"me no big chief …

       the August ‘poornima’ (full moon)

Rakhee Poornima

A day celebrated in India as Rakhsha Bandhan
the ‘bond of protection’ (rakhsha – protection; bandhan – a tie or a bond)

A sister ties a ‘rakhee’, a holy thread, on the wrist of her brother
symbolising a request for his protection, by accepting which he promises.

It doesn’t necessarily have to be a brother by birth for by tying a rakhee
any male can be “adopted” as a brother regardless of race or religion.
And it doesn’t have to be anything expensive, anything ornate
just a simple string can create a bond equally strong.

The origin of the tradition is lost in mythology.
But our history records many incidents,

it is said…

Queen Karnawati of Chittor
the widow of a hindu king was losing battle
to stop an invasion of the Sultan Bahadur Shah.

She sent a rakhee to the muslim Emperor Humayun.
The Emperor was touched by the gesture, accepted the rakhee
and immediately set off with his vast army to protect the Queen.

Rakhee poornima, a day for all sisters and brothers everywhere.

I don’t have a sister, 🙁 I never received a rakhee, never ever.

[Update: to say, I just realised, this was my 100th post. 🙂 ]

IndianhistorymythologytraditionRakhee

The threat to American Dollar Hegemony from Iraq has been averted
Iraq successfully destroyed, Mr Saddam Hussain hanged.

The next threat is Iran,
with promise of a new Oil Bourse and trading oil for Euros.
Iran too has to be destroyed, but needs to be first ISOLATED.

For Iran has strong supports.
Iran wishes to cooperate on security and trade with
China, Russia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan
and along with Mongolia and Pakistan, has applied for a full membership of the
Shanghai Cooperation Organisation

India too is a potential future member and holds an observer status since 2005.
In February 2007, Iran finalised a deal to supply natural gas to India and Pakistan.

America is desperate for an ally against this emerging group of tomorrow’s superpowers.
America need a “partner” in crime, against humanity and sovereign states.
America needs a donkey in south asia to do their unpleasant work.
The Hyde Act is about “strategic partnership”.

On September 03, 2005,
India had committed support for Iran’s peaceful nuclear programme.
But twice since then India voted against Iran to support an International Atomic Energy Agency resolution on Iran’s domestic nuclear programme.

The reason being the carrot dangling and arm twisting over the “123 agreement”.
India’s anti-Iran votes were coerced, says former US official

Stephen G. Rademaker, who quit his job as assistant secretary for non-proliferation and International Security at the US State Department last December, in a talk here on ‘Iran, North Korea and the future of the NPT’ at India’s Institute for Defense Studies and Analyses (IDSA)’ said the July 2005 nuclear agreement had helped bring about a big change in India’s attitude towards ‘non-proliferation’.

“The best illustration of this is the two votes India cast against Iran at the IAEA,” he said, adding: “I am the first person to admit that the votes were coerced.”

It is the same carrot and arm-twisting politics continuing with the “Henry Hyde’s Act”.
These are the four paragraphs that refers to Iran in this document.

‘‘Henry J. Hyde’s:
United States-India Peaceful Atomic Energy Cooperation Act of 2006’’.

“An Act to exempt from certain requirements of the (US) Atomic Energy Act of 1954
a proposed nuclear agreement for cooperation with India.”

SEC. 102. SENSE OF CONGRESS

It is the sense of Congress that:

(6) it is in the interest of the United States to enter into an agreement for nuclear cooperation arranged pursuant to section 123 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 (42 U.S.C. 2153) with a country that has never been a State Party to the NPT if —

(D) such cooperation will induce the country to give greater political and material support to the achievement of United States global and regional non-proliferation objectives, especially with respect to dissuading, isolating, and, if necessary, sanctioning and containing states that sponsor terrorism and terrorist groups that are seeking to acquire a nuclear weapons capability or other weapons of mass destruction capability and the means to deliver such weapons;

SEC. 103. STATEMENTS OF POLICY.
     (b) WITH RESPECT TO SOUTH ASIA.—

(4) Secure India’s full and active participation in United States efforts to dissuade, isolate, and, if necessary, sanction and contain Iran for its efforts to acquire weapons of mass destruction, including a nuclear weapons capability and the capability to enrich uranium or reprocess nuclear fuel, and the means to deliver weapons of mass destruction.

SEC. 104. WAIVER AUTHORITY AND CONGRESSIONAL APPROVAL.
     (c) SUBMISSION TO CONGRESS.—

(2) INFORMATION TO BE INCLUDED.—
A description and assessment of the specific measures that India has taken to fully and actively participate in United States and international efforts to dissuade, isolate, and, if necessary, sanction and contain Iran for its efforts to acquire weapons of mass destruction, including a nuclear weapons capability and the capability to enrich uranium or reprocess nuclear fuel and the means to deliver weapons of mass destruction.

SEC. 104. WAIVER AUTHORITY AND CONGRESSIONAL APPROVAL.
     (g) REPORTING TO CONGRESS.—

(2) IMPLEMENTATION AND COMPLIANCE REPORT
(E)
(i) an assessment of whether India is fully and actively participating in United States and international efforts to dissuade, isolate, and, if necessary, sanction and contain Iran for its efforts to acquire weapons of mass destruction, including a nuclear weapons capability (including the capability to enrich uranium or reprocess nuclear fuel), and the means to deliver weapons of mass destruction, including a description of the specific measures that India has taken in this regard; and

(ii) if India is not assessed to be fully and actively participating in such efforts, a description of—
   (I) the measures the United States Government has taken to secure India’s full and active participation in such efforts;
   (II) the responses of the Government of India to such measures; and
   (III) the measures the United States Government plans to take in the coming year to secure India’s full and active participation;

This is the primary reason for this deal, groundwork towards invading Iran.
This is America’s politics of blatant double standards.

USA is already, dictating to India to diminish ties with Tehran,
calling Iran an NPT signatory, a “nuclear outlaw” and a “recalcitrant and difficult” country.

In their bid to prise India away from a probable alliance with Iran, China and Russia and to force India to join in ‘isolating’ Iran or join hands in another illegal war,
they are tempting us with a pseudo status as a nuclear weapon state.

And nothing else.

I do not understand why there is a denial of this link between the Hyde’s Act and Iran. I wish our expert observers were brave (and honest) enough to acknowledge it.

There are some who wants Indians to blindly sign up to the deal, and are conveniently using the “left”s’ ideologies to scare us with the threat of China.
To divert attention from the unpleasant issues by blaming it all on the “commies”.

This government did not refuse to form a coalition with the “Lefts” to get into power, for the “left-haters” it is the time of reckoning, the time to pay the price –
for politics of convenience.

Tough.

AmericaIndiaIranShanghai Cooperation OrganisationHyde’s Act

After 60 years of independance
and one border war with China (1962),
and after three wars (1947, 1965, 1971) with Pakistan
and two major incursion battles (Siachen 1984, Kargil 1991) later,

suddenly America is now India’s friend!!!

For America is bending rules to supply N-fuel to India.

Reading many articles and commenting on three blogs later,
Ambassador Ronnen Sen….
The Indo-US Nuclear Deal: criticism addressed
123 Nuclear Deal, the Left and yet another mess, I feel uneasy.

I accept, India needs “energy” and lots of it, to develop, but so does every nation.
I also accept Nuclear Energy is “green” leaving zero carbon footprints.

To decide if N-Energy is the best option for India’s future is for the experts.
But as citizens of a democratic country, we all have a say in how India proceeds.

India has two nuclear states as neighbours, with unresolved border issues and threats.
India, a sovereign state, has every right to defend her border in the best possible way.
Jawaharlal Nehru, is quoted to have said, in 1946,

As long as the world is constituted as it is, every country will have to devise and use the latest devices for its protection. I have no doubt India will develop her scientific researches and I hope Indian scientists will use the atomic force for constructive purposes. But if India is threatened, she will inevitably try to defend herself by all means at her disposal.

How can we have forgotten within forty years, that in the 1971 War,
Nixon sent military supplies to Pakistan through Jordan and Iran! in direct violation of the US Congress-imposed sanctions on Pakistan, and encouraged China to increase its arms supplies to Pakistan.

An aware America that stayed silent when China helped Pakistan to build N-weapons.

Without our own nuclear arsenal
I stay convinced the South Asian geography today would well have been very different.

I have so far learnt, this is the nuclear world order, as it stands today:

The Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT)

Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) was opened for signature in 1968, and has been in force since 1970.
A total of 190 parties have joined the Treaty so far, including the five nuclear-weapon States

Status: Entered into force on 5 March 1970. On 11 May 1995, it was decided that the Treaty should continue in force indefinitely.

It is a multilateral treaty with the objective to prevent the spread of nuclear weapons and weapons technology, to promote cooperation in the peaceful uses of nuclear energy and to try to achieve nuclear disarmament and general and complete disarmament.

The (NPT) granted non-nuclear-weapon states access to nuclear materials and technology for peaceful purposes as long as they committed not to develop nuclear weapons.

The Treaty also represents the ONLY binding commitment by the nuclear-weapon States at the multilateral level to the goal of nuclear disarmament. To ensure the goal of non-proliferation and to build confidence between States parties, the Treaty created a safeguards system under the responsibility of the International Atomic Energy Agency.

The International Atomic Energy Agency

International Atomic Energy Agency was set up in 1957, the Agency works with its 144 Member States (03/2007) and multiple partners worldwide to promote safe, secure and peaceful nuclear technologies.

It is an independent international organization regulated by a special agreement by the UN. The IAEA reports annually to the UN General Assembly and, when appropriate, to the Security Council regarding all matters relating to international peace and security.

India has been a member since 1957.

The Nuclear Exporters Committee

Nuclear Exporters Committee
Knowing that materials and technologies used in peaceful nuclear programs could also be used to develop weapons, several NPT tried to clarify in relation to the treaty under what conditions and what specific equipment and materials and could be shared with non-nuclear-weapon states.

They formed the Zangger Committee in 1971 to require states outside the NPT to institute IAEA safeguards before being allowed imports of certain items that could be directly used to pursue nuclear weapons. These items were collectively referred to as the “Trigger List.”

It was India’s explosion of a nuclear device in 1974, that reconfirmed the fact that nuclear materials and technologies acquired for peaceful purposes could be diverted to build weapons. In response to India’s action, several Zangger Committee members joined up with France to establish the NSG to further regulate nuclear-related exports.

The NSG added technologies for control to the original Zangger Committee’s “Trigger List.” This became Part I of the NSG Guidelines.

NSG members also agreed to apply their trade restrictions to all states, not just those outside the NPT.

The Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG)

The 45 nations of the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG) that have voluntarily agreed to coordinate their export controls governing transfers of civilian nuclear material and nuclear-related equipment and technology to non-nuclear-weapon states.

Members can be any state that conducts exports appearing on the Guidelines may apply for NSG membership. They are evaluated on their proliferation record, and adherence to international nonproliferation treaties and agreements, and national export controls.

There are several countries with nuclear programs outside the NSG, most notably India, Israel, Pakistan, and North Korea.

The Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty (CTBT)

Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty (CTBT) was adopted on 10 September 1996 by the United Nations General Assembly and opened for signature on 24 September 1996.

Status: Not yet in force, it will enter into force after 44 States have ratified it.

This treaty would ban the signatory states
1. undertaking “any nuclear weapon test explosion or any other nuclear explosion, and to prohibit and prevent any such nuclear explosion at any place under its jurisdiction or control”
2. to “refrain from causing, encouraging, or in any way participating in the carrying out of any nuclear weapon test explosion or any other nuclear explosion”.

The US Atomic Energy Act of 1954

US Atomic Energy Act of 1954
America’s export of nuclear material is governed by this US Federal law, of which the Section 123: Co-operation With Other Nations, in its present form, stops US from negotiating this trade deal with India.

The United States is now willing to provide India access to civilian nuclear technology through the United States-India Peaceful Atomic Energy Cooperation Act 2006.

This is despite India not being a signatory to either the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) or the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT), this prohibits the sale of any form of nuclear material or know how to India by any country of the NSG.

So why should I welcome this new found friendship with open arms?

Is it ONLY in the name of improved trade and/or continuous supply of cheap and or clean energy?
Surely that would be better served by signing upto the NPT.
Trade with anyone.

If YES, then I ask are we still to continue our military nuclear programme?
And if YES, are we promising never to divert even a ‘grain’ of material imported to it?

If NO, is America, a member of NPT, IAEA and NSG knowingly flounting all the rules.

My priorities can only lie in the best interests of
India
the present World order,
the earth and her environment, … but it should not be with America’s.

What is the motive? Where is the catch?
I ask why is America suddenly so friendly and generous? I still feel uneasy.

AmericaIndiaNuclear BombtradeNon N-proliferation

Yesterday I was pleasantly surprised to receive a comment on my blog,
“backwhen to – Khecheopalri Lake”.

Blogger Nidhee Kekre
had been to Sikkim in May 2007, and sent me a photograph of the Lake.

I am happy to see
that the lake has shrugged off
recent constructions on its shores,
the monastery and the tourist facilities like the superficial scars of surface wounds.

I am really happy to realise that
Himalayas, beautiful in her magnitude,
will always stay untouched, unrippled and proud in her quiet tranquillity.

This photograph captures the sombre beauty of the lake, exactly as I remember it.

Click on photograph to enlarge

And just when you think you have seen all the beauty of Himalayas
reflected from within the lake…

I ask you to look to the north
for if you are as lucky as Nidhee was, you may see Kanchenjunga,
her sharp ridges etched by the sun against the blueness of her companion, the sky.

This is simply an amazing photograph, I have no choice but to share with you all.

Click on photograph to enlarge

Mount Kanchenjunga

“The five treasures of snow” which at 28,169 ft
is the tallest peak in India, second in Nepal and the third highest peak in the world.

First climbed on May 25, 1955 by George Band and Joe Brown of a British expedition
who, out of respect for Sikkimese religious beliefs did not step on the peak.
Successful summiters have followed the tradition since
the peak has stayed untrodden by human feet.

Twice, bad weather stopped me reaching its base,
to be able to sit by the Samity Lake
or just look up up up and up at the towering massif of Kanchenjunga.

Who knows maybe some day I will.

Thanks Nidhee for the photos, a joy of blogging I guess, is to be able to share.

HimalayasSikkimIndiamemoriesKhecheopalri LakeKanchenjunga

update kashmir myths – there is no objective information:

This is someone I had presumed was
an university student
well informed
educated.
How wrong was I?
Please read his blog to judge for yourself.
http://viewfrombeneath.blogspot.com/2007/08/open-letter-to-one-mr-pawan.html

Unable to draw me down to his level of intelligence
he tries to correct my grammer and in the
process showing his own ignorance.

He writes:

“…however an exception and that would be the self-righteous jackass (really hurts you when I call you that, doesn’t it?) that is little indian. There is no jesting with someone as screwy as you…”

“What does that moron have, minus pig-headed self-righteousness and atrocious grammar?”

“…but some of us like to question and dig for answers, as opposed to buying second hand views from a second hand guy wearing second hand shoes (I can only assume)…”

He then proceeds to quote my text in his attempt to mock my knowledge of English.
He writes,

” Oh yeah, so that you don’t get confused, the red annotations are mine, Pawan:”,

Instead of fouling (I believe it’s “befouling” and it would be tough to do that after you’ve done such a great job of it yourself) my blogspage, please use your ownsite with whatever you wish to say; or anything against my writing

and so obligingly highlights his own ignorance with red fonts.

Unfortunately for him,
the dictionaries do not agree.
There is such a word, and its usage has been correct.

When a writer ignores the topic of discussion
to resorts to hopeless wit and nauseating sarcasm
or starts to look for mistakes in grammer the debate is truly over.

[Fear not, if the writer changes his words and text, I have screenshots of his articles]