Posts Tagged ‘Pakistan’
Here’s the last ODI series results among test playing nations since 2008. India has the best results at home while England has the best away results.
Green = Home wins
Red – Away wins.
Link to original spreadsheet.
|*||Tri-Nation having at least 2 matches|
|***||Result of 2002|
|****||Result of 2004|
|*****||Result of 2006|
|******||Result of 2007|
|*******||Result of 2003|
When we search something in Google, it shows how many search results it got along with the search results. Google search results numbers, in these days, tend to be the best measure of the number of occurrence a keyword has in a website. Though, Google claims the number is a “best guess” only and it could be distorted by duplicates but to get an idea of number of occurrences, this is probably the best possible way.
Using this feature in Google, I went onto collect data about Indian and Bangladeshi media. The data I collected are from different sphere of News media – including how they view each other and how each of them cover the rest of the world.
To begin with, let me see how they cover each other. I prepared a normalized statistics based on the view that each newspaper puts most importance on local items, i.e. Indian newspapers would mostly have Indian news, covering Indian cities and Indian leaders. I chose four newspapers of two countries, namely – The Times of India and The Hindu from India and The Daily Star and Prothom Alo from Bangladesh. I tried to see what fraction of keyword India, the keyword Bangladesh does occur in an Indian newspaper and what fraction of keyword Bangladesh, the keyword India does occur in Bangladesh media. For Prothom Alo, I have to use Bengali equivalents of the keywords. I had similar search results in comparing Delhi+Kolkata against Dhaka+Chittagong and Manmohan (Singh) against (Sheikh) Hasina. Let me term this as “Mutual Media Importance”, or MMI.
It is obvious from the numbers that India gets much more importance in Bangladesh media compared to what it puts on Bangladesh. It also indicates that the importance is mostly on National level and not that much on the level of cities.
The second set of data looks at how a set of important keywords figure in these news media. These are related to the issues on which newspapers are supposed to publish articles. Since cricket is a popular keyword in both India and Bangladesh, I will use the search results for that term in to normalize my search results. Incidentally, it’s the highest occurring keyword except for one of these newspapers – Times of India. The relative occurrence of a keyword can be termed as Keyword Media Importance (“Cricket”) or KMI(Cricket).
All of the newspapers have very low coverage of keyword literacy (may be because all newspaper readers are literate). One the other hand, Bangladesh media covers Indian cinema world (Bollywood) quite well.
In the third and last set of data looks at how media sees some different countries. I would have been happy to include data about US too but the fact is the data related to US is not reliable – since the country is referred to by a lot off abbreviations and names. So, the current data looks at China, Pakistan and Iraq. Let me term it Country Media Importance (“Cricket”).
A notable mention – Pakistan gets more coverage in Bangladesh than it gets in India. This is most likely because of shared past and horrors of 1971 are discussed regularly in newspapers.
Let me add a disclaimer that the data I collected is prone to errors and I didn’t even try to calculate any scientific error margin for any of the parameters. Still, I believe this provides the reader with an idea of what the media publishes in India and Bangladesh – especially on the topics I covered in three sections. I hope I would cover more sections in future with a better tool to measure the keyword occurrences.
Ultimately Channel4 has presented us with what we call an complete version of the entire 26/11 attack in Mumbai. It includes tapes from Kasav’s confession, the communication between terrorists and their commander in Pakistan and of course interviews of scores of people.
Initially the whole documentary was available at youtube, but unfortunately it was removed due to copyrights claim by Channel4 (they need their cut too!!). I hope some Indian Tv broadcasters will be able to purchase the copyright to air the same uncut version of the whole documentary. Otherwise, Indians will miss something. I want it to be displayed with few more analysis and interviews – initially by NDTV or IBNLive and later in the National Tv network. We all have right to see what had happened.
Currently the video is available at this site. However, it could be gone anytime soon. I’ll keep updating this post if I find any new site hosting the video.
P.S. – The video, especially the communication between the commander and the terrorists has significant amout of religious content. This should not be used to make a case against some other innocents. I’m afraid it could potentially happen. All these attacks are creation of a handful zealots and those should not be regarded as representetives of their communities. In fact people across the world have condemed this attack irrespective of caste, creed and religion. Punishing the guilty is the only way forward …
The India-Bangladesh relationship can take another twist very soon if the truth is uncovered from the Chittagong Arms haul case. On April 2nd, 2004 Bangladesh Joint Forces seized 10 truckloads of submachine-guns, AK-47 assault rifles, other firearms and bullets on tip-off in the largest ever arms haul in an early morning swoop on the Karnaphuli coast in Chittagong. The description says –
“The cache included 690 7.62 mm T-56-I sub-machine guns (SMGs); 600 7.62 mm T-56-2 SMGs; 150 40 mm T-69 rocket launchers; 840 40 mm rockets; 400 9 mm semi-automatic spot rifles; 100 `Tommy Guns’; 150 rocket launchers; 2,000 launching grenades; 25,020 hand grenades; 6,392 magazines of SMG and other arms; 700,000 rounds of SMG cartridges; 739,680 rounds of 7.62 mm calibre; and 400,000 cartridges of other weapons. Most of the arms and ammunition were reportedly of Korean, Italian, Chinese and American make. “
To compare it with the recent Mumbai attacks, I can say that at least ten to twenty similar attacks could be launched using these arms and ammunition. To put it in another way, it can actually arm a small troop of a few thousand people.
There were a lot of opinions and comments floated throughout the country at that time. One editorial in the Daily Star captures some of these. The investigation started almost immediately but there were little progress. The initial report suggested –
“After checking circumstantial evidences, the committee came to the conclusion that three men — Din Mohammed, a labour contractor, Haji Sobhan, proprietor of a trawler, and Hafizuddin, owner of a car found near the Chittagong Urea Fertiliser Limited (CUFL) jetty — were involved in the arms smuggling.”
But, the first twist came when Assam CM Tarun Gogoi claimed to BBC that the arms was heading for ULFA (Asom based organization fighting for separate country for Asomiya people). It was at that time rejected by many Bangladeshis as a routine allegation. However, the issue complicated when –
“Chittagong City Mayor and Awami League leader A.B.M. Mohiuddin Chowdhury alleged that Indian insurgent groups ran “at least 50 to 60 camps” in Bangladesh to train militants.”
And it was never the same again. A year later, one leading Intelligence Agency confirmed the allegation. Not only that, they also mentioned how the logistics were sent there and how it was heading towards NSCN (Nagaland based organization fighting for separate country for Naga people) and ULFA camps. It also reported that both NSCN and ULFA chief were present when the truck was getting unloaded.
Even after all these, Bangladesh Govt were not interested to take it up seriously. After the regime changed and the Sheikh Hasina led Awami League govt came to power in Bangladesh with an overwhelming win, the case was reopened. A month ago an Indian TV Channel CNN-IBN revealed that they got access to confession document that was supressed by BNP led Govt. The main accused was drawn to court once more a couple of days back.
Hafizuddin, the prime accused, confessed that the Arms passage were made in presence of (and with the help of) Govt officials – including coast guard, NSI and DGFI officials. Hafiz said (translated from Bengali) –
“The trawlers carrying Arms were attacked by pirates just before it entered the channel (entry of the port). Coast guards rescued it. It was difficult to embark at night. Coast guards helped in getting it to the dock.”
And about his involvement with Paresh Baruah, the ULFA chief (translated from Bengali) –
“On 29th March, Paresh Baruah told me to unload a trawler full of machinary at St Martins Island. He also claimed that he had talked to DGFI and NSI chiefs about it and there is no reason to be afraid of anyone. … He paid me a sum of 50-60lakh taka (USD 90,000) to get it done. … At the jetty, after a few trucks were unloaded, a couple of civil-dressed Policeman came up. They wanted to see the papers. I called Paresh Baruah. Jewel, the other ULFA cadre present at the spot, challenged them to open up a box and see what’s inside. Once it was opened, I was afraid and called Paresh once more. He assured me that he has links in influential circle and he would rescue him. Later, Paresh Baruah told me that everyone has betrayed him.”
Neither of these officials acknowledged their involvement. As expected, they denied and said that the accused is making false statements. However, if all these are false, then why was the confessions kept secret so far? The case could have proceeded and the truth would have revealed by now. Why did it require the case to reopen after almost 5 years?
India has long been accusing that Bangladesh has been used for anti-Indian activities, especially with ULFA. Bangladesh has so far denied all these. However, if this confession statement is true, the allegations would be difficult to deny. Sheikh Hasina has promised the countrymen that they will free Bangladesh from any traces of terror. If she is sincere to her promise, ULFA is going to face tough time ahead. As we can see, the ball-game has already changed.
The Daily Star has published the detailed review on the incident. The Headline says – “4-party bigwigs were in plot, accused say“. One interesting quote –
“In the 10-page confessional statement one of the principal accused Hafizur Rahman claimed to have given the same statement on different occasions divulging the truth behind the case, since his surrender on October 25, 2005.
But, the confession was never recorded, instead the officials concerned warned him against making such statements in the future, threatening him with death as well, sources said quoting from Hafiz’s statement. “
Another similar incident in Bagura tracked down to Tripura based Indian organizations.
Prothom Alo reported (Bengali) the interrogation of the Police Officials who actually caught the truck load of arms. They are thrown out of their job and were threatened to be killed in “Crossfire”. The alleged people who issued the threats was Chief of RAB (Rapid Action Batalion) – 7, i.e. a Bangladesh Govt official.
The Daily Star reports the involvement of ARY group of Dubai and ISI. Top two NSI officials admit their link with Pakistan HC and son of ex Prime Minister Khaleda Zia. The finance was via ARY group with the help of ISI and the arms were purchased from China.
All’s well that ends well. Hopefully, this issue will end soon.
This article was referred by Christian Science Monitor.
As expected, the FBI did not get any links of Kasav to Faridkot. I mentioned earlier that Pakistan will shift all the proofs from that place and Pakistan proved that I was correct. The press reporting was on the wrong line though, with all Pakistani media reported that “Ajmal Kasav has no links with Pakistan : FBI“. However, the actual statement made by the FBI is (source):
“”No evidence could be collected from the area which could confirm the claim of Ajmal Kasab’s being Pakistani”, “
So, it’s all about evidences. And I wrote earlier how it was removed. Let me add those links once more. Thanks to Geo News (the Pakistani News channel) we all know even how the proofs were removed.
Day 1 : Geo News Reports
Day 2 : Evidences are removed
And of course, another update is that WSJ (later separate report from AFP also) has quoted a few anonymous Pakistani investigation officials to confirm that LeT leader Zarar Shah has confessed his role in Mumbai attack. Let’s wait till we get another flip-flop from Pakistan.
Meanwhile I read an editorial in a Pakistan newspaper to summerize why Pakistan is running soft on LeT but cracks the other terror groups hard. It was anyway an open secret, but it’s nice to see it on a Pakistani newspaper.
“And this takes me back to Pervez Musharraf’s first visit to the US after his coup. At a meeting with a group of journalists among whom I was present, my dear and much lamented friend Tahir Mirza, then the Dawn correspondent, asked Musharraf why he was not acting against Lashkar-e Tayba and Jaish-e Muhammad. Musharraf went red in the face and shot back, “They are not doing anything in Pakistan. They are doing jihad outside.””
What more could be said on this topic?
Pakistan Dawn has written a nice report on FBI investigation in Pakistan. It’s interesting to know that Pakistan Govt claim that they don’t at all know about FBI’s plan to visit Pakistan and Faridkot. Pakistan however claimed that FBI is yet to get any “credible evidences” against Pakistan link. Similarly, Indians claims the opposite.
“Unnamed Pakistani and Indian officials have been giving contradictory versions of FBI’s investigations into the Mumbai attacks.
While Pakistani officials say the FBI did not find any evidence of Pakistan’s involvement in the attacks, the Indians insist that it did. US officials, on the other hand, have remained silent on this issue.”
I am sure that FBI will not comment anything before they consult their new Government. I am eqally sure that either of India and Pakistan Government is going to reject the findings of FBI. And of course, there is nothing left to prove that the lone captured terrorist is a Pakistani.
Arundhati Roy, one of the best Human Rights activists in South Asia, has probably got it wrong this time. So far, she was right to some extent to connect Indian city bombings with the Social Justice. This time, it has gone far beyond the justice and it seems she didn’t wake up in time.
I agree to her that the Hindu fundamentalists are a threat to country. It has been proved repeatedly for last 20 years. I also agree that social injustice has fermented a lot of friction points inside India. But, I don’t attribute this particular attack to the same cause.
There are a list of factual and analytic errors in her article – “9 is not 11” published in The Guardian and The Outlook. It also has a lot of “contextual errors”. Let me go over a few of them.
“The Mumbai attacks are only the most recent of a spate of terrorist attacks on Indian towns“
It’s an absolute failure to identify the distinctive nature of the Mumbai attack. Unlike the others, it was carried out by a set of foreigners who came to India only to launch the attack. The preparation and training involved in the Mumbai attack was far greater than the “hit and run” bomb attacks on other Indian towns. If the other ones required only the knowledge of Mobile phones, SIM cards, detonators, RDX and co-ordination over the internet, then this one requires additional skills such as – handling of GPS, lobbing Grenades, use of AK-47s and intense training on fighting till death for 60 hours.
It’s (The Taj) an icon of the easy, obscene injustice that ordinary Indians endure every day.
This one hardly contextual in the ongoing Mumbai attacks.
On one side (let’s call it Side A) are those who see terrorism, especially ‘Islamist’ terrorism, as a hateful, insane scourge that spins on its own axis, in its own orbit and has nothing to do with the world around it, nothing to do with history, geography or economics. Therefore, Side A says, to try and place it in a political context, or even try to understand it, amounts to justifying it and is a crime in itself.
Side B believes that though nothing can ever excuse or justify terrorism, it exists in a particular time, place and political context, and to refuse to see that will only aggravate the problem and put more and more people in harm’s way. Which is a crime in itself.
The sayings of Hafiz Saeed, who founded the Lashkar-e-Toiba (Army of the Pure) in 1990 and who belongs to the hardline Salafi tradition of Islam, certainly bolster the case of Side A. Hafiz Saeed approves of suicide bombing, hates Jews, Shias and Democracy, and believes that jehad should be waged until Islam, his Islam, rules the world.
Among the things he has said are:
“There cannot be any peace while India remains intact. Cut them, cut them so much that they kneel before you and ask for mercy.”
This one is the most contextual in the ongoing Mumbai attacks. She admits that in some cases, terrorism doesn’t have any contexts. LeT and its mastermind belongs to that category.
Unfortunately, after this she compares Hafiz to Babu Bajrangi and tries to juxtapose the end results of these two persons. As per her article, Babu Bajrangi is set free despite his hate speech but Hafiz Saeed is “banned” by the UN.
Hafiz Saeed has lived the life of a respectable man in Lahore as the head of the Jamaat-ud-Dawa, which many believe is a front organisation for the Lashkar-e-Toiba. He continued to recruit young boys for his own bigoted jehad with his twisted, fiery sermons. On December 11, the UN imposed sanctions on the Jamaat-ud-Dawa and the Pakistani government succumbed to international pressure, putting Hafiz Saeed under house arrest. Babu Bajrangi, however, is out on bail and continues to live the life of a respectable man in Gujarat.
True, but how does it link Justice to the attacks. It’s rather proved that either of these two would have attacked their perceived opponents without any contextual reasons. For an update, Pakistan virtually did not take any action against Hafiz Saeed, neither can they take one.
Interestingly, with all these examples, she took up the the option B.
So, on balance, if I had to choose between Side A and Side B, I’d pick Side B. We need context. Always.
However, she did not include religion, illiteracy and blind-belief as context, which is unfair and creates an analytic error.
In this nuclear subcontinent, that context is Partition.
And what was the context of Partition? Isn’t that a mix of politics, religion and illiteracy? Why the history begins at partition and not from a thousand years of Caste system in India? Why doesn’t it include the rule of Aurangzeb? Why doesn’t it include the divide and rule policy of the British? History is eternal and so is the context. The history of justice and the absence of it is as long as the history of mankind.
air strikes to ‘take out’ terrorist camps may take out the camps, but certainly will not ‘take out’ the terrorists. And neither will war. …
A superpower never has allies. It only has agents.
Absolutely. I agree to this.
Terrorism is a heartless ideology, and like most ideologies that have their eye on the Big Picture, individuals don’t figure in its calculations except as collateral damage. It has always been a part of—and often even the aim of—terrorist strategy to exacerbate a bad situation in order to expose hidden fault lines. The blood of ‘martyrs’ irrigates terrorism. Hindu terrorists need dead Hindus, Communist terrorists need dead proletarians, Islamist terrorists need dead Muslims. The dead become the demonstration, the proof of victimhood, which is central to the project.
Wonderful way of putting it. Now, where does the social justice fit here? Aren’t we going farther away from the arguments in favor of social justice and more towards another deadly cause – propaganda?
After this she went into media-apathy in covering other news and the “good” and “bad” classification by the media which ended up asking for a “Police state”. I believe, if dacoits would have attacked my house, I would have put more vigil at my home from the time being. Why is it wrong to have as an immediate reaction? Isn’t it expected?
Next she delves deep into the Parliament attack, Delhi encounter with Indian Mujaheedin and Malegaon blast. Those are no way related to Mumbai attack, at least the no links has yet emerged. After that she blames the Nation states – India and USA – for a lot of misdeeds. I don’t disagree with most of them, but of course fail to see a connection with Mumbai attacks.
If 10 men can hold off the NSG commandos and the police for three days, and if it takes half-a-million soldiers to hold down the Kashmir Valley, do the math. What kind of Homeland Security can secure India?
Then she raises one question which is valuable to me. However, she did not propose any solution to that. The hint of solution came at her ending lines :
The only way to contain (it would be naive to say end) terrorism is to look at the monster in the mirror. We’re standing at a fork in the road. One sign says ‘Justice’, the other ‘Civil War’. There’s no third sign and there’s no going back. Choose.
I know the best answer to this actually came from Salman Rushdie. I am adding the video entry for his comments.
Also quote –
But the point I want to make is that I do not believe that the terrorists such as these — I do not believe that their project has anything to do with justice.
Ask yourself the question that if the Kashmir problem were resolve tomorrow, if Israel-Palestine reached a lasting peace, do we believe that al-Qaeda would disband? Do we believe that Lashkar-e-Toiba and Jaish-e-Mohammad would put their guns down and beat them into plough-shears and say we would now be farmers because our job is done.
I mean the point about is that is laughable, right? And the point about that is that that is not their project. Their project is power. This is a power grab by the most obscurantist, revanchist, old-fashioned, medievalist idea of modern culture that attempts to drag the world back into the middle ages at the point of modern weaponry …
That’s what is fueling the Terrorism – as it did always in the past – the hunger for power. At this point, one might argue that its the social injustice that is generating that sense of deprivation and hunger for power. However, History doesn’t show us many such examples. Nor did it show the end of that hunger once the justice was “won”. One major example could be the Afghanistan Mujaheedins, who were nurtured by Pakistan and USA. They targeted the Soviet Army to expell them from Afghanistan to get their perceived justice. However, after the Soviet Army withdrew, they did not returned to the “Plough-shares” as mentioned by Rushdie. Rather, the majority of them, exported terror outside the territory – from Osama bin Laden in 9/11 to Bangla Bhai in Bangladesh. The case was simple for them – the sense of “injustice” changed once they achieved their bloody battle.What happens to the sense of injustice those are impractical – “Establishing a Ram rajya” or “Re-establishment of Caliphate in India”? Is it possible to arrange “Social Justice” to the victims of so-called context – the Partition.
Social justice, like everything else, has an equilibrium. Suppose there are two communities in a society – A and B. In a perfect democratic setup, A always wins since they are the majority. Now, B has a deep sense of injustice. Let me assume, as per Arundhati, that led to radicalization of the B community. The paradox is, if there are measures taken by the Government ran by A, to improve the status of B – that itself will create similar sense of injustice among A – may be less in percentage. However, the overall percentage of person, who are extremists because of injustice, remains the same, though, they are equally spread among the communities. So, the society doesn’t gain out of effort towards inclusiveness before we remove the community barrier. If both group A and B prioritize their Nation ahread of their Community, half the problem gets resolved. Now, the next question becomes – who creates the community barrier? I believe, there lies the answer … it could be race, color or religion.
The argument from injustice is a never ending one. The absolute justice is never possible. Because, the justice itself is a perception which, like all other inputs to human brain, can be manipulated or brainwashed. A deep sense of injustice can easily be injected into a person who has little to analyze. In our societies, where rational thoughts are always discouraged and elders are always true – no better can be expected.
To see details of the proofs, one can visit my latest post.
And after that, Zardari has softens a bit but still there are no official confessions from Pakistan Govt. Instead, they are asking for ‘proof’ only to deny them. The purpose of getting the proofs from Pakistan was only to remove them quickly. At least the subsequent video from Geo TV shows that.
A support from a Pakistani Newspaper Editorial.
New Delhi has its own reasons for refusing to share evidence, fearing its sources would be compromised. New Delhi also claims that it provided sufficient information about the bombing of its embassy in Kabul earlier this year, but Pakistan failed to respond.
Also, I have written on the conspiracy theories around this.