rajiv gandhi saw pakistan as buffer against ussr

[jamahir]

Rajiv Gandhi regarded Pakistan as 'strategic buffer' against USSR: CIA document
Sep 01, 2015

• Rajiv Gandhi was the seventh Prime Minister of India (Photo: PTI/File)

Washington: Contradicting perceived proximity to the Soviet Union in the Cold War era, India under the then Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi had toyed with the idea of supporting anti-Russian civilian groups in Pakistan if the then Zia regime was thrown out by Moscow, a recent declassified CIA document has claimed.

According to CIA documents of the era, which were recently declassified and posted on the CIA website under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), which is similar to India's Right to Information Act, Gandhi wanted non-interference from both the United States and the then USSR. "Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi would like both the USSR and the United States to end their involvement in South Asia," noted the 31-page CIA document titled 'The Soviet Presence in Afghanistan: Implications for the Regional Powers and the US'.

While taking note of the historic India-USSR relationship in particular in the defence field, the CIA report of April 1985 noted that India is likely to become increasingly concerned about long-range Soviet intentions in the region and could find itself moving towards confrontation with the Soviets if Pakistan was effectively neutralised.

"New Delhi regards Pakistan as a strategic buffer against the USSR and would oppose Moscow's effort to dominate Pakistan. New Delhi and Moscow would find themselves supporting rival factions within Pakistan," said the report, according to which Moscow had plans to change the regime in Pakistan and extend its influence beyond Afghanistan. In that case, the report said, "The Indians would seek to significantly reduce their dependence on Moscow and reorder their strategic relationship with the USSR, the United States and China if they perceived Soviet ambitions as extending beyond Afghanistan toward the subcontinent."

According to the report, the Soviets tried to heighten India's suspicion about Pakistan's intentions and its security relationship with the US in order to foster Indo-Pakistani tensions and heighten New Delhi’s dependence on Moscow. "In Soviet view, conflict between India and Pakistan would work toward solving Moscow's Afghan problem and would give Moscow opportunities to strengthen its position in South Asia," the report said.

"If (Gen) Zia (Ul Haq) regime were to fall, the Indians might try to prevent Soviet attempt to dominate Pakistan by supporting rival Pakistani political factions, Soviet military moves against an already neutralised Pakistan could even result in military confrontation with India," it added.

Six months later when Gandhi was planning to meet General Zia on the sidelines of the UN General Assembly meeting in New York, the CIA analyzed that the then Indian Prime Minister, despite his strong public views on Pakistan's nuclear weapons program, was unlikely to push him hard on it. "Gandhi is unlikely to push Zia hard about the Pakistani nuclear program, although he probably will at least mention his continuing concern," noted the top secret CIA document dated October 21, 1985.

"For his part, Zia is also likely to propose ideas on ways to improve the bilateral relationship. He may suggest regular high-level diplomatic talks in addition to the formal Joint Commission sessions that focuses on trade, communications and cultural exchanges," the report said. "Zia may also solicit Gandhi's views on whether as the Pakistanis believe the Soviets are becoming serious about a negotiated settlement in Afghanistan," it said.

---------
source - Rajiv Gandhi regarded Pakistan as 'strategic buffer' against USSR: CIA document | The Asian Age

 

[indianBong]

well... if we see it other way.... india did not want pakistan proximity with ussr as then india will loose help of ussr in future war with pak.....

 

[jamahir]

well... if we see it other way.... india did not want pakistan proximity with ussr as then india will loose help of ussr in future war with pak.....

not really... indian establishment and military were reluctantly friends with ussr since nehru... indian economic/political system was never consistent with societies which were loosely/intimately part of the eastern bloc.

was india like iraq or venezuela or north korea?? it was not... india, establishment/military wise, has always been a western bloc member.

pakistani military in the 50's had elements which almost overthrew the pakistani west-leaning civilian government.

The Rawalpindi Conspiracy (also known as the Rawalpindi Conspiracy Case) was an attempted Soviet-backed coup d'état against the government of Liaquat Ali Khan, the first Prime Minister of Pakistan in 1951. The conspiracy was the first of many subsequent coup attempts against elected governments in the history of Pakistan.[1] The coup was planned by Major-General Akbar Khan, a senior commander in the Pakistani army in conjunction with other military officers and left-wing Pakistani politicians.[1]

it is these elements that rajiv gandhi feared.

 

[nForce]

@jamahir is money important ? Is capital important?

 

[jamahir]

@jamahir is money important ? Is capital important?

in the present situation...

...money is important to the extent that (a). it does not become the decider of fundamental necessities ( water, electricity, housing, education, medicine, food ), (b). it does not become a commodity over which people should compete.

...money should be a resource which (a). should not be earned by citizens for the sake of earning a living, (b). is available as a simple and easily obtainable resource which brings more comfort in what is already a comfortable-for-all society, (c). is available from the state as funding for citizens to develop their ideas.

this will more easily lead to the next step in economics - no economics.

 

[nForce]

@jamahir what, according to you is the definition of money ?

 

[jamahir]

@jamahir what, according to you is the definition of money ?

hmm, definition i don't know right now but i can point to its origin.

in the old days, a goods or services barter system was in place, where a party had something in surplus, or wanted something for immediate/future use, would go to another party and offer what goods or services he had and would in turn get what he desired... .. the desire was to have get something by offering something because the society was not scientific therefore "get for free" was not thought.

this primitive barter system was direct but was inefficient... maybe what he had was not required by the other party or maybe the other party desired more.

this necessiated the introduction of more negotiable items whose value was known widely... these items were precious stones, gold, silver, jewellery, others precious metals.

this system functioned well when a society was a village or a town and a citizen went to other lands as well.

but when kingdoms started and made way for empires, it was thought that a newer form of agent-item would make exchange of goods and items within a realm easier and more efficient... this became the money system, originally made in precious metal but in china introduced as a paper item.

it was also wrongly thought that this agent-item ( money ) when deposited in a centralized place and under control of the ruler would help compare the importance of a kingdom or empire with other kingdoms and empires... i speak of the monetary wealth of a king or emperor in the treasury which need not translate into comforts for the citizens there.

you asked for a definition which i did not have... you can perhaps use the above with your own thoughts and research to arrive upon a definition... i may have missed out some things in the above... maybe "the capital" by karl marx may have a definition... that book is full of mathematical equations so i have not read it.