/rajeev-srinivasan-on-why-india-is-not-taken-seriously.htm
     
    Sridhar likes this.
  2.  
  3. ajtr

    ajtr Veteran Member Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2009
    Messages:
    12,038
    Likes Received:
    715
    if india has hanuman syndrome then where is its jamvant to cure it???
     
  4. Rahul Singh

    Rahul Singh Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2009
    Messages:
    2,548
    Likes Received:
    1,420
    Unlike that time today JAMWANT can not be one guy, it is the whole public. If politicians doesn't perform at desired level then voters are at fault.......... Nothing will be cured unless these politicians are taught a lesson and unfortunately no other than voters can get payback...
     
  5. Oracle

    Oracle New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2010
    Messages:
    8,120
    Likes Received:
    1,541
    Location:
    Bangalore, India
    What or who is jamvant?
     
  6. Rahul Singh

    Rahul Singh Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2009
    Messages:
    2,548
    Likes Received:
    1,420
    OT
    Jamwant was a top military officer and consultant of and in Raja Bali's army later he become same in Raja Sugriv's army. He was the one who made Hanuman Ji recall his mighty and divine strength, which he had forgot because of a 'shrap' from Rishis, whom he used to tease when he was a kid.....
     
  7. Oracle

    Oracle New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2010
    Messages:
    8,120
    Likes Received:
    1,541
    Location:
    Bangalore, India
    So Jamvant was a monkey. How can a monkey cure India of it's ills, when we have enough of them governing us. We need people of real mettle who can carry us forward in a solid way.

    No offence to monkeys or Gods.
     
    Last edited: Jun 3, 2010
  8. ajtr

    ajtr Veteran Member Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2009
    Messages:
    12,038
    Likes Received:
    715
    ^^Jamvant was human bear.How can it be offensive when hindu philiosophy sees God in every little matter of the universe???
     
    Last edited: Jun 3, 2010
  9. Rahul Singh

    Rahul Singh Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2009
    Messages:
    2,548
    Likes Received:
    1,420
    Precisely JAMWANT was a 'Richh' or (gorilla) and most importantly JAMWANT was from 'TRETAYUG' not like monkeys of today or 'KALYUG'. BTW we humans too descended from monkeys, no? Can we separate us from them fully?

    With reference to JAMWANT this article is showing towards the need for guy or group of people who or which can make India recall her overwhelming power and superiority in order to deal with the challenge thrown..

    Word monkey or like doesn't decide offences or not to Hindu however the way in which it is spoken decided whether it is or its not...
     
  10. borgking82

    borgking82 Regular Member

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2009
    Messages:
    33
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Third rock from the sun! You know, the little blue
    'The rulers do not pursue India's national interests to the best of their ability, despite their solemn oath to do so.'

    First of all its ruler, without the 's' - i.e. singular, not plural.

    Second, why would an italian lady care for India? Need I say more?
     
  11. ajtr

    ajtr Veteran Member Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2009
    Messages:
    12,038
    Likes Received:
    715
    Coz she is secular convert from fascist background.....
     
  12. AkhandBharat

    AkhandBharat Regular Member

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2009
    Messages:
    542
    Likes Received:
    78
    Location:
    Brokeland
    First of all, its rulers, with the 's'- i.e. plural and not singular. Apparently you're not aware of how the world is not a set of kingdoms and fiefdoms anymore.

    Second, The italian lady doesn't care for India but she married into a powerful Indian family who has apparently done nothing for India other than mire it in conflicts. Heck, they have never done anything for their own constituency. Just look at how backward Amethi is, and the people there still vote congress all the time. Its good that the govt and the opposition did a right thing by making education a right for all Indians. Atleast the Indian junta will wake up and realize how the politicians like nehru family, mayawati and thackerays take them for a ride.
     
  13. borgking82

    borgking82 Regular Member

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2009
    Messages:
    33
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Third rock from the sun! You know, the little blue
    Dude, I was talking about those who rule India; in this case its just the she lady from Italy.
     
  14. Rahul Singh

    Rahul Singh Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2009
    Messages:
    2,548
    Likes Received:
    1,420
    She doesn't and need not to care as long as peoples like Mayawati, Mulayam Singh, Lalu Parsad, Jagdish Tytler, Sajjan Kumar keep getting vote on the name of secularism.
     

Share This Page