Malicious and misinformed campaign against India in Kashmir issue

[1]

Since 6th August, several articles/OpEd  have been published in New York Times (NYT), Bloomberg  and Washington Post on Kashmir Issue.  In short, those articles are vitriolic attack against Indian Government (GOI) with misinformed and twisted information by a handful of Journalists.  I am citing a few articles published in US media to expose how misinformed journalists are maligning the image of GOI. However, I am also appalled while Pakistani PM Imran Khan Niazi has launched all out media attack against India to sway International opinion about Kashmir issue in favor of Pakistan, there is not much of media push to defend the position of India from  Indian embassy in DC.  As a result, to a large section of American people, GOI is being portrayed as oppressor, tyrannical and rogue Government. Given the fragile and polarized  democracy in United States and a rising left populism in American Congress which for the first time raised the Palestine issue against Israel, there is a serious possibility that a victory of a far left Democratic president like Bernie or Liz Warren may tilt the Kashmir issue in favor of Pakistan in future if Indian mission in DC doesn't  throttle the malicious campaign of New York Times and Washington DC against GOI in  Kashmir Issue.

[2]
 Example-1 :
 Arundhuti Roy, New York Times, 15th of August
 Silence is the loudest sound 
 My response:

A very archetypal Arundhuti Roy article which is bereft of any factual history. She has built a story out of her quintessential ignorance blessed with a call for humanity against fictional victimization of Kashmir.

We can take a closer look at her claim that by abrogating 370, Indian Government is breaking a sacrosanct contract:

1) Article 370 is due to contractual obligation laid out in Instrumentation of Accession (IOC) of the Princely States as claimed by Roy ?

Following Indian Independence Act, 1947, 560 Princely states of British India signed the instrumentation of accession( IOC) to be part of either India or Pakistan. King of Kashmir Hari Sigh signed the same IOC document that other 560 states have signed before him. There was no separate IOC for Kashmir. It was all the same for all the 560 Princely States.

Does those Princely States have article 370 ? Why they become an integral part of India and Kashmir didn't ? Why Roy's article doesn't speak about that part of the history where all the other 560 states which did sign instrument of accession agreed to abide by Indian Constitution ? I doubt whether she even knows that part of the history.

Truth is, even if IOC proclaimed, all the signatory states will be allowed to have their separate constitution in internal matter of state ( other than Defense, Foreign Policy, Currency and Communication) , they needed to form a state Constituent Assembly to draft their own constitution. Constituent Assembly of India which was entrusted with drafting of constitution had been formed from representatives of all the states and creeds. Except for handful of states, most of the states couldn't form their state constituent assembly to draft their state constitution. Then majority of the members of Constituent Assembly decided that Princely States do not need a separate constitution since Indian Constitution will protect the right and dignity of all the states, religions and castes by separate provision. Based on the universal nature of Indian Constitution all the 560 States abdicated their claim to autonomous statehood and thus the need for a separate state constitution.

Leader of Kashmir, Sheikh Abdullah didn't agree to this decision of Constituent Assembly and its Chairman Baba Saheb Ambedkar. Sheikh argued and appealed to Indian Prime Minister Neheru that Indian Constitution needs to provide special provisions for state of Kashmir to show compliance with IOC. Else plebiscite can go against India.

This was in 1949 and India had already moved to UN asking for Plebiscite in Kashmir in 1948

Neheru was about to leave for a long trip in United States and he handed the matter to Home Minister Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel. Patel was not enthusiastic but it was agreed with Seikh Abdullah that this will be a temporary provision till Plebiscite. Based on this, GopalSwami Iyenger and Seikh Abdullah drafted article 370 and it was passed in Constituent Assembly by every Indian Politician including the most vocal opponent of the Article and leader of Jana Sangha ( old name of BJP), Shree Shyama Prasad Mukhopadhyay. Reason is simple. Article 370 very clearly stated, President of India can terminate it any time based on advice from Constituent Assembly. of Kashmir and it is a temporary provision.

Everyone then thought, article 370 is a temporary arrangement to appease the people of Kashmir to acquire them into Indian Union. Otherwise, no politician in sane mind would agree to a contract in which people of Kashmir was destined to get four to five times more per capita budget allocation than rest of India. And in return, Indians will have no right to buy any land or invest in any business in Kashmir. An Indian can invest in United States but not in Kashmir while an Indian has to pay for hefty amount to Kashmir each year. How funny is that?

Constituent Assembly of Kashmir was dissolved in 1956. Due to absence of Constituent Assembly, it was solely upon President of India to terminate the Article 370. That's exactly what President of India, Ram Nath Kovind has done. It is a total internal matter of India and no legal violation has been done. Article 370 is a part of Indian Constitution and only people of India have right to terminate which they did since it was a sheer ill conceived appeasement policy.

Now let me cite another example of why IOC was never a binding document in the matter of Partition of British India as Ms Roy has claimed.

2) Nawab of Junagar Mahabat Khabji did sign the instrument of accession (IOC) to Pakistan on 15th August 1947. Pakistan accepted it in September. But since the state was a Hindu majority state in Gujrat, India sent military and annexed the state by Plebiscite in December. Why there is no hue and cry over Junagarh ? Simple. It was a Hindi majority state and it's by a Plebiscite of 99.9% vote, the state decided to remain in India despite its Muslim ruler signed IOC with Pakistan!

3) So from 1 & 2 it is clear IOA was never a contractually obliging document in the matter of assimilation of Princely States to India or Pakistan. Two nation theory which dictated Muslims for Pakistan and Hindus for India was the most abiding principle of partition. So let's ask the question then. Why Muslim majority Kashmir valley is not transferred to Pakistan ? Why it didn't happen that way?

4) What is often and conveniently forgotten by every Pakistani who are sure of their God given right to Kashmir, is the most inconvenient truth that Sheikh Abdullah, leader of National Conference, the only true leader of Kashmiri people decided to join Indian Union. He had supported decision of Hari Singh to join Indian Union. He rejected the idea of Pakistan as theocratic state and wanted Kashmir to boom in secular India where Kashmiri people should be getting a more progressive Government by a progressive leadership. He developed a separate Kashmiri Millitia to fight against Pakistan when frustrated by Sheikh's love for India,Pakistan sent armed tribesmen to capture Kashmir by force. What is also forgotten that Indian military was assisted by militia of Sheikh Abdullah to repel the Pakistani incursion.

4 ) Because Kashmiri leaders were in favor of joining Indian Union, India went to UNSC for a permanent solution through Plebiscite. In 1950, when the Kashmir issue was hot on the agenda of the UN, Sir Owen Dixon, an eminent jurist from Australia, was appointed by the Security Council as the UN Representative to resolve Kashmir issue. From July 20 to 24 [1950], he held a conference of the Prime ministers of India and Pakistan, J Nehru and Liyakat Ali Khan, and formulated three plans for placing the entire State of Jammu and Kashmir under one administration. The single administration would alternatively be composed of a coalition of an Indian-sponsored regime, the "Azad Kashmir Movement" and of "trusted persons outside politics" or of the United Nations representatives. As a second step, demilitarization of Kashmir would begin on both sides of the ceasefire line. And as a third step, a plebiscite would be held to decide whether Kashmir would join India or Pakistan. Pakistan never agreed.

According to Dixon plan Kashmir was divided into 5 part. Buddhist Ladakh, Jammu , Kashmi valley, Gilgit and current Azadi Kashmir area. When Plebiscite looked impossible, he even suggested Ladakh and Jammu to India and rest to Pakistan. Pakistan didn't accept that either. The greedy and failed nation wanted whole of Kashmir.

Whose fault it is then? Neheru went to UN to resolve it . Pakistan didn't want a logical solution based on two nation theory.

Why her article is silent about greed of Pakistan which failed the Muslim of Kashmir ?

I doubt whether she even read history of Kashmir to any reasonable depth.

(5) She also shed her intellectual tears for Pundits of Kashmir Valley who were uprooted by the Jihadist violence in 1990. She wrote BJP Govt failed to resettle Pundits into valley. Why a Govt has to resettle them into their own land ?? Does she understand by that statement she tacitly admitted Muslims of the Kashmir valley are so communal that they are not allowing Pundits to return to their home ?

And if 5 is right, why people of India who are predominantly Hindu would have sympathy for Muslims in Kashmir who showed no mercy to their Hindu neighbors ?

She can only appeal to enemies of India by titillating fictional stories of human right violation.

 [3] Example-2 Bloomberg : 12th August
 Is India creating its own West Bank ?

   My response is published in India America Today, a DC based Web Journal.
  "Abolition of 370 and future of Kashmir"

 //A country within a country is never a good idea. Look at what is happening in Gaza and the West Bank. Kashmir was becoming the Gaza Strip of India. With abolition of 370, they are also equal citizens and an integral part of India, and prospering business would take care of them. Young Kashmiris need jobs and not self destructive politics. Neither do they deserve military presence because Indian Tax payers were paying for the indignation!

Why should the International community bother at all? Did India invade a new land? Is it a genocide? Humanitarian crisis? If it is anything, it is for the uplifting the economic status of Kashmir. They would live better.

Questions are being raised by liberals about why Kashmiris are not being consulted. Bengal and Punjab were partitioned as well. They were not consulted nor did they consent. West Bengal was forced upon Bengali Hindus where as Bengali Muslim were forced to East Pakistan. Similarly, Kashmir was also divided between PoK (Pakistan Occupied Kashmir) and Indian Kashmir. It’s time to recognize, irrespective of how we get here, process was no different than what Punjabis or Bengalis faced by partition. If they are an integral part of India and prospering within the federation, then what is the issue in Kashmir following the same roadmap?//

 

 [4] Example -3: Speech of Imran Khan on 6th August which was translated and gained widespread views in different US media after translation and explanation notes

 I responded to Khan's speech in my Facebook account and Politics India page, a community of 50,00 NRI. However, I couldn't take it to American Media which needs to know nature of vicious campaign by Pakistani premier who is comparing India with Nazi Germany.

 My response can be found in this blog post
 Imran Khan against abrogation of 370- a vicious speech in Parliament 


 Therefore, it is my urgent request to Indian mission in Washington DC to counter the malicious media campaign against GOI in Kahmir issue

AAP-a shadow of communist movement in 70s?

I may not agree with populism of AAP but I have to admit AAP has started a new inspiring movement for those who otherwise thought to have distanced politics thanks to lack of purity in the game. Change they want to bring in is definitely positive but I am not sure their action is in sync with their earnest desire for change.

  Frankly I have not seen anything new in AAP that I have not seen in CPM during 1970-77 phase. Communist leaders of 70's were more aam aadmi than Kejriwal & Co.  They led even simpler life than today's aam aadmi. But it all changed once they came to power. Party, the people, the mission-all changed since 1977 and eventually they become another party in Indian politics. They tried every trick that AAP tried-local democracy to people, local democracy to party and endless populist agenda from state budget.

  Then what happened to them? Did people feel empowered?

 Actually they did in WB for a brief.  When they came to power in 1977, there were hopes that this will be a common people's Government. And in many sense-it was. Most of the ministers of CPM were mostly school teachers. Panchayet election gave power to local villagers. A lot of commoners came to power only to become the ruling class of the next!

 But eventually the party eroded in history as proverbial power poisons everything in the party. The same leaders who used to go to school in Bi-Cycle started riding Maruti in a matter of two decades. Changes were slow compared to other part of India but power took its toll on CPM very slowly but surely.  Rank and file of the party become arrogant, obdurate and drunk with power.  With power came the illusion of invincibility and they started justifying every wrong thing they did.

In more academic analysis, communist movement's decline has to do with issues of production. Indeed the most basics of Marxism is about survival and selection of a society with more productive force.  CPM didn't encourage entrepreneurship. They made them class-enemy  as dictated by their ideology.  And we all know the result. In 1977, WB was the state with 3rd largest industrial production ( next to Gujrat and Maharastra)  which become one of the worst productive state only to be compared with Bihar! Populism, pro-people can not last long if people do not get jobs. Villages after villages of WB are empty of their adult male members because they work as laborer in the other states.  The state has simply no opportunity and it was only a matter of time myth of pro-people, populist CPM was waiting to be busted.

 Nevertheless they did achieve power to people to some extent but at the end, that didn't mean much in long run because people were leaving the state due to lack of opportunity. If opportunities, jobs do not exist what is the value of political empowerment ?  Whom you are going to empower, if the very people are forced to leave the state!

 However, there is only one sharp difference between AAP and CPM movement.  AAP is led by Arvind Kejriwal who is intelligent and can adapt to new policies. CPM leadership was inept and mired in obsolete,  inapplicable theories of communism.  AK is more pragmatic and that can be a silver line for AAP movement.

Maladies of Politics ! Age old Golds..

Upanishad warned us against three basic root of attachment which cause downfall of a person and his character ..

1. Attachment to physical & sensual pleasure
2. Greed for name and fame
3. Chasing after bookish/codified knowledge leaving self realization

When you add all three-you get a politician. And they are at the top of our society. In Democracy, it has been always like this.

So where lies the bottom line?

Incidentally, neither Plato nor Socrates was happy with the first democratic republic born in Athens. According to them, the first democracy of the world produced first class citizen and worst class politician. Yet history is testimonial to the fact, world's greatest civilization was born only during the period Athens enjoyed its democracy.

Therefore, despite poor politicians, democracy is the best political system. There is only one rule to make democracy better. Hold your politicians tight to his/her belt. Do not allow them to fool you by their crafty acting. Judge them by their action and task delivered.

Be committed to your country and its people but not to a party or politician. Committed vote bank is the source of their power. And power is root cause of all political corruption and violence. Take that power out by being non-committed to a party, a politician- they will be better controlled by the people.

Dropping of "Buy India" policy in Electronics-Time to start second Swaraj movement against corrupt UPA Govt.

Biplab Pal, 10th July, 2013
biplab@zreyastechnology.com/biplabpal2000@gmail.com

Although India is shining in IT sectors thanks to outsourcing, the country is continually losing its capability in electronics and mechanical R&D/manufacturing. We run a small Electronics R&D company in USA and in India. My experience has confirmed getting electronics and mechanical talents/vendor/components in India is an increasingly difficult task. Reason is simple. This industry didn't grow at all  and worse, it has lost capabilities thanks to Chinese dumping of electronics good in Indian market. Today situation is so critical, India needs to import even the most simplest micro-motors and other communication chips. Nearly 100% of its electronics components are imported. Even the basics of electronics industry, PCB fabrication is facing a looming threat before cheap Chinese competition.

    Under this dire situation of electronics industry in home, Indian Govt. issued a preferential market access (PMA) policy. Under this policy, any foreign company who is selling electronics goods in Indian Govt, Telecom sector etc had to produce at least 30% of their goods in India. This policy did no discrimination against foreign companies. The policy wanted the foreign companies to set up manufacturing unit in India. This had tremendous potential for all round growth in electronics industry in India as the vendor line would have swelled. Moreover, it would have created jobs for skilled and unskilled Indians interested to pursue a career in Electronics.

  Besides homegrown Telecom equipment companies like Tejas would have benefited. Today, China is boosting two giant telecom vendors who have outplayed their western rivals CISCO and Alcatel/Lucent-Huawei and ZTE have grown to be the largest Telecom equipment company in the world. If you look at the history of both the companies, they have grown very fast on Chinese Govt order flow. On the other hand, Tejas in India could not grow and they are still struggling due to lack of order from Indian Govt. This was in sharp contract with Chinese Govt policy towards ZTE and Huawei which helped them to propel as $30B company within last two decades. Therefore PMA would have reversed all the mistakes done by the Indian Govt. in the past for not boosting local electronics industries.  Example of ZTE vs Tejas shows PMA is absolutely needed for India to boost its electronics manufacturing base.

   Many small companies like us who have operational electronics unit in India saw the benefit as well. Under the new policy, all foreign companies who wanted to sell products in India had to partner with local Indian companies to produce them in India. This would have led to job and industrial growth. Before this policy,  all these foreign  companies needed to do for bagging a contract in Indian public sector- hire an expensive dalal in Delhi who is a nephew of Minister X and they are done with their duties towards India to bag multi-billion dollar deal from Indian defense.

  We already started seeing its benefit. Since the PMA was declared on February 2013, we have already seen around $100M new FDI in this sector in India. Expert estimated this policy would have created 2M direct and indirect job in next 10 years.

 But on 8th July, PMO decided to drop present  PMA under tremendous pressure from foreign companies and other countries pursuing their interest in India. I am totally shocked by the perverted logic for dropping "Buy India" policy! Lobby groups are terming it as unrealistic target as India is not prepared for such a scale of manufacturing! Well then they have established the logic of why this PMA was needed in India badly in first place.

 It is clear the present Govt. acted under the pressure and money from Delhi  dalals hired by foreign companies who do not want to set up manufacturing in India due to  archaic Indian company laws. President of US-India business council, Ron Somers indicated India does not need a PMA policy as these companies will set up manufacturing base in India automatically provided they get right kind of infrastructure.  If that is the case they should try to reform the Indian bureaucracy which is deterrent to manufacturing initiative. We would have welcomed those steps. But Indian Govt should not succumb to the pressure from them at the expense of the interest of its own people.

   This action of dropping "Buy India" policy  amounts to treason against Indian people by its own Government.  For once, I certainly want Indian opposition parties to expose the present Govt. as stooge of foreign interest in Delhi. They need to hold UPA responsible for loss of 20 lakhs job to pave the way for dalal-raj in Delhi.
   

Indian court wants to ban Google and Facebook?

It seems to me the great disconnect between ruling class of India and world reality is widening apart. Laws confining to a country is outdated in the Internet world-more ever, even the concept of a nation and country will cease to exist sooner than many people can even dream. Those who have read Plato's republic as Bible of "Ruling class politics" must have learned that world has been ruled by showing "control/sanctioned" over social action and "the republic" is dead!

As most of the social actions will be happening through social media, e-commerce, trading algorithm and emails, state will have diminished role to play or to impose laws in any of these. Just for an example, when two parties, let say one in India and another in Pakistan do business through a site like elance or Guru, their trading actions are auto-guided more by the algorithmic rule than by the laws of any country.

This high court judge from Delhi only conspicuously proved how ignorant Indian judges can be- not just about the realities of web world but about the laws as well-because laws are founded on the principle of achieving greater good for greater mankind- ulitarianism.

Blocking Google and Facebook amount to taking India back to Pakistan or Talibaan or prehistoric age. You don't stop research on nuclear power just because it can also deliver Atom Bomb. Nuclear power will be absolutely necessary for mankind. You can not ban Internet because it spreads porn.

Besides, what is obscene? It is a subjective choice and in Google or Facebook you can always filter your own feed. Technology offers you that option. In the days of Internet, one can not decide what is good for me-I am to decide what is obscene for me. Old authoritarian world is dead-a new free world has been born from the womb of facebook. You either accept it or take "Vanaprastha" in Himalaya.

Anna and his campaign : An International Perspective

Finally Anna and his team won! At least Anna's supporters think so.

If we carefully look at Anna's agitation and campaign against corruption, it would be extremely clear - actually it was against inefficient system of parliamentary democracy. It was about limitation of representative democracy. You can not win an MP position without spending a lot of cash and therefore, politics is a business now. Else how could one manage 10 /30 Crore needed to win an election? And since in India, legislative members can manupulate judiciary ( 2G case is an exception), corruption in public position turns out to be the most lucrative business. In Delhi, I have seen agents of the foreign banks freely moving around in all the high class parties seeking and convincing the prospective clients on how to keep their "black" earning safe in other countries! There is no stigma attached for being corrupt in public position as it has become norm and only way to catch up with the "others" ! Over the time, I have met a lot of Indian students in USA who have joined US Universities funded by their parent who are mostly public servant and they too perhaps do not consider their parent's illegal earning as crime as they think their parent's high income in public position is perfectly fine and in norm! Most of them are so rich, their parent who perhaps earn 30,000/ per month in public job , can afford to buy them an apartment close to the US University which would cost around a crore in Indian rupees. Maladies run that deeper !

Limitation of representative democracy is well known and well debated topic in all the democratic countries in the world. USA is also suffering from same issue of money driven democracy as it is leading to corruption in many places although due to tough law enforcement, USA is lot more clean in terms of corruption in public position. Tough law enforcement is the key but not the final solution. Political corruption in USA is also rampant. Basically same election funding evil runs deeper in US as well.

A few notable anarcho-leftists like Arundhuti Roy thinks, real demon behind the corrupt India is free market and economic liberalism. That is probably the most stupid thing I ever heard because all the top clean countries ( as rated by Transparency international) are Scandinavian and they too practice free market and capitalism! They are free from corruption because of two reasons-limited form of direct democracy exists in those countries ( like direct voting for new law is mandatory in many of these small countries) and judiciary is independent of parliament. Therefore, India needs political reform to enforce more direct form of democracy and we need to make sure no elected representative can exert any influence on judicial system or police system like we experience in advanced countries.

Next question will be -how could we evolve to direct form democracy? Is it possible?

Answer is absolutely yes. 80% of India's population have access to cell phone now and that device integrated with UID project is enough to enact a direct voting system which can be practiced in a few cases like passing proposition ( small laws) which we see in California and many other US states. Social media, specially mobile social media in India can take a decisive role in the formation of new parties, may be a virtual one which can drive this kind of propositions into law. Last year, I was helping a group in Calfornia who were driving prop15 -a law to limit corporate fund into politics:

http://californiachoices.org/ballot-measures/proposition-15

Although they were defeated by a slim margin, it raised hope for the common people that election reform is possible by means of direct democracy. Supporters of Prop-15 were scattered around whole California- a state slightly smaller than India! They were all organizing themselves through Facebook/ Twitter and group mailing. There was no party behind them-common people came forward for a cause to defeat vested interest in politics.

Democracy is no absolute system of politics. Greatest essence of a democracy is its ability for auto-correction to give birth to a better form of democracy. Critics and office bearers of democracy have one thing in common-for them democracy is a stationary form of political system. But in reality, a successful democracy should be an evolving one which pays attention to its system error and constantly seeks for solution adopted through democratic means.