The Kashmir problem is not a problem: The Real Problem is Pakistan,” by Arvind Dayal, The Acorn, http://opinion.paifamily.com/index.php?p=1261#more-1261, 19 February 2005.

The Acorn has an editorial against Pakistan. Not again Pakistani actions, or deeds, or interests — attacking the concept of the subcontinental Islamic Republic itself

“The fault lies in ourselves, dear Brutus, not in our stars”….By now it should have been clear to us in India and especially to those who rule this country that there is only one solution to the Kashmir ‘problem’. But before that we need to understand that there is no Kashmir problem. If at all there are problems they are akin to perhaps, the Telengana ‘problem’, the Bihar ‘problem’ the Nagaland ‘problem’, no more and may be less. The real problem simply is Pakistan.

Peaceniks on both sides of the border cite the wonderful closeness of the peoples of India and Pakistan. Culturally, religion-wise, culinary habits, ties of blood, even the potatoes in the mandis. What, then, could be better than to cement these ties permanently? Ergo, the only solution of the Pakistan problem is the dismantling of the State of Pakistan, that is, the reunification with India of the provinces of Sindh, Baluchistan, Punjab, NWFP and the ‘tribal’ areas. The end to a blighted, bloody and irresponsible experiment foisted upon us by the hurriedly exiting British. No doubt aided and abetted by our early leaders, naïve and unlettered as they were in statecraft, and the urgent agenda of a dying Mohammed Ali Jinnah seeking political immortality.

With the above as a backdrop India must not be misguided into entering into any more fruitless dialogue with Pakistan. Shimla, Lahore, Agra, and back to Shimla, and then perhaps Islamabad? These dialogues are used by the Pakistani leadership merely to buy time and to squeeze more dollars out of the Americans. If the Americans are content to be conned it’s their business, but for us in India, time means the further loss of lives. More Indians dead every week, every month, and every year. And money. Billions spent on arms and weaponry. Time and money, which could be used to improve the economic conditions of the people not only of Kashmir, but of the entire nation.

Pakistan has been less helpful than Iran in the GWOT twice over. First, the ISI must be considered a dysfunctional part of al Qaeda. Second, Pakistan fails a still more fundemental test: fraying rule sets. Pakistan falls steadily behind her sister India in globalization, and the corrupt education policies of Islamabad promise that this will continue for at least a generation.

The best way forward for east German was a united German. The best way forward with North Korea is a united Korea. The best way forward for Pakistan is a united India.

“Iraq Withdrawal Date Would Be Mistake-Sen. Clinton,” Reuters, http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=domesticNews&storyID=7682004&src=rss/domesticNews, 20 February 2005 (from DU).

The news itself merely continues the saga Hillary the Sane in the American Tory Party:

Setting a timetable for the withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq would offer a “green light” to the insurgency there and could undermine the fledgling Iraqi government, U.S. Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton said on Sunday.

“I think it would be a mistake,” she said on NBC’s “Meet the Press” program. “We don’t want to send a signal to the insurgents, to the terrorists, that we are going to be out of here at some date certain.”

“I think that would be like a green light to go ahead and just bide your time,” the New York Democrat said.

Aside from the strange use of “date certain,” instead of “certain date,” nothing else is new. I won’t be voting for Madame Clinton, but she is a basically good persona and basically good politican.

But considering some Democratic Underground comments, Hil is my kind of gal!

First, the most coherent reply:

she’s not the messiah folks…she’s a DLC centrist establishment Democratic socialite of the upper-class rich of this nation.

She’s not with the people…she’s not concerned with doing “the right thing”…and people should stop placing faith in her to “lead us out of the wilderness”.

and Mrs. Clinton forgets that those insurgents will be there when they do leave…it’s not like by not announcing the date, they are going to give up because they never know when the U.S. is leaving.

Clinton, in a circular way, is actually revealing the unassailable logic of the Iraq War (which dictates that the insurgency will win). Sooner or later, the U.S. will have to leave…the patience of the Shiites has worn thin..and only through their moderation has the United States even been able to stay in Iraq. If Sen. Clinton thinks that the U.S. will have a comfortable stay in Iraq until the time to leave…she’s crazy.

And some funnier ones:

Why look, she took money from the PACs of both General Electric and Northrop Grumman.

Gee, there couldn’t be any conflict of interest between those wanting to continue the war and receiving “defense” contractor money at the same time, right?

and

Hillary Clinton: war criminal.

Her whole-hearted embrace of the slaughter in Iraq places her on equal moral footing with Powell, Rice, Rumsfeld, Cheney, Bush.

It is one thing to have been grotesquely wrong about Iraq, as Hillary was from the start. But to compound that failure by continuing, in the face of all evidence, to support this murderous war…

…well, Hillary, you’re simply a collaborator.

and

Referring to insurgent strategy concerning a date for U.S. withdrawal:

“I think that would be like a green light to go ahead and just bide your time,” the New York Democrat said.

What, exactly, would it mean for the insurgents to “bide their time”?

Does that mean they would hold off making major attacks until after U.S. troops left? If so, wouldn’t that give reconstruction efforts and the fledgling Iraqi government the opportunity to make some progress?

The last thing the insurgents want is to let up and give their foes a chance to establish stability or something approaching security and normality.

The “bide your time” argument is a transparently illogical excuse for keeping a permanent U.S. presence there. What Miz Clinton and others are trying to establish is a conventional wisdom that rejects any firm committment to exit Iraq.

and

Sad but true

Future of world peace lies with US empire collapsing ASAP. And the future of American people lies with progressive anti-corporate forces left of the corrupt two-party system.

“How Many Methods Are There to Enact a New Constitution in Iraq?,” by Andrew Arato, Informed Consent, http://www.juancole.com/2005/02/how-many-methods-are-there-to-enact.html, 21 February 2005.

I have been blogging both here (and here and here), and on John Tabin‘s site, that no ratification is needed for the new Iraqi constitution. Today, Juan Cole runs an editorial on the same theme

In the meantime however it could be also amended, in part or as a whole. Its amendment rule requires ¾ of the votes of the National Assembly, plus the agreement of all three members of the Presidency Council (who were picked by 2/3 of the assembly). (Art. 3A) A UIA led coalition with the Kurdish Alliance (with obvious allies) would have about 215-220 votes, well over the required ¾, and all they would have to make sure is to elect in advance by 2/3 a friendly three member Presidency Council amenable to such purpose. Such an amendment process may simply improve upon the TAL, currently much too sketchy and even contradictory to be of use for the longer run.

But the approach could go so far as to replace the TAL altogether by an entirely new constitution, along with a new amendment rule, and a new constitution making procedure or no new constitution making procedure at all if the ruling coalition so wishes. This is so in spite of the fact that the TAL has some supposedly unamendable provisions. The careless framers forgot to make Art 3A, the amendment rule itself unamendable, and after it were suitably amended, everything else could be changed as well.

(Remember: Any action by the Bush administration that supports democracy is “careless.” True statesmen realize democracy can never work in the Mid East)

There are few artists quite like swaydo-Islamist Muslimgauze, and there are few Muslimgauze tracks quite like Hindu Kush Opium Crop

I can hook anyone up with the mp3, but can this possibly be the spoken words for HKOC?

He is welcome, always always
I like to see you always please
Print Media [???]
I am gone right now so [???]
We have a policies
about Saddam Hussein
Kill Him
Kill Him Desperately
Kill His [???]
[???] an investment bank
Yeah, he has money and everything
Everything
(repeat)

Off to UNL for the day… back late tomorrow

“Women’s Law Journal changes name,” by
Naomi Schoenbaum and Katie Wiik, The Record, http://www.hlrecord.org/news/2005/02/17/News/Letter.To.The.Editor.Womens.Law.Journal.Changes.Name-869065.shtml, 17 February 2005 (from The Volokh Conspiracy).

This is a landmark year for our Journal. After publishing for twenty-seven years as the Harvard Women’s Law Journal, we have now become the Harvard Journal of Law & Gender. Our new name does not signal a change in our Journal’s content. Rather, it reflects our long-standing commitment to publishing diverse feminist scholarship that approaches gender as an axis of power within law and throughout society.

Choosing the Harvard Journal of Law & Gender as our new name indicates our unwillingness to rely upon essentialist arguments based on biological sex or to demarcate any set of issues within the legal terrain as exclusive to women. At the same time, problems that disproportionately affect women are gendered issues, and as such, they will continue to be the central focus of our Journal. Our new name also more broadly encompasses our concerns with other mechanisms of power — such as race, class, and sexuality — that intersect with gender in rich and complicated ways.

Ah… academia… where I shall soon be returning…