Frenemies – for now

The Chinese have no tradition of imperialism or a history of conquest.

To believe that China is India’s biggest threat is to believe that the Chinese national and State character is changing.

Where is the evidence of this change? Minor border disputes with neighbours?

China’s expansion of naval power? What could be China’s realistic motivations for seeking more naval bases?

Ships from the Chinese Navy patrolling the seas on anti-piracy missions in the Gulf of Aden area for over a year now could not go to the rescue of De Xin Hai a Chinese bulk carrier with a Chinese crew of 25 members transporting coal which was hijacked by a group of Somali pirates 400 miles North-East of Seychelles and taken to the waters off Somalia in October last.

Their demand for ransom was initially resisted by the Chinese. How can China, which views itself as a power on par with the US, pay ransom? The US Navy’s Sea Air Land Commandoes (SEAL) had rescued the master of the US ship “Maersk Alabama” in an operation on April 4,2009. There were similar instances of intervention by the naval special forces of Holland and France.

Independent experts outside China were not hopeful of the Chinese Navy’s ability to intervene. They were certain that the Chinese Navy would ultimately have to cave in to the demands of the Somali pirates. The Jamestown Foundation, a prestigious American think-tank based in Washington DC, had predicted that China was unlikely to use its special forces in a rescue operation because it had too few ships in the area and its ships had no combat experience, especially in dealing with pirates.

Chinese authorities managed to get back their ship and crew from the pirates on December 28,2009, after air-dropping sacks containing US $ four million on board the ship from a helicopter. The pirates collected the money and left the hijacked ship, which is now reported to be on its way back home.

The Chinese Government has so far not told its people that it paid a ransom in order to get the ship and its crew back. The “China Daily” News merely told its readers that the ship had been “successfully rescued”.

Their embarrassing experience with this incident has brought home to the Chinese the limitations from which their Navy suffers.

One of the lessons mentioned by their experts is that the Chinese Navy could not hope to be the equal of its US counterparts unless it had overseas bases in areas of concern.

China already has two options before it—- Gwadar on the Balochistan coast in Pakistan and Hambantota in Sri Lanka. It has already constructed for Pakistan a commercial port at Gwadar, which is now being managed by a Singapore company.

Pakistan would be only too happy to respond positively to any Chinese request for naval base facilities at Gwadar. The only inhibiting factor for China would be the bad security situation in the area due to the ongoing Baloch freedom struggle. From the point of view of security, Hambantota could be ideal for the Chinese, but would the Sri Lankan Government agree to any such proposal if it comes from Beijing? (via Sri Lanka Guardian: China’s interest in naval base: Gwadar or Hambantota or elsewhere?).

History tells us

Instead, look at Western imperialism.

After 500 years of Western imperialism, entire populations and continents have been wasted. Native Americans, Australian aborigines, Africa. This list is just for starters.

US has a significant presence in Pakistan, Afghanistan – and now wanting it in Bangladesh, too.

America’s threat to send its seventh fleet to stop liberation of Bangladesh in 1971 is a known fact. Now, 41 years later – it is America again – which wants to park its seventh fleet in the country – for its strategic interests. Worried by increasing presence of Chinese naval bases in the South China Sea – America now eyes a counter strategy – as it wants an overall presence in Asia – right from Japan to its Diego Garicia base in the Indian Ocean.

This by parking its seventh fleet in a base in Chittagong giving it both an eye on taking on China and a strategic post in Asia as it pulls out of Afghanisthan. The US State Department denying on the record that Hillary Clinton’s visits had anything to do with military co-operation.

This move by America could put India on the back foot if the American fleet moves to Bangladesh, all of India’s security installations will come under the American scanner. Bangladesh is not willing to comment on record even offering explanation to deny the developments. This Clinton visit a more strategic one than just a friendly one- the Indian establishment caught unawares–as this base could cast a shadow on India’s own strategic interests. (via Excl: America eyes Bangladesh- TIMESNOW.tv – Latest Breaking News, Big News Stories, News Videos).

Fox guarding the chicken-coop

China’s diplomatic activity has been under much scrutiny by the West.

There’s been much talk in the media of an apparent offer by the Seychelles of a base for Chinese ships deployed to the Gulf of Aden and the West Indian Ocean, to help combat piracy. China’s Foreign Ministry was quick to state that Beijing isn’t contemplating a military base in for the Seychelles, adding that it wouldn’t “violate” its traditional policy of “not stationing troops abroad.” China began pursuing its so-called “String of Pearls” strategy in the Indian Ocean in 2001 via the commercial route, constructing the Gwadar port. Subsequently, China won contracts to construct ports at Hambantota on the southern tip of Sri Lanka, Chittagong in Bangladesh and Kyaukpyu on the east coast of Burma in the Arabian Sea.

But what’s China’s interest in establishing a base in the Seychelles?

For a start, it satisfies China’s hunger for a firm foothold in the Indian Ocean. The Seychelles provides the PLA Navy an ideal platform from which to counter any threat to its sea lines of communication from Africa by the U.S. Navy operating out of Diego Garcia in the Indian Ocean region. In addition, to assist with the resupply, rest and refit of PLAN ships undertaking anti-piracy duties in the region, China requires a large logistics depot, which can be supplied by air and merchant/naval ships.

Perhaps most significantly, the Seychelles is equidistant from sea lines of control carrying oil from the Middle East and Africa to China, enabling the PLAN to effectively support its merchant vessels in times of crisis. (via China Base a Threat to India Navy? | The Diplomat).

Eternal vigilance, they say

After Sri Lanka refused naval base facilities to the US. A human rights violations censure motion was moved by the US.

Globally, military bases are at

the heart of a global American empire that employs some 1,000 bases outside the United States. Their purpose: To ensure that no matter who governs in Asia, Africa or around the world, the US military would be in a position to “run the planet” from its chain of strategic island bases. (via Chagos: The heart of an American empire? – Opinion – Al Jazeera English).

More than two centuries ago, an American politician noted, ‘eternal vigilance is the price of liberty’.

It is time we believed him.

Oil wealth

The oil riches, glitzy infrastructure boom of the Middle East, after the 1973 Oil Embargo, had a profound effect in Indian Muslims. The new-found power by the Islamic Middle East made the Indian Muslim proud about his religious identity.

For the general Indian, the Middle East was the answer to the slow Indian economy. In an economy of shortages, with an over-valued Indian currency, the Dubai allure was irresistible. It was the passport to wealth and abundance.

Jannat lost?

It took another 10-15 years for Indians to discover the underbelly of Dubai.

To an average Indian, the prospect of slow career growth in Dubai, limited growth opportunities, the discrimination between the Western expatriates and Indians (and others) had a telling – and chilling effect. The Indian-Muslim, expecting a warm welcome in sandy climes, found a sneer instead.

Unfortunate victims in this labour-import by the Middle East, many are in the Saudi Arabia. With a rich Welfare State, high disposable incomes

THE presence of a housemaid in a Saudi house has become inevitable. If this inevitability is not because of her services, then it is because of the need to imitate others. This is a fact that everybody knows. The need for housemaids is connected to the ways Saudis live — women go to work, responsibilities for the social and educational welfare of children, men failing to help with house duties, few day-care facilities for children, large and spacious homes, extended families and increasing numbers of children. The net result is that the majority of families need to have housemaids. The truth of the matter is that some of us need more than one housemaid. (via Saudis and domestic help — ‘maid’ for each other).

This above extract on Middle East does not utter the word India even once – or the abuse of these maids – as another story, from the same publication shows.

But now the 40-year-old woman says her sponsor stopped paying her four months ago and then sold her to a labor placement agency in Riyadh for SR13,000 (about $3,460).

After promising to pay her the back salary, the agency sent her to work for another Saudi family without paying her the promised sum. And she claims her new employer, a Saudi woman, is treating her poorly, such as not paying her a salary, keeping her locked up so she won’t flee and denying her medical attention.

“I’m sick and this woman won’t give me even a Panadol, and she has not given me salary,” Beevi told Arab News.

“There are three other maids here, too: an Indonesian, a Sri Lankan, and one from Morocco. They have not been paid their salaries either.”

If the allegations are true then a number of Saudi labor laws have been violated by Beevi’s first sponsor, the labor placement agent and the new employer.

Besides the obvious illegal practice of not paying a salary, a sponsor cannot sell off an employee to a third party agent. That third party agent is likewise prohibited by law from then hiring out a worker under somebody else’s sponsorship.

The new employer has also broken the law by taking in a worker who is not under her sponsorship. Beevi says she is still under the sponsorship of her first sponsor.

Beevi has complained to the Federation of Kerala Associations in Saudi Arabia (FOKASA), which has filed a petition on her behalf to the Indian Embassy in Riyadh. (via Housemaids bought, sold like chattels | ArabNews).

Welcome to the party

But for Pakistanis the story has been different.

Brought up on a history that glorified Mohammed Bin Qasim, Pakistan’s official history hitched itself to Muslim ‘invaders’ and ‘conquerors’ of ‘idol-worshiping’ India. Even invoked on cricket fields, the Mohammed Bin Qasim narrative gained further strength in Pakistan with the Oil Boom in the Middle East.

From 1975-2005, as India slowly and inexorably pulled away and ahead of Pakistan, this narrative started sounding rather tinny. Further, the plateau and decline of the Oil Boom in the Middle East, diluted the power of this narrative.

What of Pakistani perception of treatment of Pakistanis by the Saudis?

Not very complimentary if this report is anything to go by.

RAWALPINDI: Airport Security Force personnel at the Benazir Bhutto International Airport allegedly entered into an altercation with the military attaché of the Saudi embassy on Thursday, after he refused to cooperate during security checks and abused Pakistan and called Pakistani officials his “servants”.

According to officials from the ASF, Colonel Sukhari, who was meant to fly out to Riyadh, refused to get a routine body check and started quarrelling with the security personnel at the airport.

The Saudi embassy official became abusive and attacked the ASF officials, say eye witnesses. He also abused Pakistanis in general and called them “servant class,” said eyewitnesses.

An official from the Airport Police said the Saudi official started the fight by slapping an ASF official, identified as Idrees. (via Refusing to cooperate: ‘ASF men rough up Saudi embassy official’ – The Express Tribune).

Not surprising this ‘official’ history attracts sarcasm and derision in Pakistan.

For instance this tweet.

Apparently the Saudi Barbarian defence attache called Pakistanis his "servants" in the airport. Is this how one Arab treats another Arab?—
  (@majorlyprofound) June 01, 2012

There’s a near-universal sense of victimhood and betrayal, which overlooks that if Pakistan’s borders are porous with respect to terror attacks on other countries, and its authorities don’t act on this, then ‘national sovereignty’ can’t be a hallowed principle and those borders are liable to be porous in the other direction as well.

Pakistani ire at the bin Laden raid as well as American drone attacks on its tribal territories may, however, have had a paradoxically beneficial effect. America has risen and India fallen in its demonology – facilitating a substantial improvement in India-Pakistan ties. In the long term, that’s the key to a peaceful and prosperous South Asia. (via Our mandarins, their mandarins – The Times of India).

One-way sovereignty?

Pakistani cannot expect its sovereignty and territory to be intact – after terrorists launch attacks on other sovereign nations from Pakistani soil. So, Pakistani ‘outrage’ at Abbottabad seems hypocritical.

Though the implications of Abbottabad for the Indian sub-continent are more ominous.

With Anglo-Saxon Bloc running amuck in Afghanistan and Pakistan, is India immune?

Hindi-Paki Bhai-Bhai?

The recent change in Pakistani mood towards India is only reactionary. Use India to blackmail USA.

Yumm-rika, if you don’t mend your ways, we will mend our relations with India. Then what leverage will you have with us is the the idea behind Pakistani ‘warmth’.

This again for India means, that US and the West will keep the Pakistani dagger against India, sharp and shining.

If not always, for the some time to come.

the squabbling has turned into a crisis (see article) which threatens to make life still worse for the 170m poor Muslims who suffer under one of the world’s worst governments. Since Bangladesh’s political leaders show no interest in their fate, outsiders need to do so.

The outside world is trying to do its bit. The World Bank has scrapped a deal to pay for a big bridge because of its suspicions of corruption. EU ambassadors have denounced the treatment of Mr Yunus and the harassment of activists. Hillary Clinton flew to Dhaka this month to stand by Mr Yunus.

But the government seems unmoved. In a snub to Mrs Clinton, it announced a review into ownership of Grameen, a move to take over (and probably destroy) the bank. The only country to have much influence in Dhaka is India. Until recently the regional superpower tolerated Sheikh Hasina’s excesses, in part because Bangladesh has cracked down on Islamists. India now seems to be hedging its bets between the two parties. But if it still wants to have a functioning democracy next door, it needs to speak out far louder in favour of it. (via Bangladesh’s toxic politics: Hello, Delhi | The Economist).

First …

The Economist is wrong on one count – to start with.

Bangladesh is not exactly the hottest or happening economy in the world – or even the region.

Never was. Can’t get worse for Bangladesh.

In the past, Bangladesh’s political leadership has not displayed the calibre to win anything – except opprobrium. So, the new direction chosen by Bangladeshi leaders can only take Bangladesh up. Is there is a downside.

Talking about ‘political leaders (who) show no interest in their fate, outsiders need to do so’. In a certain part of the world, people have been complaining loudly.

Visibly.

Two …

Across Europe, riots, protests, elections, have only shown that the people of Europe have shown trust or confidence on their leadership.

Looking at Europe’s decline in the last 50 years or even the last 100 years, the lack of trust and confidence is logical. Across the pond, in USA, the Occupy Wall Street (OWS) will soon see its first anniversary on September 11, 2012.

Now compare European leadership with India and China. From historic lows, 100 years ago, even 50 years ago, China and India have assumed positions of significant importance in the world. Going by performance between Western leadership, Indian and Chinese leadership wins hands down.

Time for outsiders from China and India to ‘ensure’ that Europe gets its’ act together.

Three …

That brings us to the third point. Why is The Economist so worried about India having a voice in Bangladesh?

Maybe Bangladesh leadership is more intelligent than Western leadership. Maybe Bangladesh has learned lessons from Pakistan! We have seen how Pakistan has descended into incendiary situation on a permanent basis. Bombs, explosions, guns, assassinations, civil war – all the benefits of Western attention.

Still blame Bangladesh for not wanting the Pakistan Experience?

Cinema in China is booming (see chart). In 2010 box-office revenues grew by 64% to just over 10 billion yuan. More than 520 films were made—about as many as in America. Only India produces more. (via China’s film industry: Kung fu propaganda | The Economist).

What The Economist does not mention is that India alone produces as many as China and US together. And that Nollywood comes in at No.2 position.

An explosion on Aurangzeb Road in New Delhi damaged an Israeli embassy car, and injured its occupants.Tal Yehoshua Koren, the wife of the defense attache at the Israeli embassy was seriously wounded. She is in critical care. She was on her way to pick up her children from their school. It is unusual for a diplomatic vehicle to be attacked on the streets of New Delhi. The Delhi police went into action. The international media wanted to know who had done the attack minutes after it was reported.The police was wary. Let us conduct our investigation, they said. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu went before his parliament and accused Iran of a terrorist act. “The elements behind these attacks were Iran and its protege, Hezbollah.” Iran, he said, is “the largest terror exporter in the world” and Israel “would act with a strong hand.” This was all the confirmation that BBC needed. It began to report the attack as an Iranian act against an Israeli diplomat on Indian soil.

Why would Iran conduct an attack on an Israeli diplomat in India, particularly as India is in the midst of trying to negotiate a delicate arrangement with Tehran to pay for Iranian oil? The question mystifies. (via Asia Times Online :: India’s dilemma: How to pay for Iranian oil).

For more on the Oil-India-Iran-USA matrix, read the first post in the related articles section below – titled Indian diplomacy: Heavy Lifting.

Bad times bring out bad ideas

With the global economy in a slowdown now for the fourth year, there is ‘consensus’ that the ‘government must do something’.

Apart from the problem of economic distortion that State intervention brings, there is an additional problem of consensus on what the governments must do.

Spend more.

The world, eurozone and UK economies are in a far worse state than expected. Yet Mr Cameron insists that “we are moving in the right direction”. Who is this “we”? UK gross domestic product is stuck at 4 per cent below its pre-crisis peak in what is the longest such slump since the 19th century, with no end in sight. Even if one believes that part of the pre-crisis output was an illusion, why should one accept that the UK economy has lost the capacity to grow altogether? How can Mr Cameron believe the economy is moving in the right direction when it is not moving?

As Jonathan Portes, director of the National Institute of Economic and Social Research, argues in a recent blog post: “With long-term government borrowing as cheap as in living memory, with unemployed workers and plenty of spare capacity, and with the UK suffering from both creaking infrastructure and a chronic lack of housing supply, now is the time for government to borrow and invest. This is not just basic macro-economics, it is common sense.”

With real interest rates close to zero – yes, zero – it is impossible to believe that the government cannot find investments to make itself, or investments it can make with the private sector, or private investments whose tail risks it can insure that do not earn more than the real cost of funds. If that were not true, the UK would be finished. Not only the economy, but the government itself is virtually certain to be better off if it undertook such investments and if it were to do its accounting in a rational way.

Yet, instead of taking advantage of the opportunity of a lifetime to repair and upgrade the capital stock, as Mr Portes notes: “Public sector net investment – spending on building roads, schools and hospitals – has been cut by about half over the past three years, and will be cut even further over the next two.”

He recommends a £30bn investment programme (about 2 per cent of GDP). I would go for far more. Note that the impact on the government’s debt stock would be trivial even if it brought no longer-term gains. Indeed, it would be modest at many times this level.

The result is likely to be a permanent reduction in the output of the UK, not to mention permanent damage to a whole generation of the unemployed. I have words for such behaviour. Not on this list is the word “sensible”. (via Cameron is consigning the UK to stagnation – FT.com).

What’s wrong

And the spending must be on ‘productive’ asset building.

Build more schools, roads, bridges, airports, docks, et al. Anything wrong with this, could seem like a valid question.

Plenty. Plenty wrong.

Big Bucks for Big Guys

We already have a situation where a paltry twelve corporate entities control our food supplies, another selected ten control news and thought flows; fewer than ten companies control the global car industry.

How about an interest subsidy of GBP30 billion to small businesses? That will mean GBP600 billion of lending to small business – based on lending equal to 20 times of interest. If it takes GBP100,000 to create a job, we are talking of 6 million jobs – @10,000 jobs for each GBP1 billion.

But this is, I am sure, not ‘possible’. So, lets go back to …

Big Spending …

Who will get the contracts for all these roads, buildings, airports, schools, docks. The same 10-20 major construction corporations that dominate the global economy.

And we will get jobs.

Aren’t we lucky that so many people in the academia and media think about our jobs – and our welfare.

Bilderberg annual meetings are held in Europe – France, Switzerland, Italy, Spain, Denmark, England, Scotland, Norway – this US election year they’re again gathering at the Westfield Marriott Hotel in Virginia from May 30 to June 3. Either they’re very fond of that place… or of US elections… or both…!

A favorite Bilderberg method consists of inviting wannabe future heads of state to their meetings to determine whether they will go along with their agenda. We thus saw George H. W. Bush attend their 1985 meeting, Bill Clinton attend their 1991 meeting, Tony Blair in 1993, and Romano Prodi, former head of the EU Commission, in 1999.

So what exactly is Bilderberg? It’s neither an organization nor a lobby. The “Bilderberg Meetings,” as they dub themselves in their (apparently) official website www.bilderbergmeetings.com, is a “by-invitation-only” club of around 140 very high-power people from business, finance, oil, politics, media, industry, academia and nobility who come together in a very private no-media / no cameras / extremely-tight-security surroundings to discuss… Well… there’s the rub: what exactly do they discuss?

They describe themselves as “a small, flexible, informal and off-the-record international forum in which different viewpoints can be expressed and mutual understanding enhanced. Bilderberg’s only activity is its annual Conference. At the meetings, no resolutions are proposed, no votes taken, and no policy statements issued.”

True enough. Actually, they don’t need to because each individual member’s power is so very vast that whatever they agree will forcefully span the globe through their far-reaching leverage and clout.

Though very high up on the Pyramid, Bilderberg is not the Global Elite’s power center.

Rather, Bilderberg is a key group within a much more vast, more complex, less centralized, and highly effective Global Power Network, where they interact and overlap with other organizations, clubs, lobbies and groups, all having common economic, financial, social and (geo)political objectives in the Globalist Agenda.

This includes such key entities as the New York-based Council on Foreign Relations (long-term geopolitical planners), its London-based sister entity Royal Institute of International Affairs (aka “Chatham House”), RAND Corp., CSIS, the American Enterprise Institute (strategic affairs specialists), Tavistock Institute in London (mass psychology research), the Carnegie Endowment, and the Trilateral Commission “umbrella” entity (founded 1973 by Rockefeller / Morgan / Rothschild interests, geared to coordinating the Americas, Europe and the East).

These so-called “Think Tanks” in turn interact with consultancies like Kissinger Associates, The Carlyle Group (specializing in oil strategies and having the Bush, Bin Laden and Baker families as key shareholders), or Trilateralist Claus Schwab’s World Economic Forum.

Thus, Bilderberg is basically part of that very powerful Global Private Power Web; a “node” so to speak… And a very powerful one at that!!

European nobility regularly attend too: the Dutch Queen, the Spanish King and Queen, Norway’s Crown Prince…

Bilderberg’s high-power participants interact with, and are cross-represented on, the global private power web through membership and directorship in the Trilateral Commission, CFR, AEI, governments, corporations, banks, media and others.

Interestingly, also in attendance are founders and top executives of giant Internet management and intelligence gathering companies as Google, Facebook, LinkedIn and Microsoft. (via Bilderberg power masters meet in the US — RT).

Declared and known

Is there anything that the rich and powerful cannot do? What is not in the public domain?

Salvador Allende, Patrice Lumumba – heads of state have been killed by the US. On any day, today, US Special forces are carrying out some actions in more than 75 countries of the world. Obama’s election was ‘foretold’ by a bestseller – by John Grisham.

So, what is not in the public domain.

Seeing is disbelieving

More than anything else, what makes me disbelieve tales of such ‘organizations’ is the fact that when Fortune-500 is already in existence, when the rich and powerful people meet at Davos openly.

Why would they need such a ‘secretive’ organization?

At all!

Why would the rich and powerful do anything furtively – when they are already doing everything in the open.

Murder, mayhem, poison, maim, torture, imprison, regime change, loot, pillage – everything.

Blatantly.

Old poisons in new bottles

After the end of overt and open Euro-colonialism, we have seen the birth of a covert Pax Americana. As Britain, France and the Dutch vacated colonies in Asia and Africa, America wriggled itself as a replacement.

Using groundless justifications like Domino Theory, creating fears of a Communist takeover (as though Communism was any worse), the US waged wars against recalcitrant countries.

Vietnam, Cambodia, Korea saw close to 5 million people killed. More than a million US soldiers were based in Asia between 1950-1975. Puppet rulers were installed. The USCAP strategy was implemented.

What more can the Bilderbergs discuss?

If all this is done, known – and out in the open.

---

2ndlook at global oligarchy

What You Dont Know and They Wont Tell – Pax Americana

-

Belgium regrets the assassination of Patrice Lummumba

-

War and crimes

Though, in 1995, the women and children of Srebrenica were first removed from the killing grounds by Bosnian Serb troops, though the 8,000 men and boys they killed were a small proportion of the Bosnian Muslim population, it meets the definition. So the trial of Ratko Mladic, the troops’ commander, which began last week, matters. Whatever one thinks of the even-handedness of international law, and though it remains true that men who commissioned or caused the killing of greater numbers of people (George Bush and Tony Blair, for instance) have not been brought to justice and are unlikely to be, every prosecution of this kind makes the world a better place. (via My fight may be hopeless, but it is as necessary as ever | George Monbiot | Comment is free | The Guardian).

Here is an interesting Western debate – between members of self-identified Left. On the issue of genocide.

George Monbiot  of The Guardian tries to persuade Noam Chomsky, John Pilger that the Aboriginal genocide in Australia or the extermination of the Native Americans is somehow equal or problematic as civil war killings by warlords in Balkans and Africa (specifically in Rwanda and Bosnia).

There are two aspects that seem important to me.

One – There is a difference between systematic killings by the State – like in the case of Native Americans, Australian Aborigines, and the killings by factions in a civil war – like in Rwanda and Bosnia. There is also a good case that these two cases of killings (Rwanda and Bosnia) were in fact based on the structures erected and supported by Western imperialism.

Two – A significant difference is status of the killers.

Can a Rwandan warlord who kills nearly a million Africans in a civil war be an equal to a George Bush who initiated war against Iraq based on patently false grounds?

George Monbiot seems to say yes!

A Joint Secretary-rank officer in the Cabinet Secretariat has been found guilty of leaking Army Chief General V K Singh’s letter to Prime Minister Manmohan

Singh about the poor state of preparedness of his force and has been shunted out. A probe into the leakage by the Prime Minister’s

Office (PMO) has also cleared Gen Singh of any wrongdoing in the episode, highly-placed sources told PTI here.

In his letter, the Army Chief had highlighted the critical shortage of equipment and ammunition in artillery and armoured regiments.

The female officer belonging to the Indian Economic Service (IES) was handling the charge of intelligence agencies under the Cabinet Secretariat and was nailed after

interrogation of some suspected persons, they said.

The officer has now been repatriated to her parent cadre and further action can be taken against her for leaking such a sensitive document, sources said. (via ‘Cabinet secretariat officer leaked Army Chief’s letter’ – Hindustan Times).

So, the Govt. has found a ‘fall guy.’ In this case it is a lady.

Why would this lady IES officer leak a document like this – unless instructed?

Instructed by whom?