Simple naivete or calculated dhimmitude?

In most alien invasion movies one would see the locals (barring the smart heroes) fall into 2 broad categories; the ones who look up to the aliens as saviors (Independence day etc.) to the ones where a group of leaders and intellectuals accept the inevitable and agree to dhimmitude ala the X-Files and agree to the colonization for exchange of power in the new setup.
Now cHindu lead by fearless leader LiC and Sidd V decide that India's approach of kissing up to its Northerly neighbor is the best approach. They praise MMS' attitude of continuing dialogue while not bringing up contentious issues like the Karakoram highway or Arunachal or Tibet as it does not put the Chinese in the spot.

Mr. Ravi’s briefing points avoided any specific mention of contentious issues. “The Prime Minister stressed that neither side should let our differences act as an impediment to the growth of functional cooperation between the two countries,” he quoted Dr. Singh as saying. He said Premier Wen “concurred … that issues that may arise in the course of our bilateral relations should be properly handled through discussions and they should not become an impediment in the development of our friendly relations.”

Guess this picture says a lot ...
All in all everything in favor of China. Not concessions from the Chinese, no acceptance of their aggression as we don't want them to get angry and LiC is happy that his masters are satisfied.

Superman MMS praised for standing up to evil China empire

Thanks to Sudhir for pointing this out. cHindu has given freedom to VK Krishna Iyer to print whatever nonsense comes into his mind. For example he thinks MMS' has stood up to China:

Respected Prime Minister Manmohan Singh: This letter comes to you from a patriot in far-off Kochi to a statesman Prime Minister who must vindicate the dignity and values of Bharat Mahan. This nation cannot tolerate anyone questioning your right to every inch of Indian territory in Arunachal Pradesh. You are our pride and our power, and ‘We, the People of India’, the least and the fallen, are with you. I salute you for your firm stand. No China has any right to protest against Manmohan entering the territory of Arunachal Pradesh. I salute you.

Wow ! Even MMS would be shocked to read that he had stood up to China. Probably sent a bouquet over to VK's home in Kochi :)

Stating the obvious - ISI is a terrorist organization

Since the fiasco after Sharm El_Sheikh, cHindu has this annoying and asinine thread of painting the Indo-Pak relationship in a positive vein when the actions of Pak to contain terror within has failed by all accounts. For the average Indian, the whole business of peace with Pak is a bunch of crock. Simply put the biggest export out of Pak has been terror. Asking them to stop terrorist activities is a bit like asking an elephant not to poop. There has been no real activity from the Pak side handling the suspects of the Mumbai attacks, including arresting the key people involved.
Finally cHindu in a whim of patriotism decides to support the Indian cause. Score one for patriotism.

Given the ups and downs in the bilateral relationship, the trust deficit, and the need to prepare the ground for confidence-building over the long-haul, India is entirely justified in reserving judgment until the trial actually commences and makes visible headway.

It rebuffs Pak's stalling techniques,

But the problem of Lashkar’s terrorism is not simply legal. Sooner or later, Pakistan has to realise that these kinds of terrorist groups have to be confronted politically. Islamabad’s insistence on “evidence” and other legal niceties is all very well but those are not the tools it is using to deal with the threat the Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan and al-Qaeda are posing to it.

But the topping is the statement on ISI's control over its terrorist minions,

The Inter Services Intelligence directorate may think it can manage the LeT and kindred groups for all time to come and that they will never pose an existential threat to Pakistan in the way the TTP does. Such a belief is seriously misplaced. The threat posed by such terrorist groups may be uneven but its impact on the future of Pakistan is uniformly destructive...Unfortunately, the ISI has not yet taken a decision to make the course correction that Pakistan so desperately needs.

Really do you think that the ISI wants a course correction? It has control over the country. It gets to play with the funds from the US to dispose as it will. It has a corrupt Govt. lead by an inefficient moron (Zardari). Why would it want to change course? But cHindu has never been one with common sense.

Asian Union a la European Union? Where do they get these ideas from?

The Hindu : Opinion / News Analysis : Sharm el Sheikh revisited
Former Foreign Secretary, Salman Haidar, revisits Sharm el Sheikh.

But there is no sound basis for such criticism.

He is quite dismissive of the sharm at Sharm el Sheik without offering any new explanations.

In a spirited address to Parliament, the Prime Minister explained his aim: Pakistan has made a frequent grievance of India’s supposed involvement in Baluchistan, and as this is entirely untrue, there is no need for India to look as if it must avoid talking about it.

It doesn't occur to our former foreign secretary that by including Baluchistan in an official statement, we are giving legitimacy to Pakistan's hallucinations and paranoia. Now, Pakistan can go around witch-hunting for evidence. If it can't find evidence, it can create it. Why even get to evidence, it can be content with propaganda. We all know how propaganda and allegations were enough to justify American invasion of Iraq. Mentioning Baluchistan in the statement is important for its symbolism. For the first time, PM Manmohan Singh has given an opportunity to Pakistan to legitimize a baseless allegation. Anyone with a rudimentary understanding of foreign relations knows the importance of this symbolism. I am sure it is not lost on our former foreign secretary, Salman Haidar. But like most authors writing for Chindu, he is indulging in distortions and misinterpretations to suit the agenda of self-destructive liberalism.

The only available modality is dialogue, which can now usefully be resumed, for to remain indefinitely disengaged would yield little and could mean that opportunity would be lost.

This is such a poor justification for dialogue and a gross display of dis-ingenuity. Why wouldn't a little posturing work better than greasing up and bending over? The urgency to rush to the discussion table is foolish. Is it hard for the former foreign secretary, Salman Haidar, to see that India and Pakistan are moving along different trajectories, which will only push India into a better bargaining position? Once again, this turns out to be a rhetorical question. It only points to a case of arguing against national interests by the esteemed former foreign secretary.

Looking further ahead, India needs now to view its neighbourhood relations, especially with Pakistan, in the context of its ever expanding international role.

Talking of looking at our neighbours, it might help the former diplomat to consider how China behaves with India. In case Salman Haidar forgot, China happens to be our neighbour after its occupation of Tibet and China also has an ever expanding international role. Makes me wonder if Mr. Haider thinks foreign relations implies relationship with Pakistan. If he had others in his view, he would have considered that China does not make any sort of conciliatory gestures towards India, leave alone concessions. I am in no position to tell this former Foreign Secretary, but surely he could learn a thing or two from China's foreign relations, especially against India.

We have so many people getting onto the chindu bandwagon and telling us how to behave with Pakistan. Why don't these guys demand from China the same kind of treatment that they expect India to give to Pakistan. Surely, foreign relations is not a one-way street.

Within the Asian region, the demands of a new security architecture have come under serious consideration. Some strategists have envisaged an Asian Union that would eclipse in size and significance the EU and be a dominant global entity for the 21st century.

Our eminent diplomat must have heard of partition and the reason behind it? Seriously, where do these strategists get these ideas from. The term "shadowy" he used earlier to describe strategists applies to those who come up with such ideas. How could some one who has been in foreign policy even do anything but be forthrightly dismissive of it. With the collapse of USSR, EU gained some form in a unipolar world. However, the unifying factor between all the small states within EU is the cultural similarity. That is the reason why the admission of Turkey, which is culturally different from the rest of EU, is being opposed. Cultural difference is also the reason why muslims seceded to form Pakistan.

(No matter what we think of cultural nationalism, it is true that our nation is held together, and may be even defined, by the extraordinarily tolerant culture of Hinduism. Islamic countries have hardly been at peace with themselves, leave
alone their neighbours. Muslim majority areas in Kashmir and, more recently, North
Kerala talk of seceding from India.)

For a foreign secretary to talk of Asian union is a sorry state of affairs for our country. It shows that our system is generating individuals who have a dysfunctional and idiotic view of the world. With writers like these, chindu is now turning into a free speech asylum for the lunatics.

Independent foreign Policy - Commie Style

The Bong gang that creates a din whenever the centre inches towards the US and lectures on "independent foreign policy" has just given us an example of what that is.The Cabinet Secretariat asked the union ministers to stay away from a function organized to felicitate the Dalai Lama.According to it, being seen with the Dalai Lama is not 'in conformity with our foreign policy". So what is our "independent" foreign policy? Bark at the US , kneel before China.
The commies can shamelessly crawl at China's feet. Why should India follow suit?

http://www.hindu.com/2007/11/04/stories/2007110460961000.htm