Between the lines: Obama’s comments on Kashmir

November 8, 2010

nubra reducedPresident Barack Obama’s words on relations with Pakistan were always going to be carefully scripted during his visit to India, where even to say the word “Kashmir”  aloud in public can raise jitters about U.S. interference in what New Delhi sees as a bilateral dispute.

So first up, here’s what he had to say during a news conference in New Delhi with Prime Minister Manmohan Singh in response to a question about what role the United States could play in resolving the Kashmir dispute (NDTV has the video).

“With respect to Kashmir, obviously this is a long-standing dispute between India and Pakistan; as I said yesterday, I believe that both Pakistan and India have an interest in reducing tensions between the two countries. The United States cannot impose a solution to these problems but I have indicated to Prime Minister Singh that we are happy to play any role that the parties think is appropriate in reducing these tensions. That’s in the interests of the region; it is in the interests of the two countries involved and it is in the interests of the United States of America.

“So my hope is that conversations will be taking place between the two countries; they may not start on that particular flashpoint; there may be confidence building measures that need to take place, but I am absolutely convinced that it is both in India’s and Pakistan’s interest to reduce tensions and that will enable them I think to focus on the range of both challenges and opportunities that each country faces.”

“I do want to make this point though, that I think Prime Minister Singh throughout his career and throughout his prime ministership has consistently spoken out both publicly and privately on his desire, his personal commitment to reduce tensions between India and Pakistan and for that I very much commend him. I think Prime Minister Singh is sincere and relentless in his desire for peace.  And so my hope is that both sides can, over the next several months, several years, find mechanisms that are appropriate for them to work out what are these very difficult issues.”

A quick reading between the lines suggests that he is unfraid of referring to Kashmir in public and keeping it on the agenda, while also acknowledging that resolving the dispute may take years rather than months, and that the two countries might need to build confidence by agreeing on other issues first. He also steered a middle course between Pakistan’s insistence that Kashmir is the core issue, and India’s demand that ”cross-border terrorism” must end before it will agree to talk.

Obama has moved quite some distance since his 2008 election campaign, when he raised hackles in India by suggesting a resolution of the Kashmir dispute could help in the war in Afghanistan by convincing Pakistan to focus on tackling militants holed up on its border rather than its traditional enemy.

“The most important thing we’re going to have to do with respect to Afghanistan, is actually deal with Pakistan,” Obama said in an interview with MSNBC in October 2008.  “We should probably try to facilitate a better understanding between Pakistan and India and try to resolve the Kashmir crisis so that they can stay focused not on India, but on the situation with those militants.”

Within a month of him giving that interview, Pakistan-based gunmen attacked Mumbai, killing 166 people in a three-day siege. India blamed the Lashkar-e-Taiba, a militant group once nurtured by Pakistan’s Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) agency to fight India in Kashmir, and broke off talks. When the dust has settled and the history books written on the Afghan war, Mumbai may well come to be seen as a turning point when Obama’s hopes that a Kashmir settlement might help turn the tide in Afghanistan were dashed.

But then pay close attention to what happened next, as understanding what went wrong will be key to predicting the chances of any future improvement in relations between India and Pakistan.

After a six-month lull and with a renewed mandate after a national election in India, Prime Minister Singh met President Asif Ali Zardari in the Russian town of Yekaterinburg in June 2009 for the first high-level talks since Mumbai. After a flurry of diplomatic activity aimed at easing tensions between the two countries. Singh held more talks with Prime Minister Yusuf Raza Gilani, this time in Sharm-el-Sheikh in Egypt. Then, even after running into  criticism at home from politicians and a jingoistic media which accused him of being too soft of Pakistan, Singh insisted on pressing ahead with peace talks

Hence Obama’s words of praise for Singh’s commitment to peace at their news conference in Delhi.  But after that the trail went cold . What went wrong?

In October 2009 in Chicago, the United States arrested David Headley, a Pakistani American accused of scouting out targets in Mumbai before switching allegiance to al Qaeda-linked militant commander Ilyas Kashmiri and plotting an attack in Denmark.  Headley, who has since turned witness for the prosecution, provided fresh insight into why Mumbai happened in the way it did - see my story on testimony given by Headley to Indian investigators, based on Indian government documents.

The details he provided — again according to the Indian government documents — also suggested that many other targets in India were under consideration for attack by different Pakistan-based militants, even after Mumbai. In other words, if Singh had continued peace talks with Pakistan he would have been exposed to political criticism at a time when he could not be sure there would be no more big attacks in India.

 We’ll come back to that lower down, as there are many sides to this story, but for now let’s stick to the timeline. As a caveat, I’d also add that this timeline is from the perspective of India-Pakistan relations, and their influence on the war in Afghanistan — Afghan specialists would probably see it differently.

By January this year, analysts had concluded that any hope of an easing of tensions between India and Pakistan would come too little, too late to make much difference to the war in Afghanistan. That same month, the idea of reaching a peace deal with the Taliban made it onto the international agenda at the London conference on Afghanistan. And as the months went by the possibility of holding talks, once seen as beyond the pale, then  gathered traction until all parties to the conflict are by now considering a peace deal.

In the interim, India and Pakistan reverted to their “one step forward, two steps back” approach.  An agreement between Singh and Gilani reached in April in Bhutan to hold more talks foundered during a rather sour meeting between the foreign ministers of India and Pakistan in July.

Scroll forward now to Obama’s visit to India.  Despite his offer of  U.S. support to India for a permanent seat on the U.N. Security Council – something that will take years to come to fruition — his carefully chosen words on Kashmir and on relations between India and Pakistan do little to change the overall dynamics.

As the documents on Headley’s testimony suggest, Pakistan has a hard time keeping groups like the Lashkar-e-Taiba in check when al Qaeda and its affiliates appear to be waging a more successful – or at least more eye-catching – global jihad in Afghanistan and beyond.  Reading through his testimony, it is also clear how much the LeT is ideologically committed to Kashmir — many of its commanders have lost  relatives fighting there — and how difficult it might be to disarm the group without movement on a political settlement.  It is also clear why the latest summer of unrest in Kashmir might have made it even harder for Pakistan to control some of its militants, whose zeal on ending what they see as Indian oppression in the region has them straining at the leash.

From an Indian point of view, any prime minister who holds peace talks runs the risk of being embarrassed by an attack on Indian targets which coincides with his or her diplomatic initiative.  Prime Minister Singh made that point in his news conference with Obama. Personally I was struck by the way he used the word “request” rather than “demand” in this comment:

“As far as India’s relations with Pakistan are concerned, I have always maintained a strong, peaceful moderate Pakistan is in the interests of India; is in the interests of South Asia, and the world as a whole.  We are committed to engage Pakistan; we are committed to resolve all outstanding issues between our two countries including the word K; we are not afraid of that,  but it is our request that you cannot simultaneously be talking and at the same time, the terror machine is as active as ever before.  Once Pakistan moves away from this terror-induced coercion, we will be very happy to engage with Pakistan to resolve all outstanding issues.”

From an international point of view, the jihadi soup in Pakistan appears to be getting thicker and thicker, even as the country itself, to use the words of one Pakistani official, undergoes a “paradigm shift” in its readiness to tackle Islamist militants.

Headley, according to his testimony, moved relatively easily between the Kashmir-centric Laskhar-e-Taiba and Ilyas Kashmiri, with his al Qaeda inspired global agenda. But he was not alone in that. The documents also speak of two separate “setups” in Karachi to plan attacks on India using Indian Muslims. While one was run by the Lashkar-e-Taiba, the other was run by a man identified by the alias Abdur Rehman, who in turn was in contact with Kashmiri and claimed to have met Osama bin Laden.

We already know, to quote former CIA officer Bruce Riedel, that “the bad guys don’t stay in their lanes”.  What we really need to know, however, is whether the inter-mingling of militants focused on Kashmir with those favouring the global jihad is getting stronger. If so, that will have increased the threat not just to India, but to the world as a whole and, perhaps most significantly, to Pakistan.

I would also suspect that no amount of carefully chosen words by President Obama would change those dynamics.  And if that were the case, I might ask whether the Afghan Taliban can be taken out of the thickening jihadi soup by reaching a separate peace deal with them on Afghanistan.  That would depend on whether you think Afghanistan can be dealt with separately from India and Pakistan. And whether you think the Taliban are ready to deal.

(Reuters photo: the source of the Nubra river in Siachen/Pawel Kopczinski)

Comments

Errare Humanum est, Perseverare Diabolicum!

Time and again Pakistan has shown its obsession with the question of Kashmir and its relations with India.
A smart Indian on this blog writes that both India and Pakistan should have a dialogue but not discuss Kashmir in the dialogue. The same gentleman states that Kashmir is an integral part of India.
Indian Govt sends an emmissary for long awaited talks to Pakistan but the guy refuses to discuss Kashmir.

Pakistan military has always justified their defeats at the hands of the Indian military and provided various excuses. mr Musharaf caved in against the threats of a very ordinary American officer, but never admitted that he had no balls. The guy who was called a dog in the streets of Pakistan still claims that he is popular among the Pakistani voters since most of them are( illetrates)from the villages.
Pakistan now has an arsenal of the most lethal weaponry that only few countries in the world could match. And yet they have taken the assignment from their new masters to fight its own citizens, o’h sorry, I meant radicals, talibans and terrorists. Both India and the USA have identified the so called terrorists to Pakistan Govt.so no investigative work is involved. Pakistan military has committed to disarm the unarmed people, whose only weapon is the suicide act..
WHAT A SHAME?
My advice to the elected Govt. would be that Pakistan nationalises its army, sending the entire military commanders and journalists Generals into retirement and any future officer beyond the grade of a major should not be promoted unless the medical community has confirmed that they have balls to take on the enemy. The foot soldiers should be reformed to become a National Army, as well as introducing the conscription i.e, all 18 years youth should serve in the army for at least 18 months. Until Pakistan has achieved this status of taking on a nuclear equiped India, both the peers and the leaders should shut up about Kashmir or other neglected minorities of India.
Like G Prasad states India is in the premium league now. Like GW propses a dialogue to give independence to both parts of Kashmir without any pre-conditions and then puts out a list of pre-conditions.
Pakistan has no reason to trust India and repeat the mistakes previously made. Most Indians on this blog have talked about the dismembermwent of Pakistan and even though it would mostly harm India than Pakistan, their intellect is not educated to admit and Mr Obama had to remind the Indian Govt. of the side effects of their venture in Kashmir.

Rex Minor

Posted by pakistan | Report as abusive
 

Umair,

Good to see that you’re talking more like a pragmatic reformist & less like a jingoistic nationalist, these days. Keep it up. I feel that the emotions that Indians generally have for Pakistan can’t simply be catagorized as black or white (hate or love) because it’s a lot more complex than that. Most Indians have felt a mixed bag of feelings for Pakistan at different times. We have felt love for your musicians, athletes etc, hate for your “non-state actors”, sympathy for the ordinary Pakistani & anger at your military establishment.
As Ganesh pointed out, the only reason that Indians might be interested in a broken up Pakistan, is because they feel that a weaker Pakistan would pose less of a threat to them. This threat is not of a conventional war. We know that Pakistan can never win a conventional war with India. Th threat that the average Indian dreads, is that posed by your state sponsored “non-state actors”. Pakistan has been facing terrorist attacks since 2007 but India has been facing terror attacks, sponosered by your establishment, for over 2 decades. Many Indian cities have been attacked & many innocent ordinary Indians have lost their lives in those attacks.
I agree, more that ever that a solution on Kashmir is the need of the hour. I say this, not for the sake of Indians or Pakistanis BUT for the sake of Kashmiris. India, urgently needs to reduce troop presence in Kashmir & for that to happen, Indians, Pakistanis & Kashmiris need to sit down and carve out a political solution. IMO, autonomy is the way to go but whatever the solution is, they need to find it now because we don’t want another generation of Kashmiris living under military presence & under the shadows of violence, rapes & murders. They deserve a good life just like anyone else.

Posted by Mortal1 | Report as abusive
 

Umairpk: “are you really serious, if yes than I would take that as a compliment. Pakistan posing a threat to a country 7 times its size. That does not seem real, and in addition to that you must keep in view that Pakistan is over sensitive when it comes to the threat posed by India. We were split in 1971, we will ensure at all cost it does not occur again. Such statements do little to create trust and add to mistrust. By the same token If India is friendly towards Pakistan, why would there be hostility on our side? And I think somewhere in between people on both sides think of each other differently, each side percieve other as unfriendly whereas the reality might not be same.”

If you look at the number of criminals in a society, they are few, compared to the majority population. But the society is always cautious and concerned about criminals. This does not mean that the general population is made up of cowards. If Pakistan came to a proper war with India, soldier-soldier, you know the outcome. But if you engage criminals and mix them in, the whole equation changes. First of all they do not confirm to any international laws or norms. They do not have to worry about war crimes. They are not accountable. That enemy is something even the world’s most powerful super power is struggling to handle. This does not mean the US lacks the balls or they are cowards. The militants no longer fight an army. They attack innocent people, take them hostage and threaten normal life. Mumbai attacks were not waged against Indian commandos. The terrorists were given commando style training by Pakistan’s military and militant organizations and were unleashed into Mumbai with machine guns and grenades. This kind of war is new and is very difficult to handle when the criminals are sent in on a suicide mission. Pakistan’s military itself is not able to snuff out the suicide attacks inside Pakistan. Does this means Pakistani military also lacks the balls? Terrorist menace is a dangerous game. It can get out of control as Pakistan is realizing it now. Playing victims of conspiracy and subterfuge will not get Pakistan out of this mess. This is not an act of bravery. It is cowardliness in nature. I have seen admiration and praise for these militants in Pakistanis. I even remember a comment by someone, “Just eleven guys walked in and took on the mighty Indian security system.” This has nothing to do with might or right. Such a menace will have to be dealt with caution. And the body language of Pakistani administration clearly showed that they were trying desperately to hide the truth that they were behind the whole thing. Now it has been diluted to a diplomatic “a few rogue elements in the ISI.” That is BS.

Kashmir dispute can always be settled with an honest approach. But we Indians have lost trust of Pakistanis. Now even the US is realizing the double dealing and duplicitous nature of Pakistanis. When that is the case, it becomes a wasted effort on our part to engage with Pakistan sincerely. Of late I am not hearing about the 17 Indian consulates, Indus dams etc. They surface when other arguments lose popularity and strength. It is Pakistan’s responsibility to become a trustworthy nation first for anyone to deal with them.

We are not talking about splitting up other countries. We are looking at the scenario where peace can prevail in the region. If Pakistanis cannot manage themselves, and that cause immense trouble in the neighborhood, then a solution has to be sought. Suddenly Pakistan cannot develop a wonder leader who will guide them to glory. It has been sixty odd years and things have only become worse. Who will let such leaders walk safely anymore? Benazir was assassinated in broad daylight. She was the last hope. I know you are a proud citizen of Pakistan. But then reality needs to be dealt with.

Posted by KPSingh01 | Report as abusive
 

Rex

“The subject article is dealing with Kashmir, which according to the India Govt. is the integral part of he Indian territory.
For you to invite my attention to a debate on China’s domestic policies is out of place.”

***Oh really! How does responding to your “misplaced” comments make my comments irrelevant to you? I am already convinced about you and need no further evidence of your double standards.

That was in response to your “out of place” comments on inhuman caste system, education reforms, Sikh nation, and fatwa/USA/USSR as the Satans and India’s bid for the permanent UNSC seat.

None of these issues spell like KASHMIR, the “subject article”!

I did not disagree (or agree) with you over India’s eligibility but asked your view on China which by your own criterion should be ineligible for the seat they have been sitting on for decades. Not surprisingly, you run away.

Posted by rehmat | Report as abusive
 

Rex

“PS The 300,000 number against Yahya Khan so called genocide are not my numbers but those listed by Piero Scarufi. I have not yet been to sight the Pakistan Govt. paper you referred to?”

***I can see how bright you are! I don’t know what exactly are you searching for. Frame crystal clear question(s) for you to get crystal clear answer.

Posted by rehmat | Report as abusive
 

Rex

“You are through and through indoctrinated over several generations by the colonialists, your great Prime Minister and many members of his govt. You question my knowledge of history, without knowing my background and education level.”

***You are contradicting yourself! Do you know enough of my “education and background” to call me indoctrinated, do you? However, you do not want me to question your knowledge of history since you think I do not know your background. True, I have no idea nor I am interested in your background. I took your words at face value when you confessed that you do not know enough about Indian history and I can see that. I do not question your any other knowledge of history. Over China or anywhere else, I would debate with you over the points you made. As you saw I did for China but you disappeared.

Talking about “indoctrination”, was Chancellor Angela Merkel talking about people like you that multicultural society has failed in Germany? Calling people of other religions “non-believers” is not human and indicates that you are not adding positively to a multicultural society as far religious tolerance is concerned. It is trouble written all over, yet you claim to be a peace seeker.

I have a suggestion for you, rather a request: In future when you respond to me or anyone else, quote the specific quotes of the commenter. Else, it really goes offtrack.

Posted by rehmat | Report as abusive
 

@Umair

“We were split in 1971, we will ensure at all cost it does not occur again.”

***Even if you do not trust that India is not planning on splitting Pakistan, you are safe because Pakistan has nuclear deterrent. It is time to focus on something else.

@Ganesh/Umair
“When Indians suggest this, it is not out of hatred. It is to reduce the threat from a hostile neighbour. If Pakistan is friendly, why would any Indian want it to be split? These statements must be viewed in context and not taken too seriously.”

***IMO Pakistan which is split up is more dangerous to India. Let us for the sake of argument imagine a “smaller Pakistan” is a country with nukes. Nukes are a deterrent and are fired as last resort when all options run out. There is threshold to fire the nukes and this arbitrary threshold would be lower for a country like smaller Pakistan, which would be weaker. One can imagine smaller Pakistan firing nuke much early than today’s Pakistan. The breadth of today;s Pakistan itself is considered a disadvantage for Pakistan for the fear of India knifing through it from front and back.

Posted by rehmat | Report as abusive
 

Rehmat: “Let us for the sake of argument imagine a “smaller Pakistan” is a country with nukes.”

If Pakistan falls apart like Yugoslavia, the first mission will be to take the nukes out of the region entirely. No one is going to sit and watch the nukes fall into the hands of a small group. The splintered new nations will need international support and relations to gain strength. And every splintered nation will not engage itself in war. They would know that they got their nations because of war. A separated Bangladesh has not gone to war with India or Burma. They are actually showing the way for Pakistan on how to be a responsible Muslim nation and a good neighbor.

Anyway, this is only a scenario if things begin to slide out of control. Today Karachi experienced a suicide attack. It is spreading into the hinterlands of Pakistan. Let us hope that Pakistan learns from this experience and abandons its reliance on radical Islam and militancy as a means to control others. They have to realize as the first step that India is not their enemy today. They can look at Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, Nepal, Myanmar etc and comfort themselves that India has no plans to take over Pakistan. A generation has come to pass. No one in India desires to take up Pakistan. And they have to learn to recognize India’s emerging stature in the international arena and respect it instead of try to thwart it. We have not accomplished it at the expense of Pakistan.

Posted by KPSingh01 | Report as abusive
 

@Rehmat
There we go again with your rhetoric, proving nothing. No, I have no idea about your background or for that matter the background of any other blogger, but I do recognise your rudeness. I have never called any one ignorant, nor have I said that certain communities are not fit to govern! This is your educational background, this is the result of the caste system in India. You are an Indian, the label given to you by the colonialists Brits.

I am not here to teach you nor do I need a lecture from you guys.
But I must talk about the great India, the occupier of Kashmir, or do you reckon the kashmiris are inhuman and also unfit to govern themselves. You propose to send them the police force and withdraw the military. very kind of you.

I do not claim to have all the knowledge of the world, but do have the ability to learn.
In your view, calling non-believers is inhuman, not in my culture. Those who do not believe in God and the life after death are called non-believers in my part of the world. You might like to call them atheists, or other names that they have assigned themselves. I consider it inhuman to call them people of low caste or schedule class, and this is coming out from a country which was invaded and then ruled by muslims for centuries.
NON BELIEVERS IS THE DEFINITION; PEOPLE HAVE CHOOSEN FOR THEMSELVES AND NOT GIVEN BY OTHERS.
Perhaps this is viewed differently and considered rude India( this is the sort of knowledge I do not have) but I can assure you that I have no intention to belittle these people. For your info. the cartoonist who depicted the cartoons of the prophet Mohammad(PBUH) recentl y claimed that he is an atheist, a non believer, and have always made cartoons of the prophets of God.

You are a smart allec; No chancellor Merkel was not talking about people like me. This is a democratic country of believers, its constitution and the laws are humane reflecting the christian and jewish values and tradition. So says Chancellor Merkel, who does not have more rights than any other citizen. She is a former elite communist and the daughter of a protesten priest, but raised in former communist German republic, has integrated into the free German republic in a very short period. The majority of the Germans from her party believe that those who want to live in this land should integrate into the fabric of this country without creating ghettos or a multicultural societies, which exist in the USA and Canada. Integration not assimilation, but many others including the majority from the opposition party want a multi-culti society. Now I am not sure if you were insinuating something different than asking a straight question.
As a matter of fact, your ironic post, somehow leaves always a bad taste in my mouth, and I intend in the future to ignore your post. you have an intimate knowledge of the Indian audience who are familiar with your culture and that should give your post sufficient readers. Please do not feel obliged to respond.
A nice day.

Rex Minor

Posted by pakistan | Report as abusive
 

@Rex Minor,

You call India occupier of Kashmir, is Pakistan not occupying Kashmir? Or is Pakistan entitled to steal land from anybody that is muslim? ie Bangladesh, Pakistan Occupied Kashmir?

You selectively pick on India and don’t even mention an ayota of a word about how Pakistani’s have occupied Kashmir, occupied it with Punjabi settlers and setup forward militant training camps of all kinds.

You are a militant and terrorist sympathizer and hater of India. You hide behind words, but you represent anything that is anti-indian or anti-western. You have a chip on your shoulder and fail to recognize that all of the technology you use and enjoy, banking healthcare, aerospace, IT, all created by great minds from the west and India.

Why don’t you go live with the pashto’s? you would change your tune in a second, as you would not survive a day in that culture.

If Kashmir is a problem, please comment on the Chinese subversion of the Tibetans and Uighers, anything to say about that? Cat got your tongue?…..Please no more selective morality, it is getting boring hearing you bash India all the time.

Posted by G-W | Report as abusive
 

@Rex

I reply in kind. If you felt rudeness in me, go back to your post and see why.

“This is your educational background, this is the result of the caste system in India. You are an Indian, the label given to you by the colonialists Brits.”
***You have one-dimensional mind and tending to be pathological. You view a Muslims’s comments via the prism of Caste-system. How ridiculous you can get?

“This is a democratic country of believers, its constitution and the laws are humane reflecting the christian and jewish values and tradition”
***BS. Who said that? Church and state are supposed to be separate in Germany. With more than 25% atheists in Germany, you are still stuck with your word “believer”. If Germany runs the ways you want, those atheists would be like Ahmediyas in Pakistan.

“But I must talk about the great India, the occupier of Kashmir, or do you reckon the kashmiris are inhuman and also unfit to govern themselves. You propose to send them the police force and withdraw the military. very kind of you.”
***What make you think I said/assume Kashmiris are inhuman? You have serious problems and need real help. I am serious!!! No joke.

Police means local Kashmiri police and to most that goes without saying, not you. It does not mean Tamil police in Kashmir. Are you suggesting police-free Kashmir?

I choose to ignore your remaining decibels.

Posted by rehmat | Report as abusive
 

@”You have serious problems and need real help. I am serious!!! No joke.”
Posted by rehmat

What too you so long? :)

Posted by Mortal1 | Report as abusive
 

@KPSingh,
And they have to learn to recognize India’s emerging stature in the international arena and respect it instead of try to thwart it.

====

You seem to be very optimistic about “Pakistan”!

Comparing it with traditional nation sates such as Bangladesh is not realistic.

“Pakistan” is an ideology, not a nation sate. “Pakistan” may have trappings of a nation state, but it is only an ideology.

Suggesting or hoping “Pakistan” would change course is very unrealistic. I’m not trying to be sarcastic or humorous here. India, the West, rest of the world need to realize this.

Posted by Seekeroftruth | Report as abusive
 

correction: What took you so long?

Posted by Mortal1 | Report as abusive
 

Umair,

One understands that offense is the best defence sometimes. That is one reason why Qureshi was actually being defensive by taking up such an offensive posture. That is par for politicians, and that is understandable. But sometimes they must keep in mind the audience. What is good for a domestic audience may backfire with an international one. I think that was what happened, anyway that is water under the bridge now.

As regards India on Kashmir governance and handling, take it for me, if Kashmir today is still a troubled area it is due in no small measure to the political shenanigans that almost all political parties in India have played in that State. I have often said that Pakistan has just exploited the conditions which Indian politicians have created with their bungling and lack of proper governance over almost the full 60 years.

Here is some food for thought. I often wonder whether all three parties, Kashmiris, Pakistanis and Indians, are really interested in keeping Kashmir alive as a problem rather than actually trying to get to a settlement and establish stability there. Sometimes it almost seems that one or other of the parties sees advantage in keeping it simmering as a problem. One thing I am sure of, ego is the biggest stumbling block to bringing about peace, stability and better relationships in the whole region.

Posted by DaraIndia | Report as abusive
 

@GW
You want to learn, then let us exchange our views. If you want to lecture like some of your fellow countrymen, then I am the wrong partner.
All along I have tried to learn and understand the reasons of India conflict with Pakistan, and to be frank I do not have any clue from your debates. And then I saw a light, your idea to get kashmir out of the equation. A dialogue between India and the Kashmiri leader across the border. This project did not progress either; you do not even have the support of the mob on this blog. And suddenly I realized that as long as the people of india and Pakistan do not sincerely want to have a peace, they a’nt going to get it. A horrible scenario emerged before me.
No one in my view can now prevent the nuclear confrontation between India and Pakistan, given the current situation, Unless, the majority of the people want peace! Pakistan civilian govts have at least tried to find a peaceful solution of the conflict without the military option. Only military has the military option, and this they have messed up several times.

History; The nuclear confrontation between the USA and Russia was prevented at the last minute, since the USA caved in and agreed to withdraw its nuclear rockets from Turkey and hands off Cuba. It was Mr Kennedy’s wise decision and the humanity won.

.Yes, in my opinion both India and Pakistan are occupying Kashmir territory, if one were to assume that Kashmir is not the integral part of India or Pakistan.
. I live in west and I am part of the west. Your larifari about the great minds of west and India is nothing but a crap and a diversion. This is deep subject, perhaps you have heard of the industry espionage? The USA is actively engaged in this business.

. I have nothing against India per say, but against the system that India has, the education it provides to the students, the caste system it operates and have explained it. The responses from most have confirmed my opinion, no sign of a humanistic society, no decolonisation program, the use of the military against the citizens who are usualy the backbone of a democracy. Pakistan is no angel either, and their misery and lack of progress one could atleast attribute it to their military dictators. But India still claims to be the democracy. And you are unlikely to have a dialogue with others with a different opinion as militants, terrorist sympathiser and hater of India. I can assure you I do not need any chip on my shoulder.

. The Pashtoons do not threaten any one and their culture is friendly for the guests.
They do not negotiate with foreign military either, they resist them and this has been proven once again with their confrontation with The USA and NATO.
Perhaps you would have a different view if you were to visit them; There are many volunteer Indian doctors in afghanistan hospitals, who are treating the injured civilians from the American bombings.
.!

It will take time but I can assure you that the Pastoons have never come across such a weaker opponent in their history. They have defeated them on ground, though very limited info reaches in the west.
For your info.the two third of the population in Germany want their troops withdrawl from Afghanistan.
THE EUROPEANS WANT PEACE; FAR WE HAVE HAD ENOUGH OF WARS

now you want to discuss China, there are several other blogs where this can be intelligently discussed. China has also been the victim of the colonisation and have not united their kind as one China. Tibet is an integral part of the chinese territory and Uighers live in China. The Chinese did not get their country back on a plate they way India and Pakistan was handed over by the brits. The USA has ever been trying to encircle the chiness territory. The chinese Govts. have successfully withstood the USA military pressure and is fast becoming an economic power. The European regard China as the number 1 power in the world.
Now what may I ask is your concern with China? I am not a moralist, a sinner can not lecture on morality. I support victims and uphold human rights. This is in the scriptures and imbedded in the german constitution.

Rex Minor

Posted by pakistan | Report as abusive
 

Mortal
“What took you so long?:-)”

***Let us blame this also on “Colonial system” and “inhuman caste system” in India! :-)

Posted by rehmat | Report as abusive
 

Pakistan: “I live in west and I am part of the west.”

You may live in the West, but your heart lives in Pakistan and your perception aligns with Pashtuns. It does not matter where you live. Just living in the West does not make you a liberated and free individual. What matters is where your heart is and we all know where it is.

Posted by KPSingh01 | Report as abusive
 

@Rex,

You are selective in the way that you express your views, that is what I take exception to. You don’t care much for the plight of the Tibetans, yet Kashmiri’s are a nation and deserve azadi?!?!?…I am just trying to make a point here. You are saying that Sikhs should get what they want, should the Uighers in China not get what they want too? Your double standards shine through again!

The reason I bring up china, is that you place greater weight on Kashmir freedom than Tibetan freedom. You say that people should allowed sovereignty as such, but you do not think that Tibetans, as humans are worthy of freedom from Chinese, but Kashmiri’s somehow are worthy of it from Indians, but not from Pakistan. Your warped, unbalanced and unreciprocal ethnic favoritism, leads me to believe that you are either muslim, or a closet case one, wanting to be muslim, and just like the Chinese for the sake of solidarity with Pakistan. Your double standards are a little “larifari” with most people here, that is undeniable.

It is quite laughable how one man in an orange robe with glasses, makes the entire nuclear communist superstructure shudder with excitement, anger and fear, it is really quite entertaining. Defenceless men in robes who pray and meditate, is enough to trigger a military crackdown on defenceless unarmed civilians, so thank you again for recognizing the Tibetans as non-entities! BTW, the Chinese are working hard to erase Tibetans as a culture all together. They have exacted huge effort to achieve this! Kudos to communism, a system where everybody is equal….equally worthless, and you politically sympathize more with the chinese than Indians and what they have to put up with china and Pakistan.

I agree, we should not have any more wars, I think they are counter productive, peace is the best way out for everybody, but a responsibly brokered peace, not a one-sided, imposed peace, where there is unfair conditions, a peace where all can economically and politically benefit, peace with concessions and compromise, not one man takes all kind of peace. Peace, where all militantism is destroyed for good.

With regards to the mob, I am not here to be liked, my point of view is, I believe is a little idealistic, but also a little away from from what the mainstream pack would say is a solution. In that regard, I stand by my POV and think it is the most sound and provides an out for everybody.

With regards to the Pashtoons, I admire many things about them. The ground reality there, is that there are energy highways coming through there in the future. There are 1.3 billion in India that need energy. There are oil and gas reserves, that need transit. The Pashtoons, can keep their unique culture and take the best of it, but they also need to enter the 21st century and embrace so ideals that will add to their uniqueness. Stagnation will only work against the world. You can’t stay static forever. Pashtoon women are dying to work, to learn, to educate, yet the culture is being kept backwards.

With regards to peace between India and Pakistan. You can talk to any north americans and europeans that have worked with Pakistani’s and indians. Indians do not come across as tight-fisted people who are unpeaceful. Let that resonate in your cranium. Indians integrate well with all cultures and even intermarry in many cases. This open attitude is one of the hallmarks of diaspora Indian success, globally.

Peace between Pakistan and India, involves both, but most of it, at the end of the day, IMHO, is 75% Pakistan and 25% India, for the ten thousand reasons that many have discussed over the several years. Pakistani’s don’t seem to want peace. Peace is considered some sort of military loss to the Pakistani’s and that is unfortunate.

You handle pakistan with kid gloves and want to reward bad behavior. Why don’t you propose a solution that will make Pakistan submit to peace, rather than pacifying Pakistan and just handing over Kashmir with out any thought for how it will anger the votership in a democratic India?

With regards to peace, you are half right, Indians DO WANT PEACE, it is Pakistan that does not want peace, at least the Emperors of Pakistan, will have no part of it.

Posted by G-W | Report as abusive
 

@Rex
“You want to learn, then let us exchange our views. If you want to lecture like some of your fellow countrymen, then I am the wrong partner.”

So when someone does not agree with you and produces a counter-argument then why you start calling them as hopeless, confused, fool, etc, etc, etc. Do you propose learning for others here can happen only by blindly accepting whatever you say?

“No one in my view can now prevent the nuclear confrontation between India and Pakistan, given the current situation, Unless, the majority of the people want peace! ”

Nuclear confrontation between India and Pakistan will NEVER happen. I am sure there are enough fools (opposite to your super intelligence) on both sides to not do such stupid act. BTW who is a war monger now? When Rex says then it is so called analysis but if someone else says then he is war monger….right Rex?

“Pakistan civilian govts have at least tried to find a peaceful solution of the conflict without the military option”

ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha

“And you are unlikely to have a dialogue with others with a different opinion as militants, terrorist sympathiser and hater of India.”

Did I not tell you of ULFA movement in Assam sometime back. Pull up your super intelligence and read about ULFA in Assam state of India. Yes you are an ignorant hater of India and sometimes ridiculous as well.

If you think Germany/Europe is perfect and India and/or Pakistan should pull up some Alladin’s magic lamp and fix everything in a blink of eye then thank GOD not everyone is as intelligent as you are.

PS. You decided not to post any more of your bigotry before 2012 but does your intelligence tell you its 2012 already.

Posted by 777xxx777 | Report as abusive
 

@Rex Minor,

You and I can agree on one thing, peace between India, where everybody moves on and lives and embraces joy and the other darker scenario, with hundreds of millions dead in days, lies solely with what choices the emperors of Pakistan make. Their creed are biggest possible source of peace, or the greatest source of death to all.

Posted by G-W | Report as abusive
 

@GW
I am sure you are a fine person, but have all mixed up ideas. Let me try again to address your queries:
. The article deals with Kashmir, the so called integral part of India. India also claims to be a democracy. Therefore it is natural that I address the sikhs plight as well since their story is the proof how the Indian military handles civilian population.
. China has never claimed to follow the so called western democratic system, or have they? Besides I regard Tibet as part of China and therefore the Tibetans as Chinese citizens. Same goes for Uighers!
I hope that you are not going to mix up India and Kashmir with China and its domestic issues; this can be handled separately.

I agree with you, it is laughable about the stocky man in the orange robe and glasses.

.India has problems with Kashmiris as well as with Pakistan. Your proposal is sound to get Kashmir out of the equation. This is feasible, but you do not have a consenses among the mob, nor in the country. Your leader is old and appears to be tired, he is waiting to pass the buck to the next in line,
Some one from the Gandhi family?
.Why do’nt you try and ask your Prime minister if he would be willing for a dialogue with a Kashmiri leader from the other side of the border? Yours is a democracy, you as a citizen are entitled to know his response.

. You have not met the emperors of Pakistan but have the illusion that they do not want peace. This is your problem, and the problems of many. You create monsters from the weak people in the chain and regard most dangerous man in the orange robe as harmless. This little man has been trying to create a wedge between the western leaders(USA,France And Germany) and China whose economic welfare requires cooperation and not political confrontations.
.Have you ever met military Generals, I have and several. They are harmless and the weakest outside the war theatre! Do not imagine that they do not desire peace. They are very straight and usualy have less patience than those in politics.
If you take the polls in india and Pakistan, you would confirm my estimates that the vast majority of the people do not desire peace. It is my view that the military in Pakistan requires of the new civilian Govt. to settle the kashmir dispute with india within a specified time! In view of the American involvement, the clash between the two countries could come as early as 2011.
I pray that my forecast is false and the guns on the kashmir borders would remain silent.
. Stop worrying about Pashtoons, they are only around sixty million fully armed with klashnikovs, India or any other power has to cofront this energy before they can hope for oil and Gas. India would probably be better of with energy from the baluchistan route or the solar energy.
Rex Minor

Posted by pakistan | Report as abusive
 

@777, Singh, rehmat, daraindia,

Guys, there is nothing absolutely wrong with forcing Pakistan to a peaceful solution with India.

Again, I tell you, that Indians, we have the money and resources, let’s incentivize peace to the Pakistani’s by helping lift their people with humanitarian work, like Schools, Hospitals and assistance with upgrading their civil service infrastructure. If they refuse it, let them keep refusing it, we should keep offering it, until they tire of saying no and give in and submit, all of this should be done in a very public forum. The peace overtures should be louder politically than the current issues that make headlines. In this regard, we Indians need to refocus and pay the peace cards in a much more pro-active fashion.

Kashmir will be resolved and Kashmiri’s free, once there is enough good will built by India, it may just be enough to tilt the political landscape enough, where Pakistani’s at the polls will reject the status quo and demand a more peaceful stance towards India and their government.

We cannot fall prey to the myth that Pakistani’s will reject peace overtures for ever, we do not know that, we must keep the pressure of humanitarian gifts to Pakistani’s as our greatest source of power to defeat militantism and the current political gridlock over Kashmir.

If Indians fail to muster the will to keep reaching out, with tangible action the Pakistani’s can digest and appreciate, their focus will turn to more important endeavors within their country, rather than Kashmir, and India will not be viewed as the occupier.

If India takes an even higher road than the one its on, it cannot lose, all win big, especially Pakistani’s.

The biggest losers will be the militants and the Chinese will lose regional hedgemony to divide and keep the South Asia, competition down.

Militants will take knock out punches to the chin from every direction by both Pakistan and India. The economic union in S. Asia stands to lift all who embrace it, war will be a thing of the past and like the Europeans, Asians will enjoy a new era of peace and stability, under a secular, plural and democratic S. Asian region.

Posted by G-W | Report as abusive
 

typo: If Indians fail to muster

should read: If Indians succeed to muster

Posted by G-W | Report as abusive
 

@Rex Minor,

If there is a confrontation, it will be the darkest most sadest day in human history, ever seen.

I don’t even want to contemplate what it would be like. The entire earth will suffer.

My question, is, can the world afford to allow Pakistani Army to keep the entire world and 1.3 billion people hostage, over a small area like Kashmir?

This is why the pindi boyz need to pushed from every direction to make peace. In the event of a full exchange, there will be nothing left in Pakistan. Indians have third response capability with their subs. Despite huge Indian losses, with time, India has the ability to recover, Pakistan does not.

There will be no winners in a nxklear war. Everybody loses. Peace makes winners of us all. Let’s focus on ways to force Pakistan to make peace.

You just don’t get that.

Posted by G-W | Report as abusive
 

@GW
It would be for easier to convince(force)Indian leaders for peace whose future is at stake. Pakistan military is unlikely to give up even if India manages to defeat them a dozen times. They are going to try again and again with the hope to destroy one day the military might of India.
Mr Manmohan singh wants to have a dialogue with Pakistan Govt. simply to avoid the involvement of outsiders in the dispute, not to settle the dispute,Israeli tactics): and it would appear that Pakistan Govt. is prepared to discuss the Kashmir issue on the basis of the UN resolution only.
Perhaps India would end up constructing a wall
around its border with neighbouring countries to keep the enemies of india out.

Both india and Israel needs friends and it would seem that they cannot rely on any one other than the great bleeding USA. Too bad mr Obama failed to convince either China or Germany in the G20 meeting for reduction in their export.
Does my comments make any sense to you? TZhe bottom line is that you need to tango!

Rex Minor

Posted by pakistan | Report as abusive
 

@KPSingh
You have a super brain and an inquisitive one. Your guesses are not accurate.

Ubi bene , Ibi patria!( Where I prosper , there is my country).
I once thought of buying a housing plot for sale near the himalayas, where, I could spend my summer breaks, but then I read a report in the local paper of an armed robbery at a petrol station. This was the end of my small project in India. Are you surprised? I now take my summer time in France in the area which was once invaded and occupied by the sarasens in the 12th century. Now please do not start another guess. It is not important for Kashmiri discussions.

Rex Minor

Posted by pakistan | Report as abusive
 

@777
Please do not try to misunderstand me. I am not a war monger. Time and again I have said that you guys are influenced by the paranoid, started by the USA. You have supported the creation of monsters, AlQaeda(not AQ), radicals, Islamists, terrorists, ISI etc etc., and all of us now are suffering and do not know how to get rid of them. They are spreading all over the world.
We are placing every one in a box and then find it difficult to tackle the real world. Believe you me they are illusions and make believe stories. Most people are straight forward and hard working people and trying to make their living.
Now tell me, how are the Govts. going to negotiate with people who have been classifgied as terrorist? The USA administartion have realised this and even removed the so called talibans from the terrorists list and yet they find that the so called talibans are not prepred for a dialogue until the foreign forces leave Afghanistan. I have said all along that the Pashtoons do not negotiate. It is also my judgement, you may like to confirm from your Pakistani contacts , that those who control the Pakistani Nukes are Pashtoons and not Punjabis. The Pashtoons would never issue threats but would act within seconds of the ultimatum. The Pashtoons could not care less who the winner is or who the looser is!

This would simply occur because in my observation, the people of India and Pakistan do not desire peace, but favour more or less confrontation.
people must desire peace to have peace!
Now you have a different opinion, I rspect it and even hope that you are right. Do not forget the saying, ” the trees do not grow in the sky”.

Rex Minor

Posted by pakistan | Report as abusive
 

GW:

You are exhausting yourself.

You are running on idealism which is not achievable in reality. Your counterpart Rex is full of speculations and he is trying to read Manmohan Singh’s brain also now. It is hard to prove speculation right or wrong since speculation is not a fact.

Kashmir is not a new issue, so I looked back and found this decent discussion between Indians and Pakistanis.

http://blogs.reuters.com/pakistan/2010/0 7/12/hopes-low-stakes-high-when-indian-a nd-pakistani-foreign-ministers-meet/

I suggest you take advantage of what has already been decently discussed.

ON nuke war: I speculate that nuke war between Indian and Pakistan will not happen. Pakistanis are in mess, but they are not MAD to have nuke war. Generals love to live for the $$$ they have in pockets.

Posted by rehmat | Report as abusive
 

Rex:

help me out of my misery by telling me which one of the following is right:

“Most people are straight forward and hard working people and trying to make their living.”

and then see the contrast:
“the people of India and Pakistan do not desire peace, but favour more or less confrontation.”

Posted by rehmat | Report as abusive
 

from Rex
“that those who control the Pakistani Nukes are Pashtoons and not Punjabis.”

***Umair can tell us about it.

Posted by rehmat | Report as abusive
 

PS
The Somalian pirates are now holding thirty ships and would release them once they have received the ransom money. The USA armada is hepless against the somalian pirates. If Pakistan is destablised, we would find the pirates operating in the Indian Ocean, practically stopping the commercial shipping industry. On top of that India would experience the so called talbans in the Indian territory, thereby making a mockery of the India nuclear arsenal. The proliferation of the nuclear weaponry from Pakistan is a remote possibility , but from India is a genuine threat. Are you guys going to wait for the wikileak to publish the Pentagon classified documents or use your own imagination to understand the coded warning from Mr Obama? We must try to stop the destabilization in the south asia, it is in the interest of all Govts.

Posted by pakistan | Report as abusive
 

@Rehmat
Sorry,I do not mean to be rude, if you do not understand my statements then move on and ignore them. I am not here to improve your feelings! You must try to retain your ability to learn not only lecture. Try to locate the statement of your Prime minister to the Indian parliament. When I speculate, I shall say so and admit my error.

Rex Minor

PS
I have felt that all of you with the exception of GW are holding on to the Indian stand on kashmir and therefore are prepared for war. you even suggested to send in the police instead of the military. You reckon where the army is unsuccessful, the police could do the job. You do not appear to get the message. The kashmiris do not want any part of the india Govt. in running their affairs.

Posted by pakistan | Report as abusive
 

@”PS
The Somalian pirates are now holding thirty ships and would release them once they have received the ransom money. The USA armada is hepless against the somalian pirates. If Pakistan is destablised, we would find the pirates operating in the Indian Ocean, practically stopping the commercial shipping industry. On top of that India would experience the so called talbans in the Indian territory, thereby making a mockery of the India nuclear arsenal. The proliferation of the nuclear weaponry from Pakistan is a remote possibility , but from India is a genuine threat. Are you guys going to wait for the wikileak to publish the Pentagon classified documents or use your own imagination to understand the coded warning from Mr Obama? We must try to stop the destabilization in the south asia, it is in the interest of all Govts.”
Posted by pakistan

You seem to have run out of your medication, sir. Please order it right away or I’ll have to notify the concerned local authorities, in order to ensure public safety.

Posted by Mortal1 | Report as abusive
 

@Mortal
Is this how your leader is to talk in the Security council? This is the second stage of demence, SIR!

Rex Minor

Posted by pakistan | Report as abusive
 

@Rehmat
The exact words of your PM speach in the parliament;

I sincerely believe it is our obligation to keep channels of communication open……
Unless we talk directly to Pakistan we will haveto rely on a third party to do so……..

Was he sincere or was this a coincidence that he used the exact words of the israeli PM announced decades ago, for a dialogue with Palestinians. Is it also a coincidence that Israeli want to have a dialogue but not on illegal settlements. The indian PM wants a step by step approach ith Pakistan after 60 odd years, without discussing the Kashmir issue until certain pre-requisites are met by Pakistan. No wonder Pakistan Govt. were fooled and Mr Omair felt let down.

It is clear, Pakistan politicians are not fmiliar with Machiavillian politics.

Rex Minor

Posted by pakistan | Report as abusive
 

@G-W
“Again, I tell you, that Indians, we have the money and resources, let’s incentivize peace to the Pakistani’s by helping lift their people with humanitarian work, like Schools, Hospitals and assistance with upgrading their civil service infrastructure. If they refuse it, let them keep refusing it, we should keep offering it, until they tire of saying no and give in and submit, all of this should be done in a very public forum. The peace overtures should be louder politically than the current issues that make headlines. In this regard, we Indians need to refocus and pay the peace cards in a much more pro-active fashion.”

I must say your thinking is quite of the box and I like that. If that is what it takes for a peaceful Pakistan then we should do it.

@Rex
“It is also my judgement, you may like to confirm from your Pakistani contacts , that those who control the Pakistani Nukes are Pashtoons and not Punjabis. The Pashtoons would never issue threats but would act within seconds of the ultimatum. The Pashtoons could not care less who the winner is or who the looser is!”

If Pashtoons care least about humanity (any one who even thinks of launching nukes for ANY purpose, right or wrong, is a monster and a grave threat to humanity) then also in your opinion they are the greatest. One one hand you shout PEACE PEACE PEACE and on other hand so much chest thumping about Pashtoon ‘fighters’ and then you blame me for being confused.

“The proliferation of the nuclear weaponry from Pakistan is a remote possibility , but from India is a genuine threat”

ha ha ha ha ha ha ha

“The kashmiris do not want any part of the india Govt. in running their affairs.”

How come that for past 10 years Kashmiris wanted Indian rule and just in 4 months they don’t? And what if next 100 years they again want Indian rule?

Posted by 777xxx777 | Report as abusive
 

@Rehmat, GW
In my opinion GW is not an idealist, but a realist. HE WANTS PRACTICAL SOLUTION, A STEP BEYOND ACADEMIC INTERCOURSE. Indian leaders need to have a talk with the Kashmiri leaders from across the border. India tried to swallow Kashmir but the kasmiri people got stuck in its throat, Pakistan hung on to the part of kashmir and claiming the other under the 1947 agreement. The Kashmiris on both sides were relegated a secondry status. GW is the first one asking for the Kashmiris consultation. Both India and Pakistan should support the project. As an outsider, I have not identified any other major reason of a conflict between India and Pakistan.
I believe that the exit of foreign troops from Afghanistan and Indian troops from Kashmir are the first major steps for stability and peace in south Asia.

MOST PEOPLE IN THE WORLD WANT INDIANS AND CHINESE TO SUPPORT THE GLOBAL PEACE AND ECONOMIC GROWTH. THIS CANNOT OCCUR IF IN THEIR BACKYARD PEOPLES ARE BEING RUTHLESSLY SUPPRESSED. I SAW THIS MESSAGE FROM EARLIER STATEMENTS OF GW. Was I speculating?

Rex Minor

Posted by pakistan | Report as abusive
 

@777
I am not chest thumping about any thing, the monkeys do! Neither the Indian leaders nor you guys have considered the possibility that the so called talibans are capable of reaching india in a days time and take out the Indian nukes. India must protect its nuclear wealth. I agree that only monsters are capable of launching Nukes, we know that the usa dropped two nukes on japan and has so far not apologised for it. All nuclearmed countries have monsters in their military.

If kashmiris want to be a part of India, than be it. I have no problem with their decision.
why use military then?

Rex Minor

Posted by pakistan | Report as abusive
 

@Rex

“Sorry,I do not mean to be rude, if you do not understand my statements then move on and ignore them. I am not here to improve your feelings! You must try to retain your ability to learn not only lecture.”
***You did not get me. I am challenging your stand and asking you to explain. Looks like you are not up to it. I am mostly very specific to what I say and ask. That does not amount to lecture. Not doing that all the time like you do is called a lecture. I use your comments and ask you to explain me and I have never heard anything positive from you that help me learn.

“I have felt that all of you with the exception of GW are holding on to the Indian stand on kashmir and therefore are prepared for war. you even suggested to send in the police instead of the military. You reckon where the army is unsuccessful, the police could do the job. You do not appear to get the message. The kashmiris do not want any part of the india Govt. in running their affairs.”
***Do not generalize me with other Indians. I cannot defend all the Indian posters here on their stand. If you have problem with my stand ask me specifically what that is and see from my posts. I have said Indians and Pakistanis are peaceful (people not politicians) but you think otherwise about people. I said India-Pak war will not happen—not even non-nuclear–due to nuclear deterrence but you think the war will happen. you even said that nukes in Pak are in Pushtoon hands—meaning “UNSAFE and IRRESPONSIBLE”–so easy to fire at India.

I copy/paste my previous post “ON nuke war: I speculate that nuke war between Indian and Pakistan will not happen. Pakistanis are in mess, but they are not MAD to have nuke war. Generals love to live for the $$$ they have in pockets.”

On Kashmir I said, I repeat: “Police means local Kashmiri police and to most that goes without saying, not you. It does not mean Tamil police in Kashmir. Are you suggesting police-free Kashmir?”

Let me ask you 2nd time: Are you imagining Kashmir to be a police-free state (let me add I meant Kashmiri police) after sudden pull out of Indian Army?
Oh! it just struck me why you do not want EVEN Kashmiri police from your statements on Sikh killing Sikhs (not factual) that police means brothers killing brothers. In my view it would be brothers killing unwanted elements and protecting the community.

“I believe that the exit of foreign troops from Afghanistan and Indian troops from Kashmir are the first major steps for stability and peace in south Asia.”
***Practically speaking, some foreign troops will stay for a while in Afghanistan. Your suggestion on Indian troops is feasible if Pakistani troops also do the same. Else it is just a useless wish and adding nothing to the theoretical solution.

Exit of Indian troops (not Pakistani) ONLY from Kashmir means trusting Pakistan. Can it happen? No. you know history more than I do on the Indo-Pak wars and the psyche of Pakistani military. That’s why Indian troops will stay at the borders of Kashmir facing Pakistan even after coming out of the streets. Others have given better solution and I support that Indian steps move to the border as required in numbers to defend borders and let Kashmir be secured by Kashmiri police. But you want a police-less Kashmir with Kashmir lacking Indian troops and Pakistani troops next door staying where they are.

“Indian leaders need to have a talk with the Kashmiri leaders from across the border”
***Suggest some names or positions they hold and tell me the feasibility of that happening. Even separatists in India want Pakistan to talk to India, so you can guess about Kashmiri leaders in Pakistan. Reverse has happened, Pakistani leaders have been allowed to talk to anyone in Kashmir and they have done that even recently.
“ sincerely believe it is our obligation to keep channels of communication open……
Unless we talk directly to Pakistan we will haveto rely on a third party to do so……..
Was he sincere or was this a coincidence that he used the exact words of the israeli PM announced decades ago, for a dialogue with Palestinians.”
***I wonlt ask you to show me Israel PM’ statement, I trust you. My view is that PM Singh is sincere. If he wants to copy Isreal approach would he use a different expression or the same? He may not be as bright as you are, but has a bit of common sense. I have heard his views over a period of time, you can call him powerless but cunning is not the word for him, which you are thinking, There is no grand scheme behind his words other than usual political pressure which he does his best to overcome. I think you lack knowledge about Singh as a person and politician and prejudice you carry about India-Israel partnership, which will always hinder you from recognizing the most sincere gestures of peace on an Indian PM’s part.
“As an outsider, I have not identified any other major reason of a conflict between India and Pakistan.”
***To name one, Bangladesh creation which India facilitated. That reminds me I have not heard your stand who killed them, although I hear a lot about terrorism by USA in holy land including even bomb blasts in Pushtoon land (since your theory is that brother cannot kill brother). You are good with intuition in many things except genocide in Bangladesh. Bit odd!

Rex: I do not doubt that you wish peace. Sadly, your words, if turned into action, and wishes, if granted, would not achieve that and worsen the situation.
GW’s views are harmless if not useful.
I hope you are specific this time (use my comments to help you respond) else it turns into a lecture which both of us dislike.

Posted by rehmat | Report as abusive
 

@Rex

“MOST PEOPLE IN THE WORLD WANT INDIANS AND CHINESE TO SUPPORT THE GLOBAL PEACE AND ECONOMIC GROWTH. THIS CANNOT OCCUR IF IN THEIR BACKYARD PEOPLES ARE BEING RUTHLESSLY SUPPRESSED. I SAW THIS MESSAGE FROM EARLIER STATEMENTS OF GW. Was I speculating?”
***if GW said that, you cannot be given credit for it.

Posted by rehmat | Report as abusive
 

@Rex
“Neither the Indian leaders nor you guys have considered the possibility that the so called talibans are capable of reaching india in a days time and take out the Indian nukes. India must protect its nuclear wealth”

Is it not chest thumping?? Don’t worry of Indian nukes. In Afghan land Pashtoons may be invincible but not in foreign lands. You think too much of them. Indians are perfectly capable to reply to any religious bigotry. And yes the administration at time of Hiroshima bombing was a monster in US.

“If kashmiris want to be a part of India, than be it. I have no problem with their decision.
why use military then? ”

Yes military should be on borders (I am sure that is the case with Germany as well, or is it not?), but when rehmat said let there be local police you have a problem. To maintain law and order and weed out unsocial elements all societies need police. Does Germany not have a Police made up of German citizens? Or are you saying German society is absolutely free of criminals and so is Kashmiris? Think a zillion times before answering.

Posted by 777xxx777 | Report as abusive
 

“Neither the Indian leaders nor you guys have considered the possibility that the so called talibans are capable of reaching india in a days time and take out the Indian nukes. India must protect its nuclear wealth”

***This is an example of wishing something using some character. The character is Taliban here. How peaceful!

Taliban is not going to grant this wish. Their strength is the terrain they live in. No wonder they stopped before they could reach Islamabad which goes to their credit since they fight within their limitations. Let them first face Pakistan Army in any case.

Perhaps Taliban should first learn to read if they want to move out on such missions. They should not have burnt the schools like this.

Posted by rehmat | Report as abusive
 

@777
as long as you have considered the possibility about Pashtoons tribes entering into India, i have no problem with it. They have done it before! This is neither my wish nor my feat, so no credit for me and therefore no chest thumping.

You should support GW’s vision or the idea for Kashmiris, let them decide their future, both Indian and Pakistan military should quit the Kashmir land.

At times you have misinterpretted my post or perhaps I was not very clear. Rehmat pretends to a clever one like a fox and sometimes manuplates ‘words’.
In kashmir the police force were apparently unable to control the disturbances and the civil disobedience so the Indian military was sent to control it. This has resulted in full blown rebellion and loss of life, atleast this is what is being reported. Kashmir is now out of control and as an occupier, India is obliged under the international law to restore peace and order avoiding further deterioration and possible foreign intervention. Indian leaders are now responding to this situation, and here comes the great Rehmat saying military out and police in. This is absolute anarchy so my comments to which you now object were “very kind of you”. I have no problem with it, but if the police is now sent and military withdrawn, the civilian crowds would massacre the police.
A dialogue with the Kashmiris was GW’s proposal to resolve the crisis. You attention is centred on borders, but the problems are in the cities. Are you of the opinion that kashmiris from across the border are causing rebellion, you might be right if the border is porus and I would not be surprised if the chechenians along with the kashmiri resistance have also entered.

Rex Minor

I still believe that the next Indian leader to be should have a dialogue with the number 1 kashmiri leader from across the border and the leaders of Indian Occupied kashmir to find a democratic solution. GW’s has a sound proposal.

Posted by pakistan | Report as abusive
 

PS

I said chechenians incase the Kashmiri resistance is now taking a conflict of international dimension, i.e, the involvement of Ummah from the world.

Posted by pakistan | Report as abusive
 

@Rehmat

My sincere advise to you, please do not misinterpret. ‘CONSIDER’ was the key word.
Your feel of the english can’t be that bad.

This was also not my wish.

The so called taliban Pashtoons now control most of the terrain in the whole of Pakistan, specificaly the Islamabad and the main port of Karachi.
The Taliban Pashtoons have their share of Harward, Yale, Oxford and Cambridge and even Texas background(thanks to George W). During their rule they were the regular visitors to George w, until the time of divorce when George W demanded of them the return of their Guest. This is the red line, no Pashtoon dare cross. incidently this is no different in europe, Sweden and switzerland are more strict than others. Those who seek asylums in Europe and are then granted are not handed over willy nilly to the USA on demand

Do not worry about the schools in the Pashtoon territory, you have a lot to do in your terrain, particularly for your over populated country with inadequate institutions and discriminations.
NGO’s from Germany have been involved in schools constructions for several years and are usually prevented from the presence of the foreign military, the rest is nothing but a propaganda.
Pashtoons are a litle bit more concerned with Kashmir because of history and now the porus borders as well as Pakistan military intrusions into their holy land. Let us not forget the Ummahs spirit which Omair mentioned.

Rex Minor

PS Give serious attention to GW and 777, they have a lot to contribute for peace in their own style.

Posted by pakistan | Report as abusive
 

“Rex Minor

I still believe that the next Indian leader to be should have a dialogue with the number 1 kashmiri leader from across the border and the leaders of Indian Occupied kashmir to find a democratic solution. GW’s has a sound proposal.”

–>You forgot to add, under third party supervision, and don’t forget to include Pakistani Army and Civilian Leaders of Pakistan. We do not want any more “larifari” from Army.

Do not forget, one of the biggest things to be done is to de-weaponize the region of Militantism, pro-actively, conclusively and with a vengeance, no apologies shall be given. In this regard, Pakistan MUST take a zero tolerance approach to all frankensteins it created.

Posted by G-W | Report as abusive
 

Serious discussions on a peaceful resolution to Kashmir can take place and azadi for Kashmiri’s once Pakistan takes on all militants forces all of them to a dead end.

7th largest army in the world, must be good for something.

Posted by G-W | Report as abusive
 

@GW
Let the USA, NATO and Pakistan army take on all militants to a dead end.

Let us see first What India and the Kashmiri leaders can achieve, ofcouse with cooperation of third party regional actors and even UNO actors and the UNO support. Do not start with preconditions otherwise the project ain’t going to fly. Let the Kashmiris have the say and let the Indians and Pakistan support it.

The region requires stability!!

Rex Minor

Posted by pakistan | Report as abusive
 

PS

I would very much like to live and see the great leader or a military General, or even a genious magician, who is able to defeat or disarm the sixty odd million Pashtoons with klashnikovs.
I am afraid that the way it looks and reading Nostra Damus, unless there is a move towards peace, the destabilazation process is going toengulf the entire subcontinent. The clash of civilisation would then be unavoidable and rule of force would come back from the ancient days.

Rex Minor

Posted by pakistan | 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/
  •