Soviet-era maps of Ukraine war campaigns & territorial changes (from *Soviet Ukraine*, c. 1970, MK Roy Library)

 

DSC02638DSC02639 DSC02640 DSC02642 DSC02643 DSC02644 DSC02644DSC02645 DSC02647

Map of Kabul etc 1879

map7defencessherpurkabul-1600

Map of the Route from Kabul to Kandahar, 1880

map8k-k-3000

Map of the Battle-field of Kandahar, 1880

map9kanda-2253

Map of Kabul c.1880

map6kabul-1600

Map of Afghanistan-Pakistan border (Durand Line area)

From Facebook:

A US Government map from the 1980s now in the public domain showing the Afghanistan-Pakistan frontier (Durand Line area) and seeming to indicate Pashtun areas.

AFGHAN~1

Map of Japan 1911 (along with Taiwan)

Japan_1911

India in the 18th Century: A Political Map of Clive’s Time 1760

INDIA1~1

India in the 18th Century: A 1923 Political Map by Shepherd

india_shepherd_1923

Map of Xinjiang/Sinkiang/East Turkestan 1967: Could this be the best available in the public domain?

Sinkiang1967

Mapping of Votes into Assembly Segments Won into Parliamentary Seats Won in the 2004 India Election

We in India shall soon be hearing the talking-heads on TV, mostly in New Delhi,  jabbering away about “swings” and “anti-incumbency” and “mandates” and “fractured mandates” etc.  Most of it will be waffle without any basis in hard facts because nobody wants to actually do any of the work necessary to acquire a serious opinion.

Just as you cannot win at cricket unless you bowl out the other side and you cannot win at soccer unless you score more goals than the other side, you are not going to win a General Election in India unless you win more Assembly Segments of Parliamentary Constituencies than your competitors.

It is not logically impossible but it is factually unlikely that you can lose, say, five out of six Assembly Segments and still win the Parliamentary Constituency by winning the sixth with a sufficiently large margin.  Raw votes generally translate into winning Assembly Segments and winning Assembly Segments generally translate into winning Lok Sabha seats.

In 2004, the top five winners were as follows, where the first number is raw votes won, the second the number of Assembly Segments won, and the third the number of Lok Sabha seats won:

INC    103,118,475    1,157    145
BJP    86,181,116    1,076    138
CPM    22,065,283    322    43
BSP    21,037,968    107    17
SP    16,822,902    167    39

Notice the BSP won some 4 million more raw votes than the SP but fewer Assembly Segments and fewer Lok Sabha Seats.  And the CPM won barely a million more raw votes than did the BSP but 215 more Assembly Segments and 26 more Lok Sabha seats.  Clearly Uttar Pradesh voting patterns need a lot more detailed analysis — my ex ante hypothesis would be that the BSP’s results are affected by the policy of some  constituencies being “reserved”.

More significantly, at the head of the race, notice that the BJP lost the raw vote to the Indian National Congress by a margin of almost 17 million votes which translated into winning 81 Assembly Segments fewer than the INC which translated into winning 7 fewer Lok Sabha seats — and hence ended up sitting in the Opposition in the Lok Sabha for five years.

A central question is whether the BJP has or has not done enough over the last five years to get in its favour a net change in the raw vote — and that too by a sufficient amount to change the number of Assembly Segments won in its favour.

Putting it differently, has the INC done enough to at least maintain its share of the raw-vote and its leading position, and hence  be likely to win the largest number of Assembly Segments and Lok Sabha seats again?

Here is the overall picture:

book1_17442_image001And yes, of course, there have been demographic changes over five years so those changed parameters shall have affected the  new outcome too (notice the INC’s emphasis on the “youth vote”).

This is original research which could come to be published in a scientific journal if I find the time to send it, so please try not to steal and instead acknowledge its source properly if you want to discuss it elsewhere.

Subroto Roy, Kolkata

Map of India, Afghanistan, Russia, China c. 1897

mapofindiaafghanistanrussiachinac18972

Map of Kashmir to Sinkiang 1944

Map of Sinkiang, Tibet and Neighbours 1944

Map of Chinese Empire c. 1900

This map accompanied my article “China’s India Example” published in The Statesman on March 25 2008.  The map is dated c. 1900 and shows the Chinese Empire of China Proper, East Turkestan (Sinkiang, Xinjiang), Tibet,  Manchuria and Mongolia (later Inner Mongolia and Outer Mongolia).chinaempire.jpg

Map of Asia c. 1900

Map of India-Tibet-China-Mongolia 1959

This map reproduced from the 1964 edition of Encyclopaedia Britannica is said to have been prepared by the US CIA and is dated 1959.  It is something I published to accompany my November 5 2007 article “China’s India Aggression”.  The Government of India and Government of China have a hard time with maps in discussing the boundary-dispute; this might help them.

Map of Bombay/Mumbai 1909, i.e., a century ago

bombay_1909

Map of Delhi Enclave c. 1916

Map of Punjab Districts c. 1916

Fact vs Falsification & Flattery in Delhi (& other places) Revised 5th May 2014

from Facebook 5th May 2014

TN Ninan (to the Twitter applause apparently of William Dalrymple) says about Manmohan Singh:

“He became finance minister in 1991 because I G Patel turned down the job. That made him, quite fortuitously, the right person in the right place at the right time. The need for a re-orientation of economic (particularly industrial) policy had already been outlined in the Congress election manifesto of 1991, written and released when Singh was not on the scene. Some correctives (like fiscal correction and disinvestment) had been announced by Singh’s predecessor as finance minister, Yashwant Sinha. Within the government, Montek Singh Ahluwalia had written a controversial paper advocating a broad re-orientation of industrial policy.”

Manmohan Singh became Finance Minister because from even before Rajiv Gandhi’s assassination, Indira-insiders in Rajiv’s inner circle (a circle created on 25 Sep 1990 by Rajiv after I, an Indira-critic and outsider and member of the same circle, gave him on 18 Sep 1990 the perestroika-for-India project I had led in America since 1986) manouevered to bring back into favour PN Haksar, Manmohan Singh’s admitted mentor in the Government of India. From before Rajiv’s assassination, the names of IG Patel, Manmohan Singh and a third unknown name said to be wholly outlandish (possibly my own) were said (in an op-ed in the Asian Age some years ago by a separate Rajiv-insider) to be in the air.

A few weeks ago, on 13 April, I said to Mr Ninan

“I have not read Sanjaya Baru’s book on his boss and mentor Manmohan Singh, and doubt I will soon. But it is said to say that PV Narasimha Rao chose Manmohan as Finance Minister saying “Of course, he knows Vithal”, referring to BPR Vithal, Baru’s father. And the title of the book describes Manmohan as “The Accidental Prime Minister”. My personal experience contradicts all this squarely. Here’s why.

In the autumn of 1973 — yes, 1973 — before I became a first year undergraduate at the LSE, my father brought Manmohan Singh home to our then residence at 14 Rue Eugene Manuel in Paris, to advise me about economics. Manmohan was perhaps 41 or 42, I was 18. He was working for MG Kaul, ICS, my father’s old buddy, and he had come to be introduced to PN Haksar himself, who was related by marriage to the Kaul family. Manmohan has acknowledged to Mark Tully in 2005 having been mentored in the Government of India by Haksar, Indira Gandhi’s right hand man.

Manmohan asked to speak to me alone, and he and I quickly got into a heated debate about the merits (as he saw them) and demerits (as I saw them) of the Soviet example on Indian planning. He stayed 40 minutes or so, before being interrupted by his staff who had to take him to another meeting. We were of course most grateful that he had taken time off from his schedule with an Indian delegation to what used to be the AID-India programme in Paris. Before departing he said he would send a letter of introduction to his friend Amartya Sen at LSE for me; he was taken aback a bit by the debate with this lad; the letter duly came and I carried it reluctantly at my father’s request, as it seemed to me testy in tone and not quite laudatory. I now wish I had kept a copy but really there was no commercial xeroxing back then.

Anyhow, the point of this story is that after Manmohan left our home that day, I told my father about our debate and he told me Manmohan was very highly thought of in government circles, with degrees from both Cambridge and Oxford, and added, to my surprise, that Manmohan was **expected to become Prime Minister some day**… My father was almost certainly expressing a Haksarian opinion, as he himself had been sent to Paris by Haksar in September 1971 in preparation for Indira Gandhi’s visit in November before the Bangladesh war.

Fast forwarding to 22 March 1991, when I was writing the outlines of the economic reform for Rajiv Gandhi, I was challenged by MK Rasgotra demanding to know what Manmohan Singh would say about all this liberalisation… I replied I did not know but did know Manmohan had been in Africa with the Nyerere project. The next day I saw and briefly met on the lawns of Rajiv’s residence, PN Haksar himself, who was clearly delighted to be back in favour with Rajiv after a decade and a half of isolation due to Indira and her younger son. I also met PV Narasimha Rao on that occasion, who was unwell and due to retire… not to become PM as he did… After Rajiv’s assassination, insider Indira-loyalists turned to Haksar for advice, and he would have named his old protege to be Narasimha Rao’s Finance Minister… Nothing accidental about it. Once Manmohan became FM, one of his first deeds in the summer of 1991 was to offer some vast sum of government money to the Rajiv Gandhi Foundation led by the newly bereaved Sonia Gandhi, which she, to her credit, apparently declined. But Manmohan had come to Sonia’s attention. By December 2001, it had become common knowledge among Congress leaders that Manmohan would be the PM in a Sonia-led victory at least for one term, after which other leaders could have a shot as long as they had good relations with her. Such is Indian politics, and indeed economics… Nothing accidental about it, really…””

Mr Ninan thanked me and offered to forward the point to his friend and colleague Sanjaya Baru.

**Mr Ninan’s hagiographic ToI article fails to mention as far as I can see what is well-known publicly that Manmohan Singh came to Sonia Gandhi’s attention in 1991 for the first time by offering her a vast sum of government money for the Rajiv Gandhi Foundation which she, to her credit, turned down. But she now knew his name.**

Mr Ninan says “the Congress election manifesto of 1991, written and released when Singh was not on the scene”, which is broadly right — it is more accurate to say Manmohan **was not in the loop** and, like Pranab Mukherjee, was not one of Rajiv’s favourite people — hence the paradox of Rajiv’s widow ending up relying on both of them: it is a story of the return of the Indira-loyalists, whom Rajiv, in my experience, wished to become free of.

Mr Ninan knows fully well the factual story of how the Congress’s change of direction in economic policy came from Rajiv’s encounter with myself and the project I had led in America since 1986, but Ninan, in his apparent wish to flatter Manmohan in post-post-retirement, has suppressed it.

Mr Ninan mentions something Yashwant Sinha and Montek Singh Ahluwalia purportedly did while in Government adding to the reform before it started. Subramanyam Swamy has claimed the same himself.

Where are the documents relating to these? Where is the paper-trail? Are they not of historical value? Mr Ninan is supposedly a top Indian economic journalist; he and his friends can find these and publish these, if they exist, before gassing about them further in any flattery of politicians or the Delhi elite.

What Mr Ninan also knows of is the London Times editorial dated 29 May 1984 — six years before the reform began in practice — about my critique of Indian economic policy published that day by London’s Institute of Economic Affairs (Philip Booth). After all, Mr Ninan sent me a telex in Blacksburg asking for a copy, and I should have that document in a file somewhere.

From Facebook 14 August 2013

I see a very strange thing happening in Indian politics…

The Sonia-Manmohan Congress continues to be effectively silent in response to national event after national event, whether Uttarakhand or the PRC’s bullying or the Pakistanis and their friends testing Indian resolve…leave aside corruption, inflation, etc… Is this because of incompetence and institutional sclerosis in their decision-making processes? Probably. Except the Congress would like to say and would like people to believe it is because the mystical secrets of Indian governance are only known to their High Command and emerge only when the Oracle speaks… .

At the same time, the BJP is trying almost to do a George Soros sort of “Orange” campaign, designed and run by the spin doctors and modern political PR firms — probably with a few layabout rightwing US Republicans helping and the Overseas BJP playing a major role in the whole design from America and Britain. The BJP are starting to fall in line behind Narendra Modi but only under condition that Modi is not allowed to be himself, i.e. Modi must not be the “uncouth rabble-rouser” he has been in my words, but instead come across as a Churchillian, or rather Sardar Patelian, figure of masculine nationalism.

Both MK Gandhi and Sardar Patel have been nicely purloined by Modi, and the Sonia-Manmohan Congress — being run, after all, by Sonia, who had had no wish for the princely husband she met at a Cambridge restaurant when she had been a language-student in the town, let aside herself, to be in Indian politics, and Manmohan, whose disdain is now obvious for Parliament and politics and everything besides his personal bureaucratic career — has been clueless how to stop the theft of their political legacy.

The BJP wants to take everything of the Congress except Nehru, Indira (except in the 1971 war) and family. Of course they have a problem with me because they cannot teach me anything about Hinduism — *nothing* — either in theory or in practice (my father incidentally in 1947, helped save the Hindu Sindhis of Karachi, probably including LK Advani himself, and the man my father, a Nehruvian, was reporting to was none other than Shyama Prasad Mookerjee, who was a family friend and a mentor of my father’s and also the Minister in Nehru’s Cabinet in charge of my father’s department) — and yet a few of them here and there want to mendaciously claim they were the original promoters of liberal economics in India, not myself and Rajiv Gandhi in 1990-1991. It won’t work. (For their information, I was invited by the Overseas BJP to give a Deendayal Upadhaya Memorial Lecture in Washington — back in 1984!, when of course I was clueless about Indian politics)…

The Rajiv Gandhi I knew had been enthused by me in 1990-1991 carrying the UH-Manoa perestroika-for-India project that I had led since 1986, and he had loved my advice to him on 18 Sep 1990 that he needed to modernise the party by preparing a coherent agenda (as other successful reformers had done) while still in Opposition waiting for elections — and to base the agenda on commitments to improving the judiciary and rule of law, stopping the debauching of money, and focusing on the provision of public goods instead.

**Rajiv I am sure wanted a *modern* and *modern-minded* Congress — not one which depended on him let aside his family, but one which *reduced* that dependence and let him and his family alone.**

Almost a quarter century later, the Sonia-Manmohan Congress (thanks I believe to a sleeper agent here or there) not only preserved but worsened the status-quo while we have the BJP hiding its past and trying to make itself over as some sort of modern conservative party. What worried the sleeper agent(s) and the vested bureaucratic and business interests was that they could see change coming but wanted to be able to control it themselves to their advantage, which they then of course proceeded to do over the next two decades. The foreign weapons’ contracts and other big-ticket imports India ends up buying needlessly had to be preserved.

Both sides now, Congress and BJP, as well as everyone else in Indian politics need to remember Blake: “Truth can never be told so as to be understood and not be believed.”

I am asked “So where are we going? What should we be doing Mr. Roy?” and say this

1. I should be invited to give this talk to a senior all-party meet — being introduced as Rajiv Gandhi’s adviser who initiated the reform:3dec


2. I would explain the *utterly dismal* state of public finances clearly — across all State budgets, across the Union budget etc, and the risk of monetary collapse…

3. I would propose Parliament decree there be no elections in 2014, or whether there are or whether there are not, then a National Government arise, presided over by the President, with a fair and reasonable distribution of portfolios, for a period of, say, three or even five years, along with a “Financial Emergency” (whether that is declared formally or not).

4. During this time, the following is done:

A. There are *system-wide* improvements in public finance and accounting using modern information technology to comprehend government liabilities and expenditures and raise their productivity,

B. There are institutional changes in public decision-making like separating banking and central banking from the Treasury while making the planning function serve the Treasury function rather than pretend to be above it.

C. State legislatures come to be reliably informed about the state of their own States.

The aim would be to bring some semblance of integrity to the national currency, both domestically and externally. The road described is long and arduous but at its end both corruption and inflation will have been reduced to minimal levels, and the rupee would have acquired integrity enough to become a hard currency of the world in the sense the average resident of, say, rural Madhya Pradesh or Mizoram may freely convert rupees and hold or trade foreign currencies or precious metals as he/she pleases.

5. At the end of the National Government period, once the public finances are cleaned up permanently across the country and the debauching of money is stopped, there are new elections and a normal democratic process is resumed.

Postscript: 

It is perhaps a bit like saying we have to change all the machinery in a moving train while it is moving in order to prevent ending up in a crash; better to stop, pause, calmly and scientifically do some critical essential maintenance, and then, when the machinery is working again, get going more surely. Here is an example:

This is the way India’s complex state and Union public finance are *supposed* to look — but they don’t…and won’t, until and unless I, all alone, happen to make them… For some 16 years, from when I first became Professor at IIT Kgp in September 1996, I have had zero support — no secretary, no research funding, nothing, except a little volunteer work here and there, to try to start to get things into shape… a project proposal I put to the World Bank in Washington in 1997 — got stolen by World Bank officials! —-

534553_10151157947982285_374587295_n74729_10151157948262285_599745511_n
The above is a sketch of how to go about doing the accounts with India’s state level public finances (and the states have something like 60 million people on average…)… Here is analysis at a more detailed level… and it can get more detailed still…(But the Government and its apologists would not know or want to know where to begin…)

66034_10151159109892285_266591766_n

532244_10151159110832285_812565539_n

603885_10151159111847285_1745323547_n

From Facebook 14 August 2013

 

From Facebook 26 July 2013

Can you see Amartya Sen, Jagdish Bhagwati, Manmohan Singh or any of their acolytes in this group photo dated 21 May 1989 at the University of Hawaii Manoa? friedman-et-al-at-uh-india-conf-19891Probably not, as they were not there and Isaac Newton tells us an object cannot be at two places at the same time… Manmohan Singh was deliberately not invited as he and his acolytes represented precisely the Indian economic policy establishment I had been determined to reform! Yet the Government of India was represented amply by the Ambassador to Washington, PK Kaul, as well as the Consul General in San Francisco, K. Rana (besides the founding head of ICRIER who invited himself). Amartya and Jagdish were invited nominally almost at the last minute as I have said, where we knew they would not accept and yet they would have been kept informed as two of the three senior Indian academic economists in the USA at the time (Jagdish was still an Indian at the time); the third, TN Srinivasan, is present, and was a major author of ours as I have said.
Of the two volumes, on India and Pakistan, that resulted from the project, the India-volume
indvol
543068_10151152270882285_835660216_n
602593_10151152229307285_27628359_n
Thus all and any gassing ever since about the 1991 reform which avoids these central facts has seemed to me, even if I have to say so myself, like “Hamlet without the prince”… :)  “It was Wordsworth who first noted, in a letter of 1793, the story of a company of strolling players who advertised a performance of Hamlet and announced, at the beginning of the performance, that they hoped the audience would forgive the omission of the character of the prince”… Facts are stubborn, unalterable things… :)

From Facebook 26 July 2013

Subroto Roy finds a young Indian gassing about Hayek at last, and sends him Hayek’s 1981 letter to a different young Indian…

559713_10150634394632285_1298642391_n

From Facebook 25 July 2013

I have been very critical of Amartya Sen in recent days but am completely in agreement with him about the unsuitability of Modi whom I have called an “uncouth rabble-rouser”, predicting he will lead the BJP to certain defeat (a small sad minority in the next Parliament)…

The BJP man who gassed about stripping Amartya of the Bharat Ratna seems to have his brain lost somewhere in his innards… What the BJP have done by falling in line behind Modi is allow the Congress a walkover despite their dreadful (Amartya Senian) economics…


From Facebook 25 July 2013

“I’m not going to vote for Modi, I have no particular affection for him, but I have no particular affection for Rahul Gandhi either”, says Jagdish Bhagwati. I am glad to hear this as Jagdish, having become a US citizen in the mid 1990s as I recall, can’t legally vote in Indian elections anyway as far as I know…

From Facebook 24 July 2013

“… What India’s polity needs is to acquire a common understanding of just how dismal the state-level and Union-level fiscal and hence monetary situations are, and to proceed accordingly, in a scientifically honest spirit, in the manner I outlined in my 3 December 2012 Delhi lecture….”

From Facebook 24 July 2013

On Some Puzzlement at Amartya Sen’s Disclaimer of Academic and Political Paternity of the “Food Security Bill” and Claims to Paternity of “Asian Economic Development” and “Human Capital”….

I am terribly sorry, besides being utterly puzzled, to find Amartya Sen **disclaiming** paternity of the whole so-called “Food Security Bill”:

“Questioner: You are being called the creator of the Food Security Bill.
Amartya Sen: Yes, I don’t know why. That is indeed a paternity suit I’m currently fighting. People are accusing me of being the father”

which he and his acolyte and their friends **did** father while claiming paternity of areas of research he did not, e.g.

1) “Asian Economic Development” [“unlike the process of development in Japan, China, Korea and other countries, which pursued **what Jean Drèze and I have called “Asian economic development” in our book**..."] — neither he nor his acolyte fathered this in 2013, it was in fact a vast area of economic research — in the 1980s!

2) “Human capital” theory… Do you see any reference to T.W. Schultz’s 1960 American Economic Association Presidential Address or his 1979 Bank of Sweden Prize address in this 1997 survey titled  *Human Capital and Human Capability” by Professor Amartya Sen in *World Development* Vol. 25, No. 12, pp. 1959-1961, 1997, the year before his 1998 Bank of Sweden Prize? I do not. If one did not know better, one might have thought from it there was nothing done in economics (worth talking about) on the subject of “human capital” from the time of Adam Smith and David Hume until Amartya Sen…

From Facebook  22 July  2013

I find the current spat between Jagdish Bhagwati of Columbia and Amartya Sen of Harvard (leave aside their respective acolytes who would not be known but for their mentors) over India’s political economy to be rather dismal, unproductive and yes, unacademic, even possibly academically dishonest.

Both were in their mid 50s and, along with TN Srinivasan at Yale, the three senior-most Indians in US academic economics when I and Ted James, in our early 30s, initiated and led the University of Hawaii perestroika-for-India project in the mid 1980s. (Bhagwati stopped being an Indian and became a US national in the following decade, I was told.)  We invited both to Hawaii but deliberately did so very late in the day knowing they would decline, which is what they did; we did not want either to come in and be the “star” who ended up hogging the microphone or the limelight especially as neither was known for work in the areas we were interested in, namely, India’s macroeconomic and foreign trade framework and fiscal and monetary policies.

Bhagwati, after his excellent work with Padma Desai on India in 1966, co-authored a fine 1975 work with TN Srinivasan *Foreign Trade Regimes and Economic Development: India* and that was what made us want to invite TN as one of our main economic authors, charged with writing the excellent chapter that he did titled “Planning and Foreign Trade Reconsidered”. The other main economics author we hoped for was Sukhamoy Chakravarty from New Delhi, but despite my pleading he would not come due to ill health; he recommended C. Rangarajan, telling me Rangarajan had been the main author with him of the critical 1985 RBI report on monetary policy, Rangarajan said he could not come and recommended Amaresh Bagchi, promising to write jointly with him, so Amaresh came and authored a chapter on monetary policy and public finance. Along with Milton Friedman’s suppressed 1955 memorandum which I was publishing for the first time in 1989, TN and Amaresh authored the main economics’ chapters we wanted.

Amartya Sen and I go back, momentarily, to Hindustan Park in 1964 when there was a faint connection as family friends from World War II, and then he later knew me cursorily when I was an undergraduate at LSE and he was already a famous professor — and I greatly enjoyed his excellent lectures at the LSE on his fine book *On Economic Inequality*, and a few years later he wrote in tangential support of me at Cambridge for which he was thanked in the preface to my 1989 *Philosophy of Economics*, and also wrote me nice handwritten letters, some pages of which remain with me, in which I recall him expressing his scepticism of what I had simply called ‘price theory’, namely the Marshallian and/or Walrasian theory of value.  We met briefly in 1978, and then again in 2006 when I was asked to talk to him in our philosophical conversation which came to be published nicely. In 2006, I told him of my whole 1990-1991 Rajiv Gandhi experience in initiating what became the 1991 reform on the basis of my giving Rajiv the results of the Hawaii project, and Amartya was kind enough to say that he knew I had been arguing all this “very early on”, referring presumably to the 1984 London Times editorial.

As for Bhagwati, he received a copy of the proofs of the 1984 work just before it was published and was kind enough to write I had “done an excellent job of setting out the problems afflicting our economic policies, unfortunately government-made problems!” We never met except accidentally for a long conversation on the sofas in the foyer of the IMF in Washington when I was a consultant there in 1993 and he had come to see someone; he was surprisingly knowledgeable about my personal 1990 matter in the Supreme Court of India which astonished me until he told me his brother the Supreme Court judge had mentioned the case to him!1013586_10151543024792285_1764498590_n

Why I find the current Bhagwati-Sen spat rather pathetic is because it seems based on ignorance of Indian macroeconomic facts and the best of Indian monetary and fiscal analysis whether at Union or provincial levels.

I have been harsh with Amartya for saying “unlike the process of development in Japan, China, Korea and other countries, which pursued what Jean Drèze and I have called “Asian economic development” in our book, India has not had enough focus on public spending on school education and basic healthcare, which these other countries have had…” — saying he seems ignorant of all the work in the 1980s on “Asian Economic Development” and have added “Is he reinventing the wheel again with “Asian Economic Development” being claimed to be invented by him and his acolyte? Oh please! Just as he reinvented “human capital” theory decades after TW Schultz’s 1960 American Economic Association Presidential Address and 1979 Bank of Sweden Prize…?”

I have to be equally harsh with Bhagwati if he has been extolling a so-called ‘Gujarat Model’ over a so-called ‘Kerala Model’ — it is all misleading nonsense, there is no such thing, Gujarat and Kerala are both states of India using the same debauched currency and contributing in no discernibly different way to that process of debauching the currency. Can Ahmedabad city or Trivandrum city raise any municipal bonds in any world capital markets freely? Of course they cannot (though I think the former might have tried or at least gassed about it once). That is the question where Bhagwati and his acolyte needed to start but of course they did not — although he has known fully of my work and his acolyte even went about praising Milton’s 1955 memorandum at one point, perhaps wishing that he and not I had in fact published it. (As for Milton himself, he met the Chief Economist of the Tatas about April 1989 at Hoover I think, and the latter told me after the meeting that Milton had said “the only Indian economist he knew was Suby Roy”.)

Why all this has any significance at all is because the Indian press are making out the Bhagwati-Sen spat to reflect a BJP-Congress or Narendra Modi-Rahul Gandhi spat. Perhaps it does, but if so that makes it even more pathetic.

What India’s polity needs is to acquire a common understanding of just how dismal the state-level and Union-level fiscal and hence monetary situations are, and to proceed accordingly, in a scientifically honest spirit, in the manner I outlined in my 3 December 2012 Delhi lecture.

From Facebook  18 July  2013

What is Amartya Sen on about?  He says

“First, unlike the process of development in Japan, China, Korea and other countries, which pursued what Jean Drèze and I have called “Asian economic development” in our book, India has not had enough focus on public spending on school education and basic healthcare, which these other countries have had….”

Sen and his acolyte called it “Asian Economic Development” in 2013?

Where have they been? My Hawaii colleagues, especially Ted James, and many many many others including especially Gerald M. Meier were publishing about all that every month — in the mid 1980s!

Everyone knows all that stuff from *a long time ago*! Where was Amartya Sen in the mid 1980s when all that was happening? (His acolyte was still a student perhaps).

Is he reinventing the wheel again with “Asian Economic Development” being claimed to be invented by him and his acolyte? Oh please!

Just as he reinvented “human capital” theory decades after TW Schultz’s 1960 American Economic Association Presidential Address and 1978 1979 Bank of Sweden Prize…?

Yes, it is true we did not invite Amartya, then at Harvard, to the UH Manoa India-Pakistan projects in 1989… (or rather we did invite him so late that we knew he would decline)…

friedman-et-al-at-uh-india-conf-19891

From Facebook  18 July  2013

Subroto Roy reads “In his explanation for the Taliban’s actions, Adnan Rasheed references a British politician from the 1800s – Thomas Babington Macaulay. Macaulay was famous for wanting to impose an English education system on colonial India, to replace local languages like Hindi, Arabic and Persian and create what he described as a “class of interpreters…Indian in colour, English in tastes,” who would help impose British colonial rule on India”…

and says

Hey, the Pakistan Taliban and India’s RSS/VHP have this in common: both hate “Macaulay’s children”! (And no, liberal secular Indian nationalists, or at least this one, are not Macaulayites)…

What Macaulay said to the House of Commons in 1833 was this: “It may be that the public mind of India may expand under our system till it has outgrown that system; that by good government we may educate our subjects into a capacity for better government; that having become instructed in European knowledge, they may, in some future stage, demand European institutions. Whether such a day will ever come I know not. But never will I attempt to avert or retard it. Whenever it comes, it will be the proudest day in English history.”…

To which I said in 1984: “Less than a hundred years later, in 1930-31, the Indian National Congress – to the considerable chagrin of the British Government – resolved to bring about an independent India in which every citizen would have the right to free speech, to profess and practise his faith freely, and to move and practise his profession anywhere in the country. There would be universal adult suffrage and no-one would be unjustly deprived of his liberty or have his property entered, sequestered or confiscated. In particular, all citizens in the future republic would be `equal before the law, irrespective of religion, caste, creed or sex’, and no disability would attach`to any citizen by reason of his or her religion, caste, creed or sex, in regard to public employment, office of power or honour, and in the exercise of any trade or calling’….”

From Facebook  17 July  2013

The totalitarianism of Indian politics, whether BJP or Congress or any of the political warlord/warlady  strongman/stronglady  parties..:

“Delhi BJP Vice President Aamir Raza Hussain has resigned from his post after his statement against Gujarat Chief Minister Narendra Modi anguished the party leadership. In a letter to Delhi BJP President Vijay Goel, Husain said that he should not have made comments which could cause hurt to a senior leader of the party while holding an important post. Husain had yesterday told a newschannel that Muslims would prefer senior party leader L K Advani or Leader of Opposition in Lok Sabha Sushma Swaraj over Modi as the Prime Ministerial candidate. His intention was not to cause anguish against any leader and he has tendered his resignation from the post, Delhi BJP said in a statement….”

As for the “Left”, there is plenty of “inner party” criticism — as long as there is no change in the entrenched leadership.

From Facebook  10 July  2013

Reflections on the BJP, India, the Congress, 1990-1991 etc (Part I)

Had the BJP been a normal political party seeking to actually win power by winning the Median Voter in an Indian general election, Yashwant Sinha would have been the kind of person they would have promoted to lead them in 2014. He is well enough educated, with an MA in political science from Patna University, he had a good enough career in the IAS before he resigned and entered politics, and he has had more than average experience of senior cabinet posts in the Union Government. He crossed over from Chandrashekhar but would be seen by all as a secularist or at least as much of a secularist as may be found today in the BJP. Had the BJP been a normal political party, Yashwant Sinha would have been the kind of person they would have made leader.

But they have not and did not. They have gone with someone I have called, and consider to be, “an uncouth rabble-rouser” – though of course we should now expect, once Narendra Modi is official leader of the BJP, he is not going to be allowed to be himself, Modi is not going to be allowed to be the uncouth rabble-rouser of his speeches but will have to strictly obey the party’s ultra-modern spin doctors and speech-writers, as the BJP, with the backing of the snazzy jet-setting immigrants to the USA and UK who make up the “Overseas BJP”, tries to create a brand and image where Modi, far from being allowed to be Modi, instead becomes a unifying symbol to be portrayed to the outside world while behind the scenes there is endless internal conflict (i.e. a BJP version of the Congress’s Sonia).

Modi, I have said, will never lead India and the BJP has shot itself in the foot by choosing such a strategy – of seeking to galvanize its own cadre rather than trying to win the Median Voter of the Indian electorate! (Might I guess the “Overseas BJP” inventing this strategy are from the Republican Right in the USA? Since Obama beat Romney, they now need to try to use their theories in the Old Country.) Mr Advani, with his experience, sensed that Modi would lead the party he had built to an irrelevant small minority in Parliament, and he has not changed his mind while he watches how things pan out; Yashwant Sinha is right behind him, and doubtless, with his own prime ministerial ambitions compelled by his party to be frozen, would like a senior Cabinet position in any new BJP-led Government.

I have also said it remains to be seen whether Modi ends up being in fact a kind of Stalking-Horse candidate, who, when the mood makes it obvious he cannot lead India, offers instead to stand aside for Advani to be PM and says he will be happy with Home or Defence. Yashwant Sinha then might aspire for Finance and be happy enough to settle for it in the circumstances. All this comes to mind reading Yashwant Sinha’s criticism of Manmohan Singh in yesterday’s *Economic Times* and today’s *Business Standard* promoting his own purported credentials as a macroeconomic policy-maker and seeking to position himself as the BJP’s only coherent Finance man.

… to be continued…

From Facebook  9 July  2013

That the Sonia-Manmohan Government is clueless about economics and is subject at any given moment entirely to the pressure of this or that interest group is apparent from, not merely their ideas about depriving peasants of their land paying them paper money for it and distributing jobs and cereals to them instead, but from the idea that “captains of industry”, namely, Big Business and their friends Big Labour, have anything but commercial self-interest in mind when gassing about “growth”…

The news this morning says

“With economic growth remaining sluggish and rupee depreciating, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh will have an interaction with the captains of industry later this month to discuss ways to boost industrial output and contain current account deficit (CAD).Singh will meet the leaders of the industry on July 29 to review the state of economy and work out steps to push growth. The discussions will cover measures to correct CAD and revive industrial growth, a PMO statement said Monday. The issue of depreciation of the rupee and its impact on trade and industry will also be discussed. The meeting assumes significance as the government has been concerned over the sluggish growth, high CAD and depreciating rupee.CAD last fiscal was 4.8 per cent and government intends to bring it down to 4.2 per cent this financial year. The slide in the value of rupee is another concern in the government. The rupee today fell to an all-time low of 61.19 against dollar.Singh will also discuss with the captains of the industry ways to accelerate skill development, besides development of Delhi-Mumbai Industrial Corridor (DMIC), Chennai-Bangalore Industrial Corridor (CBIC) and Amritsar-Delhi-Kolkata Industrial Corridor (ADKIC).Singh will meet the leaders of the industry a month after setting an investment target of Rs 1.15 lakh crore in PPP (public private partnership) projects across infrastructure sectors in rail, port and power in the next six months to pep up the investor.The meeting takes place at a difficult time with growth slumping to five percent, the lowest in a decade. Sluggish investments and industrial growth have been big drags on Asia’s third largest economy.Manufacturing sector expanded by a meagre 2.6 percent in the financial year 2012-13, according to the Central Statistics Office data.The Indian rupee has weakened by almost 10 percent this year and hit a record low of 61.21 against the dollar Monday.The current account deficit has hit a record 4.8 percent of gross domestic product in the fiscal year that ended March 31….”

Can the July 29 meeting not be predicted clearly? Importers will cry about rupee depreciation, so the Government will promise to look into it, at which Exporters will cry about possible rupee appreciation and ask for export subsidies and get them… and as for “reviving growth” there will be a lot of gas about “single window clearance”, “public private partnership” (i.e., legitimate looting), wicked environmentalists holding back industry, etc etc etc… It is all nonsense and will merely result in further subsidies and concessions from the impoverished Indian exchequer to the Fat Cats of Indian industry (dressed in their Armani as they might be these days…).

Here is what I said in October 2006:

“It is as fallacious to think private investment from foreign or domestic businessmen will support public “infrastructure” creation as it is to think foreign exchange reserves are like tax revenues in being available for Government expenditure on “infrastructure”. Such fallacies are intellectual products of either those who know no economics at all or those who have forgotten whatever little they might have been once mistaught in their youth. What serious economics does say is that Government should generally have nothing to do with any kind of private business, and instead should focus on properly providing public goods and services, encourage competition in all avenues of economic activity and prevent or regulate monopoly, and see to it all firms pay taxes they are due to pay.

That is it. It is as bad for Government to be pampering organised foreign or domestic business or organised labour with innumerable subsidies, as has been happening in India for decades, as it is to make enterprise difficult with red tape and hurdles. Businessmen are grown ups and should be allowed to freely risk their capital and make their profits or their losses without public intervention.

An economics-based policy would have single-mindedly sought to improve the financial condition of every governmental entity in the country, with the aim of improving the provision of public goods and services to all 1,000 million Indians. If and when budgets of all governmental entities become sound, foreign creditors would automatically line up before them with loans to sell, and ambitious development goals can be accomplished. As long as public budgets (and public accounts) remain in an outrageous shambles, nothing can be in fact achieved and only propaganda, corruption and paper-money creation results instead. Whatever economic growth does occur is due to new enterprise and normal technological progress, and is mostly despite and not because of New Delhi’s bureaucrats…”


From Facebook  6 July  2013

Will Manmohan Singh resign his Rajya Sabha seat if he and Sonia lead the Congress into defeat in 2014? Or will he remain there quietly until 2018 waiting for a Bharat Ratna perhaps? Or will he perhaps push off to some kind of foreign academic or UN assignment that can be found for him by his friends at his age?

The peculiar thing the Congress has caused is that they have a PM who has no personal political stake in the longevity, or really the performance, of the Government. Yet there is always rationality, always an explanation!

What explains the Congress clinging to Rajiv Gandhi’s family for unity after Rajiv’s assassination?

Sonia had had no wish to be in Indian politics, in fact she had no wish that Rajiv himself be in Indian politics. I am pretty sure Rajiv would *not* have wished to see her or their children in Indian politics: what, from my personal experience with him, he wished instead to see was the Congress party becoming a modern and modern-minded party, institutionally able to stand up on its own without help from his family. What explains the Congress clinging to Rajiv Gandhi’s family for unity after Rajiv’s assassination? And also Sonia agreeing to play the role?

There is an explanation! And it is related to the explanation of why Manmohan Singh was put forward to Sonia — who did not know him otherwise (if anyone recalls, Manmohan as Finance Minister in the middle of 1991 donated some stupendous sum like Rs 100 cr of government money to the Rajiv Gandhi Foundation, which Sonia, in her mourning, rightly rejected as I recall…)…

Let me hasten to add that I do not think the BJP will win if I say the Congress may lose: I have already said Narendra Modi will never lead India and the BJP has shot itself in the foot again even before they start.

Whom do I think will rule India in 2014 at the rate things are going?

Why, the President of India of course… (and in his favour I will say he is a nationalist, a secularist, and an intelligent and well-experienced man, still open to learning…)

From Facebook  5 July  2013

The Sonia-Manmohan policy (endorsed by Amartya Sen and initiated by his friends) misnamed the “Food Security Bill” which has been today pushed through as an Ordnance, is hopelessly bad economics, probably without precedent in known economic history. The Sonia Congress seems to have well and truly regressed to an attempted Indira “populist” mode of the 1970s — which may not surprise, given that a Sanjay stalwart is now placed as Sonia’s Gatekeeper.  But what should also not surprise is if the whole thing backfires badly on the Congress: India’s voters have become matured and enlightened and well-informed in the new information age, and are hardly the malleable masses of past decades: if they sense the whole thing amounts to a vast political gimmick or worse that causes massive dislocations and more inflation, Congress’s policy-credibility will be merely further shot through (which is a pity since the Opposition are only worse)…

From Facebook  5 July  2013

Was Ishrat Jahan a terrorist? Almost certainly not. Was she in the company of terrorists sent by Pakistan’s LeT? Probably. Did she know she was? Probably not. Were they recruiting her for a suicide bombing of a politician? Possibly. Did she know this? Probably not. Did the police kill the gang, including her, without adequate justification. Probably. Was there a political go-ahead at provincial and national levels? Possibly. Ishrat Jehan was caught in the cross-fire between Pakistan and India, “collateral damage” is the dreadul modern term…. It is a credit to India that the truth has been emerging at all, even after nine years…

From Facebook 29 June 2013

“Dehradun: Uttarakhand Assembly Speaker Govind Singh Kunjwal has said that he fears that more than 10,000 people may have died in the flash floods and landslides that have ravaged the state since June 16…”!

— It is inexplicable if not outrageous that an educated man like Manmohan Singh, as Prime Minister of India, did not immediately instruct the military to send in foot columns of crack mountain troops, supplied by mules, to make their way into the mountains to find and sustain thousands of stranded starving civilians regardless of weather conditions. There is hardly any terrain that a well-led force cannot get through on foot. Whatever helicopter support they had in the beginning should have been used to locate all major groups of stranded civilians, and land small armed forces there to organise them, maintain law and order, and prepare them for survival and evacuation… Everybody knows helicopters cannot function in bad weather, and could not be relied on for mass evacuations in bad weather.

Instead of clear-headed civilian leadership, Government and Opposition politicians merely put on a pathetic show and declared they were throwing (debauched) money at the event after the fact. The military has seemed to me somewhat complacent and unimaginative, not wanting to get their nice uniforms muddied too much. Two cheers for the Army Chief who said yesterday ‘he had asked his commanders to launch relief operations in “very, very difficult conditions” in a proactive manner, without waiting for any requisition from authorities’ — yes, finally, a clear statement of what was needed but far too many days late: when had he issued that order? Prime Minister Manmohan Singh should have ordered this himself on Day One. Did he? What did he in fact do?


Of course yes, Dr Singh and his acolytes have indeed been busy with decision-making! 
Business being business, the Big Business Lobbies cannot be stopped from controlling the Government of India’s agenda even during the Uttarakhand Emergency!

“The government on Saturday decided to set up 51 new low-cost airports with an aim to give boost to civil aviation sector and increase air connectivity to Tier-II and Tier-III cities….The state-owned airport operator, Airports Authority of India (AAI), would set up the low-cost airports in 51 cities in Andhra Pradesh, Jharkhand, Bihar, Punjab, Uttar Pradesh, Arunachal Pradesh, Assam, Madhya Pradesh, Rajasthan and Maharashtra.Apart from the low-cost airports, the government has decided grant new international airport status to Bhubaneswar and Imphal at a cost of Rs.20,000 crore. Also, construction of eight greenfield airports this year would be awarded under public-private-participation (PPP) mode for Navi Mumbai, Juhu in Mumbai, Goa, Kannur, Rajguru Nagar Chakan at Pune, Sriperumbudur, Bellary and Raigarh, a statement from Prime Minister’s Office said.Also, the government was mulling operation and maintenance of airports at Chennai, Kolkata, Lucknow, Guwahati, Jaipur and Ahmedabad through PPP contracts.In a bid to ramp up investor sentiment, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh on Friday set an investment target of Rs.1.15 lakh crore in PPP (public private partnership) projects across infrastructure sectors in civil aviation, rail, port and power in the next six months.The decisions were taken at a meeting Prime Minister held here to finalise infrastructure projects for 2013-14 which was attended by Finance Minister P Chidambaram, Planning Commission Deputy Chairman Montek Singh Ahluwalia and Ministers of Power, Coal, Railways, Roads, Shipping and Civil Aviation….”

Speaking of airports, these are presumably to service aircraft and not, e.g. railways, trucks or other surface transport vehicles used by India’s masses; are all these new aircraft to the imported? Bought from Boeing? Airbus? The Russians? What will be the net forex burden? Are existing airlines and airports in India doing well? NOT!

From Facebook 29 June 2013

Two cheers for the Indian Army Chief who said yesterday
‘he had asked his commanders to launch relief operations in “very, very difficult conditions” in a proactive manner, without waiting for any requisition from authorities’ — yes, finally, a clear statement of what was needed but far too many days late. When had he issued that order? Prime Minister Manmohan Singh should have ordered this himself on Day One. Did he? What did he in fact do? It would have meant foot columns of crack mountain troops, supplied by mules, making their way into the mountains to find and sustain thousands of stranded starving civilians regardless of weather conditions. Everybody knows helicopters cannot function in bad weather. Yet there is hardly any terrain that a well-led force cannot get through on foot. Instead of clear-headed civilian leadership, Government and Opposition politicians merely put on a pathetic show and declared they were throwing (debauched) money at the event after the fact.

From Facebook 28 June 2013

The Army says “Army has so far evacuated more than 33,000 people since 17 June. 25,000 of them by foot alone while 8000 were moved out by helicopter. 13 Army Aviation aircraft conducted 600 sorties to evacuate 2715 people and ferry 24 tons of food, fuel, medicines, blankets and relief material to the people…”

This needs candid assessment. 25,000 people evacuated by foot? By whom? From where to where? When?

I am glad to see Special Forces have been used if only slightly — to build a helipad (a good use), to retrieve bodies of rescue personnel (a not so good use)…

From Facebook 28 June 2013

“Fears mount over 3000 still missing” says one headline,
“Air ops near end, Harsil fully evacuated of pilgrims” says another…

Exactly the problem that I diagnosed some days ago! Namely, the immediate response of the Indian military on 15/16/17th June should have been to mobilise a few thousand highly trained mountain troops and send them in *on foot* with mule-trains to locate all stranded and starving civilians in the mountains, cutting through the jungle and making their own paths if need be, heavy rain and fog or not.   There is very little terrain that an equipped well-led military force cannot get through, regardless of weather conditions…

*We did this as **schoolboys** back in 1970!*…

22365_260097897284_7896224_nWhatever helicopter support they had in the beginning should have been used to locate all major groups of stranded civilians, and land small armed forces there to organise them, maintain law and order, and prepare them for survival and evacuation…

Instead the foot-columns and the mules stayed at the barracks, the helicopters flew as and when the weather permitted, even causing one or two to crash… The military seems to have been a little complacent and greatly unimaginative, not wanting to get their nice uniforms all muddied, and expecting non-existent orders from incompetent political leadership…

From Facebook 27 June 2013

The unopened water-bottles are not the only thing wrong with this picture…. But wait, it also has a lesson in political science, namely, that what the Congress (and by imitation other parties in India) follows is the Principle of Proximity….i.e., how close can one inveigle one’s way in as a courtier…

8849_10151504920047285_1581249060_n

In my case, I have declined to do any such jostling and my proximity to Rahul Gandhi’s late great father in 1990-1991 occurred due to the late great Siddhartha Shankar Ray thinking very highly of the perestroika-for-India project I had led in America in the 1980s,

friedman-et-al-at-uh-india-conf-19891and also of my 1984 work before that… Rajiv at our last meeting on 23 March 1991 said to me as I was leaving with our advisory group that he wished to see me on his own and would be arranging a meeting… but that never happened.

From Facebook 27 June 2013

Presidency College Calcutta Economics Department was *never* a “cradle of economics” though it is called that today in a morning newspaper and many Presidency alumni have doubtless nurtured that self-delusion. People passing through the St Stephen’s College Delhi Economics BA or MA have had similar delusions and fantasies. Ho hum… each to his own… Here is my 29 May 2000 proposal made as Professor at an “Institution of National Importance” for a “36 Lecture Introductory Economics Course for Advanced Undergraduate Students in India”. Also, my “One-Semester Microeconomics (Theory of Value) Course for Graduate Engineers Planning to Become MBAs” which I myself taught for more than a half dozen years. Do Presidency or St Stephen’s have a comparable syllabus or the faculty to teach either? I would be most pleasantly surprised if they did.

From Facebook 26 June 2013

The 2013 Uttarakhand disaster and the 2008 Mumbai massacres equally reveal the incompetence of the Manmohan-Sonia Government’s political and military responses to national emergencies — **not** that the fascists, communists et al of the Opposition would have been any better, probably worse… All that everyone in New Delhi’s Governing Class knows how to do is throw (debauched) money at things after the fact… Is it the **12th** “Five Year Plan” the country is supposed to be on?? Over which Manmohan, Vajpayee, et al have presided in the name of purported progress? Pathetic.

From Facebook 26 June 2013

The Chindits did not need let aside have any helicopters; just mules and men and grit and determination. Gopal Tandan may remember that in 1970 we, a schoolboy party of a dozen or so led by David Gibbs along with a dozen or so sherpas, cut through mountainous jungle and made our own paths for miles in heavy rainfall or fog carrying backpacks, crossing roaring rivers too. Our legs would be filled with leeches by evening — a completely panicky thought, until you learn to use salt on them and have them drop away. I do not think bad weather itself would prevent trained well-equipped mountain soldiers of the Indian military to have sent columns on foot into the mountains, along with mules, to rescue thousands upon thousands of stranded starving civilians; execrable political leadership and unimaginative military advice from pampered comfortable peace-time generals would be sufficient though. There is very little terrain that an equipped well-led military force cannot get through.

From Facebook 25 June 2013

I do not agree that the public evidence yet shows the Indian military have been heroically rescuing masses of people in the Uttarakhand disaster. They seem to have been doing, at best, a barely competent job. There seems to have been a woeful lack of high quality political leadership and high quality military advice too. The first helicopter priority should have been not even transporting people back in dribs and drabs of a half dozen or so per ride from here and there but rather to have located all the major groups of civilians and have landed with each of them small teams of military personnel (armed to maintain general law and order and to organise them for survival) with some supplies, so logistic contact could have been made for more systematic larger evacuations. I do not see that to have been done. And then there is the business of the helicopters! Initially some 40 light helicopters which did not seem very military in appearance seem to have been on the job. Then they added an MI-26 after several days, and also started to fly around the new expensive US-made transporters, the latter perhaps just for show. And now the excuse is made — could they not expect this? — Oh the weather has turned bad again, all the choppers have to be grounded! What can we do even if 5,000 or 10,000 remain stranded and starving? This is nonsense. The Indian Army has numerous well-trained Mountain Divisions. It has a long history of *mules* being used for transportation in all weather conditions!

945317_10151501366152285_1641222745_n

Remember the Chindits?! “The 77th Indian Infantry Brigade, otherwise known as the Chindits, was gradually formed in the area around Jhansi in the summer of 1942. Wingate took charge of the training of the troops in the jungles of central India during the rainy season….The standard brigade and battalion structures were abandoned. The force was instead formed into eight columns…The heavy weapons, radios, reserve ammunition and rations and other stores were carried on mules, which would also provide an emergency source of food once their loads had been depleted. With 57 mule handlers, each British column numbered 306 men (the Gurkha columns were slightly stronger, with 369 men). Each man carried more than 72 pounds (33 kg) of equipment, which was proportionally more than the mules carrying the support weapons and other stores….”

Just as I do not see the Indian military to have deployed forward teams with known groups of stranded civilians, I do not see it to have deployed immediately its many many many lowly mules to help reach them and rescue them…. It is more comfortable to stay at a local base perhaps waiting for helicopters to fly again, and also waiting for non-existent orders from some purported leader.

From Facebook 23 June 2013

Subroto Roy reads in the news “As rescue and relief operations in Uttarakhand gather pace, the Indian Air Force has deployed an Mi-26 – the largest helicopter in the world – to augment operations. The chopper, which is usually used to transport goods and troops, is now being used to maintain supply of aviation fuel, critical for other smaller choppers that are already in service to help evacuate thousands stranded across the state. The Army and Air Force have deployed over 40 helicopters for rescue efforts, but a shortage of fuel is turning into a concern. Bringing in new supplies is also very tough since landslides have destroyed several important roads. The Mi-26 will carry fuel to Gauchar in Chamoli district – a landing ground that has been activated by the Air Force – where other choppers can refuel. It will also transport heavy equipment required in repair and construction of roads that is being carried out by the Border Roads Organisation. The giant chopper will also support the construction of temporary helipads to enable smaller helicopters in the evacuating process of those stranded in various parts of the state”

and says This sounds to me a somewhat delayed response, several days into the crisis. Manmohan Singh’s Cabinet should have explicitly announced going onto a war-footing immediately, ordering all available government helicopters to be used and requisitioning private ones. For politicians to be donating money, or asking the public to do so, is a ridiculous hypocritical substitute.

From Facebook 22 June 2013

Subroto Roy reads from Reuters “India has launched a wide-ranging surveillance programme that will give its security agencies and even income tax officials the ability to tap directly into e-mails and phone calls without oversight by courts or parliament…The government started to quietly roll the system out state by state in April this year, according to government officials. Eventually it will be able to target any of India’s 900 million landline and mobile phone subscribers and 120 million Internet users….The new system will allow the government to listen to and tape phone conversations, read e-mails and text messages, monitor posts on Facebook, Twitter or LinkedIn and track searches on Google of selected targets, according to interviews with two other officials involved in setting up the new surveillance programme, human rights activists and cyber experts…. Security agencies will no longer need to seek a court order for surveillance or depend, as they do now, on Internet or telephone service providers to give them the data, the government officials said. Government intercept data servers are being built on the premises of private telecommunications firms. These will allow the government to tap into communications at will without telling the service providers, according to the officials and public documents. The top bureaucrat in the federal interior ministry and his state-level deputies will have the power to approve requests for surveillance of specific phone numbers, e-mails or social media accounts, the government officials said…. The senior telecommunications ministry official dismissed suggestions that India’s system could be open to abuse.  “The home secretary has to have some substantial intelligence input to approve any kind of call tapping or call monitoring. He is not going to randomly decide to tape anybody’s phone calls,” he said. “If at all the government reads your e-mails, or taps your phone, that will be done for a good reason. It is not invading your privacy, it is protecting you and your country,” he said.  The government has arrested people in the past for critical social media posts although there have been no prosecutions….”

and says Yes, I have to admit my attempts since the late 1970s and described in my 1981 Cambridge PhD thesis to advance the cause of individual liberty against a semi-tyrannical state apparatus in India have, probably, failed. Communist sleeper-agents and ideologues and fellow-travellers, opportunistic bureaucrats, fascistic rabble-rousers have prevailed and will prevail in the polity…

From Facebook 21 June 2013

Is there a connection between the ghastly 1999 mob-murder of Graham Staines and his young sons, the 2002 Gujarat riots, the 2012 Delhi gang-rape, the 2007 Nandigram killings, the 2013 Kamduni rape-murder, the 2013 Uttarakhand floods and landslides, etc etc in India (leave aside corruption and general inflation caused by the debauching of money)?

Of course there is: They are all outcomes of appalling governance over decades on end whether by the BJP, the Congress, the Communists or whomever….

I find it pretty pathetic Manmohan Singh has appealed for money to be sent to his PM Relief’s Fund for the Uttarakhand disaster when not only does he know he has presided over endless deficit-finance for decades and his Government can print what it wants in a real emergency and use the Contingency Fund of the budget, he read back in *1986* my 1984 argument sent to him by my late father, which said, e.g. “… if there happen to be millions of cases queuing outside the courts waiting to be heard, or if crime is rampant and police protection ineffective, that may constitute prima facie evidence that too few public resources have been devoted to civil order and justice. Or, if heavy rainfall annually causes landslides in the hills and floods in the plains, devastating crops and leaving innumerable citizens destitute, that also might prompt us to ask whether sufficient public resources have gone towards precautions against such havoc. And so on….”

As for Sonia Gandhi asking MPs to donate a month’s salary for flood relief, who is the political genius making this stuff up for her? Her husband in his 1990-1991 encounter with me, when I gave him the results of the UH-Manoa perestroika-for-India project, was incomparably more serious about governance and change.

From Facebook 21 June 2013

Politics and governance cannot be built, or at least cannot be built with any permanence, on mendacity and propaganda — as the BJP is trying to do with Modi’s execrable behaviour in the 2002 riots. Not that the Congress is a lot better, with its mendacity and self-delusion about its own party’s history in 1990-1991.

From Facebook 19 June 2013

Narendra Modi meets the “Planning Commission” chief and says he is pleased his state is getting more than it asked for;  the NCP says it finds Rahul Gandhi agreeable as a Congress PM choice…

to me, these signal not merely that Modi is utterly clueless about economics but that the real game is merely for the throne of Delhi, namely,

who gets to control

the endless debauching of the currency,
the weapons’ contracts with the Russians, Europeans, Americans,
the free foreign trips,
the capital stock, small as it is, of the Indian polity…

There is no pretence of any discussion of India’s national interest, let aside of the  application of  reason to it…

From Facebook 17 June 2013

Predicting the political future in India: The BJP has shot itself in the foot again, this time, to mix metaphors, on the hare-brained idea that winning India’s Median Voter is to be done by having a notorious extremist leading them; the man seems to me a poorly educated uncouth rabble-rouser, utterly unable to articulate a realistic national vision let aside a winning political strategy for anyone except himself; of course there may yet be a Big Surprise: namely he is actually used as a kind of Stalking Horse candidate, to be sidelined later in the day to allow a “moderate” face to take over… Let us see… Either way, there is no BJP-led Government in India in 2014… The Congress has been doing what it knows best which is acquiring or planning more power for itself; as I have observed since 2004, the quiet (and devious) power behind the throne remains one of Sanjay Gandhi’s notorious friends, and Sonia and her son have been pulled unambiguously in the coarse ignorant wasteful and backward direction of Indira and Sanjay **and further and further away from what I know for a fact Sonia’s husband and Rahul’s father had wanted to see in his last months**! The usual crowd of foreign weapons’ merchants and domestic Big Business and Big Labour will get their way, riding on the endless debauching of the currency that has been presided over for decades by Manmohan (and Pranab). The regional political warlords and warladies will win their due shares, and there will be a hung Parliament — which will probably end up being led by a Congress minority government with outside support… India through 2019 will not have anything like sound public finances leading towards a currency of integrity. Pari passu, the great masses of the poor and illiterate and powerless will remain the same, probably get worse as the businessman-friends of the government take over their land paying them with a debauched paper money. And of course with the systematic destruction or ruination of traditional rural employment and food markets, there might even be spots of famine here and there (caused, let us remind, by those who have been weeping so loudly about such things from far distances). But no one should see or hear or talk about any of this, and it will be conveniently drowned out by Bollywood music and cricket commentary… Such is my assessment as things stand today…

From Facebook  5 June 2013

In a sense, the question became, after Rajiv’s assassination, whom would Sonia choose to learn her political economy from and what would be its flavour and level and who would be on offer to supply this. Almost without exception, classical liberal political economy has been wholly absent in her education as an Indian political leader, and instead communists, neo-communists, communist fellow-travellers, a sleeper agent or two left over from bygone days, sundry statists and socialists besides a motley crowd of opportunists and flatterers, have held the field in her learning of political economy. The one exception was the RTI Act, but even that has become much attenuated.

From Facebook  4 June 2013

LK Advani has wisely (from his party’s point of view) realised that Narendra Modi can never lead India, and will sink the party Advani built. My harsh criticism of the Sonia-Manmohan Duumvirate notwithstanding, they remain less bad than what the BJP seem to portend.

From Facebook 2 June 2013

Subroto Roy asked Does it matter if a thread (on Kashmir) is abandoned? and is told “No.. No..Dr.Roy Its just that the legal and moral questions need debate” and says

The questions have been open for years, and might remain the same for years; my Pakistani hosts have yet to consummate their 2011 invitation for me to speak about all this; it is, in my opinion and experience, too much to expect rationality and good sense to prevail within governments or ruling classes as a general rule, especially in the subcontinent. Observe the absurd media focus on commercial cricket for weeks on end in India. For myself, I have said the biggest personal beneficiary of my 1990-91 encounter with Rajiv Gandhi was Manmohan Singh, and I would be unsurprised if the GoI offered the GoP something like the terms of my (Kashmir) solution and then passed it off as their own invention deserving a Peace Prize. So you see I am rather more sanguine about threads being abandoned.

From Facebook 1 June 2013

Subroto Roy reflects on how peculiar indeed is our Duumvirate in India these last several years… smdrIt is something never seen before. Something unprecedented. Manmohan as PM of India without being a member of the Lok Sabha! Ergo, if his Government resigns and new elections are called he does not lose his own seat — as he is in the Rajya Sabha! (Ambedkar and Nehru, and yes Indira and Rajiv, would have been appalled that India’s PM is not from the Lok Sabha as had been always intended!) He derives all his legitimacy as PM from Sonia who does command the Lok Sabha. Yet she is not officially a part of the Government! Except she and he beam down together in the Government propaganda campaign about “Bharat Nirman”… It does not make any political sense — until you see it to be based on the old USSR model of governance. Of Kosygin and Brezhnev (and Podgorny thrown in too; Pranab was one of the Indian trio after all).
kosyginBrezhnevPodgornykbpIN26_MANMOHAN-SONIA_19755e
The old USSR Communist Party with its Politburo etc was the model for the Congress with its “High Command”; the CPSU affected the Congress and the Communists in India and also the Kuomintang and the Communists in China! The BJP and friends had European fascism as their model! So India is left between fascists and communists of some or other description with nothing in between! Jeffersonian Liberals, or even a few Churchillian Conservatives or Attleean Socialists, are in short supply… (Of course it is especially odd that Sonia derives *her* power from having been Rajiv’s wife — and Rajiv had little truck with either Manmohan or Pranab; thereby hangs a tale…)

From Facebook 29 May 2013

29 May 1984, a year short of thirty years today… *The Times*, London’s leading newspaper at the time, wrote its lead editorial about my critique of Nehru-Indira economic policy… Where was Manmohan Singh? At the Planning Commission perhaps on his way to the RBI; he acknowledged in 1986 receiving from my father a copy of my critique…

From Facebook 23  May 2013

Friday June 15, 1973, my father’s diary records he gave a dinner-party at our then-Paris residence for “MGK” (MG Kaul, ICS, his good buddy and the one-time boss of Dr Manmohan Singh), “KB Lall”, “Amb” (D.N.Chatterjee), “Dr Manmohan Singh”, “RamaKrishnan”, and “Shroff”…. It may have been the next day, Saturday, that my father returned from the office with Manmohan Singh to advise me about economics, before I embarked on my undergraduate studies at the London School of Economics a few months later… Dr Singh (then in his early 40s) and I (then 18) spent about 40 minutes together alone in what became a heated debate about the influence of the USSR on Indian economic planning, he arguing in favour and me arguing, rather vehemently, against… At its end he said he would be sending a letter to me addressed to his friend Amartya Sen, then Professor at the London School of Economics, introducing me; the letter was, as I recall, ambiguous at best, harsh at worst, and I had not wished to carry it by hand but my father insisted I do… I rather wish I had kept a copy but there were no xerox machines around back then… Of course my Cambridge doctoral thesis some years later came to take a very different perspective on India than the economics of Manmohan Singh and Amartya Sen…

From Facebook, 23 May2013

“Go, go, go, said the bird: human kind

Cannot bear very much reality….”

 Certainly Indian politics, and the Government party in particular, cannot bear very much reality…


From Facebook, 12 May 2013

The saddest thing about Manmohan Singh qua statesman was simply that he quietly loved and rewarded well the sycophancy around him, and believed the myths and propaganda and general fiction created by his flatterers about his own purported achievements as an economic policy-maker since 1991. Politically, his role as nominal leader of the country and his party is now fatally wounded with the forced resignations on grounds of corruption or impropriety of two of his most sycophantic proteges (both of whom were most keen to be photographed with him as he walked to or fro, and one of whom invariably held his own hands together like a schoolgirl while walking alongside him as a superfluous mark of submissiveness)… The best thing his party can do now for itself is to get him to not be a nominee, again, for a Rajya Sabha seat from Assam (yes Assam, a state well-known for its Punjabi culture) and to get Sonia Gandhi herself to be PM to lead it into the 2014 elections… Sonia in 2013 is politically not the same as Sonia in 2004…

I should say, again, as I have said before that there is nothing personal in my critical assessment of Dr Singh’s economics and politics. To the contrary, he has been in decades past a friend or at least a colleague of my father’s, and in the autumn of 1973 visited our then-home in Paris at the request of my father to advise me, then aged 18, before I embarked on my undergraduate studies at the London School of Economics. My assessments in recent years like “The Politics of Dr Singh” or “Assessing Manmohan” etc need to be seen along with my “Assessing Vajpayee: Hindutva True and False”, “The Hypocrisy of the CPI-M”, “Against Quackery”, “Our Dismal Politics”, “Political Paralysis” etc. (Also “Mistaken Macroeconomics”, June 2009). Nothing personal is intended in any of these; the purpose at hand has been to contribute to a full and vigorous discussion of the public interest in India….

From Facebook 1 May 2013

from C.G. Somiah’s *The Honest Always Stands Alone* (Niyogi Books): “In the next meeting of the Planning Commission, the soft-spoken Dr Singh deliberated at length on the negative economic indicators prevalent in the country, which could not be ignored for providing relief in any future plan. The Prime Minister was not impressed and made some hurtful derogatory remarks about Dr Singh’s presentation. He then turned to the other members for comments but none of them had the courage to speak up. He finally turned to me and said sarcastically, ‘Let us hear what the Secretary has to say about the approach to the plan.’……A few days later the Prime Minister shared his thoughts with journalists, calling us a ‘bunch of jokers’ who were bereft of any modern ideas of development. When this news made headlines in the newspapers, Dr Singh, emerging out of an urgent meeting with the other members, called me to his office. He looked distraught and terribly upset with the Prime Minister’s remarks. He told me that he was tendering his resignation as he seems to have lost the confidence of the Prime Minister. I sat with him for nearly an hour and told him not to take the extreme step and blamed the Prime Minister’s ignorance for this behaviour. I further advised that since the Prime Minister was young and inexperienced, it was our duty to educate him rather than abandon him…. “

– Manmohan traipsed off to join Nyerere’s “South South” project in 1987 and was not physically in India when I on 18 Sep 1990 gave Rajiv the results of the perestroika-for -India project that I had led at the Univ of Hawaii since 1986… Manmohan’s name was not mentioned again until 22March 1991 when MK Rasgotra challenged the proposals that I had written for Rajiv (in Rajiv’s absence) wanting to know what Manmohan Singh would make of them…

“The next day, Friday March 22, I worked from dawn to get the penultimate draft to Krishna Rao before noon as planned the night before. Rasgotra arrived shortly, and the three of us worked until evening to finish the job. I left for an hour to print out copies for a meeting of the entire group, where the draft we were going to submit would come to be decided. When I got back I found Rasgotra had launched an extended and quite unexpected attack on what had been written on economic policy. Would someone like Manmohan Singh, Rasgotra wanted to know, agree with all this talk we were putting in about liberalization and industrial efficiency? I replied I did not know what Manmohan Singh’s response would be but I knew he had been in Africa heading something called the South-South Commission for Julius Nyrere of Tanzania. I said what was needed was a clear forceful statement designed to restore India’s credit-worthiness, and the confidence of international markets. I said that the sort of thing we should aim for was to make clear, e.g. to the IMF’s man in Delhi when that person read the manifesto, that the Congress Party at least knew its economics and was planning to make bold new steps in the direction of progress. I had argued the night before with Rasgotra that on foreign policy we should “go bilateral” with good strong ties with individual countries, and drop all the multilateral hogwash. But I did not wish to enter into a fight on foreign policy which he was writing, so long as the economic policy was left the way we said. Krishnamurty, Khusro and Pitroda came to my defence saying the draft we had done greatly improved on the March 18 draft. For a bare half hour or so with all of us present, the draft was agreed upon. Later that night at Andhra Bhavan, I gave Krishna Rao the final copy of the draft manifesto which he was going to give Narasimha Rao the next day, and sent a copy to Krishnamurty who was liaising with Pranab Mukherjee. Pitroda got a copy on a floppy disc the next day for Solanki.”

Ragini Bhuyan asked me “You mentioned that Milton Friedman in 1955 had proposed a convertible currency for India on the lines of the Canadian currency. Why was this suppressed by the GoI?”

I said:
“The ideology of India’s economists was one of Sovietesque pseudo-socialism and that has remained the ideology of many. Discussing Milton’s memorandum at the time would have exploded that, which is what I ended up doing decades later. Rajiv Gandhi agreed with me. Sonia Gandhi and Manmohan Singh apparently do not.”

From Facebook 5 February 2013:

Subroto Roy reads “The sense of importance is familiar territory for someone who is remembered as one of the posterboys of economic reforms of 1991. Together with boss and mentor Manmohan Singh, then the country’s finance minister, Ahluwalia and a team of bureaucrats plotted and executed the dismantling of the licence permit raj and the liberalisation of the Indian economy. Immortalised by their trademark light blue turbans, the senior Singh dreamt up the big changes while Ahluwalia and the other officials worked out the policy nuts and bolts and explained them to the world”

and says

“the senior Singh dreamt up the big changes”?

Nope. He did not. ** He was out of the loop** and had nothing to do with originating the 1991 reform when I gave Rajiv Gandhi the results of the UH-Manoa perestroika-for-India project that I had led since 1986… The pink business newspapers, the comprador media, and other vested interests have created a fiction, now exposed…

Do you see Manmohan Singh or Montek Ahluwalia in the photograph? Probably not as they were not there. They, after all, represented the system we were trying to reform!

From Facebook 21 January 2013

Subroto Roy reads Rahul Gandhi to have said yesterday

“And it’s an honour that Manmohan Singhji is sitting here because he spearheaded another revolution. In 1991, he unleashed the voice of thousands in the field of entrepreneurship and changed this country forever”

and says

Manmohan Singh had nothing to do with originating the 1991 economic reform. To the contrary, he represented the system we were seeking to reform!  He has not claimed to have done anything himself but he has allowed others to do so on his behalf. It is a flattering fiction, though an explicable one as it allows facades to be created in the media behind which real economic and political forces may work as normal, specifically, Russian and European weapons’ merchants.

From Facebook 17 Dec 2012

Subroto Roy says to Mr Sathe, Shekhar, changing the direction of a ship of state is very hard, knowing in which direction it should change and to what degree is even harder; it has rarely been something that can be done without random shocks arising let aside the power of vested interests. Had Rajiv Gandhi lived to form a new Government, I have little doubt I would have led the reform that I had chalked out for him and that he had approved of; Sonia Gandhi would have remained the housewife, mother and grandmother that she had preferred to be and not been made into the Queen of India by her party; Manmohan Singh had left India in 1987 for the Nyerere project and it had been rumoured at the time that had been slightly to do with him protesting, to the extent that he ever has protested anything, the anti-Sikh pogrom that some of Rajiv’s friends had apparently unleashed after Indira’s killing; he returned in Nov 1990, joined Chandrashekhar in Dec 1990, left Chandrashekhar in March 1991 when elections were announced and was biding his time as head of the UPSC; had Rajiv Gandhi lived, Manmohan Singh would have had a governor’s career path, becoming the governor of this or that state one after next; he would not have been brought into the economic reform process which he had had nothing to do with originating; and finally Pranab Mukherjee, who had been made to leave the Congress when Rajiv took over, would have been likely rehabilitated slowly but would not have come to control the working of the party as he did. I think I have said in my Lok Sabha TV interview that there have been many microeconomic improvements arising from technological progress in the last 20+ years but the macroeconomic and monetary situation is grim, because at root the fiscal situation remains incoherent and confused. I do not see anyone in Manmohan Singh’s entourage among all his many acolytes and flatterers and apologists who is able to get to these root problems.

 

Facebook March 26 2011

Mr Chidambaram knows better than that!

by Subroto Roy

I remain amused by the powers-that-be in Delhi continuing to attempt to deny me credit for the origins of the 1991 economic reform based on the UH-Manoa perestroika-for-India project I had led 1986-1992, and the results of which I brought with me to my first meeting with Rajiv Gandhi on September 18 1990.

After almost a decade of relentless pressure from me for the truth to be told, Rajiv’s widow on December 28 2009 finally admitted her late husband “left his personal imprint on the (Congress) party’s manifesto of 1991″.

Now yesterday, March 25 2011, Mr Chidambaram has admitted “The Congress manifesto prepared for the general elections in 1991 did talk about an agenda of reforms but with the assassination of Rajiv Gandhi, there was no certainty that these would have remained on the agenda”.

Well, Mr Chidambaram, you know better than that!  Did you not yourself say in Tokyo in April 1993 that the reform “was not miraculous” but based on “rewriting of the Congress manifesto while in Opposition. We were ready when we came back to power in 1991″? (And as for those two former World Bank types with you on the podium yesterday, one was out of the country and cannot possibly claim to have been part of anything, though he had begged me to come to Hawaii and I had said sorry, no; the other, well, perhaps the less said about his capacity for self-delusion the better for India (though his shift from Sovietism to Americanism and his power to waffle endlessly on TV etc is a true bureaucratic marvel). The third man on the podium with you was someone I had tried hard to get to come to Hawaii, upon recommendation of Sukhamoy Chakravarty; but he could not make it; he though has inevitably lost his way for some years now with his wish to stay in Delhi much longer than he should ever have done.)

The simple truth is very simple: the positive change in direction of the Congress Party’s economic and other thinking  occurred due to the Congress President’s meeting with me on September 18 1990, where I gave him the perestroika-for-India project results and advised him to look to the future and write a fresh and modern manifesto. He agreed with his actions the following week, and subsequently, viz., Rajiv Gandhi and the Origins of India’s 1991 Economic Reform. Later, after his assassination, against which I had warned, the process came to be taken over by the greedy and the mendacious (specifically, organised big business lobbies, big bureaucrats and politicians, Soviet sleeper agents etc). So the truth got lost and has had to be reconstructed slowly.

(And puleaaase, baba, Manmohan Singh or any of his acolytes had nothing to do with it! Not in the loop! After all, if they had had the creativity and economic knowledge and intellectual honesty and courage, during all their years and decades in the Government of India and sundry international bureaucracies, to do what we did, they would and should have done it!  But there is just no evidence that they did, sorry baba! Time almost to say Uff!)

My colleague Ted James who with me led the Hawaii projects said of it in January 2010 a few months before he tragically died: “Seldom are significant reforms imposed successfully by international bureaucracies. Most often they are the result of indigenous actors motivated by domestic imperatives. I believe this was the case in India in 1991. It may have been fortuitous that Dr. Roy gained an audience with a receptive Rajiv Gandhi in 1990 but it was not luck that he was prepared with a well-thought out program; this arose from years of careful thought and debate on the matter.”

Why all this is important is not because I want a national award and due recognition etc, which I won’t of course mind getting, but because Dr Singh, Mr Chidambaram et al (as well as all the BJP and CPI-M etc people in Delhi too) have rather ruined the fisc, the currency and the exchanges…. It may be hopeless….

From Facebook December 20 2010

Subroto Roy is glad to hear today, for the first time, Dr Manmohan Singh explicitly praise Rajiv Gandhi for chalking out the roadmap of the 1991 economic reform, as Rajiv did thanks to his encounter with the UH-Manoa project I had led since 1986. At last year’s Congress Party meet, Sonia Gandhi for the first time on Dec 28 2009 said Rajiv “left his personal imprint on the (Congress) party’s manifesto of 1991″. Better late than never.

From Facebook Sep 20 2010

Subroto Roy  notes the 20th anniversary just passed over the weekend of Rajiv Gandhi’s encounter with the UH-Manoa peresteroika-for-India project that I had led. On Sep 18 1990, when Rajiv and I first met, Dr Manmohan Singh was not physically in India, ending his final assignment before retirement with Julius Nyerere of Tanzania. Of the others whom Rajiv appointed along with myself as advisers a week later on Sep 25 1990, at least one has recently proved to be mendacious in print — stating Manmohan Singh and not I was in the group that got created on Sep 25 following my single meeting with Rajiv on Sep 18! — and I had to expose the mendacity; he has not sued me for calling him a liar because, of course, truth is a first and full defence against a charge of defamation!

National policy should not float on self-delusion and flattery and myth and mendacity — or grave problems like Kashmir and macroeconomic inflation are the inevitable result.

I have met Mrs Sonia Gandhi once in December 1991 when I gave her a tape of her husband’s conversations with me during the Gulf War; she later in 2001 was kind enough to write acknowledging receipt of an earlier draft of this story.

From Facebook  June 26 2010:

Subroto Roy reads yet another of New Delhi’s economic bluff-masters say in today’s pink business newspaper: “The architect of reforms in 1991 was… Manmohan Singh”. Manmohan is on record himself  that he had nothing to do with it, & all the bluff-masters know for a fact but cannot admit it happened due to my encounter with Rajiv Gandhi beginning Sep 18 1990 when I gave him the results of the UH Manoa project I had led since 1986.


(Subroto Roy notes that this particular bluff-master is yet another who calls himself a Dr but cannot recall or state where his PhD is from or what if anything his dissertation was about. The stench of intellectual fraud from purported economists in New Delhi continues to keep me as nauseated as a pregnant Johanna Van Beethoven.)

From Facebook:

Subroto Roy  has great sympathy for the people who were made to officially disappear by Stalin – and suggests that even today old Stalinist habits die hard in countries where there has been no liberal revolution against them.

Subroto Roy  is amused to read in the pink business papers this morning more self-serving fabrication emerge out of New Delhi’s vapid formerly Stalinist bureaucrats about what happened in 1990-91. And says he must dig out those old Stalinist photos which rubbed out Trotsky from standing beside Lenin! Hey Trotsky, I need some advice, man! Please channel…

Subroto Roy  finally declares, on the basis of what Dr Manmohan Singh’s chief aide Chief Acolyte said yesterday as quoted in the pink business papers today, that there has been a systematic attempt at a Stalinist falsification of history in New Delhi as to what happened between September 18 1990 and March 23 1991 with respect to the prospective economic policy-making of the Congress Government following the 1991 election. The falsification has failed and is destined to fail further.

Subroto Roy  needs to channel Trotsky: “Leon Trotsky was a close friend of Lenin, and shared his idealistic ideas about the communist state. In the following photographs he canbe seen together with Lenin. The next set of images are nearly identical,however Trotsky is removed from both photographs. The historical reason for this alteration is that Stalin eventually began to see Trotsky as a threat and labeled him an “enemy of the people”. After he was deported from the Soviet Union in 1929, Trotsky criticized Stalin’s leadership, arguing that the dictatorship Stalin exercised was based on his own interests, rather than those of the people. This contributed substantially to Trotsky’s removal from photographs and history.”

Sonia’s Lying Courtier (with Postscript) November 25, 2007

Two Sundays ago in an English-language Indian newspaper, an elderly man in his 80s, advertised as being “the Gandhi family’s favourite technocrat” published some deliberate falsehoods about events in Delhi 17 years ago surrounding Rajiv Gandhi’s last months. I wrote at once to the man, let me call him Mr C, asking him to correct the falsehoods since, after all, it was possible he had stated them inadvertently or thoughtlessly or through faulty memory. He did not do so. I then wrote to a friend of his, a Congress Party MP from his State, who should be expected to know the truth, and I suggested to him that he intercede with his friend to make the corrections, since I did not wish, if at all possible, to be compelled to call an elderly man a liar in public.

That did not happen either and hence I am, with sadness and regret, compelled to call Mr C a liar.

The newspaper article reported that Mr C’s “relationship with Rajiv (Gandhi) would become closer when (Rajiv) was out of power” and that Mr C “was part of a group that brainstormed with Rajiv every day on a different subject”. Mr C has reportedly said Rajiv’s “learning period came after he left his job” as PM, and “the others (in the group)” were Mr A, Mr B, Mr D, Mr E “*and Manmohan Singh*” (italics added).

In reality, Mr C was a retired pro-USSR bureaucrat aged in his late 60s in September 1990 when Rajiv Gandhi was Leader of the Opposition and Congress President. Manmohan Singh was an about-to-retire bureaucrat who in September 1990 was not physically present in India, having been working for Julius Nyerere of Tanzania for several years.

On 18 September 1990, upon recommendation of Siddhartha Shankar Ray, Rajiv Gandhi met me at 10 Janpath, where I handed him a copy of the unpublished results of an academic “perestroika-for-India” project I had led at the University if Hawaii since 1986. The story of that encounter has been told first on July 31-August 2 1991 in The Statesman, then in the October 2001 issue of Freedom First, then in January 6-8 2006, September 23-24 2007 in The Statesman, and most recently in The Statesman Festival Volume 2007. The last of these speaks most fully yet of my warnings against Rajiv’s vulnerability to assassination; this document in unpublished form was sent by me to Rajiv’s friend, Mr Suman Dubey in July 2005, who forwarded it with my permission to the family of Rajiv Gandhi.

It was at the 18 September 1990 meeting that I suggested to Rajiv that he should plan to have a modern election manifesto written. The next day, 19 September, I was asked by Rajiv’s assistant V George to stay in Delhi for a few days as Mr Gandhi wished me to meet some people. I was not told whom I was to meet but that there would be a meeting on Monday, 24th September. On Saturday, the Monday meeting was postponed to Tuesday 25th September because one of the persons had not been able to get a flight into Delhi. I pressed to know what was going on, and was told I would meet Mr A, Mr B, Mr C and Mr D. It turned out later Mr A was the person who could not fly in from Hyderabad.

The group (excluding Mr B who failed to turn up because his servant had failed to give him the right message) met Rajiv at 10 Janpath in the afternoon of 25th September. We were asked by Rajiv to draft technical aspects of a modern manifesto for an election that was to be expected in April 1991. The documents I had given Rajiv a week earlier were distributed to the group. The full story of what transpired has been told in my previous publications.

Mr C was ingratiating towards me after that first meeting with Rajiv and insisted on giving me a ride in his car which he told me was the very first Maruti ever manufactured. He flattered me needlessly by saying that my PhD (in economics from Cambridge University) was real whereas his own doctoral degree had been from a dubious management institute of the USSR. (Handling out such doctoral degrees was apparently a standard Soviet way of gaining influence.) Mr C has not stated in public how his claim to the title of “Dr” arises.

Following that 25 September 1990 meeting, Mr C did absolutely nothing for several months towards the purpose Rajiv had set us, stating he was very busy with private business in his home-state where he flew to immediately. Mr D went abroad and was later hit by severe illness. Mr B, Mr A and I met for luncheon at New Delhi’s Andhra Bhavan where the former explained how he had missed the initial meeting. Then Mr B said he was very busy with his house-construction, and Mr A said he was very busy with finishing a book for his publishers on Indian defence, and both begged off, like Mr C and Mr D, from any of the work that Rajiv had explicitly set our group. My work and meeting with Rajiv in October 1990 has been reported previously.

Mr C has not merely suppressed my name from the group in what he has published in the newspaper article two Sundays ago, he has stated he met Rajiv as part of such a group “every day on a different subject”, another falsehood. The next meeting of the group with Rajiv was in fact only in December 1990, when the Chandrashekhar Government was discussed. I was called by telephone in the USA by Rajiv’s assistant V George but I was unable to attend, and was briefed later about it by Mr A.

When new elections were finally announced in March 1991, Mr C brought in Mr E into the group in my absence (so he told me), perhaps in the hope I would remain absent. But I returned to Delhi and between March 18 1991 and March 22 1991, our group, including Mr E (who did have a genuine PhD), produced an agreed-upon document. That document was handed over by us together in a group to Rajiv Gandhi at 10 Janpath the next day, and also went to the official political manifesto committee of Narasimha Rao, Pranab Mukherjee and M. Solanki.

Our group, as appointed by Rajiv on 25 September 1990, came to an end with the submission of the desired document to Rajiv on 23 March 1991.

As for Manmohan Singh, contrary to Mr C’s falsehood, Manmohan Singh has himself truthfully said he was with the Nyerere project until November 1990, then joined Chandrashekhar’s PMO in December 1990 which he left in March 1991, that he had no meeting with Rajiv Gandhi prior to Rajiv’s assassination but rather did not in fact enter Indian politics at all until invited by Narasimha Rao several weeks later to be Finance Minister. In other words, Manmohan Singh himself is on record stating facts that demonstrate Mr C’s falsehood.

The economic policy sections of the document submitted to Rajiv on 23 March 1991 had been drafted largely by myself with support of Mr E and Mr D and Mr C as well. It was done over the objections of Mr B, who had challenged me by asking what Manmohan Singh would think of it. I had replied I had no idea what Manmohan Singh would think of it, saying I knew he had been out of the country on the Nyerere project for some years.

Mr C has deliberately excluded my name from the group and deliberately added Manmohan Singh’s instead. What explains this attempted falsification of facts – reminiscent of totalitarian practices in communist countries? Manmohan Singh was not involved by his own admission, and as Finance Minister told me so directly when he and I were introduced in Washington DC in September 1993 by Siddhartha Shankar Ray, then Indian Ambassador to the USA.

A possible explanation for Mr C’s mendacity is as follows: I have been recently publishing the fact that I repeatedly pleaded warnings that I (even as a layman on security issues) perceived Rajiv Gandhi to have been insecure and vulnerable to assassination. Mr C, Mr B and Mr A were among the main recipients of my warnings and my advice as to what we as a group, appointed by Rajiv, should have done towards protecting Rajiv better. They did nothing — though each of them was a senior man then aged in his late 60s at the time and fully familiar with Delhi’s workings while I was a 35 year old newcomer. After Rajiv was assassinated, I was disgusted with what I had seen of the Congress Party and Delhi, and did not return except to meet Rajiv’s widow once in December 1991 to give her a copy of a tape in which her late husband’s voice was recorded in conversations with me during the Gulf War.

Mr C has inveigled himself into Sonia Gandhi’s coterie – while Manmohan Singh went from being mentioned in our group by Mr B to becoming Narasimha Rao’s Finance Minister and Sonia Gandhi’s Prime Minister. If Rajiv had not been assassinated, Sonia Gandhi would have been merely a happy grandmother today and not India’s purported ruler. India would also have likely not have been the macroeconomic and political mess that the mendacious people around Sonia Gandhi like Mr C have now led it towards.

POSTSCRIPT: The Congress MP was kind enough to write in shortly afterwards; he confirmed he “recognize(d) that Rajivji did indeed consult you in 1990-1991 about the future direction of economic policy.” A truth is told and, furthermore, the set of genuine Rajivists in the present Congress Party is identified as non-null.

Subroto Roy… reads Manmohan Singh’s Media-Flatterer-in-Chief (as opposed to the Chief Acolyte) claim in the pink business newspaper today that a young Dr Singh in 1974-5 had “crafted” a “strategy” to reduce India’s “hyperinflation” and purportedly won Indira Gandhi’s praise & confidence. Sheer nonsense I am afraid. There was no “hyperinflation” at the time in India, only a massive readjustment of relative prices caused by the first oil shock & a lot of “repressed inflation” typical of controlled economies. People like LK Jha & PN Dhar (if memory serves rightly) were the key economic decision-makers, not Dr Singh. The “strategy” was one of “forced saving” and price-controls (i.e., almost no “strategy” at all). And the data show it did not work! Look up *Indian Economic Journal*, Special No in Monetary Economics Oct-Dec 1975, especially the keynote address by my great professor, Frank Hahn, titled “Money and General Equilibrium”, republished in *Money, Growth and Stability* (MIT 1984)…

Sonia Gandhi on the origins of the 1991 economic reform (Revised 17 Dec 2012)

[See also Did Jagdish Bhagwati “originate”, “pioneer”, “intellectually father” India’s 1991 economic reform?  Did Manmohan Singh? Or did I, through my encounter with Rajiv Gandhi, just as Siddhartha Shankar Ray told Manmohan & his aides in Sep 1993 in Washington?  Judge the evidence for yourself.  And why has Amartya Sen misdescribed his work? India’s right path forward today remains what I said in my 3 Dec 2012 Delhi lecture! and Fact vs Falsification & Flattery in New Delhi (& Kolkata etc) Revised 30 June 2013]

 

 

 

From Facebook 17 Dec 2012

 

Subroto Roy says to Mr Sathe, Shekhar, changing the direction of a ship of state is very hard, knowing in which direction it should change and to what degree is even harder; it has rarely been something that can be done without random shocks arising let aside the power of vested interests. Had Rajiv Gandhi lived to form a new Government, I have little doubt I would have led the reform that I had chalked out for him and that he had approved of; Sonia Gandhi would have remained the housewife, mother and grandmother that she had preferred to be and not been made into the Queen of India by her party; Manmohan Singh had left India in 1987 for the Nyerere project and it had been rumoured at the time that had been slightly to do with him protesting, to the extent that he ever has protested anything, the anti-Sikh pogrom that some of Rajiv’s friends had apparently unleashed after Indira’s killing; he returned in Nov 1990, joined Chandrashekhar in Dec 1990, left Chandrashekhar in March 1991 when elections were announced and was biding his time as head of the UPSC UGC (typo corrected 5 July 2013); had Rajiv Gandhi lived, Manmohan Singh would have had a governor’s career path, becoming the governor of this or that state one after next; he would not have been brought into the economic reform process which he had had nothing to do with originating; and finally Pranab Mukherjee, who had been made to leave the Congress when Rajiv took over, would have been likely rehabilitated slowly but would not have come to control the working of the party as he did. I think I have said in my Lok Sabha TV interview that there have been many microeconomic improvements arising from technological progress in the last 20+ years but the macroeconomic and monetary situation is grim, because at root the fiscal situation remains incoherent and confused. I do not see anyone in Manmohan Singh’s entourage among all his many acolytes and flatterers and apologists who is able to get to these root problems.

 

 

 

Facebook March 26 2011

 

Mr Chidambaram knows better than that!

 

by Subroto Roy

 

I remain amused by the powers-that-be in Delhi continuing to attempt to deny me credit for the origins of the 1991 economic reform based on the UH-Manoa perestroika-for-India project I had led 1986-1992, and the results of which I brought with me to my first meeting with Rajiv Gandhi on September 18 1990.

 

After almost a decade of relentless pressure from me for the truth to be told, Rajiv’s widow on December 28 2009 finally admitted her late husband “left his personal imprint on the (Congress) party’s manifesto of 1991″.

 

Now yesterday, March 25 2011, Mr Chidambaram has admitted “The Congress manifesto prepared for the general elections in 1991 did talk about an agenda of reforms but with the assassination of Rajiv Gandhi, there was no certainty that these would have remained on the agenda”.

 

Well, Mr Chidambaram, you know better than that!  Did you not yourself say in Tokyo in April 1993 that the reform “was not miraculous” but based on “rewriting of the Congress manifesto while in Opposition. We were ready when we came back to power in 1991″? (And as for those two former World Bank types with you on the podium yesterday, one was out of the country and cannot possibly claim to have been part of anything, though he had begged me to come to Hawaii and I had said sorry, no; the other, well, perhaps the less said about his capacity for self-delusion the better for India (though his shift from Sovietism to Americanism and his power to waffle endlessly on TV etc is a true bureaucratic marvel). The third man on the podium with you was someone I had tried hard to get to come to Hawaii, upon recommendation of Sukhamoy Chakravarty; but he could not make it; he though has inevitably lost his way for some years now with his wish to stay in Delhi much longer than he should ever have done.)

 

The simple truth is very simple: the positive change in direction of the Congress Party’s economic and other thinking  occurred due to the Congress President’s meeting with me on September 18 1990, where I gave him the perestroika-for-India project results and advised him to look to the future and write a fresh and modern manifesto. He agreed with his actions the following week, and subsequently, viz., Rajiv Gandhi and the Origins of India’s 1991 Economic Reform. Later, after his assassination, against which I had warned, the process came to be taken over by the greedy and the mendacious (specifically, organised big business lobbies, big bureaucrats and politicians, Soviet sleeper agents etc). So the truth got lost and has had to be reconstructed slowly.

 

(And puleaaase, baba, Manmohan Singh or any of his acolytes had nothing to do with it! Not in the loop! After all, if they had had the creativity and economic knowledge and intellectual honesty and courage, during all their years and decades in the Government of India and sundry international bureaucracies, to do what we did, they would and should have done it!  But there is just no evidence that they did, sorry baba! Time almost to say Uff!)

 

My colleague Ted James who with me led the Hawaii projects said of it in January 2010 a few months before he tragically died: “Seldom are significant reforms imposed successfully by international bureaucracies. Most often they are the result of indigenous actors motivated by domestic imperatives. I believe this was the case in India in 1991. It may have been fortuitous that Dr. Roy gained an audience with a receptive Rajiv Gandhi in 1990 but it was not luck that he was prepared with a well-thought out program; this arose from years of careful thought and debate on the matter.”

 

Why all this is important is not because I want a national award and due recognition etc, which I won’t of course mind getting, but because Dr Singh, Mr Chidambaram et al (as well as all the BJP and CPI-M etc people in Delhi too) have rather ruined the fisc, the currency and the exchanges…. It may be hopeless….

From Facebook December 20 2010

 

Subroto Roy is glad to hear today, for the first time, Dr Manmohan Singh explicitly praise Rajiv Gandhi for chalking out the roadmap of the 1991 economic reform, as Rajiv did thanks to his encounter with the UH-Manoa project I had led since 1986. At last year’s Congress Party meet, Sonia Gandhi for the first time on Dec 28 2009 said Rajiv “left his personal imprint on the (Congress) party’s manifesto of 1991″. Better late than never.

 

 

From Facebook Sep 20 2010

 

Subroto Roy  notes the 20th anniversary just passed over the weekend of Rajiv Gandhi’s encounter with the UH-Manoa peresteroika-for-India project that I had led. On Sep 18 1990, when Rajiv and I first met, Dr Manmohan Singh was not physically in India, ending his final assignment before retirement with Julius Nyerere of Tanzania. Of the others whom Rajiv appointed along with myself as advisers a week later on Sep 25 1990, at least one has recently proved to be mendacious in print — stating Manmohan Singh and not I was in the group that got created on Sep 25 following my single meeting with Rajiv on Sep 18! — and I had to expose the mendacity; he has not sued me for calling him a liar because, of course, truth is a first and full defence against a charge of defamation!

National policy should not float on self-delusion and flattery and myth and mendacity — or grave problems like Kashmir and macroeconomic inflation are the inevitable result.

I have met Mrs Sonia Gandhi once in December 1991 when I gave her a tape of her husband’s conversations with me during the Gulf War; she later in 2001 was kind enough to write acknowledging receipt of an earlier draft of this story.

 

 

From Facebook  (December 29, 2009):

 

Subroto Roy is pleased that Sonia Gandhi has finally said, yesterday (December 28 2009), her late husband Rajiv “left his personal imprint on the (Congress) party’s manifesto of 1991″. He did — thanks to his encounter with me dated Sep 18 1990 where I gave him a copy of the results of the perestroika-for-India project I had led at a US university since 1986, as well as my May 29 1984 IEA monograph that had provoked the lead editorial of *The Times* of London when first published (based on my Cambridge doctoral thesis under Frank Hahn).  I was very warmly introduced to Rajiv thanks to Siddhartha Shankar Ray, Bar-at-Law, senior Congress Party politician and my senior counsel in India’s Supreme Court during a grave international custody battle. The story of my encounter with Rajiv has now been fully told in the Indian newspapers, at my blog/website, and reproduced in my Notes at Facebook. Perhaps Mrs Gandhi will realise too some time that Manmohan Singh (or any of his prominent acolytes and flatterers among Indian bureaucrats, businessmen and journalists) had nothing to do with the origins of the 1991 reform — there was a reason I did not invite them to Manoa,

 

namely, I had felt they had been part of the problem, not the solution.

 

Dr Singh and I have met twice and I hold him in high personal regard — in the late summer of 1973 in Paris he kindly consented to visit our then-home there at my father’s request to discuss economics with me before I, as an 18 year old, left for my freshman year at the London School of Economics; we ended up having a tense debate on the merits (as he saw them) and demerits (as I saw them) of the Soviet influence on Indian economic policy-making until that time; then we met twenty years later in Washington in the Fall of 1993 when the Indian Ambassador, the same Barrister Ray, introduced me to him as the person on whose laptop the 1991 manifesto had been written. To his credit, he himself has not attributed to himself any of the original economic thought his many flatterers have attributed to him since 1991 though he has not denounced them either, or at least is yet to do so. My rather critical views on his economics and politics are available in the Indian newspapers, my site and now in my Notes at Facebook, e.g. “Mistaken Macroeconomics” etc.

 

 

Update from Facebook July 2, 2010:

 

Subroto Roy has lost count of all the Advisory Councils in New Delhi and whom they are supposed to be advising or about what. Manmohan Singh has an “Economic Advisory Council” and a “Trade and Industry Advisory Council” besides the “Planning Commission” and “National Development Council” and “National Security Council” and any number of others for sure. Sonia Gandhi has the “National Advisory Council” who seem to live in cities but want to talk about rural India; a rural India where people have always been fully familiar with normal markets for food and labour yet those markets are now being destroyed or at least distorted, perhaps incorrigibly. My advice to Rajiv Gandhi 20 years ago based on the perestroika-for-India project I had led at the UH Manoa was for free (in fact it has cost me a lot personally, so the price I charged was probably negative) — and yet, I am bold enough to say, it remains unsurpassed.

 

 

Update from Facebook July 3, 2010:

 

Subroto Roy is pleasantly surprised to find a “senior journalist” speak a truth in today’s pink business newspaper about the origins of India’s 1991 economic reform, admitting: “Nor might the government have been able to justify liberalisation if it hadn’t been for the 1991 Congress election manifesto that Rajiv Gandhi had compiled, but tragically, not lived to push through.”   And who got Rajiv to do that? I did. On Sep 18 1990, based on the University of Hawaii Manoa project I had led since 1986.  Later, the process got corrupted by the greedy and the mendacious.

Pakistan’s Point of View (Or Points of View) on Kashmir: My As Yet Undelivered Lahore Lecture–Part I

Preface: Exactly a year ago, in late October-November 2010, I received a very kind invitation from the Lahore Oxford and Cambridge Society to speak there on this subject.  Mid March 2011 was a tentative date for this lecture from which the text below is dated.  The lecture has yet to take place for various reasons but as there is demand for its content, I am releasing the part which was due to be released in any case to my Pakistani hosts ahead of time — after all, it would have been presumptuous of me to seek to speak in Lahore on Pakistan’s viewpoint on Kashmir, hence I instead  planned to release my understanding of that point of view ahead of time and open it to the criticism of my hosts.  The structure of the remainder of the talk may be surmised too from the Contents.  The text and argument are mine entirely, the subject of more than 25 years of research and reflection,  and are under consideration of publication as a book by Continuum of London and New York.  If you would like to comment, please feel free to do so, if you would like to refer to it in an online publication, please give this link, if you would like to refer to it in a paper-publication, please   email me.  Like other material at my site, it is open to the Fair Use rule of normal scholarship.

 

On the Alternative Theories of Pakistan and India about Jammu & Kashmir (And the One and Only Way These May Be Peacefully Reconciled): An Exercise in Economics, Politics, Moral Philosophy & Jurisprudence

 

 by

 

Subroto (Suby) Roy

 

Lecture to the Oxford and Cambridge Society of Lahore

 

March 14, 2011 (tentative)

 

 

“What is the use of studying philosophy if all that does for you is to enable you to talk with some plausibility about some abstruse questions of logic, etc., & if it does not improve your thinking about the important questions of everyday life?”  Wittgenstein, letter to Malcolm, 1944

 

 

 

 

“India is the greatest Muslim country in the world.”

Sir Muhammad Iqbal, 1930, Presidential Address to the Muslim League, Allahabad

 

 

 

 

 

 “Where be these enemies?… See, what a scourge is laid upon your hate,… all are punish’d.” Shakespeare

 

 

Dr Roy’s published works include Philosophy of Economics: On the Scope of Reason in Economic Inquiry (London & New York: Routledge, 1989, 1991); Pricing, Planning & Politics: A Study of Economic Distortions in India (London: Institute of Economic Affairs, 1984); and, edited with WE James, Foundations of India’s Political Economy: Towards an Agenda for the 1990s (Hawaii MS 1989, Sage 1992)  &  Foundations of Pakistan’s Political Economy: Towards an Agenda for the 1990s (Hawaii MS 1989, Sage 1992, OUP Karachi 1993); and, edited with John Clarke, Margaret Thatcher’s Revolution: How it Happened and What it Meant (London & New York: Continuum 2005).  He graduated in 1976 with a first from the London School of Economics in mathematical economics, and received the PhD in economics at Cambridge in 1982 under Professor Frank Hahn for the thesis “On liberty & economic growth: preface to a philosophy for India”. In the United States for 16 years he was privileged to count as friends Professors James Buchanan, Milton Friedman, TW Schultz, Max Black and Sidney Alexander.  From September 18 1990 he was an adviser to Rajiv Gandhi and contributed to the origins of India’s 1991 economic reform.  He blogs at http://www.independentindian.com.

CONTENTS

Part I

  1. Introduction

  2. Pakistan’s Point of View (or Points of View)

(a)    1930  Sir Muhammad Iqbal

(b)    1933-1948 Chaudhury Rahmat Ali

(c)    1937-1941 Sir Sikander Hayat Khan

(d)    1937-1947 Quad-i-Azam Mohammad Ali Jinnah

(e)    1940s et seq  Maulana Abul Ala Maudoodi

(f)     1947-1950 Prime Minister Liaquat Ali Khan, 1966 President Ayub Khan, 2005 Govt of Pakistan, 2007 President Musharraf, 2008 FM Qureshi, 2011 Kashmir Day

Part II

  1. India’s Point of View: British Negligence/Indifference during the Transfer of Power, A Case of Misgovernance in the Chaotic Aftermath of World War II

(a)    Rhetoric: Whose Pakistan?  Which Kashmir? 

(b)    Law: (i) Liaquat-Zafrullah-Abdullah-Nehru United in Error Over the Second Treaty of Amritsar! Dogra J&K subsists Mar 16 1846-Oct 22 1947. Aggression, Anarchy, Annexations: The LOC as De Facto Boundary by Military Decision Since Jan 1 1949.  (ii) Legal Error & Confusion Generated by 12 May 1946 Memorandum. (iii) War: Dogra J&K attacked by Pakistan, defended by India: Invasion, Mutiny, Secession of “Azad Kashmir” & Gilgit, Rape of Baramulla, Siege of Skardu.

  1. Politics: What is to be Done? Towards Truths, Normalisation, Peace in the 21st Century

The Present Situation is Abnormal & Intolerable. There May Be One (and Only One) Peacable Solution that is Feasible: Revealing Individual Choices Privately with Full Information & Security: Indian “Green Cards”/PIO-OCI status for Hurriyat et al: A Choice of Nationality (India, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Iran).  Of Flags and Consulates in Srinagar & Gilgit etc: De Jure Recognition of the Boundary, Diplomatic Normalisation,  Economic & Military Cooperation.

  1. Appendices:

(a)    History of Jammu & Kashmir until the Dogra Native State

(b)    Pakistan’s Allies (including A Brief History of Gilgit)

(c)    India’s Muslim Voices

(d)    Pakistan’s Muslim Voices: An Excerpt from the Munir Report

Part I

 

1.  Introduction

 

For a solution to Jammu & Kashmir to be universally acceptable it must be seen by all as being lawful and just. Political opinion across the subcontinent — in Pakistan, in India, among all people and parties in J&K, those loyal to India, those loyal to Pakistan, and any others — will have to agree that, all things considered, such is the right course of action for everyone today in the 21st Century, which means too that the solution must be consistent with the principal known facts of history as well as account reasonably for all moral considerations.

 

I claim to have found such a solution, indeed I shall even say it is the only such solution (in terms of theoretical economics, it is the unique solution) and plan with your permission to describe its main outlines at this distinguished gathering.  I have not invented it overnight but it is something  developed over a quarter century, milestones along the way being the books emerging from the University of Hawaii “perestroika” projects for India and Pakistan that I and the late WE James led 25 years ago, and a lecture I gave at Washington’s Heritage Foundation in June 1998, as well as sets of newspaper articles published between 2005 and 2008, one in Dawn of Karachi and others in The Statesman of New Delhi and Kolkata.

 

Before I start, allow me for a moment to remind just how complex and intractable the problem we face has been, and, therefore, quite how large my ambition is in claiming today to be able to resolve it.

 

“Kashmir is in the Supreme National Interest of Pakistan”, says Pakistan.

 

“Kashmir is an Integral Part of India”, says India.

 

“Kashmir is an Integral Part of Pakistan”, says Pakistan.

 

“Kashmir is in the Supreme National Interest of India”, says India.

 

And so it goes, in what over the decades has been all too often a Dialogue of the Deaf.  How may such squarely opposed positions be reconciled without draining public resources even further through wasteful weaponry and confrontation of standing armies, or, what is worse, using these weapons and armies in war, plunging the subcontinent into an abyss of chaos and destruction for generations to come?  How is it possible?

 

I shall suggest a road can be found only when we realize Pakistan, India and J&K each have been and are going to remain integral to one another — in their histories, their geographies, their economies and their societies.  The only place they may need to differ, where we shall want them to differ, is their politics and political systems. We should not underestimate how much mutual hatred and mutual fear has arisen naturally on all sides over the decades as a result of bloodshed and suffering all around, and the fact must also be accounted for that people simply may not be in a calm-enough emotional state to want to be part of processes seeking resolution; at the same time, it bears to be remembered that although Pakistan and India have been at war more than once and war is always a very serious and awful thing, they have never actually declared war against the other nor have they ever broken diplomatic relations – in fact in some ways it has always seemed like some very long and protracted fraternal Civil War between us where we think we know one another so well and yet come to be surprised more by one another’s virtues than by one another’s vices.

 

Secondly, with any seemingly intractable problem, dialogue can stall or be aborted due to normal human failings of impatience or lack of good will or lack of good humour or lack of a scientific attitude towards finding facts, or plain mutual miscomprehension of one another’s points of view through ignorance or laziness or negligence.  In case of Pakistan and India over J&K, there has been the further critical complication that we of this generation did not cause this problem — it has been something inherited by us from not even our fathers but our grandfathers!  It is two generations old.  Each side must respect the words and deeds of its forebears but also may have to frankly examine in a scientific spirit where errors of fact or judgment may have occurred back then.  The antagonistic positions have changed only slightly over two generations, and one reason dialogue stalls or gets aborted today is because positions have become frozen for more than half a century and merely get repeated endlessly.  On top of such frozen positions have been piled pile upon pile of further vast mortal complications: the 1965 War, the 1971 secession of East Pakistan, the 1999 Kargil War, the 2008 Mumbai massacres.  Only cacophony results if we talk about everything at once, leaving the status quo of a dangerous expensive confrontation to continue.

 

I propose instead to focus as specifically and precisely as possible on how Jammu & Kashmir became a problem at all during those crucial decades alongside the processes of Indian Independence, World War II, the Pakistan Movement and creation of Pakistan, accompanied by the traumas and bloodshed of Partition.

 

Having addressed that — and it is only fair to forewarn this eminent Lahore audience that such a survey of words, deeds and events between the 1930s and 1950s tends to emerge in India’s favour — I propose to “fast-forward” to current times, where certain new facts on the ground appear much more adverse to India, and finally seek to ask what can and ought to be done, all things considered, today in the circumstances of the 21st Century.   There are four central facts, let me for now call them Fact A, Fact B, Fact C and Fact D, which have to be accepted by both countries in good faith and a scientific spirit.  Facts A and B are historical in nature; Pakistan has refused to accept them. Facts C and D are contemporary in nature; official political India and much of the Indian media too often have appeared wilfully blind to them. The moment all four facts come to be accepted by all, the way forward becomes clear.  We have inherited this grave mortal problem which has so badly affected the ordinary people of J&K in the most terrible and unacceptable manner, but if we fail to understand and resolve it, our children and grandchildren will surely fail even worse — we may even leave them to cope with the waste and destruction of further needless war or confrontation, indeed with the end of the subcontinent as we have received and known it in our time.

 

 

2. Pakistan’s Point of View (Or Points of View)

 

 

1930  Sir Muhammad Iqbal

 

This audience will need no explanation why I start with Sir Muhammad Iqbal (1877-1938), the poetic and spiritual genius who in the 20th Century inspired the notion of a Muslim polity in NorthWestern India, whose seminal 1930 presidential speech to the Muslim League in Allahabad lay the foundation stone of the new country that was yet to be.   He did not live to see Pakistan’s creation yet what may be called the “Pakistan Principle” was captured in his words:

 

“I would like to see the Punjab, Northwest Frontier Province, Sind and Baluchistan amalgamated into a single state. Self-government within the British Empire or without the British Empire, the formation of a consolidated North West Indian Muslim state appears to me to be the final destiny of the Muslims at least of Northwest India… India is the greatest Muslim country in the world.  The life of Islam as a cultural force in this living country very largely depends on its centralization in a specified territory”.

 

He did not see such a consolidated Muslim state being theocratic and certainly not one filled with bigotry or “Hate-Hindu” campaigns:

 

“A community which is inspired by feelings of ill-will towards other communities is low and ignoble. I entertain the highest respect for the customs, laws, religious and social institutions of other communities… Yet I love the communal group which is the source of my life and my behaviour… Nor should the Hindus fear that the creation of autonomous Muslim states will mean the introduction of a kind of religious rule in such states…. I therefore demand the formation of a consolidated Muslim state in the best interests of India and Islam. For India it means security and peace resulting from an internal balance of power, for Islam an opportunity to rid itself of the stamp that Arabian Imperialism was forced to give it, to mobilise its law, its education, its culture, and to bring them into closer contact with its own original spirit and the spirit of modern times.”[1]

 

Though Kashmiri himself, in fact a founding member of the “All-India Jammu & Kashmir Muslim Conference of Lahore and Simla”, and a hero and role model for the young Sheikh Abdullah (1905-1982), Allama Iqbal was explicitly silent about J&K being part of the new political entity he had come to imagine.  I do not say he would not have wished it to be had he lived longer; what I am saying is that his original vision of the consolidated Muslim state which constitutes Pakistan today (after a Partitioned Punjab) did not include Jammu & Kashmir.  Rather, it was focused on the politics of British India and did not mention the politics of Kashmir or any other of the so-called “Princely States” or “Native States” of “Indian India” who constituted some 1/3rd of the land mass and 1/4th of the population of the subcontinent.  Twenty years ago I called this “The Paradox of Kashmir”, namely, that prior to 1947 J&K hardly seemed to appear in any discussion at all for a century, yet it has consumed almost all discussion and resources ever since.

 

Secondly, this audience will see better than I can the significance of Dr Iqbal’s saying the Muslim political state of his conception needed

 

“an opportunity to rid itself of the stamp that Arabian Imperialism was forced to give it”

 

and instead seek to

 

“mobilise its law, its education, its culture, and to bring them into closer contact with its own original spirit and the spirit of modern times”.

 

Dr Iqbal’s Pakistan Principle appears here the polar opposite of Pakistan’s 18th & 19th Century pre-history represented by Shah Waliullah (1703-1762)[2] saying

 

“We are an Arab people whose fathers have fallen in exile in the country of Hindustan, and Arabic genealogy and Arabic language are our pride”

 

 or Sayyid Ahmed Barelwi (1786-1831) saying

 

“We must repudiate all those Indian, Persian and Roman customs which are contrary to the Prophet’s teaching”.[3]  

 

Some 25 years after the Allahabad address, the Munir Report in 1954 echoed Dr Iqbal’s thought when it observed about medieval military conquests

 

“It is this brilliant achievement of the Arabian nomads …that makes the Musalman of today live in the past and yearn for the return of the glory that was Islam… Little does he understand that the forces which are pitted against him are entirely different from those against which early Islam had to fight… Nothing but a bold reorientation of Islam to separate the vital from the lifeless can preserve it as a World Idea and convert the Musalman into a citizen of the present and the future world from the archaic incongruity that he is today…” [4]

 

 

 

 

 

 

1933-1947  Chaudhury Rahmat Ali

 

 

 

Dr Iqbal’s young follower, the radical Cambridge pamphleteer Chaudhury Rahmat Ali (1895-1951) drew a picture not of Muslim tolerance and coexistence with Hindus in a peaceful India but of aggression towards Hindus and domination by Muslims over the subcontinent and Asia itself.  Rahmat Ali had been inspired by Dr Iqbal’s call for a Muslim state in Northwest India but found it vague and was disappointed Iqbal had not pressed it at the Third Round Table Conference.  In 1933, reportedly on the upper floor of a London omnibus, he invented for the then-imagined political entity the name “PAKSTAN”, P for his native Punjab, A for Afghania, K for Kashmir, S for Sind, and STAN for Balochistan.  He sought a meeting with Mr Jinnah in London — “Jinnah disliked Rahmat Ali’s ideas and avoided meeting him”[5] but did meet him.  There is a thesis yet to be written on how Europe’s inter-War ideologies affected political thinking on the subcontinent.  Rahmat Ali’s vituperative views about Hindus were akin to others about Jews (and Muslims too) at the time, all models or counterfoils for one another in the fringes of Nazism.  He referred to the Indian nationalist movement as a “British-Banya alliance”, declined to admit India had ever existed and personally renamed the subcontinent “Dinia” and the seas around it the “Pakian Sea”, the “Osmanian Sea” etc. He urged Sikhs to rise up in a “Sikhistan” and urged all non-Hindus to rise up in war against Hindus. Given the obscurity of his life before his arrival at Cambridge’s Emmanuel College, what experiences may have led him to such views are not known.

 

All this was anathema to Mr Jinnah, the secular constitutionalist embarrassed by a reactionary Muslim imperialism in that rapidly modernising era that was the middle of the 20th Century.  When Rahmat Ali pressed the ‘Pakstan’ acronym, Mr Jinnah said Bengal was not in it and Muslim minority regions were absent.  At this Chaudhury-Sahib produced a general scheme of Muslim domination all over the subcontinent: there would be “Pakstan” in the northwest including Kashmir, Delhi and Agra; “Bangistan” in Bengal; “Osmanistan” in Hyderabad; “Siddiquistan” in Bundelhand and Malwa; “Faruqistan” in Bihar and Orissa; “Haideristan” in UP; “Muinistan” in Rajasthan; “Maplistan” in Kerala; even “Safiistan” in “Western Ceylon” and “Nasaristan” in “Eastern Ceylon”, etc.  In 1934 he published and widely circulated such a diagram among Muslims in Britain at the time.  He was not invited to the Lahore Resolution which did not refer to Pakistan though came to be called the Pakistan Resolution.  When he landed in the new Pakistan, he was apparently arrested and deported back and was never granted a Pakistan passport.  From England, he turned his wrath upon the new government, condemning Mr Jinnah as treacherous and newly re-interpreting his acronym to refer to Punjab, Afghania, Kashmir, Iran, Sindh, Tukharistan (sic), Afghanistan, and Balochistan.  The word “pak” coincidentally meant pure, so he began to speak of Muslims as “the Pak” i.e. “the pure” people, and of how the national destiny of the new Pakistan was to liberate “Pak” people everywhere, including the new India, and create a “Pak Commonwealth of Nations” stretching from Arabia to the Indies.  The map he now drew placed the word “Punjab” over J&K, and saw an Asia dominated by this “Pak” empire. Shunned by officialdom of the new Pakistan, Chaudhury-Sahib was a tragic figure who died in poverty and obscurity during an influenza epidemic in 1951; the Master of Emmanuel College paid for his funeral and was apparently later reimbursed for this by the Government of Pakistan.  In recent years he has undergone a restoration, and his grave at Cambridge has become a site of pilgrimage for ideologues, while his diagrams and writings have been reprinted in Pakistan’s newspapers as recently as February 2005.

 

 

 

 

1937-1941 Sir Sikander Hayat Khan

 

 

 

Chaudhary Rahmat Ali’s harshest critic at the time was the eminent statesman and Premier of Punjab Sir Sikander Hayat Khan (1892-1942), partner of the 1937 Sikander-Jinnah Pact, and an author of the Lahore Resolution.  His statement of 11 March 1941 in the Punjab Legislative Assembly Debates is a classic:

 

 

“No Pakistan scheme was passed at Lahore… As for Pakistan schemes, Maulana Jamal-ud-Din’s is the earliest…Then there is the scheme which is attributed to the late Allama Iqbal of revered memory.  He, however, never formulated any definite scheme but his writings and poems have given some people ground to think that Allama Iqbal desired the establishment of  some sort of  Pakistan.  But it is not difficult to explode this theory and to prove conclusively that his conception of  Islamic solidarity and universal brotherhood is not in conflict with Indian patriotism and is in fact quite different from the ideology now sought to be attributed to him by some enthusiasts… Then there is Chaudhuri Rahmat Ali’s scheme (*laughter*)…it was widely circulated in this country and… it was also given wide publicity at the time in a section of the British press.  But there is another scheme…it was published in one of the British journals, I think Round Table, and was conceived by an Englishman…..the word Pakistan was not used at the League meeting and this term was not applied to (the League’s Lahore) resolution by anybody until the Hindu press had a brain-wave and dubbed it Pakistan…. The ignorant masses  have now adopted the slogan provided by the short-sighted bigotry of the Hindu and Sikh press…they overlooked the fact that the word Pakistan might have an appeal – a strong appeal – for the Muslim masses.  It is a catching phrase and it has caught popular imagination and has thus made confusion worse confounded…. So far as we in the Punjab are concerned, let me assure you that we will not countenance or accept any proposal that does not secure freedom for all (*cheers*).  We do not desire that Muslims should domineer here, just as we do not want the Hindus to domineer where Muslims are in a minority. Now would we allow anybody or section to thwart us because Muslims happen to be in a majority in this province.  We do not ask for freedom that there may be a Muslim Raj here and Hindu Raj elsewhere.  If that is what Pakistan means I will have nothing to do with it.   If Pakistan means unalloyed Muslim Raj in the Punjab then I will have nothing to do with it (*hear, hear*)…. If you want real freedom for the Punjab, that is to say a Punjab in which every community will have its due share in the economic and administrative fields as partners in a common concern, then that Punjab will not be Pakistan but just Punjab, land of the five rivers; Punjab is Punjab and will always remain Punjab whatever anybody may say (*cheers*).  This, then, briefly is the future which I visualize for my province and for my country under any new constitution.

Intervention (Malik Barkat Ali): The Lahore resolution says the same thing.

Premier: Exactly; then why misinterpret it and try to mislead the  masses?…”

 

 

 

 

1937-1947  Quad-i-Azam Mohammad Ali Jinnah

 

 

 

During the Third Round Table Conference, Dr Iqbal persuaded Mr Jinnah (1876-1948) to return to India; Mr Jinnah, from being settled again in his London law practice, did so in 1934.  But following the 1935 Govt of India Act, the Muslim League failed badly when British India held its first elections in 1937 not only in Bengal and UP but in Punjab (one seat), NWFP and Sind.

 

 

World War II, like World War I a couple of brief decades earlier, then changed the political landscape completely. Germany invaded Poland on 1 September 1939 and Britain and France declared war on Germany on 3 September.  The next day, India’s British Viceroy (Linlithgow) granted Mr Jinnah the political parity with Congress that he had sought.[6]  Professor Francis Robinson suggests that until 4 September 1939 the British

 

“had had little time for Jinnah and his League.  The Government’s declaration of war on Germany on 3 September, however, transformed the situation. A large part of the army was Muslim, much of the war effort was likely to rest on the two Muslim majority provinces of Punjab and Bengal. The following day, the Viceroy invited Jinnah for talks on an equal footing with Gandhi…. As the Congress began to demand immediate independence, the Viceroy took to reassuring Jinnah that Muslim interests would be safeguarded in any constitutional change. Within a few months, he was urging the League to declare a constructive policy for the future, which was of course presented in the Lahore Resolution[7]…. In their August 1940 offer, the British confirmed for the benefit of Muslims that power would not be transferred against the will of any significant element in Indian life. And much the same confirmation was given in the Cripps offer nearly two years later…. Throughout the years 1940 to 1945, the British made no attempt to tease out the contradictions between the League’s two-nation theory, which asserted that Hindus and Muslims came from two different civilisations and therefore were two different nations, and the Lahore Resolution, which demanded that ‘Independent States’ should be constituted from the Muslim majority provinces of the NE and NW, thereby suggesting that Indian Muslims formed not just one nation but two. When in 1944 the governors of Punjab and Bengal urged such a move on the Viceroy, Wavell ignored them, pressing ahead instead with his own plan for an all-India conference at Simla. The result was to confirm, as never before in the eyes of leading Muslims in the majority provinces, the standing of Jinnah and the League. Thus, because the British found it convenient to take the League seriously, everyone had to as well—Congressmen, Unionists, Bengalis, and so on…”[8]

 

 Mr Jinnah was himself amazed by the new British attitude towards him:

 

“(S)uddenly there was a change in the attitude towards me. I was treated on the same basis as Mr Gandhi. I was wonderstruck why all of a sudden I was promoted and given a place side by side with Mr Gandhi.”

 

Britain, threatened for its survival, faced an obdurate Indian leadership and even British socialists sympathetic to Indian aspirations grew cold (Gandhi dismissing the 1942 Cripps offer as a “post-dated cheque on a failing bank”).  Official Britain’s loyalties had been consistently with those who had been loyal to them, and it was unsurprising there would be a tilt to empower Mr Jinnah soon making credible the real possibility of Pakistan.[9]  By 1946, Britain was exhausted, pre-occupied with rationing, Berlin, refugee resettlement and countless other post-War problems — Britain had not been beaten in war but British imperialism was finished because of the War.  Muslim opinion in British India had changed decisively in the League’s favour.   But the  subcontinent’s political processes were drastically spinning out of everyone’s control towards anarchy and blood-letting.  Implementing a lofty vision of a cultured progressive consolidated Muslim state in India’s NorthWest descended into “Direct Action” with urban mobs  shouting Larke lenge Pakistan; Marke lenge Pakistan; Khun se lenge Pakistan; Dena hoga Pakistan.[10]

 

We shall return to Mr Jinnah’s view on the legal position of the “Native Princes” of “Indian India” during this critical time, specifically J&K; here it is essential before proceeding only to record his own vision for the new Pakistan as recorded by the profoundly judicious report of Justice Munir and Justice Kayani a mere half dozen years later:

 

“Before the Partition, the first public picture of Pakistan that the Quaid-i-Azam gave to the world was in the course of an interview in New Delhi with Mr. Doon Campbell, Reuter’s Correspondent. The Quaid-i-Azam said that the new State would be a modern democratic State, with sovereignty resting in the people and the members of the new nation having equal rights of citizenship regardless of their religion, caste or creed.  When Pakistan formally appeared on the map, the Quaid-i-Azam in his memorable speech of 11th August 1947 to the Constituent Assembly of Pakistan, while stating the principle on which the new State was to be founded, said:—‘All the same, in this division it was impossible to avoid the question of minorities being in one Dominion or the other. Now that was unavoidable. There is no other solution. Now what shall we do? Now, if we want to make this great State of Pakistan happy and prosperous we should wholly and solely concentrate on the well-being of the people, and specially of the masses and the poor. If you will work in co-operation, forgetting the past, burying the hatchet, you are bound to succeed. If you change your past and work together in a spirit that every one of you, no matter to what community he belongs, no matter what relations he had with you in the past, no matter what is his colour, caste or creed, is first, second and last a citizen of this State with equal rights, privileges and obligations., there will be no end to the progress you will make.  “I cannot emphasise it too much. We should begin to work in that spirit and in course of time all these angularities of the majority and minority communities—the Hindu community and the Muslim community— because even as regards Muslims you have Pathana, Punjabis, Shias, Sunnis and so on and among the Hindus you have Brahmins, Vashnavas, Khatris, also Bengalis, Madrasis and so on—will vanish. Indeed if you ask me this has been the biggest hindrance in the way of India to attain its freedom and independence and but for this we would have been free peoples long long ago. No power can hold another nation, and specially a nation of 400 million souls in subjection; nobody could have conquered you, and even if it had happened, nobody could have continued its hold on you for any length of time but for this (Applause). Therefore, we must learn a lesson from this. You are free; you are free to go to your temples, you are free to go to your mosques or to any other places of worship in this State of Pakistan. You may belong to any religion or caste or creed— that has nothing to do with the business of the State (Hear, hear). As you know, history shows that in England conditions sometime ago were much worse than those prevailing in India today. The Roman Catholics and the Protestants persecuted each other. Even now there are some States in existence where there are discriminations made and bars imposed against a particular class. Thank God we are not starting in those days. We are starting in the days when there is no discrimination, no distinction between one community and another, no discrimination between one caste or creed and another. We are starting with this fundamental principle that we are all citizens and equal citizens of one State (Loud applause). The people of England in course of time had to face the realities of the situation and had to discharge the responsibilities and burdens placed upon them by the Government of their country and they went through that fire step by step. Today you might say with justice that Roman Catholics and Protestants do not exist: what exists now is that every man is a citizen, an equal citizen, of Great Britain and they are all members of the nation. “Now, I think we should keep that in front of us as our ideal and you will find that in course of time Hindus would cease to be Hindus and Muslims would cease to be Muslims, not in the religious sense, because that is the personal faith of each individual, but in the political sense as citizens of the State’. The Quaid-i-Azam was the founder of Pakistan and the occasion on which he thus spoke was the first landmark in the history of Pakistan. The speech was intended both for his own people including non-Muslims and the world, and its object was to define as clearly as possible the ideal to the attainment of which the new State was to devote all its energies. There are repeated references in this speech to the bitterness of the past and an appeal to forget and change the past and to bury the hatchet. The future subject of the State is to be a citizen with equal rights, privileges and obligations, irrespective of colour, caste, creed or community. The word ‘nation’ is used more than once and religion is stated to have nothing to do with the business of the State and to be merely a matter of personal faith for the individual.”

 

 

 

 

 

1940s et seq  Maulana Abul Ala Maudoodi, Amir Jama’at-i-Islami

 

 

 

The eminent theologian Maulana Abul Ala Maudoodi (1903-1979), founder of the Jama’at-i-Islami, had been opposed to the Pakistan Principle but once Pakistan was created he became the most eminent votary of an Islamic State, declaring:

 

 

 “That the sovereignty in Pakistan belongs to God Almighty alone and that the Government of Pakistan shall administer the country as His agent”.

 

 

 In such a view, Islam becomes

 

 

“the very antithesis of secular Western democracy. The philosophical foundation of Western democracy is the sovereignty of the people. Lawmaking is their prerogative and legislation must correspond to the mood and temper of their opinion… Islam… altogether repudiates the philosophy of popular sovereignty and rears its polity on the foundations of the sovereignty of God and the viceregency (Khilafat) of man.”

 

 

Maulana Maudoodi was asked by Justice Munir and Justice Kayani:

 

 

 “Q.—Is a country on the border of dar-ul-Islam always qua an Islamic State in the position of dar-ul-harb ?

A.—No. In the absence of an agreement to the contrary, the Islamic State will be potentially at war with the non-Muslim neighbouring country. The non-Muslim country acquires the status of dar-ul-harb only after the Islamic State declares a formal war against it”.

“Q.—Is there a law of war in Islam?

A.—Yes.

Q.—Does it differ fundamentally from the modern International Law of war?

A.—These two systems are based on a fundamental difference.

Q.—What rights have non-Muslims who are taken prisoners of war in a jihad?

A.—The Islamic law on the point is that if the country of which these prisoners are nationals pays ransom, they will be released. An exchange of prisoners is also permitted. If neither of these alternatives is possible, the prisoners will be converted into slaves for ever. If any such person makes an offer to pay his ransom out of his own earnings, he will be permitted to collect the money necessary for the fidya (ransom).

Q.—Are you of the view that unless a Government assumes the form of an Islamic Government, any war declared by it is not a jihad?

A.—No. A war may be declared to be a jihad if it is declared by a national Government of Muslims in the legitimate interests of the State. I never expressed the opinion attributed to me in Ex. D. E. 12:— (translation)‘The question remains whether, even if the Government of Pakistan, in its present form and structure, terminates her treaties with the Indian Union and declares war against her, this war would fall under the definition of jihad? The opinion expressed by him in this behalf is quite correct. Until such time as the Government becomes Islamic by adopting the Islamic form of Government, to call any of its wars a jihad would be tantamount to describing the enlistment and fighting of a non-Muslim on the side of the Azad Kashmir forces jihad and his death martyrdom. What the Maulana means is that, in the presence of treaties, it is against Shari’at, if the Government or its people participate in such a war. If the Government terminates the treaties and declares war, even then the war started by Government would not be termed jihad unless the Government becomes Islamic’.

….

“Q.—If we have this form of Islamic Government in Pakistan, will you permit Hindus to base their Constitution on the basis of their own religion?

A—Certainly. I should have no objection even if the Muslims of India are treated in that form of Government as shudras and malishes and Manu’s laws are applied to them, depriving them of all share in the Government and the rights of a citizen. In fact such a state of affairs already exists in India.”

.…

“Q.—What will be the duty of the Muslims in India in case of war between India and Pakistan?

A.—Their duty is obvious, and that is not to fight against Pakistan or to do anything injurious to the safety of Pakistan.”

 

 

 

 

 

1947-1950 PM Liaquat Ali Khan, 1966 Gen Ayub Khan, 2005 Govt of Pakistan et seq

 

 

 

In contrast to Maulana Maudoodi saying Islam was “the very antithesis of secular Western democracy”,  Prime Minister Liaquat Ali Khan (1895-1951)[11] during his first official visit in 1950 to North America was to say the new Pakistan, because it was Muslim, held Asia’s greatest democratic potential:

 

 

 

“At present there is no democracy in Asia which is more free and more unified than Pakistan; none so free from moral doubts and from strains between the various sections of the people.”

 

 

 

He told his audiences Pakistan was created because Hindus were people wedded to caste-differences where Pakistanis as Muslims had an egalitarian and democratic disposition:

 

 

“The Hindus, for example, believe in the caste system according to which some human beings are born superior to others and cannot have any social relations with those in the lower castes or with those who are not Hindus.   They cannot marry them or eat with them or even touch them without being polluted.   The Muslims abhor the caste system, as they are a democratic people and believe in the equality of men and equal opportunities for all, do not consider a priesthood necessary, and have economic laws and institutions which recognize the right of private ownership and yet are designed to promote the distribution of wealth and to put healthy checks on vast unearned accumulations… so the Hindus and the Muslims decided to part and divide British India into two independent sovereign states… Our demand for a country of our own had, as you see, a strong democratic urge behind it.  The emergence of Pakistan itself was therefore the triumph of a democratic idea.  It enabled at one stroke a democratic nation of eighty million people to find a place of its own in Asia, where now they can worship God in freedom and pursue their own way of life uninhibited by the domination or the influence of ways and beliefs that are alien or antagonistic to their genius.” [12]

 

 

 

 

President Ayub Khan would state in similar vein on 18 November 1966 at London’s Royal Institute of International Affairs:

 

 

“the root of the problem was the conflicting ideologies of India and Pakistan. Muslim Pakistan believed in common brotherhood and giving people equal opportunity.  India and Hinduism are based on inequality and on colour and race.  Their basic concept is the caste system… Hindus and Muslims could never live under one Government, although they might live side by side.”

 

 

 

Regarding J&K, Liaquat Ali Khan on November 4 1947 broadcast from here in Lahore that the 1846 Treaty of Amritsar was “infamous” in having caused an  “immoral and illegal” ownership of Jammu & Kashmir.  He, along with Mr Jinnah, had called Sheikh Abdullah a “goonda” and “hoodlum” and “Quisling” of India, and on February 4 1948 Pakistan formally challenged the sovereignty of the Dogra dynasty in the world system of nations.  In 1950 during his North American visit though, the Prime Minister allowed that J&K was a “princely state” but said

 

 

“culturally, economically, geographically and strategically, Kashmir – 80 per cent of whose peoples like the majority of the people in Pakistan are Muslims – is in fact an integral part of Pakistan”;

 

“(the) bulk of the population (are) under Indian military occupation”. 

 

 

 

 

Pakistan’s official self-image, portrayal of India, and position on J&K may have not changed greatly since her founding Prime Minister’s statements.   For example, in June 2005 the website of the Government of Pakistan’s Permanent Mission at the UN stated:

 

 

 

“Q: How did Hindu Raja (sic) become the ruler of Muslim majority Kashmir?

A: Historically speaking Kashmir had been ruled by the Muslims from the 14th Century onwards.  The Muslim rule continued till early 19th Century when the ruler of Punjab conquered  Kashmir and gave Jammu to a Dogra Gulab Singh who purchased Kashmir from the British in 1846 for a sum of 7.5 million rupees.”

“India’s forcible occupation of the State of Jammu and Kashmir in 1947 is the main cause of the dispute. India claims to have ‘signed’ a controversial document, the Instrument of Accession, on 26 October 1947 with the Maharaja of Kashmir, in which the Maharaja obtained India’s military help against popular insurgency.   The people of Kashmir and Pakistan do not accept the Indian claim.   There are doubts about the very existence of the Instrument of Accession.  The United Nations also does not consider Indian claim as legally valid: it recognises Kashmir as a disputed territory.   Except India, the entire world community recognises Kashmir as a disputed territory. The fact is that all the principles on the basis of which the Indian subcontinent was partitioned by the British in 1947 justify Kashmir becoming a part of Pakistan:  the State had majority Muslim population, and it not only enjoyed geographical proximity with Pakistan but also had essential economic linkages with the territories constituting Pakistan.”

 

 

 

 

India, a country dominated by the hated-Hindus, has forcibly denied Srinagar Valley’s Muslim majority over the years the freedom to become part of Muslim Pakistan – I stand here to be corrected but, in a nutshell, such has been and remains Pakistan’s official view and projection of the Kashmir problem over more than sixty years.[13]

 

 

Part II

 

  1. India’s Point of View: British Negligence/Indifference during the Transfer of Power, A Case of Misgovernance in the Chaotic Aftermath of World War II

 

 

(a)    Rhetoric: Whose Pakistan?  Which Kashmir? 

(b)    Law: (i) Liaquat-Zafrullah-Abdullah-Nehru United in Error Over the Second Treaty of Amritsar! Dogra J&K subsists Mar 16 1846-Oct 22 1947. Aggression, Anarchy, Annexations: The LOC as De Facto Boundary by Military Decision Since Jan 1 1949.  (ii) Legal Error & Confusion Generated by 12 May 1946 Memorandum. (iii) War: Dogra J&K attacked by Pakistan, defended by India: Invasion, Mutiny, Secession of “Azad Kashmir” & Gilgit, Rape of Baramulla, Siege of Skardu.

 

 

  1. Politics: What is to be Done? Towards Truths, Normalisation, Peace in the 21st Century

The Present Situation is Abnormal & Intolerable. There May Be One (and Only One) Peacable Solution that is Feasible: Revealing Individual Choices Privately with Full Information & Security: Indian “Green Cards”/PIO-OCI status for Hurriyat et al: A Choice of Nationality (India, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Iran).  Of Flags and Consulates in Srinagar & Gilgit etc: De Jure Recognition of the Boundary, Diplomatic Normalisation,  Economic & Military Cooperation.

  1. Appendices:

(a)    History of Jammu & Kashmir until the Dogra Native State

(b)    Pakistan’s Allies (including A Brief History of Gilgit)

(c)    India’s Muslim Voices

(d)    Pakistan’s Muslim Voices: An Excerpt from the Munir Report



[1] EIJ Rosenthal, Islam in the Modern National State, 1965, pp.196-197.

[2] A contemporary of Mohammad Ibn Abdal Wahhab of Nejd.

[3] Francis Robinson in  WE James & Subroto Roy, Foundations of Pakistan’s Political Economy: Towards an Agenda for the 1990s, 1993, p. 36.  Indeed Barelwi had created a proto-Pakistan in NorthWest India one hundred years before the Pakistan Movement. “In the later 1820s the movement became militant, regarding jihad as one of the basic tenets of faith.  Possibly encouraged by the British, with whom the movement did not feel powerful enough to come to grips at the outset, it chose as the venue of jihad the NW frontier of the subcontinent, where it was directed against the Sikhs.  Barelwi temporarily succeeded in carving out a small theocratic principality which collapsed owing to the friction between his Pathan and North Indian followers; and he was finally defeated and slain by the Sikhs in 1831″ (Aziz Ahmed, in  AL Basham (ed) A Cultural History of India 1976, p. 384).   Professor Robinson answered a query of mine in an email of 8 August 2005: “the fullest description of this is in Mohiuddin Ahmad, Saiyid Ahmad Shahid (Lucknow, 1975), although practically everyone who deals with the period covers it in some way. Barelwi was the Amir al-Muminin of a jihadi community which based itself north of Peshawar and for a time controlled Peshawar.  He called his fellowship the Tariqa-yi Muhammadiya.  Barelwi corresponded with local rulers about him.  After his death at the battle of Balakot, it survived in the region, at Sittana I think, down to World War One.”

[4] Rosenthal, ibid., p 235

[5] Germans

[6] Events remote from India’s history and geography, namely, the rise of Hitler and the Second World War, had contributed between 1937 and 1947 to the change of fortunes of the Muslim League and hence of all the people of the subcontinent.  The British had long discovered that mutual antipathy between Muslims and Hindus could be utilised in fashioning their rule; specifically that organisation and mobilisation of Muslim communal opinion was a useful counterweight to any pan-Indian nationalism emerging to compete with British authority. As early as 1874, long before Allan Octavian Hume ICS conceived the Indian National Congress, John Strachey ICS observed “The existence side by side of these (Hindu and Muslim) hostile creeds is one of the strong points in our political position in India. The better classes of Mohammedans are a source of strength to us and not of weakness. They constitute a comparatively small but an energetic minority of the population whose political interests are identical with ours.” By 1906, when a deputation of Muslims headed by the Aga Khan first approached the British pleading for communal representation, Minto the Viceroy replied: “I am as firmly convinced as I believe you to be that any electoral representation in India would be doomed to mischievous failure which aimed at granting a personal enfranchisement, regardless of the beliefs and traditions of the communities composing the population of this Continent.” Minto’s wife wrote in her diary the effect was “nothing less than the pulling back of sixty two millions of (Muslims) from joining the ranks of the seditious opposition.” (The true significance of Maulana Azad may have been that he, precisely at the same time, did indeed feel within himself the nationalist’s desire for freedom strongly enough to want to join the ranks of that seditious opposition.)

[7] “That geographically contiguous units are demarcated into regions which should be so constituted, with such territorial readjustments as may be necessary, that the areas in which the Muslims are numerically in a majority, as in the North-Western and Eastern zones of India should be grouped to constitute Independent States in which the constituent units shall be autonomous and sovereign”.

[8] Robinson ibid, pp. 43-44.

[9] In the “Indian India” of the Native Princes, Hari Singh and others who sent troops to fight as part of British armies (and who were nominal members of Churchill’s War Cabinet) would have their vanities flattered, while Sheikh Abdullah’s rebellion against Dogra rule would be ignored. See seq. And in British India, Mr Jinnah the conservative Anglophile and his elitist Muslim League would be backed, while the radicalised masses of the Gandhi-Bose-Nehru Congress suppressed as a nuisance.

[10] An anthology about Lahore reports memories of a murderous mob arriving at a wealthy man’s home to be placated  with words like  “They are Parsis not Hindus, no need to kill them…”

[11] An exact contemporary of Chaudhury Rahmat Ali.

[12] Pakistan, Harvard University Press, 1950.

[13] It is not far from this to a certain body of sentiments frequently found, for example, as recently as February 5 2011: “To observe the Kashmir Solidarity Day, various programs, rallies and protests will be held on Saturday (today) across the city to support the people of Kashmir in their struggle against the Indian occupation of their land.  Various religious, political, social and other organizations have arranged different programs to highlight the atrocities of Indian occupant army in held Jammu and Kashmir where about 800,000 Indian soldiers have been committing atrocities against innocent civilians; killing, wounding and maiming tens of thousands of people; raping thousands of women and setting houses, shops and crops on fire to break the Kashmiris’ will to fight for their freedom…Jamat-ud-Dawah…leaders warned that a ‘jihad’ would be launched if Kashmir was not liberated through civil agitation…the JuD leaders said first the former President, Pervez Musharraf, and now the current dispensation were extending the olive branch to New Delhi despite the atrocities on the Kashmiri people….the Pakistani nation would (never compromise on the issue of Kashmir and) would continue to provide political, moral and diplomatic support to the Kashmiri people.”

On Pakistan and the Theory & Practice of the Islamic State: An Excerpt from the Munir Report of 1954

On Pakistan and the Theory & Practice of the Islamic State: An Excerpt from the Munir Report of 1954

From REPORT of THE COURT OF INQUIRY constituted under PUNJAB ACT II OF 1954 to enquire into the PUNJAB DISTURBANCES OF 1953 “Munir Report”

“ISLAMIC STATE
It has been repeatedly said before us that implicit in the demand for Pakistan was the demand for an Islamic State. Some speeches of important leaders who were striving for Pakistan undoubtedly lend themselves to this construction. These leaders while referring to an Islamic State or to a State governed by Islamic laws perhaps had in their minds the pattern of a legal structure based on or mixed up with Islamic dogma, personal law, ethics and institutions. No one who has given serious thought to the introduction of a religious State in Pakistan has failed to notice the tremendous difficulties with which any such scheme must be confronted. Even Dr. Muhammad Iqbal, who must be considered to be the first thinker who conceived of the possibility of a consolidated North Western Indian Muslim State, in the course of his presidential address to the Muslim League in 1930 said:

“Nor should the Hindus fear that the creation of autonomous Muslim States will mean the introduction of a kind of religious rule in such States. The principle that each group is entitled to free development on its own lines is not inspired by any feeling of narrow communalism”.

When we come to deal with the question of responsibility we shall have the occasion to point out that the most important of the parties who are now clamouring for the enforcement of the three demands on religious grounds were all against the idea of an Islamic State. Even Maulana Abul Ala Maudoodi of Jama’at-i-Islami was of the view that the form of Government in the new Muslim State, if it ever came into existence, could only be secular.

Before the Partition, the first public picture of Pakistan that the Quaid-i-Azam gave to the world was in the course of an interview in New Delhi with Mr. Doon Campbell, Reuter’s Correspondent. The Quaid-i-Azam said that the new State would be a modern democratic State, with sovereignty resting in the people and the members of the new nation having equal rights of citizenship regardless of their religion, caste or creed. When Pakistan formally appeared on the map, the Quaid-i-Azam in his memorable speech of 11th August 1947 to the Constituent Assembly of Pakistan, while stating the principle on which the new State was to be founded, said:—

“All the same, in this division it was impossible to avoid the question of minorities being in one Dominion or the other. Now that was unavoidable. There is no other solution. Now what shall we do? Now, if we want to make this great State of Pakistan happy and prosperous we should wholly and solely concentrate on the well-being of the people, and specially of the masses and the poor. If you will work in co-operation, forgetting the past, burying the hatchet, you are bound to succeed. If you change your past and work together in a spirit that every one of you, no matter to what community he belongs, no matter what relations he had with you in the past, no matter what is his colour, caste or creed, is first, second and last a citizen of this State with equal rights, privileges and obligations., there
will be no end to the progress you will make. “I cannot emphasise it too much. We should begin to work in that spirit and in course of time all these angularities of the majority and minority communities—the Hindu community and the Muslim community— because even as regards Muslims you have Pathana, Punjabis, Shias, Sunnis and so on and among the Hindus you have Brahmins, Vashnavas, Khatris, also Bengalis, Madrasis and so on—will vanish. Indeed if you ask me this has been the biggest hindrance in the way of India to attain its freedom and independence and but for this we would have been free peoples long long ago. No power can hold another nation, and specially a nation of 400 million souls in subjection; nobody could have conquered you, and even if it had happened, nobody could have continued its hold on you for any length of time but for this (Applause). Therefore, we must learn a lesson from this. You are free; you are free to go to your temples, you are free to go to your mosques or to any other places of worship in this State of Pakistan. You may belong to any religion or caste or creed— that has nothing to do with the business of the State (Hear, hear). As you know, history shows that in England conditions sometime ago were much worse than those prevailing in India today. The Roman Catholics and the Protestants persecuted each other. Even now there are some States in existence where there are discriminations made and bars imposed against a particular class. Thank God we are not starting in those days. We are starting in the days when there is no discrimination, no distinction between one community and another, no discrimination between one caste or creed and another. We are starting with this fundamental principle that we are all citizens and equal citizens of one State (Loud applause). The people of England in course of time had to face the realities of the situation and had to discharge the responsibilities and burdens placed upon them by the Government of their country and they went through that fire step by step. Today you might say with justice that Roman Catholics and Protestants do not exist: what exists now is that every man is a citizen, an equal citizen, of Great Britain and they are all members of the nation. “Now, I think we should keep that in front of us as our ideal and you will find that in course of time Hindus would cease to be Hindus and Muslims would cease to be Muslims, not in the religious sense, because that is the personal faith of each individual, but in the political sense as citizens of the State”.

The Quaid-i-Azam was the founder of Pakistan and the occasion on which he thus spoke was the first landmark in the history of Pakistan. The speech was intended both for his own people including non-Muslims and the world, and its object was to define as clearly as possible the ideal to the attainment of which the new State was to devote all its energies. There are repeated references in this speech to the bitterness of the past and an appeal to forget and change the past and to bury the hatchet. The future subject of the State is to be a citizen with equal rights, privileges and obligations, irrespective of colour, caste, creed or community. The word ‘nation’ is used more than once and religion is stated to have nothing to do with the business of the State and to be merely a matter of personal faith for the individual.

We asked the ulama whether this conception of a State was acceptable to them and everyone of them replied in an unhesitating negative, including the Ahrar and erstwhile Congressites with whom before the Partition this conception was almost a part of their faith.

If Maulana Amin Ahsan Islahi’s evidence correctly represents the view of Jama’at-i-Islami, a State based on this idea is the creature of the devil, and he is confirmed in this by several writings of his chief, Maulana Abul Ala Maudoodi, the founder of the jama’at. None of the ulama can tolerate a State which is based on nationalism and all that it implies; with them millat and all that it connotes can alone be the determining factor in State activity.

The Quaid-i-Azam’s conception of a modern national State, it is alleged, became obsolete with the passing of the Objectives Resolution on 12th March 1949; but it has been freely admitted that this Resolution, though grandiloquent in words, phrases and clauses, is nothing but a hoax and that not only does it not contain even a semblance of the embryo of an Islamic State but its provisions, particularly those relating to fundamental rights, are directly opposed to the principles of an Islamic State.

FOUNDATIONS OF ISLAMIC STATE
What is then the Islamic State of which everybody talks but nobody thinks? Before we seek to discover an answer to this question, we must have a clear conception of the scope and function of the State.

The ulama were divided in their opinions when they were asked to cite some precedent of an Islamic State in Muslim history. Thus, though Hafiz Kifayat Husain, the Shia divine, held out as his ideal the form of Government during the Holy Prophet’s time, Maulana Daud Ghaznavi also included in his precedent the days of the Islamic Republic, of Umar bin Abdul Aziz, Salah-ud-Din Ayyubi of Damascus, Sultan Mahmud of Ghazni, Muhammad Tughlaq and Aurangzeb and the present regime in Saudi Arabia. Most of them, however, relied on the form of Government during the Islamic Republic from 632 to 661 A. D., a period of less than thirty years, though some of them also added the very short period of Umar bin Abdul Aziz.

Maulana Abdul Haamid Badayuni stated that the details of the ideal State would be worked out by the ulama while Master Taj-ud-Din Ansari’s confused notion of an Islamic State may be gathered from the following portion of his interrogation :—

“Q.—Were you also in the Khilafat movement ?
A.—Yes.
Q.—When did the Khilafat movement stop in India ?
A.—In 1923. This was after the Turks had declared their country to be a secular State.
Q.—If you are told that the Khilafat movement continued long after the Turks had abolished Khilafat, will that be correct?
A.—As far as I remember, the Khilafat movement finished with the abolition of the Khilafat by the Turks.
Q.—You are reported to have been a member of the Khilafat movement and having made speeches. Is it correct ?
A.—It could not be correct.
Q.—Was the Congress interested in Khilafat ?
A.— Yes.
Q.—Was Khilafat with you a matter of religious conviction or just a political movement ?
A.— It was purely a religious movement.
Q.— Did the Khilafat movement have the support of Mr. Gandhi ?
A.—Yes.
Q.— What was the object of the Khilafat movement ?
A.— The Britisher was injuring the Khilafat institution in Turkey and the Musalman was aggrieved by this attitude of the Britisher.
Q.— Was not the object of the movement to resuscitate the Khilafat among the    Musalmans ?
A.—No.
Q.— Is Khilafat with you a necessary part of Muslim form of Government ?
A.—Yes.
Q.— Are you, therefore, in favour of having a Khilafat in Pakistan ?
A.—Yes.
Q.— Can there be more than one Khalifa of the Muslims ?
A.— No.
Q.— Will the Khalifa of Pakistan be the Khalifa of all the Muslims of the world ?
A.— He should be but cannot be.”

Throughout the three thousand years over which political thought extends, and such thought in its early stages cannot be separated from religion, two questions have invariably presented themselves for consideration : —

(1) what are the precise functions of the State ? and
(2) who shall control the State ?

If the true scope of the activities of the State is the welfare, temporal or spiritual or both of the individual, then the first question directly gives rise to the bigger question:

What is the object of human life and the ultimate destiny of man ? On this, widely divergent views have prevailed, not at different times but at one and the same time. The pygmies of equatorial West Africa still believe that their God Komba has sent them into the forest to hunt and dance and sing. The Epicureans meant very much the same when they said that the object of human life is to drink and eat and be merry, for death denies such pleasures. The utilitarians base their institutions on the assumption that the object of human life is to experience pleasant sensations of mind and body, irrespective of what is to come hereafter. The Stoics believed in curbing and reducing all physical desires, and Diogenes found a tub good enough to live in. German philosophers think that the individual lives for the State and that therefore the object of life is service of the State in all that it might decide to undertake and achieve. Ancient Hindu philosophers believed in the logic of the fist with its natural consequence, the law of natural selection and the struggle for survival. The Semitic theory of State, whether Jewish, Christian or Islamic, has always held that the object of human life is to prepare ourselves for the next life and that, therefore, prayer and good works are the only object of life. Greek philosophers beginning with Socrates thought that the object of human life was to engage in philosophical meditation with a view to discovering the great truths that lie in nature and that the business of the others is to feed the philosophers engaged in that undertaking.

Islam emphasises the doctrine that life in this world is not the only life given to man but that eternal life begins after the present existence comes to an end, and that the status of a human being in the next world will depend upon his beliefs and actions in this world. As the present life is not an end in itself but merely a means to an end, not only the individual but also the State, as opposed to the secular theory which bases all political and economic institutions on a disregard of their consequences on the next life, should strive for human conduct which ensures for a person better status in the next world.

According to this theory Islam is the religion which seeks to attain that object. Therefore the question immediately arises : What is Islam and who is a momin or a Muslim ? We put this question to the ulama and we shall presently refer to their answers to this question. But we cannot refrain from saying here that it was a matter of infinite regret to us that the ulama whose first duty should be to have settled views on this subject, were hopelessly disagreed among themselves.

Apart from how these learned divines have expressed themselves, we conceive of Islam as a system that covers, as every systematic religion must, the following five topics :—
(1) the dogma, namely, the essentials of belief ;
(2) the cult, namely, religious rites and observances which a person must
perform ;
(3) ethics, i. e. rules of moral conduct ;
(4) institutions, social, economic and political ; and
(5) law proper.

The essential basis of the rules on all these subjects is revelation and not reason, though both may coincide. This coincidence, however, is accidental because human reasoning may be faulty and ultimate reason is known only to God, Who sends His message to humanity through His chosen messengers for the direction and guidance of the people. One must, therefore, accept the dogma, observe the cult, follow the ethics, obey the law and establish institutions which God has revealed, though their reason may not be apparent—nay even if they be opposed to human reason. Since an error by God is an impossibility, anything that God has revealed, whether its subject be something occult or preternatural, history, finance, law, worship or something which according to human thought admits of scientific treatment as for instance, birth of man, evolution, cosmology, or astronomy, has got to be accepted as absolute truth. The test of reason is not the acid
test and a denial of this amounts to a denial of the supreme wisdom and designs of Allah—it is kufr. Now God has revealed Himself from time to time to His favoured people of whom our Holy Prophet was the last. That revelation is contained in the Qur’an and covers the five topics mentioned above. The true business of a person who believes in Islam is therefore to understand, believe in and act upon that revelation. The people whom God chooses as medium for the transmission of His messages are rasuls (messengers) or nabis (prophets). Since every action or saying of a prophet is, in the case of our own Holy Prophet it certainly was, prompted by Allah, it has the same degree of inerrancy as the formal revelation itself, because prophets are ma’sum, incapable of doing or saying something which is opposed to Divine wishes. These sayings and actions are sunna having the same infallibility as the Qur’an. The record of this sunna is hadith which is to be found in several books which were compiled by Muslim scholars after long, laborious and careful research extending over several generations.

The word hadith means a record of actions or sayings of the Prophet and his companions. At first the sahaba. i. e. people who had lived in the society of the Prophet, were the best authority for a knowledge of the sunna. Later people had to be content with the communications of the tabi’un, i. e. successors, people of the first generation after the Holy Prophet who had received their information from the sahaba, and then in the following generations with the accounts of the so-called successors of the successors (tabi’ul-tabi’un), i.e. people of the second generation after the Holy Prophet, who had concerted with the successors. Marfu’ is a tradition which contains a statement about the Prophet ; mawquf, a tradition that refers only to the sayings or doings of the sahaba ; and maqtu’ a tradition which does not at most go further back than the first generation after the Holy Prophet and deals only with sayings or doings of tabi’un. In some of the ahadith
the actual word of God is to be found. Any such tradition is designated Hadith-i-Qudsi or Ilahi as distinguished from an ordinary Hadith-i-Nabvi.

A very large portion of sayings ascribed to the Prophet deals with the ahkam (legal professions), religious obligations, halal and haram (what is allowed and forbidden), with ritual purity, laws regarding food and criminal and civil law. Further they deal with dogma, retribution at the Last Judgment, hell and paradise, angels, creation, revelations, the earlier prophets. Many traditions also contain edifying sayings and moral teachings by the Holy Prophet. The importance of ahadith was realised from the very beginning and they were not only committed to memory but in some cases were reduced to writing. The work of compilation of hadith began in the third century after the Hijra and the Sihah Sitta were all compiled in that century. These are the musannifs of —
(1) Al-Bukhari, died 256/870,
(2) Muslim, died 261/875,
(3) Abu Dawud, died 275/888,
(4) Al-Tirmizi, died 279/892,
(5) All Nasa’i, died 303/915, and
(6) Ibn-i-Maja, died 273/886.

According to modern laws of evidence, including our own, the ahadith are inadmissible evidence of sunna because each of them contains several links of hearsay, but as authority on law they are admissible pro prio vigore. The merit of these collections lies not so much in the fact that (as is often wrongly stated) their authors decided for the first time which of the numerous traditions in circulation were genuine and which false but rather in the fact that they brought together everything that was recognised as genuine in orthodox circles in those days.

The Shias judge hadith from their own stand-point and only consider such traditions reliable as are based on the authority of Ali and his adherents. They have, therefore, their own works on the subject and hold the following five works in particularly high esteem—
(1) Al-Kafi of Muhammad b. Yaqub Al-Kulini, died 328/939,
(2) Man La Yastahdiruhu’ul-Fakih of Muhammad b. Ali b. Babuya Al-Kummi,
died 381/991,
(3) Tahdib Al-Ahkam,
(4) Al-Istibsar Fi-Ma’khtalafa Fihi’l-Akhbar (extract from the preceding) of
Muhammad Altusi, died 459/1067, and
(5) Nahj Al-Balagha (alleged sayings of Ali) of Ali b. Tahir Al-Sharif Al-
Murtaza, died 436/1044 (or of his brother Radi Al-Din Al-Baghdadi.)

After the ritual, the dogma and the most important political and social institutions had taken definite shape in the second and third centuries, there arose a certain communis opinio regarding the reliability of most transmitters of tradition and the value of their statement. The main principles of doctrine had already been established in the writings of Malik b. Anas, Al-Shafi’i and other scholars regarded as authoritative in different circles and mainly on the authority of traditional sayings of the Holy Prophet. In the long run no one dared to doubt the truth of these traditions and this almost conclusive presumption of truth has since continued to be attached to the ahadith compiled in the Sihah Sitta.

We have so far arrived at this result that any rule on any subject that may be derived from the Qur’an or the sunna of the Holy Prophet is binding on every Musalman. But since the only evidence of sunna is the hadith, the words sunna and hadith have become mixed up with, and indistinguishable from, each other with the result that the expression Qur’an and hadith is not infrequently employed where the intention is to refer to Qur’an and sunna.

At this stage another principle, equally basic, comes into operation, and that is that Islam is the final religion revealed by God, complete and exhaustive in all respects, and that God will not abrogate, detract from or add to this religion (din) any more than He will send a fresh messenger. The din having been perfected (Akmalto lakum dinokum, Sura V, verse 3), there remains no need for any new code repealing, modifying or amplifying the original code; nor for any fresh messenger or message. In this sense, therefore, prophethood ceased with the Holy Prophet and revelation stopped for ever. This is the doctrine of the cessation of wahi-i-nubuwwat.

If the proposition that Muslim dogma, ethics and institutions, etc., are all based on the doctrine of inerrancy, whether such inerrancy lies in the Qur’an, the sunna, ijma’ or ijtihad-i-mutlaq, is fully comprehended, the various deductions that follow from it will be easily understandable. As the ultimate test of truth, whether the matter be one of a ritual or political or social or economic nature, is revelation and revelation has to be gathered from the Qur’an, and the sunna carries almost the same degree of inerrancy as revelation and the only evidence of sunna is hadith, the first duty of those who desire to establish an Islamic State will be to discover the precise rule applicable to the existing circumstances whether that rule is to be found in the Qur’an or hadith. Obviously the persons most suited for the purpose would be those who have made the Qur’an and hadith their lifelong study, namely, among the Sunnies, the ulama, and among the Shias, the mujtahids who are the spokesmen of the hidden Imam, the ruler de jure divino. The function of
these divines would be to engage themselves in discovering rules applicable to particular situations and they will be engaged in a task similar to that in which Greek philosophers were engaged, with only this difference that whereas the latter thought that all truth lay in nature which had merely to be discovered by individual effort, the ulama and the mujtahids will have to get at the truth that lies in the holy Book and the books of hadith.

The ulama Board which was recommended by the Basic Principles Committee was a logical recognition of this principle, and the true objection against that Board should indeed have been that the Board was too inadequate a mechanism to implement the principle which had brought that body into existence.

Ijma’ means concurrence of the mujtahids of the people, i.e., of those who have a right, in virtue of knowledge, to form a judgment of their own, after the death of the Holy Prophet. The authority of ijma’ rests on the principle of a divine protection against error and is founded on a basal tradition of the Holy Prophet, “My people will never agree in error”, reported in Ibn Maja, By this procedure points which had been in dispute were fixed, and when fixed, they became an essential part of the faith and disbelief in them an act of unbelief (kufr). The essential point to remember about ijma’ is that it represents the agreement of the mujtahids and that the agreement of the masses is especially excluded.

Thus ijma’ has not only fixed unsettled points but has changed settled doctrines of the greatest importance.

The distinction between ijma’ and ijtihad is that whereas the former is collective, the latter is individual. Ijtihad means the exerting of one’s self to the utmost degree to form an opinion in a case or as to a rule of law. This is done by applying analogy to the Qur’an and the sunna. Ijtihad did not originally involve inerrancy, its result being always zann or fallible opinion. Only combined ijtihad led to ijma, and was inerrant. But this broad ijtihad soon passed into special ijtihad of those who had a peculiar right to form judgments. When later doctors looked back to the founding of the four legal schools, they assigned to their founders an ijtihad of the first rank (ijtihad-i-mutlaq). But from time to time individuals appeared who returned to the earliest meaning of ijtihad and claimed for themselves the right to form their own opinion from first principles. One of these was the Hanbalite Ibn Taimiya (died 728). Another was Suyuti (died 911) in whom the claim to ijtihad unites with one to be the mujaddid or renewer of religion in his century. At every time there must exist at least one mujtahid, was his contention, just as in every century there must come a mujaddid.

In Shia Islam there are still absolute mujtahids because they are regarded as the spokesmen of the hidden Imam. Thus collective ijtihad leads to ijma’, and the basis of ijma’ is divine protection against error—inerrancy.

ESSENTIALS OF ISLAMIC STATE
Since the basis of Islamic law is the principle of inerrancy of revelation and of the Holy Prophet, the law to be found in the Qur’an and the sunna is above all man-made laws, and in case of conflict between the two, the latter, irrespective of its nature, must yield to the former. Thus, provided there be a rule in the Qur’an or the sunna on a matter which according to our conceptions falls within the region of Constitutional Law or International Law, the rule must be given effect to unless that rule itself permits a departure from it. Thus no distinction exists in Islamic law between Constitutional Law and other law, the whole law to be found in the Qur’an and the sunna being a part of the law of the land for Muslim subjects of the State. Similarly if there be a rule in the Qur’an or the sunna relating to the State’s relations with other States or to the relations of Muslim subjects of the State with other States or the subjects of those States, the rule will have the same superiority of sanction as any other law to be found in the Qur’an or the
sunna.

Therefore if Pakistan is or is intended to be converted into an Islamic State in the
true sense of the word, its Constitution must contain the following five provisions:—

(1) that all laws to be found in the Qur’an or the sunna shall be deemed to be a
part of the law of the land for Muslims and shall be enforced accordingly;
(2) that unless the Constitution itself is framed by ijma’-i-ummat, namely, by the
agreement of the ulama and mujtahids of acknowledged status, any
provision in the Constitution which is repugnant to the Qur’an or sunna
shall to the extent of the repugnancy be void;
(3) that unless the existing laws of Pakistan are adapted by ijma’-i-ummat of the
kind mentioned above, any provision in the existing law which is contrary
to the Qur’an or sunna shall to the extent of the repugnancy be void;
(4) that any provision in any future law which is repugnant to Qur’an or sunna
shall be void;
(5) that no rule of International Law and no provision in any convention or treaty
to which Pakistan is a party, which is contrary to the Qur’an or the sunna
shall be binding on any Muslim in Pakistan.

SOVEREIGNTY AND DEMOCRACY IN ISLAMIC STATE
That the form of Government in Pakistan, if that form is to comply with the principles of Islam, will not be democratic is conceded by the ulama. We have already explained the doctrine of sovereignty of the Qur’an and the sunna. The Objectives Resolution rightly recognised this position when it recited that all sovereignty rests with God Almighty alone. But the authors of that Resolution misused the words ‘sovereign’ and ‘democracy’ when they recited that the Constitution to be framed was for a sovereign State in which principles of democracy as enunciated by Islam shall be fully observed.

It may be that in the context in which they were used, these words could not be misunderstood by those who are well versed in Islamic principles, but both these words were borrowed from western political philosophy and in that sense they were both wrongly used in the Resolution. When it is said that a country is sovereign, the implication is that its people or any other group of persons in it are entitled to conduct the affairs of that country in any way they like and untrammelled by any considerations except those of expediency and policy. An Islamic State, however, cannot in this sense be sovereign, because it will not be competent to abrogate, repeal or do away with any law in the Qur’an or the sunna. Absolute restriction on the legislative power of a State is a restriction on the sovereignty of the people of that State and if the origin of this restriction lies elsewhere than in the will of the people, then to the extent of that restriction the sovereignty of the State and its people is necessarily taken away. In an Islamic State, sovereignty, in its essentially juristic sense, can only rest with Allah. In the same way, democracy means the rule of the demos, namely, the people, directly by them as in ancient Greece and Rome, or indirectly through chosen representatives as in modern democracies. If the power of the people in the framing of the Constitution or in the framing of the laws or in the sphere of executive action is subject to certain immutable rules, it cannot be said that they can pass any law that they like, or, in the exercise of executive functions, do whatever they like. Indeed if the legislature in an Islamic State is a sort of ijma’, the masses are expressly disqualified from taking part in it because ijma’-i-ummat in Islamic jurisprudence is restricted to ulama and mujtahids of acknowledged status and does not at all extend, as in democracy, to the populace.

OTHER INCIDENTS OF ISLAMIC STATE ACCORDING TO ULAMA
In the preceding pages we have attempted to state as clearly as we could the principles on which a religious State must be built if it is to be called an Islamic State. We now proceed to state some incidents of such State, with particular reference to the ulamas’ conception of it.

LEGISLATURE AND LEGISLATION
Legislature in its present sense is unknown to the Islamic system. The religiopolitical system which is called din-i-Islam is a complete system which contains in itself the mechanism for discovering and applying law to any situation that may arise. During the Islamic Republic there was no legislature in its modern sense and for every situation or emergency that arose law could be discovered and applied by the ulama. The law had been made and was not to be made, the only function of those entrusted with the administration of law being to discover the law for the purposes of the particular case, though when enunciated and applied it formed a precedent for others to follow. It is wholly incorrect, as has been suggested from certain quarters, that in a country like Pakistan, which consists of different communities, Muslim and non-Muslim, and where representation is allowed to non-Muslims with a right to vote on every subject that comes up, the legislature is a form of ijma’ or ijtihad, the reason being that ijtihad is not collective but only individual, and though ijma’ is collective, there is no place in it for those who are not experts in the knowledge of the law. This principle at once rules out the infidels (kuffar) whether they be people of Scriptures (ahl-i-kitab) or idolators (mushrikeen).

Since Islam is a perfect religion containing laws, express or derivable by ijma’ or ijtihad, governing the whole field of human activity, there is in it no sanction for what may, in the modern sense, be called legislation.

Questioned on this point Maulana Abul Hasanat, President, Jami’at-ul-Ulama-i-Pakistan says :—

“Q.—Is the institution of legislature as distinguished from the institution of a
person or body of persons entrusted with the interpretation of law, an
integral part of an Islamic State?
A.—No. Our law is complete and merely requires interpretation by those who are
experts in it. According to my belief no question can arise the law relating
to which cannot be discovered from the Qur’an or the hadith.
Q.—Who were Sahib-ul-hall-i-wal-aqd
A.—They were the distinguished ulama of the time. These persons attained their
status by reason of the knowledge of the law. They were not in any way
analogous or similar to the legislature in modern democracy.”

The same view was expressed by Amir-i-Shari’at Sayyad Ata Ullah Shah Bukhari
in one of his speeches reported in the ‘Azad’ of 22nd April, 1947, in the course of which he said that our din is complete and perfect and that it amounts to kufr to make more laws.

Maulana Abul Ala Maudoodi, however, is of the opinion that legislation in the true sense is possible in an Islamic State on matters which are not covered by the Qur’an, the sunna, or previous ijma’ and he has attempted to explain his point by reference to the institution of a body of persons whom the Holy Prophet, and after him the khulafa consulted on all matters relating to affairs of State. The question is one of some difficulty and great importance because any institution of legislature will have to be reconciled with the claim put forward by Maulana Abul Hasanat and some other religious divines that Islam is a perfect and exhaustive code wide enough to furnish an answer to any question that may arise relating to any human activity, and that it does not know of any “unoccupied field” to be filled by fresh legislation. There is no doubt that Islam enjoins consultation and that not only the Holy Prophet but also the first four caliphs and even their successors resorted to consultation with the leading men of the time, who for their knowledge of the law and piety could well be relied upon.

In the inquiry not much has been disclosed about the Majlis-i-Shura except what is contained in Maulana Abul Ala Maudoodi’s written statement which he supplied to the Court at its request. That there was a body of men who were consulted is true, but whether this was a standing body and whether its advice had any legal or binding force, seems somewhat doubtful. These men were certainly not elected in the modern way, though their representative character cannot be disputed. Their advice was certainly asked ad hoc, but that they were competent to make law as the modern legislatures make laws is certainly not correct. The decisions taken by them undoubtedly served as precedents and were in the nature of ijma’, which is not legislation but the application of an existing law to a particular case. When consulted in affairs of State, their functions were truly in the nature of an advice given by a modern cabinet but such advice is not law but only a decision.

Nor can the legislature in a modern State correspond to ijma’ because as we have already pointed out, the legislature legislates while the ulama of Majlis-i-Shura who were called upon to determine what should be the decision on a particular point which was not covered by the Qur’an and the sunna, merely sought to discover and apply the law and not to promulgate the law, though the decision when taken had to be taken not only for the purposes of the particular case but for subsequent occasions as a binding precedent.

An intriguing situation might arise if the Constitution Act provided that any provision of it, if it was inconsistent with the Qur’an or the sunna, would be void, and the intra vires of a law made by the legislature were questioned before the Supreme Court on the ground that the institution of legislature itself was contrary to the Qur’an and the sunna.

POSITION OF NON-MUSLIMS
The ground on which the removal of Chaudhri Zafrullah Khan and other Ahmadis occupying key positions in the State is demanded is that the Ahmadis are non-Muslims and that therefore like zimmies in an Islamic State they are not eligible for appointment to higher offices in the State. This aspect of the demands has directly raised a question about the position of non-Muslims in Pakistan if we are to have an Islamic Constitution.

According to the leading ulama the position of non-Muslims in the Islamic State of Pakistan will be that of zimmies and they will not be full citizens of Pakistan because they will not have the same rights as Muslims They will have no voice in the making of the law, no right to administer the law and no right to hold public offices.

A full statement of this position will be found in the evidence of Maulana Abul Hasanat Sayyad Muhammad Ahmad Qadri, Maulana Ahmad Ali, Mian Tufail Muhammad and Maulana Abdul Haamid Badayuni. Maulana Abul Hasanat on being questioned on the subject stated as follows :—

“Q.—If we were to have an Islamic State in Pakistan, what will be the position of the kuffar (non-Muslims)? Will they have a voice in the making of laws, the right of administering the law and the right to hold public offices?
A.—Their position will be that of zimmies. They will have no voice in the making of laws, no right to administer the law and no right to hold public offices.
Q.—In an Islamic State can the head of the State delegate any part of his powers to kuffar?
A.—No.”

Maulana Ahmad Ali, when questioned, said:—
“Q.—if we were to have an Islamic State in Pakistan, what will be the position of the kuffar? Will they have a hand in the making of the law, the right to administer the law and the right to hold public offices ?
A.—Their position will be that of zimmies. They will have no say in the making of law and no right to administer the law. Government may, however, permit them to hold any public office”.

Mian Tufail Muhammad stated as follows :—
“Q.—Read the article on minorities’ rights in the ‘Civil and Military Gazette’ of 13th October, 1953, and say whether it correctly represents your view of an Islamic State? (It was stated in the articles that minorities would have the same rights as Muslims).
A.—I have read this article and do not acknowledge these rights for the Christians or other non-Muslims in Pakistan if the State is founded on the ideology of the Jama’at”.

The confusion on this point in the mind of Maulana Abdul Haamid Badayuni, President, Jami’at-ul-Ulama-i-Pakistan, is apparent from the following: —

“Q.—Have you ever read the aforesaid speech (the speech of the Quaid-i-Azam to the Constituent Assembly of Pakistan on 11th August, 1947)?
A.—Yes, I have read that speech.
Q.—Do you still agree with the conception of Pakistan that the Quaid-i-Azam presented to the Constituent Assembly in this speech in which he said that thereafter there would be only one Pakistan nation, consisting of Muslims and non-Muslims, having equal civic rights, without any distinction of race, religion or creed and that religion would be merely a private affair of the individual ?
A.—I accept the principle that all communities, whether Muslims or non-Muslims, should have, according to their population, proper representation in the administration of the State and legislation, except that non-Muslims cannot be taken in the army or the judiciary or be appointed as Ministers or to other posts involving the reposing of confidence.
Q.—Are you suggesting that the position of non-Muslims would be that of zimmies or any better ?
A.—No. By zimmies are meant non-Muslim people of lands which have been conquered by an Islamic State, and the word is not applicable to non-Muslim minorities already living in an Islamic State. Such minorities are called mu’ahids, i.e. those people with whom some agreement has been made.
Q.—What will be their status if there is no agreement with them ?
A.—In that case such communities cannot have any rights of citizenship.
Q.—Will the non-Muslim communities inhabiting Pakistan be called by you as mu’ahids?
A.—No, not in the absence of an agreement with them. To my knowledge there is no such agreement with such communities in Pakistan.”

So, according to the evidence of this learned divine, the non-Muslims of Pakistan will neither be citizens nor will they have the status of zimmies or of mu’ahids. During the Islamic Republic, the head of the State, the khalifa, was chosen by a system of election, which was wholly different from the present system of election based on adult or any other form of popular suffrage. The oath of allegiance (ba’it) rendered to him possessed a sacramental virtue, and on his being chosen by the consensus of the people (ijma’-ul-ummat) he became the source of all channels of legitimate Government. He and he alone then was competent to rule, though he could delegate his powers to deputies and collect around him a body of men of outstanding piety and learning, called Majlis-i-Shura or Ahl-ul-Hall-i-wal-Aqd. The principal feature of this system was that the kuffar, for reasons which are too obvious and need not be stated, could not be admitted to this majlis and the power which had vested in the khalifa could not be delegated to the kuffar. The khalifa was the real head of the State, all power vesting in him and not a powerless individual like the President of a modern democratic State who is merely to sign the record of decisions taken by the Prime Minister and his Cabinet. He could not appoint non-Muslims to important posts, and could give them no place either in the interpretation or the administration of the law, the making of the law by them, as already pointed out, being a legal impossibility.

This being the position, the State will have to devise some machinery by which the distinction between a Muslim and a non-Muslim may be determined and its consequences enforced. The question, therefore, whether a person is or is not a Muslim will be of fundamental importance, and it was for this reason that we asked most of the leading ulama, to give their definition of a Muslim, the point being that if the ulama of the various sects believed the Ahmadis to be kafirs, they must have been quite clear in their minds not only about the grounds of such belief but also about the definition of a Muslim because the claim that a certain person or community is not within the pale of Islam implies on the part of the claimant an exact conception of what a Muslim is. The result of this part of the inquiry, however, has been anything but satisfactory, and if considerable confusion exists in the minds of our ulama on such a simple matter, one can easily imagine what the differences on more complicated matters will be. Below we reproduce the definition of a Muslim given by each alim in his own words. This definition was asked after it had been clearly explained to each witness that he was required to give the irreducible minimum conditions which, a person must satisfy to be entitled to be called a Muslim and that the definition was to be on the principle on which a term in grammar is defined.

Here is the result : —

Maulana Abul Hasanat Muhammad Ahmad Qadri, President, Jami’at-ul-Ulamai-
Pakistan —
“Q.— What is the definition of a Muslim ?
A — (1) He must believe in the Unity of God.
(2) He must believe in the prophet of Islam to be a true prophet as well as in all other prophets who have preceded him,
(3) He must believe in the Holy Prophet of Islam as the last of the prophets (khatam-un-nabiyin).
(4) He must believe in the Qur’an as it was revealed by God to the Holy
Prophet of Islam.
(5) He must believe as binding on him the injunctions of the Prophet of
Islam.
(6) He must believe in the qiyamat.
Q.—Is a tarik-us-salat a Muslim ?
A.—Yes, but not a munkir-us-salat”

Maulana Ahmad Ali, President, Jami’at-ul-Ulama-i-Islam, Maghribi Pakistan —
“Q.— Please define a Muslim ?
A.—A person is a Muslim if he believes (1) in the Qur’an and (2) what has been said by the prophet. Any person who possesses these two qualifications is entitled to be called a Muslim without his being required to believe in anything more or to do anything more.”

Maulana Abul Ala Maudoodi, Amir Jama’at-i-Islami —
“Q.—Please define a Muslim ?
A.—A person is a Muslim if he believes (1) in tauheed, (2) in all the prophets (ambiya), (3) all the books revealed by God, (4) in mala’ika (angels), and (5) yaum-ul-akhira (the Day of Judgment).
Q.—Is a mere profession of belief in these articles sufficient to entitle a man
to call himself a Musalman and to be treated as a Musalman in an Islamic State ?
A.—Yes.
Q.—If a person says that he believes in all these things, does any one have a right to question the existence of his belief ?
A.—The five requisites that I have mentioned above are fundamental and any alteration in anyone of these articles will take him out of the pale of Islam.”

Ghazi Siraj-ud-Din Munir—
“Q.—Please define a Muslim ?
A.—I consider a man to be a Muslim if he professes his belief in the kalima, namely, La Ilaha Illalah-o-Muhammad-ur-Rasulullah, and leads a life in the footsteps of the Holy Prophet.”

Mufti Muhammad Idris, Jamia Ashrafia, Nila Gumbad, Lahore—
“Q.—Please give the definition of a Musalman ?
A.—The word ‘Musalman’ is a Persian one. There is a distinction between the word ‘Musalman’ which is a Persian word for Muslim and the word ‘momin’. It is impossible for me to give a complete definition of the word ‘momin’. I would require pages and pages to describe what a momin is. A person is a Muslim who professes to be obedient to Allah. He should believe in the Unity of God, prophethood of the ambiya and in the Day of Judgment. A person who does not believe in the azan or in the qurbani goes outside the pale of Islam. Similarly, there are a large number of other things which have been received by tavatir from our prophet. In order to be a Muslim, he must believe in all these things. It is almost impossible for me to give a complete list of such things.”

Hafiz Kifayat Hussain, Idara-i-Haquq-i-Tahaffuz-i-Shia—
“Q.—Who is a Musalman?
A.—A person is entitled to be called a Musalman if he believes in (1) tauheed, (2) nubuwwat and (3) qiyamat. These are the three fundamental beliefs which a person must profess to be called a Musalman. In regard to these three basic doctrines there is no difference between the Shias and the Sunnies. Besides the belief in these three doctrines, there are other things called ‘zarooriyat-i-din’ which a person must comply with in order to be entitled to be called a Musalman. These will take me two days to define and enumerate. But as an illustration I might state that the respect for the Holy Book, wajoob-i-nimaz, wajoob-i-roza, wajoob-i-hajj-ma’a-sharait, and other things too numerous to mention, are among the ‘zarooriyat-i-din’ ”

Maulana Abdul Hamid Badayuni, President, Jami’at-ul-Ulama-i-Pakistan :
“Q.—Who is a Musalman according to you ?
A.—A person who believes in the zarooriyat-i-din is called a momin and every momin is entitled to be called a Musalman.
Q.—What are these zarooriyat-i-din ?
A.—A person who believes in the five pillars of Islam and who believes in the rasalat of our Holy Prophet fulfils the zarooriyat-i-din.
Q.—Have other actions, apart from the five arakan, anything to do with a man being a Muslim or being outside the pale of Islam?
(Note—Witness has been explained that by actions are meant those rules of moral conduct which in modern society are accepted as correct.)
A.—Certainly.
Q.—Then you will not call a person a Muslim who believes in arakan-ikhamsa and the rasalat of the prophet but who steals other peoples’ things, embezzles property entrusted to him, has an evil eye on his neighbour’s wife and is guilty of the grossest ingratitude to his benefector?
A.—Such a person, if he has the belief already indicated, will be a Muslim despite all this”.

Maulana Muhammad Ali Kandhalvi, Darush-Shahabia, Sialkot —
“Q.—Please define a Musalman?
A.—A person who in obedience to the commands of the prophet performs all the zarooriyat-i-din is a Musalman.
Q.—Can you define zarooriyat-i-din ?
A.—Zarooriyat-i-din are those requirements which are known to every Muslim irrespective of his religious knowledge.
Q.—Can you enumerate zarooriyat-i-din ?
A.—These are too numerous to be mentioned. I myself cannot enumerate these zarooriyat. Some of the zarooriyat-i-din may be mentioned as salat, saum, etc.”

Maulana Amin Ahsan Islahi —
“Q.—Who is a Musalman?
A.—There are two kinds of Musalmans, a political (siyasi) Musalman and a real (haqiqi) Musalman. In order to be called a political Musalman, a person must:
(1) believe in the Unity of God,
(2) believe in our Holy Prophet being khatam-un-nabiyin, i.e., ‘final
authority’ in all matters relating to the life of that person,
(3) believe that all good and evil comes from Allah,
(4) believe in the Day of Judgment,
(5) believe in the Qur’an to be the last book revealed by Allah,
(6) perform the annual pilgrimage to Mecca,
(7) pay the zaka’at,
(8) say his prayers like the Musalmans,
(9) observe all apparent rules of Islami mu’ashira, and
(10) observe the fast (saum).

If a person satisfies all these conditions he is entitled to the rights of a full citizen of an Islamic State. If any one of these conditions is not satisfied, the person concerned will not be a political Musalman. (Again said) It would be enough for a person to be a Musalman if he merely professes his belief in these ten matters irrespective of whether he puts them into practice or not. In order to be a real Musalman, a person must believe in and act on all the injunctions by Allah and his prophet in the manner in which they have been enjoined upon him.
Q.—Will you say that only the real Musalman is ‘mard-i-saleh’ ?
A.—Yes.
Q.—do we understand you aright that in the case of what you have called a political (siyasi) Musalman, belief alone is necessary, while in the case of a haqiqi Musalman there must not only be belief but also action?
A.—No, you have not understood me aright. Even in the case of a political (siyasi) Musalman action is necessary but what I mean to say is that if a person does not act upon the belief that is necessary in the case of such a Musalman, he will not be outside the pale of a political (siyasi) Musalman.
Q.—If a political (siyasi) Musalman does not believe in things which you
have stated to be necessary, will you call such a person be-din ?
A.—No, I will call him merely be-amal”.

The definition by the Sadr Anjuman Ahmadiya, Rabwah, in its written statement
is that a Muslim is a person who belongs to the ummat of the Holy Prophet and professes belief in kalima-i-tayyaba.

Keeping in view the several definitions given by the ulama, need we make any comment except that no two learned divines are agreed on this fundamental. If we attempt our own definition as each learned divine has done and that definition differs from that given by all others, we unanimously go out of the fold of Islam. And if we adopt the definition given by any one of the ulama, we remain Muslims according to the view of that alim but kafirs according to the definition of every one else.

APOSTASY
Apostasy in an Islamic State is punishable with death. On this the ulama are practically unanimous (vide the evidence of Maulana Abul Hasanat Sayyad Muhammad Ahmad Qadri, President, Jami’at-ul-Ulama-i-Pakistan, Punjab; Maulana Ahmad Ali, Sadr Jami’at-ul-Ulama-i-Islam, West Pakistan; Maulana Abul Ala Maudoodi, founder and ex-Amir-i-Jama’at-i-Islami, Pakistan; Mufti Muhammad Idris, Jami’Ashrafia, Lahore, and Member, Jami’at-ul-Ulama-i-Pakistan; Maulana Daud Ghaznavi, President, Jami’at-i-Ahl-i-Hadith, Maghribi Pakistan; Maulana Abdul Haleem Qasimi, Jami’at-ul-Ulama-i-Islam, Punjab; and Mr. Ibrahim Ali Chishti). According to this doctrine, Chaudhri Zafrullah Khan, if he has not inherited his present religious beliefs but has voluntarily elected to be an Ahmadi, must be put to death. And the same fate should befall Deobandis and Wahabis, including Maulana Muhammad Shafi Deobandi, Member, Board of Talimat-i-Islami attached to the Constituent Assembly of Pakistan, and Maulana Daud Ghaznavi, if Maulana Abul Hasanat Sayyad Muhammad Ahmad Qadri or Mirza Raza Ahmad Khan Barelvi, or any one of the numerous ulama who are shown perched on every leaf of a beautiful tree in the fatwa, Ex. D. E. 14, were the head of such Islamic State. And if Maulana Muhammad Shafi Deobandi were the head of the State, he would exclude those who have pronounced Deobandis as kafirs from the pale of Islam and inflict on them the death penalty if they come within the definition of murtadd, namely, if they have changed and not inherited their religious views.

The genuineness of the fatwa, Ex. D. E. 13, by the Deobandis which says that Asna Ashari Shias are kafirs and murtadds, was questioned in the course of enquiry, but Maulana Muhammad Shafi made an inquiry on the subject from Deoband, and received from the records of that institution the copy of a fatwa signed by all the teachers of the Darul Uloom including Maulana Muhammad Shafi himself which is to the effect that those who do not believe in the sahabiyyat of Hazrat Siddiq Akbar and who are qazif of Hazrat Aisha Siddiqa and have been guilty of tehrif of Qur’an are kafirs. This opinion is also supported by Mr. Ibrahim Ali Chishti who has studied and knows his subject. He thinks the Shias are kafirs because they believe that Hazrat Ali shared the prophethood with our Holy Prophet. He refused to answer the question whether a person who being a Sunni changes his view and agrees with the Shia view would be guilty of irtidad so as to deserve the death penalty. According to the Shias all Sunnis are kafirs, and Ahl-i-Qur’an; namely, persons who consider hadith to be unreliable and therefore not binding, are unanimously kafirs and so are all independent thinkers. The net result of all this is that neither Shias nor Sunnis nor Deobandis nor Ahl-i-Hadith nor Barelvis are Muslims and any change from one view to the other must be accompanied in an Islamic State with the penalty of death if the Government of the State is in the hands of the party which considers the other party to be kafirs. And it does not require much imagination to judge of the consequences of this doctrine when it is remembered that no two ulama have agreed before us as to the definition of a Muslim. If the constituents of each of the definitions given by the ulama are given effect to, and subjected to the rule of ‘combination and permutation’ and the form of charge in the Inquisition’s sentence on Galileo is adopted mutatis mutandis as a model, the grounds on which a person may be indicted for apostasy will be too numerous to count.

In an earlier part of the report we have referred to the proscription of the ‘Ashshahab’, a pamphlet written by Maulana Shabbir Ahmad Usmani who later became Sheikh-ul-Islam-i-Pakistan. In that pamphlet the Maulana had attempted to show from the Qur’an, the sunna, the ijma’ and qayas that in Islam the punishment for apostasy (irtidad) simpliciter is death. After propounding the theological doctrine the Maulana had made in that document a statement of fact that in the time of the Caliph Siddiq-i-Akbar and the subsequent Caliphs vast areas of Arabia became repeatedly red with the blood of apostates. We are not called upon to express any opinion as to the correctness or otherwise of this doctrine but knowing that the suggestion to the Punjab Government to proscribe this pamphlet had come from the Minister for the Interior we have attempted to inquire of ourselves the reasons for Government’s taking a step which ex hypothesi amounted to condemning a doctrine which the Maulana had professed to derive from the Qur’an and the sunna. The death penalty for irtidad has implications of a far-reaching character and stamps Islam as a religion of fanatics, which punishes all independent thinking. The Qur’an again and again lays emphasis on reason and thought, advises toleration and preaches against compulsion in religious matters but the doctrine of irtidad
as enunciated in this pamphlet strikes at the very root of independent thinking when it propounds the view that anyone who, being born a Muslim or having embraced Islam, attempts to think on the subject of religion with a view, if he comes to that conclusion, to choose for himself any religion he likes, has the capital penalty in store for him. With this implication Islam becomes an embodiment of complete intellectual paralysis. And the statement in the pamphlet that vast areas of Arabia were repeatedly bespattered with human blood, if true, could only lend itself to this inference that even when Islam was at the height of its splendour and held absolute sway in Arabia there were in that country a large number of people who turned away from that religion and preferred to die than to
remain in that system. It must have been some such reaction of this pamphlet on the mind of the Minister for the Interior which prompted him to advise the Punjab Government to proscribe the pamphlet. Further the Minister who was himself well-versed in religious matters must have thought that the conclusion drawn by the author of the pamphlet which was principally based on the precedent mentioned in paras. 26, 27 and 28 of the Old Testament and which is only partially referred to in the Qur’an in the 54th verse of the Second Sura, could not be applicable to apostasy from Islam and that therefore the author’s opinion was in fact incorrect, there being no express text in the Qur’an for the death penalty for apostasy. On the contrary each of the two ideas, one underlying the six brief verses of Surat-ul-Kafiroon and the other the La Ikrah verse of the second Sura, has merely to be understood to reject as erroneous the view propounded in the ‘Ash-Shahab’.
Each of the verses in Surat-ul-Kafiroon which contains thirty words and no verse of
which exceeds six words, brings out a fundamental trait in man engrained in him since his creation while the La Ikrah verse, the relevant portion of which contains only nine words, states the rule of responsibility of the mind with a precision that cannot be surpassed. Both of these texts which are an early part of the Revelation are, individually and collectively, the foundation of that principle which human society, after centuries of conflict, hatred and bloodshed, has adopted in defining one of the most important fundamental rights of man. But our doctors would never dissociate chauvinism from Islam.

PROPAGATION OF OTHER RELIGIONS
Closely allied to the punishment for apostasy is the right of non-Muslims publicly to preach their religion. The principle which punishes an apostate with death must be applicable to public preaching of kufr and it is admitted by Maulana Abul Hasanat, Ghazi Siraj-ud-Din Munir and Master Taj-ud-Din Ansari, though the last subordinates his opinion to the opinion of the ulama, that any faith other than Islam will not be permitted publicly to be preached in the State. And Maulana Abul Ala Maudoodi, as will appear from his pamphlet ‘Punishment in Islam for an apostate’, has the same views on the subject.

Ghazi Siraj-ud-Din Munir, when questioned on this point, replied :—
“Q.—What will you do with them (Ahmadis) if you were the head of the
Pakistan State ?
A.—I would tolerate them as human beings but will not allow them the right
to preach their religion”.

The prohibition against public preaching of any non-Muslim religion must logically follow from the proposition that apostasy will be punished with death and that any attack on, or danger to Islam will be treated as treason and punished in the same way as apostasy.

JIHAD
Earlier we have pointed out that one of the doctrines on which the Musalmans and Ahmadis are at variance is that of jihad. This doctrine at once raises a host of other allied matters such as the meanings of ghazi, shahid, jihad-bis-saif, jihad fi sabili’llah, dar-ul-Islam, dar-ul-harb, hijrat, ghanima, khums and slavery, and the conflict or reconciliation of these conceptions with modern international problems such as aggression, genocide, international criminal jurisdiction, international conventions and rules of public international law.

An Islamic State is dar-ul-Islam, namely, a country where ordinances of Islam are
established and which is under the rule of a Muslim sovereign. Its inhabitants are
Muslims and also non-Muslims who have submitted to Muslim control and who under
certain restrictions and without the possibility of full citizenship are guaranteed their lives and property by the Muslim State. They must, however, be people of Scriptures and may not be idolaters. An Islamic State is in theory perpetually at war with the neighbouring non-Muslim country, which at any time may become dar-ul-harb, in which case it is the duty of the Muslims of that country to leave it and to come over to the country of their brethren in faith. We put this aspect to Maulana Abul Ala Maudoodi and reproduce his views :—

“Q.—is a country on the border of dar-ul-Islam always qua an Islamic State
in the position of dar-ul-harb ?
A.—No. In the absence of an agreement to the contrary, the Islamic State will be potentially at war with the non-Muslim neighbouring country. The non-Muslim country acquires the status of dar-ul-harb only after the Islamic State declares a formal war against it”.

According to Ghias-ul-Lughat, dar-ul-harb is a country belonging to infidels which has not been subdued by Islam, and the consequences of a country becoming darul-harb are thus stated in the Shorter Encyclopaedia of Islam :—

“When a country does become a dar-ul-harb, it is the duty of all Muslims to
withdraw from it, and a wife who refuses to accompany her husband in
this, is ipso facto divorced”.

Thus in case of a war between India and Pakistan, if the latter is an Islamic State, we must be prepared to receive forty million Muslims from across the border into Pakistan.

In fact, Maulana Abdul Haamid Badayuni, President, Jami’at-ul-Ulama-i- Pakistan, thinks that a case for hijrat already exists for the Musalmans of India. The following is his view on this subject :—
“Q.—Do yon call your migration to Pakistan as hijrat in the religious sense ?
A.—Yes”.

We shall presently point out why Mirza Ghulam Ahmad’s version of the doctrine of jihad is relied on as a ground for his and his community’s kufr, but before we do that it is necessary first to state how jihad has been or is understood by the Musalmans. There are various theories about jihad which vary from the crude notion of a megalomaniac moved by religious frenzy going out armed with sword and indiscriminately slaughtering non-Muslims in the belief that if he dies in the combat he becomes a shahid and if he succeeds in killing attains the status of a ghazi, to the conception that a Musalman throughout his life is pitted against kufr, kufr here being used in the sense of evil and wrong, and that his principal activity in life is to strive by argument a where necessary by force to spread Islam until it becomes a world religion. In the latter case he fights not for any personal end but because he considers such strife as a duty and an obligation which he owes to Allah and the only recompense for which is the pleasure of Allah. The Shorter Encyclopedia of Islam contains the following brief article on djihad :—
“DJIHAD (A), holy war. The spread of Islam by arms is a religious duty upon
Muslims in general. It narrowly escaped being a sixth rukn, or fundamental duty, and is indeed still so regarded by the descendants of the Kharidjis. This position was reached gradually but quickly. In the Meccan Suras of the Qur’an patience under attack is taught ; no other attitude was possible. But at Medina the right to repel attack appears, and gradually it became a prescribed duty to fight against and subdue the hostile Meccans.
Whether Muhammad himself recognised that his position implied steady and unprovoked war against the unbelieving world until it was subdued to Islam may be in doubt. Traditions are explicit on the point ; but the Qur’anic passages speak always of the unbelievers who are to be subdued as dangerous or faithless. Still, the story of his writing to the powers around him shows that such a universal position was implicit in his mind, and it certainly developed immediately after his death, when the Muslim armies advanced out of Arabia. It is now a fard ala’l-kifaya, a duty in general on all male, free, adult Muslims, sane in mind and body and having means enough to reach the Muslim army, yet not a duty necessarily incumbent on every individual but sufficiently performed when done by a certain number. So it must continue to be done until the whole world is under the rule of Islam. It must be controlled or headed by a Muslim sovereign or imam. As the imam of the Shias is now invisible, they cannot have a djihad until he reappears. Further, the requirement will be met if such a sovereign makes an expedition once a year, or, even, in the later view, if he makes annual preparation for one. The people against whom the djihad is directed must first be invited to embrace Islam. On refusal they have another choice. They may submit to Muslim rule, become dhimmis (q. v.) and pay djizya and kharadj (q. v.) or fight. In the first case, their lives, families and property are assured to them, but they have a definitely inferior status, with no technical citizenship, and a standing only as protected wards. If they fight, they and their families may be enslaved and all their property seized as booty, four-fifths of which goes to the conquering army. If they embrace Islam, and it is open to them to do so even when the armies are face to face, they become part of the Muslim community with all its rights and duties. Apostates must be put to death. But if a Muslim country is invaded by unbelievers, the imam may issue a general summons calling all Muslims there to arms, and as the danger grows so may be the width of the summons until the whole Muslim world is involved. A Muslim who dies fighting in the path of Allah (fi sabil Allah) is martyr (shahid) and is assured of Paradise and of peculiar privileges there. Such a death was, in the early generations, regarded as the peculiar crown of a pious life. It is still, on occasions, a strong incitement, but when Islam ceased to conquer it lost its supreme value. Even yet, however, any war between Muslims and non-Muslims must be a djihad with its incitements and rewards. Of course, such modern movements as the so-called Mu’tazili in India and the Young Turk in Turkey reject this and endeavour to explain away its basis; but the Muslim masses still follow the unanimous voice of the canon lawyers. Islam must be completely made over before the doctrine of djihad can be eliminated”.

The generally accepted view is that the fifth verse to Sura-i-Tauba (Sura IX) abrogated the earlier verses revealed in Mecca which permitted the killing of kuffar only in self-defence. As against this the Ahmadis believe that no verso in the Qur’an was abrogated by another verse and that both sets of verses, namely, the Meccan verses and the relative verses in Sura-i-Tauba have different scopes and can stand together. This introduces the difficult controversy of nasikh and mansukh, with all its implications. It is argued on behalf of the Ahmadis that the doctrine of nasikh and mansukh is opposed to the belief in the existence of an original Scripture in Heaven, and that implicit in this doctrine is the admission that unless the verse alleged to be repealed was meant for a specific occasion and by the coming of that occasion fulfilled its purpose and thus spent itself, God did not know of the subsequent circumstances which would make the earlier verse inapplicable or lead to an undesired result.

The third result of this doctrine, it is pointed out, cuts at the very root of the claim that laws of Islam are immutable and inflexible because if changed circumstances made a new revelation necessary, any change in the circumstances subsequent to the completion of the revelation would make most of the revelation otiose or obsolete.

We are wholly incompetent to pronounce on the merits of this controversy but what has to be pointed out is the result to which the doctrine of jihad will lead if, as appears from the article in the Shorter Encyclopaedia of Islam and other writings produced before us including one by Maulana Abul Ala Maudoodi and another by Maulana Shabbir Ahmad Usmani, it involves the spread of Islam by arms and conquest. ‘Aggression’ and ‘genocide’ are now offences against humanity for which under sentences pronounced by different International tribunals at Nuremburg and Tokio the war lords of Germany and Japan had to forfeit their lives, and there is hardly any difference between the offences of aggression and genocide on the one hand and the doctrine of spread of Islam by arms and conquest on the other. An International Convention on genocide is about to be concluded but if the view of jihad presented to us is correct, Pakistan cannot be a party to it. And while the following verses in the Mecca Suras :—

Sura II, verses 190 and 193 :190. “Fight in the Cause of God Those who fight you,
But do not transgress limits ;
For God loveth not transgressors”.
193. “And fight them on
Until there is no more
Tumult or oppression,
And there prevail
Justice and faith in God ;
But if they cease,
Let there be no hostility
Except to those
Who practise oppression”.
Sura XXII, verses 39 and 40:
39. “To those against whom
War is made, permission
Is given (to fight) because
They are wronged;— and verily,
God is most Powerful
For their aid;—”
40. “(They are) those who have
Been expelled from their homes
In defiance of right,—
(For no cause) except
That they say, ‘Our Lord
Is God.’ Did not God
Check one set of people
By means of another,
There would surely have been
Pulled down monasteries, churches,
Synagogues, and mosques, in which
The name of God is commemorated
In abundant measure. God will
Certainly aid those who
Aid His (cause);—for verily
God is Full of Strength,
Exalted in Might,
(Able to enforce His Will),”

contain in them the sublime principle which international jurists have only faintly begun to discover, we must go on preaching that aggression is the chief characteristic of Islam. The law relating to prisoners of war is another branch of Islamic law which is bound to come in conflict with International Law.

As for instance, in matters relating to the treatment of prisoners of war, we shall have to be governed by Maulana Abul Ala Maudoodi’s view, assuming that view is based on the Qur’an and the sunna, which is as follows :—

“Q.—Is there a law of war in Islam?
A.—Yes.
Q.—Does it differ fundamentally from the modern International Law of war?
A.—These two systems are based on a fundamental difference.
Q.—What rights have non-Muslims who are taken prisoners of war in a jihad?
A.—The Islamic law on the point is that if the country of which these prisoners are nationals pays ransom, they will be released. An exchange of prisoners is also permitted. If neither of these alternatives is possible, the prisoners will be converted into slaves for ever. If any such person makes an offer to pay his ransom out of his own earnings, he will be permitted to collect the money necessary for the fidya (ransom).
Q.—Are you of the view that unless a Government assumes the form of an Islamic Government, any war declared by it is not a jihad?
A.—No. A war may be declared to be a jihad if it is declared by a national Government of Muslims in the legitimate interests of the State. I never expressed the opinion attributed to me in Ex. D. E. 12:—
“Raha yeh masala keh agar hukumat-i-Pakisten apni maujuda shukl-o-surat ke sath Indian Union ke sath apne mu’ahadat khatm kar-ke i’lan-i-jang bar bhi de to kya us-ki yeh jang jihad ke hukam men a-ja’egi ? Ap ne is bare men jo rae zahir ki hai woh bilkul darust hai – Jab-tak hukumat Islami nizam ko ikhtiyar kar-ke Islami nah ho jae us waqt tak us-ki kisi jang ko jihad kehna aisa hi hai jaisa kisi ghair Muslim ke Azad Kashmir ki fauj men bharti ho-kar larne ko jihad aur us-ki maut ko shahadat ka nam dediya jae – Maulana ka jo mudd’a hai woh yeh hai keh mu’ahadat ki maujudgi men to hukumat ya us-ke shehriyon ka is jang men sharik hona shar’-an ja’iz hi nahin – Agar hukumat mu’ahadat khatm kar-ke jang ka
i’lan kar-de to hukumat ki jang to jihad phir bhi nahin hogi ta-an keh hukumat Islami nah ho jae.’

(translation)

‘The question remains whether, even if the Government of Pakistan, in its present form and structure, terminates her treaties with the Indian Union and declares war against her, this war would fall under the definition of jihad? The opinion expressed by him in this behalf is quite correct. Until such time as the Government becomes Islamic by adopting the Islamic form of Government, to call any of its wars a jihad would be tantamount to describing the enlistment and fighting of a non-Muslim on the side of the Azad Kashmir forces jihad and his death martyrdom. What the Maulana means is that, in the presence of treaties, it is against Shari’at, if the Government or its people participate in such a war. If the Government terminates the treaties and declares war, even then the war started by Government would not be termed jihad unless the Government becomes Islamic’.

About the view expressed in this letter being that of Maulana Abul Ala Maudoodi, there is the evidence of Mian Tufail Muhammad, the writer of the letter, who states: “Ex. D. E. 12 is a photostat copy of a letter which I wrote to someone whose name I do not now remember.”

Maulana Abul Hasanat Muhammad Ahmad Qadri’s view on this point is as
follows:—
“Q.—Is there a law of war in Islam?
A.—Yes.
Q.—Does it differ in fundamentals from the present International Law?
A.—Yes.
Q.—What are the rights of a person taken prisoner in war?
A.—He can embrace Islam or ask for aman, in which case he will be treated as a musta’min. If he does not ask for aman, he would be made a slave”.
Similar is the opinion expressed by Mian Tufail Muhammad of Jam’at-i-Islami who says:—
“Q.—Is there any law of war in Islamic laws?
A.—Yes.
Q.—If that comes into conflict with International Law, which will you follow?
A.—Islamic law.
Q.—Then please state what will be the status of prisoners of war captured by your
forces?
A.—I cannot reply to this off hand. I will have to study the point.”
Of course ghanima (plunder) and khums (one-fifth) if treated as a necessary incident of
jihad will be treated by international society as a mere act of brigandage.

REACTION ON MUSLIMS OF NON-MUSLIM STATES
The ideology on which an Islamic State is desired to be founded in Pakistan must have certain consequences for the Musalmans who are living in countries under non-Muslim sovereigns.

We asked Amir-i-Shari’at Sayyad Ataullah Shah Bukhari whether a Muslim could be a faithful subject of a non-Muslim State and reproduce his answer:—
“Q.—In your opinion is a Musalman bound to obey orders of a kafir
Government?
A.—It is not possible that a Musalman should be faithful citizen of a non-Muslim
Government.
Q.—Will it be possible for the four crore of Indian Muslims to be faithful citizens
of their State?
A—No.”

The answer is quite consistent with the ideology which has been pressed before us, but then if Pakistan is entitled to base its Constitution on religion, the same right must be conceded to other countries where Musalmans are in substantial minorities or if they constitute a preponderating majority in a country where sovereignty rests with a non-Muslim community. We, therefore, asked the various ulama whether, if non-Muslims in Pakistan were to be subjected to this discrimination in matters of citizenship, the ulama would have any objection to Muslims in other countries being subjected to a similar discrimination. Their reactions to this suggestion are reproduced below:—

Maulana Abul Hasanat Sayyed Muhammad Ahmad Qadri, President, Jami’at-ul-
Ulama-i-Pakistan:—
“Q.—You will admit for the Hindus, who are in a majority in India, the right
to have a Hindu religious State?
A.—Yes.
Q.—Will you have any objection if the Muslims are treated under that form
of Government as malishes or shudras under the law of Manu?
A.— No.”

Maulana Abul Ala Maudoodi :—
“Q.—If we have this form of Islamic Government in Pakistan, will you
permit Hindus to base their Constitution on the basis of their own
religion?
A—Certainly. I should have no objection even if the Muslims of India are
treated in that form of Government as shudras and malishes and Manu’s laws are applied to them, depriving them of all share in the Government and the rights of a citizen. In fact such a state of affairs already exists in India.”

Amir-i-Shari’at Sayyad Ata Ullah Skak Bukhari :—
“Q.—How many crores of Muslims are there in India?
A.—Four crores.
Q.—Have you any objection to the law of Manu being applied to them
according to which they will have no civil right and will be treated as
malishes and shudras?
A.—I am in Pakistan and I cannot advise them.”

Mian Tufail Muhammad of Jama’at-i-Islami :—
“Q.—What is the population of Muslims in the world?
A.—Fifty crores.
Q.—If the total population of Muslims of the world is 50 crores, as you say,
and the number of Muslims living in Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Yemen,
Indonesia, Egypt, Persia, Syria, Lebanon, Trans-Jordan, Turkey and
Iraq does not exceed 20 crores, will not the result of your ideology be
to convert 30 crores of Muslims in the world into hewers of wood and
drawers of water?
A.—My ideology should not affect their position.
Q.—Even if they are subjected to discrimination on religious grounds and
denied ordinary rights of citizenship ?
A.—Yes.”
This witness goes to the extent of asserting that even if a non-Muslim Government were to offer posts to Muslims in the public services of the country, it will be their duty to refuse such posts.

Ghazi Siraj-ud-Din Munir :—
“Q.—Do you want an Islamic State in Pakistan?
A.—Surely.
Q.—What will be your reaction if the neighbouring country was to found
their political system on their own religion?
A.—They can do it if they like.
Q.—Do you admit for them the right to declare that all Muslims in India, are
shudras and malishes with no civil rights whatsoever?
A.—We will do our best to see that before they do it their political
sovereignty is gone. We are too strong for India. We will be strong
enough to prevent India from doing this.
Q.—Is it a part of the religious obligations of Muslims to preach their
religion?
A—Yes.
Q.—Is it a part of the duty of Muslims in India publicly to preach their
religion?
A.—They should have that right.
Q.—What if the Indian State is founded on a religious basis and the right to
preach religion is disallowed to its Muslim nationals?
A —If India makes any such law, believer in the Expansionist movement as I
am, I will march on India and conquer her.”

So this is the reply to the reciprocity of discrimination on religious grounds.

Master Taj-ud-Din Ansari :—
“Q.—Would you like to have the same ideology for the four crores of
Muslims in India as you are impressing upon the Muslims of
Pakistan?
A.—That ideology will not let them remain in India for one minute.
Q.—Does the ideology of a Muslim change from place to place and from
time to time?
A.—No.
Q.—Then why should not the Muslims of India have the same ideology as
you have?
A.—They should answer that question.”

The ideology advocated before us, if adopted by Indian Muslims, will completely
disqualify them for public offices in the State, not only in India but in other countries also which are under a non-Muslim Government. Muslims will become perpetual suspects everywhere and will not be enrolled in the army because according to this ideology, in case of war between a Muslim country and a non-Muslim country, Muslim soldiers of the non-Muslim country must either side with the Muslim country or surrender their posts.

The following is the view expressed by two divines whom we questioned on this point:—

Maulana Abul Hasanat Sayyed Muhammad Ahmad Qadri, President, Jami’at-ul-
Ulama-i-Pakistan :—
“Q.—What will be the duty of Muslims in India in case of war between India
and Pakistan?
A.—Their duty is obvious, namely, to side with us and not to fight against us
on behalf of India.”

Maulana Abul Ala Maudoodi : —
“Q.—What will be the duty of the Muslims in India in case of war between
India and Pakistan?
A.—Their duty is obvious, and that is not to fight against Pakistan or to do
anything injurious to the safety of Pakistan.”

OTHER INCIDENTS
Other incidents of an Islamic State are that all sculpture, playing of cards, portrait
painting, photographing human beings, music, dancing, mixed acting, cinemas and
theatres will have to be closed.

Thus says Maulana Abdul Haleem Qasimi, representative of Jami’at-ul-Ulama-i-Pakistan: —

“Q.—What are your views on tashbih and tamseel ?
A.—You should ask me a concrete question.
Q.—What are your views on lahw-o-la’b?
A.—The same is my reply to this question.
Q.—What are your views about portrait painting?
A.—There is nothing against it if any such painting becomes necessary.
Q.—What about photography?
A.—My reply to it is the same as the reply regarding portrait painting.
Q.—What about sculpture as an art?
A.—It is prohibited by our religion.
Q.—Will you bring playing of cards in lohw-o-la’b?
A.—Yes, it will amount to lahw-o-la’b.
Q.—What about music and dancing?
A.—It is all forbidden by our religion.
Q.—What about drama and acting?
A —It all depends on what kind of acting you mean. If it involves immodesty
and intermixture of sexes, the Islamic law is against it.
Q.—If the State is founded on your ideals, will you make a law stopping
portrait painting, photographing of human beings, sculpture, playing
of cards, music, dancing, acting and all cinemas and theatres?
A.—Keeping in view the present form of these activities, my answer is in the
affirmative.”

Maulana Abdul Haamid Badayuni considers it to be a sin (ma’siyat) on the part of
professors of anatomy to dissect dead bodies of Muslims to explain points of anatomy to the students.

The soldier or the policeman will have the right, on grounds of religion, to disobey a command by a superior authority. Maulana Abul Hasanat’s view on this is as follows :—

“I believe that if a policeman is required to do something which we consider to be
contrary to our religion, it should be the duty of the policeman to disobey the authority. The same would be my answer if ‘army’ were substituted for ‘police’.

Q.—You stated yesterday that if a policeman or a soldier was required by a
superior authority to do what you considered to be contrary to religion, it would be the duty of that policeman or the soldier to disobey such authority. Will you give the policeman or the soldier the right of himself determining whether the command he is given by his superior authority is contrary to religion ?
A.—Most certainly.
Q.—Suppose there is war between Pakistan and another Muslim country and
the soldier feels that Pakistan is in the wrong; and that to shoot a
soldier of other country is contrary to religion. Do you think he would
be justified in disobeying his commanding officer ?
A.—In such a contingency the soldier should take a fatwa of the ‘ulama’.”

We have dwelt at some length on the subject of Islamic State not because we intended to write a thesis against or in favour of such State but merely with a view to presenting a clear picture of the numerous possibilities that may in future arise if true causes of the ideological confusion which contributed to the spread and intensity of the disturbances are not precisely located. That such confusion did exist is obvious because otherwise Muslim Leaguers, whose own Government was in office, would not have risen against it; sense of loyalty and public duty would not have departed from public officials who went about like maniacs howling against their own Government and officers; respect for property and human life would not have disappeared in the common man who with no scruple or compunction began freely to indulge in loot, arson and murder; politicians would not have shirked facing the men who had installed them in their offices; and administrators would not have felt hesitant or diffident in performing what was their obvious duty. If there is one thing which has been conclusively demonstrated in this inquiry, it is that provided you can persuade the masses to believe that something they are asked to do is religiously right or enjoined by religion, you can set them to any course of action, regardless of all considerations of discipline, loyalty, decency, morality or civic sense.

Pakistan is being taken by the common man, though it is not, as an Islamic State. This belief has been encouraged by the ceaseless clamour for Islam and Islamic State that is being heard from all quarters since the establishment of Pakistan. The phantom of an Islamic State has haunted the Musalman throughout the ages and is a result of the memory of the glorious past when Islam rising like a storm from the least expected quarter of the world—wilds of Arabia—instantly enveloped the world, pulling down from their high pedestal gods who had ruled over man since the creation, uprooting centuries old institutions and superstitions and supplanting all civilisations that had been built on an enslaved humanity. What is 125 years in human history, nay in the history of a people, and yet during this brief period Islam spread from the Indus to the Atlantic and Spain, and from the borders of China to Egypt, and the sons of the desert installed themselves in all old centres of civilisation—in Ctesiphon, Damascus, Alexandria, India and all places associated with the names of the Sumerian and the Assyrian civilisations. Historians have often posed the question : what would have been the state of the world today if Muawiya’s siege of Constantinople had succeeded or if the proverbial Arab instinct for plunder had not suddenly seized the mujahids of Abdur Rahman in their fight against Charles Martel on the plains of Tours in Southern France. May be Muslims would have discovered America long before Columbus did and the entire world would have been Moslemised; may be Islam itself would have been Europeanised. It is this brilliant achievement of the Arabian nomads, the like of which the world had never seen before, that makes the Musalman of today live in the past and yearn for the return of the glory that was Islam. He finds himself standing on the crossroads, wrapped in the mantle of the past and with the dead weight of centuries on his back, frustrated and bewildered and hesitant to turn one corner or the other. The freshness and the simplicity of the faith, which gave determination to his mind and spring to his muscle, is now denied to him. He has neither the means nor the ability to conquer and there are no countries to conquer. Little does he understand that the forces, which are pitted against him, are entirely different from those against which early Islam, had to fight, and that on the clues given by his own ancestors human mind has achieved results which he cannot understand. He therefore finds himself in a state of helplessness, waiting for some one to come and help him out of this morass of uncertainty and confusion. And he will go on waiting like this without anything happening. Nothing but a bold re-orientation of Islam to separate the vital from the lifeless can preserve it as a World Idea and convert the Musalman into a citizen of the present and the future world from the archaic in congruity that he is today. It is this lack of bold and clear thinking, the inability to understand and take decisions which has brought about in Pakistan a confusion which will persist and repeatedly create situations of the kind we have been inquiring into until our leaders have a clear conception of the goal and of the means to reach it. It requires no imagination to realise that irreconcilables remain irreconcilable even if you believe or wish to the contrary. Opposing principles, if left to themselves, can only produce confusion and disorder, and the application of a neutralising agency to them can only produce a dead result. Unless, in case of conflict between two ideologies, our leaders have the desire and the ability to elect, uncertainty must continue. And as long as we rely on the hammer when a file is needed and press Islam into service to solve situations it was never intended to solve, frustration and disappointment must dog our steps. The sublime faith called Islam will live even if our leaders are not there to enforce it. It lives in the individual, in his soul and outlook, in all his relations with God and men, from the cradle to the grave, and our politicians should understand that if Divine commands cannot make or keep a man a Musalman, their statutes will not….

Posted in Academic freedom, Ahimsa, Ahmadis, Arabs, Asia and the West, Bangladesh, Bengal Constitutional Politics, Bhagavad Gita, Books, Britain in India, British imperialism, Caliphate, Christianity, Common Law and Equity, Comparative Government, Constitutional law, Constitutional Politics, Good and Evil, Government of Afghanistan, Government of India, Government of Pakistan, Ground Zero Mosque, Hindu political traditions, Hinduism, Hindus and Muslims, Imperialism, India's military doctrine, India's History, India's independence, India's Muslims, India's Partition, India's Politics, India's Polity, India's Rule of Law, India's secularism, India-Pakistan cooperation against terrorism, Indian subcontinent, International diplomacy, International immigration, International Law, International politics, Iqbal, Iran, Iran's politics, Iran's modern history, Islam, Israel-Iran conflict-resolution, Jammu & Kashmir, Jammu & Kashmir in international law, Judaism, Jurisprudence, Just war, Law, Law of the Sea, Law of the Sea applied to international terrorists, Laws and customs of parliaments, Laws of war, Laws of war applied to international terrorists, Life and death, MA Jinnah, Master and Servant Law, Metaphysics (Ontology), Mob violence and behaviour, Monarchy vs Republicanism, Moral reasoning, Mumbai massacres, Munir Report, Muslim and Hindu communalism, Nationalism, Natural Justice, Pakistan in international law, Pakistan's civil war, Pakistan's origins, Pakistan's constitutional politics, Pakistan's diplomacy, Pakistan's history, Pakistan's judiciary, Pakistan's military, Pakistan's murder of Indian POWs, Pakistan's nuclear weapons, Pakistan's politics, Pakistan's Rule of Law, Pakistan's terrorist masterminds, Pakistan's terrorist training institutes, Pakistan, Balochistan, Afghanistan, Iran, Pakistani expansionism, Parliamentary Government, Parliamentary law, Pashtuns, Patriarchy, Pervez Hoodbhoy, Pervez Musharraf, Political assassinations, Political asylum, Political cynicism, Political legitimacy, Political mendacity, Political Philosophy, Political Science, Qadian, Racism, Rational decisions, Rationality, Reason, Religion, Rule of Law, Saudi Arabia, Scepticism and Dogmatism, Schizophrenia in international relations, Secular governance, Secularism in practice, September 11 attacks, Serendipity and international relations, Sikhs, Sindhis, Srinagar, Sunnis and Shias, Terrorist techniques, Terrorist-hostage situations, Turkey, Uighurs, Unconscious Mind, US AfPak policy, US Pakistan policy, US-Iran relations, War, War crimes, World War, Zionism. Leave a Comment »

ISRO & NASA find thin films of water on the Moon

India’s moon rocket Chandrayaan-1 carried NASA’s Moon Minerology Mapper, which has now reported finding evidence of thin films of water on the moon. A year ago I was very pessimistic as to whether the rocket would reach successfully, and I was happy to eat my words when it did. Because the initial US and USSR rockets had failed miserably half a century earlier, I had mistakenly assumed it likely that India’s would too, not acknowledging the technological progress in rocketry, telemetry etc in the meantime.

Subroto Roy

The BBC retrogresses once more in its knowledge of history & geography

On March 30 this year, I was finally able to congratulate the BBC for having retracted its prevarication about Jammu & Kashmir.  Unfortunately, it has retrogressed again!  Today’s broadcast at 1530 Indian Standard Time of purported world news showed a purported map of the Indian Republic without J&K.   Time for the GoI to make some phone calls again please!

Subroto Roy

Kolkata

Thoughts, words, deeds: My work 1973-2010

Thoughts, words, deeds

My work 1973-2010

Subroto Roy

This is an incomplete bibliography of my writings, public lectures etc 1973-2010 including citations, reviews, comments. I have been mostly an academic economist who by choice or circumstance over 36 years has had to venture also into science, philosophy, public policy, law, jurisprudence, practical politics, history, international relations, military strategy, financial theory, accounting, management, journalism, literary criticism, psychology, psychoanalysis, theology, aesthetics, biography, children’s fables, etc. If anything unites the seemingly diverse work recorded below it is that I have tried to acquire a grasp of the nature of human reason and then apply this comprehension in practical contexts as simply and clearly as possible. Hence I have ended up following the path of Aristotle, as described in modern times (via Wittgenstein and John Wisdom) by Renford Bambrough. The 2004 public lecture in England, “Science, Religion, Art & the Necessity of Freedom”, may explain and illustrate all this best. A friend has been kind enough to call me an Academician, which I probably am, though one who really needs his own Academy because the incompetence, greed and mendacity encountered too often in the modern professoriat is dispiriting.

1-289 refer mostly to writings and publications printed on paper; 290-382 refer to writings or items not printed on paper — as new media break space, cost and other constraints of traditional publishing, a little repetition and overlap has occurred too. Also in a few cases, e.g., Aldous Huxley’s essay on DH Lawrence, nothing has been done except discover and republish. Several databases have been created and released in the public interest, as have been some rare maps. There is also some biographical and autobiographical material. Several inconsequential errors remain in the text, which shall take time to be rectified as documents come to be rediscovered and collated.

1973

1. “Behavioural study of mus musculus”, Haileybury College, Supervised by J de C Ford-Robertson MA (Oxon). (Due to be published here 2010).

2. “Chemistry at Advanced & Special Level: Student Notes 1972-73” (Due to be published here 2010).

3. “Biology at Advanced & Special Level: Student Notes 1972-73”, (Due to be published here 2010).

4. “Physics at Advanced Level: Student Notes 1972-73”, (Due to be published here 2010).

5. “Revolution: theoria and praxis”, London, mimeo (Due to be published here 2010).

6. “Gandhi vs Marx”, London, mimeo (Due to be published here 2010).

1974

7. “Relevance of downward money-wage rigidity to the problem of maintaining full-employment in the classical and Keynesian models of income determination”, London School of Economics, mimeo (Due to be published here 2010).

8. “Testing aircraft fuels at Shell Finland”.

1975

9. “Oxford Street experiences: down and out in London town”.

10. “SE Region Bulk Distribution Survey”, Unilever, Basingstoke.

11. “Four London poems”, in JCM Paton (ed) New Writing (London, Great Portland Street: International Students House). (Due to be republished here 2010)

12. “On economic growth models and modellers”, London School of Economics, mimeo. (Due to be published here 2010).

1976

13. “World money: system or anarchy?”, lecture to Professor ACL Day’s seminar, London School of Economics, Economics Department, April. (Due to be published here 2010).

14. “A beginner’s guide to some recent developments in monetary theory”, lecture to Professor FH Hahn’s seminar, Cambridge University Economics Department, November 17 (Due to be published here 2010). See also “Announcement of My “Hahn Seminar”, published here June 14 2008.

1977

15. “Inflation and unemployment: a survey”, mimeo, Fitzwilliam College, Cambridge. (Due to be published here 2010).

16. “On short run theories of dual economies”, Cambridge University Economics Department “substantial piece of work” required of first year Research Students. Examiner: DMG Newbery, FBA. (Due to be published here 2010).

1978

17. “Pure theory of developing economies 1 and 2”, Delhi School of Economics mimeo (Due to be published here 2010).

18. “Introduction to some market outcomes under uncertainty”, Delhi School of Economics mimeo (Due to be published here 2010).

19. “On money and development”, Corpus Christi College, Cambridge, mimeo, September. (Due to be published here 2010)

20. “Notes on the Newbery-Stiglitz model of sharecropping”, Corpus Christi College, Cambridge, mimeo November. (Due to be published here 2010).

1979

21. “A theory of rights and economic justice”, Corpus Christi College Cambridge mimeo. (Due to be published here 2010).

22. “Monetary theory and economic development”, Corpus Christi College Cambridge, mimeo (Due to be published here 2010).

23. “Foundations of the case against ‘development planning’”, Corpus Christi College Cambridge, mimeo, November. (Due to be published here 2010).

1979-1989

24. Correspondence with Renford Bambrough (1926-1999), philosopher of St John’s College, Cambridge (Due to be published here 2010).

1980

25. “Models before the monetarist storm”, New Statesman letters

26. “Disciplining rulers and experts”, Corpus Christi College, Cambridge, mimeo. (Due to be published here 2010).

1981

27. “On liberty & economic growth: preface to a philosophy for India”, Cambridge University doctoral thesis, supervisor FH Hahn, FBA; examiners CJ Bliss, FBA; TW Hutchison, FBA (Due to be published here 2010). 27a Response of FA Hayek on a partial draft February 18 1981. 27b Response of Peter Bauer, 1982. 27c Response of Theodore W Schultz, 1983. 27d. Response of Frank Hahn 1985.

1982

28. “Knowledge and freedom in economic theory Parts 1 and 2”, Centre for Study of Public Choice, Virginia Polytechnic Institute & State University, Working Papers.

29. “Economic Theory and Development Economics”. Lecture to American Economic Association, New York, Dec 1982. Panel: RM Solow, HB Chenery, T Weisskopf, P Streeten, G Rosen, S Roy. Published in 29a.

1983

29a “Economic Theory and Development Economics: A Comment”. World Development, 1983. [Citation: Stavros Thefanides "Metamorphosis of Development Economics", World Development 1988.]

30. “The Political Economy of Trade Policy (Comment on J. Michael Finger)”, Washington DC: Cato Journal, Winter 1983/84. See also 000 “Risk-aversion explains resistance to freer trade”, 2008.

1984

31. “Considerations on Utility, Benevolence and Taxation”, History of Political Economy, 1984. 31a Response of Professor Sir John Hicks May 1 1984.

[Citations: P. Hennipman, "A Tale of Two Schools", De Economist 1987, "A New Look at the Ordinalist Revolution", J. Econ. Lit. Mar 1988; P. Rappoport, "Reply to Professor Hennipman", J. Econ. Lit. Mar 1988; Eugene Smolensky et al "An Application of A Dynamic Cost-of-Living Index to the Evaluation of Changes in Social Welfare", J. Post-Keynesian Econ.IX.3. 1987.]

32. Pricing, Planning and Politics: A Study of Economic Distortions in India, London: Institute of Economic Affairs, London 1984.

[Citations: Lead editorial of The Times of London May 29 1984, “India’s economy”, Times letters June 16 1984. John Toye "Political Economy & Analysis of Indian Development", Modern Asian Studies, 22, 1, 1988; John Toye, Dilemmas of Development; D. Wilson, "Privatization of Asia", The Banker Sep. 1984 etc]. See also 370 “Silver Jubilee of ‘Pricing, Planning and Politics: A Study of Economic Distortions in India’” 2009.

33. Review of Utilitarianism and Beyond, Amartya Sen & Bernard Williams (eds) Public Choice.

34. Review of Limits of Utilitarianism, HB Miller & WH Williams (eds.), Public Choice.

35. Deendayal lecture (one of four invited lecturers), Washington DC, May.

1987

36. (with one other) “Does the Theory of Logical Types Inform the Theory of Communication?”, Journal of Genetic Psychology., 148 (4), Dec. 1987 [Citation:

37. “Irrelevance of Foreign Aid”, India International Centre Quarterly, Winter 1987.

38. Review of Development Planning by Sukhamoy Chakravarty for Economic Affairs, London 1987.

1988

39. (with two others) “Introduction” to Lessons in Development: A Comparative Study of Asia and Latin America. San Francisco: Inst. of Economic Growth.

40. “A note on the welfare economics of regional cooperation”, lecture to Asia-Latin America conference, East West Center Honolulu, published 2009.

1989

41. Philosophy of Economics: On the Scope of Reason in Economic Inquiry, London & New York: Routledge (International Library of Philosophy) 1989, paperback 1991. Internet edition 2007. [Reviews & Citations: Research in Economics, 1992; De Economist 1991 & 1992; Manch.Sch. Econ.Studs. 59, 1991; Ethics 101.88 Jul. 1991; Kyklos 43.4 1990; Soc. Science Q. 71.880. Dec.1990; Can. Phil. Rev. 1990; J. Econ. Hist. Sep. 1990; Econ. & Phil. Fall 1990; Econ. Affairs June-July 1990; TLS May 1990; Choice March 1990; J. App.Phil. 1994, M. Blaug: Methodology of Economics, 2nd ed., Cambridge, 1992; Hist. Methods. 27.3, 1994; J. of Inst. & Theoretical Econ.,1994; Jahrbucker fur Nationaleconomie 1994, 573:574. Mark A Lutz in Economics for the Common Good, London: Routledge, 1999, et al]. See also 339 “Apropos Philosophy of Economics”, Comments of Sidney Hook, KJ Arrow, Milton Friedman, TW Schultz, SS Alexander, Max Black, Renford Bambrough, John Gray et al.

42. Foreword to Essays on the Political Economy by James M. Buchanan, Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press 1989.

43. “Modern Political Economy of India”, edited by Subroto Roy & William E James, Hawaii mimeo May 21 1989. This published for the first time a November 1955 memorandum to the Government of India by Milton Friedman. See also 43a, 53.

43a. Preface to “Milton Friedman’s extempore comments at the 1989 Hawaii conference: on India, Israel, Palestine, the USA, Debt and its uses, Erhardt abolishing exchange controls, Etc”, May 22 1989, published here for the first time October 31 2008.

44. Milton Friedman’s defence of my work in 1989.

45. Theodore W. Schultz’s defence of Philosophy of Economics

1990

46. “Letter to Judge Evelyn Lance: On A Case Study in Private International Law” (Due to be published here in 2010).

47-49. Selections from advisory work on economic policy etc for Rajiv Gandhi, Leader of the Opposition in the Parliament of India, published in 47a-49a.

1991

41b Philosophy of Economics: On the Scope of Reason in Economic Inquiry, Paperback edition.

50. “Conversations and correspondence with Rajiv Gandhi during the Gulf war, January 1991” (Due to be published here 2010).

47a. A Memo to Rajiv I: Stronger Secular Middle”, The Statesman, Jul 31 1991.

48a “A Memo to Rajiv II: Saving India’s Prestige”, The Statesman, Aug 1 1991.

49a “A Memo to Rajiv III: Salvation in Penny Capitalism”, The Statesman, Aug 2 1991 47b-49b “Three Memoranda to Rajiv Gandhi 1990-91”, 2007 republication here.

51. “Constitution for a Second Indian Republic”, The Saturday Statesman, April 20 1991. Republished here 2009.

52. “On the Art of Government: Experts, Party, Cabinet and Bureaucracy”, New Delhi mimeo March 25 1991, published here July 00 2009.

1992

53. Foundations of India’s Political Economy: Towards an Agenda for the 1990s Edited and with an Introduction by Subroto Roy & William E. James New Delhi, London, Newbury Park: Sage: 1992. Citation: Milton and Rose Friedman Two Lucky People (Chicago 1998), pp. 268-269.

54. Foundations of Pakistan’s Political Economy: Towards an Agenda for the 1990s Edited and with an Introduction by William E. James & Subroto Roy, Hawaii MS 1989, Sage: 1992, Karachi: Oxford 1993.

Reviews of 53 & 54 include: Bus. Today, Mar-Apr 1992; Political Studies March 1995; Econ Times 21 March 1993; Pakistan Development Review 1992. Hindustan Times 11 July 1992. Pacific Affairs 1993; Hindu 21 March 1993, 15 June 1993; Pakistan News International 12 June 1993. Book Reviews March 1993; Deccan Herald 2 May 1993; Pol.Econ.J. Ind. 1992. Fin Express 13 September 1992; Statesman 16 Jan. 1993. J. Royal Soc Asian Aff. 1994, J. Contemporary Asia, 1994 etc.

55. “Fundamental Problems of the Economies of India and Pakistan”, World Bank, Washington, mimeo (Due to be published here 2010).

56.“The Road to Stagflation: The Coming Dirigisme in America, or, America, beware thy economists!, or Zen and Clintonomics,” Washington DC, Broad Branch Terrace, mimeo, November 17.

1993

57. “Exchange-rates and manufactured exports of South Asia”, IMF Washington DC mimeo. Published in part in 2007-2008 as 58-62:

58. “Path of the Indian Rupee 1947-1993”, 2008.

59. “Path of the Pakistan Rupee 1947-1993”, 2008.

60. “Path of the Sri Lankan Rupee 1948-1993”, 2008.

61. “Path of the Bangladesh Taka 1972-1993”, 2008.

62. “India, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh Manufactured Exports, IMF Washington DC mimeo”, published 2007.

63. “Economic Assessment of US-India Merchandise Trade”, Arlington, Virginia, mimeo, published in slight part in Indo-US Trade & Economic Cooperation, ICRIER New Delhi, 1995, and in whole 2007.

64. “Towards an Economic Solution for Kashmir”, mimeo, Arlington, Virginia, circulated in Washington DC 1993-1995, cf 82, 111 infra. Comment of Selig Harrison.

1994

65. “Comment on Indonesia”, in The Political Economy of Policy Reform edited by John Williamson, Washington, DC: Institute for International Economics.

66a “Gold reserves & the gold price in anticipation of Central Bank behaviour”, Greenwich, Connecticut, mimeo. 67b. “Portfolio optimization and foreign currency exposure hedging” Greenwich, Connecticut mimeo.

1995

68. “On the logic and commonsense of debt and payments crises: How to avoid another Mexico in India and Pakistan”, Scarsdale, NY, mimeo, May 1.

69. “Policies for Young India”, Scarsdale, NY, pp. 350, manuscript.

1996

70. US Supreme Court documents, published in part in 2008 as “Become a US Supreme Court Justice!” 70a, 70b (Due to be published in full here in 2010 as Roy vs University of Hawaii, 1989- including the expert testimonies of Milton Friedman and Theodore W Schultz.).

71. “Key problems of macroeconomic management facing the new Indian Government”, May 17. Scarsdale, New York, mimeo. (Due to be published here 2010).

72. “Preventing a collapse of the rupee”, IIT Kharagpur lecture July 16 1996.

73. “The Economist’s Representation of Technological Knowledge”, Vishleshlaya lecture to the Institution of Engineers, September 15 1996, IIT Kharagpur.

1997

74. “Union and State Budgets in India”, lecture at the World Bank, Washington DC, May 00.

75. “State Budgets in India”, IIT Kharagpur mimeo, June 6.

1998

76. “Transparency and Economic Policy-Making: An address to the Asia-Pacific Public Relations Conference” (panel on Transparency chaired by CR Irani) Jan 30 1998, published here 2008.

77. Theodore W. Schultz 1902-1998, Feb 25.

78. “The Economic View of Human Resources”, address to a regional conference on human resources, IIT Kharagpur.

79. “Management accounting”, lecture at Lal Bahadur Shastri Academy, Mussourie,

80a “The Original Reformer”, Outlook letters, Jan 23 1998

81. “Recent Developments in Modern Finance”, IIM Bangalore Review, 10, 1 & 2, Jan.-Jun 1998. Reprinted as “From the Management Guru’s Classroom”: 81a “An introduction to derivatives”, Business Standard/Financial Times, Bombay 18 Apr 1999; 81b “Options in the future, Apr 25 1999; 81c “What is hedging?”, May 2 1999; 81d “Teaching computers to think”, May 9 1999.

82. “Towards an Economic Solution for Kashmir”, Jun 22 1998, lecture at Heritage Foundation, Washington DC. Cf 111 Dec 2005.

83. “Sixteen Currencies for India: A Reverse Euro Model for Monetary & Fiscal Efficacy”, Lecture at the Institute of Economic Affairs, London, June 29 1998. Due to be published here 2010.

84. “Fable of the Fox, the Farmer, and the Would-Be Tailors”, October (Published here July 27 2009).

85. “A Common Man’s Guide to Pricing Financial Derivatives”, Lecture to “National Seminar on Derivatives”, Xavier Labour Research Institute, Jamshedpur, Dec. 16 1998. See 98.

1999

86. “An Analysis of Pakistan’s War-Winning Strategy: Are We Ready for This?”, IIT Kharagpur mimeo, published in part as 86a.“Was a Pakistani Grand Strategy Discerned in Time by India?” New Delhi: Security & Political Risk Analysis Bulletin, July 1999, Kargil issue. See also 000

80b. “The Original Reformer”, Outlook letters, Sep 13 1999.

2000

87. “On Freedom & the Scientific Point of View”, SN Bose National Centre for Basic Sciences, Feb 17 2000. Cf 100 below.

88. “Liberalism and Indian economic policy”, lecture at IIM Calcutta, Indian Liberal Group Meetings Devlali, Hyderabad; also Keynote address to UGC Seminar Guntur, March 30 2002. (Due to be published here 2010).

89. “Towards a Highly Transparent Fiscal & Monetary Framework for India’s Union & State Governments”, Invited address to Conference of State Finance Secretaries, Reserve Bank of India, Bombay, April 29, 2000. Published 2008.

90. “On the Economics of Information Technology”, two lectures at the Indian Institute of Information Technology, Bangalore, Nov 10-11, 2000.

91. Review of A New World by Amit Chaudhuri in Literary Criterion, Mysore.

2001

92. Review of AD Shroff: Titan of Finance and Free Enterprise by Sucheta Dalal, Freedom First., January.

93. “Encounter with Rajiv Gandhi: On the Origins of the 1991 Economic Reform”, Freedom First, October. See also 93a in 2005 and 93b in 2007.

94. “A General Theory of Globalization & Modern Terrorism with Special Reference to September 11”, a keynote address to the Council for Asian Liberals & Democrats, Manila, Philippines, 16 Nov. 2001. Published as 91a.

95. “The Case for and against The Satanic Verses: Diatribe and Dialectic as Art”, Dec 22 republished in print 95a The Statesman Festival Volume, 2006.

2002

94a “A General Theory of Globalization & Modern Terrorism with Special Reference to September 11”, in September 11 & Political Freedom in Asia, eds. Johannen, Smith & Gomez, Singapore 2002.

2002-2010

96. “Recording vivid dreams: Freud’s advice in exploring the Unconscious Mind” (Due to be published here in 2010).

2003

97. “Key principles of government accounting and audit”, IIT Kharagpur mimeo.

98. “Derivative pricing & other topics in financial theory: a student’s complete lecture notes” (Due to be published here in 2010).

2004

99. “Collapse of the Global Conversation”, International Institute for Asian Studies, Leiden, Netherlands, Jul 2004.

100. “Science, Religion, Art & the Necessity of Freedom”, a public lecture, University of Buckingham, UK, August 24 2004. Published here 2007.

2005

93a Rajiv Gandhi and the Origins of India’s 1991 Economic Reform (this was the full story; it appeared in print for the first time in The Statesman Festival Volume 2007).

101. “Can India become an economic superpower (or will there be a monetary meltdown)?” Cardiff University Institute of Applied Macroeconomics Monetary Economics Seminar, April 13, Institute of Economic Affairs, London, April 27, Reserve Bank of India, Bombay, Chief Economist’s Seminar on Monetary Economics, May 5.

102. Margaret Thatcher’s Revolution: How it Happened and What it Meant, Edited and with an Introduction by Subroto Roy & John Clarke, London & New York: Continuum, 2005; paperback 2006; French translation by Florian Bay, 2007.

103. “Iqbal & Jinnah vs Rahmat Ali in Pakistan’s Creation”, Dawn, Karachi, Sep 3.

104. “The Mitrokhin Archives II from an Indian Perspective: A Review Article”, The Statesman, Perspective Page, Oct 11 .

105. “After the Verdict”, The Statesman, Editorial Page, Oct 20.

106. “US Espionage Failures”, The Statesman, Perspective Page, Oct 26

107. “Waffle But No Models of Monetary Policy”, The Statesman, Perspective Page, Oct 30.

108. “On Hindus and Muslims”, The Statesman, Perspective Page, Nov 6.

109. “Assessing Vajpayee: Hindutva True and False”, The Statesman, Editorial Page, Nov 13-14″.

110. “Fiction from the India Economic Summit”, The Statesman, Front Page, Nov 29.

111. “Solving Kashmir: On an Application of Reason”, The Statesman Editorial Page

I. “Give the Hurriyat et al Indian Green Cards”, Dec 1

II. “Choice of Nationality under Full Information”, Dec 2

III. “Of Flags and Consulates in Gilgit etc”, Dec 3.

2006

112. “The Dream Team: A Critique”, The Statesman Editorial Page

I : New Delhi’s Consensus (Manmohantekidambaromics), Jan 6

II: Money, Convertibility, Inflationary Deficit Financing, Jan 7

III: Rule of Law, Transparency, Government Accounting, Jan 8.

113. “Unaccountable Delhi: India’s Separation of Powers’ Doctrine”, The Statesman, Jan 13.

114. “Communists and Constitutions”, The Statesman, Editorial Page, Jan 22.

115. “Diplomatic Wisdom”, The Statesman, Editorial Page, Jan 31.

116. “Mendacity & the Government Budget Constraint”, The Statesman, Front Page Feb 3.

117. “Of Graven Images”, The Statesman, Editorial Page, Feb5.

118. “Separation of Powers, Parts 1-2”, The Statesman, Editorial Pages Feb 12-13.

119. “Public Debt, Government Fantasy”, The Statesman, Front Page Editorial Comment, Feb 22.

120. “War or Peace Parts 1-2”, The Statesman, Editorial Page, Feb 23-24.

121. “Can You Handle This Brief, Mr Chidambaram?” The Statesman, Front Page Feb 26.

122. “A Downpayment On the Taj Mahal Anyone?”, The Statesman, Front Page Comment on the Budget 2006-2007, Mar 1.

123. “Atoms for Peace (or War)”, The Sunday Statesman, Editorial Page Mar 5.

124. “Imperialism Redux: Business, Energy, Weapons & Foreign Policy”, The Statesman, Editorial Page, Mar 14.

125. “Logic of Democracy”, The Statesman, Editorial Page, Mar 30.

126. “Towards an Energy Policy”, The Sunday Statesman, Editorial Page, Apr 2.

127. “Iran’s Nationalism”, The Statesman, Editorial Page, Apr 6.

128. “A Modern Military”, The Sunday Statesman, Editorial Page, Apr 16.

129. “On Money & Banking”, The Sunday Statesman, Editorial Page, Apr 23.

130. “Lessons for India from Nepal’s Revolution”, The Statesman, Front Page Apr 26.

131. “Revisionist Flattery (Inder Malhotra’s Indira Gandhi: A Review Article)”, The Sunday Statesman, May 7.

132. “Modern World History”, The Sunday Statesman Editorial Page, May 7.

133. “Argumentative Indians: A Conversation with Professor Amartya Sen on Philosophy, Identity and Islam,” The Sunday Statesman, May 14 2006. “A Philosophical Conversation between Professor Sen and Dr Roy”, 2008. Translated into Bengali by AA and published in 00.

134. “The Politics of Dr Singh”, The Sunday Statesman, Editorial Page, May 21.

135. “Corporate Governance & the Principal-Agent Problem”, lecture at a conference on corporate governance, Kolkata May 31. Published here 2008.

136. “Pakistan’s Allies Parts 1-2″, The Sunday Statesman, Editorial Page, Jun 4-5.

137. “Law, Justice and J&K Parts 1-2″, The Sunday Statesman, Editorial Page, Jul 2, The Statesman Editorial Page Jul 3.

138. “The Greatest Pashtun (Khan Abdul Ghaffar Khan)”, The Sunday Statesman, Editorial Page, Jul 16.

139. “Understanding Pakistan Parts 1-2”, The Sunday Statesman, Editorial Page, Jul 30, The Statesman Editorial Page Jul 31.

140. “Indian Money and Credit”, The Sunday Statesman, Editorial Page, Aug 6.

141. “India’s Moon Mission”, The Sunday Statesman, Editorial Page, Aug 13.

142. “Jaswant’s Journeyings: A Review Article”, The Sunday Statesman Magazine, Aug 27.

143. “Our Energy Interests, Parts 1-2”, The Sunday Statesman, Editorial Page, Aug 27, The Statesman Editorial Page Aug 28.

144. “Is Balochistan Doomed?”, The Sunday Statesman, Editorial Page, Sep 3 2006.

145. “Racism New and Old”, The Statesman, Editorial Page, Sep 8 2006

146. “Political Economy of India’s Energy Policy”, address to KAF-TERI conference, Goa Oct 7, published in 146a.

147. “New Foreign Policy? Seven phases of Indian foreign policy may be identifiable since Nehru”, Parts 1-2, The Sunday Statesman, Oct 8, The Statesman Oct 9.

148. “Justice & Afzal: There is a difference between law and equity (or natural justice). The power of pardon is an equitable power. Commuting a death-sentence is a partial pardon”, The Sunday Statesman Editorial Page Oct 14

149. “Non-existent liberals (On a Liberal Party for India)”, The Sunday Statesman Editorial Page Oct 22.

150. “History of Jammu & Kashmir Parts 1-2”, The Sunday Statesman, Oct 29, The Statesman Oct 30, Editorial Page.

151. “American Democracy: Does America need a Prime Minister and a longer-lived Legislature?”, The Sunday Statesman Nov 5.

152. “Milton Friedman A Man of Reason 1912-2006”, The Statesman Perspective Page, Nov 22.

153. “Postscript to Milton Friedman Mahalanobis’s Plan (The Mahalanobis-Nehru “Second Plan”) The Statesman Front Page Nov 22.

154. “Mob Violence and Psychology”, Dec 10, The Statesman, Editorial Page.

155. “What To Tell Musharraf: Peace Is Impossible Without Non-Aggressive Pakistani Intentions”, The Statesman Editorial Page Dec 15.

156. “Land, Liberty and Value: Government must act in good faith treating all citizens equally – not favouring organised business lobbies and organised labour over an unorganised peasantry”, The Sunday Statesman Editorial Page Dec 31.

2007

157. “Hypocrisy of the CPI-M: Political Collapse In Bengal: A Mid-Term Election/Referendum Is Necessary”, The Statesman, Editorial Page, Jan 9.

158. “On Land-Grabbing: Dr Singh’s India, Buddhadeb’s Bengal, Modi’s Gujarat have notorious US, Soviet and Chinese examples to follow ~ distracting from the country’s real economic problems,” The Sunday Statesman, Editorial Page Jan 14.

159. “India’s Macroeconomics: Real growth has steadily occurred because India has shared the world’s technological progress. But bad fiscal, monetary policies over decades have led to monetary weakness and capital flight” The Statesman Editorial Page Jan 20.

160. “Fiscal Instability: Interest payments quickly suck dry every year’s Budget. And rolling over old public debt means that Government Borrowing in fact much exceeds the Fiscal Deficit”, The Sunday Statesman, Editorial Page, Feb 4.

161. “Our trade and payments Parts 1-2” (“India in World Trade and Payments”),The Sunday Statesman, Feb 11 2007, The Statesman, Feb 12 2007.

162. “Our Policy Process: Self-Styled “Planners” Have Controlled India’s Paper Money For Decades,” The Statesman, Editorial Page, Feb 20.

163. “Bengal’s Finances”, The Sunday Statesman Editorial Page, Feb 25.

164. “Fallacious Finance: Congress, BJP, CPI-M may be leading India to Hyperinflation” The Statesman Editorial Page Mar 5.

165. “Uttar Pradesh Polity and Finance: A Responsible New Govt May Want To Declare A Financial Emergency” The Statesman Editorial Page, Mar 24

166. “A scam in the making” in The Sunday Statesman Front Page Apr 1 2007, published here in full as “Swindling India”.

167. “Maharashtra’s Money: Those Who Are Part Of The Problem Are Unlikely To Be A Part Of Its Solution”, The Statesman Editorial Page Apr 24.

146a. “Political Economy of Energy Policy” in India and Energy Security edited by Anant Sudarshan and Ligia Noronha, Konrad Adenauer Stiftung, New Delhi 2007.

168. “Presidential Qualities: Simplicity, Genuine Achievement Are Desirable; Political Ambition Is Not”, The Statesman, Editorial Page, May 8.

169. “We & Our Neighbours: Pakistanis And Bangladeshis Would Do Well To Learn From Sheikh Abdullah”, The Statesman, Editorial Page May 15.

170. “On Indian Nationhood: From Tamils To Kashmiris And Assamese And Mizos To Sikhs And Goans”, The Statesman, Editorial Page, May 25.

171. A Current Example of the Working of the Unconscious Mind, May 26.

172. Where I would have gone if I was Osama Bin Laden, May 31.

173. “US election ’08:America’s Presidential Campaign Seems Destined To Be Focussed On Iraq”, The Statesman, Editorial Page, June 1.

174. “Home Team Advantage: On US-Iran talks and Sunni-Shia subtleties: Tehran must transcend its revolution and endorse the principle that the House of Islam has many mansions”, The Sunday Statesman Editorial Page, June 3

175. “Unhealthy Delhi: When will normal political philosophy replace personality cults?”, The Statesman, Editorial Page, June 11.

176. “American Turmoil: A Vice-Presidential Coup – And Now a Grassroots Counterrevolution?”, The Statesman, Editorial Page, June 18

177. “Political Paralysis: India has yet to develop normal conservative, liberal and socialist parties. The Nice-Housing-Effect and a little game-theory may explain the current stagnation”, The Sunday Statesman, Editorial Page, June 24.

177. “Has America Lost? War Doctrines Of Kutusov vs Clausewitz May Help Explain Iraq War”, The Statesman, Editorial Page, July 3.

178. “Lal Masjid ≠ Golden Temple: Wide differences are revealed between contemporary Pakistan and India by these two superficially similar military assaults on armed religious civilians”, The Sunday Statesman, Editorial Page July 15

179 “Political Stonewalling: Only Transparency Can Improve Institutions”, The Statesman, Editorial Page July 20.

180. “Gold standard etc: Fixed versus flexible exchange rates”, July 21.

181. “US Pakistan-India Policy: Delhi & Islamabad Still Look West In Defining Their Relationship”, The Statesman, Editorial Page, July 27.

182. “Works of DH Lawrence” July 30

183. “An Open Letter to Professor Amartya Sen about Singur etc”, The Statesman, Editorial Page, July 31.

184. “Martin Buber on Palestine and Israel (with Postscript)”, Aug 4.

185. “Auguste Rodin on Nature, Art, Beauty, Women and Love”, Aug 7.

186. “Saving Pakistan: A Physicist/Political Philosopher May Represent Iqbal’s “Spirit of Modern Times”, The Statesman, Editorial Page, Aug 13.

187. Letter to Forbes.com 16 Aug.

188. “Need for Clarity: A poorly drafted treaty driven by business motives is a recipe for international misunderstanding”, The Sunday Statesman, Editorial Page, Aug 19.

189. “No Marxist MBAs? An amicus curiae brief for the Hon’ble High Court”, The Statesman, FrontPage, Aug 29.

190. On Lawrence, Sep 4.

191. Dalai Lama’s Return: In the tradition of Gandhi, King, Mandela, Sep 11.

192. Of JC Bose, Patrick Geddes & the Leaf-World, Sep 12.

193. “Against Quackery: Manmohan and Sonia have violated Rajiv Gandhi’s intended reforms; the Communists have been appeased or bought; the BJP is incompetent Parts 1-2”, in The Sunday Statesman and The Statesman, Editorial Pages of Sep 23-24.

194. Karl Georg Zinn’s 1994 Review of Philosophy of Economics, Sep 26.

195. DH Lawrence’s Phoenix, Oct 3.

93b. “Rajiv Gandhi and the Origins of India’s 1991 Economic Reform”, Statesman Festival Volume.

196. “Iran, America, Iraq: Bush’s post-Saddam Saddamism — one flip-flop too many?”, The Statesman, Editorial Page, Oct 16.

197. “Understanding China: The World Needs to Ask China to Find Her True Higher Self”, The Statesman, Editorial Page, Oct 22.

198. “India-USA interests: Elements of a serious Indian foreign policy”, The Statesman, Editorial Page, Oct 30.

199. “China’s India Aggression : German Historians Discover Logic Behind Communist Military Strategy”, The Statesman, Editorial Page Special Article, Nov 5.

200. Sonia’s Lying Courtier (with Postscript), Nov 25.

201. “Surrender or Fight? War is not a cricket match or Bollywood movie. Can India fight China if it must?” The Statesman, Dec 4, Editorial Page.

202. Hutton and Desai: United in Error Dec 14

203. “China’s Commonwealth: Freedom is the Road to Resolving Taiwan, Tibet, Sinkiang”, The Statesman, Dec 17.

2008

204. “Nixon & Mao vs India: How American foreign policy did a U-turn about Communist China’s India aggression. The Government of India should publish its official history of the 1962 war.” The Sunday Statesman, Jan 6, The Statesman Jan 7 Editorial Page.

205. “Lessons from the 1962 War: Beginnings of a solution to the long-standing border problem: there are distinct Tibetan, Chinese and Indian points of view that need to be mutually comprehended”, The Sunday Statesman, January 13 2008.

206. “Our Dismal Politics: Will Independent India Survive Until 2047?”, The Statesman Editorial Page, Feb 1.

207. Median Voter Model of India’s Electorate Feb 7.

208. “Anarchy in Bengal: Intra-Left bandh marks the final unravelling of “Brand Buddha””, The Sunday Statesman, Editorial Page, Feb 10.

209. Fifty years since my third birthday: on life and death.

210. “Pakistan’s Kashmir obsession: Sheikh Abdullah Relied In Politics On The French Constitution, Not Islam”, The Statesman, Editorial Page, Feb 16.

211. A Note on the Indian Policy Process Feb 21.

212. “Growth & Government Delusion: Progress Comes From Learning, Enterprise, Exchange, Not The Parasitic State”, The Statesman, Editorial Page, Feb 22.

213. “How to Budget: Thrift, Not Theft, Needs to Guide Our Public Finances”, The Statesman, Editorial Page, Feb 26.

214. “India’s Budget Process (in Theory)”, The Statesman, Front Page Feb 29.

215. “Irresponsible Governance: Congress, BJP, Communists, BSP, Sena Etc Reveal Equally Bad Traits”, The Statesman, Editorial Page, March 4.

216. “American Politics: Contest Between Obama And Clinton Affects The World”, The Statesman, Editorial Page, March 11.

217. “China’s India Example: Tibet, Xinjiang May Not Be Assimilated Like Inner Mongolia And Manchuria”, The Statesman, Editorial Page, March 25.

218. “Taxation of India’s Professional Cricket: A Proposal”, The Statesman, Editorial Page, April 1.

219. “Two cheers for Pakistan!”, The Statesman, Editorial Page, April 7.

220. “Indian Inflation: Upside Down Economics From The New Delhi Establishment Parts 1-2”, The Statesman, Editorial Page, April 15-16.

221. “Assessing Manmohan: The Doctor of Deficit Finance should realise the currency is at stake”, The Statesman, Editorial Page Apr 25.

222. John Wisdom, Renford Bambrough: Main Philosophical Works, May 8.

223. “All India wept”: On the death of Rajiv Gandhi, May 21.

224. “China’s force and diplomacy: The need for realism in India” The Statesman, Editorial Page May 31.

226. Serendipity and the China-Tibet-India border problem June 6

227. “Leadership vacuum: Time & Tide Wait For No One In Politics: India Trails Pakistan & Nepal!”, The Statesman Editorial Page June 7.

228. My meeting Jawaharlal Nehru Oct13 1962

229. Manindranath Roy 1891-1958

230. Surendranath Roy 1860-1929

231. The Roys of Behala 1928.

232. Sarat Chandra visits Surendranath Roy 1927

233. Nuksaan-Faida Analysis = Cost-Benefit Analysis in Hindi/Urdu Jun 30

234. One of many reasons John R Hicks was a great economist July 3

236. My father, Indian diplomat, in the Shah’s Tehran 1954-57 July 8

237 Distribution of Govt of India Expenditure (Net of Operational Income) 1995 July 27

238. Growth of Real Income, Money & Prices in India 1869-2008, July 28.

239. Communism from Social Democracy? But not in India or China! July 29

240. Death of Solzhenitsyn, Aug. 3

240a. Tolstoy on Science and Art, Aug 4.

241. “Reddy`s reckoning: Where should India’s real interest rate be relative to the world?” Business Standard Aug 10

242. “Rangarajan Effect”, Business Standard Aug 24

243. My grandfather’s death in Ottawa 50 years ago today Sep 3

244. My books in the Library of Congress and British Library Sep 12

245. On Jimmy Carter & the “India-US Nuclear Deal”, Sep 12

246. My father after presenting his credentials to President Kekkonen of Finland Sep 14 1973.

247. “October 1929? Not!”, Business Standard, Sep 18.

248. “MK Gandhi, SN Roy, MA Jinnah in March 1919: Primary education legislation in a time of protest”

249. 122 sensible American economists Sept 26

250. Govt of India: Please call in the BBC and ask them a question Sep 27

251. “Monetary Integrity and the Rupee: Three British Raj relics have dominated our macroeconomic policy-making” Business Standard Sep 28.

252a. Rabindranath’s daughter writes to her friend my grandmother Oct 5

252b. A Literary Find: Modern Poetry in Bengal, Oct 6.

253. Sarat writes to Manindranath 1931, Oct 12

254. Origins of India’s Constitutional Politics 1913

255. Indira Gandhi in Paris, 1971

256. How the Liabilities/Assets Ratio of Indian Banks Changed from 84% in 1970 to 108% in 1998, October 20

257a. My Subjective Probabilities on India’s Moon Mission Oct 21

258. Complete History of Mankind’s Moon Missions: An Indian Citizen’s Letter to ISRO’s Chairman, Oct 22.

259. Would not a few million new immigrants solve America’s mortgage crisis? Oct 26

260. “America’s divided economists”, Business Standard Oct 26

261. One tiny prediction about the Obama Administration, Nov 5

262. Rai Bahadur Umbika Churn Rai, 1827-1902, Nov 7 2008

263. Jawaharlal Nehru invites my father to the Mountbatten Farewell Nov 7 2008

70a. “Become a US Supreme Court Justice! (Explorations in the Rule of Law in America) Preface” Nov 9

70b. “Become a US Supreme Court Justice! (Explorations in the Rule of Law in America) Password protected.” Nov 9.

257b. Neglecting technological progress was the basis of my pessimism about Chandrayaan, Nov 9.

264. Of a new New Delhi myth and the success of the University of Hawaii 1986-1992 Pakistan project Nov 15

265. Pre-Partition Indian Secularism Case-Study: Fuzlul Huq and Manindranath Roy Nov 16

266. Do President-elect Obama’s Pakistan specialists suppose Maulana Azad, Dr Zakir Hussain, Sheikh Abdullah were Pakistanis (or that Sheikh Mujib wanted to remain one)? Nov 18

267. Jews have never been killed in India for being Jews until this sad day, Nov 28.

268. In international law, Pakistan has been the perpetrator, India the victim of aggression in Mumbai, Nov 30.

269. The Indian Revolution, Dec 1.

270. Habeas Corpus: a captured terrorist mass-murderer tells a magistrate he has not been mistreated by Mumbai’s police Dec 3

271. India’s Muslim Voices (Or, Let us be clear the Pakistan-India or Kashmir conflicts have not been Muslim-Hindu conflicts so much as intra-Muslim conflicts about Muslim identity and self-knowledge on the Indian subcontinent), Dec 4

272. “Anger Management” needed? An Oxford DPhil recommends Pakistan launch a nuclear first strike against India within minutes of war, Dec 5.

273. A Quick Comparison Between the September 11 2001 NYC-Washington attacks and the November 26-28 2008 Mumbai Massacres (An Application of the Case-by-Case Philosophical Technique of Wittgenstein, Wisdom and Bambrough), Dec 6

274. Dr Rice finally gets it right (and maybe Mrs Clinton will too) Dec 7

275. Will the Government of India’s new macroeconomic policy dampen or worsen the business-cycle (if such a cycle exists at all)? No one knows! “Where ignorance is bliss, ‘Tis folly to be wise.” Dec 7

276. Pump-priming for car-dealers: Keynes groans in his grave (If evidence was needed of the intellectual dishonesty of New Delhi’s new macroeconomic policy, here it is) Dec 9.

277. Congratulations to Mumbai’s Police: capturing a terrorist, affording him his Habeas Corpus rights, getting him to confess within the Rule of Law, sets a new world standard Dec 10

278. Two cheers — wait, let’s make that one cheer — for America’s Justice Department, Dec 10

279. Will Pakistan accept the bodies of nine dead terrorists who came from Pakistan to Mumbai? If so, let there be a hand-over at the Wagah border, Dec 11.

280. Kasab was a stupid, ignorant, misguided youth, manufactured by Pakistan’s terrorist masterminds into becoming a mass-murdering robot: Mahatma Gandhi’s India should punish him, get him to repent if he wishes, then perhaps rehabilitate him as a potent weapon against Pakistani terrorism Dec 12.

281. Pakistan’s New Delhi Embassy should ask for “Consular Access” to nine dead terrorists in a Mumbai morgue before asking to meet Kasab, Dec 13

282. An Indian Reply to President Zardari: Rewarding Pakistan for bad behaviour leads to schizophrenic relationships Dec 19

283. Is my prediction about Caroline Kennedy becoming US Ambassador to Britain going to be correct? Dec 27

284. Chandrayaan adds a little good cheer! Well done, ISRO!, Dec 28

285. How sad that “Slumdog millionaire” is SO disappointing! Dec 31

289. (with Claude Arpi) “Transparency & history: India’s archives must be opened to world standards” Business Standard New Delhi Dec 31, 2008, published here Jan 1 .

2009

290. A basis of India-Pakistan cooperation on the Mumbai massacres: the ten Pakistani terrorists started off as pirates and the Al-Huseini is a pirate ship Jan 1.

291. India’s “pork-barrel politics” needs a nice (vegetarian) Hindi name! “Teli/oily politics” perhaps? (And are we next going to see a Bill of Rights for Lobbyists?) Jan 3

292. My (armchair) experience of the 1999 Kargil war (Or, “Actionable Intelligence” in the Internet age: How the Kargil effort got a little help from a desktop) Jan 5

293. How Jammu & Kashmir’s Chief Minister Omar Abdullah can become a worthy winner of the Nobel Peace Prize: An Open Letter, Jan 7

294. Could the Satyam/PwC fraud be the visible part of an iceberg? Where are India’s “Generally Accepted Accounting Principles”? Isn’t governance rather poor all over corporate India? Bad public finance may be a root cause Jan 8

295. Satyam does not exist: it is bankrupt, broke, kaput. Which part of this does the new “management team” not get? The assets belong to Satyam’s creditors. Jan 8

296. Jews are massacred in Mumbai and now Jews commit a massacre in Gaza! Jan 9

297. And now for the Great Satyam Whitewash/Cover-Up/Public Subsidy! The wrong Minister appoints the wrong new Board who, probably, will choose the wrong policy Jan 12

298. Letter to Wei Jingsheng Jan 14

299. Memo to the Hon’ble Attorneys General of Pakistan & India: How to jointly prosecute the Mumbai massacre perpetrators most expeditiously Jan 16

300. Satyam and IT-firms in general may be good candidates to become “Labour-Managed” firms Jan 18

301. “Yes we might be able to do that. Perhaps we ought to. But again, perhaps we ought not to, let me think about it…. Most important is Cromwell’s advice: Think it possible we may be mistaken!” Jan 20.

302. RAND’s study of the Mumbai attacks Jan 25

303. Didn’t Dr Obama (the new American President’s late father) once publish an article in Harvard’s Quarterly Journal of Economics? (Or did he?) Jan 25.

304. “A Dialogue in Macroeconomics” 1989 etc: sundry thoughts on US economic policy discourse Jan 30

305. American Voices: A Brief Popular History of the United States in 20 You-Tube Music Videos Feb 5

306. Jaladhar Sen writes to Manindranath at Surendranath’s death, Feb 23

307. Pakistani expansionism: India and the world need to beware of “Non-Resident Pakistanis” ruled by Rahmat Ali’s ghost, Feb 9

308. My American years Part One 1980-90: battles for academic integrity & freedom Feb 11.

309. Thanks and well done Minister Rehman Malik and the Govt of Pakistan Feb 12

310. Can President Obama resist the financial zombies (let alone slay them)? His economists need to consult Dr Anna J Schwartz Feb 14

311. A Brief History of Gilgit, Feb 18

312. Memo to UCLA Geographers: Commonsense suggests Mr Bin Laden is far away from the subcontinent Feb 20

313. The BBC gets its history and geography deliberately wrong again Feb 21

314. Bengal Legislative Council 1921, Feb 28

315. Carmichael visits Surendranath, 1916, Mar 1

316. Memo to GoI CLB: India discovered the Zero, and 51% of Zero is still Zero Mar 10

317. An Academic Database of Doctoral & Other Postgraduate Research Done at UK Universities on India, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh and Other Asian Countries Over 100 Years, Mar 13

318. Pakistan’s progress, Mar 18

319. Risk-aversion explains resistance to free trade, Mar 19

320. India’s incredibly volatile inflation rate! Mar 20

321. Is “Vicky, Cristina, Barcelona” referring to an emasculation of (elite) American society?, Mar 21

322. Just how much intellectual fraud can Delhi produce? Mar 26

323. India is not a monarchy! We urgently need to universalize the French concept of “citoyen”! Mar 28

324. Could this be the real state of some of our higher education institutions? Mar 29

325. Progress! The BBC retracts its prevarication! Mar 30

326. Aldous Huxley’s Essay “DH Lawrence” Mar 31

327. Waffle not institutional reform is what (I predict) the “G-20 summit” will produce, April 1

328. Did a full cricket team of Indian bureaucrats follow our PM into 10 Downing Street? Count for yourself! April 3

329. Will someone please teach the BJP’s gerontocracy some Economics 101 on an emergency basis? April 5

330. The BBC needs to determine exactly where it thinks Pakistan is!, April 5

331. Alfred Lyall on Christians, Muslims, India, China, Etc, 1908, April 6

332. An eminent economist of India passes away April 9

333. Democracy Database for the Largest Electorate Ever Seen in World History, April 12

334. Memo to the Election Commission of India April 14 2009, 9 AM, April 14

335. Caveat emptor! Satyam is taken over, April 14

336. India’s 2009 General Elections: Candidates, Parties, Symbols for Polls on 16-30 April Phases 1,2,3, April 15

337. On the general theory of expertise in democracy: reflections on what emerges from the American “torture memos” today, April 18

338. India’s 2009 General Elections: 467 constituencies (out of 543) for which candidates have been announced as of 1700hrs April 21, April 21

339. Apropos Philosophy of Economics, Comments of Sidney Hook, KJ Arrow, Milton Friedman, TW Schultz, SS Alexander, Max Black, Renford Bambrough, John Gray et al., April 22.

340. India’s 2009 General Elections: Names of all 543 Constituencies of the 15th Lok Sabha, April 22.

341. India’s 2009 General Elections: How 4125 State Assembly Constituencies comprise the 543 new Lok Sabha Constituencies, April 23.

342. Why has America’s “torture debate” yet to mention the obvious? Viz., sadism and racism, April 24

343. India’s 2009 General Elections: the advice of the late “George Eliot” (Mary Ann Evans, 1819-1880) to India’s voting public, April 24.

344. India’s 2009 General Elections: Delimitation and the Different Lists of 543 Lok Sabha Constituencies in 2009 and 2004, April 25

345. Is “Slumdog Millionaire” the single worst Best Picture ever?

346. India’s 2009 General Elections: Result of Delimitation — Old (2004) and New (2009) Lok Sabha and Assembly Constituencies, April 26

347. India’s 2009 General Elections: 7019 Candidates in 485 (out of 543) Constituencies announced as of April 26 noon April 26

348. What is Christine Fair referring to? Would the MEA kindly seek to address what she has claimed asap? April 27

349. Politics can be so entertaining :) Manmohan versus Sonia on the poor old CPI(M)!, April 28

350. A Dozen Grown-Up Questions for Sonia Gandhi, Manmohan Singh, LK Advani, Sharad Pawar, Km Mayawati and Anyone Else Dreaming of Becoming/Deciding India’s PM After the 2009 General Elections, April 28

351. India’s 2009 General Elections: How drastically will the vote-share of political parties change from 2004? May 2

352. India’s 2009 General Elections: And now finally, all 8,070 Candidates across all 543 Lok Sabha Constituencies, May 5

353. India’s 2009 General Elections: The Mapping of Votes into Assembly Segments Won into Parliamentary Seats Won in the 2004 Election, May 7

354. Will Messrs Advani, Rajnath Singh & Modi ride into the sunset if the BJP comes to be trounced? (Corrected), May 10

355. India’s 2009 General Elections: 543 Matrices to Help Ordinary Citizens Audit the Election Commission’s Vote-Tallies May 12

356. Well done Sonia-Rahul! Two hours before polls close today, I am willing to predict a big victory for you (but, please, try to get your economics right, and also, you must get Dr Singh a Lok Sabha seat if he is to be PM) May 13

357. Buddhadeb Bhattacharjee must dissolve the West Bengal Assembly if he is an honest democrat: Please try to follow Gerard Schröder’s example even slightly! May 16

358. India’s 2009 General Elections: Provisional Results from the EC as of 1400 hours Indian Standard Time May 16

359. Memo to the Hon’ble President of India: It is Sonia Gandhi, not Manmohan Singh, who should be invited to our equivalent of the “Kissing Hands” Ceremony May 16

360. Time for heads to roll in the BJP/RSS and CPI(M)!, May 17.

361. Inviting a new Prime Minister of India to form a Government: Procedure Right and Wrong May 18

362. Starting with Procedural Error: Why has the “Cabinet” of the 14th Lok Sabha been meeting today AFTER the results of the Elections to the 15th Lok Sabha have been declared?! May 18

363. Why has the Sonia Congress done something that the Congress under Nehru-Indira-Rajiv would not have done, namely, exaggerate the power of the Rajya Sabha and diminish the power of the Lok Sabha? May 21

364. Shouldn’t Dr Singh’s Cabinet begin with a small apology to the President of India for discourtesy? May we have reviews and reforms of protocols and practices to be followed at Rashtrapati Bhavan and elsewhere? May 23

365. Parliament’s sovereignty has been diminished by the Executive: A record for future generations to know May 25

366. How tightly will organised Big Business be able to control economic policies this time? May 26

367. Why does India not have a Parliament ten days after the 15th Lok Sabha was elected? Nehru and Rajiv would both have been appalled May 27

368. Eleven days and counting after the 15th Lok Sabha was elected and still no Parliament of India! (But we do have 79 Ministers — might that be a world record?) May 28

369. Note to Posterity: 79 Ministers in office but no 15th Lok Sabha until June 1 2009! May 29

370. Silver Jubilee of Pricing, Planning & Politics: A Study of Economic Distortions in India May 29

371. How to Design a Better Cabinet for the Government of India May 29

372. Parliament is supposed to control the Government, not be bullied or intimidated by it: Will Rahul Gandhi be able to lead the Backbenches in the 15th Lok Sabha? June 1

373. Mistaken Macroeconomics: An Open Letter to Prime Minister Dr Manmohan Singh, June 12

374. Why did Manmohan Singh and LK Advani apologise to one another? Is Indian politics essentially collusive, not competitive, aiming only to preserve and promote the post-1947 Dilli Raj at the expense of the whole of India? We seem to have no Churchillian repartee (except perhaps from Bihar occasionally) June 18

375. Are Iran’s Revolutionaries now Reactionaries? George Orwell would have understood. A fresh poll may be the only answer Are Iran’s Revolutionaries now Reactionaries? George Orwell would have understood. A fresh poll may be the only answer June 22

376. My March 25 1991 memo to Rajiv (which never reached him) is something the present Government seems to have followed: all for the best of course! July 12

377. Disquietude about France’s behaviour towards India on July 14 2009 July 14

378. Does the Govt. of India assume “foreign investors and analysts” are a key constituency for Indian economic policy-making? If so, why so? Have Govt. economists “learnt nothing, forgotten everything”? Some Bastille Day thoughts July 14

379. Letter to the GoI’s seniormost technical economist, May 21.July 19

380. Excuse me but young Kasab in fact confessed many months ago, immediately after he was captured – he deserves 20 or 30 years in an Indian prison, and a chance to become a model prisoner who will stand against the very terrorists who sent him on his vile mission July 20

381. Finally, three months late, the GoI responds to American and Pakistani allegations about Balochistan July 24

382. Thoughts, words, deeds: My work 1973-2010

M1. Map of Asia c. 1900

M2. Map of Chinese Empire c. 1900

M3. Map of Sinkiang, Tibet and Neighbours 1944

M4. China’s Secretly Built 1957 Road Through India’s Aksai Chin

M5. Map of Kashmir to Sinkiang 1944

M6. Map of India-Tibet-China-Mongolia 1959

M7. Map of India, Afghanistan, Russia, China, 1897

M8. Map of Xinjiang/Sinkiang/E Turkestan

M9. Map of Bombay/Mumbai 1909

M10-M13. Himalayan Expedition, West Sikkim 1970 – 1,2,3,4

Posted in . Leave a Comment »

Thoughts, words, deeds: My work 1973-2010

Thoughts, words, deeds

My work 1973-2010

Subroto Roy

This is an incomplete bibliography of my writings, public lectures etc 1973-2010 including citations, reviews, comments.  I have been mostly an academic economist who by choice or circumstance over 36 years has had to venture also into science, philosophy, public policy, law, jurisprudence, practical politics, history, international relations, military strategy, financial theory, accounting, management, journalism, literary criticism, psychology, psychoanalysis, theology, aesthetics, biography, children’s fables, etc.   If anything unites the seemingly diverse work recorded below it is that I have tried to acquire a grasp of the nature of human reason and then apply this comprehension in practical contexts as simply and clearly as possible. Hence I have ended up following the path of Aristotle, as described in modern times (via Wittgenstein and John Wisdom) by Renford Bambrough.  The 2004 public lecture in England, “Science, Religion, Art & the Necessity of Freedom”, may explain and illustrate all this best.  A friend has been kind enough to call me an Academician, which I probably am, though one who really needs his own Academy because the incompetence, greed and mendacity encountered too often in the modern professoriat is dispiriting.

1-289 refer mostly to writings and publications printed on paper; 290-382 refer to  writings or items not printed on paper — as new media break space, cost and other  constraints of traditional publishing, a little repetition and overlap has occurred too. Also in a few cases, e.g., Aldous Huxley’s essay on DH Lawrence, nothing has been done except discover and republish.  Several databases have been created and released in the public interest, as have been some rare maps.  There is also some biographical and autobiographical material.  Several inconsequential errors remain in the text, which shall take time to be rectified as documents come to be rediscovered and collated.

1973

1. “Behavioural study of mus musculus”, Haileybury College, Supervised by J de C Ford-Robertson MA (Oxon). (Due to be published here 2010).

2. “Chemistry at Advanced & Special Level: Student Notes 1972-73” (Due to be published here 2010).

3. “Biology at Advanced & Special Level: Student Notes 1972-73”, (Due to be published here 2010).

4.  “Physics at Advanced Level: Student Notes 1972-73”, (Due to be published here 2010).

5. “Revolution: theoria and praxis”, London, mimeo (Due to be published here 2010).

6. “Gandhi vs Marx”, London, mimeo (Due to be published here 2010).

1974

7. “Relevance of downward money-wage rigidity to the problem of maintaining full-employment in the classical and Keynesian models of income determination”, London School of Economics, mimeo (Due to be published here 2010).

8. “Testing aircraft fuels at Shell Finland”.

1975

9. “Oxford Street experiences: down and out in London town”.

10. “SE Region Bulk Distribution Survey”, Unilever, Basingstoke.

11. “Four London poems”, in JCM Paton (ed)  New Writing (London, Great Portland Street: International Students House).  (Due to be republished here 2010)

12. “On economic growth models and modellers”, London School of Economics, mimeo. (Due to be published here 2010).

1976

13. “World money: system or anarchy?”, lecture to Professor ACL Day’s seminar, London School of Economics, Economics Department, April. (Due to be published here 2010).

14. “A beginner’s guide to some recent developments in monetary theory”, lecture to Professor FH Hahn’s seminar, Cambridge University Economics Department, November 17 (Due to be published here 2010). See also “Announcement of My “Hahn Seminar”,  published here June 14 2008.

1977

15. “Inflation and unemployment: a survey”, mimeo, Fitzwilliam College, Cambridge. (Due to be published here 2010).

16. “On short run theories of dual economies”, Cambridge University Economics Department “substantial piece of work” required of first year Research Students.  Examiner: DMG Newbery, FBA. (Due to be published here 2010).

1978

17. “Pure theory of developing economies 1 and 2”, Delhi School of Economics mimeo (Due to be published here 2010).

18. “Introduction to some market outcomes under uncertainty”, Delhi School of Economics mimeo (Due to be published here 2010).

19. “On money and development”, Corpus Christi College, Cambridge, mimeo, September.  (Due to be published here 2010)

20. “Notes on the Newbery-Stiglitz model of sharecropping”, Corpus Christi College, Cambridge, mimeo November.  (Due to be published here 2010).

1979

21. “A theory of rights and economic justice”, Corpus Christi College Cambridge mimeo. (Due to be published here 2010).

22. “Monetary theory and economic development”, Corpus Christi College Cambridge, mimeo  (Due to be published here 2010).

23. “Foundations of the case against ‘development planning’”, Corpus Christi College Cambridge, mimeo, November.   (Due to be published here 2010).

1979-1989

24. Correspondence with Renford Bambrough (1926-1999), philosopher of St John’s College, Cambridge (Due to be published here 2010).

1980

25. “Models before the monetarist storm”, New Statesman letters

26. “Disciplining rulers and experts”, Corpus Christi College, Cambridge, mimeo.  (Due to be published here 2010).

1981

27. “On liberty & economic growth: preface to a philosophy for India”, Cambridge University doctoral thesis, supervisor FH Hahn, FBA; examiners CJ Bliss, FBA; TW Hutchison, FBA  (Due to be published here 2010). 27a Response of FA Hayek on a partial draft February 18 1981.  27b Response of Peter Bauer, 1982.  27c Response of Theodore W Schultz, 1983.  27d. Response of Frank Hahn 1985.

1982

28. “Knowledge and freedom in economic theory Parts 1 and 2”, Centre for Study of Public Choice, Virginia Polytechnic Institute & State University, Working Papers.

29. “Economic Theory and Development Economics”. Lecture to American Economic Association, New York, Dec 1982.  Panel: RM Solow, HB Chenery, T Weisskopf, P Streeten, G Rosen, S Roy. Published in 29a.

1983

29a “Economic Theory and Development Economics: A Comment”. World Development, 1983. [Citation: Stavros Thefanides "Metamorphosis of Development Economics", World Development 1988.]

30. “The Political Economy of Trade Policy (Comment on J. Michael Finger)”, Washington DC: Cato Journal, Winter 1983/84. See also 000 “Risk-aversion explains resistance to freer trade”, 2008.

1984

31. “Considerations on Utility, Benevolence and Taxation”, History of Political Economy, 1984.   31a Response of Professor Sir John Hicks May 1 1984.

[Citations: P. Hennipman, "A Tale of Two Schools", De Economist 1987, "A New Look at the Ordinalist Revolution", J. Econ. Lit. Mar 1988; P. Rappoport, "Reply to Professor Hennipman", J. Econ. Lit. Mar 1988; Eugene Smolensky et al "An Application of A Dynamic Cost-of-Living Index to the Evaluation of Changes in Social Welfare", J. Post-Keynesian Econ.IX.3. 1987.]

32. Pricing, Planning and Politics: A Study of Economic Distortions in India, London: Institute of Economic Affairs, London 1984.

[Citations: Lead editorial of The Times of London May 29 1984, “India’s economy”, Times letters June 16 1984. John Toye "Political Economy & Analysis of Indian Development", Modern Asian Studies, 22, 1, 1988; John Toye, Dilemmas of Development; D. Wilson, "Privatization of Asia", The Banker Sep. 1984 etc].  See also 370 “Silver Jubilee of ‘Pricing, Planning and Politics: A Study of Economic Distortions in India’” 2009.

33. Review of Utilitarianism and Beyond, Amartya Sen & Bernard Williams (eds) Public Choice.

34. Review of Limits of Utilitarianism, HB Miller & WH Williams (eds.), Public Choice.

35. Deendayal lecture (one of four invited lecturers), Washington DC, May.

1987

36. (with one other) “Does the Theory of Logical Types Inform the Theory of Communication?”, Journal of Genetic Psychology., 148 (4), Dec. 1987 [Citation:

37. “Irrelevance of Foreign Aid”, India International Centre Quarterly, Winter 1987.

38. Review of Development Planning by Sukhamoy Chakravarty for Economic Affairs, London 1987.

1988

39. (with two others) “Introduction” to Lessons in Development: A Comparative Study of Asia and Latin America. San Francisco: Inst. of Economic Growth.

40. “A note on the welfare economics of regional cooperation”, lecture to Asia-Latin America conference, East West Center Honolulu, published 2009.

1989

41. Philosophy of Economics: On the Scope of Reason in Economic Inquiry, London & New York: Routledge (International Library of Philosophy) 1989, paperback 1991. Internet edition 2007.   [Reviews & Citations: Research in Economics, 1992; De Economist 1991 & 1992; Manch.Sch. Econ.Studs. 59, 1991; Ethics 101.88 Jul. 1991; Kyklos 43.4 1990; Soc. Science Q. 71.880. Dec.1990; Can. Phil. Rev. 1990; J. Econ. Hist. Sep. 1990; Econ. & Phil. Fall 1990; Econ. Affairs June-July 1990; TLS May 1990; Choice March 1990; J. App.Phil. 1994, M. Blaug: Methodology of Economics, 2nd ed., Cambridge, 1992;  Hist. Methods. 27.3, 1994; J. of Inst. & Theoretical Econ.,1994;  Jahrbucker fur Nationaleconomie 1994, 573:574. Mark A Lutz in Economics for the Common Good, London: Routledge, 1999, et al].  See also 339 “Apropos Philosophy of Economics”, Comments of Sidney Hook, KJ Arrow, Milton Friedman, TW Schultz, SS Alexander, Max Black, Renford Bambrough, John Gray et al.

42. Foreword to Essays on the Political Economy by James M. Buchanan, Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press 1989.

43. “Modern Political Economy of India”, edited by Subroto Roy & William E James,  Hawaii mimeo May 21 1989.  This published for the first time a November 1955 memorandum to the Government of India by Milton Friedman.  See also 43a, 53.

43a. Preface to “Milton Friedman’s extempore comments at the 1989 Hawaii conference: on India, Israel, Palestine, the USA, Debt and its uses, Erhardt abolishing exchange controls, Etc”,  May 22 1989, published here for the first time October 31 2008.

44. Milton Friedman’s defence of my work  in 1989.

45. Theodore W. Schultz’s defence of Philosophy of Economics

1990

46. “Letter to Judge Evelyn Lance: On A Case Study in Private International Law” (Due to be published here in 2010).

47-49. Selections from advisory work on economic policy etc for Rajiv Gandhi, Leader of the Opposition in the Parliament of India,  published in 47a-49a.

1991

41b Philosophy of Economics: On the Scope of Reason in Economic Inquiry, Paperback edition.

50. “Conversations and correspondence with Rajiv Gandhi during the Gulf war, January 1991”   (Due to be published here 2010).

47a. A Memo to Rajiv I:  Stronger Secular Middle”, The Statesman, Jul 31 1991.

48a “A Memo to Rajiv II: Saving India’s Prestige”, The Statesman, Aug 1 1991.

49a “A Memo to Rajiv III: Salvation in Penny Capitalism”, The Statesman, Aug 2 1991  47b-49b “Three Memoranda to Rajiv Gandhi 1990-91”, 2007 republication here.

51. “Constitution for a Second Indian Republic”, The Saturday Statesman, April 20 1991.  Republished here 2009.

52. “On the Art of Government: Experts, Party, Cabinet and Bureaucracy”, New Delhi mimeo March 25 1991, published here July 00 2009.

1992

53. Foundations of India’s Political Economy: Towards an Agenda for the 1990s Edited and with an Introduction by Subroto Roy & William E. James New Delhi, London, Newbury Park: Sage: 1992.   Citation: Milton and Rose Friedman Two Lucky People (Chicago 1998), pp. 268-269.

54. Foundations of Pakistan’s Political Economy: Towards an Agenda for the 1990s Edited and with an Introduction by William E. James & Subroto Roy, Hawaii MS 1989, Sage: 1992, Karachi: Oxford 1993.

Reviews of 53 & 54 include: Bus. Today, Mar-Apr 1992; Political Studies March 1995; Econ Times 21 March 1993; Pakistan Development Review 1992. Hindustan Times 11 July 1992. Pacific Affairs 1993; Hindu 21 March 1993, 15 June 1993; Pakistan News International 12 June 1993. Book Reviews March 1993; Deccan Herald 2 May 1993; Pol.Econ.J. Ind. 1992. Fin Express 13 September 1992;  Statesman 16 Jan. 1993.  J. Royal Soc Asian Aff. 1994, J. Contemporary Asia, 1994 etc.

55. “Fundamental Problems of the Economies of India and Pakistan”, World Bank, Washington, mimeo  (Due to be published here 2010).

56.“The Road to Stagflation: The Coming Dirigisme in America, or, America, beware thy economists!, or Zen and Clintonomics,” Washington DC, Broad Branch Terrace, mimeo, November 17.

1993

57. “Exchange-rates and manufactured exports of South Asia”, IMF Washington DC mimeo.  Published in part in 2007-2008 as 58-62:

58. “Path of the Indian Rupee 1947-1993”, 2008.

59.  “Path of the Pakistan Rupee 1947-1993”, 2008.

60. “Path of the Sri Lankan Rupee 1948-1993”, 2008.

61. “Path of the Bangladesh Taka 1972-1993”, 2008.

62. “India, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh Manufactured Exports, IMF Washington DC mimeo”, published 2007.

63. “Economic Assessment of US-India Merchandise Trade”, Arlington, Virginia, mimeo, published in slight part in Indo-US Trade & Economic Cooperation, ICRIER New Delhi, 1995, and in whole 2007.

64. “Towards an Economic Solution for Kashmir”, mimeo, Arlington, Virginia, circulated in Washington DC 1993-1995, cf 82, 111 infra. Comment of Selig Harrison.

1994

65. “Comment on Indonesia”, in The Political Economy of Policy Reform edited by John Williamson, Washington, DC: Institute for International Economics.

66a “Gold reserves & the gold price in anticipation of Central Bank behaviour”, Greenwich, Connecticut, mimeo. 67b. “Portfolio optimization and foreign currency exposure hedging” Greenwich, Connecticut mimeo.

1995

68. “On the logic and commonsense of debt and payments crises: How to avoid another Mexico in India and Pakistan”, Scarsdale, NY, mimeo, May 1.

69. “Policies for Young India”, Scarsdale, NY, pp. 350, manuscript.

1996

70. US Supreme Court documents, published in part in 2008 as  “Become a US Supreme Court Justice!” 70a, 70b (Due to be published in full here in 2010 as Roy vs University of Hawaii, 1989- including the expert testimonies of Milton Friedman and Theodore W Schultz.).

71. “Key problems of macroeconomic management facing the new Indian Government”, May 17.  Scarsdale, New York, mimeo.  (Due to be published here 2010).

72. “Preventing a collapse of the rupee”, IIT Kharagpur lecture July 16 1996.

73. “The Economist’s Representation of Technological Knowledge”, Vishleshlaya lecture to the Institution of Engineers, September 15 1996, IIT Kharagpur.

1997

74. “Union and State Budgets in India”, lecture at the World Bank, Washington DC, May 00.

75. “State Budgets in India”, IIT Kharagpur mimeo, June 6.

1998

76. “Transparency and Economic Policy-Making:  An address to the Asia-Pacific Public Relations Conference” (panel on Transparency chaired by CR Irani) Jan 30 1998, published here 2008.

77. Theodore W. Schultz 1902-1998,  Feb 25.

78. “The Economic View of Human Resources”, address to a regional conference on human resources, IIT Kharagpur.

79.  “Management accounting”, lecture at Lal Bahadur Shastri Academy, Mussourie,

80a “The Original Reformer”, Outlook letters, Jan 23 1998

81. “Recent Developments in Modern Finance”, IIM Bangalore Review, 10, 1 & 2, Jan.-Jun 1998. Reprinted as “From the Management Guru’s Classroom”: 81a “An introduction to derivatives”, Business Standard/Financial Times, Bombay 18 Apr 1999; 81b “Options in the future, Apr 25 1999; 81c “What is hedging?”, May 2 1999; 81d “Teaching computers to think”, May 9 1999.

82. “Towards an Economic Solution for Kashmir”, Jun 22 1998, lecture at Heritage Foundation, Washington DC.  Cf 111 Dec 2005.

83. “Sixteen Currencies for India: A Reverse Euro Model for Monetary & Fiscal Efficacy”, Lecture at the Institute of  Economic Affairs, London, June 29 1998.  Due to be published here 2010.

84. “Fable of the Fox, the Farmer, and the Would-Be Tailors”, October  (Published here July 27 2009).

85. “A Common Man’s Guide to Pricing Financial Derivatives”, Lecture to “National Seminar on Derivatives”, Xavier Labour Research Institute, Jamshedpur, Dec. 16 1998.   See 98.

1999

86. “An Analysis of Pakistan’s War-Winning Strategy: Are We Ready for This?”, IIT Kharagpur mimeo, published in part as 86a.“Was a Pakistani Grand Strategy Discerned in Time by India?” New Delhi:  Security & Political Risk Analysis Bulletin, July 1999, Kargil issue.  See also 000

80b. “The Original Reformer”, Outlook letters, Sep 13 1999.

2000

87. “On Freedom & the Scientific Point of View”, SN Bose National Centre for Basic Sciences, Feb 17 2000.  Cf 100 below.

88. “Liberalism and Indian economic policy”, lecture at IIM Calcutta,  Indian Liberal Group Meetings Devlali, Hyderabad; also Keynote address to UGC Seminar Guntur, March 30 2002.  (Due to be published here 2010).

89. “Towards a Highly Transparent Fiscal & Monetary Framework for India’s Union & State Governments”, Invited address to Conference of State Finance Secretaries, Reserve Bank of India, Bombay, April 29, 2000.  Published 2008.

90. “On the Economics of Information Technology”, two lectures at the Indian Institute of Information Technology, Bangalore, Nov 10-11, 2000.

91. Review of A New World by Amit Chaudhuri in Literary Criterion, Mysore.

2001

92. Review of AD Shroff: Titan of Finance and Free Enterprise by Sucheta Dalal, Freedom First., January.

93. “Encounter with Rajiv Gandhi: On the Origins of the 1991 Economic Reform”, Freedom First, October. See also 93a in 2005 and  93b in 2007.

94. “A General Theory of Globalization & Modern Terrorism with Special Reference to September 11”, a keynote address to the Council for Asian Liberals & Democrats, Manila, Philippines, 16 Nov. 2001.  Published as 91a.

95. “The Case for and against The Satanic Verses: Diatribe and Dialectic as Art”, Dec 22 republished in print 95a The Statesman Festival Volume, 2006.

2002

94a “A General Theory of Globalization & Modern Terrorism with Special Reference to September 11”, in September 11 & Political Freedom in Asia, eds. Johannen, Smith & Gomez, Singapore 2002.

2002-2010

96. “Recording vivid dreams: Freud’s advice in exploring the Unconscious Mind” (Due to be published here in 2010).

2003

97. “Key principles of government accounting and audit”, IIT Kharagpur mimeo.

98. “Derivative pricing & other topics in financial theory: a student’s complete lecture notes” (Due to be published here in 2010).

2004

99. “Collapse of the Global Conversation”, International Institute for Asian Studies, Leiden, Netherlands, Jul 2004.

100. “Science, Religion, Art & the Necessity of Freedom”, a public lecture, University of Buckingham, UK, August 24 2004.  Published here 2007.

2005

93a Rajiv Gandhi and the Origins of India’s 1991 Economic Reform (this was the full story; it appeared in print for the first time in The Statesman Festival Volume 2007).

101. “Can India become an economic superpower (or will there be a monetary meltdown)?” Cardiff University Institute of Applied Macroeconomics Monetary Economics Seminar, April 13, Institute of Economic Affairs, London, April 27, Reserve Bank of India, Bombay, Chief Economist’s Seminar on Monetary Economics, May 5.

102. Margaret Thatcher’s Revolution: How it Happened and What it Meant, Edited and with an Introduction by Subroto Roy & John Clarke, London & New York: Continuum, 2005; paperback 2006; French translation by Florian Bay, 2007.

103. “Iqbal & Jinnah vs Rahmat Ali in Pakistan’s Creation”, Dawn, Karachi, Sep 3.

104. “The Mitrokhin Archives II from an Indian Perspective: A Review Article”, The Statesman, Perspective Page, Oct 11 .

105. “After the Verdict”, The Statesman, Editorial Page, Oct 20.

106.   “US Espionage Failures”, The Statesman, Perspective Page, Oct 26

107.  “Waffle But No Models of Monetary Policy”, The Statesman, Perspective Page, Oct 30.

108. “On Hindus and Muslims”, The Statesman, Perspective Page, Nov 6.

109. “Assessing Vajpayee: Hindutva True and False”, The Statesman, Editorial Page, Nov  13-14″.

110. “Fiction from the India Economic Summit”, The Statesman, Front Page, Nov 29.

111. “Solving Kashmir: On an Application of Reason”, The Statesman Editorial Page

I.  “Give the Hurriyat et al Indian Green Cards”, Dec 1

II.  “Choice of Nationality under Full Information”, Dec 2

III.  “Of Flags and Consulates in Gilgit etc”, Dec 3.

2006

112. “The Dream Team: A Critique”, The Statesman Editorial Page

I : New Delhi’s Consensus (Manmohantekidambaromics), Jan 6

II: Money, Convertibility, Inflationary Deficit Financing, Jan 7

III:  Rule of Law, Transparency, Government Accounting, Jan 8.

113. “Unaccountable Delhi: India’s Separation of Powers’ Doctrine”, The Statesman, Jan 13.

114. “Communists and Constitutions”, The Statesman, Editorial Page, Jan 22.

115. “Diplomatic Wisdom”, The Statesman, Editorial Page, Jan 31.

116.  “Mendacity & the Government Budget Constraint”, The Statesman, Front Page  Feb 3.

117. “Of Graven Images”, The Statesman, Editorial Page, Feb5.

118. “Separation of Powers, Parts 1-2”, The Statesman, Editorial Pages Feb 12-13.

119. “Public Debt, Government Fantasy”, The Statesman, Front Page Editorial Comment, Feb 22.

120. “War or Peace Parts 1-2”, The Statesman, Editorial Page, Feb 23-24.

121. “Can You Handle This Brief, Mr Chidambaram?” The Statesman, Front Page  Feb 26.

122. “A Downpayment On the Taj Mahal Anyone?”, The Statesman, Front Page  Comment on the Budget 2006-2007, Mar 1.

123. “Atoms for Peace (or War)”, The Sunday Statesman, Editorial Page Mar 5.

124. “Imperialism Redux: Business, Energy, Weapons & Foreign Policy”, The Statesman, Editorial Page, Mar 14.

125.  “Logic of Democracy”,  The Statesman, Editorial Page, Mar 30.

126. “Towards an Energy Policy”, The Sunday Statesman, Editorial Page, Apr 2.

127. “Iran’s Nationalism”, The Statesman, Editorial Page, Apr 6.

128. “A Modern Military”, The Sunday Statesman, Editorial Page, Apr 16.

129.  “On Money & Banking”, The Sunday Statesman, Editorial Page, Apr 23.

130.  “Lessons for India from Nepal’s Revolution”, The Statesman, Front Page Apr 26.

131. “Revisionist Flattery (Inder Malhotra’s Indira Gandhi: A Review Article)”, The Sunday Statesman, May 7.

132. “Modern World History”, The Sunday Statesman Editorial Page, May 7.

133. “Argumentative Indians: A Conversation with Professor Amartya Sen on Philosophy, Identity and Islam,” The Sunday Statesman,  May 14 2006.  “A Philosophical Conversation between Professor Sen and Dr Roy”,  2008.  Translated into Bengali by AA and published in 00.

134. “The Politics of Dr Singh”, The Sunday Statesman, Editorial Page, May 21.

135. “Corporate Governance & the Principal-Agent Problem”, lecture at a conference on corporate governance, Kolkata May 31.  Published here 2008.

136. “Pakistan’s Allies Parts 1-2″, The Sunday Statesman, Editorial Page, Jun 4-5.

137. “Law, Justice and J&K Parts 1-2″, The Sunday Statesman, Editorial Page, Jul 2, The Statesman Editorial Page Jul 3.

138. “The Greatest Pashtun (Khan Abdul Ghaffar Khan)”, The Sunday Statesman, Editorial Page, Jul 16.

139. “Understanding Pakistan Parts 1-2”, The Sunday Statesman, Editorial Page, Jul 30, The Statesman Editorial Page Jul 31.

140.  “Indian Money and Credit”, The Sunday Statesman, Editorial Page, Aug 6.

141.  “India’s Moon Mission”, The Sunday Statesman, Editorial Page,  Aug 13.

142. “Jaswant’s Journeyings: A Review Article”, The Sunday Statesman Magazine, Aug 27.

143. “Our Energy Interests, Parts 1-2”, The Sunday Statesman, Editorial Page, Aug 27, The Statesman Editorial Page Aug 28.

144. “Is Balochistan Doomed?”, The Sunday Statesman, Editorial Page, Sep 3 2006.

145. “Racism New and Old”, The Statesman, Editorial Page, Sep 8 2006

146. “Political Economy of India’s Energy Policy”, address to KAF-TERI conference, Goa Oct 7, published in 146a.

147. “New Foreign Policy? Seven phases of Indian foreign policy may be identifiable since Nehru”, Parts 1-2, The Sunday Statesman, Oct 8, The Statesman Oct 9.

148. “Justice & Afzal:  There is a difference between law and equity (or natural justice). The power of pardon is an equitable power. Commuting a death-sentence is a partial pardon”, The Sunday Statesman Editorial Page Oct 14

149. “Non-existent liberals (On a Liberal Party for India)”, The Sunday Statesman Editorial Page Oct 22.

150. “History of Jammu & Kashmir Parts 1-2”,  The Sunday Statesman, Oct 29, The Statesman Oct 30, Editorial Page.

151. “American Democracy: Does America need a Prime Minister and a longer-lived Legislature?”, The Sunday Statesman Nov 5.

152. “Milton Friedman A Man of Reason 1912-2006”, The Statesman Perspective Page,  Nov 22.

153. “Postscript to Milton Friedman Mahalanobis’s Plan  (The Mahalanobis-Nehru “Second Plan”) The Statesman Front Page Nov 22.

154.  “Mob Violence and Psychology”, Dec 10,  The Statesman, Editorial Page.

155. “What To Tell Musharraf: Peace Is Impossible Without Non-Aggressive Pakistani Intentions”, The Statesman Editorial Page Dec 15.

156. “Land, Liberty and Value: Government must act in good faith treating all citizens equally – not favouring organised business lobbies and organised labour over an unorganised peasantry”,  The Sunday Statesman Editorial Page Dec 31.

2007

157. “Hypocrisy of the CPI-M: Political Collapse In Bengal: A Mid-Term Election/Referendum Is Necessary”, The Statesman, Editorial Page, Jan 9.

158. “On Land-Grabbing: Dr Singh’s India, Buddhadeb’s Bengal, Modi’s Gujarat have notorious US, Soviet and Chinese examples to follow ~ distracting from the country’s real economic problems,” The Sunday Statesman, Editorial Page Jan 14.

159. “India’s Macroeconomics:  Real growth has steadily occurred because India has shared the world’s technological progress. But bad fiscal, monetary policies over decades have led to monetary weakness and capital flight” The Statesman Editorial Page Jan 20.

160. “Fiscal Instability: Interest payments quickly suck dry every year’s Budget. And rolling over old public debt means that Government Borrowing in fact much exceeds the Fiscal Deficit”, The Sunday Statesman, Editorial Page, Feb 4.

161. “Our trade and payments Parts 1-2”  (“India in World Trade and Payments”),The Sunday Statesman, Feb 11 2007, The Statesman, Feb 12 2007.

162. “Our Policy Process: Self-Styled “Planners” Have Controlled India’s Paper Money For Decades,” The Statesman, Editorial Page, Feb 20.

163. “Bengal’s Finances”, The Sunday Statesman Editorial Page, Feb 25.

164. “Fallacious Finance: Congress, BJP, CPI-M may be leading India to Hyperinflation” The Statesman Editorial Page Mar 5.

165. “Uttar Pradesh Polity and Finance: A Responsible New Govt May Want To Declare A Financial Emergency” The Statesman Editorial Page, Mar 24

166. “A scam in the making” in The Sunday Statesman Front Page Apr 1 2007, published here in full as “Swindling India”.

167. “Maharashtra’s Money: Those Who Are Part Of The Problem Are Unlikely To Be A Part Of Its Solution”, The Statesman Editorial Page Apr 24.

146a. “Political Economy of Energy Policy” in India and Energy Security edited by Anant Sudarshan and Ligia Noronha, Konrad Adenauer Stiftung, New Delhi 2007.

168.  “Presidential Qualities: Simplicity, Genuine Achievement Are Desirable; Political Ambition Is Not”, The Statesman, Editorial Page, May 8.

169. “We & Our Neighbours: Pakistanis And Bangladeshis Would Do Well To Learn From Sheikh Abdullah”, The Statesman, Editorial Page May 15.

170. “On Indian Nationhood: From Tamils To Kashmiris And Assamese And Mizos To Sikhs And Goans”, The Statesman, Editorial Page, May 25.

171. A Current Example of the Working of the Unconscious Mind, May 26.

172. Where I would have gone if I was Osama Bin Laden, May 31.

173. “US election ’08:America’s Presidential Campaign Seems Destined To Be Focussed On Iraq”,  The Statesman, Editorial Page, June 1.

174. “Home Team Advantage: On US-Iran talks and Sunni-Shia subtleties: Tehran must transcend its revolution and endorse the principle that the House of Islam has many mansions”,  The Sunday Statesman Editorial Page, June 3

175. “Unhealthy Delhi: When will normal political philosophy replace personality cults?”,  The Statesman, Editorial Page, June 11.

176. “American Turmoil: A Vice-Presidential Coup – And Now a Grassroots Counterrevolution?”,  The Statesman, Editorial Page, June 18

177.  “Political Paralysis: India has yet to develop normal conservative, liberal and socialist parties. The Nice-Housing-Effect and a little game-theory may explain the current stagnation”,  The Sunday Statesman, Editorial Page, June 24.

177. “Has America Lost? War Doctrines Of Kutusov vs Clausewitz May Help Explain Iraq War”,  The Statesman, Editorial Page, July 3.

178. “Lal Masjid ≠ Golden Temple: Wide differences are revealed between contemporary Pakistan and India by these two superficially similar military assaults on armed religious civilians”, The Sunday Statesman, Editorial Page July 15

179 “Political Stonewalling: Only Transparency Can Improve Institutions”, The Statesman, Editorial Page July 20.

180. “Gold standard etc: Fixed versus flexible exchange rates”, July 21.

181. “US Pakistan-India Policy: Delhi & Islamabad Still Look West In Defining Their Relationship”, The Statesman, Editorial Page, July 27.

182. “Works of DH Lawrence” July 30

183. “An Open Letter to Professor Amartya Sen about Singur etc”, The Statesman, Editorial Page,  July 31.

184.  “Martin Buber on Palestine and Israel (with Postscript)”, Aug 4.

185. “Auguste Rodin on Nature, Art, Beauty, Women and Love”,  Aug 7.

186. “Saving Pakistan: A Physicist/Political Philosopher May Represent Iqbal’s “Spirit of Modern Times”, The Statesman, Editorial Page, Aug 13.

187. Letter to Forbes.com  16 Aug.

188. “Need for Clarity: A poorly drafted treaty driven by business motives is a recipe for international misunderstanding”, The Sunday Statesman, Editorial Page, Aug 19.

189. “No Marxist MBAs? An amicus curiae brief for the Hon’ble High Court”,  The Statesman, FrontPage, Aug 29.

190. On Lawrence, Sep 4.

191. Dalai Lama’s Return: In the tradition of Gandhi, King, Mandela, Sep 11.

192. Of JC Bose, Patrick Geddes & the Leaf-World, Sep 12.

193. “Against Quackery: Manmohan and Sonia have violated Rajiv Gandhi’s intended reforms; the Communists have been appeased or bought; the BJP is incompetent  Parts 1-2”, in The Sunday Statesman and The Statesman, Editorial Pages of Sep 23-24.

194. Karl Georg Zinn’s 1994 Review of Philosophy of Economics, Sep 26.

195. DH Lawrence’s Phoenix, Oct 3.

93b. “Rajiv Gandhi and the Origins of India’s 1991 Economic Reform”, Statesman Festival Volume.

196. “Iran, America, Iraq: Bush’s post-Saddam Saddamism — one flip-flop too many?”, The Statesman, Editorial Page, Oct 16.

197. “Understanding China: The World Needs to Ask China to Find Her True Higher Self”,  The Statesman, Editorial Page, Oct 22.

198. “India-USA interests: Elements of a serious Indian foreign policy”,  The Statesman, Editorial Page, Oct 30.

199. “China’s India Aggression : German Historians Discover Logic Behind Communist Military Strategy”,  The Statesman, Editorial Page Special Article, Nov 5.

200. Sonia’s Lying Courtier (with Postscript), Nov 25.

201. “Surrender or Fight? War is not a cricket match or Bollywood movie. Can India fight China if it must?” The Statesman, Dec 4, Editorial Page.

202. Hutton and Desai: United in Error Dec 14

203. “China’s Commonwealth: Freedom is the Road to Resolving Taiwan, Tibet, Sinkiang”,  The Statesman, Dec 17.

2008

204. “Nixon & Mao vs India: How American foreign policy did a U-turn about Communist China’s India aggression. The Government of India should publish its official history of the 1962 war.”  The Sunday Statesman, Jan 6, The Statesman Jan 7  Editorial Page.

205. “Lessons from the 1962 War:  Beginnings of a solution to the long-standing border problem: there are distinct Tibetan, Chinese and Indian points of view that need to be mutually comprehended”, The Sunday Statesman, January 13 2008.

206. “Our Dismal Politics: Will Independent India Survive Until 2047?”, The Statesman Editorial Page, Feb 1.

207. Median Voter Model of India’s Electorate Feb 7.

208. “Anarchy in Bengal: Intra-Left bandh marks the final unravelling of “Brand Buddha””, The Sunday Statesman, Editorial Page, Feb 10.

209. Fifty years since my third birthday: on life and death.

210. “Pakistan’s Kashmir obsession: Sheikh Abdullah Relied In Politics On The French Constitution, Not Islam”, The Statesman, Editorial Page, Feb 16.

211.  A Note on the Indian Policy Process  Feb 21.

212. “Growth & Government Delusion: Progress Comes From Learning, Enterprise, Exchange, Not The Parasitic State”, The Statesman, Editorial Page, Feb 22.

213.  “How to Budget: Thrift, Not Theft, Needs to Guide Our Public Finances”, The Statesman, Editorial Page, Feb 26.

214. “India’s Budget Process (in Theory)”, The Statesman, Front Page Feb 29.

215.  “Irresponsible Governance: Congress, BJP, Communists, BSP, Sena Etc Reveal Equally Bad Traits”, The Statesman, Editorial Page, March 4.

216. “American Politics: Contest Between Obama And Clinton Affects The World”, The Statesman, Editorial Page, March 11.

217. “China’s India Example: Tibet, Xinjiang May Not Be Assimilated Like Inner Mongolia And Manchuria”, The Statesman, Editorial Page, March 25.

218. “Taxation of India’s Professional Cricket: A Proposal”, The Statesman, Editorial Page, April 1.

219. “Two cheers for Pakistan!”,  The Statesman, Editorial Page, April 7.

220. “Indian Inflation: Upside Down Economics From The New Delhi Establishment Parts 1-2”, The Statesman, Editorial Page, April 15-16.

221. “Assessing Manmohan: The Doctor of Deficit Finance should realise the currency is at stake”, The Statesman, Editorial Page Apr 25.

222. John Wisdom, Renford Bambrough: Main Philosophical Works, May 8.

223.  “All India wept”: On the death of Rajiv Gandhi,  May 21.

224. “China’s force and diplomacy: The need for realism in India” The Statesman, Editorial Page May 31.

226. Serendipity and the China-Tibet-India border problem  June 6

227. “Leadership vacuum: Time & Tide Wait For No One In Politics: India Trails Pakistan & Nepal!”, The Statesman Editorial Page June 7.

228. My meeting Jawaharlal Nehru Oct13 1962

229.  Manindranath Roy 1891-1958

230. Surendranath Roy 1860-1929

231.  The Roys of Behala 1928.

232. Sarat Chandra visits Surendranath Roy 1927

233. Nuksaan-Faida Analysis = Cost-Benefit Analysis in Hindi/Urdu Jun 30

234.  One of many reasons John R Hicks was a great economist July 3

236.  My father, Indian diplomat, in the Shah’s Tehran 1954-57  July 8

237 Distribution of Govt of India Expenditure (Net of Operational Income) 1995 July 27

238. Growth of Real Income, Money & Prices in India 1869-2008, July 28.

239. Communism from Social Democracy? But not in India or China!  July 29

240. Death of Solzhenitsyn, Aug. 3

240a. Tolstoy on Science and Art, Aug 4.

241. “Reddy`s reckoning: Where should India’s real interest rate be relative to the world?” Business Standard Aug 10

242. “Rangarajan Effect”, Business Standard Aug 24

243. My grandfather’s death in Ottawa 50 years ago today  Sep 3

244. My books in the Library of Congress and British Library Sep 12

245. On Jimmy Carter & the “India-US Nuclear Deal”, Sep 12

246. My father after presenting his credentials to President Kekkonen of Finland Sep 14 1973.

247. “October 1929?  Not!”, Business Standard, Sep 18.

248. “MK Gandhi, SN Roy, MA Jinnah in March 1919: Primary education legislation in a time of protest”

249. 122 sensible American economists Sept 26

250. Govt of India: Please call in the BBC and ask them a question Sep 27

251. “Monetary Integrity and the Rupee:  Three British Raj relics have dominated our macroeconomic policy-making” Business Standard Sep 28.

252a.  Rabindranath’s daughter writes to her friend my grandmother Oct 5

252b.  A Literary Find: Modern Poetry in Bengal, Oct 6.

253. Sarat writes to Manindranath 1931,  Oct 12

254. Origins of India’s Constitutional Politics 1913

255. Indira Gandhi in Paris, 1971

256. How the Liabilities/Assets Ratio of Indian Banks Changed from 84% in 1970 to 108% in 1998, October 20

257a. My Subjective Probabilities on India’s Moon Mission Oct 21

258. Complete History of Mankind’s Moon Missions: An Indian Citizen’s Letter to ISRO’s Chairman, Oct 22.

259. Would not a few million new immigrants solve America’s mortgage crisis? Oct 26

260. “America’s divided economists”, Business Standard Oct 26

261. One tiny prediction about the Obama Administration, Nov 5

262. Rai Bahadur Umbika Churn Rai, 1827-1902,  Nov 7 2008

263. Jawaharlal Nehru invites my father to the Mountbatten Farewell  Nov 7 2008

70a. “Become a US Supreme Court Justice! (Explorations in the Rule of Law in America) Preface” Nov 9

70b. “Become a US Supreme Court Justice! (Explorations in the Rule of Law in America) Password protected.” Nov 9.

257b. Neglecting technological progress was the basis of my pessimism about Chandrayaan,  Nov 9.

264. Of a new New Delhi myth and the success of the University of Hawaii 1986-1992 Pakistan project Nov 15

265. Pre-Partition Indian Secularism Case-Study: Fuzlul Huq and Manindranath Roy Nov 16

266. Do President-elect Obama’s Pakistan specialists suppose Maulana Azad, Dr Zakir Hussain, Sheikh Abdullah were Pakistanis (or that Sheikh Mujib wanted to remain one)?  Nov 18

267. Jews have never been killed in India for being Jews until this sad day, Nov 28.

268. In international law, Pakistan has been the perpetrator, India the victim of aggression in Mumbai,  Nov 30.

269. The Indian Revolution, Dec 1.

270. Habeas Corpus: a captured terrorist mass-murderer tells a magistrate he has not been mistreated by Mumbai’s police Dec 3

271. India’s Muslim Voices (Or, Let us be clear the Pakistan-India or Kashmir conflicts have not been Muslim-Hindu conflicts so much as intra-Muslim conflicts about Muslim identity and self-knowledge on the Indian subcontinent), Dec 4

272. “Anger Management” needed? An Oxford DPhil recommends Pakistan launch a nuclear first strike against India within minutes of war, Dec 5.

273. A Quick Comparison Between the September 11 2001 NYC-Washington attacks and the November 26-28 2008 Mumbai Massacres (An Application of the Case-by-Case Philosophical Technique of Wittgenstein, Wisdom and Bambrough), Dec 6

274. Dr Rice finally gets it right (and maybe Mrs Clinton will too) Dec 7

275. Will the Government of India’s new macroeconomic policy dampen or worsen the business-cycle (if such a cycle exists at all)? No one knows! “Where ignorance is bliss, ‘Tis folly to be wise.”  Dec 7

276. Pump-priming for car-dealers: Keynes groans in his grave (If evidence was needed of the intellectual dishonesty of New Delhi’s new macroeconomic policy, here it is) Dec 9.

277. Congratulations to Mumbai’s Police: capturing a terrorist, affording him his Habeas Corpus rights, getting him to confess within the Rule of Law, sets a new world standard  Dec 10

278. Two cheers — wait, let’s make that one cheer — for America’s Justice Department, Dec 10

279. Will Pakistan accept the bodies of nine dead terrorists who came from Pakistan to Mumbai? If so, let there be a hand-over at the Wagah border, Dec 11.

280. Kasab was a stupid, ignorant, misguided youth, manufactured by Pakistan’s terrorist masterminds into becoming a mass-murdering robot: Mahatma Gandhi’s India should punish him, get him to repent if he wishes, then perhaps rehabilitate him as a potent weapon against Pakistani terrorism Dec 12.

281. Pakistan’s New Delhi Embassy should ask for “Consular Access” to nine dead terrorists in a Mumbai morgue before asking to meet Kasab, Dec 13

282. An Indian Reply to President Zardari: Rewarding Pakistan for bad behaviour leads to schizophrenic relationships Dec 19

283. Is my prediction about Caroline Kennedy becoming US Ambassador to Britain going to be correct?  Dec 27

284. Chandrayaan adds a little good cheer! Well done, ISRO!, Dec 28

285. How sad that “Slumdog millionaire” is SO disappointing! Dec 31

289. (with Claude Arpi) “Transparency & history: India’s archives must be opened to world standards” Business Standard New Delhi Dec 31, 2008, published here Jan 1 .

2009

290. A basis of India-Pakistan cooperation on the Mumbai massacres: the ten Pakistani terrorists started off as pirates and the Al-Huseini is a pirate ship Jan 1.

291. India’s “pork-barrel politics” needs a nice (vegetarian) Hindi name! “Teli/oily politics” perhaps? (And are we next going to see a Bill of Rights for Lobbyists?) Jan 3

292. My (armchair) experience of the 1999 Kargil war (Or, “Actionable Intelligence” in the Internet age: How the Kargil effort got a little help from a desktop)  Jan 5

293. How Jammu & Kashmir’s Chief Minister Omar Abdullah can become a worthy winner of the Nobel Peace Prize: An Open Letter,  Jan 7

294. Could the Satyam/PwC fraud be the visible part of an iceberg? Where are India’s “Generally Accepted Accounting Principles”? Isn’t governance rather poor all over corporate India? Bad public finance may be a root cause Jan 8

295. Satyam does not exist: it is bankrupt, broke, kaput. Which part of this does the new “management team” not get? The assets belong to Satyam’s creditors. Jan 8

296. Jews are massacred in Mumbai and now Jews commit a massacre in Gaza!  Jan 9

297. And now for the Great Satyam Whitewash/Cover-Up/Public Subsidy! The wrong Minister appoints the wrong new Board who, probably, will choose the wrong policy Jan 12

298. Letter to Wei Jingsheng  Jan 14

299. Memo to the Hon’ble Attorneys General of Pakistan & India: How to jointly prosecute the Mumbai massacre perpetrators most expeditiously Jan 16

300. Satyam and IT-firms in general may be good candidates to become “Labour-Managed” firms Jan 18

301. “Yes we might be able to do that. Perhaps we ought to. But again, perhaps we ought not to, let me think about it…. Most important is Cromwell’s advice: Think it possible we may be mistaken!” Jan 20.

302. RAND’s study of the Mumbai attacks Jan 25

303. Didn’t Dr Obama (the new American President’s late father) once publish an article in Harvard’s Quarterly Journal of Economics? (Or did he?) Jan 25.

304. “A Dialogue in Macroeconomics” 1989 etc: sundry thoughts on US economic policy discourse Jan 30

305. American Voices: A Brief Popular History of the United States in 20 You-Tube Music Videos Feb 5

306. Jaladhar Sen writes to Manindranath at Surendranath’s death, Feb 23

307. Pakistani expansionism: India and the world need to beware of “Non-Resident Pakistanis” ruled by Rahmat Ali’s ghost, Feb 9

308. My American years Part One 1980-90: battles for academic integrity & freedom Feb 11.

309. Thanks and well done Minister Rehman Malik and the Govt of Pakistan Feb 12

310. Can President Obama resist the financial zombies (let alone slay them)? His economists need to consult Dr Anna J Schwartz Feb 14

311. A Brief History of Gilgit, Feb 18

312. Memo to UCLA Geographers: Commonsense suggests Mr Bin Laden is far away from the subcontinent Feb 20

313. The BBC gets its history and geography deliberately wrong again Feb 21

314. Bengal Legislative Council 1921, Feb 28

315. Carmichael visits Surendranath, 1916, Mar 1

316. Memo to GoI CLB: India discovered the Zero, and 51% of Zero is still Zero Mar 10

317. An Academic Database of Doctoral & Other Postgraduate Research Done at UK Universities on India, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh and Other Asian Countries Over 100 Years, Mar 13

318. Pakistan’s progress, Mar 18

319. Risk-aversion explains resistance to free trade, Mar 19

320. India’s incredibly volatile inflation rate!  Mar 20

321. Is “Vicky, Cristina, Barcelona” referring to an emasculation of (elite) American society?,  Mar 21

322. Just how much intellectual fraud can Delhi produce? Mar 26

323. India is not a monarchy! We urgently need to universalize the French concept of “citoyen”!  Mar 28

324. Could this be the real state of some of our higher education institutions? Mar 29

325. Progress! The BBC retracts its prevarication! Mar 30

326. Aldous Huxley’s Essay “DH Lawrence” Mar 31

327. Waffle not institutional reform is what (I predict) the “G-20 summit” will produce, April 1

328. Did a full cricket team of Indian bureaucrats follow our PM into 10 Downing Street? Count for yourself! April 3

329. Will someone please teach the BJP’s gerontocracy some Economics 101 on an emergency basis?  April 5

330. The BBC needs to determine exactly where it thinks Pakistan is!, April 5

331. Alfred Lyall on Christians, Muslims, India, China, Etc, 1908, April 6

332. An eminent economist of India passes away April 9

333. Democracy Database for the Largest Electorate Ever Seen in World History, April 12

334. Memo to the Election Commission of India April 14 2009, 9 AM, April 14

335. Caveat emptor! Satyam is taken over, April 14

336. India’s 2009 General Elections: Candidates, Parties, Symbols for Polls on 16-30 April Phases 1,2,3, April 15

337. On the general theory of expertise in democracy: reflections on what emerges from the American “torture memos” today, April 18

338. India’s 2009 General Elections: 467 constituencies (out of 543) for which candidates have been announced as of 1700hrs April 21, April 21

339. Apropos Philosophy of Economics, Comments of Sidney Hook, KJ Arrow, Milton Friedman, TW Schultz, SS Alexander, Max Black, Renford Bambrough, John Gray et al., April 22.

340. India’s 2009 General Elections: Names of all 543 Constituencies of the 15th Lok Sabha, April 22.

341. India’s 2009 General Elections: How 4125 State Assembly Constituencies comprise the 543 new Lok Sabha Constituencies, April 23.

342. Why has America’s “torture debate” yet to mention the obvious? Viz., sadism and racism, April 24

343. India’s 2009 General Elections: the advice of the late “George Eliot” (Mary Ann Evans, 1819-1880) to India’s voting public, April 24.

344. India’s 2009 General Elections: Delimitation and the Different Lists of 543 Lok Sabha Constituencies in 2009 and 2004, April 25

345. Is “Slumdog Millionaire” the single worst Best Picture ever?

346. India’s 2009 General Elections: Result of Delimitation — Old (2004) and New (2009) Lok Sabha and Assembly Constituencies, April 26

347. India’s 2009 General Elections: 7019 Candidates in 485 (out of 543) Constituencies announced as of April 26 noon April 26

348. What is Christine Fair referring to? Would the MEA kindly seek to address what she has claimed asap? April 27

349. Politics can be so entertaining :) Manmohan versus Sonia on the poor old CPI(M)!, April 28

350. A Dozen Grown-Up Questions for Sonia Gandhi, Manmohan Singh, LK Advani, Sharad Pawar, Km Mayawati and Anyone Else Dreaming of Becoming/Deciding India’s PM After the 2009 General Elections, April 28

351. India’s 2009 General Elections: How drastically will the vote-share of political parties change from 2004? May 2

352. India’s 2009 General Elections: And now finally, all 8,070 Candidates across all 543 Lok Sabha Constituencies, May 5

353. India’s 2009 General Elections: The Mapping of Votes into Assembly Segments Won into Parliamentary Seats Won in the 2004 Election, May 7

354. Will Messrs Advani, Rajnath Singh & Modi ride into the sunset if the BJP comes to be trounced? (Corrected), May 10

355. India’s 2009 General Elections: 543 Matrices to Help Ordinary Citizens Audit the Election Commission’s Vote-Tallies  May 12

356. Well done Sonia-Rahul! Two hours before polls close today, I am willing to predict a big victory for you (but, please, try to get your economics right, and also, you must get Dr Singh a Lok Sabha seat if he is to be PM) May 13

357. Buddhadeb Bhattacharjee must dissolve the West Bengal Assembly if he is an honest democrat: Please try to follow Gerard Schröder’s example even slightly! May 16

358. India’s 2009 General Elections: Provisional Results from the EC as of 1400 hours Indian Standard Time May 16

359. Memo to the Hon’ble President of India: It is Sonia Gandhi, not Manmohan Singh, who should be invited to our equivalent of the “Kissing Hands” Ceremony May 16

360. Time for heads to roll in the BJP/RSS and CPI(M)!, May 17.

361. Inviting a new Prime Minister of India to form a Government: Procedure Right and Wrong  May 18

362. Starting with Procedural Error: Why has the “Cabinet” of the 14th Lok Sabha been meeting today AFTER the results of the Elections to the 15th Lok Sabha have been declared?!  May 18

363. Why has the Sonia Congress done something that the Congress under Nehru-Indira-Rajiv would not have done, namely, exaggerate the power of the Rajya Sabha and diminish the power of the Lok Sabha? May 21

364. Shouldn’t Dr Singh’s Cabinet begin with a small apology to the President of India for discourtesy? May we have reviews and reforms of protocols and practices to be followed at Rashtrapati Bhavan and elsewhere?  May 23

365. Parliament’s sovereignty has been diminished by the Executive: A record for future generations to know May 25

366. How tightly will organised Big Business be able to control economic policies this time? May 26

367. Why does India not have a Parliament ten days after the 15th Lok Sabha was elected? Nehru and Rajiv would both have been appalled May 27

368. Eleven days and counting after the 15th Lok Sabha was elected and still no Parliament of India! (But we do have 79 Ministers — might that be a world record?) May 28

369. Note to Posterity: 79 Ministers in office but no 15th Lok Sabha until June 1 2009! May 29

370. Silver Jubilee of Pricing, Planning & Politics: A Study of Economic Distortions in India May 29

371. How to Design a Better Cabinet for the Government of India May 29

372. Parliament is supposed to control the Government, not be bullied or intimidated by it: Will Rahul Gandhi be able to lead the Backbenches in the 15th Lok Sabha? June 1

373. Mistaken Macroeconomics: An Open Letter to Prime Minister Dr Manmohan Singh, June 12

374. Why did Manmohan Singh and LK Advani apologise to one another? Is Indian politics essentially collusive, not competitive, aiming only to preserve and promote the post-1947 Dilli Raj at the expense of the whole of India? We seem to have no Churchillian repartee (except perhaps from Bihar occasionally) June 18

375. Are Iran’s Revolutionaries now Reactionaries? George Orwell would have understood. A fresh poll may be the only answer Are Iran’s Revolutionaries now Reactionaries? George Orwell would have understood. A fresh poll may be the only answer  June 22

376. My March 25 1991 memo to Rajiv (which never reached him) is something the present Government seems to have followed: all for the best of course! July 12

377. Disquietude about France’s behaviour towards India on July 14 2009 July 14

378. Does the Govt. of India assume “foreign investors and analysts” are a key constituency for Indian economic policy-making? If so, why so? Have Govt. economists “learnt nothing, forgotten everything”? Some Bastille Day thoughts July 14

379. Letter to the GoI’s seniormost technical economist, May 21.July 19

380. Excuse me but young Kasab in fact confessed many months ago, immediately after he was captured – he deserves 20 or 30 years in an Indian prison, and a chance to become a model prisoner who will stand against the very terrorists who sent him on his vile mission  July 20

381. Finally, three months late, the GoI responds to American and Pakistani allegations about Balochistan July 24

382.  Thoughts, words, deeds: My work 1973-2010

M1. Map of Asia c. 1900

M2. Map of Chinese Empire c. 1900

M3. Map of Sinkiang, Tibet and Neighbours 1944

M4. China’s Secretly Built 1957 Road Through India’s Aksai Chin

M5. Map of Kashmir to Sinkiang 1944

M6. Map of India-Tibet-China-Mongolia 1959

M7. Map of India, Afghanistan, Russia, China, 1897

M8. Map of Xinjiang/Sinkiang/E Turkestan

M9. Map of Bombay/Mumbai 1909

M10-M13. Himalayan Expedition, West Sikkim 1970 – 1,2,3,4

Excuse me but young Kasab in fact confessed many months ago, immediately after he was captured – he deserves 20 or 30 years in an Indian prison, and a chance to become a model prisoner who will stand against the very terrorists who sent him on his vile mission

I have almost stopped being amazed by the near-imbecility that our English-language TV and print media seem so often to be capable of. Oui mes enfants, Kasab did confess to mass-murder and other crimes in open court today but please do not feign such surprise for commercial reasons — if you had done your homework diligently you would have known that Kasab had confessed quite as fully as he did today many months ago, in fact as soon as he was physically able to do so after being treated in hospital following his capture by Mumbai police. (The BBC proved again it has no institutional memory left by failing to remember these facts too and instead relying on the Indian TV media today. Or, alternatively, the BBC’s dual national Pakistani staffers were quick to get the BBC to veer towards the official GoP line — and the GoP certainly has not wanted to remember the fact Kasab was being truthful from day one of his capture.)

Why was Kasab’s court-appointed lawyer silent and bewildered today? Because Kasab (with his Class 4 schooling) had somehow thought things through on his own during this existential experience and effectively sacked the lawyer peremptorily as was his right to do.  It was the lawyer who had chalked out the faulty legal strategy of starting off by pleading not-guilty instead of plea-bargaining on the basis of Kasab’s initial confessions being the primary source of evidence for the Government of India to be able to indict Pakistan in the Mumbai massacres.

(To the lawyer’s credit though, at least he had taken the case when no one else would and furthermore, he had clearly acted in good faith.)

Had Kasab been killed along with his 9 compatriot fellow-terrorists (and he was the youngest and least experienced which is probably why he was teamed with Ishmael who was the team leader), India would have had almost no hard evidence in creating the dossier that we were able to confront Pakistan with.

Kasab’s correct legal strategy was to accept his guilt and plead for mercy on the basis of having turned State’s evidence, indeed the Government of India’s star witness for the prosecution. There is absolutely no jurisprudential benefit in seeing a tiny pawn like him– the very tiniest of all pawns –hang for his evil deeds. That is why I said back in November-December that if I was the judge sentencing him, I would send him to jail for 20-30 years, for his 20 or 30 victims at CST station, and get him to become a model prisoner who could become a prime spokesman against the terrorists who had sent him.

The right way for India and Pakistan to cooperate against the perpetrators of the Mumbai massacres was via a prompt application of common maritime law and the Law of the Sea Treaty’s provisions against piracy, murder etc on the high seas, followed by some well-publicised hangings at sea, on a Pakistan Navy vessel, of the masterminds. Here is a complete list of what I said here between November 28 2008 and March 18 2009 on all this:

1. November 28, 2008 Jews have never been killed in India for being Jews until this sad day

Jews have never been killed in India for being Jews until today.   For two thousand years, in fact perhaps as long as there have ever been Jews in the world, there had been Jews living peacefully in India.  I used to say that proudly to my Jewish friends, adding that the Indian Army had even had a Jewish general.  Today, November 28 2008, or perhaps yesterday November 27 2008, that changed.  Five Hasidic Jews who had been peaceful residents of Nariman House in Mumbai, came to be murdered by terrorists, merely for being Jews, or died in explosions or in the cross-fire between the terrorists and Indian security forces.   The Israeli Government had offered India their well-known technical expertise in trying to save their fellow-nationals.  I believe the Government of India made a tragic mistake by not accepting it.  Yes certainly our national prestige would have taken the slightest of blows if Israeli commandos had helped to release Israeli hostages in India.  But our national prestige has taken a much vaster and more permanent blow instead, now that we can no longer say that Jews have never in history been killed for being Jews in India.  I am especially sad on this already very sad day to see that proud record destroyed.

2. November 30, 2008 In international law, Pakistan has been the perpetrator, India the victim of aggression in Mumbai

In international law, the attacks on Mumbai would probably reveal Pakistan to have been  the aggressor state, India the victim of aggression.   It is standard law that a “master” is responsible for the misdeeds of his “servant”. E.g., “Where the relation of master and servant clearly exists, the employer is responsible for injury occasioned by the negligent conduct of the servant in carrying out his orders.  And this rule is so extensive as to make the master liable for the careless, reckless and wanton conduct of his servant, provided it be within the scope of his employment”.   President Zardari and Prime Minister Gillani may declare truthfully they had no prior knowledge of the attacks on Mumbai, that these were not in any way authorized by them or their Government.  But it seems likely  on the basis of current evidence that  the young terrorists who attacked Mumbai were still in a “master-servant” relationship with elements of the Pakistani state and had been financed, trained, motivated and supplied by  resources arising, directly or indirectly, from the Pakistani exchequer.   Public moneys in Pakistan came to be used or misused to pay for aggression against India –  in a quite similar pattern to the October 1947 attack on Kashmir, Ayub Khan’s 1965 “Operation Grand Slam”, and Pervez Musharraf’s 1999 attack on Kargil.  And to think that these youth who were made into  becoming terroristic mass murderers were toddlers  when the USSR withdrew from Afghanistan, in primary school when the 1993 WTC bombing happened and adolescents at the time of the 9/11 attacks.

3. December 3, 2008   Habeas Corpus: a captured terrorist mass-murderer tells a magistrate he is not being mistreated by Indian police

A youth who had been a petty thief in Multan, was induced by Pakistan’s terrorist masterminds to  train to  become a mass murderer with an assault rifle and grenades in the Mumbai massacres last week.  He was shot and arrested by India’s police and is now in custody.  He has already been produced before a magistrate who asked him if he was being mistreated, to which he said he was not. This redounds to India’s credit in view of the vast (and yes, probably racist) mistreatment over years of those held e.g. at Guantanamo Bay.  (The argument that the US Constitution and the laws associated with habeas corpus did not apply to the US Government because Guantanamo Bay was not American territory, was always specious.)

4. December 4, 2008 India’s Muslim Voices (Or, Let us be clear the Pakistan-India or Kashmir conflicts have not been Muslim-Hindu conflicts so much as intra-Muslim conflicts about Muslim identity and self-knowledge on the Indian subcontinent) bySubroto Roy

Ill-informed Western observers, especially at purported “think tanks” and news-portals, frequently proclaim the Pakistan-India confrontation and Jammu & Kashmir conflict to represent some kind of savage irreconcilable division between Islamic and Hindu cultures. For example, the BBC, among its many prevarications on the matter (like lopping off J&K entirely from its recently broadcasted maps of India, perhaps under influence of its Pakistani staffers), frequently speaks of “Hindu-majority India” and “Indian-administered Kashmir” being confronted by Muslim Pakistan. And two days ago from California’s Bay Area arose into the Internet Cloud the following profundity: “What we’re dealing with now, in the Pakistani-Indian rivalry, is a true war of civilizations, pitting Muslims against Hindus…. the unfathomable depths of the Muslim-Hindu divide….”. Even President-elect Obama’s top Pakistan-specialists have fallen for the line of Washington’s extremely strong Pakistan lobby: “Pakistan… sees itself as the political home for the subcontinent’s Muslim population and believes India’s continued control over the Muslim-majority Kashmir valley and denial of a plebiscite for its inhabitants represent a lingering desire on India’s part to undo the legacy of partition, which divided the British Indian Empire into India and Pakistan.”

The truth on record is completely different and really rather simple: for more than a century and a half, Muslims qua Muslims on the Indian subcontinent have struggled with the question of their most appropriate cultural and political identity.  The starkest contrast may be found in their trying to come to terms with their partly Arabic and partly Hindu or Indian parentage (the words Hindu, Sindhu, Indus, Indian, Sindhi, Hindi etc all clearly have the same Hellenistic root).  For example, there was Wali Allah (1703-1762) declaring “We are an Arab people whose fathers have fallen in exile in the country of Hindustan, and Arabic genealogy and Arabic language are our pride”. But here has been Mohammad Iqbal (1877-1938), in his 1930 Allahabad speech to the Muslim League, conceiving today’s Pakistan as a wish to become free of precisely that Arab influence: “I would like to see the Punjab, NWFP, Sind and Baluchistan amalgamated into a single state… The life of Islam as a cultural force in this living country very largely depends on its centralisation in a specified territory… For India it means security and peace resulting from an internal balance of power, for Islam an opportunity to rid itself of the stamp that Arabian Imperialism was forced to give it, to mobilise its law, its education, its culture, and to bring them into closer contact with its own original spirit and the spirit of modern times.” In an article “Saving Pakistan” published last year in The Statesman and available elsewhere here, it was suggested Iqbal’s “spirit of modern times” may be represented most prominently today by the physicist/political philosopher Pervez Hoodbhoy: in a December 2006 speech Hoodbhoy suggested a new alternative to MA Jinnah’s “Faith, Unity, Discipline” slogan: “First, I wish for minds that can deal with the complex nature of truth…. My second wish is for many more Pakistanis who accept diversity as a virtue… My third, and last, wish is that Pakistanis learn to value and nurture creativity.” He has spoken too of bringing “economic justice to Pakistan”, of the “fight to give Pakistan’s women the freedom which is their birthright”, and of people to “wake up” and engage politically. But Pakistan’s Iqbalian liberals like Hoodbhoy still have to square off with those of their compatriots who sent the youthful squad into Mumbai last week with assault rifles, grenades and heroic Arabic code-names, as well as orders to attack civilians with the ferocity of the original Muslims attacking caravans and settlements in ancient Arabia.

What the extremely strong Pakistan lobbies within the British and American political systems have suppressed in order to paint a picture of eternal Muslim-Hindu conflict is the voice of India’s nationalist Muslims, who historically have had no wish to have any truck with any idea of a “Pakistan” at all.  Most eminent among them was undoubtedly Jinnah’s fiercest critic: Maulana Abul Kalam Azad whose classic 1946 statement on Pakistan is available in his India Wins Freedom, the final version published only in 1988……

5.  December 6, 2008  A Quick Comparison Between the September 11 2001 NYC-Washington attacks and the November 26-28 2008 Mumbai Massacres (An Application of the Case-by-Case Philosophical  Technique of Wittgenstein, Wisdom and Bambrough) bySubroto Roy

In my book Philosophy of Economics (Routledge, 1989) and in my August 24  2004 public lecture  in England  “Science,  Religion, Art and the Necessity of Freedom”, both available elsewhere here, I described the “case-by-case” philosophical technique recommended by Ludwig Wittgenstein, John Wisdom and Renford Bambrough.  (Bambrough had also shown a common root in the work of the American philosopher Charles Sanders Peirce.)   Herewith an application of the technique to a contemporary problem that shows the “family resemblance” between two modern terrorist attacks, the September 11 2001 attack on New York and Washington and the Mumbai massacres last week.

Similarity:  In both, a gang of motivated youthful terrorists acted as a team against multiple targets; their willingness to accept  suicide while indulging in mass-murder may have, bizarrely enough, brought a sense of adventure and meaning to otherwise empty lives.

Difference: In the 9/11 attacks, Mohammad Atta seemed to have been a single predominant leader while each of the others also had complex active roles requiring decisions, like piloting and navigating hijacked jumbo-jets.  In the Mumbai massacres, the training and leadership apparently came from outside the team before and even during the operation  – almost as if the team were acting like brainwashed robots under long-distance control.

Similarity:  Both attacks required a long prior period of training and planning.

Difference: The 9/11 attacks did not require commando-training imparted by military-style trainers; the Mumbai massacres did.

Difference: In the 9/11 attacks, the actual weapons used initially were primitive, like box-cutters; in the Mumbai massacres, assault rifles and grenades were used along with sophisticated telecommunications equipment.

Difference: In 9/11, the initial targets, the hijacked aircraft, were themselves made into weapons against the ultimate targets, namely the buildings, in a way not seen before.  In the Mumbai massacres, mass-shooting of terrorized civilians was hardly something original; besides theatres of war, the Baader-Meinhof gang and the Japanese Red Army used these in the 1970s as terrorist techniques (e.g. at Rome Airport  Lod Airport; Postscript January 26 2009: I make this correction after reading and commenting on the RAND study which unfortunately  did not have the courtesy of acknowledging my December 6 2008 analysis) plus there were, more recently, the Columbine and Virginia Tech massacres.

Similarity: In both cases, Hollywood and other movie scripts could have inspired the initial ideas of techniques to be  used.

Similarity: In both cases, the weapons used were appropriate to the anticipated state of defence: nothing more than box-cutters could be expected to get by normal airport security; assault rifles etc could come in by the unguarded sea and attack soft targets in Mumbai.  (Incidentally, even this elementary example of strategic thinking  in a practical situation may be beyond the analytical capacity contained in the tons of waste paper produced at American and other modern university Economics departments under the rubric of  “game theory”.)

Similarity: In both cases, a high-level of widespread fear was induced for several days or more within a targeted nation-state by a small number of people.

Similarity: No ransom-like demands were made by the terrorists in either case.

Similarity: Had the single terrorist not been captured alive in the Mumbai massacres, there would have been little trace left by the attackers.

Difference: The 9/11 attackers knew definitely they were on suicide-missions; the Mumbai attackers may not have done and may have imagined an escape route.

6. December 10, 2008 Congratulations to Mumbai’s Police: capturing a terrorist, affording him his Habeas Corpus rights, getting him to confess within the Rule of Law, sets a new world standard

The full statement to police of the single captured terrorist perpetrator of the Mumbai massacres is now available. It tells a grim story. But Mumbai’s Police, from ordinary beat constables and junior officers to the anti-terrorism top brass, come off very well both with their heroism and their commitment to the Rule of Law.   In comparison to the disastrous failures of the Rule of Law in the United States and Britain since 9/11 in fighting terrorism, Mumbai’s Police may have set a new world standard.

The prisoner was several days ago afforded Habeas Corpus rights  and produced before a magistrate who asked him if he was being mistreated to which he replied he was not – though there might not be any Indian equivalent of America’s “Miranda”  law.

7. December 12, 2008  Kasab was a stupid, ignorant, misguided youth, manufactured by Pakistan’s terrorist masterminds into becoming a mass-murdering robot: Mahatma Gandhi’s India should punish him, get him to repent if he wishes, then perhaps rehabilitate him as a potent weapon against Pakistani terrorism

The crime of murder is that of deliberate homicide, that of mass-murder is the murder of a mass of people.  There is no doubt the lone captured Mumbai terrorist, “Kasab”, has committed mass-murder, being personally responsible for the murder of probably 20 or 30 wholly innocent people he had never met.  He killed them by machine-gun fire and grenades at CST/VT railway station on November 26 2008 before being shot and captured by police.  He is also a co-conspirator in the mass-murders carried out by his associate at the railway station and those elsewhere in Mumbai.  There is no doubt he should serve rigorous imprisonment for life in an Indian prison for his crimes.

And yet…. And yet…

If the Government of India is sensible, it needs to describe and comprehend the moral subtleties of the circumstances surrounding Kasab’s life, especially during the last year.  Here was a stupid, ignorant, rather primitive youth misguided by others first into becoming a petty robber, later into becoming a terrorist-trainee in hope of advancing his career in thievery!

Bakri-Id 2008 has just occurred – it is on Bakri-Id a year ago in 2007 that Kasab reportedly first ventured into volunteering for terrorist training as a way of learning how to use firearms!  It is almost certain he had never met a Hindu or an Indian in his life before then, that he knew absolutely nothing about the subcontinent’s history or politics, that he would be ignorant about who, say, Iqbal or Jinnah or Maulana Azad or Sheikh Abdullah or Mahatma Gandhi ever were.  Within less than a year, that same youth had been brainwashed and trained adequately enough by Pakistan’s terrorist masterminds to become a robotic mass-murderer in Mumbai’s railway station.  Now having been caught and treated humanely by his captors, he has confessed everything and even expressed a wish to write a letter to his father in Pakistan expressing remorse for his deeds.

If I was the judge trying him, I would sentence him to a minimum of twenty or thirty years rigorous imprisonment in an Indian prison.  But I would add that he should be visited in jail by a few of India’s Muslim leaders, and indeed he should be very occasionally allowed out of the prison (under police supervision) in a structured program to offer Namaz with India’s Muslims in our grandest mosques.  He should learn firsthand a little of the lives of India’s Muslims and of India’s people as a whole.  Perhaps he will become a model prisoner, perhaps he may even want to become in due course a potent weapon against the terrorist masterminds who ruined his life by sending him to murder people in India.

It bears to be remembered that in an incredible act of Christian forgiveness, the widow of the Australian missionary Graham Staines forgave the cold-blooded murderers who burnt alive her husband and her young sons as they slept in a jeep in Orissa.  The family of Rajiv Gandhi may have done the same of those who assassinated or conspired to assassinate Rajiv Gandhi.  This is the land of Mahatma Gandhi, who had woven a remarkable moral and political theory out of the Jain-Buddhist-Hindu doctrine of ahimsa as well as Christian notions from Tolstoy and Thoreau of forgiving the sinner.

Of course there cannot be forgiveness where there is no remorse.  Kasab’s behaviour thus far suggests he will be remorseful and repentant; there are many other thieves and murderers in the world who are not.

Subroto Roy

Reported statement of Mohammad Ajmal Amir ‘Kasab’, 21, to police after arrest:  “I have resided in Faridkot, Dinalpur tehsil, Ukada district, Suba Punjab state, Pakistan since my birth. I studied up to class IV in a government school. After leaving school in 2000, I went to stay with my brother in Tohit Abad mohalla, near Yadgar Minar in Lahore. I worked as a labourer at various places till 2005, visiting my native once in a while. In 2005, I had a quarrel with my father. I left home and went to Ali Hajveri Darbar in Lahore, where boys who run away from home are given shelter. The boys are sent to different places for employment.  One day a person named Shafiq came there and took me with him. He was from Zhelam and had a catering business. I started working for him for Rs120 per day. Later, my salary was increased to Rs200 per day. I worked with him till 2007. While working with Shafiq, I came in contact with one Muzzafar Lal Khan, 22. He was from Romaiya village in Alak district in Sarhad, Pakistan. Since we were not getting enough money, we decided to carry out robbery/dacoity to make big money. So we left the job.

We went to Rawalpindi, where we rented a flat. Afzal had located a house for us to loot… We required some firearms for our mission… While we were in search of firearms, we saw some LeT stalls at Raja Bazaar in Rawalpindi on the day of Bakri-id. We then realised that even if we procured firearms, we would not be able to operate them. Therefore, we decided to join LeT for weapons training.  We reached the LeT office and told a person that we wanted to join LeT. He noted down our names and address and told us to come the next day.  The next day, there was another person with him. He gave us Rs200 and some receipts. Then he gave us the address of a place called Marqas Taiyyaba, Muridke, and told us to go to there. It was an LeT training camp. We went to the place by bus. We showed the receipts at the gate of the camp. We were allowed inside… Then we were taken to the actual camp area. Initially, we were selected for a 21 days’ training regimen called Daura Sufa. From the next day, our training started.

The daily programme was as follows: 4.15 am — Wake-up call and thereafter Namaz; 8 am — Breakfast; 8.30 am to 10 am — Lecture on Hadis and Quran by Mufti Sayyed; 10 am to noon – Rest; Noon to 1 pm – Lunch break; 1 pm to 4 pm – Rest; 4 pm to 6 pm – PT; instructor: Fadulla; 6 pm to 8 pm – Namaz and other work; 8 pm to 9 pm – Dinner

After Daura Sufa, we were selected for another training programme called Daura Ama. This was also for 21 days. We were taken to Mansera in Buttal village, where we were trained in handling weapons.  The daily programme was as follows: 4.15 am to 5 am – Wake-up call and thereafter Namaz; 5 am to 6 am – PT; instructor: Abu Anas; 8 am – Breakfast; 8.30 am to 11.30 am – Weapons training; trainer: Abdul Rehman; weapons: AK-47, Green-O, SKS, Uzi gun, pistol, revolver; 11.30 am to Noon – rest; Noon to 1 pm – Lunch break; 1 pm to 2 pm – Namaz; 2 pm to 4 pm – Rest; 4 pm to 6 pm – PT; 6 pm to 8 pm – Namaz and other work; 8 pm to 9 pm – Dinner.

After the training, we were told that we will begin the next stage involving advanced training. But for that, we were told, we had to do some khidmat for two months (khidmat is a sort of service in the camp as per trainees’ liking). We agreed. After two months, I was allowed to go to meet my parents. I stayed with my parents for a month.  Then I went to an LeT camp in Shaiwainala, Muzaffarabad, for advanced training…  We were taken to Chelabandi pahadi area for a training programme, called Daura Khas, of three months. It involved handling weapons, using hand grenade, rocket launchers and mortars.

The daily programme was as follows: 4.15 am  to 5 am – Wake-up call and thereafter Namaz; 5 am to 6 am – PT; instructor: Abu Mawiya; 8 am – Breakfast; 8.30 am  to 11.30 am – Weapons training, handling of all weapons and firing practices with the weapons, training on handling hand grenade, rocket-launchers and mortars, Green-O, SKS, Uzi gun, pistol, revolver; trainer: Abu Mawiya; 11.30 am to 12 noon – rest; Noon to 1 pm – Lunch break; 1 pm to 2 pm – Namaz; 2 pm to 4 pm – Weapons training and firing practice; lecture on Indian security agencies; 4 pm to 6 pm – PT; 6 pm to 8 pm – Namaz and other work; 8 pm to 9 pm – Dinner

There were 32 trainees in the camp. Sixteen were selected for a confidential operation by one Zaki-ur-Rehman, alias Chacha, but three of them ran away from the camp.  Chacha sent the remaining 13 with a person called Kafa to the Muridke camp again. At Muridke, we were taught swimming and made familiar with the life of fishermen at sea… We were given lectures on the working of Indian security agencies. We were shown clippings highlighting atrocities on Muslims in India.  After the training, we were allowed to go to our native places. I stayed with my family for seven days. I then went to the LeT camp at Muzaffarabad. The 13 of us were present for training.   Then, on Zaki-ur-Rehman’s instructions, Kafa took us to the Muridke camp. The training continued for a month. We were given lectures on India and its security agencies, including RAW. We were also trained to evade security personnel. We were instructed not to make phone calls to Pakistan after reaching India.

The names of the persons present for the training are: n Mohd Azmal, alias Abu Muzahid  n Ismail, alias Abu Umar  n Abu Ali n Abu Aksha n Abu Umer  n Abu Shoeb n Abdul Rehman (Bada) n Abdul Rehman (Chhota) n Afadulla  n Abu Umar. After the training, Chacha selected 10 of us and formed five teams of two people each on September 15. I and Ismail formed a team; its codename was VTS. We were shown Azad Maidan in Mumbai on Google Earth’s site on the internet… We were shown a film on VT railway station. The film showed commuters during rush hours. We were instructed to carry out firing during rush hours — between 7 am and 11 am and between 7 pm and 11 pm. Then we were to take some people hostage, take them to the roof of some nearby building and contact Chacha, who would have given us numbers to contact media people and make demands.  This was the strategy decided upon by our trainers. The date fixed for the operation was September 27. However, the operation was cancelled for some reason. We stayed in Karachi till November 23.  The other teams were: 2nd team: a) Abu Aksha; b) Abu Umar; 3rd team: a) Abdul Rehman (Bada); b) Abu Ali; 4th team: a) Abdul Rehman (Chotta); b) Afadulla; 5th team: a) Abu Shoeb; b) Abu Umer.

On November 23, the teams left from Azizabad in Karachi, along with Zaki-ur-Rehman and Kafa. We were taken to the nearby seashore… We boarded a launch. After travelling for 22 to 25 nautical miles we boarded a bigger launch. Again, after a journey of an hour, we boarded a ship, Al-Huseini, in the deep sea. While boarding the ship, each of us was given a sack containing eight grenades, an AK-47 rifle, 200 cartridges, two magazines and a cellphone.  Then we started towards the Indian coast. When we reached Indian waters, the crew members of Al-Huseini hijacked an Indian launch. The crew of the launch was shifted to Al-Huseini. We then boarded the launch. An Indian seaman was made to accompany us at gunpoint; he was made to bring us to the Indian coast. After a journey of three days, we reached near Mumbai’s shore. While we were still some distance away from the shore, Ismail and Afadulla killed the Indian seaman (Tandel) in the basement of the launch. Then we boarded an inflatable dinghy and reached Badhwar Park jetty.  I then went along with Ismail to VT station by taxi. After reaching the hall of the station, we went to the toilet, took out the weapons from our sacks, loaded them, came out of the toilet and started firing indiscriminately at passengers. Suddenly, a police officer opened fire at us. We threw hand grenades towards him and also opened fire at him.  Then we went inside the railway station threatening the commuters and randomly firing at them. We then came out of the railway station searching for a building with a roof.  But we did not find one. Therefore, we entered a lane. We entered a building and went upstairs. On the third and fourth floors we searched for hostages but we found that the building was a hospital and not a residential building. We started to come down. That is when policemen started firing at us. We threw grenades at them.

While coming out of the hospital premises, we saw a police vehicle passing. We took shelter behind a bush. Another vehicle passed us and stopped some distance away. A police officer got off from the vehicle and started firing at us. A bullet hit my hand and my AK-47 fell out of my hand. When I bent to pick it up another bullet hit me on the same hand. Ismail opened fire at the officers in the vehicle. They got injured and firing from their side stopped. We waited for a while and went towards the vehicle.  There were three bodies in the vehicle. Ismail removed the bodies and drove the vehicle. I sat next to him. Some policemen tried to stop us. Ismail opened fire at them. The vehicle had a flat tyre near a big ground by the side of road. Ismail got down from the vehicle, stopped a car at gunpoint and removed the three lady passengers from the car. Since I was injured, Ismail carried me to the car. He then drove the car. We were stopped by policemen on the road near the seashore. Ismail fired at them, injuring some policemen. The police also opened fire at us. Ismail was injured in the firing. The police removed us from the vehicle and took us to the same hospital. In the hospital, I came to know that Ismail had succumbed to injuries.  My statement has been read to me and explained in Hindi, and it has been correctly recorded.”

8. December 13, 2008  Pakistan’s New Delhi Embassy should ask for “Consular Access” to nine dead terrorists in a Mumbai morgue before asking to meet Kasab

After two weeks of pointblank denials that Pakistan had anything to do with the Mumbai massacres (”the  Mumbai incident”, “the Bombay event” as Pakistan’s social butterflies put it), Pakistan’s diplomats are now asking for Consular Access to Kasab, the lone captured terrorist!   The cheek of it!   Would they please request Consular Access instead to the nine dead terrorists who were Kasab’s companions, and who are presumably in a Mumbai morgue at present because India’s Muslims have denied them a burial?   It is certain the Government of India would be relieved and delighted to hand over  full custody of the mortal remains of these nine Pakistanis to representatives of His Excellency the High Commissioner of Pakistan to New Delhi for transfer back home to Pakistan.

As for Consular Access to Kasab, the Government of India will doubtless inform His Excellency that His Excellency may appreciate that in present circumstances in which the individual Kasab, not to put  too fine a point on it,   is singing like a canary, the Government of India deems the security of India could be jeopardised by any possibility of such a song becoming jeopardised.  The Government of India will however doubtless assure His Excellency that Kasab is being well cared for in custody and has reported as such to the magistrate.

9. December 19, 2008 An Indian Reply to President Zardari: Rewarding Pakistan for bad behaviour leads to schizophrenic relationshipsbySubroto Roy

Pakistan President Asif Ali Zardari’s recent argument in the New York Times resembles closely the well-known publications of his ambassador to the United States, Mr Husain Haqqani.  Unfortunately, this Zardari-Haqqani thesis about Pakistan’s current predicament in the world and the world’s predicament with Pakistan is shot through with clear factual and logical errors. These  need to be aired because true or useful conclusions cannot be reached from mistaken premises or faulty reasoning.

i.  Origins of Pakistan, India, J&K, and their mutual problems

Mr Zardari makes the following seemingly innocuous statement:

“…. the two great nations of Pakistan and India, born together from the same revolution and mandate in 1947, must continue to move forward with the peace process.”

Now as a matter of simple historical fact, the current entities in the world system known as India and Pakistan were not “born together from the same revolution and mandate in 1947”.  It is palpably false to suppose they were and Pakistanis indulge in wishful thinking and self-deception about their own political history if they suppose this.

India’s Republic arose out of the British Dominion known as “India” which was the legal successor of the entity known previously in international law as “British India”.  British India had had secular governance and so has had the Indian Republic.

By contrast, the Islamic Republic of Pakistan arose out of a newly created state in international law known as the British Dominion of Pakistan, consisting of designated territory carved out of British India by a British decision and coming into existence one day before British India extinguished itself. (Another new state, Bangladesh, later seceded from Pakistan.)

The British decision to create territory designated “Pakistan” had nothing to do with any anti-British “revolution” or “mandate” supported by any Pakistani nationalism because there was none.  (Rahmat Ali’s anti-Hindu pamphleteering in London could be hardly considered Pakistani nationalism against British rule.  Khan Abdul Ghaffar Khan’s Pashtun patriots saw themselves as Indian, not Pakistani.)

To the contrary, the British decision had to do with a small number of elite Pakistanis — MA Jinnah foremost among them — demanding not to be part of the general Indian nationalist movement that had been demanding a British departure from power in the subcontinent.   Jinnah’s separatist party, the Muslim League, was trounced in the 1937 provincial elections in all the Muslim-majority areas of British India that would eventually become Pakistan.  Despite this, in September 1939, Britain, at war with Nazi Germany, chose to elevate the political power of Jinnah and his League to parity with the general Indian nationalist movement led by MK Gandhi.  (See, Francis Robinson, in William James and Subroto Roy (eds), Foundations of Pakistan’s Political Economy: Towards an Agenda for the 1990s.)  Britain needed India’s mostly Muslim infantry-divisions — the progenitors of the present-day Pakistan Army — and if that meant tilting towards a risky political idea of “Pakistan” in due course, so it would be.  The thesis that Pakistan arose from any kind of “revolution” or “mandate” in 1947 is  fantasy — the Muslim super-elite that invented and endorsed the Pakistan idea flew from Delhi to Karachi in chartered BOAC Dakotas, caring not a hoot about the vulnerability of ordinary Muslim masses to Sikh and Hindu majority wrath and retaliation on the ground.

Modern India succeeded to the rights and obligations of British India in international law, and has had a recognized existence as a state since at least the signing of the Armistice and Treaty of Versailles in 1918-1919.  India was a founding member of the United Nations, being a signatory of the 1945 San Francisco Declaration, and an original member of the Bretton Woods institutions.  An idea put forward by Argentina that as of 1947 India and Pakistan were both successor states of British India was rejected by the UN (Argentina withdrew its own suggestion), and it was universally acknowledged India was already a member of the UN while Pakistan would have to (and did) apply afresh for membership as a newly created state in the UN.  Pakistan’s entry into the UN had the enthusiastic backing of India and was opposed by only one existing UN member, Afghanistan, due to a conflict that continues to this day over the legitimacy of the Durand Line that bifurcated the Pashtun areas.

Such a review of elementary historical facts and the position in law of Pakistan and India is far from being of merely pedantic interest today.  Rather, it goes directly to the logical roots of the conflict over the erstwhile State of Jammu and Kashmir (J&K) — a state that itself originated as an entity in the world system a full century before Pakistan was to do so and more than half a century before British India did, but which would collapse into anarchy and civil war in 1947-1949.

Britain (or England) had been a major nation-state in the world system recognized since Grotius first outlined modern international law. On March 16 1846, Britain entered into a treaty, the Treaty of Amritsar, with one Gulab Singh, and the “State of Jammu & Kashmir” came to arise as a recognizable entity in international law for the first time. (See my “History of Jammu and Kashmir” published in The Statesman, Oct 29-30 2006, available elsewhere here.)

Jammu & Kashmir continued in orderly existence as a state until it crashed into legal and political anarchy and civil war a century later.  The new Pakistan had entered into a “Standstill Agreement” with the State of Jammu & Kashmir as of August 15 1947. On or about October 22 1947, Pakistan unilaterally ended that Standstill Agreement and instead caused military forces from its territory to attack the State of Jammu & Kashmir along the Mansehra Road towards Baramula and Srinagar, coinciding too with an Anglo-Pakistani coup d’etat in Gilgit and Baltistan (see my “Solving Kashmir”; “Law, Justice & J&K”; “Pakistan’s Allies”, all published in The Statesman in 2005-2006 and available elsewhere here).

The new Pakistan had chosen, in all deliberation, to forswear law, politics and diplomacy and to resort to force of arms instead in trying to acquire J&K for itself via a military decision.  It succeeded only partially.  Its forces took and then lost both Baramula and Kargil; they may have threatened Leh but did not attempt to take it; they did take and retain Muzaffarabad and Skardu; they were never near taking the summer capital, Srinagar, though might have threatened the winter capital, Jammu.

All in all, a Ceasefire Line came to be demarcated on the military positions as of February 1 1949.  After a war in 1971 that accompanied the secession of Bangladesh from Pakistan, that Ceasefire Line came to be renamed the “Line of Control” between Pakistan and India. An ownerless entity may be acquired by force of arms — the erstwhile State of Jammu & Kashmir in 1947-1949 had become an ownerless entity that had been dismembered and divided according to military decision following an armed conflict between Pakistan and India.  The entity in the world system known as the “State of Jammu & Kashmir” created on March 16 1846 by Gulab Singh’s treaty with the British ceased to exist as of October 22 1947.  Pakistan had started the fight over J&K but there is a general rule of conflicts that he who starts  a fight does not get to finish it.

Such is the simplest and most practical statement of the history of the current problem.  The British, through their own compulsions and imperial pretensions, raised all the talk about a “Lapse of Paramountcy” of the British Crown over the “Native Princes” of “Indian India”, and of how, the “Native Princes” were required to “accede” to either India or Pakistan.  This ignored Britain’s own constitutional law.  BR Ambedkar pointed out with unsurpassed clarity that no “Lapse of Paramountcy” was possible even for a single logical moment since “Paramountcy” over any “Native Princes” who had not joined India or Pakistan as of August 15 1947, automatically passed from British India to its legal successor, namely, the Dominion of India.   It followed that India’s acquiescence was required for any subsequent accession to Pakistan – an acquiescence granted in case of Chitral and denied in case of Junagadh.

What the Republic of India means by saying today that boundaries cannot be redrawn nor any populations forcibly transferred is quite simply that the division of erstwhile J&K territory is permanent, and that sovereignty over it is indivisible. What Pakistan has claimed is that India has been an occupier and that there are many people inhabiting the Indian area who may not wish to be Indian nationals and who are being compelled against their will to remain so ~  forgetting to add that precisely the same could be said likewise of the Pakistani-held area. The lawful solution I proposed in “Solving Kashmir, “Law, Justice and J&K” and other works has been that the Republic of India invite every person covered under its Article 370, citizen-by-citizen, under a condition of full information, to privately and without fear decide, if he/she has not done so already, between possible Indian, Iranian, Afghan or Pakistani nationalities ~ granting rights and obligations of permanent residents to any of those persons who may choose for whatever private reason not to remain Indian nationals. If Pakistan acted likewise, the problem of J&K would indeed come to be resolved. The Americans, as self-appointed mediators, have said they wish “the people of the region to have a voice” in a solution: there can be no better expression of such voice than allowing individuals to privately choose their own nationalities and their rights and responsibilities accordingly. The issue of territorial sovereignty is logically distinct from that of the choice of nationality by individual inhabitants.

ii.  Benazir’s assassination falsely compared to the Mumbai massacres

Secondly, President Zardari draws a mistaken comparison between the assassination last year of his wife, Benazir Bhutto, and the Mumbai massacres a few weeks ago.  Ms Bhutto’s assassination may resemble more closely the assassinations in India of Indira Gandhi in 1984 and Rajiv Gandhi in 1991.

Indira Gandhi died in “blowback” from the unrest she and her younger son and others in their party had opportunistically fomented among Sikh fundamentalists and sectarians since the late 1970s.  Rajiv Gandhi died in “blowback” from an erroneous imperialistic foreign policy that he, as Prime Minister, had been induced to make by jingoistic Indian diplomats, a move that got India’s military needlessly involved in the then-nascent Sri Lankan civil war.  Benazir Bhutto similarly may be seen to have died in “blowback” from her own political activity as prime minister and opposition leader since the late 1980s, including her own encouragement of Muslim fundamentalist forces.  Certainly in all three cases, as in all assassinations, there were lapses of security too and imprudent political judgments made that contributed to the tragic outcomes.

Ms Bhutto’s assassination has next to nothing to do with the Mumbai massacres, besides the fact the perpetrators in both cases were Pakistani terrorists.  President Zardari saying he himself has lost his wife to terrorism is true but not relevant to the proper diagnosis of the Mumbai massacres or to Pakistan-India relations in general.  Rather, it  serves to deflect criticism and condemnation of the Pakistani state’s pampered handing of Pakistan’s terrorist masterminds, as well as the gross irresponsibility of Pakistan’s military scientists (not AQ Khan) who have been recently advocating a nuclear first strike against India in the event of war.

iii.  Can any religious nation-state be viable in the modern world?

President Zardari’s article says:

“The world worked to exploit religion against the Soviet Union in Afghanistan by empowering the most fanatic extremists as an instrument of destruction of a superpower. The strategy worked, but its legacy was the creation of an extremist militia with its own dynamic.”

This may be overly simplistic.  As pointed out in my article “Pakistan’s Allies”,  Gregory Zinoviev himself  after the Bolshevik Revolution had declared that international communism “turns today to the peoples of the East and says to them, ‘Brothers, we summon you to a Holy War first of all against British imperialism!’ At this there were cries of Jehad! Jehad! And much brandishing of picturesque Oriental weapons.” (Treadgold, Twentieth Century Russia, 1990, p. 213).   For more than half of the 20th century, orthodox Muslims had been used by Soviet communists against British imperialism, then by the British and Americans (through Pakistan) against Soviet communism.  Touché! Blowback and counter-blowback!  The real question that arises from this today may be why orthodox Muslims have allowed themselves to be used either way by outside forces and have failed in developing a modern nation-state and political culture of their own.  Europe and America only settled down politically after their religious wars were over.  Perhaps no religious nation-state is viable in the modern world.

iv.   Pakistan’s behaviour leads to schizophrenia in international relations

President Zardari pleads for, or perhaps demands, resources from the world:

“the best response to the Mumbai carnage is to coordinate in counteracting the scourge of terrorism. The world must act to strengthen Pakistan’s economy and democracy, help us build civil society and provide us with the law enforcement and counterterrorism capacities that will enable us to fight the terrorists effectively.”

Six million pounds from Mr Gordon Brown, so much from here or there etc –  President Zardari has apparently demanded 100 billion dollars from America and that is the price being talked about for Pakistan to dismantle its nuclear weapons and be brought under an American “nuclear umbrella” instead.

I have pointed out elsewhere that what Pakistan seems to have been doing in international relations for decades is send out “mixed messages” – i.e. contradictory signals,  whether in thought, word or deed.  Clinical psychologists following the work of Gregory Bateson would say this leads to confusion among Pakistan’s interlocutors (a “double bind”) and the symptoms arise of what may be found in schizophrenic relationships.  (See my article “Do President-elect Obama’s Pakistan specialists believe…”; on the “double bind” theory,  an article I chanced to publish in the Journal of Genetic Psychology, 1986, may be of interest).

Here are a typical set of “mixed messages” emanating from Pakistan’s government and opinion-makers:

“We have nuclear weapons

“We keep our nuclear weapons safe from any misuse or unauthorized use

“We are willing to use nuclear weapons in a first strike against India

“We do not comprehend the lessons of Hiroshima-Nagasaki

“We do not comprehend the destruction India will visit upon us if we strike them

“We are dangerous so we must not be threatened in any way

“We are peace-loving and want to live in peace with India and Afghanistan

“We love to play cricket with India and watch Bollywood movies

“We love our Pakistan Army as it is one public institution that works

“We know the Pakistan Army has backed armed militias against India in the past

“We know these militias have caused terrorist attacks

“We are not responsible for any terrorist attacks

“We do not harbour any terrorists

“We believe the world should pay us to not use or sell our nuclear weapons

“We believe the world should pay us to not encourage the terrorists in our country

“We believe the world should pay us to prevent terrorists from using our nuclear weapons

“We hate India and do not want to become like India

“We love India and want to become like India

“We are India and we are not India…”

Etc.

A mature rational responsible and self-confident Pakistan would have said instead:

“We apologise to India and other countries for the outrageous murders our nationals have committed in Mumbai and elsewhere

“We ask the world to watch how our professional army is deployed to disarm civilian and all “non-state” actors of unauthorized firearms and explosives

“We do not need and will not demand or accept a dollar in any sort of foreign aid, military or civilian, to solve our problems

“We realize our economic and political institutions are a mess and we must clean them up

“We will strive to build a society imbued with what Iqbal described as the spirit of modern times..”

As someone who created at great personal cost at an American university twenty years ago the book Foundations of Pakistan’s Political Economy: Towards an Agenda for the 1990s, I have a special interest in hoping that Pakistan shall find the path of wisdom.

10. January 1, 2009 A basis of India-Pakistan cooperation on the Mumbai massacres: the ten Pakistani terrorists started off as pirates and the Al-Huseini is a pirate ship

One of my finest teachers at the London School of Economics many years ago had been Professor DHN Johnson, a pioneer of the Law of the Sea Treaty; reflecting upon the aftermath of the Mumbai massacres, it occurs to me that the Law of the Sea Treaty may provide the most expedient and lawful recourse in present circumstances, as well as a proper and clear basis for cooperation between the Government of India and the Government of Pakistan in the matter.

Both India and Pakistan have signed and ratified the Law of the Sea Treaty which reads at  Article 101

“Definition of piracy

Piracy consists of any of the following acts:

(a) any illegal acts of violence or detention, or any act of depredation, committed for private ends by the crew or the passengers of a private ship or a private aircraft, and directed:

(i) on the high seas, against another ship or aircraft, or against persons or property on board such ship or aircraft;

(ii) against a ship, aircraft, persons or property in a place outside the jurisdiction of any State;

(b) any act of voluntary participation in the operation of a ship or of an aircraft with knowledge of facts making it a pirate ship or aircraft;

(c) any act of inciting or of intentionally facilitating an act described in subparagraph (a) or (b).”

From the captured Kasab’s confession, it is clear he and his companions began their criminal activities within Pakistan (by training as terrorists and engaging in a conspiracy to commit mass-murder) and this continued outside Pakistan at sea:

“On November 23, the teams left from Azizabad in Karachi, along with Zaki-ur-Rehman and Kafa. We were taken to the nearby seashore… We boarded a launch. After travelling for 22 to 25 nautical miles we boarded a bigger launch. Again, after a journey of an hour, we boarded a ship, Al-Huseini, in the deep sea. While boarding the ship, each of us was given a sack containing eight grenades, an AK-47 rifle, 200 cartridges, two magazines and a cellphone.  Then we started towards the Indian coast. When we reached Indian waters, the crew members of Al-Huseini hijacked an Indian launch. The crew of the launch was shifted to Al-Huseini. We then boarded the launch. An Indian seaman was made to accompany us at gunpoint; he was made to bring us to the Indian coast. After a journey of three days, we reached near Mumbai’s shore. While we were still some distance away from the shore, Ismail and Afadulla killed the Indian seaman (Tandel) in the basement of the launch.”

Pirates in law are Hostis humani generis or “enemies of mankind”.    As signatories to the Law of the Sea Treaty, India and Pakistan may act jointly against the Al-Huseini and others associated with the acts of  piracy including the maritime murders of the Indian fishermen that preceded the Mumbai massacres, thus solving the question of jurisdiction before it arises.  The remains of the nine dead Pakistani terrorists presently in a Mumbai morgue  can be buried at sea in international waters by whatever funeral procedure is due to dishonourable sailors and pirates.  (The fish will not refuse them.)  Kasab can be tried as a pirate too — though he really needs an American defence attorney to plea-bargain for him as he turns State’s evidence against the real masterminds of the plot, some of whom may be presently in the custody of the Pakistan Government.

Subroto Roy

11. January 2 2009  How to solve the jurisdiction problem in prosecuting perpetrators of the Mumbai massacres: let the Pakistan and Indian Navies try them (and hang them) at sea as pirates

Should Pakistan hand over the terrorist masterminds now in its custody to India for trial for mass murder?  Should India hand over the captured Mumbai terrorist Kasab to Pakistan for trial as a mass murderer?   Such questions can lead to endless legal wrangling, no action, and no justice for all the many victims of the Mumbai massacres.  It is far more expeditious for both countries to instead hand over all these characters in their custody to their respective navies for trial and punishment as pirates who have violated the Law of the Sea.  The Pakistan Navy Chief and the Indian Navy Chief can agree to have their admirals meet with their respective prisoners for a rendezvous at sea in international waters.   A joint trial under maritime law can be conducted on board, say, a Pakistan naval vessel in international waters.  Pakistan’s terrorist masterminds can be hanged at sea on a scaffold aboard a Pakistan Navy vessel in international waters for crimes of  piracy, murder and conspiracy.  Kasab, if he turns State’s evidence, can plea-bargain for a lesser sentence;   if he does not turn State’s evidence, he can join his handlers on the scaffold (assuming he is of adult age and sane).  Pakistan’s terrorist training institutes, incidentally, will see a rapid decline in their admissions and recruitment figures once there are some well-televised hangings at sea.

Subroto Roy

12. January 16, 2009 Memo to the Hon’ble Attorneys General of Pakistan & India: How to jointly prosecute the Mumbai massacre perpetrators most expeditiously

A criminal conspiracy was hatched within the Pakistan Republic by persons known and unknown affiliated with an unlawful organization. The plot was to commit kidnapping, murder, robbery and piracy on the high seas, to be followed by illegal entry, criminal trespass, mass-murder, kidnapping, grievous bodily harm, arson, robbery, dacoity and multiple similarly heinous crimes in the Indian Republic, amounting to waging war against the Indian Republic and the Indian people. The conspirators commissioned services of at least 10 identified persons to be trained and indoctrinated as willing instruments in these multiple crimes, inducing them with money and other incentives.

Nine of these 10 persons came to be killed by Indian law enforcement authorities during the execution of their crimes; their mortal remains have remained in a Mumbai morgue now for more than one month and a half.

The tenth person,  one Kasab, was captured alive and is in custody. He has been a willing witness for the prosecution of these multiple crimes and it is principally due to his testimony that the precise sequence of events in the commission of these crimes has been able to be reconstructed by law enforcement authorities (as contained e.g. in the “dossier” submitted by the Indian Republic to the Pakistan Republic.)

Both the Pakistan Republic and the Indian Republic have jurisdiction to prosecute these crimes. The jurisdiction of the Indian Republic is obvious.

Pakistan’s jurisdiction arises from the Pakistan Penal Code which states

2. Punishment of offences committed within Pakistan: Every person shall be liable to punishment under this Code and not otherwise for every act or omission contrary to the provisions thereof, of which he shall be guilty within Pakistan.3. Punishment of offences committed beyond, but which by law may be tried within Pakistan: Any person liable, by any Pakistani Law, to be tried for an offence committed beyond Pakistan shall be dealt with according to the provision of this Code for any act committed beyond Pakistan in the same manner as if such act had been committed within Pakistan. 4. Extension of Code for extra-territorial offences: The provisions of this Code apply also to any offence committed by “[(1) any citizen of Pakistan or any person in the service of Pakistan in any place without and beyond Pakistan];…. (4) any person on any ship or aircraft registered in Pakistan wherever it may be. Explanation: In this section the word “offence” includes every act committed outside Pakistan which, if committed in Pakistan, would be punishable under this Code…”.

Furthermore, both the Pakistan Republic and the Indian Republic have jurisdiction from the Law of the Sea Treaty which both have signed and ratified and which states at Article 101

“Definition of piracy(b) any act of voluntary participation in the operation of a ship or of an aircraft with knowledge of facts making it a pirate ship or aircraft;

Piracy consists of any of the following acts: (a) any illegal acts of violence or detention, or any act of depredation, committed for private ends by the crew or the passengers of a private ship or a private aircraft, and directed:

(i) on the high seas, against another ship or aircraft, or against persons or property on board such ship or aircraft;

(ii) against a ship, aircraft, persons or property in a place outside the jurisdiction of any State;

(c) any act of inciting or of intentionally facilitating an act described in subparagraph (a) or (b).”

From Kasab’s testimony, it is clear he and his companions began their criminal activities within Pakistan (by training as terrorists and engaging in the conspiracy to commit mass-murder in India) and this continued outside Pakistan at sea:

“On November 23, the teams left from Azizabad in Karachi, along with Zaki-ur-Rehman and Kafa. We were taken to the nearby seashore… We boarded a launch. After travelling for 22 to 25 nautical miles we boarded a bigger launch. Again, after a journey of an hour, we boarded a ship, Al-Huseini, in the deep sea. While boarding the ship, each of us was given a sack containing eight grenades, an AK-47 rifle, 200 cartridges, two magazines and a cellphone. Then we started towards the Indian coast. When we reached Indian waters, the crew members of Al-Huseini hijacked an Indian launch. The crew of the launch was shifted to Al-Huseini. We then boarded the launch. An Indian seaman was made to accompany us at gunpoint; he was made to bring us to the Indian coast. After a journey of three days, we reached near Mumbai’s shore. While we were still some distance away from the shore, Ismail and Afadulla killed the Indian seaman … in the basement of the launch.”

Traditionally, pirates are Hostis humani generis or “enemies of mankind” in law (as are international terrorists).

In view of the competing jurisdictions to try and punish all these crimes, as well as in view of the regrettable historical circumstances of grave conflict and deep misunderstanding and mistrust between the Pakistan Republic and the Indian Republic, it may be most expeditious for there to be a joint investigation and prosecution under maritime law by the Pakistan Navy and Indian Navy of this entire set of crimes, assisted by civilian legal authorities in both countries. As signatories to the Law of the Sea Treaty, the Pakistan Republic and the Indian Republic may act jointly against the vessel Al-Huseini and all the others associated with the whole conspiracy including the acts of piracy and maritime murder of the Indian fishermen and the trawler-skipper Solanki preceding the massacres in Mumbai.

Both countries would hand over all the accused in their custody to their respective navies for trial and punishment as pirates who have or have conspired to violate the Law of the Sea. The Pakistan Navy Chief and the Indian Navy Chief can agree to have their admirals meet with their respective prisoners for a rendezvous at sea in international waters. A joint trial under maritime law can be conducted on board, say, a Pakistan naval vessel in international waters. The masterminds who conceived and plotted these crimes and who are presently in the custody of the Pakistan Republic can be hanged at sea on a scaffold aboard a Pakistan Navy vessel in international waters for piracy, murder and conspiracy. Kasab, if he turns State’s evidence, can plea-bargain for a lesser sentence; if he does not turn State’s evidence, he can join his handlers on the scaffold. The remains of the nine dead criminals presently in a Mumbai morgue can be buried at sea in international waters by whatever funeral procedure is due to dishonourable sailors and pirates.

Incidental consequences may be that future admissions and recruitment figures of terrorist training institutes would decline, and of course Pakistan-India tensions would be reduced once clear justice is seen to have been done expeditiously in this complex case.

Subroto Roy

13.  January 25, 2009 RAND’s study of the Mumbai attacks by Subroto Roy Kolkata

The conspicuously good thing that can be said about the RAND Corporation’s study of the Mumbai massacres (”The Lessons of Mumbai”, RAND January 2009) is that there is no sign of it having been affected by the powerful Pakistan lobby.  Far too many purported studies emerging from American or British “thinktanks” cannot say the same.

If anything, the ten American authors of the 25-pages of the RAND text have among them two prominent advocates of better US-India relations.  This is helpful to truthfulness because of the simple fact India has been in this case a victim of aggression that originated in Pakistan. Whether elements of the Pakistan Government were involved is almost the wrong question – if some retired underemployed former soldier drawing a Pakistan Army pension helped the Lashkar-e-Taiba’s commando training of the Mumbai terrorists, the existence of Pakistani state involvement is proved. Commando training requires technical skills of a sort that can only originate with a military.

In Pakistan as in any other large populous country including India, the state tends to be a hydra-headed monster and it may be foolish to imagine instead a rational, unified, well-informed or even a benevolent political entity.  State involvement in Pakistan, India, China or elsewhere is something hard to isolate when there is so much mixing of private and public property or misuse of resources arising from the public exchequer.

What Pakistan’s PR campaign has done after Mumbai is not so much raise the Kashmir dispute as to obfuscate things by shedding crocodile tears and pretending to share victimhood saying, oh we sympathise with you but please sympathise with us too as we have been victims of even bigger terrorist attacks by the same kind of people, we have lost Benazir, we have lost many more people than you have, therefore  cooperate with us and we will try to do what we can to help you in this matter.  English-speaking liberals educated at places like Karachi Grammar School have then appeared on Indian TV stations (owned by Delhi people from places like Doon School) purporting to represent Pakistan on “the Mumbai incident”; none of them can have much credibility because the real India-haters in Pakistan might cheerfully make them murder victims too given half a chance.

The RAND study deserves credit for avoiding all misleading Pakistani rhetoric about the Mumbai massacres and at least intending to try to get to the bottom of things in a systematic manner.  Beyond that, unfortunately, it has made logical and factual and methodological errors which cause it to fail to do so.

The key logical error made by the RAND authors arises from combining a central front-page statement

“Evidence suggests Lashkar-e-Taiba, a terrorist group based in Pakistan, was responsible for the attack”

with assertive suggestions about Mumbai’s police being backward, incompetent, cowardly etc (”passive”).  Yet how precisely did evidence about LeT culpability come to light?  Only because Mumbai’s police and the Railway police engaged, injured and then captured Kasab using their antiquated equipment the best they could.  There is no evidence of police cowardice at CST Station; to the contrary, it took courage to aim .303’s at adversaries firing back with assault rifles.  Kasab received his first hand injury there. ATS Chief Karkare and his fellow-officers may seem foolhardy in hindsight to have been driving in the same vehicle but they did engage their unknown enemy immediately they could and died doing so, crippling Kasab badly enough that he could be captured in due course at Chowpatty.  [Correction: it appears that though Kasab was fired upon by the police at CST Station  he  received both his hand injuries from the firing by the ATS squad.] And the Chowpatty police action showed obvious bravery in absorbing injury and death in order to kill Ishmail and capture Kasab.  (Kasab, among the youngest, had been paired with Ishmail, the apparent leader of the group.)

Furthermore, Kasab upon capture was treated humanely and lawfully.  His injuries were treated, he was produced before a magistrate within a week who asked him if he was being mistreated to which he said no.  Slumdog millionaire may get undeserved Oscars portraying torture of a British actor by Mumbai police but it is ridiculous fiction – Kasab the captured Pakistani terrorist mass murderer was not tortured by Mumbai’s police.

Contrast such Indian police behaviour with the “enhanced interrogation techniques” the Bush Administration used with negative results in Guantanamo and Abu Ghraib – which President Obama has now started to end.  Kasab, an ignorant misguided youth, was grateful enough for the humane and civilized treatment to start singing like the proverbial canary.  The result of that has been precisely all the evidence the Government of India has now presented to the world and Pakistan about the LeT’s culpability.

As for the anti-terrorist actions of the Indian Army, Navy and NSG, the RAND study is right to point to multitudinous errors and it is useful to have these listed in orderly fashion.  But many of these errors were obvious to millions of lay Indian citizens who watched events on TV.  The central fault was the scarcity of trained NSG officers and men, and the failure to apply standard emergency management protocols.

The RAND study, by relying overly on government sources, has failed to point to what ordinary Indian citizens already know – the NSG is being utterly wasted protecting our politicians.  India has no proper equivalent of the US “Secret Service”, and even if we did, we would probably waste that by spreading it too thinly among politicians.  As it happens if almost any politician in India today did happen to be unfortunately assassinated, the main mourners would be family-members and not the general Indian public.  Despite politicians constituting rather “low-value targets” for terrorists, India’s scarce anti-terrorist and police resources have been misallocated to protecting them.

Finally, the RAND study makes the lazy-man’s methodological error of supposing outfits like the LeT think and behave in a manner explicable by American political science textbooks, or ought to do so.  What Western analysts may need to do instead is learn from the old Arabist and Orientalist traditions of how to think and see the world from Eastern points of view.    But that may require greater self-knowledge than the modern world tends to permit.

Postscript:

My December 6 2008 analysis here titled “A Quick Comparison Between the September 11 2001 NYC-Washington attacks and the November 26-28 2008 Mumbai Massacres (An Application of the Case-by-Case Philosophical  Technique of Wittgenstein, Wisdom and Bambrough)” is republished below.  I have corrected “Rome Airport” with “Lod Airport” on the basis of  reading the RAND report, though may not have received the courtesy of acknowledgment for the reminder of the  Japanese Red Army attack….

14. February 9 2009, Pakistani expansionism: India and the world need to beware of “Non-Resident Pakistanis” ruled by Rahmat Ali’s ghost

The Government of Pakistan is said to be due to release its initial report on the involvement of Pakistanis in the Mumbai massacres.  It is reportedly expected that the G o P will partly if not mainly or wholly attribute responsibility for the planning of the massacres to expatriate  Pakistanis  in other countries, perhaps in Europe and Britain.  If so, a fact the Government of India might find prudent to recall is that the Government of Pakistan in bygone decades did deny citizenship to Rahmat Ali himself    (who invented the acronym “P, A, K, I, S, T, A, N” ) and even deported him back to Britain from where he had carried out his vituperative and bigoted campaign against Hindus.

Rahmat Ali’s British grave has become a site of pilgrimage for expatriate Pakistani extremists and his ignorant hate-filled ideology from the 1930s has been inspiring their modern manifestos.  I said this in an article published in Karachi’s Dawn newspaper in 2005, which also pointed to Iqbal and Jinnah’s disdain for Rahmat Ali’s views (see “Iqbal and Jinnah vs Rahmat Ali” republished here).  American nationals and  British subjects of Pakistani origin inspired by Rahmat Ali’s  ghost are spreading theories of Pakistani territorial expansionism at the cost of the destruction of the Indian Republic and many other countries.

The fact that at one such website recently I myself, presumably because of my Hindu name and Indian nationality, have been referred to as a “monkey- or donkey-worshipper” :D may speak to the somewhat  rabid nature of such ideologies.  (Drat! And there I was expecting some elementary Pakistani courtesy and acknowledgment let alone gratitude for having created, at great personal cost at an American university twenty years ago, the volume with WE James titled Foundations of Pakistan’s Political Economy: Towards an Agenda for the 1990s with its mundane chapters on agriculture, macroeconomics, education etc!)

Incidentally, British newspapers are reporting today that America’s  CIA has been deeply concerned about British subjects of Pakistani origin being a source of international terrorism. It may be pertinent to recall  that terrorism in India’s Punjab had much support among numerous Sikh expatriates and immigrants in North America and Britain, and the same kind of thing may be true of Tamil expatriates from  Sri Lanka.  Being isolated and alienated as immigrants in a foreign country may lead to psychological conditions that contribute to such phenomena, whereby political and other events in the faraway country-of-origin take on exaggerated proportions in an individual’s mental make-up.   Certainly Rahmat Ali himself was a rather tragic lonely figure who wasted his own potential to properly contribute to Pakistan’s political history  through his own self-blinding hatred of Hindus.

SR

15. February 11, 2009 Kasab, the young misguided Pakistani mass-murdering terrorist, needs to be given political asylum in India! (Matt Damon, Will Smith: here’s a real-life case!)

Life imitates art or rather Hollywood again as young Kasab, the misguided primary-school dropout Pakistani mass-murdering terrorist caught by Indian police after the Mumbai massacres,  becomes a kind of Jason-Bourne/Enemy-of-the-State character who is said to be being targeted now by Pakistan’s terrorist masterminds for not being dead already! There have been all kinds of weird assassinations by and of government agents using poisoned umbrellas and radioactive pills etc in real life, and who is to say that young Kasab is not going to be given a small cyanide capsule along with a letter of farewell from his parents when His Excellency the High Commissioner’s consular agents receive access to him?

Shortly after Kasab’s remorseful confessions (which flowed from his natural gratitude at having survived and having been treated humanely by Mumbai’s police), I said here that if I was the judge trying him, I would send him to an Indian prison for 20 or 30 years (given his 20 or 30 murder victims), but I would add that he should be occasionally, say once a year, permitted to offer namaz at India’s grandest mosques. He could become a model prisoner,  possibly a potent weapon against Pakistan’s terrorist masterminds who have ruined his life and now wish him dead.

(Message to Matt Damon, Will Smith and assorted Hollywood cinematic personalities:  there is a confessed, remorseful mass-murdering 20-year old Pakistani terrorist in an Indian prison who is being targeted by the very people who sent him on his vile mission.)

In present circumstances, young Kasab needs to seek political asylum in the Indian Republic as his life in his own Pakistan Republic is as good as over for political reasons. He would become the first person ever in history to receive political asylum in a country that he attacked despite being a confessed terrorist mass-murderer.   But Mahatma Gandhi would have approved and smiled at the irony of it all!  Ahimsa paramo dharmaha in practice.

SR

16.  February 12 2009, Thanks and well done Minister Rehman Malik and the Government of Pakistan

The Hon’ble Rehman Malik and the Government of Pakistan have done very well, all things considered, in taking forward the criminal investigation into the Mumbai massacres, based on the evidence provided by Indian authorities that arose from the cooperation and testimony of young Kasab, the captured  Pakistani terrorist.   I am hopeful the Government of India will provide a serious well-considered response too, though our private TV channels continue frequently to be rather juvenile, sensationalist and inflammatory caused by their overall lack of editorial competence.

As foreseen here over the last two months, a very serious problem of international  law  still arises  due to the competing jurisdictions in the prosecution of this complex case,  since both the Indian Republic and the Pakistan Republic have jurisdiction.   I continue to believe that a joint prosecution  by the Pakistan Navy and the Indian Navy under the Law of the Sea in international waters (conducted on board, say, a Pakistan Navy vessel) may be the most expeditious way to bring this whole tragic and awful matter to proper closure.

In the meantime, the Government of Pakistan has done well and deserves Indian thanks.  Recall, by way of contrast, that investigations of many of Pakistan’s major political assassinations, from Liaquat Ali Khan and Dr Khan Sahib to Zia ul Haq and Nawab Bugti and Benazir Bhutto herself, still remain in the dark.   We in India tend to solve our political assassinations better but in recent  times our police have failed  woefully to solve several ghastly and notorious personal murders.

Subroto Roy, Kolkata

17. March 18 2009. Pakistan’s progress

Nine months ago, on June 9 2008, I wrote but did not publish the op-ed article below “Pakistan’s progress” intended for an Indian newspaper.   When the Mumbai massacres took place, I was rather glad I had not come to do so  because its cheer and optimism contrasted too starkly with the vileness and viciousness of the massacres.  Instead I turned to the legal, moral and political implications of the massacres, and several articles are to be found here on Kasab, competing jurisdictions in international law in prosecuting the crimes, and application of the Law of the Sea Treaty (which both countries have ratified) to jointly try and hang the masterminds at sea in international waters.  Pakistan’s initial criminal investigation into the massacres received praise here, and I can only trust that both the Government of India and the Government of Pakistan will remain forensically focussed on that case of mass-murder and other heinous  crimes until its appropriate conclusion.

Meanwhile, recent political events in Pakistan have made the article below relevant again; when it was written Pervez Musharraf had still not departed from office but the more abstract constitutional question raised in the article had to do with the relative powers of the Head of State and Head of Government in the new Pakistan.  With the peaceful restoration of the Chief Justice to his high office, I am glad to say that the question I raised  but did not publish nine months ago, namely, “A rare constitutional consensus might be developing – can it last long enough?”, seems to be headed at present to being answered in the affirmative.

Subroto Roy, Kolkata, India

“Pakistan’s progress: A rare constitutional consensus might be developing – can it last long enough?  Subroto Roy, dated June 9 2008

The dynamic evolution of politics in Pakistan should be judged not against Indian politics (rotten or exemplary as our politics can be at different times) but against its own initial conditions.   It is an unimaginable luxury that Pakistanis in recent months have been discussing such sweet constitutional questions as how to restore judges unseated by soldiers having entered the Supreme Court, what to do with judges who took an oath despite such an abomination, how to maintain diplomatic relations between the PPP and PML(N),  and most important of all, whether the military with its nuclear assets should report to the PM or President – in other words, is the Head of Government or Head of State the Chief Executive?   It is a luxury too that Pervez Musharraf has become almost a distraction in Pakistani politics, that he himself indicates he may be running out of dramatic lines and may be getting ready to exit his country’s political stage, that the Pakistan Army is shocked by its realisation of its loss of prestige in society, that the Ex-Servicemen’s Society thinks Musharraf deserves punishment for having caused such a state of affairs.  Dr Ayesha Siddiqa has pointed out that every Pakistani military strongman has been eventually removed, and has been removed not by democratic forces alone but by intra-military pressure.

It is likely we are at present witnessing such a critical moment, and it is naturally fraught with danger for any civilian prime minister and parliament because any intra-military conflict can descend into mutiny or worse.  Pakistan Army officers have been deeply divided for years over Islamicisation already — onto which is now compounded the issue of loyalty to Musharraf (mostly paid for in American dollars) versus the urge to remove him in the best future interests of the military.  Musharraf himself, with his usual braggadocio, has been claiming fealty to constitutional principles as well; so at least there is agreement on all sides that matters should proceed in an orderly and dignified manner and not by nefarious means.

The relevant comparison of the present situation is with the recent past.  Let us look back just a few years, say to the autumn of 2005 when the initial post 9/11 Western backlash against Pakistan had been renewed after the London Underground bombings.  On 1 September 2005, during the scheduled Islamabad visit of the Indian Foreign Secretary, the PAF launched massive month-long war-games against an assumed Indian enemy.  It involved “the entire fleet, including US-made F-16s, French Mirage fighter aircraft and Chinese-built jets” and “using all assets” in an exercise “closest to war you can get in peacetime”; from the Hindu Kush to the Arabian Sea “8,200 operational sorties” would be flown, Shaukat Aziz witnessing the start, Musharraf the finish.  Hardly had this orgy of militarism concluded when northern Pakistan and parts of J&K were hit by the devastating earthquake; Musharraf visited quake-hit areas still dressed in battle gear down to his para wings.

Pakistanis of all classes were appalled at the ineptitude of their government in face of the earthquake and it was inevitable the military would be held responsible.  What had been the opportunity cost in fungible resources of those “8,200 operational sorties”?  The military’s extremely expensive “assets” were designed for war with India and had bankrupted the country but ordinary people had been left utterly helpless in a natural calamity.  Future historians of Pakistan may well see the 2005 earthquake as a critical turning point in their political development just as the 12 November 1970 cyclone was in the history of Bangladesh.

A modern war between Pakistan and India, even a non-nuclear one, would be like a hundred earthquakes.  Indians have not been so jingoistic as to contemplate such an exchange of destruction but less than a decade ago Gohar Ayub Khan, as Pakistan’s Foreign Minister, was boasting how India would surrender within a few hours in the next war – which was presumably a threat to unleash missiles, even non-nuclear ones, as a first resort against Indian cities and civilian populations.  That such abominable Pakistan-India tension has today come to vanish might have been indicated during the recent IPL cricket final when Kamran Akmal jumped onto Yusuf Pathan or crashed into Mohammad Kaif as commercially driven team-mates led by an Australian captain and associated with what used to be Hindu Rajputana.  So much for the “Two Nations Theory” in the 21st Century.  Maulana Azad seems to have been proven right and MA Jinnah proven wrong after all.

The Pakistani state had become an oppressive war-machine solely guided by anti-Indian paranoia even while ordinary Pakistanis, through modern communications and technology, knew fully well India and Indians were not nearly as bad as the Pakistan Government was making them out to be.  From an official Pakistani point of view, a nuclear bomb (even a purchased and assembled one) was needed out of fear India intended to destroy what remained of West Pakistan – a theory that could arise only from the delusion that Bangladesh had been caused by Indian intrigues.  The Pakistan Army has been reluctant for more than a generation to face up to the reality of its behaviour in East Pakistan and the consequences that resulted; it has been far easier to blame India instead.

Yet Pakistan’s national hero, AQ Khan himself, born in Bhopal and extremely bitter at modern India as many former Indian nationals tend to be, has now said “Never! Never!” will there be an exchange of destruction in nuclear warfare between India and Pakistan.  It may be a wise Indian diplomatic move to invite Dr Khan, stricken with cancer as he is said to be, to make a quiet private visit to his place of birth if he wished to (perhaps followed by a courtesy luncheon at BARC on the way home).

Of course Indians cannot forget the destruction that has been wrought in this country in recent years by our old Bogeyman, the ISI.  Yet it is a fair bet that not only do we not comprehend the workings of that particular bureaucracy, nor do Pakistanis themselves,   indeed the ISI itself may not comprehend itself in the sense that different ISI sections have been and may remain at cross-purposes or conflict with each other as has become apparent in the ongoing official attempts to suppress the new “Taliban”.  Proper civilian control of the ISI is part of the same process as the proper civilian control of the Pakistan military as a whole, and what we are witnessing is nothing less than the first serious constitutional attempt in Pakistan’s history for that to take place.  The whole subcontinent is hopeful and watching Pakistan’s transition.  In the meantime, a milestone was certainly reached on 25 May when Pakistan’s young and brilliant sufi rock band *Junoon* performed in beautiful Srinagar to the delight of thousands of Kashmiris.   The “United Jehad Council” and Syed Ali Shah Geelani had denounced them; in reply the band’s lead guitarist Salman Ahmed had the courage to say: “I want them to join us in the musical *jehad* for peace and ring the bells of harmony.”  For peace to break out will of course require India’s participation and willingness as well.”…

India’s 2009 General Elections: Provisional Results from the EC as of 1400 hours Indian Standard Time May 16 2009

Const.        PC NAME        Leading/Winning Candidate    Leading Party    Trailing Candidate Name    Trailing Party    Margin of Votes    Result Declared
1    AP    ADILABAD         Rathod Ramesh    Telugu Desam    Kotnak Ramesh    Indian National Congress    115752    NO
2    AP    PEDDAPALLE         Dr.G.Vivekanand    Indian National Congress    Gomasa Srinivas    Telangana Rashtra Samithi    48503    NO
3    AP    KARIMNAGAR         Ponnam Prabhakar    Indian National Congress    Vinod Kumar Boinapally    Telangana Rashtra Samithi    50179    NO
4    AP    NIZAMABAD        Madhu Yaskhi Goud    Indian National Congress    Bigala Ganesh Gupta    Telangana Rashtra Samithi    59007    NO
5    AP    ZAHIRABAD        Syed Yousuf Ali    Telangana Rashtra Samithi    Suresh Kumar Shetkar    Indian National Congress    12423    NO
6    AP    MEDAK        Vijaya Shanthi .M    Telangana Rashtra Samithi    Narendranath .C    Indian National Congress    7513    NO
7    AP    MALKAJGIRI        Sarvey Sathyanarayana    Indian National Congress    Bheemsen.T    Telugu Desam    45684    NO
8    AP    SECUNDRABAD        Anjan Kumar Yadav M    Indian National Congress    Bandaru Dattatreya    Bharatiya Janata Party    143695    NO
9    AP    HYDERABAD        Asaduddin Owaisi    All India Majlis-E-Ittehadul Muslimeen    Zahid Ali Khan    Telugu Desam    74507    NO
10    AP    CHELVELLA        Jaipal Reddy Sudini    Indian National Congress    A.P.Jithender Reddy    Telugu Desam    18032    NO
11    AP    MAHBUBNAGAR        Devarakonda Vittal Rao    Indian National Congress    K. Chandrasekhar Rao    Telangana Rashtra Samithi    4782    NO
12    AP    NAGARKURNOOL        Dr. Manda Jagannath    Indian National Congress    Guvvala Balaraju    Telangana Rashtra Samithi    31833    NO
13    AP    NALGONDA        Gutha Sukender Reddy    Indian National Congress    Suravaram Sudhakar Reddy    Communist Party of India    68461    NO
14    AP    BHONGIR         Komatireddy Raj Gopal Reddy    Indian National Congress    Nomula Narsimhaiah    Communist Party of India (Marxist)    75636    NO
15    AP    WARANGAL        Rajaiah Siricilla    Indian National Congress    Ramagalla Parameshwar    Telangana Rashtra Samithi    97708    NO
16    AP    MAHABUBABAD         P. Balram    Indian National Congress    Kunja Srinivasa Rao    Communist Party of India    67553    NO
17    AP    KHAMMAM         Nama Nageswara Rao    Telugu Desam    Renuka Chowdhury    Indian National Congress    102505    NO
18    AP    ARUKU         Kishore Chandra Suryanarayana Deo Vyricherla    Indian National Congress    Midiyam Babu Rao    Communist Party of India (Marxist)    90318    NO
19    AP    SRIKAKULAM        Killi Krupa Rani    Indian National Congress    Yerrnnaidu Kinjarapu    Telugu Desam    49013    NO
20    AP    VIZIANAGARAM        Jhansi Lakshmi Botcha    Indian National Congress    Appalanaidu Kondapalli    Telugu Desam    41954    NO
21    AP    VISAKHAPATNAM        Daggubati Purandeswari    Indian National Congress    Palla Srinivasa Rao    Praja Rajyam Party    21581    NO
22    AP    ANAKAPALLI        Sabbam Hari    Indian National Congress    Allu Aravind    Praja Rajyam Party    30239    NO
23    AP    KAKINADA        M.M.Pallamraju    Indian National Congress    Chalamalasetty Sunil    Praja Rajyam Party    32934    NO
24    AP    AMALAPURAM         G.V.Harsha Kumar    Indian National Congress    Pothula Prameela Devi    Praja Rajyam Party    30060    NO
25    AP    RAJAHMUNDRY        Aruna Kumar Vundavalli    Indian National Congress    M. Murali Mohan    Telugu Desam    15135    NO
26    AP    NARSAPURAM        Bapiraju Kanumuru    Indian National Congress    Gubbala Tammaiah    Praja Rajyam Party    71888    NO
27    AP    ELURU         Kavuri Sambasiva Rao    Indian National Congress    Maganti Venkateswara Rao(Babu)    Telugu Desam    36019    NO
28    AP    MACHILIPATNAM         Konakalla Narayana Rao    Telugu Desam    Badiga Ramakrishna    Indian National Congress    1866    NO
29    AP    VIJAYAWADA        Lagadapati Raja Gopal    Indian National Congress    Vamsi Mohan Vallabhaneni    Telugu Desam    30685    NO
30    AP    GUNTUR        Rayapati Sambasiva Rao     Indian National Congress    Madala Rajendra    Telugu Desam    18978    NO
31    AP    NARASARAOPET        Balashowry Vallabhaneni    Indian National Congress    Modugula Venugopala Reddy    Telugu Desam    3988    NO
32    AP    BAPATLA         Panabaka Lakshmi    Indian National Congress    Malyadri Sriram    Telugu Desam    43089    NO
33    AP    ONGOLE         Magunta Srinivasulu Reddy    Indian National Congress    Madduluri Malakondaiah Yadav    Telugu Desam    38947    NO
34    AP    NANDYAL        S.P.Y.Reddy    Indian National Congress    Nasyam Mohammed Farook    Telugu Desam    16735    NO
35    AP    KURNOOL        Kotla Jaya Surya Prakash Reddy    Indian National Congress    B.T.Naidu    Telugu Desam    61274    NO
36    AP    ANANTAPUR        Anantha Venkata Rami Reddy    Indian National Congress    Kalava Srinivasulu    Telugu Desam    59410    NO
37    AP    HINDUPUR        Kristappa Nimmala    Telugu Desam    P Khasim Khan    Indian National Congress    13186    NO
38    AP    KADAPA        Y.S. Jagan Mohan Reddy    Indian National Congress    Palem Srikanth Reddy    Telugu Desam    156168    NO
39    AP    NELLORE        Mekapati Rajamohan Reddy    Indian National Congress    Vanteru Venu Gopala Reddy    Telugu Desam    42407    NO
40    AP    TIRUPATI         Chinta Mohan    Indian National Congress    Varla Ramaiah    Telugu Desam    17462    NO
41    AP    RAJAMPET        Annayyagari Sai Prathap    Indian National Congress    Ramesh Kumar Reddy Reddappagari    Telugu Desam    62762    NO
42    AP    CHITTOOR         Naramalli Sivaprasad    Telugu Desam    Thippeswamy M    Indian National Congress    8806    NO
1    AR    ARUNACHAL WEST        Takam Sanjoy    Indian National Congress    Kiren Rijiju    Bharatiya Janata Party    20798    NO
2    AR    ARUNACHAL EAST        Ninong Ering    Indian National Congress    Lowangcha Wanglat    Arunachal Congress    57975    NO
1    AS    KARIMGANJ        Rajesh Mallah    Assam United Democratic Front    Lalit Mohan Suklabaidya    Indian National Congress    37542    NO
2    AS    SILCHAR        Kabindra Purkayastha    Bharatiya Janata Party    Badruddin Ajmal    Assam United Democratic Front    15243    NO
3    AS    AUTONOMOUS DISTRICT        Biren Singh Engti    Indian National Congress    Elwin Teron    Autonomous State Demand Committee    71819    NO
4    AS    DHUBRI        Badruddin Ajmal    Assam United Democratic Front    Anwar Hussain    Indian National Congress    161394    NO
5    AS    KOKRAJHAR        Sansuma Khunggur Bwiswmuthiary    Bodaland Peoples Front    Urkhao Gwra Brahma    Independent    165034    NO
6    AS    BARPETA        Ismail Hussain    Indian National Congress    Bhupen Ray    Asom Gana Parishad    2974    NO
7    AS    GAUHATI        Bijoya Chakravarty    Bharatiya Janata Party    Capt. Robin Bordoloi    Indian National Congress    2092    NO
8    AS    MANGALDOI        Ramen Deka    Bharatiya Janata Party    Madhab Rajbangshi    Indian National Congress    40759    NO
9    AS    TEZPUR        Joseph Toppo    Asom Gana Parishad    Moni Kumar Subba    Indian National Congress    22778    NO
10    AS    NOWGONG        Rajen Gohain    Bharatiya Janata Party    Anil Raja    Indian National Congress    54992    NO
11    AS    KALIABOR        Dip Gogoi    Indian National Congress    Gunin Hazarika    Asom Gana Parishad    115587    NO
12    AS    JORHAT        Bijoy Krishna Handique    Indian National Congress    Kamakhya Tasa    Bharatiya Janata Party    63749    NO
13    AS    DIBRUGARH        Sima Ghosh    Independent    Lakhi Charan Swansi    Independent    13171    NO
14    AS    LAKHIMPUR        Ranee Narah    Indian National Congress    Dr. Arun Kr. Sarma    Asom Gana Parishad    22689    NO
1    BR    VALMIKI NAGAR        Baidyanath Prasad Mahto    Janata Dal (United)    Fakhruddin    Independent    92894    NO
2    BR    PASCHIM CHAMPARAN        Dr. Sanjay Jaiswal    Bharatiya Janata Party    Prakash Jha    Lok Jan Shakti Party    27380    NO
3    BR    PURVI CHAMPARAN        Radha Mohan Singh    Bharatiya Janata Party    Akhilesh Prasad Singh    Rashtriya Janata Dal    16852    NO
4    BR    SHEOHAR        Rama Devi    Bharatiya Janata Party    Sitaram Singh    Rashtriya Janata Dal    20138    NO
5    BR    SITAMARHI        Arjun Roy    Janata Dal (United)    Samir Kumar Mahaseth    Indian National Congress    58330    NO
6    BR    MADHUBANI        Hukmadeo Narayan Yadav    Bharatiya Janata Party    Abdulbari Siddiki    Rashtriya Janata Dal    14813    NO
7    BR    JHANJHARPUR        Mangani Lal Mandal    Janata Dal (United)    Devendra Prasad Yadav    Rashtriya Janata Dal    15645    NO
8    BR    SUPAUL        Vishwa Mohan Kumar    Janata Dal (United)    Ranjeet Ranjan    Indian National Congress    156716    NO
9    BR    ARARIA        Pradeep Kumar Singh    Bharatiya Janata Party    Zakir Hussain Khan    Lok Jan Shakti Party    990    NO
10    BR    KISHANGANJ        Mohammad Asrarul Haque    Indian National Congress    Syed Mahmood Ashraf    Janata Dal (United)    23819    NO
11    BR    KATIHAR        Nikhil Kumar Choudhary    Bharatiya Janata Party    Shah Tariq Anwar    Nationalist Congress Party    25043    NO
12    BR    PURNIA        Uday Singh Alias Pappu Singh    Bharatiya Janata Party    Shanti Priya    Independent    45055    NO
13    BR    MADHEPURA        Sharad Yadav    Janata Dal (United)    Prof. Ravindra Charan Yadav    Rashtriya Janata Dal    63004    NO
14    BR    DARBHANGA        Kirti Azad    Bharatiya Janata Party    Md. Ali Ashraf Fatmi    Rashtriya Janata Dal    10506    NO
15    BR    MUZAFFARPUR        Captain Jai Narayan Prasad Nishad    Janata Dal (United)    Bhagwanlal Sahni    Lok Jan Shakti Party    22358    NO
16    BR    VAISHALI        Raghuvansh Prasad Singh    Rashtriya Janata Dal    Vijay Kumar Shukla    Janata Dal (United)    16884    NO
17    BR    GOPALGANJ         Purnmasi Ram    Janata Dal (United)    Anil Kumar    Rashtriya Janata Dal    14206    NO
18    BR    SIWAN        Om Prakash Yadav    Independent    Hena Shahab    Rashtriya Janata Dal    46540    NO
19    BR    MAHARAJGANJ        Prabhu Nath Singh    Janata Dal (United)    Uma Shanaker Singh    Rashtriya Janata Dal    3826    NO
20    BR    SARAN        Lalu Prasad    Rashtriya Janata Dal    Rajiv Pratap Rudy    Bharatiya Janata Party    12043    NO
21    BR    HAJIPUR         Ram Sundar Das    Janata Dal (United)    Ram Vilas Paswan    Lok Jan Shakti Party    25499    NO
22    BR    UJIARPUR        Aswamedh Devi    Janata Dal (United)    Alok Kumar Mehta    Rashtriya Janata Dal    3919    NO
23    BR    SAMASTIPUR         Maheshwar Hazari    Janata Dal (United)    Ram Chandra Paswan    Lok Jan Shakti Party    16617    NO
24    BR    BEGUSARAI        Dr. Monazir Hassan    Janata Dal (United)    Shatrughna Prasad Singh    Communist Party of India    7134    NO
25    BR    KHAGARIA        Dinesh Chandra Yadav    Janata Dal (United)    Ravindar Kr. Rana    Rashtriya Janata Dal    111954    NO
26    BR    BHAGALPUR        Syed Shahnawaz Hussain    Bharatiya Janata Party    Shakuni Choudhary    Rashtriya Janata Dal    51019    NO
27    BR    BANKA        Digvijay Singh    Independent    Jai Prakesh Narain Yadav    Rashtriya Janata Dal    1717    NO
28    BR    MUNGER        Rajiv Ranjan Singh Alias Lalan Singh    Janata Dal (United)    Ram Badan Roy    Rashtriya Janata Dal    93963    NO
29    BR    NALANDA        Kaushalendra Kumar    Janata Dal (United)    Satish Kumar    Lok Jan Shakti Party    57221    NO
30    BR    PATNA SAHIB        Shatrughan Sinha    Bharatiya Janata Party    Vijay Kumar    Rashtriya Janata Dal    149553    NO
31    BR    PATALIPUTRA        Ranjan Prasad Yadav    Janata Dal (United)    Lalu Prasad    Rashtriya Janata Dal    18071    NO
32    BR    ARRAH        Meena Singh    Janata Dal (United)    Rama Kishore Singh    Lok Jan Shakti Party    32291    NO
33    BR    BUXAR        Lal Muni Choubey    Bharatiya Janata Party    Jagada Nand Singh    Rashtriya Janata Dal    5884    NO
34    BR    SASARAM         Meira Kumar    Indian National Congress    Muni Lal    Bharatiya Janata Party    7236    NO
35    BR    KARAKAT        Mahabali Singh    Janata Dal (United)    Kanti Singh    Rashtriya Janata Dal    15062    NO
36    BR    JAHANABAD         Jagdish Sharma    Janata Dal (United)    Surendra Prasad Yadav    Rashtriya Janata Dal    9210    NO
37    BR    AURANGABAD        Sushil Kumar Singh    Janata Dal (United)    Shakil Ahmad Khan    Rashtriya Janata Dal    27551    NO
38    BR    GAYA         Hari Manjhi    Bharatiya Janata Party    Ramji Manjhi    Rashtriya Janata Dal    58906    NO
39    BR    NAWADA        Bhola Singh    Bharatiya Janata Party    Veena Devi    Lok Jan Shakti Party    4582    NO
40    BR    JAMUI         Bhudeo Choudhary    Janata Dal (United)    Shyam Rajak    Rashtriya Janata Dal    19419    NO
1    GA    NORTH GOA        Shripad Yesso Naik    Bharatiya Janata Party    Jitendra Raghuraj Deshprabhu    Nationalist Congress Party    6353    NO
2    GA    SOUTH GOA        Cosme Francisco Caitano Sardinha    Indian National Congress    Adv. Narendra Keshav Sawaikar    Bharatiya Janata Party    12516    YES
1    GJ    KACHCHH        Jat Poonamben Veljibhai    Bharatiya Janata Party    Danicha Valjibhai Punamchandra    Indian National Congress    69187    NO
2    GJ    BANASKANTHA        Gadhvi Mukeshkumar Bheiravdanji    Indian National Congress    Chaudhary Haribhai Parathibhai    Bharatiya Janata Party    10317    NO
3    GJ    PATAN        Jagdish Thakor    Indian National Congress    Rathod Bhavsinhbhai Dahyabhai    Bharatiya Janata Party    27015    NO
4    GJ    MAHESANA        Patel Jayshreeben Kanubhai    Bharatiya Janata Party    Patel Jivabhai Ambalal    Indian National Congress    22003    YES
5    GJ    SABARKANTHA        Chauhan Mahendrasinh    Bharatiya Janata Party    Mistry Madhusudan    Indian National Congress    17160    NO
6    GJ    GANDHINAGAR        L.K.Advani    Bharatiya Janata Party    Patel Sureshkumar Chaturdas (Suresh Patel)    Indian National Congress    134558    NO
7    GJ    AHMEDABAD EAST        Harin Pathak    Bharatiya Janata Party    Babaria Dipakbhai Ratilal    Indian National Congress    89547    NO
8    GJ    AHMEDABAD WEST        Dr. Solanki Kiritbhai Premajibhai    Bharatiya Janata Party    Parmar Shailesh Manharlal    Indian National Congress    91127    NO
9    GJ    SURENDRANAGAR        Mer Laljibhai Chaturbhai    Bharatiya Janata Party    Koli Patel Somabhai Gandalal    Indian National Congress    1273    NO
10    GJ    RAJKOT        Kuvarjibhai Mohanbhai Bavalia    Indian National Congress    Kirankumar Valjibhai Bhalodia (Patel)    Bharatiya Janata Party    13362    NO
11    GJ    PORBANDAR        Radadiya Vitthalbhai Hansrajbhai    Indian National Congress    Khachariya Mansukhbhai Shamjibhai    Bharatiya Janata Party    38342    NO
12    GJ    JAMNAGAR        Ahir Vikrambhai Arjanbhai Madam    Indian National Congress    Mungra Rameshbhai Devrajbhai    Bharatiya Janata Party    2463    NO
13    GJ    JUNAGADH        Solanki Dinubhai Boghabhai    Bharatiya Janata Party    Barad Jashubhai Dhanabhai    Indian National Congress    13759    NO
14    GJ    AMRELI        Kachhadia Naranbhai    Bharatiya Janata Party    Nilaben Virjibhai Thummar    Indian National Congress    37317    NO
15    GJ    BHAVNAGAR        Rajendrasinh Ghanshyamsinh Rana (Rajubhai Rana)    Bharatiya Janata Party    Gohilmahavirsinhbhagirathsinh    Indian National Congress    13964    NO
16    GJ    ANAND        Solanki Bharatbhai Madhavsinh    Indian National Congress    Patel Dipakbhai Chimanbhai    Bharatiya Janata Party    67318    NO
17    GJ    KHEDA        Chauhan Devusinh Jesingbhai    Bharatiya Janata Party    Dinsha Patel    Indian National Congress    4973    NO
18    GJ    PANCHMAHAL        Chauhan Prabhatsinh Pratapsinh    Bharatiya Janata Party    Vaghela Shankarsinh Laxmansinh    Indian National Congress    2081    NO
19    GJ    DAHOD        Dr. Prabha Kishor Taviad    Indian National Congress    Damor Somjibhai Punjabhai    Bharatiya Janata Party    58536    NO
20    GJ    VADODARA        Balkrishna Khanderao Shukla (Balu Shukla)    Bharatiya Janata Party    Gaekwad Satyajitsinh Dulipsinh    Indian National Congress    136028    YES
21    GJ    CHHOTA UDAIPUR        Rathwa Ramsingbhai Patalbhai    Bharatiya Janata Party    Rathwa Naranbhai Jemlabhai    Indian National Congress    13493    NO
22    GJ    BHARUCH        Mansukhbhai Dhanjibhai Vasava    Bharatiya Janata Party    Umerji Ahmed Ugharatdar (Aziz Tankarvi)    Indian National Congress    31846    NO
23    GJ    BARDOLI        Chaudhari Tusharbhai Amrasinhbhai    Indian National Congress    Vasava Riteshkumar Amarsinh    Bharatiya Janata Party    59463    NO
24    GJ    SURAT        Shrimati Darshana Vikram Jardosh    Bharatiya Janata Party    Gajera Dhirubhai Haribhai    Indian National Congress    74798    NO
25    GJ    NAVSARI        C. R. Patil    Bharatiya Janata Party    Dhansukha Rajput    Indian National Congress    118558    NO
26    GJ    VALSAD        Kishanbhai Vestabhai Patel    Indian National Congress    Patel Dhirubhai Chhaganbhai (Dr. D.C.Patel)    Bharatiya Janata Party    7169    NO
1    HR    AMBALA        Selja    Indian National Congress    Rattan Lal Kataria    Bharatiya Janata Party    14925    NO
2    HR    KURUKSHETRA        Naveen Jindal    Indian National Congress    Ashok Kumar Arora    Indian National Lok Dal    118729    NO
3    HR    SIRSA        Ashok Tanwar    Indian National Congress    Dr. Sita Ram    Indian National Lok Dal    35877    NO
4    HR    HISAR        Bhajan Lal S/O Kheraj    Haryana Janhit Congress (BL)    Sampat Singh    Indian National Lok Dal    24443    NO
5    HR    KARNAL        Arvind Kumar Sharma    Indian National Congress    Maratha Virender Verma    Bahujan Samaj Party    62190    NO
6    HR    SONIPAT        Jitender Singh    Indian National Congress    Kishan Singh Sangwan    Bharatiya Janata Party    148409    NO
7    HR    ROHTAK        Deepender Singh    Indian National Congress    Nafe Singh Rathee    Indian National Lok Dal    445736    NO
8    HR    BHIWANI-MAHENDRAGARH        Shruti Choudhry    Indian National Congress    Ajay Singh Chautala    Indian National Lok Dal    25647    NO
9    HR    GURGAON        Inderjit Singh    Indian National Congress    Zakir Hussain    Bahujan Samaj Party    86438    NO
10    HR    FARIDABAD        Avtar Singh Bhadana    Indian National Congress    Ramchander Bainda    Bharatiya Janata Party    49661    NO
1    HP    KANGRA        Dr. Rajan Sushant    Bharatiya Janata Party    Chander Kumar    Indian National Congress    24368    NO
2    HP    MANDI        Virbhadra Singh    Indian National Congress    Maheshwar Singh    Bharatiya Janata Party    13997    YES
3    HP    HAMIRPUR        Anurag Singh Thakur    Bharatiya Janata Party    Narinder Thakur    Indian National Congress    72732    NO
4    HP    SHIMLA        Virender Kashyap    Bharatiya Janata Party    Dhani Ram Shandil    Indian National Congress    29568    NO
1    JK    BARAMULLA        Sharief Ud Din Shariq    Jammu & Kashmir National Conference    Mohammad Dilawar Mir    Jammu & Kashmir Peoples Democratic Party    46361    NO
2    JK    SRINAGAR        Farooq Abdullah    Jammu & Kashmir National Conference    Iftikhar Hussain Ansari    Jammu & Kashmir Peoples Democratic Party    30242    NO
3    JK    ANANTNAG        Mirza Mehboob Beg    Jammu & Kashmir National Conference    Peer Mohd Hussain    Jammu & Kashmir Peoples Democratic Party    373    NO
4    JK    LADAKH        Hassan Khan    Independent    Asgar Ali Karbalaie    Independent    7513    NO
5    JK    UDHAMPUR        Ch. Lal Singh    Indian National Congress    Dr. Nirmal Singh    Bharatiya Janata Party    13394    NO
6    JK    JAMMU        Madan Lal Sharma    Indian National Congress    Lila Karan Sharma    Bharatiya Janata Party    118165    NO
1    KA    CHIKKODI        Katti Ramesh Vishwanath    Bharatiya Janata Party    Prakash Babanna Hukkeri    Indian National Congress    55287    YES
2    KA    BELGAUM        Angadi Suresh Channabasappa    Bharatiya Janata Party    Amarsinh Vasantrao Patil    Indian National Congress    118687    NO
3    KA    BAGALKOT        Gaddigoudar P.C.    Bharatiya Janata Party    J.T.Patil    Indian National Congress    35446    NO
4    KA    BIJAPUR        Ramesh Chandappa Jigajinagi    Bharatiya Janata Party    Prakash Kubasing Rathod    Indian National Congress    42404    YES
5    KA    GULBARGA        Mallikarjun Kharge    Indian National Congress    Revunaik Belamgi    Bharatiya Janata Party    13404    NO
6    KA    RAICHUR        Pakkirappa.S.    Bharatiya Janata Party    Raja Venkatappa Naik    Indian National Congress    30636    YES
7    KA    BIDAR        N.Dharam Singh    Indian National Congress    Gurupadappa Nagmarpalli    Bharatiya Janata Party    19342    NO
8    KA    KOPPAL        Shivaramagouda Shivanagouda    Bharatiya Janata Party    Basavaraj Rayareddy    Indian National Congress    81789    NO
9    KA    BELLARY        J. Shantha    Bharatiya Janata Party    N.Y. Hanumanthappa    Indian National Congress    2243    YES
10    KA    HAVERI        Udasi Shivkumar Chanabasappa    Bharatiya Janata Party    Saleem Ahamed    Indian National Congress    87920    NO
11    KA    DHARWAD        Pralhad Joshi    Bharatiya Janata Party    Kunnur Manjunath Channappa    Indian National Congress    137376    NO
12    KA    UTTARA KANNADA        Anantkumar Hegde    Bharatiya Janata Party    Alva Margaret    Indian National Congress    22769    YES
13    KA    DAVANAGERE        Mallikarjuna S.S.    Indian National Congress    Siddeswara G.M.    Bharatiya Janata Party    6103    NO
14    KA    SHIMOGA        B.Y. Raghavendra    Bharatiya Janata Party    S. Bangarappa    Indian National Congress    52694    NO
15    KA    UDUPI CHIKMAGALUR        D.V.Sadananda Gowda    Bharatiya Janata Party    K.Jayaprakash Hegde    Indian National Congress    17154    NO
16    KA    HASSAN        H. D. Devegowda    Janata Dal (Secular)    K. H. Hanume Gowda    Bharatiya Janata Party    191514    NO
17    KA    DAKSHINA KANNADA        Nalin Kumar Kateel    Bharatiya Janata Party    Janardhana Poojary    Indian National Congress    40420    YES
18    KA    CHITRADURGA        Janardhana Swamy    Bharatiya Janata Party    Dr. B Thippeswamy    Indian National Congress    107373    NO
19    KA    TUMKUR        G.S. Basavaraj    Bharatiya Janata Party    Muddahanumegowda S.P.    Janata Dal (Secular)    59288    NO
20    KA    MANDYA        N Cheluvaraya Swamy @ Swamygowda    Janata Dal (Secular)    M H Ambareesh    Indian National Congress    23437    NO
21    KA    MYSORE        Adagur H Vishwanath    Indian National Congress    C.H.Vijayashankar    Bharatiya Janata Party    7691    YES
22    KA    CHAMARAJANAGAR        R.Dhruvanarayana    Indian National Congress    A.R.Krishnamurthy    Bharatiya Janata Party    11470    NO
23    KA    BANGALORE RURAL        H.D.Kumaraswamy    Janata Dal (Secular)    C. P. Yogeeshwara    Bharatiya Janata Party    130275    NO
24    KA    BANGALORE NORTH        D. B. Chandre Gowda    Bharatiya Janata Party    C. K. Jaffer Sharief    Indian National Congress    49448    NO
25    KA    BANGALORE CENTRAL        P. C. Mohan    Bharatiya Janata Party    H.T.Sangliana    Indian National Congress    24385    NO
26    KA    BANGALORE SOUTH        Ananth Kumar    Bharatiya Janata Party    Krishna Byre Gowda    Indian National Congress    37612    NO
27    KA    CHIKKBALLAPUR        M.Veerappa Moily    Indian National Congress    C.Aswathanarayana    Bharatiya Janata Party    17697    NO
28    KA    KOLAR        K.H.Muniyappa    Indian National Congress    D.S.Veeraiah    Bharatiya Janata Party    23006    YES
1    KL    KASARAGOD        P Karunakaran    Communist Party of India (Marxist)    Shahida Kamal    Indian National Congress    64427    NO
2    KL    KANNUR        K. Sudhakaran    Indian National Congress    K.K Ragesh    Communist Party of India (Marxist)    43151    YES
3    KL    VADAKARA        Mullappally Ramachandran    Indian National Congress    Adv. P. Satheedevi    Communist Party of India (Marxist)    56186    YES
4    KL    WAYANAD        M.I. Shanavas    Indian National Congress    Advocate. M. Rahmathulla    Communist Party of India    153439    NO
5    KL    KOZHIKODE        M.K. Raghavan    Indian National Congress    Adv. P.A. Mohamed Riyas    Communist Party of India (Marxist)    838    NO
6    KL    MALAPPURAM        E. Ahamed    Muslim League Kerala State Committee    T.K. Hamza    Communist Party of India (Marxist)    115569    NO
7    KL    PONNANI        E.T. Muhammed Basheer    Muslim League Kerala State Committee    Dr. Hussain Randathani    Independent    84478    NO
8    KL    PALAKKAD        M.B. Rajesh    Communist Party of India (Marxist)    Satheesan Pacheni    Indian National Congress    1820    NO
9    KL    ALATHUR         P.K Biju    Communist Party of India (Marxist)    N.K Sudheer    Indian National Congress    20960    NO
10    KL    THRISSUR        P C Chacko    Indian National Congress    C N Jayadevan    Communist Party of India    25421    NO
11    KL    CHALAKUDY        K.P. Dhanapalan    Indian National Congress    Adv. U.P Joseph    Communist Party of India (Marxist)    71679    NO
12    KL    ERNAKULAM        Prof. K V Thomas    Indian National Congress    Sindhu Joy    Communist Party of India (Marxist)    11790    NO
13    KL    IDUKKI        Adv. P.T Thomas    Indian National Congress    Adv. K. Francis George    Kerala Congress    74796    NO
14    KL    KOTTAYAM        Jose K.Mani (Karingozheckal)    Kerala Congress (M)    Adv. Suresh Kurup    Communist Party of India (Marxist)    66170    NO
15    KL    ALAPPUZHA        K.C Venugopal    Indian National Congress    Dr. K.S Manoj    Communist Party of India (Marxist)    57791    NO
16    KL    MAVELIKKARA         Kodikkunnil Suresh    Indian National Congress    R.S Anil    Communist Party of India    48240    NO
17    KL    PATHANAMTHITTA        Anto Antony Punnathaniyil    Indian National Congress    Adv.K.Anantha Gopan    Communist Party of India (Marxist)    111206    NO
18    KL    KOLLAM        N.Peethambarakurup    Indian National Congress    P.Rajendran    Communist Party of India (Marxist)    17531    NO
19    KL    ATTINGAL        Adv. A Sampath    Communist Party of India (Marxist)    Prof.G Balachandran    Indian National Congress    17660    NO
20    KL    THIRUVANANTHAPURAM        Shashi Tharoor    Indian National Congress    Adv. P Ramachandran Nair    Communist Party of India    100045    NO
1    MP    MORENA        Narendra Singh Tomar    Bharatiya Janata Party    Ramniwas Rawat    Indian National Congress    96255    NO
2    MP    BHIND        Ashok Argal    Bharatiya Janata Party    Dr. Bhagirath Prasad    Indian National Congress    8086    NO
3    MP    GWALIOR        Yashodhara Raje Scindia    Bharatiya Janata Party    Ashok Singh    Indian National Congress    21923    NO
4    MP    GUNA        Jyotiraditya Madhavrao Scindia    Indian National Congress    Dr.Narottam Mishra    Bharatiya Janata Party    189578    NO
5    MP    SAGAR        Bhupendra Singh    Bharatiya Janata Party    Aslam Sher Khan    Indian National Congress    131168    NO
6    MP    TIKAMGARH        Virendra Kumar    Bharatiya Janata Party    Ahirwar Vrindavan    Indian National Congress    41862    NO
7    MP    DAMOH        Shivraj Bhaiya    Bharatiya Janata Party    Chandrabhan Bhaiya    Indian National Congress    55747    NO
8    MP    KHAJURAHO        Jeetendra Singh Bundela    Bharatiya Janata Party    Raja Paterya    Indian National Congress    28332    NO
9    MP    SATNA        Ganesh Singh    Bharatiya Janata Party    Sukhlal Kushwaha    Bahujan Samaj Party    377    NO
10    MP    REWA        Deoraj Singh Patel    Bahujan Samaj Party    Sunder Lal Tiwari    Indian National Congress    3644    NO
11    MP    SIDHI        Govind Prasad Mishra    Bharatiya Janata Party    Indrajeet Kumar    Indian National Congress    44915    NO
12    MP    SHAHDOL        Rajesh Nandini Singh    Indian National Congress    Narendra Singh Maravi    Bharatiya Janata Party    13415    NO
13    MP    JABALPUR        Rakesh Singh    Bharatiya Janata Party    Advocate Rameshwar Neekhra    Indian National Congress    106003    YES
14    MP    MANDLA        Basori Singh Masram    Indian National Congress    Faggan Singh Kulaste    Bharatiya Janata Party    62726    NO
15    MP    BALAGHAT        K. D. Deshmukh    Bharatiya Janata Party    Vishveshwar Bhagat    Indian National Congress    40898    NO
16    MP    CHHINDWARA        Kamal Nath    Indian National Congress    Marot Rao Khavase    Bharatiya Janata Party    74134    NO
17    MP    HOSHANGABAD        Uday Pratap Singh    Indian National Congress    Rampal Singh    Bharatiya Janata Party    17542    NO
18    MP    VIDISHA        Sushma Swaraj    Bharatiya Janata Party    Choudhary Munabbar Salim    Samajwadi Party    375074    NO
19    MP    BHOPAL        Kailash Joshi    Bharatiya Janata Party    Surendra Singh Thakur    Indian National Congress    30764    NO
20    MP    RAJGARH        Narayansingh Amlabe    Indian National Congress    Lakshman Singh    Bharatiya Janata Party    24856    NO
21    MP    DEWAS        Sajjan Singh Verma    Indian National Congress    Thavarchand Gehlot    Bharatiya Janata Party    16084    NO
22    MP    UJJAIN        Guddu Premchand    Indian National Congress    Dr. Satyanarayan Jatiya    Bharatiya Janata Party    15841    NO
23    MP    MANDSOUR        Meenakshi Natrajan    Indian National Congress    Dr. Laxminarayan Pandey    Bharatiya Janata Party    26817    NO
24    MP    RATLAM        Kantilal Bhuria    Indian National Congress    Dileepsingh Bhuria    Bharatiya Janata Party    57668    NO
25    MP    DHAR        Gajendra Singh Rajukhedi    Indian National Congress    Mukam Singh Kirade    Bharatiya Janata Party    2012    NO
26    MP    INDORE        Sumitra Mahajan (Tai)    Bharatiya Janata Party    Satynarayan Patel    Indian National Congress    11365    NO
27    MP    KHARGONE        Makansingh Solanki (Babuji)    Bharatiya Janata Party    Balaram Bachchan    Indian National Congress    34175    NO
28    MP    KHANDWA        Arun Subhashchandra Yadav    Indian National Congress    Nandkumar Sing Chauhan Nandu Bhaiya    Bharatiya Janata Party    49081    NO
29    MP    BETUL        Jyoti Dhurve    Bharatiya Janata Party    Ojharam Evane    Indian National Congress    97317    NO
1    MH    NANDURBAR         Gavit Manikrao Hodlya    Indian National Congress    Gavit Sharad Krushnrao    Samajwadi Party    13952    NO
2    MH    DHULE        Amarishbhai Rasiklal Patel    Indian National Congress    Sonawane Pratap Narayanrao    Bharatiya Janata Party    4220    NO
3    MH    JALGAON        A.T. Nana Patil    Bharatiya Janata Party    Adv. Vasantrao Jivanrao More    Nationalist Congress Party    96020    NO
4    MH    RAVER        Haribhau Madhav Jawale    Bharatiya Janata Party    Adv. Ravindra Pralhadrao Patil    Nationalist Congress Party    28692    NO
5    MH    BULDHANA        Jadhav Prataprao Ganpatrao    Shivsena    Shingane Dr.Rajendra Bhaskarrao    Nationalist Congress Party    30565    NO
6    MH    AKOLA        Dhotre Sanjay Shamrao    Bharatiya Janata Party    Ambedkar Prakash Yashwant    Bharipa Bahujan Mahasangha    59331    NO
7    MH    AMRAVATI         Adsul Anandrao Vithoba    Shivsena    Gawai Rajendra Ramkrushna    Republican Party of India    33563    NO
8    MH    WARDHA        Datta Meghe    Indian National Congress    Suresh Ganpatrao Waghmare    Bharatiya Janata Party    121938    NO
9    MH    RAMTEK         Wasnik Mukul Balkrishna    Indian National Congress    Tumane Krupal Balaji    Shivsena    16465    NO
10    MH    NAGPUR         Muttemwar Vilasrao Baburaoji    Indian National Congress    Purohit Banwarilal Bhagwandas    Bharatiya Janata Party    7078    NO
11    MH    BHANDARA – GONDIYA        Patel Praful Manoharbhai    Nationalist Congress Party    Nanabhau Falgunrao Patole    Independent    119604    NO
12    MH    GADCHIROLI-CHIMUR        Kowase Marotrao Sainuji    Indian National Congress    Ashok Mahadeorao Nete    Bharatiya Janata Party    4795    NO
13    MH    CHANDRAPUR        Ahir Hansaraj Gangaram    Bharatiya Janata Party    Pugalia Naresh    Indian National Congress    7044    NO
14    MH    YAVATMAL-WASHIM        Bhavana Gawali (Patil)    Shivsena    Harising Rathod    Indian National Congress    114    NO
15    MH    HINGOLI         Subhash Bapurao Wankhede    Shivsena    Suryakanta Jaiwantrao Patil    Nationalist Congress Party    73569    NO
16    MH    NANDED        Khatgaonkar Patil Bhaskarrao Bapurao    Indian National Congress    Sambhaji Pawar    Bharatiya Janata Party    74975    NO
17    MH    PARBHANI        Adv. Dudhgaonkar Ganeshrao Nagorao    Shivsena    Warpudkar Suresh Ambadasrao    Nationalist Congress Party    30356    NO
18    MH    JALNA        Danve Raosaheb Dadarao    Bharatiya Janata Party    Dr. Kale Kalyan Vaijinathrao    Indian National Congress    9143    NO
19    MH    AURANGABAD        Chandrakant Khaire    Shivsena    Uttamsingh Rajdharsingh Pawar    Indian National Congress    18142    NO
20    MH    DINDORI         Chavan Harishchandra Deoram    Bharatiya Janata Party    Zirwal Narhari Sitaram    Nationalist Congress Party    37347    YES
21    MH    NASHIK        Sameer Bhujbal    Nationalist Congress Party    Godse Hemant Tukaram    Maharashtra Navnirman sena    22032    NO
22    MH    PALGHAR         Jadhav Baliram Sukur    Bahujan Vikas Aaghadi    Adv. Chintaman Vanga    Bharatiya Janata Party    12360    NO
23    MH    BHIWANDI        Taware Suresh Kashinath    Indian National Congress    Patil Jagannath Shivram    Bharatiya Janata Party    41364    YES
24    MH    KALYAN        Anand Prakash Paranjape    Shivsena    Davkhare Vasant Shankarrao    Nationalist Congress Party    21049    NO
25    MH    THANE        Dr.Sanjeev Ganesh Naik    Nationalist Congress Party    Chaugule Vijay Laxman    Shivsena    49020    NO
26    MH    MUMBAI NORTH        Sanjay Brijkishorlal Nirupam    Indian National Congress    Ram Naik    Bharatiya Janata Party    10054    NO
27    MH    MUMBAI NORTH WEST        Ad.Kamat Gurudas Vasant    Indian National Congress    Gajanan Kirtikar    Shivsena    33261    NO
28    MH    MUMBAI NORTH EAST        Sanjay Dina Patil    Nationalist Congress Party    Kirit Somaiya    Bharatiya Janata Party    2415    NO
29    MH    MUMBAI NORTH CENTRAL        Dutt Priya Sunil    Indian National Congress    Mahesh Ram Jethmalani    Bharatiya Janata Party    157401    NO
30    MH    MUMBAI SOUTH CENTRAL        Eknath M. Gaikwad    Indian National Congress    Suresh Anant Gambhir    Shivsena    69714    NO
31    MH    MUMBAI SOUTH        Deora Milind Murli    Indian National Congress    Bala Nandgaonkar    Maharashtra Navnirman sena    54220    NO
32    MH    RAIGAD        Anant Geete    Shivsena    Barrister A.R. Antulay    Indian National Congress    115119    NO
33    MH    MAVAL        Babar Gajanan Dharmshi    Shivsena    Pansare Azam Fakeerbhai    Nationalist Congress Party    60796    NO
34    MH    PUNE        Kalmadi Suresh    Indian National Congress    Anil Shirole    Bharatiya Janata Party    20225    NO
35    MH    BARAMATI        Supriya Sule    Nationalist Congress Party    Kanta Jaysing Nalawade    Bharatiya Janata Party    188399    NO
36    MH    SHIRUR        Adhalrao Shivaji Dattatray    Shivsena    Vilas Vithoba Lande    Nationalist Congress Party    140719    NO
37    MH    AHMADNAGAR         Gandhi Dilipkumar Mansukhlal    Bharatiya Janata Party    Kardile Shivaji Bhanudas    Nationalist Congress Party    42474    NO
38    MH    SHIRDI        Wakchaure Bhausaheb Rajaram    Shivsena    Athawale Ramdas Bandu    Republican Party of India (A)    132640    NO
39    MH    BEED        Munde Gopinathrao Pandurang    Bharatiya Janata Party    Kokate Ramesh Baburao (Adaskar)    Nationalist Congress Party    70369    NO
40    MH    OSMANABAD        Patil Padamsinha Bajirao    Nationalist Congress Party    Gaikwad Ravindra Vishwanath    Shivsena    17017    NO
41    MH    LATUR         Awale Jaywant Gangaram    Indian National Congress    Gaikwad Sunil Baliram    Bharatiya Janata Party    241    NO
42    MH    SOLAPUR         Shinde Sushilkumar Sambhajirao    Indian National Congress    Adv. Bansode Sharad Maruti    Bharatiya Janata Party    99585    NO
43    MH    MADHA        Pawar Sharadchandra Govindrao    Nationalist Congress Party    Deshmukh Subhash Sureshchandra    Bharatiya Janata Party    243142    NO
44    MH    SANGLI        Pratik Prakashbapu Patil    Indian National Congress    Ajitrao Shankarrao Ghorpade    Independent    43746    NO
45    MH    SATARA        Bhonsle Shrimant Chh. Udyanraje Pratapsinhmaharaj    Nationalist Congress Party    Purushottam Bajirao Jadhav    Shivsena    297515    NO
46    MH    RATNAGIRI – SINDHUDURG        Dr.Nilesh Narayan Rane    Indian National Congress    Suresh Prabhakar Prabhu    Shivsena    46750    NO
47    MH    KOLHAPUR        Sadashivrao Dadoba Mandlik     Independent    Chhatrapati Sambhajiraje Shahu    Nationalist Congress Party    36524    NO
48    MH    HATKANANGLE        Shetti Raju Alias Devappa Anna    Swabhimani Paksha    Mane Nivedita Sambhajirao    Nationalist Congress Party    63028    NO
1    MN    INNER MANIPUR        Dr. Thokchom Meinya    Indian National Congress    Moirangthem Nara    Communist Party of India    33321    NO
2    MN    OUTER MANIPUR        Thangso Baite    Indian National Congress    Mani Charenamei    Peoples Democratic Alliance    10586    NO
1    ML    SHILLONG        Vincent H Pala    Indian National Congress    John Filmore Kharshiing    United Democratic Party    107832    NO
2    ML    TURA         Agatha K. Sangma    Nationalist Congress Party    Debora C. Marak    Indian National Congress    17945    NO
1    MZ    MIZORAM        C.L.Ruala    Indian National Congress    Dr. H. Lallungmuana    Independent    96238    NO
1    NL    NAGALAND        C.M. Chang    Nagaland Peoples Front    K. Asungba Sangtam    Indian National Congress    422134    NO
1    OR    BARGARH        Sanjay Bhoi    Indian National Congress    Dr. Hamid Hussain    Biju Janata Dal    39632    NO
2    OR    SUNDARGARH         Jual Oram    Bharatiya Janata Party    Hemanand Biswal    Indian National Congress    6161    NO
3    OR    SAMBALPUR        Amarnath Pradhan    Indian National Congress    Rohit Pujari    Biju Janata Dal    26282    NO
4    OR    KEONJHAR         Yashbant Narayan Singh Laguri    Biju Janata Dal    Dhanurjaya Sidu    Indian National Congress    49221    NO
5    OR    MAYURBHANJ         Laxman Tudu    Biju Janata Dal    Sudam Marndi    Jharkhand Mukti Morcha    17259    NO
6    OR    BALASORE        Srikant Kumar Jena    Indian National Congress    Arun Dey    Nationalist Congress Party    10300    NO
7    OR    BHADRAK         Arjun Charan Sethi    Biju Janata Dal    Ananta Prasad Sethi    Indian National Congress    24187    NO
8    OR    JAJPUR         Mohan Jena    Biju Janata Dal    Amiya Kanta Mallik    Indian National Congress    36000    NO
9    OR    DHENKANAL        Tathagata Satpathy    Biju Janata Dal    Chandra Sekhar Tripathi    Indian National Congress    87929    NO
10    OR    BOLANGIR        Kalikesh Narayan Singh Deo    Biju Janata Dal    Narasingha Mishra    Indian National Congress    24022    NO
11    OR    KALAHANDI        Bhakta Charan Das    Indian National Congress    Subash Chandra Nayak    Biju Janata Dal    59795    NO
12    OR    NABARANGPUR         Pradeep Kumar Majhi    Indian National Congress    Domburu Majhi    Biju Janata Dal    25904    NO
13    OR    KANDHAMAL        Rudramadhab Ray    Biju Janata Dal    Ashok Sahu    Bharatiya Janata Party    57091    NO
14    OR    CUTTACK        Bhartruhari Mahtab    Biju Janata Dal    Bibhuti Bhusan Mishra    Indian National Congress    94756    NO
15    OR    KENDRAPARA         Baijayant Panda    Biju Janata Dal    Ranjib Biswal    Indian National Congress    27810    NO
16    OR    JAGATSINGHPUR         Bibhu Prasad Tarai    Communist Party of India    Rabindra Kumar Sethy    Indian National Congress    30229    NO
17    OR    PURI        Pinaki Misra    Biju Janata Dal    Braja Kishore Tripathy    Bharatiya Janata Party    81737    NO
18    OR    BHUBANESWAR        Prasanna Kumar Patasani    Biju Janata Dal    Santosh Mohanty    Indian National Congress    96043    NO
19    OR    ASKA        Nityananda Pradhan    Biju Janata Dal    Ramachandra Rath    Indian National Congress    94869    NO
20    OR    BERHAMPUR        Sidhant Mohapatra    Biju Janata Dal    Chandra Sekhar Sahu    Indian National Congress    23753    NO
21    OR    KORAPUT         Jayaram Pangi    Biju Janata Dal    Giridhar Gamang    Indian National Congress    42161    NO
1    PB    GURDASPUR        Partap Singh Bajwa    Indian National Congress    Vinod Khanna    Bharatiya Janata Party    1998    NO
2    PB    AMRITSAR        Navjot Singh Sidhu    Bharatiya Janata Party    Om Parkash Soni    Indian National Congress    9057    NO
3    PB    KHADOOR SAHIB        Dr. Rattan Singh Ajnala    Shiromani Akali Dal    Rana Gurjeet Singh    Indian National Congress    28869    NO
4    PB    JALANDHAR        Mohinder Singh Kaypee    Indian National Congress    Hans Raj Hans    Shiromani Akali Dal    36445    NO
5    PB    HOSHIARPUR        Santosh Chowdhary    Indian National Congress    Som Parkash    Bharatiya Janata Party    643    NO
6    PB    ANANDPUR SAHIB        Ravneet Singh    Indian National Congress    Dr. Daljit Singh Cheema    Shiromani Akali Dal    50363    NO
7    PB    LUDHIANA        Manish Tewari    Indian National Congress    Gurcharan Singh Galib    Shiromani Akali Dal    89676    NO
8    PB    FATEHGARH SAHIB        Sukhdev Singh    Indian National Congress    Charanjit Singh Atwal    Shiromani Akali Dal    34299    NO
9    PB    FARIDKOT        Paramjit Kaur Gulshan    Shiromani Akali Dal    Sukhwinder Singh Danny    Indian National Congress    68461    NO
10    PB    FEROZPUR        Sher Singh Ghubaya    Shiromani Akali Dal    Jagmeet Singh Brar    Indian National Congress    30853    NO
11    PB    BATHINDA        Harsimrat Kaur Badal    Shiromani Akali Dal    Raninder Singh    Indian National Congress    99521    NO
12    PB    SANGRUR        Vijay Inder Singla    Indian National Congress    Sukhdev Singh Dhindsa    Shiromani Akali Dal    42789    NO
13    PB    PATIALA        Preneet Kaur    Indian National Congress    Prem Singh Chandumajra    Shiromani Akali Dal    95502    NO
1    RJ    GANGANAGAR        Bharat Ram Meghwal    Indian National Congress    Nihal Chand    Bharatiya Janata Party    140668    NO
2    RJ    BIKANER        Arjun Ram Meghwal    Bharatiya Janata Party    Rewat Ram Panwar    Indian National Congress    19575    NO
3    RJ    CHURU        Ram Singh Kaswan    Bharatiya Janata Party    Rafique Mandelia    Indian National Congress    9525    NO
4    RJ    JHUNJHUNU        Sheesh Ram Ola    Indian National Congress    Dr Dasrath Singh Shekhawat    Bharatiya Janata Party    65321    NO
5    RJ    SIKAR        Mahadev Singh    Indian National Congress    Subhash Maharia    Bharatiya Janata Party    33819    NO
6    RJ    JAIPUR RURAL        Lal Chand Kataria    Indian National Congress    Rao Rajendra Singh    Bharatiya Janata Party    45487    NO
7    RJ    JAIPUR        Mahesh Joshi    Indian National Congress    Ghanshyam Tiwari    Bharatiya Janata Party    3628    NO
8    RJ    ALWAR        Jitendra Singh    Indian National Congress    Dr.Kiran Yadav    Bharatiya Janata Party    149251    NO
9    RJ    BHARATPUR        Ratan Singh    Indian National Congress    Khemchand    Bharatiya Janata Party    80625    NO
10    RJ    KARAULI-DHOLPUR        Khiladi Lal Bairwa    Indian National Congress    Dr Manoj Rajoria    Bharatiya Janata Party    27752    NO
11    RJ    DAUSA        Kirodi Lal    Independent    Qummer Rubbani    Independent    23539    NO
12    RJ    TONK-SAWAI MADHOPUR        Namo Narain    Indian National Congress    Kirori Singh Bainsla    Bharatiya Janata Party    472    NO
13    RJ    AJMER        Sachin Pilot    Indian National Congress    Kiran Maheshwari    Bharatiya Janata Party    76135    YES
14    RJ    NAGAUR        Dr. Jyoti Mirdha    Indian National Congress    Bindu Chaudhary    Bharatiya Janata Party    155185    NO
15    RJ    PALI        Badri Ram Jakhar    Indian National Congress    Pusp Jain    Bharatiya Janata Party    171757    NO
16    RJ    JODHPUR        Chandresh Kumari    Indian National Congress    Jaswant Singh Bisnoi    Bharatiya Janata Party    98259    YES
17    RJ    BARMER        Harish Choudhary    Indian National Congress    Manvendra Singh    Bharatiya Janata Party    119106    NO
18    RJ    JALORE        Devji Patel    Bharatiya Janata Party    Buta Singh    Independent    29177    NO
19    RJ    UDAIPUR        Raghuvir Singh Meena    Indian National Congress    Mahaveer Bhagora    Bharatiya Janata Party    165021    NO
20    RJ    BANSWARA        Tarachand Bhagora    Indian National Congress    Hakaru Maida    Bharatiya Janata Party    199418    YES
21    RJ    CHITTORGARH        (Dr.)girija Vyas    Indian National Congress    Shrichand Kriplani    Bharatiya Janata Party    65731    NO
22    RJ    RAJSAMAND        Gopal Singh    Indian National Congress    Rasa Singh Rawat    Bharatiya Janata Party    38178    NO
23    RJ    BHILWARA        Dr. C. P. Joshi    Indian National Congress    Vijayendra Pal Singh    Bharatiya Janata Party    135368    NO
24    RJ    KOTA        Ijyaraj Singh    Indian National Congress    Shyam Sharma    Bharatiya Janata Party    68106    NO
25    RJ    JHALAWAR-BARAN        Dushyant Singh    Bharatiya Janata Party    Urmila Jain “bhaya”    Indian National Congress    25503    NO
1    SK    SIKKIM        Prem Das Rai    Sikkim Democratic Front    Kharananda Upreti    Indian National Congress    48955    NO
1    TN    THIRUVALLUR         Venugopal.P    All India Anna Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam    Gayathri.S    Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam    27607    NO
2    TN    CHENNAI NORTH        Elangovan T.K.S    Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam    Pandian. D    Communist Party of India    28385    NO
3    TN    CHENNAI SOUTH        Rajendran C    All India Anna Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam    Bharathy R.S.    Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam    12962    NO
4    TN    CHENNAI CENTRAL        Dayanidhi Maran    Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam    Mogamed Ali Jinnah S.M.K.    All India Anna Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam    24352    NO
5    TN    SRIPERUMBUDUR        Baalu T R    Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam    Moorthy A K    Pattali Makkal Katchi    8222    NO
6    TN    KANCHEEPURAM         Viswanathan.P    Indian National Congress    Ramakrishnan.Dr.E    All India Anna Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam    7297    NO
7    TN    ARAKKONAM        Jagathrakshakan    Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam    Velu R    Pattali Makkal Katchi    103407    NO
8    TN    VELLORE        Abdulrahman    Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam    Vasu L K M B    All India Anna Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam    107393    NO
9    TN    KRISHNAGIRI        Sugavanam. E.G.    Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam    Nanjegowdu. K.    All India Anna Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam    45858    NO
10    TN    DHARMAPURI        Thamaraiselvan. R    Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam    Senthil. R. Dr.    Pattali Makkal Katchi    107130    NO
11    TN    TIRUVANNAMALAI        Venugopal.D    Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam    Guru (A) Gurunathan. J    Pattali Makkal Katchi    110998    NO
12    TN    ARANI        Krishnasamy M    Indian National Congress    Subramaniyan N    All India Anna Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam    78457    NO
13    TN    VILUPPURAM        Anandan M    All India Anna Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam    Swamidurai K    Viduthalai Chiruthaigal Katch    9108    NO
14    TN    KALLAKURICHI        Sankar Adhi    Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam    Dhanaraju K    Pattali Makkal Katchi    105958    NO
15    TN    SALEM        Semmalai S    All India Anna Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam    Thangkabalu K V    Indian National Congress    41509    NO
16    TN    NAMAKKAL        Gandhiselvan.S    Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam    Vairam Tamilarasi.V    All India Anna Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam    87495    NO
17    TN    ERODE        Ganeshamurthi.A.    Marumalarchi Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam    Elangovan.E.V.K.S.    Indian National Congress    45254    NO
18    TN    TIRUPPUR        Sivasami C    All India Anna Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam    Kharventhan S K    Indian National Congress    85966    NO
19    TN    NILGIRIS         Raja A    Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam    Krishnan C    Marumalarchi Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam    75810    NO
20    TN    COIMBATORE        Prabhu.R    Indian National Congress    Natarajan.P.R.    Communist Party of India (Marxist)    41048    NO
21    TN    POLLACHI        Sugumar.K    All India Anna Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam    Shanmugasundaram.K    Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam    45431    NO
22    TN    DINDIGUL        Chitthan N S V    Indian National Congress    Baalasubramani P    All India Anna Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam    54347    YES
23    TN    KARUR        Tambidurai.M    All India Anna Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam    Pallanishamy. K.C.    Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam    31070    NO
24    TN    TIRUCHIRAPPALLI        Kumar.P    All India Anna Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam    Sarubala.R.Thondaiman    Indian National Congress    5681    NO
25    TN    PERAMBALUR        Napoleon,D.    Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam    Balasubramanian,K.K.    All India Anna Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam    66551    NO
26    TN    CUDDALORE         Alagiri S    Indian National Congress    Sampath M C    All India Anna Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam    23136    NO
27    TN    CHIDAMBARAM         Thirumaavalavan, Thol    Viduthalai Chiruthaigal Katch    Ponnuswamy,E    Pattali Makkal Katchi    86277    NO
28    TN    MAYILADUTHURAI        Manian O.S    All India Anna Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam    Mani Shankar Aiyar    Indian National Congress    36854    NO
29    TN    NAGAPATTINAM         Vijayan A K S    Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam    Selvaraj M    Communist Party of India    30273    NO
30    TN    THANJAVUR        Palanimanickam.S.S    Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam    Durai.Balakrishnan    Marumalarchi Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam    101124    NO
31    TN    SIVAGANGA        Raja Kannappan R.S.    All India Anna Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam    Chidambaram P    Indian National Congress    490    NO
32    TN    MADURAI        Alagiri M.K    Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam    Mohan P    Communist Party of India (Marxist)    140985    NO
33    TN    THENI         Aaron Rashid.J.M    Indian National Congress    Thanga Tamilselvan    All India Anna Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam    5503    NO
34    TN    VIRUDHUNAGAR        Manicka Tagore    Indian National Congress    Vaiko    Marumalarchi Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam    15764    NO
35    TN    RAMANATHAPURAM        Sivakumar @ J.K. Ritheesh. K    Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam    Sathiamoorthy. V    All India Anna Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam    56352    NO
36    TN    THOOTHUKKUDI        Jeyadurai.S.R    Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam    Cynthia Pandian.Dr    All India Anna Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam    76671    NO
37    TN    TENKASI         Lingam P    Communist Party of India    Vellaipandi G    Indian National Congress    34677    NO
38    TN    TIRUNELVELI        Ramasubbu S    Indian National Congress    Annamalai K    All India Anna Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam    20948    NO
39    TN    KANNIYAKUMARI        Helen Davidson J    Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam    Radhakrishnan P    Bharatiya Janata Party    63826    NO
1    TR    TRIPURA WEST        Khagen Das    Communist Party of India (Marxist)    Sudip Roy Barman    Indian National Congress    241235    NO
2    TR    TRIPURA EAST        Baju Ban Riyan    Communist Party of India (Marxist)    Diba Chandra Hrangkhawl    Indian National Congress    291209    NO
1    UP    SAHARANPUR        Jagdish Singh Rana    Bahujan Samaj Party    Rasheed Masood    Samajwadi Party    36681    NO
2    UP    KAIRANA        Tabassum Begum    Bahujan Samaj Party    Hukum Singh    Bharatiya Janata Party    14047    NO
3    UP    MUZAFFARNAGAR        Kadir Rana    Bahujan Samaj Party    Anuradha Chaudhary    Rashtriya Lok Dal    21002    NO
4    UP    BIJNOR        Sanjay Singh Chauhan    Rashtriya Lok Dal    Shahid Siddiqui    Bahujan Samaj Party    10372    NO
5    UP    NAGINA        Yashvir Singh    Samajwadi Party    Ram Kishan Singh    Bahujan Samaj Party    11920    NO
6    UP    MORADABAD        Mohammed Azharuddin    Indian National Congress    Kunwar Sarvesh Kumar Alias Rakesh    Bharatiya Janata Party    24445    NO
7    UP    RAMPUR        Jaya Prada Nahata    Samajwadi Party    Begum Noor Bano Urf Mehtab Zamani Begum    Indian National Congress    12093    NO
8    UP    SAMBHAL        Dr. Shafiqur Rahman Barq    Bahujan Samaj Party    Iqbal Mehmood    Samajwadi Party    19762    NO
9    UP    AMROHA        Devendra Nagpal    Rashtriya Lok Dal    Mehboob Ali    Samajwadi Party    39398    NO
10    UP    MEERUT        Rajendra Agarwal    Bharatiya Janata Party    Malook Nagar    Bahujan Samaj Party    3674    NO
11    UP    BAGHPAT        Ajit Singh    Rashtriya Lok Dal    Mukesh Sharma    Bahujan Samaj Party    63382    NO
12    UP    GHAZIABAD        Rajnath Singh    Bharatiya Janata Party    Surendra Prakash Goel    Indian National Congress    43627    NO
13    UP    GAUTAM BUDDH NAGAR        Surendra Singh Nagar    Bahujan Samaj Party    Mahesh Kumar Sharma    Bharatiya Janata Party    26730    NO
14    UP    BULANDSHAHR        Kamlesh    Samajwadi Party    Ashok Kumar Pradhan    Bharatiya Janata Party    14776    NO
15    UP    ALIGARH        Zafar Alam    Samajwadi Party    Raj Kumari Chauhan    Bahujan Samaj Party    12277    NO
16    UP    HATHRAS        Sarika Singh    Rashtriya Lok Dal    Rajendra Kumar    Bahujan Samaj Party    20754    NO
17    UP    MATHURA        Jayant Chaudhary    Rashtriya Lok Dal    Shyam Sunder Sharma    Bahujan Samaj Party    35239    NO
18    UP    AGRA        Kunwar Chand (Vakil)    Bahujan Samaj Party    Dr. Ramshankar    Bharatiya Janata Party    3836    NO
19    UP    FATEHPUR SIKRI        Raj Babbar    Indian National Congress    Seema Upadhyay    Bahujan Samaj Party    10025    NO
20    UP    FIROZABAD        Akhilesh Yadav    Samajwadi Party    Prof. S.P. Singh Baghel    Bahujan Samaj Party    52555    NO
21    UP    MAINPURI        Mulayam Singh Yadav    Samajwadi Party    Vinay Shakya    Bahujan Samaj Party    93137    NO
22    UP    ETAH        Kalyan Singh R O Madholi    Independent    Kunwar Devendra Singh Yadav    Bahujan Samaj Party    102812    NO
23    UP    BADAUN        Dharmendra Yadav    Samajwadi Party    Dharam Yadav Urf D. P. Yadav    Bahujan Samaj Party    12579    NO
24    UP    AONLA        Menka Gandhi    Bharatiya Janata Party    Dharmendra Kumar    Samajwadi Party    1217    NO
25    UP    BAREILLY        Praveen Singh Aron    Indian National Congress    Santosh Gangwar    Bharatiya Janata Party    9439    NO
26    UP    PILIBHIT        Feroze Varun Gandhi    Bharatiya Janata Party    V. M. Singh    Indian National Congress    224196    NO
27    UP    SHAHJAHANPUR        Mithlesh    Samajwadi Party    Sunita Singh    Bahujan Samaj Party    43831    NO
28    UP    KHERI        Zafar Ali Naqvi    Indian National Congress    Ajay Kumar    Bharatiya Janata Party    16020    NO
29    UP    DHAURAHRA        Kunwar Jitin Prasad    Indian National Congress    Rajesh Kumar Singh Alias Rajesh Verma    Bahujan Samaj Party    96823    NO
30    UP    SITAPUR        Kaisar Jahan    Bahujan Samaj Party    Mahendra Singh Verma    Samajwadi Party    19638    NO
31    UP    HARDOI        Usha Verma    Samajwadi Party    Ram Kumar Kuril    Bahujan Samaj Party    87402    NO
32    UP    MISRIKH        Ashok Kumar Rawat    Bahujan Samaj Party    Shyam Prakash    Samajwadi Party    22999    NO
33    UP    UNNAO        Annutandon    Indian National Congress    Arunshankarshukla    Bahujan Samaj Party    195269    NO
34    UP    MOHANLALGANJ        Sushila Saroj    Samajwadi Party    Jai Prakash    Bahujan Samaj Party    66348    NO
35    UP    LUCKNOW        Lal Ji Tandon    Bharatiya Janata Party    Rita Bahuguna Joshi    Indian National Congress    31090    NO
36    UP    RAE BARELI        Sonia Gandhi    Indian National Congress    R.S.Kushwaha    Bahujan Samaj Party    276054    NO
37    UP    AMETHI        Rahul Gandhi    Indian National Congress    Asheesh Shukla    Bahujan Samaj Party    157511    NO
38    UP    SULTANPUR        Dr.Sanjay Singh    Indian National Congress    Mohd.Tahir    Bahujan Samaj Party    69185    NO
39    UP    PRATAPGARH        Rajkumari Ratna Singh    Indian National Congress    Prof. Shivakant Ojha    Bahujan Samaj Party    6346    NO
40    UP    FARRUKHABAD        Naresh Chandra Agrawal    Bahujan Samaj Party    Salman Khursheed    Indian National Congress    5472    NO
41    UP    ETAWAH        Premdas    Samajwadi Party    Gaurishanker    Bahujan Samaj Party    43513    NO
42    UP    KANNAUJ        Akhilesh Yadav    Samajwadi Party    Dr. Mahesh Chandra Verma    Bahujan Samaj Party    110828    NO
43    UP    KANPUR        Sri Prakash Jaiswal    Indian National Congress    Satish Mahana    Bharatiya Janata Party    14161    NO
44    UP    AKBARPUR        Rajaram Pal    Indian National Congress    Anil Shukla Warsi    Bahujan Samaj Party    30075    NO
45    UP    JALAUN        Ghansyam Anuragi    Samajwadi Party    Tilak Chandra Ahirwar    Bahujan Samaj Party    7332    NO
46    UP    JHANSI        Pradeep Kumar Jain (Aditya)    Indian National Congress    Ramesh Kumar Sharma    Bahujan Samaj Party    7228    NO
47    UP    HAMIRPUR        Vijay Bahadur Singh    Bahujan Samaj Party    Siddha Gopal Sahu    Indian National Congress    13663    NO
48    UP    BANDA        R. K. Singh Patel    Samajwadi Party    Bhairon Prasad Mishra    Bahujan Samaj Party    26245    NO
49    UP    FATEHPUR         Rakesh Sachan    Samajwadi Party    Mahendra Prasad Nishad    Bahujan Samaj Party    22816    NO
50    UP    KAUSHAMBI        Shailendra Kumar    Samajwadi Party    Girish Chandra Pasi    Bahujan Samaj Party    16569    NO
51    UP    PHULPUR        Kapil Muni Karwariya    Bahujan Samaj Party    Shyama Charan Gupta    Samajwadi Party    13881    NO
52    UP    ALLAHABAD        Kunwar Rewati Raman Singh Alias Mani Ji    Samajwadi Party    Ashok Kumar Bajpai    Bahujan Samaj Party    17435    NO
53    UP    BARABANKI        P.L.Punia    Indian National Congress    Kamala Prasad Rawat    Bahujan Samaj Party    147335    NO
54    UP    FAIZABAD        Nirmal Khatri    Indian National Congress    Mitrasen    Samajwadi Party    41691    NO
55    UP    AMBEDKAR NAGAR        Rakesh Pandey    Bahujan Samaj Party    Shankhlal Majhi    Samajwadi Party    8227    NO
56    UP    BAHRAICH        Kamal Kishor    Indian National Congress    Lal Mani Prasad    Bahujan Samaj Party    41205    NO
57    UP    KAISERGANJ        Brijbhushan Sharan Singh    Samajwadi Party    Dr Lalta Prasad Mishra Alias Dr L P Mishra    Bharatiya Janata Party    27873    NO
58    UP    SHRAWASTI        Vinay Kumar Alias Vinnu    Indian National Congress    Rizvan Zaheer    Bahujan Samaj Party    38796    NO
59    UP    GONDA        Beni Prasad Verma    Indian National Congress    Kirti Vardhan Singh (Raja Bhaiya)    Bahujan Samaj Party    22898    NO
60    UP    DOMARIYAGANJ        Jagdambika Pal    Indian National Congress    Jai Pratap Singh    Bharatiya Janata Party    21356    NO
61    UP    BASTI        Arvind Kumar Chaudhary    Bahujan Samaj Party    Raj Kishor Singh    Samajwadi Party    77981    NO
62    UP    SANT KABIR NAGAR        Bhisma Shankar Alias Kushal Tiwari    Bahujan Samaj Party    Bhal Chandra Yadav    Samajwadi Party    17218    NO
63    UP    MAHARAJGANJ        Harsh Vardhan    Indian National Congress    Ganesh Shanker Pandey    Bahujan Samaj Party    52122    NO
64    UP    GORAKHPUR        Adityanath    Bharatiya Janata Party    Vinay Shankar Tiwari    Bahujan Samaj Party    70171    NO
65    UP    KUSHI NAGAR        Ku. Ratanjeet Pratap Narayan Singh    Indian National Congress    Swami Prasad Maurya    Bahujan Samaj Party    10593    NO
66    UP    DEORIA        Gorakh Prasad Jaiswal    Bahujan Samaj Party    Shri Prakash Mani Tripathi    Bharatiya Janata Party    16718    NO
67    UP    BANSGAON        Kamlesh Paswan    Bharatiya Janata Party    Shree Nath Ji    Bahujan Samaj Party    22382    NO
68    UP    LALGANJ        Dr. Baliram    Bahujan Samaj Party    Neelam Sonkar    Bharatiya Janata Party    38531    NO
69    UP    AZAMGARH        Ramakant Yadav    Bharatiya Janata Party    Akbar Ahmad Dumpy    Bahujan Samaj Party    36914    NO
70    UP    GHOSI        Dara Singh Chauhan    Bahujan Samaj Party    Arshad Jamal Ansari    Samajwadi Party    17965    NO
71    UP    SALEMPUR        Ramashankar Rajbhar    Bahujan Samaj Party    Dr. Bhola Pandey    Indian National Congress    4923    NO
72    UP    BALLIA        Neeraj Shekhar    Samajwadi Party    Sangram Singh Yadav    Bahujan Samaj Party    41103    NO
73    UP    JAUNPUR        Dhananjay Singh    Bahujan Samaj Party    Paras Nath Yadava    Samajwadi Party    53859    NO
74    UP    MACHHLISHAHR        Tufani Saroj    Samajwadi Party    Kamla Kant Gautam (K.K. Gautam)    Bahujan Samaj Party    19050    NO
75    UP    GHAZIPUR        Radhey Mohan Singh    Samajwadi Party    Afzal Ansari    Bahujan Samaj Party    50237    NO
76    UP    CHANDAULI        Ramkishun    Samajwadi Party    Kailash Nath Singh Yadav    Bahujan Samaj Party    10919    NO
77    UP    VARANASI        Dr. Murli Manohar Joshi    Bharatiya Janata Party    Mukhtar Ansari    Bahujan Samaj Party    5750    NO
78    UP    BHADOHI        Gorakhnath    Bahujan Samaj Party    Chhotelal Bind    Samajwadi Party    12980    NO
79    UP    MIRZAPUR        Bal Kumar Patel    Samajwadi Party    Anil Kumar Maurya    Bahujan Samaj Party    8519    NO
80    UP    ROBERTSGANJ        Pakauri Lal    Samajwadi Party    Ram Chandra Tyagi    Bahujan Samaj Party    46930    NO
1    WB    COOCH BEHAR        Nripendra Nath Roy    All India Forward Bloc    Arghya Roy Pradhan    All India Trinamool Congress    37085    NO
2    WB    ALIPURDUARS        Manohar Tirkey    Revolutionary Socialist Party    Paban Kumar Lakra    All India Trinamool Congress    112516    NO
3    WB    JALPAIGURI        Mahendra Kumar Roy    Communist Party of India (Marxist)    Barma Sukhbilas    Indian National Congress    67529    NO
4    WB    DARJEELING        Jaswant Singh    Bharatiya Janata Party    Jibesh Sarkar    Communist Party of India (Marxist)    271267    NO
5    WB    RAIGANJ        Deepa Dasmunsi    Indian National Congress    Bireswar Lahiri    Communist Party of India (Marxist)    68682    NO
6    WB    BALURGHAT        Prasanta Kumar Majumdar    Revolutionary Socialist Party    Biplab Mitra    All India Trinamool Congress    1610    NO
7    WB    MALDAHA UTTAR        Mausam Noor    Indian National Congress    Sailen Sarkar    Communist Party of India (Marxist)    18758    NO
8    WB    MALDAHA DAKSHIN        Abu Hasem Khan Choudhury    Indian National Congress    Abdur Razzaque    Communist Party of India (Marxist)    126935    NO
9    WB    JANGIPUR        Pranab Mukherjee    Indian National Congress    Mriganka Sekhar Bhattacharya    Communist Party of India (Marxist)    61761    NO
10    WB    BAHARAMPUR        Adhir Ranjan Chowdhury    Indian National Congress    Pramothes Mukherjee    Revolutionary Socialist Party    68254    NO
11    WB    MURSHIDABAD        Abdul Mannan Hossain    Indian National Congress    Anisur Rahaman Sarkar    Communist Party of India (Marxist)    11288    NO
12    WB    KRISHNANAGAR        Tapas Paul    All India Trinamool Congress    Jyotirmoyee Sikdar    Communist Party of India (Marxist)    50892    NO
13    WB    RANAGHAT        Sucharu Ranjan Haldar    All India Trinamool Congress    Basudeb Barman    Communist Party of India (Marxist)    48444    NO
14    WB    BANGAON        Gobinda Chandra Naskar    All India Trinamool Congress    Asim Bala    Communist Party of India (Marxist)    15248    NO
15    WB    BARRACKPORE        Dinesh Trivedi    All India Trinamool Congress    Tarit Baran Topdar    Communist Party of India (Marxist)    36729    NO
16    WB    DUM DUM        Saugata Ray    All India Trinamool Congress    Amitava Nandy    Communist Party of India (Marxist)    3651    NO
17    WB    BARASAT        Kakali Ghosh Dastidar    All India Trinamool Congress    Sudin Chattopadhyay    All India Forward Bloc    29999    NO
18    WB    BASIRHAT        Sk. Nurul Islam    All India Trinamool Congress    Ajay Chakraborty    Communist Party of India    4259    NO
19    WB    JOYNAGAR        Dr. Tarun Mondal    Independent    Nimai Barman    Revolutionary Socialist Party    41657    NO
20    WB    MATHURAPUR        Choudhury Mohan Jatua    All India Trinamool Congress    Animesh Naskar    Communist Party of India (Marxist)    6717    NO
21    WB    DIAMOND HARBOUR        Somendra Nath Mitra    All India Trinamool Congress    Samik Lahiri    Communist Party of India (Marxist)    69116    NO
22    WB    JADAVPUR        Kabir Suman    All India Trinamool Congress    Sujan Chakraborty    Communist Party of India (Marxist)    24147    NO
23    WB    KOLKATA DAKSHIN        Mamata Banerjee    All India Trinamool Congress    Rabin Deb    Communist Party of India (Marxist)    137046    NO
24    WB    KOLKATA UTTAR        Sudip Bandyopadhyay    All India Trinamool Congress    Md. Salim    Communist Party of India (Marxist)    64971    NO
25    WB    HOWRAH        Ambica Banerjee    All India Trinamool Congress    Swadesh Chakrabortty    Communist Party of India (Marxist)    10672    NO
26    WB    ULUBERIA        Sultan Ahmed    All India Trinamool Congress    Hannan Mollah    Communist Party of India (Marxist)    53703    NO
27    WB    SRERAMPUR        Kalyan Banerjee    All India Trinamool Congress    Santasri Chatterjee    Communist Party of India (Marxist)    92670    NO
28    WB    HOOGHLY        Dr. Ratna De(Nag)    All India Trinamool Congress    Rupchand Pal    Communist Party of India (Marxist)    56711    NO
29    WB    ARAMBAGH        Malik Sakti Mohan    Communist Party of India (Marxist)    Sambhu Nath Malik    Indian National Congress    144361    NO
30    WB    TAMLUK        Adhikari Suvendu    All India Trinamool Congress    Lakshman Chandra Seth    Communist Party of India (Marxist)    16735    NO
31    WB    KANTHI        Adhikari Sisir Kumar    All India Trinamool Congress    Prasanta Pradhan    Communist Party of India (Marxist)    36085    NO
32    WB    GHATAL        Gurudas Dasgupta    Communist Party of India    Nure Alam Chowdhury    All India Trinamool Congress    62938    NO
33    WB    JHARGRAM        Pulin Bihari Baske    Communist Party of India (Marxist)    Amrit Hansda    Indian National Congress    109497    NO
34    WB    MEDINIPUR        Prabodh Panda    Communist Party of India    Dipak Kumar Ghosh    All India Trinamool Congress    32890    NO
35    WB    PURULIA        Narahari Mahato    All India Forward Bloc    Shantiram Mahato    Indian National Congress    5978    NO
36    WB    BANKURA        Acharia Basudeb    Communist Party of India (Marxist)    Subrata Mukherjee    Indian National Congress    44697    NO
37    WB    BISHNUPUR        Susmita Bauri    Communist Party of India (Marxist)    Seuli Saha    All India Trinamool Congress    54371    NO
38    WB    BARDHAMAN PURBA        Anup Kumar Saha    Communist Party of India (Marxist)    Ashoke Biswas    All India Trinamool Congress    52048    NO
39    WB    BURDWAN – DURGAPUR        Sk. Saidul Haque    Communist Party of India (Marxist)    Nargis Begam    Indian National Congress    79822    NO
40    WB    ASANSOL        Bansa Gopal Chowdhury    Communist Party of India (Marxist)    Ghatak Moloy    All India Trinamool Congress    46638    NO
41    WB    BOLPUR        Doctor Ram Chandra Dome    Communist Party of India (Marxist)    Asit Kumar Mal    Indian National Congress    76596    NO
42    WB    BIRBHUM        Satabdi Roy    All India Trinamool Congress    Braja Mukherjee    Communist Party of India (Marxist)    15936    NO
1    CG    SARGUJA        Murarilal Singh    Bharatiya Janata Party    Bhanu Pratap Singh    Indian National Congress    113866    NO
2    CG    RAIGARH        Vishnu Deo Sai    Bharatiya Janata Party    Hridayaram Rathiya    Indian National Congress    41920    NO
3    CG    JANJGIR-CHAMPA        Shrimati Kamla Devi Patle    Bharatiya Janata Party    Dr.Shivkumar Dahariya    Indian National Congress    35284    NO
4    CG    KORBA        Charan Das Mahant    Indian National Congress    Karuna Shukla    Bharatiya Janata Party    10348    NO
5    CG    BILASPUR        Dilip Singh Judev    Bharatiya Janata Party    Dr.Renu Jogi    Indian National Congress    18186    NO
6    CG    RAJNANDGAON        Madhusudan Yadav    Bharatiya Janata Party    Devwrat Singh    Indian National Congress    91638    NO
7    CG    DURG        Saroj Pandey    Bharatiya Janata Party    Pradeep Choubey    Indian National Congress    3397    NO
8    CG    RAIPUR        Ramesh Bais    Bharatiya Janata Party    Bhupesh Baghel    Indian National Congress    28680    NO
9    CG    MAHASAMUND        Chandulal Sahu (Chandu Bhaiya)    Bharatiya Janata Party    Motilal Sahu    Indian National Congress    12100    NO
10    CG    BASTAR        Baliram Kashyap    Bharatiya Janata Party    Shankar Sodi    Indian National Congress    63828    NO
11    CG    KANKER        Sohan Potai    Bharatiya Janata Party    Smt. Phoolo Devi Netam    Indian National Congress    18247    NO
1    JH    RAJMAHAL        Devidhan Besra    Bharatiya Janata Party    Hemlal Murmu    Jharkhand Mukti Morcha    3694    NO
2    JH    DUMKA        Shibu Soren    Jharkhand Mukti Morcha    Sunil Soren    Bharatiya Janata Party    8319    NO
3    JH    GODDA        Nishikant Dubey    Bharatiya Janata Party    Furkan Ansari    Indian National Congress    18747    NO
4    JH    CHATRA        Inder Singh Namdhari    Independent    Dhiraj Prasad Sahu    Indian National Congress    16178    NO
5    JH    KODARMA        Babulal Marandi    Jharkhand Vikas Morcha (Prajatantrik)    Raj Kumar Yadav    Communist Party of India (Marxist-Leninist) (Liberation)    38742    NO
6    JH    GIRIDIH        Ravindra Kumar Pandey    Bharatiya Janata Party    Saba Ahmad    Jharkhand Vikas Morcha (Prajatantrik)    61580    NO
7    JH    DHANBAD        Chandrashekhar Dubey    Indian National Congress    Pashupati Nath Singh    Bharatiya Janata Party    4456    NO
8    JH    RANCHI        Ram Tahal Choudhary    Bharatiya Janata Party    Subodh Kant Sahay    Indian National Congress    9420    NO
9    JH    JAMSHEDPUR        Arjun Munda    Bharatiya Janata Party    Suman Mahato    Jharkhand Mukti Morcha    57892    NO
10    JH    SINGHBHUM        Madhu Kora    Independent    Barkuwar Gagrai    Bharatiya Janata Party    84088    NO
11    JH    KHUNTI        Karia Munda    Bharatiya Janata Party    Neil Tirkey    Indian National Congress    29812    NO
12    JH    LOHARDAGA        Chamra Linda    Independent    Sudarshan Bhagat    Bharatiya Janata Party    2916    NO
13    JH    PALAMAU        Kameshwar Baitha    Jharkhand Mukti Morcha    Ghuran Ram    Rashtriya Janata Dal    4812    NO
14    JH    HAZARIBAGH        Yashwant Sinha    Bharatiya Janata Party    Saurabh Narain Singh    Indian National Congress    9161    NO
1    UK    TEHRI GARHWAL        Vijay Bahuguna    Indian National Congress    Jaspal Rana    Bharatiya Janata Party    45804    NO
2    UK    GARHWAL        Satpal Maharaj    Indian National Congress    Lt. Gen(Retd) Tejpal Singh Rawat P.V.S.M, V.S.M    Bharatiya Janata Party    17257    NO
3    UK    ALMORA        Pradeep Tamta    Indian National Congress    Ajay Tamta    Bharatiya Janata Party    6848    NO
4    UK    NAINITAL-UDHAMSINGH NAGAR        K.C. Singh Baba    Indian National Congress    Bachi Singh Rawat    Bharatiya Janata Party    78365    NO
5    UK    HARDWAR        Harish Rawat    Indian National Congress    Swami Yatindranand Giri    Bharatiya Janata Party    85040    NO
1    AN    ANDAMAN & NICOBAR ISLANDS        Shri. Bishnu Pada Ray    Bharatiya Janata Party    Shri. Kuldeep Rai Sharma    Indian National Congress    3618    NO
1    CH    CHANDIGARH        Pawan Kumar Bansal    Indian National Congress    Satya Pal Jain    Bharatiya Janata Party    58967    YES
1    DN    DADAR & NAGAR HAVELI        Patel Natubhai Gomanbhai    Bharatiya Janata Party    Delkar Mohanbhai Sanjibhai    Indian National Congress    618    YES
1    DD    DAMAN & DIU        Lalubhai Patel    Bharatiya Janata Party    Dahyabhai Vallabhbhai Patel    Indian National Congress    24838    YES
1    DL    CHANDNI CHOWK        Kapil Sibal    Indian National Congress    Vijender Gupta    Bharatiya Janata Party    200710    YES
2    DL    NORTH EAST DELHI        Jai Prakash Agarwal    Indian National Congress    B.L.Sharma Prem    Bharatiya Janata Party    138816    NO
3    DL    EAST DELHI        Sandeep Dikshit    Indian National Congress    Chetan Chauhan    Bharatiya Janata Party    129779    NO
4    DL    NEW DELHI        Ajay Makan    Indian National Congress    Vijay Goel    Bharatiya Janata Party    134979    NO
5    DL    NORTH WEST DELHI        Krishna Tirath    Indian National Congress    Meera Kanwaria    Bharatiya Janata Party    176846    NO
6    DL    WEST DELHI        Mahabal Mishra    Indian National Congress    Prof. Jagdish Mukhi    Bharatiya Janata Party    129010    NO
7    DL    SOUTH DELHI        Ramesh Kumar    Indian National Congress    Ramesh Bidhuri    Bharatiya Janata Party    75232    NO
1    LD    LAKSHADWEEP        Muhammed Hamdulla Sayeed A.B    Indian National Congress    Dr. P. Pookunhikoya    Nationalist Congress Party    2198    YES
1    PY    PUDUCHERRY        Narayanasamy    Indian National Congress    Ramadass. M    Pattali Makkal Katchi    86301    NO

India’s General Elections: 543 Matrices to Help Ordinary Citizens Audit the Election Commission’s Vote-Tallies

I do not know if anyone in India audits or checks the Election Commission’s arithmetic and procedures.   Certainly the EC seems to leave a great deal to be desired by its slowness, its high-handedness and its obscurity/lack of transparency.   I have said previously that this may be a result of obsolescent technology and management and organisation — problems that may be common across many departments of the Government of India and our State Governments.

Here then are the elements of  a tool for use of ordinary citizens which may allow everyone to check the arithmetic involved in the EC’s counting of those hundreds of millions of votes all of us have cast in the 2009 General Elections.

On the vertical axis is supposed to be the list, by Parliamentary Constituency, of all 8,070 candidates who have contested the polls to the 15th Lok Sabha.

On the horizontal axis is supposed to be a series of 543 lists of Assembly Segments for each Constituency.  Please note that the horizontal axis has had to be truncated for lack of space after only ten such segments;  this covers the vast majority of Constituencies but there are a dozen or so in Goa, J&K, Arunachal, Manipur, Mizoram, Nagaland, Tripura which are not complete as they each have many more than 10.

So altogether here are the elements of a series of 543 matrices, one for each Lok Sabha Constituency, which may help ordinary citizens engage in a process of themselves auditing the EC’s declared results.

Or, at the very least, the 543 matrices would act as a score-card, and in this nation of cricket-fans, everyone loves a score-card.

(The text below will have to be adjusted appropriately to get the right format, columns etc.)

Subroto Roy, Kolkata

SIRPUR-1     ASIFABAD-5     KHANAPUR-6     ADILABAD-7     BOATH-8     NIRMAL-9
MUDHOLE-10
S01-1-AP-ADILABAD     1ADE TUKARAM     BJP
2KOTNAK RAMESH     INC
3RATHOD RAMESH     TDP
4RATHOD SADASHIV NAIK     BSP
5MESRAM NAGO RAO     PRAP
6ATHRAM LAXMAN RAO     IND
7GANTA PENTANNA     IND
8NETHAVAT RAMDAS     IND
9BANKA SAHADEVU     IND
CHENNUR-2     BELLAMPALLY-3     MANCHERIAL-4     DHARMAPURI-22     RAMAGUNDAM-23
MANTHANI-24     PEDDAPALLE-25
S01-2-AP-PEDDAPALLE     1GAJJELA SWAMY     BSP
2GOMASA SRINIVAS     TRS
3MATHANGI NARSIAH     BJP
4DRGVIVEKANAND     INC
5AREPELLI DAVID RAJU     PRAP
6KRISHNA SABBALI     MCPI(S)
7AMBALA MAHENDAR     IND
8A KAMALAMMA     IND
9GORRE RAMESH     IND
10NALLALA KANUKAIAH     IND
11B MALLAIAH     IND
12K RAJASWARI     IND
13D RAMULU     IND
14GVINAY KUMAR     IND
15SLAXMAIAH     IND
KARIMNAGAR-26     CHOPPADANDI-27     VEMULAWADA-28     SIRCILLA-29
MANAKONDUR-30     HUZURABAD-31     HUSNABAD-32
S01-3-AP-KARIMNAGAR     1CHANDUPATLA JANGA REDDY     BJP
2PONNAM PRABHAKAR     INC
3VINOD KUMAR BOINAPALLY     TRS
4VIRESHAM NALIMELA     BSP
5RAGULA RAMULU     RPI(A)
6LINGAMPALLI SRINIVAS REDDY     MCPI(S)
7VELICHALA RAJENDER RAO     PRAP
8T SRIMANNARAYANA     PPOI
9K PRABHAKAR     IND
10KORIVI VENUGOPAL     IND
11BARIGE GATTAIAH YADAV     IND
12GADDAM RAJI REDDY     IND
13PANAKANTI SATISH KUMAR     IND
14PEDDI RAVINDER     IND
15B SURESH     IND
ARMUR-11     BODHAN-12     NIZAMABAD (URBAN)-17     NIZAMABAD (RURAL)-18
BALKONDA-19     KORATLA-20     JAGTIAL-21
S01-4-AP-NIZAMABAD     1DR BAPU REDDY     BJP
2BIGALA GANESH GUPTA     TRS
3MADHU YASKHI GOUD     INC
4YEDLA RAMU     BSP
5DUDDEMPUDI SAMBASIVA RAO CHOUDARY     LSP
6PVINAY KUMAR     PRAP
7DR VSATHYANARAYANA MURTHY     PPOI
8S SUJATHA     TPPP
9AARIS MOHAMMED     IND
10KANDEM PRABHAKAR     IND
11GADDAM SRINIVAS     IND
12RAPELLY SRINIVAS     IND
JUKKAL-13     BANSWADA-14     YELLAREDDY-15     KAMAREDDY-16     NARAYANKHED-35
ANDOLE-36     ZAHIRABAD-38
S01-5-AP-ZAHIRABAD     1CHENGAL BAGANNA     BJP
2MVISHNU MUDIRAJ     BSP
3SYED YOUSUF ALI     TRS
4SURESH KUMAR SHETKAR     INC
5BENJAMIN RAJU     IJP
6MALKAPURAM SHIVA KUMAR     PRAP
7MALLESH RAVINDER REDDY     LSP
8CHITTA RAJESHWAR RAO     IND
9POWAR SINGH HATTI SINGH     IND
10BASAVA RAJ PATIL     IND
SIDDIPET-33     MEDAK-34     NARSAPUR-37     SANGAREDDY-39     PATANCHERU-40
DUBBAK-41     GAJWEL-42
S01-6-AP-MEDAK     1NARENDRANATH C     INC
2P NIROOP REDDY     BJP
3VIJAYA SHANTHI M     TRS
4Y SHANKAR GOUD     BSP
5KOVURI PRABHAKAR     PPOI
6KHAJA QUAYUM ANWAR     PRAP
7D YADESHWAR     BSP(AP)
8K SUDHEER REDDY     LSP
9KUNDETI RAVI     IND
MEDCHAL-43     MALKAJGIRI-44     QUTHBULLAPUR-45     KUKATPALLY-46     UPPAL-47
LAL BAHADUR NAGAR-49     SECUNDERABAD CANTT.-71
S01-7-AP-MALKAJGIRI     1NALLU INDRASENA REDDY     BJP
2MBABU RAO PADMA SALE     BSP
3BHEEMSENT     TDP
4SARVEY SATYANARAYANA     INC
5SDKRISHNA MURTHY     TPPP
6TDEVENDER GOUD     PRAP
7NARENDER KUMBALA     BPD
8PRATHANI RAMAKRISHNA     RKSP
9LION C FRANCIS MJF     SP
10N V RAMA REDDY     PPOI
11DRLAVU RATHAIAH     LSP
12KANTE KANAKAIAH GANGAPUTHRA     IND
13KOYAL KAR BHOJARAJ     IND
14CHENURU VENKATA SUBBA RAO     IND
15JAJULA BHASKAR     IND
16LTCOL RETD DUSERLA PAPARAIDU     IND
17MDMANSOORALI     IND
18SVICTOR     IND
19KSRINIVASA RAJU     IND
MUSHEERABAD-57     AMBERPET-59     KHAIRATABAD-60     JUBILEE HILLS-61     SANATH
NAGAR-62     NAMPALLI-63     SECUNDRABAD-70
S01-8-AP-SECUNDRABAD     1ANJAN KUMAR YADAV M     INC
2BANDARU DATTATREYA     BJP
3M D MAHMOOD ALI     TRS
4M VENKATESH     BSP
5SRINIVASA SUDHISH RAMBHOTLA     TDP
6ABDUS SATTAR MUJAHED     MUL
7IMDAD JAH     ANC
8P DAMODER REDDY     PPOI
9DR DASOJU SRAVAN KUMAR     PRAP
10S DEVAIAH     TPPP
11CVL NARASIMHA RAO     LSP
12DR POLISHETTY RAM MOHAN     SAP
13MOHD OSMAN QURESHEE     AJBP
14SHIRAZ KHAN     UWF
15ASEERVADAM LELLAPALLI     IND
16AMBATI KRISHNA MURTHY     IND
17B GOPALA KRISHNA     IND
18DEVI DAS RAO GHODKE     IND
19BABER ALI KHAN     IND
20M BHAGYA MATHA     IND
21CH MURAHARI     IND
22G RAJAIAH     IND
23K SRINIVASA CHARI     IND
MALAKPET-58     KARWAN-64     GOSHAMAHAL-65     CHARMINAR-66
CHANDRAYANGUTTA-67     YAKUTPURA-68     BAHDURPURA-69
S01-9-AP-HYDERABAD     1ZAHID ALI KHAN     TDP
2P LAXMAN RAO GOUD     INC
3SATISH AGARWAL     BJP
4SAMY MOHAMMED     BSP
5ASADUDDIN OWAISI     AIMIM
6S GOPAL SINGH     ABJS
7TAHER KAMAL KHUNDMIRI     JD(S)
8FATIMA A     PRAP
9P VENKATESWARA RAO     PPOI
10D SURENDER     TPPP
11ALKASARY MOULLIM MOHSIN HUSSAIN     IND
12ALTAF AHMED KHAN     IND
13MA QUDDUS GHORI     IND
14ZAHID ALI KHAN     IND
15MA BASITH     IND
16MD OSMAN     IND
17B RAVI YADAV     IND
18NL SRINIVAS     IND
19MA SATTAR     IND
20D SADANAND     IND
21SYED ABDUL GAFFTER     IND
22SARDAR SINGH     IND
23MA HABEEB     IND
MAHESHWARAM-50     RAJENDRANAGAR-51     SERILINGAMPALLY-52     CHEVELLA-53
PARGI-54     VICARADAB-55     TANDUR-56
S01-10-AP-CHELVELLA     1JAIPAL REDDY SUDINI     INC
2APJITHENDER REDDY     TDP
3BADDAM BAL REDDY     BJP
4CSRINIVAS RAO     BSP
5KASANI GNANESHWAR     MANP
6KUMMARI GIRI     PPOI
7DASARA SARALA DEVI     MCPI(S)
8DRBRAGHUVEER REDDY     LSP
9SAMA SRINIVASULU     GRIP
10SMALLA REDDY     IND
11GMALLESHAM GOUD     IND
12RAMESHWARAM JANGAIAH     IND
13LAXMINARAYANA     IND
14VENKATRAM NAIK     IND
15SAYAMOOLA NARSIMULU     IND
KODANGAL-72     NARAYANPET-73     MAHBUBNAGAR-74     JADCHERLA-75
DEVARKADRA-76     MAKTHAL-77     SHADNAGAR-84
S01-11-AP-MAHBUBNAGAR     1KUCHAKULLA YADAGIRI REDDY     BJP
2K CHANDRASEKHAR RAO     TRS
3DEVARAKONDA VITTAL RAO     INC
4PALEM SUDARSHAN GOUD     BSP
5ABDUL KAREEM KHAJA MOHAMMAD     LSP
6ASIRVADAM     GRIP
7KOLLA VENKATESH MADIGA     TPPP
8GUNDALA VIJAYALAKSHMI     PPOI
9B BALRAJ GOUD     MANP
10MUNISWAMYCR     SJP(R)
11USHAN SATHYAMMA     IND
12USAIN RANGAMMA     IND
13YETTI CHINNA YENKAIAH     IND
14YETTI LINGAIAH     IND
15KANDUR KURMAIAH     IND
16KARRE JANGAIAH     IND
17GANGAPURI RAVINDAR GOUD     IND
18GAJJA NARSIMULU     IND
19CHENNAMSETTY DASHARATHA RAMULU HOLEA DASARI     IND
20MA JABBAR     IND
21DEPALLY MAISAIAH     IND
22DEPALLY SAYANNA     IND
23K NARSIMULU     IND
24NAGENDER REDDY K     IND
25PANDU     IND
26BUDIGA JANGAM LAXMAMMA     IND
27MOHAMMAD GHOUSE MOINUDDIN     IND
28MALA JANGILAMMA     IND
29RAJESH NAIK     IND
30RAIKANTI RAMADAS MADIGA     IND
31V VENKATESHWARLU     IND
32B SEENAIAH GOUD     IND
WANAPARTHY-78     GADWAL-79     ALAMPUR-80     NAGARKURNOOL-81     ACHAMPET-82
KALWAKURTHY-83     KOLLAPUR-85
S01-12-AP-NAGARKURNOOL     1GUVVALA BALARAJU     TRS
2TANGIRALA PARAMJOTHI     BSP
3DR MANDA JAGANNATH     INC
4DR T RATNAKARA     BJP
5DEVANI SATYANARAYANA     PRAP
6SPFERRY ROY     PPOI
7G VIDYASAGAR     LSP
8ANAPOSALA VENKATESH     IND
9N KURUMAIAH     IND
10BUDDULA SRINIVAS     IND
11AV SHIVA KUMAR     IND
12SIRIGIRI MANNEM     IND
13HANUMANTHU     IND
DEVARAKONDA-86     NAGARJUNA SAGAR-87     MIRYALGUDA-88     HUZURNAGAR-89
KODAD-90     SURYAPET-91     NALGONDA-92
S01-13-AP-NALGONDA     1GUTHA SUKENDER REDDY     INC
2NAZEERUDDIN     BSP
3VEDIRE SRIRAM REDDY     BJP
4SURAVARAM SUDHAKAR REDDY     CPI
5A NAGESHWAR RAO     PPOI
6PADURI KARUNA     PRAP
7DAIDA LINGAIAH     IND
8MD NAZEEMUDDIN     IND
9BOLUSANI KRISHNAIAH     IND
10BOLLA KARUNAKAR     IND
11MARRY NEHEMIAH     IND
12YALAGANDULA RAMU     IND
13KVSRINIVASA CHARYULU     IND
14SHAIK AHMED     IND
IBRAHIMPATNAM-48     MUNUGODE-93     BHONGIR-94     NAKREKAL-95
THUNGATHURTHY-96     ALAIR-97     JANGOAN-98
S01-14-AP-BHONGIR     1KOMATIREDDY RAJ GOPAL REDDY     INC
2CHINTHA SAMBA MURTHY     BJP
3NOMULA NARSIMHAIAH     CPM
4SIDDHARTHA PHOOLEY     BSP
5CHANDRA MOULI GANDAM     PRAP
6PALLA PRABHAKAR REDDY     PPOI
7RACHA SUBHADRA REDDY     LSP
8GUMMI BAKKA REDDY     IND
9POOSA BALA KISHAN BESTA     IND
10PERUKA ANJAIAH     IND
11MAMIDIGALLA JOHN BABU     IND
12MEDI NARSIMHA     IND
13RUPANI RAMESH VADDERA     IND
14SANGU MALLAYYA     IND
15SIRUPANGI RAMULU     IND
GHANPUR (STATION)-99     PALAKURTHI-100     PARKAL-104     WARANGAL WEST-105
WARANGAL EAST-106     WARDHANAPET-107     BHUPALPALLE-108
S01-15-AP-WARANGAL     1JAYAPAL V     BJP
2DOMMATI SAMBAIAH     TDP
3RAJAIAH SIRICILLA     INC
4RAMAGALLA PARAMESHWAR     TRS
5LALAIAH P     BSP
6ONTELA MONDAIAH     PPOI
7DR CHANDRAGIRI RAJAMOULY     PRAP
8BALLEPU VENKAT NARSINGA RAO     LSP
9KANNAM VENKANNA     IND
10KRISHNADHI SRILATHA     IND
11SOMAIAH GANAPURAM     IND
12DAMERA MOGILI     IND
13DUBASI NARSING     IND
14PAKALA DEVADANAM     IND
15D SREEDHAR RAO     IND
DORNAKAL-101     MAHABUBABAD-102     NARSAMPET-103     MULUG-109
PINAPAKA-110     YELLANDU-111     BHADRACHELAM-119
S01-16-AP-MAHABUBABAD     1KUNJA SRINIVASA RAO     CPI
2GUMMADI PULLAIAH     BSP
3B DILIP         BJP
4P BALRAM     INC
5DT NAIK     PRAP
6PODEM SAMMAIAH     PPOI
7BANOTH MOLCHAND     LSP
8KALTHI VEERASWAMY     IND
9KECHELA RANGA REDDY     IND
10DATLA NAGESWAR RAO     IND
11PADIGA YERRAIAH     IND
12P SATYANARAYANA     IND
KHAMMAM-112     PALAIR-113     MADIRA-114     WYRA-115     SATHUPALLI-116
KOTHAGUDEM-117     ASWARAOPETA-118
S01-17-AP-KHAMMAM     1KAPILAVAI RAVINDER     BJP
2THONDAPU VENKATESWARA RAO     BSP
3NAMA NAGESWARA RAO     TDP
4RENUKA CHOWDHURY     INC
5JALAGAM HEMAMALINI     PRAP
6JUPELLI SATYANARAYANA     LSP
7MANUKONDA RAGHURAM PRASAD     PPOI
8SHAIK MADAR SAHEB     TPPP
9AVULA VENKATESWARLU     IND
10CHANDA LINGAIAH     IND
11DANDA LINGAIAH     IND
12BANOTH LAXMA NAIK     IND
13MALLAVARAPU JEREMIAH     IND
PALAKONDA-129     KURUPAM-130     PARVATHIPURAM-131     SALUR-132     ARAKU
VALLEY-147     PADERU-148     RAMPACHODAVARAM-172
S01-18-AP-ARUKU     1KISHORE CHANDRA SURYANARAYANA DEO VYRICHERLA     INC
2KURUSA BOJJAIAH     BJP
3GADUGU BALLAYYA DORA     RJD
4MIDIYAM BABU RAO     CPM
5LAKE RAJA RAO     BSP
6MEENAKA SIMHACHALAM     PRAP
7VADIGALA PENTAYYA     LSP
8APPA RAO KINJEDI     IND
9ARIKA GUMPA SWAMY     IND
10ILLA RAMI REDDY     IND
11JAYALAKSHMI SHAMBUDU     IND
ICHCHAPURAM-120     PALASA-121     TEKKALI-122     PATHAPATNAM-123
SRIKAKULAM-124     AMADALAVALASA-125     NARASANNAPETA-127
S01-19-AP-SRIKAKULAM     1YERRNNAIDU KINJARAPU     TDP
2KILLI KRUPA RANI     INC
3TANKALA SUDHAKARA RAO     BSP
4DUPPALA RAVINDARA BABU     BJP
5KALYANI VARUDU     PRAP
6NANDA PRASADA RAO     PPOI
ETCHERLA-126     RAJAM-128     BOBBILI-133     CHEEPURUPALLE-134
GAJAPATHINAGARAM-135     NELLIMARLA-136     VIZIANAGARAM-137
S01-20-AP-VIZIANAGARAM     1APPALA NAIDU KONDAPALLI     TDP
2GOTTAPU CHINAMNAIDU     BSP
3JHANSI LAXMI BOTCHA     INC
4SANYASI RAJU PAKALAPATI     BJP
5KIMIDI GANAPATHI RAO     PRAP
6LUNKARAN JAIN     PPOI
7DATTLA SATYA APPALA SIVANANDA RAJU     LSP
8VENKATA SATYA NARAYANA RAGHUMANDA     BSSP
9MAHESWARA RAO VARRI     IND
SRUNGAVARAPUKOTA-138     BHIMLI-139     VISAKHAPATNAM EAST-140
VISAKHAPATNAM SOUTH-141     VISAKHAPATNAM NORTH-142     VISAKHAPATNAM
WEST-143     GAJUWAKA-144
S01-21-AP-VISAKHAPATNAM     1IMAHMED     BSP
2DAGGUBATI PURANDESWARI     INC
3DRMVVSMURTHI     TDP
4DVSUBBARAO     BJP
5PALLA SRINIVASA RAO     PRAP
6BETHALA KEGIYA RANI     BSP(AP)
7DBHARATHI     PPOI
8DVRAMANA VASU MASTER     TPPP
9RAMESH LANKA     BHSASP
10MTVENKATESWARALU     LSP
11APPARAO GOLAGANA     IND
12BANDAM VENKATA RAO YADAV     IND
13YADDANAPUDI RANGARAO     IND
14YALAMANCHILI PRASAD     IND
15RANGARAJU KALIDINDI     IND
CHODAVARAM-145     MADUGULA-146     ANAKAPALLE-149     PENDURTHI-150
ELAMANCHILI-151     PAYAKARAOPET-152     NARSIPATNAM-153
S01-22-AP-ANAKAPALLI     1APPA RAO KIRLA     BJP
2NOOKARAPU SURYA PRAKASA RAO     TDP
3BHEEMISETTI NAGESWARARAO     RJD
4VENKATA RAMANA BABU PILLA     BSP
5SABBAM HARI     INC
6ALLU ARAVIND     PRAP
7PULAMARASETTI VENKATA RAMANA     PPOI
8BOYINA NAGESWARA RAO     JD(U)
9NANDA GOPAL GANDHAM     IND
10PATHALA SATYA RAO     IND
TUNI-154     PRATHIPADU-155     PITHAPURAM-156     KAKINADA RURAL-157
PEDDAPURAM-158     KAKINADA CITY-160     JAGGAMPETA-171
S01-23-AP-KAKINADA     1DOMMETI SUDHAKAR     BSP
2MMPALLAMRAJU     INC
3BIKKINA VISWESWARA RAO     BJP
4VASAMSETTY SATYA     TDP
5ALURI VIJAYA LAKSHMI     LSP
6UDAYA KUMAR KONDEPUDI     TPPP
7GALI SATYAVATHI     RPI
8GIDLA SIMHACHALAM     RDMP
9CHALAMALASETTY SUNIL     PRAP
10NAMALA SATYANARAYANA     RDHP
11NPALLAMRAJU     AJBP
12BUGATHA BANGARRAO     CPI(ML)(L)
13AKAY SURYANARAYANA     IND
14CHAGANTI SURYA NARAYANA MURTHY     IND
15DANAM LAZAR BABU     IND
16BADAMPUDI BABURAO     IND
RAMACHANDRAPURAM-161     MUMMIDIVARAM-162     AMALAPURAM-163     RAZOLE-164
GANNAVARAM-165     KOTHAPETA-166     MANDAPETA-167
S01-24-AP-AMALAPURAM     1KOMMABATTULA UMA MAHESWARA RAO     BJP
2GEDDAM SAMPADA RAO     BSP
3DOCTOR GEDELA VARALAKSHMI     TDP
4GVHARSHA KUMAR     INC
5AKUMARTHI SURYANARAYANA     TPPP
6KIRAN KUMAR BINEPE     PBHP
7PVCHAKRAVARTHI     RPI(KH)
8POTHULA PRAMEELA DEVI     PRAP
9BHEEMARAO RAMJI MUTHABATHULA     PPOI
10MASA RAMADASU     RDMP
11YALANGI RAMESH     IND
ANAPARTHY-159     RAJANAGARAM-168     RAJAHMUNDRY CITY-169     RAJAMUNDRY
RURAL-170     KOVVUR-173     NIDADAVOLE-174     GOPALAPURAM-185
S01-25-AP-RAJAHMUNDRY     1ARUNA KUMAR VUNDAVALLI     INC
2M MURALI MOHAN     TDP
3VAJRAPU KOTESWARA RAO     BSP
4SOMU VEERRAJU     BJP
5UPPALAPATI VENKATA KRISHNAM RAJU     PRAP
6DATLA RAYA JAGAPATHI RAJU     PPOI
7DR PALADUGU CHANDRA MOULI     LSP
8MEDAPATI PAPIREDDY     TPPP
9MEDA SRINIVAS     RPC(S)
10PARAMATA GANESWARA RAO     IND
11MUSHINI RAMAKRISHNA RAO     IND
12VASAMSETTY NAGESWARA RAO     IND
13SANABOINA SUBHALAKSHMI     IND
ACHANTA-175     PALACOLE-176     NARASAPURAM-177     BHIMAVARAM-178     UNDI-179
TANUKU-180     TADEPALLIGUDEM-181
S01-26-AP-NARSAPURAM     1KALIDINDI VISWANADHA RAJU     BSP
2THOTA SITA RAMA LAKSHMI     TDP
3BAPIRAJU KANUMURU     INC
4BHUPATHIRAJU SRINIVASA VARMA     BJP
5ALLURI YUGANDHARA RAJU     PPOI
6GUBBALA TAMMAIAH     PRAP
7NAVUNDRU RAJENDRA PRASAD     BHSASP
8M V R RAJU     RDMP
9MANORAMA SANKU     LSP
10KALIDINDI BHIMARAJU     IND
UNGUTURU-182     DENDULURU-183     ELURU-184     POLAVARAM-186
CHINTALAPUDI-187     NUZVID-189     KAIKALUR-192
S01-27-AP-ELURU     1KAVURI SAMBASIVA RAO     INC
2KODURI VENKATA SUBBA RAJU     BJP
3PILLELLLI SUNIL     BSP
4MAGANTI VENKATESWARA RAOBABU     TDP
5YVSV PRASADA RAO YERNENI PRASADA RAO     PPOI
6KOLUSU PEDA REDDAIAH YADAV     PRAP
7SAVANAPUDI NAGARAJU     MCPI(S)
8SIRIKI SRINIVAS     RDMP
9KASI NAIDU KAMMILI     IND
10TANUKU SEKHAR     IND
11DODDA KAMESWARA RAO     IND
12DOWLURI GOVARDHAN     IND
GANNAVARAM-190     GUDIVADA-191     PEDANA-193     MACHILIPATNAM-194
AVANIGADDA-195     PAMARRU-196     PENAMALURU-197
S01-28-AP-MACHILIPATNAM     1KONAKALLA NARAYANA RAO     TDP
2CHIGURUPATI RAMALINGESWARA RAO     BSP
3BADIGA RAMAKRISHNA     INC
4BHOGADI RAMA DEVI     BJP
5KOPPULA VENKATESWARA RAO     LSP
6CHENNAMSETTI RAMACHANDRAIAH     PRAP
7YARLAGADDA RAMAMOHANA RAO     BHSASP
8VARA LAKSHMI KONERU     PPOI
9GV NAGESWARA RAO     IND
10YENDURI SUBRAMANYESWA RAO  MANI     IND
TIRUVURU-188     VIJAYWADA WEST-198     VIJAYAWADA CENTRAL-199     VIJAYAWADA
EAST-200     MYLAVARAM-201     NANDIGAMA-202     JAGGAYYAPETA-203
S01-29-AP-VIJAYAWADA     1LAGADAPATI RAJA GOPAL     INC
2LAKA VENGALA RAO     BJP
3VAMSI MOHAN VALLABHANENI     TDP
4SISTLA NARASIMHA MURTHY     BSP
5DEVINENI KISHORE KUMAR     LSP
6RAGHAVA RAO JAKKA     PPOI
7RAJIV CHANUMOLU     PRAP
8APPIKATLA JAWAHAR     IND
9KRISHNA MURTHY SUNKARA     IND
10JAKKA TARAKA MALLIKHARJUNA RAO     IND
11DEVERASETTY RAVINDRA BABU     IND
12DEVIREDDY RAVINDRANATHA REDDY     IND
13PERUPOGU VENKATESWARA RAO     IND
14BAIPUDI NAGESWARA RAO     IND
15BOPPA VENKATESWARA RAO     IND
16BOLISETTY HARIBABU     IND
17VEERLA SANJEEVA RAO     IND
18VENKATA RAO P     IND
19SENAPATHI CHIRANJEEVI     IND
20SHAIK MASTAN     IND
TADIKONDA-205     MANGALAGIRI-206     PONNUR-207     TENALI-210
PRATHIPADU-212     GUNTUR WEST-213     GUNTUR EAST-214
S01-30-AP-GUNTUR     1MALLELA BABU RAO     BSP
2RAJENDRA MADALA     TDP
3YADLAPATI SWARUPARANI     BJP
4SAMBASIVA RAO RAYAPATI     INC
5AMANULLA KHAN     LSP
6KOMMANABOINA LAKSHMAIAH     RDHP
7THOTA CHANDRA SEKHAR     PRAP
8YARRAKULA TULASI RAM YADAV     SP
9VELAGAPUDI LAKSHMANA RAO     PPOI
10SRINIVASA RAO THOTAKURA     AJBP
PEDAKURAPADU-204     CHILAKALURIPET-215     NARASARAOPET-216
SATTENPALLI-217     VINUKONDA-218     GURUZALA-219     MACHERLA-220
S01-31-AP-NARASARAOPET     1BALASHOWRY VALLABHANENI     INC
2BEJJAM RATNAKARA RAO     BSP
3VENUGOPALA REDDY MODUGULA     TDP
4VALLEPU KRUPA RAO     BJP
5SAI PRASAD EDARA     BHSASP
6GANUGAPENTA UTTAMA REDDY     LSP
7SHAIK SYED SAHEB     PRAP
8SG MASTAN VALI     PPOI
9ATCHALA NARASIMHA RAO     IND
10ANNAMRAJU VENUGOPALA MADHAVA RAO     IND
11KATAMARAJU NALAGORLA     IND
12SRINIVASA REDDY KESARI     IND
13YAMPATI VEERANJANEYA REDDY     IND
14RAMADUGU VENKATA SUBBA RAO     IND
VEMURU-208     REPALLE-209     BAPATLA-211     PARCHUR-223     ADDANKI-224
CHIRALA-225     SANTHANUTHALAPADU-226
S01-32-AP-BAPATLA     1DARA SAMBAIAH     BSP
2PANABAKA LAKSHMI     INC
3BATTULA ROSAYYA     BJP
4MALYADRI SRIRAM     TDP
5GARIKAPATI SUDHAKAR     RDMP
6NUTHAKKI RAMA RAO     PRAP
7GUDIPALLI SATHYA BABUJI     IND
8GORREMUCHU CHINNA RAO     IND
9GOLLA BABU RAO     IND
10DEVARAPALLI BUJJI BABU     IND
YERRAGONDAPALEM-221     DARSI-222     ONGOLE-227     KONDAPI-229
MARKAPURAM-230     GIDDALUR-231     KANIGIRI-232
S01-33-AP-ONGOLE     1MANDAVA VASUDEVA     BJP
2MADDULURI MALAKONDAIAH YADAV     TDP
3MAGUNTA SRINIVASULU REDDY     INC
4CHALUVADI SRINIVASARAO     PPOI
5DRNARAYANAM RADHA DEVI     LSP
6PIDATHALA SAI KALPANA     PRAP
7SHAIK SHAJAHAN     UWF
8GARRE RAMAKRISHNA     IND
9DAMA MOHANA RAO     IND
10NALAMALAPU LAKSHMINARASAREDDY     IND
11YATHAPU KONDAREDDY     IND
ALLAGADDA-253     SRISAILAM-254     NANDIKOTKUR-255     PANYAM-257
NANDYAL-258     BANAGANAPALLE-259     DHONE-260
S01-34-AP-NANDYAL     1NASYAM MOHAMMED FAROOK     TDP
2SMOHAMMED ISMAIL     BSP
3SPYREDDY     INC
4ABDUL SATTAR  G     BCUF
5PICHHIKE NARENDRA DEV     RKSP
6BHUMA VENKATA NAGI REDDY     PRAP
7RAMA JAGANNADHA REDDY TAMIDELA     LSP
8SADHU VEERA VENKATA RAMANAIAH     RDMP
9AMBATI RAMESWARA REDDY     IND
10KARTHER PANCHARATNAM     IND
11BPKAMBAGIRI SWAMY     IND
12GALI RAMA SUBBA REDDY     IND
13AUFAROOQ     IND
14GBALASWAMY     IND
15TMAHESH NAIDU     IND
16BVRAMI REDDY     IND
17BRLREDDY     IND
18VENNUPUSA VENKATESHWARA REDDY     IND
19SINGAM VENKATESHWARA REDDY     IND
20TSRINUVASULU     IND
21VSESHI REDDY     IND
KURNOOL-256     PATTIKONDA-261     KODUMUR-262     YEMMIGANUR-263
MANTRALAYAM-264     ADONI-265     ALUR-266
S01-35-AP-KURNOOL     1KOTLA JAYA SURYA PRAKASH REDDY     INC
2GADDAM RAMAKRISHNA     BSP
3BTNAIDU     TDP
4RAVI SUBRAMANYAM KA     BJP
5JALLI VENKATESH     LSP
6DRDANDIYA KHAJA PEERA     PRAP
7BNAGA JAYA CHANDRA REDDY     RDMP
8DRPRPARAMESWAR REDDY     PPOI
9DEVI RAMALINGAPPA     IND
10VV RAMANA     IND
11RAJU         IND
RAYADURG-267     URAVAKONDA-268     GUNTAKAL-269     TADPATRI-270
SINGANAMALA-271     ANANTAPUR URBAN-272     KALYANDURG-273
S01-36-AP-ANANTAPUR     1ANANTHA VENKATA RAMI REDDY     INC
2AMBATI RAMA KRISHNA REDDY     BJP
3KALAVA SRINIVASULU     TDP
4GADDALA NAGABHUSHANAM     BSP
5AMARNATH     LSP
6KRUSHNAPURAM GAYATHRI DEVI     CPI(ML)(L)
7MANSOOR     PRAP
8G HARI         PPOI
9T CHANDRA SEKHAR     IND
10DEVELLA MURALI     IND
11K P NARAYANA SWAMY     IND
12J C RAMANUJULA REDDY     IND
RAPTADU-274     MADAKASIRA-275     HINDUPUR-276     PENUKONDA-277
PUTTAPARTHI-278     DHARMAVARAM-279     KADIRI-280
S01-37-AP-HINDUPUR     1KRISTAPPA NIMMALA     TDP
2P KHASIM KHAN     INC
3NARESH CINE ACTOR     BJP
4BSPSREERAMULU     BSP
5KADAPALA SREEKANTA REDDY     PRAP
6NIRANJAN BABU K     LSP
7S MUSKIN VALI     PPOI
8K JAKEER     IND
9B NAGABHUSHANA RAO     IND
10P PRASAD PEETLA PRASAD     IND
BADVEL-243     KADAPA-245     PULIVENDLA-248     KAMALAPURAM-249
JAMMALAMADUGU-250     PRODDATUR-251     MYDUKUR-252
S01-38-AP-KADAPA     1JAMBAPURAM MUNI REDDY     BSP
2YS JAGAN MOHAN REDDY     INC
3PALEM SRIKANTH REDDY     TDP
4VANGALA SHASHI BHUSHAN REDDY     BJP
5KASIBHATLA SAINATH SARMA     RDHP
6N KISHORE KUMAR REDDY     JD(S)
7KUNCHAM VENKATA SUBBA REDDY     RRS
8DR KHALEEL BASHA     PRAP
9GAJJALA RAMA SUBBA REDDY     PPOI
10GUDIPATI PRASANNA KUMAR     LSP
11C GOPI NARASIMHA REDDY     JD(U)
12CHINNAPA REDDY KOMMA     BJSH
13Y SEKHARA REDDY     RPI(A)
14S ALI SHER     IND
15THIMMAPPAGARI VENKATA SIVA REDDY     IND
16V NARENDRA     IND
17S RAJA MADIGA     IND
18YELLIPALAM RAMESH REDDY     IND
19SIVANARAYANA REDDY CHADIPIRALLA     IND
20J SUBBARAYUDU     IND
KANDUKUR-228     KAVALI-233     ATMAKUR-234     KOVUR-235     NELLORE CITY-236
NELLORE RURAL-237     UDAYAGIRI-242
S01-39-AP-NELLORE     1S PADMA NAGESWARA RAO     BSP
2BATHINA NARASIMHA RAO     BJP
3MEKAPATI RAJAMOHAN REDDY     INC
4VANTERU VENU GOPALA REDDY     TDP
5JANA RAMACHANDRAIAH     PRAP
6VEMURI BHASKARA RAO     LSP
7SIDDIRAJU SATYANARAYANA     PPOI
8KARIMULLA     IND
9MUCHAKALA CHANDRA SEKHAR YADAV     IND
10VENKATA BHASKAR REDDY DIRISALA     IND
11SYED HAMZA HUSSAINY     IND
SARVEPALLI-238     GUDUR-239     SULLURPETA-240     VENKATAGIRI-241
TIRUPATI-286     SRIKALAHASTI-287     SATYAVEEDU-288
S01-40-AP-TIRUPATI     1CHINTA MOHAN     INC
2VARLA RAMAIAH     TDP
3NVENKATASWAMY     BJP
4JUVVIGUNTA VENKATESWARLU     LSP
5DEGALA SURYANARAYANA     PPOI
6DHANASEKHAR GUNDLURU     RPI(A)
7VARAPRASADA RAO V     PRAP
8OREPALLI VENKATA KRISHNA PRASAD     IND
9KATTAMANCHI PRABAKHAR     IND
10YALAVADI MUNIKRISHNAIAH     IND
RAJAMPET-244     KODUR-246     RAYACHOTI-247     THAMBALLAPALLE-281
PILERU-282     MADANAPALLE-283     PUNGANUR-284
S01-41-AP-RAJAMPET     1ANNAYYAGARI SAI PRATHAP     INC
2ALLAPUREDDY HARINATHA REDDY     BJP
3RAMESH KUMAR REDDY REDDAPPAGARI     TDP
4SUNKARA SREENIVAS     BSP
5DR ARAVA VENKATA SUBBA REDDY MBBSDCH     PPOI
6ADI NARAYANA REDDY V     BHSASP
7NAGESWARA RAO EDAGOTTU     LSP
8DA SRINIVAS     PRAP
9SHAIK AMEEN PEERAN     ANC
10ASADI VENKATADRI     IND
11INDRA PRAKASH     IND
12KASTHURI OBAIAH NAIDU     IND
13B KRISHNAPPA     IND
14PULA RAGHU     IND
15HAJI MOHAMMAD AZAM     IND
CHANDRAGIRI-285     NAGARI-289     GANGADHARA NELLORE-290     CHITTOOR-291
PUTHALAPATTU-292     PALAMANER-293     KUPPAM-294
S01-42-AP-CHITTOOR     1JAYARAM DUGGANI     BSP
2THIPPESWAMY M     INC
3NARAMALLI SIVAPRASAD     TDP
4BSIVAKUMAR     BJP
5A AMARNADH     RKSP
6TALARI MANOHAR     PRAP
7G VENKATACHALAM     LSP
LUMLA-1     TAWANG-2     MUKTO-3     DIRANG-4     KALAKTANG-5
THRIZINO-BURAGAON-6     BOMDILA-7     BAMENG-8     CHAYANG TAJO-9     SEPPA EAST-10
S02-1-AR-ARUNACHAL WEST     1KIREN RIJIJU     BJP
2TAKAM SANJOY     INC
3TABA TAKU     LB
4SUBU KECHI     IND
TUTING YINGKIONG-34     PANGIN-35     NARI-KOYU-36     PASIGHAT WEST-37
PASIGHAT EAST-38     MEBO-39     MARIYANG-GEKU-40     ANINI-41     DAMBUK-42     ROING-43
S02-2-AR-ARUNACHAL EAST     1LOWANGCHA WANGLAT     AC
2NINONG ERING     INC
3TAPIR GAO     BJP
4DR SAMSON BORANG     PPA
RATABARI-1     PATHERKANDI-2     KARIMGANJ NORTH-3     KARIMGANJ SOUTH-4
BADARPUR-5     HAILAKANDI-6     KATLICHERRA-7     ALGAPUR-8
S03-1-AS-KARIMGANJ     1RAJESH MALLAH     AUDF
2LALIT MOHAN SUKLABAIDYA     INC
3SUDHANGSHU DAS     BJP
4UTTAM NOMOSUDRA     IND
5JOY DAS     IND
6DEBASISH DAS     IND
7PROBHASH CH SARKAR     IND
8BIJON ROY     IND
9BIJOY MALAKAR     IND
10MALATI ROY     IND
11MILON SINGHA     IND
12RANJAN NAMASUDRA     IND
13RAJESH CHANDRA ROY     IND
14SITAL PRASAD DUSAD     IND
15HIMANGSHU KUMAR DAS     IND
SILCHAR-9     SONAI-10     DHOLAI-11     UDHARBOND-12     LAKHIPUR-13
BORKHOLA-14     KATIGORAH-15
S03-2-AS-SILCHAR     1KABINDRA PURKAYASTHA     BJP
2DIPAK BHATTACHARJEE     CPM
3BADRUDDIN AJMAL     AUDF
4SONTOSH MOHAN DEV     INC
5KANTIMOY DEB     IND
6CHANDAN RABIDAS     IND
7JAYANTA MALLICK     IND
8JOY SUNDAR DAS     IND
9NAGENDRA CHANDRA DAS     IND
10NAZRUL HAQUE MAZARBHUIYAN     IND
11NABADWIP DAS     IND
12PIJUSH KANTI DAS     IND
13MANISH BHATTACHARJEE     IND
14YOGENDRA KUMAR SINGH     IND
15SUBIR DEB     IND
16SUMIT ROY     IND
HAFLONG-16     BOKAJAN-17     HOWRAGHAT-18     DIPHU-19     BAITHALANGSO-20
S03-3-AS-AUTONOMOUS DISTRICT     1KULENDRA DAULAGUPU     BJP
2BIREN SINGH ENGTI     INC
3HIDDHINATH RONGPI     NCP
4ELWIN TERON     ASDC
5DR JAYANTA RONGPI     CPI(ML)(L)
6KABON TIMUNGPI     IND
MANKACHAR-21     SALMARA SOUTH-22     DHUBRI-23     GAURIPUR-24     GOLOKGANJ-25
BILASIPARA WEST-26     BILASIPARA EAST-27     GOALPARA EAST-37     GOALPARA
WEST-38     JALESWAR-39
S03-4-AS-DHUBRI     1ANWAR HUSSAIN     INC
2BADRUDDIN AJMAL     AUDF
3ARUN DAS     RWS
4ALOK SEN     SP
5SOLEMAN ALI     IND
6SHAHJAHAN ALI     IND
7SOLEMAN KHANDAKER     IND
8TRIPTI KANA MAZUMDAR CHOUDHURY     IND
9NUR MAHAMMAD     IND
10MINHAR ALI MANDAL     IND
GOSSAIGAON-28     KOKRAJHAR WEST-29     KOKRAJHAR EAST-30     SIDLI-31
BIJNI-33     SORBHOG-40     BHABANIPUR-41     TAMULPUR-58     BARAMA-62     CHAPAGURI-63
S03-5-AS-KOKRAJHAR     1SABDA RAM RABHA     AGP
2SANSUMA KHUNGGUR BWISWMUTHIARY     BOPF
3URKHAO GWRA BRAHMA     IND
BONGAIGAON-32     ABHAYAPURI NORTH-34     ABHAYAPURI SOUTH-35
PATACHARKUCHI-42     BARPETA-43     JANIA-44     BAGHBAR-45     SARUKHETRI-46
CHENGA-47     DHARMAPUR-61
S03-6-AS-BARPETA     1ABDUS SAMAD AHMED     AUDF
2MD AMIR ALI     RJD
3ISMAIL HUSSAIN     INC
4DURGESWAR DEKA     CPM
5BHUPEN RAY     AGP
6ABU CHAND MAHMMAD     RPI(A)
7ABDUL KADDUS     SP
8KANDARPA LAHKAR     RVNP
9MD DILIR KHAN     MUL
10MUIJ UDDIN MAHMUD     LJP
11ABDUL KADER     IND
12GOLAP HUSSAIN MAZUMDER     IND
13DEWAN JOYNAL ABEDIN     IND
14BHADRESWAR DAS     IND
DUDHNOI-36     BOKO-48     CHHAYGAON-49     PALASBARI-50     JALUKBARI-51
DISPUR-52     GAUHATI EAST-53     GAUHATI WEST-54     HAJO-55     BARKHETRI-60
S03-7-AS-GAUHATI     1AKSHAY RAJKHOWA     NCP
2BIJOYA CHAKRAVARTY     BJP
3CAPT ROBIN BORDOLOI     INC
4SONABOR ALI     AUDF
5AMBU BORA     RCPI(R)
6DEEPAK KALITA     SP
7SHIMANTA BRAHMA     RWS
8AMIT BARUA     IND
9KAZI NEKIB AHMED     IND
10DEVA KANTA RAMCHIARY     IND
11BRIJESH ROY     IND
12RINA GAYARY DAS     IND
KAMALPUR-56     RANGIA-57     NALBARI-59     PANERY-64     KALAIGAON-65
SIPAJHAR-66     MANGALDOI-67     DALGAON-68     UDALGURI-69     MAZBAT-70
S03-8-AS-MANGALDOI     1BADIUJ ZAMAL     AUDF
2MADHAB RAJBANGSHI     INC
3RAMEN DEKA     BJP
4DINA NATH DAS     BOPF
5PARVEEN SULTANA     AIMF
6RABINDRA NATH HAZARIKA     JMM
7RATUL KUMAR CHOUDHURY     SP
8LANKESWAR ACHARJYA     RDMP
9LUCYMAI BASUMATARI     RSPS
10AROON BAROOA     IND
11PRODEEP KUMAR DAIMARY     IND
12BHUPENDRA NATH KAKATI     IND
13MANOJ KUMAR DEKA     IND
DHEKIAJULI-71     BARCHALLA-72     TEZPUR-73     RANGAPARA-74     SOOTEA-75
BISWANATH-76     BEHALI-77     GOHPUR-78     BIHPURIA-109
S03-9-AS-TEZPUR     1JITEN SUNDI     CPM
2DEBA ORANG     AUDF
3MONI KUMAR SUBBA     INC
4JOSEPH TOPPO     AGP
5ARUN KUMAR MURMOO     BVM
6PARASHMONI SINHA     JMM
7JUGANANDA HAZARIKA     SP
8RUBUL SARMA     CPI(ML)(L)
9REGINOLD V JOHNSON     RSPS
10KALYAN KUMAR DEORI BHARALI     IND
11DANIEL DAVID JESUDAS     IND
12MD NAZIR AHMED     IND
13DR PRANAB KR DAS     IND
14PRASANTA BORO     IND
15RUDRA PARAJULI     IND
JAGIROAD-79     MORIGAON-80     LAHARIGHAT-81     RAHA-82     NAGAON-86
BARHAMPUR-87     JAMUNAMUKH-90     HOJAI-91     LUMDING-92
S03-10-AS-NOWGONG     1ANIL RAJA     INC
2RAJEN GOHAIN     BJP
3SIRAJ UDDIN AJMAL     AUDF
4PHEIROIJAM IBOMCHA SINGH     AIFB
5BIPIN SAIKIA     RDMP
6BIREN DAS     RWS
7BHUPEN CHANDRA MUDOI     RPI(A)
8LIAQAT HUSSAIN     LJP
9ASHIT DUTTA     IND
10NAZRUL HAQUE MAZARBHUIYAN     IND
11PUSPA KANTA BORA     IND
12BIMALA PRASAD TALUKDAR     IND
13HERAMBA MOHAN PANDIT     IND
DHING-83     BATADRABA-84     RUPAHIHAT-85     SAMAGURI-88     KALIABOR-89
BOKAKHAT-93     SARUPATHAR-94     GOLAGHAT-95     KHUMTAI-96     DERGAON-97
S03-11-AS-KALIABOR     1GUNIN HAZARIKA     AGP
2DIP GOGOI     INC
3SIRAJ UDDIN AJMAL     AUDF
4KAMAL HAZARIKA     IND
5PAUL NAYAK     IND
6PRADEEP DUTTA     IND
7BINOD GOGOI     IND
8MRIDUL BARUAH     IND
JORHAT-98     TITABAR-100     MARIANI-101     TEOK-102     AMGURI-103
NAZIRA-104     MAHMORA-105     SONARI-106     THOWRA-107     SIVASAGAR-108
S03-12-AS-JORHAT     1KAMAKHYA TASA     BJP
2DRUPAD BORGOHAIN     CPI
3BIJOY KRISHNA HANDIQUE     INC
4ABINASH KISHORE BORAH     RWS
5BIREN NANDA     JMM
6NAVAPROKASH SONOWAL     IND
7RAJ KUMAR DOWARAH     IND
8SUJIT SAHU     IND
MORAN-115     DIBRUGARH-116     LAHOWAL-117     DULIJAN-118     TINGKHONG-119
NAHARKATIA-120     TINSUKIA-122     DIGBOI-123     MARGHERITA-124
S03-13-AS-DIBRUGARH     1SRI PABAN SINGH GHATOWAR     INC
2SRI ROMEN CH BORTHAKUR     NCP
3SRI RATUL GOGOI     CPI
4SRI SARBANANDA SONOWAL     AGP
5SRI GONGARAM KAUL     CPI(ML)(L)
6NIHARIKA BORPATRA GOHAIN GOGOI     JMM
7IMTIAZ HUSSAIN     IND
8FRANCIS DHAN     IND
9LAKHI CHARAN SWANSI     IND
10SIMA GHOSH     IND
MAJULI-99     NAOBOICHA-110     LAKHIMPUR-111     DHAKUAKHANA-112
DHEMAJI-113     JONAI-114     CHABUA-121     DOOMDOOMA-125     SADIYA-126
S03-14-AS-LAKHIMPUR     1DR ARUN KR SARMA     AGP
2BHOGESWAR DUTTA     CPI
3RANEE NARAH     INC
4GANGADHAR DUTTA     SHS
5DEBNATH MAJHI     CPI(ML)(L)
6PRAN JYOTI BORPATRA GOHAIN     RWS
7MINU BURAGOHAIN     SP
8RATNESWAR GOGOI     AIFB
9LALIT MILI     RDMP
10SONAMONI DAS     LJP
11ASAP SUNDIGURIA     IND
12PRASHANTA GOGOI     IND
13BHUMIDHAR HAZARIKA     IND
14RANOJ PEGU     IND
15RABIN DEKA     IND
VALMIKI NAGAR-1     RAMNAGAR-2     NARKATIAGANJ-3     BAGAHA-4     LAURIYA-5
SIKTA-9
S04-1-BR-VALMIKI NAGAR     1DILIP VERMA     NCP
2BAIDYANATH PRASAD MAHTO     JD(U)
3MANAN MISHRA     BSP
4MOHAMMAD SHAMIM AKHTAR     INC
5RAGHUNATH JHA     RJD
6BIRENDRA PRASAD GUPTA     CPI(ML)(L)
7SHAILENDRA KUMAR GARHWAL     LTSD
8AMBIKA SINGH     IND
9UMESH         IND
10DEORAJ RAM     IND
11FAKHRUDDIN     IND
12MAGISTER YADAV     IND
13MANOHAR MANOJ     IND
14RAMASHANKAR PRASAD     IND
15RAKESH KUMAR PANDEY     IND
16SATYANARAIN YADAV     IND
NAUTAN-6     CHANPATIA-7     BETTIAH-8     RAXAUL-10     SUGAULI-11     NARKATIA-12
S04-2-BR-PASCHIM CHAMPARAN     1ANIRUDH PRASAD ALIAS SADHU YADAV     INC
2PRAKASH JHA     LJP
3RAMASHRAY SINGH     CPM
4SHAMBHU PRASAD GUPTA     BSP
5DR SANJAY JAISWAL     BJP
6FAIYAZUL AZAM     JD(S)
7MANOJ KUMAR     RDMP
8SYED SHAMIM AKHTAR     LTSD
9NAFIS AHAMAD     IND
10SHRIMAN MISHRA     IND
11SYED IRSHAD AKHTER     IND
HARSIDHI-13     GOVINDGANJ-14     KESARIA-15     KALYANPUR-16     PIPRA-17
MOTIHARI-19
S04-3-BR-PURVI CHAMPARAN     1AKHILESH PRASAD SINGH     RJD
2ARVIND KUMAR GUPTA     INC
3GAGANDEO YADAV     BSP
4RADHA MOHAN SINGH     BJP
5RAMCHANDRA PRASAD     CPI
6UMESH KUMAR SINGH     SJP(R)
7NAGENDRA SAHANI     LTSD
8SURESH KUMAR RAJAK     IJP
9SURESH KUMAR RAI     BJKVP
10JHAGARU MAHATO     IND
11PARASNATHPANDEY     IND
12MD MURTUJA ANSARI ALIAS DR LAL     IND
MADHUBAN-18     CHIRAIA-20     DHAKA-21     SHEOHAR-22     RIGA-23     BELSAND-30
S04-4-BR-SHEOHAR     1MD ANWARUL HAQUE     BSP
2MD TANVEER ZAFAR     CPI
3RAMA DEVI     BJP
4LOVELY ANAND     INC
5SITARAM SINGH     RJD
6ARUN SAH     BLPGL
7BASDEO SAH     IJP
8SHATRUGHNA SAHU     BJJD
9AJAY KUMAR PANDEY     IND
10CHANDRIKA PRASAD     IND
11MOHAMMAD FIROZ AHAMAD     IND
12MOHSIN     IND
13YOGENDRA RAM     IND
14RAM ASHISH MAHTO     IND
15SUNIL SINGH     IND
BATHNAHA-24     PARIHAR-25     SURSAND-26     BAJPATTI-27     SITAMARHI-28
RUNISAIDPUR-29
S04-5-BR-SITAMARHI     1ARJUN ROY     JD(U)
2MAYA SHANKAR SHARAN     BSP
3SAMIR KUMAR MAHASETH     INC
4SITARAM YADAV     RJD
5S ABU DAUJANA     LTSD
6CHITARANJAN GIRI     RPP
7MOHAMMAD AFZAL PAINTHER     ANC
8SHANKAR SINHA     RSP
9CHANDRIKA PRASAD     IND
10ZAHID         IND
11DINESH PRASAD     IND
12PAPPU KUMAR MISHRA     IND
13MUKESH KUMAR GUPTA     IND
14RAVINDRA KUMAR     IND
15RAM KISHORE PRASAD     IND
16SONE LAL SAH     IND
HARLAKHI-31     BENIPATTI-32     BISFI-35     MADHUBANI-36     KEOTI-86     JALE-87
S04-6-BR-MADHUBANI     1ABDULBARI SIDDIKI     RJD
2LAXMANKANT MISHRA     BSP
3DR SHAKEEL AHAMAD     INC
4HUKM DEO NARAYAN YADAV     BJP
5DR HEMCHANDRA JHA     CPI
6MINTU KUMAR SINGH     JGP
7MISHRI LAL YADAV     RKJP
8RAMCHANDRA YADAV     KSVP
9RAM SAGAR SAHANI     IJP
10MD ZINNUR     IND
11RAVINDRA THAKUR     IND
12RAJESHWAR YADAV     IND
13SANJAY KUMAR MAHTO     IND
14HARIBHUSHAN THAKUR BACHOL     IND
KHAJAULI-33     BABUBARHI-34     RAJNAGAR-37     JHANJHARPUR-38     PHULPARAS-39
LAUKAHA-40
S04-7-BR-JHANJHARPUR     1KRIPANATH PATHAK     INC
2GAURI SHANKAR YADAV     BSP
3DEVENDRA PRASAD YADAV     RJD
4MANGANI LAL MANDAL     JD(U)
5DR KIRTAN PRASAD SINGH     LTSD
6YOGNATH MANDAL     CPI(ML)(L)
7OM PRAKASH     IND
8NATHUNI YADAV     IND
9FIROZ ALAM     IND
10VIVEKA NAND JHA     IND
11SHANKAR PRASAD     IND
NIRMALI-41     PIPRA-42     SUPAUL-43     TRIBENIGANJ-44     CHHATAPUR-45
SINGHESHWAR-72
S04-8-BR-SUPAUL     1ASHOK MAHTO     BSP
2BALRAM SINGH YADAV     CPM
3RANJEET RANJAN     INC
4VISHWA MOHAN KUMAR     JD(U)
5SURYA NARAYAN YADAV     LJP
6NARAYAN MANDAL     SHS
7MANJU DEVI     IJP
8SHARVAN KUMAR CHOUDHARY     JD(S)
9SURESH PRASAD MEHTA     LTSD
10ARBIND KUMAR     IND
11ASHOK PANKAJ     IND
12BHIM KUMAR GUPTA     IND
13RAMCHANDRA PRASAD SINGH     IND
14RAMDEO SHARMA     IND
15VIJAY KUMAR CHOUDHARY     IND
16SURESH KUMAR AZAD     IND
NARPATGANJ-46     RANIGANJ-47     FORBESGANJ-48     ARARIA-49     JOKIHAT-50
SIKTI-51
S04-9-BR-ARARIA     1ZAKIR HUSSAIN KHAN     LJP
2PRADEEP KUMAR SINGH     BJP
3RAJA RAMAN BHASKAR     BSP
4DR SHAKEEL AHMAD KHAN     INC
5AYAJUDIN     RKJP
6KAMALI DEVI     CPI(ML)(L)
7NASIM AHMAD GHAZI     RJJM
8ABDUL GAFOOR     IND
9ABDUL WAHAB     IND
10OM PRAKASH     IND
11KANHAIYA KUMAR DAS     IND
12DINESH RATHOUR     IND
13NAND LAL PASWAN     IND
14NITYA NAND BISHWAS     IND
15PRAMOD SINGH YADAV     IND
16PRINCE VICTOR     IND
17LAXMI SADA     IND
18VIJAY SAH     IND
19SANJAY KUMAR JHA     IND
20MD SAJJAD     IND
21SATYA NARAYAN WRITER     IND
22SADA NAND CHOUDHARY     IND
23SADHANA DEVI     IND
24SUKDEO PASWAN     IND
25MOHAMMED SAIFUR RAB     IND
BAHADURGANJ-52     THAKURGANJ-53     KISHANGANJ-54     KOCHADHAMAN-55
AMOUR-56     BAISI-57
S04-10-BR-KISHANGANJ     1ZUBAIR ALAM     BSP
2TASLEEM UDDIN     RJD
3MOHAMMAD ASRARUL HAQUE     INC
4SYED MAHMOOD ASHRAF     JD(U)
5TAMAJUL ALI     BJJD
6MOHAMMAD KHASHIUR RAHMAN     SJP(R)
7MOHAMMAD NISSAR ALAM     JMM
8RAJIT PODAR     ABAS
9ABDUL RAJJAK URF KAL     IND
10ABHINAV MODI     IND
11ASGAR MALIK     IND
12CHOTAY LAL MAHTO     IND
13MD TASLIMUDDIN     IND
14VISHWANATH KEJRIWAL     IND
15SIKANDER SINGH     IND
KATIHAR-63     KADWA-64     BALRAMPUR-65     PRANPUR-66     MANIHARI-67
BARARI-68
S04-11-BR-KATIHAR     1AHMAD ASHFAQUE KARIM     LJP
2NIKHIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY     BJP
3MADAN MOHAN NISHAD     BSP
4SHAH TARIQ ANWAR     NCP
5OM PRAKASH PODDAR     BJJD
6MAHBOOB ALAM     CPI(ML)(L)
7MUNNI DEVI     ABJS
8RAJESH GURNANI     LTSD
9CHANDU MURMU     IND
10PHOOLO DEVI     IND
11BABU LAL MARANDI     IND
12MANOJ PARASAR     IND
13MOHAMMAD HAMID MUBARAK     IND
14RAJGIRI SINGH     IND
15SUNIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY     IND
16HIMRAJ SINGH     IND
KASBA-58     BANMANKHI-59     RUPAULI-60     DHAMDAHA-61     PURNIA-62     KORHA-69
S04-12-BR-PURNIA     1UDAY SINGH ALIAS PAPPU SINGH     BJP
2NAVEEN KUMAR SINGH     BSP
3SHANKAR JHA     LJP
4ANIL KUMAR BHARTI     RVNP
5ASHOK KUMAR SAH     JMM
6IRSHAD AHMAD KHAN     LTSD
7MADHAVI SARKAR     CPI(ML)(L)
8MD AISUR RAHMAN     IND
9ABDUL SATTAR     IND
10ALIMUDDIN ANSARI     IND
11UPENDRA NATH SAGAR     IND
12KAUSHALYA DEVI     IND
13JAGDISH PRASAD YADAV     IND
14JIVACHH PASWAN     IND
15DEEP NARAYAN SINGH     IND
16PRAMOD NARAYAN PODDAR     IND
17VIJAY KUMAR SAH     IND
18SHANTI PRIYA     IND
19SHIEKH AKBAR ALI     IND
20SUNIL KUMAR     IND
ALAMNAGAR-70     BIHARIGANJ-71     MADHEPURA-73     SONBARSA-74     SAHARSA-75
MAHISHI-77
S04-13-BR-MADHEPURA     1OMPRAKASH NARAYAN     CPI
2DRTARA NAND SADA     INC
3PROF RAVINDRA CHARAN YADAV     RJD
4BINOD KUMAR JHA     BSP
5SHARAD YADAV     JD(U)
6DHANOJ KUMAR TANTI     RVNP
7RAVINDRA KUMAR     RSWD
8RAJO SAH     LTSD
9NKSINGH     SAP
10KARPURI RISHIDEO     IND
11KISHOR KUMAR     IND
12TIRO SHARAMA     IND
13DHRUVA KUMAR GUPTA     IND
14PRASANN KUMAR     IND
15BALWANT GADHWAL     IND
16MAHADEO YADAV     IND
17SAAKAR SURESH YADAV     IND
GORA BAURAM-79     BENIPUR-80     ALINAGAR-81     DARBHANGA RURAL-82
DARBHANGA-83     BAHADURPUR-85
S04-14-BR-DARBHANGA     1AJAY KUMAR JALAN     INC
2MD ALI ASHRAF FATMI     RJD
3KIRTI AZAD     BJP
4YUGESHWAR SAHNI     BSP
5KUMARI SURESHWARI     RMEP
6MD KHURSHID ALAM     AD
7DURGANAND MAHAVIR NAYAK     BJJD
8MD NIZAMUDDIN     IJP
9SATYANARAYAN MUKHIA     CPI(ML)(L)
10ABDUR RAHIM     IND
11GOVIND ACHARAY     IND
12BHARAT YADAV     IND
13LALBAHADUR YADAV     IND
14PROF HARERAM ACHARAY     IND
GAIGHAT-88     AURAI-89     BOCHAHA-91     SAKRA-92     KURHANI-93
MUZAFFARPUR-94
S04-15-BR-MUZAFFARPUR     1CAPTAIN JAI NARAYAN PRASAD NISHAD     JD(U)
2BHAGWANLAL SAHNI     LJP
3VINITA VIJAY     INC
4SAMEER KUMAR     BSP
5JITENDRA YADAV     CPI(ML)(L)
6DINESH KUMAR KUSHWAHA     RKSP
7DEVENDRA RAKESH     BJKVP
8NEELU SINGH     PSS
9MAHENDRA PRASAD     RPP
10MITHILESH KUMAR     RASED
11MOHAMMAD SHAMIM     RDMP
12MD RAHAMTULLAHA     ABJS
13RAM DAYAL RAM     AIFB
14REYAJ AHMAD ATISH     JGP
15MD SALEEM     RVNP
16ASHOK KUMAR LALAN     IND
17AHMAD RAZA     IND
18GEORGE FERNANDES     IND
19TARKESHWAR PASWAN     IND
20VIJENDRA CHAUDHARY     IND
21VINOD PASWAN     IND
22SHAMBHU SAHNI     IND
23SADANAND KISHORE THAKUR     IND
24SYED ALAMDAR HUSSAIN     IND
MINAPUR-90     KANTI-95     BARURAJ-96     PAROO-97     SAHEBGANJ-98
VAISHALI-125
S04-16-BR-VAISHALI     1RAGHUVANSH PRASAD SINGH     RJD
2VIJAY KUMAR SHUKLA     JD(U)
3SHANKAR MAHTO     BSP
4HIND KESRI YADAV     INC
5PUNAMRI DEVI     UWF
6PRAMOD KUMAR SHARMA     BJKVP
7BADRI PASWAN     RKSP
8BALAK NATH SAHANI     IJP
9LALJI KUMAR RAKESH     RASED
10BINOD PANDIT     LPSP
11INDARDEO RAI     IND
12JITENDRA PRASAD     IND
BAIKUNTHPUR-99     BARAULI-100     GOPALGANJ-101     KUCHAIKOTE-102
BHOREY-103     HATHUA-104
S04-17-BR-GOPALGANJ     1ANIL KUMAR     RJD
2JANAK RAM     BSP
3PURNMASI RAM     JD(U)
4RAMAI RAM     INC
5MADHU BHARTI     LTSD
6RAM KUMAR MANJHI     SBSP
7RAMASHANKAR RAM     RJJM
8SATYADEO RAM     CPI(ML)(L)
9ASHA DEVI     IND
10DINANATH MANJHI     IND
11DHARMENDRA KUMAR HAZRA     IND
12BANITHA BAITHA     IND
13RAJESH KUMAR RAM     IND
14RAM SURAT RAM     IND
15SHAMBHU DOM     IND
16SURENDRA PASWAN     IND
SIWAN-105     ZIRADEI-106     DARAULI-107     RAGHUNATHPUR-108     DARAUNDHA-109
BARHARIA-110
S04-18-BR-SIWAN     1PARASH NATH PATHAK     BSP
2BRISHIN PATEL     JD(U)
3VIJAY SHANKER DUBEY     INC
4HENA SHAHAB     RJD
5AMAR NATH YADAV     CPI(ML)(L)
6ASWANI KR VERMA     IJP
7MADHURI PANDAY     SJTP
8LAL BABU TIWARI     RKSP
9UMESH TIWARY     IND
10OM PRAKASH YADAV     IND
11NIDHI KIRTI     IND
12PRABHU NATH MALI     IND
13DR MUNESHWAR PRASAD     IND
14RAJENDRA KUMAR     IND
15SHAMBHU NATH PRASAD     IND
GORIYAKOTHI-111     MAHARAJGANJ-112     EKMA-113     MANJHI-114     BANIAPUR-115
TARAIYA-116
S04-19-BR-MAHARAJGANJ     1UMA SHANAKER SINGH     RJD
2TARKESHWAR SINGH     INC
3PRABHU NATH SINGH     JD(U)
4RAVINDRA NATH MISHRA     BSP
5RAMESH SINGH KUSHWAHA     LTSD
6SATYENDRA KR SAHANI     CPI(ML)(L)
7GAUTAM PRASAD     IND
8DHURENDRA RAM     IND
9NAYAN PRASAD     IND
10PRADEEP MANJHI     IND
11BANKE BIHARI SINGH     IND
12RAJESH KUMAR SINGH     IND
13BREENDA PATHAK     IND
MARHAURA-117     CHAPRA-118     GARKHA-119     AMNOUR-120     PARSA-121
SONEPUR-122
S04-20-BR-SARAN     1RAJIV PRATAP RUDY     BJP
2LALU PRASAD     RJD
3SALIM PERWEZ     BSP
4SANTOSH PATEL     LTSD
5SOHEL AKHATAR     BMF
6KUMAR BALRAM SINGH     IND
7DHUPENDRA SINGH     IND
8RAJKUMAR RAI     IND
9RAJAN HRISHIKESH CHANDRA     IND
10RAJARAM SAHANI     IND
11LAL BABU RAY     IND
12SHEO DAS SINGH     IND
HAJIPUR-123     LALGANJ-124     MAHUA-126     RAJA PAKAR-127     RAGHOPUR-128
MANHAR-129
S04-21-BR-HAJIPUR     1DASAI CHOUDHARY     INC
2MAHESHWAR DAS     BSP
3RAM VILAS PASWAN     LJP
4RAM SUNDAR DAS     JD(U)
5DINESH CHANDRA BHUSHAN     LTSD
6NAND LAL PASWAN     IND
7PRATIMA KUMARI     IND
8RAJENDRA KUMAR PASWAN     IND
9RAM TIRTH PASWAN     IND
10VISHWA VIJAY KUMAR VIDHYARTHI     IND
11SANJAY PASHWAN     IND
PATEPUR-130     UJIARPUR-134     MORWA-135     SARAIRANJAN-136
MOHIUDDINNAGAR-137     BIBHUTPUR-138
S04-22-BR-UJIARPUR     1ASWAMEDH DEVI     JD(U)
2ALOK KUMAR MEHTA     RJD
3RAMDEO VERMA     CPM
4VIJAYWANT KUMAR CHOUDHARY     BSP
5SHEEL KUMAR ROY     INC
6CHANDRA DEO ROY     SLP(L)
7JAI NARAYAN SAH     BJKVP
8JITENDRA KUMAR ROY     SHS
9TOSHAN SAH     RPP
10MD TAUKIR     SAP
11MASSOD HASSAN     MUL
12RAMNATH SINGH     RSWD
13ARJUN SAHNI     IND
14PRADEEP KUMAR     IND
15BRAJESH KUMAR NIRALA     IND
16MANSOOR     IND
17MOHAN PAUL     IND
18MOHAMMAD KURBAN     IND
19RATAN SAHNI     IND
20RAM SAGAR MAHTO     IND
21SANJAY KUMAR JHA     IND
22SUJIT KUMAR BHAGAT     IND
KUSHESHWAR ASTHAN-78     HAYAGHAT-84     KALYANPUR-131     WARISNAGAR-132
SAMASTIPUR-133     ROSERA-139
S04-23-BR-SAMASTIPUR     1DR ASHOK KUMAR     INC
2MAHESWER HAZARI     JD(U)
3RAM CHANDRA PASWAN     LJP
4BINDESHWAR PASWAN     BSP
5UPENDRA PASWAN     LTSD
6JEEBACHH PASWAN     CPI(ML)(L)
7RANDHIR PASWAN     IND
8RAJA RAM DAS     IND
9REKHA KUMARI     IND
10SHIVCHANDRA PASWAN     IND
11SATISH MAHTO     IND
CHERIA BARIARPUR-141     BACHHWARA-142     TEGHRA-143     MATIHANI-144
SAHEBPUR KAMAL-145     BEGUSARAI-146     BAKHRI-147
S04-24-BR-BEGUSARAI     1ANIL CHAUDHARY     LJP
2AMITA BHUSHAN     INC
3CHANDRASHEKHAR MAHTO     BSP
4DR MONAZIR HASSAN     JD(U)
5SHATRUGHAN PRASAD SINGH     CPI
6KISHORI PRASHAD MAHTO     LTSD
7RAM SAH     RPP
8AMIYA KASHYAP BIKKI     IND
9ARUN KUMAR     IND
10ASHOK SAH     IND
11DILIP KUMAR     IND
12NARENDRA KUMAR SINGH ALIAS BOGO SINGH     IND
13NARAYAN PRASAD HISARIYA     IND
14RANJEET PASWAN     IND
15RADHA RAMAN PASWAN     IND
16RAM DAYAL BHARTI     IND
17RAM NARESH PRASAD SINGH     IND
18RAMSHRAYA NISHAD     IND
19SAJJAN CHAUDHARY     IND
SIMRI BAKHTIARPUR-76     HASANPUR-140     ALAULI-148     KHAGARIA-149
BELDAUR-150     PARBATTA-151
S04-25-BR-KHAGARIA     1ASARFI PRASAD MEHTA     BSP
2CHOUDHARY MEHBOOB ALI KAISER     INC
3DINESH CHANDRA YADAV     JD(U)
4RAVINDAR KR RANA     RJD
5PAWAN KUMAR SUMAN     ABDBM
6BABLOO PASWAN     NNP
7BHARAT KUMAR YADAV     KVSP
8LAL BAHADUR HIMALAYA     RDMP
9HARI NANDAN SINGH     SJP(R)
10GULAB RAJ     IND
11NAIMUDDIN     IND
12NEHA CHAUHAN     IND
13PRADUMNA KUMAR     IND
14MANJU KUMARI     IND
15RAM NANDAN YADAV     IND
16SANGRAM KUMAR     IND
17SANJAY YADAV     IND
18SURESH PODDAR     IND
BIHPUR-152     GOPALPUR-153     PIRPAINTI-154     KAHALGAON-155
BHAGALPUR-156     NATHNAGAR-158
S04-26-BR-BHAGALPUR     1AJIT SHARMA     BSP
2SHAKUNI CHOUDHARY     RJD
3SADANAND SINGH     INC
4SUBODH ROY     CPM
5SYED SHAHNAWAZ HUSSAIN     BJP
6DAYA RAM MANDAL     BHJAP
7DEEPAK RAM     BSP(K)
8NARESH MANDAL     RPP
9MD IZRAIL     LTSD
10RAMAN SAH     BJJD
11RAM VILASH PASWAN     RWS
12SRINARAYAN GAUSWAMI     IJP
13AMIT KUMAR JHA     IND
14ANAND KUMAR JAIN     IND
15INDRADEO KUMAR SINGH     IND
16DINESH YADAV     IND
17DR N K YADAV     IND
18RATAN KUMAR MANDAL     IND
19RAVI SHANKAR SINGH     IND
20LADDU     IND
21SIKANDAR TANTI     IND
SULTANGANJ-157     AMARPUR-159     DHURAIYA-160     BANKA-161     KATORIA-162
BELHAR-163
S04-27-BR-BANKA     1GRIDHARI YADAV     INC
2JAI PRAKESH NARAIN YADAV     RJD
3DAMODAR RAWAT     JD(U)
4MUKESH KUMAR SINGH     BSP
5SANJAY KUMAR     CPI
6ANIL KUMAR ALIAS ANIL GUPTA     JVM
7AMRESHWAR KUMAR     JGP
8ARVIND KUMAR SAH     RPP
9KEDAR PRASAD SINGH     SJP(R)
10MAHBOOB ALAM ANSARI     BMF
11RAJENDRA PANDIT NETAJEE     JMM
12VIVEKA NAND JHA     RDMP
13CP SINHA     LTSD
14DIGVIJAY SINGH     IND
15NARAYAN RAM     IND
16MOHD HUMAYUN     IND
MUNGER-165     JAMALPUR-166     SURYAGARHA-167     LAKHISARAI-168     MOKAMA-178
BARH-179
S04-28-BR-MUNGER     1MANNU MAHTO     BSP
2RAJIV RANJAN SINGH ALIAS LALAN SINGH     JD(U)
3RAM BADAN ROY     RJD
4RAM LAKHAN SINGH     INC
5KUNDAN KUMAR     BJJD
6PRAMOD KUMAR SINGH     ABDBM
7BIPIN KUMAR PASWAN     NBNP
8RAMENDRA MOHAN RAJESH     RSWD
9LOKNATH KUSHWAHA     BMF
10UCHIT KUMAR     IND
11UMA SHANKAR BHAGAT ALIAS TUNTUN BHAIYA     IND
12NARESH MAHTO     IND
13PRAMOD KUMAR     IND
14BRAHMANAND MANDAL     IND
15RAJENDRA PRASAD SINGH     IND
16RADHIKA RAMAN SINGH     IND
17RAMDEO SINGH YADAV     IND
18SHANKAR LAL CHOKHANI     IND
19SHAILENDRA KUMAR     IND
20SURYODAY PASWAN     IND
ASTHAWAN-171     BISHARSHARIF-172     RAJGIR-173     ISLAMPUR-174     HILSA-175
NALANDA-176     HARNAUT-177
S04-29-BR-NALANDA     1KAUSHALENDRA KUMAR     JD(U)
2DEV KISHORE RAI     BSP
3RAMSWAROOP PRASAD     INC
4SATISH KUMAR     LJP
5ANIL SINGH     LTSD
6AMAR KANT SAH     RPP
7UJJWAL KANT HUNKAR     MUL
8DEVENDRA PRATAP     EKSP
9PRIYRANJAN KUMAR     BJJD
10RANJEET KUMAR     BPD
11REKHA KUMARI     AD
12VIJAY KUMAR     JPS
13VINOD KUMAR PATEL     LM
14SHASHI YADAV     CPI(ML)(L)
15SAUDAGAR RAM     BSKP
16HARICHARAN PRASAD     BMF
17ARUN KUMAR     IND
18KAPIL DEO SINGH     IND
19KUMAR RAJESH     IND
20KAUSHAL KUMAR KAUSHALENDRA SINHA     IND
21CHANDRAMANI KUMAR MANI     IND
22JITENDRA KUMAR     IND
23NARESH PASWAN     IND
24SANTOSH KUMAR     IND
25SARYUG PRASAD SAHASTH     IND
BAKHTIARPUR-180     DIGHA-181     BANKIPUR-182     KUMHRARH-183     PATNA
SAHIB-184     FATWAH-185
S04-30-BR-PATNA SAHIB     1VIJAY KUMAR     RJD
2SHATRUGHAN SINHA     BJP
3SHEKHAR SUMAN     INC
4ON MASUMI     LTSD
5DR DIWAKER TEJASWI     BUDM
6RAM NARAYAN RAI     CPI(ML)(L)
7HASSAN FAIZI HASHMI     ANC
8ANJANI KUMAR     IND
9KUMAR RAJIV     IND
10DEEPAK KUMAR SINGH     IND
11PANKAJ KUMAR SHARMA     IND
12PRAMOD KUMAR GUPTA     IND
13RAM BHAJAN SINGH NISHAD     IND
14VIDHAN CHANDRA RANA     IND
15SANJAY VERMA     IND
16HEMANT KUMAR SINGH     IND
DANAPUR-186     MANER-187     PHULWARI-188     MASAURHI-189     PALIGANJ-190
BIKRAM-191
S04-31-BR-PATALIPUTRA     1RANJAN PRASAD YADAV     JD(U)
2LALU PRASAD     RJD
3VIJAY SINGH YADAV     INC
4HARENDRA KUMAR PATEL     BSP
5KIRAN DEVI     RKJP
6KUNDAN KUMAR     RWS
7DR KRISHNADHAR SINGH     BJKD
8PANCHA DEVI     JGP
9PRABHUNATH YADAV     IJP
10MOHAMMAD AFTAB ALAM     LTSD
11MOHAMMAD SADRUDDIN     AIFB
12RAMESHWAR PRASAD     CPI(ML)(L)
13HASAN MANZOOR HASHMI     ANC
14AWADHESH SHARMA     IND
15DURGESH NANDAN SINGH     IND
16SUNIL KUMAR SINGH     IND
SANDESH-192     BARHARA-193     ARRAH-194     AGIAON-195     TARARI-196
JAGDISHPUR-197     SHAHPUR-198
S04-32-BR-ARRAH     1MEENA SINGH     JD(U)
2RAMA KISHORE SINGH     LJP
3REETA SINGH     BSP
4HARIDWAR PRASAD SINGH     INC
5AJIT PRASAD MEHTA     JKM
6ARUN SINGH     CPI(ML)(L)
7BHARAT BHUSAN PANDEY     ABJS
8RAMADHAR SINGH     SHS
9SAMBHU PRASAD SHARMA     AIFB
10SANTOSH KUMAR     RDMP
11SATYA NARAYAN YADAV     RASED
12SAIYAD GANIUDDIN HAIDER     ANC
13ASHOK KUMAR SINGH     IND
14BHARAT SINGH SAHYOGI     IND
15MAHESH RAM     IND
16SOBH NATH SINGH     IND
BARHAMPUR-199     BUXAR-200     DUMRAON-201     RAJPUR-202     RAMGARH-203
DINARA-210
S04-33-BR-BUXAR     1KAMLA KANT TIWARY     INC
2JAGADA NAND SINGH     RJD
3LAL MUNI CHOUBEY     BJP
4SHYAM LAL SINGH KUSHWAHA     BSP
5MOKARRAM HUSSAIN     SBSP
6MOHAN SAH     BJJD
7RAJENDRA SINGH MAURYA     LTSD
8DR VIJENDRA NATH UPADHYAY     SHS
9SHYAM BIHARI BIND     JPS
10SATYENDRA OJHA     AD
11SUDAMA PRASAD     CPI(ML)(L)
12SURESH WADEKAR     RPI
13KAMLESH CHOUDHARY     IND
14JAI SINGH YADAV     IND
15DADAN SINGH     IND
16PRATIBHA DEVI     IND
17PHULAN PANDIT     IND
18RAJENDRA PASWAN     IND
19LALLAN RUPNARAIN PATHAK     IND
20SHIV CHARAN YADAV     IND
21SUNIL KUMAR DUBEY     IND
22SURENDRA KUMAR BHARTI     IND
MOHANIA-204     BHABUA-205     CHAINPUR-206     CHENARI-207     SASARAM-208
KARGAHAR-209
S04-34-BR-SASARAM     1GANDHI AZAD     BSP
2MEIRA KUMAR     INC
3MUNI LAL     BJP
4LALAN PASWAN     RJD
5DUKHI RAM     CPI(ML)(L)
6BABBAN CHAUDHARY     LTSD
7BALIRAM RAM     PMSP
8BHOLA PRASAD     IJP
9RADHA DEBI     AD
10RAM NAGINA RAM     RKJP
11RAM YADI RAM     RPI
12PRAMOD KUMAR     IND
13BHARAT RAM     IND
14MUNIYA DEBI     IND
15RAM PRAVESH RAM     IND
16SURENDRA RAM     IND
NOKHA-211     DEHRI-212     KARAKAT-213     GOH-219     OBRA-220     NABINAGAR-221
S04-35-BR-KARAKAT     1AWADHESH KUMAR SINGH     INC
2UPENDRA KUMAR SHARMA     BSP
3KANTI SINGH     RJD
4MAHABALI SINGH     JD(U)
5AJAY KUMAR     RPI(A)
6JYOTI RASHMI     RSWD
7MUDREEKA YADAV     AD
8RAJ KISHOR MISRA     AJSP
9RAJA RAM SINGH     CPI(ML)(L)
10MDSHAMIULLAH MANSOORI     SSD
11ERABDUL SATAR     IND
12AMAVAS RAM     IND
13PRO KAMTA PRASAD YADAV     IND
14GIRISH NARAYAN SINGH     IND
15SATISH PANDEY     IND
16HARI PRASAD SINGH     IND
ARWAL-214     KURTHA-215     JAHANABAD-216     GHOSI-217     MAKHDUMPUR-218
ATRI-233
S04-36-BR-JAHANABAD     1DR ARUN KUMAR     INC
2JAGDISH SHARMA     JD(U)
3RAMADHAR SHARMA     BSP
4SURENDRA PRASAD YADAV     RJD
5AYASHA KHATUN     LTSD
6PROF JAI RAM PRASAD SINGH     SSD
7TARA GUPTA     RPP
8MAHANAND PRASAD     CPI(ML)(L)
9RAMASRAY PRASAD SINGH     RLD
10MD SAHABUDDIN JAHAN     BSKP
11SHRAVAN KUMAR     LM
12SADHU SINHA     AIFB
13SYED AKBAR IMAM     ABAS
14AJAY KUMAR VERMA     IND
15ABHAY KUMAR ANIL     IND
16DR ARBIND KUMAR     IND
17ARVIND PRASAD SINGH     IND
18UPENDRA PRASAD     IND
19JAGDISH YADAV     IND
20PRIKSHIT SINGH     IND
21PRABHAT KUMAR RANJAN     IND
22RANJIT SHARMA     IND
23RAKESHWAR KISHOR     IND
24SIYA RAM PRASAD     IND
25SUMIRAK SINGH     IND
KUTUMBA-222     AURANGABAD-223     RAFIGANJ-224     GURUA-225     IMAMGANJ-227
TIKARI-231
S04-37-BR-AURANGABAD     1ARCHANA CHANDRA     BSP
2NIKHIL KUMAR     INC
3SHAKIL AHMAD KHAN     RJD
4SUSHIL KUMAR SINGH     JD(U)
5ANIL KUMAR SINGH     RSWD
6AMERIKA MAHTO     SSD
7RAM KUMAR MEHTA     LTSD
8VIJAY PASWAN     BSKP
9ASLAM ANSARI     IND
10INDRA DEO RAM     IND
11UDAY PASWAN     IND
12PUNA DAS     IND
13RANJEET KUMAR     IND
14RAJENDRA YADAV     IND
15RAMSWARUP PRASAD YADAV     IND
16SANTOSH KUMAR     IND
SHERGHATI-226     BARACHATTI-228     BODH GAYA-229     GAYA TOWN-230
BELAGANJ-232     WAZIRGANJ-234
S04-38-BR-GAYA     1KALAWATI DEVI     BSP
2RAMJI MANJHI     RJD
3SANJIV PRASAD TONI     INC
4HARI MANJHI     BJP
5DILIP PASWAN     NBNP
6NIRANJAN KUMAR     CPI(ML)(L)
7RAJESH KUMAR     LTSD
8RAMDEV ARYA PAAN     ABJS
9AMAR NATH PRASAD     IND
10KRISHNA CHOUDHARY     IND
11KAIL DAS     IND
12DIPAK PASWAN     IND
13RAM KISHORE PASWAN     IND
14RAMU PASWAN     IND
15SHIV SHANKAR KUMAR     IND
16SHYAM LAL MANJHI     IND
BARBIGHA-170     RAJAULI-235     HISUA-236     NAWADA-237     GOBINDPUR-238
WARSALIGANJ-239
S04-39-BR-NAWADA     1GANESH SHANKAR VIDYARTHI     CPM
2BHOLA SINGH     BJP
3MASIH UDDIN     BSP
4VEENA DEVI     LJP
5SUNILA DEVI     INC
6UMAKANT RAHI     SSD
7KAILASH PAL     BSKP
8VIDHYAPATI SINGH     LTSD
9SURENDRA KUMAR CHAUDHARY     SBSP
10AKHILESH SINGH     IND
11ANIL MEHTA     IND
12KAUSHAL YADAV     IND
13CHANCHALA DEVI     IND
14DURGA PRASAD DHAR     IND
15NAVIN KUMAR VERMA     IND
16RAJ KISHOR RAJ     IND
17RAJ BALLABH PRASAD     IND
18RAJENDRA VISHAL     IND
19RAJENDRA SINGH     IND
20SHAMBHU PRASAD     IND
21SUNIL KUMAR     IND
TARAPUR-164     SHEIKHPURA-169     SIKANDRA-240     JAMUI-241     JHAJHA-242
CHAKAI-243
S04-40-BR-JAMUI     1ASHOK CHOUDHARY     INC
2GAJADHAR RAJAK     CPI
3BHAGWAN DAS     BSP
4BHUDEO CHOUDHARY     JD(U)
5SHYAM RAJAK     RJD
6ARJUN MANJHI     JGP
7UPENDRA RAVIDAS     SAP
8OM PRAKASH PASWAN     LTSD
9GULAB CHANDRA PASWAN     RKJP
10NUNDEO MANJHI     JVM
11PRASADI PASWAN     JMM
12SUBHASH PASWAN     STPI
13KAPILDEO DAS     IND
14JAY SEKHAR MANJHI     IND
15PAPPU RAJAK     IND
16YOGENDRA PASWAN     IND
17VIJAY PASWAN     IND
18BILAKSHAN RAVIDAS     IND
19SARYUG PASWAN     IND
MANDREM-1     PERNEM-2     BICHOLIM-3     TIVIM-4     MAPUSA-5     SIOLIM-6
SALIGAO-7     CALANGUTE-8     PORVORIM-9     ALDONA-10
S05-1-GA-NORTH GOA     1CHRISTOPHER FONSECA     CPI
2JITENDRA RAGHURAJ DESHPRABHU     NCP
3RAUT PANDURANG DATTARAM     MAG
4SHRIPAD YESSO NAIK     BJP
5UPENDRA CHANDRU GAONKAR     SHS
6NARACINVA SURYA SALGAONKAR     IND
7MARTHA D SOUZA     IND
PONDA-21     SIRODA-22     MARCAIM-23     MORMUGAO-24     VASCO-DA-GAMA-25
DABOLIM-26     CORTALIM-27     NUVEM-28     CURTORIM-29     FATORDA-30
S05-2-GA-SOUTH GOA     1COSME FRANCISCO CAITANO SARDINHA     INC
2ADV NARENDRA KESHAV SAWAIKAR     BJP
3ADV RAJU MANGESHKAR ALIAS RAJENDRA NAIK     CPI
4ROHIDAS HARICHANDRA BORKAR     SGF
5MATANHY SALDANHA     UGDP
6DIAS JAWAHAR     IND
7DERICK DIAS     IND
8FRANCISCO ANTONIO JOAO DE PHILOMENO FERNANDES     IND
9MULLA SALIM     IND
10SALUNKE SMITA PRAVEEN     IND
11HAMZA KHAN     IND
ABDASA-1     MANDVI-2     BHUJ-3     ANJAR-4     GANDHIDHAM-5     RAPAR-6     MORBI-65
S06-1-GJ-KACHCHH     1JAT POONAMBEN VELJIBHAI     BJP
2DANICHA VALJIBHAI PUNAMCHANDRA     INC
3NAMORI MOHANBHAI LADHABHAI     BSP
4CHAUHAN MOTILAL DEVJIBHA     LPSP
5DR TINA MAGANBHAI PARMAR     BNJD
6DUNGARIYA BHARMALBHAI NARANBHAI     SP
7PARMAR MUKESHBHAI MANDANBHAI     IJP
8BADIYA RAMESH GANGJI     RKSP
9KANJI ABHABHAI MAHESHWARI     IND
10GARVA ASMAL THAKARSHI     IND
11GOVIND JIVABHAI DAFADA     IND
12MAHESHWARI GANGJI DAYABHAI     IND
13MAHESHWARI DHANJIBHAI KARSHANBHAI     IND
14MANGALIYA LILBAI JIVANBHAI     IND
15MUNSHI BHURALAL KHIMJIBHAI     IND
16VANZARA HIRABEN DALPATBHAI     IND
17SARESA NANJI BHANJIBHAI     IND
VAV-7     THARAD-8     DHANERA-9     DANTA-10     PALANPUR-12     DEESA-13
DEODAR-14
S06-2-GJ-BANASKANTHA     1GADHVI MUKESHKUMAR BHAIRAVDANJI     INC
2CHETANBHAI KALABHAI SOLANKI     BSP
3CHAUDHARI HARIBHAI PARATHIBHAI     BJP
4AMRUTBHAI LAKHUBHAI PATELFOSI     MJP
5KATARIYA HASMUKHBHAI RAVJIBHAI     LSWP
6LODHA ISHVARBHAI MAHADEVBHAI     ABJS
7KARNAVAT YOGESHKUMAR BHIKHABHAI     IND
8PARSANI MAHMAD SIKANDAR JALALBHAI     IND
9PUROHIT ASHOKBHAI CHHAGANBHAI     IND
10MAJIRANA BHOPAJI AASHAJI     IND
11ROOTHAR LEBUJI PARBATJI     IND
12SHARDABEN BHIKHABHAI PARMAR     IND
13SAVJIBHAI PATHUBHAI RAJGOR     IND
14SIPAI AAIYUBBHAI IBRAHIMBHAI     IND
15SHRIMALI ASHOKBHAI BALCHANDBHAI     IND
VADGAM-11     KANKREJ-15     RADHANPUR-16     CHANASMA-17     PATAN-18
SIDHPUR-19     KHERALU-20
S06-3-GJ-PATAN     1KHOKHAR MAHEBOOBKHAN RAHEMATKHAN     BSP
2JAGDISH THAKOR     INC
3BAROT SANJAYBHAI MAGANBHAI     NCP
4RATHOD BHAVSINHBHAI DAHYABHAI     BJP
5PATAVAT MAHAMMADBHAI SHARIFBHAI     SP
6PATEL NARANBHAI PRAGDASBHAI     MJP
7RAVAL BHURABHAI MOTIBHAI     BNJD
8KANUBHAI BHURABHAI MAHESHVARI MANDOVARA     IND
9CHAUDHARY KIRTIKUMAR JESANGBHAI     IND
10CHAUDHARY MANSINHBHAI MANABHAI     IND
11JUDAL GANESHBHAI MEGHRAJBHAI     IND
12PATEL DILIPKUMAR LILACHAND     IND
13PATEL MANORBHAI VIRAMDAS     IND
14PATEL RAMESHBHAI GOVINDBHAI     IND
15BRAHMAKSHATRIY NIRUPABEN NATVARLAL     IND
16RAJPUT JAGATSINH SAMANTSING     IND
UNJHA-21     VISNAGAR-22     BECHARAJI-23     KADI-24     MAHESANA-25
VIJAPUR-26     MANSA-37
S06-4-GJ-MAHESANA     1ZALA RUDRADATTSINH VANRAJSINH     BSP
2PATEL JAYSHREEBEN KANUBHAI     BJP
3PATEL JIVABHAI AMBALAL     INC
4THAKOR AMARSINH RAMSINH BABUJI     MJP
5DR P C PATEL MBBS MD     BRP
6BABUBHAI ISHWARBHAI PRAJAPATI     VHS
7CHAVDA SHANKARJI BADARJI     IND
8THAKOR RAMANJI SHIVAJI     IND
9NAYEE KOKILABEN MANUBHAI ALIAS MAHENDRABHAI     IND
10PATEL JIVRAMBHAI HIRDAS     IND
11PATEL MANOJKUMAR BAHECHARDAS     IND
12PATEL LALJIBHAI KESHAVLAL     IND
HIMATNAGAR-27     IDAR-28     KHEDBRAHMA-29     BHILODA-30     MODASA-31
BAYAD-32     PRANTIJ-33
S06-5-GJ-SABARKANTHA     1CHAUHAN MAHENDRASINH     BJP
2MISTRY MADHUSUDAN     INC
3RAMLAVAT VIKRAMSINH LAXMANSINH     BSP
4KADARI MOLANA RIYAZ     SP
5PARMAR MINABA DIPSINH     IJP
6SINHALI DASHRATH CHANDULAL     CPI(ML)(L)
7CHAUHAN MAHENDRASINH PADAMSINH     IND
8TRIVEDI BALKRUSHN PRANLAL     IND
9PATEL KANTIBHAI KHUSHALBHAI     IND
10PATEL DANABHAI BECHARBHAI     IND
11RATHOD SABIRMIYA AMIRMIYA     IND
12SOLANKI CHHAGANBHAI KEVALABHAI     IND
GANDHINAGAR NORTH-36     KALOL-38     SANAND-40     GHATLODIA-41     VEJALPUR-42
NARANPURA-45     SABARMATI-55
S06-6-GJ-GANDHINAGAR     1LKADVANI     BJP
2PATEL SURESHKUMAR CHATURDAS SURESH PATEL     INC
3RAKESH PANDEY     BSP
4ASHOKKUMAR ISHVARBHAI PATEL     BNJD
5KHALIFA SAMSUDDIN NASIRUDDIN JUGNU     LSWP
6TRIVEDI SUNILBHAI MANUBHAI     MJP
7FIROZ DEHLVI     AIMF
8MEMON FATAMABEN FARUKBHAI     IJP
9KALPESHKUMAR RAJANIKANT MODI     IND
10THAKUR RAKESHBHAI RAJDEVSINGH     IND
11PATEL SIDDHESH DINESHBHAI     IND
12PARIKH HETA KUMARPAL     IND
13BRAHMBHATT SANJAYBHAI AMARKUMAR     IND
14MAKWANA ANILKUMAR SOMABHAI     IND
15DRMALLIKA SARABHAI     IND
16MAHANTSHRI DHARAMDASBAPU     IND
17RAHUL CHIMANBHAI MEHTA     IND
18VAGHELA SUKHDEVSINH PARBATSINH     IND
19SHAH MUKESH     IND
DEHGAM-34     GANDHINAGAR SOUTH-35     VATVA-43     NIKOL-46     NARODA-47
THAKKARBAPA NAGAR-48     BAPUNAGAR-49
S06-7-GJ-AHMEDABAD EAST     1PATEL BHOLABHAI VALJIBHAI KAKDIYA     NCP
2BABARIYA DIPAKBHAI RATILAL     INC
3VIRUBHAI N VANZARA     BSP
4HARIN PATHAK     BJP
5PATEL PRAVIN RAMBHAI     MJP
6PREMHARI RAMESHCHANDRA SHARMA     NLHP
7BHATT SANJIV INDRAVADAN     BNJD
8RAJPUT RANJEETSINGH RAMSHANKARSINH     IJP
9RAJPUT SANJITKUMAR RADHAKRISHNASINH     SP
10DR N T SENGAL     LSWP
11HASRATH JAYRAM PAGARE     RSPS
12KHODABHAI LALJIBHAI DESAI     IND
13THAKKAR PARESHBHAI RASIKLAL     IND
14PATEL BHAVINBHAI AMRUTBHAI     IND
15BUDHDHPRIYA JASVANT SOMABHAI     IND
16MAURYA RAJESH HARIRAM     IND
17SHARMA ANILKUMAR BRIJENDRABHAI     IND
18SHARMA BRIJESHKUMAR UJAGARLAL     IND
ELLISBRIDGE-44     AMRAIWADI-50     DARIAPUR-51     JAMALPUR – KHADIA-52
MANINAGAR-53     DANILIMDA-54     ASARWA-56
S06-8-GJ-AHMEDABAD WEST     1PARMAR SHAILESH MANHARLAL     INC
2DR PRAVIN S SOLANKI     BSP
3DR SOLANKI KIRITBHAI PREMJIBHAI     BJP
4PARMAR MOHANBHAI KARSHANBHAI     LPSP
5MAKWANA ISHWARBHAI DHANABHAI     LJP
6VIJAYKUMAR MANJIBHAI VADHER     AIMF
7SAVLE BHIKA FULA     RPI(A)
8SHIRSATH VEDUBHAI KAUTIKBHAI     IJP
9SANKHALIYA NARENDRASINH MANSINH     LSWP
10CHAUHAN PRAHLADBHAI NATTHUBHAI     IND
11VANZARA DALPATBHAI KHIMABHAI     IND
12VORA RATNABEN DAHYABHAI     IND
13SHAH ISHWARBHAI KHANDAS     IND
14SOLANKI KANTIBHAI HEMABHAI     IND
15SOLANKI RAMESHBHAI DANABHAI     IND
16SOLANKI VITTHALBHAI MAGANBHAI     IND
VIRAMGAM-39     DHANDHUKA-59     DASADA-60     LIMBDI-61     WADHWAN-62
CHOTILA-63     DHRANGADHRA-64
S06-9-GJ-SURENDRANAGAR     1KOLI PATEL SOMABHAI     INC
2PATEL MOHANBHAI DAHYABHAI     BSP
3MER LALJIBHAI CHATURBHAI     BJP
4JAGRUTIBEN BABULAL GADA SHAH     MJP
5DHAVANIYA BACHUBHAI CHHAGANBHAI     LPSP
6PATADIYA KHIMJIBHAI HARAJIVANBHAI     KKJHS
7VAGHELA SATUBHA KANUBHA     ABJS
8KORDIA ALTAFBHAI VALIBHAI     IND
9JADAV BHAGWANBHAI MATHURBHAI     IND
10DABHI MOHANBHAI TULSHIBHAI     IND
11DERVALIA MEDHABHAI KALABHAI     IND
12NAYAKPRA HITESH BHAGVANGIBHAI     IND
13PATEL ASHOKKUMAR CHIMANLAL     IND
14BHARATBHAI RAMNIKLAL MAKWANA     IND
15BHATIYA NARANBHAI KEHARBHAI     IND
16UKABHAI AMARABHAI MAKWANA     IND
17MER MAVJIBHAI KUKABHAI     IND
18RABA HARSURBHAI RAMBHAI     IND
19SAVUKIYA LALJIBHAI MOHANLAL     IND
20SOLANKI KARSHANBHAI JIVABHAI     IND
TANKARA-66     WANKANER-67     RAJKOT EAST-68     RAJKOT WEST-69     RAJKOT
SOUTH-70     RAJKOT RURAL-71     JASDAN-72
S06-10-GJ-RAJKOT     1KIRANKUMAR VALJIBHAI BHALODIA PATEL     BJP
2KUVARJIBHAI MOHANBHAI BAVALIA     INC
3DHEDHI DALEECHANDBHAI LIRABHAI PATEL     BSP
4SUDHIR JOSHI     CPM
5KUBAVAT BABUDAS CHHAGANDAS     ABJS
6GOKALBHAI KHODABHAI PARMAR     LPSP
7JASVANTBHAI RANCHHODBHAI SABHAYA     SP
8JADEJA SATUBHA AMARSANG     NSCP
9NARENDRASINH TAPUBHA JADEJA     RKSP
10BABULAL DEVJIBHAI GHAVA     LJP
11VEKARIA ALPESHBHAI KESHUBHAI     MJP
12AJITSINH HARISINH JADEJA     IND
13ARVINDBHAI JADAVJIBHAI RATHOD     IND
14KESHUBHAI DHANJIBHAI VEKARIYA     IND
15CHAVDA LAKHMANBHAI DEVJIBHAI     IND
16DR ZAKIRHUSEN MATHAKIYA     IND
17DUDHATRA MUKUNDBHAI GOVINDBHAI     IND
18NAYANBHAI HASHMUKHBHAI UPADHYAY     IND
19PRAVINBHAI MEGHJIBHAI DENGADA     IND
20BHIKHABHAI KURJIBHAI SADADIYA     IND
21MULTANI SUBHANBHAI POPATBHAI     IND
22RABARI MOMAIYABHAI ALABHAI     IND
23DRRAJESHKUMAR SHANTIBHAI MAKADIA PATEL     IND
24VEKARIYA PRAGJIBHAI NATHUBHAI     IND
25SAROLA GEETABEN MANJIBHAI     IND
26HARSODA MAHESH HIRABHAI     IND
27HIRABHAI GORDHANBHAI CHANGELA     IND
GONDAL-73     JETPUR-74     DHORAJI-75     PORBANDAR-83     KUTIYANA-84
MANAVADAR-85     KESHOD-88
S06-11-GJ-PORBANDAR     1KHACHARIYA MANSUKHBHAI SHAMJIBHAI     BJP
2CHANDRAVADIYA MEHULKUMAR KARSANBHAI     BSP
3RADADIYA VITTHALBHAI HANSRAJBHAI     INC
4JADEJA NATHABHAI JIVABHAI     IJP
5PATOLIYA MANOJBHAI SAMJIBHAI     IND
6BHATT NITINBHAI VRUJLAL     IND
7RAJENDRA AMRUTLAL PARMAR     IND
KALAVAD-76     JAMNAGR RURAL-77     JAMNAGAR NORTH-78     JAMNAGAR SOUTH-79
JAMJODHPUR-80     KHAMBHALIA-81     DWARKA-82
S06-12-GJ-JAMNAGAR     1AHIR VIKRAMBHAI ARJANBHAI MADAM     INC
2CHAVDA JAYSUKHBHAI TRIKAMBHAI     BSP
3MUNGRA RAMESHBHAI DEVRAJBHAI     BJP
4CHAUHAN DINESHBHAI KALABHAI     RPI(A)
5JADEJA HITENDRASI