Condi is India's friend

[rand0M aXiS]

Condi is India's friend

 

HT.com ^ | March 17, 2005 | Binay Kumar

 

As I write this column today, the US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice is visiting New Delhi, her latest stopover in a South Asia tour that will take her to six countries including India, Pakistan and Afghanistan. Going by the press reports from the subcontinent, there is an air of heightened expectations swirling over Raisina Hills, and perhaps justifiably so.

 

This is her first tour of South Asian since taking oath of office on January 28. As part of a new charm offensive for the second term of President Bush aimed at undoing the severe damage done to American image abroad in the aftermath of the unilateral declaration of war on Iraq, Rice has already visited Israel, the West Bank and Europe (but a larger Middle East tour was called off last week apparently after reports of differences with Egypt over a political prisoner).

 

Why should we treat Rice differently? We haven't forgotten the avoidable demonstration of double standards by Colin Powell when he visited the subcontinent last. Let bygones be bygones! Rice is made differently.

 

Notwithstanding the enormous goodwill democrat Clinton had earned in India, as the main foreign policy adviser to the presidential republican candidate George Bush in the election campaign of 2000, Rice had forcefully argued in an article published in Foreign Affairs that America "should pay closer attention to India's role in the regional balance."

 

She had argued: ''There is a strong tendency conceptually (in America) to connect India with Pakistan and to think only of Kashmir or the nuclear competition between the two states. But India is an element in China's calculation, and it should be in America's, too. India is not a great power yet, but it has the potential to emerge as one.''

 

It was her recognition of India's prospect as a global power that has shaped the contours of US policy towards India in the last four years since Bush assumed the presidency. What Rice was saying in 2000 assumes significance today as she steers America's foreign policy at its forefront.

 

It also underlines her prudent acceptance of India's perception of itself as a country destined to achieve major power status. That Rice should recognize this aspiration as legitimate and valid is indeed a major shift in American establishment's view of India in the comity of nations.

 

In fact, it was quite late in coming but this is not the place to lament the fallacies that hurt India-US relations for over fifty years. India's aspirations to be a global player was evident in the world view of its first Prime Minister, Jawaharlal Nehru, the architect of India's post-independence foreign policy. His pursuit of non-alignment was not so much an attempt at 'aligning' India with the Soviet Union as it was essentially an endeavor to enter the world stage on its own terms.

 

Non-alignment is a forgotten idea these days. America's ties with India have improved greatly since the collapse of the Soviet Union in the mid 1990s. Recently, Washington signed an agreement allowing India to purchase sensitive technology from the United States, something that looked almost impossible only a few years ago.

 

On Friday, India and the United States agreed to hold joint workshops on missile defense at a two-day meeting that concluded in Hyderabad. Last month, the United States indicated that it may sell Patriot missile defense system to India.

 

While Indian officials have also shown interest in buying F-16 fighter jets from the United States, US officials have said they want to be a major supplier of weapons to India, which has one of the largest armed forces in the world.

 

The Indo-US Defense Policy Group, the highest policy making body that coordinates defense ties between the two countries, is reviewing various proposals to expand bilateral defense cooperation.

 

All these new initiatives stem from the the controversial National Security Strategy document unveiled by the Bush Administration in September 2002, in which the White House, for the first time, put India in the section of global powers rather than in the traditional chapters reviewing US regional policy.

 

Rice's unconventional view of India prevailed despite the fact that the US needed Pakistan to pursue its objectives in Afghanistan after September 11, 2001. Despite the well-known American disappointment with India's refusal to send troops to Iraq in the summer of 2003, Rice persisted with the implementation of President Bush's commitment to end the nuclear dispute with India.

 

Together with Robert Blackwill, the US Ambassador to India at that time, Rice prevailed upon the American administration to 'certify' that the elections in Jammu and Kashmir in 2002 were free and fair. It was a very important endorsement, which helped shape the cricket diplomacy of 2005.

 

Rice is no stranger to New Delhi. She may not have visited the place but is up to speed on its political and geo-strategic interests in that part of the world and beyond. It is crucial that India leverages the new correlation of forces in Washington to its advantage.

 

And we wish both parties lots of luck in their interactions.

 

 

[theist]

Prabhupada wanted mutual cooperation between the two. But it must be carefully managed. The lame man and the blind man. The brahmanas and the ksatriya must cooperate. From India's side they must be willing and able to supply brahminical influence while receiving protective help. Not that they export Bollywood movies and we export Hollywood movies.

 

Where there is great oppurtunity there is often great danger close by.

[Guest guest]

India wants the oil, US wants to deprive them. India wants bollywood, condi wants to hold on and prevent them from making US into the third world while India becomes the nation of the 21st century.

 

India does not need US. Condis there to patronize and dissuade. US has no economy, no morality, nothing. Maybe it did 25 years ago, but its been spent.

 

Time to hit the rio grande, we be wetbacks the other way. Vera Cruz, here I come, (if I dont get rounded up and sent back).

 

mad mahax

[stonehearted]

theist:

Prabhupada wanted mutual cooperation between the two. But it must be carefully managed. The lame man and the blind man. The brahmanas and the ksatriya must cooperate.

 

 

Srila Prabhupada was talking about disseminating spiritual culture. The cooperation he spoke of was that Americans' technological and economic savvy should be engaged in helping introduce India's spiritual wealth to the rest of the world. He didn't express any interest in using American political power to bolster India's, especially considering how misguided India's political leaders are. I recall his making disparaging remarks even about the then-emerging BJP leaders. It seems terribly naive to think there are any brahmanas or ksatriyas in this story.

[Kulapavana]

"It seems terribly naive to think there are any brahmanas or ksatriyas in this story."

 

amen to that, brother. just a bunch of shrewd vaishas out to make a buck (or a billion bucks) and protect their walla.

[Guest guest]

is always saying he is leaving.

[Guest guest]

It's not so much the adhikar of the politicians, it is the underlying spiritual wealth that is within the country as a whole that can filter into the consciouness of the world if they get a better profile on the world stage, rather than just a banana and chapati republic. Wonder if they gave her any cow urine and dung medicines in the ettiquette exchange.

Gradually the dignity of Gaudiya Vaisnava philosophy will leak out thru the devotees to the politicians, as it has a better chance in India than any other country, of sprouting in a polis consciousness.

Regardless of motives there will always be much both countries can benefit thru mutual co-operation. I've noticed many ambassadors change by visiting other countries and getting a deeper understanding of their customs and fundermental values.

[theist]

Babhru,

 

Please give us the meaning to the parable of the blind man and the lame man cooperating.

 

I always thought it illustrated the relationship between the able seer and the able doer or satva directing rajas for the benefit of all.

 

I thought the same was true of the brahmana being in the role of a counciler to the ksatriya king.

 

I hope people are not waiting for Pariksit or Prthu cuz' they ain't comin'.

 

I am confused by your use of the word ksatriya Kulapavana. I remember when you declared you personal varna as a ksatriya yourself.

[stonehearted]

Prabhupada compared the West to someone who is (spiritually) blind but ambulant (has $$$ and influence), and India's spiritual culture (represented by himself and, he expected, his disciples) as the lame (economically disadvantaged) but (spritually) sighted person who could guide him by directing him while riding on his shoulders. It wasn't at all about lame, mundane politics, but about the devotees taking advantage of the material facilities provided by Western obsession with economic and technological devleopment to inject spiritual culture everywhere. It had nothing whatsoever to do with the US government helping the Indian government nuke the Pakis or whatever else we seem concerned with on this thread. If we read Srila Prabhupada's books and the books of our acharyas and dedicate ourselves to the spiritual culture they give there, it's not complicated at all to understand. We are about spritual culture; everything else is useful only to the extent it actually facilitates that. Bas.

[theist]

This is what I said:

 

 

Prabhupada wanted mutual cooperation between the two. But it must be carefully managed. The lame man and the blind man. The brahmanas and the ksatriya must cooperate. From India's side they must be willing and able to supply brahminical influence while receiving protective help. Not that they export Bollywood movies and we export Hollywood movies.

 

Where there is great oppurtunity there is often great danger close by.

 

 

How you read "mundane politics" and "nuke the Pakis" out of that I am not sure. I have no doubt you read it but have no doubt I didn't write it.

[stonehearted]

Or ignore what you like. When you wrote "Prabhupada wanted mutual cooperation between the two" in response to the first post here, one could reasonably conclude that you meant the US government and the Indian government. That's what the article is about: money and arms, mundane politics and nothing more. (What do they want the jet fighters for--building temples?) I was reading your comment in context. That's unreasonable?

 

If you see anything in that article about cooperating to establish spiritual culture all over the world in that article, please point it out to me.

 

And if you see anything in Prabhupada's "parable" about brahamans and ksatriyas, I'd be interested in seeing that, too.

[Guest guest]

You are right Babhru ,about the lame and blind men metaphor of Srila Prabhupad.

[theist]

I will try again, Only this time I will make some key points bold.

 

 

Prabhupada wanted mutual cooperation between the two. But it must be carefully managed. The lame man and the blind man. The brahmanas and the ksatriya must cooperate. From India's side they must be willing and able to supply brahminical influence while receiving protective help. Not that they export Bollywood movies and we export Hollywood movies.

 

Where there is great oppurtunity there is often great danger close by.

 

 

[theist]

The terms "supply braminical influence" and "spiritual knowledge disemination" are the same thing.

 

But who am I to disagree?

 

 

[stonehearted]

Well, there's brahminical influence, and then there's brahminical influence. In this age, it's not necessarily much of an asset. Kali yuga was started by a materilalistic brahmana. And besides, India has shipped plenty of "brahmanas" to America to serve as priests in Hindu temples. Based on our experience over the last 5100 years, India is not a reliable source of any kind of brahminical influence. Srila Prabhupada's metaphor addresses the need for Krishna consciousness, not any kind of cheating religion, which is pretty much what brahmanas in Kali yuga have to offer. And there's nothing in that metaphor that could reasonably be read as a need for US military might and taxpayer money for supporting a corrupt government. He was talking about Americans' knack for making things happen in a big way, largely because of our money and influence. Srila Sridhar Maharaja sometimes said that Srila Sarasvati Thakura opined that if he had ten more years, he'd like to go to New York. That's because he had foresight that the US would be the most influential nation in the world, not because he hoped the future leading military power would sell jets to the Indian government.

 

What Prabhupada meant by his metaphor, old friend, is that you and I could benefit the entire world if we were to become the kind of brahamanas he often said he wanted to train. And that reminds me that I have three more rounds to chant today to fulfill the promise I made him. Catch you later!

[Guest guest]

This is a very lucid explanation of this parable Sh prabhu, I always envisioned it similarly to what you have explained, to those who haven't heard it i also thought he meant that the seer or sadhu of spiritual vision would sit on the shoulders of the strong and healthy legged person who is unfortunately blind. But when joined together they will make a complete entity. The strong but blind man receiving guidance from the lame visionary. Thru mutual co operation they can help each other walk to their destination which in Prabhupads case was to expose the whole world to Krsna consciouness.

 

Like-- "where are we going Prabhupad?"

"Just print these books and chant Hare Krsna and you will see, trust my vision"

But I always felt more emphasis was placed on the spiritual vision than the material support. Obviously Prabhupad saw the need to utilize the wealth and material strength of the west to spread Mahaprabhus mission, in those days as he wasn't getting much contribution from the Indian aristocracy.

 

Still I think it can be seen as the head being the real vaisnava brahminical section, that due to India better understanding the whole Theistic conception, they are generally in a better position to give it, if only they will embrace the gift they have been given, directing the rest of the body i.e Ksatriyas politicians and protectors,(arms) vaisyas traders and the sudra labourers(the legs) to the goal of Life.

 

I think it essential that America and all other nations for that matter realize the real hidden treasure that India has to offer thru her long line of saints revelations, hence the vast pool of wisdom to draw from, that can bring about inner fullfillment to the world at large.

Unfortunately it's all been undermined by the misuse of all castes

 

[theist]

 

This is a very lucid explanation of this parable Sh prabhu, I always envisioned it similarly to what you have explained, to those who haven't heard it i also thought he meant that the seer or sadhu of spiritual vision would sit on the shoulders of the strong and healthy legged person who is unfortunately blind. But when joined together they will make a complete entity. The strong but blind man receiving guidance from the lame visionary. Thru mutual co operation they can help each other walk to their destination which in Prabhupads case was to expose the whole world to Krsna consciouness.

 

 

Yeah, no kidding. I give up, read into my words what you like.