West’s Silence over Indian Proliferation

Sajjad Shaukat

Setting aside the Indian irresponsible record of non-proliferation, defence agreement signed between the US and India on July 20, this year as part of the deal about civil nuclear technology, agreed upon by the two countries in 2008 has raised new alarms on global and regional level.
Now, New Delhi is officially allowed to obtain the US sophisticated arms and nuclear weapons for its armed forces. In February this year, America had pressurised the International Atomic Agency (IAEA) to sign an accord of specific safeguards with India. It permits New Delhi a broad atomic cooperation, while superseding the IAEA regarding transfer of nuclear equipments and technologies. These arrangements also entail enrichment and reprocessing items under the so-called cover of IAEA. In this regard, Washington also contacted the Nuclear Suppliers Group in order to grant a waiver to India for starting civil nuclear trade on larger scale, while the latter has already been getting nuclear material and arms of all kinds from Israel, Russia, and other European countries.

On the other side, US and European high officials including their media make much hue and cry in relation to the safety of Pakistan’s nukes. In this respect, in the recent past, by manipulating Taliban’s advances in Buner, they misperceived that Pakistan could be overtaken by these extremists who could also possess atomic weapons. On April 22, US Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton clearly remarked that atomic weapons of Pakistan could fall into the hands of terrorists. Recently, although the President Barrack Obama admitted that nuclear assets of Pakistan are safe, yet he clarified that America had all options open. On the other hand, Pakistan’s successful military operations which flushed the Taliban out of Buner, Dir and Swat exposed the real designs of the US and Europe which only distort the image of Islamabad in connection with nuclear proliferation. In this context, while rejecting west’s misperceptions, Pakistan’s military and civil leadership has repeatedly been assuring that nuclear assets of the country are under tight security.

Notably, on September 25, 2008, Obama had pledged that if elected, he would encourage India and Pakistan to ratify the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT) and resolve the Kashmir problem to reduce nuclear dangers in South Asia. But he has deviated from his earlier commitments and by following the unilateral approach of the ex-president Bush, he sent Hillary Clinton to sign the defence pact with New Delhi. Surprisingly other major European countries like France, Germany and UK are also silence on US-India nuclear deal. In fact, they are also encouraging New Delhi in this regard.

Nonetheless, double standards of the western counties indicate that they totally ignore India on the question of nuclear proliferation as their sole aim is to de-nuclearise Pakistan which is the only atomic power in the Islamic World.

As regards the question of nuclear proliferation, India’s past and present record is replete with innumerable events.

In July 1998, India’s Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) seized eight Kg. of nuclear material from Arun, an engineer in Chennai including two other engineers. It was reported that the uranium was stolen from an atomic research center. The case still remains pending. On November 7, 2000, IAEA revealed that Indian police had seized 57 pounds of uranium and arrested two men for illicit trafficking of radioactive material. IAEA had said that Indian civil nuclear facilities were vulnerable to thefts.

On January 26, 2003, CNN pointed out that Indian company, NEC Engineers Private Ltd. shipped 10 consignments to Iraq, containing highly sensitive equipments entailing titanium vessels and centrifugal pumps. Indian investigators acknowledged that the company falsified customs documents to get its shipments out of India.

In 2004, when the issue of international nuclear black market came to surface, Pakistani nuclear scientist, Dr. A.Q. Khan was only blamed by America and Europe for proliferation activities by neglecting the western nationals and especially those of India. While in February, same year, India’s Ambassador to Libya, Dinkar Srivastava revealed that New Delhi was investigating that retired Indian scientists could possibly be engaged in “high technology programs” for financial gains during employment in the Libyan government.

On June 12, 2004, Berkeley Nucleonics Corporation (BNC), an American company was fined US $ 300,000 for exporting a nuclear component to the Bhaba Atomic Research Center in India.

In December 2005, United States imposed sanctions on two Indian firms for selling missile goods and chemical arms material to Iran in violation of India’s commitment to prevent proliferation. In the same year, Indian scientists, Dr. Surendar and Y. S. R Prasad had been blacklisted by Washington due to their involvement in nuclear theft. In December 2006, a container packed with radioactive material had been stolen from an Indian fortified research atomic facility near Mumbai.

Some weeks ago, death of India’s nuclear scientist, Lokanathan Mahalingam raised new apprehension about Indian proliferation. He was missed from the scenario and after a couple of days; his dead body was recovered from the Kali River. Indian police concocted a story that Mahalingam had committed suicide by jumping into the river. It is a big joke to hide some real facts behind his death because wisdom proves that if an educated person decides to commit suicide, he will definitely adopt a soft way to eliminate his life. Notably, Dr. Haleema Saadia disclosed that death of the scientist is a conspiracy, as soon as his dead body was found, within no time; the police had announced that Mahalingam had committed suicide.

Nevertheless, in connivance with the officials, proliferation of nuclear components and their related-material has continued intermittently by the Indians.

Besides, in the recent past, solid evidence has surprised the world regarding the existence of Hindu terrorism which also shows future dangers of Indian proliferation. In this respect, Anti-Terrorism Squad (ATS) of the Maharashtra arrested a serving Lt. Col. Srikant Purohit along with some officials who confessed that they were involved in training of the Hindu terrorists, supplying them the military-grade explosive RDX, used in bombings of various Indian cities including Malegaon. The investigation further indicated the confession of Lt. Col. Purohit for the bombing of Samjhota express, while proving close links of the Indian army officials with prominent politicians of BJP, VHP, RSS and Bajrang Dal, who have been pressurizing New Delhi to release the arrested persons. Nevertheless, the enquiry still remains pending. Meanwhile, assassination of Indian Anti-Terrorism Squad Chief Hemant Karkare in Mumbai during terror attacks also endorsed these links. All these developments show that Hindu fundamentalists, trained by Indian military experts or secret agency RAW could obtain Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMDs). Thus they could jeopardise the global peace by using these fatal weapons inside America and Europe so that these developed nations could point finger to Islamabad because of their ‘stereotypes’ against the Muslims in wake of war on terror.

However, it is surprising that despite nuclear proliferation by India in violation of various international agreements and its refusal to sign Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), CTBT and Additional Protocol with the IAEA, the United States also included New Delhi in its joined non-proliferation goals like Proliferation Security Initiative (PSI) by praising India as a responsible atomic actor.

In the past, Islamabad offered a number of suggestions to New Delhi to jointly sign NPT and CTBT, but the latter flatly declined. Instead, in 1998, India detonated atomic devices and compelled Pakistan to follow the suit. On July 27 this year, by launching its first nuclear-powered submarine, India has initiated deadly nuclear arms in South Asia.

It seems that all the global non-proliferation conventions led by Washington and its western partners are applicable to Iran, North Korea and especially Pakistan, while India which has played a real role in the international black market from where even terrorists can obtain these fatal weapons, is exempted because the sole superpower has to fulfill its Asian interests through New Delhi at the cost of Islamabad and other regional countries. If American duplicity in the matter continues, Obama’s policy of South Asia will badly fail as all the issues such as terrorism, Kashmir, Afghanistan and non-proliferation are inter-related.

We can conclude that western countries ignore India which is the real nuclear proliferator. So the right hour has come that the international community must take notice of the dangers posed by Indian proliferation to save the world from any prospective nuclear catastrophe.

Sajjad Shaukat writers on international affairs and is author of the book: US vs Islamic Militants, Invisible Balance of Power: Dangerous Shift in International Relations.

Where is my Buddy – Hemant Karkarey?

Ishaal Zehra

It seems that investigation to the Mumbai tragedy is re-opened. And so are the queries in my mind. Some unanswered questions that still haunt the investigation authenticity are laying bared open with no one serious enough, or more preciously, daring enough to search for the answers. Death of Hemant Karkery who was about to expose the Hindu-Israeli terrorism in India and the long-forgotten lethal case of Colonol Prohit are two of those serious questions.

All this remembers me of a joke which was circulated widely condemning the absurdity of Iraq war. It went like this… On a campaign the (former) US President George Bush visits a school and explains his political actions. Afterwards he invites the children to ask him questions. One little boy raises his hand and say, “Mr. President my name is Joe and I have three questions from you. 1- How come you invaded Iraq without the support of the United Nations? 2- Where is Osama bin Laden actually hiding? And 3- Don't you think that the nuclear bomb on Hiroshima was the biggest terrorist attack of all times?”

Just as the President Bush begins to answer, the recess bell rings and he says they’ll continue afterward. 25 minutes later the kids come back to class.

“Where were we?” says Bush. “Oh, yes... do you kids have any questions?”

Another boy raises his hand and says, “sir my name is John and I have 5 questions: First, why did you invade Iraq without support from the U.N.? Second, where is Osama bin Laden actually hiding? Third, don’t you think that the nuclear bomb on Hiroshima was the biggest terrorist attack of all times? Fourth, how come the recess bell went off 30 minutes early? And last where is my buddy Joe?!!”

Similarly, the number of times the Mumbai case will be re-opened, the questions will increase with the same magnitude. Who benefited from Mumbai carnage? How come Hemant Karkery died? Why his death is not being investigated properly specially from the point of view that he died just after unearthing rich and credible material about the involvement of a section of Hinduised army officers in the Malegaon and Modasa blasts? Why the case has not been investigated as a “False-Flag Operation” rather simply putting the blame on Pakistan? Why BJP Inclusion in the whole drama is being missed out? What has happened to the case of Col. Prohit, who is a Symbol of Hindu Terrorism? Why the findings are not being made public? The real motives behind this terror act and the actual beneficiaries are still not apprehended by the authorities. The case is being mishandled intentionally.

These dilly-dally tactics regarding the Mumbai incident investigations simply cannot hide the reality. Keeping own eyes shut doesn’t mean that every one else is blind as well. Some serious questions have to be investigated and answered if fair trail is to be done. How is it that ATS Chief Hemant Karkare, his associates Ashok Kamte, Vijay Salaskar and his entire team of about seven, who were tracking the case of Col Prohit, were gunned down in a narrow lane near Cama hospital about 12.5 miles away from the Taj Hotel? The Marathi papers in Mumbai have reported that the killers of Hemant Karkare and his associates spoke to them in Marathi before killing him and the others. The connection between Hemant Karkarey death and the Col Prohit case must be deeply probed, as there is much more underneath than what is present at the surface.

The death of ATS squad during the carnage has remained controversial as there are many loop ends in this regard. The wives of killed Policeman keep issuing statements suspecting hands of some vested interest Hindu organization in killing their husbands. Vinita Kamte, wife of slain police officer Ashok Kamte who was killed during the operation, wanted to depose some points before the Ram Pradhan committee panel but was not allowed to do so. She alleged that certain portions of the call records of the police control room on November 26 were deleted. "There are at least 10 minutes of conversation that has been deleted. I have sought call records of my husband, Ashok Kamte through RTI," Vinita said but was ignored completely.

Again, Quoting his captors’ conversation in his interview with Aaj Tak, a TV news channel, one of the hostages who escaped from room # 630 following his brief captivity said “One terrorist asks the other: How much amount of money these Indian politicians have?” The other terrorist answers, “You have received your payment isn’t it, then why are you worried?” why not this lead was taken forward? The election in India is over. The new government has taken the charge well and we all now expect fair trail of Mumbai carnage from them, evaluating all the leads which were left earlier. The loopholes must be probed properly.

One thing for sure, whether today or tomorrow, every time the case will be proceeded further the same question will haunt the court; where is our buddy Hemant Karkarey? And how was he and his whole team was cold bloodedly gunned down at a distant place from the main terror venue before he could proceed further the case of Col Prohit with some concrete proof about which he gave a hint in his interview to a TV channel before his tragic death? Surely, the case will only solve when this mystery will be cracked.

The neighbour next door – a persistent pain in Bengal’s neck

Ishaal Zehra

Bangladesh Premier Sheikh Hasina has said that the recent mutiny in the paramilitary force Bangladesh Rifles (BDR) which killed 73 army officers was aimed at triggering a civil war and warned that the masterminds behind the bloody revolt still wanted to achieve their goal. The 33-hour mutiny by the rebel BDR soldiers on February 25-26, 2009 was initially believed to have been caused by disputes over pay and command structure.
Commerce Minister Lt Col (Retd) Faruq Khan, who heads a high-power committee to coordinate the foreign and local investigations into the February 25-26 carnage, said “a dangerous conspiracy is going on to destroy the development of the country". Whereas the State Minister for Foreign Affairs Hassan Mahmoud admitted that terrorist outfits with alleged cross-border links still existed in the country despite years of massive anti-terrorism campaigns.
At a glance, Bangladesh's 37-year history has been a turbulent one, with many incidents of political turmoil and violence, where most of the time cross-border linkage was confirmed at the public level (even if not acknowledged at government level). This recent mutiny reminded me of the tempest that rocked Dhaka University and other educational institutes of Bangladesh, in August 2007 which ended up in the imposition of curfew like situation in the country. At that time too the sole purpose of the tempest creators (master minds), seemingly, was to start a civil war by bringing the people face to face with the armed forces through the so-called student movement. The Bengali media reports later disclosed that the havoc was actually masterminded by the Indian Intelligence Research and Analysis Wing – RAW. In an exclusive interview with VOA Bangla service, the first elected mayor of Rajshahi City, Mr. Md. Mizanur Rahman Minu said that he feels that India is behind the terrorist activities in Bangladesh. Minu said that because of the Indo-Bangladesh porous border, it has not been possible for the government to apprehend the terrorists.
Yet today the same situation is again being sensed in the country. “Foreign hands” had been detected by the new Chief of Bangladesh Rifles (BDR) Brigadier General Mohammed Mainul Islam who revealed the involvement of outsiders wearing BDR uniform in the mutiny. Ironically, had there been no revelation from General Mainul Islam, people would have believed that BDR personnel targeted Army officers on account resentment over biased treatment as well as difference in their pay, allowances and other benefits. Chief of Jamaat-e-Islami Bangladesh, Matiur Rahman Nizami, in the same regard, also claimed that the killing mission was executed from Indian intelligence headquarters through close monitoring. Analytically, Mr. Nizami might be true as the increasing frenzy in Bangladesh is only paving an easy way for India to increase her hegemony in political, economical and cultural arenas.
The story is quite simple if considered logically. Bangladesh, having the population of more than 140 million - 40% of whom are below the poverty line - and it is dependent on foreign aid and investment, seems a soft target to digest. And by initiating a civil war in the country many disrupted plans could have been fulfilled like crippling the economy of Bangladesh, disrupting and destroying the road communications and infrastructures thus proving Bangladesh a dysfunctional and failed state and finally paving the way for Indian military invasion.
To achieve the objective, the people of Bangladesh were being targeted in an ingenious way and from all dimensions of life. RAW is exploiting this civil force to meet its own evil objectives. India’s agenda does not obviously end in creating and keeping Bangladesh as a nominally independent country. Since 1972, India has been pouring in huge material and intellectual support to Indianise the mind and psyche of Bangladeshi people. The so-called modern school educational curriculum, in general, and the social sciences, in particular, have been said to be shaped and oriented to Vedic philosophy rather than to Islamic values and virtues. Besides the promotion of narcotics in the society RAW is said to be supplementing terrorism via educational institutes in Bangladesh and the recent BDR mutiny exhibits the reach of Indian tentacles.
There lies a real dilemma for Bangladesh in forging some form of much needed unity to stand concrete against constant onslaught of Indian hegemony. Indian policy makers are well aware that the traditional method of occupying a country by force is neither appreciable nor acceptable in the recent scenario. Today, to run over a country, an aggressor cripples psychologically of the civil force of the nation and reduces its economy to shambles and creates such a situation that its citizens no longer possess mental strength and inspiration to be self- reliant. And RAW is persistently attempting to create such a situation in Bangladesh. It is known to all that Indian intelligence agency is engaged in disruptive activities in Bangladesh since it came into being in 1971 to create the demand for Indian intervention from within the country. As a matter of fact, India has a condemnable history of swallowing Hyderabad, Manvadhar, Goa, Dumn, Deue and Kashmir and of course not forgetting the illegal and conspiratorial annexation of Sikkim, a tiny and rocky mountainous kingdom of Himalayas. Recalling all this it would be quite naive to believe that India is not interested in capturing a strategically important country like Bangladesh as this annexation seems necessary for them to suppress the on-going liberation struggles in North-Eastern Indian states bordering Bangladesh.

It wasn’t surprising at all when General Mainul Islam said that the BDR mutiny was a conspiracy by outside forces. Even history is evident that India's assistance in the liberation war of Bangladesh in 1971, did not originate from their sense of humanity for the people of Bangladesh, but to dismember Pakistan and finally merge them to 'greater Bharat, what Nehru termed as 'Aakhand Bharat'. At that time probably the Indian leaders thought that dismemberment of Pakistan would lead to the accession of Bangladesh to India but unfortunately this dream of them could not materialize even after the lapse of 38 years but hats off to the consistent nature of India that she has still kept her dream alive and is still working for its establishment.

Indian Elections and the Muslim Factor

Momin Iftikhar

The elections for the 15th Lok Sabha in India are at hand and as the billion plus public gears up to go to hustings, the Indian Muslims are only prominent on the tumultuous scene through their conspicuous absence.

In a changing political scenario in which the mainstream parties (Indian National Congress, Bhartya Janata Party) are loosing their clout to an empowerment of regional players (Bahujan Samaj Party, Samajwadi Party, Rashtrya Janata Dal etc), it is disconcerting that despite constituting a solid 14% chunk of the Indian population, Muslims as a community appear comatose, confused and directionless.

The most striking aspect is the absence of a unifying strategy seeking to uplift the community from the social morass and squalor that it finds itself in. It is a reason for major concern that Muslims in India neither have a leader to represent them nor a party of their own to articulate their aspirations. It is a measure of the prevailing drift that Muslims remain outside of the core constituency of any mainstream or regional party in India; leaving them at the mercy of political mavericks who are ruthlessly exploiting them for realizing partisan agendas, more often than not at unbearable cost to their interest.

Having been disillusioned by the supposedly secularist Congress Party and bruised and battered by the BJP, the Muslims in India find themselves at the mercy of exploitative regional parties whose interest in their welfare barely extends beyond a malicious purloining of votes. It is ironic that instead of producing and supporting a leader from among their own ranks, Muslims in India are turning to the likes of Lalu Prasad Yadav, Mulayam Singh Yadev and Mayavati for political leadership and emancipation. The situation need not have been so dismal. Notwithstanding that the Indian state and the political process tends to leave them outside the mainstream of politics yet in term of numbers, which determine the thrust of matters in a democracy, Muslim presence in India is in no way insignificant. Their clout, if suitably exploited, becomes particularly potent in a scenario whereby the major political parties are shrinking in influence and the regional parties are becoming ascendant. It is a measure of their latent potential that in at least 140 constituencies where they constitute more than 20% (including 14 constituencies where they are in majority and 28 other where they are above 30%), all political parties, including the BJP, are bending backwards to woo Muslim votes.

The formation of the Central Government in India largely depends upon the number of seats secured by political parties in Bihar and UP and in both states the Muslim constituencies can play a major role in deciding who reaches the pinnacle of political power in India. It is a different matter though that the supposed friends of Muslims, boasting claims of their leadership, are playing games with them. In Bihar, during 15 year’s rule of Lalu Prasad Yadav, the Muslims have suffered the maximum, particularly on the education front. Lalu never cared to implement reforms that would benefit Muslim; only administering to the interests of his own clan of Yadavs. Once asked as to why there was no Muslim in the top leadership of his Rashtrya Janatadal Party, Lalu replied jokingly that he himself was the leader of the Muslims of Bihar.

Situation is no different in UP, where the Muslim votes have been instrumental in the rise of Bahujan Samaj Party’s Mayawati , who after winning the UP state elections a year ago, appointed only one Muslim minister and that too in the insignificant department of environments. In another unkind cut she ordered the abandoning of construction of the Mohammad Ali Johar Minority University in Rampur that was much needed in spreading the light of education among Muslim youngsters who presently lack badly in this vital field. As for Mulayam Singh Yadav, claiming to be the rock solid friend of Muslims of UP, in the run up to the elections, has taken into his party’s folds Kalyan Singh, who during his stint as the Chief Minister of UP was instrumental in demolition of Babri Mosque on 6 December 1992.

It doesn’t require exceptional political acumen to identify the well known Muslim grievances that have reduced a significant community to the level of the proverbial slumdogs. The Sachar Committee report starkly outlines the despicable conditions of the Indian Muslims who are sliding miserably on account of all socio – economic indicators. It also exposes a state sponsored culture of institutionalized insensitivity that has seen Muslims in India descending to the bottom of the pit, even below the scheduled castes(SC) / tribes (ST) and other backward classes (OBC) whose sponsorship by the Government is facilitating these neglected communities’ upward social mobility.

The absence of a political clout to voice the concern of the Muslim community over racial profiling, that has made the Muslim youth a target of police and agencies, is another area that requires immediate emphasis. Muslim community also needs to underscore the need for implementing recommendations made by the Mishra Commission to provide 15% reservations for the minorities in the government jobs, provision of higher education opportunities, developmental benefits and availability of credit flow with 10% assured quota for Muslims. These recommendations are pertinent but in a joint electorate system where Muslims political and economic interests are totally overshadowed, given the obtaining state of affairs, hold no promise. Unless Muslims acquire a voice in the political system of India and secure dedicated quotas, guaranteed by legislative guarantees, there can be no empowerment of the community enabling them to benefit from the high pace of economical growth so proudly brandished by the Indian leaders and economists.

Muslims exclusion in Indian politics, irrespective of who takes the reins of the government, seems to have made the community resigned to a life of second rate citizens in perpetuity. It is instructive to note that in dealing with Muslims’ welfare and matters of advancement, the secular Congress Party has not been much different to BJP once their performance is viewed even superficially. In violation of its manifesto and charter, UPA in direct political competition with BJP, tried to sidetrack the Muslim community’s interests in a bid to vie for the Hindu votes. Congress made its lack of concern for the Muslim welfare glaringly obvious once it trashed the recommendations made by Sachar commission, refusing to even table it in the Parliament. Congress led UPA even refused to acknowledge the constitutional and legal recommendations made by the Mishra Commission in the wake of the Sachar findings. The reason behind this inertia is the stark realization that any relief to the Muslims is cross grained to the run of the democracy practiced in India where Muslims are destined to remain eternal losers under the crippling weight of a strident Hindu majority.

Indian infringement over Nepal border Area

Ishaal Zehra

THE history of demarcation of India-Nepal border began on March 4th, 1816, after the signing of the “Sugauli Treaty” between the then British India and the state of Nepal, which declares River Mahakali, of Nepal, as the border-line between both the countries. The Treaty was expected to resolve the border issues, but it did not. Even after such a long time, the dispute regarding the border and the no-man’s land area is being ensued now and then in different areas of Nepali border. The reason for the continuation of such dispute is that the rivers, counted on as border, diverged from their courses several times in the past. Interestingly, 595 Km of the border is defined by rivers. Mechi in the East, Mahakali in the West and Naryani in the Susta area, and the unavailability of old maps and documents to revise demarcations has made the situation more significant. The Central government of India deputed its Para-military security guards of special services bureau (Shastra Seema Bal) along the border where as to counter guard the Nepali side of border-line, presence of Nepali security is almost nil!. Taking advantage of the ignorant attitude of Nepalese towards border guard, India started encroachment of the border land. She has said to encroach over 60,000 hectares in 21 of the bordering districts, by now. There has been a lot of hue and cry over the encroachment by Nepali people which unfortunately never fell on the deaf ears of the giant called India.

India surrounds Nepal from the East, West and South. There is a 1,808 km long border between Nepal and India, where 26 districts of Nepal adjoin Indian Territory, marking 54 areas of disputes altogether where the main ones include Kalapani- Limpiyahura, Susta, Mechi and Tanakpur. There is often found an opportunistic overtone in both countries regarding the ownership of such disputed border points. Hence, to resolve the issue, an India-Nepal Joint Technical Level Boundary Committee has been set up in motion which is still to find a reasonable solution for this false encroachment issue.

The encroachment by India started right after the Indo-Sino border war of November 1962. After facing defeat the Indian army set-up a camp inside Nepali’s territory at Kalapani to monitor the Chinese activities. But now they claim that the area belongs to them. However, reports prepared by Buddhi Narayan Shrestha, former director general of the Department of Survey Nepal, corroborates that the maps of 1850 and 1856 prepared by the Survey of India with the participation of Nepalese authority clearly states that the river originates from Limpiyadhura, 16 km North-West of Kalapani, which proves that Kalapani belongs to Nepal. But India refuses to accept those maps as proof. They say that the map prepared by them in 1875 should be considered as proof which shows river Mahakali origin is beyond Kalapani. Interestingly, the said map does not have Nepal’s certification.

The other disputed area situated in the East of Naryani River, is the Susta area, which is the tensest area owing to encroachment. Some time ago, over one thousand Indian villagers backed by Indian border police force (SSB) had forcibly entered the Nepali territory in Susta. They completely destroyed sugarcane in about ten hectares of land and also manhandled men and women. Where the locals of Susta complain such incidents are rampant in the area. The main reason behind the dispute is the changing course of Naryani River, over the past decades. The river has said to change its course towards the Nepalese side in the West. India has encroached about 14,000 hectares of the reclaimed land because of this. The intrusion happened in stages over a period of 73 years. Considering the situation, the people of Nepal had launched a “save Susta campaign”. The organizers requested students of Nepal to join them and launch a valley wide campaign from Nepal’s capital Katmandu. The purpose of the campaign was to inform the world about the wicked plans of her “polite” neighbor India. Actually the reason to start off the border dispute at Susta side is that Susta is surrounded by Indian Territory on three sides -the North, South and East, and on the West it is the Naryani River. Hence, cutting off Susta from its mother land becomes much easier for India to occupy it which will pave her closer to the “Greater India” dream of Hindus.

The other most talked about point of dispute is Mechi. India’s disapproval of “Junge pillers” as the main boundary pillars has sparked the Mechi border dispute. The map published by the British India right after the Sauguli Treaty clearly indicates those pillars to be the main boundary pillars. Even history is evident that British had erected those pillars as monuments of Nepal-India border. But the credit goes to the Indian desire of getting control over weak and tiny neighbours which made her to incite the dispute by denying the original Sauguli Treaty signed by the British and the Nepal Kingdom.

According to the official records, Nepal covers a total area of 147,181 Sq Km. But in reality, the territory of Nepal is gradually shrinking because of the increasing encroachment by India. The Maoists Young Communist league (YCl) once submitted a memorandum to the Indian embassy Katmandu, demanding immediate return of the encroached land by the Indians in Susta area but later the political havoc in Nepal made everything go vanish for some time. They demanded that scientific demarcation of the border land must be done as per historical maps, the encroached territories should be given back to Nepal and the bilateral bordering area should be regulated. The district level of Nepal and India earlier agreed not to allow the use of encroached land for any purpose and put the issue at the central level for the resolution of the problem. But despite the agreement Indian farmer have been cultivating in the disputed area. More than 125 Bighas of Nepali land has been encroached by Indian farmers in year 2007 alone.

The Nepal-India joint Technical level Boundary Committee has supposed to have completed 98% of the task of strip-mapping the border, as per 1874 Persian map adopted by the committee. According to them all the disputes, except Susta and Kalapani, have been resolved. But when the border is traced in the field, many instances of encroachment are found. The unwisely decision of Nepalese side of accepting the Persian map as the basis of demarcation has made them deprived of 1630 hectares of their own land, which now lies in Indian territory. The border committee somehow, could not act the way it ought to. It failed to take firm decisions regarding border disputes at several places, such as the presence of Indian Paramilitary force in Kalapani since 1962.

The amusing part is that India ignoring all her regional disputes is always eager to malign Pakistan by making her a part of every Indian dispute (with whom so ever it may be). And her practice is same even in this land dispute problem. Propaganda against Pakistan is the main instrument of Indian Intelligence. Exposing Indian hegemonic designs, Nepali media says that although India grumbles a lot of the India-Nepal open border being misused by the ISI, it is actually India’s own intelligence agency which is blatantly exploiting the open border. Today every tom, dick and Harry knows that the Terai agitation was actually fueled by India. Earlier when Nepal was a kingdom, India used to supply arms and ammunition to the warring fractions of the Terai and gave safe sanctuary to its leaders, as exposed by a visiting team of United Nation Mission in Nepal (UNMN). The Research and Analysis Wing of Indian Intelligence (RAW) is active in Nepal for the last 40 years, earlier it was only the Intelligence Bureau (IB), operating from there. Experts say that due to open border and special relations with India and Indian association in political changes in 1950, 1990 and 2006, it has become easy for RAW to perform disguised role in Nepal. Raw is not only involved in creating instability and disturbing peace in the Asian region but its name is also associated with terrorism.

India has many interests in Nepal to fulfill which it has gradually made her strong political, diplomatic, economical and cultural influence there, all due to RAW’s efforts. Her main strategy is to keep Nepal instable and always dependent towards India. In this regard, she has supported arms to the establishment as well as anti-establishment groups in Nepal, according to the former Prime Minister BP Koirala’s biography. The untrustworthy nature of India is evident from the past. She has a history for formulating efforts on multiple fronts to weaken the already fragile country to facilitate its swallowing. It is high time when all the Nepalese, currently divided among various political affiliations, should come together against the onslaught, instigated by India, in Nepalese territory and understand the game-plan of their so-called considerate neighbors. And India also should realize that the flame she has ignited in Nepal can very well extend to its own northern flank and the unstable southern part as well.

WHITHER INDIAN PEACEKEEPERS?

Amjed Jaaved

India boasts of professional competence and conduct of its peacekeeping forces. But, the facts tell a different story. Take Republic of Congo. In view of elusive ceasefire (1998-2003) between rival groups, the United Nations deployed a multinational 8,000-strong force there. The force evinced sterling-clean conduct, except for two groups of Indian `soldiers’. One group indulged in gold trafficking and gun running. And, the other committed `sexual exploitation and abuse’ in Congo’s North Kivu province.

The local commander tried to cover up the incidents for fear of beclouding UN peacekeepers’ image. But, Human Rights’ Watch (HRW) somehow managed to get an inkling of the Indian troops’ moral infarctions. When Indians’ misconduct surfaced in the HRW report, the United Nations’ Secretary General Ban ki Moon, had to order an inquiry through the Office of Internal Oversight Service.

The Service confirmed several allegations. As such, the secretary general had to demand from India `disciplinary action to the maximum degree permitted by Indian law’ against Indian peacekeepers’.

India’s defence minister, A. K. Antony and vice chief of army staff, M. L. Naidu, had to carry out a time-bound probe to punish the offenders. Aside from moral turpitude, Indian peacekeepers regard gun running as a lucrative pastime. They do so, not as individuals, but as state-sponsored-policy agents. Indian peacekeepers in Sri Lanka amply bear out this policy role.

India forced Sri Lanka to accept its `mediation’ and `peacekeeping’. During peacekeeping, its forces never made a sincere attempt to eliminate the LTTE. They were more interested in establishing a pro-India administration in northern Sri Lanka than exterminating armed rebels.

Prabhakarn was India’s prodigal son. He received political, financial, and military support from India’s central government during 1978-87. He enjoyed patronage of not only the Tamil Nadu’s state government, but also the politicians from all shades of opinion in that state Prabhakaran lived in Tamil Nadu for several years. His Ambassador car used to be escorted by Tamil Nadu state police. He sustained his outfit’s warfare through supplies of arms, ammunition, explosives, medicines, etc from Tamil Nadu, his base of operations.

The position of the LTTE vis-à-vis India was total cooperation until Rajiv Gandhi began to compel it to negotiate outside Eelam context in late 1986. The Indian agencies the RAW, and Q Branch of the Tamil Nadu police not only armed and funded the LTTE but also provided logistical as well as intelligence support for their operations. The Sri Lankan government realised that Indian forces were actually perverting, not keeping peace by avoiding confrontation with the LTTE. So, it considered it wise to initiate negotiations with the militants. It directed Indian peace keepers to pack up and leave Sri Lanka.

India reluctantly left Sri Lanka. But, look, what it did before leaving! She decided to punish the LTTE for its conciliatory attitude towards the Sri Lankan government. It expressed its ennui at the LTTE by raising, arming, training and funding another militant force, Tamil National Army.
The Indians conscripted `volunteers’ from the refugee camps, and trained them in handling weapon and explosives. For easy identification, lest they should slip out, the young men drafted were shaved and their eyebrows plucked.

On June 23, 1989, president Premadasa asked the IPKF to remain in their barracks, if they could not withdraw by end-July, as he earlier directed. Judging the government’s mood, Indians decided to withdraw. But, before doing so they heavily armed the TNA to pave way for gory clash between the LTTE and the TNA.

Rohan Gunaratna points out: “Most of the Indian troops were airlifted on board Soviet-built Ilyushin-76 transport aircraft. Accompanying these planes were Antonov-32 transport planes carrying arms and ammunition for the TNA” (Indian Intervention) in Sri Lanka, p. 3560. To India’s ill fate, the TNA was wiped off in a few months.

The Sri Lankan experience reflects that Indian peacekeepers do not keep peace. They pervert it. They are morally bankrupt. In view of Indian government‘s ulterior motives in peacekeeping in foreign lands, these forces should never be deployed anywhere in the world.

RAW THE RASCAL by PREM RAJ in Columbo

Up to the mid-seventies the Sri Lankan government had kept India happy by following policies which followed the Indian line - domestically and externally. The trouble began in 1977 when the Sri Lanka Freedom Party (SLFP) lost power to the Jayewardene-led United National Party in elections. He moved towards a more cooperative policy with the United States and Sri Lanka chose to oppose the Indian demand for the withdrawal of all foreign naval forces from the Indian Ocean. Mrs. Gandhi had already been irked by Sri Lanka’s support to Pakistan during the 1971 war when it allowed landing and fuelling facilities to Pakistan’s East-West commercial flights.

So RAW saw a perfect opportunity to exploit within the prevailing dispute between the Sinhalese majority (74 percent) and Tamil minority (14 percent) over distribution of economic and social spoils of independence. Before the two sides could work out a compromise, India, through its RAW, managed to polarise the two sides as well as militarise this essentially political conflict. On the Mukti Bahini model, RAW built up terrorist training camps in India for a number of Tamil terrorist organisations, while India suddenly began orchestrating a public campaign feigning concern because of the links the Tamils had with the 50 million Indian Tamils of Tamil Nadu state - which was separated from Sri Lanka by the Palk Straits. It was only a matter of time before the militants trained in India began sidelining the moderate Tamils and instead demanding complete independence - Ealam. Ironically, the presence of Tamil training camps in Tamil Nadu often created a law and order situation when large arms were captured by the state police. The surprise for the state government came when New Delhi ordered that such captured material be returned.

According to Rohan Gunaratna, in his book Indian Intervention in Sri Lanka, RAW waged a secret war in India beginning 1983 so that when the Sri Lankan armed forces launched a major offensive against the Tamil militancy in 1987, the Indian government had already ensured that the Tamils were well supplied and were able to conduct terrorist acts that brought the war closer to Colombo. Tamil Nadu had become the sanctuary for the Tamil terrorists in their hit-and-run tactics. Already, a year prior to this offensive, that is by 1986, there were over 20,000 Indian trained and financed Tamils and India forced Sri Lanka through this militant pressure to alter its foreign policy. But even more crucial, India by now was systematically destabilising Sri Lanka. Being unable to resist the temptation to now intervene directly, India used the Sri Lankan offensive against the Tamil terrorists to force Sri Lanka to accept India’s armed intervention ostensibly to save ‘ innocent Tamil civilians’. Unfortunately for India, the controversial Indo-Sri Lankan Accord of July 1987 proved to be as much of a failure as India’s policy of direct intervention. The result was India’s massively assisted LTTE (Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam) turned on its benefactor and declared war against the Indian forces in Sri Lanka. All in all, this Indian adventure killed 60,000 men, women and children and forced the Indians to withdraw their forces without successfully completing their mission. The price has been steep for both India and Sri Lanka and even today Sri Lanka is paying the price for this Indian-initiated and RAW inspired polarised conflict. The extent of RAW’s role in this affair has been painstakingly documented by Gunaratna in his book on the Indian intervention.