India's not Israel, Pakistan's not Iraq
G S Bhargava: India's not Israel, Pakistan's not Iraq
G S Bhargava / New Delhi December 21, 2008, 0:16 IST
http://www.business-standard.com/in...p?autono=343833
Iraq didn't have nuclear weapons when it was attacked - Pakistan does
Former India captain Ravi Shastri, who is a prominent commentator nowadays, asked Sachin Tendulkar about his views on the Mumbai terrorist attacks as a Mumbai man. This was after the first Test between India and England at Chennai last week.
The Master Blaster did not utter a single word in anger. He spoke more in anguish than in rage. First asserting that the Mumbai terrorist attacks were not the concern only of Mumbai citizens, Tendulkar added: What happened in Mumbai was extremely unfortunate and I do not think by India winning (the Test) or me scoring hundreds (of runs), people who have lost their loved ones would feel better. It is a terrible loss for all of them and our hearts are with them. All I can say is that in whatever way we can contribute to make them feel better, we will make that effort. I would like to dedicate this hundred to all those people who have gone through such terrible times. I look at it (the Mumbai terror strike) as an attack on India, not on Mumbai, he repeated, referring particularly to Ravi Shastris allusion to Tendulkar being from Mumbai.
In contrast, socialite television commentators like Simi Grewal turned into security experts and suggested, more in jest that seriously apparently, that India should go in for military surgical strikes on select Pakistani terrorist centres. Did not Israel strike similarly at Iraqi nuclear facilities some years ago? There were variations on the theme with Kabir Bedi, one notch higher, temporising: We dont really want a war, but how about Mossad-style operations to take out specific targets presumably in Pakistan, if necessary. (Mossad is the dreaded Israeli espionage agency.)
Israel could get away with eliminating Iraqs burgeoning nuclear weapon development programme in 1981 because Iraq was not a nuclear weapon power then not by a long chalk. In fact, it was not one even in 2003 when the Bush Administration launched its invasion, along with Britain and its other allies, of Iraq to remove Saddam Hussein. The justification was its possession of weapons of mass destruction. The then British Prime Minister, Tony Blair, spelt it out as nuclear, chemical and biological weapons. But neither the US nor Britain could detect anything except remnants of the old nuclear development programme, presumably what had been eliminated by Israel in 1981.
In contrast, Pakistan is a nuclear weapon power sustained reportedly by China and North Korea, with ballistic missiles and nuclear weapon capability. During the war against the Soviet troops in Afghanistan in the early 2000s, the US Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) and the Pakistani Inter-Services Intelligence Agency (ISI) joined forces when the US poured weaponry into Pakistan. The ISI naturally retained quite a large quantity of it. On top of it, the then Pakistan President, General Zia-ul-Haq, acquired nuclear weapons from Pakistans Asian allies, with the connivance of the US. That was how Pakistan, during the tenure of General Pervez Musharraf, matched Indian development and testing of nuclear capable ballistic missiles in the 1990s.
It is, therefore, nothing short of brinkmanship to talk glibly of military strikes against Pakistan now. Also, Israel can get away with whatever it does as the massive Jewish population in the US makes the administration go along with it. This remains true whether it is a Republican or Democratic dispensation that is in power. Presumably incoming President Barack Obama will be no exception. Those entertaining and advocating such fancy pleas do not obviously have any idea of the international ramifications of what they suggest. Do they think India is a superpower in the US league, capable of unilateral action? Do they think India has the resources and backing which Israel has? It would have been funny had it not been depressing coming from educated, elite Indians. But Pakistan-bashing is a sentiment shared across the political and social spectrum. It just happened to come out in an unguarded moment. Does that make it less scary? Thats hard to tell.
No doubt, the BJP has been a tireless proponent of such policies because they can be vote winners in the present situation. But when Atal Behari Vajpayee was BJP Prime Minister (1996-2004) he had wisely refrained from such suicidal actions. He did not also float such harebrained schemes. Instead he conducted tireless negotiations with General Musharraf and reached a modus vivendi of sorts.
Finally, the socialites foray in nuclear diplomacy comes on top of the English television channels treatment of the Mumbai terror strikes as if it were a source of scoring TRP ratings.
G S Bhargava: India's not Israel, Pakistan's not Iraq
G S Bhargava / New Delhi December 21, 2008, 0:16 IST
http://www.business-standard.com/in...p?autono=343833
Iraq didn't have nuclear weapons when it was attacked - Pakistan does
Former India captain Ravi Shastri, who is a prominent commentator nowadays, asked Sachin Tendulkar about his views on the Mumbai terrorist attacks as a Mumbai man. This was after the first Test between India and England at Chennai last week.
The Master Blaster did not utter a single word in anger. He spoke more in anguish than in rage. First asserting that the Mumbai terrorist attacks were not the concern only of Mumbai citizens, Tendulkar added: What happened in Mumbai was extremely unfortunate and I do not think by India winning (the Test) or me scoring hundreds (of runs), people who have lost their loved ones would feel better. It is a terrible loss for all of them and our hearts are with them. All I can say is that in whatever way we can contribute to make them feel better, we will make that effort. I would like to dedicate this hundred to all those people who have gone through such terrible times. I look at it (the Mumbai terror strike) as an attack on India, not on Mumbai, he repeated, referring particularly to Ravi Shastris allusion to Tendulkar being from Mumbai.
In contrast, socialite television commentators like Simi Grewal turned into security experts and suggested, more in jest that seriously apparently, that India should go in for military surgical strikes on select Pakistani terrorist centres. Did not Israel strike similarly at Iraqi nuclear facilities some years ago? There were variations on the theme with Kabir Bedi, one notch higher, temporising: We dont really want a war, but how about Mossad-style operations to take out specific targets presumably in Pakistan, if necessary. (Mossad is the dreaded Israeli espionage agency.)
Israel could get away with eliminating Iraqs burgeoning nuclear weapon development programme in 1981 because Iraq was not a nuclear weapon power then not by a long chalk. In fact, it was not one even in 2003 when the Bush Administration launched its invasion, along with Britain and its other allies, of Iraq to remove Saddam Hussein. The justification was its possession of weapons of mass destruction. The then British Prime Minister, Tony Blair, spelt it out as nuclear, chemical and biological weapons. But neither the US nor Britain could detect anything except remnants of the old nuclear development programme, presumably what had been eliminated by Israel in 1981.
In contrast, Pakistan is a nuclear weapon power sustained reportedly by China and North Korea, with ballistic missiles and nuclear weapon capability. During the war against the Soviet troops in Afghanistan in the early 2000s, the US Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) and the Pakistani Inter-Services Intelligence Agency (ISI) joined forces when the US poured weaponry into Pakistan. The ISI naturally retained quite a large quantity of it. On top of it, the then Pakistan President, General Zia-ul-Haq, acquired nuclear weapons from Pakistans Asian allies, with the connivance of the US. That was how Pakistan, during the tenure of General Pervez Musharraf, matched Indian development and testing of nuclear capable ballistic missiles in the 1990s.
It is, therefore, nothing short of brinkmanship to talk glibly of military strikes against Pakistan now. Also, Israel can get away with whatever it does as the massive Jewish population in the US makes the administration go along with it. This remains true whether it is a Republican or Democratic dispensation that is in power. Presumably incoming President Barack Obama will be no exception. Those entertaining and advocating such fancy pleas do not obviously have any idea of the international ramifications of what they suggest. Do they think India is a superpower in the US league, capable of unilateral action? Do they think India has the resources and backing which Israel has? It would have been funny had it not been depressing coming from educated, elite Indians. But Pakistan-bashing is a sentiment shared across the political and social spectrum. It just happened to come out in an unguarded moment. Does that make it less scary? Thats hard to tell.
No doubt, the BJP has been a tireless proponent of such policies because they can be vote winners in the present situation. But when Atal Behari Vajpayee was BJP Prime Minister (1996-2004) he had wisely refrained from such suicidal actions. He did not also float such harebrained schemes. Instead he conducted tireless negotiations with General Musharraf and reached a modus vivendi of sorts.
Finally, the socialites foray in nuclear diplomacy comes on top of the English television channels treatment of the Mumbai terror strikes as if it were a source of scoring TRP ratings.
