"Srini Ramakrishnan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Besides, I fear that the subcontinent is very much of the "give an > inch and take a mile" mindset. Giving up J&K can embolden PK to > aggressively stake claims on other parts of India.
Pakistan is an economic and political basket case, where India is just starting to take off and join the first world. I think that if India continues to follow the path of classical liberalism and becomes a prosperous and largely free place, it will have very little to fear from impoverished neighbors other than immigrants willing to work for lower wages than the locals. Their military will swiftly look pathetic and unimportant, much as Mexico's military looks to the United States. The rhetoric of geopolitical gamesmanship doesn't feed people, and being able to proudly beat your chest about how you showed The Other that you are "Better" doesn't create a single pleasant afternoon strolling in a park. Leave foolishness to fools. Switzerland has few territorial aspirations, no disputes with its neighbors, and little central government. Its people seem quite happy. Let me mention another path. Right now, Russia is run by men intent on demonstrating how manly they are. Nearly two decades of economic and political progress, and integration with their neighbors, is being sacrificed to demonstrate that they can't be pushed around and are in fact the big men in the neighborhood. They trashed their free press, nationalized major industries, eliminated foreign investment, and they did it all with temporary gains from oil money. Soon, within ten years, the money from oil will fall, their army will have no supplies, the government enterprises propped up with oil money will collapse, and they'll have no friends. Today, though, they feel manly. I think the Russians, the Americans, and the other countries who try to play the "Great Game" end up losers. Far better to be happy and ignored. Perry -- Perry E. Metzger [EMAIL PROTECTED]
