I know your tricks and my security has been warned to catch you and hold your arms. We all know you are a note-bandit and steal-notes as well as steal pockets when you hug people. Many dignatories reported missing wallets and money when you hugged them as you were a pocketmar before becoming a politician that is why you steal money through various means. You also steal peoples money throug overcharging taxes.
The city plan of New Delhi (the area surrounding Rajpath) was made by the British architect Edwin Lutyens. Rajpath (then called King's Way or Kingsway by the British) was of central importance to the plan. Lutyens wanted a panoramic view of the city of Delhi from the Viceroy’s palace. Most of the buildings surrounding Rajpath, were designed by Lutyens and Herbert Baker.
Re: Rajpath and The British
by Confused Mind on Jan 25, 2015 04:59 AM
The Rashtrapati Bhavan, the official residence of the President of India. It was the Viceroy's residence before India got its independence from Britain. India Gate is India's war memorial arch in honour of those who died in the First World War and the Second Anglo-Afghan War. It is also India's memorial of the unknown soldier.
Why not 1.25 billion start licking the rajpath clean to show how much you are obliged to Obama for this visit? There is a reason you are called third world slaves, and that is not going to change in the next 5 million years.
Re: Why not lick the rajpath clean
by Confused Mind on Jan 25, 2015 04:55 AM
Thank the British for colonization that civilized India significantly and the process is still going on. Spirituality is a big hoax. It is over-glamorized in 3rd world countries like India, which rarely has any performers like Olympic athletes, scientific innovations, engineering feats or medical wonders, but a balm to appease the churn of mediocrity by the thousands.
Indians have gotten so used to freebies, getting somethig for nothing, that they even expect it to spill-over into the realm of international relations...Wrong!!! No one gets anything for free...you have to give something to get something...which means, pragmatism and flexibility must become the new order of things.
The trouble is President Obama used the same phrase for not only India-US relation but also China-US relations. Blame it on his speech writers!
US invests heavily on its hidden persuaders, and these motivated folks often do more harm than good. Already too much of hype is built up in Indian news channels, and probably there are few plants as well to build up interests. Such verbiage may queer pitch, and got to be resisted.
There is lot more at stake for both nations and for the free world. The context of Russia, China, EU, Japan and SAARC nations pose different kind of challenges which has made it difficult for Indo-US relationship to realize its scope. By making a mere spectacle of visit is a risk which is much too high. Wish this could have a defining impact as Indo-Soviet friendship treaty had on India. But it looks like US is simply not ready to take it much above hype value.
Our President Obama is fighting a bitter political battle with Republicans and he can hardly deliver anything in law making unless he makes serious and probably unacceptable concessions in domestic policies, i.e. Unacceptable to Democrats. This limits his scope for negotiations considerably.
Re: defining partnership of the 21st century
by Ramesh on Jan 20, 2015 05:32 PM
Our President has defined himself more as a politician than a statesman in domestic polity. He has been unable to rise to, or most probably unable to elevate himself to bipartisan mode in domestic arena. He did try to be statesman like but Republicans were simply too vicious to him, and still are.
As Prof. Krugman recently wrote, politics disregarded facts even! Given this backdrop, to expect bickering US politicians to provide a united, bipartisan platform to President Obama on Indian policy seem far fetched. But you never know!
Re: Re: defining partnership of the 21st century
by Ramesh on Jan 21, 2015 05:32 AM
In this excellent overview the Indian predicament and constraints in handling the complex relationship has been outlined. One critical issue both in the economic and security context is IPR.
Indian stand about being in conformity with WTO-TRIP needs careful reconsideration. If the intent is to seek special technology and investment access in bilateral mode from US and Allies who comprise its industrial ecology, think it is very reasonable to expect that legal infrastructure would have additional domain protection responsibilities.
Think IPR would signal real intent for a legal market economy in consonance with developed democracies. It would probably be as impactful as Indo-Soviet friendship treaty. This agreement is likely to receive bipartisan consensus in US as well.
Re: Re: Re: defining partnership of the 21st century
by Ramesh on Jan 21, 2015 05:56 AM
Hopefully the sales pitch would explain the case for IPR lucidly and be able to overcome rhetoric of making a concession when in fact it is a reciprocal agreement which protects rights of all signatories equally.
Re: Re: Re: Re: defining partnership of the 21st century
by Ramesh on Jan 21, 2015 06:21 AM
IPR is not a big ticket item, hence not visible to public. It is more like planting a seed. Thereafter it needs watering and nurturing, and has to pass through sapling phase. The commitment required to make it work is considerable and for the long haul.
Whether the promise of IPR as enabler of Indian development is for experts to judge, from outside it seems to be so. We can only hope that per India first criteria, this matter receives due consideration and is not falter due to ideological reason.
