Comments on: Guest contribution-Unifying Pakistan http://blogs.reuters.com/pakistan/2010/11/03/guest-contribution-unifying-pakistan/ Perspectives on Pakistan Thu, 01 Oct 2015 19:31:05 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=4.2.5 By: https://eyeweardock.com/shop/brand/ralph-lauren/ http://blogs.reuters.com/pakistan/2010/11/03/guest-contribution-unifying-pakistan/comment-page-2/#comment-53758 Sun, 28 Sep 2014 15:28:03 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/pakistan/?p=6353#comment-53758 Simply want to say your article is as astonishing. The clarity in your post is simply cool and i can assume you’re an expert on this subject. Fine with your permission let me to grab your feed to keep updated with forthcoming post. Thanks a million and please keep up the gratifying work.

]]>
By: fifa 15 coins ps http://blogs.reuters.com/pakistan/2010/11/03/guest-contribution-unifying-pakistan/comment-page-2/#comment-53608 Fri, 26 Sep 2014 01:20:08 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/pakistan/?p=6353#comment-53608 As well as in this little existing tablet, Brevicon 1/35 for more than each year. I started my best past frequent period at The spring of 4, 2010, in the future very early just as my best 21 years of age time lively medicine stop over the Wednesday and i also begun blood loss over the Wednesday. My very own period of time has been regular. Following Chintan Shivir, any Jaipur commitment of any bash said, “the Indian State Institutions the first will always put together the capability of girls Personal growth Communities (SHGs). Indira Gandhi possessed started NABARD 30 years ago to help you induce farming along with country improvement. “The Institutions the first thinks that the next step is to ascertain a fanatical State Bank or investment company for women to deliver economical products and services to help you most women generally and women SHGs for example.Ins PTI AMR RAI.

]]>
By: prasadgc http://blogs.reuters.com/pakistan/2010/11/03/guest-contribution-unifying-pakistan/comment-page-2/#comment-33628 Wed, 10 Nov 2010 05:42:34 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/pakistan/?p=6353#comment-33628 Rehmat,

Very good points. Thank you.

Regards,
Ganesh Prasad

]]>
By: 777xxx777 http://blogs.reuters.com/pakistan/2010/11/03/guest-contribution-unifying-pakistan/comment-page-2/#comment-33627 Wed, 10 Nov 2010 03:18:35 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/pakistan/?p=6353#comment-33627 @G-W
“I mean tangible acts of goodwill directly to the Pakistani people themselves”

HOW HOW HOW??????
When Pakistanis did not accept aid from India even at times of flood then how do you expect Indian organisations being allowed to work inside Pakistan? Don’t be childish. Do you think any foreign delegation can work in a country without government support. I think not.

But yes I get your point. And let me tell you it is not Pakistanis who do not want peace it is the politicians who do not want peace. Because once Pakistan has peace politicians will have no political fodder and will have to work towards development which is a dammn tough task. So its not common Pakistanis who are at fault it is actually their top that is corrupt.

]]>
By: rehmat http://blogs.reuters.com/pakistan/2010/11/03/guest-contribution-unifying-pakistan/comment-page-2/#comment-33626 Wed, 10 Nov 2010 01:16:27 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/pakistan/?p=6353#comment-33626 @GW

“Pakistani’s are a very stubborn and proud people, they will be defiant and tight fisted, until their last bit of life in them. As INdians, we are a sophisticated, ancient culture, we have the energy, imagination, inertia and resources to figure out a peaceful way to reach them. The best way to do that for India to create goodwill with Pakistani people directly and entirely circumvent the Emperors of Pakistan.”

***There is a trouble with this approach. Unwittingly, you are depicting India (Hinduism I guess) as ancient and sophisticated not Pakistanis. We seriously do not have figured the peaceful ways if you see lack of common sense of Indian Army (I would not blame them, it is the govt). Assuming our leaders are the best, they have not shown a common sense much less any peaceful way.

I have a serious problem with owning the history before 1947. That was different time. After 1947, India has not been this peaceful or imaginative or what not, as claimed –people behaved like mobs as well as the state violated all laws. India is not a land of honey and milk. It is a matter of degree. Pakistan has more blood at hand than Indians, but that does not allow us to generalize 1.2billion Indians and 170million Pakistanis. I am sure like me you would have come across peaceful Pakistanis including Punjabis from either side of the border.

It is the politics/policies/choices we made. People are fine are victims of the situation. Let this not be used as an excuse however to behave in certain way.

Calling Pakistanis unpeaceful/arrogant and Indians as peaceful and all good things, and then suggest India be a big brother and help them to fix, does not sound good. This does not work even at people to people level. we got to own our mistakes as people and suggest fixes via people-people level. If I were a Pakistani I would not like this appriach. We need to put ourselves in each other’s shoes. There is no denying the fact that SOME Pakistanis would throng the streets at the call of Jihad. But this crowd forms the monority just like in India or anyhere else during riots. The decison makers at the top or in streets are few, rest all of us make a mob. Few Pakistani or Indian commenters at Reuters do not represent the majority. If you look at a larger sample size on a bigger blog, you would see lot of peace in Pakistan hearts as well. I have seen that. I hate to admit it but we all are victims of the situations. GW in Pakistan would have behaved the way any other Pakistani does. Genes do not play big role, environment does in this context. Same way a Pakistani in a different situation would respond diffently. I hope you get my point.

]]>
By: prasadgc http://blogs.reuters.com/pakistan/2010/11/03/guest-contribution-unifying-pakistan/comment-page-2/#comment-33625 Wed, 10 Nov 2010 00:24:20 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/pakistan/?p=6353#comment-33625 Interesting to read a relatively neutral and balanced piece on Pakistan by Brian Cloughley. Unlike genuinely (I think) neutral analysts like Christine Fair, Cloughley is usually an apologist for the Pakistani military. Looking at the accelerating downward trend in that country though, I think he may be unemployed within 5 years. That may explain the shift in his position. What next, his CV turning up in New Delhi? There’s definitely more money there now…

Regards,
Ganesh Prasad

]]>
By: G-W http://blogs.reuters.com/pakistan/2010/11/03/guest-contribution-unifying-pakistan/comment-page-2/#comment-33610 Tue, 09 Nov 2010 16:23:07 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/pakistan/?p=6353#comment-33610 @777,

It is no secret that politically speaking, discussion of peace with India in Pakistan is tantamount to political suicide or mass protests and fatwas against anyone who seriously contemplates such a heretical act such as peace with India.

It is therefore required and necessary, that India use its current ability, that being money, to incentivize the peace process with Pakistan, with actions. I mean tangible acts of goodwill directly to the Pakistani people themselves, like transfer of Medical Technology, Building of Schools and Hospitals and assistance with building and upgrading of civilian infrastructure with Pakistan.

If India can assemble a delegation to pro-actively impose peace on Pakistan with Tangible things that Pakistani’s can appreciate, it will go a long way to thaw relations. Current distant discussions have yielded no results. If India can do this and muster the political will, in the international forum, India will significantly boost its international image and potentially thaw the political gridlock with Pakistani’s, who then, with time, start moving away from an anti-India stance.

Pakistani’s are a very stubborn and proud people, they will be defiant and tight fisted, until their last bit of life in them. As INdians, we are a sophisticated, ancient culture, we have the energy, imagination, inertia and resources to figure out a peaceful way to reach them. The best way to do that for India to create goodwill with Pakistani people directly and entirely circumvent the Emperors of Pakistan.

At least, if the Army or any political factions force Pakistani’s to refuse gifts or assistance, it will be there for the record, that India reach out a loving hand, reach out with flowers and got thorns in return.

Perhaps it will be what is required to make Pakistani’s look at themselves and how they want the world to view them. Defiancey, pride, hatred and many other emotions must be melted within Pakistani’s with the offer of goodwill from Indians.

India had a good chance during the flood to deliver and politically tilt things in their favour, but squandered the opportunity due to political shortsightedness.

You can’t look for impediments to peace, but look for opportunities, 777, that is the whole point. We have rise above all of the BS and keep it simple and deal directly with Pakistani’s and nurture their needs first.

As I said, let the history books show that India reached out for peace to an ailing Pakistan, if it takes the help and it makes peace, so be it, if Pakistani’s refuse the help and want to politicize that, then let history show that they chose to keep the path of hatred with Indians in their hour of need, while they were drowning in their own pain. As Indians, we have to let Pakistani’s choose at the end of the day, if they want peace.

With India’s huge progress and prestige now, we still the continual duty to reach out to Pakistani’s and try to lift them, it is upto them to accept it, or refuse it and prolong their own suffering at their own devices, as they choose. But make no mistake about it, it will echo around the world, hundreds of times, if India makes these heartfelt peace overtures, it will be considered a sign of immense strength, no weakness.

]]>
By: 777xxx777 http://blogs.reuters.com/pakistan/2010/11/03/guest-contribution-unifying-pakistan/comment-page-2/#comment-33598 Tue, 09 Nov 2010 03:08:21 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/pakistan/?p=6353#comment-33598 @G-W
“I think India, needs to use its current position and let Pakistani’s know the incentives of peace, with the understanding that the two countries need to make peace first, and then resolve kashmir”
And HOW do you propose India should do this (if not already doing it for past decade or so)?

“Given that most of S.Asia is poor, any, I mean an economic production on a collaberative scale will benefit the status quo and lift the people”
I think you did not get my point. I was saying political independence (for Kashmir) does not mean anything if one does not have financial independence and that financial independence can be achieved ONLY in political union and not division. Which effectively means the same as you outlined. So for economics of the region we are on same page and I also firmly believe that Sindhis in Pakistan can give Indian businessmen a run for their money. If there can be a Karachi in such a chaotic Pakistan then imagine what Karachi can become in a peaceful Pakistan. Hope I am clear.

@Umair
So you are again going through those emotional fits. First come out of it then we will talk.

]]>
By: prasadgc http://blogs.reuters.com/pakistan/2010/11/03/guest-contribution-unifying-pakistan/comment-page-2/#comment-33590 Mon, 08 Nov 2010 23:56:22 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/pakistan/?p=6353#comment-33590 G-W said:

> There is no reason why Pakistan cannot be an equal partner with India

Actually, this is the crux of the problem. Pakistan is *not* India’s equal. The sooner they accept this and adjust their expectations of the relationship, the better for them. Ultimately, it’s not India’s hostility that bothers them, it’s the fact that India is in a higher league altogether which is difficult for them to swallow.

Regards,
Ganesh Prasad

]]>
By: KPSingh01 http://blogs.reuters.com/pakistan/2010/11/03/guest-contribution-unifying-pakistan/comment-page-2/#comment-33587 Mon, 08 Nov 2010 22:38:21 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/pakistan/?p=6353#comment-33587 Umairpk,

No one is going to or will be allowed go into Pakistan and splinter it up into small nations, whether Pakistan has the nukes or not. Everyone recognizes its sovereignty as a nation. But if Pakistan does not help resolve the Afghanistan problem soon, conditions will turn against its own very existence. You have mentioned about it yourself earlier. And implosion can happen without anyone really doing anything from outside. At that time, having the nukes can be more dangerous to Pakistanis more than anyone else. All this talk of Pak nukes being in safe hands are political in nature. Those who say that in public also have expressed concerns about dirty nukes being used in New York Times Square or London. They talk both things depending on who they are talking to. A lot depends upon how your military will handle the near future – will it try to keep its “assets” or give up on terror-sponsorship entirely to save the nation. All bombs going off inside Pakistan today were meant to go off in Indian cities. If war on terror had not happened, that would have become a reality. Obama will not be in India now if that was the case. Unfortunately those bombs are going off inside Pakistan now. The same can be extended to the nukes, which are meant for India specifically. If the situation inside Pakistan gets out of control, I won’t be surprised if some elements get together and launch a nuclear offensive on fellow citizens. Anything is possible in Pakistan today. No one is there to be trusted. All this talk of vibrant society is only talk. Reality is very different.

If Pakistan falls apart and splinters up, it will be entirely due to internal reasons and hopefully your country will come off from this edge. All we have discussed is about that potential to fall which is becoming real by the day. One more attack on US soil or Europe that originates from Pakistan will meet with dire consequences. That is what your Jihadists are trying to do – bring the war close to home. They are thinking that it is easier to fight it by bringing the enemy closer. They have Afghanistan to prove that point. You do not want the world fighting the elements inside your country. If they get pushed beyond a point, they will.

]]>