India and Pakistan: looking beyond the rhetoric (part 2)

September 14, 2009

Following up on my earlier post about what is happening behind the scenes in the fraught relationship between India and Pakistan, it’s worth keeping track of this report that Islamabad is considering appointing former foreign secretary Riaz Mohammad Khan to handle the informal dialogue with New Delhi known as “backchannel diplomacy”.

As discussed in this story there has been much talk about trying to get the backchannel diplomacy between India and Pakistan up and running again, both to reduce India-Pakistan rivalry in Afghanistan and to prevent an escalation of tensions between the two countries themselves.  So any forward movement on the backchannel diplomacy, if confirmed, would be important.

To recap (and with apologies to those who already know this), India and Pakistan have many different ways of engaging with each other.  They have a formal peace process known as the composite dialogue, started in 2004 and broken off by India after last November’s attack on Mumbai.  India has said it will not resume the composite dialogue until Pakistan takes more action against those accused of involvement in Mumbai.

Then there are Track II talks, in which politicians, journalists, administrators and others on both sides of the border meet in a private capacity to try to promote understanding between India and Pakistan.

Senior politicians also have a habit of holding bilateral meetings on the fringes of international conferences, as happened when Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh met President Zardari in Russia in June and Prime Minister Yusuf Raza Gilani in Egypt in July. The foreign secretaries, or top diplomats, of both countries are also expected to meet on the sidelines of the UN General Assembly this month, ahead of a meeting between the foreign ministers.

But of all the different ways that India and Pakistan have found to engage with each other, the backchannel diplomacy carried out away from the glare of the media has arguably been the most successful. In 2003, the two countries agreed a ceasefire on the Line of Control dividing disputed Kashmir, and extended it to Siachen, where the two countries had fought a high-altitude war since 1984.

In 2007, Satinder Lambah, a special envoy to Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, and Tariq Aziz, envoy to then president Pervez Musharraf, etched out a set of principles meant to allow them to work towards a resolution of the Kashmir dispute (Praveen Swami at The Hindu gives the details here.)

I’m told there is no evidence the deal would ever have worked – many crucial details had yet to be negotiated. And since the backchannel talks were held in secret, it has always been unclear whether either country could win over domestic constituencies which might resist or sabotage any peace deal. But the backchannel diplomacy, and the intellectual space it opened up even to consider an agreement on Kashmir, functioned as an important ”shock absorber” between two nuclear-armed countries which have already fought three full-scale wars since independence in 1947.

The tentative “roadmap” agreement fell apart as Musharraf’s own political fortunes deteriorated, and the backchannel talks have yet to find their feet again in any kind of structured format.

The signs are that many other informal discussions are going on. As discussed here, the Pakistan Army has moved a significant number of troops away from its eastern border with India to fight the Pakistani Taliban on its western border with Afghanistan. The head of the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) broached what is effectively Indian territory by attending an iftar at the Indian High Commision in Islamabad. And the Indian government is trying to work out how to engage the Hurriyat, the main political separatist group in Kashmir, and that is something it can only do with Pakistani acquiescence.

But these informal contacts have lacked the structure of the backchannel diplomacy, whose main aim was to work out a way towards peace.

Until this week, it was unclear who would handle the backchannel diplomacy on the Pakistan side to replace Tariq Aziz, who was an appointee of Musharraf. On India’s side, Satinder Lambah could remain as a special envoy to the prime minister.

So the suggestion that Riaz Mohammad Khan might be appointed to fill that role for Pakistan would be a major step forward.

That said, there are plenty of spoilers in both countries who don’t believe in the peace process. So if India and Pakistan find a way back into their secret backchannel diplomacy, we might never know.

(Reuters file photos: A child at the funeral of Benazir Bhutto; Prime Minister Singh and President Zardari in Yekaterinburg; the gates closing on the india-Pakistan border; and a soldier at base camp in Siachen)

Comments

The US and UK can help themselves by increasing student visa quotas, and give scholarship opportunitites to the students from this disadvantaged region. This is only way to tackle the threat emenating from southern Punjab.
- Posted by Umair

Does it it any more shameless!!! You just confirmed that your country is not in your control and you have no hopes to save it. All you need is MORE money.. unconditional to army and politicians.

Why not you merge your country with China or Saudi or US or UK? They will take care of you and you won’t have to beg ever after!

Obviously Zinaha’s vision has gone down the toilet. What’s there to aspire for!

Posted by Ramin | Report as abusive
 

The irony is Pakistan was used for war against the Soviets and later dumped. this time a long term and sustained campaigned is needed to turn around serious challenging threats.
- Posted by Umair

Dude,
Who used Pakistan? How can someone use Pakistan without Pakistan’s will? Even banana republics have egos! That was your proposal and US/Saudi only financed your proposal? What happened to the 300 billion given to Pakistan army? How many times will you keep asking money for the same reason. That project was over 20 years back and you still keep asking for money! For how long?

Are you ever going to do some work or live off aid forever? I have a feeling, you don’t intend to give up terrorism and keep milking for West forever!

Posted by Ramin | Report as abusive
 

The US and UK can help themselves by increasing student visa quotas, and give scholarship opportunitites to the students from this disadvantaged region. This is only way to tackle the threat emenating from southern Punjab.
- Posted by Umair

Yeah right! Have you checked news recently!!!

US/UK are deporting Pakistani students in thousands. All are considered security threats. Nobody has time to deal with Made in Pakistan products.

You need to give up terrorism and wait for a generation till anybody can trust you again!

Also, you want US/UK to feed your country and educate your country while your country is feeding the Chinese. And the well fed Chinese are attacking US/UK everyday! What kind of morality is this? You need to control your spending. You are a pretentious beggar, not a genuine one!

Pakistan’s first F-22 frigate arrives in Karachi from Shanghai
http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2009-0 9/12/content_12041487.htm

Posted by Ramin | Report as abusive
 

I think the backchannel diplomacy is the way, it almost have resolved the Kashmir issue in 2007 if Musharraff did not have got carried away with his media brinkmanship on “breakfast with editors” and his public relations officer didn’t leak the cassette “accidentally” to private channel.

The plan on the table shelved when Mr. Vajpayee withdrew under immense friction offered by BJP hawks at the last moment.

Had the agreement signed we would have seen tremendous improvement in relations.

Posted by AAfromUSA | Report as abusive
 

Blackwater brings jobs to Pakistan! Some good news!
http://www.analyst-network.com/article.p hp?art_id=3140

Posted by Sameer | Report as abusive
 

Pakistan: Bomb FATA with dollar bundles, not hellfires!

http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp  ?page=20099\15\story_15-9-2009_pg7_1

Posted by Peter | Report as abusive
 

Pakistan Army makes Secret peace deals with Swat Taliban.
All Taliban leaders go in to hiding.
http://www.thaindian.com/newsportal/sout h-asia/secret-peace-talks-on-between-swa t-taliban-and-pak-army_100245935.html

Then Army massacres innocent villagers and burns their houses
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/82 54718.stm

Then demands 1.6 bil from US for war cost
http://www.regionaltimes.com/11sep2009/f rontpagenews/pakisatnagain.htm

Posted by Andy | Report as abusive
 

It’s not rhetoric!

Pakistan doesn’t have a legally valid case or argument! They are only demanding ransom with the threat of guns! You decide!

1. Indian Independence Act of 1947:
(a) Kashmir was not part of pre-partitioned India
(b) Under the partition plan provided by the Indian Independence Act of 1947, Kashmir King was free to accede to India or Pakistan.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kashmir
As parties to the partition process, both countries had agreed that the rulers of princely states would be given the right to opt for either Pakistan or India or—in special cases—to remain independent. (Note: Under the Indian Independence Act of 1947, ONLY the king was authorized to decide, NOT the people, NO plebiscite)
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/27 39993.stm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_Inde pendence_Act_1947
(c) But the king was hesitant to join a muslim Pakistan when his Kashmir was mostly secular. The King had serious concerns about the future of his people under a muslim rulers and took months to decide.
(d) Not able to tolerate king’s hesitation, Pakistan army entered Kashmir, dressed tribals. The details of plundered villages, massacres and rapes of Pakistan army in Kashmir will be a separate blog topic! Horor was similar to Bangladesh war crimes!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1971_Bangla desh_atrocities
(e) The king was unprepared for this sudden betrayal and attack from Pakistan. He desperately asked India to defend Kashmir.
(f) India insisted that it will not defend Kashmir, unless it is an Indian territory!
(g) So the King (Maharaja, Hari Singh) signed the Instrument of Accession in October 1947 and Indian subsequently Indian army went to Kashmir to defend the villagers from the plunderers and rapists. So the Kashmiris live today with their culture and freedom and secularism. As part of India’s commitment to the King, Kashmiris continue to enjoy some special rights in India, which normal Indian don’t enjoy.
(h) Ten similar state signed Instrument of Accession with Pakistan and India never questioned those!
(i) Faced with a unfavorable decision from the King, Pakistan started to argue that Muslims are in the majority in the region and Pakistan should be the default choice. BUT that’s a direct contradiction of Indian Independence Act of 1947, which created Pakistan and to which Pakistan agreed to. This is direct violation #1.
(Example: You steal your neighbor’s car because you have a similar car. You expect the judge will award you the car! When the judge finds you guilty, you complain about the skin color of the hudge and don’t accept the judgement and go on shouting threatening the neighbor with a gun)
(j) Pakistan involuntarily cededd a big part of Kashmir to China to gain Chinese friendship.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trans-Karak oram_Tract

2. UN, Security Council ordered in its Resolution 47:
(a) So when Indian army went to save Kashmir, It was directly fighting with Pakistan army. Gone were the tribal dresses or any make ups! It was never the tribals, always the Pakistan army in disguise!
(b) After India went to UN, Security Council ordered in its Resolution 47, passed on 21 April 1948, that the invading Pakistani army retreat from Jammu & Kashmir and that the accession of Kashmir to either India or Pakistan be determined in accordance with a plebiscite to be supervised by the UN. Only invading Pakistan army was ordered to retreat (NOT Indian army!)
(c) Till this day, Pakistan army has FAILED to retreat and allow plebiscite. This is direct violation #2.
(d) Facing the Pakistani failures to withdraw, In 1990 after nearly four decades, the United States changed its position and is no longer urging a plebiscite in Kashmir, saying the dispute should be settled through direct negotiations between India and Pakistan
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nati ons_Security_Council_Resolution_47

3. Shimla agreement:
(a) After liberation of Bangladesh and Pakistani defeat, Pakistan signed Shimla agreement. It says:
(i) Pakistan and Indi will peacefully solve all pending issues bilaterally and nobody will promote hostilities.
(ii) This agreement invalidates all previous agreements including UN resolution 47.
(iii) All sides will respect Line of Control and NOT change unilateraly
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simla_Agree ment
(b) Pakistan continues to viloate this agreement:
(i) By romoting various terrorist orgs and attacking India repeatedly and promoting hostilities
(ii) By trying to change LoC in Kargil
(iii) By repeatedly raising UN resolution 47 and seeking 3rd party interventations
These direct violations #3, #4, #5.

4. Joint statements:
All Pakistani Priministers (including Zulfikr Bhutto, Benazir Bhutto, Nawaz Sharif) and dictators (including Musharraf) have repeatedly made joint statements that they will stick to Shimla agreement and NOT use terrorism to achieve goals. But their pledges never lasted more than 2 hours.
(i) There are hundreds of anti-India terrorist orgs in Pakistan (from A to Z) and several serious attacks on India
(ii) Pakistani leaders continue to shout about Kashmir in all international forums. No body cares, but these are direct violations of their pledges, joint statements and Shimla agreement!

5. Ethinic Cleansing:
(i) With the support of terrorist orgs, Pakistan started an ethnic cleansing in Indian Kashhmir. In 1947 there were 74% muslims and 23% Hindus, 3% Buddhists and Sikhs in Kashmir. Today there is 95% muslims and less than 5% Hindus, Buddhists and Sikhs
(ii) Pakistani Kashmir had around 74% muslims before Pakistani invasion and today there are 99.9% muslims. What happened to the Hindus and Sikhs?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kashmiri_Pa ndit

6. Democracy:
(i) Pakistani Kashmirs don’t enjoy any democratic rights.
(ii) Indian Kashmiris continue to enjoy democratic rights since their accession to India. In the most recent elections, Kashmirs voted overwhelingly (around 70%), inspite of severe militant threats. Women were the more active voters. This percentage of voters was higher than India’s national average and higher than most developed countries.
(iii) Average annual income of Indian Kashmiris is roughly 5 times that of Pakistani kashmiris.

There is no rule, pledge or agreement or resolution that India has violated. Pakistan has never proved or produced any evidence and still occupies part of Kashnir!
(1) Under what basis Pakistan deserves and claims Indian Kashmir?
(2) What is the legality Pakistan occupying Pak-Occupied-Kashmir?
(3) Why is Pakistan denying Pakistanis their democratic rights?
(4) What is Pakistan setting up more Taliban training camps in Pakistani Kashmir?
(5) Who will save the Pakistani Kashmiris from talibans and US drones?

References:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kashmir
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kashmir_con flict
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_Inde pendence_Act_1947
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indo-Pakist ani_War_of_1947
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trans-Karak oram_Tract
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nati ons_Security_Council_Resolution_47
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1971_Bangla desh_atrocities
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simla_Agree ment
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kashmiri_Pa ndit
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/27 39993.stm

Posted by Soman | Report as abusive
 

Musharraf: A Brazen insolent thief!

Yes, I stole US aid!

Musharraf confirmed that the weapons were indeed used against India.

“Whoever wishes to be angry, let them be angry, why should we bother? We have to maintain our security, and the Americans should know, and the whole world should know that we won’t compromise our security, and will use the equipment everywhere.”

In the past, Pakistan’s army has dismissed claims that aid from the US had been misappropriated.

In 2007, Pakistan rejected a report which said it had used $5bn on weapons systems designed to fight India.
Pakistan’s military had described the New York Times report as “nonsense”.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/82 54360.stm

Posted by Patrick | Report as abusive
 
 

The Pakistani army back to it’s genocidal & torturous ways in Swat. Conducting a mass murder of Swatis!

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/15/world/ asia/15swat.html?_r=1&hp

Posted by Mortal | Report as abusive
 

Mortal:
Pakistan army wants US to finance it’s war crimes in SWAT and Balochistan!

“There was no place on his body not tortured,” the petition said. Nails were “hammered into his body, and cigarettes burned into the skin.”

Posted by Patrick | Report as abusive
 

Umair, Ramin, you said:

“The irony is Pakistan was used for war against the Soviets and later dumped. this time a long term and sustained campaigned is needed to turn around serious challenging threats.
- Posted by Umair

Dude,
Who used Pakistan? How can someone use Pakistan without Pakistan’s will? Even banana republics have egos! That was your proposal and US/Saudi only financed your proposal? What happened to the 300 billion given to Pakistan army? How many times will you keep asking money for the same reason. That project was over 20 years back and you still keep asking for money! For how long?

Are you ever going to do some work or live off aid forever? I have a feeling, you don’t intend to give up terrorism and keep milking for West forever!”

–>Guys, the Pakistan military Mafia loaned Pakistani sovereinty to suit their own financial and political means. The Pak military is guilty of renting and letting Pakistan get used by the highest bidder, or Saudi masters. Please take note.

Posted by Global Watcher | Report as abusive
 

Chill out Rabin
US education foundation Fullbright scholarship programme from Pakistan is the biggest in the world sending more than 200 students to US every year on scholarship. Same is case with UK, Sweden etc I was just making a point about education/scholarship opportunities, who asked for free money? The whole world cant even pay back for a single drop of blood of our brave Army officers and men who laid down their lives to protect Pakistan from terrorists. And these terrorists are not only our problem, the world has a collective responsiility.

I would say YOU suffer from moral bankruptcy and your shameful response is reflective of that.

“You need to give up terrorism and wait for a generation till anybody can trust you again!”

-Rubbish and crap, just google the number of Pakistani students in Swedish universities only. hell if Britain deports a few of them, Sweden is willing to take as much.

Posted by Umair | Report as abusive
 

“-Rubbish and crap, just google the number of Pakistani students in Swedish universities only. hell if Britain deports a few of them, Sweden is willing to take as much.”

–>Not for long, Europe is fed up.

Posted by Global Watcher | Report as abusive
 

Umair:

UK Accused of Treating Pakistani Students Badly
http://www.emigrate.co.uk/news/517342.ht ml

Britain and Pakistan agreed last week to work towards the return of thousands of Pakistani immigrants living illegally in Britain.
http://www.immigrationmatters.co.uk/paki stan-will-help-return-illegal-immigrants -living-in-uk.html

“Let me be very clear and inform the Pakistanis that they must not think that they can get a permanent status if they stay here illegally for 10 years or more,” he added.
http://www.immigrationmatters.co.uk/paki stan-will-help-return-illegal-immigrants -living-in-uk.html

The numbers could run into thousands, but the High Commission could not be more precise,
http://www.dw-world.de/dw/article/0,,460 1686,00.html?maca=en-aa-top-861-rdf

It’s time to give up terrorism! Innocent students are suffering. Sweden will start deporting soon. AQ KHan has a legacy there!

Posted by Ramin | Report as abusive
 

@ Ramin: You do need to chill a little. Do express your opinions boldly & forcefully but let’s all just try to be civil & humane and not degrade or condescend anyone. Just my personal opinion!

@ Umair: “The whole world cant even pay back for a single drop of blood of our brave Army officers and men who laid down their lives to protect Pakistan from terrorists. And these terrorists are not only our problem, the world has a collective responsiility” – Posted by Umair

So if I get this right, the world needs to pay back Pakistan for destroying the terrorists, which Pakistan created, aided, abetted & groomed in the first place?
It’s like this guy who bought a tiger’s cub to scare his neighbors & boost his ego. He fed & groomed it for years & one day when the tiger became a danger to his own life, the guy started demanding that it was the whole neighborhood’s responsibility to help him get rid of the tiger.

“US education foundation Fullbright scholarship programme from Pakistan is the biggest in the world sending more than 200 students to US every year on scholarship”

Instead of looking to send a very limited number of students to the US, UK, Sweden etc on scholarships, Pakistan needs to use the money it is receiving, towards building, developing & establishing it’s own world class educational institutions where every Pakistani can get a shot at a good education so that they can change their own fortunes as well as Pakistan’s.
I hate to bring India into the picture again but the truth is that Pakistan can learn a lot from the way India has developed & established it’s educational institutions. For instance, today the Indian Institutes of Technology (IITs) & the Indian Institutes of Management (IIMs) are regarded as one of the best educational institutions in the world. Just to give you an idea, about 20% of Microsoft’s workforce is an IIT graduate. India has successfully emulated this educational model from the west. There’s no shame or harm if Pakistan emulates it from India. If India can do it, so can Pakistan. It’s just a matter or will & correct direction.

Posted by Mortal | Report as abusive
 

And these terrorists are not only our problem, the world has a collective responsiility.
- Posted by Umair

Then why don’t you let the world do their job? Why is there so much noise from Pakistan when US/NATO bomb this area?

Do you have any intention to clean this area or just keep asking money for that area?

Posted by Sameer | Report as abusive
 

If recent history proves anything it’s that things for the Pakistanis have to get worse before the Army is convinced it’ll have to make peace with India.

And it may even be the same for the Indians. The Indians need to come to terms with Pakistan’s paranoia and insecurities. Perhaps, they can offer them some kind of movement towards a non-aggression pact as long as Pakistan makes real and genuine efforts towards taking apart the terror infrastructure.

Back channel’s good but I have always thought that a grand gesture might not hurt. There is goodwill among both populations, or at least enough of it to bring an end to conflict in the region. A grand gesture by India directly aimed at the Pakistani public, not the Army or the government would not hurt. Let all those poor Pak students being turned away from the West, study in India. Give Pakistan preferential status for trade. Do monkey diplomacy or whatever the Indian version is of China’s Panda diplomacy. These make seem like radical suggestions and they might just be that right now. But in a generation they will have built up a constituency for peace in Pakistan. At the very minimum it will finally convince the Pakistanis that India does not covet their homeland. And if really successful, the strategy could bring a split between the Army and the public. It’s high risk and even higher reward. The Indians need to start re-thinking the paradigm. 62 years on, the ways of old have been well proven not to work.

Posted by Keith | Report as abusive
 

-Rubbish and crap, just google the number of Pakistani students in Swedish universities only. hell if Britain deports a few of them, Sweden is willing to take as much.
- Posted by Umair

Yep! Sounds like a good plan! Pakistan is beyond repair. Who wants to die in a food stampede anyway! Look for a new country and start a new life! Please don’t take your IT skills to the new country!

Posted by Ramin | Report as abusive
 

UK deporting thousands of Pakistanis!
http://www.dw-world.de/dw/article/0,,460 1686,00.html

Posted by Ramin | Report as abusive
 

Keith:
I think your plan makes sense. India should try a different approach. Ignore the politicians and Army and start dealing with the Pakistani people directly.

But it is hard to know who controls Pakistan. Saudi controls Mullahs and Madrassas. China controls the army. Saudi/UAE control Sharif/Zardari. ISI controls militants.

So even if India tries to deal with Pakistani people directly, these diverse groups will try to scuttle it. That’s what happens every time India comes close to a deal with the politicians. A terrorist attack in between peace process makes peace very complicated!

May be India should focus on internal security and let US stabilize Pakistan. Then India deal with the stakeholders in Pakistan!

Posted by Soman | Report as abusive
 

There has been a general perception that only an Army led government in Pakistan could solve the Kashmir issue. This may not be true. The time has come for India and Pakistan to seriously consider tackling the problems in their relations and back-door diplomacy-away from the limelight- is the best possible way. Also it is important that seasoned diplomats are assigned to the job as the issues are so sensitive that a professional approach is required. India must however give up its rigid stand regarding the composite dialogue. No one denies that the Mumbai incident was tragic and should not have happened but living in the past has never helped. Internal political considerations must not outweigh the benefits of lasting peace in the region, which in turn could have a positive effect on the people at large.

Posted by Naushad Shafkat | Report as abusive
 

Ramin
“Who wants to die in a food stampede anyway!”

Again shameful remarks and no compassion and dignity for the poor women and children who died in a stampede in Karachi during food handout by a charity. Poverty is also rampant in India, go show your hatred somewhere else. You are full of hate, you have no place in a civilized society.

Posted by Umair | Report as abusive
 
 

@Also it is important that seasoned diplomats are assigned to the job as the issues are so sensitive that a professional approach is required. India must however give up its rigid stand regarding the composite dialogue. No one denies that the Mumbai incident was tragic and should not have happened but living in the past has never helped. Internal political considerations must not outweigh the benefits of lasting peace in the region, which in turn could have a positive effect on the people at large.”
- Posted by Naushad Shafkat

–Naushad Shafkat: valid points. Everyone emphasizes Mumbai as the reason. NO, Mumbai was just an icing on the cake. India has been very resilent in absorbing routine bomb blasts (like Parliamnent attack). I hope we can assume they are via the similar terrorist organizations very well supported by Pakistan ISI/Army. Still there is weight in there, but is it not fair that Pakistan gives some credible support to India’s concerns since 198Os or perhaps even before that ISI’s “foreign hand” in the terrorism in Indian Punjab, Kashmir, North East India. I said “Credible” and that is not possible due to the nature of political structure of pakistan. If PM and President of pakistan are themselves not 100% sure of their jobs, what credibility they can give to others. It is REAL complex and Mumbai is just a dot on the graph.But still it is possible with an element of SINCEREITY from either side.

Perhaps ISI, RAW, Indian and Pakistan Army chiefs, PM s and Presidents and Diplomats need to be on board and talk the same language.

Posted by rajeev | Report as abusive
 

I did not mean to say: “Parliamnent attack” as routine attack in my previous post.
requoted:

“India has been very resilent in absorbing routine bomb blasts (like Parliamnent attack).”

Posted by rajeev | Report as abusive
 

@Is India really a big nation, which behaves small?
questions Javed Naqvi
- Posted by Umair

Umair: No surprise, coming from J. Naqvi. Just check the archives of his columns. But I prefer he stays this way. It is better to have a harsh critic than a boring admirer with zero feedback.

Well since the title of his article has a question mark, short YES/NO answer is NO. He forgets that India’s peaceful co-existence policy by Nehru, no first attack whether a small or a big neighbor is based on acting big.
But there is a lot of scope for improvement.

Posted by rajeev | Report as abusive
 

From Pakistan with love !

While people talk about Top 10 Cars, Top 10 Actors or Top 10 Films

In Pakistan talk is about Top 10 Terrorists.

http://www.memri.org/bin/latestnews.cgi? ID=SD253609

And First prize goes to Maulana Fazlullah Hurray !

Posted by singh | Report as abusive
 

After Drones now NATO Fighter Jets are bombing Pakistan

http://www.presstv.ir/detail.aspx?id=106 245&sectionid=351020401

Where is the pride, ego and sovereignty.

Posted by singh | Report as abusive
 

Is India really a big nation, which behaves small?
questions Javed Naqvi – Posted by Umair

Javed Naqvi is a Dawn columnist, who (unlike many other Dawn columnists who are fair & balanced) has a strong anti-India bias. He covers India for dawn & I’ve hardly ever read any article of his which shows India in a positive light. In this particular article, his reference to Daniel Patrick Moynihan is from the 70′s (Moynihan has been dead for 7 yrs).

Posted by Mortal | Report as abusive
 

Umair:
Sorry for the late response. Uploading problem.
@And for ISI that was a piece of cake during that time, they would have thought (leaving certain unexpected events) with a sustained campaign the liberation of Kashmir and seperation of Indian Punjab is merely a few years away. Settling the scores of 1971 war too.”
-posted by Umair

Umair: I strongly disagree. Indian Punjabis have gone through terrible times and thousands of innocent lives lost in this unnnecessary game; country faced fallouts and is out of it.

See below some essential factors for separation of a state and the presence/absence of them in Punjab:
1. Mass support of the movement—absent
2. Poverty or disparity in social and economic status—Punjab is the most prosperous with perhaps the least disparity—richest state and perhaps least disparity
3. Riots/sectarian violence—Not a single Hindu-Sikh riot inside Punjab during 15yrs of the movement—no anti-Hindu attacks in 1984 during riots against Sikhs that happened outside Punjab.
4. Punjab is contiguous with the rest of India unlike E. and W. Pakistan. People in Punjab faced traumatic times and everyone is out of it. To say separation of Punjab was a piece of cake is not only wrong but not possible.
On Kashmir separatism: In contrast to Punjab, Kashmir has more favorable factors but still not possible. In 1965 Pakistan tried it but failed. Kashmiris supported India.

For you and other Pakistanis who adhere to settling the scores of 1971, an introspection is needed and ask yourself some questions like: 1. Why did Bangladesh happen? 2. If Pakistan accepted the outcome of the elections in 1971 and given power to Bengalis, was it possible for India to liberate Bangladesh?
38yrs and counting, certain things are just not possible and every strategy has an expiry date. Wisdom demands to stop the cycle of unnecessary bloodshed and work for peace. Otherwise India and Pakistan will lag behind the rest of the world. There are better things to do and worse OUR leaders are so deep in this mess they do not realize that. I am not unaware that many in Pakistan are already beginning to realize this.

Posted by rajeev | Report as abusive
 

@Myra,

For those Pakistani naysayers, who keep throwing doubt on why the U.S. is in Afghanistan, let them swallow this one”

http://www.indianexpress.com/news/alqaed a-seeking-nuclear-secrets-from-pakistan- holbrooke/517843/

Special Envoy Holbrooke says Al-Qaeda trying to get nuclear secrets from pakistan, and this is a security risk to the U.S. and the world.

To our Pak friends, the U.S. is here to stay. If they cannot get ride of the militants, they will settle for Pakistani denuclearization, that is equally palatable.

Pakistan can’t have nukes and terrorists. One MUST go. Without nukes, terrorism will drop from Pak.

Posted by Global Watcher | Report as abusive
 

A quick link if one would liek to read a bot more about the indian brutality, opression in Kshmir…

http://www.defencejournal.com/nov98/indk ashmir.htm

Posted by ali | Report as abusive
 

Rajeev/Mortal

In continuation to Javed Naqvi’s column titled ‘Is India really a big nation, which behaves small?’

Now one more link here:
http://english.peopledaily.com.cn/90001/ 90776/90883/6754023.html
China refutes trespass claims- People’s Daily

And this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WnUYhMuYb sk&feature=related
Pakistan Ambassador to London slapping Indian media

The interviewer is emotional, charged, and ignores all diplomatic norms while conducting interview with Pakistan’s top diplomat stationed in one of the most important capital’s in London.

This kind of media jingoism, together with follies of Indian government has mired India’s relations with its neighbours. I am not being negative here, please think through and dont attack me in reply. This type of thing only damages relations with China and Pakistan.

Posted by Umair | Report as abusive
 

Myra,

I have read both your posts with great interests, through these posts, I would like to raise a very important point before all your readers and commentators as to how Pakistan has or can contribute to the development of the region or how it is important for India to have a good and normal relation with Pakistan especially in view of fact that Pakistan has done everything to hurt India : 3 wars, unending stream of border incursion , sponsor of terrorist activities against India in the name of religion ? Last 60 years of its independence , Pakistan has definitely proved its nuisance value, by becoming terror hub, a terror training center and illegal proliferation of nuclear technology all across of the globe and export of jehadis.

Why must India seek friendship with Pakistan? Is it because , we are too weak to defend our nation against onslaught of terrorists from across the border or is it due to the vote bank politics or is it the US pressure?

Posted by Manish | Report as abusive
 

“A quick link if one would liek to read a bot more about the indian brutality, opression in Kshmir…

http://www.defencejournal.com/nov98/indk ashmir.htm”
- Posted by ali

Ali why don’t you give us news and views from independent sources ? Articles from propaganda websites are effective on Pakistanis only.

Domain Name: DEFENCEJOURNAL.COM
Registrant:
PATHFINDER GROUP
SMS Block, Defence Hockey Stadium,
Phase-5, Defence Housing Authority,
KARACHI, SINDH 75500
PK

Posted by singh | Report as abusive
 

Myra,

If I could throw out a question at our Pak blogger friends.

What do you expect us to do, what kind of reaction do you expect in the future, if there are Pakistani based terror attacks on India, state or non-state type, military or non-military, the response would be the same, as excuses are wearing thin on Indian patience?

Do you expect us to take carnage sitting down, when you continuously stall and fail to arrest the plotters and Indian public anger builds?

How are Indians citizens supposed to keep any ounce of love for neighbours that are uncompassionate, unco-operative and in fact blame the victim for the violence that was just inflicted upon it?

What about the 50-60 militants that cross the LOC every month?

Posted by Global Watcher | Report as abusive
 

To those who say that India and Pakistan should work out how to build trust, how would you do this without talking? The alternative is to rely on the Americans, and to a lesser extent the British, to pass messages back and forth.

So one thing that intrigues me is the question of how India and Pakistan talk to each other. In which forum, and in what format? Through secret backchannel talks that leave no room for public debate? Maybe that’s the way it will go, since doing anything else is politically difficult on both sides. But is that the right way to go?

The other thing that I’m trying to work out is the role of the media vs the electorate in all this. The media has a bit of a tendency to be jingoistic. What I saw — at least in rural India and I imagine it is the same in the villages of Pakistan — was that the issues for the electorate were more about the price of diesel for irrigation pumps, and the nature of monsoon rains so people did not go hungry.

For example, if you ask village women about “security”, they will say that one of the most important things for them are toilets. Not Pakistan, or India, or China, or five-star hotels, or anything else that the rest of us talk about all the time.

None of us can go around the villages of Pakistan and India to find out what the electorate is actually saying (though I would certainly like to). But I’d be very interested in knowing what you are all hearing in the different places where you live.

Myra.

Myra

Posted by Myra MacDonald | Report as abusive
 

Umair: The Naqvi article is not worth the follow up but I will still don this time.
Umair’s complaint: “The interviewer is emotional, charged, and ignores all diplomatic norms while conducting interview with Pakistan’s top diplomat stationed about With all due respect, Naqvi article is not worth the follow up.”
Umair: Have you noticed that the interview was within 1 month of Mumbai attack with a background of catching the terrorist Kasab from Pakistan alive and Pakistan saying NO about his Pakistani nationality. Instead, Pakistan media was floating the conspiracy theories like Mumbai as Indian conspiracy etc…Kasab as Hindu etc—-now officially debunked by India and much later Pak. Lots of journalists expressed outrage at the attack and at Pakistan’s reaction after the episode. That includes Pakistan journalists too—one Dawn columnist saying that Pakistanis have not sympathized with India and instead given India conspiracy theories and have not shared the grief and anguish of the Indians. That says a lot.

On the host: I personally do not like Rajdeep Sardesai’s way of hosting/talking showed loud, ill-mannered bad hosting. I agree with you that he should respect the guest. But it is not personal. And the more important question to ask is: Was the interviewer right? To me, mostly he had the substance and ith smart hosting he could have done better. He was angry not only at the attack but also at the lack of Pakistani support.

Rest, media jignoism is not the Indian monopoly–Pak media is known to breed that in plenty. Pakistan’s notorious Urdu media, the Zaid Hamid types–Brasstacks-anti-Hindu/CIA/Isreal stuff, the open conferences of the terrorists giving hate speeches in Pakistan Punjab (u know more about that than I do), the recent JeM campus with Jihadi quotes keeping the pro-terrorism feeling alive Pakistan knowing all of it. Pakistan media and state (history books) is systematically and effectively breeding jingoism and the anti-Hindu/CIA/Israel hatred. Pakistani scholars say that Pakistani books delete history or distort history-making a common man like you believe in “Ek pakistani Dus Hindustani ke Brabar” type unrealistic bollywood type stuff. I am more worried about this. Internet age has given you and me to find the truth despite what our text books say. It is time to make use of that.

@on China article: China is irrelevant to the blog and that article proves nothing. I am sure you are not that naïve to think Chinese are innocent. Pak journalist Ahmed Rasheed calls them paranoid. The world does not know Mandarin and Chinese are poor in English blocks their exposure.

Any way, let us stick to our common problems like:

Bangladesh issue/settling the score etc: that you have pointed numerous times.
Umair: 1. Why did Bangladesh happen? 2. If Pakistan accepted the outcome of the elections in 1971 and given power to Bengalis, was it possible for India to liberate Bangladesh?

Posted by rajeev | Report as abusive
 

Myra:
Here is a video (more than 1 hr long ncluding Q&A).
http://fora.tv/2009/04/13/Ahmed_Rashid_D escent_into_Chaos#fullprogram

Speaker: Distinguished Pakistani journalist Ahmed Rashid
The topic is: Descent into Chaos US Policy and the Failure of Nation Building in Pakistan, Afghanistan and Central Asia

It is very useful.

Posted by rajeev | Report as abusive
 

“To those who say that India and Pakistan should work out how to build trust, how would you do this without talking?” Myra.

To my mind the best way to do it is by actually talking on how this trust can be generated. Leave aside, for the time being, the more political issues that are the hurdles. Instead, sit down and discuss only how to rebuild bridges – what each side expects from the other so that people on both sides gain confidence in each other. Its won’t be easy, if it does succeed though, progress on the basic differences may seem easier to resolve.

Using the US or British as messengers has been tried and tried again and failed miserably. They insist on giving instructions and try to push their own agendas. The ‘we know best’ attitude gets both sides to pull down the shutters.

There is much that I admire about the American system, yet as far as their foreign policy is concerned it is an unmitigated disaster. The main trouble with it, according to me, is that instead of basing their policy on the fact that foreign policy must look after US interests they also feel that the foreign policies of other countries should also look after US interests. They will eventually end up telling the two countries just what to do, how to do it and how to react to each others concerns instead of being being facilitators.

Posted by Dara | Report as abusive
 

Dara:
@ I gave by suggestion, to start establishing trust first and foremost, the trial of those already charge sheeted needs to be taken up in earnest. That is the same point you made. The rest would then follow. One side keeps showing earnestness in curbing attacks on the other from its soil and the other is ready to take discussions further forward”
-posted by Dara.
—I agree. Both India and Pak move forward. But the exercise of building mutual trust has been done in the past only to be disrupted by major terrorist attacks—-so something different has to be done. The evolution of the process is India linked talks with terrorism, then India delinked talks and terrorism and says both should move ahead, and now Pakistan steps back and start using the words “unconditional talks”. Pakistan should show its sincerity by taking a tiny step forward by taking action against prime suspects in the Mumbai attacks. Why not try Azhar who is a proven killer and sheltered by Pakistan.
Recent statements by pak are not encouraging: On Sept 17th Pak’s Foreign Minister Shah Mahmood Qureshi says “We want a dialogue (with India) but we are not willing to accept any conditions… We want talks in an open and friendly atmosphere. They (India) are mistaken if they think they can achieve anything by putting pressure on Pakistan,” He says India had been issuing statements and taking up issues like terrorism with the world community to “put Pakistan on the defensive. He blames it on India’s “internal political compulsions”—is there anything wrong woth taking he matter with intern comm!!! This is all ahead of his meeting with Indian Ex Aff Min Krishna on the sidelines of UN meeting in US. Typically, to reduce US pressure before the meeting, Hafiz Saeed has been charged under Pakistan’s Anti-Terrorism Act (not arrested yet) for making anti-state speeches where he urged activists of the JuD to wage a Jihad—but did not link him with 26/11. He will be released shortly like in the past or given a nice house arrest with pool and internet like JeM terrorist Azhar is enjoying.
This is getting back into its older ways. I feel that there is no other way than taking the issue of terrorism head on using the international community who also has a stake in the same terror groups with increasing global aspirations. Pakistan-terrorism stuff is not a issue post-26/11. It is of great interest to US. US Ambassador to India said “Going after Hafiz Saeed and dismantling terror infrastructure in that region is extremely important for both U.S. and India,” People to people contacts at different levels should be re-established to move the process forward. There is lot to be trivial stuff to talk about even before the more serious issues like Kashmir are discussed. Meanwhile watch for action on terrorism-related policies of Pakistan.
Oh yes, I did not say the most important thing: trust cannot be built up until democratic civil govt is in full charge of the military and ISI and spooks are not running the business within Pakistan. Zardari/Gilani will not put their neck on the block about that but PM Singh can do that.
All in all, I see little hope until Pakistan’s own interest—national security/existence is in danger due to these terrorists.
Agree with your plebiscite comment.
________________________________________ __

Myra:
@ To those who say that India and Pakistan should work out how to build trust, how would you do this without talking? The alternative is to rely on the Americans, and to a lesser extent the British, to pass messages back and forth.”
—–It is not just about the mediator here. Right now it is about agreeing on the talks itself. India saying terrorism and talks not linked and both must move ahead, but Pakistan saying unconditional talks—are not on same page (pl. see above post to Dara). I am sure 3rd party help will be taken to get over little bumps but I will not like to see the extreme importance given to the 3rd party.
@So one thing that intrigues me is the question of how India and Pakistan talk to each other. In which forum, and in what format? Through secret backchannel talks that leave no room for public debate? Maybe that’s the way it will go, since doing anything else is politically difficult on both sides. But is that the right way to go?
—Believing the media, historically backchannel worked; so let that be. Debate without proper talks and plan means chaos. Post-talks, any solution can be debated in the public and parliament. In all this, Indians will like to see terrorism taken care off and some guarantees from Pakistan. Publically Pak never owned terrorism—I am curious if Pakistan owns it in backchannel talks or off the record? If that’s not happening, where will be the guarantee?
Also, the terrorism issue is real and whether or not the other issues of basic necessities mask it. Today, the economic recession/unemplyment in the US is the most important thing on US public mind—some in far off places in Americans do not even think off economy or 9/11, but the dangers of terrorism in US are real and have to be faced.
Simply put, Congress govt will be out of power if an attack of 26/11 scale happens and govt does nothing. People will vote for the alternative that they never thought of while Rahul Gandhi/Sonia Gandhi drool.

Posted by rajeev | Report as abusive
 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f0FA_tWpr yI&feature=related

A slap to Indian Government and Media

Posted by Umair | Report as abusive
 

Rajeev, you said:

“Simply put, Congress govt will be out of power if an attack of 26/11 scale happens and govt does nothing.”

–>I hope another 911 or 26/11 never happens ever again. It will change the world or relations with Pakistan all over again. This next time, if something like that ever happens, and it started from Pakistani soil, the U.S. will not spare Pakistan. Nukes will not prevent Pakistan bearing the full brunt of the might of the U.S. or Indian military.

Posted by Global Watcher | Report as abusive
 

While Indians blame Pakistan for breaking down efforts to build friendly relationships, they never admit what their side is doing to sabotage the efforts. It is always “we are good and you are evil” mindset. Look at the following link in your own internet site. Truth is coming out. You guys have been asking for evidence. Here it comes from your own sources.

http://news.rediff.com/report/2009/sep/1 9/indias-raw-trained-taliban-militants.h tm

Accept this. We are no angels. And you are no angels either. So if you really want Pakistan to make an honest effort, you do that first.

 

A slap to Indian Government and Media
- Posted by Umair

LMAO! Slap by whom? 2 loony tunes who are laughed at by 98% of America. Such nut jobs who concoct conspiracy theories provide nothing more than comedic relief to the American public & they are only followed by other nut jobs as well. These are the same guys who said that 9/11 was planned & executed by the CIA (Umair, I’m sure you agree with that one too). If you are going to post a link with the title ‘A slap to the Indian Govt & media’, at least put someone with a little credibility up there.

Talking about slaps, have you ever counted the number of tight slaps Pakistan has received over it’s terrorism? And I’m not talking about smacks by idiots with no credibility, I’m talking about officials from the Govts of various countries. If I were to post links to all the times Pakistan has been smacked & beaten black & blue by the officials of various countries (US, UK, France, Germany, Russia etc), we would have to start another blog just for that.

Posted by Mortal | Report as abusive
 

Mr Qureshi rejected any pre-condition for the dialogue and said that India wanted to keep Pakistan on the defensive.

“We understand the compulsions of their (Indians) internal politics. But if India thinks that it can make us bow to its pressure tactics, it is mistaken.”

Pakistan rejects precondition for India talks
http://www.dawn.com/wps/wcm/connect/dawn -content-library/dawn/the-newspaper/fron t-page/pakistan-rejects-precondition-for -india-talks-899

Posted by Umair | Report as abusive
 

Umair Wrote:

“Mr Qureshi rejected any pre-condition for the dialogue and said that India wanted to keep Pakistan on the defensive.”

Umair, If you think India is making false allegations on Pakistan and there should be no preconditions, why are you guys dying to resume the talks. Its because everybody knows now that Pakistan is a terrorist country and free Dollars will stop pouring in if you don;t pretend that you are trying to solve issues peacefully.

Pakistanis have to remove terrorists from equation and then talk.

These statements are for keeping venom fed population happy. Your leadership knows that the anti India false propaganda injected in you over many years has made you too blind to accept the truth, And this venom cannot be sucked overnight. So they are desperately trying talk to India and issuing these Statements every once in a while to satisfy the false ego.

Its same drama as Pakistani confession of Ajmal Kasab, Your leaders tried to create a buffer by doing flip flop and giving contradicting statements, Just to keep you calm.

BTW under what capacity or capability Pakistani Govt. think they can get something out of Talks, Civilian govt has no power to make decision in Pakistan. Army always keep own agenda and they have sabotage peace process several times by sending terrorists without uniform and sometimes with uniform. Qureshi is nobody in your country, wait for another coup and see where these leaders go.

Posted by singh | Report as abusive
 

@While Indians blame Pakistan for breaking down efforts to build friendly relationships, they never admit what their side is doing to sabotage the efforts. It is always “we are good and you are evil” mindset. Look at the following link in your own internet site.”
–Posted by Mohammed Anjum

Mohammed Anjum: If you read carefully,
1. this report is taken from Dawn report and put in the Indian site. So the original source is pakistani media. there are dozen such reports in Pakistani media.

2. Note the question mark in the title.

Is ISI that bad not to have any solid evidence of the Indian angle.

Posted by rajeev | Report as abusive
 

Post Your Comment

We welcome comments that advance the story through relevant opinion, anecdotes, links and data. If you see a comment that you believe is irrelevant or inappropriate, you can flag it to our editors by using the report abuse links. Views expressed in the comments do not represent those of Reuters. For more information on our comment policy, see http://blogs.reuters.com/fulldisclosure/2010/09/27/toward-a-more-thoughtful-conversation-on-stories/
  •