Wednesday, February 29, 2012

purushaarthaalu - artham


అర్థం, అర్థ-కామ-ధర్మ-మోక్షాలనే నాలుగు విధాలైన పురుషార్థాలలో మొదటిది.

మన ఋషులు మనం చెసే ప్రతి పనియొక్క పరమార్థం (ఏ ప్రయోజనం/లాభం కోసం ఆ పని చెస్తున్నాము) బట్టి, ఆ పనులని నాలుగు విధాలుగా విభజించారు; అవే పురుషార్థాలుగా పిలవబడుతున్నాయి.

ప్రాణం ఉన్న ప్రతిజీవి ఆ ప్రాణాన్ని కాపాడుకోవడం కోసం ప్రయత్నిస్తుంది. మృత్యువు నుంచి తనను తాను కాపాడుకొనడంలో ఆ ప్రాణి చేసే ప్రతి కర్మ లెదా పనిని ఆర్థ-పురుషార్థం గా పరిగణిస్తాం.

ఈ అభద్రత అనేది, అనేక రకాలుగా వుంటుంది. ఆకలి, దాహం, ఛలి, ఎండ, వర్షం; ఇలాగ ఎన్నో అభద్రతలు ప్రతి ప్రాణి ఎదుర్కొంటుంది ప్రతి నిముషం. వీటితోపాటే తన వంశాన్ని నిలబెట్టుకొవడానికి చేసే వివాహ లెదా సంసార కర్మ (పని) కూడా ఆర్థ పురుషార్థం కిందకే వస్తుంది.

ఈ సాధారణ అభద్రతకి మించిన ఏ కర్మ అయినా కామం అనే రెండవ పురుషార్థంగా పరిగణింపబడుతుంది. ఉదాహరణకి తన శరీర పొషణార్థం తీసుకునె ఆహారం అర్థం అయితె, తన జిహ్వ (రుచి) సంత్రుప్తికోసం తీసుకునే ఆహారం కామం అవుతుంది.

వ్యక్తి చేసే ఏ కర్మ అయినా, అది తన అర్థ పురుషార్థం కోసరం అయినా సరే, ధర్మం అనే మూడవ పురుషార్థానికి లోబడే జరగాలి. ఈక్కడ ప్రాణులని కర్త(లు) అని, భోక్త(లు) అని రెండు రకాలుగా విభజించారు మన ఋషులు. విచక్షనా జ్ఞానం కల మనుష్యులందరు కర్తలు అయితే, విచక్షనా జ్ఞానం లెని పక్షి, జంతు, వృక్ష గణాలన్ని భోక్తలుగా పిలవబడ్డాయి. ఈ భోక్తలు తాము చెసే పనులను (విలాస, వినోద, మైధునాలతో సహా - పక్షులు, జంతువులు ఇంకా వృక్షాలు కూడా వినోదం మరియు వుల్లాసం కోసం ఆటలాడడం మనం చూస్తూవుంటాము, జీవితంలో) ఏ మాత్రం కర్తృత్వ భావన లెకుండా (నేను ఈ పని చెస్తున్నాను అనె జ్ఞానం/ఆలొచన/భావన) చెస్తాయి కనుక వాటికి ఈ ధర్మం అనేది వర్తించదు. ఇదే కాకుందా ఈ భోక్తలు తమమీద ఆరొపింపబడ్డ కర్మలని తప్పించుకోలెక పొవడం (పశు, వృక్ష, జంతు పాలన ఇంకా బానిసత్వం) అనేది కూడా ఈ మినహాయింపుకు కారణం.

ఈ అర్థ పురుషార్థాన్ని వ్యక్తి స్థాయి నుంచి ఒక సంఘం స్థాయికి తీసుకు వెళితే దాన్ని ఈ ఆధునిక కాలంలో మనం పిలిచే దేశ సంరక్షన, భద్రత అనే భావన అవుతుంది. ఏ ప్రభుత్వ పాలన యొక్క పరమావధి అయినా తన దేశం/సంఘం లొని వ్యక్తుల సమిష్ఠి భద్రత మాత్రమె. ఈ భద్రత అనేది ఎన్నొ రకాలుగా వుంటుంది- సాంఘిక, భౌగొళిక, వారసత్వ, సంస్కృతిక, ఇంకా ఎన్నొ. అందుకే ఆర్య చాణక్య ఇలా అంటాడు తన అర్థశాస్త్రంలొ - "మనుష్యాణాం వ్రుత్తి: ఆర్ఠ:, మనుష్యవతీ భూమిరిత్యర్థ:, తస్యా: ప్రుథివ్యా: లాభపాలనోపాయ: శాస్త్రం ఆర్ఠశాస్త్రం ఇతి (15వ అధికరణం, 1వ శ్లోకం)" అంటే, మనుష్యుల జీవనోపాధి అర్థం. అనగా మనుష్యులున్న భూమి అని అర్థం (దేశమంటే మట్టి కాదొయ్, దేశమంటే మనుషులోయ్ - గురజాడ). ఆ భూమిని పొందడానికి, పాలించడానికి తగిన ఊపాయాన్ని చెప్పే శాస్త్రం అర్థశాస్త్రం.

ఏ ప్రభుత్వ/రాజరిక వ్యవస్థ అయినా ఈ అర్థ-పురుషార్థానికే పరిమితమై ఉంటుంది. ఎందుకంటే ఈ సమస్త విశ్వంలో ఉన్న అన్ని వనరులు ఎకమైనా కనిసం ఒక్క మనిషియొక్క కోరికలని కూడా సంత్రుప్తిపరచలెవు. అందుకే ఎన్ని ప్రభుత్వాలు మారినా అవి ఆ దెశంలొని ప్రజల కోరికలని తీర్చలెక పొతున్నాయి.

మరి వివేకవంతుడైన మనిషి ఈ అర్థ పురుషార్థాన్ని దాటే మార్గం ఏమిటి? దానికి మనం మనిషియొక్క జీవితం అనే మూలానికి వెళ్ళాలి. మనం ఈ జీవితాన్ని ఈ పుట్టుక మరియు చావు/మృత్యువు ల మధ్యలో వుండే కాలం గా భావించినంత కాలం మనం ఈ అర్థ పురుషార్థానికి బానిసై ఉండాలి. ఈ జీవితం యొక్క నిర్వచనం మార్చినప్పుడే మనం అర్థ-పురుషార్థాన్ని దాటగలుగుతాం.

మనం హిందు-ఇజం అని పిలుచుకునె మన సనాతన ధర్మం మన జీవితాన్ని ఆత్మ-స్వరూపం గా నిర్వచిస్తోంది. ఈ ఆత్మ తత్వాన్ని అర్థం చెసుకుని, మన ఆత్మ-స్వరూపాన్ని తెలుసుకోగలిగినప్పుడు అది మోక్షం అనే నాలగవ పురుషార్థం అవుతుంది. ఆ స్థితిలో ఈ అర్థ-కామ-ధర్మ పురుషార్థాలు అన్ని లీనమైపొతాయి.

స్వస్తి!

Tuesday, February 28, 2012

Purusharthas - Artha

Artha is the first of four Purusharthas: Artha, Kama, Dharma, and Moksha.


The fundamental quest of any living being is to stay alive and fight the insecurity of 'death/Mr'tyu'. This pursuit for security is called Artha, the first Purushartha.


It is instinctive for a living being to search and acquire food to fight hunger, water for thirst, dwelling for security from elements, procreate to continue one’s lineage etc., which are part of pursuing the Artha Purushartha. Any pursuit that goes beyond this basic sense of security becomes the second Purushartha, Kaama. For example - acquiring food to sustain one's life and health is Artha, whereas the desire to have a specific taste/type of food becomes Kaama.


Even this natural pursuit of security has to be done within the limits of a socially acceptable code of conduct, Dharma, the third Purushartha. The live beings are separated into two groups: the species that are mere Bhoktas - all non-human beings who have limited consciousness; and Kartaas - humans who are beings with enough level of consciousness to choose their actions. Only the Kartaas are bound by the Dharma - code of conduct, whereas Bhoktas are destined to accept whatever action is imposed on them.


When extrapolated to a society, the Artha Purushartha becomes the modern concept of National Security. The purpose and objective of any governance system is to ensure that all its citizens are provided this basic sense of security in terms of the social, civilizational and territorial definitions of a given nation. Chanakya thus defines Artha "ManuShyaaNaam Vrutti : ArTha:, Manushyavatii Bhoomirityartha:, Tasyaa: pruThivyaa: LaabhaPaalanOpaaya: Saastram ArThaSaastram Iti = The process of human livelihood is Artham, and the process of acquiring and securing such a society is science of Artha or Artha-Sastram" in his Arthashastra (Chapter 15:1).


No government's mandate goes beyond this Artha-Purushartha, because even the whole universe cannot satisfy a single person's Kaama/desire.


The only way a being's Artha Purushartha can be neutralized is by redefining one's being. As long as a person's being is defined in the limited sense of life (period between material birth and material death), the Artha Purushartha exists. Only when this definition of oneself goes beyond this concept of life, this in-complete sense of insecurity can be solved permanently.


That alternative definition of self and life is defined as Aatma-swaroopa in Sanatana Dharma a.k.a Hinduism. That is why all other Purusharthas dissolve when one realizes one's Aatma-swaroopa-- Moksha, the last Purushartha.

Friday, February 24, 2012

Secularism – A leash or shackle in Bharat’s neck? Part 1


The other day I watched the movie “Rise of the Planet of the Apes”. The story is about a Chimpanzee called “Caesar” that received a gene-therapy drug, developed to improve the brain cell capacity in Alzheimer's patients, and achieves human-level intelligence. At first Caesar is un-aware of its social status but starts to resent the leash in its neck after seeing a family's German shepherd being restrained from coming after him. Caesar wonders if he deserves to be restrained like a pet, which might hurt itself and others due to its animal-level intelligence and low emotional-intelligence. Eventually Caesar revolts against its captivators by first exposing other Chimpanzees and apes to the same gene-therapy drug (it got) and then liberating them from the shackles of human civilization in order to lead a free life among its kind and build a civilization of his own.


*****

The European wars of religion conducted in the name of Christianity brought immense suffering and destruction to European Anglo-Saxon society. The Church played a significant role in this and the political response of the European society was to separate the Church from state affairs. This is called as Secularism – separation of Church and State in a Christian society.
The first non-Christian society that adopted Secularism is the modern state of Turkey (1923). The past incarnation of Turkey is Asia-Minor, which is the land bridge between Asian and European continents. This is the region that is much contested by the Islamic Middle-East/West-Asia and Christian Europe. As long as the Islamic Ottoman Empire lasted (1302-1922), this region remained the center of Islamic power. The Ottoman Empire was defeated in the First World War, leading to the formation of the new republic, Turkey, in 1923. If this were to happen in medieval times, the Turkish society would have been converted into Christianity. Since the west itself separated the church from the state, a modern version of this political overlordism, Secularism, was accepted as the compromise option by both sides. This transformed the definition of Secularism from “separation of Church and State” to “Christianity without Church” in the modern geopolitical context.

The next major society that accepted Secularism is the Hindu-majority India (1947). Once again this Hindu majority nation (India) was colonized by Christian west and the only compromise option for India to get its independence is to accept Secularism (read the overlordship of Christianity without Church) as the governance model. It is pertinent to note out that half of Muslim-majority India, that became Pakistan at the same point, did not choose to become a secular state. Perhaps this is the compromise that the Hindu-majority India is forced into with Christian Britain in return for its support to convince the numerous princely states in favor of India.

Saturday, January 21, 2012

Who is talking to Pakistan – India or INC?

The recent visit by Congress MP and former Minister of State, Ministry of External Affairs, Sri Sashi Tharoor offers an interesting insight into the dynamics of Indo-Pakistan dialogue process. To a student of Foreign Relations, it doesn't appear like a dialogue between two independent and sovereign nations but a dialogue between a dynasty (separated from its people) and a troublesome satrap. While it may satisfy the egos of some misguided nationalists, in reality such approach doesn't offer any realistic solutions to problems that matter and might result in unintended harm to Indian core Interests.
As part of his visit, Sri Tharoor gave multiple speeches and participated in talk shows. They are too long to reproduce/quote here. Some of his articles and debates (that are basis for this post) are:
Following are the key aspects of that deliberation and let us see what is said and what point of view (India’s or Indian National Congress Party’s) is presented.

1. Pakistan’s Civil-Military relationship
The whole world knows about the relationship between Pakistani civil-military relationships. If not for Pakistan evolving into the world’s capital of Islamic Terrorism, this is completely an internal matter of Pakistan society and India or any other country has no business talking about it.
One should distinguish between a civil Pakistani government and military Pakistan government if and only if there is a significant difference between these models on the use of Terrorism as a Foreign Policy tool.
The below graphic illustrates and the reader can clearly see that the Civilian governments in Pakistan are no different from their military counterparts when it comes to their “terrorism as instrument of state policy” concerning India.

Note: Blue = Civilian Govt Yellow = Sustained Terrorist programs (Punjab & JK) Red = Major terrorist events or wars
Combined with the on-going tussle between the current UPA2 administration and the nation’s armed forces leader Sri VK Singh one can understand the true purpose of Sri Tharoor’ s comments.
2. Cross-Border terror emanating from Pakistan in to India
Here Sri Tharoor admits that the people who believe that peace is possible between India and Pakistan are in minority. Yet he tries to present the minority opinion as Indian Foreign Relations objective.
Then he gives the longest rope to Pakistan by admitting that terrorist groups cannot be turned off like a tap; thus making the whole issue of “cross-border terrorism” meaningless.
What is important to India; stopping cross-border terrorism or free-trade/educational-exchange with Pakistan?
The root of this convoluted logic in Foreign Policy lies in INC’s need to recapture the Muslim vote-bank in India proper. Since it lost the Muslim vote bank to regional parties, post 1992 Babri Masjid demolition, INC failed to come to power on its own strength in Delhi. INC has tried many political tricks to bring this significant vote bank (15% vote share – that can influence >100 parliament constituencies) under its fold by witch hunting Post-Godhra riots and Saffron-Terrorism etc to no avail.
In its eagerness to solve this issue before 2014 elections, INC seems to have resorted to Paki-logic; by associating Indian Muslim community with better relations with Pakistan; giving Pakistan (sic) say in sub-continental Muslim affairs.
3. Peace talks between Govts of India and Pakistan
Sri Tharoor points out the lack of clarity on who in Pakistan, Civil Govt or Military, guarantees the agreements signed between the two nations and if the agreement signed by one party is honored by the other power center.
This is a basic challenge involved in solving in any multi-party negotiation problem. A simple approach would have been to request that both civil and military representatives are part of the negotiations.
4. Pakistani paranoia on Indian intentions
Sri Tharoor makes few assertions on this point.
  • India is totally reconciled to Pakistan’s existence as an independent state
  • A strong and stable Pakistan was in India’s interest
  • India is a “status quo-ist” power and there could be peace between the two sides if they agreed on “mutually acceptable parameters”.
The inherent contradiction in these assertions is - would India still want a “Strong and Stable” Pakistan even when there are no “mutually acceptable parameters” that are foundation for peace between these two nations, and would India still accept Pakistan’s existence under those circumstances?
5. Pakistani national obsession to dismember India
Sri Tharoor reminds us Pakistan’s long sponsored terrorism as part of its policy meant to “bleed India” and its efforts to wrest Kashmir from India and concludes that such policy is yielding negative results to Pakistani society and military as the chickens are coming home to roost.
Does it mean Pakistani terrorist policy is an acceptable instrument of foreign policy if it were to contain those jihadi terrorist outfits to India-centric operations only? Would this elder brotherly advice resonate in Pakistani strategic and military community? After all the whole Pakistani existence is based up on its Islamic identity and its military strategy is based on Jihad in the name of Allah. Would there be any need for Pakistan’s existence if it starts behaving like a mini-India?
6. Siachin conflict
Sri Tharoor says that “Indian political leadership is agreeable to vacating Siachin glacier region as a confidence building measure; but Indian Armed forces are not comfortable with this measure given Pakistani betrayal in Kargil in 1998 and Pakistani unwillingness to mark these positions electronically.”
This is the second most irresponsible assertion Sri Tharoor made in this spate of articles and discussions he had in Pakistan. With this single statement Sri Tharoor unwisely implies that
  • That there are two disparate assessments on Siachin issue within India
  • Indian political decision making is devoid of inputs from its military leadership
  • That Indian military must accept the agenda of political leadership even if it is inimical to Indian Interests (After all he was preaching Pakistan the same thing)
7. Life of Indian Muslims
That brings us to the most irresponsible assertion by Sri Tharoor in his Pakistan trip.
Instead of politely but firmly reminding his Pakistani hosts that Pakistan is not a representative of Indian Muslims, Sri Tharoor not only entertains such line of thought but also makes ludicrous excuses to his Pakistani hosts to suite his party’s political agenda.
When questioned by his Pakistani counterparts on the so-called (sic) Gujrat-Pogram, Sri Tharoor admits that this is a shameful event and squarely blames BJP government for these religious riots, well in sync with his party position and subsequent witch hunting by successive Congress governments.
In his eagerness to wash his (sic) secular dirty laundry in Pakistan (a religious state) Sri Tharoor forgets that
  • The sub-continent history is full of Hindu-Muslim religious clashes starting from the days the Islamic hoards pillaged peaceful Hindu subcontinent
  • The founding fathers (JL Nehru and MK Gandhi) of his political party did much-worse than Sri Narendra Modi in stopping the worst religious riots in 1947 resulting hundreds of thousands of Hindu and Muslim deaths
  • There have been more than 50 religious riots since 1947 under INC’s leadership, often triggered for Congress’s own political moves
These are just few examples. A careful analysis of INC’s strategy, thru Sri Tharoor’s words, towards Pakistan reveals two fundamental objectives
  1. That INC doesn’t want to make India’s vision as its political vision but instead want to make its vision India’s vision
  2. That INC doesn’t mind using its foreign policy to benefit its internal fortunes instead of making India’s fortunes as the primary goal of Indian foreign policy

In other words Sri Tharoor wants us to believe that “INC is India”!


Thursday, January 19, 2012

Gen. V.K. Singh episode - Following the political bread crumbs

Why would a corrupt and scam-infected coalition government try to remove the leader of the nation's armed forces over a non-issue? What makes a clerical error (incorrect DoB in a personal file) so important to the UPA2 administration that its Ministry of Defense wants to spend its ever dwindling political capital on this issue instead of selection of MMRCA partner or expanding LCA/Arjun acquisition into Indian Army or any other equally important issue?
The Political bread-crumbs

Siachin
- When his Pakistani counterparts raised the demilitarization of Siachin, Sashi Tharoor (Congress MP and former Asst. External Affairs minister) is on record saying Indian Political Leadership (read INC and MMS administration) is ready for that but it is the Indian Army that is not on board on this issue.
Is the successor of VK Singh is on board with INC/UPA2 government to vacate Siachin so INC can move forward with its Peace with Pakistan Program?

AFPSA – It was Indian Army again that halted the political moves initiated by Omar Abdullah with blessings of Rahul Gandhi.

Is the successor of VK Singh on board with INC/UPA2 government to remove AFPSA?

Kashmir Valley – Last year UPA2 and MMS sent special interlocutors (some of who later found to be receiving favors from Pakistani ISI) to discuss the peace options in the state of Jammu and Kashmir.
Is INC/UPA2 contemplating autonomy to Kashmir Valley or parts of J&K states and making sure that Indian Army will not put hurdles in these efforts as it might mean pulling Army back from LoC in some areas?

The Strategy

Given INC’s obsession to come back to power in 2014 at any cost and make Rahul Gandhi the PM of India, the following seems to be INC’s political strategy

2012 –
• Remove VK Singh and replace him with someone who will be part of INC’s vision for India.
• Make a peace deal with Pakistan on Siachin. IA vacates Siachin and Pakistani Army will not make any efforts to claim this area. India will not see any terror attacks on its soil in return.
Before 2014
• Remove AFPSA in JK and NE to consolidate Muslim and Christian vote banks
• Give Autonomy to Parts of JK or Kashmir Valley

2014-2019 (Assuming Rahul Gandhi is the PM)
• Make further peace moves with Pakistan.
• Declare the new LOC (with parts of Kashmir Valley given autonomy or given to Pakistan) as the international border with Pakistan and give up all claims on PoK

Propaganda Value
• Nehru-Gandhi dynasty is portrayed (using politically motivated media houses) as leaders of peace (Rahul Gandhi was on record saying that only his family can bring peace to India)
• Rahul Gandhi (INC) claiming to have solved the Kashmir problem for India permanently
The holy-grail of dynastic politics

The Gandhi-Nehru dynasty might invite Pakistan (and Bangladesh?) to become the extended electorate of India in the hope of consolidating the Muslim minority votes under its belt forever. Key political parties in Pakistan and Bangladesh might merge or join the UPA alliance in this effort; thus giving INC and Pakistani RAPE (Rich Anglicized Pakistani Elite) permanent hold over the political fortunes of Indian Subcontinent

It could be sold to the Indian public as
- An effort to guide Pakistan on the road of Democracy
- To accommodate Bangladeshi-immigrant sensitivities
- Eventual re-unification of India
Impact to Indian Geo-Political Environment
This may result in some unintended consequences to the Gandhi-Nehru dynasty and Hindu Bharat. When big people make mistakes, the price for those mistakes too will be huge.
Once India converts LoC into LAC, Pakistan can cede parts of PoK/NA to China so China’s hold over Tibet is complete and absolute. China might even buy some of these sparsely populated areas from Pakistan for onetime payment (Pakistan getting $20-50B onetime payment for giving up Northern Areas)
As and when Pakistan becomes the extended electorate of India, the founding objectives of Pakistan will be met. A modern version of Muslim-electorate dominated Mughalistan will be formed (as different state governments of Indian union – J&K x 10) from Pakistan to Bangladesh thru the Gangetic belt of India. The consolidated Muslim vote bank will demand (and probably receive) a higher say and share in the Indian success story disproportional to its contributions (20% contribution but gets 50% of share of the spoils).

Wednesday, July 21, 2010

Is Talibanization of Pakistan in Indian Interests?

In last few months there is increased strategic-discourse on Af-Pak conundrum given Obama administration’s determination to roll-out all overt military presence from Afghanistan. Former US Ambassador’s article in Indian media called for partition of Afghanistan giving de facto control of Sothern-Afghanistan to Pakistani supported Haqquani (the good Taliban) group, while retaining the Northern-Afghanistan under current Karzai administration with western help. His strategy also calls for focused cross-border air campaign against Taliban/AQ networks in Sothern-Afghanistan extending into Pakistani NWFP. This strategy essentially recognizes the ideological and organizational integration of Afghani-Taliban with Pakistani intelligence and armed forces, given that the decision on who should run Southern-Afghanistan is entrusted with Pakistan Army and ISI.

A further extrapolation of this reality brings us to the subject of this article – Talibanization of Pakistan. Given the real or perceived victories against super powers, USSR in 1990s and now USA, by an Islamic Mercenary force under a Jihadi call, it is highly likely that “other” associated parties see this as a potent strategy to extend their vested interests. Given their ideological, organizational, and logistical integration with Taliban and AQ forces, the most-religious sections of Pakistani Armed Forces and ISI might like to adopt this strategy and emulate Taliban success within and without Pakistan. These sections of Pakistani establishment will find supporting space, structures, and logistics in Pashtunistan area blurring political and sovereign borders of erstwhile Pakistan and Afghanistan.

Once this initiative gains traction, it will not take more than 2-3 years for the entire Pakistan nation to come under Taliban control, given the social, religious and logistical support system created for these very elements in Pakistan for past three decades by various civil and military administrations. There might be sporadic, half-hearted, and non-military resistance from the RAPE (Rich Anglicized Pakistani Elite) to Taliban advancement into Pakistan heart lands but it might not change the direction or the timeline of Pakistan’s Talibanization program once key sections of Pakistan Army make their switch. The USA (and others) may resist transformation of Pakistani crown jewels (nuclear arsenal) into Wahhabi nuclear assets; but there is very little chance of Pakistan losing these assets as it is highly unlikely for USA or its allies to invade Pakistan (in search of WMD).

In summary a new Islamic Talibani state of Pakistan (Land of Pure) is expected to be created in Indian sub-continent sometime between 2012 and 2015, essentially due to the world’s sole super power’s (USA) failed strategic vision and corrupt military strategy. By virtue of being the civilizational, political, geographical pivot of this region, India has paid the highest price for this western-perfidy in the name of geopolitics. In the past sixty years, India paid dearly for this western (especially UK and USA) misadventure with millions of lives (partition of India), countless terrorist attacks, and suppressed economic prosperity (anywhere between 2-5% of GDP growth between 1960 and 2010).

So the big question for Indian strategic community is – Is Talibanization of Pakistan in Indian Interests? How these developments of geopolitical dimensions in its extended region influence its internal and external policy? Let us analyze -

Geopolitics
Since its formulation, Pakistan relied heavily on external powers to sustain its [sic] identity, and achieve a psychological parity with its larger neighbor India. In its efforts Pakistan was supported politically, technologically, militarily, and economically by its 3.5 friends, namely USA, KSA, PRC as full partners and UK and JPN as partial partners. It is a well-known and well documented fact how each one of these patrons helped shape the Af-Pak region to achieve the current state of religious-fanaticism, social-militarization, disregard for human life and dignity, and mercenary-jihadism. These external powers have been sustaining Pakistan to undermine the other regional and global powers namely Russia, Iran, and India by funding it with more than US$10-20B a year on one or other account.

What would be the geopolitical value-proposition of Af-Pak region with the advent of Islamic Talibani state of Pakistan (ITP)? The new ITP will continue to offer its services to external players for monetary and military goodies but will lose its politico-ideological connection with certain patrons. Given USA’s continued presence and influence in Northern-Afghanistan and improved strategic-partnership with India, ITP may lose its geopolitical value to USA. ITP’s relationship with UK and JPN is highly correlated with its alignment with USA and thus will receive similar treatment. In such a scenario the financial support Pakistan received in the past two decades will not continue into the future. PRC might be tempted to support ITP to counter Indian raise in the short-term but any PRC-ITP relationship will lose its potential as Indo-PRC trade relationship dwarfs any geopolitical gains PRC might achieve thru ITP. In addition to that, ITP’s jihadi vigor might create new internal-dynamics in PRC’s Xinjiang province.

Thus the geopolitical value proposition of ITP will diminish as this region takes an overtly religious-mercenary dimension bringing half-century long shadow over Indian interests.

Economy
If Taliban rule of Afghanistan is any indicator, ITP will fail to nurture key policy and governance structures that are instrumental to achieve economic prosperity in modern sense. It is highly likely that the present feudal structures of Pakistan will evolve into warlord-like structures accumulating national wealth into very few pockets. Majority of the nation will remain poor and inefficient. ITP may be able to sell some of its services to potential geopolitical customers but will fail to become a reckoning force economically.

The present near-zero trade partnership between India and Pakistan turns out to be a blessing in disguise for India as there will be zero impact on Indian economy due to ITP’s transformation.

Nuclear War
This is a well debated issue. At present Pakistan possesses anywhere between 70-90 nuclear warheads and the means (missiles or aircraft) to deliver them. Pakistan’s stated nuclear policy is to use WMD in the event of a significant loss of territory or military capability; without defining what that significance level is.

Irrespective of its formulation, ITP will continue to have this capability as it will be near impossible to sweep of a nation of ITP’s size and population for WMD. A future ITP will also would maintain the same nuclear posture as Pakistan in order to maintain the ambiguity and keep the pressure on its foes, mainly India. Since the past and current administrations of Pakistan behaved no differently than a hypothetical Taliban nation; a fanatical religious world-view, terrorism as state-policy, and suppression of religious minorities, there will be little change in terms of the nuclear posture from a future ITP with regards to India.

As far as India is concerned, formation of ITP would remove the veil of non-state actors from the nuclear equation. Any nuclear attack (dirty or pure) will be viewed as an act of war and will invoke an existential response from India. In fact ITP would have lesser incentive to go nuclear against India than nuclear-blackmailing Iran, or Israel or West or even KSA to gain enhanced political and economic incentives and establish itself as the undisputed leader of Islamic-Ummah.

Refugee Issue
There is a very high probability of a refugee crisis developing in India’s western borders during late transformation phase of ITP (2014-15). It is highly probable that the refugee population is of two types – The RAPE class and religious minorities. Based on past behavioral patterns, the RAPE class will receive overwhelming support from Indian WKK-brigade (Wagha Kandle Kissers) wile the religious minorities will be seen as an economic and social burden on India by the Indian ruling class. Taking their history, behavior, and actions in Pakistan into consideration the motives and beliefs of RAPE class will be highly detrimental to Indian values, democracy, and pluralism. The RAPE class must be denied entry and access into India against the conventional wisdom of WKK-brigade.

Based on Bangladesh freedom movement and Talibanization of Afghanistan experiences, it is safe to assume that at least 15-20 million refugees will try to cross into India thru its western borders. These people will receive significant opposition and harassment from bordering Indian states Gujarat, Rajastan, Punjab, and Haryana, whereas there is fair chance that Kashmir valley separatists welcome some of these refuges on religious grounds for future maneuvers. India’s internal political fissures will be exploited by WKKs in all the border states to enhance their vested interests.

It is in the best interests of India to seal off Indian borders and contain any future refugee situation to af-pak region. One strategy is to support internal independence movements so the refugees see little need to move to India. Balochistan and Sindh regions offer great value in this regard, provided India offers generous financial and water resources under UN auspices. An alternative yet risky strategy would be for India to use UN to occupy a small area within ITP and declare it a demilitarized zone (DMZ) for refugees.

In all the possibility an impending refugee crisis will be a game changer vis-à-vis India. It is in India’s best interests that the Indian defense and political leadership prepares a well-rounded strategy to contain and support ITP refugee flow to serve its agenda.

Terrorism
The root of terrorism emanating from Pakistan lies in Pakistan’s identity crisis and jealousy. Pakistan created and supported various terror outfits within its borders to hurt India in the past two decades amounting to more than 50,000 Indian lives and more than $100B economic costs. This is no less than a nuclear attack. The advent of ITP will not change the ground situation in any way. ITP will become an overt terror state not only in Indian eyes but also for the international community. This will help India in removing the excuse of “non-state actors” and allow it to take suitable military action.

A possible side effect of the transformation of ITP might occur in Kashmir valley of Jammu and Kashmir. The Kashmir separatists might get emboldened by the perceived [sic] Islamic victory across the border and might demand either unification with ITP or implementation of Sharia in the valley. A logical approach to this issue would be to repeal Article 370, which gives special status to the state of Jammu & Kashmir, as the whole JK issue becomes meaningless with the formation of ITP.

At national level, talibanization of Pakistan will open new opportunities for India. Creation of ITP will convince the Indian public on the dangers of Islamic fundamentalism once and for all. This will enable the Government of India to develop suitable anti-terror laws and civic infrastructure such as special intelligence services, courts, and paramilitary forces. If done properly such an initiative will have many positive side effects such as lower crime rate, better international credit rating etc.,

Role of Religion
People born and die, whereas the religion lives on and evolves/transforms. At least two generations of Afghans lived thru current geopolitical game with no hope in the horizon. Similarly India has seen three generations of Pakistanis born and die in the past 60 years, but peaceful-coexistence is still a mirage in Indian subcontinent. Pakistani society’s hatred and jealousy for any/every Indian value has increased many fold in the same period. Indian Muslims must make note of this in evolving their faith to suite modern values of religious pluralism, respect for women’s-rights, and focus on scientific reasoning in life.

Indian Muslims received their faith from the desert lands of west-Asia. It is time for Indian Muslim community to return the favor to Islamic-Ummah by offering an alternative perspective on faith, life, and environment where Islamic-Ummah can be at peace with itself and others. Indiam Muslims should demand a seat at Ummah’s high-table where they can explain their brothers and sisters the difference between religion and one’s history, culture and heritage and that blind adherence to foreign culture, history and heritage removes the individual from their environment destroying the very spiritualism that religion claims to improve.

Conclusion
In summary the overall political, military, and terror posture of Pakistan will not change in the event of overt talibanization of Pakistani society. On the other hand it will open up new opportunities for Indian political leadership to get out of the geopolitical shackles of Pakistan and continue with its national resurgence. This development also provides a rare opportunity for Indian Muslims to lead the world Muslim community by balancing between religion and local culture/heritage.



Above table summarizes various influence factors, their weightages and threat probabilities with respect to current state of Pakistan and a possible ITP. As we can see the overall threat to Indian national interests is reduced by nearly 15%, which is equal to complete disappearance of Pakistani terrorism.

Now it is up to Indian political leadership to plan ahead and come up with suitable strategies to benefit from this once in a millennium opportunity. Such a vision would require clarity of national purpose, self-confidence, and efficient use of national resources. The world community is looking at India with great interest and hope.