Barack Obama should negotiate with Osama bin Laden!

How does it sound, stupid? Well, that’s exactly how America sounds when it advises India to negotiate with Pakistan. What al-Qaeda is to the United States Pakistan is to India. If only Americans could understand this simple fact, negotiations would be much simpler for Indo-US relations. Probably the US policy makers don’t care about India’s concerns, in which case why should Indians care either? In any case in the next few decades, Americans would just have to learn to respect India and its opinions. India is going to be the largest economy on planet earth by 2050 and a very significant military power as well. This is not my wishful thinking but an undisputed reality. A country of 1.2 billion English speaking people can not be wished away! By 2050 a democratic India might have a population of 2 billion people with a middle class of 600 million. It would be the biggest consumer market in the world with a much smaller China playing a second fiddle to its size and influence. The Indian subcontinent might have a population of 3 billion people in its 1200 districts. India would have strong presence in all twelve hundred districts, including the area now called Pakistan. China and Pakistan both need to THINK seriously about future!

President Obama keeps sending Richard Holbrooke, US special envoy to AfPak, to the area again and again to report on the ground situation. Pakistan refuses to let him visit the affected areas with the excuse of security concerns. Holbrooke in turn reports to Obama whatever the Pakistanis tell him about the actual progress. Obama also persists with roping in India about a dialogue with Pakistan and India keeps turning down the request by Richard Holbrooke on his behalf. This chicken and mouse game is going on and on for the past 6 months. I wonder how long Richard Holbrooke would subject himself to such humiliation! The fact that India is actively supporting the Afghan government with development projects should have been enough for Washington to keep away from the Kashmir fiasco. The Wall Street Journal has an interesting article, “India Befriends Afghanistan, Irking Pakistan”, that explains the reason why the US keeps pushing India with no possible outcome. Holbrooke also keeps pushing Pakistanis to keep the pressure on Taliban and not let their guard down. An article in The New York Times, “US Presses Pakistan on Taliban”, suggests that Americans are not likely to persuade the generals in Pakistan to give up their terror instruments of foreign policy. America’s Pakistan policy lacks intellectual honesty. Some very talented people are being wasted on a twisted vision!

John Bolton and the familiar American fantasy!

Yesterday, John R Bolton the former US Ambassador to the United Nations wrote a piece in The Wall Street Journal, “The Taliban’s Atomic Threat”. This guy is so off the wall that there seems to be no hope for Pakistan and its neighbors. The only question is who is worst, Democrats or the Republicans? A total lack of understanding about the “idea of Pakistan” is simply frightening! During the past 62 years since Pakistan was created, the Republicans were in power for 36 years in America and the Democrats for the remaining 26. Both sides invested billions and billions of dollars in the hope of developing Pakistan into a moderate Islamic country, friendly to the United States of America. What happens to Afghanistan, India or Iran in the bargain was of no concern to the expanding ‘Superpower’. Liberals and conservatives, progressives and neocons, both sides had enough time and money to experiment everything in their arsenal to achieve their objectives. Did they succeed in any sense of the world? The answer lies in the rise of Taliban and the failing state of Pakistan! Happy?

Today, May 3, 2009, Fareed Zakaria had an hour long interview with US Secretary of Defense Robert Gates at the Pentagon on his weekly show ‘Fareed Zakaria GPS’ on CNN. Gates echoed the policies of Obama administration. These policies are no different than the ones pursued by the George W Bush administration or for that matter the last 11 presidents. These policies are, invent a democracy in a fundamentally Islamic state, and train Pakistan military officers in the US, just in case the first policy fails. Keep supplying sophisticated weapons aid to the loyal ally against a democratic invader like India etc etc. Put what ever spin you want but the basic thrust has been the same and would remain unchanged. Do you know why? Americans never understood the “idea of Pakistan”. The glue that binds Pakistan is “hate India”. The dictators of Pakistan have always known that if their country develops like China or India, the logic for a separate country disappears. General Pervez Musharraf saw the results of building good and durable relations with India! The Pakistani establishment went after his blood. The Islamists mounted a relentless campaign against him and finally America had to mid-wife a transfer of power.

Here is the bummer! For the first time in Pakistan’s history, radical Islam has found a home in the so called “AfPak” region. Pakistan is not a moderate ‘Muslim State’. This is only an American fantasy. More than 70% of Pakistani population has been radicalized during the past 30 years. The fundamentalists have tasted power, first in Afghanistan and now in Pakistan. They are not going to give up political power for any monetary inducement what so ever. The earlier the Americans understand this the better off they would be in the long run. A huge majority of AfPak population hates America and Americans just like they hate India and Hindus or Israel and Israelis. The Pakistani establishment would never allow the AfPak region to develop and prosper. If we all do not learn our lessons from the past 62 years, we would never ever learn to deal with this explosive situation. Fortunately for Afghanistan, India and Iran, this time the American ass is on line. The jihadis have tasted blood on September 11, 2001. They would follow the Americans whenever US decides to leave the region.

The evolution of India’s foreign policy – Part XII

Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee was perceived by Indian voters as a strong and decisive leader in 1998-99. His 13 month long second term plus 6 months as ‘care-taker prime minister’ convinced the people that the country would be safer in his hands. General Elections were held in India from September 5 to October 3, 1999, a few months after the ‘Kargil War’. The BJP-led NDA had won 303 seats in the 543 seat Lok Sabha, thereby securing a comfortable, stable majority. The coalition government that was formed lasted its full term of 5 years – the only non-Congress government to do so. On October 13, 1999, Atal Bihari Vajpayee took oath as Prime Minister of India for the third time. Just a day earlier, General Pervez Musharraf, Chief of Pakistan Army and the main architect of the ‘Kargil War’, seized power in Pakistan in a bloodless coup from a democratically elected Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif. He probably found public support because of the ‘Kargil’ humiliation. This was bad news for India! On December 24, 1999, an Indian Airlines flight IC-814 was hijacked from Nepal by 5 Pakistani terrorists. The hijackers held 189 hostages and demanded the release of 3 dreaded, including Maulana Masood Azhar (founder of Jaish-e-Mohammed), Mushtaq Ahmed Zargar and Ahmed Omar Saeed Sheikh (the killer of The Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Pearl) from the Indian prison. Once a hostage was stabbed to death, Government of India capitulated under public pressure and released the terrorists in exchange for the hostages. India and the world is still paying the price for that error of judgment! The crisis ended on December 31, 1999.

President Bill Clinton visited India from March 19 – 24, 2000. His was the first state visit to India by a US President in 22 years. He became the first President of the United States to visit Bangladesh on March 20, 2000. Clinton also visited Pakistan for a few hours on his way back home. Obviously he had very little interest in Pakistan sponsored terrorism and the spread of Taliban and Al-Qaeda. Instead of chasing around the Islamic terrorists in a distant Indian subcontinent, he decided to chase ‘white-bimbos’ right at home in Washington DC. America and the world had to pay a staggering price in blood and treasure just 18 months later on September 11, 2001. Now in 20-20 hindsight, it appears that Vajpayee Administration, Clinton Administration as well as the Bush Administration, all of them failed to see the looming catastrophe in Af-Pak. Aside from terrorism, Clinton-Vajpayee dialogue proved to be a watershed in Indo-US relations. India did not look back till 2008 US elections!

President George W Bush took office on January 20, 2001. He came to power with a soft-corner for India! We thought it was because of Condi Rice, that eventually proved to be a myth. George Bush considered China to be a rival and not a partner. He believed that an alliance with Australia, India, Japan and Singapore would be in the best interest of US national security. He was in the process of developing a consensus for this alliance within his administration when suddenly 9/11 happened. The world changed that day and with that India’s foreign policy became hostage to the Afghanistan-Pakistan region. President had little time for any other issue. He became a war-time president. India had no choice but to adjust to the realities on the ground. Vajpayee was the first head of the state to call President Bush and offer assistance. Bush appreciates that gesture till date! As if this was not bad enough, a group of masked terrorists attacked the Indian Parliament on December 31, 2001. The terrorists managed to kill several security guards, but the building was sealed off swiftly and security forces cornered and killed the men, who were later proven to be Pakistan nationals. Although the Government of Pakistan officially condemned the attack, Indian intelligence reports pointed the finger at a conspiracy hatched in Pakistan. Prime Minister Vajpayee ordered a mobilization of India’s military forces, and as many as 500,000 servicemen amassed along the international border. Pakistan responded in kind. The Indian subcontinent was heading towards a nuclear exchange!

The underground economy is the only free-market economy!

The other economy is turning into a welfare economy. It is also true that the underground economy does not pay any kind of taxes, but then they would get nothing in return for their taxes in any case. At least they are not a drag on the government and therefore the taxpayers. Can you say the same thing for the developed economies? I am absolutely confident that the underground economy would be willing to pay modest amount in taxes to the government if they were to see a direct benefit to their businesses. This is common sense! In contemporary world, taxes have become the ransom that you pay to the politicians to stay in business. Every four years they get more greedy and demand more of your income either in form of deficits (like the Republicans do in the US) or just raise your taxes like all Democrats do around the world. The justification for higher taxes is becoming less and less credible.

There was an interesting article in The Wall Street Journal on March 14, 2009 by Patrick Barta titled, “The Rise of the Underground”. It illustrates the understanding some people seem to have about the world beyond America and Western Europe. A welfare state is not the answer for high unemployment or widespread poverty. It makes people dependent and unproductive. This does not mean that the ‘State’ does not have any responsibilities towards them or that the self-employed do not any obligations towards the society. What it means is that there could be a good balance between the heavy-hand of the ‘State’ and an absolute anarchy in the market place. This balance defines the creative intellect of the elected representatives of the people. This quality in politicians has become a rare commodity these days! Governments around the world assume the tax revenues to be their personal property.

It is not practical for countries with large populations to have 80-90% working people under formal employment. This makes it easy for the politicians, the bureaucrats and the establishment to try and grab as much share of the national wealth as possible. Look at the United States of America, Republicans and Democrats; both are competing to be a bigger ‘Robin Hood’, notwithstanding their public pronouncements. In a $14 trillion economy, a $3.6 trillion federal budget is not just insane, it is criminal. What is so special about this group of bandits to give them such power over a civilized and enlightened society? They tax and you pay, period! You have little or no say in the matter. It is time not just for Americans but for all informed people to rethink about the role of their respective governments. The best way to do that is to learn more about other cultures and other emerging societies around the world.

“Buy American” and loose the world!

“Buy American” patriotism is worse than 9/11 jingoism. The election of Barack Obama as the 44th President of the United States of America is partly a consequence of the over-reaction of the 9/11 patriotism by candidates like Rudy Giuliani . The world couldn’t wait to see the departure of George W Bush. Candidate Obama became the rock-star in Europe and around the world. The 9/11 jingoism did not impact America materially as much as it did diplomatically. Outsourcing grew in leaps and bounds because of the restrictions on H-1B visas and limitations on immigration in general. This over-reaction also resulted in a war of choice (Iraq invasion) that escalated into a trillion dollar nightmare. “Buy American” patriotism could be 20-30 times more expensive! Americans have no idea how good they have had so far.

Burton Gordon Malkiel of Princeton University has written a simple straightforward article in The Wall Street Journal on February 5, 2009, “Congress Wants a Trade War” and there is very little left to add to it! Having said that, it is important to refresh the memory and ponder over the history of American trade in the 18th and 19th centuries and the eventual outcome of those forward looking policies. Trade for the United States was critical for the quality of life for its citizens and in some ways its national security. In the early days after independence, the United States did substantial trade and business with Europe and Asia. ‘Sea Piracy’ posed a serious problem for the American cargo ships and paying ransom to the pirates was a cheaper solution. The United States leadership decided to face the threat head-on and embarked on developing its naval power. This decision resulted in not only curbing the sea piracy but America becoming a formidable ‘Naval Power’ of the 20th century.