The Workshop sponsored by RAND? Or an anti-Hindu workshop?

08-18-2005, 07:15 AM

From: "Mohan Gupta" <mgupta (AT) rogers (DOT) com>To: <info (AT) a4india (DOT) com>Subject: The
Workshop sponsored by RAND? Or an anti-Hindu workshop?Date: Thu, 18 Aug 2005
00:07:21 -0400
The Workshop sponsored by RAND? Or an anti-Hindu workshop by Rand?
Rand is a workshop that brings together intelligence analysts and experts on
religion with the goal of providing background and a frame of reference for
assessing religious motivations in international politics.
Recently Rand has published a report about Hindu religion, Hindu
organizations and Al-Qaeda. From the 84 page report available in pdf format
(only 0.2 mb) http://www.rand.org/pubs/conf_procee...RAND_CF211.pdf,
It is clear that the philosopher providing the theology for identifying anew
group called New Religious Movements is Mark Juergensmeyer who has floated a
concept of 'cosmic war' which he claims to be 'a conceptual framework for
examining the larger-than-life confrontations that religious extremists are
engaged in today. This concept refers to the metaphysical battle between the
forces of Good and Evil that enlivens religious imagination and compels violent
action. The vast majority of NRMs are not violent, and so our concern is with
indicators, signposts that might indicate a turn toward violence by NRM.
"Cosmic war has roots in the theology of most religions...In Hinduism and
Buddhism, it is the perennial struggle to exit the Wheel of Existences
with its continuous cycle of rebirths in order to return to Brahman or achieve
Nirvana'. (p.13)The pundits add: (p. 16) "Sometimes referred to as cults, NRMs
(New Religious Movements) have two defining characteristics -- a high degree of
tension between the group and its surrounding society and a high degree of
control exercised by leadership over their members...NRMs can be found in
Hinduism (the Rashtriya Swyam Sevak Sangh, or RSS), Israel (Gush Emunim),
Christianity (the US-based Identity Movement) and Islam, including Al
Qaeda..."1. The report does not attribute to any original resource.
2. The only sources which might remotely be connected to India are by a UC Santa Barbara professor.
The attack of the report is principally on: RSS, Hindu, India in that order.
Reference to non-entities like Gush Emunim or Identity Movement is only for
'secular' reasons. The most devastating recommendation is: Christist-Islamist
bhai-bhai (brothers). Against whom community and religion and organization
Christist-Islamist are bhai-bhai (brothers)? RAND is a consultancy outfit out
to make money. They will write what the client wants them to write. I have seen
how the international consultancy firms behave at very close quarters for over
18 years. The key is to figure out who asked for the report. (That CIA
Directorate of Intelligence paid for it is only part of the story).
http://www.rand.org/publications/CF/CF211/index.htmlWho are these religious
experts? The workshop is sponsored by the Intelligence Policy Center of
RANDComments of some people on the Rand report:
From: "Radha Rajan" <radharajan7 (AT) gmail (DOT) com>
Friends I did a quick reading of the report. The body of the report devotes just
one paragraph to the RSS. It states explicitly that the RSS is a violent
organization, uses terrorist methods against adversaries and insinuates that it
killed Gandhi.Now there is no point in saying the RSS is this or it is not this.
The question is 'why did the rand corporation mention the RSS when the report
itself does not provide the context for it? If it really wanted NRM should it
not have looked at Khalistanis and the Maoists? yes, Maoists. While the rest of
the report is input for the US government for thecurrent day, the paragraph on
the RSS is for the future. No point in engaging the rand corporation in a
dialogue. We must abuse them and then drop the issue. The battlefield is
elsewhere. I take the reference to the RSS as
a spitty finger to test the wind. We have to do what we have to do.
RAND reports are generally written at the request of Senators or powerful
Congresspersons. I know this because I was in Delhi recently to negotiate with
the India First Foundation about a book. I was asked to speak to a select
audience on the book and speak about the line that I have taken in the
introduction to the book.
One remark that I made had them deeply silent. I said Islam and Christianity
have historically fought murderous wars against each other and because they
both know that they can’t end each other, they have also declared periodic
cease fire.
Hindu nationalism poses the biggest challenge to them both conceptually and as a
real physical threat, and therefore both forces will turn as one against any
individual, group or force which they think represents Hindu nationalism which
must position itself against not only Islam and white Christianity but also
western notions of pluralism and secularism.
Coalition against genocide - Marxist, Muslim and Christian coalition is one such
alliance. Magsay, Nobel and sundry human rights awards are intended to extend
moral and financial support for such anti-Hindu forces like Musharraf's moral
support for the freedom fighters of Kashmir.
The Magsay award has been instituted by the Rockefeller brothers foundation and
a very large part of the money for the award is donated by the ford foundation
members and relatives. Therefore the persons who get nominated for these
awards, who nominates them, the screening process or the panel which ultimately
decide the winners - all of these will be instructive about the forces at work.
And incidentally, all the Magsay say winners, human rights award winners in
Bharat have been avowedly anti-Hindu or anti-nationalist forces.
The western governments with their homogenizing and de-nationalizing mission are
as much a threat to Hindu India as the jihadis. So please take the report
seriously as an indicator of both contemporary and future foreign policy trends
of the US.
Its glib statement that religious violence is common to ALL RELIGIONS. Its
interpretation of cosmic war in Hinduism, with Rama and Ravana. Ravana is
labeled 'evil one' for easy comparison to the Christian and Islamic devil and
shaitan.
It calls Ayodhya a 'battlefield'. All Hindus know that Kurukshetra was the
battle field and not Ayodhya.It says in India NRMs (read RSS) have come into
being because of massive 'social displacement'. (Do they mean it is the lumpen
and society's riffraff which constitute the RSS?) That was the meaning of
lumpen, the socially displaced. Is this description of the RSS polite social
science or politically correct international politics?
Another point. The RSS is lumped together with apolitical paranoid religious
cults like the Branch Davidians of Waco and religious terrorist groups like the
Al Qaeda, some Christian and Jew groups. These are armed groups who believe
terrorism is the shortest route to their po0litical objectives. The RSS is
neither an apolitical religious cult nor a religious terrorist armed
organization. So why bring in Hinduism and the RSS. Was Hinduism and Srirama
included unnaturally just to provide the religious context for the RSS?The
whole thing about the RSS and Hinduism is conceptually faulty besides being
inaccurate in its details.
The CIA could have spent its money better in donating it to me for taking care of street animals.
RR
Jurgensmeyer may be small fry (I am not sure about that too) but the Rand
Corporation is not and neither is the CIA which funded it nor the US Defense
secretary and the military and intelligence establishments which commissioned
the report. Jihad is a convenient enemy no doubtbut that should not distract
our attention from the US which represents white Christian state power at its
most monstrous. The western governments with their homogenizing and
de-nationalizing mission are as much a threat to Hindu India as the jihadis.
So please take the report seriously as an indicator of both contemporary and
future foreign policy trends of the US. RRN.S. Rajaram <nsrajaram (AT) vsnl (DOT) com>
wrote:
"The western governments with their homogenising and de-nationalising mission
are as much a threat to Hindu India as the jihadis. So please take the report
seriously as an indicator of both contemporary and future foreign policy trends
of the US." I am not sure I agree. I have close ties with the U.S. military
among others and I don't see it that way. In any event, what is the
alternative? Not work with them but shun them as untouchables and cry among
ourselves? I have worked with RAND and nothing is accomplished by talking
among ourselves. Also I don't hold on to the belief that the U.S. is driven by
white racism. If anything, it is India that has excessive preoccupation with
white people-- be it Sonia Gandhi, Michael Witzel or Jean Dreze. None of them
would be taken seriously in the West. We are creating these white monsters. We
needn't scare ourselves so much. See how the Japanese defeated them, but
went and begged Mountbatten. We need to get out of this fear psychosis. As
Franklin Roosevelt once said:"There is nothing to fear but fear itself."
Whether it is just PR or not (NOT in my opinion, since no one reads these
reports), we need to make our presence in the think tanks and shift the focus
to Jihad. I feel it can be done. Otherwise, someone else will fill the vacuum.
I feel that some people are giving too much importance to these small fry
like Jurgensmeyer (an obscure faculty member) and Heather Gregg (a struggling
graduate student). It was picked up be the Indian media while no one in the
U.S. bothers with them. It is we who keep these people alive. Let us be
pro-active and try to occupy some space.
New'"> Rajaram---------------
Nachiketa Tiwari nachiketa_t (AT) hotmail (DOT) com
Logic will not negate the report. We all know that from the standpoint of logic,
it will be a futile exercise for someone to try to prove that orgs like RSS are
extremist in nature.
Rather, the question and concern is, that there in all probability, reports such
as these are laying the ground-work to achieve something big. A report here, and
another one there, does not make a difference. Rather, what is concerning is the
overall emerging pattern, and the politics underlying it. I have strong feelings
that orgs are being goaded to cook up such reports, so that the "next steps"
could follow.
Many may view this as a PR problem. I do not see it that way. I view it as a
problem rooted in ideology (as in Clash of Civilizations) and the consequential
politics.
RAND maintains a database called “Terrorism Knowledge Base” which is fill with junk .
From: "Srinivasan Kalyanaraman" <kalyan97 (AT) gmail (DOT) com>
I don't know what role the members of many advisory boards play apart from
eating cookies. That it is an appendage of the top policy brass of US is
obvious, with many Lt. Gens. donning research caps.Here is some info. from the
website www.rand.orgRAND is just a business outfits which hires scribes based
on who pays them. It has no independent stand. Their main job is fund
raising.----------
One might have seen headlines in Indian news papers stating that RAND Corp
study linked or equated RSS with Al-Qaeda. Of course our usual suspects'
characterization of this study since it concerns RSS, is misleading as
usual.Enclosed is clarification received from RAND in response to the note sent
to them.This is in reply to your note to RAND's vice president, Gene Gritton.
The study cited in the article in the Indian press is available at
www.rand.org.The press story is basically accurate, but its headline is not.
The headline implies we somehow link RSS and Al Qaeda. In fact,
what we say, and the story has accurately, is that many religious traditions
have spawned "new" religious movements, and we cite RSS as an example from
Hinduism, along with Al Qaeda as one from Islam, along with Jewish and
Christian examples. We also say, and the story quotes, that almost all of
these new movements are non-violent. There is nothing to imply any connection
at all between RSS and Al Qaeda.
Any action against Rand report MUST include a pointed exposure of Treverton's
lies, and RAND MUST suffer from adverse publicity about their fraudulent
'research'.
There are people working already on developing well-thought-out and
well-researched points to slam Treverton, and expose his motives as well as
those whom he collected for that "Workshop of Experts". Such an opportunity
does not come along often. If 'we' waste it again with some half-baked
response, it will really betray people who want to help and spend most of their
free time trying to help.
Treverton invited some Harvard Divinity School jerk as an "Expert" to come in
with Alice-in-Wonderland "Cosmic" theories to appease the terrorists and bring
in their bigoted agenda. Treverton must pay for that, and it must be ensured
that the "Cosmic" guru in question must never again find credibility in such
circles. We can turn this into a MAJOR coup and reduce the anti-RSS commie
cabal to utter ridicule if we show that RAND had to fire its "researchers" and
retract a report under exposure for fraud. The scope of this is tremendous. It
will also put egg on the faces of the Harvard Divinity
School types - which is vital to help us counter the Clooney Baloney. I view it
as a problem rooted in ideology (as in Clash of Civilizations) and the
consequential politics. Read Page 57 of the report, the very last paragraph:
"For the intelligence community, a different set of conceptual tools must be
employed to better understand this new reality. It requires both understanding
of religions and knowledge of non-Western culture and history as seen through a
non-Western lens. For an analyst who is American by culture and training, this
is a formidable task but one that is not insurmountable. The lens through
which one views cosmic war and state response can be helpful. The next steps in
building a framework for thinking about religion and conflict or violence might
be to look in more depth at the particulars of religious extremists - such as
their leadership or their patterns of education and indoctrination." It
appears that the recommendation is to target the leadership of Hindu
organisation. As was done recently with Shankaracharya who was identified as an
accused even before Sankararaman was murdered.
Here are some suggestions. It is excellent that someone contacted RAND's VP, and
clearly, Treverton has had his backside kicked. His response is essentially the
same as that advanced by the "Chief Librarian and Researcher" of the "Terrorism
Analysis" scam which was charging money to people to find out why they listed
them as terrorist. They were also lying. Of course, Treverton is not telling
the truth, as the reader of the RAND report can confirm. To me, the words in
the RAND report said very clearly that RSS was characterized as TERRORIST, with
HATRED as one of its characteristics. Also, exactly how is the RSS "NEW"? It's
almost as old as Communism, far older than the American Civil Rights Movement,
MUCH older than Independent
India, and definitely much older than the Moral Majority in the US - and much
older than RAND, Gritton and Treverton. It is evident that Treverton is a liar.
That finding should be analyzed, documented clearly and in bulletized form, and
conveyed back in the strongest terms to RAND's VP - and publicized along with
their weasel-worded slimy squirming when caught in the headlights of the truth.
This is a breakthrough. Either Treverton should come out with a PUBLIC
clarification and APOLOGY which RETRACTS the stupidly-worded statements in his
report, or the RAND VP must face the fact that he has a fundamentalist bigot
putting his religious agenda above his employer's policies and objectives. The
fact that Treverton is an idiot, and RAND have seriously erred in publishing a
report with such poor quality controls,
MUST be widely publicized. Please have someone look very carefully at this
issue, and lets not blow this golden opportunity to convey a deterrent lesson.

Many may view this as a PR problem. Many people do not see it that way. I view
it as a problem rooted in ideology (as in Clash of Civilizations) and the
consequential politics.
>From a long-term point, Westerners see Bharat (and China) as more of a threat to
their dominance vis-à-vis Islamic terrorists. While they perceive that Islamic
threat is short term in nature (and containable), the threat from China and
Bharat is more of a long-term type, more fundamental, and civilization in
scope. Those perceptions will drive them to adopt certain specific strategies.
Reports such as the one we are currently talking about are a very-very-very
small piece of their giant strategic puzzle. So, while it is good (and
desirable) to undertake measures against such reports, a long-lasting response
would be to ensure the emergence of a proud, prosperous and just Hindu Bharat
without relying at all on the doles from the
West.
"If anything, it is India that has excessive precoccupation with white people"

The fact is that India started its independence with a huge burden -- a morbid
sense of inferiority complex in relation to the white man!! My estimate or
guesstimate will be that 80 percent of educated Indians of that time suffered
from this complex. However, the new generation that has largely replaced the
first post-independence generation, is full of self confidence and knows it has
the ability to beat the white man in the global game that's unfolding. India's
is, therefore, now well set on the road to its tryst with destiny! Yet, I guess
probably 20 percent of the educated guys in India today may still be suffering
from that "disease". It's that section that one often comes across in various
walks of life including the media.

Ratan Tata and Lalita Gupta, Joint MD ICICI Bank (South Asian Cttee.) and Hemant
Shah, leading Indian-US entrepreneur, (terrorism, etc.) are on Rand Advisory
Boards. Just let's attack them as anti-Hindu and send them copies of our
accusations to create a fuss. Rand receives Arab money, almost certainly
instigated by the Pakis, who play this game in the US and rather effectively.
An apology might also be sent to Rand with a promise that the RSS will be urged
to imitate Al Qaeda to justify Rand's labelling. Also remind them that the
latter is a creature of the US and may have remained so for reasons that may
only become known in the future.
(It's a trick to make the Jihadis concentrate upon India alone and leave the
good White Christians and their greedy Multinational rapists in peace. We have
no choice but to realize that we are fighting TWO WARS at the same time. We can
do it if we refuse to be cowed down. Sandhya )
We need to break the habit of treating US Think Tank reports as authoritative,
and use the examples of ignorant and incompetent reports like this one, to
start depending more on Indian Think Tank reports. SAAG and SATP write good,
solid stuff.The report finds tortuous reasons to include Hinduism within the
framework of the violent abrahamic faiths.---------------

Start your day with Yahoo! - make it your home page