/**SNAP Code begin **/ /**SNAP Code end **/

Saturday, July 29, 2006

Islam vs Islamism

Bill Moyer, an American journalist who usually does programs on faith, has a new series on American Public Broadcasting Station (PBS) in which he talks to western philosophers and novelists and non-fiction writers. Some were interesting, some not so. The series is mostly geared towards western audience with discussion primarily about Christianity and Islam and faith itself. I found one especially interesting - a conversation with Martin Amis, a British writer, who seems to be struck by reality after September 11 attacks. (I am not sure the rest of Europe still is.)

Martin talks about the difference between Islam as practiced during the past 500 years prior to the decline of Ottoman Empire after WWI - an open and modernizing religion and culture - and Islamism that is practiced now - essentially a role back of all the openness and modernizing effect of the prior 500 years. He talks about how the Islamic terrorists feel and justify their murdering activities especially referring to Mohammad Atta, the leader of September 11 attacks.

Martin declares that atheism is passé now and that at best he is an agnostic. And he recognizes that irreligious Europe has to deal with a tiny minority Islamists who have nothing but religion. It is very interesting conversation. Watch it here.


Thursday, July 27, 2006

"If You Want to Be Treated Like India, Be Like India"

Gary Ackerman, US Congressman from the state of New York and long time supporter of India in Washington, made a floor speech in US Congress on July 26, 2006, on the eve of passage of Indo-US nuclear deal.

"Critics have expressed concerns regarding the bill's impact on our non-proliferation policy and clearly, Iran, Pakistan and North Korea are all looking for clues about what this deal means for them and their nuclear programmes. What do you tell Pakistan and Iran and North Korea? Well, you tell them this: If you want to be treated like India, be like India. Be a responsible international actor with regard to weapons of mass destruction technologies. Don't sell your nuclear technologies to the highest bidder. Don't provide it to terrorists. Be a democracy -- a real democracy like India and work with us on important foreign policy objectives and not against us.


I think the choice is clear: if you want the IAEA to inspect India's civilian nuclear facilities, then you're for this bill; if you want India to be obligated to adhere to the Missile Technology Control Regime for the first time, then you're for the bill; if you want them to comply for the first time with the Nuclear Suppliers Group guidelines, then you're for the bill; if you want to send a clear message to nuclear rogue states about how to behave, then you're for the bill; and if you want a broad, deep and enduring strategic relationship with India, then you are for the bill!"

Need I say more?

And here is what Tom Lantos, Congressman from California and Ranking member (committee leader of Democrats in Republican ruled US Congress) of the powerful House International Relations Committee, offered to non-proliferation concerns in US Congress:

"And Mr Chairman, our bill addresses those concerns thoroughly. It requires the President to make several determinations to Congress. Among these, the President must determine:

· that India has concluded a credible plan to separate civilian and military nuclear facilities;

· that India has concluded a safeguards agreement with the International Atomic Energy Agency that will apply safeguards in perpetuity to India's civil nuclear facilities, materials and programs;

· that India is harmonizing its export control laws and regulations to match those of the so-called Nuclear Suppliers Group; and

· that India is actively supporting US efforts to conclude a fissile material cutoff treaty."

Those conditions sound pretty benign to me. Separation of civil and defense reactors is plus for India; agreement with IAEA on civil reactors should not be an issue; India already has export controls; and lastly actively supporting US efforts on FMCT is not same as US tying up India and Pak in some smaller version of FMCT.

Lots of people say lots things during the hearings and elsewhere; but they don't become law. I am still convinced this nuclear deal is in India's interest.

Tuesday, July 25, 2006

Come of it Mr. Jaswant Singh

Is Jaswant Singh a traitor for not relieving the spy in P.V. Narashima Rao's PMO office for which he claims he has proof?

I personally like Jaswant Singh because of what he has done for the country. Despite that and all his protestations, I think he belongs in that category.

He should have revealed who the spy was 10 years ago when he got the information. Not only did he not reveal the information, he did nothing to pursue the matter or prosecute the person when he was the defence, foreign, and finance ministers during various times for five years in PM Vajpayeeji government after he got the information about the spy in former PMO.

It is shear stupidity to offer all the excuses he gives now for not having revealed the name and for contined obfuscation.

"The former Foreign Minister also disclosed to the media that the mole was close to the then Prime Minister Narasimha Rao and he was a civil servant not a politician.

"The civil servant was in such a high position that he was privy to a lot of information," Jaswant singh said, adding the person concerned was no more in office or the country.

The former External Affairs Minister, however, evaded a clear-cut reply when asked repeatedly why the subsequent NDA government allowed the civil servant to go scot-free despite him having leaked sensitive information."

Update (July 25, 2006): IBNLive reports Jaswant Singh revealed the spy as Dr V S Arunachalam to BJP leaders in a closed door session.

"Dr V S Arunachalam served five prime ministers - including Indira Gandhi, Rajiv Gandhi and Narasimha Rao - and 10 defence ministers in different capacities like defence scientific advisor, and as secretary of the department of Defence Research and Development, in his official assignments at the Centre from 1982 onwards."

The next day Jaswant denies Arunachalam is the man. We are still in the dark.

Update (July 26, 2006): S. Gurumurthy says there were two spies - not one - in PM P.V. Narashimha Rao's government, and that the names were known in 1997. He describes how the two people worked with Rockefeller Foundation and Carter Center to enable a Kashmir solution using the than soft PM I.K. Gujral to sign on the dotted lines in 1997 without any official involvement of the either India or Pak governments. And the two also worked hand-in-hand to alert the Rockefeller Foundation when PM Rao wants to test nuclear weapons and Prithvi missiles in November 1995. The two were - V. S. Arunachalam and Naresh Chandra, former ambassador to US. I still remember the sweating Ambassador Naresh Chandra trying to explain on CNN the PM Atal Vajpayee's nuclear weapons tests 1998. (PM Vajpayee didn't confer to anyone before taking the decision.) Link

It looks like Jaswant Singh's spy is Naresh Chandra (after his denial that Arunachalam was the spy). But Naresh Chandra was not in PMO?

Update (July 28, 2006) Indian Express had an interesting interview with PM P.V. Narasimha Rao recorded when he was alive few years ago. PM Rao says he will take the secret of why he didn't test nuclear weapons to his grave. But I wonder if he told his close friend PM Vajpayee as to what happened. And Mr. Vajpayee could avoid the same pitfall as PM Rao when he became the prime minister in 1998.

Update (Aug 12, 2006) I finally read Sekhar Gupta's late July column in Indian Express on the mole issue. He thinks PM Rao may have wanted US to believe he wanted to test and used someone as mole to get the message across. Mr. Gupta thinks both Naresh Chandra and Arunachalam are unlikely moles. Link

What Do Victims get?

Autopsy, Inquires, and Kid’s education - State Sympathy For Maoists Killers

Civil Rights wing of naxalites and other civil rights groups in AP demand autopsy when AP police killed 30 Maoists guerrillas, including Madhav an apparent state secretary of CPI-Maoist.

"The People's Union for Civil Liberties (PUCL), the Andhra Pradesh Civil Liberties Committee and other groups also sought a judicial probe into the gun battle and booking of cases of murder against the policemen involved."

Instead of standing by the police force, the AP government launches a magisterial inquiry into how the murderers were killed. And offers free education and employment to Madhav's son.

"Home Minister K. Jana Reddy said the government would order a magisterial probe and punish the policemen if they were guilty.

The government has also offered free education and employment thereafter to Karthik, son of Madhav. The 16-year-old reportedly fainted after hearing the news of his father's killing.'

Ah, the ideal murdering father.

Where do these civil rights group hide when civilians are slowly and brutally murdered by these naxalites? What kind of education and jobs does the state give to families of victims of naxalites brutality?

Here is what KPS Gill had to say in an interview with Indian Express’s Shekhar Gupta on NDTV on how naxalites brutally murder their victims -

"See, if a person is killed by a bullet or stabbed or hit by a dow (a North Eastern machete), his death, you feel, is not so brutal. But if he’s killed by multiple injuries, a stone is picked up and he’s hit with it over and over, it seems brutal, prehistoric. It does not sit well with the conscience. This is what I have seen." Link

Friday, July 21, 2006

Economist's Continued Assault on Indo-US Nuclear Deal

Economist is clearly perturbed by US Congress and Senate committees approval, first step in multi-step bill approval process, of Indo-US Nuclear deal of July 18, 2005 and the implementation plan announced in March 2006 during Bush's visit to India.

None of its arguments make any sense. It agrees that China is stock piling nuclear weapons; but bristles at India when it wants to maintain minimum credible deterrence. Link

"...the NPT to curb their arsenals (four are shrinking, only China's bomb-pile is still growing) on the way to eventual disarmament."

It approve the bogus signature of NPT P-5 countries that they will eliminate their weapons the never future; but it would not approve of India become a full fledge member of NPT as nuclear weapons state taking on the same responsibilities as the P-5.

"The five have at least all signed the treaty banning further nuclear tests and have stopped producing more highly enriched uranium and plutonium for weapons; India flatly refuses to do either."

And of course the Pakistan boogie! If only Economist (and western media at large) didn't turn blind eye to Pakistan stealing designs from Europe, its collaboration with China to make nuclear weapons, and creation and sustaining WMD Walmart of Pakistan's father of WMD, A.Q. Khan, may be Economist has some right to use Pakistan boogie.

Now it wants Nuclear Suppliers Group and IAEA to block the deal. The noble prize winner IEAE chief, Mr. al Barade’i, already supports the deal. Good luck with NSG!

The only way Economist can influence the process now is to join the suspicious bandwagon in India. Everyone from the Communists to pseudo-analysts to serious analysts are afraid of the deal - Communists because they don't want anything to do with US; pseudo-analysts because they are afraid of some the fine print the Manmohan and MEA apparently is covering up; and serious analysts that US Congress will have too much influence on India nuclear establishment. While I think the concerns are far outweighed by the real benefit to India from access to Uranium to sophisticated reactor designs, if Economist wants to stop the deal it has to pump up Indian legislature, that has to approve the deal also, to reject it.

For that the Economist has to change its message, a bit.

Update: The most serious critic, from the start of the nuclear deal, came from Brahma Chellaney. His complains are exactly the opposite of Economist. To torpedo the deal, Economist should join hands with Mr. Chellaney. Link (subscription needed)

"Paying For Naïveté

The much vaunted Indo-US nuclear deal is pockmarked with a string of humiliating conditions for India"

Thursday, July 20, 2006

Anti-Terror Initiatives: Observer Foundation

Wilson John and PV Ramana of Observer Research Foundation offer an excellent policy brief on what India should do to tackle terror systematically. Most of them are eminently sensible. I was disappointed with their recommendations on what to do with Pakistan. May be it goes along with overt and covert actions recommendations.

● Formulate a National Counter-Terrorism Strategy.
● Create separate Ministry of Internal Security affairs and
institute a Counter Terrorism Centre.
● Direct overt and covert actions against terrorists and
terrorist groups.
● Completely root-out the underworld in Mumbai. Silence
fugitive underworld leaders and operatives.
● Hunt down groups like SIMI. Punish political leaders
linked to such groups.
● Stop terrorist funding through punitive legislation.
● Introduce a comprehensive, permanent anti-terror law.
Take fi rm action to prevent the abuse of such a law.
● Make a provision to declare a person as terrorist.
● Take action to secure extradition of fugitive terrorists.
● Re-invigorate intelligence and police forces in all
● Strengthen Joint Taskforce on Intelligence, Multi Agency
Centre and Joint Intelligence Committee.
● Create Counter-Terrorism Fund.
● Formulate a comprehensive action plan to prevent attacks
on mass transit systems.
● Prepare to face recurring, more lethal terror attacks
● Make terrorism an integral part of Composite Dialogue.
● Force Pakistan to shut down LeT, JeM and all other terrorist
organizations targeting India.
● Launch global diplomatic and media campaign to pressurize
Pakistan to act against terrorist groups.

It's a thoughtful policy document. One would hope UPA govt will put these into action at the earliest. I know one action that UPA will not pursue even if it pursues the rest - "Punish political leaders linked to such groups." Because appeasement policies have no end in UPA - even if it means national security is threatened.

Wednesday, July 19, 2006

Americans Playing Double Game With Indian Terror Again

200 People Dead. Sorry, But We Are Not With You, Says US

Within a week of terror attacks in Mumbai, US is parroting its apparent front line ally against terror. The combined message comes from US and Pakistan. US barely even acknowledge terror against India. And General Mush on the same day says not talking to him on J&K is playing into terrorists’ hands. His Foreign Minister already said the terror will not stop until J&K is resolved according their satisfaction.

Manmohan is more than willing to oblige that talks will go on.

Chidanada Rajghatta reports for TOI:

Scepticism about New Delhi’s post-blasts policy ran so deeply in [Richard] Boucher that at one point, he suggested India may not be such a long-suffering victim of terrorism after all.

"The terrorists that we're fighting against have been fighting against Afghanistan, been fighting against Pakistan, been fighting against the United States, been fighting against Europeans, and maybe some of them fighting against India, as well," he said, almost grudgingly including India among the list of countries affected.

He also appeared to reject the Indian contention about the role of the Pakistani state or military-intelligence establishment in the blasts saying they (the perpetrators) were "obviously well-prepared by somebody with evil intent, by somebody with local knowledge, by somebody with -- or some group, some individuals, some people with a lot of planning and malice, so forth, you know, and a lot of knowledge."

Is this for real? Actually it has been US position for a long time that Indians don't face Islamic terror. And Pakistan is one of the good guys. And in a related(?) story, Pakistan dips into Tablian kiddy bank.

Pakistan arrests scores of Taliban in crackdown

Tue Jul 18, 8:11 AM ET

QUETTA, Pakistan (Reuters) - Pakistan arrested scores of Taliban militants in raids overnight in the southwest province of Baluchistan, taking action that Afghanistan, the United States and NATO powers have long called for.

More than 150 Afghans were arrested during an operation ordered by the Baluch government in the past two days.

200 people dead - sorry but we are not with you, says US. This when Indian PM is hob-knobbing with US president in northern Russia.

Sunday, July 16, 2006

Beyond Wimpiness - Hypocrisy

Instead of learning from Israeli response to the kidnapping its soliders by Hamas in Gaza and by Hizbollah in Lebanon, Indian government wants Israel to stop bombing terror groups headquarters while not even pretending to condemn the unprovoked Hizbollah's rocket attacks into the port city of Haifa.

India also condemned the “excessive” military retaliation by Israel, but at the same time called for the immediate release of the two abducted Israeli soldiers.” Link

Based on Manmohan’s government’s non-response to the latest Mumbai terror carnage, we can call Indian wimpy.

But here comes the hypocrisy part. A day later, Manmohan’s Foreign Secretary Shyam Saran says, the PM would ask G8 to ask for a coordinated response to global terrorism.

Prime Minister Manmohan Singh is expected to ask leaders of the G-8 countries to come out with 'cohesive' action and a 'credible strategy' to effectively combat global terrorism. Link

Indian government condemns Pakistan for supporting terrorists but we are friends with Iran that supports Hamas and Hizbollah and is now indirectly waging war (using Hizbulla) against Israel to shift the world focus from its nuclear weapons program.

Coordinated response. Yeah, right.

Thursday, July 13, 2006

Three Columns of Interest on 11/7 Terror Bombing

I have seen three columns that I thought were interesting - there are, of course, plenty more that have nothing new to offer to explain or understand the current situation in better light. Some excerpts from the three.

First is The Hindu's Praveen Swami. Based on his previous articles on spectre of terror cells and the complex interactions between them and with their bosses in Pakistan, he creates narrative speculating who may have created this cranage.

""THE HINDU," wrote the Lashkar-e-Taiba's founder and spiritual guide Hafiz Mohammed Saeed in 1999, "is a mean enemy and the proper way to deal with him is the one adopted by our forefathers, who crushed them by force."

...In December, the Intelligence Bureau and the Mumbai Police arrested National Conference-affiliated municipal councillor Arshad Badroo along with two other Jammu and Kashmir residents — the key figures, it turned out, in a Lashkar bombing operation targeting the city.

Last month, evidence emerged that the Lashkar continued to seek the resources needed for a major strike. Acting on information provided by the Intelligence Bureau, the Maharashtra Police arrested 11 members of a Lashkar cell that had shipped in an incredible 43 kilograms of explosives, along with assault rifles and grenades. Several had links to SIMI — just like Raza and Sheikh. Soon after, three Lashkar operatives were killed while attempting to storm the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh's office in Nagpur.

Another Dawood Ibrahim lieutenant, Fahim Machmach, helped a separate group of terror recruits transit through Bangkok, including two Bangalore residents who identified themselves using the code-names `Iqbal' and `Sohail.'..."
Link (Bold mine)

Second is Indian Express columnist Shishir Gupta. He expresses dismay at UPA, especially Manmohan and Shivraj Patil's, lax attitude towards internal security and intellegency gathering.

"But the Intelligence establishment under the UPA is in denial. The comfortable theory about terrorism is that it is imported into this country. And that is still true. But the UPA, it seems, simply can’t accept that jihad now has a domestic manufacturing facility. Shivraj Patil wants us to think of boys gone astray...

... The PM has allowed his national security adviser, M.K. Narayanan, the home minister, Shivraj Patil, to put the party first in engaging ULFA and the Naxalites. The Naxalite strategy badly backfired. But even after that the government halted the army’s anti-ULFA operations in the Dibrugarh-Saikhowa forests earlier this year.

Management of internal security has suffered after the rule of two-year fixed tenures was instituted for home and defence secretaries, R&AW and IB chiefs. Here merit was not the criterion. Comfort levels with the Congress were the yardstick. While the R&AW fumbled from spy to spy (Rabinder Singh to Ujjawal Dasgupta), the IB lost key people in its Kashmir, anti-Naxalite and Operations wings due to office politics.

...The counter-insurgent Salwa Judum movement in Naxalite-infested areas of Chhattisgarh occupied as much time and attention as Kashmir violence. The Left criticised the BJP taking over a movement started by a Congress MLA."

And finally Rediff's Saisuresh Sivaswamy compares American reaction after terror attacks on its soil verses Bharatiya reaction after terror attacks on its soil - both after 1993 Mumbai's Bombay Stock Exchange and current Mumbai attacks.

"I cannot but notice that the United States of America, which then declared its biggest offensive since Pearl Harbour and which action brought it tonnes and tonnes of international criticism -- not to mention unveiled threats of attack from Osama bin Laden, abduction of US nationals and their murder -- has not faced any terrorist attack since 9/11.

...With these words America went to war.

I had waited in 1993 for the majesty of the Indian State to similarly display itself, as I waited many more times for it to happen. I waited for it last night as well, and finally I saw the display.

On the streets of Mahim, close to where we work, the majesty of the Indian State was on full display as Congress president Sonia Gandhi accompanied by Home Minister Shivraj Patil and Railway Minister Lalu Yadav drove past, en route to the blast site. My colleague counted 38+ cars in the motorcade that swept past, as other traffic on the road was kept frozen in place by the security phalanx. It was truly an impressive sight -– only, I couldn't help thinking, it was put on for someone who doesn't hold an office of authority. While the man who does, simply reviewed the security situation in the face of the Srinagar and Mumbai blasts, and directed that New Delhi's security be beefed up.

This was the majesty of the Indian State on display yesterday. I could have wept.

When somebody directs terror at you, nation-States are expected to hit back with maximum force, carry the fight into the enemy camp. It is not enough to possess unrelenting, unremitting muscle power -- it also becomes necessary, once in a while, to display that power. And not merely through caparisoned missiles parading down Janpath once a year, but by responding forcefully to challenges to the State's very existence.

All your nuclear weapons, your missiles, your tanks, come to nought when you don't have the steel in your soul to defend yourself and your subjects -- at any cost.

And finally, a supreme court lawyer says this in his article in Indian Express on July 12, 2006, under the title A nation of wimps

" A distinguished analyst of South Asian affairs once told the Pakistani government that “India does not react to the loss of people. They have just too many. India only reacts to the loss of territory”."

True indeed. Both the statement and the title of the article.

Wednesday, July 12, 2006

Dear Prime Minister, Name Three Things You Did Since Last Attack

Information is pouring in on the nature and extent of carnage that terrorists unleashed on Mumbai commuters and theories (1, 2, 3, 4 - via Varnam) about who may be responsible. As I watch and read the usual Indian leaders in charge talking reading tough statements which sound awfully familiar, I was wondering what did Manmohan do in the past nine months since the Diwali attacks in Delhi market place?

So here is an open letter to prime minister Manmohan Singh.

Dear Prime Minister: I heard and read your statement, after the horrific killing of Mumbai commuters on July 11, 2006, that terrorism will be defeated and your government will 'fight and defeat the evil designs of terrorists'. The statement sounds remarkably similar to the statement you made before. It's the same statement you made when terrorists killed more than 60 people in Delhi's market place during Diwali season last year and the same statement I heard from you after terrorists stuck Varanasi in March of this year.

Your repeated, yet similar, statements after every terrorist attacks makes me wonder if you really believe in what you are saying. I am sure you do and I have no reason to doubt your sincerity. But then may be I do have reason to doubt your sincerity. I doubt it because I don't see any action following those words in your statements. May be I missed the quite action.

So please tell us, Prime Minister Manmohan, the three things that you did to tackle terrorism since you came into office in 2004, or say, since after Delhi attacks nine months ago.

1. What new laws did you pass to give our security forces more power to investigate and prosecute terrorists and terror cells?

2. How did you reorganize the internal security apparatus so that they can coordinate information and capabilities better?

3. How is our border more secure to intercept and stop terrorists from entering or contacting terrorist sympathizers in our country?

4. And finally, how did you improve our internal and external intelligence capabilities and coordination to track and kill or prosecute terrorists before they carry out their carnage?

We are bit weary of listening to your and your Home Minister’s reading of tough statements. Give us specifics on your anti-terror actions to make us believe you.

With Regards.

Update: The Acorn apparently noticed the same.

Thursday, July 06, 2006

Presenting Garbage Fiction As Facts - Pankaj Mishra

Pankaj Mishra single handily made up allegations that Indian security forces massacred Sikhs in Chittisinghpura when Clinton visited India in 2000. Clinton probably read his writing in New York Times, and without getting confirmation from his intelligence agencies (they would parrot ISI, anyway), made allegations in Madeleine Albright's autobiography's introduction that Hindus killed Sikhs during his trip to, apparently, make a point. (Publisher of the autobiography later retracts the story but Clinton's people refuses to do so.)

When push come to shove, Mr. Mishra says no one really knows about who killed those poor J&K Sikh villagers and wants an investigation and talks about fragile Indian democracy and (laughably) play with words. Talk about obscurantism. Because his fiction gets space in western newspapers and magazines as facts, he is given wide coverage in Indian newspapers.

Now Economist (July 1-7) gleefully reviews his another garbage portrayed as facts. This garbage has a lengthy title - "Temptations of the West: How to be Modern in India, Pakistan, Tibet and Beyond" (apparently to China and Japan). I don't think I would ever read the book but the review is quite entertaining by itself. I couldn't stop laughing after reading the review:

"His part in the wider drama established, Mr Mishra identifies himself with all manner of strugglers on the sub-continent...

"His eye is keenest in his homeland, the subject of more than half the book. Mr Mishra shreds the Hindu nationalists, purveyors of a religion cobbled together from folk beliefs in the 19th century, for the political purpose of opposing foreign rule. He reveals their contradictory ideas of caste and the imbecility of their world-view which is haunted by fears of the World Trade Organisation and the pope. In their rhetoric, they are as anti-America as al-Qaeda. Yet, at the same time, Hindu extremists seek to co-opt Western countries through mastery of their own scientific achievements. Mr Mishra discovers, in a secret laboratory hidden in a teak forest, Hindu extremists making dental powder out of cow's urine. But the nationalists' violence is no joke: 2,000 Indian Muslims were slaughtered in Gujarat in 2002 alone. In Kashmir the army, backed by every Indian government of the past decade, has murdered thousands of people in a failed effort to quell an insurgency that is rooted in legitimate grievance.

"India is not shining, but its people do have the advantagein violent and corrupt elections of changing their government. That has rarely, or never, been the case in Pakistan, Afghanistan, Nepal and Tibet,...."

Ah, the wonderful struggling garbage maker:

Hindus fundamentalists can out do al-Qaeda in their hatred of US; Hindus haunted by WTO and pope; Hindus making dental power from cow's urine; Hindu army murdering thousands of people - what else is missing: naked Hindu sandus dipping in Ganga; Hindus praying to multiple gods (all at the same time); Hindus myriad languages and customs - they all play into this surreal image of destructive power of Hindus.

But he throws the Hindus a bone...despite all this the Hindus can change their government. And their neighbours can't.

Update:Salil Tripathi provides an excellent rebuttal to Mishra's nostalgia to India socialistic past and aborring present in UK's Guardians commentisfree section (via Confused - read both Salil's rebuttal to Mishra original article and his reply to Mishra reply to his rebuttal). Sandeep and Acorn critique Mishra latest tirade on India in NYT op-ed.