In the article 'Piracy off Somalia' (December 2008) Andrew Small is right in pointing out that the lawless stretch of coast off east Africa has become the 'crime central' of world maritime trade. Meanwhile, the world seems to be tackling the growing menace with kid gloves.

Instead of going into things like defining piracy or permission to board a pirate vessel, these modern-day Blackbeards should be dealt with firmly, more so because of concerns that their ill-gotten money could be financing Islamist terrorism.

Indian Navy has set a good example on this score. In December its warship INS Mysore prevented pirates from attacking an Ethiopian merchant vessel and took 23 marauders into custody. In November INS Tabar had sunk a ship of pirates and rescued two merchant vessels which were under attack. The pirates don't observe any rules, so you can't fight them with rules. They understand only the language of force. All countries affected by this menace will soon realise there is no other way.

The entry of Blackwater Security Company to provide protection is not a good idea. It could lead to complications. But it is indeed time for a United Nations anti-piracy fleet to be in place.

Romi Kapoor
Mumbai

Tough task

Writing about India in 'Sliding as a soft state' (December 2008) M.J. Akbar notes: 'India is a tough nation. No one should have illusions about that…But under ineffectual governance, particularly in the last few years, a tough country is in danger of degenerating into a soft state.' The writer has a point. Prime Minister Manmohan Singh has excellent credentials as an economist and a human being but he's not the right candidate to handle security matters. To govern a country like India is a tough task and calls for a tough leader. It remains to be seen if the appointment of P. Chidambaram as home minister will make a difference.

Andy Hamilton
London

Overwhelming vote

Since your magazine features India so prominently, and particularly the Kashmir issue, I'd like to make some observations on the first two phases of Jammu and Kashmir assembly elections held late last year.  

The heavy voter turnout in these polls effectively pushed Kashmiri separatists into a corner. The second phase of elections concluded with some astonishing results. If we look at the Pakistani media or views of those who support Pakistan irrespective of what that country has done to the Kashmir dispute, we find that people heeded the call of separatists and resultantly there was a total boycott of elections; and that the Indian Army has only one mission in the state and that is to intimidate and harass innocent people.

But when we look at the other media and speak directly to people on ground a totally different picture emerges, which shows that some sections of the Pakistani media serve just one purpose: and that is to tell lies and hide facts from people as they have been doing to their own people for years on matters concerning Pakistan and its security.

According to BBC correspondent Altaf Hussain, he had 'not seen such long queues for any voting in the past'; and despite cold weather people came out in thousands to vote. In his report, filed November 23, he mentioned long lines of people standing outside polling booths. According to BBC, turnout in voting was 65 per cent.

Another interesting aspect of this election was the attitude of young people, who openly defied separatists' calls for boycott and used their democratic right to vote. People see this as a protest vote against pro- Pakistan leaders who have all along used the Kashmiri struggle to feather their own nests. 

In this context a member of Al- Fatah Force wrote from Bandipora: 'Our leaders Geelani Sahib, Mirwaiz Sahib, Yasin Malik, Javed Mir and others had appealed earlier that people should stay away from these elections but we want to tell them that our people voted not because of the love of pro- Indian leaders but because of the hate of our own leaders.'

Apart form these reports I have personally spoken to many journalists who were monitoring these elections and who confirmed that people have clearly rejected calls of boycott as ordinary masses do not trust those who give calls for boycott. One person I spoke to said, 'It is true we want independence and don't want to be part of India, but by staying away from polling booths we will only strengthen the hands of those who are promoting a Pakistani agenda in Jammu and Kashmir and are getting rewards for this.'

The amazing voter turnout has bewildered everyone. After the 'successful communalisation' of the Kashmiri polity, anti- election leaders and their mentors thought they had won the battle and they were predicting a total boycott and a possible 'bloodbath', which could have helped them garner political gains. Even Indian government officials were worried that the turnout could be low compared to the elections of 2002; and that 'terrorists would stage bloody incidents', which could have embarrassed New Delhi.

The present turnout should also be seen as a protest vote against policies of successive Pakistani governments. Kashmiri youths see Pakistan's Kashmir policy change like the weather changes in England. These youths are incensed with the continued proxy war, proxy politics, forced division and subjugation and want to make their wishes known.

Shabir Choudhry
London

Useful and informative

Getting your magazine by chance, I would like to express my appreciation of it. It seems quite useful and informative, helping to better understand what is happening inside and outside of India.

Roman N. Babushkin
Russian Embassy,
New Delhi

top