|
|
|
|
|
| HOME | NEWS | COMMENTARY | AT HOME ABROAD | |||
|
June 24, 1998
SPECIALS
|
Rajeev Srinivasan
How Readers responded to Rajeev Srinivasan's recent columns
Date sent: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 09:46:10 EDT Very nicely written. But we need to start making a distinction between the Chinese and the people of the Communist-ruling mainland China. Over the years I have met and interacted with countless Chinese from all parts of the world. They are basically good people. I am sure most overseas Indians will agree with me on this. In fact, most of the overseas Chinese we come across are from Taiwan. The problem that Rajeev is talking about is arise from the Communist leadership in mainland China. We should begin to be clear about this and identify the culprits as the "Communist Chinese" or another label to that effect. Prasanna Chituri
Date sent: Tue, 16 Jun 1998 16:34:20 Touche! Refreshing lack of hypocrisy in identifying the true security concerns of India: nuclear China and its continued proliferation vis-a-vis Pakistan. The current US government in its infinite wisdom recently decided "not to make the determination" as to whether China is sending missiles to Pakistan, as that would lead to automatic sanctions against China for missile proliferation. Such blatant acts are not going to reduce the Clinton government's lack of credibility with India, further compounded by the intemperate language of the pathetic group of misfits he calls his state department. Where are the Kissengers and Brezinskis who understand geopolitics? The main interest groups this article is likely to offend are the ever-hypocritical Indian communists and the we-will-throw-wool-over-your-eyes gang in the U S state department. Srinivas
Date sent: Tue, 16 Jun 1998 11:34:19 -0400 Two points of fact: 1. China has built at least one nuclear ballistic missile submarine (Xia class SSBN, with 12 JL-1 missiles). It is not known if a second was ever built. A new design is planned with MIRVed JL-2 SLBMs, of 8,000 km range. In addition, the PLA navy has several nuclear attack submarines (Han class SSN) 2. The October 1986 confrontation with China took place at Sumdorong Cho. The sequence of events here apparently began a good deal earlier, in 1984. It is not clear that the Chinese initiated it. An interesting account of the incident is found in Ravi Rikhye's The Militarization of Mother India; it runs counter to the conventional Indian account. Nainan Kovoor
Date sent: Tue, 16 Jun 1998 10:25:03 -0500 The article on China is very good and, hopefully, true. But are we doing anything to inform the Western countries about these facts? Many people in the US really believe that India invaded China in 1962 and was defeated, and China's occupation of parts of India is justified because the Macmohon line was not correct. Well, there is no point crying about the Indian land in Chinese possession if we can't do anything about it. Anurag Sinha
Date sent: Tue, 16 Jun 1998 10:11:56 -0500 This is an excellent article, very well-written. More of the same, keep it up!
Date sent: Mon, 08 Jun 1998 22:56:48 -0700 Absolutely awesome. I hope this article also gets circulated within the Indian Foreign Service, and they finally decide to invest some time and money in having a decent PR firm in Washington. Unni
Date sent: Mon, 8 Jun 1998 18:03:04 -0400 MR SRINIVASAN, PLEASE SEND ALL YOUR ARTICLES ON INDIA's NUCLEAR BOMB TESTS & THE RECENT ONE ON AMERICA & INDIA SHARING COMMON INTERESTS & ARE NOT ENEMIES TO: PRIME MINISTER ATAL BIHARI VAJPAYEE AT 7, RACE COURCE ROAD NEW DELHI, INDIA. PLeaSe SHARE YOUR MAGNIFICENT VISION WITH THE MAN WHO HAS INDIA'S DESTINY IN HIS HANDS. THANKS FOR SUCH SUPERB ARTICLES.
Date sent: Mon, 8 Jun 1998 16:11:22 -0400 It is a thoughtful and sensible article! Something which influential US Indians and responsible politicians should think about. Sanjay
Date sent: Sun, 24 May 1998 20:44:12 -0400 Like his previous week's article, this is a very balanced, informed and intelligently-put opinion. I look forward to reading more good articles from Rajeev. Jawahar Desai
Date sent: Sat, 23 May 1998 23:08:38 -0500 He says Pakistan's defence expenditure and debt servicing burden exceed its GNP. That is factually incorrect. The two only exceed the federal government's gross revenues, not the GDP and there is a world of difference between GDP and gross revenues of the federal government.
Date sent: Sat, 23 May 1998 09:02:46 -0500 Rajeev: For a long time I haven't read a comprehensively packaged article on nuclear India vis-a vis the world. Then I read yours! Good job ! The journalist-theoreticians of NY Times and Washington Post with intellectually bankrupt views on India and its vision of the world, I hope, would have a chance to glance at your article. Nobody realises that the US's Chinese fatal attraction (not to talk about the Chinese army contribution to the White House election campaign, US transfer of sensitive missile technology, and the overt -- covert to Americans -- transfer of missile technology to Pakistan leading to the launch of Ghauri missile) is the most destabilising post-Cold War factor in international relations. The Cuban missile crisis of 1960 was premised on a possible threat perception of Soviet missile deployment in Cuba. The American response was an embargo which I call an act of legitimate use of self defence as authorised by article 2(4) of the UN Charter on use of force. Well, Ghauri is not a figment of Indian imagination. It's a Pakistani confession of Islamic expansionism stating that with Chinese help we are ready to annihilate even the remotest of South Indian cities. I see parallels of legitimate nationalistic response premised on national security interests in U S response to Cuban missile deployment and Indian response to Ghauri. I have noticed with interest your chiding of Krishna Menon (purely due to chauvinistic Keralite feeling -- I love and respect that great man) and Nehru. Nehru's overzealous obsession with peace created the Chinese war. However, in the list you failed to include Mrs Gandhi, whose "peaceful" explosion of a nuclear bomb in 1974 was the single biggest act of hypocrisy in international politics and a betrayal of India's security concerns. If India had gone ahead and completed its nuclearisation in 1974, there would have been no Ghauri, no sanctions, and India would have been a permanent member of the UN Security Council. It's this failure of Mrs Gandhi that has brought India the shame of the ignominious American proposal to share the new Asian permanent seat in the Security Council on a rotating basis with countries like Pakistan, Bangladesh, Bhutan, Nepal and Indonesia! What a great accomplishment in terms of international respect for the great apostle of peace and non violence! Even Tushar Gandhi realises that his grandfather's principle of nonviolence was relevant to fight the British in the pre-Independence era (by the way, Britain was not a nuclear power then) and no more. Even Tushar subscribes to the post Cold War necessity of "armed neutrality" as enunciated by you. Good work Rajeev! Jayaraman
Date sent: Sat, 23 May 1998 09:57:54 -0400 Rajeev, you said it well. People should read India's history. What you said about the NY Times is correct. The NY Times (or its biased reporter) coin a statement which is anti-Indian (some times outright racist) and go on repeating that in their new articles. This is not a simple mistake -- they have a hidden agenda. Even a lie becomes truth when NY Times repeats it again and again. Look at the statement you pointed out: "A 12th century Hindu king defeated by Ghori!" They left out Ghori being a Muslim tyrant invader king who chopped Hindu heads. Also, they always repeat "Hindu nationalist government."
Date sent: Fri, 22 May 1998 16:58:41 -0700 Mr Srinivasan has explored the entire gamut of reasons for the nuclear test and its timing, passing judgements along the way as to their plausibility. While he is brimming with pride (understandable -- after all he is a neo-liberal), one article in the TOI is extremely troubling. I sure wish it had caught his attention. I am referring to the one about a village 5 km from Pokhran, whose residents seem to have bourne the brunt of the tests. The classic symptoms of nuclear radiation (nose bleeding, vomiting, skin sores etc) have started showing. Our PM, also giddy with pride, has brushed this off by saying that a price has to be paid for national security. As a responsible journalist/columnist, I want Mr Srinivasan to undertake a trip to Pokhran and ascertain for himself what the facts are and make them public. Specifically I want answers for:
1. Was it known before that radiation would affect certain villages in the vicinity?
Unless and until our nation strives to protect the dignity and rights of every citizen -- even those who are not privileged to line the coffers of BJP with wads of cash -- I shan't be thumping my chest.
Date sent: Fri, 22 May 1998 14:39:07 -0500 Don't get me wrong, I like the bomb as much as the next guy, but to imply the world owes us [India] something for its unbroken civilisation etc is sophomoric at best. Come on, Rajeev Srinivasan and everyone who thinks like him, the world doesn't owe us anything. One cannot earn respect by begging for it. Respect and similar attributes comes from one's actions, deeds and disposition -- not by begging for it. Come on, let us have some self respect here. All this pleading and demand for world respect shows nothing but an inferiority complex and I demand we quit acting like juveniles. You with me, Rajeev????? Best regards, Mohan Marette/USA
Date sent: Wed, 13 May 1998 15:00:09 -0400 Rajeev, your balanced thinking shows up again. However, your disappointment on the choice of Buddha Poornima day (again) is, I feel, on shaky ground. I agree, Gautama Buddha is Bharat's greatest son. But, was he a born pacifist? The accounts of Buddha scriptures indicate how he practised rigorous austerities, got reduced to a mere skeleton with no real wisdom blossoming in his heart, then gave up this path of self-mortification while seeking the path to happiness, and chose a middle path of moderation in self-restraint that involved keeping a fit body and mind suitable for deep meditation. Thus, Bhagwan Buddha attained nirvana and rediscovered the lost technique of vipasana that was originally discovered and developed by the Vedic rishis of our past. Later, when a Magadha general came to him disillusioned with fighting, and wanted to become a bikku, Bhagavan Buddha guided the general onto his duty to defend the kingdom against aggression and sent him back to the war front. Just as Bhagwan Shri Krishna guided Arjuna in the Mahabharat war. I have not yet grasped any evidence of pacifism in Buddha's personal or social life, or in his original teachings. We see such non-pacifism in the life of Bhagwan Mahavir as well: when Vardhamana was dragged by a brute, he hit and scratched the brutish kid real hard that made the bully kid chase his tail. What applies to the survival of individual applies to the survival of the nation too. That was the teaching and practice of all of the great sons of Bharat throughout her history. It appears that a perverted version of ahimsa gained hold in the society, probably during King Ashoka's time and later under the British rule. We know from history all too well how our society in the northwest frontier region under the complete sway of this "later Buddhism" lost the art of unity and self-defence and quickly succumbed to barbaric invasions carried out by only handfuls of human beasts (Vedic rishis used to call such humans as raakshasas). Of course, our "saviour" British masters and their Christian missionaries, Macaulays and Mullers, further taught us, "the barbaric, paganic natives", this perverted version of ahimsa as the real Buddhist teaching, only to further reduce the nation to servitude and impotence. We, the intelligentsia, are still in this deep coma of ignorance about Bharat's greatest son. Bharat's recent demonstrations of self-defence are perfectly in line with the life and teachings of this greatest son and it is quite appropriate that they were carried out on the Buddha Poornima day. There is no justification for disappointment. Ahimsa in no way means pacifism such as, for example, that preached by Bertrand Russell. The real meaning of the Sanskrit word is: na himsa. It is one of the ten attributes of dharma and it stands for having a mighty strength to self-preserve and an ever-vigilant self-defence to thwart any aggression -- be it in the case of an individual, family, community, nation, or even the entire mankind. Therein lies the very fundamentals of the unbroken Bharateeya civilisation and its secret of long survival. Bhagavan Shri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa's story of cobra comes to mind: the poisonous snake did not even hiss when attacked by some bullying boys, got thoroughly beaten by these boys, and later survived only after the sage told it to hiss in self-defence, and started hissing and scaring off the brutes. We must clearly grasp this distinction between pacifism and ahimsa. Just as Bhagavan Buddha did, Mahatma Gandhiji practised ahimsa but not pacifism: he told Sardar Patel to send our army to Kashmir when Pakistan attacked us right after its ignominious birth. Gandhiji's ahimsa will not be fulfilled until Pakistan's act of aggression is completely erased. The raakshasas must be completely converted at heart, failing that, eliminated. Period. Whether they are our own, like Venu, Ravana, Duryodhana, Ashoka or Jinnha, or the "externals" like Mongals, Khiljis, Ghouris, Brits, or the US of A makes little difference. Bharat's necessary nuclear might and unified social strength must be employed to practice this true, unperverted ahimsa for the good of humanity -- to tame the asuri shakti and to enrich the daivi shakti and thus help every human to turn divine. Only fear tames the mind. Then offer something noble, unselfish and sublime to that tamed mind. There is no other way but this spiritual path of ahimsa not pacifism, for reaching real and lasting Peace and Happiness. Let us clearly understand that pacifism was never accepted in our individual or national life. It was imported and imparted. It is not good for the humanity's survival. Pacifism leads to aggression and wars. Ahimsa leads to peace. Hence, we must first get rid of our perverted notions. We must truly grasp and practice the fundamentals of our heritage. It is time. |
| Tell us what you think of this column | |
|
HOME |
NEWS |
BUSINESS |
CRICKET |
MOVIES |
CHAT
INFOTECH | TRAVEL | LIFE/STYLE | FREEDOM | FEEDBACK |
|