|
|
|
|
|
| HOME | NEWS | DEAR REDIFF | |||
|
COMMENTARY
|
|
|
E-mail from readers the world over
Date sent: Sat, 18 Oct 1997 11:50:57 -0400 Varsha Bhosle is at it again. All style, but no substance. She has resorted to quoting selectively from my articles and letters, misinterpreted the central thrust of my argument, and drawn linkages where there exist none. Despite all the wisdom that was "bequeathed" to Ms Bhosle by her nuclear philosopher and friend Jaideep Menon, it is obvious that she has not understood the meaning of "opaque deterrence." "Nuclear opacity" has seven characteristics: (1) no tests (2) denial of possession (3) no direct threats (4) no official military doctrine (5) no deployment (6) no open debate and (7) organisational insulation of the nuclear-military bureaucracy. All these conditions apply to India and Pakistan and a regime of "veiled" or "recessed" deterrence is already operational in South Asia. Ms Bhosle might also want to note that the epistemological construct "opaque deterrence" was coined by Avner Cohen and Benjamin Frankel and not Jaideep Menon. She ought to give credence where it is due. The critical question now being debated is whether India should abandon its posture of opacity in favour of a "minimum," "triad," or an "all-horizons" posture. In my article, 'Why India Ought to Exercise Nuclear Restraint,' I made a case in favour of ambiguity which is a variant of nuclear opacity. To quote from the concluding paragraph of that article: "Of course, the great powers attempts to legalise nuclear apartheid must be opposed. Who ever argued in favour of signing the NPT or the CTBT? But India must not make the error of pouring resources into a horrendously expensive programme that bears little or no correlation to its real security needs. The country probably has a few dozen bombs in the basement. Great! These are enough to deter Pakistan. They also generate sufficient uncertainty in China. A sensible policy for India would be to rely on a "stewardship" programme capable of producing refined fission weapons, as a hedge against strategic uncertainty. Meanwhile, India must use this capability as a bargaining chip to accelerate nuclear disarmament and resume its historic leadership role in the global disarmament community." I am entirely at a loss to understand how Ms Bhosle has arrived at the opposite conclusion. Ms Bhosle has got her facts wrong all over again. India is not yet capable of "designing, developing, and producing missile systems, battle tanks, and combat aircraft." For instance, the Indian army's dependence in areas like armour, surface-to-air missiles, radar, and electronic warfare ranges from 80-100 percent. In the case of the air force's ground attack and air defense fighters, this dependence has been calculated at 60-75 percent. Similarly, the navy's fleet air arm, destroyers, and submarines import 70-100 percent of their sub-systems from abroad. In the case of the light combat aircraft, 70 percent of the aircraft's sub-systems and components including the aircraft's engine will be imported from abroad. Similarly, foreign content in the Arjun MBT is estimated at 45 per cent. Observers now believe that 50 per cent of the "indigenous" content in the tank has foreign origins. Thus India's advanced technology and defence sectors are neither indigenous nor self-reliant. Their continued dependence on external suppliers makes them vulnerable to external manipulation, disruptions, and sanctions. The purpose of marshalling the above facts is not to argue that India ought to abandon its nuclear option because it has been unable to develop the requisite technologies in the past. The attempt instead is to counter oversimplifications in the nuclear debate, highlight the structural weaknesses of the Indian state and society and make a case for an alternative vision of national security. Varsha Bhosle excels in the art of substituting bombast for facts and megalomania for ambition. Instead of reflecting "bequeathed wisdom," she might consider acquiring some knowledge as well. It would help dispel some of the opacity surrounding her vision.
Date: Thu, 30 Oct 1997 11:40:49 -0500 How lovely! Just run your mouth. If China is such a great success, how come their per capita GDP is only $ 600? Also, how do we know that the economic numbers presented by the Chinese government are correct? Certainly it helps to be surrounded by countries like Taiwan and Singapore. Further, the money from Hong Kong helps too. If you ask me ( I am no lord, mind you), there is little that the Chinese government or the Chinese elite has done that has positively impacted economic growth in that country. The Chinese elite consists of the same people who participated in the Cultural Revolution and the Tiananmen Square massacre. It is the same elite that uses prison labour and executes a record number of convicted prisoners each year. Perhaps, all of this does not matter as long as there are two digits in front of the economic growth rate. Think for a second what Lord Desai and other like him are implying -- the Cultural Revolution, where about 10 to 20 million people were murdered is just a blip along the path. No, it was a catastrophe, that thankfully our democratic system, however flawed, prevents from hapenning. Economic growth is frankly over-rated as a yardstick (I'm not implying that it is unimportant), what is important is how the average citizen is doing. Despite their fantastic growth, I seriously doubt that poverty has been reduced in vast areas of China. Economic progress has been confined to the South of China -- and not all of China as the lord would have us believe. I suggest he visit the North or the South West of China to get a better picture. Under a totalitarian state it is always easier and more convenient to mask the truth. All of this nevertheless does not suggest that India is some sort of Heaven, no it's not and it does not take a rocket scientist nor a lord to tell me or anyone else for that matter. But I am surely sick of the suggestion that somehow we as Indians need to learn from the Chinese about instituting economic programmes or feel inferior. We may be the laughing stock in the English parliament -- but frankly that's not something I am going to lose sleep over. Jaffrey Ali Vienna, Virginia
Date: Fri, 31 Oct 1997 10:44:00 -0500 The memory of visiting Mathura is still etched and this article was quite interesting to point several other vistas of the City of Krishna. The palaces and the temples with the din and bustle have still preserved a serene atmosphere. The oil refinery and other polluting factories does not detract any faithful from enjoying Krishna's' town. The article refreshed my mind and conveyed a real thrill of a lifetime. However rational one gets, it's the sense of irrationality towards the divine spirit and the ultimate guru Krishna who bridges the gap between an immortal and a mere mortal that gets one to know the subliminal truths of the universe... Mathura in that sense is the centrestage stage forever to bring the eternal to normal folk. Sundar
Date sent: Sat, 6 Sep 1997 13:47:19 -0400 (EDT) I would like to commend T V R Shenoy for an absolutely true and bold article. Sitting here in America it is very easy for people to get carried away by all the media hype. The reason for this all this public sympathy could be the fact that she was beautiful and above all was a commoner. Don't get me wrong, I am not being heartless and I have full sympathy for her two sons, but I don't think all this posthumous show of immense affection by the masses was necessary. Where was this affection when they were devouring everything written about her by the tabloids to satisfy their voyeurism? I don't understand what's so big about her social work. If given the opportunity and the resources then I am sure there would be a lot of people who would do the same thing. Was Diana involved in any social work before her marriage to Prince Charles ? I think the real treasure the world has lost is Mother Teresa, not Princess Diana.
Date sent: Tue, 9 Sep 1997 09:16:54 -0700 I admire your choice of subjects. All your chosen subjects have one thing in common -- way to beat Hindus in general and the Shiv Sena in particular. This time you got the Kashmiri Pandits to beat the Hindus! You compare the Pandits in Kashmir to the Muslims in Maharashtra! The only co-relation I see here is they are minorities in their respective state, and you skillfully exploit this fact to bash the Hindus and the Sena in Maharashtra. How many Muslims have lost their properties in Maharashtra? How many Muslim girls were raped in Maharashtra only because they were Muslims? What are the specific problems of Muslims in Maharashtra to warrant a Minority commission? Why do riots take place in the areas where the Muslim population is in good number? Why not Muslims in say Juhu or Thane suffer from riots? And now tell me what do Hindus mean when they expect the Muslims to join the mainstream? I tell you what I think (and I mean) -- Be Indian! That's it and this is not what Kashmiri terrorists mean when they want Hindus to achieve their goodwill. You quote the foddess Saraswati incident! In that particular incident and in any incident where Hindu feelings are hurt, you must have seen the number of Hindus that opposed the Sena and Bal Thackeray. Has it ever happen in any of the famous "Muslim sentiment" issues? Dilip understand the difference and quit bashing Hindus. Makarand
Date sent: 03 Oct 97 11:26:21 -0700 General Brar was to the point. India should go nuclear and declare itself a nuclear state. In fact, like France, India can test some nuclear devices both on ground, through air and water (submarine), perfect the technology, build some nuclear devices in a state of ready deployment and then sign the CTBT. Hey, if France can get away with it -- why can't we? And after signing the CTBT, we can force other nations like Pakistan to sign the CTBT! We should have done that by now -- we did nothing from 1974 onwards -- we should go ahead now and put it to rest. Dhaval Shah
Date sent: Thu, 9 Oct 97 22:52:59 UT Never in my life I have heard such moronic arguments. Is there no difference between giving tip to a waiter with my money and Rajiv Gandhi paying more for the Bofors guns from the money belonging to all Indians? What does a free market economy have to do with bribes? Mr Nandy, writing good English is not synonymous with good journalism. The latter needs insight, courage, honesty and intelligence. Rita
Date sent: Fri, 10 Oct 1997 13:23:29 -0400 Mr Dawaram had his chance and he failed. It is difficult to digest the fact that this guy was once the director general of police. Reading Dawaram's and Verrappan's statements makes me wonder if they could be the "lost brothers" we often see in Hindi films (how perfect! one is a dacoit and the other a cop). They both make fantastic claims and demands. Dawaram says when he was police chief, most of his force was unfit, unmotivated and self-centered, so much for his leadership. Mohan N
Date: Thursday, October 16, 1997 12:10 AM That was a good feature on Sunil Shetty today on the Rediff site. Can you please tell me when are you planning to feature Anil Kapoor's interviews? I saw the Deewana Mastana feature and the slide show. Absolutely superb! Thank you so much. But I would like to know how Anil Kapoor is feeling now that every film released in 1997 has been doing very well. This is assuming that Deewana Mastana will be a hit as well. Shenaz
Date sent: Tue, 07 Oct 1997 11:17:57 -0500 Absurd. What next? Someone will come up with a theory that a state government employee died of work-related stress, and everyone will stop working. Simply brilliant!
Date sent: Mon, 20 Oct 1997 19:38:49 -0700 Excellent article! Rajeev Srinivasan really has an excellent knack of presenting technology-related matters. Good job, Rajeev keep them coming. Rajesh Marepally Santa Clara, CA
Date sent: Mon, 20 Oct 1997 12:56:18 -0700 The "renowned educationist" Mr Sankdher does not seem to understand the basic difference between education and literacy, which is amusing. He may be true in saying that India has the highest number of literate people in the world. But educated, the least number is probably true. If education makes people biased against one another, then the Indian education system has performed a commendable job in producing the highest number of bigots and hypocrites. One look at our politicians, bureaucrats, police and the "educated class" through past and present tells us a lot about the "great Indian tradition of education." And the contribution of this mass of educated people in development of the Indian nation is almost a big ZERO! It would be a good beginning if educationists and academicians like Mr Sankdher talk frankly and honestly about our education system rather than making statements like "We have the highest number of educated people in the world", which are totally misleading. And the 20 doctorates produced by our system every day, how many are really deserved? Very few for sure, the rest are mostly awarded based on 'bhaichara, 'caste' or 'source.'
Date: Sunday, October 26, 1997 3:59 AM I just wanted to say that I loved your article in the movies section. The one that I loved so much was the ten chartbusters. Keep the movies part coming. I was wondering if you could give more gossip about Bollywood, and report from the sets of movies. Keep up the good work!! Amita
|
||
|
HOME |
NEWS |
BUSINESS |
CRICKET |
MOVIES |
CHAT
INFOTECH | TRAVEL | LIFE/STYLE | FREEDOM | FEEDBACK |
||