India may never be a super power : LSE Study

Despite India’s "impressive" rise, its ambition to be a super power may remain just that—an ambition, according to an authoritative new study by the London School of Economics to which several Indian scholars have contributed.

It pointedly dismisses what it calls the US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s "unequivocal verdict" during her India visit in 2009 that "India is not just a regional power, but a global power’.

The study, India: the Next Superpower? acknowledges India’s "formidable achievements" in fostering democracy, growth and cultural dynamism but concludes that these are nullified by its structural weaknesses, widespread corruption, poor leadership, extreme social divisions, religious extremism and internal security threats.

India, it argues, still faces too many "developmental challenges" to qualify for "super power" status, or to be considered a serious "counterweight" to China, a role sought to be thrust on it by some in the West. Some of the report’s authors wonder whether India should even aspire to be a super power given its institutional weaknesses and social and economic divisions.

Historian Ramachandra Guha, currently the Philippe Roman Chair in History and International Affairs at LSE, suggests that rather than being seduced by the bright lights of great power diplomacy, India should instead focus on reforming its institutions and repairing the social fabric that seems to be coming off its seams.

“We need to repair, one by one, the institutions that have safeguarded our unity amidst diversity, and to forge the new institutions that can help us. It will be hard, patient, slow work,” he writes.

Hasan Suroor in The Hindu. Here

Killing of Osama: It's a dirty game based on lies, cunningness, hatred and deceit

When I watched the photograph of Obama, Hilary and co, watching the CIA briefing on Operation Geronimo, I was reminded of the movie “Hard Target” (1993).

In that movie a bunch of psychopaths plays the game of head hunters. They feed some malnourished people and make them physically strong. They then organize an event where those folks are to run for their life and in the process those psychopath hunts them down. The psychos then laugh at their laurels each time, till the hero Van Dam, takes those bulls by the horn and give a run for their money.

The killing of Osama Bin Laden looks to me a script of similar to that of “Hard Target.” That bunch of most powerful people on this earth reminded me of those psychopaths of the movie who took sadist pleasure in taking the blood of those running for life, playing the dirty game “This is who we are.”

I am sure, when it might have been announced that “enemy is killed in action” Obama may have done the NBA hero Karim Abdul Jbbar’s act, leaping up few feet from the ground, raising his hand in exclamation shouting “We got him”!

To me, Osama was like, Van Dam who took up the challenge by the scruff and for ten years defied the most powerful nation on the earth equating with the hero of “Hard Target,” eventually to fall to the superior arrow. This however does not mean that arrow has upstaged the shield and the duel has come to rest. It’s an unending fight with no clear cut winner.

It’s a dirty game based on lies, cunningness, hatred and deceit. The most ironical part is there seems to be a conspiracy of silence among the nations of the world and none has the moral courage to say to stop this madness.

There are few exceptions. Former Cuban President Fidel Castro criticized the way the United States carried out the raid against Osama bin Laden. He said the U.S. raid in Pakistan violated that country's laws and offended its dignity.

In India, Tamil Nadu Chief Minister and DMK President M. Karunanidhi said the path taken by Osama bin Laden cannot be termed as ‘Islamic terrorism.’ He argued that just because bin Laden took to terrorism to achieve his goal, it cannot be called Islamic terrorism. Anger against any person cannot be justified in the form of terrorism, he wrote.

However, these are fringe voices and by and large the community of nations has condoned the acts of the US and it acts that it has skirted under the war against terror.

It’s only China that criticized the United States for violating' Pakistan's sovereignty by carrying out a military operation to kill Osama bin Laden saying “China holds that the independence, sovereignty and territorial integrity of any country should be respected.”

There are no two opinions that terrorism in any form has to be opposed tooth and nail but then this does not mean that those who become the cause of terrorism should be condoned.

Syed Ali Mujtaba in Mujtaba's Musings. More Here

The secret of Hillary Clinton's sudden interest in Libya

US secretary of state Hillary Clinton has emerged as the leading voice of the Barack Obama administration on Libya. She has been most vociferous about the support for 'democratic forces' (rebels) in Libya. She spearheaded the diplomatic campaign for UN resolution. She travelled to Cairo and Tunis to discuss Arab participation. She attended the summit in Paris last Monday to flesh out the coalition to implement Resolution 1973. She began interpreting the scope of R-1973. She is traveling back to London next week for the 'contact group' meeting on Libya.

And now, above all, she has announced that US is taking the next step in the war by transferring command and control to NATO. "We are taking the next step: We have agreed along with our NATO allies to transition command and control for the no-fly zone over Libya to NATO."

Furthermore, Clinton went one step ahead and anticipated that it is a matter of time before NATO is put in charge of the entire mission. "All 28 allies have also now authorized military authorities to develop an operations plan for NATO to take on the broader civilian protection mission." (Hey, where is Robert Gates?) Do UAE or Qatar have any problem operating under NATO? No. Because Clinton sorted it out with her Arab counterparts at the Paris meeting. Quite obviously, this isn't Obama Gates' war. Both have taken low-key roles while Clinton is leading and is in full cry.

What is there in Libya for Clinton? Significantly, Clinton is getting strong support principally from two unlikely camps: the interventionists and neocons in US. But what is not obvious in the ongoing discourses - or, more precisely, what is not being openly discussed - is that the Israeli Lobby has been in the vanguard of the campaign for the intervention in Libya. A large NATO presence in Libya is a huge security guarantee for Israel at a time when it faces the spectre of isolation in the Middle East.

Veteran diplomat M K Bhadrakumar in his blog. More Here.

Al Jazeera has demolished the lies of the empire

The greatest tribute you could ever crave is to get it from your detractors. So when Hillary Clinton admits that "viewership of Al Jazeera is going up in the United States (and around the world) because it's real news," the Qatar-based television network has every reason to celebrate and pat its own back. Speaking before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee last week, the US secretary of state warned that America is "losing the information war," citing the superior quality of Al Jazeera as one of the reasons for her opinion.

Clinton compared the Middle East-based TV network with the giants of US media outlets saying: "Like it or hate, it (Al Jazeera) is really effective. In fact, viewership of Al Jazeera is going up in the US because it's real news. You may not agree with it, but you feel like you're getting real news around the clock instead of a million commercials and arguments between talking heads and the kind of stuff that we do on our news which, you know, is not particularly informative to us, let alone foreigners."

Hmm. This is what many in alternative media and numerous independent conscience keepers of the world have been saying for years. I mean, the bit about the unwillingness and inability of Western media, especially of those in the US, to see the whole picture and tell the other side of the story.

The US media has been too busy acting as the mouthpiece of the American empire and protecting the interests of the rich and powerful like those big boys of the Wall Street who continue to party Recession or no Recession. In fact, as a friend wrote this week commenting on Clinton's speech, the US newspapers have become newsletters of the US government.

This is why it is gratifying to see the world's most powerful woman work herself up over the growing reach of Al Jazeera and its ability and courage to offer "real news" as it happens - and in the process probably an alternative to the overbearing loudspeakers of the US media.

It's amazing what a critical difference a single voice of sanity, however frail, could make in the Goebbelsian cacophony of lies, half-truths and shameless spin. And what a fantastic journey of sheer courage and chutzpah - and of course loads of hard work and persistence - has it been for Al Jazeera.

It has changed the rules of the game not just in the incredibly dull world of the Middle East media but is forcing the movers and shakers of the world media to watch their step and constantly read and revise their script to keep pace with the change that the Doha-based network has come to represent. Al Jazeera has not just emerged as the real voice of the Arab street, it is pitching itself as a healthy, credible alternative, even if still hopelessly young and green, to the apologists and cheerleaders of the empire. Which has been hard to miss for anyone following the whirlwind of change that has turned the Arab world upside down.

A great deal has been written and said about the role the Internet and social media networks such as Facebook and Twitter have played in sowing the winds of change across the Middle East. Doubtless, the history of popular uprisings in the region - in fact the history of our times - will remain incomplete without the amazing contribution the Net has made. However, Al Jazeera had been there, long before the FB and Twitter arrived in the Middle East, educating, informing and fashioning public opinion across the Arab and Islamic world.

In fact, by faithfully and courageously reporting the dramatic, lightning developments in Tunisia, beaming the action right into millions of homes across the Middle East and around the world minute by minute, it unleashed the tsunami that swept away Egypt's Hosni Mubarak and now threatens many of his fellow travelers.

With its unvarnished and unedited reporting of the ground-shifting developments in Tunisia and Egypt, it created a template of change, a truly democratic and homegrown model, suggesting to the rest of the Muslim world they deserve better. That peaceful change is possible - without the intervention of our manipulative

Western friends or the cynical, diabolic extremism as championed by the likes of Osama Bin Laden.
As a student of media and someone who has avidly followed Al Jazeera's breathtaking journey, it's uplifting to see a little known television network, once identified as the mouthpiece of OBL, grow from strength to strength and take on the Goliaths of this world.

In a region where the media have long come to act as the hand maiden of governments and journalism has largely meant publishing and broadcasting of endless comings and goings of royalty, Al Jazeera came as a burst of fresh, life-giving air.
While rest of the pliant, media establishment obsessed over what is known as "protocol news", Al Jazeera, in the words of its boss Wadah Khanfar, looked for "the real actors. We have been guided by a firm belief that the future of the Arab world will be shaped by people from outside the aging elites and debilitated political structures featured so disproportionately by most other news outlets."

It kept its ear to the ground, listening to the drums beating in distance. This is why all those Western wonks and professional pundits failed to see the wave of change spearheaded by the Internet generation of young Arabs, dangerously aware of their democratic rights as well as the hopeless inadequacy of their elites, Al Jazeera saw the Arab revolt coming, as Khanfar so modestly claims.

It has exposed the shenanigans of both the corrupt, authoritarian regimes in the neighborhood and the terrorism and tyranny of big powers. From Palestine to Pakistan and from America to Australia, Al Jazeera has defied and demolished the lies and narrative of the empire. No wonder it constantly finds itself under attack from both brotherly Arab regimes and the bullies of the West.

While the Doha-based network has been repeatedly banned and harassed in numerous Arab countries, its journalists and offices have often found themselves in the line of fire, literally, of the Self-appointed champions of freedom and democracy. Amazingly, despite being funded by the Qatari government, a close ally of Uncle Sam, Al Jazeera has managed to jealously guard and maintain its independence so far. Which is how it should be.

By the way, why can't we have more Al Jazeeras out there? God knows we do need them more than ever. Instead of chasing those billion dollar mirages in the sand, why can't Arabs invest more in the media? Instead of crying all the time about Islamophobia and negative stereotyping of Arabs and Muslims in Western media and popular culture, why don't they do something concrete to address it?

Al Jazeera's success, especially that of Al Jazeera English, proves it's possible to make professionally credible attempts on this front. If a tiny emirate like Qatar can do it, surely big boys like Saudi Arabia, Egypt and Turkey could do it. Even if 5 percent of what many Muslim countries spend on the expensive junk sold by the West as arms was devoted to developing world class media, universities and research institutions, they wouldn't be stuck where they have been. For those who control the media will control the mind.

Aijaz Zaka Syed in Arab News. More Here.