[Assam] NYT Editorial
Chan Mahanta
cmahanta at charter.net
Mon Dec 1 16:14:00 PST 2008
You are missing the point Ram.
IF finding a sustainable peace in Kashmir is thru a negotiated
settlement, why should it not be in Assam as well?
Americans may not care about Assam. Indians surely don't. But what
about you or I or Assam Netters ? Should THEY not raise their voices
in support of the same principle?
At 6:08 PM -0600 12/1/08, Ram Sarangapani wrote:
>C'da,
>
>>Just because a conflict is international, does not make the victims somehow
>more important than those who do not sport that >label or wear a halo of
>being international, wouldn't you agree?
>
>Whether we like it or not, the reason for that line in the editorial is
>precisely the reason that the Op ed did not mention Assam.
>
>You are absolutely correct, and I agree. Unfortunately, the fact is, Assam
>is NOT, and that is why there is no mention of Assam in the op ed.
>
>So, C'da, unless someone makes the Assam issue "international", you are not
>going to be reading any bylines on the subject.
>
>>The loss of lives and the destruction and continuation of a violent
>conflict in Assam is no less important than those at Mumbai, or >Gujarat or
>Delhi. NYT may not be aware of it, or may not care. But what about you, or
>I? And if you care, why would you wish to >subordinate the conflict in Assam
>to anything else anywhere in the world?
>
>Of course, you are correct (you are putting words into my mouth here - hey,
>I'm just the messenger :)).
>
>Other things being equal, can you tell me why the ethinic conflict (killed
>millions) in Rwanada took 6 years to get international attention? Even
>during a Democartic Admin in the US?
>
>Nations, states, and cities come in order of importance (regardless of how
>much the destruction). Somehow, and for whatever reason, the Kashmir issue
>is more important in international eyes, than say Dafur or some other such
>issue. And Tibet is more important than Rwanda.
>
>That is mu 2 cents.
>
>--Ram
>
>
>
>
>On Mon, Dec 1, 2008 at 4:17 PM, Chan Mahanta <cmahanta at charter.net> wrote:
>
>> The point Ram, is NOT whether these issues are 'elevated' or degraded to
>> "international" issues.
>>
>> Just because a conflict is international, does not make the victims somehow
>> more important than those who do not sport that label or wear a halo of
>> being international, wouldn't you agree?
>>
>> The loss of lives and the destruction and continuation of a violent
>> conflict in Assam is no less important than those at Mumbai, or Gujarat or
>> Delhi. NYT may not be aware of it, or may not care. But what about you, or
>> I? And if you care, why would you wish to subordinate the conflict in Assam
>> to anything else anywhere in the world?
>>
>> IMHO, the PRINCIPLE espoused by the NYT Editorial in its last paragraph
>> applies eminently and equally to the conflict in Assam and the others
>> around it.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> At 3:59 PM -0600 12/1/08, Ram Sarangapani wrote:
>>
>>> C'da,
>>>
>>> This is the last para of the editorial
>>>
>>> *Washington's most important role will be to urge the Indians and
>>> Pakistanis
>>> to step back from the brink. The next administration *will then have to
>>> move
>>> quickly to encourage serious negotiations over the future of Kashmir and
>>> genuine cooperation to defeat *extremists.
>>>
>>> and your view: >Look at the last paragraph of the editorial. Only thing
>>> they
>>> did not include was Assam.
>>>
>>> Right or wrong Kashmir has been elevated to an international level, wars
>>> having been fought over etc. And the Kashmir issue has even been brought
>>> up
>>> at the UN, issue a bone of contention between two countries
>>>
>>> Assam is not Kashmir. No wars have been fought over it by countries, there
>>> is no border dispute, it hasn't been mentioned in the UN etc.
>>>
>>> Having said that, it may come to pass, in years to come, that Bangladesh
>>> demands that Assam be a part of it (as most of the poplulation at that
>>> time
>>> prefer to be in B'desh or think of themselves as B'deshis), but till such
> >> time, Assam is firmly considered Indian.
>>>
>>> Of course, we all agree in getting the numerous problems that plague the
>>> NE
>>> be solved/resolved - and that will be good for all of Assam.
>>>
>>>
>>> --Ram
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mon, Dec 1, 2008 at 3:32 PM, Chan Mahanta <cmahanta at charter.net>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> The below from NY Times.
>>>>
>>>> I am no writer, but picked up somewhere that in an essay, the main idea,
>>>> the thrust of the piece, is to be found either in the opening or the
>>>> concluding paragraph.
>>>>
>>>> Look at the last paragraph of the editorial. Only thing they did not
>>>> include was Assam.
>>>>
>>>> http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/01/opinion/01mon1.html?_r=1
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>***************************************************************************************************************The
>>>> Horror in Mumbai
>>>>
>>>> Published: November 30, 2008
>>>> We share the horror, the pain and the disbelief that Indians are feeling
>>>> as
>>>> they absorb the appalling details of the terrorist attacks in Mumbai
>>>> that
>>>> left nearly 200 dead. We also recognize and understand the questions
>>>> Indians
>>>> are asking themselves, and the anger they are feeling, about what some
>>>> are
>>>> calling their own 9/11.
>>>>
>>>> How can their government have ignored the warning signs? A 2007 report
>>>> to
>>>> Parliament warned that the country's shores were poorly protected - and
>>>> some
>>>> or all of the attackers arrived by boat. Why weren't the police and the
>>>> army
>>>> better prepared to respond? Sharpshooters outside the Taj Mahal Palace &
>>>> Tower Hotel did not have telescopic sights, so they could not get off a
>>>> shot
>>>> for fear of killing hostages rather than the terrorists.
>>>> Most of all, who is to blame and who should pay the price for such
>>>> cruelty?
>>>> Deccan Mujahedeen, the group that claimed responsibility - the term
>>>> itself
>>>> is so chillingly flawed - is unknown. But Indian and American
>>>> intelligence
>>>> officials saw signs pointing to Lashkar-e-Taiba, an Islamist group from
>>>> the
>>>> disputed region of Kashmir that is increasingly collaborating with the
>>>> Taliban and Al Qaeda. What makes that especially frightening is that the
>>>> group received training and support from Pakistan's intelligence
>>>> services,
>>>>
>>> > before it was officially banned in 2002.
>>>
>>>> We fear that whoever was behind it, the carnage will unleash dangerous
>>>> new
>>>> furies between nuclear-armed India and Pakistan. And we fear it will
>>>> divert
>>>> even more of Pakistan's attention and troops away from fighting
>>>> extremists
>>>> on its western border with Afghanistan.
>>>> India's prime minister, Manmohan Singh, has so far shown extraordinary
>>>> forbearance. But there are already strong calls for him to retaliate -
>>>> with
>>>> or without proof of who was behind the attack. We urge him to carefully
>>>> consider the consequences.
>>>> India's leaders must be very careful not to ignite a religious war
>>>> inside
>>>> their own borders. Any military confrontation with Pakistan would be
>>>> hugely
>>>> costly in human life. And even the threat of war would be hugely
>>>> damaging to
>>>> India's extraordinary economic progress.
>>>> The Bush administration must use all of its influence to ensure that
>>>> India's leaders recognize these dangers. And it must assure the Indians
>>>> that
>>>> it will bring all of the pressure it can on Pakistan to cooperate fully
>>>> with
>>>> the investigation - no matter where it leads.
>>>> We were heartened when Pakistan's civilian government immediately agreed
>>>> to
>>>> send the new chief of the country's powerful intelligence agency, the
>>>> ISI,
>>>> to India. We hoped that meant the government was confident that the ISI
>>>> played no role in the attack. Or that it was finally prepared to purge
>>>> its
>>>> ranks of all those who have aided and abetted extremists.
>>>> Unfortunately, the offer was quickly withdrawn after the Pakistani Army
>>>> and
>>>> opposition parties objected. The government then announced that a
>>>> lower-level intelligence official would go at some point. By Saturday,
> >>> Pakistani officials were blustering as if they were the victims. Despite
>>>> all
>>>> of the recent horrors Pakistan has suffered, its military and
>>>> intelligence
>>>> services still do not understand that the terrorists pose a mortal
>>>> threat to
>>>> their own country.
>>>> In coming days India will have to look inward to see where and how its
>>>> government failed to protect its citizens. The United States is still
>>>> learning the lessons of its own failures before 9/11, but it can help in
>>>> the
>>>> process.
>>>> Washington's most important role will be to urge the Indians and
>>>> Pakistanis
>>>> to step back from the brink. The next administration will then have to
>>>> move
>>>> quickly to encourage serious negotiations over the future of Kashmir and
>>>> genuine cooperation to defeat extremists.
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> assam mailing list
>>>> assam at assamnet.org
>>>> http://assamnet.org/mailman/listinfo/assam_assamnet.org
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>> assam mailing list
>>> assam at assamnet.org
>>> http://assamnet.org/mailman/listinfo/assam_assamnet.org
>>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> assam mailing list
>> assam at assamnet.org
>> http://assamnet.org/mailman/listinfo/assam_assamnet.org
>>
>_______________________________________________
>assam mailing list
>assam at assamnet.org
>http://assamnet.org/mailman/listinfo/assam_assamnet.org
More information about the Assam
mailing list