• This forum contains old posts that have been closed. New threads and replies may not be made here. Please navigate to the relevant forum to create a new thread or post a reply.
  • Welcome to Tamil Brahmins forums.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our Free Brahmin Community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us.

Opinionated Obama Must Realise He's Dealing with a PM Who's as Responsive as Ruthless

Status
Not open for further replies.
Opinionated Obama Must Realise He's Dealing with a PM Who's as Responsive as Ruthless


obama.jpg





“A superior man is modest in his speech, but exceeds in his actions.”—Confucius


For the chief executive of a global superpower like America, verbal modesty literally exceeds his intent and actions. President Barack Obama is reputed to be one of the world’s best orators. His Demosthenic dexterity can demolish even dedicated dissentients. Obama, however, is no exception when it comes to using words as weapons to target and tarnish other democracies. Every US president applies the US model of culture and democracy, which is used as a patent yardstick to measure the quality of cultural and religious harmony of other nations.


Last week, Obama displayed the diplomacy of arrogance by questioning the idea of a genuinely secular India. He even linked the country’s survival with its capacity to keep people of all faiths together, as if Indians are constantly engaged in bloody confrontations on the streets. His sermons came as a shock to even those who avoid seeing any evil in American acts of misadventure and malice.


In India, POTUS was not just given an unprecedented welcome, but PM Narendra Modi broke protocol to turn the Obama visit into one of the most productive sojourns compared to past presidential landings. It was considered one of the Modi government’s most stellar achievements and the PM and his team were least prepared for the unexpected and unsolicited advice from their otherwise affable guest. But Obama is a helpless victim of his domestic vote bank politics. After all, Democrats have never been genuine friends of India, preferring to give precedence to Pakistan. They have been backing Indian secularists, who have fought relentlessly against the saffron surge. Yielding to their pressure, the US had treated Modi as a pariah for over a decade. Once he became PM, Indian opinion-makers expected a change in both the mind and heart of the US establishment.

Some early signs were visible during Modi’s US visit, when Obama, the American leadership and the corporate world bent backwards to woo the leader who controls one of the biggest markets for the US defense industry and other services eight months after Modi took over the reins. The Americans seem to have reverted to type, playing blow hot, blow cold with India. It surprised many of Obama’s Indian admirers when he said at the National Prayer Breakfast address in Washington, “Michelle and I returned from India—an incredible, beautiful country, full of magnificent diversity—but a place where, in past years, religious faiths of all types have, on occasion, been targeted by other peoples of faith, simply due to their heritage and their beliefs—acts of intolerance that would have shocked Gandhiji, the person who helped to liberate that nation.”

Coming a week after a similar statement in New Delhi, Indian diplomats were scrambling to find a plausible justification behind his sudden emphasis on India’s communal situation. A careful reading of Obama’s speech reflects that he was determined to send a strong message to his hosts. His critics were unkind to him for his selective praise of achievers from the minority communities, leaving out outstanding players from other states and faiths. Yet he went on to say, “Every person has the right to practice their faith how they choose, or to practice no faith at all, and to do so free of persecution and fear of discrimination. Nowhere is that more important than India, nowhere is it going to be more necessary for that foundational value to be upheld. India will succeed so long as it is not splintered along lines of religious faith, along lines of anything, and is unified as one nation.”



Such uncharitable remarks have upset all those lobbying hard to forge strong business ties between the two nations. It is no surprise, therefore, that not one member of the chambers of industry has bothered to raise the issue of US interference in Indian domestic affairs. It is quite possible that some serious communal flare-ups may have upset the US establishment, but it is presidentially immature of Obama to have gone public with his disapproval and veiled warnings.



Obama, it seems, has not understood the might and mind of Modi. The PM is not a leader who would take an attack on his ego and purpose lying down. His ministers have already given a strong rebuttal. But Obama’s politically incorrect opinion may cost the Americans hugely in terms of both trade and ties.

India has already started rebuilding bridges with Russia and China. It may again restrict imports from the US and go slow on various promises Modi had made during POTUS’s visit.

America has already been reminded that future arms imports would depend on it staying away from India’s internal affairs.

As per official figures, India is the largest importer of US arms. Of the $16 billion spent on importing weapons over the past three years, over $6 billion went to the US, followed by $4 billion to Russia. This is the first time that the US has emerged as India’s largest arms supplier, displacing Russia. India has acquired a variety of US defence equipment in the last three years, including C130J Super Hercules aircraft, Harpoon anti-submarine missiles and the C-17 heavy lift transport aircraft. India is also the 17th largest holder of American debt. It has invested over $6 billion at relatively low returns in the US treasury debt bonds.

Despite India being heavily tilted in favour of building a better relationship with the US, the latter’s politicians remain hostile towards India’s business and strategic interests. For example, some of the active members of US establishment have launched a tirade against the Indian pharma industry. On February 26, an open campaign called ‘Harmful Indian Medicines’ began in Washington against the Indian generic drugs industry. US agencies have been holding public hearings in Washington as part of its investigation titled ‘Trade, investment and industrial policies in India: Effects on the US economy’. Various industry associations from India have been forced to appear before these agencies for clarifications.


Even in the past, Americans have resorted to similar pressure tactics and flip-flops to extract favourable decisions from India. But they haven’t realised that they are dealing with a PM for whom personal dignity and national interest are non-negotiable. If he is capable of being an expansive host, he can be ruthless opponent as well.



Opinionated Obama Must Realise He's Dealing with a PM Who's as Responsive as Ruthless - The New Indian Express
 
I appreciate the spirit of this post. PotUS should MODIfy himself.
Anyway when MODI would still be still ruling the potus would be nowhere.
 
Two successive statements by U.S. President Barack Obama within a span of nine days on the shrinking religious tolerance in India have created some flutter. In the first instance, as he wound up his India visit on January 27, Mr. Obama underscored the point that countries that are divided within along religious lines cannot progress; in the second one, on February 5, he said the acts of religious intolerance that are being reported in India would have shocked Mahatma Gandhi. Though the White House later said that the President’s remarks were not aimed at anyone in particular, they have embarrassed the Narendra Modi government. The Congress has seized the opportunity to attack the government for inaction in the face of the acts of intolerance, while hardline Hindutva groups such as the Vishwa Hindu Parishad have seen in Mr. Obama’s remarks a pattern of unwelcome interference. It is curious that Mr. Obama invoked two motifs that Mr. Modi has repeatedly claimed to have been guided by — first, the Constitution, and second, Gandhian ideals. It is also curious that Mr. Modi invokes Gandhi on issues ranging from cleanliness to diaspora concerns, but not when it comes to the question of religious harmony.
Finance Minister Arun Jaitley’s statement — that “India’s huge cultural history of tolerance” cannot be altered by aberrations — is perfectly valid, but such well-meaning statements by themselves just would not do. The point of concern is that the tradition of tolerance that Mr. Jaitley — like most Indians — takes pride in, is being attacked and weakened. Liberties and values will have to be nurtured in order for them to be enduring. That is the reason why Mr. Modi’s silence on recurring reports of desecration of churches and intimidation of religious minorities by extremist groups has become a matter of concern, as noticed also by the outside world, and reflected in a recent editorial in The New York Times. More troubling is the fact that these acts are being committed by groups that belong to the larger ideological universe that Mr. Modi has been associated with. This is not to overlook violence promoted in the name of other faiths, but the question here is about the links of intolerance to political power that controls the state. Mr. Modi has told his party colleagues that he does not want to be distracted from his economic agenda by contentious issues. Tolerance, though essential for growth, cannot be reduced to an instrumentality of growth, and the amiable coexistence of diverse religious and cultural traditions is an end in itself. The Indian Constitution enshrines a set of fundamental freedoms and rights. The government of the day has a constitutional duty to uphold these rights and freedoms. A government should not only be fair but also be seen to be so, and needs to be outspoken in the defence of constitutional values.

Silence is not an option - The Hindu

DON"T kill the Messenger

If the message is unpalatable, and you think is wrong present the counter point and prove the message is wrong.
But it hurts when the message is right and you have been ignoring it right under your nose.
 
Last edited:
We need not worry about the US & can afford to keep it at arm's length...We can go East & oriental like the way Japan has done under Shinzo Abe..West is self centered..They are interested in keeping differences simmering so that they can play their monkey games...If US is a genuine friend of India would it have the temerity to support Pakistan?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest ads

Back
Top