The Daily Observer

Exceeding expectations on both sides, President Obama’s recent visit to India was an unqualified success. It was full of generous theatrics and solid tangibles, and therefore was terrific. A recent article in the New York Times about presidential visits to India mentioned another president, who was both a statesman and a soldier, whose impressive civic record was only matched by his instrumental role in defeating the forces of evil and darkness who were intent on plunging the world into centuries of intolerance and dictatorship. A president who because of his service in the military recognized how vital a robust military is to the defense of democracy, but at the same time how dangerous a military industrial complex could be. Dwight Eisenhower’s administration was by no means a dramatic one. However his executive actions as well as the legislation he approved did ultimately lead to the civil rights revolution of the 1960s. The inter-state highway system which improved economic as well as social integration was another key achievement of Eisenhower. He wasn’t an idealogue, but a pragmatic conservative who probably believed in gradual change to accomplish progressive goals.

A key feature of his governing philosophy was balance, for example recognizing and appreciating the primal role of free enterprise in the country but at the same time realizing that for the free market system to succeed and indeed evolve, sometimese government endevours are necessary. Those endevours can be subtle sometimes, massive other times. Indeed, one of the main reasons for the US’ emergence as the world’s dominant superpower in the later half of the 20th century was because it was the most educated nation in the world. One of the reasons it was the most educated nation in the world was because as a country it made a conscious effort to provide high quality higher education to the masses,regardless of pedigree. This effort had its roots in the Morrill Act signed into law by another great Republican president, Abe Lincoln, which led to the establishment of several top notch universities  throughout the country via federal land grants.

Government is an imperfect institution. The combination of private enterprise and rule of law is an almost perfect recipe for economic growth. However, in a democracy, government still is the institution which best represents the collective will of the populace. And whereas a system that enforces equality of outcome is downright socialist and inefficient, the desire to bring about equality of opportunity is as American as apple pie. And that is where government can come into the picture, to help the country as a whole meet modern challenges by brushing up educational, economic and health infrastructure, simply because it can take a long term view of things, whereas corporations by their very nature can only look to the next couple of quarters, or at most years, but definitely not generations.

Obama’s Race to the Top program for improving our schools, and his emphasis on community colleges as a provider of modern day skills will help improve educational infrastructure. Assuring citizens of affordable health care will make it easier for people to leave their jobs to start companies, strengthening our free-market system.

Indeed, it is no surprise that some of President Obama’s strongest supporters (whom some of  are at the same time his most constructive critics) are solid Eisenhower Republicans like Colin Powell and Chuck Hagel. I don’t believe Obama is a socialist. Although his rhetoric sometimes sounds anti-business, his actions don’t give that impression. For example, his recent visit to India had a strong business emphasis to it, althuogh this was not at the cost of the long-term strategic emphasis. In fact, his cabinet has strong  Republicans like Defense Secretary Gates, Army Secretary McHugh and Transportation Secretary LaHood. On the economic front, Obama did make an effort to recruit a strong Reagan Republican, Judd Gregg, as Commerce Secretary, but Gregg ultimately withdrew from consideration, although he is on Obama’s deficit commission.

The Republican party of 2010, however, likes to play down Eisenhower Republicans and Lincoln Republicans and promote Roger-Ailes (President of Fox News) Republicans instead. While Obama would do well do reach out to free-marketers symbolically as well as on substance (which to some extent he is doing), patriotic Republicans would do well to realize that it is in the country’s best interests that they promote policies that ensure the long-term competitiveness and vitality of our great nation, and if this means occasional co-operation and compromise with President Obama regarding our educational , financial and physical infrastructure, so be it. For example, I can understand if they don’t want to let tax cuts expire for those making $300K a year. But do they have to be so rigid about tax cuts for those making $2 million a year, or $10 million, or $1 billion?

-AS Chakra

This happened before. Thailand in the 1990s, Argentina in 2001, Iceland last year and now Dubai. The story of the white hot emerging and exotic markets, that reach the himalayan levels before they crash hard.

Incase you didn’t know already, The state run financial holding company, Dubai World is now seeking moratorium on the interest payments for 6 months. Dubai, through Dubai World has borrowed about $80 billion to finance its huge construction activity. Dubai aspired to be the world’s largest and hippest financial and tourism hub and for a while it seemed as if things were going great. It is a fact that not too long ago, the celebrities around world (the likes of David Beckham and Denzel Washington) were clamoring to own the luxurious villas on the Jumeriah Palm island. All the hip multimillionaires around the world owned a piece of property in Dubai. If Dubai cannot repay its obligations, this could easily be the biggest sovereign default since Argentina(2001). 

Dubai is part of the United Arab Emirates (UAE), So naturally the creditors are looking at Abu Dhabi to step in and clear the mess that Dubai has created. The reason for the creditors to hope for this to happen is simple. Abu Dhabi is the senior member of the UAE and thanks to its huge oil reserves, it has the financial means to clear this mess. The motivation for Abu Dhabi to take on this huge financial obligation is not very strong. The exact risk involved and the credit worthiness of Dubai is yet to be gauged properly.

 The european banks were hit worse than the US banks. HSBC and RBS face significant exposure this Dubai meltdown. what are the immediate repercussions? The stock markets around the world opened low, the Gold prices fell to end the 9 day upward streak, Oil prices fell. The US Dollar and the Japanese Yen got stronger and Euro is trading lower. In the mid-term, if Dubai opts for a sovereign default, the investors confidence in the emerging markets will take a temporary hit. In the long term, the world’s financial system will lick its wounds and leap forward to the next great and exciting markets. 

This pops a question in my mind, are the democratic nations are more credit worthy than their non-democratic counter parts?

I don’t know the answer to this question. Your thoughts ?

The "Party with a Difference" has shown that it has become a debate-stifling, party that tolerates no differences. By expelling Jaswant Singh, an intelligent patriot whose service to the country has been immeasurable, it has shown its preference for dogma over critical thinking. Jaswant Singh is one of the very few, if not only, politicians to have held all the top portfolios (Finance, Defence, External Affairs) except for Home in independent India. He was instrumental in guiding India’s rise as a global power during his tenure in the government. He is probably the only BJP leader in its top echelons who has actively served in India’s army and fought for it.

Are the party’s leaders so blinded by their ‘ideology’ that they fail to see the larger potential agenda behind Jaswant’s praise of Jinnah? For peace to exist between India and Pakistan on India’s terms, it is crucial that Pakistanis do not feel that India wants to conquer them. By continuously denigrating Jinnah, Indian politicains have effectively been saying that they do not believe in Pakistan’s legitimacy. Re-evaluation of the role of Pakistan’s founder can actually help ease Indo-Pak relations. Prior to the 1940’s, it is accepted by many that Jinnah did play a positive role in the evolution of  Indian nationalism. To demonise his subsequent actions without an attempt to understand the motivation behind them serves no good.

In general, robust debate and re-examination of history always leads to a better understanding of the past, which leads to a better understanding of the present.Jaswant in no way implied that his views on Jinnah had anything to do with the BJP. Most BJP leaders who were party to the decision to expel him probably haven’t even read his book. Have they even quoted any passage from his book which could be seen as damaging to Sardar Patel’s repution? I doubt it.

It truly is a sad day for Indian politics when the main opposition party shows it is lacking in intellectual vigor and that ideological rigidity triumphs over  long term national interests.

Who is to blame? I asked myself, this question several times the past three days. I am talking about the horrific acts of meaningless violence that took place in Mumbai this week. I couldn’t come up with a clear answer on who is to be blamed for these attacks. Of course, This group of weak minded and misguided youth, who were devoid of any basic human emotion and displayed such a display of shameless contempt for human life including their own , they need to be blamed for this atrocity. The next logical step is to blame the organization that they belong to , the people that trained them, the people that funded them, the country that sheltered them and helped them to carry on this act.

By the country that helped and sheltered these terrorists, I mean Pakistan. I blame them for this and more terrorist acts that were carried out in India and around the world in the past few years.“But we have no hand in this terrorist act”, the leaders of Pakistan might say. The fact remains that, Pakistan actively allows for these terrorist organizations to thrive in its territory. They allow for the “charitable funds” collected around the world, to find their way to buy weapons and train these terrorists. They allow for their state intelligence agency to procure and share the intelligence that is used to carry out a terror activity in India. Once a terrorist attack is complete, they offer five star accommodations to the perpetrators and facilitators of such act (case and point : Dawood Ibrahim ). Pakistan does everything that it can do, short of stamping its official seal of approval to encourage these heinous activities. So, I blame Pakistan and the terrorist organizations and terrorists that it harbors for this attack. But is that all?

What about the Indian Government? No, I am not suggesting that these attacks might be some crazy conspiracy hatched by the Indian administration. But, I want to ask, what was done to stop these attacks? What was done to secure the people that put them in power ? The current UPA government took office on May 22, 2004. Since then there were 18 major terrorist attacks on Indian soil. 18 terrorist acts in 54 months. Here is the list :

2004 August : 6 killed in car blasts in the city of Mumbai.

2005 October : 60 killed in three bomb blasts that occurred in busy markets of New Delhi

2006 March : 20 killed in bomb blasts in the train station and a temple in Varanasi.

2006 July : 187 killed in the bomb blasts on commuter trains in Mumbai.

2006 September: 40 killed in the bomb blasts in the town of Malegaon.

2007 February : 70 killed in fire bombing of Pakistan bound Friendship express.

2007 May : 11 killed in a bomb blast in Hyderabad.

2007 August : 40 killed in bomb blasts in Hyderabad.

2007 October : 2 killed in a blast at Ajmer Sharif shrine in Ajmer.

2007 November: 15 killed in bombings in various cities of Uttar Pradesh.

2008 May : 65 killed in bomb blasts in Jaipur.

2008 July : 8 bombs go off in Bangalore.

2008 July : 50 killed in bomb blasts in Ahmedabad.

2008 September : 25 killed in Bomb blasts in New Delhi.

2008 September: 80 killed in bomb blasts in Malegaon

2008 October : 20 killed in bomb blasts in Imphal.

2008 October : 80 killed in bomb attacks in Assam.

2008 November: 200 killed in gunmen attacks in Mumbai.

I see a trend here. Every year the terrorist acts went unanswered, it emboldened the terrorists. The number of terrorist acts that were carried out in India multiplied year by year since 2004. The Indian response after most of these bombings is more or less the same- “we blame the external forces that are encouraging the terrorist acts in India. We will endure these attacks……” Lot of words were said after these 18 bombings, not a single solid action was taken to check the terrorist activity in India. The politicians in charge continue to play vote bank politics, too complacent and too incompetent to protect the people who trusted them to protect them – What a shame!.

So I ask again , Should the Indian Government be blamed ? I think so.

What about the people who not only voted for such an incompetent and weak government into power in India but, continue to tolerate it ? Are they to be blamed ?