I would hope any cut and paste strategy of our actions after 9/11 would be done selectively. There have been good and bad consequences of the approach the Bush administration took and with a firm view on the effectiveness of the strategies, India should be able to effect similar if not better results. Based on India’s governmental cohesiveness, the first order of business should be a review and overhaul of the primary response mechanism to any disaster, whether it be terror related or not, to achieve a level of confidence for its citizens and foreign visitors. From Zakaria’s The Post-American World, this is a very important step for India to take to begin a firm move onto the world stage as a true global power.

The timeline aspect Dr. Carr brings up is very interesting. In an increasingly fast paced world, things done in the wake of the attacks may achieve the immediate results, but India needs to make sure that it makes for a better future within its borders and with their trading partners. I hope those creating the strategies have in mind the long run, unlike some of those that were involved in the post 9/11 policies.

I do agree with Dr. Carr, in that we need to remove our emotions and be truly objective in finding the best solution to each problem. The hardest part about these events is that each one of them is so unique and each happen under unique circumstances. So even though India is using a strategy that is similar to what the U.S. used after 9/11, India does need to adapt it to fit their needs and circumstances better.

Also it is hard for India because the tensions are very high, and it is hard to please everyone since there are so many people there. No matter what choice the government decides to make, someone will be unhappy with it. We will have to see what exactly the Indian Government decides to do and how it will or will not effect our upcoming trip in June.

I don’t know.

On this one I will follow advice of Zhou Enlai, who was the urbane, handsome, smart, well liked and respected by most everybody, French university educated right hand man of Chairman Mao, when Enlai was asked at a public meeting in the early 1970s, in effect, “What is your assessment of the French Revolution?”

To which he responded: “It’s too early to say.”

Now that, my friends, is a different concept of time and history than we are used to in the West.

To wit, it seems to me that we will need to distance ourselves in emotion and in time to be able to give a fair look at which approach to the war on terror, the hard or soft, has been the best or most effective. In another 25 years, this picture may all look very different to us. In 100 years, even more different.

Interesting, though, to see how India is showing signs of cutting and pasting from our (2001 to 2008) strategic approach and template for dealing with the bad guys.

“Finally, terror will never disappear from India unless authorities find a way to deal with the grievances of minority and economically disenfranchised groups other than by the “blunt instrument” approach the Indian state has used over and over again at every level: Round up a bunch of likely suspects, generally young men. Disappear them in ‘encounters’ with the police or armed forces, or torture and rough them up enough they won’t dare report any abuses.”

Interrogation is an art, best done by professionals with a good grip on human psychology – not gestapos with whips. On a larger scale, terrorism should be dealt with in a more nuanced manner, and not only brute force. I know many people disagree, but it’s hard to argue that our War on Terror has, in fact, reduced terrorism. It’s empowered these radical groups, if anything.

In recent weeks India and Pakistan have amassed their border with troops. We’re lulled into complacency, and tend to think things will work themselves out. But who knows what little spark can ignite a wider conflict. Here’s an interesting NY Times article which explains why the two countries will not go to war. It doesn’t explain how they will diffuse their differences, though:

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/29/world/asia/29india.html?scp=4&sq=pakistan&st=cse