An analysis of the PM's speech to the joint US Congress

Status
Not open for further replies.
O

ozyjat

Banned
These are the statistics of the speech from our Prime Minister to the joint session of congress.
Three thousand, one hundred and five words, give the few innocuous ones he extemporaneously inserted into the text and take the few he spontaneously omitted.A fraction over 35 minutes delivery time -- and, not counting the standing ovation when he was introduced and the sustained applause when he concluded, 29 interruptions for applause.

The best phrased, and articulated, segment of the speech was the one referring to the US and India as natural partners. 'Partnerships can be of two kinds,' Singh told his audience. 'There are partnerships based on principle, and partnerships based on pragmatism. I believe we are at a juncture where we can embark on a partnership that can draw both on
principle as well as pragmatism. We must build on this opportunity.'

'On the reform of the United Nations,' Singh told his audience, 'we believe that it is time to recognize the enormous changes that have occurred since the present structure was established. There must be comprehensive reform of the United Nations to make it more effective and also more representative. The UN Security Council must be restructured as part of the reform process. In this context, you would agree that the voice of the world's largest democracy surely cannot be left unheard on the Security Council when the United Nations is being restructured.'

Set in gold letters, close to the ceiling and above the seat of the House Speaker, are these words that perhaps best sum up the need for, powers of, and goal of, a legislative body: "Let us develop the resources of our land, call forth its powers, build up its institutions, promote all its great interests, and see whether we also in our day and our generation may not perform something worthy to remember."

The Indian delegation, led by Montek Singh Ahluwalia, found seating space on the floor of the House, to the left of the Speaker. Above them, in the visitors' gallery, sat -- in one heavyweight row -- Mukesh Ambani, Dipak Parikh, Ratan Tata, and the Hinduja brothers Srichand and Gopichand.

The CEOs noticeably triggered, and led, the applause when Singh referred to the launch of the CEOs Forum, as a means of stepping up economic cooperation between the two countries. Elsewhere in the galleries was a sizeable
sprinkling of Sikh community leaders, come to honor their own -- including a contingent of white Sikhs.

As speeches go, this one -- delivered with characteristic lack of verve by a man uncomfortable with public speaking and unschooled in the ways of the demagogue who can make the insipid inspiring -- didn't go too far. It did not say much that was new, and it said it in too many words.

Yet, in the frequent interruptions for applause that punctuated it -- 29 of them, over the 35-minute duration of the speech -- there perhaps lay a message: India is a buzzword today, one that not even the lawmakers on Capitol Hill -- who walk in to the Great Hall knowing the decisions they take can, often do, impact on lives in nations they couldn't pick out on an atlas -- can resist.
 
The question is: Who cares? I saw the speach, and I picked up a few pepper laced words, that didnt go down oo well with me. I will be wrinting my own analysis on it, very soon. The fact is that the life of an average Indian peson is going o be the same aftr the 29 applauses, as it was before them. And by the way, who were the guys who were applauding. Ted Kenneddy, Hillary clinton (Looked lost, and has that Lesbian-Butch stare on her face ever since they've been speculating if shes running in 08) and Bill Frist (actually he hasnt pissed me off as much as others). The senior whip seemed asleep throughout, as he melted down the chair, and Cheney seemed to be concerened about the fact that he forgot his new Philips defubulator at home. I hear these guys speak everyday, the congress is in session, and they are the most pathetic clowns you vould ever come out of America, excpet for Dr. Ron Paul R-TX, who I highy admire. All these guys are good at is spending the tax dllars they amass and hoarde, and still run into a deficit. Gaam ke baawale ne ek bay hass diya tay tu usnay syana samajhan lagya. Un susre ka kaam aay auran na dekh ke hasan ka hai. Aur unh dhoray dhara ke say.
 
By the way I dont have any problems with the entreprenuers like Tatas, Hindujas, and the Ambanis. I just find it funny that the wealth creators (entreprenuers) and the wealth destroyers (Politicians), walk hand in hand. Masla kya hai. Or is it just another symbiotic relationship. You do this for me, and I will do that for you. God only knows.
 
India did a great job by all accounts. Americans don't spend their $$s and time if they are not likely to gain anything out of a relationship. India also gained a lot through various agreements signed. Success of this relationship will be judged by how we develop India further to make her really a strong world power. Slowly we are moving in that direction. To those who think what common India gets out of it. My answer is, ask your elders who have seen the pre-1965 era when India used to import food. Indina green revolution came from Americal help. I remeber 1965 when Lal Bahadur Shastri convinced whole nation to fast at least one day in a week. He gave the famous slogan of Jai Jawan Jai Kisan. India was very week on defence and food fronts at that time. India needed jawans and faremsr more than anyone else. I remeber how Australian and Mexican wheat used to be distributed through ration shops in those days.
Hope by this time we Indians have learned the art of engaging other nations to our advantage...Long live Indo-US friendship... I am sure India will gain a lot out of this new freindship..

RK^2
 
dahiyarules said:
By the way I dont have any problems with the entreprenuers like Tatas, Hindujas, and the Ambanis. I just find it funny that the wealth creators (entreprenuers) and the wealth destroyers (Politicians), walk hand in hand. Masla kya hai. Or is it just another symbiotic relationship. You do this for me, and I will do that for you. God only knows.
Click to expand...

Bhai Sumit,

Yeh Maharaja Suraj Mal ka photo to hum sabne dekha hua hai... We will like to see your picture here.

RK^2
 
dahiyarules said:
The question is: Who cares? I saw the speach, and I picked up a few pepper laced words, that didnt go down oo well with me. I will be wrinting my own analysis on it, very soon. The fact is that the life of an average Indian peson is going o be the same aftr the 29 applauses, as it was before them. And by the way, who were the guys who were applauding. Ted Kenneddy, Hillary clinton (Looked lost, and has that Lesbian-Butch stare on her face ever since they've been speculating if shes running in 08) and Bill Frist (actually he hasnt pissed me off as much as others). The senior whip seemed asleep throughout, as he melted down the chair, and Cheney seemed to be concerened about the fact that he forgot his new Philips defubulator at home. I hear these guys speak everyday, the congress is in session, and they are the most pathetic clowns you vould ever come out of America, excpet for Dr. Ron Paul R-TX, who I highy admire. All these guys are good at is spending the tax dllars they amass and hoarde, and still run into a deficit. Gaam ke baawale ne ek bay hass diya tay tu usnay syana samajhan lagya. Un susre ka kaam aay auran na dekh ke hasan ka hai. Aur unh dhoray dhara ke say.
Click to expand...


We as Indian's CARE! and should care... It is not about the applause or who was listening to it in what way; but what this whole thing means to every Indian!
This could be not a huge step but is still a step anyways... Getting the congress (and other members nations) to agree to the whole new nuclear deal with India might need a lot of convincing by the Bush government in days to come, for sure....but still it is all a positive step at least!
A more spirited style in the way the speech could have been delivered is absolutely right but still it packed the punch it was supposed to deliver!

I applaud the PM and it felt good to see the treatment that was meted out to him at the US...
Period!
 
I agree with Shailendra, one may say great oratorship was lacking when PM delivered the speech; but much more importantly speech was great in terms of content and truly reflected Indian ethos, values, its new found confidence in World affairs.


shailendra said:
We as Indian's CARE! and should care... It is not about the applause or who was listening to it in what way; but what this whole thing means to every Indian!
This could be not a huge step but is still a step anyways... Getting the congress (and other members nations) to agree to the whole new nuclear deal with India might need a lot of convincing by the Bush government in days to come, for sure....but still it is all a positive step at least!
A more spirited style in the way the speech could have been delivered is absolutely right but still it packed the punch it was supposed to deliver!

I applaud the PM and it felt good to see the treatment that was meted out to him at the US...
Period!
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
...Here are some more comments on how the whole recent visit is being percieved back in India!

India media upbeat on US nuclear deal
Indian newspapers have greeted the historic deal between India and the United States on civilian nuclear co-operation with cautious optimism.

"The agreement promises to end India's nuclear isolation," says the Indian Express. "The agreement is also a tribute to India. India is slowly being acknowledged as a full-fledged nuclear power, and an important player in the shaping of a new proliferation order," the newspaper says in an editorial.

The Hindustan Times says the US decision to recognise India as a "responsible" state with nuclear technology "is part of a historic bargain which could transform the global balance of power in as significant a manner as Richard Nixon's opening to China did in the seventies".
 
Last edited:
The reason INdia suffered in the post Independence era was because of our socialist policies. You may call it a green revolution, or whatever revolution. I am of the opinion we could have done better by the means of private entreprenuership. The fact that majority of India derives its lievelyhood from agriculture is a bad sign in itself. With new technology, lesser human labor is required to have higher agricultural yeilds. Thus an agrarian economy is a bad justfication of good human resources.

Well, you guys can say "we as indians care?" Who is US? Whose permisison or assistance they ask for when they want to do something? And honestly, I have no problems with it, because as a nation its better to be bold and decisive, rather than be a lapdog of other nations. By getting the stamp of Ameircan approval on Indian ambitions, we are just stressing that we cannot do it wihtout them. If we goby your logic, we would ahve never had Pokhran 1 and 2.

Finally it is good to have cordial relationship with everyo other nation, and have a free trade policy. But we shouldnt be engaging in political alliances on issues. If we wan to do something, we must just go ahead an do it.
 
dahiyarules said:
The reason INdia suffered in the post Independence era was because of our socialist policies. You may call it a green revolution, or whatever revolution. I am of the opinion we could have done better by the means of private entreprenuership.
Click to expand...

Here are my views on India following socialist policies post-independence:

I agree with you that if we analyse today, these socialist policies seem to have done more harm to us than good. Couple of decades of snail pace economic growth in my opinion can be attributed to these policies, at least partially.

But do I blame anyone for it(including Nehru)? No. This is because we are judging these policies in hindsight today, and hindsight is always 20/20...at the time these policies were embarked on by India, half of the world was embracing these policies believing that socialism is the wave of future. It was only towards late 80s (USSR started failing, the Berlin wall was torn down, and eastern Europe appreared economically battered) when most of the world realised that socialism/communism type ideas are good only in theory and not in practise. Dwight Eisenhower once said,"Communism is an evil system whose only good seems to be the forced economic developement". So even the capitalists of that era didn't know for sure, and were intrigued by economic potential of socialist "theories".

During Post-Independence era, India had to make a choice, as it arrived in a world with severe war of ideologies: Democracy+Capitalism+USA versus Communism+Socialism+USSR, you pick for your country what you think will succeed in long term. India did a mix and match and picked Democracy+Socialism+NAM(USSR under the table). Today, in hindsight, seems like we could've picked better, perhaps Democracy+Free Capitalism+USA.

So if we look at these policies from today's lenses: yes, they were bad for India (like they were for a good chunk of world that embraced some of these policies in middle of 20th centrury.)
My point being, that it is only in hindsight that these policies 'proved' wrong, not enough evidence was available to the Indian policy makers in 50s & 60s to come up with this conclusion then.
 
Last edited:
You are right dude. Things were differnet then. And very honestly, I am not playing the blame game. Jo hua so hua. But we are moving on. Indian economy is moving on. Just 15 years ago, it was impossible for foreign giants to invest in India. The other day, our PM made an open appeal for foreign diret investment. I give high points to Mr. Manmohan Singh on this. Put that in contrast to Nehru cozying up with Stalin. Perhaps he was the smartest guy in the room along with Dr. Dr. Ron Paul R-TX.
 
Why India did not choose capitalism, should be seen through her experience with East India Company. Our troubled history made us suspicious of western capitalists. With time as we gained experience and knowledge to handle them, we started accepting capitalism.. It takes time to walk on one's feet with confidence. I think India has done fairly well if we keep in mind all aspects of our history...Major blunder which we Indians have been doing all through our history is to trust our enemies. This is where we need to change more than anything. There are no permanent friends and foes when it comes to relations among nations.

Let us not be carried away that private sector can solve all the ills of our nation. They have not solved all problems even in USA. Till such time private sector is ready to move in everywhere, government has to continue taking care of such areas.

RK^2
 
Dear Rajendra Sir !

First of all US is not a completely captalist nation. There are all these corporate giants that provide services to the consmers. Those whose services are appreciated, they survive. Example: Microsoft. But on the other hand there are these humongous government departments that were supposed to provide public services. I will strip them off one by one.

1. Social Secuirty: Everyone knows, what a disaster it is. Its going to go bust very soon. On the other hand those who saved with the mutual funds comapnies and other financia services companies have their finds managed by the professionals who have an incentive to be honest and reliable, in order to have an edge over the competing firms. yes there have been disasters like enron. But they wre only covered up with the help of the government buddies of the senior management.

2. Public education: Now people are waking up to the realization that kids from poor neighborhoods perfrom poorly, because of poor education infrastructure in their neighborhoods. On the other hand look at the jewels of americans higher education. Harvard, Yale, Stanford, are all privately owned and managed colleges. Even though they are forced to take govt. intervention, but they are still managing to keep thier edge.

3. Americans pay taxes like anything. Some states dont ahave income taxes, but ppl living in other states pay state and federal income taxes. I odnt know if you know this, but some people are under tax debts. i.e. they havent been able to pay up their tax liabilities to the government. So the government has converted those taxes into laons, and people ar epaying intereston the top of them. And what happens with the tax money. Its redistributed to those who dont contribute anything to the counrty i.e. the use less unep,ployed homeless bums, or some big ass momma, whose been sitting home for 20 yrs, becuase she ahd 8 children.

4. Medicare or public healthcare is in shambles too. govt. doesnt ahve enough funds to cover it. On theother hand pvt. insurance companies are providing the services efficiently. even though insurance costs are going up, but a private insurance assures that you have higher chances of staying afloat in case of an eventuality, rahter than trusting on medicare. I know a few ppl over here who didnt have an insurance, fell sick, medicare didnt cover them, and are now knocking the doors of the social work agencies, for help.

I can go on an on. the ogvt. owned service provders have failed, while the efficinet privatly held enterprises are running in the green.

By the way my picture is on the profile. hahaha. I was kinda feeling sheepish doing it, bcuase I dont know how well i am oging to fit in among the buzurg log.
 
Hi Sumit,

I am aware of what all you have mentioned. Every system works fine till one has honest and committed people running it. Unfortunately there is a short supply of such people world over and this where the problem starts. I have worked for Tyco Healthcare as their country manager in India for over 5 years and I know how most of these corporate work. I have lots of friends in USA and know how private doctors submit inflated bills to insurance companies. This makes not only the insurance cover expensive, it denies healthcare to poorer sections of society. There is a mafia operating in health insurance sector of USA.

This topic is so vast that one can write volumes on it. Our own old time proven Indian system where sons and daughters provided the social security to parents , education to kids is one of the best in my view. However, this so called western influence is eroding all that.

I think we need to pick up the best from every system to make India great. We cannot follow any system blindly.

RK^2
 
Last edited:
Ok, I finally agree with yu on some something. We need honesty and integrity among our people. Now thats a question that moves towards anthropology and psychology. I think honesty and integirty are cucltural. In japan, honesty is an integral part of their cuclture. reminds me of the other day, when a UPS guy deliverd two dell laptops to my house by mistake. Now I had two options,

1. Donon laptops ko gol karr do.

2. Call them up, and let me know I have em.

I took the second option. But you wont believe that noone ever came to claim them, inspite of repeated attempts to ocntact dell and UPS. they would say someones coming the next day. What happened to the laptops, is another story, but i realized honesty starts from little things.

I think we would be moving in the right direction, if we stressed more on morals in our society, than on ideological shifts.


Thanks again.
 
Respected uncle ji,
Sahi kaha.We as a nation have to learn to adapt to time change.Ganda pado khet se bahar.

rkumar said:
There are no permanent friends and foes when it comes to relations among nations. RK^2
Click to expand...
 
What a grey view...It should be quite Black and White!

dahiyarules said:
Well, you guys can say "we as indians care?" Who is US? Whose permisison or assistance they ask for when they want to do something? And honestly, I have no problems with it, because as a nation its better to be bold and decisive, rather than be a lapdog of other nations. By getting the stamp of Ameircan approval on Indian ambitions, we are just stressing that we cannot do it wihtout them. If we goby your logic, we would ahve never had Pokhran 1 and 2.

Finally it is good to have cordial relationship with everyo other nation, and have a free trade policy. But we shouldnt be engaging in political alliances on issues. If we wan to do something, we must just go ahead an do it.
Click to expand...

I am confused a bit cause you seem to be contradicting yourself a lot here...

When you say it is good to have cordial relationship with every nation, then why do you discount what the PM did recently was anything else but that??? :confused: He was not groveling on their feet for alms but if anyone cared to notice it was with head very much held high (apparently due to some of the recent developments in the Indian subcontinent and as a very obvious result of the recent giant leaps India has made in the global economic front) demanding they wake up to the inevitable knock this great nation is making on the doors of all developed nations… not asking for entry, mind you…but a request to them all to join this silver streak bandwagon in time and before the economic boom almost surely knocks that door down, cause the Indian juggernaut is here gentlemen!

It was a no cloaked no holding back appeal that just like ‘Rising tide raises all ships’, so is the time for them (all the developed nations with America being undoubtedly in the fore front) to buy in and make those economic gains together! Cause an intelligent nation quite obviously understands that these gains can only be made together and in a vice-versa situations!!!

So really; for all of us, still looking at this recent visit by our PM and his talks with Bush as some kind of a plea which had our arms folded and the heads bowed down low asking for nuclear and other deals that needed a US approval….please sit up and smell the roses, cause it was anything but that; It can more likely to be compared to that kindly-friendly smile of that stretching and yawning tiger now getting up ready for the hunt!!!
 
Dont get me wrong here. But theres this global monoply that the US holds. China is doing great at it, by first making the US economy rely on theirs, then making ndependent economic decesions. Just befor coming to work I was listening over the radio, how they wnt be pegging the Yuan to the US dollar, not becuase of American pressure, but to make their prodicts more appealing in other economies as well.

Once again, I dindt have much probelms with the PM, but I dont have any faith in the US legislators. I am making it clear no one should feel i am contradicitng myself over here.we shouldnt end up bieng a lapdog to any country.
 
dahiyarules said:
Dont get me wrong here. But theres this global monoply that the US holds. China is doing great at it, by first making the US economy rely on theirs, then making ndependent economic decesions. Just befor coming to work I was listening over the radio, how they wnt be pegging the Yuan to the US dollar, not becuase of American pressure, but to make their prodicts more appealing in other economies as well.

Once again, I dindt have much probelms with the PM, but I dont have any faith in the US legislators. I am making it clear no one should feel i am contradicitng myself over here.we shouldnt end up bieng a lapdog to any country.
Click to expand...

As I have often said, USA works like a corporate where everything is reviewed quarterly. USA can summersault on any policy anytime depending upon what suits them. They have no regard for any established norms. India has taken very long time to adjust to this trait of USA. This is why India is engaging with Myanmar, Sudan, and Iran etc in the same way as USA acts with Pakistan, Saudi and Jordan etc. Relations among Gundas are always stronger than among gentle people when it comes to politics and diplomacy. Of course these relations are reviewed every evening, exactly in the same way as a Baniya reviews hi Bahikhatta. BTW Chinese knew this art much before Indians.

RK^2
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top