New Delhi – My WordPress

Guest post from T.R.Ramaswami
I write with reference to your editorial “Chidambaram’s Proposals” (BS 28 December 2008). The proposals are nothing but a rehashed version on what the US did after 26/11. Faced with the problem that the FBI, CIA, NSC etc had different objectives and did not talk to each other, the US created the TTIC – Terrorist Threat Integration Centre. However post 26/11 the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, headed by Senator Richard Shelby, made some important statements that Mr. Chidambaram may do well to consider. The report, inter alia stated – the FBI has deeply entrenched mind sets that prize the production of evidence supported narratives over the drawing of probabilistic inferences based on incomplete and fragmentary information …..Law enforcement agencies just think differently from intelligence organisations…….Intelligence analysts would doubtless make poor policemen and it has become very clear that policemen make poor intelligence analysts.
Our IB and RAW consists of more than 80% IPS officers at levels higher than Assistant Director, and many of the deputationists are those who do not want to do routine police work or have been sent to these bodies because the state government does not want them. Intelligence aptitude is not their forte or even a criteria. However having spent time in the IPS they have become personal adjuncts of the government in power, keeping watch over opposition moves, helping in toppling governments and even funding the purchase of MPs/MLAs sequestered in their safe houses from the secret budgets they have. What security and intelligence the country can get from such outfits is a moot point. However to be fair it must also be stated that an intelligence body is the only one where failures become public but it cannot publicise its successes as that would alert the other side and may lead to more failures! A real Catch-22 if there was ever one.
In a recent TV interview Mr. Chidambaram slammed the state governments for not giving a tenure to key officials and admitted he could do nothing. Can he at least start with his own Congress state governments? And how about denying central police support for those who do heed to the Centre’s advisories. Other wise it appears that the Union Home Minister’s writ runs only over New Delhi, some central police organizations and the IB and RAW.
– T.R.Ramaswami

India’s love for peace? ( you can conquer but not rule).. tibet chapter

The Iraq war has clearly validated that you can conquer the country in a matter of hours, but it will take a heavy toll if you wish to establish a rule there.

A thousand Americans lost their life in Iraq not while fighting but while acting as a sentry, guarding the outposts and regular patrol duty. The people strongly condemn the foreign rule and they violently express their opinions.

Well, bringing this to the context of India- China relation opens up a new dimension in the secret wars and foreign policy disaster which I was talking about.

Tibet was a buffer state between the 2 Asian Giants. The presence of a buffer territory is a time tested method of reducing the tension and border incidents between the two super-powers. Chinese acquisition of Tibet did not go very well with India.
1) We condemned the Dragon of being an aggressor.
2) Gave shelter to the spiritual leader Dalai Lama.
3) Questioned the validity of the puppet govt. and the new Dalai Lama which Chinese govt. installed.
Chinese saw it in this way:
1) In order to rule Tibet, the Dalai Lama’s presence has to be quenched.
2) In future, if India gets powerful and it can use absconding leader as a pretense to expand its territories.
3) Over years the British had slowly and steadily expanded their territories into the weak Tibet, the Mac-Mohan line was forced on Tibet kingdom.

The war preparation at that moment was next to nothing. In fact India lost so much ground without even a single fight that Pakistan’s thought of capturing the buffer state of Kashmir could be put into action.

If China would have been an aggressor, it could have simply flag marched into New Delhi and we would be standing and accusing it of back-stabbing. Chanakya esp. said that there is friendship among equals. Humble states may call their alliance friendship, but it is actually submitting and seeking protection. It is a misfortune that the work of such a wonderful manager of diplomatic relations gathers dust.