If my earlier post on dyed-in-the-wool communist, Raja Mohan hasn’t convinced you, here’s more proof. The article is titled Winners still in denial and the blurb reads Don’t obsess over the nuke deal’s text. Read it for the big idea on India but you shake your head in frustration after reading it: huh? what’s he trying to say? The piece also contains what I’ll call plain evil but more of that as you read on.
Raja Mohan wants us to buy his–probably Congress-sponsored–idea, that everything is milk and honey over the Indo-US nuclear deal. At a time when the clueless Opposition is making feeble attempts to make itself heard and despite several cautions against India giving its blanket signature.
Clarity was never Raja Mohan’s forte, so he takes us on a world tour to “prove” how India’s respect has shot up several million notches higher. And then he botches the entire thing in a way that is too perverse; one fails to find adequate words to describe it.
From highlighting India’s rising star, his “article” suddenly takes a vulgar, casteist turn, the evil that I mentioned about earlier.
The real problem lies in the emergence of two world views in India — speaking metaphorically — one of the “bania” and the other of the “brahmin”. The banias are revelling in India’s new prospects on the global stage; the brahmins are frightened at the likelihood of India emerging as a great power.
One can condone this kind of writing in a hate site like Dalitstan but as the Acorn says, How a national newspaper allowed such an article to appear in print is unfathomable. But then, if it’s unfathomable, it’s certainly understandable: the Editor of the Indian Express is one of the biggest dyed-in-the-wool Communist, an establishment stooge masquerading as the upholder of journalism of courage.
It can’t get more hypocritical than this: those who protest loudest against casteism–the Indian Express tops this list–bring in caste in an “analysis” of foreign policy. What’s next? People will begin to use this article to support the OBC Reservation monstrosity.
Cross-posted in Desicritics
Tags: Commentary, Indian Politics, International Politics, Media Watch, Pseudo Secularism Hall of Shame, Society & Culture, War on Communism, Weblogs
Raja Mohan’s middle name is mediocrity. He too is an establishment stooge, probably paid for by the Americans. There is hardly any depth in his analysis - hence the need to spice it up with the reference to caste. He heads off on an anti-Brahmin tirade and the Indian Express publishes it with glee. I had responded to that point in the comments section of the Express but it predictably did not get published. Once again, the man is a mediocrity in the pay of the yanks.
[...] Dissecting the U.S.-India Nuclear Cooperation Act 2006 Posted on 07.02.06 by Jaffna @ 5:00 am . The objective of this post is to deconstruct the proposed bill before the United States Congress. We argue that the draft legislation is intended to secure United States strategic objectives in South Asia. These do not coincide with Indian security interests. We add that the bill has very little to do with civil nuclear cooperation and everything to do with reversing India’s nuclear program. The Manmohan Singh administration has jettisoned national security by acceding to the agreement in a surreptitious manner. It is turning India into a client state. Unfortunately, the opposition seems preoccupied by other considerations and has failed to rise to the task at hand i.e., to vigorously oppose the draft agreement as a sell out leaving the task to the Communists (which back in’98 opposed to India going nuclear). . The Committee of International Relations of the United States House of Representatives passed the United States and India Nuclear Cooperation and Promotion Act of 2006 (H.R. 5682 available in PDF). The Congressional document throws light on the proposed Nuclear Deal in a manner that New Delhi failed to do. The nuclear deal is intended to cap and roll back India’s nuclear weapons program under the alleged garb of providing enriched fuel to purportedly run nuclear power plants in India. We refer to relevant clauses in the document Act itself. . Section 2 (6) (C) of the Act makes it clear that the proposed “cooperation induces the country … to refrain from actions that would further the development of its nuclear weapons program”. There is no reference what so ever to meeting the energy needs (as the July 18 agreement) of India. The emphasis throughout the text is on nuclear non-proliferation. The objective of the United States is strategic while the Manmohan Singh administration’s purported goal was secure energy. Unfortunately, one can not be substituted for the other. . Section 3 (B) (2) adds that the deal is intended to “achieve a moratorium on the production of fissile material for nuclear explosive purposes by India, Pakistan and the People’s Republic of China”. Further section 4 (D) “encourages India to identify and declare a date by which India would be willing to stop the production of fissile material for nuclear weapons unilaterally”. These clauses highlight the American objective to cap fissile material production in India despite significant American stockpiles of fissile material. India can not cap the production of fissile materials unless China and the United States roll back their existing stockpiles of fissile material. . Section 3 (B) (4) reiterates that the deal would “secure India’s full and active participation in United States efforts to dissuade, isolate and if necessary sanction and contain Iran … ”. Iran is not an Indian priority. It is an American obsession. We do not believe that India should forego its foreign policy objectives with a regional influential to its west merely to accommodate United States strategic considerations. This is especially true when the United States has been unwilling to factor in Indian strategic considerations vis-à-vis Pakistan as evidenced by its high profile sale of F-16s to Islamabad (see our take on the issue). Manmohan Singh appears to be transforming India into a client state of America. . Section 3 (B) (5) states that the objective of the proposed deal is to “halt the increase of nuclear weapons arsenals in South Asia and to promote their reduction and eventual elimination”. This illustrates once again the American strategic goal in pushing the deal. It has very little to do with nuclear energy. It is all about nuclear weapons. This is a flawed trade off. India can not eliminate its nuclear weapons arsenals unless and until China (and the rest of the P-5) is effectively denuclearized. This in turn will never happen though India has always strived for global disarmament. India will therefore need to retain the nuclear option. The foreign policy pundits of the current UPA administration are obviously not in tune with Indian strategic priorities being busy kowtowing to Washington in this regard.. . Meanwhile, Section 4 (B) (4) reveals that India will work with the United States towards a multilateral Fissile Material Cutoff Treaty. Elsewhere in the text, India’s compliance with the Missile Technology Control Regime is sought through the civil nuclear deal. The objective is to roll back significant gains in Indian missile technology. . The United States is also going back on its earlier commitment to ensure steady fuel supplies by other states of the NSG in the event that it can not honor its obligations to India as revealed in Section 4 (D) (3) i.e., “If nuclear transfers to India are restricted pursuant to this Act … the President should seek to prevent the transfer to India of nuclear equipment, materials or technology from other participating governments in the NSG or from any other source” This is contrary to the agreement signed during President Bush’s visit which said “And as a final guarantee, there should be a document binding a group of “friendly countries” to ensure fuel supply in case the US is unable to meet its commitment. Through separate negotiations with some key EU member-states and Russia, India has already obtained certain assurances on this score.” . In addition to these conditions, the Crowley Amendment further ensured that there will now be an yearly audit where the President of the United States reports to the Congress on new Indian civil and military reactors which intrudes upon Indian sovereignty. The Senate resolution is even more an insult to injury since it is an ‘incentive’ against further testing to quote from the statement of SFRC Chairman Sen. Lugar. . The U.S. ambassador to India David “foot in mouth” Mulford further confirms that even a subcritical nuclear test violates the treaty and will thus invite Presidential sanctions. Hypocritically, the U.S. keeps performing such tests – see list of recent tests here. . K. Subrahmanyam chides a part of the elites that “Instead of being gratified at this development, a section of our elite are afraid of various contingencies in which the US will apply pressure on India using this enactment” . He further says that the US Congress has passed much stricter resolutions against China to no effect. Without going into the above-mentioned specifics, he then goes on with a wild rant against perceived Indian fear of Cold War and fear of globalization. . But India is not China - our press is not government controlled - here we have someone like C Raja Mohan (shamefully called as the top foreign policy analyst) who openly advocated for putting our breeder reactors under safeguards before Dr. Kakodkar blew the whistle on the strategic importance of the breeder reactors - Perhaps Shri Subrahmanyam should be told how special interests are buying up editorial space in the Indian media. In fact, top scientists PK Iyengar and AN Prasad have all come out against it. . In our view, a future nationalist government should exit from the ‘civil’ nuclear deal and free India from any responsibility thereof. It should also pass American style resolutions to ensure that should the United States back track on fuel supplies, India would jettison the nuclear deal in toto (remember the reciprocity clause). Further, should American firms supply arms to Pakistan, Indian law would make it imperative that such firms can not supply arms to India. [...]
arsenals unless and until China (and the rest of the P-5) is effectively denuclearized. This in turn will never happen though India has always strived for global disarmament. India will therefore need to retain the nuclear option. The foreign policy pundits of the current UPA administration are obviously not in tune with Indian strategic priorities being busy kowtowing to Washington. Meanwhile, Section 4 (B) (4) reveals that India will work with the United States towards a multilateral Fissile Material