Burma Burns as the World Watches

[sandtest]

Hmm okay so a Democratic India supports a Dictatorship. Wonder what was our problem that we went running to Commonwealth and got kicked Pakistan out when Musharraf took over then.

We have no problem with democracy or military rule in Paki land, but OUR interests are BEST served by doing that. Pakistan is a country which needs to be isolated and condemned at every stage, because existence of Pakistan is the single biggest threat to our nation!!!! And India did right thing, by exploiting it's clout in commonwealth and expelling pakis. Same thing Pakis have been doing with us by opposing our membership in OIC (Organization of Islamic countries), where they toss Kashmir issue at every given opportunity. China does the same in case of ASEAN and their stand is well known about India's application for permanent UNSC seat. Next generation "anglicized" Indians should get this point very clearly as early as possible.

3 questions for you now: 1) How does Indian support to Dictatorial regime in Burma help us against China?

It will Help a lot in STRATEGIC MILITARY TERMS. Burmas location is very unique, Our key Navy assets are located near Andmans....Chian can develop a foothold and military observation post, hearing posts for their intelligence agencies in burma and can easily keep an eye over Indian navy from their. It can also help in infiltratio and creating trouble in nearby Indian regions. Chinas SOLE intention in helping Burma is to check mate growing Indian navy clout, despite they are enduring western "lecture". It's not their "fetish" for so called communist ideology which many indian elites dream.....China will throw away their communist ideology whenever they feel it's better for their interest..be it economy or military!!...alas our Indian communist retards will never understand this. Our good relationship with current "dictatorship" regime of Burma will help us counter Chinese threat and will provide us some breakthrough in knowing Chinese design, if any against us. Remember in security terms -- you should never remain oblivious about your enemy at any time. That's the reason why recently, acting at R & AW advise MMS decided to sell Dhruv helicopters to Burmese government in so called "de-weaponized"(:giggle:) state, despite the protest from some european idiots. rememebr any Chinese development in Burma will affect INDIA first rather than Europe, USA and so called "democracy" mumbo-jumbo. talk about history of Cuba and USA will shy-away about democracy.

2) What makes you so convinced that the Burmese junta shall rule Burma forever?

I never said it will "rule" forever. But waht makes YOU convinced that it will collapse tomorrow??

3) Tomorrow if Democratic Forces win in Burma, just what would be their response to Indian support to Burmese junta?

Security establishments think about threats faced "Today' first before dreaming about tomorrow. As far "future" democrazies response about Indian support to Burma is concerned, it won't be much different than their response to China -which is "openly" supporting the regime. Our interest in Burma is ONLY due to China.

[sandtest]

I find it greatly apalling that Gordon Brown and George Bush have taken a lead into a political issue that happens in our very own backyard. xxx

They are acting because it is the most convenient for them....Burma is not directly harming their any INTEREST, so they will talk all "democracy", "Freedom" etc. etc. Imagine same Burma in some Russia-Europe bordering area and the equation will change, rapidaly, particularly if their is a "freindly" dictatorship to western countries. We can sympathize with Bushists and their freedom, we share that pain. But in this ideology fetish, we cannot become oblivious to our security threats due to China....world will not come to protect us. This is bad bad world, you have to be ''practical" to save your arse first.

[Lurker]

We have no problem with democracy or military rule in Paki land' date=' but OUR [b']interests are BEST served by doing that.

That is the single biggest load of baloney people serve out everyday. Acting in the name of country's "interest". I remember getting caught up in a discussion with a poster here who is pro-US and when pointed out that the ONLY country that did NOT support India's candidature in Security Council was USA, he went right behind this shield of "USA's interest". Long story short jiska koi jawaab nahin aaye usko National Interest ke naam kar do.

Pakistan is a country which needs to be isolated and condemned at every stage, because existence of Pakistan is the single biggest threat to our nation!!!!

First of all that is a typical rant. But still I will indulge you on this. Help me understand why do you mean by existence of Pakistan is the biggest thread. Do you mean you wish to see Pakistan evaporate into thin air one day?

And India did right thing, by exploiting it's clout in commonwealth and expelling pakis.

India did the right thing, how? National Interest? Nah. It was clearly due to Democracy vs Dictatorship. You know India doesnt own Commonwealth and neither is every country out there so gullible that they shall just lap up whatever India dishes out.

Same thing Pakis have been doing with us by opposing our membership in OIC (Organization of Islamic countries), where they toss Kashmir issue at every given opportunity.

Those two groups are fundamentally different. Unless you see as an Islamic Country I fail to see you should be even bothered about getting inside OIC.

China does the same in case of ASEAN and their stand is well known about India's application for permanent UNSC seat.

Like what? Like this. China understands and supports the aspirations of India to become a permanent member of the Security Council," said the document, drawn up after a meeting on Sunday between Chinese Vice Foreign Minister Wu Dawei and Indian Foreign Secretary Shyam Saran. http://www.indiadaily.com/editorial/2277.asp

Next generation "anglicized" Indians should get this point very clearly as early as possible.

Hahaha..Round of personal attack..Typical.

Chinas SOLE intention in helping Burma is to check mate growing Indian navy clout, despite they are enduring western "lecture".

Bogus. China has always been close to Burma. This is not a new phenomenon. Take your fear-mongering some place else.

It's not their "fetish" for so called communist ideology which many indian elites dream.....China will throw away their communist ideology whenever they feel it's better for their interest..be it economy or military!!...alas our Indian communist retards will never understand this.

Take your rant to a Communist, why are you wasting it here?

Our good relationship with current "dictatorship" regime of Burma will help us counter Chinese threat and will provide us some breakthrough in knowing Chinese design, if any against us. Remember in security terms -- you should never remain oblivious about your enemy at any time.

Bullsh**t. Just another round of fear mongering. India's silence over Burma is for 2 reasons, none of which you have mentioned: 1) Burmese Energy resources. 2) Fact that Burma has acknowledged that Indian insurgents get inside Burma and has agreed to deal with the problems. talk about history of Cuba and USA will shy-away about democracy.

I never said it will "rule" forever. But waht makes YOU convinced that it will collapse tomorrow??

Ha, so basically you dont have an answer there. Why would it collapse? Well amongst other things: 1) Its economy is in shackles. 2) Rest of the world is completely against it. 3) China doesnt want another basket bowl, a la North Korea, on its borders. Atleast with N Korea China contains S Korea and Taiwan, what does Burma offer?

As far "future" democrazies response about Indian support to Burma is concerned, it won't be much different than their response to China -which is "openly" supporting the regime. Our interest in Burma is ONLY due to China.

That is a typical myopic response. Our interest in Burma is ONLY due to China. Our interest in BD is ONLY due to Pakistan and load of similar cr@p. Do you, for example, realize that India is surrounded by countries like BD, Nepal, Pakistan, Burma all of which are either failing or have failed? Do you truly beleive India's interest are served by failed states around it? And why should India not develop good trade relationship with Burma, or Pakistan, or BD? Whats with all this in-built hate ST? xxx

[THX_1138]

Is that CC? Too much to read there. Cut and paste or you typed it all?

he put in the effort to understand the situation and respond. a lot more than i can say about you. stay away from this thread if all you can contribute is pathetic jibs and funnies.

[THX_1138]

I already said, I DON'T CARE about Burma or any other country...I am not a peace activist aspiring for noble prize :hysterical: On a serious note....threat of China is REAL and more dangerous than Pakis for various reasons. India should counter Chinese influence in Burma by selling military equipments to it's present "dictatorship" government. Also we can go ahead with some more economic ties, without caring of "peace" lectures from bully western countries. China getting it's foothold in Burma and other countries in our neighborhood will dircetly affect INDIA first. So ignore these European and American bullies and their "human rights" chants and get foothold in Burma like Chinese are doing.

you have got to be the dumbest assh*le on this discussion board. why the frack would the junta buy a single bullet from us when china literally gives it, yes says "come here and take it, free!" to this junta in exchange for looking the other way when china lays down three pipelines to ship the natural gas and petroleum from the bay of bengal to central china? moreover, does that defeat the entire purpose that we try to aleviate the suffering of the poor burmese when we are actually strengthing the oppressive junta? and do tell me you lame frack, what will happen to the stock market when it hears that we are actively moving towards deploying nuclear weapons? what do you suppose will happen to foreign investments and the attitude of foreign investors towards india as a "safe and reliable destination for investment"? do you think this out, or simply regugitate it from after hearing it at your right wing nut job conferences? we are trying to move towards a safer world, not a more trigger happy one. go read a book, take a cold bath and if such thoughts still prevail, stiffle them with a pillow for people like you are no less than those who flew two aeroplanes into the WTC or those lunes who target large crowds on every hindu holiday with massive explosions.

[THX_1138]

anyways guys, well done with the inaction. not blaming anyone here in particular, you are just as helpless as i, so really we are all guilty. the junta have crushed the protestors, the monks are locked up in their monasteries, interent services have been removed, foreign journalists have been imprisoned or killed and ang su kyi has been moved to the worst fracking prison in all of burma. lets continue with the senseless orgy started by sandtest and his diabolical idea of making more guns and bullets to establish peace. sandtest, if you can, go f*ck yourself.

[sandtest]

you have got to be the dumbest assh*le on this discussion board. and do tell me you lame frack, go read a book, take a cold bath and if such thoughts still prevail, stiffle them with a pillow for people like you

sandtest, if you can, go f*ck yourself.

*ignoring* Bacchey, I thought you can refute the post if you can, but instead you going CC way. Listen, I am not going to abuse you back, so calm down, this trick isn't working. waise bhi, yeh meri khud ki tauheen hogi, ke main kisi bacche se gali-galuch kerun. Peace.

[sandtest]

I was talking in REAL terms of geo-politik. The INTERESTS of a country comes always FIRST, before juvenile jingoism of "peace" "Love" and "humanity". Of course that doesnot mean we don't like that, in fact we must give Peace and democracy first preference as long as our INTERESTS are safe. Now just go through this article by expert analyst B.Raman regardng Burma situation and read between the lines. Everyone, including India wants well being of Burmese, but our Interests needs to preserved simultaneously. We can't allow Chinese to use Burma as a place in supporting North-East insurgency. http://www.outlookindia.com/full.asp?fodname=20070927&fname=raman&sid=1 With the Myanmar military junta determined, if need be, to unleash another bloodbath reminiscent of that of 1988, in order to re-assert its control over the country and its people, Indian and Chinese policy-makers are facing a difficult dilemma. Rightly or wrongly, the international community is convinced that only China and India, which have been following a policy of active engagement with the junta, despite its ruthless suppression of its people, are in a position to moderate the behaviour of the junta. But neither country is presently inclined to do so. (I ask why?? -- any hint you got:lightbulb:) Their policy of non-interference in the internal affairs of other countries is cited as the ostensible reason for their reluctance to exercise pressure on the junta.:giggle: A more important reason is their perception of the importance of Myanmar for their respective national security.:lightbulb::lightbulb: Interest in Myanmar's oil and gas reserves for meeting their growing energy requirements is one reason. For India, another reason is the likely benefits of Myanmar's co-operation in dealing with the insurgencies in North-East India. :sad_smile::sad_smile: (clealrly you cannot blame India here, we are forced to act in this way seeing Chinese covert support in NE insurgency) An additional reason for China is Myanmar as a gateway to the Indian Ocean and as a potential energy route for reducing its dependence on the Malacca Strait for the movement of its energy supplies from West Asia and Africa. While pursuing their respective economic and security interests, the two countries have been keeping a wary eye on each other in order to see that one does not make a strategic headway at the expense of the other. The junta is hoping to take advantage of the perceived need of India and China for Myanmar to overcome the pressure from the international community for a change in its repressive policies. The developing situation in Myanmar poses a more difficult dilemma for China than India. If there is bloodshed and further instability in Myanmar, India's economic and strategic hopes can be belied, but there is unlikely to be any damage to its international position. However, if there is bloodshed in Myanmar, not only can China's economic and strategic calculations go wrong, but its international position and its dreams of making a grand success of next year's Beijing Olympics can receive a set-back. The benign role which China has been trying to play in respect of North Korea's military nuclear ambitions and its concern over the situation in Myanmar--palpable, but not yet overtly expressed-- are a reflection of a China sensitive to the views and concerns of other countries--particularly the US-- as it moves towards the Olympics. China needs the co-operation of the US for making a success of the Olympics--whether it be in making a grand spectacle of it or in ensuring its security. Well-known Hollywood personalities are already helping the organisers of the Games for making a grand spectacle of them. American security advice is eagerly sought and accepted. The Chinese policy-makers have a nagging fear that traditional anti-China elements in the West--particularly in the US-- could politically sabotage the impact of next year's Olympics as the US sabotaged the impact of the Moscow Olympics in 1980 by exploiting the intervention of the Soviet troops in Afghanistan. One saw how promptly the Chinese policy-makers introduced correctives in their policy towards the Sudan, when American activists led by Mia Farrow started calling for a boycott of the Beijing Olympics if China did not change its policy on Darfur.There is an undercurrent of concern in the policy-making circles in Beijing that if the situation in Myanmar leads to a bloodbath, this could provide another handle to these activists to revive their campaign for a boycott of the Olympics under the pretext that it is the Chinese support, which has enabled the Myanmar junta to resist international pressure. The Chinese policy-makers have not yet been able to find a way out of the dilemma. Myanmar has today one of the most ruthless juntas of the world. It is conceivable that even a change in Chinese and Indian policies may not make it see reason in the short term. But the realisation that the entire international community--including India, China and the ASEAN-- are now united in opposing the policies of the junta could bring about a change in the medium and long term. India and China should enter into mutual consultations as to how the two, working together and with the international community, could bring about an end of the repressive policies of the junta. Given the kind of junta Myanmar has, their initiative may fail, but that is not a valid argument for not trying.

[sandtest]

Myanmars government has co-operated with us in dealing with insurgent groups. "Myanmar promises to weed out terror" http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/1998647.cms India, Myanmar could launch military operations against anti-terror groups http://www.india-defence.com/reports/2502 ------------------------------------------------- That said, it doesnot mean that we are nurturing a dictatorship ideology. We are just doing to keep Chincommies influence checked and not harm us. If situtation changes and there is really some strong movement which can bring down the current regime, we should support that movement. For the time being, we can wait and watch, while protecting our national security first.

[Gaurav]

he put in the effort to understand the situation and respond. a lot more than i can say about you. stay away from this thread if all you can contribute is pathetic jibs and funnies.

My question was genuine. I was curious if he wrote that or if it was cut and paste. His own response was-

'Scan & Paste' - appeared in a local circular as post to the editor.

Anyway THX can I have your phone number? I will check with you before I post anything:finger:

[THX_1138]

Myanmars government has co-operated with us in dealing with insurgent groups. "Myanmar promises to weed out terror" http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/1998647.cms India, Myanmar could launch military operations against anti-terror groups http://www.india-defence.com/reports/2502 ------------------------------------------------- That said, it doesnot mean that we are nurturing a dictatorship ideology. We are just doing to keep Chincommies influence checked and not harm us. If situtation changes and there is really some strong movement which can bring down the current regime, we should support that movement. For the time being, we can wait and watch, while protecting our national security first.

the people we are labeling as terrorists are oppressed farmers who make a better case for a seperate state than kashmir. the residents of the seven sisters have been oppressed and their resources exploited (be it oil, be it tea plantation, be it minning) and they have received little government attention. we talk about development in india, and fail to see how the fringes of this nation that was begun on such a nobel concept are being marginalized. instead of trying to "suppress the terrorists" we must attempt to understand what is it that they demand: all they wish for is better spending of their resources on their development (not illogical if you ask me). trust me, if you wish to maintain a democracy, you cant go about oppressing ever rebellion. there are some nit wits who will demand anything, and yeah they need to be delt with aptly. but the eastern states have really been given the short end of the stick, since the days of the british raj. they are ideologically and culturally rather distinct and thus if they press for the demands for a seperate land, we must approach them with understanding and economic reform rather than bullets. we are a billion people, you cant govern a billion with the bullet. now go f*ck yourself.

[THX_1138]

My question was genuine. I was curious if he wrote that or if it was cut and paste. His own response was- Anyway THX can I have your phone number? I will check with you before I post anything:finger:

my bad dude. i was a bit too peeved off by this whole matter and i made the error of reading sandtest prior to your post. apologies are in order... p.s. call me any time at 1-800-KISS-MY-ASS (sorry my man but i always wanted to say that)

[Bongosamaj]

Sandtest, I find it interesting that you have completely ignored my post in this matter/refused to address the points raised there. And I dunno where on earth you get gems of this sort :

I already said, I DON'T CARE about Burma or any other country

I want "democratic" India to support "dictatorian" regime, to Protect it's INTEREST i.e. to counter Chinese influence, same like Western countries do in other regions.

INDIA SHOULD FOLLOW EXAMPLE OF USA.

because existence of Pakistan is the single biggest threat to our nation!!!!

Our good relationship with current "dictatorship" regime of Burma will help us counter Chinese threat and will provide us some breakthrough in knowing Chinese design, if any against us. Remember in security terms -- you should never remain oblivious about your enemy at any time.

Its amazing how much garbage you spew, particularly because i can tell you know little or next to nothing about Burma or the situation there today. I shall address your rather fictitious and illogical arguments step by step in the order of your quotes. 1. How can you pretend to be a 'good hindu' who pretends/thumps chest about Hinduism and then say you do not care about any other country ? I suppose you arn't very aware of the nuances in Hinduism to realize that Hinduism is fundamentally anti-nationalistic and your hindu-nationalism phenomenon is a very new concept in Indian history- at no point stretching beyond the last 150 years by even the most generous estimation. I don't know how strong your grasp of Hinduism is ( beyond the simplistic and mindless ritualism that pervades it today) or even if you understand an iota of sanskrit, but reflect on this phrase for a second ( if you have the capability to) and then please tell me where it is from : Vasudaiva Kutumbakam. Can you please tell us whether your nationalism trumps your hindu-ness or vice-versa ? 2. Please tell me how does cozying up with the Burmese Militia put us in a position to counter China in Burma. Do you think Cozying up to Britain would negate USA's influence in Britain or vice versa as well ? Can you please tell us if you know the basis of Burma-China relationship today? 3. Why should India follow the example of the USA ? is it simply because you have no idea on how to chart a new course and you are only creative enough to follow a path that has been trodden before ? Can you please tell us why you consider USA's path to be such a glorious path to follow, given that US national debt is over nine trillion dollars and USA, by no means, is the most developed western nation when it comes to the overall society and civil population ? Do you have any idea of USA's history, the reasons for it being the world power it is today and just how much of it was down to USA's glorious navigation of their path to stardom ? 4. I realize that you have overriding concerns about Pakistan and that Islamic terrorism terrifies you. But at the same time, i am glad India isn't run by your type for the most part and has not been in the past. Pakistan is not our biggest threat or our biggest cause of concern. As long as Pakistani nukes don't fall in the hands of their fundamentalist parties, Pakistan has little or no relevance to our existence as a nation. Sure, their funding of terrorism can create a scenario of 'slow simmering' but it has nowhere close to the influence or the power to engineer India's downfall or even play a major part in it. India infact has the biggest threat in the form of China ( though it is not an open threat, it is more of a competetive threat in my opinion). 5. You provide some nice soundbytes on 'know thy enemy'. I suppose you read Napoleon and gave a nice thrilling soundbyte to try and mask your ignorance of the issues here. But please tell us just why would Burmese govt. today start countering China's influence simply because we cozied up to them. Do you know what China has done so far for the Burmese government ? With a hostile China, the current Burmese government will not last more than a week in power. They get everything from China- their weapons, tons and tons of money to support their failed state, Chinese help in infrastructure building and even intelligence gathering ( yes, China gathers intelligence FOR Burma). What does China get out of this ? Simple - it gets to jack Burma's resources with nobody asking questions and score an incredible geo-strategic victory over India. On the other hand, Burma does not give a hoot about a hostile India. India cannot move against Burma in the UN ( whereas all that is KEEPING the current Burmese government in power is China vetoing any resolution against Burma) ,India cannot attack Burma unilaterally without a very credible causality ( such as one i underlined in my initial post) and India most definitely cannot 'bribe/buy the military Junta' to swing India's way- remember, China is far richer than India ( their FER is at over 1 trillion US$, India's is less than 150 billion US$.) China can 'out-bribe' India without breaking a sweat. So i ask you this- instead of hiding behind soundbytes, please try to THINK like your adversary to understand them better ( not to blindly copy them). Now, if you were the Burmese Junta, what would be your reason for marginalizing China and favouring India ? Simply because India gave Burma a few helicopters and wants to be 'friendly' with Burma ? Their government may be xenophobic ( a trait you also share, so you should understand this aspect well) and despotic but they are not stupid. You do not remain in power for 40 years in a country of over 50 million people by being stupid. They know for a fact that China offers the Burmese government far more than India can possibly offer. So what if India is cozying up to Burma or wants to ? Burma will simply lap up India's attention/showerings of platitudes & 'gifts' and simply play the fool to India. Its only logical - its like if i live in my father's house, i will not oppose my father for a stranger like you, regardless of what you offer- particularly if i still live on my father's money and you cannot match his money & power. Yes, even if my father was a jacka$$ and always lectured me on how he 'owns me', it'd be illogical for you to expect i'd pick you over my father. Simply because the bottomline is, my father offers me far more than you ever can. So what will i do with your platitudes and your attempts to distance me from my father ? I will simply play you for the fool- what have I got to lose by that ? Nothing. What i have to profit from that ? Simple - whatever you 'offer up' is 'free stuff' for me and improves my quality of life. This is exactly the way it is with Burma's military junta. China is its father, India is the outsider trying to seperate the son from the father. Do not forget for a minute that China has a 'slant-eyes of the world unite' policy as its long term plan. Yes, it doesn't mind taking over other lands- any lands- but China's action plan since the days of Mao has been to present a unified government for all 'east asians'. China most definitely plays the 'race card' very subtly by pointing out to Burmese govt. that they are closer related to 'Chinese' people than Indians. I can garantee you that India can do whatever it wants, give Burma a few sukhois if it wants to or even give it AID money- Burma will still remain in China's grasp as long as the Burmese military junta is in power. The only way Burma will swing in India's corner is if India somehow manages to play a noticeable part in unhinging the Burmese military government and it is replaced by a civillian government. And lastly, you quite happily pick up soundbytes about 'Burma helping India with terrorism in the North-East' as a plausable cause. Do you have any idea how silly this viewpoint is and how incorrect it is ? First off, i'd say that i agree with THX on the North-East issue- there are a couple of oddball genuinely nefarious terrorist organizations there but most of the sepratists/insurgents in the North-East have a very genuine gripe with New Delhi. Second, terrorists don't make guns out of thin air ( unless you are from the Darra people in the caves of Pakistan) - they get it from someone. And the scale of terrorist activities means they don't just get some guns from oddball smugglers but are backed by national entities. Where does the rebels in north-east get their guns from ? Who supplies them ? I will give you a hint : please look up the word 'NORINCO' and who owns Norinco. Most arms that are captured from rebels are Norinco issues and in the field of ballistics, its fairly easy to tell weapons - the fake ones from real ones and the real ones even if all markings have been filed away into a smooth allround shiny surface. A Colt 1911 is a Colt 1911, even if it has 'made by Haldiram Bhujiawala' engraved on it. Now, where do the Rebels get their guns from ? The INS controls the Bay of Bengal- shipping arms into Bangladesh & then redistributing them in India to 'terrorists' is simply out of the question for this scenario- sure, it happens too but the scale of it is no more than 1-5%, simply because if Bangladesh were to underwrite such a venture, INS would know easily due to the scale of weaponry in question here. It doesn't come through Bhutan- Bhutan is perhaps our only 'true' friend in the region so far. Indian military guards the 'chicken's neck' fastidiously (as it should) and it rules out direct contact between North-East rebels and Nepalese elements. Half of India's armed forces in the North-East sits in Arunachal Pradesh and quite obviously, supplying guns to these blokes from AP is out of question. So what does it leave by the process of elimination ? Answer: Burma. Indo-Burmese border is the longest border in North east and most of it is through very dense jungles on very rough hilly terrain that is nearly impossible to secure. Fact is, Burma serves as the 'base' for most ULFA and other various NE rebel groups- they go in, train/take some rest, stock up on NORINCOs and come back. Indian army found out about this and pestered Burma on this, threatening to draw international attention. So Burma turned over a 'few handful' of itty bitty rebels (no top dawgs) just to serve as an alibi for Burmese involvement in this matter. And then it told the ULFAs and other groups that they'd have to 'dig a little deeper' into Burma to get their R&R and weaponry. They still go to Burma and they still get their stuff from Burma, as evidenced by the fact that most NE rebels who get apprehended by India to this day, are apprehended very close to the Burmese border, usually trying to sneak back in or escape into Burma. If this is your idea of 'helping us' with terrorism, then i suggest you look up the phrase 'playing you for a fool' and the word ' alibi' in the dictionary.

[sandtest]

Sandtest, I find it interesting that you have completely ignored my post in this matter/refused to address the points raised there.

Well, your post was very much "historical" in nature and enlightening as well. But, as I made it clear hundred times that I am in this thread ONLY for INDIA's Interests. Why you people can't understand this simple thing??

And I dunno where on earth you get gems of this sort :

Nit-picking and selective quoting will lead to mis-understandig. Each of those are meaningful and need seperate threads to discuss.

Its amazing how much garbage you spew, particularly because i can tell you know little or next to nothing about Burma or the situation there today. I shall address your rather fictitious and illogical arguments step by step in the order of your quotes.

1. How can you pretend to be a 'good hindu' who pretends/thumps chest about Hinduism and then say you do not care about any other country ? I suppose you arn't very aware of the nuances in Hinduism to realize that Hinduism is fundamentally anti-nationalistic and your hindu-nationalism phenomenon is a very new concept in Indian history- at no point stretching beyond the last 150 years by even the most generous estimation. I don't know how strong your grasp of Hinduism is ( beyond the simplistic and mindless ritualism that pervades it today) or even if you understand an iota of sanskrit, but reflect on this phrase for a second ( if you have the capability to) and then please tell me where it is from : Vasudaiva Kutumbakam. Can you please tell us whether your nationalism trumps your hindu-ness or vice-versa ?

What does my religious background has to do with a geo-political discussion topic?? If you want to discuss Hinduism and Vedanta just OPEN A NEW THREAD. We can know how much grasp you have about Hinduism, there. Can you Open a seperate thread for that??? Please?? To satisfy your quest of knowledge, "vasudhaiva kutumbakam" is from Upanishads. mate, I can easily cajole you to philosophical discussion of Vedanta and Advaita of Upanishads, but this thread is NOT about that. If you are so concerned about it PLEASE OPEN a NEW THREAD. And don't drag Hinduism everywhere and also stop quoting Sanskrit verses at the drop of hat...I can do that too. I hope that is clear to you now...and I sincerely hope you will open a new Vedanta thread.:D

2. Please tell me how does cozying up with the Burmese Militia put us in a position to counter China in Burma. Do you think Cozying up to Britain would negate USA's influence in Britain or vice versa as well ? Can you please tell us if you know the basis of Burma-China relationship today?

Again I am ONLY interested in How Chinese influence in Burma will affect India? OK. As far as "cozying" up with Burmese military junta is concerned, alienating them totally, will also NOT benefit us. We can keep a tap on Chinese move by some "modest" relationship with present regime, as we are already doing. And yes, wait for proper time, if present opposition is strong enough to throw away the military regime, we can support the democratic movement in that case -- but that should be proper calculated risk by defense and intelligence analyst. At present RAW can covertly engage with military regime to watch Chincommies.

3. Why should India follow the example of the USA ? is it simply because you have no idea on how to chart a new course and you are only creative enough to follow a path that has been trodden before ? Can you please tell us why you consider USA's path to be such a glorious path to follow, given that US national debt is over nine trillion dollars and USA, by no means, is the most developed western nation when it comes to the overall society and civil population ? Do you have any idea of USA's history, the reasons for it being the world power it is today and just how much of it was down to USA's glorious navigation of their path to stardom ?

Your rant about USA is reminding me again of CCism in this board :D India MUST follow USA because USA is the nation which cares for it's INTEREST first....they have amazing quality of "marketing" themselves as "torch-bearers" of democracy at the same time ignoring so called "values" and "ideals" fetish whenever it conflicts with their INTERESTS and Geo-Political ambitions. Prime examples are US dealing with Saudi and Iran -- look how they care about their interests FIRST and Democrazy later. USA is an ideal example for India to follow.....they have everything from democracy to spiritual ideology. In front media and the world they are "plural" and "secular" at the same time they keep CIA highly Evangelical with strong Christian agenda and funding, to protect their religion and culture. To me that's good thing, you protect yourself first, before indulging in "ideals" fetish jingoism. Be practical, like USA is.

4. I realize that you have overriding concerns about Pakistan and that Islamic terrorism terrifies you. But at the same time, i am glad India isn't run by your type for the most part and has not been in the past. Pakistan is not our biggest threat or our biggest cause of concern. As long as Pakistani nukes don't fall in the hands of their fundamentalist parties, Pakistan has little or no relevance to our existence as a nation. Sure, their funding of terrorism can create a scenario of 'slow simmering' but it has nowhere close to the influence or the power to engineer India's downfall or even play a major part in it. India infact has the biggest threat in the form of China ( though it is not an open threat, it is more of a competetive threat in my opinion).

There is a seperate thread titled "Know your Pakistan' dedicated to apologist folks like you. Please dig it out, get some knowledge about roots of Paki brand of hatred, through some excellent third party references in that thread. And as you said correctly, China is the biggest threat, not an open one, but you missed the very important point that this same China will use "open threat" Pakistan against us, in any hostility. I am more than assured that Paki rogue nukes are a gift from harami Chinese. Eliminating this "open threat" called Islamic republic of Pakistan should be a priority, before we concentrate our resources to counter Chincommies.

5. You provide some nice soundbytes on 'know thy enemy'. I suppose you read Napoleon and gave a nice thrilling soundbyte to try and mask your ignorance of the issues here. But please tell us just why would Burmese govt. today start countering China's influence simply because we cozied up to them.

Not really, they desperately need Indian support. Right now all they have is Chincommies, that too with world-wide apprehensions against china. They need India and India can "trade" benefits in return......typical Chankyan "Yindoo" way of thinking.:cantstop::cantstop: And when democracy movement becomes "strong" enough to overthrow them, just abondon military regime and support democracy in US style by giving big speeches and media psy-ops.

Do you know what China has done so far for the Burmese government ? With a hostile China, the current Burmese government will not last more than a week in power. They get everything from China- their weapons, tons and tons of money to support their failed state, Chinese help in infrastructure building and even intelligence gathering ( yes, China gathers intelligence FOR Burma). What does China get out of this ? Simple - it gets to jack Burma's resources with nobody asking questions and score an incredible geo-strategic victory over India. On the other hand, Burma does not give a hoot about a hostile India. India cannot move against Burma in the UN ( whereas all that is KEEPING the current Burmese government in power is China vetoing any resolution against Burma) ,India cannot attack Burma unilaterally without a very credible causality ( such as one i underlined in my initial post) and India most definitely cannot 'bribe/buy the military Junta' to swing India's way- remember, China is far richer than India ( their FER is at over 1 trillion US$, India's is less than 150 billion US$.) China can 'out-bribe' India without breaking a sweat.

Exactly, China is the main culprit in Burma....but by alienating Burma we will gain "nothing" except some jingoistic pat on back from pesudo-"peace" organizations like Amnesty Int. etc. Engaging them will provide some real chances of intelligenec gathering to know Chincommie design. The region is too sensitive to ignore. Our Eastern Naval Comand will never like to cut-off all ties with Burma and loose critical intel-info gathering. India has so far done well, by supplying ALH Dhruv helicopter gunships and some petroleum minister visits.

[sandtest]

Now, since a lot of news and analysis is coming in media regarding Burma, I have some diferent thoughts regarding Indian Interests and present regime in Burma. India did some Foreign policy investment in Burma's milatary junta. However, we need to analyze the quantum of investment, very seriously. 1) Is there a bang for the buck? What I mean is if this junta is gone, are we going to lose tremondously. For example when Northern alliance and Najibullah were overthrown by Taliban, India lost a large strategic space. Is it that much in case of Burma? 2) If we openly align with the monks on the street, are we going to build a greater strategic space with Burma? Can India take a calculated risk by openly aligning with the democracy movement? 3)If the democrats(monks and Aung San Suu Kyi ) are in power, do they have great thinker to think only about Burma and not become poodles to China? Will they like to be more friendly with India? How does aam janta of Burma like Inida? Do they like on the lines of Afghans? Afghans hate Pak(India's enemy) and love Indians. Do we similar situation with Burma? India needs to agressively think and spend some money on the eastern strategy. Anecdotal evidence suggests that India goes extra mile not to antogonize the Chinese, due to Indian communist pressures on present spineless government run by p-secs. But, again There is not much of knowledge regarding India - Burma strategic relations. i nexpect some more info, on my above quesries in coming days.

[Bongosamaj]

To satisfy your quest of knowledge, "vasudhaiva kutumbakam" is from Upanishads. mate, I can easily cajole you to philosophical discussion of Vedanta and Advaita of Upanishads, but this thread is NOT about that. If you are so concerned about it PLEASE OPEN a NEW THREAD. And don't drag Hinduism everywhere and also stop quoting Sanskrit verses at the drop of hat...I can do that too. I hope that is clear to you now...and I sincerely hope you will open a new Vedanta thread

Hah! I thought that you are merely a hindu who knows very little about hinduism and your comment merely confirms it. Vasudhiaiva Kutumbakam is not from the Upanishads, its from what most scholarly circles consider the most anciest and holiest book through India's history- the Rig veda. To be more precise, it is from Book 1, chapter 164, verse 46 of the Rig veda. As for your charge of dragging hinduism into the fray- you misunderstand me. As i said, i find you on one hand to be extremely nationalistic and at the other, extremely devout hindu ( or you think you are). I see basic inconsistency in this, because hinduism fosters the notion of world brotherhood far greater than nationalism and that is evident in the hindu scriptures. So i find your position to be fundamentally inconsistent and i asked you to state just what you are exactly- a nationalist or a hindu. For those two are not very compatible with each other. And if you want to quote sanskrit verses, please be my guest but i hope you understand what you are quoting and where it is from and not operate under erroneous notions like i showed in the previous paragraph.

Why you people can't understand this simple thing??

i understand that you THINK you are looking after India's best interests. I also understand that you are gravely mistaken.

alienating them totally, will also NOT benefit us.

True. But overthrowing them or atleast, playing a critical role in their demise will most definitely be in India's favour as i explained earlier.

We can keep a tap on Chinese move by some "modest" relationship with present regime, as we are already doing.

That is an utterly baseless and illogical assumption and i've also underlined why it is so. To the Burmese military government, India will never mean even 1/10th as much as China. Therefore, your idea of 'modest' relationship with Burma currently = keep a tap on Chinese move is at best naive, at worst, totally ridiculous.

India MUST follow USA because USA is the nation which cares for it's INTEREST first.

err no. USA doesnt care for its interests- it cares for the interest of its corporations. If USA cared for its national interest, they wouldn't be spending more money in Iraq than on their public education and healthcare system. I find your position on USA to be utterly inaccurate.

they have amazing quality of "marketing" themselves as "torch-bearers" of democracy at the same time ignoring so called "values" and "ideals" fetish whenever it conflicts with their INTERESTS and Geo-Political ambitions

Is that Dharma or adharma ? As a hindu, do you support dharma or adharmic methods ? or are you simply a groupie ?

they have everything from democracy to spiritual ideology.

They have religion. Not spirituality. Do not confuse the two.

In front media and the world they are "plural" and "secular" at the same time they keep CIA highly Evangelical with strong Christian agenda and funding, to protect their religion and culture.

So basically you are saying 'might is right' and lets do as the mightiest does. Correct ? I wonder what Sri Krishna would have to say on that one ?

Eliminating this "open threat" called Islamic republic of Pakistan should be a priority, before we concentrate our resources to counter Chincommies.

How do you propose on eliminating this open threat called Islamic republic of Pakistan that is a nuclear power and how does destabilizing India's bordering nations benifit India ? You think we can destabilize Pakistan and they will not nuke us ? Please take what you 'wish' for in another thread- we are dealing with geopolitical realities here, not what you wish the world looked like on a map.

There is a seperate thread titled "Know your Pakistan' dedicated to apologist folks like you.

Apologist ? Do you even know meaning of that word ? I suggest you look it up because i am not apologizing for Pakistan's behaviour or trying to justify it. I am a realist- i simply said that Pakistan is not a big threat to India's existence short of some fundamentalist party gaining control of Pakistani nukes.

Not really, they desperately need Indian support. Right now all they have is Chincommies, that too with world-wide apprehensions against china.

utterly false. Burma does not 'desperately need' Indian support- India has practically ignored Burma since 1988 and it has mattered naught for Burma. They get everything they want/need from the Chinese so they have zero need for India. Does not mean they won't take stuff we offer them though. Only means that they will take the stuff and not hold up their end of the bargain. Oh and i suggest you drop childish terms like 'Paki' and 'Chincommie' and address them as Pakistan and China. I suggest you read your hindu scriptures a bit more carefully, where it asks you to show respect to everyone, including your enemy. That is not some idealistic mumbo-jumbo, it is very intelligent, since showing minimum respect is a sign of keeping one's composure and thus not be a raving illogical fanatic as you present yourself to be.

but by alienating Burma we will gain "nothing" except some jingoistic pat on back from pesudo-"peace" organizations like Amnesty Int. etc.

Again, i didn't say just piss off Burmese military junta and keep it at that- obviously, even a child will tell you that it is detrimental. What i said is, India should play a critical part in overthrowing the military Junta. And i see nothing 'psuedo' about Amnesty International and neither do they fit the bill of 'psuedo-secularism'. They are a NGO that is one of the most respected NGOs in the world and i see your slander of them to be nothing but fascistic hinduvta dismissal of something that does not look the other way when Hindus are being retarded and hosting a bloodbath, like in Gujrat.

Engaging them will provide some real chances of intelligenec gathering to know Chincommie design.

Very naive of you and very inaccurate. Do you think 'engaging the Saudis' would provide some real chance of intelligence gathering over militant activities and their fundings ? No, because Saudis themselves do this and therefore will not tell you anything. Similarly, Burma is China's 'naukar'. Engage them all you want but they wont tell you squat about their 'maalik'.

India has so far done well, by supplying ALH Dhruv helicopter gunships and some petroleum minister visits.

That is laughable. India has given some helicopters to Burma and in return has got very little gain in the long term. Negligible infact. And what India has done is display its historic nature of being a p*ssy and utterly clueless at the world stage. What India has done is look at the next 10 years at the expense of the next 100.

What I mean is if this junta is gone, are we going to lose tremondously.

No we are not going to lose one iota. As i said, even if Burma never talks to India again, India still wins because when the junta is gone, Burma will be less China-friendly. Simply because the average Burmese knows that China is the main reason their brutal government(which they hate) is in power. Once that government is gone, they won't be as friendly to the supporter of their opressors. Same has been noticed in eastern Europe- countries like Poland, Checz republic, Finland, etc. are far more west-friendly today than Russia-friendly because they hated their brutal government and they knew that their brutal governments were in power because of Russia(Soviet Union). It makes no sense to be 'close' to the main architects of your opression.

Can India take a calculated risk by openly aligning with the democracy movement?

Yes India can. I already answered this in the first post on this thread and since you have not read and understood it, you are asking a question that has already been answered.

do they have great thinker to think only about Burma and not become poodles to China?

Refer above, already answered.

Afghans hate Pak(India's enemy) and love Indians.

You have no idea, do you ? How many Afghans have you met ? I've met several- and i can tell you that most Afghans consider Indians to be an inferior race. They will taunt Indians as 'Dal-khors' ( dal-eaters) in a derogatory sense, talk up their 'meat-eating chivalry' and pointedly mention how easy it was for them to rape Indian women throughout the medieval period. Yes, the Afghans hate the Pakistanis, but they are no friend of India. There is fundamental religious discord and there is a fundamental cultural discord where Afghans view India much the same way 19th century Europe viewed Africa - a backwards race that should be whacked/guided.

Will they like to be more friendly with India?

A less China-friendly Burma is a more India-friendly Burma by default. DUH!

Anecdotal evidence suggests that India goes extra mile not to antogonize the Chinese, due to Indian communist pressures on present spineless government run by p-secs.

Those reasons ( communist pressure and spineless government run by BJP/Congress) is a small part of the reason why India goes out of its way not to antagonize China. The biggest reason is China can crush India today in a straight fight easily. PLAAF can ( and have done so in the past) make the Indian army look like a bunch of amatuers. China also has far more financial clout than India. Quite simply, India goes out of its way not to antagonize the Chinese for the same reason why a hyena goes out of its way not to mess with a Lion.

But, again There is not much of knowledge regarding India - Burma strategic relations. i nexpect some more info, on my above quesries in coming days.

If you expect more info and you don't have much knowlegde regarding India-Burma strategic relations, you have no basis for presenting a case on what India should do re: Burma. Isn't that common sense, or do you simply seek to speak out of your hiney just for the hell of it ?

Our Eastern Naval Comand will never like to cut-off all ties with Burma and loose critical intel-info gathering.

Our Eastern Naval Command's intel-gathering relies on our ships patrolling/sailing past the Burmese coastlines with our radars running at max. power. Not due to diplomacy. Cutting off ties with Burma will have zero bearing on where INS ships float around pinging away Burmese space through our radars. Again, DUH!

How does aam janta of Burma like Inida?

Aam junta of Burma is predominantly Buddhist, very poor, very much cut-off from rest of the world in terms of information exchange and has very little basis for likes or dislikes of anyone bar China. They hate China because they see China as the big reason why the brutal military government is in power in Burma. Your 'kiss Burma's a$$ and hope it returns our kisses by going away from China' policy has one huge error in its thinking: If India, like China, starts to appease the Burmese military government, then the Burmese people will start hating India too, just like they hate China. Simply because, you do not love the funders of your opressors. Military governments do not last indefinitely, particularly in a democratic world. But if we keep looking the other way re: Burmese military junta and giving them little favours in the hope of 'winning them over', we run a huge risk that when ( not if) Burma becomes democratic, it will hate India just as much as it hates China. On the other hand, if India shows an iota of courage, realizes that the timing is of critical importance, India can pull Burma close to it for the next 100+ years, if not more. ( as i said, China will NOT go out of its way to counter-act India's aggression against the Junta right before the Olympics because China's world image and foreign policy is riding on the Olympics. If China casts its lot with the Brutal military junta while India is busy trying to overthrow it, the world will hate China for it, especially the most powerful block in the world ( the western nations). All it would require of India is some courage and boldness in action. But those two words are strangely missing from Indian public and government's vocabulary and our military is too civil to act unilaterally on its own. Sad case of ignorance from the likes of you allied with a completely stupid perspective that relies on nation X betraying nation Y to nation Z, when nation Y is the biggest single supporter and sugar-daddy of nation X.

[sandtest]

Hah! I thought that you are merely a hindu who knows very little about hinduism and your comment merely confirms it. Vasudhiaiva Kutumbakam is not from the Upanishads, its from what most scholarly circles consider the most anciest and holiest book through India's history- the Rig veda. To be more precise, it is from Book 1, chapter 164, verse 46 of the Rig veda.

Gotcha! CC1981, You are nailed again!!!:giggle: There is a method in my madness.....I purposefully didn't say RigVedas, because I was expecting a 2-bit google jingo like you will claim it from RigVeda. And you went a step further, preaching "precise" verse.:haha: Now pray tell me which is this so called "verse"??...just copy and paste it here, then I will translate it TOTALLY in Hindi, from Sanskrit and you can translate it in which ever language you wish including in your greatly understood English. And I will not tell you now, where in Upanishads it is.:hysterical:....you will never get it in google. First of all, let me see your above claimed "verse" from Rigveda mentioning "Vasudhaiva Kutumbakam" -- in Sanskrit -- Rememeber, the rule-- I want Sanskrit not any English Translation from Max Mueller or Griffith in google, they are flawed. Just put the Verse in Sanskrit and I will translate it in Hindi for you, to show you the light. And remember, Knowledge can either make a human humble & conscious being or it can aggravate human ego.....in your case it is later, your little knowledge has only aggravated your ego. Know the example of a Mango tree and learn something, before your ego destroys your "buddhi". Peace.

As for your charge of dragging hinduism into the fray- you misunderstand me. As i said, i find you on one hand to be extremely nationalistic and at the other, extremely devout hindu ( or you think you are). I see basic inconsistency in this, because hinduism fosters the notion of world brotherhood far greater than nationalism and that is evident in the hindu scriptures

It's not a charge, it's a fact...In your previous incarnation as CC1981, you always dragged my religious belief in every political debate, which is totally a PERSONAL thing to me. My religious background is NONE of your business and you can stick to topic at hand rather than pondering over whether I am following Dharma or not, leave it on my parents and guru to do that job. Thanks in advance.

And if you want to quote sanskrit verses, please be my guest but i hope you understand what you are quoting and where it is from and not operate under erroneous notions like i showed in the previous paragraph.

First prove your above claimed verse from RigVeda then come again to lecture.:giggle:

i understand that you THINK you are looking after India's best interests. I also understand that you are gravely mistaken.

I have know problem if you understand something wrong about me.

True. But overthrowing them or atleast, playing a critical role in their demise will most definitely be in India's favour as i explained earlier.

But ONLY after making SURE that they can be OVERTHROWN and NOT become like IRAQ and Afghanistan. because they are very close to our borders and will affcet us in tremendously if they become another Iraq.

That is an utterly baseless and illogical assumption and i've also underlined why it is so. To the Burmese military government, India will never mean even 1/10th as much as China. Therefore, your idea of 'modest' relationship with Burma currently = keep a tap on Chinese move is at best naive, at worst, totally ridiculous.

We have got our "job" done by current Burmese regime. Indian petroleum minister has visisted Burma a few times-- SILENTLY. Some Indian companies have invested in there (RAW has penetrated) , obviously you have no idea about how, military establishment of India operates.

err no. USA doesnt care for its interests- it cares for the interest of its corporations.

Because America is made by these Corporations..what America is TODAY, mainly because of HUGE succes of their Companies and products, be it defense or civilian. They are not sitting on huge Oil and Gas reserves like Saudi and Qatar. But they create and control these through their "Corporations". So obviously they will protect it which is backbone of their status as World Supre Power. That doesnot mean, Iraq war is justified. Iraq is a classical example of intelligence failure. It can happen with any country. It has happened with India as well in case of Kargil. Overall, India following USA footstep is good for us.

Is that Dharma or adharma ? As a hindu, do you support dharma or adharmic methods ? or are you simply a groupie ?

Create a seperate thread for discussion of Dharma.

They have religion. Not spirituality. Do not confuse the two.

Well, I am not residing in western country or US. But as far as I know, they have religion, but they are also "OPEN" to spirituality as long as it doesn't harm their INTEREST i.e. their religion -- which is fair enough IMO. Unlike your beloved Islamic countries and beloved neighbors who are NOT open to any spirituality other than pseudo-monotheistic charm of Islam. By the way recently our beloved Pakis tried to destroy one more ancient Buddha statue to please Allah, so much for spirituality, isn't it?

If you expect more info and you don't have much knowlegde regarding India-Burma strategic relations, you have no basis for presenting a case on what India should do re: Burma. Isn't that common sense, or do you simply seek to speak out of your hiney just for the hell of it ?

Ace, I assume, you have also worked with Prime Ministers security cabinet, isn't it? I meant to say is their is not much in OPEN about Burma policy of Indian security establishment, and what is our practical policy in this case. All we are hearing is through lifafa prone media.

[sandtest]

Swapan Dasgupta -- you beauty!!.....this guy has just delivered as promised! A must read article about Burma issue!...makes a very good points!!:two_thumbs_up::isalute: My salutations to such journalists!! India Needs a Stable Burma Swapan Dasgupta It's an awkward time to be presiding over neighbourhood relations. Writing in Saturday's Guardian, Aung Zaw, a Burmese exile and Editor of the Thailand-based Irrawady magazine, proffered a view that is certain to make Indians squirm. The Burmese leaders, he wrote, "still believe they can count on China, India and Russia to prop up their regime." It's bad enough to be equated with two completely amoral regimes. What makes it worse is that New Delhi is perceived to be propping up a sinister military junta with a style that blends Kim Il Sung with Mohammed-bin-Tugluq. In the world's league of rogue regimes, Burma (the name Myanmar has suddenly lost currency) ranks fourth after North Korea, Sudan and Zimbabwe. Hence the irony of Mahatma Gandhi's putting realpolitik over ethical grandstanding. The Gandhi legacy has added to India's profound embarrassment. If Nelson Mandela symbolised the Mahatma's legacy during the anti-apartheid struggle against apartheid, the mantle has passed on to the one woman who epitomises the sufferings of Burma. Aung San Suu Kyi started off two decades ago as a doughty fighter for democracy; today she has evolved into the living Gandhi. The events in Burma have confronted Indian foreign policy with a dharma sankat. There is no doubt that the heart of India is with the National League for Democracy and its incarcerated leader. Everything about Suu Kyi - her upbringing, her education and her values - makes her one of us. And yet, for the past decade only George Fernandes, the lovable repository of lost causes, had the guts to say so consistently. At the same time, the extra-cautious, wait-and-see approach of the Government can't be dismissed lightly. In the early 1990s, India stuck its neck out for the pro-democracy movement and paid a price for it. The Burmese generals turned a blind eye to the various insurgent groups operating from across the international borders. Capitalising on strained Indo-Myanmar relations, China pierced the bamboo curtain and took its encirclement of India a levelhigher. It took a lot of patient diplomatic effort from the mid-1990s before New Delhi was able to repair the damage in bilateral relations. Overlooking democracy and human rights was the price India had to pay to secure Burma's co-operation in securing the eastern borders. Of course, India hasn't been able to offset China's stranglehold - particularly its control over Burma's vast reserves of energy - but at least it now has a meaningful presence in Burma. For all their other angularities, the junta has kept its side of an understanding based on mutual self-interest. President George Bush and Prime Minister Gordon Brown may well be sincere in their espousal of democracy in Burma. Unfortunately, the US and the European Union have no significant strategic and commercial interests in Burma. Therefore, unlike Saudi Arabia and Pakistan where flawed political dispensations are tolerated on grounds of expediency, the ridiculous Tatmadaw (the name by which the military junta is known) can be denounced because the West has very little at stake in Burma. It can afford to gush over Suu Kyi and overlook the enforced exile of Nawaz Sharif. There is, however, a larger strategic thrust behind the West's indignation over events in Burma. Whether Condi Rice and David Miliband admit it or not, the developments in Burma are inextricably linked to concerns over Chinese hegemonism in Asia. A containment of China, whether in the form of an overthrow of the Tatmadaw or deflating the 2008 Beijing Olympics, is the sub-text of the reappearance of Burma on the international radar. It is on this count that Indian and Western interests converge. India would ideally like a regime that, even if it is pro-West, is wary of China. If such a regime is headed by the India-friendly Suu Kyi, all the better. However, before plunging into the good fight for democracy, India must be convinced of two things. First, there has to be a dispassionate and realistic appraisal of the chances of the Tatmadaw crumbling under the pressure of mass demonstrations. If the pro-democracy movement is once again foiled by heavy-handed repression, the junta will extract a price from all those countries that didn't stand by it. To commit itself to the forces of democracy, India must be convinced that a regime change in Burma is unavoidable. As of now, the evidence isn't compelling. The democracy movement is still waiting for outside intervention to give it the critical push forward. If the demonstrations fizzle out after another fortnight or so, the Tatmadaw will be grateful to an India that didn't climb on the righteous bandwagon. Second, there is little doubt that any abrupt collapse of the Tatmadaw will be accompanied by the weakening of the central authority in Burma. In particular, it will lead to the revival of the Kachin, Shan and Karen insurgencies and it is possible that a beleaguered China may resume its material support to the secessionists. In other words, turbulence in Burma can provide new opportunities for India's insurgents in the North-East. Will the West come to India's aid in such a situation? ,Remember there is a Christian evangelical dimension to these rebellions. Or will the human rights lobby then train its guns on India? For its own sake, India needs a stable and self-confident Burma that can keep China at bay. Our internal debate must centre on the best way to achieve this objective. The rest is humbug. http://www.dailypioneer.com/columnist1.asp?main_variable=Columnist&file_name=swapan%2Fswapan167%2Etxt&writer=swapan

[Guest dada_rocks]

Dasgupta is one of the most brilliant political observer in our country tells it like it is and like it sud be.:two_thumbs_up:

[kumble_rocks]

CC , Why did you change ur moniker to Bongosamaj ?