[Assam] NYT Editorial
Chan Mahanta
cmahanta at charter.net
Mon Dec 1 16:42:19 PST 2008
>My prediction is that the Kashmir issue will be just that. I suspect, that
>will also be the case in the Assam situation - maybe at the Center and State
>level or in Indian parlance - kick the ball to the end of the street (and
>worry about it later).
**** You are obviously not alone in prophesying that. My point is
that it ought not to be a self-fulfilling one for Indian
intelligentsia or the Assamese and their supporters abroad.
At 6:34 PM -0600 12/1/08, Ram Sarangapani wrote:
>Of course, C'da, we all do - we all, I am pretty sure, want peace in
>Assam. And if that peace were to come thru some dialog, why shouldn't that
>be welcome.
>
>
>BTW - just because the Kasmir issue is internationally bandied about,
>doesn't mean a darn thing. I seriously doubt if that will be solved, nor
>will the Middle East.
>
>Now a days it seems that international bodies are only interested in
>"containing" the issue as opposed to solving.
>
>My prediction is that the Kashmir issue will be just that. I suspect, that
>will also be the case in the Assam situation - maybe at the Center and State
>level or in Indian parlance - kick the ball to the end of the street (and
>worry about it later).
>
>--Ram
>
>
>On Mon, Dec 1, 2008 at 6:14 PM, Chan Mahanta <cmahanta at charter.net> wrote:
>
>> 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
>>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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