Complaint against George Bush & others in the International Criminal Court

                         

                                FOUNDATION FOR INDO-TURKIC STUDIES                     

Tel/Fax ; 43034706                                                          Amb (Rtd) K Gajendra Singh                                                      

Emails; Gajendrak@hotmail.com                                                   A-44 ,IFS Apartments

KGSingh@Yahoo.com                                                                     Mayur Vihar –Phase 1,

http://tarafits.blogspot.com/                                                                Delhi 91, India

                                                                                                           23 January, 2010. 

Complaint against George Bush & others in the International Criminal Court & warning to Obama

For Crimes against Humanity

Prof Boyle requests International Arrest Warrants for Rendition & Torture

 

Recognition of the inherent dignity and of the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family is the foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world : Preamble, Universal Declaration of Human Rights

Illinois University professor Francis A. Boyle has filed a Complaint with the Prosecutor for the International Criminal Court (I.C.C.) in The Hague against U.S. citizens George W. Bush, Richard Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, George Tenet, Condoleezza Rice, and Alberto Gonzales (the "Accused") for their criminal policy and practice of "extraordinary rendition" ie enforced disappearance and consequent torture perpetrated upon about 100 human beings. This criminal policy and practice by the Accused constitute Crimes against Humanity in violation of the Rome Statute establishing the I.C.C.

While United States is not a party to the Rome Statute the Accused ordered and were responsible for the commission of I.C.C. statutory crimes within the respective territories of many I.C.C. member states, including several in Europe. Consequently, the I.C.C. has jurisdiction to prosecute the Accused for their I.C.C. statutory crimes under Rome Statute article 12(2)(a) that affords the I.C.C. jurisdiction to prosecute for I.C.C. statutory crimes committed in I.C.C. member states.

The Complaint requests (1) that the I.C.C. Prosecutor open an investigation of the Accused on his own accord under Rome Statute article 15(1); and (2) that the I.C.C. Prosecutor also formally "submit to the Pre-Trial Chamber a request for authorization of an investigation" of the Accused under Rome Statute article 15(3).

For similar reasons, the Highest Level Officials of the Obama administration risk the filing of a follow-up Complaint with the I.C.C. if they do not immediately terminate the Accused's criminal policy and practice of "extraordinary rendition," which the Obama administration has continued to implement.

The Complaint concludes with a request that the I.C.C. Prosecutor obtain International Arrest Warrants for the Accused from the I.C.C. in accordance with Rome Statute articles 58(1)(a), 58(1)(b)(i), 58(1)(b)(ii), and 58(1)(b)(iii).

Prof .Francis A Boyle of the University of Illinois College of Law in Champaign, U.S.A. who teaches law at the university is a scholar of international law and human rights. He received a J.D. degree magna cum laude and A.M. and Ph.D. degrees in political science from Harvard University, where he was a teaching fellow and an associate at its Center for International Affairs. He also practiced tax and international tax Laws with Bingham, Dana & Gould in Boston. He has written and lectured extensively in the United States and abroad on the relationship between international law and politics. Professor Boyle served as counsel to Bosnia and Herzegovina and to the Provisional Government of the State of Palestine. He has advised numerous international bodies in the areas of human rights, war crimes and genocide, nuclear policy, and bio-warfare.

Prof .Francis A Boyle, was a member of the Kuala Lumpur War Crimes Tribunal**

Copy of Complaint of 19 January, 2010 from Prof Boyle to Prosecutor Luis Moreno-Ocampo , International Criminal Court .The Hague , the Netherlands ,below.*

Rumsfeld, misled the US Congress and President George Bush also "had to be aware" of the atrocities ;- US Gen Antonio Taguba to Seymour Hersh

 

In an interview in 2007 with Seymour Hersh in New Yorker , Major General Antonio Taguba who led the first military investigation in 2004 into human rights abuses at Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq has bluntly questioned the integrity of former US Secretary of Defence, Donald Rumsfeld, suggesting he misled the US Congress by downplaying his own prior knowledge of what had happened. Gen Taguba also claimed in the interview that President George Bush also "had to be aware" of the atrocities despite saying at the time of the scandal that he had been out of the loop until he saw images in the US media.

 

The long arm of Justice and Time and Criminals

US has tried all tricks including threats and money that countries joining ICC grant exemption to US citizens .Washington had coerced Belgium to change its law of universal jurisdiction under which Donald Rumsfeld could have been tried.

 

Many Israeli officials arriving in London and on being warned of arrests for war crimes did not disembark and returned home .  

 

George Bush et al are now private citizens and let us see what happens when the declining US hegemony collapses .At best they will dare not leave USA.

Augusto Pinochet's arrest and trial                                                                                                    General Augusto Pinochet was indicted on 10 October 1998 by Spanish magistrate Baltasar Garzón. He was arrested in London and finally released by the British government in March 2000. Authorized to freely return to his native Chile, he was there first indicted by the judge Juan Guzmán Tapia, and charged of a number of crimes, before dying on 10 December 2006, without having been convicted in any case. His arrest in London made the front-page of newspapers worldwide as not only did it involve the head of the military dictatorship that ruled Chile from 1973 to 1990, but it was the first time that several European judges applied the principle of universal jurisdiction, declaring themselves competent to judge crimes committed by former head of states, despite local amnesty laws.
War Crimes, Crimes Against Humanity And Genocide In Iraq
Earlier on 7 October ,2009 a Legal Case against 4 U.S. Presidents and 4 UK Prime Ministers was filed by The Brussels Tribunal at the Audiencia Nacional in Madrid ahead of the change of law by the Spanish Senate, acting to confirm a decision already taken under pressure from powerful governments accused of grave crimes, which will limit Spain's laws of universal jurisdiction for commissioning, condoning and/or perpetuating multiple war crimes, crimes against humanity, and genocide in Iraq.
This case, naming George H W Bush, William J Clinton, George W Bush, Barack H Obama, Margaret Thatcher, John Major, Anthony Blair and Gordon Brown, is brought by Iraqis and others who stand in solidarity with the Iraqi people and in defence of their rights and international law.
Iraq: 19 years of intended destruction
The intended destruction — or genocide — of Iraq as a state and nation has been ongoing for 19 years, combining the imposition of the most draconian sanctions regime ever designed and that led to 1.5 million Iraqi deaths, including 500,000 children, with a war of aggression that led to the violent deaths of over one million more.
Destruction of Iraq included the purposeful targeting of its water and sanitation system, attacking the health of the civilian population. Since 1990, thousands of tons of depleted uranium have been dropped on Iraq, leading in some places to a 600 per cent rise in cancer and leukaemia cases, especially among children. In both the first Gulf War and "Shock and Awe" in 2003, an air campaign that openly threatened "total destruction", waves of disproportionate bombing made no distinction between military and civilian targets, with schools, hospitals, mosques, churches, shelters, residential areas, and historical sites all destroyed. 
Since 2003, some 4.7 million Iraqis — one fifth of the population — have been forcibly displaced. Under occupation, kidnappings, killings, extortion and mutilation became endemic, targeting men, women and even children and the elderly. 

In parallel, Iraq's rich heritage and unique cultural and archaeological patrimony has been wantonly destroyed.

DESTRUCTION OF WORLD'S EASTERN HERITAGE IN IRAQ:  by K Gajendra Singh

http;//www.southasiaanalysis.org/papers8/paper733.html

Every Iraqi victim deserves justice.
Everyone responsible should be accountable.

Kuala Lumpur Declaration to Criminalise War and War Crimes Tribunal

 

Following the launching of the Kuala Lumpur Declaration to Criminalise War in 2004, a War Crimes Commission was appointed to investigate allegations of brutality and to gather evidence. A War Crimes Court was also set up. The Commission took two and a half years to trace and interview victims, gather  evidence and research the law.

On 31 October, 2009 the Commission submitted its case to the seven member judge Tribunal .
Prof .Francis A Boyle, was a member of the Tribunal .
Other members of the Tribunal are ;
Dato Abdur Kadir Sulaiman is a retired Malaysian Federal Court Judge. He is the President of the Kuala Lumpur War Crimes Tribunal ,
Tunku Sofia Jewa ,was called to the English Bar at the Lincoln's Inn .She then obtained LLM and Ph.D from the US University of Miami .She has taught international law at universities in Malaysia and now heads a legal firm .

Prof Salleh Buang ,a Bar-at Law from Lincoln's Inn. England, is visiting professor at Universiti Teknology, Malaysia .He served as a Federal council at the Attorney General's Chambers and  taught law and practiced corporate law .He has written over 25 books on Law.

Prof.Niloufer Bhagvat , a graduate of Mumbai Law college , did her LLM from the Mumbai University in Constitutional Law , Administrative Law and International Law. She taught law at the university and has appeared as senior advocate at the Supreme Court in New Delhi and Mumbai High Courts and also before Commissions of Enquiries including the Justice Srikrishna Commission .She is the vice president of Indian Lawyers Association and writes on legal and international affairs regularly .She was a judge at the International Tribunal on Afghanistan at Tokyo in 2003.

Alfred Lambremont Webre, J.D., M.Ed.,a graduate of Yale University and Yale Law School is a renowned author, lawyer, futurist, peace activist, environmental activist . A space activist he promotes the ban of space weapons. He was a co-architect of the Space Preservation Treaty and the Space Preservation Act and is the International Director of the Institute for Cooperation in Space.He helped draft the Citizen Hearing in 2000 with Stephen Bassett and serves as a member on the Board of Advisors.

Dr Shad Saleem Faruqi is Emeritus Professor at UiTM and Visiting Professor at USM. After graduating from the Wesleyan University in the United States ,Dr Faruqi completed his LLB (First Class) and LLM (First Class) from Aligarh Muslim University, India and his PhD from International Islamic University Malaysia

War Crimes Commission presents Testimonies of the victims to the Tribunal

An International Conference to Criminalize War by the Perdana Global Peace Organization (PGPO) and Kuala Lumpur Foundation to Criminalize War (KLFCW) with the aim of stopping slaughter of innocents and prevent profiteers from earning blood money was held along with an Exhibition at Putra World Trade Center in Kuala Lumpur from Oct. 28 to 31. The conference was opened by former Malaysian Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad, who has been the driving force behind the conference , the exhibition and holding the Commission and the Tribunal . Renowned world and Malaysian experts and personalities participated in the events.

On the first two days of event, the conference heard views of  both Malaysian and foreign Speakers  on the wars and related matters.

'Flouting of International Law and the Failure of International Organisations,'

 In the 28 October morning session, British MP George Holloway ,Ms Cynthia Mckinney and the author spoke on the subject.

The War Crimes Commission and Tribunal heard testimonies from victims of torture following the illegal US led invasion of Iraq and earlier of Afghanistan.

The exhibition featured the carnage of war and torture committed by the US led forces and personnel in Iraq, Afghanistan, Guantanamo and elsewhere.

War Crimes Commission Hears Graphic Accounts of US Torture From Former Detainees

 

The KL War Crimes Commission heard harrowing testimonies about the atrocities committed against the Guantanamo Bay detainees, which included psychological torture and routine humiliation.

A total of seven detainees including Sudanese journalist Sami Al'Hajj, and British nationals Moazzam Begg and Rahul Ahmed about the atrocities that took place in the camps including how they were shackled, stripped naked in front of female soldiers, thrown naked into makeshift cells made with barbed wires, injected with substances and subjected to mental torture to the point they hallucinated.

 

Begg also spoke of the psychological torture inflicted on him while he was imprisoned. A psychiatrist assigned to him had asked him if he had ever considered committing suicide and even suggested how he could kill himself by tying his prison clothes to make a rope that could be used as a noose.

"Of the six deaths that I knew of during detention, five were carried out in this way," Begg said, adding that the detainees were also drugged.

Begg also revealed that he was interrogated more than 300 times including once when insinuations were made that his wife was in danger while the screams of a woman could be heard next door.He also said he was forced to sign a confession that he was member of the terrorist organisation Al-Qaeda under threat of torture and because he though it would give him access to legal recourse.

Summing up his testimony, Begg revealed to the commission that 92% of people held in Guantanamo Bay were not involved with the Taliban or Al-Qaeda, saying he believed many were detained and handed to the Americans to get the hefty bounty paid for each detainee.

He also had some harsh words for the role played by the British government in the affair.

Begg is now director of Cage Prisoners – a human rights organisation that works to raise awareness of the plight of the prisoners held as part of the War on Terror

Another victim R Ahmed ,in 2002, when 18-year-old and two friends crossed the Pakistan-Afghanistan border to obtain drugs and alcohol which they were told was easily available in the American-occupied Afghanistan. They were promptly arrested and Ahmed spent the next two and the half years of his life in Guantanamo Bay.

Iraqi-born Jameela Abbas Hameedi said that rape and abuse of women and children by US troops were almost a daily affair over at the Abu Ghraib prison in Baghdad. Jameelah, 54, was arrested in the Iraqi capital in January 2004 with her entire family, allegedly for supporting and funding forces against the US invasion.

"The US army even beat me with tubes and a plastic chair until it broke. A plastic shard entered my leg and caused a bad infection. I had to undergo surgery but without any anaesthetic given," said Jameelah who was also stripped to her underwear in the "black room" of the prison and bashed against a wall.

Her only daughter and nephew were beaten and tortured naked for six months until Jameelah admitted that she supported the resistance. She also witnessed other abuses like sleep deprivation, forced stress positions, forced nudity, the use of dogs to scare and bite prisoners, death threats and sexual abuse.

Jameelah and her family were freed in July 2004 without any charges brought against them.

 

These are only some of the examples of illegal rendition and torture perpetrated by US and UK.

Commissioners at the hearing were former Bar Council president Zainur Zakaria, former UN assistant secretary general for humanitarian operations in Iraq Prof Hans-Christof von Sponeck, former assistant secretary general for human resource management and head of UN humanitarian programme in Iraq Dennis J.Halliday, lawyer and former magistrate Musa Ismail, professor of law Gurdial Nijar, Perdana Foundation's Dr Zulaiha Ismail and Prof Dr Mohd Akram Shair Mohamed of the Islamic University.

The testimonies before the Kuala Lumpur War Crimes Commission Hearings were submitted to the Tribunal on 31 October, 2009.

 

For some details on illegal 'rendition' and torture  see below ;

US Franchised Torture Refuses To Go Away-By Gajendra Singh 18 Jan, 2006 www.informationclearinghouse.info/article11601.htm

Gen Taguba Unveils Abu Ghraib, US Gulag - "The abused are only Iraqis!"  

By K Gajendra Singh  -27 June, 2007

http://www.uruknet.info/?p=m34046&hd=&size=1&l=e 

*Copy of Complaint dated 19 January, 2010 from Prof Boyle to Prosecutor Luis Moreno-Ocampo , International Criminal Court .The Hague ,the Netherlands is below.*

January 19, 2010

Dear Sir:

Please accept my personal compliments. I have the honor hereby to file with you and the International Criminal Court this Complaint against U.S. citizens George W. Bush, Richard Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, George Tenet, Condoleezza Rice , and Alberto Gonzales (hereinafter referred to as the "Accused") for their criminal policy and practice of "extraordinary rendition." This term is really a euphemism for the enforced disappearances of persons, their torture, severe deprivation of their liberty, their violent sexual abuse, and other inhumane acts perpetrated upon these Victims. The Accused have inflicted this criminal policy and practice of "extraordinary rendition" upon about one hundred (100) human beings, almost all of whom are Muslims/Arabs/Asians and People of Color. I doubt very seriously that the Accused would have inflicted these criminal practices upon 100 White Judeo-Christian men.

The Accused's criminal policy and practice of "extraordinary rendition" are both "widespread" and "systematic" within the meaning of Rome Statute article 7(1). Therefore the Accused have committed numerous "Crimes against Humanity" in flagrant and repeated and longstanding violation of Rome Statute articles 5(1)(b), 7(1)(a), 7(1)(e), 7(1)(f), 7(1)(g), 7(1)(h), 7(1)(i), and 7(1)(k). Furthermore, the Accused's Rome Statute Crimes Against Humanity of enforced disappearances of persons constitutes ongoing criminal activity that continues even as of today.

The United States is not a contracting party to the Rome Statute. Nevertheless, the Accused ordered and were responsible for the commission of these I.C.C. statutory crimes on, in, and over the respective territories of several I.C.C. member states, including many located in Europe. Therefore, the I.C.C. has jurisdiction over the Accused for their I.C.C. statutory crimes in accordance with Rome Statute article 12(2)(a), which provides as follows:

Article 12

Preconditions to the Exercise of Jurisdiction
…

2. In the case of article 13, paragraph (a) or (c), the Court may exercise its jurisdiction if one or more of the following States are Parties to this Statute or have accepted the jurisdiction of the Court in accordance with paragraph 3:


(a) The State on the territory of which the conduct in question occurred …

So the fact that United States is not a contracting party to the Rome Statute is no bar to the I.C.C.'s prosecution of the Accused because they have ordered and been responsible for the commission of Rome Statute Crimes against Humanity on, in, and over the respective territories of several I.C.C. member states.

Consequently, I hereby respectfully request that the Court exercise its jurisdiction over the Accused for these Crimes against Humanity in accordance with Rome Statute article 13(c), which provides as follows:

Article 13

Exercise of Jurisdiction

The Court may exercise its jurisdiction with respect to a crime referred to in article 5 in accordance with the provisions of this Statute if:
…

(c) The Prosecutor has initiated an investigation in respect of such a crime in accordance with article 15.
Pursuant to Rome Statute article 13(c), I hereby respectfully request that you initiate an investigation proprio motu against the Accused in accordance with Rome Statute article 15(1): "The Prosecutor may initiate investigations proprio motu on the basis of information on crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court." My detailed Complaint against the Accused constitutes the sufficient "information" required by article 15(1).

Furthermore, I respectfully submit that this Complaint by itself constitutes "a reasonable basis to proceed with an investigation" under Rome Statute article 15(3). Hence, I also respectfully request that you formally "submit to the Pre-Trial Chamber a request for authorization of an investigation" of the Accused under Rome Statute article 15(3) at this time. Please inform me at your earliest convenience about the status and disposition of my two requests set forth immediately above.

Based upon your extensive human rights work in Argentina, you know full well from direct personal experience the terrors and the horrors of enforced disappearances of persons and their consequent torture. According to reputable news media sources here in the United States, about 100 human beings have been subjected to enforced disappearances and subsequent torture by the Accused. We still have no accounting for these Victims. In other words, many of these Victims of enforced disappearances and torture by the Accused could still be alive today. Their very lives are at stake right now as we communicate. You could very well save some of their lives by publicly stating that you are opening an investigation of my Complaint.

As for those Victims of enforced disappearances by the Accused who have died, your opening an investigation of my Complaint is the only means by which we might be able to obtain some explanation and accounting for their whereabouts and the location of their remains in order to communicate this critical information to their next-of-kin and loved-ones. Based upon your extensive experience combating enforced disappearances of persons and their consequent torture in Argentina, you know full well how important that objective is. The next-of-kin, loved-ones, and friends of "disappeared" human beings can never benefit from psychological "closure" unless and until there is an accounting for the fates, if not the remains, of the Victims. In part that is precisely why the Accused's enforced disappearances of about 100 human beings constitutes ongoing criminal activity that continues as of today and will continue until the fates of all their Victims have been officially determined by you opening an investigation into my Complaint.

Let us mutually suppose that during the so-called "dirty war" in Argentina the International Criminal Court had been in existence. I submit that as an Argentinean human rights lawyer you would have moved heaven and earth and done everything in your power to get the I.C.C. and its Prosecutor to assume jurisdiction over the Argentine Junta in order to terminate and prosecute their enforced disappearances and torture of your fellow Argentinean citizens. I would have done the same. Unfortunately, the I.C.C. did not exist during those darkest of days for the Argentine Republic when we could have so acted. But today as the I.C.C. Prosecutor, you have both the opportunity and the legal power to do something to rectify this mass and total human rights annihilation, and to resolve and to terminate and to prosecute the "widespread" and "systematic" policy and practice of enforced disappearances and consequent torture of about 100 human beings by the Accused.

Unfortunately, the new Obama administration in the United States has made it perfectly clear by means of public statements by President Obama and his Attorney General Eric Holder that they are not going to open any criminal investigation of any of the Accused for these aforementioned Crimes against Humanity. Hence an I.C.C. "case" against the Accused is "admissible" under Rome Statute article 1(complementarity) and article 17. As of right now you and the I.C.C. Judges are the only people in the entire world who can bring some degree of Justice, Closure, and Healing into this dire, tragic, and deplorable situation for the lives and well-being of about one hundred "disappeared" and tortured human beings as well as for their loved-ones and next-of-kin, who are also Victims of the Accused's Crimes against Humanity. On behalf of them all, as a fellow human rights lawyer I implore you to open an investigation into my Complaint and to issue a public statement to that effect.

Also, most regretfully, the new Obama administration has publicly stated that it will continue the Accused's policy and practice of "extraordinary rendition," which is really their euphemism for enforced disappearances of human beings and consequent torture by other States. Hence the Highest Level Officials of the Obama administration fully intend to commit their own Crimes against Humanity under the I.C.C. Rome Statute – unless you stop them! Your opening an investigation of my Complaint will undoubtedly deter the Obama administration from engaging in any more "extraordinary renditions" -- enforced disappearances of human beings and having them tortured by other States. Indeed your opening of an investigation into my Complaint might encourage the Obama administration to terminate its criminal "extraordinary rendition" program immediately and thoroughly by means of issuing a public statement to that effect. In other words, your opening an investigation of my Complaint could very well save the lives of a large number of additional human beings who otherwise will be subjected by the Obama administration to the Rome Statute Crimes against Humanity of enforced disappearances of persons and their consequent torture by other States, inter alia.

The lives and well-being of countless human beings are now at risk, hanging in the balance, waiting for you to act promptly, effectively, and immediately to save them from becoming Victims of Rome Statute Crimes against Humanity perpetrated by the Highest Level Officials of the Obama administration as successors-in-law to the Accused by opening an investigation of my Complaint. Otherwise, I shall be forced to file with you and the I.C.C. a follow-up Complaint against the Highest Level Officials of the Obama administration. I certainly hope it will not come to that. Please make it so.

Finally, for reasons more fully explained in the Conclusion to my Complaint, I respectfully request that you obtain I.C.C. arrest warrants for the Accused in accordance with Rome Statute articles 58(1)(a), article 58(1)(b)(i), article 58(1)(b)(ii), and article 58(1)(b)(iii). The sooner, the better for all humankind.

I respectfully request that you schedule a meeting with me at our earliest mutual convenience in order to discuss this Complaint. I look forward to hearing from you at your earliest convenience.

This transmission letter is an integral part of my Complaint against the Accused and is hereby incorporated by reference into the attached Complaint dated as of today as well.

Please accept, Sir, the assurance of my highest consideration.

Francis A. Boyle
Professor of International Law

K Gajendra Singh, Indian ambassador (retired), served as ambassador to Turkey and Azerbaijan from August 1992 to April 1996. Prior to that, he served terms as ambassador to Jordan, Romania and Senegal. He is currently chairman of the Foundation for Indo-Turkic Studies. Copy right with the author E-mail kgsingh@yahoo.com

---

New Windows 7: Find the right PC for you. Learn more.

The Charade of Climate Change and other Western Fables

                           

FOUNDATION FOR INDO-TURKIC STUDIES                     

Tel/Fax ; 43034706                                                          Amb (Rtd) K Gajendra Singh                                                      

Emails; Gajendrak@hotmail.com                                                   A-44 ,IFS Apartments

KGSingh@Yahoo.com                                                                     Mayur Vihar –Phase 1,

http://tarafits.blogspot.com/                                                                Delhi 91, India

                                                                                                        20 January , 2010.                                                                                                                        

 

The Charade of Climate Change and other Western Fables

US led West will use any trick to maintain its hegemony and will find many collaborators .In the past Europeans were on a civilising mission and saving souls for Jesus Christ  .How they civilised the East ,West and South through colonial exploitation after carrying out genocides !

After the collapse of the Communist USSR and the Fall of the Berlin Wall ,trillions of dollars worth of wealth was transferred to the West under the charade of bringing in capitalism and globalisation .From Russia alone between $400 billion to a trillion was taken out if not more .

Now that western economies are going down hill , a new charade of Climate Change is being erected , under which US ,which has not built a single nuclear power plant in decades hopes to build new units in India .During Hilary Clinton's visit she even cited Gujarat and Andhra Predesh for the US projects .And of course US will supply Uranium fuel taken out from its now defunct weapons after its agreements with Moscow .Of course Washington can stop supply of the fuel as in the case of Tarapore and hold India's strategic options hostage to US objectives .

Carbon Tax –New West Weapon

But the new weapon will be the carbon tax to be imposed on emerging economies and the sale of technology to Asia and Africa to ease the warming of the planet earth .Of course the West will not pay for the criminal polution of the universe by their industrisation ;civilian and military.

A few years ago a former British minister of environment had complained that US wasted as much energy as the total energy used by Japan , the 2^nd industrial state in GDP .

Paul Krugman of The New York Times, for example, has laready advocated imposing a carbon tariff on China to help the country curb their growing carbon output. It was supported by consumer advocate Ralph Nader , but who opposed a market based carbon-trading system.

"A tax on CO2 emissions - not a cap-and-trade system - offers the best prospect of meaningfully engaging China and the U.S., while avoiding the prospect of unhinged environmental protectionism," wrote Nader and Toby Heaps in a December 2008 issue of The Wall Street Journal. "An effective, harmonized tax on C02 emissions must stabilize the growth of atmospheric concentrations of GHGs [greenhouse gases] by no later than 2020. The tax must also be adjusted annually, by a global body, according to this objective

These carbon tariffs proposals were met with outrage in USA , not the first time. Last July, the United States Chamber of Commerce spoke out about the prospect of taxing imports from polluting countries.

Indian Pachauri tool of climate change western agenda!

A panel of Indian scientists to study the Himalayan glacier melting in an exhaustive study of the region, after analyzing 150 years of data by the Geological Survey of India from 25 Himalayan glaciers, concluded that while Himalayan glaciers had long been retreating, there was no acceleration of the trend and nothing to suggest that the glaciers would vanish.

When this panel's report was released in November 2009, the Inter-governmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) head, R K Pachauri, dismissed it as "voodoo science" and called the findings "school science". Accusing Environment Minister Jairam Ramesh of arrogance, Pachauri said that such skeptical claims were reminiscent of "climate change deniers".

 

It has now been proved that the health of glaciers which was a cause of grave concern for the IPCC's alarmist position that they would melt by 2035 was not based on an iota of scientific evidence, reiterated minister  Ramesh .

 

This has aroused considerable debate on India's corporate channels .Arnab Goswami , a somewhat better anchor than the hysterical men and babbling women hogging other channels, first appeared pissed off at the charge of chicanery at India's latest Nobel Laureate ,but finally felt enough disturbed to find out the truth .With London's Times exposing Pachauri and others ,it became quite clear that apart from him another villain .The claims of shrinkage were based solely on a speculative remark made by a little-known Indian scientist formerly at Jawaharlal Nehru University, Professor Dr Syed Iqbal Hasnain, in 1999 during an interview with New Scientist magazine .

 

Dr Hasnain's replies on TV channel were vague and droll proving what Poet AK Ramanujam said that Indians don't seem to have a sense of absolute .They place everything in some context or another. And, depending on the context, what the rest of the world would regard as being wrong in  absolute sense, becomes quite all right in India. But then most research institutions are being headed by ignorant experts appointed by village yokels and urban riffraff now appointing personnel based on cste , region and party affiliation consideration.

The IPCC's was called into question late last year after e-mails hacked from computer servers at the University of East Anglia showed climate researchers discussed keeping some scientific papers out of an IPCC report. The ensuing scandal, dubbed Climategate, led skeptics to suggest that environmental scientists were willing to use fake evidence to back up their claims. Claims by  Pachauris or World Health Organisation's (WHO) alarmist claims of threat posed by the H1N1 virus, or swine flu, to sell the vaccines ,perhaps because of links between members of WHO's vaccine board and big pharmaceutical companies have eroded the credibility of west controlled institutions.

 

" IPCC Report: Millions At Risk Of Hunger And Water Stress In Asia Unless Global Greenhouse Emissions Cut" reported a April 2007 headline in the Science Daily. As late as December last year, an Agence France-Presse article headlined "Melting Himalayan Glaciers Threaten 1.3 Billion Asians" cited the IPCC figure.

Environmentalists are now suggesting that Pachauri should resign over the burgeoning scandal .He has promised to clear the air soon.

 

It may be recalled tat Pachauri and Al Gore were feted for the Nobel Prize awarded last year . It is quite common practice that third world personnel can be bribed by gifts or awards like the Nobel Prize .Indians fall victims easily .UN Sec General  Kofi Anan from Ghana and International Atomic Energy Agency El Bardai successfully resisted US led propaganda and threats  regarding US led Western agendas on Iraq and Iran.

 

I had written in November , 2009 comments along with a serious in depth piece on climate change by an expert posing some uncomfortable questions questioning Pachauri's integrity .It can be read at leisure . It is a very critical and almost an perennial problem.

 

Propaganda and Some Home Truths About Climate Change

http://www.rebelnews.org/component/content/article/96019

I am reproducing a piece dated 27 December, 2009 by a very respected economist and investigative journalist F.William Engdahl on Pachauri's hidden conflict of interest in this sordid affair

 

PS .I can not transpose the references K.Gajendra Singh .A-44,IFS Apartments , Mayur Vihar, Delhi-92 .20 January, 2010.UN IPCC Climate Change chief in Conflict of Interest Scandal

By F. William Engdahl     27 December 2009

Proof of massive personal conflicts of interest of the UN Climate Change chief, Dr Rajendra Pachauri, the co-winner of the Nobel Peace prize for advocating the bogus theory of global warming dangers, has emerged. Pachauri has been accused by prominent scientists and researchers of making a fortune through his personal ties to various carbon trading organizations that stand to make billions if the Copenhagen Agenda is adopted and a cap on global CO2 emissions is agreed.Pachauri has been Chair of the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) since 2002. In that role he reportedly massively altered the conclusions of the 2007 UN report from the intent of numerous participating scientists to allegedly show a universal scientific consensus on the dramatic danger of global warming from man made emissions of CO2 and other gases. That UN report is used as the "scientific" basis to create worldwide hysteria about CO2 gas, a totally harmless gas that is part of the nature process. No one in the world had more influence on the events leading up to the Copenhagen conference on global warming than Pachauri, mastermind of the IPCC 2007 report. More remarkable, given the power he has is the fact that Rajenda Pachauri is presented as a scientist, even once described by the BBC as "the world's top climate scientist." But he is a former railway engineer with a PhD in economics. He has no professional qualifications in climate science. His is a political appointment by the international interests who hope to use Global Warming hysteria to create a huge new trillion dollar carbon trade scheme.¹

Evidence of Pachauri's gross conflicts of interest was made public first at the Copenhagen Climate Change conference when British former Government Advisor, Lord Monckton and Australian Senator Stephen Fielding challenged the science used at Copenhagen by Pachauri and circulated an Open Letter to all member delegations detailing brazen conflicts of interest of the IPCC head.

The letter detailed that Pachauri among other lucrative interests is on the advisory board of the Chicago Climate Exchange, the largest and most lucrative carbon-trading exchange in the world, whose prime backers include the same Wall Street finance firms including Goldman Sachs who control the world oil futures markets. The Chicago Climate Exchange and its sister firms in Europe also are involved with Pachauri's own institute in India, The Tata Energy Research Institute, or TERI, in setting up an India carbon exchange.²

Pachauri's lucrative TERI institute

Pachauri has responded in a statement to the Indian press calling the allegations "a pack of lies." He insisted that the powerful Indian Tata industrial group had severed all tied to the TERI, yet a spokesman from TERI admitted Tata still is closely tied to TERI.

Among the allegations as well are that Pachauri gives paid advice on climate change to bodies ranging from major banks such as Credit Suisse and Deutsche Bank, where he received €100,000 to the Chicago Climate Change, the worlds's largest dealer in buying and selling the right to emit CO2. Pachauri has a worldwide portfolio of business interests with bodies which have been investing billions of dollars in organisations dependent on the IPCC's policy recommendations, including in addition to the named banks, oil and energy companies and investment funds invested in 'carbon trading', the fastest-growing commodity market in the world, estimated soon to be worth trillions of dollars a year.³

TERI has admitted receiving more than $250,000 in payments over the past three and a half years in exchange for Dr. Pachauri's services from companies with a direct financial stake in climate policy, which constitutes a clear violation of conflict of interest policies of the UN, the parent body of the IPCC. The fact that the money goes to an organization that Dr. Pachauri directs rather than directly into his pocket is not relevant.

The Tata Group behind Pachauri's TERI institute is India's largest industrial group with interests from coal to steel plants which stand to reap large benefits from proposed UN carbon trading schemes and other "clean energy" subsidies. The financial reports of TERI are not public information nor is the remuneration Pachauri receives as IPCC head from the UN. In denying the allegations Pachauri seems to have got himself deeper in the muck. He issued a claim that Teri has had no "direct links" with Tata since 1999. But it was only in 2003 that the name changed to The Energy and Resources Institute from Tata Energy Research Institute, and a Teri spokesman explained that, "we have not severed our links with the Tatas" and that the change of name was "only for convenience."⁴

A Tata Group company is still listed among Teri's corporate sponsors, several directors of Tata serve on Teri's Business Council for Sustainable Development, and one senior director serves on Teri's Advisory Board. As well, Pachauri and Ratan Tata, the head of the Tata group, both serve on the Indian Prime Minister's Council on Climate Change, advising on all aspects of national climate policy.

 Pachauri's TERI has opened branches in the US, the EU and several countries in Asia. TERI Europe in London, of which he is a trustee, with Sir John Houghton, one of the key players in the early days of the IPCC and formerly head of the UK Met Office, is currently running a project on bio-energy, financed by the EU. Another project, co-financed by the UK Department of Environment, Food and Rural Affairs and the German insurance firm Munich Re, is studying how India's insurance industry, can benefit from exploiting the supposed risks of exposure to climate change. Why UK taxpayers should fund a project to increase the profits of Indian insurance firms is not explained.
Even more blatant is the role of TERI's Washington-based North American branch, TERI-NA, funded by official and corporate sponsors, including the UN; US government agencies; oil giants such as Amoco; two of leading US defence contractors; Monsanto, the world's largest GMO seed producer; and two world leaders in the international 'carbon market', between them managing more than $1 trillion (£620 billion) worth of assets.⁵
One hand washes the other
Tata Group in India reaps huge potential gains from the worldwide TERI activities and industrial ties as it is involved not just in bio-energy, renewables and insurance but also in 'carbon trading', the worldwide market in buying and selling the right to emit CO2, administered at a profit by the UN under the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) set up under the Kyoto Protocol, which the Copenhagen treaty was designed to replace with an even more lucrative successor. Under the CDM, firms and consumers in the developed world pay for the right to exceed their 'carbon limits' by buying certificates from those firms in countries such as India and China which would win 'carbon credits' for every renewable energy source they develop – or by showing that they have in some way reduced their own 'carbon emissions.'
In 2008 Pachauri became an adviser on renewable and sustainable energy to the Rockefeller Foundation. He joined the board of the Nordic Glitnir Bank, as it launched its Sustainable Future Fund, looking to raise £4 billion. He became chairman of the Indochina Sustainable Infrastructure Fund, who plan to raise £100 billion. As well Pachauri is a director of the International Risk Governance Council in Geneva, set up by EDF and E.On, two of Europe's largest electricity firms. And in 2009 Pachauri joined the New York investment fund Pegasus as a 'strategic adviser', and was made chairman of the advisory board to the Asian Development Bank, which funds projects tied to CDM trading, and whose CEO warned that failure to agree a treaty at Copenhagen would lead to a collapse of the trillion dollar proposed carbon market. ⁶

---

New Windows 7: Find the right PC for you. Learn more.

Baron Bhikhu Parikh tears into Nehru and Gandhi policies

 

            FOUNDATION FOR INDO-TURKIC STUDIES                     

Tel/Fax ; 43034706                                                             Amb (Rtd) K Gajendra Singh                                                      

Emails; Gajendrak@hotmail.com                                              A-44 ,IFS Apartments

KGSingh@Yahoo.com                                                              Mayur Vihar –Phase 1,

http://tarafits.blogspot.com/                                                             Delhi 91, India

                                                                                                       15 January, 2010.   

                                                                                                                     

Baron Bhikhu Parikh tears into Nehru and Gandhi policies -                                                                  Indian Minister Tharoor and ex- Diplomats almost applaud.                                                                                                        A litany of British perfidy ,crimes and wrongs against India

 

Oscar Wilde: The only duty we owe to history is to rewrite it.

 

At the annual lecture by British Lord Bhikhu Parikh ( of Gujarati origin) on 'India's place in world ' organized by the Association of Indian Diplomats (retired) aka AID on 8 January at the Indian Council of World Affairs in Delhi caused ripples and criticism in the media and political circles .

 

According to the Indian media external affairs state minister Shashi Tharoor endorsed Parikh's criticism of Jawaharlal Nehru's foreign policy as tad too preachy that gave India an exaggerated sense of importance.

Parikh reportedly slammed Nehru's policies as having given India a sense of misplaced self-righteousness: "He (Nehru) even developed Indian foreign policy as though it was speaking for the whole of Asia, homogenizing the entire continent and ignoring internal conflicts." Parikh then went on to describe Indira Gandhi's policies as having lacked "strategic vision".

As the presiding officer, Tharoor reportedly stated , "I agree with Parikh on several points. We come from the same school of thought on these issues." Agreeing with Parikh's opinion of Nehru and (Mahatma) Gandhi's foreign policies he added ," It was more like a moralistic running commentary," recalling his own writings in which he criticized Nehru's approach to world affairs.

Tharoor's endorsement of Parikh's comments raised hackles in his Congress party and caused embarrassment. The media recalled that for the Congress, India's first prime minister is a venerated figure, not the least for being part of the Nehru-Gandhi pantheon. Though India recast its foreign policy after the end of the cold war, Panchsheel and non-aligned movement are seen as Nehru's signal contributions, certainly in the Congress.

The Congress rebuttal was prompt. "Nehru is a giant about whom no one can be dismissive in a one-liner," said party spokesperson Abhishek Singhvi. "Given the past history (of controversies in which Tharoor was involved ), it's useful to apply the principle that silence is golden."

"Congress's foreign policy was visualized by Mahatma Gandhi and Jawaharlal Nehru even before Independence; that should not be questioned by a person who is particularly in the government and is supposedly carrying that legacy (forward). The PM should take note of this," Congress spokesman Shakil Ahmed said.

But soon after the lecture Tharoor had Twittered: "Attended great lecture by Lord Bhikhu Parikh on India's place in world."

 

Tharoor , who was deputy to UN Secretary General Kofi Annan, has been mired in controversies ever since made a minister after his maiden entry into the lower house , perhaps to infuse educated blood into the government. So faced with media and party criticism Tharoor responded that as chairman at the lecture at the Council, he had only made an honest summary of an hour-long speech of Lord Parikh, a professor at the London School of Economics (LSE) .

Seeking an apology form newspapers for distorting his remarks on Nehru, Tharoor said, "I am dismayed by the inaccurate and tendentious reporting of a statement attributed to me. Lord Parikh's speech was an hour-long one and largely positive analysis of the major trends in Indian foreign policy. While he expressed some criticisms of past policies, these were not inappropriate in an academic setting dedicated to free discussion of global issues, and in any case were expressed in constructive terms," he said.

While summarising the main points of Parikh's speech he had merely said that, "That Indian foreign policy drew from our sense of civilisation, and the extraordinary contribution by Mahatma Gandhi and Nehruji's articulation of our civilisational heritage, both enhanced India's standing in the world but also earned us the negative reputation of running a moralistic commentary on world affairs — that has come through very clearly in your speech."

"I went on to point out that there was more to Nehruvian policies than that, alluding to the use of force in Goa as an example of real-politik in Indian policy. At no stage did I say what has been reported. It is a basic tenet of good journalism that any quotations within quotation marks should be the exact words spoken. This was manifestly not the case… This is not merely unprofessional, it is dishonest. I demand a correction."

Tharoor also criticised television channels for running stories on the 'basis of inaccurate press reporting', without even checking the tape of his remarks. "That reflects very poorly on their professionalism or lack thereof," he said.

When asked if he had become an embarrassment to the Congress, Tharoor retorted he was not going to take this `nonsense' anymore. "If you are continuing to misreport everything, I say... clearly, people are going to judge me not by what I have actually said but by what you all are reporting what I have said," he said.

He had not issued a rejoinder on 9 January, because , "only one newspaper had reported and I did not take it seriously. It is now that you have made a big song and dance about it I am not only issuing a statement but also issuing a rebuttal and demanding a correction, because we cannot go on like this.".

Tharoor regretted the fact that there were people in the audience who clearly did not have the background, the reading, the depth, the knowledge and the judgment to know what was being said. "That is a great shame. The problem is that journalists must learn but they must not learn at the expense of the country's and the Ministry's credibility," Tharoor said.

As Tharoor clarified his stand, the Congress came out in his support. "There is nothing left in the issue now. It is clear that he was misquoted. We have nothing more to add to it," party spokesman Shakeel Ahmed said.

 

Quite clearly Tharoor does not fit into rough and tumble of the Indian political system brimming with semi-educated hustlers in contrast with his Foreign education and orientation and experience only at United Nations ,where to survive and succeed one has to toe the Washington line as he himself admitted that his thinking was like Lord Parikh's .

 

I had found it incredible that he thought that he would be supported by USA , forget about China , when he stood for elections for the post vacated by Kofi Anan .And the Indian government in its wisdom even supported his candidature .A lot has been amiss in India's foreign policy since 2004 .

 

The grassroots Congress leadership has been already in arms at his utterances that  the air economy class was 'cattle class' ,when the political class was promoting the charade of economy .This kind of flippant conversation is more suited at cocktails among diplomats .In a highly competitive political culture , his peers were upset that without a dynastic pedigree he was after his very first parliament win catapulted into the council of ministers .

 

Lord Bhikhu Chotalal Parikh

 

Bhikhu Chotalal Parikh son of a goldsmith was born in the village of Amalsad in Gujarat in 1935 and had early university education in Bombay , India. He currently holds the Centennial Professorship at the Centre for the Study of Global Governance at the LSE. He has taught at many universities in USA and Europe. Between 1981-1984 he was Vice-Chancellor at the University of Baroda, India.

 

Parikh was appointed a life peer in 2000 as Baron Parikh, of Kingston upon Hull in the East Riding of Yorkshire , when Tony Blair was prime minister (1997-2007).

 

Does Bhikhu Parekh recommend India follow Tony Blair like policies !

 

But would Lord Parekh recommend that India follow policies similar to UK specially under prime minister Tony Blair , under whose watch he was made Baron .The immoral policies followed by Tony Blair were a disgrace and disaster as admitted even by sane UK citizens and led to his being forced out of office . And the current British prime minister Gordon Brown was in know of the spins and lies and decisions taken against the advice of the British Attorney General , who was later forced into changing his advice , specially when the Military brass asked for a review since it could be hauled up and tried under international laws . In the enquiry going on in London , Blair defense has been that he wanted to remove Saddam Hussein as President of Iraq .

 

Derided as George Bush's poodle even in the British media , Tony was complicit in all lies which the Bush administration broadcast to the world through its corporate media and even in the UN before the illegal invasion of Iraq in 2003 and its continued brutal occupation . Even when a vain  and incompetent US Defense Secretary  Donald Rumsfeld , asked UK need not join in the invasion, Tony still joined, in the hope of getting some crumbs from the loot in Iraq .

 

When sent as stalking horse to persuade Russia to support the invasion resolution in UNSC , Blair was told twice at the press conferences in Moscow by President Putin and his foreign minister Sergei Lavrov that British dossiers were false .But Tony kept plodding on glorying in his 'special relationship' with the White House tenant . No wonder Nelson Mandela called Tony USA's foreign minister

.

Tony Blair told the British people that Saddam's "weapons of mass destruction" could reach British targets in as little as 45 minutes. With no such weapons ever being found, the entire prospectus for the war appears flawed, the basis of faulty, perhaps massaged, intelligence. This has given rise to the understandable suspicion - by many in Westminster and across Britain as a whole - that an illegitimate war was launched by Blair in 2003 largely to support president Bush and his neo-conservative circle who had already decided on regime change in Iraq soon after Bush was sworn in 2001 and wanted facts to fit the decision, come what may.

 

Do you remember March 16, 2003 when swaggering George Bush, Tony Blair and Spanish Prime Minister Jose Maria Aznar in an emergency summit on Spain's Azores Islands discussed a new U.N. draft resolution on Iraq and gave the Security Council members 24 hours to rubber-stamp the US-British resolution, after which he will terminate all further diplomatic discussions and authorize the Pentagon to proceed with bombing and a full-scale land invasion. At one point, the US president's face contorted as he denounced France for its expected veto, and he seemed prepared to order military action against Paris as well as Baghdad.

 

Poodle Tony Blair, Bhikhu Parekh's leader was in step with George Bush.

 

After the summit in the Azores illegal invasion was launched against a hapless Iraqi people  within a matter of days. That ,after the starvation and impoverishment of the Iraqi people—the consequences of 12 years of US/UK implemented UN economic sanctions leading to death of half a million children. The 2003 invasion , codenamed in colonial narrative 'Operation Iraqi freedom.' and brutal occupation has caused extra deaths of over a million Iraqis, created a million widows, 5 million orphans and 4 million refugees and destroyed Iraq and its unity.
 
On April 30, 2009 after six years, Britain formally handed over control of the Iraqi port city of Basra to US Army command. Since 2003, 179 British soldiers have been killed in action in Iraq, in addition to many thousands of Basra Iraqis .Britain's Iraq operations cost the UK around 7 billion pounds (US$10.4 billion). The British Tommies were not behind the GIs in committing atrocities on hapless Iraqis.
 
Bhikkhu Parikh , should India follow such immoral policies.
 
Fact is that British citizens like Parikh have been made Barons to parrot British and its master USA's  immoral policies , which more often than not have gone against  Indian interests .Parikh's minister for foreign affairs David Milliband , a Jew whose father Ralph was a foremost Marxist theorist and grandfather Red army soldier , comes to Mumbai and has the temerity to lecture that India should solve the Kashmir problem .Such statements by Parikh's British masters clearly provide oxygen to Jihadists , separatists and terrorists in Kashmir and elsewhere .Do Indians tell UK government that London should solve the north Ireland problem to satisfy all sections even the real Irish Republican Army .
 
When David tried his wits on telephone with the Russian foreign minister Sergei Lavrov over West inspired Georgian attack on South Ossetia , he got a tongue lashing from the Russian. At one point Sergei became so incensed that he reportedly barked: 'Who the f*** are you to lecture me?' .Mr Miliband was reportedly 'surprised' by the ferocity of the verbal attack and the nature of the language. Indian timidity not to articulate their position forcefully is rightly taken as cowardice,

Since Indian independence UK has followed policies generally inimical to India ie  Kashmir in the United Nations since 1948 .One can cite a litany of unfriendly actions beginning with the distortion of the Indian complaint to UNSC to favour Pakistan and misguiding the new Western leader USA , which policy is continued even now .London has hosted Sikh , Kashmiri and Pakistani terrorist groups who have worked against India openly . Remember the UK government mouthpiece BBC showing Sikhs celebrating in London murder of Indira Gandhi in 1984 .Even now BBC describes the 26/11 Pak terrorists coyly as gunmen.
 
London bombings on 7 July, 2005
 

Do you remember how the British reacted to London bombings on 7 July, 2005 .It was a clumsy performance like a Laurel Hardy comic film with a poor innocent Brazilian youngster murdered in cold blood in public.

 

Tony Blair was 'surprised and described the bombings "barbaric" – which they were. But "what were the civilian deaths of the Anglo-American invasion of Iraq in 2003 , the children torn apart by cluster bombs, the countless innocent Iraqis gunned down at American military checkpoints? When they die, it is "collateral damage"; when "we" die, it is "barbaric terrorism" asked Robert Fisk in the "Independent' of London. " If Tony Blair really believes that by "fighting terrorism" in Iraq we could more efficiently protect Britain - fight them there rather than let them come here, as Bush constantly says - this argument is no longer valid ," Fisk concluded
 
The bombings were a natural revenge for Blair joining Bush in bombing Afghanistan and then in illegal invasion of Iraq . Osama bin Laden had warned London in October 2001 not to join the U.S. campaign in Afghanistan. In a November tape he said, "What do your governments want from their alliance with America in attacking us in Afghanistan? I mention in particular Britain, France, Italy, Canada, Germany and Australia." In February of 2003 , as Bush and Blair went to war on Iraq, bin Laden warned that the U.K. and the U.S. would be made to pay. In October of 2003, bin Laden named Britain as a target for reprisals. A month later, an al-Qaeda-linked group targeted a British bank and Consulate in Istanbul killing its vice-consul.
 
A CIA report and EU analysts concluded that an attack on Britain was inevitable, since 70 British Muslims, most of them originally from Pakistan, had joined the Iraqi resistance. Once their skills were honed in the field, they would inevitably return home.
 
Do these Gujju origin Baron professors approve of Blair and Brown policies .
 
Nefarious British role in the partition of India .
 
Quite clearly Jaswant Singh's book - "Jinnah: India-Partition-Independence ", had an agenda , a wag even suggesting to win kudos from Jinnah's grand son Nusli Wadia of Bombay Textiles , Mumbai .Certainly it is not a serious  book on the history of partition .
 
In a panel discussion after the book release, another Gujju origin British citizen Lord Meghnand Desai , again a professor at LSE exposed his ignorance of history by declaring that "the division of the country became inevitable around April, 1947 and not before that". He termed Lord Mountbatten the "father of Pakistan" and added that Jinnah had been turned into a villain through complete fabrication of facts, and claimed the Partition happened because of Nehru's individualism and crude Marxism. He said the Congress had no right to represent Muslims and accused Nehru of mindlessly rejecting Jinnah's genuine demand for a guarantee about Muslim rights. Such drivel .
 
It is irritating that a British loyalist and toady like Desai is given undue importance in India, his vacuous articles and chatter fill Indian media and corporate channels.
Writing in "The Tribune" of 19 August, 2009, that "Jinnah pursued Pakistan for power; Jaswant disappoints; ignores British designs," retired Indian diplomat, Narendra Singh Sarila, who he was ADC to Lord Mountbatten and wrote a few years ago  a book "The Shadow of the Great Game: The Untold Story of India's Partition," said;
 
"I am disappointed with Jaswant Singh's 660-page book on Jinnah and Partition, released earlier this week." At the end he says: "I still fail to understand why India was partitioned in 1947? Or the manner in which it was done." If even after his massive research and hard work, he did not get to the bottom of his subject, there is a reason for it. It is because he has ignored the most important element that was responsible for Partition, namely British strategic interests that required the creation of Pakistan. The British top secret documents on Partition have now been unsealed and there was no excuse for ignoring them. I myself showed these to him some years back. The whole story is there in those documents.
 
"The Labour government that came to power in Britain in mid-1945 was willing to grant independence to India but was worried about losing its 60-year-old military base here from which the British controlled the whole Indian Ocean area, including the eastern Middle-East that contained oil wells — The Wells of Power — of increasing importance in war and peace and which Stalin, with his rising ambition after his victory over Germany, the British feared, might seize. In the last two great wars it was from their Indian base that the British deployed Indian and British forces in Iran and Iraq and the British Chiefs of Staff were adamant on keeping a foothold in India. But Atlee, the British Prime Minister, knew that the government of a free India under the Congress party's rule would neither give them a military base nor join their team against the Soviet Union in the fresh Great Game. What were they to do?
 
"Towards the end of 1945, Field Marshal Wavell, the Viceroy of India, came up with a possible way out of their quandary. After the Congress party had refused to cooperate in the war effort in 1939, unless Britain announced that it would give freedom to India after the war, Wavell's predecessor, Lord Linlithgow, had encouraged Jinnah to formulate the Pakistan scheme, informing London that Jinnah was in his pocket. "He represents a minority and a minority can only hold its own with our assistance," the Viceroy told London.
 
" Wavell now suggested that they use Jinnah's demand to create a separate state in the north-west — not give him all he wanted in the west but territories along Iran, Afghanistan and Sinkiang with the port of Karachi — and Pakistan would cooperate with them on defence matters. On being asked by London to give them a clear picture of the areas that could go to Pakistan, Wavell in a historic dispatch on February 6, 1946, sent a map delineating the boundaries of Pakistan he had in mind, which were exactly the boundaries that Radcliff drew 18 months later.
 
"So, what Pakistan was going to be was already decided in early 1946 and the time between then and August 15 was used by Atlee, Cripps and Wavell and later Mountbatten to make Jinnah accept the smaller Pakistan and the Congress party to accept Partition, while Atlee kept proclaiming from housetops that they were working to preserve India's unity. All the British maneuvering can be discerned by studying the British top secret files. It is a myth that Jinnah founded Pakistan. President Roosevelt had posted his representative in Delhi after1942 and his dispatches in the US archives also tell us much.
 
" Some of the assessments in the book are also mistaken. To believe that the Cabinet Mission Plan would have resulted in a united India is moonshine. After 10 years Punjab, Sindh and the NWFP had the option to break away on one side and Bengal and Assam on the other side. That would give the League a much larger Pakistan after 10 years and certainly, in the meanwhile, it would fan the flames of communalism to prepare the ground for the above. And what about the princely states? They had the option to break away too. So, possibly Hyderabad would join Pakistan and would help reach Tripura and Manipur, which would be swallowed up. The Plan would have Balkanized India and Nehru, despite the many mistakes he made, was correct in striking it down. "
 
Genocide and rampant looting of India under British colonial rule                                                                                                               
     Ten millions killed after the 1857 revolution.
 
In his book "War of Civilizations: India AD 1857" writer/journalist Shri Amaresh Misra states that 1857 revolt was a revolution which failed because it was not sufficiently well organized .It was much more broad-based than thought and lasted well beyond 1857, all the way into the 20th century. It was a war of civilisations. "The conventional view that Indians lost militarily or politically has to be overhauled… Despite everything, Indians could still have won a conventional victory — it was only internal betrayal that probably skewed this possibility." ( internal betrayal can be seen everywhere and everyday)
 
The number of Indians killed in revenge after 1857 has been estimated at 10 million (7 per cent of the population) in UP, Haryana and Bihar alone based on primary sources in the National Archives in New Delhi and the state archives in Lucknow , Patna, Bhopal, Bombay, and Ahmadabad apart from the Raza Library in Rampur, Shibli Numani Library in Azamgarh, Khuda Baksh Library in Patna, and the Deoband Library. The original sources are in Urdu, Persian, and Arabic
 
The British did destroy all records on the genocide but preserved the story of the battles because the British had to report to their superiors.  The figure of the genocide were tabulated from land, railway and labor survey reports. From Lahore and Bangladesh Misra obtained the gazetteers of districts of Punjab, Sind, and NWFP of Dhaka, Chittagong, and Fareed Pur.
 
Colonial exploitation and loot
 
"The conquest of the earth, which means the taking away from those who have a different complexion and slightly flatter noses than ourselves, is not a pretty thing when you look at it too much." Conrad's Marlow in Heart of Darkness :
 
Before the arrival of the British East India Company in the late 18th century, the sub-continent's share in world manufacturing was 24.5 percent in 1750 ( 32.8 percent for China ). But by the time the British had finished with India, the sub-continent's share had fallen to 1.7 percent (in 1900) and that of the British increased from 1.9 percent (in 1750) to 22.9 percent (in 1880).
 
The transfer of wealth from Hindustan to Great Britain is defined by the bald figures below, which hide tens of millions of deaths in famines , destruction of India's industry and massive transfer of wealth following the battle of Plassy and subsequent battles in Hindustan.
 

 ( From THE RISE AND FALL OF THE GREAT  POWERS  by Paul Kennedy)

 

TABLE 6. Relative Shares of World Manufacturing Output, 1750-1900

                                          1750  1800   1830   1860   1880  1900     

(Europe as a whole)           23.2  28.1  34.2  53.2  61.3  62.0

United Kingdom                 1:9    4.3    9.5    19.9  22.9  18.5

Habsburg Empire               2.9    3.2    3.2    4.2    4.4    4.7   

France                               4.0    4.2    5.2    7,9    7.8    6.8   

German States/Germany     2.9    3.5    3.5    4,9    8.5    13.2

Italian StateslItaly               2.4    2.5    2.3    2.5    2.5    2.5   

Russia                                5.0 ~ 5.6    5.6    7.0    7.6    8.8   

United States                     0.1    0.8    2.4    7.2    14.7  23.6

Japan                                 3.8    3.5    2.8    2.6    2.4    2.4   

Third World                       73.0  67.7  60.5  36.6  20.9  11.0

China                                 32.8  33.3  29.8  19.7  12.5  6.2   

Indian subcontinent          24.5     19.?  17.6  8.6    2.8    1.7

 

In the book 'Late Victorian Holocausts - the famines that fed the empire 'Mike Davis says that in 1901, shortly before the death of Queen Victoria, the radical writer William Digby looked back to the 1876 Madras famine and confidently asserted: "When the part played by the British Empire in the 19th century is regarded by the historian 50 years hence, the unnecessary deaths of millions of Indians would be its principal and most notorious monument."
 
Advice on economic matters !
We will not take up economic advice  Lords Bhikhu and Meghnand might have tendered to their true masters at 10, Downing Street .But from all accounts UK economy is in serious trouble and might unravel even before USA's.
 
It is another Gujarati , a Patel , who sells washing powder 'Nirma' who employs the principles of marketing and soft diplomacy. He uses ordinary Indian housewives to sell 'Nirma' and not semi-clad bolly wood starlets .The buyers can identify easily. So the perfidious Albion, that is how French statesman Gen de Gaule described the British , use mercenaries like Parikhs and Desais to market their view point and polices even inimical to India . Looking like Indians , Indians believe that whatever they trot out is true . The same technique is used by BBC, CNN while marketing Western spins and lies by having brown and black anchors and news readers for their Asian/Indian audience .
 
Parikh criticized "Nehru foreign policy as though it was speaking for the whole of Asia, homogenizing the entire continent and ignoring internal conflicts Indira Gandhi's policies as having lacked "strategic vision". Quite often US and UK claim to be the international community , when even France and Germany are not with them .Europe Union , a disunited body ever since UK entry is agreed only on keeping the poor citizens of  countries looted by them out. Does it have a common defense or foreign policy .UK is not part of Euro system and will suffer like USA
 
India with its experience of peaceful and non-violent struggle for freedom ( in my opinion it should have followed Netaji Subhash Chandra Bose ) tried to help enslaved nations, many under British colonial yoke, in Asia and Africa in their efforts to free themselves .Nehru and Krishna Menon  spoke about it , something which London and its master Washington could not stomach and still recall it repeatedly .
 
Would Parikh suggest that Indira Gandhi instead of firm action in 1971 in teeth of total opposition from US and UK , after signing a treaty with Russia , helped aid Bangladesh's independence but should have gone around begging international community like the current Indian establishment is doing for more than a year after 3 days of pubic rape of Indian sovereignty and honour in the commercial and cultural capital Mumbai on 26 November , 2008 . Islamabad's other master Beijing crowed "The general view of the Mumbai terrorist attack was that it had destroyed the big-country dream of India", a commentator in Xinhua, China. The overall losses are incalculable.
 

In the history of Hindustan, there have been very few rulers with strategic perception and skills . Say, like Mauryas who had their capital at Pataliputra but kept the crown prince  at Ujjain to guard against ingress from the Hindukush and meet the invader on the route chosen ie  Sindh- Gujarat or Punjab and the Himalayan foot hills. So were the early Moghuls. Akbar having built his beautiful capital at Fatehpur Sikri spent a decade near Lahore watching Mongols and others invaders across the Hindukush .In modern times we had Indira Gandhi, who instead of mopping around the world against refugee influx from East Pakistan, took advantage of the situation and broke up Pakistan into two .

 

As for strategic understanding and acumen, Lord Parikh could begin with a Qeada ( primer) on elementary geo-politics if he said that Indira Gandhi's policies lacked "strategic vision".

 

Parikh and his ilk like the other LSE professor Lord Meghnad Desia are only promoting British policies and just repeating what the British leaders and Nixons and Dullesses said against India  throughout the Cold War period.
 
How British Lords are created –Titles for cash or other obligations
 

There was a big media scandal during 2006 and 2007 in UK and elsewhere about 'Cash for Peerages, Loans for Honours or Loans for Peerages' , on donation to political parties in exchange for life peerages. In March 2006, several men nominated for life peerages by Tony Blair were rejected by the House of Lords Appointments Commission since the nominees had loaned large amounts of money to the ruling Labour party at the behest of Labour fundraiser Lord Levy , who was arrested and later released on bail . Also arrested was Ruth Turner, who worked in Downing Street with Blair as head of government publicity. Again Turner was not charged with anything.

It was reported on 20 July 2007 that the Crown Prosecution Service would not bring any charges against any of the individuals involved. Their decision stated that while peerages may have been given in exchange for loans, it could not find direct evidence that that had been agreed in advance; this direct evidence of an agreement in advance is what would be required for a successful prosecution .Many enquires involving higher ups in UK are just a whitewash . Like the enquiry about abetment of suicide by a UK scientist who was against the claimed WMD's in Iraq by Lord Hutton or by senior bureaucrat Butler against UK intelligence in sexing up the information to suit Blair' s wishes to recommend an attack on Iraq.

 

Among those rejected for Lordship was one , you guessed it, a Gujarati ,Dr Chai Patel ,Director of the Priory healthcare group,who had donated £10,000 to the Labour Party .His droll explaination "It is a fact that I have donated, but what is being implicated is that I would be rewarded with a peerage. I have never asked for any favour for the money that I have donated. My children suggested that if I had not given this money, I would not be seen in this light. But I happen to support this Government. I gave money to the party because I happen to believe in what it stands for. I can't change what has happened." Can you imagine a baniya Gujarati doing anything without paisa vassol – value of money .

 

Explained London's 'Independent' how the exercise was carried out by the likes of Lord Levy

"Millionaire tycoons mingled with politicians and flattery was the order of the day. At social events, Labour figures, starry-eyed about the rich and powerful, used to sidle up to successful supporters of the Party and suggest that they, too, deserved a career in politics. 'You are ministerial material', or 'I can see you in the Lords' were the type of unctuous suggestions made, according to one source."

 

And would the nation of hard bargaining shopkeepers not ask academics like Parikhs and Desais to promote British policies and interests .Go and tell it to marines.

 

Conclusion
The extent of Indian intellectual slavery as a result of British colonial rule is pernicious and abiding , a mutant of Stockholm Syndrome .

The author had decided to keep away from AID for personal reasons and did not attend the lecture .Nor could he get full text of the lecture on line. But I was told that the discourse was of undergraduate level. No serious discussion took place. Tharoor statement that there were people in the audience who clearly did not have the background, the reading, the depth, the knowledge and the judgment to know what was being said is noteworthy.

 

It is more than 60 years since the British left India and since 1958 entrants to India diplomatic service stopped being sent to London for training to avoid brainwashing .Still AID invites the likes of these British toadies of Indian origin or say Kamlesh Sharma ,Secretary General of a moribund Commonwealth organization for their post retirement enlightenment. Why not open windows to French , Russian , Chinese or even Turkish scholars and men of distinction .

 

Anglo-American influence is deep and wide spread . Our RAW ( external intelligence ) and even Intelligence Bureau ( internal intelligence ) agents are so easily seduced into Western honey traps and having been trained by them and invited for well paid seminars they become a putty in the experienced hands of CIA, Mossad and FBI .It will make an interesting study to see to what extent we opened our intelligence dossiers after 119 and 2611 .

 

But despite requests from India, US intelligence has it made clear that it has no intention to provide its Indian counterparts with information about Pakistani American and Laskhar-e-Tayiba operative David Coleman Headley or Chicago native Tahawwur Rana , both deeply involved in 26 11 and other terror attacks in India , possibly because Headley not only worked for the US Drug Enforcement Agency as a mole in Pakistan, but perhaps could have also worked for the US Central Intelligence Agency. But our police , security and Raw experts will keep on singing paens for these countries , their policies and agents.

 

K Gajendra Singh, Indian ambassador (retired), served as ambassador to Turkey and Azerbaijan from August 1992 to April 1996. Prior to that, he served terms as ambassador to Jordan, Romania and Senegal. He is currently chairman of the Foundation for Indo-Turkic Studies. Copy right with the author E-mail kgsingh@yahoo.com
 
 

 

 

 

 

 

---

Windows 7: Find the right PC for you. Learn more.