Random Thoughts on India

India's Very Own Onion

2011-07-22T10:09:00.000-07:00

www.fakingnews.com, India's equivalent of America's The Onion. Take a look.

SLAPP Suits in the US

2010-05-31T10:41:00.000-07:00

Today's article in NYT. What is admirable is the rapidity of the response in Congress.

Potential Unintended Consequences of an HIV Vaccine

2009-09-27T20:23:00.000-07:00

Interesting article. It can be accessed here.

Interview with Salman Khurshid: An 'Evolving' Ministry

2009-09-02T15:34:00.000-07:00

Today's interview in The Hindu with Salman Khurshid is quite revealing. In his own ministry, he has virtually no power except to dole out a few scholarships (maybe it ought to be rechristened the ministry of scholarships). He sees his ministry not as powerless but as 'evolving'. This is a little shocking - ideas are supposed to evolve before governments act upon them; here it seems to work the other way round. If whoever came up with this brainwave had bothered to study Darwin, they would have realized that evolution is not a very predictable process and much of it involves wasted effort since only the fittest of the lot will survive. Perhaps prudence and efficiency were not considerations in making this decision.

His other main idea of serving as an equal opportunity ministry is equally fuzzy. I can understand an equal opportunity commission but a ministry? Ministries of social welfare, law and human resources are all already involved in drafting reservations/affirmative action policies; so what is a new equal opportunity ministry going to do? Besides, ministries ought to have enough responsibilities to justify their existence and a ministry with a one point agenda is, much like a one trick pony, quite dispensable. Quotas/affirmative action policies involve long term monitoring and implementation more than drafting which is why a commission is a better answer. Clearly, Khurshid's half-baked ideas are not going to take him or his ministry very far which means his thinking must go through some more 'evolution' before it achieves anything meaningful.

Craigslist and Business as a Community Service

2009-09-02T12:11:00.000-07:00

Here. A very interesting article about Craigslist, its owner Craig Newmark and CEO Buckmaster. Success of its philosophy is a good reason to rethink present day business models.

GOI Not to Appeal Against Delhi HC Decision

2009-09-01T17:41:00.000-07:00

All major newspapers have reported today that the government of India has decided not to oppose the Delhi HC's decision in the Naz Foundation case when it comes up for appeal in the Supreme Court. With this decision, Naz foundation's victory is now pretty much a foregone conclusion.

I am not aware of many cases where the attorney general chooses not to defend the law of the land (however bad it may be in intent or practice). In that sense, this is somewhat unusual and represents a departure from the usual practice. But in light of the natural sympathy and support of the concerned ministers for the rights of gay people, this is quite understandable.

I share that sentiment but do question whether such a method of legislation through the backdoor via the agency of the court is the proper way to do it. The big question that remains is what the outcome of this case will mean to constitutional jurisprudence in the future. Will article 15 now end up being amended to include analogous grounds not included within its text much as with article 21? Will the laws and outcomes of foreign court cases provide the sole basis in the future for the Supreme Court to determine reasonableness under article 21? Does this mean that more and more laws are now going to be amended/overturned on the ground that they have been abolished or replaced by newer versions in the West?

The transaction cost of a court case will always remain lower than that of a legislative battle. So are we now condemning the legislatures to a moribund state for good because they cannot 'perform' with the desired 'efficiency' unlike the relatively 'more efficient' courts? There is another small problem with this newly minted system. The people of India and their elected representatives do not formally figure anywhere in it. Activists demand change, the media campaign for their cause and courts respond to it basing their judgment on the fact that some other countries also have the same desired outcome (as the US Chief Justice said, 'standing over a crowd and picking out your friends'). The law stands changed and the people are presented with a fait accompli. The outcome may be desirable in this instance but that does not alter the larger point: neither the people nor their leaders are left with much of a say in what the laws that govern them ought to be and in particular, what their own constitution means or ought to mean.

The final decision may be sweet news and will undoubtedly launch the Indian media into another frenzy but the trail of wreckage of hallowed constitutional principles (including the basic question of popular prerogatives in a sovereign democracy) this case would have left during the course of its journey will endure and cause much damage to the system for many years to come.

NYT on Pakistan

2009-08-11T20:20:00.000-07:00

Acorn has a point. The New York Times does seem clueless about Pakistan.

Nobel Peace Prize May Do More Bad Than Good

2009-08-11T20:17:00.001-07:00

A well-written critique of the Nobel Peace Prize.

Africa's Non-Existent Crisis

2009-08-11T20:13:00.000-07:00

I was a little surprised to read this but things may actually not be as bad as they are made out to be.

2009-08-10T07:23:00.001-07:00

Rapid diagnostic test for H1N1 is not very sensitive. Here.

Islam and Homosexuality (with particular reference to Pakistan)

2009-08-10T07:21:00.000-07:00

Here.

Stiglitz Calls for More Spending

2009-08-10T07:19:00.000-07:00

Stiglitz favors another stimulus. His post in today's Guardian can be accessed here.

Mankiw on Waxman-Markey's Cap and Trade System

2009-08-09T19:18:00.000-07:00

Mankiw writes that the Waxman-Markey climate change bill means higher current and prospective tax rates and calls for a veto. I think that is too strong a position to take. His point is well taken but a higher tax might very well lead to a backlash and more negotiations in Congress leading to an amended bill in the future. For now, this bill is a start however bad it may be. Good may not be good enough but the perfect is also the enemy of the good.

Greenwald on Bolton

2009-08-05T14:32:00.000-07:00

John Bolton's criticism of Bill Clinton's North Korea visit prompts Glenn Greenwald to write:
"This morning, John Bolton borrowed sugar from his neighbor and felt deeply humiliated because he got it without having to threaten."

Drugs, Innovation and Health-Care Reform

2009-08-05T07:07:00.000-07:00

Here is an interview conducted by Ezra Klein with Dr.Jerry Avorn, chief of Pharmacoepidemiology and Pharmacoeconomics at Brigham and Women's Hospital. Here is sharp critique of his answers by Megan McArdle (link via Gregory Mankiw's blog).

New Book on Geology, Religion and Creationism

2009-08-04T08:45:00.001-07:00

A new book is out titled 'Geology and Religion: A History of Harmony and Hostility' by M. Kolbl Ebert. A review by Alan Cutler is available on Nature Geoscience. I have not yet read the book but I found some of the observations he makes in the review quite interesting. I quote an excerpt of his analysis of the conflict between creationism and science:

In what may be the most illuminating chapter of this book, Richard A. Peters, a self-described former young-Earth creationist, offers an explanation for the tenacious grip this doctrine has on the minds (and hearts) of many people whom we might think should know better. As with the question of the Lisbon earthquake (discussed in a chapter by Agustín Udías), it all comes down to human sinfulness and God's righteousness. No death or suffering could have existed before the fall of man; therefore no organisms could have existed for an appreciable length of time before Adam ate the apple. To assert otherwise, even that lowly trilobites lived and died before humans, is to impugn God's mercy over innocent creatures. Not only that, but it also lets wicked humans off the hook. Peters writes that "what unites the radical creationists is a need to declare God innocent of the charge of creating an already fallen world, a world full of suffering and death and futility from the beginning." The issue, then, is not that modern science threatens the idea of God's existence or his power, but that it threatens the idea of his goodness.

That, as he notes, is 'a tough nut to crack'. The other point he writes about is how 'it is no longer solely a North American phenomenon but is spreading worldwide, and that many of its adherents are highly educated.' Experience supports this assertion. Indeed, a recent article in Science showed how Darwin is viewed with great suspicion in Islamic countries as well. Quite obviously, the conflict between science and religion is growing globally.

There being no organized opposition to Darwinism in India, no one seems to have paid much attention to Indian perceptions on this question. I have however heard a Swamiji a while ago argue that Darwinian evolution was contrary to the theory of rebirth in ancient Hindu texts. Anyone with more knowledge regarding the Hindu perspective on this is welcome to comment.

Fertility and the Right to Education

2009-08-03T20:03:00.000-07:00

I have so far not seen a lot of articles on the right to education bill. Though the contents of this bill have been in the public domain for a while, debate only now seems to be picking up. Latha Jishnu's article in the Business Standard titled 'The right to cut-rate education' was a good read. Today's Indian Express op-ed calls for changes to provide for the disabled.

One question is worth considering in light of Arokiasamy's latest study on the decline of fertility in India. I suspect most of us are well aware of the considerable literature about the inverse relationship between literacy (female in particular) and fertility (Dreze and Murthi, 2001; several articles in the World Development Issue of October, 2002 as well as others). From this standpoint, promoting primary education is an excellent way to also promote a reduction in fertility. But in the last few years, it has been noticed that the small family norm has gained considerable currency across communities. This new paper demonstrates the impact diffusion of this idea has had amongst uneducated women and how the cause-and-effect relationship might be working in the opposite direction. A brief excerpt:

The magnitude of overall TFR [Total fertility rate] reduction vis-à-vis TFR reduction among illiterate women over the period of three rounds of NFHS surveys shows that the main contribution to the overall fertility decline in majority of the Indian states comes from illiterate women. The states that make major contributions include Bihar,Haryana, Himachal Pradesh, Punjab, Jammu and Kashmir, Madhya Pradesh, Uttar Pradesh, Assam, West Bengal, Andhra Pradesh and Karnataka....The reduction in TFR in the Indian states is mainly because of emerging behavioural change among the uneducated women.

From this, he concludes: "Such a major shift in demographic behaviour clearly suggests that uneducated women perceive contraceptive use and fertility limitation as means to realise growing parental aspirations of good quality education, better health of children and overall well-being of families." Thus, even uneducated women are now making what Gary Becker called the quantity-quality trade-off and choosing to have fewer children who would enjoy the advantage of greater parental resources. In the hypothetical situation where this bill is enacted and fully implemented with the government providing universal primary education of high quality, a fundamental element of this trade-off, namely the cost of children's primary education, would no longer be operative (the longer it takes to enact the bill and implement it, the greater its likely impact given that this phenomenon is now on the rise). Would that not then amount to incentivizing higher fertility through state subsidy?

Corporate Censorship and Lobbyist Talk Shows

2009-08-01T18:43:00.000-07:00

A NYT story ('Voices from above silence a cable TV feud') today details how talk show commentators were censored on MSNBC and Fox News because of the harm they did to the interests of GE (which owns MSNBC) and News Corp. Glenn Greenwald has more. He writes of how a corporate lobbyist also doubles as an MSNBC political analyst! Not that anyone is unaware of this phenomenon but this is quite the story of, as Greenwald calls it, 'sleaze and corporate whoredom'.

On China's Economic Growth and How It is Measured

2009-08-01T09:26:00.001-07:00

Here (link via Marginal Revolution).

China's One Child Success

2009-08-01T09:11:00.000-07:00

Reversal of the strict one-child policy in Shanghai has made world news. Today's Indian Express op-ed is the best summary I have seen so far about it. The big question though is whether this would be enough. European countries and Russia trying to reverse their declining population have so far not been successful in the effort.

Scientific Approach to Fighting Poverty

2009-07-31T10:55:00.000-07:00

I strongly recommend reading Esther Duflo's interview in The Hindu Business Line. There is much sense in the points she makes about a lack of research about effectiveness of various schemes. It also tells us why it may not be a good idea to rapidly expand coverage of schemes without waiting for the outcome of pilot studies.

Vinay Sitapati on Homosexuality: A Comment

2009-07-29T14:48:00.000-07:00

Vinay Sitapati's op-ed 'Which tale to tell?' in the Indian Express today is not very well thought out. His first point may be true that many believe (falsely) it is a western rich-boy perversion. But his argument on harm is more troublesome: 'After all, we don’t have the freedom to smoke cocaine or commit incest (even though, strictly speaking, these choices don’t harm anyone else).' The argument in case of both cocaine and incest is that they do harm someone. In case of cocaine, it is not only the person consuming it but also those who are victims of crimes perpetrated either by people on the drug or by those committing crimes in pursuit of it. The same goes for incest where the argument is that it harms the child who might be born out of that relationship.

The next problem is with his facts. He says 'Since scientific data conclusively proves that sexual orientation is determined at an early age and is unchangeable, being gay is like being born a woman, a Dalit or a Muslim.' This is not entirely true. It is now said that sexual orientation may not necessarily be determined at an early age and may evolve over time. Prof. K.S.Jacob's op-ed in The Hindu recently also reiterates this point.

His third error is his statement on the equality portion of the judgment: 'Just as there can be no discrimination on the basis of race, caste or religion, those with alternate sexual orientations cannot be discriminated against. This is what the high court meant when it said that the constitutionally protected identity of “sex” in articles 15 and 16, includes “sexual orientation”.' This is factually incorrect. Citing Anuj Garg, the court said that sexual orientation is analogous to sex, not included within the category of sex though it quoted from a foreign opinion which suggested that sex should include sexual orientation.

The author believes that the equality argument is a better one than a freedom/Art.21. If we set aside the legal quibble that sexual orientation is not included under art.15 and focus upon the question only from a political/moral standpoint, I think the two are related and are not entirely separable. It would be good for Mayawati to come out publicly and support it. In fact, a legislation supported by the progressive parties to enshrine protection from non-discrimination for LGBT and possibly other sexual minorities would be an excellent idea. But I am not betting on it because at the center, there would be considerable resistance to the idea. A better answer would be to start slowly at the state level. The communist parties which have supported the High Court judgment can take the lead and push for legislation in the states where they are in power.

My criticism of the High Court judgment is here.

Media Speculation, Public Perception and Questions about the Batla House Encounter

2009-07-29T12:05:00.000-07:00

Coomi Kapoor's article in the Indian Express is worth reading. There is considerable force to his argument that reporting on the Batla House encounter has been considerably prejudiced particularly in Mail Today which has taken the lead in publicizing the fake encounter theory and fanned suspicions about the actions of the Delhi Police. I am not suggesting that the questions raised here are all false, only that the claim that the event was entirely staged to eliminate the dead police officer and the muslim students living there is in all probability unfounded.

The activists' accusation that the NHRC report is simply an attempt to whitewash the incident may or may not be true but their questions regarding the autopsy findings of the dead house inmates do appear genuine and ought to be addressed. The report only addressed the limited question of how the firing started for which the findings from the autopsy of Mohan Chand Sharma had sufficient corroborative value to back up the police version of the story. The remaining question however still needs to be addressed by the NHRC: were any of the inmates likely killed by the police not out of self-defense but as retribution for the death of one of their own after the encounter began? Let us see what the Delhi High Court says about this.

An Economic Analysis of Why Delhi's Buses Are Deadly

2009-07-28T10:23:00.000-07:00

Here (link via Freakonomics).

How Bush is Spending Time Now

2009-07-27T10:31:00.001-07:00

Here.

Constitutional Comparitivism in the Context of Sotomayor Hearings

2009-07-22T07:39:00.000-07:00

Opinio Juris has a post on the role of foreign law in the interpretation of domestic statutes. A worthwhile read particularly in light of the Delhi High Court's approach in Naz Foundation.

Obscenity, Art and Law: The Consequences of Lady Chatterley's Lover

2009-07-21T11:17:00.000-07:00

An interesting history of how the first amendment came to protect 'obscenity' in the US. It is an interesting example of how a single book had such diverse consequences in different countries. While it was the vehicle for liberalization of First Amendment jurisprudence in the US, it turned out to be an occasion to reassert the highly subjective and flawed Hicklin test in Ranjit Udeshi v. State of Maharashtra in India.

RhD positivity, Toxoplasmosis and Traffic Accidents

2009-07-21T11:06:00.000-07:00

I am posting the abstract of a recent paper which arrived at an interesting relationship amongst RhD, Toxoplasma infection and the incidence of infections:

Background: Latent toxoplasmosis, protozoan parasitosis with prevalence rates from 20 to 60% in most populations, is known to impair reaction times in infected subjects, which results, for example, in a higher risk of traffic accidents in subjects with this life-long infection. Two recent studies have reported that RhD-positive subjects, especially RhD heterozygotes, are protected against latent toxoplasmosis-induced impairment of reaction times. In the present study we searched for increased incidence of traffic accidents and for protective effect of RhD positivity in 3890 military drivers.

Methods: Male draftees who attended the Central Military Hospital in Prague for regular entrance psychological examinations between 2000 and 2003 were tested for Toxoplasma infection and RhD phenotype at the beginning of their 1 to1.5-year compulsory military service. Subsequently, the data on Toxoplasma infection and RhD phenotype were matched with those on traffic accidents from military police records and the effects of RhD phenotype and Toxoplasma infection on probability of traffic accident was estimated with logistic regression.

Results: We confirmed, using for the first time a prospective cohort study design, increased risk of traffic accidents in Toxoplasma-infected subjects and demonstrated a strong protective effect of RhD positivity against the risk of traffic accidents posed by latent toxoplasmosis. Our results show that RhD-negative subjects with high titers of anti-Toxoplasma antibodies had a probability of a traffic accident of about 16.7%, i.e. a more than six times higher rate than Toxoplasma-free or RhDpositive subjects.

Conclusion: Our results showed that a common infection by Toxoplasma gondii could have strong impact on the probability of traffic accident in RhD negative subjects. The observed effects could provide not only a clue to the long-standing evolutionary enigma of the origin of RhD polymorphism in humans (the effect of balancing selection), but might also be the missing piece in the puzzle of the physiological function of the RhD molecule.

John Milton

2009-07-16T12:10:00.001-07:00

Several interesting posts about John Milton can be found here.

Carter's Article on Women and Faith

2009-07-16T11:33:00.000-07:00

I was reading Carter's article in The Guardian today titled 'The words of God do not justify cruelty to women'. His main point is that religions are open to interpretation and ought to be interpreted in a way that ensures equal treatment of the genders. Even a single religion is quite complex; so summarizing all the religions is quite impossible to do in a few sentences or a blog post but I will present a general theme here of the problem. Texts, I tend to think, can be contradictory or unclear in many places and do have some passages open to broader reading supportive of equality and others that would lend themselves to a narrower misogynist interpretation. Recognizing that they were generally composed at a time when gender roles were distinguished and women were not envisaged in positions or roles similar to men, that would not be entirely surprising. To promote a progressive interpretation then would require some elements of the faith to be downplayed as compared to others but that might amount to diminishing its authenticity. A better answer might be to challenge faith itself but this might make it unpalatable to many. I do not quite have a solution to this but I think allowing a market with various faiths, versions of a faith and even the absence of faith and letting everyone take their pick is the best way forward.

A Critique of the Naz Foundation Judgment

2009-07-13T16:46:00.000-07:00

I have posted it here. A short comment before anyone reads it. This was originally written for the other blog Law and Other Things but now posted here. It was not intended to be against gays nor was it meant to convey any animus against any individual or group. It was written essentially in the belief that it would serve as a principled critique against what I considered to be an activist opinion of the Delhi High Court. I do believe that legalization of homosexual sodomy is primarily a political question and not a legal one. Thus it could be said that it was, in a sense, a critique about the means rather than the ends that Naz Foundation and other activist groups adopted.

The other intention of writing this critique was to initiate a discussion into the larger issue of how we view marginalized groups as well as to point out that there may well be other similarly placed groups we have not paid attention to which would also benefit from better public understanding of their predicament and an evidence based approach. Having reviewed a considerable body of evidence about adults who have sex with minors (this group includes both pedophiles who are attracted to prepubescent minors and ephebophiles who are attracted to post-pubescent minors), I am persuaded that outlawing all sexual relationships between adults and minors may not be justified and the question of consent is better determined based on the onset of puberty and in accordance with what studies show about the harm associated with particular acts.

I was hoping that the post would generate a debate that would flesh out details about such thorny questions and would help separate out the truth from common myths that appear be driving the Indian debate today. In addition, I thought that it would be a worthwhile occasion to examine the moral theories of John Gardener, Robert Wintemute, Ronald Dworkin and others in an era where science may have altered assumptions thought to be true in the past. Sadly, that did not happen. For those reading this post, I hope it provides them with a certain amount of insight that will drive them to ask more questions, reflect and gain better answers. Happy reading!

(PS: If you have questions, feel free to contact me).

Dialing 1-800-HAQQANI

2009-01-09T13:02:00.000-08:00

From David Sanger's article in the NYT today:

Washington’s sanguinity was not increased when Pakistan’s new prime minister, Yousaf Raza Gilani, arrived in Washington over the summer for what turned out to be a disastrous first visit. Gilani, as the country’s first civilian leader in more than a decade, was under huge pressure to show he could bring the intelligence agency, and the country, under control. He couldn’t — a brief effort to force the ISI to report to the civilian leadership was quashed — but he thought he had better show up with a gift for President Bush.

Gilani wanted to tell Bush that he had sent forces into the tribal areas to clean out a major madrassa where hard-line ideology and intolerance were part of the daily curriculum. There were roughly 25,000 such private Islamic schools around Pakistan, though only a small number of them regularly bred young terrorists. The one he decided to target was run by the Haqqani faction of Islamic militants, one of the most powerful in the tribal areas.

Though Gilani never knew it, Bush was aware of this gift in advance. The National Security Agency had picked up intercepts indicating that a Pakistani unit warned the leadership of the school about what was coming before carrying out its raid. “They must have called 1-800-HAQQANI,” said one person who was familiar with the intercepted conversation. According to another, the account of the warning sent to the school was almost comic. “It was something like, ‘Hey, we’re going to hit your place in a few days, so if anyone important is there, you might want to tell them to scram.’

When the “attack” on the madrassa came, the Pakistani forces grabbed a few guns and hauled away a few teenagers. Sure enough, a few days later Gilani showed up in the Oval Office and conveyed the wonderful news to Bush: the great crackdown on the madrassas had begun.

How India Avoided a Crisis

2008-12-19T20:51:00.000-08:00

From the NYT: here.

Shourie's Speech in the Rajya Sabha

2008-12-14T16:24:00.000-08:00

I found Shourie's Rajya Sabha speech worth reading. I disagree about his argument that the best lawyers should not represent the terrorist suspects. But apart from that, he generally makes sense. Here is the report on school curricula in Pakistan prepared by the Sustainable Development Policy Institute that Shourie talks about in his speech. And he is right - children are being taught to hate Hindus and India and aspire for jehad and shahadat (martyrdom) from as early as Class VI (you can find that on pages 20-23).

Hafiz Mohamed Saeed's 'House Arrest'

2008-12-13T16:10:00.000-08:00

Here.

The CJI's Remarks on Terrorism

2008-12-13T12:47:00.000-08:00

Read the CJI's remarks today.

Expressing concern at such coverage, the CJI said, “one of the ill-effects of unrestrained coverage is that of provoking anger amongst the masses. While it is fair for the media to prompt public criticism of inadequacies in the security and law-enforcement apparatus, there is also a possibility of such resentment turning into an irrational desire for retribution. Furthermore, the trauma resulting from the terrorist attacks may be used as a justification for undue curtailment of individual rights and liberties.”

What exactly is an 'irrational desire for retribution'? Of course the whole idea of press coverage is to provoke the masses into responding with calls for change. Why is this so bad? Many will probably point out the preposterous ideas and suggestions that were made on TV. Conceded. But that still does not imply that anger itself is bad. After all, just because bad ideas have an outlet does not imply that they are necessarily going to get accepted, in Holmes' words, in the marketplace of ideas. So why fear? Is not popular anger the qui vive for change in a democracy?

He said, “instead of offering a considered response to the growth of terrorism, a country may resort to questionable methods such as permitting indefinite detention of terror suspects, the use of coercive interrogation techniques and the denial of the right to fair trial. Outside the criminal justice system, the fear generated by terrorist attacks may also be linked to increasing governmental surveillance over citizens and unfair restrictions on immigration.”

Again, what is this 'considered response to the growth of terrorism' supposed to be? Is that not what everyone is asking about? Can the honorable CJI kindly elaborate the specifics rather than simply talk in generalities? Has he even followed the debate on the question of detaining terror suspects and the use of coercive interrogation techniques? Has he read any of the authors who have pointed out the benefits of such techniques? Does he even understand the problem with jihadis? Does he understand how this is a political movement, not ordinary criminal activity which is why we are having this debate about whether ordinary rules of criminal procedure can even be successfully applied to these individuals? Does he remember what Maulana Masood Azhar did upon release from jail? If he is talking of increased governmental surveillance, does he have a better answer to prevent attacks on markets and other places frequented by the public?

I am not suggesting that these concerns are invalid, only that there are valid reasons for concern about the efficacy of ordinary criminal methods in dealing with the jihadi phenomenon. For him to take such a categorical position on controversial questions without outlining the reasoning raises questions about what he knows about these things.

Why Mumbai Attacks May Not Have Had Establishment's Blessing

2008-12-13T12:38:00.001-08:00

As anyone who has followed recent news can tell, LeT and Pakistan's non-al-Qaeda outfits have been getting a fair amount of press in the US lately. That is a good thing which suggests that the heat is on though for how long is not clear.

Reuel Marc Gercht's column is the latest. We have heard why LeT's Mumbai operation must have been endorsed and aided by the ISI. This author makes the counterargument based on the same evidence:

If the Lashkar still had real friends in the Pakistani military and in the Inter-Services Intelligence Agency--the most Islamist-friendly Muslim intelligence service in the world--its attacks in Mumbai would have been more murderous. So these holy warriors, widely feared in Kashmir and Pakistan for their savagery and their disciplined organization, are not yet the missing link for the jihadists who aspire to kill "the enemies of God" in huge numbers.

Money Trail Gone Cold

2008-12-13T12:32:00.000-08:00

Jamaat-ud-Dawa's money is gone. Read the whole item. Clearly, it is going to be a difficult challenge to shut down the organization...assuming the powers that be want to do so.

Sainath's View of the War on Terror

2008-12-10T17:41:00.000-08:00

There have been a lot of articles lately telling us to avoid a 9/11 kind of response. Not surprisingly, many of the same people also insist that the Mumbai attacks are not India's 9/11. I buy the part about the Mumbai attacks not being a new and entirely unexpected event but that still does not change the fact that the failed strategies of the past ought not to be repeated again to the same result. Which is what I seem to be seeing everywhere.

The latest in this series is P.Sainath recounting the horrors of the War on Terror (Many commentators seem to have concluded already that the US-led war on terror is lost. I am at a loss to understand the basis for this). His numbers on the Iraq Body Count are taken from the now discredited 2006 study published in Lancet (I might write a short post at some point on this). But the point is why Iraq is being invoked all the time especially when Pakistan is not Iraq. There are many differences between the two - Pakistan does not have the history of oppression that Iraq has nor does it have the fractured demography of that country. Finally, the state institutions are still very much functional in Pakistan which was not case when Paul Bremer's CPA demolished them soon after the invasion. The comparison may have some validity only if one assumes that objectives of an Indian attack will also involve an Iraq-style occupation and breaking and rebuilding of its institutions from scratch. That is a major and probably fallacious assumption - India has not done that anytime in the past and none of the military scenarios being currently deliberated even contemplate it which only suggest that Sainath's implied comparison is spurious.

As for Afghanistan, would Sainath have been happier living with a Taliban-ruled country with jihadis provided all the space and assistance to fulfil their global agenda? Would fewer people have died if horrendous attacks had been allowed to be planned and executed incessantly from that country? Sainath of course proposes no solutions to any problem. Only that he wants a vigorous response to the attacks. That is simply not good enough.

Dawn Blames Musharraf

2008-12-10T09:34:00.001-08:00

After days of denial, Dawn blames Musharraf for the ongoing terrorist saga. That sounds quite convenient given that Musharraf is now gone and blaming him will not affect the fortunes of any of those presently running the show.

Second Amendment Arguments

2008-03-18T15:25:00.000-07:00

The US supreme court heard arguments on the constitutionality of the DC ban on handguns today. With J.Kennedy siding with the ban opponents, in all likelihood, the ban will be struck down. However, whether a reasonableness standard under which the scope of the restriction on arms ownership will be determined is not so clear. Also, I was somewhat surprised that most judges seemed to concur that machine guns will not be covered - given that even the Solicitor General Clement conceded that 'keep and bear' refers primarily though not solely to military use, it seems to me that machine guns have a stronger case to be protected by the second amendment than hand guns do. It is likely that some of the liberals including J. Stevens and J. Breyer who pointed that out may come out in support of the ban though I do not expect him to actually pronounce that machine guns are okay. It seems for now that individual self-defense and use of arms for hunting will end up being protected with even conservative judges allowing restrictions to apply to more dangerous weaponry which is ironical given that the plain language of the Second Amendment seems to make clear exactly otherwise, i.e., the chief concern pertained to national defense through a civilian army. Anyway, more when the opinion is actually pronounced.

Jeffrey Archer To Tour India

2008-03-15T08:19:00.001-07:00

Jeffrey Archer's books are now very popular in India and he is doing a full tw0-week long tour of India. Read his full interview here.

James Laine: Claims and Reality

2008-03-08T22:13:00.000-08:00

Link to post on Lawandotherthings.

Rudy and His Loonies

2007-11-10T16:08:00.000-08:00

Pat Buchanan has an interesting column at the conservative website Humanevents in which he showcases the extremism inherent in Rudy Guiliani's rhetoric. He also talks about the credentials and views held by his advisers. It appears he is all set to repeat Iraq, only this time in Iran, a country three times its size with already a limited democratic set-up and a Shia majority ruled by a Shia-dominated government, a very different situation from Iraq. There is not much talk of any rebuilding, only of an attack which of course will set the Middle East and much of the Islamic world on fire and probably take oil prices spiraling into the sky. Buchanan thinks that Guiliani's victory will very likely set the stage for another military campaign, this time with even more ominous portents for the world which will make the current Bush administration look cautious and 'soft' by comparison.. What is worse is that he has publicly disavowed a commitment to even a semblance of evenhandedness in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Even the Bush administration, despite the unilateral assurances given publicly to Sharon on Palestinian concessions, has not gone that far. Clearly if one believes that the US and its allies are now staring into the abyss, if this rhetoric has even an element of truth, then a Guiliani adminstration may really take the plunge forcing the entire world to actually wallow in it. A thoughtful write-up. Check it out.

Khare's Leftist Nonsense

2007-07-03T16:15:00.000-07:00

Did anyone read Harish Khare's defence of Pratibha Patil in the Hindu today? It is a rehash of the same things that have been doing the rounds in the media circuit for the last few days . Here are a few of the points her supporters are making which Mr. Khare parrots again and the answers to them: (1) Laundering district level pettiness, antagonisms and quarrels demeans the contest to the Republic's highest office, hence the campaign should not be conducted. True, but the nature of the allegations and the campaign depends on the kind of people and activities that the candidate has chosen to associate herself with. If a campaign ought to remain of a high level, surely a candidate who has such a record ought to have been chosen. (2) She is our potential first woman president. Oh, since when is being so and so a defense of anything? Expecting to be treated as a Presidential candidate cuts both ways – along with the authority, the name and prestige also comes the responsibilities and the probing media inquiry. If one wants the job, they ought to stop whining about the downside and learn to face up to it. (3) This campaign reeks of a character assassination. If close relatives of the candidate have been implicated in shady financial dealings and murder, it may not been the candidate's fault but is it wrong, ethically and morally, to make that known to the public at large given that such people may benefit from the power and glory flowing from the candidate's authority should she be elected to office? If such people face legal punishment after her allegation, would that not also reflect on her and her office? (4) The BJP would rather convert the Presidency into an antagonistic institution and the bitterness would spill over into Ms. Patil's innings. I have no idea what an 'antagonistic Presidency' means or will look like. Presidents are primarily figureheads and by the very nature of their position, no one has a particularly good reason to antagonize such a person and if indeed they do without good reason, it will simply engender more support and sympathy for her and reflect badly on those who engage in the act. The very same argument can be made for every elected institution – whether it is parliament, cabinet or prime minister's office, asking even legitimate questions might well inject partisan bitterness and convert them into 'antagonistic' institutions as well. Surely if preventing partisanship and protecting the office from such 'damage' were so paramount, the founders of our constitution would not have approved of a campaign or even an elected presidency at all; instead they might well have preferred a nominated or hereditary Presidency and saved us all the expense. All these criticisms are little more than obfuscation. The simple truth is this – Ms. Patil has been asked some questions and she must answer them straightforwardly to the best of her ability. Let the Electoral College and the people then decide where the truth lies and whether she deserves the treatment she has got.