For China, Pakistan comes first (PO)

By M D Nalapat
In July 2010,the Kashmir factor led to India stopping all defense ties with China, including the sending of delegates to conferences. After having given him a visa, the authorities in Beijing abruptly cancelled - just before his departure for Beijing - permission to visit China for Lt-Gen B S Jamwal, chief of the Northern Command, whose area of responsibility includes Kashmir. Incidentally, the officer himself hails from the state. There was no reason given by the Chinese side for what was taken on the Indian side as a serious act of discourtesy towards a senior military officer. Informally, it became known that Beijing was reluctant to host an officer who had been active in operations in Kashmir.

It was suggested to the Indian side through informal channels that another officer, from a different army command zone, ought to be sent. Instead, an angry Defense Ministry cut off all defense links with China. Earlier, the ChineseMinistry of Foreign Affairs had annoyed the External Affairs Ministry by giving only stapled visas to visitors from India who hailed from Kashmir. For some time, a discussion had taken place as to whether India ought to retaliate by giving stapled visas to Chinese visitors from Tibet, but finally the doves in the MEA prevailed over the hawks, and nothing was done. This may have led the Chinese authorities to believe that there would only be a pro forma Indian reaction to cancelling Lt-Gen Jamwal’s visit. Certainly there was surprise in Beijing at the sharp Indian reaction to the treatment meted out to one of the country’s most respected army generals.

The Defense Ministry is usually much more strident about China than the Ministry of External Affairs, which is usually very sensitive to Beijing’s concerns. After the Jamwal visa cancellation, the National Security Advisor of the Prime Minister, Shivshankar Menon, agreed with Defense Minister A K Antony that “enough is enough”, and supported the total snapping of defense exchanges in retaliation for the snub. Such a strong response had not been expected by the Chinese side, who tried for months to get such exchanges to re-start,but failed to persuade North Block (the Ministry of Defense). The Annual Sino-Indian Defense Dialogue, which had last been held in January 2010, got indefinitely postponed.

While on the surface there was a complete cessation of contacts, behind the scenes a compromise was arrived at in seven months. China gave a visa to the Lt-Gen in charge of the Northern Command, although by this time, Lt-General Jamwal had been transferred. Having made the point that a visa ought not to be denied to the Northern Command chief, Delhi restarted defense links. At the same time, Beijing had the satisfaction of knowing that the officer who had been rejected for a visa was not included in the Indian delegation. As North Block has once again restarted the defense dialogue with China, the next annual meeting of the two sides is scheduled on December 8,2011, with high-level participation on both sides.

Interestingly, on the Indian side, the talks will be led by Union Defense Secretary S K Sharma, a civil servant who - if we except a possible stint in the National Cadet Corps decades ago as a college student - has had no military experience whatsoever. India is the only major democracy that totally excludes serving military officers from holding posts in the Defense Ministry. Such jobs are the monopoly of generalist officers, who may come to the ministry after stints in the ministries of Fisheries, Sports and Culture. Their experience in mastering the intricacies of prawn cultivation in the backwaters and helping dancers travel on junkets abroad is expected to give them the expertise needed to take decisions on the purchase of key defense items.

Needless to say, politicians find it much more convenient to have generalists rather than specialists in charge of the procurement process, as the former can be more easily persuaded to buy expensive weapons systems that are best in fighting not the next war but the last. Often, substandard equipment gets purchased. As the officials in the Defense Ministry are in no danger of ever going near the front line of a conflict, they are unconcerned about the suitability or

otherwise of the weapons systems that politicians want them to buy. When compared to the equipment of a Peoples Liberation Army soldier on the Line of Actual Control between China and India, the Indian soldier has equipment that is often inferior. For example, night-vision capabilities are low, while body Armour is much heavier in the Indian army than in the PLA.

It was Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru who ensured the exclusion of the military from the Ministry of Defense. Both Nehru and his daughter (also Prime Minister) Indira Gandhi feared the possibility of a military coup. They ensured that the military was kept far away from those who make encourage such a coup, namely the US. Fear of a coup grew after the deposing and subsequent murder of President Salvador Allende of Chile in 1973,and the brutal murder of Sheikh Mujibur Rahman and most of his family by junior army officers in August 1975. The killings shocked Indira Gandhi, and was taken by her as vindication for her June decision to impose a State of Emergency in India that took away fundamental rights, including the right to life, and which got lifted only 21 months later. It shows the inertia of the traditional system in India that the exclusion of specialists, including from the military, in the Defense Ministry is still continuing in an era when a military coup in India is even less likely than it was in the 1970s. The only time there may have been a chance of a coup in India was in 1959,when then Chief of Army Staff Kodendera Thimayya got exasperated at the cuts in defense spending implemented by then Finance Minister Morarji Desai (who, like Nehru, was a pacifist) and the hectoring manner of Defense Minister Krishna Menon.

It was no secret at the time that General Thimayya favoured a tilt towards the US, in place of the USSR-leaning policy of “non-alignment” that was the brainchild of Prime Minister Nehru. He saw the US as India’s natural partner, much better than the USSR. Whether there was any external suggestion to the army chief to launch a coup (the way General Ayub Khan did in 1958 in Pakistan) we will never know. However, the reality of a political organisation, the Congress Party, that was spread across the country (and which had seen off the once-invincible British Raj) ensured that Thimayya never put the plan for a military coup into operation. The situation in China is very different from that of India. Senior military officers are seeded within the Minuistry of Defense, and indeed run the department. Further, the ChineseCommunist Party has set up the Central Military Council, which too is filled with serving military officers,and is headed by the top leader of the country, now President Hu Jintao.

When the Chinese side sits down to meet with the almost-entirely non-military Defense Delegation from India, it will be headed by General Xiaotian Ma, Deputy Chief of General Staff of the PLA, and will comprise of military officers. Such a disconnect itself creates problems of perception and communication between the two sides, something not seen in the case of PRC defense dialogues with Pakistan, where uniformed personnel conduct the meeting from both sides of the table. The Chinese are unable to understand how and why the Indian side always conducts technical discussions with generalists. The same civil service officer ( who may hold an MA in Hindi Literature) may lead the Indian delegation on Climate Change at an international conference one year, before chairing the Indian team in WTO negotiations the next year, and in Defense the year after. If India is still progressing reasonably in spite of such a dysfunctional system, one that has no space for expertise even in complicated fields of governance, it is entirely due to the mercy of the Almighty.

India and China are too big for each other to neglect. Thus far, the PLA has been hesitant to establish closer ties to its Indian counterpart, for fear of annoying its old friends in Pakistan. Unlike the US, which has made no secret of its eagerness to develop close strategic ties with India, thus far China has openly adopted a policy that places Pakistan well above India in strategic weight, although for the record Chinese Communist Party (CCP) spokespersons say that they are pursuing a policy that gives equal weight to both. The CCP and the PLA have not followed the US in constantly asking Pakistan to “respect the security needs of India”. Clearly, he Chinese leadership believes that Islamabad is far more valuable as a partner than Delhi, trade and other factors notwithstanding.
http://pakobserver.net/detailnews.asp?id=126888

Sawant must get Rs 10,000 cr (Sunday Guardian)

ROOTS OF POWER M.D. NALAPAT www.sunday-guardian.com/profile/m-d-nalapat hat, a mere Rs 100 cr for the indescribable torture and humiliation felt by Justice P.B. Sawant as viewers beheld the sage visage of the jurist for the abnormally long period of 15 seconds, that too in a report about a scam? The sum awarded ought to have been much more, given that the channel aired an apology for such a lapse for only five consecutive days, rather than the five hundred that such inhumane treatment of Justice Sawant merited. As for the relatively low value placed on Justice Sawant's reputation by the Pune trial court, well, there are precedents for such admirable generosity towards a defendant. Two decades ago, the Supreme Court fixed a sum of US $470 million as damages on Union Carbide, after the Madhya Pradesh government had demanded at least $3.3 billion in damages for the world's biggest industrial disaster. While many saw the amount of compensation decreed by the apex court as low, those involved in selection of judges for the International Court of Justice at The Hague clearly disagreed, as the Chief Justice who delivered the verdict, R.S. Pathak, was soon after made a judge of the ICJ, where no doubt he served with the same distinction as in his previous avatar. { The Pune trial court has struck a necessary blow in defence of press standards that would dry up 99% of reporting and commentary in India. And now comes another verdict, in which many feel that the Honourable Court has been extremely parsimonious in awarding damages. This relates to the derisory amount of Rs 100 cr that was decided by the Pune trial court as being sufficient compensation for the agony inflicted on Justice P.B. Sawant (a former judge of the Supreme Court) by a television channel flashing his visage onscreen in a report relating to a scam involving provident fund dues. The showing of such images in such a context would do irreparable harm to the good judge's reputation, perhaps to the point where longtime friends avoid his company, and close family members begin to seriously consider whether he may truly be involved in matters relating to provident funds. In such circumstances, perhaps an award of Rs 10,000 cr may have better met the ends of justice. After all, television channels are expected (presumably by the law and the Constitution of India, these being the only texts on which judges rely) to be 100% accurate in their reporting. Unless they ferret out all the information about a particular story, they would be committing an act of grave irresponsibility in telecasting such episodes. So what if it may take several years to gather all the evidence, or that in almost all the issues they seek to report on, such a perfect result is unobtainable? After all, most cases in India take dozens of years before finally getting settled, and hence there is a strong precedent for the media to follow the same example in their own work. Stories based on less than 100% information ought to be canned and never see the light of day. North Korean television can be a good model to emulate. There, nothing is conveyed that is remotely seen as suspicious or adventurous. It speaks of the generosity and capacity for forgiveness of Justice Sawant that he has not appealed against the small amount of Rs 100 cr that has been awarded as damages to him. Lesser men than him would have done so. It is perfectly in order that the television channel in question has been asked to deposit Rs 20 cr and furnish a bank guarantee for four times that amount before being given the right to have an appeal heard against the High Court verdict upholding the trial court's decision. Unless one has serious money, one should not expect to waste the time of courts through appealing against judgments that clearly err — if at all — on the side of generosity towards the defendant. Putting in place procedures that would limit the frequency of appeals is a step that has immense beneficial value in a country where few are sensible enough to live for the 125 years and more that is needed to see through legal procedures. Justice Markandey Katju has, with clear understatement, described in some detail the mentally challenged nature of those who (being unfit for useful tasks) work in the media. Clearly, the media — as it presently operates — is a grave danger to civilised society and indeed to Indian culture. What the community deserves is a media that comments only after a process of verification that will ensure that only the most anodyne of commentary pass muster. Knowing the allergy of UPA chairperson Sonia Gandhi towards any mediaperson not considered genteel enough to share a pot of tea with her (several of whom have figured in the conversations of the loquacious Nira Radia), it is clear why Justice Katju was made the chairperson of the Press Council by her followers. Hopefully, he will soon begin to levy damages on newspapers and television outlets for reportage not backed by 100% evidence of the kind that only the National Security Advisor can gain access to. Clearly, such damages need to be more, much more than the small amount levied on Times Now for committing such an egregious act of media frenzy as showing an image of Justice Sawant in a report about a scam. What horrors will come next if the media were to get away with its myriad transgressions? Allegations of corruption against political leaders or high officials, and that too without getting copies of all files relating to the subject? What would happen to the future of India if the population were to get exposed to negative views about the selfless individuals who dedicate their lives to serve the people, and who live in the humble accommodations that dot Lutyensway? he Pune trial court has struck a necessary blow in defence of press standards that would dry up 99% of reporting and commentary in India. Humble scribes such as this columnist, who will find it tough to pay even 1% of 1% of the (admittedly very low) level of compensation now established as a precedent in the Sawant case, will now need to pause before making comments about anything other than flowers in a park. The advantage will be that he will now need to visit the park more often, thereby improving his health. Thank you, Justice Sawant, for standing up in defence of all those who are being attacked by a media that seems to believe it has the same licence in its reportage as do its counterparts in backward, repressive societies such as those found in the EU or in North America. In a country like India, that is teeming with saints, especially at the higher levels of the administrative machinery, the sort of media favoured by Justices Sawant and Katju are exactly the saintisised — sorry, sanitised — media we need. http://www.sunday-guardian.com/analysis/sawant-must-get-rs-10000-cr

Reserve Bank kills India growth story (PO)

By M D Nalapat
In 1997, then Prime Minister of China Zhu Rongji took note of the crisis in several Asian economies and launched a full scope reform of State-Owned Enterprises (SOEs) in China. Several of the worst performers were shut down, and others merged together or told to confine themselves to their core competences. Zhu’s slogan was “Grasp the big and ignore the small”. As a consequence, several smaller state enterprises were shut down. However, industrial reforms ensured that the slack caused by this was more than made up by private units, which were given much greater freedom than previously. Certainly the 1997-99 SOE reform was a very painful process, and it is estimated that about 40 million lost their livelihoods directly or indirectly as a consequence of the measures adopted by Zhu. However, several of these got new jobs in the next few years, as the Chinese industrial economy, both public and private, began to expand throughout the first decade of the 21st century. Today, several SOEs in China have emerged as some of the largest companies in the world.

The growth of Chinese companies has become a nightmare for companies in Europe, who are unable to compete on terms of price. Several markets that at one time were the exclusive preserve of European companies have now switched to Chinese imports. Even more troubling, during 2003-5,several Indian companies began to emerge as global competitors. Indeed, they were even able to buy out several companies in Europe, including huge enterprises such as Arcelor Steel, Jaguar-Land Rover and Corus. All of a sudden, there was fear in company boardrooms across Europe at this new competitor from Asia. Would even more of their global markets get lost because of the Indian private sector?. It was exactly at this time of gathering trouble for European businesses that the RBI, the Reserve Bank of India (the central bank of the country), began to put in place policies that were certain to

negatively affect the Indian growth story. Then RBI Governor Yaga Reddy began raising bank interest rates on loansdrastically, besides other steps designed to sharply reduce loans to industry and commerce. From the close of 2005 onwards, Reddy was determined to starve the private sector in India of money from commercial banks, and to see that they paid very high interest rates on the loans taken by them. In the process, he reversed the policy of low interest ratesthat had helped ensure a high growth rate (and moderate inflation) during the previous five years. Although the RBI is supposed to be an independent organisation, yet the government takes care to appoint only career civil servants as Governors, thereby ensuring that they will follow the habit of a lifetime and listen to commands (passed off as “informal requests”) from the Union Finance Ministry.

Despite increasing protests from industrial groups in India, who began losing out in international markets because of the high bank interest rates and the drying up of credit, the RBI continued its suicidal policy. Clearly, the approach of the central bank met with approval from the Chairperson of the United Progressive Alliance government, Sonia Gandhi, despite the fact that it gave an unfair advantage to European (and Chinese) companies competing in the Indian market. It is noteworthy that Sonia Gandhi is very popular in both China and the EU, being the subject of frequent and flattering media reports in both locations. While Manmohan Singh is the Prime Minister, the reality is that the ministers in his team report to Sonia Gandhi. In a way, he can be compared to President Ahmedinejad of Iran, whose ministers report to Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei rather than to him. Being an expert economist, Manmohan Singh understood the harm that the policy of restrictive credit and high interest rates was doing to the Indian economy, yet he was forced to remain a silent bystander while Finance Minister P Chidambaram ( who is much closer to Sonia Gandhi and her family than is Manmohan Singh) orchestrated the RBI policies which began to apply the brakes on economic growth in India.

Naturally, Yaga Reddy became a hero in Europe, including in the UK, because of the benefits that his policy was showering on industry in that continent. By the time he retired in 2008, the once-feared Indian private sector had diminished into a shadow of is previous self, wounded by the policies of its own government. The Finance Ministry and the RBI were fully aware that rising inflation (which they gave as the reason for higher and higher interest rates) was not at all lowered by higher interest rates. Instead, the higher rates fuelled more inflation, by adding to the costs of doing business. This increase was passed on to the consumer, thereby raising prices still more. The increase was promptly used by the RBI to justify still higher interest rates and sharper cutbacks in bank lending, a cycle of disaster that began picking up steam just when the international financial crisis hit in 2008.

Although the RBI has claimed credit for the relatively better health of Indian banks as compared to those in the US or the EU, the reality is that the lack of problems with Home Lending by Indian banks is because there is a sizeable “black money”( ie undeclared) component in the value shown of houses that are mortgaged to the banks for a loan. This underestimation of the money value of houses in India provides a cushion for the banks in case of a fall in house prices, a factor that is not present in economies where 100% of the value of a dwelling is declared to a bank. That India weathered the 2008 crisis better than several other major economies is a tribute to the resilience of the Indian people and to its entrepreneurial community, not to the policies of a government that has been working overtime since 2005 to slow the indian economy down.

In order to ensure the continuation of Finance Ministry control over the RBI, another career civil servant was made Goverrnor of the RBI in 2008,after Reddy finally retired. Duvvuri Subbarao was a former Finance Secretary, used to taking orders from the Union Finance Minister. He has continued, with still greater viciousness, the policy of higher andhigher interest rates and reduction in the flow of credit. To the delight of those VVIPs who want to ensure that Europe and China do not need to feel the pain of competition from India, Subbarao has increased interest rates by as much as thirteen times so far, all in the name of fighting inflation. He has ignored the fact that prices have risen, not fallen, each time he has raised interest rates. After all, he has to fulfill the wishes of those who seek to derail the India growth story. He has to obey those who want to see that Indian industry never emerges as a serios competitor to European and Chinese companies, a job he is carrying out so well that his term in office has been extended from 2011 to 2013.By that time, Reserve Bank of India Governor Subbarao would have succeeded in finishing off several thousand enterprises in India, which are being closed down each week because of the unbearable burden of high interest rates.

The India that was roaring upwards in 2003-2005 is now going downhill, writhing in agony. The Indian growth story has been replaced by steep falls in Manufacturing and even in Services. The only thing growing exponentially is government expenditure. The RBI is merrily printing currency notes to finance the wasteful expenditure of a government that spends more in a single year than others ever did in five. Another “achievement” of Subbarao has been the steady fall in the value of the Indian riupee, which has gone down by 20% in just a year, another factor causing higher rates of inflation. Of course, Subbarao’s political masters do not bother about the falling rupee, because he knows that VVIPs are happy that their Swiss bank deposits get more in rupee terms each time the currency in India gets reduced in value. If the fence begins to eat the crops, what hope is left? When the RBI itself becomes an engine of economic stagnation, India’s once-bright future seems to be darkening.


http://pakobserver.net/detailnews.asp?id=125579

The ISI: U.S. backers run for cover (Gateway House)

18 NOVEMBER 2011

 ,

Gateway House

The 'double-dealing' of the U.S. and Pakistani army - all with the ambition of military dominance - has significantly aided various terrorist groups. After 26/11, there is no place to hide for the Mike Mullens and countless others who have been apologists for the Pakistan army and the state it controls.

BY

 M.D. Nalapat

DIRECTOR, DEPARTMENT OF GEOPOLITICS, MANIPAL UNIVERSITY

In September, the recently-retired U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff, Mike Mullen, warned of the risks to international security because of the propensity of the Pakistan army to back – sometimes covertly, but usually openly – Wahabbi extremist fighters. However, he left unsaid the name of the country that has been most responsible over six decades for causing this risk to develop.

Since the 1950s, the Pakistan army has been, in a significant way, the creation of the U.S. military and intelligence services, including its fraternisation with jihadis. Even as the former admiral was talking of the 'double-dealing' of the Pakistani military, U.S. military and intelligence officers were going through the very same ‘double-dealing’ machinery in order to gain access to elements such as the Taliban. And as before, they were using the Pakistan side to gain information about the country that has become the biggest challenger to U.S. military dominance – China.

Prior to the fall of the Soviet Union in 1991, the U.S. had teamed up with China in encouraging the Pakistan army to weaken its Indian counterpart through non-conventional and clandestine methods. After that, Washington's policy changed to one of benign acquiescence to the ISI's operations in India – even after 9/11. It was only after the 26/11 attacks showed that Western interests were almost as much at risk as India's, that the U.S. began to actually – as distinct from formally – discourage Islamabad from using Wahabbi and other proxies to launch attacks within India. Of course, China's People’s Liberation Army has, to date, continued the policy of seeing in the ISI's antics a useful way of slowing down the progress of a country that it sees as a rival – India.

It was easy to play these games in the early days. Till 9/11, the U.S. regarded Wahabbi-based terrorism as a problem far from home. This perception was shared by many Europeans, even though other manifestations of the scourge had for decades hit the continent, such as the actions of the Basque separatists in Spain or the IRA in the UK. The latter country, in fact, prided itself on the sanctuary it afforded to any extremist who was a self-labelled 'freedom fighter.' To this day, collections are made by citizens of the UK, which are sent directly to organisations active in Kashmir or for the Naga insurgency. The latter is made possible by Anglican church groups which still have collections for ‘charities’ active in Nagaland that oppose Indian ‘domination' – without a peep from Indian authorities.

In the past, a large share of the funds used by the Khalistan movement were formed out of collections made in cities such as Los Angeles and Toronto. In fact, the latter location, together with Paris, was a prime source of funds utilised by the LTTE until its 2009 collapse at the hands of the Sri Lankan army. These days, countries that are more 'progressive' in Europe, notably Norway, have picked up some of the slack, encouraged by a state that believes it has a magic wand that can turn extremists into good citizens in any part of the globe. Flush with cash and with a taste for exotica, Norwegian-funded NGOs have blossomed in conflict locations, usually on the side of those confronting established authorities. Should the Sri Lankan or another government ask Interpol for an international arrest warrant to be issued against those funding and otherwise backing groups engaged in organised violence, it may have some effect on the volume of such 'Good Samaritan' contributions. The Government of India is, of course, far too genteel to even think of such measures, no matter what the havoc such funds collected from the 'civilised world' have done to its internal security.

While others may argue that it is better late than never that the former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff realised the truth about the ISI and the broader Pakistan army, the reality is that the fusion of the military in that country with terrorists has been known across the globe. In its very first war, waged against India over Kashmir during 1947–1948, the Pakistan army relied on irregulars armed by itself to soften up resistance from the forces of the Maharaja of Kashmir. This fact was not unknown to Pakistan's backers in the UN, notably the U.S. and the UK, both of whom succeeded in making a fool out of Indian Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru when the latter placed the issue of Pakistan's aggression before a UN Security Council – a body dominated by those unhappy with his anti-colonial rhetoric and impressed with the effusive promises of Pakistan to remain as loyal a follower of the superior wisdom of the Occident as Mohammad Ali Jinnah was of Winston Churchill.

Sixteen years ago, Gene Madding, an official in the Clinton administration, organised a meeting for this columnist in the innards of the Clinton administration. More than a dozen analysts and officials showed up for the inquisition, and there was a knowing cynicism about the part of the presentation that held the Pakistan military as a pro-terror force. "That's because you're an Indian (that such a point was made),” was the comment of a State Department analyst who was introduced as an expert on South Asia. Despite the first World Trade Centre attack – and its obvious link to Pakistan – the Clinton administration remained in total denial about the actual nature of the only organised military in the world that has 'jihad' as its motto. Small wonder that a year prior to the (1995) meeting, former Assistant Secretary of State for South Asia, Robin Raphel and U.S. Ambassador to Afghanistan Zalmay Khalilzad, had already begun the program of facilitation that ensured the takeover of 86% of Afghanistan by the Taliban in 1996. A check of the output of journalists of that period will show the credulity of the U.S. and UK media of the actions and analysis of Raphel and other Pakophiles within the Beltway.

Faith in the Pakistan military, and in the Wahabbi elements within the ruling elites of the Gulf Cooperation Council countries, comprise the hole in the ozone layer of counter-terrorism strategy – a gap through which numerous terrorist groups and individuals have escaped punishment. Till today, the U.S. hesitates to place international sanctions against even those members of the ISI that the Defense Intelligence Agency and the CIA know are aiding terror groups, in contrast to their zeal against a defanged and collaborative Muammar Gaddafi.

Until the United States accepts that the only path to success in cleansing Afghanistan of significant terror groups is to take the war to the Pashtun areas as a whole, including those located in Pakistan, the Taliban will continue as a potent threat. The former Soviet Union made the mistake of not even trying to interdict weapons and explosives supplies from Pakistan that had been flowing into Afghanistan since 1978. President Obama has been more robust in the drone program than the pro-Pakistani Defence Secretary Dick Cheney, allowed George W. Bush to be. But these attacks – like those on Mumbai – represent only a small fraction of the attention needed to be paid by the Pentagon to the Pashtun territories as a whole. And after 26/11 (which incidentally this columnist was the first to expose as being an ISI operation inUPIAsia.com), there is no place to hide for the Mike Mullens and countless others who have, throughout their careers, been apologists for the Pakistan army and the state it controls.

M.D. Nalapat is the director of the School of Geopolitics at Manipal University in Manipal, India.

http://www.gatewayhouse.in/publication/gateway-house/2611-reflections/isi-us-backers-run-cover