Comments on: Will Obama refer to Kashmir in public in India? http://blogs.reuters.com/pakistan/2010/10/30/will-obama-refer-to-kashmir-in-public-in-india/ Perspectives on Pakistan Thu, 01 Oct 2015 19:31:05 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=4.2.5 By: NPegasus http://blogs.reuters.com/pakistan/2010/10/30/will-obama-refer-to-kashmir-in-public-in-india/comment-page-2/#comment-33562 Sun, 07 Nov 2010 18:49:01 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/pakistan/?p=6316#comment-33562 Myra,

Refer Kashmir in public? Why?! Should Manmohan ask Obama about the Alaska secessionist party in public? What nonsense write up is this?

]]>
By: rehmat http://blogs.reuters.com/pakistan/2010/10/30/will-obama-refer-to-kashmir-in-public-in-india/comment-page-2/#comment-33519 Fri, 05 Nov 2010 22:45:56 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/pakistan/?p=6316#comment-33519 Rex
@you said India racist and Pakistan not..and then you say “I had no intention to get into arguements, which of the two countries has more positives or more negatives.”
***ON that note, I am off from this discussion. Reason being you are unaware of the changes and want nothing short of big bang. comparisons are made for understanding not to belittle anyone.

BTW that weblink was by a Pakistani. He knows what Pakistan needs so I care less about anyone who is remote from the real scenario.
see ya later.

]]>
By: pakistan http://blogs.reuters.com/pakistan/2010/10/30/will-obama-refer-to-kashmir-in-public-in-india/comment-page-2/#comment-33512 Fri, 05 Nov 2010 17:50:28 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/pakistan/?p=6316#comment-33512 @Rehmat
I had no intention to get into arguements, which of the two countries has more positives or more negatives. And I fully agree with your positives,however, let me draw your attention to the article( written by Ibrahim..) you referred to make my point, and I quote the following:
1, An emancipatory education of the oppressed involves a dismanling of colonial structures and ideologies( Paulo Freire)

2. Anti-colonial and modern education for native population, a humanistic society alone can truly be an anti-colonial society(Frantz Fanon).

Now tell me, how far the colonial structures and the ideologies have been dismantled or eliminated?
. military, one hundred prcent colonial structure in both countries,
.education, humanistic or racists structures in India, not in Pakistan, though the system is more or less the same. Never mind the disparity of number of higher education institutions etc. among the two countries. some Pakistani bloggers do not agree with the assessment in the article.

It is my opinion that neither the Congress party nor the Muslim league party wanted the separaion of the two people as such, but simply separate autonomous regions, one for muslims and one for others, the sikh community was not organised and had a could’nt careless attitude, no different than today’s. Now, here is my thesis, had the sikh community asked for an autonomous home state for their majority areas, the outcome would have been more peaceful and not divisive.( please do not tell me that I am carrying a sikh load, and I have to remind the readers without any prejudice that the indian territory has also witnessed sikh rule.

Ofcourse, the colonialist brits were too happy to leave the country in as many divisions as possible, not allowing the peeople to decide but the sultans and Maharajas were given the fate of the slaves.

In other words leave the land as they found them.
What the people of the land made out of the partition is a shabby tale and proves simply that had it not been agreed among the ww2 Powers about the decolonisation of the British empire, the Brits could have continued for another century to be the masters of today’s India and Pakistan.

A good day sir.

Rex Minor

]]>
By: pakistan http://blogs.reuters.com/pakistan/2010/10/30/will-obama-refer-to-kashmir-in-public-in-india/comment-page-1/#comment-33510 Fri, 05 Nov 2010 16:27:22 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/pakistan/?p=6316#comment-33510 @GW
So I interpretted your thoughts! Let India and Pakistan vacate the Kashmir.
You try and get the Indian Faqir on board, and he would have the right partner. Never mind whether Pakistan leaders are willing or not. No one can stand in the way of peace.

Both India and Pakistan should support the independence project(no pre-conditions, your words). This would be the classic move for peace since both countries are very much interdependent on peace in the continent, wheather they like it or not.

Rex Minor

]]>
By: G-W http://blogs.reuters.com/pakistan/2010/10/30/will-obama-refer-to-kashmir-in-public-in-india/comment-page-1/#comment-33502 Thu, 04 Nov 2010 19:20:08 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/pakistan/?p=6316#comment-33502 The only pre-condition, I ask, is that if Pakistan wants Azadi for Kashmiri’s, that they vacate and leave their portion of Kashmir alone too.

Pakistan cannot swallow up all of kashmir for itself, never going to happen!

For India to not force conditions on talks, Pakistan must do the same and be a fair handed partner in peace.

Kashmir discussion cannot be one sided for pro-muslim empirical expansionary purposes. They can only happen, if both parties will give up their respective portions of Kashmir to all Kashmiri’s to have their own country.

What do you think, should Pakistan be willing to vacate Kashmir, if India is? I am curious what parties think here.

]]>
By: pakistan http://blogs.reuters.com/pakistan/2010/10/30/will-obama-refer-to-kashmir-in-public-in-india/comment-page-1/#comment-33494 Thu, 04 Nov 2010 10:12:39 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/pakistan/?p=6316#comment-33494 @GW
When you have found that your Prime Minister is prepared for peace talks on Kashmir, without any pre-conditions(your words), a leader on the other side would be ready to meet him.
The rest is larifari.

Rex Minor

]]>
By: rehmat http://blogs.reuters.com/pakistan/2010/10/30/will-obama-refer-to-kashmir-in-public-in-india/comment-page-1/#comment-33492 Thu, 04 Nov 2010 06:57:36 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/pakistan/?p=6316#comment-33492 Rex Minor:

“If one would be prepared to accept a simple reality that both India and Pakistan are a century behind the European civilisation; then one could proceed further to catch up with the lost time(on account of colonisation of the land by the Brits( and make progress”
***PLEASE begin to use 1. specific names of the country- Europe as a continent is as vague as bundling India and Pakistan together. 2. In which areas are you comparing. 3. May be you start comparing countries in Europe itself and you will find one 100 years behind the other.

Until then I do not buy which country are you comparing India (and Pakistan too) with. Compared to I cannot agree to the number (a century) but there is no denying in several areas India lacks behind some European countries.
@European Civilization! Let us not even go there!

India is definitely behind in several areas if compared with Britain or Germany or France.

while you are at it, make a comparison of Europe with the USA now.

“No serious reforms have been implemented as of this date and the military has been used in both countries, more often in Pakistan than in India to suppress the citizens of the land, for one or another reason.”
***I would make use of the following article to give you a glimpse of what you have been missing. I tell you that there are lots similarities between India and Pakistan, but India has been undergoing reforms.

http://ibrahimsajidmalick.com/when-it-co mes-to-education-pakistan-can-learn-demo cracy-from-india/1370/

Do read the comments also.

“The world has witnessed the massacre of sikhs in India and the massacre or the genocide of Bengalis in former Pakistan territory.”
***who orchestrated these massacres, btw?

“PS if you are of the opinion that India and Pakistan are peaceful countries then tell us the purpose of acquiring Nukes and missiles in their arsenal? For the museums or to overcome the “fear for what will happen in the future”, your words?”
***i thought you meant people from each country so I said people from both countries are peaceful.
Well, India acquired nukes because China acquired. Post 1962 india-china war scenario. After India acquired, Pakistan acquired. Nukes are deterrent and my view has been that no one in the world will use on a country which already has nukes.

“No wonder, the USA and Canada were the main destinations for the asylum seekers and other immigrents from india and Pakistan, which are the homes for a multi-culured immigrants.”
***Agreed. Well, India has been home to asylum seekers from Tibet–count those Lamas. India also has accepted Muslim artists from Pakistan who were suffering under military rule. Nothing to belittle anyone—just plain hard facts.
BTW, the USA is land of immigrants to begin with and more accepting/tolerant to outsiders than Europeans.It is filled with people of all kinds, including Europeans and Chinese.

PS: Do a quick survey and find the differences between India and Pakistan.

Land reforms, education reforms, economic reforms and green revolution has happened in India not Pakistan. India produces double the amount of wheat for the same land area for example. You will stop clubbing them together. India still has that colonial structure but do not miss the positives. This is not going to be big bang, this is a slow gradual change and it is happening. Just develop antennas to detect positive changes.

have a wonderful day!

]]>
By: pakistan http://blogs.reuters.com/pakistan/2010/10/30/will-obama-refer-to-kashmir-in-public-in-india/comment-page-1/#comment-33485 Wed, 03 Nov 2010 22:44:40 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/pakistan/?p=6316#comment-33485 @Rehmat
It is neither ignorance nor arrogance on my part, but I find it very hard on this blog to genuinely communicate my thoughts. If one would be prepared to accept a simple reality that both India and Pakistan are a century behind the European civilisation; then one could proceed further to catch up with the lost time(on account of colonisation of the land by the Brits( and make progress.

I have noticed that you have tried at times to reflect your thinking in my words. I cannot influence your attitude, for your baggage(not the one coolie carries) of the colonial past has probably still not left you completely. (It is not KPSingh’s doing that the sikhs did not act in 1857 against the Brits.)The answer to your thinking is very simple, both India and Pakistan Govts. were given a territory intact with the civil and military administrations. No serious reforms have been implemented as of this date and the military has been used in both countries, more often in Pakistan than in India to suppress the citizens of the land, for one or another reason.
A famous German politician once said that “what belongs together grows together”. His sayings were proven when the east and west germany became a one nation country.

What has happened in south Asia, after the exit of Brits, is the continued struggle for who belongs to whom, and as of this date, has not yet ended. Neither multiculti in India nor an religous and secular state in Pakistan has been successful. In the meantime, the so called leaders of two large territories have failed to change the colonial structure of the military, or to comletely reform the educational system. The world has witnessed the massacre of sikhs in India and the massacre or the genocide of Bengalis in former Pakistan territory. The atrocities of the military against the kashmiris and the Pashtoons are still in progress. These adventures are unlikely to end until the “Belonging” or in other words the question about the ‘identity’ of the people in this vast territory has been determined and accepted by the people themselves.
No wonder, the USA and Canada were the main destinations for the asylum seekers and other immigrents from india and Pakistan, which are the homes for a multi-culured immigrants.
My own views are that yes one must move on, but until there is a clarity of the purpose and some ground rules have been defined
and reforms undertaken, the military machinery is unlikely to stop.

Rex Minor
PS if you are of the opinion that India and Pakistan are peaceful countries then tell us the purpose of acquiring Nukes and missiles in their arsenal? For the museums or to overcome the “fear for what will happen in the future”, your words? Have a nice day.

]]>
By: rehmat http://blogs.reuters.com/pakistan/2010/10/30/will-obama-refer-to-kashmir-in-public-in-india/comment-page-1/#comment-33477 Wed, 03 Nov 2010 19:48:05 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/pakistan/?p=6316#comment-33477 GW
***On Kashmir independence, KPSingh’s statement “Nations cannot be made by emotional needs. They have to be made with practical reasons.” summarizes it.

@Rex
“Even on this blog you do not have the consence from your fellow citizens. Most of them are carrying a heavy baggage of the past.”
***I think it is the fear of what will happen in future that is preventing the peace, not so much the past.

IN fact KPSingh, whose community suffered, has moved on and advises others to do the same. Instead you have mentioned Sikh issue umpteenth time, carrying baggage for Sikhs like a coolie as if they really need it. Same for Indian Muslims, perhaps not to that degree as yet. All such communities anywhere do not need to be reminded how deep is the wound, but understand their pain and help in healing it.

Your pessimism that Indians and Pakistanis are not peaceful is misplaced.

Also glance through the link below. People are as unhappy with atrocities against Kashmiris but not everyone suggests the same solution.

http://www.kashmirobserver.net/index.php  ?option=com_content&view=article&id=595 9:deoband-conclave-says-kashmirs-future- lies-with-india&catid=3:regional-news&It emid=4

KPSingh: I share with no less passion GW’s views about Sikh bravery. For academic interest only, let me state that it was the Sikh bravery that PERHAPS delayed India;s independence because Sikhs did not join in the First war of independence in 1857, and supported British against the freedom fighters.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Anyone:

WE have heard Pakistan says “Kashmir banega Pakistan”
and India says “Kashmir is an integral part of India”
Basically it is the same thing. Does anyone know when did the latter happen (integral part) and what was immediate reaction of Kashmiris and the Kashmir situation at that time?
Thanks

]]>
By: pakistan http://blogs.reuters.com/pakistan/2010/10/30/will-obama-refer-to-kashmir-in-public-in-india/comment-page-1/#comment-33466 Wed, 03 Nov 2010 08:19:11 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/pakistan/?p=6316#comment-33466 @GW
Sorry, mate, your ideas are good but no takers. You are sorrounded by loosers, more than fifty percent from a Prime Minister of a country is not good enough. You need people who offer 100 percent support for peace without any pre-conditions. Even on this blog you do not have the consence from your fellow citizens. Most of them are carrying a heavy baggage of the past.

I am sure that your words would not go wasted, the timing needs to be reset. Indians and Pakistanis have still the energy to march on without peace for another century.

Rex Minor

]]>