Delhi sweats change in Washington

Categorized | Current Affairs, India CA, Pak CA, S. Asia History, US CA

Delhi sweats change in Washington

Posted on 21 January 2009. Tags: Afghan, Bharat, India, Mumbia, Pakistan

Rupee News after a thorough analysis of the writings of the advisors of President Barack Obama has written extensively about the change in direction and policy of the United States. We predicted that Bharat would try to derail the major policy decisions already made by Mr. Obama and his team by staging a False Flag event. Judging by the frustration expressed by the Bharti leadership despite the drama after the drama Bharati diplomacy has fallen falt on its face once again.

RFE/RL: How would an Obama administration look at the whole Afghanistan-Pakistan situation? Do you think they will move forward with some of the plans and strategies already in place, or will they seek a new beginning?

Marvin Weinbaum: Undoubtedly, there will be a reassessment. I am very confident that it will be a policy which will not follow his predecessors. There is already in [Obama's] statements before the election, his position that you talk to everyone — that you are prepared to seek compromise where it is possible. These are the sorts of things that lead me to conclude that it is going to be a fresh start. And that is what we need very much in both Afghanistan and in Pakistan.

Mr. Pranab the yawning king of Bharat has made a fool of himself by first calling the Pakistani president, then threatening Mr. Zardai and then denying it. Bharat is now the laughing stock of the world because of its impotency in coming up with evidence about the Mumbai militants. Toothpase, and Saving cream is not evidence, it shows he stupidy of the investigative team who tried to pin the origins of the militants as Paksitani by showing toiletries–as if militants on suicide misison are concerned about their looks and their hyegiene. Ostensibly the militants trained by professionals took their ID cards with them. Pakistan to India: “NO” to extradition. “NO” to false charges. “NO” to hegemony

Obviously something stinks in Mumbai, and its not the rotting fish on Marine Drive. Hardly had the blood been washed off the pavement in Mumbai that Mr. Milliband who really knows the origns of the militancy in Bharat–began talking about Kashmir being the root cause of all terror in South Asia. Much to the chagrin of Delhi, Mr. Milliband not only repeated his remairks, but also validated his remarks as the official policy of the UK government.

NEW DELHI, Jan 20: The Indian government is nervous about the policies the new US administration, headed by President Barack Obama, could pursue on Kashmir, CTBT and other tricky issues, which it didn’t worry about with the Bush presidency, the Mail Today reported on Tuesday.

“On Monday, a day before President-elect Obama formally takes charge as the 44th US president, India’s foreign secretary Shiv Shankar Menon said he was ‘nervous’ about this change,” The Mail said.

It quoted senior analysts and Foreign Secretary Menon as expressing apprehensions about the Democratic administration.

“How much will the US change is a matter of speculation… I am nervous what this change will mean,” Mr Menon was quoted as saying during an interaction with university students in Delhi. An Indian foreign ministry spokesman denied Mr Menon made the comments.

The newspaper recalled that Mr Obama made it clear after he had won the presidential election that he would appoint a special envoy for Kashmir. Then, last week, in her testimony to the US Congress, Obama’s UN Ambassador-designate Susan Rice called Kashmir as one of the “global hot spots” and compared it to conflict areas such as the Golan Heights, the Balkan region, Liberia and East Timor. “In one of her earlier statements, Rice, the former foreign policy adviser to Obama, had said that Kashmir, along with Chechnya and Iraq, is an active recruiting ground for Al Qaeda,” the newspaper noted.

It noted that in her testimony to the US Senate on January 13, Secretary of State-designate Hillary Clinton said the Obama administration would support the bill the president-elect and Vice-President-elect Joe Biden had introduced last year to triple non-military aid to Pakistan. India nervous about Obama policies, says report By Jawed Naqvi. The Dawn. The Mail

The US is now on the brink of naming a special envoy for Kashmir, but he may not have the title “Envoy for Kashmir”. He may be called something elce. A rose by any name is still a rose.

Judging by the nervousness of the Bharti leadership, all is not well in the Indo-US alliance. The mjor issues were highlighted by former President Jimmy Carter, the moral compass of a huge section of the Democratic Party. Delhi’s dead-end daft diplomacy DOA

India has consistently opposed the appointment of a special US envoy for Kashmir and it told British Foreign Secretary David Miliband last week that Kashmir was a bilateral issue between India and Pakistan.

The Mail quoted former foreign secretary Kanwal Sibal as saying that while it was natural for the US to give primacy to its strategic interests, “it does not mean India should sacrifice its national interests…This will undermine the Indo-US strategic partnership developed over years. India should not pay any price for the US Afghan policy.” India’s former national security adviser Brajesh Mishra also repeatedly said that Mr Obama’s personal involvement in the Kashmir issue would damage Indo-US relations.

On the other hand, a Congressional Research Service report has warned that the Obama administration should stay away from the Kashmir issue as it could anger India and raise Pakistan’s expectations. The Mail quoted the 19-page report, Terrorist Attacks in Mumbai, India and Implications for US Interests, as saying that the terror attacks on Mumbai could further complicate America’s South Asian policy.

Mr Sibal was wary that India might get drawn into President Obama’s Iran policy. “India has long-term strategic interests in Iran. We should not be seen being congruent to American policy on Iran.” Bilateral business ties, particularly Obama’s stand on outsourcing, could also emerge as another irritant. So could issues such as the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty and Fissile Material Cut-off Treaty,” he was quoted as saying. India nervous about Obama policies, says report By Jawed Naqvi. The Dawn. The Mail

Bharat will run into huge issues with the US on the following issues.

1) Mr Obama made it clear after he had won the presidential election that he would appoint a special envoy for Kashmir

2) lLast week, in her testimony to the US Congress, Obama’s UN Ambassador-designate Susan Rice called Kashmir as one of the “global hot spots” and compared it to conflict areas such as the Golan Heights, the Balkan region, Liberia and East Timor.

3) Susan Rice, the former foreign policy adviser to Obama, had said that Kashmir, along with Chechnya and Iraq, is an active recruiting ground for Al Qaeda

4) Obama administration would support the bill the president-elect and Vice-President-elect Joe Biden had introduced last year to triple non-military aid to Pakistan.

5) Former foreign secretary Kanwal Sibal as saying that while it was natural for the US to give primacy to its strategic interests, “it does not mean India should sacrifice its national interests

6) India’s foreign secretary Shiv Shankar Menon said he was ‘nervous’ about this change

7) India’s former national security adviser Brajesh Mishra also repeatedly said that Mr Obama’s personal involvement in the Kashmir issue would damage Indo-US relations

8) After rebuff from US, & rebuke from UK, Delhi seeks help from Afghanistan

9) Delhi planning further covert action in Pakistan

10) Pakistani government could press the Obama administration to help resolve the Kashmir dispute

Intellectuals and think tanks all over the world are now want an end to the Afghan war and a return to normalcy. French Voltaires question France’s role in Afghan war. Marvin Weinbaum goes on to clearly define what the US policy towards Pakistan would be.

RFE/RL: In your assessment, how prominently will Pakistan-Afghanistan issues figure on Obama’s agenda?

Weinbaum: Assuming now he can begin to move away from Iraq, [Obama] is almost obligated to give high priority to the Afghanistan-Pakistan theater. He made that such an important part of his overall argument — that this is where the challenge lies to fighting global terrorism. It was the failure to recognize this — and the distraction of Iraq — which brought about the situation as it is today.

Whether you can fix this now given what has happened over the last seven years is another question. But this will be very high on his agenda.

Obama’s South Asia policy

Peek into Obama’s brains: Bruce Reidel on Pakistan. Ironically the evolving US policy in Afghanistan was not instigated by either one of the presidential candidates. Afghanistan: Gen. Petraeus’ Pakistani advisors: Indians jittery.

McCain,Obama Afghan bluster on Pakistan overtaken by events. The salient features of Mr. Marvin Weinbaum’s assessment of President Barack Obama’s policy are as follows:

South Asia: Obama’s new policy: Marshal Plan & end to bombing raids in Pakistan
Undoubtedly, there will be a reassessment. I am very confident that it will be a policy which will not follow his predecessors.
Indian vs Chinese Navy: Aden, Chahbahar, Gwader….
There is already in [Obama's] statements before the election, his position that you talk to everyone — that you are prepared to seek compromise where it is possible.
Analysis of Delhi’s bigoted “Bomb Islamabad” syndrome
I do believe that there will be additional forces [sent into Afghanistan]. Half of the people who they are talking about sending — the two or three brigades — would be simply involved in training the Afghan [National] Army. They would not be combat forces.
That we need from all three capitals — [Washington, Kabul, and Islamabad] — is a more coordinated approach. More cooperation.
…over the next year is that things become stabilized. We see evidence here of a reconciliation process begun. We’ve got to follow up any kind of military successes with the kind of policies that are going to sustain successes.

K Brig. Smith: “We’re not going to win this [Afghan] war”. That new policy was a result of the of the situation on the ground as well as as the results of the informed opinions of almost all the heads of the NATO, EU, UK and US forces in Afghanistan. We can’t defeat the Taliban: British Army Chief in Afghanistan. It is the combined opinion of the entire slate of military generals that the Taliban cannot be defeated and that there is no military solution to the war in West Asia. Risk of another war: How many more American Crusades?

Rupee News has been recommending reconciliation and non-military means to resurrect peace in West Asia. This advice has finally gotten through to the new president. The last mayor of Kabul’s failures spell the end of Afghanistan. How long can the inept Karzai blame others for his corrupt Narco Warlordism?