Pakistan, ISI, and the US ...

Interesting topic, eh? Well ... read on! There was an interesting article in the ToI today, about Bush ticks off Pak PM ... ... Interesting reading. What this brings out is the fact that there is much more than catches the eye. Or, for that matter, much more than what comes out.

This article represents ample admission from the United States that Pakistan is, willingly or otherwise, backing, in some form or other, terrorism in South Asia. The humorous part about this is that it took Mr. Bush so long to figure this out. When this is something which is common knowledge in this part of the world.

While there might be a lot of truth in that the ISI is an institution unto itself, without much control that can be exercised by the civillian authorities in the nation, this does bring up the question that there must be someone in Pakistan, otherwise outside the country, who should be in a position to tame the institution of terror. After all, it cant be that this hydra monster is totally untamable! And as for Mr. Gilani's statement that they "would not allow that" sounds totally hollow, because, with all due respect, Mr. Gilani should remember that he needs to be able to exercise control in order to decide whether to allow or not.

Global Warming

I had posted an idea over at idopia ... About Global Warming. Well, the idea didnt generate too many responses (in fact, only 1 ...). But, the response it did generate is quite interesting ... The cynicism is apparent in the comment itself.

The basic idea is that whoever is bothered about global warming, and about the possible future of our world, are already trying to do something about it. This is the nice part. The shocking part is, the large majority of the population couldnt be bothered less. And, they wouldnt even be bothered, unless the problem reaches a crisis proportion. And, this is a thought that is disturbing.

Question is, what can we do about it? Not much, i am afraid. Plenty of awareness generated ... Nobel prize ... the works! And, where does that lead us? To a point, where our future is decided based on highly short-sighted considerations by people who either dont understand implications, or couldnt be bothered less about them.

And this collective myopia, to my mind, is a large part of the problem ...

So Who Is It?

There is a front page piece in the ToI today ... Blame $146 oil on speculators, US House told ... Interesting reading. Apparently, the expert has told the US House that the surge in oil prices is due to speculative activity. Interesting ... On the other hand, there was an article in the Financial Express, which says, Majors say high oil pricess not due to speculators. Even more interesting ... CNBC says ...

Crude prices have surged seven-fold since the start of 2002 as supply struggles to keep up with demand from emerging nations like China. The price spike has caused fuel protests worldwide and hurt demand in consuming nations like the United States.

Interesting ... China and India (though the article doesnt explicitly mention India), are to blame, according to this statement. On the other hand, the United States is seen as a consuming nation. Is China, or India, not a consuming nation? This gives the impression that according to CNBC, China should be "sacrificing" for the "consuming nation", the United States. If anything, this should be a clarion call for the "developed" world to look inwards, and understand why they are consuming hydrocarbons (or anything else for that matter), in disproportionate measure. And, shoulder the responsibility of the implications of relentless consumption. Queer ... Very queer!