Something’s rotten in Sonia’s Delhi – N.S. Rajaram

Pakistan Exposed!

Dr. N.S. Rajaram“Following their return from Pakistan Sarabjit Singh’s relatives have charged that the Sonia-Manmohan Singh Government failed to support them and put no pressure on the Pakistani Government to stop its atrocities. This is consistent with Sonia Gandhi’s decades-long deference to Islamist forces even in the face of the most severe provocation. This weakness has come to haunt India with Chinese squatting on Indian soil and Pakistanis butchering Indians.” – Dr. N.S. Rajaram

Sarabjit Singh's sister Dalbir KaurI refer to Sarabjit Singh’s sister Dalbir Kaur’s charge on her return from Pakistan that the Indian Government is not supporting her by putting pressure on Pakistan. Others have also noted this Government’s soft attitude towards Pakistan (and other anti-India outfits) in the face of the most appalling atrocities. Even this is only a symptom of a much deeper malaise.

One can ignore Manmohan Singh who is a voluntary nobody propped up by Sonia Gandhi. He has no mind or spirit of his own, but a willing minion of 10 Janpath. So we must look beyond him into 10 Janpath itself and examine the antecedents of its occupants to decipher this persistent pro-Pakistan, pro-Islamist trend in the Sonia – Manmohan Singh policy.

An examination of her record over the years shows that Sonia Gandhi has never openly criticized Pakistani aggression or even Pakistan sponsored terrorism. This was so even during the Kargil War when she was anything but supportive of the Indian Armed Forces waging a life-and-death struggle against the Pakistani intruders. This is not a new development and Islamist forces have taken advantage of her reluctance to criticize them. As far back as 2001, within weeks of the 9/11 attacks, the Bin Laden family founded Oxford Centre for Islamic Studies invited Sonia Gandhi to deliver a lecture. Many found it strange, for the BJP was in power and Mrs. Gandhi has no credentials to justify the invitation (other than her willingness to speak).

Sonia GandhiHere is what I wrote in 2005, in a two-part article published in American Thinker, “Sonia Gandhi’s Reluctant War on Terror”  Part 1 and Part 2

As just noted, the most curious thing was her talk given at the Oxford Centre for Islamic Studies, a task for which she was by no stretch of the imagination qualified. Here is my summary of her performance at the event:

“In her talk titled ‘Conflict and Coexistence in our Age‘, Mrs. Gandhi spoke  vaguely about extremism and fundamentalism, ‘of all religions’ without once mentioning the word Jihad or terrorism. Mrs. Gandhi has never once uttered the word ‘Jihad’ or mentioned Islamic terror in public even though India is one of the worst victims of Jihadi terrorism. The Telegraph of London called it a ‘strongly pro—Muslim speech.’

“Mrs. Gandhi is not an Islamic scholar—she has not even graduated high school. There was no reason for her to be invited to such a high profile institution, at such an inopportune time (November 2001) except its propaganda value. This proved suicidal for her party in the Gujarat state elections where the Congress was trounced. Adding to her troubles was a terrorist attack on a train that killed scores of passengers, mostly women and children. There again she failed to denounce Islamic terror.”

It was the same story again when on July 5, 2005 (two days before the London bombings) a band of Muslim terrorists armed with grenades and AK 47 rifles attacked a temple complex at the sacred Hindu site of Ayodhya. Thanks to the vigilance and the speedy response of the security forces, all the terrorists were killed before they could do serious damage. Still there was a gun battle lasting hours and a soldier was killed, but the intended holocaust of Hindu devotees was averted.

Teesta Setalvad: Professional liar and perjurer.Mrs. Gandhi did not outright condemn the terrorist attack. All she did was to issue a weak statement appealing to the people to “stand as a rock against the divisive forces.” As was the case after the London blasts, there was talk of “backlash.” Teesta Setalvad, a Muslim activist close to Mrs. Gandhi cautioned that the attack on the Ayodhya temple should not be labeled as Jihad. (Sic: Should it be labeled as a tea party?) As usual, Mrs. Gandhi did not use the word Jihad.

Her appeasement policy came to the fore again in a human rights case that drew international attention. When Imrana, a young Muslim woman was raped by her father-in-law, a self-appointed Muslim body calling itself the All India Muslim Personal Law Board, issued a ruling that the rape had made Imrana ‘impure’ (haram) and that her marriage to her husband therefore stood annulled. Adding insult to injury, it directed Imrana to leave her husband and live with her rapist father-in-law as one of his wives!

There were protests all over India and the whole world reacted with shock. Salman Rushdie, himself a victim of religious persecution, wrote an op—ed in The New York Times (July 10, 2005) denouncing Islamic courts and the Sharia (Islamic law) called “India and Pakistan’s Code of Dishonor”.

In the midst of the storm, Mrs. Gandhi refused to intervene or even condemn it. Instead, she directed her government’s law minister H.R. Bharadwaj, said to be her closest advisor, to issue a statement exonerating the Muslim Personal Law Board—saying that the government could not “interfere” in a religious matter.

So her reaction in face of the Pakistani barbarism is consistent with her record of handling provocations by Islamic outfits with kid gloves. Her conduct in the face of Pakistani atrocities against Indian prisoners is consistent with her decades old pattern of deference Sarabjit Singhtowards provocation by Islamist outfits including Pakistan. It is not something to be seen in isolation.

Clearly her concern for not offending such groups is overriding her concern for India’s national interest—assuming she has any. The same is true of her son Rahul Gandhi who has been propagating the view that Hinduism represents a greater threat to security than terrorist outfits like the LeT, etc—all the while being protected by security guards who are mostly Hindu. (The same holds for his mother.)  But he seems to have mental deficiencies with no assets beyond birth and (ill-gotten) wealth and is not taken seriously. It is a different matter with Mrs. Gandhi and Dr. Manmohan Singh.

She and her family now enjoy security guards provided by the Government. She will lose this protection once the coalition government falls. Has this made her go soft in the face of provocation by Islamic fundamentalist forces? This vulnerability and its potential impact on the global war on terror, not to mention India’s national security is something that all of us need to know and understand.

This cannot be said of Manmohan Singh. At this time in his life he should be thinking about his place in history. Unlike Sonia Gandhi and her family and friends– from Quattrocchi to Robert Vadra—one expects him to be dedicated to India, not to a neo-rich family that has propped him up because he has a supple backbone. He needs to decide how he wants to go down in history– as a national leader or as the Manmohan Singhdomestic minion of a neo-rich family rapidly descending into a cesspool of disrepute and disgrace.

But the conduct of Sonia Gandhi in the face of Pakistani atrocities is enough to raise questions about her motives and agenda in India and her attitude towards national security. At the very least she should address the nation and declare unequivocally where she sees her interests lie: in India which has given her everything while getting little in return (other than rapacious friends and relatives)—or appeasing Pakistan and the Jihadi forces that have sworn to destroy India and with it everything Sonia Gandhi has gained.

In the final analysis no individual is above the nation—or every individual is. National security cannot be sacrificed on the altar of insecurity of a privileged few. India’s enemies are taking advantage of the spinelessness of the Sonia—Manmohan Singh Government. Chinese are squatting on Indian soil while Pakistan is butchering Indian citizens. In the face of this Mrs. Gandhi must stop playing the Sphinx; she should come out and spelling out her policy on Jihadi terrorism and national security. People have seen enough of her veil of Sphinx-like silence and are now beginning to see through it. – Folks, 2 May 2013

Chinese invade Ladakh!

4 Responses


    IS this is good archives about conversions in TN. Requires patience to go thru the entire document.


  2. Subramniam Swamy rightly says Indian politicians can not take steps against the rouge state Pakistan. The reason is almost all politicians have black money in foreign banks. They transfer their ill got money to foreign banks via Dubai and Dubai is under the control of the infamous ISI. Now, ISI has every details about black that the anti-national politicians have in foreign banks. So it becomes easy for the ISI to black mail the corrupt Indian Politicians.


  3. Dr. Rajaram has done well to document Sonia Gandhi’s studied indifference to the threat posed to India by jihadi terrorism in particular and prophetic Islam in general. Ditto for proselytizing Christian missionaries. The truth is she could not care less. She has no stake in India as we know it.

    The fault, however, lies as much with us as with her. If we Indians have enough number of fools among us who place such a corrupt and dangerous character on a high pedestal and provide her unbridled power without a trace of accountability on the top of immense ill-gotten wealth, why should she not enjoy all this?

    By the way, I like the learned Doctor’s description of Gandhis as the “neo-rich family rapidly descending into a cesspool of disrepute and disgrace.” A small correction. They are not exactly neo-rich. The last Nehru who worked for a living was Motilal. All his successor generations have had a good time at the expense of Indian taxpayers.

    The party has lasted so long that they now come to regard it as their birth right.


  4. Implications of the Sarabjit Singh episode for India – Rajeev Sharma – Firstpost India – May 2, 2013

    The death of Sarabjit Singh in a Pakistani hospital, announced in the wee hours of 2 May, conveys a dangerous portent to the Indian strategic establishment at a time when the ongoing Chinese incursion in Depsang Valley of Ladakh has already entered its third week.

    It conveys that the much-feared pincer threat to Indian geopolitical interests from Pakistan and China may well become a reality in the near future if India does not take effective preventive measures in double quick time.

    Sarabjit’s death is nothing but an extra judicial killing, possibly choreographed by Lashkar-e-Toiba (LeT) and Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP). Of the two Pakistani non-state actors, the former has been a major bug bear for India for a long time, while the latter has been Pakistan-centric in its terrorist activities. The two outfits’ cadres possibly acted in unison in the murderous assault on Sarabjit on 26 April in Lahore’s Kot Lakhpat jail while the jail officials turned a blind eye to the attack.

    Sarabjit was no ordinary prisoner in Kot Lakhpat, a jail meant to lodge four thousand prisoners but is housing over 17,000 prisoners. He was on death row which means a separate cell for him and very difficult and multi-layered system for his access. There is no way that the seven attackers (two of whom supposedly have links to terror organisations) armed with iron rods, bricks and other improvised weapons could have gained access to him without the jail officials themselves flinging his cell doors open for the marauders.

    The colluding jail officials could not dare to do what they did in normal circumstances. But then these were hardly ‘normal’ circumstances and hawks in the Pakistani defence establishment (read the notorious Inter Services Intelligence) were baying for Sarabjit’s blood and score a brownie point over the Indians after the hangings of Ajmal Kasab (21 November, 2012) and Afzal Guru (9 February 2013). Therefore, once the powerful military establishment of the country decides that Sarabjit has to be expended, all it required to do was to give a hands-off signal to the Kot Lakhpat jail officials as their agents masquerading as prisoners finish the job.

    It will be interesting to see what happens to Sarabjit’s seven attackers. No, no, this writer is not talking about whether any action would be taken against them. India should not entertain such thoughts even though the Ministry of External Affairs has demanded that the Pakistani government conducts a thorough investigation to identify those responsible for the attack and ensure that they are punished.

    This is not going to happen. The most likely scenario is that the seven attackers will simply melt into thin air, sooner or later. Indian intelligence apparatus will do well to keep a hawk’s eye on the whereabouts of Sarabjit killers and dig up an entire data base on them. These seven killers are the only route available for India to build up a dossier on them, collect clues (if possible, evidence, which obviously would be like pinching a hair of the moustache of a sleeping lion) and expose Pakistan before the international community.

    Implications of LeT-TTP combination for India

    Now let us turn to the original point: how the use of the LeT-TTP combination for carrying out Sarabjit’s extra judicial killing can a bad portent for India.

    This writer is not aware of a single joint operation by the LeT and the TTP against Indian interests. The question is: whether a nuptial of sorts has been performed by the two Pakistani non state actors or whether it was just a one-off arrangement cobbled up by their mentors in the Pakistani military establishment to hit at Indian interests?

    The LeT and the TTP are radically different in their approach and ideology. The LeT is turning global while keeping its anti-India operations very high on their agenda. The TTP, on the other hand, has of late emerged as Pakistan’s single biggest security nightmare which is ironically nurtured and replenished in Pakistan’s areas bordering Afghanistan.

    Their getting together, even if for a one-off India-specific operation, would not have gone unnoticed by the Indian intelligence establishment. A question worth examining would be whether Pakistani military establishment has brokered some secret deal with the TTP or some elements of the TTP.

    The China factor

    Now couple it with obscure Chinese moves vis a vis India in the recent years which have been like an iceberg constantly expanding under water. The Chinese incursion in Lepsang Valley of Ladakh since 15 April may well be just a tip of this dangerous iceberg.

    The Chinese have for some years silently knocked off the western sector boundary from the Sino-Indian boundary disputes talks. China has unilaterally rewritten the ground rules for the boundary talks with India and excluded Jammu and Kashmir from the total length of Line of Actual Control, thus clearly questioning Indian sovereignty on Jammu and Kashmir.

    The Sarabjit issue and the ongoing Chinese incursion in Ladakh are not inter-related per se. But the two developments ring an alarm bell for the Indian strategic establishment. Are China and Pakistan working in tandem and moving in a pincer formation to increase the heat on India?

    >> The writer is a Firstpost columnist and a strategic analyst. He can be reached at:


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: