Tippu Sultan - India's brave king against the mighty British empire

I am honored to be a part of the History of the state of Karnataka, and a recipient of one of the two brass busts of Tippu Sultan made on the 200th commemoration. I am glad to be a part of the history, but I am not history yet. 

Tippu Sultan's vision of India was Swaraj (self rule) not British Raj. He was killed in the 4th war of Mysore against the British on this day, May 4th 1799. History records that his confidant and assistant leaked the information to the British about Tippu’s whereabouts and that’s how the native kingdom fell to the colonists. 

On the bi-centennial commemoration of his death in 1999, two brass busts were made. One is with former Prime Minister Deve Gowda, then Chief Minister Deve Gowda, and other one was presented to me by Dr. Range Gowda, an expert on Tippu Sultan and author of many books. 

 

Indeed, when my father was running for the City council, it was festivity at our home, the public address systems (we called it loud speakers then) were set and Lavani (folk singing in Kannada Language) were sung, how Poornayya, Tippu’s deputy betrayed him. I am trying to recall that in Kannada with failures. My father was also elected Mayor of the city back in 1952, and he was elected on the day I was born or vice-Versa. 

Tippu was a secular King in the times when it was not a common thing. Dr. Gowda's research is an eye opener. Unfortunately, a few right wingers in India have maligned him for the excesses’ done by his fanatic deputies in Kerala and Mangalore, where they forced Hindus and Christians to convert to Islam. On the contrary, Tippu granted lands to build temples, and he defended the Sringeri Matt (Hindu Sanctuary) from attacks from Marathas, and has protected the Ranganatha Temple in Srirangapatna. Indeed, the first Christian church in the state was built in Mysore City with a land grant from Tippu Sultan that was before the British invaded. His deputy Poornayya was a Hindu. 

In a free society, falsities come with the facts, and we have to live with it. I have been to all his places. Indeed his Toop Khana - the artillery depot sat next to my house in Yelahanka, the wall of our house joined the wall of Tippu's depot known as Chattra now - where they conduct weddings, and my sister’s wedding was conducted in it and my best friend Jaichand Sugalchand Sajjanraj Jain’s wedding was also conducted there. 

When I was a kid, I messed with everything my Dad did, in front of our house, while digging for a wall, I jumped into the trench to dig foundation with axe, boom, one hit, and there was a massive hole. I screamed and came out of the trench, later it took truck loads of dirt to fill it in. and they said it was Tippu's tunnel. No one verified or reported that to anyone. Unfortunately that is not a custom in India. We don't value the old stuff unlike here in America, which would have become a heritage.

The house we lived was the house where Kempe Gowda, founder of Bangalore lived. I have asked my nephew to save the 500 year old rosewood columns and the arches, and I hope to do something with it. It is historical. 

Tippu goes on the record as the only 2nd head of the state in human history that was on the front line of battle field defending his state. He also has a record among all the British colonies to be the only one who captured and imprisoned the British soldiers. 

The Kingdom of Mysore was also among three nations in the world that recognized American Independence and apparently July 4th was celebrated in Sri Rangapatna, the State Capital of Mysore in 1776.

Don’t forget he is the father of Rockets and inventor of Torpedo, known as Bangalore Torpedo. The British and American scientists have given him due recognition. Indeed, India’s first satellite was made in Bangalore as well.


Thank you.

Mike Ghouse
(214) 325-1916/ text

....... Mike Ghouse is a speaker, thinker and a writer on pluralism, politics, peace, Islam, Israel, India, interfaith, and cohesion at work place. He is committed to building a Cohesive America and offers pluralistic solutions on issues of the day at www.TheGhousediary.com. He believes in Standing up for others and has done that throughout his life as an activist. Mike has a presence on national and local TV, Radio and Print Media. He is a frequent guest on Sean Hannity show on Fox TV, and a commentator on national radio networks, he contributes weekly to the Texas Faith Column at Dallas Morning News; fortnightly at Huffington post; and several other periodicals across the world. His personal site www.MikeGhouse.net indexes all his work through many links.

Ghalib and Marx - a literary enounter between them.

URL - http://mikeghouseforindia.blogspot.com/2013/05/ghalib-and-marx-literary-enounter.html


I am as surprised as any person who is familiar with Urdu/ Hindi literature reading about this encounter between Ghalib and Carl Marx, it is funny, and you can recognize Ghalib's poetry flowing in this letter. 

Hain aur bhi duniya may sakhunwar bahut achchay
Kahte hain ke Ghalib ka andaz-e- bayan aur

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RRqHeWQq8Hg

Mike Ghouse
........

Courtesy of MeriNews
http://www.merinews.com/article/literary-encounter-between-ghalib-and-marx/137382.shtml

Literary encounter between Ghalib and Marx

It was an historical encounter between two intellectual giants of the nineteenth century, Mirza Ghalib and Karl Marx. It took Abida Ripley 15 years to fish out the details of their correspondence which reflects the acute contrast of their thoughts.

FIFTEEN YEARS ago when I visited the library of the famous India Office in London, I took out one pale jacketed book belonging to the Mughal era. A wrinkled leaf fell down to the floor. When I picked it up, I was startled. The style and expression of its content appeared to be familiar. The doubt which prevailed over my mind, vanished when I saw the seal and signature of the Urdu poet, Ghalib.

In Focus


After I returned home, I flipped through Khaleeq Anjum’s two volumes of translations of Ghalib’s letter writings. But, to my amazement, I could not locate the letter anywhere in the books, which I had found. What sparked my curiousity was that the letter was addressed to the famous German philosopher, Karl Marx. It is shocking as well as ironical that not even a single biographer or translator has yet mentioned about Ghalib’s communication with Marx.

From the content, it seemed a reply to Marx’s letter. And that intensified my desire to somehow to get hold of the letter of Marx. Finally, my quest ended after painstaking 15 years as I found the letter of Marx to Ghalib. I would rather make you go through those rare pieces of writings between the two geniuses in their own rights than describing the obstacles that came in my way. Here is an excerpt of the letter Marx wrote to Ghalib:

"Sunday, April 21, 1867

London, England

Dear Ghalib,

Day before yesterday I received a letter from my friend, Angels. It ended with a couplet that impressed me very much. After much effort, I learnt that it was written by some Indian poet named Mirza Asadullah Khan Ghalib. Brother, it’s wonderful! I had never envisaged that revolutionary feelings for independence from slavery would ripen so early in a country like India! Yesterday, I got some more poetic works of yours from a Lord’s personal library. The couplet is highly appreciable!:

Hum ko maloom hai jannat ki haqeeqat lekin,

Dil ko behlane ko Ghalib ye khayal achha hai. (I know paradise does exist, But, Ghalib! It’s good to console your heart.)

In your next edition of poetry do write in detail addressing workers: "Landlords, administrators, and religious leaders sap your toil’s rewards by taking you to the fanciful world of paradise. Rather, it would be nicer if you write some lines on:

"Duniya bhar ke mazdooron, muttahid ho jao (World labourers, get united.)"

I am not well aware of the Indian style and poetic treatment. You are a poet, you write something substantive being under poetic restrictions. Whatever, the sole purpose is to invigorate the masses with its message. Moreover, I would advise you to quit composing leisure writings like ghazal or quatrain and move over to free verses so that in least time you can write more and the more you write the more the wretched people would have to read and mull over.

I am dispatching the Indian version of the Communist Manifesto along with the first volume whose translation is unfortunately not available. If you like it, next time I will send you some more literature. At present, India has been converted into a den of the English imperialists. And only the collective effort of the exploited and downtrodden masses or workers can liberate them from the clutches of the perpetrators.

You should study the modern philosophies of the West than the outmoded and unworkable thoughts of Asian scholars; and do not write the fables and praises of the Mughal kings and nawabs and create the literature that takes up the revolutionary cause of the masses. Revolution is imminent. No force in this world can restrain it. That time is coming soon when the tradition of guru and disciple will fade away.

I wish India a steady path toward revolution,

Yours,

Karl Marx

From Ghalib to Karl Marx

September 9, 1867

I received your letter along with the Communist Manifesto. How would I reply? First, it’s too difficult to understand what you talk. Second, I have grown too weak to write as well as speak. Today, I wrote a letter to a friend, so, I thought of writing to you too.

Your view about Farhaad (reference in Ghalib’s one poem) is mistaken. He is not any worker as you perceived him. Rather, he was a lover but his perception toward love did not impress me. He was lunatic in love and would think of committing suicide all the time for his beloved’s sake. And you talk of which inquilab (revolution)? That is a past, ended ten years ago! Now the Britishers roam broad-chested and everyone eulogises them here. The discipline of royalty and lavishness has become a thing of the past; and the tradition of guru and disciple is losing its charm.

If you don’t believe, pay a visit to Delhi and see all in flesh and blood..... And that’s not confined to Delhi only, Lucknow’s essence too is disappearing...where have those mannerisms gone...where are those gentlemen! Now, you predict of which revolution?

And in the middle of your letter I also learnt you talk of changing the mode of poetry writing. Mind you, poetry cannot be created but it comes to you naturally. And my case is distinct. When ideas flow in, they just merge into any forms, ghazal or quatrains.

I believe, Ghalib’s style is unmatched in the world of poetry, and because of that, the kings have already gone and you want me to be deprived of the nawabs and patrons who take care of me...!? What goes wrong if I say a few lines in their praise!

What is philosophy and what it has to do with life, who knows better than me? My dear, which modern thinking you talk about? If you are interested in it, you better read Vedanta and Wahdat-ul-Wajood. And stop just harping on thought after thought, if you can, do some work in this direction...you are an Englishman, do me a favour. Please convey a recommendation letter to the viceroy, requesting for reissue of my pension....

Now I am feeling very tired. So, I am putting an end to it,

Humbly yours,

Ghalib


Thank you.

Mike Ghouse
(214) 325-1916/ text

....... Mike Ghouse is a speaker, thinker and a writer on pluralism, politics, peace, Islam, Israel, India, interfaith, and cohesion at work place. He is committed to building a Cohesive America and offers pluralistic solutions on issues of the day at www.TheGhousediary.com. He believes in Standing up for others and has done that throughout his life as an activist. Mike has a presence on national and local TV, Radio and Print Media. He is a frequent guest on Sean Hannity show on Fox TV, and a commentator on national radio networks, he contributes weekly to the Texas Faith Column at Dallas Morning News; fortnightly at Huffington post; and several other periodicals across the world. His personal site www.MikeGhouse.net indexes all his work through many links.

Sri Srinivasan - The Supreme Court Nominee-in-Waiting

This is one hell of happy news for us; it’s an expression of integration, that Indians are fully participating and contributing members of the society at large. Despite the flaws in our democracies (American and Indian), we are the most inclusive societies.


The New Yorker reports this great news: "The next Supreme Court confirmation hearing begins on Wednesday afternoon, April 10th. Technically, Sri Srinivasan is just a candidate for the United States Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, but few are misled. The stakes in this nomination are clear: if Srinivasan passes this test and wins confirmation, he’ll be on the Supreme Court before President Obama’s term ends."

We have a lot more work to do in India and the United States to truly make it a society, where every individual is honored for his or her contributions to the nation building without regards to his or her religion, race, ethnicity, sexual orientation and nationality.

We do have bigots in both nations and we need to continue to have a dialogue with them to treat every American (USA) or Indian (India) as an individual to be treated with full dignity without prejudice.

When a Sikh, Buddhist, Jain, Christian, Dalit, Muslim and Hindu achieves success, and if each one of us can celebrate that success by draining sewerage out of our hearts that he is a Christian, Muslim or Sikh... then we have achieved Moksha, Mukti and freedom, and congratulations to all those who have achieved that, and those who have not, please do not miss out that opportunity in your life time.

 Mike Ghouse is an Indian American speaker, thinker, writer and a pluralist committed to building cohesive societies and offers pluralistic solutions on issues of the day – details at www.MikeGhouse.net and his daily writings are at www.TheGhousediary.com

URL - http://mikeghouseforindia.blogspot.com/2013/04/sri-srinivasan-supreme-court-nominee-in.html  

...........

The Supreme Court Nominee-in-Waiting

By Jeffrey Toobin

The next Supreme Court confirmation hearing begins on Wednesday afternoon, April 10th. Technically, Sri Srinivasan is just a candidate for the United States Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, but few are misled. The stakes in this nomination are clear: if Srinivasan passes this test and wins confirmation, he’ll be on the Supreme Court before President Obama’s term ends.

The next Supreme Court confirmation hearing begins on Wednesday afternoon, April 10th. Technically, Sri Srinivasan is just a candidate for the United States Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, but few are misled. The stakes in this nomination are clear: if Srinivasan passes this test and wins confirmation, he’ll be on the Supreme Court before President Obama’s term ends. 

The D.C. Circuit has long operated as a Supreme Court farm team (John Roberts, Antonin Scalia, Clarence Thomas, and Ruth Bader Ginsburg played their AAA ball there), and Republicans have worked with zeal, and amazing success, to keep Obama from placing a single judge on that court. Just last month, Caitlin Halligan, an eminently qualified New York prosecutor whose confirmation had been shamefully blocked by Senate Republicans for more than two years, withdrew her candidacy. Srinivasan is next up for consideration.

Srinivasan, who is forty-six years old, is currently the Obama Administration’s principal deputy solicitor general. He’s had twenty or so arguments in the Supreme Court, including part of the Administration’s attack on the Defense of Marriage Act last month. He’s been a corporate litigator at O’Melveny & Myers; a junior lawyer in the Office of the Solicitor General; and a law clerk to J. Harvie Wilkinson, who is a moderate conservative on the Fourth Circuit, and then to Sandra Day O’Connor. He earned degrees from Stanford in college, law school, and even business school; he grew up in Lawrence, Kansas, where his parents taught at the state university. 

When Srinivasan’s name first surfaced as a possible nominee to the federal bench, early in Obama’s first term, he drew opposition from labor groups, who appeared to take issue with some of his stands as a private lawyer and in George W. Bush’s Justice Department. (He was a career lawyer, not a political appointee, under Bush.) Lately, those objections to Srinivasan have become muted or disappeared altogether. In part, this may be because those kinds of challenges to a nominee are inherently unfair; lawyers, after all, represent clients. 

More importantly, perhaps, liberal groups have become so frustrated with President Obama’s dithering on judicial nominations that they are happy to see him put forward almost any name. There are four vacancies on the D.C. Circuit, and Obama has just one current nominee for that court. There are, in total, eighty-seven vacancies on the federal courts, and right now the President has just twenty-five nominees to fill those seats. In light of the tactics of obstruction and delay that Republicans have used against his nominees, Obama’s failure to fill the pipeline will cripple his efforts to leave a broad judicial legacy. 

In fairness, Obama’s team has at least mustered a comprehensive effort on Srinivasan’s behalf. Most notably, twelve former Solicitors General, including such Republican notables as Kenneth Starr and Paul Clement, have signed a letter endorsing Srinivasan’s confirmation. He has the sort of impeccable credentials that are much beloved by the Supreme Court bar, though Srinivasan’s own views on the Constitution are more difficult to discern. He has written many briefs but few articles that reveal his own thinking. He is a protégé of Walter Dellinger, the acting Solicitor General in the Clinton Administration and a (mostly) beloved (mostly) liberal figure in the world of the Supreme Court. The safe assumption seems to be that Srinivasan would be the same kind of moderate liberal as Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan (and Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen Breyer, for that matter).

The real issue with a potential Srinivasan nomination would be political. Ginsburg is the justice most likely to retire in the next two years. Would Obama select a woman to take her place? Tom Goldstein, the proprietor of the indispensable SCOTUSblog, thinks the President will feel compelled to keep three women on the court. He points to Kamala Harris, the attorney general of California, as the most likely choice. (It’s now well known that the President already finds Harris an, er, attractive office holder.) Another possibility is Jacqueline Nguyen, a Vietnamese immigrant who now serves on the Ninth Circuit. But there hasn’t been an active politician like Harris named to the Court since Earl Warren in 1953, and Nguyen is little-known outside California. (If the President does go for a politician, I think the more likely possibility is Amy Klobuchar, the senior Senator from Minnesota.) I am less sure than Goldstein that Obama will nominate a woman to replace Ginsburg. There is no female candidate as obvious as Sotomayor was in 2009, and Srinivasan would, as the first Indian-American on the court, be a history-making choice. 

Plus, if Srinivasan runs the confirmation gauntlet now, it will be difficult for Republicans to argue that he’s unconfirmable just months later. His credentials would surely appeal to Obama, who has a fondness for technocrats, and his thin paper trail would make him difficult to attack. Which is why it looks very much like this hearing isn’t just a test for Srinivasan—it’s a dress rehearsal.

Illustration, of Sri Srinivasan speaking about the Defense of Marriage Act at the Supreme Court, by Art Lien/Reuters.

Read more: http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/comment/2013/04/sri-srinivasan-dc-circuit-nominee-supreme-court.html?printable=true&currentPage=all#ixzz2Q02DAEcl

A Muslim Pluralist Celebrates Easter

A MUSLIM CELEBRATES EASTER

The first response from a few Muslims would be "no, no and no!" Muslims cannot celebrate resurrection of Jesus Christ. Jesus did not die, he and his message lives on! 

Whether Jesus was buried and resurrected, or taken up by God, faith in him is shared by more than half of the world inclusive of Muslims and Christians. Whether you believe in Jesus or not, his message of love thy enemy, love thy neighbor and forgive the other will set us free. Can we celebrate that message? 

Perhaps I may be the first Muslim to be baptized. It was an enriching experience to me in particular, feeling the symbolic transformation of the feeling of love towards all of God's creation. Muslims feel the same upon performance of Hajj Pilgrimage; we become child-like with love for all of God's creation; life and matter. The Hindus cherish an identical feeling when they take a dip at the Sangam in River Ganges, particularly during the Kumbh Mela.
To this Muslim, Easter represents resurrection of Jesus through his message, and Easter is a symbolic day to celebrate that message.

Continued - http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mike-ghouse/a-muslim-pluralist-celebrates-easter_b_2976582.html#es_share_ended

 PLEASE SHARE ON FACE BOOK AND TWEET FROM THE HUFFPOST

full story in the link at Huffington post

 Mike Ghouse is a speaker, thinker and a writer on pluralism, politics, peace, Islam,Israel, India, interfaith, and cohesion at work place. He is committed to building aCohesive America and offers pluralistic solutions on issues of the day atwww.TheGhousediary.com. He believes in Standing up for others and has done that throughout his life as an activist. Mike has a presence on national and local TV, Radio and Print Media. He is a frequent guest on Sean Hannity show on Fox TV, and a commentator on national radio networks, he contributes weekly to the Texas Faith Column at Dallas Morning News; fortnightly at Huffington post; and several other periodicals across the world. His personal site www.MikeGhouse.net indexes all his work through many links.

The Desi Factor in U.S.-India Relations

Good piece by David Karl about US India relations. There was another ugly chapter in our relationship. In the 50's when India was in her 2nd or 3rd 5year plan, and wanted to upgrade the Rourekla Steel factory, the United States had turned down the request, saying India did not need the tehcnology...  Russia Jumped in and the relationship remained strong through the 80's. 

This piece is also posted at http://mikeghouseforindia.blogspot.com/2013/03/the-desi-factor-in-us-india-relations.html

Mike Ghouse

Desi Factor in U.S - India Relations

Posted on March 26, 2013 by davidjkarl

 

According to a new Gallup survey, more than two-thirds of the U.S. public has a positive impression of India, a score that even edges out Israel’s traditionally-high favorability rating.  This is the latest indicator of how decisively American perceptions about the country have changed.  Not too long ago, India was regarded as the very epitome of what the term “Third World” meant – decrepit, destitute and pitiable.  Yet in a relatively short period of time, the popular view of India has changed in critical ways.

For many decades most Americans were inclined to the views of President Harry S. Truman, who dismissed India at its birth as an independent state as “pretty jammed with poor people and cows wandering around streets, witch doctors and people sitting on hot coals and bathing in the Ganges.”  His Secretary of State, Dean Acheson, had an even more incisive perspective: “by and large [Indians] and their country give me the creeps.”  When Daniel Patrick Moynihan was U.S. ambassador to India from 1973-75, he regularly lamented that Washington was utterly indifferent to the country’s fate; writing in his diary, he confided that it “is American practice to pay but little attention to India.”  In a cable to the State Department, he complained of dismissive attitudes, “a kind of John Birch Society contempt for the views of raggedly ass people in pajamas on the other side of the world.”

Public opinion kept close track with official attitudes in Washington.  Harold Issacs’s classic 1958 survey of U.S. elite opinion, Scratches on Our Minds, revealed that influential Americans held very negative perceptions of the country, associating it with “filth, dirt and disease,” along with debased religious beliefs.  A State Department analysis prepared in the early 1970s found that U.S. public opinion identified India more than any other nation with such attributes as disease, death and illiteracy, and school textbooks throughout this period regularly portrayed it in a most negative light.  This view was again underscored in a 1983 opinion poll, in which Americans ranked India at the bottom of a list of 22 countries on the basis of perceived importance to U.S. vital interests.

So, what accounts for the significant shift in perceptions?  An obvious part of the answer lies in the dramatic turnabout in Indian prospects launched by the 1991 economic reforms.  For all the attention lavished on China these days, Jim O’Neill, the progenitor of the BRICs acronym, contends that India still “has the largest potential for growth among the BRICs countries this decade.”  A recent Citibank report concludes that India will likely be the world’s largest economic power by 2050 and, according to International Monetary Fund data, India supplanted Japan as Asia’s second-largest economy last year.  President Obama routinely points to Bangalore as a threat to America’s competitive advantage while Lawrence H. Summers, his former chief economics adviser, touts the virtues of the Indian development model.  And the jugaad concept, once seen as a sign of backwardness, is now viewed as an innovative approach to business management.

Another prominent piece of the explanation lies in U.S. admiration for India’s durable democratic traditions.   The concept of democratic India had particular appeal to George W. Bush, who engineered a remarkable transformation in bilateral affairs.  Robert D. Blackwill, who served as Bush’s first ambassador to New Delhi, recalls asking Bush as he geared up his presidential campaign in early 1999 about his special interest in India.  Bush immediately responded, “a billion people in a functioning democracy. Isn’t that something? Isn’t that something?”

But a less obvious, though equally important, factor is also at work: The increasing stature of Indians in American society has changed how all Americans think about India.  Consider the following examples:

• The election of Bobby Jindal and Nikki Haley to the governorships of Louisiana and South Carolina (respectively), states in the heart of the Old Confederacy.
• The entertaining television ad Intel ran a few years back lauding the rock star status of Ajay Bhatt, the co-inventor of the USB computer connection.
• The ubiquitous presence of Sanjay Gupta, CNN’s chief medical correspondent. In 2003, he was named as one of the world’s sexiest men by People magazine and a “pop culture icon” by USA Today. And in 2009 he was mentioned as President Obama’s choice as Surgeon General of the United States, the country’s top public health official.
• The winner and the two runners-up of last year’s national spelling bee were Indian-American children.  It was the fifth consecutive year, and the tenth time in the last 14 years, that an Indian American won.  The top four positions in the 2012 National Geographic Bee were also Indian-American kids.
• Last summer witnessed a high-profile Desi clash– the successful prosecution on insider trading charges of Rajat Gupta, McKinsey & Company’s former chief executive and an iconic figure in the Indian diaspora, by Preet Bharara, the U.S. attorney responsible for Wall Street.  Bharara was named last year to TIME magazine’s roster of the world’s 100 most influential people and Bloomberg Market’s “50 Most Influential” list.

Large-scale Indian migration to the United States did not begin until the late 1960s and though the community remains relatively small – less than one percent of the overall U.S. population – it is one of the country’s fastest-growing ethnic groups.  But the community’s growing success has given it an influence and impact wholly disproportionate to its size.  As one analyst puts it, “Indians in America are emerging as the new Jews: disproportionately well-educated, well paid, and increasingly well connected politically.”
According to a recent Pew Research Center report, 70 percent of Indian immigrants to the United States have at least a college degree, compared to the national average of 28 percent, and Indians lead all other Asian sub-groups in income and education levels.  This finding echoes another PRC study that Hindu Americans possess the highest socio-economic accomplishments of any U.S. religious community.

Indians have become a driving force on the U.S. business landscape.  According to a new Kauffman Foundation report, Indian immigrants established one-third of Silicon Valley start-ups in 2006-2012, up from about 7 percent in 2005.  Indeed, Indians founded a markedly greater number of engineering and technology firms than did immigrants from other countries, including those from China and the United Kingdom.  And a RAND Corporation study reports that Indian-American entrepreneurs have business income that is substantially higher than the national average and higher than any other immigrant group.

The success and prosperity of the Indian community has had a real impact on U.S. foreign policy.   First, it has helped change public opinion on India in relatively short order, since it is difficult to dismiss or disparage a country that has produced immigrants who have become so rapidly admired in U.S. society.

Second, the growing impact of the Indian American community catalyzed stronger interest about India on Capitol Hill beginning in the mid-1990s, helping in turn to reverse Washington’s traditional disregard of the country – recall, for instance, how the U.S. ambassador’s post in New Delhi was vacant for the Clinton administration’s first year. Pro-India caucuses in the U.S. Congress played an important role in the lifting of U.S. economic sanctions levied against India in the wake of its 1998 nuclear tests, and in securing the ratification of the landmark U.S.-India civil nuclear agreement a decade later. Today, a third of the members of the U.S. Senate and House of Representatives belong to these caucuses.

Third, the Indian-American community has been at the forefront in building critical societal linkages between its native and adoptive countries. Consider, for example, the dynamics at work more than a decade ago. At the same time as Washington was imposing sanctions in response to the 1998 nuclear tests, concerns about the “Y2K” programming glitch led businesses on both sides to set the foundation for today’s strong technology partnership. The significant role played by these societal bonds leads Fareed Zakaria to compare U.S.-India ties to the special relationships the United States has with Great Britain and Israel. And Shashi Tharoor, formerly India’s minister of state for external affairs, has likewise remarked that “in 20 years I expect the Indo-U.S. relationship to resemble the Israel-U.S. relationship, and for many of the same reasons.”

Although they are often overlooked by national policymakers, non-governmental ties fostered by the Indian-American community will be one key in securing the long-term growth of the new bilateral partnership.  As Shivshankar Menon, now Prime Minister Singh’s national security advisor, remarked a few years back, “[I]f anything, the creativity of [American and Indian] entrepreneurs, engineers and scientists has sometimes exceeded that of our political structures.”

This commentary is cross-posted on Monsters Abroad, my blog on U.S. foreign policy and national security.  

Democracy and Indian Muslims by Tufail Ahmed

URL - http://mikeghouseforindia.blogspot.com/2013/03/democracy-and-indian-muslims-by-tufail.html

The following piece "Democracy and Indian Muslims"  by Tufail Ahmad is reflective, thoughtful and dreamy.

For a Democracy to be alive and functional we have to bitch at the Government,  India is good at it and Pakistan and Bangladesh have done well in that area as well. The most patriotic person is the one who attacks government every day and on everything. We have got to keep the Government guys from becoming pig-headed.

In 1947, India rightly chose to be a secular state and Pakistani leadership erred in making it a religious state. By the way, the only two nations created on the earth based on religion are the ones facing most difficulties;Pakistan and Israel. We can blame the British or any one, but the fact is the problem persists.  God does not have a religion himself, he was super careful in not mentioning in any holy books  that he was a Muslim, Hindu, Christian or a Native, because he is not divisive.  God simply does not like religious governments, because he does not like any one to mess with his creation in his name. An attack on a Hindu, Muslim or any is an attack on God, who created them, do you think he likes it?  It is still not late to strip religion from the governance in Pakistan and Israel.

He prefers a government where all of his creation is treated with dignity, equality and respect. Individuals will be judged in the society by the society for the violations of others space, sustenance and nurturence, where as God  reserves the right to judge the individuals for their moral compass. 
. 
 God loves Americans for keeping him out of school and public spaces, he doesn't need any more headaches, he washed his hands off us when he implanted a self-governing device called brain, and he wants nothing but good for his creation, and offers the same guidance to all - to treat each other with respect.

Mike Ghouse is committed to build cohesive societies - www.MikeGhouse.net
.............................................


DAILY TIMES 
http://dailytimes.com.p/default.asp?page=2013%5C03%5C16%5Cstory_16-3-2013_pg3_5

Saturday, March 16, 2013

 Democracy and Indian Muslims — Tufail Ahmad

The organising principles of Indian polity and society are the same that define a western country: a multi-party system, individualism, liberty, a free press and rule of law

Hafiz Muhammad Saeed, the self-confessed leader of the banned outfit Lashkar-e-Taiba, may think that Pakistan is the best Islamic nation for the Bollywood star, Shahrukh Khan to move to, but it is India that is arguably the best Muslim country today. Muslims in India enjoy complete political and religious liberty, a free legislative environment to undertake economic and educational initiatives, a vibrant television media and cinema that teach liberal coexistence, and access to a vast number of universities and institutes of modern education. There is absolutely no Muslim country that offers such a vast array of freedoms to its people.

India is able to offer these freedoms to its citizens because it is a successful democracy. It was good for India to lose the 1857 war; if the British had lost, Indians would have continued to be governed by kings and nawabs, and under shari’a courts that existed during the Mughal era. At the time of independence, the British left behind a justice system that was blind to religious and caste inequities in Indian society, an inclusive democracy that guaranteed equal rights and religious and political freedoms for all; English language that opened doorway to enlightenment and scientific education; and a civil service that treated everyone as Indians rather than Muslims, Hindus or Christians. Muslims in India enjoy these freedoms because India is a thriving democracy, unlike Pakistan that chose a discriminatory constitution, barring its own citizens from holding top positions such as the president of Pakistan because they are Hindus or Christians. Over the past half century, hundreds of millions of Dalits and women have found political empowerment and social freedoms in Indian democracy.

Religion cannot be a good model of governance for modern times because it fails to imagine situations in which non-Muslim citizens could be trusted to govern a Muslim country. Conversely, democracies trust their citizens irrespective of their faith. In a democracy like India, any citizen could compete to be the elected ruler. As democracy matures, India has appointed its Muslim citizens to top positions, currently Hamid Ansari as vice president, Salman Khurshid as foreign minister, Justice Altamas Kabir as Chief Justice, and Syed Asif Ibrahim as the chief of the Intelligence Bureau. It is also true that Muslims lag behind in India’s collective life, but this is because they are under the influence of orthodox ulema or because Muslim politicians fail to imagine themselves as leaders of all Indians. A Muslim politician will be the country's prime minister the day Indian Muslims begin to view themselves as leaders of all Indians and not only of Muslims, much like Barack Obama who imagined himself as a leader not only of blacks, but of all Americans.

Effectively, India is a ‘western’ country. In the popular imagination, the west is viewed as a geographic concept, covering mainly the United States, Britain and parts of Europe. However, the ground realities are otherwise. Several countries, notably Australia, New Zealand, Japan and South Korea, are situated in the east, but in terms of their values and politics are firmly part of the west. Conversely, countries such as Russia and some in Latin America are geographically in the west but cannot be called a western country as their citizens do not enjoy the social and political freedoms available to free people in the west. The organising principles of Indian polity and society are the same that define a western country: a multi-party system, individualism, liberty, a free press and rule of law. As in a western country, consensus about governance, politics and society is moderated by media and political parties and is derived from differences rather than similarities of religion and ideology as in Saudi Arabia or North Korea.

Early this year, Shahrukh Khan wrote a long article in which he discussed how “stereotyping and contextualizing” determine the way societies treat us as individuals as we interact with others. Khan narrated that he is loved as a Bollywood star in every country, but is also questioned by officials at US airports over links to terrorists, as his surname is shared by an unknown terrorist. Khan also observed: “There have been occasions when I have been accused of bearing allegiance to our neighbouring nation [Pakistan].” Hafiz Saeed reacted to this statement, suggesting that Khan, and presumably all Indian Muslims, should move to Pakistan. If Khan were to move to Pakistan, think of the images he would witness everyday: the genocide of Shia Muslims; the Taliban bombers shooting girls and namazis; Karachi up in flames and Pakistani businessmen leaving the country; plight of Hindus and Christians and lawlessness everywhere.

Saeed and his cohorts must bear in mind that terrorism that affects Muslims in India originates from Pakistan: the jihad in Kashmir through the 1990s or the attacks by Indian Mujahideen collaborating with their controllers in Pakistan. Like any country, India has its own share of extremist Hindus as well as Islamic and naxalite militants, but the courts are taking care of them.

Indian democracy is a model for all Islamic countries. It is the only country where Muslims have experienced democracy solidly for more than half a century; the other countries where Muslims have had some democratic experience are Indonesia and Turkey but their experiences have been limited to just a few decades. Democracies trust their citizens and are accountable to them. Democracies also bring freedom and economic prosperity for their people. In his book, Development as Freedom, Nobel laureate Amartya Sen demonstrated that famines have occurred only in countries governed under authoritarianism while freedom available to people in democracies has ensured economic welfare of their entire populations. Indian democracy has a large Muslim population, about the same as in Pakistan. As democracy matures and economy prospers, Muslims in India are beginning to benefit from a sea of economic and educational opportunities opening before them.

Islamic and authoritarian countries like Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and North Korea do not trust their own people. Islamic terrorists, jihadists like Hafiz Saeed and other Taliban-like Islamists think of defending their religions and ideologies rather than the interests and welfare of their people. It is due to such thinking that 180 million people of Pakistan are today literally buried under the weight of a failed education system, a rapidly collapsing Pakistani economy that is forcing business leaders to move their money to countries such Sri Lanka, lawlessness that makes common Pakistanis insecure in their own homes and a future that fails to offer hope. The Inter-Services Intelligence, a friend of Saeed that imagines itself as the ideological guardian of the Islamic state of Pakistan, could do a favour by trusting the Pakistani people and letting them decide their own course of life and governance.

The writer is a former BBC Urdu Service journalist, is Director of South Asia Studies Project at the Middle East Media Research Institute, Washington DC.

Muslims welcome Pope Francis

Dallas, Texas, March 13, 2013 – The World Muslim Congress, a think tank, and the Foundation for Pluralism congratulate the new Pope, Pope Francis.

“I hope he heralds a new beginning for building a better world. In behalf of the people of faith or no faith, and my faith Islam, I welcome the Pope and make ourselves available to jump at his call for creating a peace in the world, where no human has to live in fear of the others, let the world be the new kingdom of heaven where we all feel safe and secure with each other. Amen”

There are a few deeply rooted conflicts among the Muslim-Christian, and Jewish-Christian communities that are the root cause of much of the conflict in the world, they have been simmering within the hearts and minds of the Christians, Muslims and Jews, and flare up now and then in difficult expressions.

The world needs a powerful personality to urge Muslims and Christians to accept the otherness of the other without the temptation to correct the other. It needs a strong personality that can absolve Jews from the myths ascribed to them. It needs a pope who is a blessed peacemaker and extends his embrace to the Pagans, Hindus and all others who do not worship or worship God in their own way. We are all children of God and honoring each other is honoring the creator.

He has got to initiate a dialogue on same sex marriage, women priesthood, birth control, intrafaith, and interfaith relations.


The pope is singularly the most important person on the world stage besides the President of the United States who can affect positive or negative outcomes. He can aggravate the conflicts or mitigate them and earn the blessings of Jesus – Blessed are the peacemakers.

We pray that Pope Francis ushers us into a new era of dialogue and respect for each other, Amen.

Mike Ghouse
World Muslim Congress
Foundation for Pluralism

2665 Villa Creek Dr, Suite 206
Dallas, TX 75234
(214) 325-1916 – text or phone
SpeakerMikeGhouse@gmail.com

Mike Ghouse is a speaker, thinker and a writer on pluralism, politics, peace, Islam,Israel, India, interfaith, and cohesion at work place. He is committed to building aCohesive America and offers pluralistic solutions on issues of the day atwww.TheGhousediary.com. He believes in Standing up for others and has done that throughout his life as an activist. Mike has a presence on national and local TV, Radio and Print Media. He is a frequent guest on Sean Hannity show on Fox TV, and a commentator on national radio networks, he contributes weekly to the Texas Faith Column at Dallas Morning News; fortnightly at Huffington post; and several other periodicals across the world. His personal site www.MikeGhouse.net indexes all his work through many links.