In 1999, India and Pakistan were closer to nuclear war
May 15, 2002 12:20 AM Subscribe
In 1999, India and Pakistan were closer to nuclear war than was commonly known, according to Clinton's former chief adviser on South Asia. On Monday, the Defense Department's policy chief said that "there is a risk of war" that is "very large." On Tuesday, militants attacked an army camp in Indian Kashmir and killed 30 people, including 11 women and 10 children. All this makes me very nervous. Is it just me? And adding a touch of the bizarre, India is officially researching arcane, 2300 year-old military technology that it believes will give its military a greater advantage.
all india need do is establish countless union carbide plants all along their border with west pakistan and let those competent industrialists do the rest.
posted by johnnyboy at 4:44 AM on May 15, 2002
posted by johnnyboy at 4:44 AM on May 15, 2002
Actually, most of us in India at the time were very aware of how close we were, Kargil was taken very seriously, and was of course, one of the major reasons Musharraf was able to come to power. They were intercepted conversations with the chinese, he was travelling there and back, the scenario where Nawaz Sharif refused to let him land etc etc. It was a very tense time, and as far as I know, we were very aware how close we were to full blown war, and as 'most' indians will agree, there is no expectation of Pakistan not using the bomb in the case of all out war. If we get there they will use it.
Are these US government statements issued for the purpose of trying to change the prevailing mood here that Pakistan is a friend? Particularly after the last few weeks, Musharraf's "referendum. ha", refusal to allow unlimited US troop presence on the ground etc.?
Ignore the crap about that military tech research, I can assure you the Indian armed forces are a very serious lot, and George Fernandes' (defence ministers) come and go. Think back to the '71 war, Indira Gandhi actually had to ask Field Marshall Sam Maneckshaw if he intended to take over the country. The politicians have a very 'healthy' respect for the military.
posted by bittennails at 5:46 AM on May 15, 2002
Are these US government statements issued for the purpose of trying to change the prevailing mood here that Pakistan is a friend? Particularly after the last few weeks, Musharraf's "referendum. ha", refusal to allow unlimited US troop presence on the ground etc.?
Ignore the crap about that military tech research, I can assure you the Indian armed forces are a very serious lot, and George Fernandes' (defence ministers) come and go. Think back to the '71 war, Indira Gandhi actually had to ask Field Marshall Sam Maneckshaw if he intended to take over the country. The politicians have a very 'healthy' respect for the military.
posted by bittennails at 5:46 AM on May 15, 2002
I wholeheartedly support this endeavor; in fact, I suggest the Packistani follow the same blueprint. If these two countries insist on battling each other, far better for the population if they do it wearing magic slippers, eating magic happy meals, and blowing arcane smoke at one another, rather than nuking each other into non-existence.
If people have to live in the 21st century with BC passions and bloodlust, then at least reduce the damage to the innocents by using BC tech. Terrorists - a mixture of crow wings, cow dung, and ashes from the holly bush will cause fear in the leaders of nation. The current administration may want to consider the use of slings and rocks in their upcoming invasion of Iraq; Iraq may want to step up their magic carpet development to gain air superiority...
Humans just dont seem to understand how very, very close they still are to swinging from tree branches, hurling excrement. Another evolutionary experiment gone horribly wrong.
posted by Perigee at 6:45 AM on May 15, 2002
If people have to live in the 21st century with BC passions and bloodlust, then at least reduce the damage to the innocents by using BC tech. Terrorists - a mixture of crow wings, cow dung, and ashes from the holly bush will cause fear in the leaders of nation. The current administration may want to consider the use of slings and rocks in their upcoming invasion of Iraq; Iraq may want to step up their magic carpet development to gain air superiority...
Humans just dont seem to understand how very, very close they still are to swinging from tree branches, hurling excrement. Another evolutionary experiment gone horribly wrong.
posted by Perigee at 6:45 AM on May 15, 2002
Are these US government statements issued for the purpose of trying to change the prevailing mood here that Pakistan is a friend?
Does anyone actually believe this? Pakistan is about as friendly toward the U.S. as a pit viper. What they have conceded, they have conceded under extreme pressure. And even that is unreliable at best.
posted by rushmc at 7:01 AM on May 15, 2002
Does anyone actually believe this? Pakistan is about as friendly toward the U.S. as a pit viper. What they have conceded, they have conceded under extreme pressure. And even that is unreliable at best.
posted by rushmc at 7:01 AM on May 15, 2002
I got one:
What's the difference between Pakistan and a pancake?
I don't know any pancakes that were nuked by India!
Ha-ha! What? Too soon?
posted by wackybrit at 7:48 AM on May 15, 2002
What's the difference between Pakistan and a pancake?
I don't know any pancakes that were nuked by India!
Ha-ha! What? Too soon?
posted by wackybrit at 7:48 AM on May 15, 2002
bittennails, thanks for the front-row perspective. I don't know what the purpose behind the statements was, possibly just a reminder that the situation is of concern to everyone.
posted by homunculus at 10:07 AM on May 15, 2002
posted by homunculus at 10:07 AM on May 15, 2002
"The book was written by military strategist Kautilya, also known as Chanakya and Vishnugupta, a prime minister in the court of India's first emperor Chandragupta Maurya, in the fourth century BC."
Interesting, one of the other Mauryan emperors, Asoka, was one of the most intriguing ancient historical figures I've read about. If the leaders of India are looking to the Mauryas for guidance, I wish they would turn to the more benevolent Edicts of Asoka instead.
posted by homunculus at 10:08 AM on May 15, 2002
Interesting, one of the other Mauryan emperors, Asoka, was one of the most intriguing ancient historical figures I've read about. If the leaders of India are looking to the Mauryas for guidance, I wish they would turn to the more benevolent Edicts of Asoka instead.
posted by homunculus at 10:08 AM on May 15, 2002
I might be entirely wrong about this. But if I remember my high school history right, Arthashastra was more akin to philosophical treatises like Machiavelli's 'Prince' or Sun Tzu's 'Art of Was' than about actual methods of war. Chanakya/Kautilya is credited with setting up the first established spying agency in the country. A cursory browse thru the Top google search search results (1, 2) seem to support my assertion.
I find it hard to believe that this is going to lead anywhere (specially with DRDO championing it). The elections are coming. The senior leadership of BJP, the Hindu rightist party that is the majority party in the ruling coalition, has alienated many of their grass roots supporters thru (what the cadre considers) a policy of moderation. I suspect we'll see all kinds of monkey business in the next few months in a bid to convince the masses that they have not strayed far from the 'path'.
India and Pakistan have been on the brink of war many times. I dont have the inclination to start a flame war by getting into why and wherefores of that (also we did talk about that before). But I do tend to think that at least in the foreseeable future - till the time the US operates out of Pakistan and/or thinks that General Musharraf will help them in nabbing the Al Quida people hiding in Pakistant, Indian government will hate to precipitate things beyond a certain point. There is simply way too much economic interests riding with USA. But war is what a lot of insurgent elements in Kashmir will want to precipitate. Some of the leading terrorist outfits in J&K are getting fractured and demoralized. A war will be a huge moral boost for them.
On a different note: I had hoped that some day Amitabh Ghosh will put his book 'Countdown' online. He has done the next best thing. The notes and interviews that he conducted while researching the book are now online (Countdown In South Asia: The Interviews ). They give the best coverage of the anguish that many people in South Asia (at least in India) felt when both Pakistan and India went nuclear. Read George Fernandese's interview if you get a chance.
posted by justlooking at 10:32 AM on May 15, 2002
I find it hard to believe that this is going to lead anywhere (specially with DRDO championing it). The elections are coming. The senior leadership of BJP, the Hindu rightist party that is the majority party in the ruling coalition, has alienated many of their grass roots supporters thru (what the cadre considers) a policy of moderation. I suspect we'll see all kinds of monkey business in the next few months in a bid to convince the masses that they have not strayed far from the 'path'.
India and Pakistan have been on the brink of war many times. I dont have the inclination to start a flame war by getting into why and wherefores of that (also we did talk about that before). But I do tend to think that at least in the foreseeable future - till the time the US operates out of Pakistan and/or thinks that General Musharraf will help them in nabbing the Al Quida people hiding in Pakistant, Indian government will hate to precipitate things beyond a certain point. There is simply way too much economic interests riding with USA. But war is what a lot of insurgent elements in Kashmir will want to precipitate. Some of the leading terrorist outfits in J&K are getting fractured and demoralized. A war will be a huge moral boost for them.
On a different note: I had hoped that some day Amitabh Ghosh will put his book 'Countdown' online. He has done the next best thing. The notes and interviews that he conducted while researching the book are now online (Countdown In South Asia: The Interviews ). They give the best coverage of the anguish that many people in South Asia (at least in India) felt when both Pakistan and India went nuclear. Read George Fernandese's interview if you get a chance.
posted by justlooking at 10:32 AM on May 15, 2002
On a side note, homunculus, Asokha, the movie is out at the local blockbuster, great fun, in the typical indian movie genre. But don't expect anything more, it's fun for the usual song and dance.
Thanks for that link, justlooking, I just love my Georgi porgi.
posted by bittennails at 10:44 AM on May 15, 2002
Thanks for that link, justlooking, I just love my Georgi porgi.
posted by bittennails at 10:44 AM on May 15, 2002
Are these US government statements issued for the purpose of trying to change the prevailing mood here that Pakistan is a friend?
First, that is not the prevailing mood; most people are smarter than that. We understand that Pakistan is working with us because they have no choice, and judge accordingly. Second, one needs to eliminate the misconceived conflation that ally and friend are the same thing. They most certainly are not; and in any case even a steadfast friend, like France, which is acting as an ally in Afghanistan, can have problematic relations with us. Pakistan as a people is mostly friendly; as a nation they are not so much friendly as neutral. For most of the Cold War we had important interests in common and even during periods of rebuff, such as the one beginning after the nuclear tests and Musharraf's putsch, we've maintained close contacts. In terms of Afghanistan we gave them the choice of being an ally or an enemy, but there was never any serious consideration of the latter, given the power disparity. As the war has wound down and Musharraf's position has become more secure, the overt aspects of the alliance have become more visible. Right now our interest in hunting OBL has coincided with Islamabad's longstanding interest in taming the Tribal Areas, which have had a dangerous level of autonomy (if Afghanistan does not coalesce, a Pashtunistan isn't out of the question -- and that would take a big bite out of the Northwest Frontier), so cooperation continues. Meanwhile, our interest in the Central Asian states mirrors hopes by Pakistan to build an alliance northward, given its rocky relationships with India on one side and Iran on the other.
There's little question that our natural ally in the region is India, though, since we remain in a competitive position as regards China and hope to keep its regional ambitions in check. Pakistan knows it doesn't fit into that, and has worked closely with China over the years. Still, they are anxious not to maneuver themselves into outright conflict with US interests. To the extent that they have, e.g. the Talibanization of Afghanistan, even that has been with our tacit support given our interest in stability and in building up their maturity as a regional power. It turned out to have a downside, of course, but that was as damaging to Islamabad's long-term plan as anything could have been.
No, they are not a friend, but neither are they an enemy. They are an ally, but that only goes so far. Partly, we're allying with them to keep a closer eye on their radicals, including the rogue elements in the ISI. Like most alliances, it represents a confluence of interests, rather than generous friendship.
posted by dhartung at 12:16 PM on May 15, 2002
First, that is not the prevailing mood; most people are smarter than that. We understand that Pakistan is working with us because they have no choice, and judge accordingly. Second, one needs to eliminate the misconceived conflation that ally and friend are the same thing. They most certainly are not; and in any case even a steadfast friend, like France, which is acting as an ally in Afghanistan, can have problematic relations with us. Pakistan as a people is mostly friendly; as a nation they are not so much friendly as neutral. For most of the Cold War we had important interests in common and even during periods of rebuff, such as the one beginning after the nuclear tests and Musharraf's putsch, we've maintained close contacts. In terms of Afghanistan we gave them the choice of being an ally or an enemy, but there was never any serious consideration of the latter, given the power disparity. As the war has wound down and Musharraf's position has become more secure, the overt aspects of the alliance have become more visible. Right now our interest in hunting OBL has coincided with Islamabad's longstanding interest in taming the Tribal Areas, which have had a dangerous level of autonomy (if Afghanistan does not coalesce, a Pashtunistan isn't out of the question -- and that would take a big bite out of the Northwest Frontier), so cooperation continues. Meanwhile, our interest in the Central Asian states mirrors hopes by Pakistan to build an alliance northward, given its rocky relationships with India on one side and Iran on the other.
There's little question that our natural ally in the region is India, though, since we remain in a competitive position as regards China and hope to keep its regional ambitions in check. Pakistan knows it doesn't fit into that, and has worked closely with China over the years. Still, they are anxious not to maneuver themselves into outright conflict with US interests. To the extent that they have, e.g. the Talibanization of Afghanistan, even that has been with our tacit support given our interest in stability and in building up their maturity as a regional power. It turned out to have a downside, of course, but that was as damaging to Islamabad's long-term plan as anything could have been.
No, they are not a friend, but neither are they an enemy. They are an ally, but that only goes so far. Partly, we're allying with them to keep a closer eye on their radicals, including the rogue elements in the ISI. Like most alliances, it represents a confluence of interests, rather than generous friendship.
posted by dhartung at 12:16 PM on May 15, 2002
Finally, *informed, nuanced* commentary. Thanks, dhartung.
Historically, Pakistan has always been our ally. That they also have, gasp, regional security interests has never precluded this. For the most part Pakistan's populace wants to see the extremists go as much as we do.
posted by donkeyschlong at 12:40 PM on May 15, 2002
Historically, Pakistan has always been our ally. That they also have, gasp, regional security interests has never precluded this. For the most part Pakistan's populace wants to see the extremists go as much as we do.
posted by donkeyschlong at 12:40 PM on May 15, 2002
Finally, *informed, nuanced* commentary. Thanks, dhartung.
Historically, Pakistan has always been our ally. That they also have, gasp, regional security interests has never precluded this. For the most part Pakistan's populace wants to see the extremists go as much as we do.
posted by donkeyschlong at 12:47 PM on May 15, 2002
Historically, Pakistan has always been our ally. That they also have, gasp, regional security interests has never precluded this. For the most part Pakistan's populace wants to see the extremists go as much as we do.
posted by donkeyschlong at 12:47 PM on May 15, 2002
Damn.
posted by donkeyschlong at 12:47 PM on May 15, 2002
posted by donkeyschlong at 12:47 PM on May 15, 2002
Thanks, dhartung, as usual, that made sense. I am not that aware that the prevailing mood tilts in our favor, though. There still are a great many americans I meet who wonder if I rode an elephant to school back home.
But as you said, most people are smarter than that. Until - For the most part Pakistan's populace wants to see the extremists go as much as we do.
- this. It's the opposite, most of the populace is extremist, I hope the ones who want them gone, really get to control that country.
posted by bittennails at 12:58 PM on May 15, 2002
But as you said, most people are smarter than that. Until - For the most part Pakistan's populace wants to see the extremists go as much as we do.
- this. It's the opposite, most of the populace is extremist, I hope the ones who want them gone, really get to control that country.
posted by bittennails at 12:58 PM on May 15, 2002
Bitten, you just hate Pakistan. This has come up before. And last time I checked, it was India that was experiencing widespread race riots and sectarian violence. Pakistan has this kind of bullshit too, but it's mostly a handful of extremists trying to make trouble for everyone. What's widespread in the region as a whole is ignorance and poverty.
posted by donkeyschlong at 1:25 PM on May 15, 2002
posted by donkeyschlong at 1:25 PM on May 15, 2002
I would love to hear your opinions about a country that was expected to nuke yours any time soon. Oh, wait, I think I figured that out for myself.
posted by bittennails at 1:41 PM on May 15, 2002
posted by bittennails at 1:41 PM on May 15, 2002
I think I figured that out for myself.
Huh?
Anyway, it just seems like you're more interested in saying one thing over and over than actually having an objective discussion. I'll never understand the "attrition as argument" mentality. Just because you repeat yourself doesn't make your version of things true, no matter how much you want them to be true. Accept complexity. The world is more ambiguous than X vs. Y.
posted by donkeyschlong at 2:15 PM on May 15, 2002
Huh?
Anyway, it just seems like you're more interested in saying one thing over and over than actually having an objective discussion. I'll never understand the "attrition as argument" mentality. Just because you repeat yourself doesn't make your version of things true, no matter how much you want them to be true. Accept complexity. The world is more ambiguous than X vs. Y.
posted by donkeyschlong at 2:15 PM on May 15, 2002
Right now our interest in hunting OBL has coincided with Islamabad's longstanding interest in taming the Tribal Areas, which have had a dangerous level of autonomy (if Afghanistan does not coalesce, a Pashtunistan isn't out of the question -- and that would take a big bite out of the Northwest Frontier), so cooperation continues.
From Washington Post, May 12:
But speaking privately, Pakistani officials disclosed the military leaders concluded that no operation would be launched in the volatile border region -- known as the Tribal Areas -- without more specific intelligence that the Pakistani government deemed credible. Even then, they decided, U.S. military involvement in the area should be kept to a minimum.
........"There was almost a consensus during this meeting that extreme care be taken before launching any security operation in the tribal areas, and in the event of any such action, the involvement of foreign personnel be kept at the minimum level," said an official familiar with the conference proceedings.
...He added that recent small-scale raids launched jointly by the United States and Pakistan in the Tribal Areas already have created a "revolt-like situation" there. "The territory is hostile to the U.S. forces and sympathetic to Taliban and Arabs," a Pakistani military official agreed. He indicated that the United States should reconsider before pushing Pakistan "to launch a military assault against thousands of well-armed, religiously motivated people."
If the reports leaking out into the media are correct the Pakistani government is already backpedalling and seem to be in no hurry to challange the de facto autonomy of the tribal warlords out there. I can't really blame Musharraf! This can be more trouble than it is worth for him at this time. He has other problems which are more important to Pakistani society.
posted by justlooking at 2:16 PM on May 15, 2002
From Washington Post, May 12:
But speaking privately, Pakistani officials disclosed the military leaders concluded that no operation would be launched in the volatile border region -- known as the Tribal Areas -- without more specific intelligence that the Pakistani government deemed credible. Even then, they decided, U.S. military involvement in the area should be kept to a minimum.
........"There was almost a consensus during this meeting that extreme care be taken before launching any security operation in the tribal areas, and in the event of any such action, the involvement of foreign personnel be kept at the minimum level," said an official familiar with the conference proceedings.
...He added that recent small-scale raids launched jointly by the United States and Pakistan in the Tribal Areas already have created a "revolt-like situation" there. "The territory is hostile to the U.S. forces and sympathetic to Taliban and Arabs," a Pakistani military official agreed. He indicated that the United States should reconsider before pushing Pakistan "to launch a military assault against thousands of well-armed, religiously motivated people."
If the reports leaking out into the media are correct the Pakistani government is already backpedalling and seem to be in no hurry to challange the de facto autonomy of the tribal warlords out there. I can't really blame Musharraf! This can be more trouble than it is worth for him at this time. He has other problems which are more important to Pakistani society.
posted by justlooking at 2:16 PM on May 15, 2002
I think they're hoping at least some of the militants will slip back into Afghanistan where they can be carpet bombed without too much fallout, no pun intended.
posted by artifex at 2:22 PM on May 15, 2002
posted by artifex at 2:22 PM on May 15, 2002
Here's some attrition for you. "Since 1989, 34,000 people have died as a result of the conflict and according to official sources at least 1,745 civilans have "disappeared". The real figure is probably much higher."
your version of things true
Which are?
objective discussion
And your point in this regard being?
posted by bittennails at 2:36 PM on May 15, 2002
your version of things true
Which are?
objective discussion
And your point in this regard being?
posted by bittennails at 2:36 PM on May 15, 2002
Both sides are to blame, simply.
posted by donkeyschlong at 2:38 PM on May 15, 2002
posted by donkeyschlong at 2:38 PM on May 15, 2002
Wow, how astute...
posted by bittennails at 2:42 PM on May 15, 2002
posted by bittennails at 2:42 PM on May 15, 2002
Bitter, surrender the anger. Jeez.
posted by donkeyschlong at 2:56 PM on May 15, 2002
posted by donkeyschlong at 2:56 PM on May 15, 2002
Sure, while we are at it, why not a lobotomy too, let's all not give a shit, why bother, it's them... far, far away...
posted by bittennails at 3:02 PM on May 15, 2002
posted by bittennails at 3:02 PM on May 15, 2002
Asokha, the movie is out at the local blockbuster
Your Blockbuster must be quite superior to mine. I was lucky to find Lagaan.
posted by rushmc at 5:29 PM on May 15, 2002
Your Blockbuster must be quite superior to mine. I was lucky to find Lagaan.
posted by rushmc at 5:29 PM on May 15, 2002
Yup, good old cape cod.
posted by bittennails at 6:57 PM on May 15, 2002
posted by bittennails at 6:57 PM on May 15, 2002
Rushmc: The other two Indian movies from last year that I liked are Dil Chahta Hai (very Bollywood, but rather enjoyable) and Chandni Bar (depressing, but a very good movie). If you like Indian movies, you should check them out.
posted by justlooking at 9:18 PM on May 15, 2002
posted by justlooking at 9:18 PM on May 15, 2002
Thanks for the recommendations, justlooking. I will look for them, but Vegas is quite the cultural wasteland, I fear.
posted by rushmc at 7:34 PM on May 16, 2002
posted by rushmc at 7:34 PM on May 16, 2002
Alternate headline: India's DARPA finally taking advantage of a 2,300 year headstart.
posted by sheauga at 5:42 AM on May 17, 2002
posted by sheauga at 5:42 AM on May 17, 2002
« Older | Lying with video. Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
"According to a Pune University report, the book says that soldiers fed with a single meal of special herbs, milk and clarified butter can stay without food for an entire month.
Shoes made of camel skin smeared with a serum made from the flesh of owls and vultures can help soldiers walk hundreds of miles during a war without feeling tired."
Their are many modern equivalents. The book also recommends chemical and biological warfare:
"The book says that smoke from burning a powder made from the skin and excreta of certain reptiles, animals and birds can cause madness and blindness in the enemy.
The book also provides the formula to create a lethal smoke by burning certain species of snakes, insects and plant seeds in makeshift laboratories."
The modern equivalent? Bhopal with wings. Imagine relentless sleepless armies marching across a poisoned Kashmir. Eventually, fear of the overwhelming mass would make generals resort to the force that turned the mountain white.
posted by pracowity at 1:35 AM on May 15, 2002