[Peace-discuss] Hard to be a satrap today...

[C. G. Estabrook]

But the US is likely to acquiesce on that -- as it is on Indian nukes -- in
order to keep India away from the SCO.  Particularly if it controls Pakistan, as
it's moving to do -- the real point of the Afpak war -- and is able to suppress
Pakistani actions re Kashmir.

US involvement in the region (arrogant or not) will probably not tend to some
sort of negotiated federal solution for Kashmir, which looks like the best
possible outcome. Kashmiris will have to learn that -- as Kissinger said of the
US sellout of the Kurds in Iraq in 1975 -- "Covert action should not be confused
with missionary work."


Robert Naiman wrote:
> The subtext of this, tho, is India's insistence that its policies in Kashmir
> and vis-a-vis Pakistan are off the table for discussion. And that's hardly
> something to celebrate.
> 
> On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 12:02 AM, C. G. Estabrook<galliher at illinois.edu>
> wrote:
>> [The famous diplomat puts a foot (or more) wrong, and reveals what seems to
>>  be a typical US attitude.  The wonderful phrase "signals of hyphenation" 
>> should be saved for future use.  --CGE]
>> 
>> Govt to Holbrooke: Can't just walk in and out of India Indrani Bagchi, TNN
>> 14 August 2009, 04:10am IST
>> 
>> NEW DELHI: Richard Holbrooke, the US special envoy on Af-Pak, is finding
>> the going very difficult when it comes to India. For the second time in a
>> month, Holbrooke has had "scheduling" problems in India.
>> 
>> The foreign office has told Holbrooke in very polite diplomatic terms that 
>> he cannot walk in and out of India at will. Holbrooke, senior officials 
>> said, had a habit of unilaterally deciding when he wanted to come to India 
>> and then demanding to see his top foreign policy interlocutors...