India-Pakistan – cricket, spooks and peace

March 27, 2011

cricket  refugee“Cricket diplomacy” has always been one of the great staples of the relationship between India and Pakistan. The two countries have tried and failed before to use their shared enthusiasm for cricket to build bridges, right back to the days of Pakistan President Zia ul-Haq, if not earlier.

So when Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh announced last week that he was inviting Prime Minister Yusuf  Raza Gilani and President Asif Ali Zardari to watch the semi-finals of the Cricket World Cup in Mohali, India, the temptation was to dismiss it as an old idea.

Yes, it would be the first visit by a leader of either country to the other since the November 2008 attack on Mumbai.  Yes, the invitation came at a time when relations between the two countries were already thawing. And yes, the Middle East is changing so fast that you would expect –  in the way that warring siblings do — that India and Pakistan would bury their differences at a time when the outside world has become so unpredictable.

But the instinct for cynicism is unerring. India and Pakistan have tried and failed to make peace for so long that it is easy, lazily easy, to predict that this latest initiative will also come to nothing. Former Pakistan President Pervez Musharraf, himself a participant in cricket diplomacy in 2005, wrote it off in 2000:

`”We have been trying all kinds of bus diplomacy and cricket diplomacy and everything. Why has all of it failed? It has failed because the core issue was not being addressed … because there is only one dispute, the Kashmir dispute … others are just aberrations, minor differences of opinion which can be resolved,” he told The Hindu in an interview in 2000.

Yet even after Mumbai, even after years of fighting over Kashmir, even after all the failed diplomatic initiatives of the past, I still found myself regularly  checking on Google and Twitter to see whether Pakistan had accepted the invitation to the cricket match. When Zardari’s spokeswoman Farahnaz Ispahani announced on her Twitter feed that Gilani would be going to Mohali, the news was retweeted with the speed once reserved by traditional media for attendance at U.S.-Soviet summits.

Over the years, each time something like this has happened, enthusiasm about a breakthrough in India-Pakistan relations has been swiftly disabused.

Yet cynicism, lazy or otherwise, notwithstanding, there are a few reasons why we should allow for the possibility that this time might be different.

The first is Pakistan’s reassessment of its relationship with the United States.  For years Pakistan has looked to America to bolster its defences against India.  Yet America will never give Pakistan what it wants in terms of absolute loyalty. By definition, if you are in a “strategic relationship”, you expect your ally to take your side against your enemy. The United States, trying to straddle its alliance with Pakistan with its strategic and economic interests in India, can, and never will, do that.

And Pakistan, increasingly unwilling to put up with what it sees as bullying by the United States in return for financial aid, is arguably growing out of an unhealthy dependency.  Nowadays, you hear arguments that Pakistan is a big country of some 170 million people which no longer wishes to be a supplicant to the United States, and which, as described by Pakistani journalist Mosharraf Zaidi, is discovering a new kind of nationalism. For Pakistan, achieving that independence from the United States is easier done if it is not also at loggerheads with India.

The second reason to think that this time might be different comes from an increasing understanding of the need to improve relations between the intelligence agencies of the two countries.  Both the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) agency and the Research & Analysis Wing (R&AW) are ultimately inheritors of a system set up by the British to maintain colonial rule and as such remain secretive and somewhat apart from the countries they serve.

Their ways of challenging each other, whether in Kashmir or Afghanistan, are so rarely debated in the media that we have little idea about what is going on in the behind-the-scenes battles between the ISI and R&AW.

In an interview earlier this year, Musharraf, speaking from his own experience of running Pakistan, was clear that an improvement in relations between the ISI and R&AW was needed.

“ISI and R&AW have always been confrontational, since 1948, since our inception,” he said. “This tit-for-tat has been going on over the last 60 years; both are to blame or not to blame; both should share responsibility for all that is happening.” Adding that it should not just be Pakistan that is blamed, he said,  “It’s mutual. I think India and Pakistan need to sit down and stop this confrontation.”

B. Raman, formerly at R&AW, has made a not too dissimilar argument. Calling for the revival of past contacts between the ISI and R&AW, he wrote that, ”it has always been my view that such liaison contacts on a sustained basis may not lead to any substantive results, but will enable the officers of the two organisations to assess each other in flesh and blood instead of relying on source and media reports.”

The Times of India has meanwhile reported that India is keen to open a dialogue with the Pakistan Army and the ISI to ”open up new possibilities of deepening Indo-Pak engagement”. That would be a major departure for India, which has been very uncomfortable in the past about the idea of talking to the Pakistan Army during periods of democratic government. In a country where the military has always been subvervient to the civilian government, India has traditionally had strong reservations about acknowledging the power of the Pakistan Army in setting foreign and security policy. The Times of India report, if confirmed, and reciprocated, would represent a significant change in the ground rules of India-Pakistan dialogue.

All in all, given the many disappointments of the India-Pakistan peace process over the decades, I would assume that much work has already been done behind-the-scenes to prepare for the ”Mohali thaw”. So I’m not going to write it off as mere cricket diplomacy. It may be bigger than it looks.

 


199 comments

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/

If you read carefully, what B Raman said and what Musharaff said are not one and the same. B Raman agreeing with the idea of having real contacts between ISI and RAW is not the same as Musharaff spin (i.e lie) that ISI and RAW are to be equally blamed.

Indians should not get carried away by silly, meaningless pleasantries..Lahore Bus Yatra mentality should not lead to false sense of faith on Pak motives.

In the meantime there are 2 news items related to Pakistan floating around:

1) According to Musharraf, India is existential threat to Pakistan.

2) According to Interpol, Pakistan has issued an existential threat to Mushaaraf. :-)

Posted by netizen | Report as abusive

[...] India-Pakistan – cricket, spooks and peaceReuters Blogs (blog)“Cricket diplomacy” has always been one of the great staples of the relationship between India and Pakistan. The two countries have tried and failed before to use their shared enthusiasm for cricket to build bridges, right back to the days of Pakistan …Playing with IndiaThe News InternationalAkhtar must play against India: ImranIndian ExpressPakistan looking to ease visa regime with IndiaThe HinduDaily Times -NDTV.com -DAWN.comall 1,448 news articles » [...]

The difference between the past and now is that for this cricket match, a democratic leader from Pakistan is arriving. In the past it was a military dictator. I think if Pakistan continues with democratic government for another 25 years, things will change there. What has been lacking there is continuation of democratic exercise. They have never been allowed to play a long innings. Pakistani national politics resembles a 20/20 match whereas civilian rule is like a five day test match. It will be relatively boring and slow. But democratic innings is needed there. Tensions will come down slowly.

If Pakistan wins the match, I’d like them to hug their Indian counterparts and thank them for a great match. Likewise, I’d like the Indian cricketers to do the same if they win the game. The message from that gesture will bring a lot of goodwill that is badly needed. Both teams have to realize that friction has to be avoided and brotherly gestures have to be displayed. They are not only playing cricket there, diplomacy between the two countries and its future relies on how they handle the whole game. This is not a war. People should go out from the game with warm feelings, no matter who wins. It can be a turning point in the relationship between the people of the two countries if the right kind of gesture is shown by both teams.

Thanks for Mr. Geelani for accepting the invitation.

Posted by KPSingh01 | Report as abusive

There is a third reason why there could be a real thaw. There could be a growing realisation in the Pakistani establishment that they have already lost to India. It may not be as obvious as in 1971, but it is conclusive and irreversible. Gen Kayani lamented a few months ago that true strategic depth is not Afghanistan but a strong economy. It’s a bit late to be fixing that. India is larger and growing faster. Anyone can now see that Pakistan is headed on the same trajectory that the USSR was on when it took on the US in an arms race. The country is on a fast track to bankruptcy.

Looking at the history of the subcontinent dispassionately, I must say the Pakistanis have been remarkably pigheaded about Kashmir, and have done nothing less than ruin their country in this hopeless quest. For all their ingenuity and dogged persistence, they have not succeeded in moving the Kashmir border an inch in 63 years, but have instead brought their country to the brink of economic and civil disaster in this time. They could have achieved so much more for themselves by cooperating with India than by being hostile. I think some realisation is finally dawning that Pakistan itself is more important than Kashmir, and if Pakistan disintegrates, then the Kashmir issue becomes academic.

So I’m sure they will start talking again, with increasing humility as time goes on. They’re pigheaded, but they’re not fools. Staring at reality for a prolonged period will surely bring about pragmatism.

Regards,
Ganesh Prasad

Posted by prasadgc | Report as abusive

It is just for showing to international community that they are putting effort for peace. Nothing is going to happen. Go back to sleep.
India thinks that Pakistan is going to fall apart in short order and then they will rearrange things to their liking.
Good Luck.
The real question is where American stands on this?

Posted by Matrixx | Report as abusive

Well, I appreciate Dr. Singh’s invitation to their counterparts in Pakistan, not in the hope of further peace process between two nations but at least they can sit and enjoy something together instead of playing blame game all the time. Both countries face threat from internal insurgency, corruption, price hike,poverty, unemployment, child labor, women exploitation and many more problems more severely than the conflicts between the two and both seems helpless against these issues. So in the wake of cricket i wish both countries forget their enmities for some time and share some lighter moments of joy.

Posted by Rockysfan | Report as abusive

One nation, One passion, Green team and a dream! Go Pakistan.

Posted by Umairpk | Report as abusive

Well, Myra may have her hopes alive regarding relations between two countries. But Indians are mostly pessimistic about the new Initiative taken by PrimeMinister Manmohan singh to invite Pakistan’s Heads (seemingly political heads) to the Cricket match.
But if you go through the weak leaks or any independent sources, it is clear that Mr.Singh is completely isolated from other Political class and Foreign policy experts regarding the detente with pakistan.
For one, There is an understanding in the security establishment in India that even after two years after mumbai attacks pakistan is still in state of denial regarding source of attacks. Even though Pak Government may offer some explainations and reassurances that it will investigate the matter. we are still waiting to see anything solid on this count.

Secondly, with large part of popular media,politicians and military generals not reconciling to the fact that attacks were perpetrated from pakistan and popular beliefs against any movement forward, it is likely that this invitation may well fail to offer anything new.

Also, India’s security establishment is cautious to talk to pakistan at a time when the country has gone even more
radical with the murder of moderate politicians and offering any unilateral concession by India will only embolden those elements and encourage them for more attacks.

Finally, It is clear that any detente with pakistan is subject of extreme hostility for some elements in pakistan that any normal relations with the country may resume the attacks on India.

Although talking to the Army is a good begginning, Author’s belief that both Intelligence agencies are equally to blame is imprudent as RAW is completely under civilian control and has limited Human Intelligence operations whereas the ISI clearly works independent of Civil or military policies which was realized by even americans to their dismay.

Posted by sensiblepatriot | Report as abusive

“India thinks that Pakistan is going to fall apart”

For one article in Indian media about potential of Pakistan falling apart, there are 10 articles in Western media, and 20 articles in Pakistani media about Pakistan potentially falling apart.

The REAL question is not “where Americans stand on this”, but WHERE PAK ARMY/ISI STAND ON THIS!

Posted by netizen | Report as abusive

It is interesting to observe a trend here. Indian posters have wished for a thaw in the relations and some kind of a miraculous change for good. Pakistanis have either expressed hopelessness or utter disregard for any warm gestures. Like vicarious enjoyment of a Hindi movie hero bashing up 20 guys, I think Pakistanis enjoy beating India through cricket matches at least. To them it seems like an extension of the conflict they have with India on all fronts. There is not even a reciprocation of goodwill. It is important for people to be sensible before we expect establishments to reflect our feelings.

Unless attitudes change, hope cannot be realized. I am hoping that through this cricket match, more diplomatic and people-people level interactions increase to restore some kind of a peace that had developed prior to the Mumbai attacks.

Americans have been warning about another set of terrorist attacks. Hope the terrorists’ attempts fail so that a new era of peace can be started in South Asia.

Posted by KPSingh01 | Report as abusive

I saw this youtube video yesterday. This is an interview of an Indian journalist who spent sometime in Islamabad. At some point during the interview, the indian journalists points directly at the emotional nature of Pakistanis where they jump to sweeping conclusions without facts. This includes even journalists. I do not know how Pak media is reacting to the upcoming match at Mohali.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uKZ18gQVS go

Posted by KPSingh01 | Report as abusive

I think this match is low investmnent/high return situation. Given India-Pakistan history, there is high probability that this will improve the relations or at worst no harm done.

“I saw this youtube video yesterday. This is an interview of an Indian journalist who spent sometime in Islamabad.”

*** :-) Long video have not seen yet. But sure Pakistan talk show host Mohtarama is HOT, with all due respect to women.

Posted by rehmat | Report as abusive

Kpsingh01:At some point during the interview, the indian journalists points directly at the emotional nature of Pakistanis where they jump to sweeping conclusions without facts.

Well not just Pakistan,but entire south Asian psyche is emotional in nature. If you look at the way Nehru had taken decisions based on his belief of people rather than institutions we would not have the problem of kashmir. Nehru believed so much in Sheikh Abdullah that he did not realize that sheikh is demanding a completely different treaty of accession for kashmir (Read Article 370) and his naive belief of chinese benignity which eventually lead to 1962 embarassment (and of course his even naive socialistic policies). The only person with real politic was Indira Gandhi (and perhaps P.v, Narsimha Rao). Even Rajiv and Vajpayee were less mortals of emotional thinking. Even when intelligence was available to India that Pak was going nuclear Morarji stubbornly refused to act naively underestimating their capabilities.
well Although I am not against any talks, they should begin with some realpolitik in mind and not on emotional offer or acceptance of inviting to cricket matches. No matter what kind of bonhomie is reached. Long standing disputes can only begin with taking the Process forward and this process should stand on reciprocity and nothing else. Trust is strengthened by reciprocity and not by friendly gestures which can only turn more sour if something goes wrong.

Also, A little pity that even People like KPSingh01 who abide by the idea of real politik start to get emotional that something positive is gonna happen by this invitation and rather forgetting for a moment, the gigantic task that the pakistani state has to battle its own monsters.

Posted by sensiblepatriot | Report as abusive

I watched this video and my take is that Nirupa is trying to be nice but not open. She was defensive thru out. She was looking for facts on river flows that Indian establishment holds. Interesting anyway.

Posted by Matrixx | Report as abusive

Sensiblepatriot:

“Well not just Pakistan,but entire south Asian psyche is emotional in nature.”

Agreed. It is this emotional nature that has led our people to betray each other and offer our heads to outsiders just to settle scores.

“If you look at the way Nehru had taken decisions based on his belief of people rather than institutions we would not have the problem of kashmir.”

No arguments there either. I am still trying to understand why Nehru back tracked on Kashmir. He was a very open minded and secular person. In the case of Kashmir, I guess his attachment to the place of his origin overwhelmed him. No one knows.

“The only person with real politic was Indira Gandhi”

She was ruthless and cold blooded. No one could read her mind. But she was leading the country towards self destruction.

“Even Rajiv and Vajpayee were less mortals of emotional thinking.”

Rajeev was highly inexperienced. He walked into the trap that Jeyawardhane had laid for him in Sri Lanka and paid the price for it at the end. His mother would not have done that. Vajpayee is a very good man at heart. But for Musharraf’s untimely venture in Kargil, he would have accomplished a lot for both countries.

“Even when intelligence was available to India that Pak was going nuclear Morarji stubbornly refused to act naively underestimating their capabilities.”

Morarji was being accused of being an American supporter and “agent” to some. He clashed with George Fernandes who
wanted Coca Cola and IBM thrown out of the country. The latter succeeded in his mission.

“well Although I am not against any talks, they should begin with some realpolitik in mind and not on emotional offer or acceptance of inviting to cricket matches.”

There is no other option available. People sometimes come forward and agree to bury all hatchets after a tragedy or a celebration. It happens a lot between family members. Long standing issues get resolved through a wedding or someone’s death that resulted due to the feud.

“Long standing disputes can only begin with taking the Process forward and this process should stand on reciprocity and nothing else. Trust is strengthened by reciprocity and not by friendly gestures which can only turn more sour if something goes wrong.”

Everything has to start somewhere. This occasion can be one.

“Also, A little pity that even People like KPSingh01 who abide by the idea of real politik start to get emotional that something positive is gonna happen by this invitation and rather forgetting for a moment, the gigantic task that the pakistani state has to battle its own monsters.”

A small key is all needed to open a large door. One does not have to break the door down. This cricket match is like a small key. One never knows how the emotions will play out after the match. If Pakistan wins, they must hold the final in Colombo instead of Mumbai because the Shiv Sena might riot. If India wins, there is a possibility of LeT terror attack in Mumbai, which can reset everything back to square one. Let us see how things go. I always look at the glass that is half full.

Posted by KPSingh01 | Report as abusive

KP

Nice video. TV Host was making lots of assumptions and was so certain about them and treating those assumptions as factual.

Matrixx

I agree the journalist Nirupa (in the video link by KP) was not open on CERTAIN issues. But I do not agree you with her being not open on river flow into Pakistan. Neither lady was having clue about river water. Pakistan lady was making assumptions floating around and Indian lady Nirupa said she does not have facts and figures so she cannot say.

My impression on water issue is that it is a vicious propaganda in Pakistan in the absence of evidence and evidence is easy to get if India is “stealing water”. News similar to “India stops water, no drinking water/Agriculture water, babies dying” is sold so easily.
Forgot the name of the Pakistani guy, who really knows water issues, says India is doing none of that.

I am wondering was there a time when India could not hold on to its share of water and water flowing downstream into Pakistan, and Pakistan taking advantage of that.

WE should use restraint in swallowing such news.

Posted by rehmat | Report as abusive

Matrixx: “She was defensive thru out. She was looking for facts on river flows that Indian establishment holds. Interesting anyway.”

She was being careful not to stir up any emotions with the hosts. She played her cards well. And she corrected the host by saying that conclusions cannot be drawn without facts on hand. That is the right thing for a journalist to do. Facts are important from both sides of the issue. She was quoting poor monsoon, which could have led to limited water supply into Pakistan. I’d like to see more interviews of this kind on TV in both countries. I’d like to see Zaid Hamid, Shiv Sena’s Bal Thackery, Advani and LeT chief Hafiz Seed on the same stage arguing with each other. That will be even better than an India-Pakistan cricket match.

Posted by KPSingh01 | Report as abusive

KP Singh said:

> I’d like to see Zaid Hamid, Shiv Sena’s Bal Thackery, Advani and LeT chief Hafiz Seed on the same stage arguing with each other. That will be even better than an India-Pakistan cricket match.

That would be “doughnut politics” of the kind seen in the US today. Everyone is on one extreme or the other, and there is no one in the middle. We need more people in the middle if any real progress is to be made.

Regards,
Ganesh Prasad

Posted by prasadgc | Report as abusive

Ganesh: “We need more people in the middle if any real progress is to be made.”

It is not for the middle folks. We must make these guys clash so that people get to see how warped they are and why they should think for themselves.

Posted by KPSingh01 | Report as abusive

Rehmat,
I like to see rainfall, river flow, storage data from GOI if they are honest. Why is it so difficult? Water is a big issue, so don’t push it under the rug.

Posted by Matrixx | Report as abusive

” I like to see rainfall, river flow, storage data from GOI if they are honest”
=

Every one has their own priorities ;-)

Global suppliers of paper for printing currency report that GOP purchases lot more currency paper than it seems to need for its own currency.

There is a press in Quetta set aside to print high quality Indian currency, flooded into India through Nepal, Bangaldesh and Gulf. GOI is interested in knowing more details :-)

GOI is also interested in the whereabouts of terrorists living in Karachi wanted for murdering unarmed civilians in India who are living under ISI protection.

GOI has enough data, but still seeks more data on flow at terrorist training camps. Data, Data, Data…every one needs data:-)

Posted by netizen | Report as abusive

Matrixx

Sure, Water is a sensitive matter–within a country (Indian states have issues and so does Pakistan) or between countries.

I bet the data you are asking is with Pakistan already. Only technical experts from India and Pakistan know the issue. Politicians give statements for gullible public and media, which does not let the truth come out.

Foreign Office spokesman Abdul Basit said India is not honoring the Indus water treaty. In the past, Indus Water Committee Commissioner Syed Jamaat Ali Shah said India is not violating the treaty (read interview in the HIndu; news in Dawn is inaccessible now). here is the link:

http://www.thehindu.com/opinion/intervie w/article443956.ece

Between Basit and Shah, I will pick Shah as trustworthy source on water issues.

Shah gave that comment in June 2010 and was removed from his post later that year. see here:

http://www.pakistantoday.com.pk/pakistan -news/National/15-Dec-2010/Indus-Water-C ommissioner-removed

I do not know the reason why. But he has been in this post for 17yrs. I can connect the dots, cautiously.

Posted by rehmat | Report as abusive

There is nothing unusual about the positions of India on the Indus water treaty. With expanding populations, there is water scarcity everywhere. There are disputes within Pakistan, within India between upper riparian and lower riparian disputants.

India has been following the spirit of Indus Water Treaty.

This is not the case with Pakistan. With tail between his legs ZA Bhutto signed the following in 1971:

{{{{(ii) That the two countries are resolved to settle their differences by peaceful means through bilateral negotiations or by any other peaceful means mutually agreed upon between them. Pending the final settlement of any of the problems between the two countries, neither side shall unilaterally alter the situation and both shall prevent the organization, assistance of encouragement of any acts detrimental to the maintenance of peaceful and harmonious relations; }}}}

He/Pakistan kept their word. So it is kind of silly to talk about India violating treaty, etc.

Posted by netizen | Report as abusive

Guys hold one minute. We are talking about Nirupa, you top journalist in Islamabad. You should educate her on one of the major issues of interest in Islamabad. She is the one who needs facts but who is going to give her facts?

Currency paper prices or quantity is not related to issues at hand. Give her the data any way.

Terrorism is not related to issues at hand. Give her the data any way.

Internal water distribution is not related to issues at hand. Give her the data any way.

So what were we talking about???

Posted by Matrixx | Report as abusive

According to the Indus water treaty, India gets 20% of the water and Pakistan gets 80%. I may be a bit naive here, but wouldn’t 50-50 be a fairer split? Why is it Pakistan that is complaining and not India?

Regards,
Ganesh Prasad

Posted by prasadgc | Report as abusive

@Ganesh
“Why is it Pakistan that is complaining and not India?”

Because we have had too many emotional fools heading PMO in India. And this latest act of inviting a lameduck puppet PM of Pakistan by our own lameduck puppet Indian PM is just hilarious. What is Singh trying to achieve here. Is inviting Gilani going to solve anything? He cannot resolve any issues in 10 years for he is just a puppet and dishes out such emotional acts. This cricket encounter will lead to more trouble than peace if Pakistan loses the match. Their interior minister is already suspicious of their players involved in fixing and that is supposed to boost morale of their team…huh?? There will be artillery firing on border if pakistan loses for that has been the trend, so can Gilani stop that response this time?? If not then what’s the use of inviting him?? He is not the one who has any say in Pakistan.

Posted by 007XXX | Report as abusive

Here is an excellent article on real-politic impacting India and Pakistan. I like Prasad and Singh to read it and comment on it ( take it as a complement ).

http://www.eurasiareview.com/pakistans-g eopolitical-dilema-china-or-us-viewpoint -from-pakistan-analysis-22032011/#commen t-86852

I’ll be adding my extension and observation in a day or so.

Posted by Matrixx | Report as abusive

Although I was not invited to comment, I will post it any way :-)

Khan A. Sufyan is a Lahore-based ISI analyst. His column in Eurasia review on “view point” of Pakistan regurgitates and rehashes the now well known, worn out delusions of Pakistan-the security state. PA/ISI grandiose delusions on “Pak-China axis ” will mean diddly-squat since Pakistan’s economic stature, and internal cohesion are in tatters.

This is not some sort of temporary set back for Pakistan. “alliance” with China will not lead to a grandiose “pak-china axis” as the ISI analyst opines…..I mean deludes….

Rather the “axis” will resemble the “China-North Korea” axis.

Posted by netizen | Report as abusive

Matrixx: “I like Prasad and Singh to read it and comment on it ( take it as a complement ).”

The article sounds as though someone like Umair wrote it. I do not see anything new in it. It is the same flour that has been ground over and over again – India surrounding Pakistan, India being unable to exert its dominance over Pakistan, US is clueless, China is the greatest ally of all etc. I am surprised he did not bring in India’s thousand consulates in Afghanistan, TTP being supported by RAW, Kashmir, Indus water etc. May be when he runs out of ideas, he would mix these old spice into the grinder and churn out yet another article.

There is nothing new in it absolutely. Basically it gives the impression of Pakistanis wanting India and the US to look like losers, while Pakistan coming out of all issues without getting harmed and China carrying Pakistan off in its high horse. We know and have read these useless lamentations from various Pakistani authors and people.

However, falling into China’s hands is dangerous. Any country that China brings under its influence resembles Burma or North Korea. China did not even lift a little finger to help Japan during the recent disaster. If it really wants to be a world power and a leader at that, it needs to take charitable actions. Only then the world will look up to China. If refugees are given an option to choose between China and the US, they will prefer the US without a question. For that matter, if they are offered to choose between China and India, they would still opt for India. That is the image China created about itself. Any country cozying up with China will be trampled soon if not sooner.
And China is where it is not because of its own innovation or creativity. It is there because of the huge American market that supported it and sustained. Without American help, China would never have made it to where it is. Normal nations would have a sense of gratitude. But Chinese have shown their true colors – they take and only take. They do not give. When they give, it is for taking more. Remember this fact.

Posted by KPSingh01 | Report as abusive

[...] still can be done.  An Indian reader in a comment on a companion blog saw the match as an opportunity to renew ties and bury the rancour of the recent past. “ If [...]

Matrixx said:

> I like Prasad and Singh to read it and comment on it ( take it as a complement ).

Thanks for the compliment. I agree with the main contextual statement made by Khan Sufyan in his article:

“Pakistan therefore sits at the cross-roads of strategic interests of major world powers – an unenviable predicament or an enviable opportunity!”

I think this is a question on which the jury is still out. The next few years will tell whether Pakistan is able to walk this tightrope to its own benefit. Certainly the Raymond Davis episode has shown that Pakistan holds a few cards of its own when dealing with a superpower, but one cannot be too complacent. Large and powerful countries have bigger margins of error, so the situation could be very different over the long term.

The sections on India are full of wishful thinking, I’m afraid. Surely if the pivotal role that Pakistan has is such a strategic advantage, shouldn’t India have an even bigger one? After all, it has been discussed by geopolitical strategists for many years that India holds the balance of power between the Core Powers (Russia, China and Iran) and the Peripheral Powers (the West). By playing them off against each other, India can gain tremendous advantages. There is no recognition of these parallels in this article, which indicates bias. This may be understandable in an average Pakistani blogger or private citizen, but an analyst must at least consider and address such obvious points.

I’m also surprised that although the author comes close to recognising the Chinese strategy, he doesn’t quite get its negative implications for Pakistan. Yes, the Chinese are developing the Western part of their country and trying to bring prosperity to the 300 million people who live in that region. This much the author recognises. But he remains blind to what is happening under his very nose, so to speak. China treats Pakistan as just the host country for the Karakoram-Gwadar expressway which is intended to get Chinese goods to the Arabian sea in the quickest and most economical manner possible, whence they can be shipped worldwide. Along the way, Chinese goods are hollowing out the local Pakistani industry, as can be seen from the balance of trade deficit that Pakistan has. If the relationship with China was benefiting Pakistan, then this should have been a surplus. I’m not talking about raw materials. Does China encourage Pakistani industry by importing finished goods of any kind? Pakistan enjoys a balance of trade surplus with the US and Europe and is seeking to deepen that advantage given the flood crisis of last year. The Chinese have shown no equivalent support, which is why the Pakistani blind spot towards that country is so surprising.

I believe China will destroy whatever is left of Pakistan’s industry by flooding the economy with cheaper goods. It’s only distrust that prevents Pakistan from aligning its economy with a country (India) that can deliver genuine benefit to both economies. It’s a real pity. I have no idea how long this blind spot will last.

Ah well, history has a way of playing itself out, and we will be able to verify the perspicacity of such articles in a few years.

Regards,
Ganesh Prasad

Posted by prasadgc | Report as abusive

Some of the Key Points in the Article pointed by matrix which I would put below and the other points the author seemed to miss out.

1.Also, the Americans soon realized Indian inability to replace Pakistan’s strategic influence in its backyard. This also solidified the fact that the geo-politically influenced strategic pivot provided by Pakistan could not and would not be replaced by India, no matter how powerful India may be”- the Author is forcibly putting a point saying India cannot replace Pakistan, no matter what the Author has understood, The point is Indians cannot replace Pakistani’s for two reasons. Firstly, India cannot stoop too low to become a lackey of US, When the Americans say we cannot fill the place of Pakistani’s it effectively also means that Americans cannot expect India to act as a complete client state.

secondly, If America cannot itself fight a raging perpetual insurgency eminating from pakistan and directed at American propped by Afghanistan with almost no political and democratic institutions. How can India do that and no dishonour in accepting that.
But the Question is, has pakistan gained anything by becoming an unwilling ally in this war. I’ve seen pakistanis naively pointing it out the billion dollars of aid that swept their coffers, but forgot the socio-political cost the war has imposed on the pakistani society.
And just like the African states drugged to the foreign aid becoming a disincentive in strengthening local political institutions,economy and foreign relations, one wonders whether the cost being paid by pakistani state for this “strategic victory” over india is worth.

2.”Many believe that India is a regional power, yet they fail to realize the fact that its regional prowess can only be exercised against nations as small and vulnerable as Nepal, Bhutan, Sri Lanka, Maldives and Bangladesh”.-one wonders whether author still lives in colonial era where states were coerced by foreign powers.
He conveniently ties bangladesh to srilanka and calls it a small state ignoring bangladesh is almost as big as pakistan in population. The Author does not realize that these neighbouring states are friendly towards India because of their own self interests and not for any kindness or fear.
Also, there was a time when Srilanka and Bangladesh were hostile to India and after the realization of their wrong policies, they have corrected their course. Nepal will follow suit if it has its national interests in mind.

3.India may become a strong economic power and be able to generate fair bit of economic influence in all those countries which are its trading partners and may also be able to exercise fair bit of negativity against Pakistan and China in this domain. However, it’s overall power projection and generation of influence in the key regions would still remain limited unless it drastically improves relations with both Pakistan and China. It also highlights the importance of strategic nature of Pak-China relationship – Just a little analysis shows that just as China used North Korea for Geo stragetic entanglement (or straitjacket)of South Korea and Japan. It used the pakistan for the same purpose and the underlying compulsion for both the client states of China are same; their interminable hatred of others.

If there is any strategic region lost by India, it is the northern areas which geographically connected Afghanistan and India knows there is no point in crying for spilled milk. Central Asian states do know that Big powers are competing for their oil and will never allow a singly hegemon to control all their oil and hence their fate. This is the most significant point the author has missed in his analysis. It is true pakistan has influence in this region but the influence is disruptive in nature and just as bangladesh,srilanka and maldives realized they will realize the gameplan of pakistani state too. I believe the market of 1.5 billion (our population likely be in 2 decades) for their resource is too mouth watering to lose out.
In the early nineties Pakistan’s economy was a fifth of the Indian economy and because of its “strategic victories” over india it has fallen to 1/7 th in 2008 and will fall to 10th in the next fiscal year. I wish pakistan more such “strategic victories”.

Posted by sensiblepatriot | Report as abusive

To all people of goodwill:
As promised, here is my take on Khan a Sufyan article:

http://www.eurasiareview.com/pakistans-g eopolitical-dilema-china-or-us-viewpoint -from-pakistan-analysis-22032011/#commen t-86852

It is a good review of American project for South-central Asia and it has been works since early ninties after the demise of Soviet Union. It was the time for “New world order”, “New American century” and “Full spectrum dominance”. There were other grand concepts as to how world should be shaped under American leadership and guidance. There was the European Union and recasting NATO as global security organization. The alliance for democracy and color revolutions had their day in the sun. Then there was 911 and the application of shock and awe. Here we are twenty years later, properly awed; perhaps ready to take stock world we live in.
We live in a world where international law is in shambles, the concept of state as agreed in treaty of Westphalia is no more, United Nations is laughing stock of the world, human rights have more acceptance so is the case with torture. Technology and communication are the bright spots helping the masses. Coming back to American project, it is quite simple in fact. It is to have corporate state structure like it was built in Japan and very successfully. It is being done in China, as we speak. If it is repeated in other countries, they can also share the prosperity with their people. This is what American leadership provides and also assures full spectrum dominance. What is your problem? Japanese mushroom clouds, any one!
Countries are states no more, they are markets and resources. If you have good products, consumers will break you door to get it. The resources are labor and commodities. It is natural commodities that are in greater demand. Just look at wages against prices of natural commodities. So, nobody wants to take over highly populated countries, just only those with natural resources.
In South Asia, India has been blocked by Pakistan and then America has blocked Pakistan from free access to energy resources, and that flow is allowed to West only. Both countries need significant amount of energy for their economic growth. There was the solution of Nuclear energy but after Fukushima it is doubtful proposition for densely populated countries.
Despite all the issues between India and Pakistan, here is an issue where they should tell NATO to unblock the flows of energy to the area. Does India have the guts? This is my proposal to both sides and even half brains could understand.

All comments are welcome.

Is there a way to watch India-Pakistan match on internet?

Posted by Matrixx | Report as abusive

Matrixx,

I will extend what you said. The West’s reputation lies in tatters. They are no longer a referee (if they ever were). They are a player like everyone else, with equally soiled hands. Much as they would like to project themselves as adults maintaining order in the playground, they’re just bigger kids often acting like bullies.

With the simultaneous drop in both Western moral standing and their relative economic strength, the world has entered a new period of uncertainty and instability. Not that this is a bad thing. Smaller players are jostling for space and influence. Alliances are shifting. The world will be a different place by 2020.

Pakistan is playing the role of spoiler. Their strength lies in their ability to deny what others seek unless they are appeased. This is a dangerous role to play, as any loss of influence will translate swiftly into retribution. In this respect, they are vulnerable to tipping points that arise from gradual and imperceptible trends, such as the increasing importance of India to China, or the gradual hardening in the US attitude. Some shocks could be in store when those tipping points are crossed.

China is still largely conservative. Their problem is that the world wants to ride on the back of their economic rise and therefore has a stake in it, but whenever they flex their growing muscle, the rest of the world unites against them. They are still working out their strategy to minimise opposition to their rise.

India has not yet learned to use its power. The country is still timidly tiptoeing its way around old power structures, unwilling to push aside the more rotting ones to make space for itself. But the confidence of the new generation of Indians will soon translate into bolder state action as demographic change sweeps through all the organs of the state.

Russia and Iran are wild cards. Russia is getting richer, but its governance is awful and alcoholism has ravaged the potential of its people. Iran has many friends but also many enemies. If their green revolution reboots and succeeds in its second try, they could be a natural ally of India and help to form a Russia-Iran-India triumvirate. The three states do not have any natural conflict of interests. It’s only Iran’s current hardline Islamist ideology that keeps it an outcast. That could change soon.

All in all, it is an interesting time.

Regards,
Ganesh Prasad

Posted by prasadgc | Report as abusive

“Pakistan is playing the role of spoiler. Their strength lies in their ability to deny what others seek unless they are appeased.”
Posted by prasadgc
==
Actually it goes beyond that when you think about it. When a country conducts itself like a suicide bomber, obviously the opposing party will have very little leverage. This is what they mean, when they say India has not been able to exert its influence over Pakistan.

A normal, non-ideological country will worry about trade benefits, economic consequences of perpetual confrontation against a larger neighbor. Not so in the case of the militant security state where they feel they are “blocking” India’s economic growth.

90% of India’s interest on Pakistan is related to how to protect, prevent against terrorism, and tackling it, attempting to discourage Pakistan without hampering economic growth inside India. Other issues are trivial, peripheral.

Pakistan’s ability to block a land route to C.Asia is an inconvenience, but this is not as much of a big deal, as paks would like to believe and would like Indians to believe. Developing Chabahar port in Iran is one solution.

Posted by netizen | Report as abusive

netizen: “Actually it goes beyond that when you think about it. When a country conducts itself like a suicide bomber, obviously the opposing party will have very little leverage. This is what they mean, when they say India has not been able to exert its influence over Pakistan.”

Spot on. I think this kind of attitude arises from false pride and the inability to swallow it. They have a lot of talented and intelligent people. But working together is a problem. Only a common enemy and the pride associated with looking down upon that enemy unites them. And it gets reflected in all walks of life, including cricket. Left to themselves they fight each other and the team just falls apart more often than achieve anything. As soon as India is in the picture, something unites them like iron files by a magnet. One can feel that burning sensation arising from them. Uniting by relying on a common enemy is like steroid. It weakens the system much faster. If they had a common goal of progress instead of an enemy, they would have done very well. In the case of India, we are all not all that united either. But we have a common goal instead of relying on a common enemy. This is something they do not see. They see us reflecting their attitude without realizing that we do not look at them that way. For us, their unnecessary paranoia and hindrance is an irritant more than anything else. If they had left us alone after they got their country, we wouldn’t even think about them. But they need an enemy to keep their country going and it has taken them to where they are now.

Posted by KPSingh01 | Report as abusive

KPSingh01:”Only a common enemy and the pride associated with looking down upon that enemy unites them”.

I believe the definition of “enemy” for Pakistani state (the politico-military-mullah establishment) is more obscure than anything we have seen.

For a section of society which is whole lot conservative (religious mullahs), the anger towards India may be because they see us as Infidels. But if this is the sole theological hatred then that should also push their boundary of hatred to china too, who are offcially atheists (and with atheist culture thoroughly embedded). There cannot be belief that India is more infidel and china is a lesser infide, well Infidel is an Infidel right!

For a section of society which forms the basic political class,the anger towards India was because in their perception we treat the minorities in a demeaning way. But the case is same for all countries(including its own) and more so with china which represses the uighur people. May be these guys think our numbers of repressed minorities are larger in our case, but have they missed the point that Chinese Xinjiang province is bigger than our kashmir in size and population (or the tears are only for land grab).

For a section of society which forms the miltary complex of Pakistan who understand the strategic issues better, Have they realized that US,its Afghan insurgency into pakistan and extreme dependence on chinese has undermined their country more than India.

Thinking of the above scenarios I was at loss to understand why this hatred is perpetuated by the state and I realize that Pakistani state is an Insecure state which needs the bogey of some enemy to keep the Country united. The Question is if the relations between two nations would become better tomorrow (or whenever it will be). Wont the same political class with feudalistic roots be questioned by the masses for serious governance deficit?

Wont the military which cannibalised most of states resouces be questioned by the masses for serious foreign policy and strategic blunders?

Wont the religious mullahs with perverted and regressive ideas be questioned by the masses for perverting religion,defaming their people and destroying their social lives?
(I did not add schizophrenic media which is an effect of exiting faultlines)

And without taking the above groups into confidence, will the relations improve? and with India’s own hawks (chidambaram was being brought to the table with kicking and dragging his feet) the Prime Minister had begun this detente with very limited political capital. I really hope for a miracle for it to succeed.

Posted by sensiblepatriot | Report as abusive

An excellent analysis by Myra! A very good feel too at this juncture. Pakistan is well advised to keep her diplomcy more in tune now with India, Russia, China,Brazil and Germany from Europe(if it must) and not with the USA, France and UK, who have taken the first step towards the third world war intheir brutal military attack on Libya. We are now in the new time zone of Geo strategic changes when the industry need for oil and renewal energy is likely to increase rapidly. W are witnessing the fall of the great industrial country, and the Arabian people struggle for dignity which was denied themby their dictator leaders with support of the successive American and European Govts over the past several decades and today these powrs want to direct these movements simply to deny the supply of oil to China and perhaps India and have even appointed an oil agent for the libyan oil or any future oil country where the people’s revolution becomes violent.

Indian Govt. have chosen the neutrality and it is time Pakistan follow the same to avoid libyan like disaster in its country. You have a passionless kenyan technocrat sitting in the USA and war mongers from the right occupying the European Govts.

I know from this blog that both Indians(most citizens of Western countries) and Pakistans have very constrained compassion towards each others misfortunes ut perhaps this is the time that the Govts should keep cool and in my view Pakistan Govt. can learn a lot from the current Indian Govt. diplomacy!

Rex Minor

Posted by pakistan | Report as abusive

The beginning has to involve the US. The US must make aid to Pakistan contingent on it stopping its training and funding of terrorists.

Posted by barrykumar | Report as abusive

This cricket match clearly shows Pakistan’s potential. With so many road blocks and issues in their cricket, they are still producing one of the finest cricketers in the world. Imagine if this potential was turned in the direction of constructive development. They have already demonstrated that they can make nukes with almost no infrastructure to make even bicycles. Unfortunately all potential is being wasted towards wrong things. I think Pakistan will win this game, the way it is going and even if they lose, it will be a very close one. Pakistan badly needs a positive result from this match to bring back its national confidence. I hope they build from there on and choose the right path. There should be a clear understanding at that point that India is not the enemy anymore. I’d like relationship to build from here so that we all can move on with our lives and goals.

Posted by KPSingh01 | Report as abusive

I think Pakistan will win this game
=

Oh well India just won :-)

“There should be a clear understanding at that point that India is not the enemy anymore.”
=
Easier said than done. The entire edifice is based on victimhood, confrontation and falsehoods.

The option of peaceful co-existence has always been available to Pakistan. It has never been possible. Many Indians (unfortunately) say and write things (including here) that there are “hawks” in Inda also and that’s why there is no peace.

The truth is Indian actions have always been reactive towards Pakistan. Before 1971, PA army had launched war twice and was financing, and etending logistic support to militant groups from erstwhile E Pakistan. Each time hoping there will be a change of heart/course on the other side.

Posted by netizen | Report as abusive

The game just got over. India has won. However, I salute the Pakistan team for making this match worthy of a memorable win. I wish India and Pakistan met in the final instead of the semi final. May be next time.

I now want goodwill to start from here on the diplomatic front.

Posted by KPSingh01 | Report as abusive

Interesting posts but some incorrect and stereotypical conclusions about our motivations. Pakistanis don’t hate India or Indians. The hostilities are due to Kashmir. There is a feeling of great sense of injustice at Pakistan being deprived of Kashmir vis-a-vis other princely states. There is a feeling of anger at the brutal subjugation of ‘our people’ brothers and sisters in Kashmir. Finally, there is a feeling of helplessness about not being able to do anything about it militarily or politically.

As you can imagine, those are 3 very powerful emotions and the basis for our animosity towards the republic of india. I certainly don’t expect you to agree with these sentiments but these are undoubtedly the core drivers of Pakistani actions.

There is to my knowledge no other basis i.e. “bogey, pan-islamic-delusions, land-grab, kaffiricide, state sponsored hate-literature, existentialist threat” etc.

Posted by shoaibo | Report as abusive

“There is a feeling of anger at the brutal subjugation of ‘our people’ brothers and sisters in Kashmir. Finally, there is a feeling of helplessness about not being able to do anything about it militarily or politically.”

Separation of East Pakistan should be closer in memory than Kashmir, which predates it. If Pakistan is able to accept Bangladesh, I do not understand why it cannot accept the status quo in Kashmir. And it is Pakistan that did not respect the UN resolution of 1948, which required all Pakistani military and non-military personnel to be evicted from all of Kashmir as a pre-condition before the plebiscite. Pakistan refused and has held Azad Kashmir. Six decades have gone by and Kashmir seems to be a simple excuse for Pakistan’s governing bodies to divert public attention away from their lack of efforts to develop the nation.

As far “brothers and sisters” being subjugated, it is not as bad as being projected. If people riot and throw stones, tear gas, batons and bullets are the norm everywhere. And many of these riots seem to be staged and controlled by vested groups in Pakistan.

If you are so much shedding tears about your brothers and sisters in Kashmir, you must do the same for the brothers and sisters in Balochistan which your military and ISI are brutally holding under siege. See the recent reference here:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/mar  /29/balochistan-pakistans-secret-dirty- war

No one is an angel. Pot cannot call the kettle black. So let us move on. I am hopeful that Geelani and Manmohan Singh will build a new future through diplomatic efforts that will eventually help Kashmiris.

Posted by KPSingh01 | Report as abusive

This (cricket diplomacy) could bring about goodwill & cooperation between India & Pakistan. I already see some postive reciprocation by Pakistan like inviting Indian officials investigating Mumbai attacks to visit Pakistan & releasing some Indian prisoners. I hope both countries can build on this initiative.

Congrats to India for winning the game. It was the first live cricket game that I saw in more than a decade & thoroughly enjoyed it. Pakistanis must be disapppointed but their team did well under the circumstances AND don’t forget that it’s just a game.

Posted by Mortal1 | Report as abusive

KP Singh,

My response was to SensiblePatriot’s assumptions about pakistan’s belligerent posture towards India. I do agree with the Indians on the impact of the Indo-centric approach but not the presumed root causes.

I care deeply for Baluchis and all the misgoverned people of my country. However, in the context of our discussion, Balochistan is not similar to Kashmir as a international, political or territorial dispute. It is not similar in the magnitude or continuity or severity of violence, suppression, subjugation. You have given one link, I could give you a thousand reports from just amnesty international. Still, I absolutely condemn our actions in Baluchistan as I think all Pakistanis should.

I thought the theory of Kashmiri’s liberation struggle is staged by ISI was discredited even by Indian scholars. btw, Kashmiri liberation struggle predates the creation of Pak/Ind.

While I genuinely commend your desire for peace, the proposal to build a new future by pretending core issues are ‘so last year’ is wishful at best. A powerful neighbor dictating its terms for peace is not diplomacy; it is hegemony.

I suspect you think our concern for Kashmiris is insincere. Since you are already cognizant of my thoughts, my words will only be a waste of your valuable time.

Posted by shoaibo | Report as abusive

@shoaibo

Assuming that your concern for Kahmiris is genuine, what do you think about the fact that some credible polls have concluded that Kashmiris are averse to being a part of Pakistan at least as much as they are, to being a part of India (if not more)? Under such circumstances would you support independence of Kashmir from both India & Pakistan (with Pakistan giving up AJK & GB)?

Posted by Mortal1 | Report as abusive

Rex,

What are “constrained compassions”?

Posted by shoaibo | Report as abusive

Shoaibo,

Thanks very much for your calm and analytical listing of the roots of the problem as seen from the Pakistani side.

> The hostilities are due to Kashmir. [1] There is a feeling of great sense of injustice at Pakistan being deprived of Kashmir vis-a-vis other princely states. [2] There is a feeling of anger at the brutal subjugation of ‘our people’ brothers and sisters in Kashmir. [3] Finally, there is a feeling of helplessness about not being able to do anything about it militarily or politically.

This is probably one of the best enunciations of the Pakistani viewpoint.

My personal belief is that in 1947, Pakistan did have a prima facie case for Kashmir because of the opposite parallels to Junagadh and Hyderabad. However, two factors have led to the current impasse – military action by Pakistan in 47-48, and a refusal to withdraw from PoK, which was a pre-condition to holding a UN-conducted plebiscite. I still think if Pakistan had chosen the path of peace and protested the Kashmir case without resort to violence, the issue may have been settled within a decade, in the fifties itself. Ten years may seem a long time, but now we have seen 63 years go by without a solution in sight. A Gandhi-style agitation would have done more for the Pakistani cause than all the wars and belligerence. After all, Indian civil society has been fairly reasonable. Before the Mumbai 2008 attack, we had even begun to see articles by prominent Indian journalists and opinion-makers (not just Arundhati Roy but people like Swaminathan Aiyer, Jug Suraiya and Vir Sanghvi) arguing for “letting Kashmir go”. Then the Mumbai attack happened and Indian attitudes hardened, perhaps irrevocably. My favourite analogy here is the bet between the Sun and the Wind. The Wind tried hard to blow a man’s jacket off, but he only held on tighter. But when the Sun shone and it became warm, the man took off his jacket by himself. Pakistan followed a very counterproductive strategy to the point that Indian attitudes have hardened a very great deal. After Mumbai 2008, very many Indians would now be averse to making any concessions to Pakistan on Kashmir. It would be seen as succumbing to terrorist blackmail. If Pakistan had been a friendly country throughout and never initiated any hostilities, then Indian civil society would have accepted a transfer of Kashmir much more readily, and a long time ago. Today, the best that we can hope for is a freezing of the LoC as the border. It is the only realistic solution, and Pakistanis will have to accept that. Perhaps after a few decades of peace, the border will become irrelevant, as PM Manmohan Singh hopes, and then we will have some semblance of a united Kashmir and both countries more or less satisfied. But today, this is where we are, unfortunately. In my opinion, the situation is of Pakistan’s making, because the same cause could have been pursued very differently with very different results.

To me, the moral of the story is that a smaller player must not resort to violence even in a just cause, as they just ruin their chances.

> As you can imagine, those are 3 very powerful emotions and the basis for our animosity towards the republic of india. I certainly don’t expect you to agree with these sentiments but these are undoubtedly the core drivers of Pakistani actions.

> There is to my knowledge no other basis i.e. “bogey, pan-islamic-delusions, land-grab, kaffiricide, state sponsored hate-literature, existentialist threat” etc.

I do have one question here, which is whether the solution to the Kashmir problem will make the India-Pakistan relationship hunky-dory, or whether another problem will then take its place due to some deeper issues we have not considered. Many analysts have talked about the need for identity on the part of Pakistan, and the consequent striving to be the “un-India”. Is this true, and will this quest for a separate identity continue to be a barrier to good relations? I have also asked here before about fear of India’s cultural and economic domination (as opposed to a military threat), but no Pakistani has answered me. These may be something you need to think about as well.

Regards,
Ganesh Prasad

Posted by prasadgc | Report as abusive

There is to my knowledge no other basis i.e. “bogey, pan-islamic-delusions, land-grab, kaffiricide, state sponsored hate-literature, existentialist threat” etcPosted by shoaibo

==

We can discuss differences of opinions, differences in interpretation of history and so on. But blatant lies as in this write up should be pointed out.

There are many lies written by shoaibo, but let’s take one of them: “There is no hate sponsored hate literature”.

When you have ensured ethnic cleansing of Hindus in Pakistan, and gurantee 3rd class citizenship to minorities, what is the need for “educating” with “pakistan studies” year after year in school and in college about evils of Hindu society, other than to indulge in “state sponsored hate literature”?

http://www.sdpi.org/whats_new/reporton/S tate%20of%20Curr&TextBooks.pdf

The class 4 text book states: The religion of the Hindus did not teach them good things — Hindus did not respect women…
Another book tells the students: Hindus worship in temples which are very narrow and dark places, where they worship idols. Only one person can enter the temple at a time.

For another, the Hindus as a monolith were always cunning, scheming, and conspiring to deprive the Muslims of their due rights.. The Hindus always desired to crush the Muslims as a nation. Several attempts were made by the Hindus to erase the Muslim culture and civilization

Posted by netizen | Report as abusive

Shoaibo,

A further complication is that the Kashmir issue started off as a territorial dispute between India and Pakistan, but along the way, as there has been more attention paid to the aspirations of the Kashmiris themselves, an independent Kashmir has become a third option, much to the discomfort of the two original parties to the dispute. The plebsicite according to the original UN resolution does not include the option of independence, which many today would say is a fatal flaw in it, even if that plebiscite were to be held. [According to what I have read, it was Pakistan that lobbied the UN to have the independence clause removed from the plebiscite resolution.]

Yet another complication is the ethnic cleansing of the Kashmiri Pundits, which will skew the results of any plebiscite to India’s disadvantage, since the Pundits would likely vote for India.

Finally, there is the question of whether (on the Indian side) Jammu and Ladakh should have their own independent plebiscites and be allowed to choose their destiny independently of the Kashmir Valley. There are good humanitarian arguments for this, and the recent plight of religious minorities in Pakistan strengthens these arguments. In such a case, the most that Pakistan can hope to gain from India is the Kashmir Valley. From India’s perspective, if this will not satisfy many in Pakistan and hostilities will only continue, then the sacrifice of territory will not be worth it, so why even bother?

It is therefore a very complicated situation. However, if we are able to talk about the issue and all its confronting aspects without calling each other names, we may one day get somewhere.

Regards,
Ganesh Prasad

Posted by prasadgc | Report as abusive

Netizen,

I suggest you don’t go on the attack immediately by calling Shoaibo a liar, even if you disagree with what he said. It spoils the atmosphere unnecessarily, and this has been a constant problem on this blog and elsewhere. He has been courteous and as Indians, we should respond in good faith. We can drive a strong argument without personal attacks.

Regards,
Ganesh Prasad

Posted by prasadgc | Report as abusive

A genuine Pakistani?? Every self-respecting Indian knows this is an oxymoron.

I think you are talking about the Chatham Poll. This poll had a big impact on my thinking personally. It seems to me that by offering Pakistan, India or INDEPENDENCE up as options, Pakistan’s ‘score’ is impacted much more than India’s. I am suggesting that if India and Pakistan were the only options, majority of the Kashmir votes would go in Pakistan’s favor. You may ask for evidence and I can’t give you a better barometer than the number of flags being waved in Muzzafarabad and Srinagar during the semi-final today.

Nevertheless, I would be lying to you if I said the results did not sting a little. I feel a sense of abandonment by the Kashmiris at a time of difficulty and war. Does one leave their family when they are sick or injured? I realize that I am being unfair to Kashmiris who have watched Pakistan mismanage its affairs for decades, who have given over 100,000 fathers and sons, helplessly watched 10,000 of their sisters, mothers and in some cases grandmothers ravaged by Indian forces. Relatively speaking, we Pakistanis have sacrificed very little in comparison.

I do think that Indians are trying to extract too much capital from these polls. The better question is what did Indians learn from the polls? Is the freedom struggle still “not indigenous”? Is Kashmir still an “integral part of India”? Why is a wealthy, prosperous and shining superpower not a better option than a rudderless pakistan or even independence for Kashmiris?

I would be open to a plebiscite so long as it is administered by the UN and I would respect their decision.

Posted by shoaibo | Report as abusive

We can discuss differences of opinions, differences in interpretation of history and so on. But blatant lies as in this write up should be pointed out.

There are many lies written by shoaibo, but let’s take one of them: “There is no hate sponsored hate literature”.

….. You prepare your comments in your head before you read. I said hostility is due to Kashmir NOT literature. I did not suggest that there is not anti-Indian literature in pak. Understand ???? If not, please don’t respond to me. I forfeit all arguments to you in advance so there is no need to respond to me. You “win”.

Posted by shoaibo | Report as abusive

There are many lies written by shoaibo, but let’s take one of them:

“There is no hate sponsored hate literature”.

….. When you accuse others of lying on forums such as this one, you may consider not manufacturing a quote. You see, a written record is available for all to see. It would also advance your cause if the fabricated quote was coherent giving you some remnant of credibility.

Posted by shoaibo | Report as abusive

….. You prepare your comments in your head before you read. I said hostility is due to Kashmir NOT literature.

==Posted by shoaibo

Ok, if I understand correctly your position is hostility is due to Kashmir, not due to hate literature itself.

Further, as I understand you do admit to having state sponsored hate literature in Pakistan. Our understanding is you study and get tested on evils of Hindus year after year upto college level.

Not clear how this distinction makes a big difference. When you have very few hindus, tiny minority living in the fringes, what is the purpose of instilling such hateful education?

Posted by netizen | Report as abusive

Netizen,
I suggest you don’t go on the attack immediately by calling Shoaibo a liar
Posted by prasadgc
==

I thought he said there is no state sponsored hate literature in Pakistan which would in fact be a lie. If I understand correctly he has clarified he did not say that. I stand corrected.

Posted by netizen | Report as abusive

shoaibo: “Is the freedom struggle still “not indigenous”? Is Kashmir still an “integral part of India”? Why is a wealthy, prosperous and shining superpower not a better option than a rudderless pakistan or even independence for Kashmiris?”

In today’s context, for Indians, letting states or regions divide on the basis of religion, ethnicity, language etc are anachronistic and useless exercises. They lead to no one’s benefit. We understand what has happened in Kashmir. After 1989, Pakistan launched its proxy war insurgency into Kashmir, based on its experiences in the war against the Soviets. India had no choice but to move its troops and other security forces into the state to counter this insurgency. People became victims in the cross fire. And that was the intent – to make the people feel trapped and deflect their built up frustration against the establishment. Protests can only be carried out against establishments. No one can act against criminals. It was simply Operation Gibraltor II with lessons learned from the botched attempt in 1965. This time it worked. Just like the American led coalition in Afghanistan is now painted as an occupying military, Indian counter insurgency units have been branded similarly. And it takes a generation or two to build up long term distaste and hate. The Kashmiri Muslim youth have grown up watching Indian military, curfews and blockades. And the Indian military has been drawn in there and held there by launching insurgency offensives. It has taken two decades to change the people’s hearts against India. And now Pakistan has to do nothing. Kashmir Muslim youth will now carry on the baton in Pakistan’s favor. And India knows this and therefore has decided to wait it out. One never knows what will happen to Pakistan itself. Or one never knows who will gain control of Pakistan. If fundamentalists gain, India will have to bring the troops back into Kashmir. Therefore we see no use pulling them out of there. Things have not settled down yet. So we are waiting.

Kashmiris might want to be independent. But they are not going to be allowed to be so by all the surrounding powers – Pakistan, China and India. If one goes, the other one takes. We are playing this against each other in today’s scenario. Whatever happened in the past has become irrelevant. There is no use bringing in UN resolution, Simla accord etc into the picture any more. Kashmir is the rope that is being tugged on both sides by India and Pakistan. India has no intention of letting that grip go. But if Pakistan loosens its grip and gives up the game, India might be inclined to consider loosening the grip as well.

We are talking of another two decades before all this will happen. If India’s economy is extremely weak, then definitely it will not be in a position to sustain its hold on Kashmir. But India’s strength is growing instead of subsiding.

Pakistan will need to stop agonizing over Kashmiris and start looking at its internal enemies – radicals, ISI, economic decline, unemployment, money, resources etc. India will open up with Kashmiris if there is no outside interference. You guys have no qualms about “brothers and sisters” in China, and most of the Middle East suffering at the hands of autocrats and dictatorships. Therefore Kashmir is only a point you are using to score against India. It is very clear to us.

Kashmiris are cheering for Pakistan, much like Pakistan is cheering for China. These are based on emotions and we understand those sentiments. But there is no use paying attention to them. Pakistan has to realize that it does not have the power to force anyone to its demands. That is all is needed. Things will come around if Pakistan realizes that it needs to focus on itself rather than on others.

Posted by KPSingh01 | Report as abusive

Continuing from this cricket match, I hope IPL takes in Pakistani cricketers into their teams. Indian government should somehow facilitate this. Pakistan’s talented cricketers will surely embellish IPL. I hope this happens soon.

Posted by KPSingh01 | Report as abusive

Shoaibo,

I agree with you that Kashmir is the root cause of animosity which most Pakistanis feel towards India & I also agree with Ganesh that Pakistan had a credible & strong claim on Kashmir in 1947, based on India’s parallel claims on Junagadh & Hydrabad. If your leaders would have resorted to peaceful means instead of violence, there’s a pretty good chance that Kashmir would have become a part of Pakistan, a long time ago but they shot themselves in the foot with their belligerence.

Yes, I was referring to the Chatham house poll earlier & if my memmory serves me correctly, the poll was conducted in J&K, AJK & GB and had 3 options (1. joining India 2. joining Pakistan 3. Independence). A majority voted for independence while the options of joining India & Pakistan ended in a close tie. I must also point out that the primary cause of the current kashmiri resentment towards India is the proxy war started by Pakistan in 1989, which led to heavy deployment of Indian army in the valley & I don’t blame the kashmiris for it. If you deploy the army in any Indian state (Punjab, West Bengal, Karnataka etc) for 2 decades, I bet they would all want independence from India. Prior to the initiation of proxy war by pakistan in Kashmir, there were no atrocties & Kashmiris were living peacefully & happy to be a part of India.

Posted by Mortal1 | Report as abusive

Ganesh,
Shoaibo is more Gentle in putting his thoughts,
He is one pakistani I found after a long time(or sympathiser of pakistan) who has put his opinions without name calling and is more straight forward unlike a bigot shahidkhan (with great sense of pain I have to put this word and with no intentions spoil the environment) or more obscure Umair.

Shoaib Says:The hostilities are due to Kashmir.
[1] There is a feeling of great sense of injustice at Pakistan being deprived of Kashmir vis-a-vis other princely states.
[2] There is a feeling of anger at the brutal subjugation of ‘our people’ brothers and sisters in Kashmir.
[3] Finally, there is a feeling of helplessness about not being able to do anything about it militarily or politically.
Its spot on, these are the narratives that has been propogated as near conviction in the pakistani society without even sense of discussion on the Facts of these perceptions.

As Ganesh put it “Pakistan did have a prima facie case for Kashmir”. No Question about that.
Ganesh you said that pakistanis shot at their foot by Invading and plundering Kashmir at the wrong time which completely made the local people hostile to pakistan.
And the Sympathy among kashmiris for pakistan is due to their anger from Indians rather than their love for them.

But your opinion that “A Gandhi-style agitation would have done more for the Pakistani cause than all the wars and belligerence. After all, Indian civil society has been fairly reasonable” -smacks of something important in the nature of society and means to achieve their goals.Jinnah had begun his conquest or demand for pakistan based on Direct Action. The Direct Action instigated to provoke and frighten Non-Muslims (specifically Hindus) in muslim majority regions of India unfortunately proved successful. The Governement of the Day headed by Nehur and Patel had to give in to their demand of pakistan for fear of civil war. Inevitable it may be, but for pakistani state this has given a great sense of confidence and joy, and given enough reasons to pursue more quick and voilent course of action.

This they displayed against Kashmir when they raided the Kashmir and occupied a third of the State. Before Patel could complete the Kashmir war, Nehru naively put the issue to UN believing it would solve it only to realize to his dismay that Leading Powers have already converted it as dispute and internationalised the Issue.

Having gained territory in their two attempts Ayub’s 1965 war imagined in wresting the kashmir. Although India gained some 710 sq miles Approx(Wiki source) for pakistan’s 210 . The Indians inability to battle out a decisive victory (they made an early ceasefire even before the army captured Lahore) played into the hands of pakistani establishment who only propogated the victory of pakistan. Since you already know this, it intersting to know pak’s perception on this.
Check youtube videos with “Murder of History in Pakistan discussed by Mr Najam Sethi”. people will be surprise that most pakistani’s to this day believe they won the war.

Since their first ever free and fair elections also resulted in session of the Pakistani state, the establishment always worked out for a limited democracy.

Finally Ganesh your point that “we had even begun to see articles by prominent Indian journalists and opinion-makers (not just Arundhati Roy but people like Swaminathan Aiyer, Jug Suraiya and Vir Sanghvi) arguing for “letting Kashmir go”.
You also made a point regarding plebicite for minorities in kashmir who would go with indians and in this regard, I would point you out an old link on kashmir, which emphatically points the impossibility of Division because of strategic and geographical reasons.
http://india_resource.tripod.com/kashmi r.html”.
The key point in the above link is this, “As a partial solution, some may suggest a region-wise plebiscite, but a look at the map of the undivided state will show how impractical that would be. The Kashmir valley seperates the remote regions of Kargil and Ladakh to Jammu and the rest of India. The life-line for the mountains of Kargil and Ladakh winds through the Kashmir valley. To allow the Kashmir valley to secede would destroy the lives of the people of Ladakh and Kargil. And what is worse, it could leave the Kashmir region itself divided into a patchwork of geographically disconnected principalities. By losing their seasonal mobility which could threaten their livelihood, the nomadic Gujar and Bakarwal people would be particularly affected by any such partition of Kashmir”.

I have never before realized the importance of “Right Means to achieve your goal” propogated by Mahatma Gandhi, Now I realize what a colossus conviction it was by gandhi!

Posted by sensiblepatriot | Report as abusive

Friends (at the moment),

You presented the Chatham poll as a landmark event of great significance. I gave you my thoughts on the matter and made parallels to less scientific but much more powerful polls i.e. cricket in South Asia. This was immediately dismissed as irrelevant and something that nobody should pay attention. I think this demonstrates immaturity by otherwise worldly and educated people. This attitude only manages to confirm our own narrative of “India’s contradictory postures on an as-needed, self-serving basis”.

I have many things to say about the Ghandian principles applicability in Kashmir and the points raised about our ‘identity crisis’. Hopefully the discussion has not degenerated to MC/BC by the time I am able to respond.

Posted by shoaibo | Report as abusive

Since this topic is somewhat related to cricket, let me say a few words to the Pakistan team – Great job! Even without the star fast bowlers like Aamir and Asif, Pakistan made it to the semi-finals. Despite the tense issues that the team has gone through over the past two years, they still managed to rally themselves into a fighting unit. Dropped catches could have been due to the immense pressure the players faced. I am sure Tendulkar did not play at his best for the same reason. Both teams handled it very well. The gesture between the two teams was friendly. I did not see the animosity between players that I have seen in the past. In all it was a great game. Pakistan made India earn its place.

Posted by KPSingh01 | Report as abusive

Shoaibo said:

> Hopefully the discussion has not degenerated to MC/BC by the time I am able to respond.

It takes two hands to clap, so as long as you keep your commments above that level when you post, the discussion should not degenerate. The question is, how quickly do we give up on other people with whom we would like to have a dialogue?

Speaking for myself, I want to understand how other people feel about things, and I learn more when I experience other viewpoints.

Defensiveness is unnecessary for anyone here. We are not diplomats or decision-makers, so any points we concede will not make any immediate material difference to our countries’ interests. We can afford to be intellectually honest, and this can lead us to interesting places in terms of what we get to explore and learn. Some Indians may take issue with my opinion that Pakistan had a case for getting Kashmir in 1947. But at least two other Indians here have agreed with me. This should be music to your ears (but you haven’t acknowledged it at all).

Keep talking.

Regards,
Ganesh Prasad

Posted by prasadgc | Report as abusive

@Ganesh
“Some Indians may take issue with my opinion that Pakistan had a case for getting Kashmir in 1947″

Ohh come on an intelligent guy like you living in past. I can go on saying there was no case of India’s division when muslims and hindus lived side by side like brothers in pre-1947 era, there should not have been a case of British RULING India (the darkest period in our, Indian and Pakistani both, history), there should not have been a case for Persians attacking and looting India, how much past will you keep looking at. There is no point talking about the past like this. We have a problem and we need to find solution(s). I agree with both shoaibo and netizen that Pakistanis dislike India because of feeling of being cheated due to Kashmir and other princely states like junagadh, etc. Time is to move on.

Shoaib let me tell you that as soon as Pakistan gives up its claims on Kashmir, there and then only the Kashmir independence struggle will have any meaning. Why can’t Pakistan give up its side of Kashmir and let those people rule themselves if it so much believes in independence of Kashmir? Let me tell you, Pakistani establishment is fearful on two accounts:
1. If kashmir is out of picture the PA will immediately lose its charm in absence of an enemy and Generals will have no more say in running of country.
2. If Kashmir is out of picture then your politicians will have to become leaders which obviously they are not. All that they have to sell to voters is Kashmir and nothing else. I saw a video of Ms Fozia Khan, of MQM from Karachi, debating on this very point in Pakistan parliament and for first time I was impressed with a Pakistani politician. But alas she had no support. Both countries need more like Fozia.
And we may have our differences due to our experiences or education but don’t worry its not going to go down to MC/BC as your style of posting seems to me to be polite and soft just like Ganesh and Rehmat. Rest of us do get emotional at times but get back to our senses pretty fast :) Respect is a two way street ALWAYS.

As for Indians, we do NOT want to pre-empt any war, had current Indian govt voted/joined for war on Libya they would not have survived in office for even an hour. War is THE LAST thing Indians want on earth. But we also would not allow anyone to mess with India’s growth story as well. We are not shinning but want to and aspire to and would protect the dream at any cost.

Posted by 777xxx777 | Report as abusive

@”You presented the Chatham poll as a landmark event of great significance. I gave you my thoughts on the matter and made parallels to less scientific but much more powerful polls i.e. cricket in South Asia.” Posted by shoaibo

The Chatham poll was referred to, because it’s the only credible poll conducted in all of J&K (as it orginally existed) that I’m aware of. If there are others which you know of, please provide a link. With all due repect, a scientific poll is better than the number of Pakistani flags being waved, during a cricket game in Srinagar, which none of us have personally counted or even witnessed for that matter.

Posted by Mortal1 | Report as abusive

[...] still can be done.  An Indian reader in a comment on a companion blog saw the match as an opportunity to renew ties and bury the rancour of the recent past. “ If [...]

I agree with Ganesh. The chance to settle Kashmir permanently came definitely during the 1950s. It was missed due to intransigence on the part of Pakistan and Nehru’s decision to induct Kashmir as an autonomous state under Indian union. But Pakistan should have learned by now that militancy, proxy wars and wars will not help its cause. It has been tested and tried and has not worked. Threatening with nukes will not make India budge. By 1960s Kashmir had settled to a pattern. People wanted to move on with their lives. Since Pakistan has always seen as an unresolved issue, it has kindled the fire there time and again and has not allowed anything to settle there. Now that many Pakistanis do not mind Kashmiris going independent, they should not mind Kashmiris going along with India either. They have accepted the fact that Kashmiris do not want to be a part of Pakistan. Therefore there is no use trying to wrest it from India. That will only help settle a score with India and will not benefit the Kashmiris. All that Pakistan has to do is to stop meddling in Kashmir and India will be able to work out an amiable solution with Kashmiris on its own. People want to live in peace. Until 1989 they were living in peace. Let us restore that condition and that is all matters.

Posted by KPSingh01 | Report as abusive

Once indigenous Militancy abated and foreign militancy not in the numbers that are hoped for by the pakistani establishment, Pakistan’s kashmir policy lost traction. Now with their own militancy problems posing an existential threat to their state, their body language tells they have no longer the stomach to pursue this ill fated policy. And so it is only limited to “Moral support to brothers and sisters of kashmir”. I believe it will take pakistan atleast 4 to 5 years to come out of this Afghan mess and to start rethinking on the kashmir policy. India with rapid growth on this account should furthur improve its standing in the world in the next half decade. Pakistan will hopefully come to terms with the truth and start working for improving its own economy.

Most of the problems of kashmir would end with the end of insurgency and seperatist tendencies. while there was no question of human right violations perpetuated by India, People around the world would hopefully see it in an insurgency context. Strangely though the constitution of India guarentees more freedoms than are propogated by the seperatists which is in the form of tyranny of the sunni majority of the kashmir valley. The openness of india can be seen by the awesome amount of anti-india literature available with india baiting journalists is testimony to this fact. when followers of yasin malik of JKLF say “kashmir ka matlab kya, la ilahi illallah”, it only sounds an islamist war cry which even modern state of pakistan is not comfortable with.

when kashmiri seperatists deny the power to be handed over to panchayats (local bodies in india while it is available in entire india), howcome their cause has so much moral standing and is it not hatred borne out of excessive military involment in the region, which itself is the sympton of insurgency.

Posted by sensiblepatriot | Report as abusive

Admittedly, my comment will seem rambled. This is because I am responding to multiple replies and topics.

1.
It is true some of you have posted that Pakistan had a legitimate argument on Kashmir. By south asian standards, this is progress. However, almost immediate caveats are presented that negate any legitimacy Pakistan may have. Here is what I believe you are saying:

Upon X’s accession to Y, Z invaded and occupied X on the basis of a Z-majority in X. Y suggested a plebiscite upon withdrawal of Z’s troops. Z declined and kept X.

I agree with you. Z in this case is villain in the black hat. But what if I changed the variables? What if Z=India, Y=Pakistan and X=Junagadh

Pakistan is simply guilty of plagiarism. Is it the formula that delegitimizes Pakistan’s claim on Kashmir or is it the selective application of variables that you find unpalatable?

2.
Far from belligerence, Pakistan showed restraint over Hyderabad & Junagarh. Pakistan **was** pragmatic. Geographically and demographically, it made sense that those two principalities would go to India. Pakistan even suggested a defence-pact with India to protect the northern perimeter against a ‘northern threat’. This was remarkably visionary by Pakistani standards. Unfortunately, it is India that declined and paid for it in blood, treasure and territory in 1962.

3.

” I still think if Pakistan had chosen the path of peace and protested the Kashmir case without resort to violence, the issue may have been settled within a decade, in the fifties itself.”

….Agreed. The settlement would’ve been India retaining all of historic Kashmir territories including Gilgit, Baltistan, AJK

Ten years may seem a long time, but now we have seen 63 years go by without a solution in sight.

….Perhaps superpowers can declare expiry dates on freedom struggles but Pakistan has no such power over the stubbornness of Kashmiris. Who would’ve thought in 1940 that Poland et al would ever get out of the clutches of Germany?

A Gandhi-style agitation would have done more for the Pakistani cause than all the wars and belligerence.

…. Things would’ve been different if **Gandhi** had not been murdered by terrorists. If he applied Ghandian principles in today’s Kashmir, he would be jailed for 2 years and die mysteriously in an “encounter”. From what I have read, Mahatma Gandhi would be appalled at India’s behavior in Kashmir.

Pakistan followed a very counterproductive strategy to the point that Indian attitudes have hardened a very great deal. After Mumbai 2008, very many Indians would now be averse to making any concessions to Pakistan on Kashmir.

….. Mumbai 2008 angers and hurts you as it should. The tragedy should also help you understand the pain we feel for our countrymen in the valley. To date, one thousand Mumbai’s have taken place upon Kashmir.

It would be seen as succumbing to terrorist blackmail. If Pakistan had been a friendly country throughout and never initiated any hostilities, then Indian civil society would have accepted a transfer of Kashmir much more readily, and a long time ago. Today, the best that we can hope for is a freezing of the LoC as the border.

…… That’s fine with me but I see that Kashmiris are almost an afterthought to you. Is it fine with them?

It is the only realistic solution, and Pakistanis will have to accept that. Perhaps after a few decades of peace, the border will become irrelevant, as PM Manmohan Singh hopes, and then we will have some semblance of a united Kashmir and both countries more or less satisfied. But today, this is where we are, unfortunately. In my opinion, the situation is of Pakistan’s making, because the same cause could have been pursued very differently with very different results. To me, the moral of the story is that a smaller player must not resort to violence even in a just cause, as they just ruin their chances.

….. I disagree with you on moral, philosophical and historical grounds but I actually respect your honesty. It is an elegant way of saying might is right. Your statement also answers SensiblePatriot’s analysis of Pakistani hostility.

I do have one question here, which is whether the solution to the Kashmir problem will make the India-Pakistan relationship hunky-dory, or whether another problem will then take its place due to some deeper issues we have not considered.

….. No, things won’t be perfect. There will still be fascists on both sides looking for opportunity to disrupt relations. There may even be a Mumbai/Samjotha type incident. There are many vested interests in a continuation of Indo-Pak conflict internally and externally. Rivalry will still exist. Pakistan has no global ambitions. We haven’t the work ethic required for global mastery. There will be problems emanating from Pakistan but nothing of Kashmiri proportions. As India competes on a global scale, it will be less imposing on regional neighbors in both soft/hard power. There will still be complaints about trade/economics/immigration similar to Bangladesh/India.

An Indo-Pak entente would be unfavorable for Islamic expansionists, Hindu ultra-nationalists, Indo/Pak military complex, China, USA, Israel & western arms dealers. I am almost certain I am missing some other players here…

Posted by shoaibo | Report as abusive

The Chatham poll was referred to, because it’s the only credible poll conducted in all of J&K (as it orginally existed) that I’m aware of. If there are others which you know of, please provide a link. With all due repect, a scientific poll is better than the number of Pakistani flags being waved, during a cricket game in Srinagar, which none of us have personally counted or even witnessed for that matter.

…… Let me clarify. There were two games that took place in the 80s in Srinagar. Kashmiris overwhelmingly opposed the ‘home’ team. I suggested cricket for a few reasons:

1. I can’t think of a better ‘poll’ than cricket loyalties in South Asia.
2. A cricket game would only have 2 options unlike the Chatham poll which I believe was advantageous to India.
3. There are many examples of public celebrations/prayers for pakistani team against india in muqzooba kashmir. I will post the links later if you don’t believe me.

Your point is well taken though. Why are we Pakistanis fighting for Kashmir if it has only the slightest edge over India?

Posted by shoaibo | Report as abusive

4.
Many analysts have talked about the need for identity on the part of Pakistan, and the consequent striving to be the “un-India”. Is this true, and will this quest for a separate identity continue to be a barrier to good relations?

……

There are things for which we want to be like India. There are things for which we don’t want to be like India. We admire your batsmen, governance, patriotism, sustained democracy. we **should** admire your entrepreneurial spirit but we don’t. we don’t want to have disproportionate billionaires like your country. we would prefer a more socialist or islamic model of wealth distribution. we want to protect our culture and folk art from bollywood influence. I think India should protect it’s rich regional arts from bollywood as well but this is none of my business. We would like to liberate and empower our women as professionals as you have. But we don’t want to allow liberties that treat women as sexobjects. etc. etc.
In the grand scheme of things, these are petty and sovereign matters. None of these things should bother or offend Indians.

I have immense pride in my heritage both Islamic and pre-Islamic. Afghanistan, Pakistan, Bangladesh and Indian Muslims represent the South Asian Muslim civilization. I grew up in the shadows of one of the world’s oldest civilizations. We had invented mechanical dental drills while the rest of the world was still hanging from trees. We are one of the few countries in the digital age where poetry gatherings are a part of pop culture. I am at ease with my Buddhist ancestors, I am at ease with my Buddhist ancestors Hindu ancestors. Allama Iqbal’s, the nation’s undisputed philosopher’s family was Hindu. As a Pakistani, I am proud of being part of south asia, central asia and the greater middle east. I took some satisfaction in seeing Sri Lanka win which guaranteed a south asian victory. When Pakistan loses, we cheer for Hindu/Buddhist Sri Lanka or Muslim Bangladesh.

There are moments of shame i.e. the fratricide in 1971 but there are moments of recovery 1974 friendship with Bangladesh. There are failures — inability to liberate all of kashmir but there are unparalleled successes — liberation of communist afghanistan. There are catastrophic losses and incredible victories.

In success or failure, we love our Pakistan just as you love your India. I can’t think of a better measure of identity for both of our countries. I believe this identity thing is a non-issue for the average Pakistani.

Posted by shoaibo | Report as abusive

I will respond to the “there was no agitation for liberation before 1989″ claims later.

Posted by shoaibo | Report as abusive

@shoaibo

Compassion is the feeling that arises in witnessing another’s sufferings and motivates one’s subsequent desire to help(Lazarus,1991,Nussbaum, 1996,2001).
In my view compassion is also a source of principled moral judgment(Haidi,2003, Nussbaum,1996,2001).

As an observer I have witnessed on this blog a very constrained and thin version. Perhaps the reality is different and the sample on this blog s not representitive of the population. A god day.

Rex Minor

Posted by pakistan | Report as abusive

Shoaibo,

Thanks for providing your view point of the situation. I do not expect it to be unbiased, just like our views are biased against your country.

Our observation is this – even if Pakistan had taken all of Kashmir in 1948 or by the end of the 1950s, my belief is that it would not have stopped with that. Pakistan still has many excuses on hand to keep up its taunt against India. The reason is big macho and ego. Even prior to the semi-final match at Mohali, there is an article in Dawn that mentions about this macho attitude.
In that one paragraph caught my attention. Some people were going for Indian women as trophies. The article says that these sports fans aligned themselves with the conquistadors of the past who took Hindu women as booty after their plundering raids. I could not find that article today. If you can search the Dawn archives, you will find that article.

I suggest that you read the works by Pakistani authors like Tariq Ali and Ahmed Rashid. Pakistan was formed by violent means. Once the nation was formed, there was no further agenda. It is always easier to protest against a system, stage riots and bring about chaos. It is a lot more difficult to run an administration. Once Pakistan was formed, its leaders had no idea how to go about building a nation. Anti-Hindu or anti-Indian campaigns always were found favorable. Politics was run by sensationalizing India-phobia.

Pakistan was created using the fear of majority Hindus. After that it has been sustained by the fear of a Hindu majority India. This means, there is only one thing that has held Pakistan together – fear of India. People in the past generations post independence were very different from we are today. They saw a world torn by civil strife, displacement and mayhem. And their attitudes were shaped by those memories. They are gone now. Now there is only the empty rhetoric of India trying to destroy Pakistan with no other agenda. In reality, India has moved on. We have focused on our development and growth. If Pakistan did the same and minded its own business, it will save a lot for both our countries. If Kashmir issue had been resolved, your military might be facing an indigenous revolution there. The roles would have been reversed. And much like the accusations in the case of Balochistan, Pakistan would be living off Indian help to Kashmiri militants. And that excuse would have been used to take further raids into India.

We can see very clearly that in your military establishment there is a warped view of India that wants to hold on to India as the main enemy at all costs. Your people might be different. But in the context of Pakistan, your military has made everything irrelevant, including the people. Kashmir to us, is now a geo-strategic buffer zone that has helped us keep Pakistan and China at a distance. If Kashmir was independent or inside Pakistan, we would be facing your missiles and tanks too close to Delhi.

A lot of damage has been done by successive generations in South Asia. At this point, human rights violations in Kashmir is the only point Pakistanis are desperately clinging on to, with exaggerated numbers. Extra judicial deaths happen in India. No one denies that. It is not confined to Kashmir only. Rapes happen during custody as well. Any part of the country is no different from Kashmir in this regard. They are not justified. But they happen. That does not give the justification for independence. If that is the case, every citizen will be his own nation. Kashmiri Muslims have to come down to earth from their high heavens and take the same deal as everyone else. There is nothing special about them. They are in a geo-strategic zone unfortunately. None of the players are going to give up an inch there. Pakistan will not be able to dictate terms to India. Terrorist threats have been and will be dealt with. In due course, Kashmiris will calm down and go along. We are working on it.

If you feel so much for oppressed people, do not be selective. Campaign for Tibetans or Uighurs against Chinese. Campaign against Burmese military. Campaign against Saudi Royal family. Campaign for Kurdistan. The moment you become selective, your sentiments become selfish. If you are fair, we can talk.

Posted by KPSingh01 | Report as abusive

Far from belligerence, Pakistan showed restraint over Hyderabad & Junagarh. Pakistan **was** pragmatic
Posted by shoaibo
=
The above is a factually inaccurate statement from an academic historical perspective. Jinnah/ML demanded Junagadh, Hyderabad on the principle that the rulers should decide, whereas they demanded Kashmir on DIAMETRICALLY opposite principle.

There are other factual historical inaccuracies about the claim that Pakistan “showed restraint”. I will
address only one aspect for now, more later.

The choice of a plebiscite in all three was given to Jinnah by none other than Mountbatten. Nehru and Patel were also on board. But Jinnah refused.

Here is A. G. Noorani:
“In his hour of triumph, Jinnah’s bitterness overwhelmed his judgment and he sowed the seeds of Indo-Pakistan strife. Statesmanship, itself a blend of morality and expediency, required Jinnah to grasp the AICC formula and forge a grand settlement ***based on the popular will*** in regard to all three states – Kashmir, Junagadh and Hyderabad. Mountbatten offered that to Jinnah in Lahore on November 1. So did Nehru the next day. Jinnah rejected it and acted in crass ignorance and ineptitude. “He received his first shock upon discovering that Pakistan was militarily incapable of securing the accession of Junagadh”. (Ayesha Jalal; The State of Martial Rule; p. 43).
AG. Noorani, Frontline, Oct. 12, 2001,

and here again,

“..the Kashmir settlement was possible on the 1st of November 1947 when Mountbatten offered a plebiscite in Kashmir and Hyderabad. Jinnah was very fond of Hyderabad and he refused. Had he done that there would have been no cold war between India and Pakistan; everything would have been settled there. Sardar Patel was prepared and Nehru would have been prepared, had he but agreed to plebiscite in Hyderabad. This is Jinnah’s shortsightedness”

A. G. Noorani, Two Circles.net, Nov. 16, 2009

Posted by netizen | Report as abusive

Further on the “pragmatic” approach of Pakistan in 1947.

Zafrullah Khan was Pakistan’s 1st Foreign Minister (1947–1954). Zafrullah Khan advised the Nawab of Junagadh that if he decided to join his state with Pakistan, it would be both moral and legal. The Nawab then proceeded to announce his decision accordingly against the popular will of his Hindu population.

Hyderabad-

The 1941 census had estimated the population of Hyderabad to be 16.34 million, over 85% of who were Hindus and with Muslims accounting for about 12%.. Nizam with political support of Jinnah chose path of confrontation despite opposition from his Hindu majority population.
The Nizam of Hyderabad had a large army with a tradition of hiring mercenary forces. These included Arabs, Rohillas, North Indian Muslims and Pathans. The State Army consisted of three armoured regiments, a horse cavalry regiment, 11 infantry battalions and artillery. This army was commanded by Major General El Edroos, an Arab.[5] 55 per cent of the Hyderabadi army was composed of Muslims, with 1,268 Muslims in a total of 1,765 officers as of 1941. Nizam received arms supplies from Pakistan and from the Portuguese administration based in Goa. In addition, additional arms supplies were received via airdrops from an Australian arms trader Sidney Cotton.

Posted by netizen | Report as abusive

Shoaibo said:

> It is true some of you have posted that Pakistan had a legitimate argument on Kashmir. By south asian standards, this is progress.

Thanks for the acknowledgement. I hope our horns seem a bit shorter now. ;-)

> Z in this case is villain in the black hat. But what if I changed the variables? What if Z=India, Y=Pakistan and X=Junagadh

See my answer to your other question below.

> I disagree with you on moral, philosophical and historical grounds but I actually respect your honesty. It is an elegant way of saying might is right.

No, I’m saying that the application of the “might is right” principle by a weaker party is foolish and will not achieve results. This is not the same as justifying “might is right”. I’m actually saying right can prevail against might when non-violent persuasion is used. Gandhi proved it, but you still don’t believe it could have worked against India if Pakistan had used it. You are cynical and believe any opponent of the Indian government is arrested and dies in prison. That’s unjustified cynicism. Geelani of the Kashmir agitation is the biggest thorn in India’s side and he is still going strong at 80+. Let me be cynical in turn and say that a country founded by a person who believed in “direct action” (http://bit.ly/cxdpiU) could not have contemplated any means but a violent one, and such a course of action was therefore doomed to failure from the start.

If we truly believed in “might is right”, we may say “Well, you’re not going to get Kashmir and your country is increasingly irrelevant, so take a hike.” The fact that so many Indians are spending time on this blog, conceding points where justified and trying to engage in reasoned debate should tell you something different. You should give credit where it is due.

> Pakistan even suggested a defence-pact with India to protect the northern perimeter against a ‘northern threat’. This was remarkably visionary by Pakistani standards. Unfortunately, it is India that declined and paid for it in blood, treasure and territory in 1962.

This is indeed an intriguing part of our history that we only seem to have sketchy accounts of. Whether Nehru turned down Ayub Khan’s proposal due to haughtiness and pride or whether he had his reasons to distrust the man are unknown. Supporters of Nehru would point to Operation Gibralter in 1965 to vindicate Nehru’s lack of trust in Ayub Khan. Whether the 1965 attack was a result of Nehru’s refusal or would have happened anyway is now conjecture. As an Indian, knowing what I now know about the Pakistani obsession with Kashmir, I think the 1965 attack by Pakistan was inevitable, regardless of Nehru’s response.

> Agreed. The settlement would’ve been India retaining all of historic Kashmir territories including Gilgit, Baltistan, AJK

Initially, yes. You keep forgetting my subsequent point that if Kashmiris/Pakistanis had kept up a *peaceful* agitation for a fraction of the time that the violence has been sponsored, Kashmir (or at least the Muslim parts of it) could well have been transferred later. We can only conjecture about this today since history has taken a very different turn.

> To date, one thousand Mumbai’s have taken place upon Kashmir.

To put it very mildly, I think that statement is an exaggeration. Even if 177,000 people have been killed in Kashmir as that statement would imply, you’re in effect blaming all of them on the Indian army and completely ignoring the killings by “militants” (i.e., terrorists). I have read articles (I’ll post links when I dig them up) where Kashmiris have admitted that many killings earlier attributed to Indian forces were in fact the work of “militants”. The most recent case was the death of two sisters. This is a murky situation and nobody (neither you nor I) has the *facts*. So drawing conclusions based on what is in effect propaganda can be dangerous.

I’m not defending the Indian army. I’m always suspicious of men in uniform not being accountable (this wasn’t intended as a swipe against the Pakistani setup, but the cap fits anyway). However, I think the Indian army has had many more atrocities pinned on them than they’re responsible for, and this is unfair.

> That’s fine with me but I see that Kashmiris are almost an afterthought to you. Is it fine with them?

Again, I have to ask you what your locus standi is as a Pakistani when talking about the rights of Kashmiris. I would like to keep an open mind and be reasonable, and in the course of my readings, I come across the writings of Kashmiris (Muslims, I may add) like Dr. Shabbir Choudhry (http://bit.ly/ihNERT) who criticise the actions of Pakistan and equate them to India’s. I am led to believe that the situation in AJK and GB may be in fact no better than that in Indian Kashmir, but there has been no media spotlight on the Pakistani side. Perhaps what we need is not so much the withdrawal of the Indian army from Indian-held Kashmir but the infusion of an army of journalists into Pakistan-held Kashmir so we can get a balanced picture of how the rights of Kashmiris are being upheld.

I’m all for the rights of minorities (heck, every minority in India has special protections) but this holier-than-thou attitude is unwarranted. I think the Chatham House survey is truly significant because it has exposed a reality that is very different from what Pakistan has been telling the world. It greatly discomfits you guys and now we are back to counting flags. My cynical view is that the access granted to Chatham House into AJK and GB will never be repeated. It has been a PR disaster for Pakistan and I don’t know how they let down their guard that time.

I can understand your multiple frustrations, but to be comprehensive, you should take the three Kashmir-related emotions you listed together and add the other one you talked about, even if it contradicts the first three:

[1] There is a feeling of great sense of injustice at Pakistan being deprived of Kashmir vis-a-vis other princely states.
[2] There is a feeling of anger at the brutal subjugation of ‘our people’ brothers and sisters in Kashmir.
[3] Finally, there is a feeling of helplessness about not being able to do anything about it militarily or politically.
[4] We feel betrayed and abandoned that ‘our people’ equate us with India and don’t like us any more than they like India. It stings.

You should deal with this whole bundle of emotions together, not just the ones that make you feel like a victim. That would not only be more honest, it may also show you and your compatriots a way forward. Otherwise you will be simmering in frustrated rage for the next 63 years as well.

Sorry that this doesn’t validate all your feelings and make you feel vindicated. You have some points but the reality is not as clear-cut as the position you have taken. Let’s see if we can agree on a more nuanced position.

Regards,
Ganesh Prasad

Posted by prasadgc | Report as abusive

Two mighty nations fighting over a quite useless bit of land.
It really shows the lack of leadership and maturity of both nations. Originally India was at fault for trying to gain the area when it knew those living there wanted to be part of Pakistan. However that was a long time ago and surely it is time to get past this rather pointless dispute.
There would be much to gain for both countries if relations could be normalized.
India will never be a superpower and Pakistan will never be rid of the Americans as long as this dispute continues.

Make Kashmir a neutral zone under joint administration.

Posted by Sinbad1 | Report as abusive

I missed a very important point in my post above. The rights of the Kashmiris would have been ensured through a peaceful agreement on many past occasions, but moderate leaders have always been eliminated by “militants” when they seemed to be reaching agreement with the Indian government. The objective here was not the interests of the Kashmiri people, which could have been secured through a negotiated agreement, but the accession of Kashmir to Pakistan by any means, the rights of be people be damned. No wonder the Kashmiris are angry with Pakistan as well.

Regards,
Ganesh Prasad

Posted by prasadgc | Report as abusive

Sinbad1: “Originally India was at fault for trying to gain the area when it knew those living there wanted to be part of Pakistan. However that was a long time ago and surely it is time to get past this rather pointless dispute.”

Wrong. India had no interest in that area in 1947.

It is just that Kashmir’s Hindu ruler was toying with different options, with being independent as the most desired option. He was hated by his Muslim citizens. He controlled them with brute methods.

It was Pakistan that could not wait. Mr. Jinnah had worries about Pathans not wanting to be a part of Pakistan. The entire NWFP had shown no interest in the separate nationhood for Muslims. But they were merged with Pakistan. Jinnah was worried that the Pashtuns might rise against his new country. Therefore he deflected them off with the raid of Kashmir. Pathans ran into Kashmir. Starved of sex, they indulged themselves in Kashmir.

They had come pretty close to Sri Nagar when the Hindu king flew to India for help. He was told that Kashmir was not an Indian territory and there was not much India can do to defend his country. There was only one means by which this was possible – if he signed an instrument of accession to India as a head of state. This would make Kashmir an Indian territory and India would have the right to defend it with its military. Since those who raided Kashmir were not from an organized military and were tribals, it would have been justifiable to drive them out of Kashmir. Only when the king signed the instrument of access, India sent in its troops. They drove the Pathans out of Kashmir. This is when Pakistan decided to send its military to counter India’s.

The war continued when Nehru suddenly decided to seek UN intervention on the advice of Lord Mountbatten, the Governor General of India at that time. The UN recommended a cease fire, followed by a resolution for a plebiscite. The resolution had three options – accession to India, accession to Pakistan or remain independent. Pakistan fought hard at the UN and removed the third option.

The resolution was built and it stipulated complete withdrawal of all Pakistan’s military and militants from all of Kashmir. India was to follow next with a minimal number of soldiers to provide security. Plebiscite was to be held after the above two conditions were met. Pakistan refused to move its military out demanding that India do it first. Since Pakistan did not meet the UN resolution demand, India did not remove its troops from the rest of Kashmir. That stalemate has remained to this day.

Pakistan did not want to obey UN rules when it did not suit its interests. If it had, and if a plebiscite was held, Kashmiris would have voted against joining Pakistan then. But now every Pakistani is screaming at the top of his voice about India honoring the UN resolution. This is because conditions appear favorable now by causing alienation of the people through controlled insurgency.

In 1965, Operation Gibraltor was launched with a plan to infiltrate and cause mayhem. Pakistanis planners were surprised when local Kashmiris caught the militants and handed them over to Indian security personnel. A frustrated Pakistani military launched a war immediately, assuming India to be made up of spineless cowards. India had no preparation for this war and it hurriedly put together a counter offensive.

Ineptness and inexperience led to wrong decisions. One of the generals that the Indian PM consulted gave him a wrong estimate of how long they can choke Pakistan. Indian offensive went Southwards and would have taken Lahore. Because of this miscalculated advice, India decided to accept the ceasefire proposal by Russia.

Please read up history from valid international sources before making any claims. None of what I have said above are from Indian sources.

Posted by KPSingh01 | Report as abusive

Pakistan will not yield an inch to India on any matter. So expecting India to yield is foolish. Kashmir has been used by Pakistan to score a goal against India. It is as clear as the sun to everyone. When the whole thing has become a soccer game, with Kashmir being kicked around by both India and Pakistan, no one is going to yield. If you do not want Kashmiris to be hurt, stop kicking them from your end. And we will stop from our side.

Posted by KPSingh01 | Report as abusive

India will never be a superpower and Pakistan will never be rid of the Americans as long as this dispute continues.

Make Kashmir a neutral zone under joint administration.

Posted by Sinbad1
==

Asking India to cede a section of the country to be under joint administration is a non-starter!!

It is not some real estate for India (may be it is for Pakistan), that it would be willing to become a superpower. There are other wrong premises as well.

Indian economic, diplomatic stature started growing at the same time since Kashmir jihad was unleashed, so Indians are skeptical about the notion, ceding a part of the country is the way to become superpower. Secondly, even if that premise is true, we are not interested in becoming a “superpower”.

Besides, confrontation with India is not the only reason for Pakistani dependence on USA. Not developing even rudimentary instituitions, absence of democracy, lack of development of educational, industrial infrastructure are the reasons for being on American life support.

Posted by netizen | Report as abusive

Shoaibo

Thanks for your opinion. Let us use this as platform to learn and reshape our opinions.

“You may ask for evidence and I can’t give you a better barometer than the number of flags being waved in Muzzafarabad and Srinagar during the semi-final today.”
***I have always found this not a sound reasoning. Why because if you ask these questions, answers will tell you that: a) Are there more people who are neutral (let me not say pro-India at his point) and are sitting tight inside their home watching the game. b) can you expect any soul in Kashmir raise an Indian tri-color and stand next to Pakistan’s “cresent and star” You will see Pakistan support in some Indian Muslims too.

The similar reasoning can be used in Pakistan;s case. How many in Pakistan will openly declare they are against terrorists? Only few and they have been shot dead. AK-47 rules these days but violence in Pakistani streets does not mean everyone sitting inside supports that. This is an analogy and do not take it literally.

A fraction of my extended familiy supports Pakistan in cricket games. It is just limited to that. If you ask them would they migrate to Pakistan, the answer is resounding NO.

“Nevertheless, I would be lying to you if I said the results did not sting a little. I feel a sense of abandonment by the Kashmiris at a time of difficulty and war. Does one leave their family when they are sick or injured? I realize that I am being unfair to Kashmiris who have watched Pakistan mismanage its affairs for decades, who have given over 100,000 fathers and sons, helplessly watched 10,000 of their sisters, mothers and in some cases grandmothers ravaged by Indian forces. Relatively speaking, we Pakistanis have sacrificed very little in comparison.”
***Do not feel dejected since the reasons you mentioned have nothing to do with the BASIC Kashmiri way of thinking and not much to do with how Pakistan is today. This is clear from 1965 action by Pakistan when Kahsmiris were expected to side with Pakistan and they did not.

What you mentioned about Kashmiris is a normal thing to do for anyone in their place. I can understand they will get support from Pakistan for the cause but why would they like to be part of Pakistan which has a documented record against minorities and discrimination against (I am not mentioning names since we all know what that means). Any Muslim that crossed the line has not integrated well with the native Pakistan population. same can happen to Kashmiris if they move.

“Does one leave their family when they are sick or injured?”
***Shoaibo, I hope you realize this one will not fly as a debate point as i mentioned earlier

“Why is a wealthy, prosperous and shining superpower not a better option than a rudderless pakistan or even independence for Kashmiris?”
***Shoaibo, let me rephrase it. Why Pakistan who has supported Kashmiris since last 20yrs is not a better option than India whose army has killed ~100,000 Kashmiris and raped so many women.

“A fraction of my extended familiy supports Pakistan in cricket games, I don;t. It is limited to that. If you ask them would they migrate to Pakistan, the answer is resounding NO.

Peace!

Posted by rehmat | Report as abusive

Every time a new Pakistani poster arrives here, we have to start from scratch all over. They all start with the same false assumptions and theories and we spend our time explaining to them the real story with enough references to back them with. Then the existing trolls enter the fray and create enough noise. After that everything goes quiet. This cycle keeps repeating. If one went back a few years on this blog spot, we will see the same thing repeated over and over again. It clearly shows the mindset that has evolved in Pakistan.

Posted by KPSingh01 | Report as abusive

Shoaibo

I was shocked to see the result of the poll. More Kashmiris wanted to join India than Pakistan (see below) if you look at these numbers dispassionately.

Following qustion was asked
“Table 6: Q ‘If you were given the choice in a vote tomorrow, which one of these, if any, would you vote for? Kashmir on both sides of the LoC to become independent/join India/join Pakistan/LoC made a permanent international border/India and Pakistan to have joint sovereignty for foreign affairs and whole of Kashmir to have autonomy over internal affairs/ India and Pakistan to have joint sovereignty for foreign affairs with local control (at State level) over internal affairs/ no change?’”

Total AJK J&K
Independence 43 44 43
To join India 21 1 28
To join Pakistan 15 50 2
LoC to be permanent 14 1 19

I take it as a better barometer of what Kashmiris think.

Posted by rehmat | Report as abusive

Rehmat,

I have stated this poll made a big impact on me and changed some of my opinions on Kashmir. I have other sources for my opinion as well. My sister-in-law is Kashmiri.

I also made two other points. Should this not be a lesson for India as well? After all, Kashmir has no indigenous freedom movement and it is an integral part of India. Second, how would the numbers look for India if only two options were given i.e. Pakistan or India?

Btw, I am not here to score any ‘points’ even if these mythical points can be converted to currency. (I am not going to win any arguments here)

I have an Indian Muslim friend in UAE (Hyderabadi). He told me his father kept a photograph of Ayub Khan in his desk so I believe you when you say some members of your family are pak cricket fans.

Peace be upon you as well.

Posted by shoaibo | Report as abusive

Kashmiri Muslims and some Muslims cheering Pakistan during sports events is similar to Indian or Pakistani immigrants to UK or USA or Australia cheering their native team when they tour those countries. This does not mean that these immigrants are traitors to their new homes. It takes a few generations for bonds to shift. I am yet to see an Indian or Pakistani American or British citizen feeling thrilled about a win for their home team against India or Pakistan. One should not misunderstand these emotions. If Pakistan and Bangladesh played against each other, who would Indian and Kashmiri Muslims cheer for? Who do Pakistani Hindus and Sikhs cheer for during an India-Pakistan game? If we start asking questions, then analysis gets haywire. One should be careful not to bring in such points to score in a discussion or argument.

Posted by KPSingh01 | Report as abusive

Mr. Rex,

You are an enigma wrapped in a mystery. I have already been scolded by Mr. Singh for slowing down the class but could you elaborate just a little bit more on constrained compassion. Are you saying we Indians and Pakistanis don’t have compassion for each other? I am not disagreeing, I am just trying to understand.

Posted by shoaibo | Report as abusive

Shoaibo said:

> You are an enigma wrapped in a mystery. I have already been scolded by Mr. Singh for slowing down the class

I like your sense of humour :-). Keep it coming.

Regards,
Ganesh Prasad

Posted by prasadgc | Report as abusive

KP, I did not call anyone a traitor. I would say Rehmat’s family are patriotic indians who have some fondness for Pakistanis. Perhaps the names and faces remind them of friends from a distant past. I admire Sachin Tendulkar but not at the expense of Pakistan. :(
An expatriate cheering on India in Toronto is different from an Muqzooba Kashmiri cheering against India. The Indian Kashmiri is also not a traitor either. India is not his country.

Posted by shoaibo | Report as abusive

It really shows the lack of leadership and maturity of both nations.

…. Sinbad, I totally agree with this statement.

Are Singh, Prasad and myself the only people without a sexy internet code name? It is ridiculous to address someone as “Sinbad” when discussing a serious issue.

Posted by shoaibo | Report as abusive

Shoaibo: “The Indian Kashmiri is also not a traitor either. India is not his country.”

I do not know about that. You and I do not get to make those decisions on someone’s citizenship. As far Kashmiri Muslim’s cheering for Pakistan, it stems from “my enemy’s enemy is my friend” syndrome. If India played China in some game, every Pakistani will cheer for China. This does not mean there is any special love for China. China is not a friend of Pakistan in reality. It is the enemy of Pakistan’s enemy. And these equations can change. Once Pakistan cheered for America and India booed them. Now things have become reverse.

Posted by KPSingh01 | Report as abusive

Sunni Islam countries (except some shia sects) cannot be at peace with neighbors and even internally, shia killings, ethnic minorities like pashtuns, hazaras, etc.
The sunni version of koran teaches a constant state of jihad that leads to oppression, war and civil unrest. Most leaders of these countries abuse their power and either perpetuate it by force or loot funds to protect their often sad end (benazir, zia ul haq, soon musharraf, ghaddaf, and a very long list).
All this talk about kashmir is just another in a list of demands that will never end (remember the partition of india), it is foolish feeding a wild animal that can be a threat once it recovers strength.
India fought and won all wars with pakistan and will be forced to another one once the pakistanis forget enough about their last defeat.
Hopefully the next one will be a nuclear one and kill millions, turn the jihadis off war for a few hundred years ( the internet and science will put most sunni beliefs in the dustbin) – when that happens and the shia separate from their biggest threat – sunni islam
Finally peace for a long time..

Posted by qadean1 | Report as abusive

Shoaibo said:

> The Indian Kashmiri is also not a traitor either. India is not his country.

Let’s logically analyse that claim. Would a Kashmiri Pundit agree with that statement, i.e., that India is not his country? Ridiculous, right? Which other country could he possibly belong to? Now if we change a Kashmiri’s religion (from Hinduism to Islam) but not his ethnicity, would India suddenly stop being his country? What kind of logic is that?

Wishful thinking should not be substituted for a logical argument. India has many ethnicities and all of them “belong”. There is no “Indian race” that can be used as a basis to include or exclude someone.

Regards,
Ganesh Prasad

Posted by prasadgc | Report as abusive

on a lighter side, who would americans support if North Korea and Iran were playing a world cup football match finals. ;-)

Posted by sensiblepatriot | Report as abusive

We are all now in the knowledge age and could learn from each other if for one or other reason did not get the opportunity to visit a university.
Indian denomination is the lowest of lowest which the anglo saxon have assigned to human beings in the world. Govt. of India and now people of India including expatriots voluntarily accept this title, simply reflects the intellectual level of the involved! People of Bharat are made up of various communities, different cultures, different language groups and be it as it may of different faiths. Together they live in the territory of so called Bharat. Bharat per say was never a single country in history. People of Pakistan have similar structures, with the exception that majority claim Islam as their faith. There is no logic but history involved in this structure.

@shoib

It is upto Indians and Pakistanis to decide wheather they have compassions for each other or not? And it is upto Kashmiris to decide how they want to face their future. Pakistan military has been decidedly defeated to the point of uncondtional surrender, and it is futile for zardari/gillani duo to speak for Kashmir?
Pakistan military has classified India as Enemy No. ONE and have still maintained diplomatic relations throughout and have kept support of clandastine operations against India. Even this has backfired.
It is about time that Pakistan should take care of its own problems and let Kashmiris take their future in their own hands.

Rex Minor

Posted by pakistan | Report as abusive

Have a read of this: http://bit.ly/hCnhUa

There’s no point counting flags, is the moral. And it corroborates what Rehmat said about support for the Pakistani cricket team being nothing more than that. The sooner everyone gets used to the idea, the better.

Regards,
Ganesh Prasad

Posted by prasadgc | Report as abusive

As far Kashmiri Muslim’s cheering for Pakistan, it stems from “my enemy’s enemy is my friend” syndrome.
Posted by KPSingh01
==

May be!
To a Baluchi, being called “Pakistani” is an insult. Pakistan flags have to be flown in Baluchistan with Punajabi army protection, the school children refuse to sing Pakistan national anthem and sing only “Ma Chuke Balochani”.

At least Kashmir valley is not 48% of the land mass of India :-)

Posted by netizen | Report as abusive

KP, I think your statement of ‘My enemy’s enemy’ syndrome is also part of the equation. In your statement, perhaps unintentionally, you seem to admit Kashmiris consider India their enemy. Pakistan is not a friend but the enemy’s enemy.

Prasad, no need to limit discussion on logic only. I came to this blog looking for articles on Pak cricket. No harm in discussing things through the lens of cricket. There has been plenty of conjecture and alternative history discussed here so why stop now.

I draw a different conclusion from your Kashmiri pundit example. It seems Kashmiri Hindus are loyal to ‘Hindu’ India irrespective of India’s atrocities against their fellow Kashmiri nationalists. They likely constitute the india’s ‘enormous lead’ over Pakistan in the diluted but popular chatham poll. The Kashmiri muslim seems to have a much more secular outlook opting for independence. Once again, they are not traitors to India but patriots of the Kashmiri nation.

Rex, I have a soft spot for all people. Personally, I have compartmentalized the average Indian from India’s policies.

I agree with you on many points. There is no substance to the current invitation for peace. Manmohan Singh is a good man and his heart is in the right place but this is a well calculated publicity stunt which our inept lotas eagerly accepted. Yes, Pakistan should focus on internal problems. Yes, If Kashmiris want freedom, they will have to fight for it like the Vietnamese.

SensiblePatriot, Americans would not cheer for Iran or North Korea, just bomb the stadium. They would see it as an ‘opportunistic target’ with acceptable ‘collateral damage’. America’s general public would applaud the victory over those ‘North Korean Islamists’ and ‘Communist Iranians’.

Posted by shoaibo | Report as abusive

“Hopefully the next one will be a nuclear one and kill millions”

…… Finally a sensible person. ROTFL. We have a genius in our midst. He will save us from our collective tomfoolery.

Posted by shoaibo | Report as abusive

http://www.examiner.com/foreign-policy-i n-baltimore/balochistan-celebrates-india -s-victory-over-pakistan-world-cup-crick et

Balochistan celebrates India’s victory over Pakistan in world cup cricket :-)

Ahmar Mustikhan

KHUZDAR, Occupied Balochistan: Baloch people in many towns and cities across Occupied Balochistan celebrated the victory of India over Pakistan in the world cup semifinals in Mohali Wednesday.A traditional dhol cha’ap or music and dance was spontaneously organized in Khuzdar, which is regarded as the political and cultural center of Balochistan, according to Bramsh news. Vociferous slogans were chanted against Pakistan, the report said.

A second cultural town, Sibi also presented the look of a festive city and firing in the air continued till late in the night. Such firing is common pratice to express public joy in many parts of southwest Asia.

Jubiliant crowds also took to the streets in the coastal Balochistan cities of Turbat and Panjgur.

Posted by netizen | Report as abusive

A double-whammy by the looks of it – Kashmiris in Indian Kashmir cheer for Pakistan but they don’t really mean it. Balochis in Pakistan cheer for India and they really mean it.

Time for some soul-searching by patriotic Pakistanis. What has their country done to put off people both outside and inside? Don’t say that Indian army atrocities are the only truth and all other news items are propaganda. There’s something going on, and it’s not as clean as the Pak establishment narrative. Do our friends have the courage to admit, “Yes, there seems to be something else going on”?

Regards,
Ganesh Prasad

Posted by prasadgc | Report as abusive

@shoibo
Most of the so called Indians on this blog are harmless, some are zombies from canada and NY. They have lived their times and are unwanted guests on Pakistan Blog, since they regard Pakistan as a source of their plight from the land which is now Pakistan. Your leaders have as of todate not understood the psyche of the Indian people, both hindus, sikhs and muslims. They regard the creation of Pakistan as a separate country, as the greatest sin committed in the subcontinent, whereas successive Pakistan Govts have been presenting themselves to India as the victims, and asking for freedom for the kshmiris. Indian Govts. have taken every opportunity to hurt and break Pakistan, several wars, direct intervention to defeat Pakistan Army in former East Pakistan and compelled Pakistan to acquire nuclear weapons. Pakistan army on the other hand have been shooting in their own feet, simultaneously suppressing its own people to the extent that today Pashtoons and Baluchis are at odds with the Govt. No one likes to suffer loss of dignity even if one tells them that the injuries were caused by one’s own Govt. The facts are that Pakistan military sent Bhutto to gallows and declined to protect Benazir Bhutto. Mr zardari was unable to look after his flamboyant wife, and despite several years experience in the prison is not the right leader for Pakistan. Forgive me, I have no intention to evaluate the occurances whether they were justified r not but these things did happen. Pashtoons and Baluchis do not forgive their contrahand in generations. Pakistan needs reforms, education reforms, military reforms to make it a national army, new civil institutions, a code of loyalty for the jounalists who are tranplants from India but have proven long ago that they are mismatchs. There are no text books to teach ex colonial people how they can become independent! I have not read anything about the decolonsation program in your countries.
I am not an enigma but Pakistan definitely is?

Rex Minor

Posted by pakistan | Report as abusive

Ganesh: “There’s something going on, and it’s not as clean as the Pak establishment narrative.”

The following link raises that question:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/mar  /29/balochistan-pakistans-secret-dirty- war

Posted by KPSingh01 | Report as abusive

There are absolutely injustices going on in Baluchistan and our govt. and military better learn some lessons from 1971. Let me give you an example my father has always given us. Karachi has plenty of ‘Sui Gas’ (Liquified Natural Gas) but the areas surrounding Sui in Balochistan do not. This has been going on since the 50s.

I drove to Ormara on the Makraan coastal highway (beautiful drive btw), I sensed uncharacteristic lack of hospitality (for Pakistanis). Nothing blatant occurred but just a feeling I had. Who can blame them for cheering Indians? If Indians are looking for heated arguments over the incompetence of Pakistani politicians and power-brokers, you won’t find them in Pakistani forums!

What I find interesting in Indian comments is an almost knee-jerk reflex to make parallels to Baluchistan on a self-serving basis. Baluchistan was brought up earlier in this thread. I pointed to the differences between Baluchistan and Kashmir… there were no takers and the discussion moved to swiftly to the next talking point.

Pakistan’s invasion of Kashmir and the dismissal of Junagadh is another example of hyper-patriotism if not outright hypocrisy.

Pakistan is vilified as an aggressor while every possible legal, philosophical, circumstantial, conjectural and sometimes blatantly contradictory argument is given to India’s aggressive posture in Gurduspur, Junagadh, Hyderabad, Kashmir, Goa, Sikkim, Thag La, Siachen, East Pakistan, Maldives, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh, Nepal etc.

All scenarios our given legitimacy on one pretext or another. Come on yaar, even Sachin mistimes a shot every once a while.

You tell us to search our souls as we should. When will you do the same?

Rex,
Pakistan is undoubtedly an enigma :) What do you mean by ‘journalist transplants from India that are mismatches’? Why is your id Pakistan?

Posted by shoaibo | Report as abusive

“Zombies from Canada”. LOL. I have no idea what that means but it just sounds funny.

Posted by shoaibo | Report as abusive

Just because Baluchistan is not an international dispute like Kashmir, it does not make the freedom struggle of the Balochs any less credible than that of the Kashmiris or justify the injustices & atrocities being committed by the Pakistani establishment on the Baloch people for decades. East Pakistan was not an international dispute either.

Posted by Mortal1 | Report as abusive

I pointed to the differences between Baluchistan and Kashmir.
Posted by shoaibo
====
I agree.

FIRST,

The Baluchis had never subscribed to TNT/Pakistan ideology i.e. muslim-vs nonmuslim hate ideology.  To a Baluchi Muslim, his Hindu neighbor is/ has always been his blood brother. Even through all communal violence, the Baluchis protected and took care of their tiny minority Hindus, and their temples. Whereas the Baluchi muslim considers the Punjabi Muslim  his mortal enemy, the usurper, occupier.They were forcibly annexed into Pakistan.  

Here is the Balochi version of how they were enslaved:

http://www.bso-na.org/files/The_Illegal_ Annexati_478B7B.pdf

SECOND,
Baluchis are being reduced to minority status in their own ancestral land through through forced settlement of Punjabis. This is the opposite of Kashmir valley, where they have ethnic cleansed their own Hindu community and other Indians are unable to buy land or property within their own country.

THIRD,

Baluchi muslims just want freedom in their own land and don’t have any supremacist territorial ambitions and theirs is a secular, humanistic freedom struggle. Whereas the Kashmir valley muslims want to rule over Hindus, Sikhs, Buddhists in Jammu and Ladakh, who fear “freedom” for valley muslims will be hell for them and are totally opposed to the Kashmiri “freedom struggle”. 

Posted by netizen | Report as abusive

Shoaibo: “In your statement, perhaps unintentionally, you seem to admit Kashmiris consider India their enemy. Pakistan is not a friend but the enemy’s enemy.”

I wouldn’t say all Kashmiris. There are a sizable number of Muslims who have an antipathy to India due to obvious reasons. They were not like that prior to 1988. When people face constant searches, arrests, torture, disappearance of near and dear ones, lack of justice and emotions will turn anyone against the existing establishment. I do not say that Indian system is not brutal. It is like this all over the country. Pakistan is no exception either. Brutality is not confined to Kashmir alone. Therefore this selective protest against a “cruel” Indian system for the sake of Kashmiris alone baffles me. British Intelligence system has been recently accused of out sourcing torture based investigations to Pakistan. There was some furor with Musharraf justifying it recently. If you feel for others, please do not feel selectively. Everyone needs justice. Not just Kashmirs because some of them seem to be aligning with Pakistan’s political objectives.

Posted by KPSingh01 | Report as abusive

Shaibo,

Just ignore Rex Minor. Do not respond. We all have been doing that for a while now. He is seeking attention. Just ignore him. Let us move on with more mutual understanding of our view points. Thanks for sharing your time with us.

Posted by KPSingh01 | Report as abusive

I would like to applaud the level of knowledge here. I learned some new things especially from KP Singh. The POV about Kashmir as a buffer zone from both China and the historic invasion route of Khyber Pass were most interesting. Mr. Rex was just plain old interesting. I want to thank you for the courtesy extended to me.

Regards.

Posted by shoaibo | Report as abusive

Shaibo,
You should listen to Mr. Singh. He is the director of this blog. He knows what is good for you and Pakistan. Now he will detail that mutual understanding for you and all. You will be assimilated.

Posted by Matrixx | Report as abusive

Matrixx: “You will be assimilated”

Some fear! Don’t worry, we will not pollute your pure hearts.

Posted by KPSingh01 | Report as abusive

Shoaibo

I read your comment that father of your Indian Muslim friend kept a photograph of Ayub Khan with him. I guess this is hangover of older generation. New generation of Muslims will be different in India, not in Kashmir though. perhaps speculation.

The idea of my comment on Indian Muslims and Kashmiri Muslims cheering for Pakistani team was to drive home the point that this should not be interpreted as their willingness to live in Pakistan. I am sure you know about Indian Muslims, but not clearly not about Kashmiri Muslims. This is reflected by your question what will be their pick between India and Pakistan if given choice. It is dangerous guess work driven by our bias. Either answer can sound reasonable.

**********************

On lighter note, I found this comment on cricinfo hilarious.

“Haar kar jeetne wali ko hi Baazigar kehte hain
aur one day ko test match style me khelne wall ko misbah” :-)

Although I am laughing at that comment, personally I consider Misbah as a match winner who can turn the match around anytime. He just did not have support and did not have the luxury to do what was expected from him.

Posted by rehmat | Report as abusive

correction:

““Haar kar jeetne wali ko Baazigar kehte hain
aur one day ko test match style me khelne wall ko misbah” :-)

Posted by rehmat | Report as abusive

Shoaibo,

I must admit you do make very good points, and an honest person would find them hard to deal with. Discomfort is a good sign, because it means one’s own perceptions are being challenged in a way that cannot easily be dismissed. They only way out is to change one’s opinions and worldview, and that hopefully brings the opposing parties closer.

I commend you on your honest admission of problems on the Pakistani side and your personal examples with regard to Baluchistan. Your flexible attitude should make it easier for Indians to admit to a few “mistimed shots by Sachin”.

You said:

> What I find interesting in Indian comments is an almost knee-jerk reflex to make parallels to Baluchistan on a self-serving basis.

Guilty as charged. I guess it’s a kind of cheap consolation to even the score, and it’s true that “You guys are doing something bad too” isn’t really a good counter-argument. Both sides need to face facts, because justice for ordinary people everywhere is more important than nationalistic point-scoring.

OK, for what’s it’s worth, many of us do accept the analogy of Kashmir (for Pakistan) to Junagadh and Hyderabad (for India), and that’s significant progress, as you said.

You also said:

> Pakistan’s invasion of Kashmir and the dismissal of Junagadh is another example of hyper-patriotism if not outright hypocrisy.

So now we move on from initial legitimacy to military action in support of such claims, and there is once again a parallel. India moved militarily against Junagadh and Hyderabad, while Pakistan tried to do the same against Kashmir. There are some differences, but we could see them as technicalities, such as instruments of accession and the infeasibility of Pakistani intervention in the Hyderabad and Junagadh cases. The overall scenarios are roughly the same. The big difference in outcome has been that India succeeded in Junagadh and Hyderabad, while Pakistan did not (fully) succeed in Kashmir. The populations of Junagadh and Hyderabad have accepted the accession to India and there is no freedom movement in either territory. Kashmir still simmers, and there is a desire for independence there. From a Pakistani viewpoint, I can understand the frustration that Pakistan alone is seen as the aggressor while India’s analogous aggression has been forgotten.

> Pakistan is vilified as an aggressor while every possible legal, philosophical, circumstantial, conjectural and sometimes blatantly contradictory argument is given to India’s aggressive posture in Gurduspur, Junagadh, Hyderabad, Kashmir, Goa, Sikkim, Thag La, Siachen, East Pakistan, Maldives, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh, Nepal etc.

Let’s just stick to Kashmir, Junagadh and Hyderabad for now. You’re muddying the waters by mentioning places where India has much stronger arguments, most of all East Pakistan, which is a case study of Pakistani genocide and Indian intervention to halt that genocide, and not at all an example of Indian aggression. If we stick to these three places, then yes, it could be considered hypocritical. I guess one way forward is to admit the parallels and think about “where do we go from here?”

> You tell us to search our souls as we should. When will you do the same?

Good point. Treat this post as a response to your invitation. Where do we go from here?

While historically, both sides have made mistakes, I must say I still sympathise with the “modern” Indian position, which has two options:

1. If we want to respect the aspirations of the Kashmiri people, then this must include all of Kashmir, not just the Indian-held part. And any plebiscite must include true independence. I don’t see much flexibility on the Pakistani side (either officialdom or bloggers) in terms of willingness to put AJK and GB on the table, especially when independence is made a possibility! There are also the complications of the displaced Kashmiri Pundits whose opinions must also count, and the possibly independent will of the people of Jammu and Ladakh. This is a messy way forward, but it can be justified on the basis of respecting people’s will.

2. Or we can accept and formalise the status quo, because history has shown us that the current situation will most probably continue anyway. We can then approach the issue again after a few decades of peace and good relations. It may then be conceivable to effect political changes that seem unacceptable today. Let’s face it, any Indian or Pakistani leader who agrees to give up territory in today’s climate faces political suicide or even assassination. It is politically infeasible for borders to move today, and it may be more prudent to leave that to a future generation that is calmer and wiser.

Do you think there is any real alternative to these two options? Jihad in its various forms has been tried, and it not only doesn’t work, it creates blowback. The “indigenous” struggle for independence may turn out to be just people letting off steam with no real serious intent to secede. There’s probably no point hoping for a miracle to change the borders and gift Kashmir to Pakistan.

My point has always been that India and Pakistan are much greater than Kashmir, and we shouldn’t let this small issue hamper the far bigger opportunity for the two countries to progress together and for South Asia to emerge as the most economically important region in the world. This is not about neglecting Kashmir or ignoring the rights of the Kashmiris. It’s about tackling the most important thing for the two countries, which is improving the quality of life of all our people. For that, we need cooperation, not hostility. There seems to be more willingness on the part of India to pursue such friendship and cooperation. Pakistan still seems stuck on the Kashmir issue.

What are your thoughts?

Regards,
Ganesh Prasad

Posted by prasadgc | Report as abusive

Dear Rehmat. Neither Pakistanis nor Indians are asking for your Indian Muslim Loyalty badge. You need not present disclaimers at the beginning of every post. It is evident in your utter disregard for ‘Indian’ Muslimas in Kashmir. I think you see in Chatham poll’s result some sort of Indian victory over Pakistan. There are lessons only for Pakistan in its results. Since all other barometers are unacceptable, perhaps we could invite Chatham for a poll that resembles the two options provided in the U.N. resolution. Let’s allow my bias to be exposed so that we can both declare Jai Hind!

Posted by shoaibo | Report as abusive

Since the discussion has moved from cricket to Kashmir (what a surprise!), I must say that the Indian govt needs to get the ball rolling & start appeasing the kashmiris, if it wants to retain the valley. IMO, systematically rolling back the army & introducing economic reforms is the need of the hour in Kashmir. The Kashmiri youth need to be educated, trained & put to work. What they really need, is not an independent country surrounded by gigantic wolves but peace, prosperity & an honourable life. This was evident in the recent recruitment camp held by the Indian army, which has attended by thousands of kashmiri youth. India, with it’s growing economic resources can bring about the much needed prosperity to the valley.

Posted by Mortal1 | Report as abusive

Shoaibo said:

> perhaps we could invite Chatham for a poll that resembles the two options provided in the U.N. resolution.

That’s an excellent idea. A lot of hypotheses can be proven or rejected based on these results. Of course, people are known to vote differently in opinion polls and in real elections/referenda (the Bradley and reverse Bradley effects), but a formal opinion poll may be better than mere conjecture fed by one’s own biases and perceptions. I for one would like to see the results of such a poll.

The main question is, will the Pakistani government allow such a poll, given the red faces caused by the previous one?

Regards,
Ganesh Prasad

Posted by prasadgc | Report as abusive

Prasad
I looked Chatham House poll source. There is only half page summary on their site. There is nothing on methodology or full set of questions or geographical distribution. The data is not even tabulated. The percent numbers don’t add up to 100 percent. Are there any reviews in any Indian or Pakistan or Kashmiri publications? I would not spend more than five minutes on such garbage.
More garbage from your masters you love to hate.

Posted by Matrixx | Report as abusive

prasad, the purpose of the laundry list is to debunk the whole “Pakistan is evil aggressor” notion. Truth be told, I really don’t care what you did in Sri Lanka or Sikkim. It is one thing to be given justifications for all territorial acquisitions but to be called the regional land grabber adds insult to injury.

My suggestion is simple. Get all parties involved. The Pakistanis, Indians, Northern Areas, AJK, Muslims, Sunnis, Shias, Pandits, Sikhs, Buddhists. I would say even the Chinese but they are more stubborn with India than India is with Pakistan. Am I missing anyone else?

Historically, Pakistan offered for both armies to vacate Kashmir to hold the plebiscite. This is understandable due to India’s absorption of principalities and the rigging of elections in Kashmir. More recently, Pakistan has dropped claims on Laddakh & Leh. Kashmiri majority muslims have too. Pakistan has offered freezing of LOC but Kashmiris have not. Pakistan may even give up Azad Kashmir to an independent Kashmir. Surely there are options other than “Integral part of India” & “Kashmir bunay gah Pakistan”.

60 years have made all parties flexible except extremists. To even consider a compromise would be an affront to India’s pride and global ambitions.

My own opinion is that If India wishes to realize its global potential, it will have to first demonstrate leadership in her own neighborhood.

——————

On a separate topic, you had asked about Pakistanis cultural aversion. I told you I was one of the people protective of our local arts. Listen to this beautiful poetry in Pashto (there are translations). There is no debate or argument here just something worth sharing..

Have a listen:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=flNNwRtTs BI

Posted by shoaibo | Report as abusive

Mortal,

You can try throwing money at the problem but Kashmiris have been stubborn since the days of Mughals and Dogras. Muslim people as a political unit are not as easily bought as Muslim leaders. Kashmiris are becoming opportunistic with the new opportunities presented by India. They plan on using everything from medical schools to bayonet training only to fuel their movement for self-determination.

At any rate, I would suggest that you let Prasad explore alternatives. 2 fools day-dreaming will not shift the line of control in either direction.

Posted by shoaibo | Report as abusive

I am so touched by these photographs:

http://www.dawn.com/2011/03/31/images-yo u-do-not-normally-see.html?pid=15217

Afridi might have lost the game to India. But he has definitely won the hearts of many Indians.

Posted by KPSingh01 | Report as abusive

Why does everyone call me Prasad? A rather British form of address (“Hey, Willoughby!”)

Regards,
Ganesh Prasad

Posted by prasadgc | Report as abusive

Shoaib :”Pakistan offered for both armies to vacate Kashmir to hold the plebiscite”.

Could you substantiate that with evidence, I could not find anything officially from pakistan mentioning that.
Also, what stops the pakistani politicians or senior journalists from openly offering such aa advice in resolving the issue.

What ever the way forward in Kashmir is, no politician in India (or pakistan for that matter) has the wherewithal politically to accept a dilution in sovereignty or change in Line or Control disfavouring their current position.

If a referendum is to be taken up, dont you think demilitarisation of the populated areas is enough rather than complete withdrawl of the army from their respective borders.

Moreover the referendum must be conducted district wise (for full Kashmir AZ and GB included) because the kashmir is pluralistic society with sunni muslims in valley, shias, buddhists in ladakh, hindus in jaamu,dogras,bakarwals in kargil districts etc. The districts which opts for India should be completely integrated with India abolishing 370 article there (Indeed people in jammu and ladakh have been demanding the same) and the districts which vote for independence must be given complete autonomy under pre 1953 status where only foreign affairs,communications,currency and security remains with the centre (of respective governments). The Autonomy for these districts should not be a problem since in constitution, we already have autonomous hill counsils like in Nagaland (in pakistan they have tribal counsils or Federally Administered
Tribal areas which are semi-autonomous). As the Chatham poll suggests of the 18 districts in kashmir(in indian side) 4 to 5 districts may support independence (all of them in kashmir valley) they are baramulla,srinagar,badgam and ananthnag (and perhaps pulwara). The conditions that this autonomy must be granted is too see the existence of regular elections being held for these districts under election commission of India (same for pakistan on their side) and not a single rupee can be expected by these districts from india, other than exports earned and taxes which they pay to the central autonomous council of their respective kashmirs (Central Autonomous Cousil of Indian Kashmir and Central Autonomous Counsil of Pakistan Kashmir).

Same should happen to districts in Azad kashmir and Gilgit Baltistan. This provision will probably give them their independent aspirations under the respective countrie’s constitutions and provisions like income for the autonomous counsils that can come only from their taxes and exports will diincentivise them to play blackmail with their respective central governments for freebies. And encourage them to absolve voilence and encourage tourist friendly policies.

That in my opinion is the one solution. what do you say?

Posted by sensiblepatriot | Report as abusive

Oh I forgot to Add,
As these districts have voted for independence and have clinched fists to be a Seperate Country, they should behave as a seperate country. The taxes they should acquire thorugh mobilising the resources from their own districts (and no donations), the people in these districts cannot buy a land in india (and no seperate goodies like reservations in jobs and education which exist now. Geelani’s and seperatist’s sons study in Delhi and other universities under kashmir reservation)and are citizens of these districts only. They do not have to take the pain to vote in loksabha (central) elections and so politicians will not lust for their support. Since these four/five districts cannot be given a country status we should provide maximum autonomy to let it behave like a country.

Posted by sensiblepatriot | Report as abusive

Shoaibo said:

> Listen to this beautiful poetry in Pashto (there are translations). There is no debate or argument here just something worth sharing..

Very nice indeed. Thanks for sharing. (Had to rely on the English translation since I don’t understand Pashto, except for a familiar word here and there).

I feel sad when I visit India and see the number of TV channels and programs that seem to be devoted to “filmi” themes. Bollywood and the regional film industries seem to be crushing other forms of art. But on the bright side, I see many more young people becoming interested in classical music (both Hindustani and Carnatic) and many more books by Indian authors on bookstore shelves. So perhaps there’s no real need to panic. As countries get richer and people get more time for leisure and more discretionary income, culture also thrives.

I hope that holds true for Pakistan as well. I very much enjoyed the Sufi and fusion music at Coke Studio (Rahat Fateh Ali Khan, Ali Azmat, Arif Lohar, Meesha Shafi, etc.)

Regards,
Ganesh Prasad

Posted by prasadgc | Report as abusive

@hoibo
Zombie is a soulless body, a dead person which is revived by a magician and remains his slave. It also has supernatural abilities. Yu wwill learn to know them yurself on this blog. Stick for some time, they can also turn into a MOB. They are in this state because their relatives were brutaly murdered, became vicims and some supr natural magician have revived them. They are harmless but can become very aggressive too.
Now you have got all the knowledge. By the way instead of being inquisitive have you ever thought of going for higher studies. The Pashto singer has a very melodiusvoice. In translation I would use the word rose nstead of a flower.
Have a nice discussion with the Indian bloggers. The security on this blog is not very secured and after they allocated the name ‘Pakistan’ to one of post I am getting used to it and even like some discomfor to Indian bloggers. Have a nic day Mr Shaibo.

Rex Minor

Posted by pakistan | Report as abusive

@Shoaibo
Sorrymy note book is acting strange and have misspelled a number of words. I am sorry, I am sure you would understand the sentence. Have a nice day.

Rex Minor

Posted by pakistan | Report as abusive

Rex
Thanks for your analysis of German political trends.

Posted by Matrixx | Report as abusive

@Shoaibo

“Dear Rehmat. Neither Pakistanis nor Indians are asking for your Indian Muslim Loyalty badge. You need not present disclaimers at the beginning of every post. It is evident in your utter disregard for ‘Indian’ Muslimas in Kashmir. I think you see in Chatham poll’s result some sort of Indian victory over Pakistan.”

*** I am not here to play games. I say what I say and say pretty clearly. I am trying to understand and give my 2 cents on the issue. I present examples about those who are close to me on cricket support and today they supported India. You must be hurt by Indian win (or Sri Lankan loss). If you know everything on Indian and Pakistani Muslims behalf, what am I doing here. Every Pakistani knows some Indian Muslism’s dad or uncle. Thayt os good but let us keep it at that.

No need to put words into my mouth like I am explaining the loyalty or whatever.

What an utter crap fot you to say “It is evident in your utter disregard for ‘Indian’ Muslimas in Kashmir.”

I am not fond of you jumping to conclusions. What is that utter disregard btw let me know, I can split hair with you.

Now would you like to share in my joy that Indian won the cricket world cup.

Peace!

Posted by rehmat | Report as abusive

Rex,

There is no need to belittle my lack of higher education. Sometimes circumstances don’t allow for advanced degrees. I admire and respect Germans. The same perfectionist trait that can create marvels of engineering can sometimes lose a poem in the technicality. From my illiterate perspective, this is a gift and a curse.

There is no harm in talking to the Indians. I have no state secrets to give. I do think a ban on your comments by our democratic friends is a travesty. Your comments are interesting and deserve reply. Actually, any German that speaks Pashto needs to be heard just on the basis of uniqueness.

btw, Wouldn’t a gulaab by any other name smell as sweet?

Posted by shoaibo | Report as abusive

Dear Rehmat, You like to taunt and you are hyper-sensitive. This is an uneasy combination. I recommend you drop one of the two traits. In sports, Pakistanis don’t generally celebrate the losses of others with impromptu firecrackers (or Klashnikovs in our case). We came close when Australia did not win its 4th WC but lost interest. We only mourn our own losses. Congratulations on a well-earned victory by the tournament powerhouse.

Jai Hind!

Posted by shoaibo | Report as abusive

@Shoaibo

“You like to taunt and you are hyper-sensitive. This is an uneasy combination.”

***I apologize if I hurt you dear.

I go with the flow of the traffic. By that I mean I am hypersensitive or wonder at those who make allegations such as “It is evident in your utter disregard for ‘Indian’ Muslimas in Kashmir.” That is quite a serious allegation, don;t you think so? you are the one to pull the trigger.
Neither you a Pakistani Muslims nor me an Indian Muslim or for that matter can take Kashmiris for guaranteed.

All I did so far has talked few issues: Chatham House poll, green flags in Kashmir/cricket support by Kashmiri Muslims as majority being pro-Pakistan (a point which you have been trying to make that Kashmiris have abandoned you “the family”). I cited personal experience on cricket support by Indian Muslims and the meaning of it and today I wrote to you that same Indian Muslims who supported Pakistan in semis (some of my cousins) supported India in finals. What is in it that has you dislike. let us handle it maturely.

If you have anything specific, I am ready to talk to you.

Thanks for the Rx though. Let us both use it.

Posted by rehmat | Report as abusive

@Shoaibo

“You like to taunt and you are hyper-sensitive. This is an uneasy combination.”

***I apologize if I hurt you dear.

I go with the flow of the traffic. By that I mean I am hypersensitive or wonder at those who make allegations such as “It is evident in your utter disregard for ‘Indian’ Muslimas in Kashmir.” That is quite a serious allegation, don;t you think so? you are the one to pull the trigger.
Neither you a Pakistani Muslims nor me an Indian Muslim or for that matter can take Kashmiris for guaranteed.

All I did so far has talked few issues: Chatham House poll, green flags in Kashmir/cricket support by Kashmiri Muslims as majority being pro-Pakistan (a point which you have been trying to make that Kashmiris have abandoned you “the family”). I cited personal experience on cricket support by Indian Muslims and the meaning of it and today I wrote to you that same Indian Muslims who supported Pakistan in semis (some of my cousins) supported India in finals. What is in it that has you dislike. let us handle it maturely.

If you have anything specific, I am ready to talk to you.

Thanks for the Rx though. Let us both use it.

Posted by rehmat | Report as abusive

Rehmat
Regarding Indian Muslims. Let’s openly talk about it. Indian establishment has used Indian Muslims as a cutting tip against Pakistan. This is from my personal experience. One commonly heard argument is that if Kashmir somehow goes to Pakistan, the price will be paid by Indian Muslims.
This is rich coming from secular democratic Indian population.
One thing you should know that after 1971, the idea that Pakistan is a home and protector of subcontinental Muslims is no more. Indian Muslims have to make their own destiny given their situation and involving Pakistan in positive or negative way is not going to work. If you have problems with your rights, you should fight for those rights.
Good luck.

Posted by Matrixx | Report as abusive

“I would not spend more than five minutes on such garbage.” Posted by Matrixx

There’s no need to trash the credibility of a fine organization, just because one of it’s polls refuted your false beliefs & claims. Chatham house’s analytical work is held in high regard & it is considered as one of the top five think tanks in the world.

“You can try throwing money at the problem but Kashmiris have been stubborn since the days of Mughals and Dogras. Muslim people as a political unit are not as easily bought as Muslim leaders.” Posted by shoaibo

I’m not talking about throwing money at the problem or about “buying kashmiri muslims”. I’m talking about bringing long term economic progress & prosperity to Jammu & Kashmir. The Kashmiri youth, sure did not seem very stubborn while thronging the recently held recruitment camps by the Indian army & Kashmiri police. I suspect, they would be even less stubborn at recruitment seminars held by India’s top private firms. From my POV, the “stubbornness of Kashmiris” seems more like wishful thinking on your part, more than anything else. Economic progress is a major factor in installing or maintaining peace in a state or nation & I believe that a gradual reduction of the Indian army & economic progress in kashmir will eventually take care of a lot of grievences, the Kashmiris have against the Indian govt. It’s unfortunate that the kashmiris have not experienced any of the economic success which the rest of Indians have, since instability in the valley coincided with the commencement of India’s economic rise. If they get a taste of that success, I’m sure their thinking will change over time.

“At any rate, I would suggest that you let Prasad explore alternatives. 2 fools day-dreaming will not shift the line of control in either direction.”

We’re here in our individual capacities & don’t represent any official position. Also, nobody really has a monopoly over ideas & we’re all entitled to throw in our 2 cents, no matter how worthless they might seem to some.

On another note, congrats to Indians all over the world for the cricket world cup victory. Enjoy the celebrations, no matter where you are!

Posted by Mortal1 | Report as abusive

Matrixx

“Regarding Indian Muslims. Let’s openly talk about it. Indian establishment has used Indian Muslims as a cutting tip against Pakistan. This is from my personal experience. One commonly heard argument is that if Kashmir somehow goes to Pakistan, the price will be paid by Indian Muslims.
This is rich coming from secular democratic Indian population.”
***I know you are using restraint naming some xyz non-Muslim community, which is fine. What you said is general feeling among Indian Muslims as well. There is historical evidence to that i.e., 1947. I have heard the same feeling among Sikhs living outside Punjab about Khalistan. Although Hindu-Sikh riots did not happen per se but creation of Khalistan would have led to 1984 type reaction (political riots). This was feeling among Sikhs outside Punjab and they were saying that those promoting are not watching their interests. I

Coming back to your other point
“Indian Muslims have to make their own destiny given their situation and involving Pakistan in positive or negative way is not going to work.”
***Perhaps I gave you wrong perception that I am expecting Pakistan to protect Indian Muslims interests. I agree with you and fully realize that Pakistan cannot become home for Indian Muslims. Not sure what led you to mention about rights of Indian Muslims.

Indian Muslims issue is a separate issue.
Thanks

Posted by rehmat | Report as abusive

Coming to the talk on Pakistan, Kashmir, Taliban etc, see this video interview of Tariq Ali, a famous Pakistani writer:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FFDcGnupj 8E

I am reading his book, “The clash of fundamentalisms, crusades, Jihads and modernity” right now. I have read and enjoyed his work “Duel.”

Posted by KPSingh01 | Report as abusive

Matrix, I also respectfully disagree. Chatham is a reliable source. Western institutions don’t care about our ‘petty squabbles’. If the land doesn’t have oil, they don’t care. There really is no surprise in the poll as far as independence goes. The surprise for me personally was the low numbers for Pakistan even in the cannibalizing answer-set. The Indians are ostensibly drawing the conclusion that Kashmir as a whole prefers India over Pakistan. In all likelihood they know fully well that the Pathans in Gilgit, Kashmiris in Azad or Muqzooba Kashmir have no love for India over Pakistan and certainly not over independence. The problem is not the source but the clever use of statistics to score a ‘point’.

The question we Pakistanis have to ask is if we are a distant second, how much blood and treasure should we spill for **their** cause? I have asked Kashmiris this question both in Muzzafarabad, relatives (by way of marriage) and on the internet. The answer they provide is something along the lines of Kashmir is Pakistan jugular vein. You can trust us with water as your amaanat but never the Indians. They even offer special visas for pakistanis! I asked them for their lack of support in 65, they claim poor communication by our military. I asked about their tilt towards India in the 50s, they tell me they were tricked by Nehru’s false promises. They even offer helpful advice on how best to help the Kashmiri cause: Acquire proportional economic parity with India.

I personally don’t want to lord over territory that does not want us. Pakistan has a good record in terms of respecting our neighbors. We negotiated with the Chinese to demarcate territory. We purchased Gwadar from Oman without threats. We respect Iranian Baluchestan from Pakistani Balochistan. We gave FATA their autonomy. We have respected the Durand line. We are not given credit for our record but it is a record worth keeping.

What do you think we should do?

Regards.

Posted by shoaibo | Report as abusive

KP,

His non-fiction work is brilliant with a wicked prose. If you have read Duel, then you have read them all. His fiction is below average as novels but interesting for weekend historians especially those interested in Islamic Civilizations of Andalus and Usmania “Ottoman” empire.

He is not your typical historian, he definitely has an agenda and not all of his assessments should not be taken as gospel. He works hard to be Arundhati Roy of Pakistan. Actually, I should say Roy works hard to be Indian Tariq Ali. He was also the inspiration for some famous Rolling Stones song.. I can’t recall.

I can’t stand the man but he is a good writer with an interesting viewpoint.

Posted by shoaibo | Report as abusive

Rehmat
The reason I raised the issue with you is that it has been frequently used by Indians. Few days back, I was watching some Indian peace delegation on TV and one Muslim member of Indian parliament mentioned that don’t forget Indian Muslim factor when discussing Kashmir.
You also bring in Sikh situation in Punjab. I’m ready to discuss it any time with Mr. Singh.

Shoaib:
Don’t take me wrong. I’m full supporter of Kashmiri right to decide freely their own future. It does not matter if the want to go independent, with India or Pakistan and I would go as far as their right to opt for China. It is one thing to get some trend information from a poll but I won’t hang millions of people on a poll for which I can’t find full details.

Jai Shindustan

Posted by Matrixx | Report as abusive

Shoaibo said:

> Pakistan has a good record in terms of respecting our neighbors. We negotiated with the Chinese to demarcate territory. We purchased Gwadar from Oman without threats. We respect Iranian Baluchestan from Pakistani Balochistan. We gave FATA their autonomy. We have respected the Durand line. We are not given credit for our record but it is a record worth keeping.

This has contributed something to my knowledge as well. I welcome discussions with people who have a different opinion as long as they are honest in debating their points. You have been genuinely contributing a different point of view without being too shrill and I think we Indians should take the opportunity to discuss issues in greater detail in the same spirit of enquiry and desire to learn and understand. We’re not going to accomplish anything on this blog except gain a greater understanding of each other, but that in itself would be a good outcome.

Please keep the discussion going.

Regards,
Ganesh Prasad

Posted by prasadgc | Report as abusive

@Shoaibo
Take it easy and do not sulk and come up with the complex which most from India and Pakistan are capable of! I am giving my comments as an observer on this blog for those who still possess the abiliy and the scruples to learn. Certainly not for the so called Indian Bloggers who like a pest have invaded this sight and are not going to let go. I like to learn withot asking direct questions or be asked to explain and expand my statements. I regard Myra Mcdonald the author, one of the finest because she appears to me to understand the psyche of the people of south east asians. I am keen to learn about the views of Pakistanis and find that most Pakistani blogs are crowded by Indian bloggers. They are rarely seen on blogs which deal with other world people. Admittedly I am not able to understand the impact of Kashmiri issue on Indian muslims. I guess this has not been thought over by the Pakistan leaders nor was fully understood by the leaders who brought about the birth of Pakistan. I personaly find that Kashmiris are one of the most non violent people that I have come across and cannot imagine for a minute that Indian denial of their aspiration is going to last for ever. I was born a free person and believe very strongly that every human has this inherent right.

Fear is the weakness of humans which restricts their options for good or bad. Those who are able to overcme the fear and have faith in justice are going to survive in the coming world. Technology finesse alone is not the future!

Rex Minor

PS Snotty comments are not welcome. I laid down the same rules for the Indian mob. Familiarity in my view creates misunderstanding and later the contempt!

Posted by pakistan | Report as abusive

@Shoaibo
Take it easy and do not sulk and come up with the complex which most from India and Pakistan are capable of! I am giving my comments as an observer on this blog for those who still possess the abiliy and the scruples to learn. Certainly not for the so called Indian Bloggers who like a pest have invaded this sight and are not going to let go. I like to learn withot asking direct questions or be asked to explain and expand my statements. I regard Myra Mcdonald the author, one of the finest because she appears to me to understand the psyche of the people of south east asians. I am keen to learn about the views of Pakistanis and find that most Pakistani blogs are crowded by Indian bloggers. They are rarely seen on blogs which deal with other world people. Admittedly I am not able to understand the impact of Kashmiri issue on Indian muslims. I guess this has not been thought over by the Pakistan leaders nor was fully understood by the leaders who brought about the birth of Pakistan. I personaly find that Kashmiris are one of the most non violent people that I have come across and cannot imagine for a minute that Indian denial of their aspiration is going to last for ever. I was born a free person and believe very strongly that every human has this inherent right.

Fear is the weakness of humans which restricts their options for good or bad. Those who are able to overcme the fear and have faith in justice are going to survive in the coming world. Technology finesse alone is not the future!

Rex Minor

PS Snotty comments are not welcome. I laid down the same rules for the Indian mob. Familiarity in my view creates misunderstanding and later the contempt!

Posted by pakistan | Report as abusive

I would not spend more than five minutes on such garbage.” Posted by Matrixx There’s no need to trash the credibility of a fine organization, just because one of it’s polls refuted your false beliefs & claims
Posted by Mortal1
==

http://tinyurl.com/3pdjoyd

LONDON: Embattled Libyan dictator colonel Muammar Gaddafi’s controversial second son, Saif Al Islam Gaddafi, attempted to contrive a pro-Pakistan opinion poll in Kashmir, but it boomeranged on him. The result published last summer by Royal Institute of International Affairs (also known as Chatham House) and Kings College, London, was contrary to Saif’s expectation.

Saif was then fresh from a visit to Pakistan occupied Kashmir (POK), where he was fed usual propaganda of mock refugee camps and the plight of Kashmiris in India compared to “paradise they experienced in Pakistan” .

Saif agreed. Brainwashed in Pakistan, he perhaps could not believe the findings would be anything other than in Islamabad’s favour. He was in for a rather rude shock. The plebiscite, as agreed at the UN in 1948, which Pakistan still demands, gave Kashmiris only two choices: either to remain with India or join Pakistan. In the event, Bradnock’s poll, the first ever to be held on both sides of LoC, unearthed that 98% of people in India-controlled J&K did not wish to be a part of Pakistan; and 50% in POK did not wish to remain with Pakistan, either.

Posted by netizen | Report as abusive

Meanwhile it is March 1971 in Baluchistan:

http://tinyurl.com/3mz7dmd

On March 22, the bullet-riddled and severely tortured body of Hameed Shaheen, former Chairman of the Baloch Students Organisation (BSO), was discovered in Quetta’s Sariab area. He had been abducted by the intelligence agencies two days earlier while on his way to Karachi……

……The politicians have relegated all authority to the FC, the intelligence agencies and the army, and are satisfied with presenting themselves as sidekicks to add respectability to events and projects that are run by the former……

….Qambar Chakar, Abdul Qayyum, Faiz Mohammad Marri, Zaman Khan Marri, Mehboob Wadhela — the list could go on and on — were all picked up by the FC and intelligence agencies in full view of the public and later their tortured bodies were dumped. Yet the governor expects the Baloch to not be angry. The numbers of angry Baloch keep rising in spite of, and because of, these atrocities.

Posted by netizen | Report as abusive

Matrixx

“The reason I raised the issue with you is that it has been frequently used by Indians. Few days back, I was watching some Indian peace delegation on TV and one Muslim member of Indian parliament mentioned that don’t forget Indian Muslim factor when discussing Kashmir.”

***”Indian Muslim factor” is no surprise to me. Is it to you? You will find this view among lots of Indian Muslims. I already commented about this in my previous post. Sikh issue was meant as another example in this context. We can leave that aside if you want.

Let me make it clear this does not amount to being insensitive about Kashmiri cause or supporting the atrocities over there. Let us appreciate the complexity of it.

Posted by rehmat | Report as abusive

Matrix,
I understand now. I think both of our position is in line with a majority of Pakistanis but not necessarily our govt. You are absolutely correct about a poll being a trend at a moment in time. I don’t think the Indian celebration of Chatham poll is to decide the fate of millions. India has ALREADY decided the fate of the teeming millions.

Forget Shindustan. I bleed green. I am Pak for life. I have my national identity card from Durra Market to prove it. :)

Rex,
It is true, there are not a lot of open forums on Pakistan not inundated with Indians. It does not afford us an opportunity to talk amongst ourselves or with others like yourself or with people like prasad. An example is the copy-paste from Times of India above with zero commentary. Try to Ignore the noise. Your comments are new and fresh. If you know Pashto, you know a thing or two about hospitality. Welcome.

Posted by shoaibo | Report as abusive

An example is the copy-paste from Times of India above with zero commentary. Try to Ignore the noise. Your comments are new and fresh.

Posted by shoaibo
==

As if you have responed to my commentary before :-)

“Try to Ignore the noise.” OTHERWISE, we have to face the reality.

“Your comments are new and fresh.” ROTFL!! Best joke on this blog EVER. BESIDES what a suprise ;-)

Posted by netizen | Report as abusive

“Indian establishment has used Indian Muslims as a cutting tip against Pakistan.” Posted by Matrixx

I would say, it’s the other way around. For a long time, the Pakistani military establishment has tried (in vain) to alienate Indian muslims & use them against India, in order to advance their own agenda. Watch Musharraf being grilled by an Indian maulana in this video.

http://bit.ly/oFGoE

Posted by Mortal1 | Report as abusive

The issue of Kashmir is raging in since six decades and no one can expect a breakthrough on that in a year or two.
But there are some facts which Indians have reconciled too, but it is hard to see even some educated pakistanis not as forthcoming and appreciative of our honesty.
I can explain broadly what Indians position is (although this is my personal opinion, some disagreements and intensity of the points differ from say KP Sigh to Ganesh)

1. It is true that Pakistan had a prima facie case for kashmir as there existed opposite paradoxes in junagadh and hyderabad. But pakistan did blow it up and at that moment atleast, India had an upper hand. No point in discussing the same legal pre-partition issue, when people of kashmir itself are not interested to join pakistan, even Chatham poll shows the trend. They may have no love for India but pakistan is a definitely no-no for them.

2.It is true that Human right abuses happened and no indian can deny that and we do sympathise that. we only deny the intensity pakistan has conjured it up. The human rights abuses happen not just in kashmir but even other places in India too and in other parts of the world too and in this case pakistan hands have more blood than Indians (see genocide in bangladesh by pakistan). Not that I am supporting the Human Right Abuses but is it not to be seen in the context of insurgency? This is the tactic Pakistanis implemented to its perfection in Afghanistan and with its success, in India. As India had better democratic structures and better equipped military, they were not successful.

3. In Geostrategic terms, Jammu and Kashmir (Indian administered) is a classic potpourri of different cultural identities. The Kashmir valley has about half the population living in just 7% of the area(Kashmir Valley, see J&K Map). And jammu people with 20 Percent of people living in 30 % of the area and buddhist ladhakis of 3 to 4% living in some 60% (ladakh and kargil) area. So this is a rare case of majority living in miniority area and minority living in majority geographical area of J&K. which means if a referendum is to be conducted, it has to be region wise and not as whole J&K. The region wise plebicite will perhaps shock pakistanis as that will result in majority of J&K still with India and a small valley with no resouces becoming independent of joining pakistan.

4.The Indian army placed in J & K is stationed because the Pakistan made it mandatory for India to place troops which were the result of the belligerence of pakistan for three times. The nation whose birth has come from voilence and whose belief in solving political problems in its own country (East pakistan or baluchistan) through force cannot be believed unless there is a fundemental shift in how pakistan conducts its statecraft and moves its locus centre of power to democracy and away from military.

5. If the pakistan’s tears for kashmir is to be considered as taking high moral standing, one wonders why they do not protest against similar and even more brutal state voilence against uighur province in china etc and we believe it smacks of intellectual honesty.

6. Even if we consider the pakistan’s moral support of kashmir is correct, Indians are left wondereing why its intelligence agencies support insurgencies in North-East of India which have no ideological and geostrategic basis or advantage for pakistan. How can we convince the hawks who say the pakistan’s raison d’être is simply undoing India.

7. When the Jammu and Kashmir elections were conducted last time, it was hailed as the most free and fair elections by the world community and India allows hundreds of foreign delegates every six years to check the fairness and getting a pulse on the more than autonomous election commission practises in conducting them. Why then in this atmosphere does the seperatists refuse to participate the Indian elections? if they are sure about thier support from people.

8. I donot know if Pakistani’s followed the Kashmir elections closely, but its a fact that most of the people in J&K vote in large numbers, especially kargil dogras ,the shias and silent sufi community in valley and Jammu (who are all muslims) and vote enthusiastically in indian elections and whose numbers are higher than indian average. The places where their numbers are really lower is in valley districts (which i mentioned in my previous post) which gets the most attention. I have once chatted with a pakistani in a pak defence forum and he is shocked to realize there are other minorites in kashmir and valley geographically is a small part of entire J&K, such is the propoganda machine which runs pakistan.

9. India, since kashmir’s accession had never in its 63 years tried to demographically change the state’s charecter even if it had ample oppurtunities and better legal reasons to do so, while pakistan pushed sunnis and pathans in AJK and GB and china moving their teeming millions (to borrow the word) of Hans in tibet. This itself is a testimony to the fact that we are sincere in resolving the issue and providing autonomy to the people.

10.The Kashmiri seperatists demand for complete independence for complete J&K which at the same time refusing the demand of the minorities of J&K (Hindus,buddhists and if i may add shias) for the same choice. Is is not the peak of hypocrisy.

11. It is a fact that when moderate among the seperatists were in faour of talks with India, they were assasinated at the slightest oppurtunity. while India would like to provide autonomy to the people who demand it (the four districts of the valley , which is my exclusive opinion here), is it too much to ask that voilence need to end first.

I know from experience that the pakistanis never never never answer these questions honestly, and I have seen them squirting and dodging the above questions whenever they are presented and will either rhetoric sets in or a meaningless one line statements of human freedom or liberty is pushed on us.

Posted by sensiblepatriot | Report as abusive

Mortal
Watch the video. Indian media using some Maulana to rile up Mushy. This is exactly my point.

Posted by Matrixx | Report as abusive

Of course. Anyone who does not subscribe to the Pakistani agenda must be an “Indian stooge”. I should’ve known better!

Posted by Mortal1 | Report as abusive

BTW, the Maulana questioning Musharraf in the video, is not some guy off the street, he’s the President of Jamiat-Ulama-i-Hind.

Posted by Mortal1 | Report as abusive

So I’m supposed to take his remarks as Fatwa!

Posted by Matrixx | Report as abusive

SP, the tone of my replies should not read as mean-spirited
1. It is true that Pakistan had a prima facie case for kashmir as there existed opposite paradoxes in junagadh and hyderabad. But pakistan did blow it up and at that moment atleast, India had an upper hand. No point in discussing the same legal pre-partition issue, when people of kashmir itself are not interested to join pakistan,
1.1 Junagadh acceded to Pakistan… India invaded
1.2 Hyderabad wanted independence… India invaded
1.3 Portugal wanted Goa… Indian invaded
1.4. Sikkim royalty wanted independence…. India invaded
1.5 Why is only Pakistan to blame for claiming the K in its name in the same manner?
1.6 If Pakistan is so evil, look at how we handled Gwadar with Oman (colonial power) as opposed to India’s handling of Goa with Portugal. Look at how we handled territory with China (China actually gave in to all our claims) as opposed to India’s forward policy. Look at how we handled the Durand line against a weaker and hostile neighbor. We could’ve made BaluchIstan happier by taking on BaluchEstan.

Just a take a moment to think about these things outside of the Indo/Pak prism. Condemn us for our wrongs, Don’t condemn us for everything.

2.It is true that Human right abuses happened and no indian can deny that and we do sympathise that. we only deny the intensity pakistan has conjured it up.

2.1 and AI, HRW, OIC, UN, Indian Humanists. Kashmir is becoming the Indian East Pakistan and believe me you don’t want that on your national conscience.

The human rights abuses happen not just in kashmir but even other places in India too and in other parts of the world too and in this case pakistan hands have more blood than Indians (see genocide in bangladesh by pakistan). Not that I am supporting the Human Right Abuses but is it not to be seen in the context of insurgency? This is the tactic Pakistanis implemented to its perfection in Afghanistan and with its success, in India. As India had better democratic structures and better equipped military, they were not successful.
2.2 Kashmir predates 1971, India’s Junagadh example predates Kashmir. 1971 did not make Kashmir India’s integral property. Bangladeshis and Pakistanis are now friends. We resolved our issues in 1974. I believe we owe them an apology and reparations. Someone owes Biharis an apology and reparations. The two countries have decided to move on, you should too.

3. In Geostrategic terms, Jammu and Kashmir (Indian administered) is a classic potpourri of different cultural identities. The Kashmir valley has about half the population living in just 7% of the area(Kashmir Valley, see J&K Map). And jammu people with 20 Percent of people living in 30 % of the area and buddhist ladhakis of 3 to 4% living in some 60% (ladakh and kargil) area. So this is a rare case of majority living in miniority area and minority living in majority geographical area of J&K. which means if a referendum is to be conducted, it has to be region wise and not as whole J&K. The region wise plebicite will perhaps shock pakistanis as that will result in majority of J&K still with India and a small valley with no resouces becoming independent of joining pakistan.

3.1 I agree with most of your points here.

4.The Indian army placed in J & K is stationed because the Pakistan made it mandatory for India to place troops which were the result of the belligerence of pakistan for three times. The nation whose birth has come from voilence and whose belief in solving political problems in its own country (East pakistan or baluchistan) through force cannot be believed unless there is a fundemental shift in how pakistan conducts its statecraft and moves its locus centre of power to democracy and away from military.

4.1 This point deserves a separate post. I am not dodging…

5. If the pakistan’s tears for kashmir is to be considered as taking high moral standing, one wonders why they do not protest against similar and even more brutal state voilence against uighur province in china etc and we believe it smacks of intellectual honesty.

5.1 You mean to say intellectual dishonesty. Who would you defend first your family or friend? your friend or neighbor? Your neighbor or countrymen? Your countrymen or foreigner? a human or an alien species? India is the size of Western & Central Europe. To the Tamils, Kashmir might as well be in another galaxy. For Pakistanis, kashmiris are our relatives, our neighbors and friends. Islamabad is a short drive from Muzafarabad. You may have noticed that Pakistanis are at ease with Bangladesh but not Kashmir. This should demonstrate consistency not hypocrisy.

6. Even if we consider the pakistan’s moral support of kashmir is correct, Indians are left wondereing why its intelligence agencies support insurgencies in North-East of India which have no ideological and geostrategic basis or advantage for pakistan. How can we convince the hawks who say the pakistan’s raison d’être is simply undoing India.

6.1 India supported Mukthi Bahini before a single shot was fired by west pakistan.
6.2 India supported BLA
6.3 Rules should not apply to one party only
6.4 India has a 10:1 advantage over Pakistan. I think Indians forget that. The purpose is to keep that advantage somewhat distributed. It DOES NOT MEAN that we want to break up India. If Kashmir is resolved… these boys would get an early retirement in a nice cushy home from Defence Housing Authority.

You are a prolific writer. Did you write this yourself? I will get to 7+ later. You will win this discussion just on the basis of attrition!

Posted by shoaibo | Report as abusive

How can you discredit Kashmir’s Pakistan cricket fans in one post and present one maulana as the epitome of the scientific method in the next?

Posted by shoaibo | Report as abusive

Shoaibo: “Junagadh acceded to Pakistan… India invaded”

Here is a link that talks about Junagadh’s accession to India:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_inte gration_of_Junagadh

What you have said is only partly true. India did not invade Junagadh. It surrounded the place with its troops. A plebiscite was indeed held and people voted 99% for accession to India.

In the case of Kashmir, Pakistan definitely had favorable conditions – it was a contiguous state with a majority Muslim population. No one knows why Jinnah decided to invade the place with Pashtun tribesmen. If the Pashtun tribals did not indulge in their usual pillage and rape, things would have been all right. Pakistan could simply have taken the matter to UN asking for a plebiscite. Nehru would have honored that. The problem lies with the macho attitude of Pakistani thinkers who rely on historic belief of taking everything by force. Using force to bring everyone to negotiation table worked in the past. Kings would lay a siege and wait it out until supplies ran out for the surrounded people. But the world has moved on. Pakistan made a mistake of emulating India which was much bigger and had more depth to take shocks. It would have been a simple exercise to conduct the plebiscite and the verdict would have been known. Supposing the Kashmiris of that time decided to vote against Pakistan’s accession, would they have accepted it? Probably not. This is what Pakistan feared then. That is why they refused to honor the UN resolution requirement of having to vacate all of Kashmir before a plebiscite. They knew that Kashmiris had developed strong fear and aversion to joining Pakistan after the tribal plunder.

Things have changed a lot. We simply cannot go back to the old days.

New settlement has to be reached. An independence option for Kashmir has to be included in the UN resolution. Pakistan fought and removed this option in the past. It is time to agree on that. All of Kashmir has to be vacated by both Indian and Pakistani troops and a UN contingent has to come in and maintain law and order. Kashmiri military has to be trained by a neutral nation like Turkey. For five years this status has to be maintained. Then a plebiscite should be held. And if people vote for independence, Kashmir will be ready to handle it. India, China and Pakistan must sign an agreement at the UN that if either country invades Kashmir, they get to face economic sanctions and international isolation. This is the only future option that is left.

Posted by KPSingh01 | Report as abusive

KP,

Let’s play this out to humor ourselves.

Pakistan and India could also sign a no-war pact and confirm each other’s territorial integrity. Realpolitik dictates that an Indo-Pak entente would make Pakistan less desirable for Beijing. If you think about it, China could’ve easily helped Pakistan wrest Kashmir from India in the 60s “window of opportunity”. It stands to reason that China prefers to keep India busy with Pakistan. With a quiet western flank India could can be confident of her northern perimeter. Nobody expects war but Chindia will have some interesting global “contaigments” this century. India would still have to tread carefully around her smaller neighbors. With a quiet eastern flank , Pakistan could heal itself from its perceived Nakba and realize her own full potential.

Posted by shoaibo | Report as abusive

Mortal1,

Matrixx is hardcore. I have not known him to change or even soften his stance in response to someone’s argument. The only evidence he accepts is one that confirms his existing views. I have to reluctantly conclude that discussing anything with him is a waste of time. Sorry, Matrixx.

Shoaibo on the other hand, has the right combination of reasonable accommodation when faced with plausible arguments, and robust, hard-to-refute arguments again backed up by plausible facts. I find it a pleasure to discuss with him, because I’m learning a lot more from this discussion than from most previous interactions with Pakistanis where I felt the other party was just shouting with their ears shut.

I’ll respond to Shoaibo’s points separately.

Regards,
Ganesh Prasad

Posted by prasadgc | Report as abusive

If the Pashtun tribals did not indulge in their usual pillage and rape, things would have been all right.

…. This is an ugly statement. No group, people or race is preordained to rape and pillage. I expect this from a pimple-ridden teenager on Pak/Indo defence forums not a well-read person such as yourself.

Posted by shoaibo | Report as abusive

Shaoibo said:

> Pakistan and India could also sign a no-war pact and confirm each other’s territorial integrity.

There will be clauses and subclauses to be wrestled with in this statement, but the underlying principle is definitely wise.

The Pakistani position has always been – Kashmir resolution first, normalisation of relations afterwards.

I think it should be the other way around, and perhaps you mean the same thing (I don’t mean to put words in your mouth, though).

If both sides can rule out hostilities in pursuit of their goals (and from the Indian side, I would definitely look for an unequivocal repudiation of support for terrorism from the PA, not just the civilian leadership), I can see a rather rapid normalisation of relations, and Kashmir can be settled in a more relaxed atmosphere in a few years. I know Pakistanis fear that India will use this interim period to consolidate its own position and deny Kashmir to Pakistan, but that argument assumes that the Kashmiris want to go to Pakistan in the first place. From whatever I read, the fundamental desire of the Kashmiris is to be a united territory instead of being split between two hostile powers, and to have good economic opportunities for themselves. That will in fact be better served in a peaceful atmosphere. Neither India nor Pakistan may get exactly what they want in terms of a Kashmir settlement, but in a cordial atmosphere, these things will not mean as much as they do in an atmosphere of hostility.

I also like your suggestion of DHA accommodation for retiring officers of the PA to keep them happy. I was thinking of shares in companies, but the idea is similar. Buy them off. It may seem like rewarding bad behaviour, but the prize for the people of both countries is far greater.

Regards,
Ganesh Prasad

Posted by prasadgc | Report as abusive

I don’t know if anyone has seen Afridi’s press conference back home. Forget Cricket, This man is becoming an inspirational national leader…. That’s right Boom Boom Shahid Afridi.

One should never underestimate the human potential

Some statements poorly translated:

“Don’t tell me about hating Indians, Everyone of you has Indian movies at home”
“I walk out of the airport whether we win or lose, people have the right to scold me”
“Mohturma Reporter” (looks away in modesty)
“Imran Sahib has the right to say he wants, but we were on the field”
“Rehman Malik Sahib should focus on his timing”
“I apologize to the country for not bringing home the cup at a time when we needed it most”
“India is just a game, you win and lose. dont worry we will beat greater teams inch’allah”
“It is time to let the young get a chance so that they can showcase their talent before it is too late”
“good time and bad times come to all, aap pay bhee aye gah”

Posted by shoaibo | Report as abusive

Shoaibo: “This is an ugly statement. No group, people or race is preordained to rape and pillage. I expect this from a pimple-ridden teenager on Pak/Indo defence forums not a well-read person such as yourself.”

This is not an ugly statement. It really happened. You can look at any book on Kashmir conflict and it will mention it. There is a famous case of nuns being raped in a church. If they had not engaged in their acts and continued with their invasion, they could have captured key areas in Kashmir for Pakistan. Their distraction gave time for the king of Kashmir to run to India and sign the instrument of accession. India sent its para troopers once it was officially signed that Kashmir is its territory.

Posted by KPSingh01 | Report as abusive

“How can you discredit Kashmir’s Pakistan cricket fans in one post and present one maulana as the epitome of the scientific method in the next?”

Why exaggerate? I never presented the maulana as “the epitome of the scientific method”.

“Pakistan and India could also sign a no-war pact and confirm each other’s territorial integrity.”

That’s a good idea, provided it includes proxy wars in addition to conventional ones’. Extra cirricular activities of “non state actors” must also be done away with.

Posted by Mortal1 | Report as abusive

Ganesh Prasad:
“Matrixx is hardcore. I have not known him to change or even soften his stance in response to someone’s argument. The only evidence he accepts is one that confirms his existing views. I have to reluctantly conclude that discussing anything with him is a waste of time. Sorry, Matrixx.”
Don’t be sorry, call me hardcore if you wish, but I consider myself a realist. My views are formed after long study and experience. I’m willing change my views, if solid argument is presented.

Here is one proposal I presented and shared on PTH site rather popular with Indians.

http://pakteahouse.net/2011/03/28/pakist an%E2%80%99s-geopolitical-dilema-china-o r-us-viewpoint-from-pakistan-%E2%80%93-a nalysis/#comments

“It is a good review of American project for South-central Asia and it has been works since early ninties after the demise of Soviet Union. It was the time for “New world order”, “New American century” and “Full spectrum dominance”. There were other grand concepts as to how world should be shaped under American leadership and guidance. There was the European Union and recasting NATO as global security organization. The alliance for democracy and color revolutions had their day in the sun. Then there was 911 and the application of shock and awe. Here we are twenty years later, properly awed; perhaps ready to take stock world we live in.
We live in a world where international law is in shambles, the concept of state as agreed in treaty of Westphalia is no more, United Nations is laughing stock of the world, human rights have more acceptance so is the case with torture. Technology and communication are the bright spots helping the masses. Coming back to American project, it is quite simple in fact. It is to have corporate state structure like it was built in Japan and very successfully. It is being done in China, as we speak. If it is repeated in other countries, they can also share the prosperity with their people. This is what American leadership provides and also assures full spectrum dominance. What is your problem? Japanese mushroom clouds, any one!
Countries are states no more, they are markets and resources. If you have good products, consumers will break you door to get it. The resources are labor and commodities. It is natural commodities that are in greater demand. Just look at wages against prices of natural commodities. So, nobody wants to take over highly populated countries, just only those with natural resources.
In South Asia, India has been blocked by Pakistan and then America has blocked Pakistan from free access to energy resources, and that flow is allowed to West only. Both countries need significant amount of energy for their economic growth. There was the solution of Nuclear energy but after Fukushima it is doubtful proposition for densely populated countries.
Despite all the issues between India and Pakistan, here is an issue where they should tell NATO to unblock the flows of energy to the area. Does India have the guts. This is my proposal to both sides and even half brains could understand.”

Then I also put forward a proposal to make Lahore and Amritsar as cities open to trade and people.

There was not one repose from any Indian. In fact it shut down all discussion.

See these proposals have nothing to do with Kashmir. Make a counter argument not based on sentiments. Be as hard nosed as you want and if you are right I will accept it. Go for it.

Posted by Matrixx | Report as abusive

If the Pashtun tribals did not indulge in their usual pillage and rape, things would have been all right.
…. This is an ugly statement. No group, people or race is preordained to rape and pillage. I expect this from a pimple-ridden teenager on Pak/Indo defence forums not a well-read person such as yourself.
posted by shoaibo
—–

Only the lies, bigotry and hatred taught in Pakistan studies must be “facts” :-)

Tribals indulged in rape and pillage is a well documented historical fact. There is actually video footage of St Josephs convent in Baramullah being pillaged by western media, rape of nuns is also true.

Posted by netizen | Report as abusive

Meant to say video footage by western media

Posted by netizen | Report as abusive

Cricket has opened the doors for renewed goodwill between India & Pakistan. It can be clearly seen in the people to people interaction. I hope that the bone-headed leaders of the 2 countries can capatalize on this opportunity.

Posted by Mortal1 | Report as abusive

Shoaib: “You are a prolific writer. Did you write this yourself? I will get to 7+ later. You will win this discussion just on the basis of attrition!”

Winning a discussion on the basis of just attrition and other’s fatigue is more disgrace to me (and other indians) than anything else.
Oh, the long post was due to a reason that everytime a new pakistani citizen comes to the forum people like netizen,kp,ganesh,mortal et al has to go through each and every point that I’ve mentioned in a detailed manner. Since I’ve been on the forum as a passive participant for about a year. I’ve just consolidated them for the benifit of reducing the stroll.
No I have not thought about you as a mean spirited guy and since we are craving for a more rational and just spirited paksiani individual for long, we are not going to leave you either in a hurry :-)

shoaib:”Junagadh acceded to Pakistan… India invaded
“.
India did (although symatics differ) but we have never pillaged and raped junagadh the way kashmir was plundered. It is a fact and I believe you should go through more on this, on neutral sources to know the truth.

There is no shame in accepting that because it was not the professional pakistani army which did it; but the pathan tribes which were sent as infiltrators. But devoid of modern military ethics and objectives, they overrode kashmir like barbarians and had it not for them, maharajah hari singh would not have escaped to sign a treay with india.
Shoaib :” If Pakistan is so evil, look at how we handled Gwadar with Oman “. – Good, we wish you deal with kashmir in the same manner. Pakistan should ask themselves why they chose different path regarding India on kashmir (have they thought it to be feasible i donno?).
shaoib: “and AI, HRW, OIC, UN, Indian Humanists. Kashmir is becoming the Indian East Pakistan and believe me you don’t want that on your national conscience”
Morethen AI,OIC,HRW etc, it is Indian Human Rights commission that is important to us and IHRCommission’s acknowledgement that abuses happened is enough for us to hang our heads in shame and no need of international agencies. Also the fundemental reason that you know about these abuses is because we allowed the free media to exist and dont forget that unlike baluchistan or tibet and so no much differences here either.
shoaib:”Kashmir predates 1971, India’s Junagadh example predates Kashmir”.
Since you are more honest and curious about truth, the kind of Human Right abuses that is bestowed on us did not really begin prior to the Insurgency in 1989, many pakistanis I have seen believe the Human Right abuses have taken place since the kashmir acceded to India which is perhaps the biggest lie pakistani state got away with people.

Shoaib:”India supported Mukthi Bahini before a single shot was fired by west pakistan. 2 India supported BLA”
Pakistan’s support for North East Insurgencies predates 1971 and I can prove them. If you have a liberty to buy a book read “Myths and Facts Bangladesh Liberation War:” by western authors. India was greatly hopeful and combined pakistan served it purpose bcoz, East pakistan with moderate muslim polity and huge hindu minority there would have put a check on the high antagonism that existed in west pakistan against India. when Pakistan used force (that is what I put in my very first point about the means to solve political problems) to control East pakistan and its more than moderate muslim polity and Indian friendly populace, who could have brokered a peaceful deal better with India, Indians believed there is little point in keeping pakistan united. when West pakistan state overrided Pakistan’s foreign policy against the majority peoples wishes there was really little point in a status quo. Also, even if india would not have supported, left radicals who were gaining strength would have eventually led to the birth of bangladesh and could’ve threatened india and we’ve better thought a moderate democratic polity serves better. Bangladesh with better UNDP goals (see dawn opinion success and failure) proved the Indians right, in this matter. The author akbar zaidi has a interesting perspective “http://www.dawn.com/2011/04/01/success- and-failure.html”
To borrow his word “In many ironic ways, it is Bangladesh which has become Jinnah`s Pakistan — democratic, developmental, liberal, secular — while Pakistan has become his worst nightmare — intolerant, authoritarian, illiberal and fundamentalist”. I will keep my posts shorter from now on, my previous post is a one-off matter and I will take that point in good spirit.

Posted by sensiblepatriot | Report as abusive

Afridi has let me down. I like him a lot. He fell for the trap by the interviewer. But his speaking the truth about how he feels about Indian team tells how he feels. Sad what he said in response to how was your treatment and relationship with Indian team.

Watch this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HXh8Wk9Lk qU

Posted by rehmat | Report as abusive

shoaib :” Who would you defend first your family or friend? your friend or neighbor? Your neighbor or countrymen? Your countrymen or foreigner? a human or an alien species? India is the size of Western & Central Europe. To the Tamils, Kashmir might as well be in another galaxy. For Pakistanis, kashmiris are our relatives, our neighbors and friends. Islamabad is a short drive from Muzafarabad. You may have noticed that Pakistanis are at ease with Bangladesh but not Kashmir. This should demonstrate consistency not hypocrisy”.

Point well taken and I agree on this. I would be forthcoming on this and will not downplay the emotions the pakistanis have on kashmir. We have the habit of using the word pakistanis interchangeably with pakistani state (both are different and more so in the context of limited liberal environment there) and I will be more careful to make it explicit from now on.

Posted by sensiblepatriot | Report as abusive

“Sad what he said in response to how was your treatment and relationship with Indian team.” Posted by rehmat

As Shoaibo says, maybe Mr. Afridi is looking for a career in politics, after all ;)

Posted by Mortal1 | Report as abusive

Here’s some more. After garnering some goodwill from Indians with his gracious act in India, Afridi’s giving it all back. An excerpt:

Asked by a chat show host on Pakistan’s Samaa TV station about what it was like playing in India and the feeling he got from the Indian public, Mr. Afridi had this to say:

“If I speak truthfully, they just can’t have the kind of heart a Muslim has or a Pakistani has. I think they don’t have the sort of big hearts, pure hearts, Allah has given us.”

The comments elicited applause from a studio audience.

http://on.wsj.com/hg8RK6

Posted by Mortal1 | Report as abusive

If I speak truthfully, they just can’t have the kind of heart a Muslim has or a Pakistani has. I think they don’t have the sort of big hearts, pure hearts, Allah has given us.”

The comments elicited applause from a studio audience.

http://on.wsj.com/hg8RK6

Posted by Mortal1

==
Mortal 1,
I saw that 2 days ago, thought of posting it here. Didn’t do it because I didn’t want to be the person repeatedly pointing out reality as it is.

Thanks for sharing the mantle.

Posted by netizen | Report as abusive

Rehmat,

The Pushtun’s generosity for friends is like no other and his ferocity in battle is like no other. I have never known a Sikh personally but I have heard the same generalizations for them. Perhaps this is why Harbhajan and Afridi get along so well. Could there be a possible cultural misunderstanding? Our standards for hospitality are much higher than Indians, could an unintended slight from the Indian team offended the Khan? Is it possible that a personable fellow like Afridi encountered an Indian cricket team that has more Rehmats than Prasads? Perhaps, to the Pathan this equates to small hearts versus big, pure hearts. Could he be referring to the manner Pakistani players were snubbed in IPL? He should not have brought religion into the mix. You are a perfect illustration of that.

Have you seen some of the coverage of the Indian media? Educated Indians have criticized their media’s sensationalism. What conclusions would a simple Afridi draw from coverage like this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uhCLtGFYa zY

From 1 hour press footage, you chose to share only this recent clip? What about the one a few days back where he berated a reported on hatred of India. Do you indict everyone this quickly or just Pakistanis? No comment on Gambhir?

He said the same thing about the media to Indians in India. A man that speaks the truth (as he sees it) is the opposite of politician.

Jai Hind.

Posted by shoaibo | Report as abusive

Our standards for hospitality are much higher than Indians,
Posted by shoaibo
==

Saaf Dil Badaa Dil

repeat :-)

Posted by netizen | Report as abusive

Most Indians would agree with Afridi that a segment of Indian media is excessively negative about Pakistan & sensationalizes news, in general. But to say that Indians lack big & pure hearts which muslims & Pakistanis do, is a mean spirited & dumb thing to say. He should’ve known better.

Posted by Mortal1 | Report as abusive

There may be some truth to the hospitality thing. I personally know two or three Indian friends and relatives who have been to Pakistan at different points in time over the years, and all of them were wowed by the hospitality and warmth they received. A few years ago, a group of Indian journalists visited Pakistan and one of them (a famous person, but I don’t recall his name now) said they got such generous treatment, with many shopkeepers refusing to accept payment when they learnt the visitors were from India. This journalist was ashamed to think what would happen if a group of Pakistanis were to visit Delhi, because he was sure they would be ripped off.

Perhaps there really is something to this. I have never been to Pakistan, so I cannot say anything about their hospitality, but I have been to Delhi, and I would agree with the journalist :-(. People in Indian cities (auto and taxi drivers, shopkeepers, etc.), are quick to rip you off if they know you’re not a local, even if you’re another Indian. I don’t think they would show any special consideration if they knew the person was Pakistani. It may in fact have the opposite effect.

I don’t mean to be disloyal, but this is a home truth we may have to confront.

Regards,
Ganesh Prasad

Posted by prasadgc | Report as abusive

@Shoaibo

“He should not have brought religion into the mix. You are a perfect illustration of that.”
***Explain please. Did I talk religion here? NO. Also, I have the liberty to say without affecting masses, he in his position does not.

Your long-winded spin will do nothing to justify what Afridi said will not do anything. It was a case of being bitter after the loss to India. After all he is a Pushtoon who is not used to defeat. IPL etc issue is not part of the question asked to him.

He undid cricket diplomacy. By all counts India-Pak match was played in good spirit and players had good body language on the field and off the field they always have. Mumbai crowd (which I disliked for their behavior according to reports) was much more aggressive than Mohali’s.

“Is it possible that a personable fellow like Afridi encountered an Indian cricket team that has more Rehmats than Prasads?”
*** Indian team has “stingy and deceptive” Zaheer and “wicked” Yusuf Pathan whom I want to stay that way. :-)
With hotel under Indian security control, do you think he was allowed to mingle with anyone. Indians did not want Pakistan team hit by rocket launcher like Sri Lankans got in Pakistan.

Let us assume he encountered few “Rehmats” who shoved him across the wall, he must be intelligent to assume that India has more “Prasads” than be so sure about “heart size”. He is captain of Pakistan team not a “Shoaibo” that he uses his position to express his prejudices.

My take is that he was “jetlagged” (lol) and was caught on camera as he entered his house by so-called “positive media” of Pakistan. In the interview, Afridi was visibly disturbed or sleepless even before this sad comment. Perhaps it was the loss to India plus the prejudices he carries (but needs to drop as a Captain) that made him say that. he is simple enough that he could not hide what he said. I am not going to change my view about him; he is a pleasing personality and likable guy. After all it is just one sad comment.

“Have you seen some of the coverage of the Indian media? Educated Indians have criticized their media’s sensationalism.”

***I agree with you on media so I did not say that he said anything wrong about the media. I have problem with only one comment, which you seem to justify: “If I speak truthfully, they just can’t have the kind of heart a Muslim has or a Pakistani has. I think they don’t have the sort of big hearts, pure hearts, Allah has given us.”

“From 1 hour press footage, you chose to share only this recent clip?”
***I saw this clip on Dawn and have no idea about the rest. I was not being selective. Will see and comment on that.

“He said the same thing about the media to Indians in India. A man that speaks the truth (as he sees it) is the opposite of politician.”
***He can give hell to media, I do not care and will support him. Targeting a community based on religion/country (in his position) is what I have problem with.

Peace!

Posted by rehmat | Report as abusive

@Ganesh

“I don’t mean to be disloyal, but this is a home truth we may have to confront”
***May I ask you what does what you said all along in the post has anything to do with the specific comment made. NOTHING.
please check the question asked and answer given. Qn was about Indian team. PUHLEEZE!

Posted by rehmat | Report as abusive

@Shoaibo

“The Pushtun’s generosity for friends is like no other and his ferocity in battle is like no other. I have never known a Sikh personally but I have heard the same generalizations for them. Perhaps this is why Harbhajan and Afridi get along so well.”

***You can find Sikhs in Peshawar Pakthoonkhwa, paying Jizya by “hospitable and generous” Pushtoons/Talibans.

Posted by rehmat | Report as abusive

Rehmat,

I only commented on the hospitality angle, which came up in the course of the discussion above (the comment by Shoaibo that netizen responded to). I don’t follow cricket very much, and didn’t care to watch what Afridi said.

Regards,
Ganesh Prasad

Posted by prasadgc | Report as abusive

Ganesh

“I only commented on the hospitality angle, which came up in the course of the discussion above (the comment by Shoaibo that netizen responded to).”

***Perhaps you should watch what Afridi said than what Neitzen said. Shoaibo responded to my post about what Afridi said. Cricket is not an issue here. Look at the original post.

I do not care about irrelevant hospitality angle in general which has no connection to the original reason it started.

Let us be “intellectually honest” but I understand if you are trying to make people happy here.

Let us talk about hospitality. Mohali is in Punjab with Sikh majority. Shoaibo also knows that Sikhs like Pushtoons are hospitable. So what’s the issue? Where does Delhi come here. May be I am dumb.

Take care

Posted by rehmat | Report as abusive

Ganesh,
I have an interesting thought for you. Have you ever wondered why we show more than needed hospitality to our relatives who come from More developed countries say Australia or United states. We constantly try to prove them that we have all the facilities that the americans enjoy and we have best culture around and we long for being flattered. When the same relatives speak about poverty or dirt on the streets, we try our best to avoid that or simply blame politicians and get away with.

This is true of families too, where my uncle (father’s brother) who is economically less fortunate than we are, would always play up this more than needed generosity and kindness when we visit them. He tries to make a point that he has everything that we enjoy . My father is angered with this behaviour as he thinks his brother is wasting money. But my father doesn’t seem to obstruct us when we do the same with our rich foreign relatives!

Pakistan with less than capable clout depends heavily on that generosity showoff ( sorry if was mean). It is not with all neighbours (like afghanistan).

In one of the articles of dawn, I remember Zia-Ul-Haq says to his pakistani bureaucrats to treat neighbours with flattery and utmost generosity you can show as that is the only leverage we could possibly have with americans.

The American bureaucrats who visit pakistan are ofcourse extremely joyful that they would never see that warmthness with procedural and protocol obsessed Indians. But the fact should not be lost on you in this respect. Between countries it does not matter what you show but what you does.

But can you see the split personality of an average pakistani and this can be best depicted by one person. Shahid Afridi! It is the lack of conviction of your thoughts that has given this phenomenon of flattering more than what is needed (Afridi flattering indians more than one expects) and a slight critism from media and establishment makes him spit poision. This is the nature of person with inferiority complex (like we ourselves display with our rich NRI’s ) with lack of self-belief.

It may also look more generous because we rarely meet them just like we rarely meet our NRI relatives and not knowing whether it could be our last (or the belief that the reunion is long away) we show more than it is needed.
An objective analysis is needed in this. A person with curiosity in psychology like you may dissect it better.

Posted by sensiblepatriot | Report as abusive

SP,

In your example, Indians are generous to wealthier relatives. A sibling rivalry and social status is in play. What is the incentive of rickshaw driver in Rawalpindi who forgoes a stranger’s fare never to see him again? Sometimes our hospitality can be quite stupid. If a guest asks for refuge, we won’t give him even if FIA is at the door. Conversely, our per capita income was higher than India at one time, we were still good to our guests.

I will be very honest with you Indian Muslims visiting relatives in Pakistan are not well-off. They still get the same love and treatment as any other guest. Where is the inferiority complex? In Pakistan, nobody gives a hoot about someone from ‘villlayat’.

I was only trying to describe possible misunderstanding due to cultural differences. If all you took out from my comment was “pakistan is better than india in hospitality”, than we have another cultural misunderstanding !

Posted by shoaibo | Report as abusive

Pakistan with less than capable clout depends heavily on that generosity showoff ( sorry if was mean). It is not with all neighbours (like afghanistan).

…. In our culture, show off is when you SHOW your material belongings. Generosity is when you GIVE your material wealth. No offense taken.

Posted by shoaibo | Report as abusive

People in South Asia, Middle East and the Orient suck up to the white people. Caucasians get extra attention and hospitality everywhere. In India, by default the term “foreigner” refers to white people. If someone fakes an accent, relatives get thrilled to their bones. On top of that people of these regions sometimes become mean towards each other in the presence of white people. People switch to demonstration mode whenever white people show up. My nephew married a Canadian girl (white of course) and my folks were bending over backwards preparing to welcome her. Firanghee bahu is very special in many parts of the region. Everyone is desperate to explain all aspects of “our” culture to “them” with periodic, “this is how we wash our rear ends” demonstration. And people vie with each other to get their attention. I sometimes wonder why cricket teams in South Asia always have “white” coaches. Isn’t there any competent ex-player who can run the show? Younis Khan was all teeth when he said his team won the 20/20 World cup for Bob Woolmer sahib. Hospitality comes with a lot of inferiority complex towards fair skinned people. I have at least seen how Indians treat Chinese or “Negros” in India. And I have heard that in China, the latter are low down the order as well.

Posted by KPSingh01 | Report as abusive

Singh, but in Pakistan, I would say the opposite is true. Fellow South Asians are from Lanka, India, Bangladesh are treated the best. There is shyness with westerners.

Conversely, you may have seen timidness in Indian players with the sledging Australians a few years back. But Pakistani players like Akram, Akhtar et al stared them down eyeball to eyeball, sledge for sledge. Even if they were blasting us for sixes all over the ground !!! lol.

Bob Woolmer holds a VERY special place in the heart of Pakistani cricketers. God bless his soul, he was a wonderful human being and a ‘fatherly’ figure to Younis Khan. It had nothing to do with Woolmer being a white man.

The real problem with South Asians is that we see ill even in each other even in good deeds.

Posted by shoaibo | Report as abusive

correction: we see ill in each other even in good deed.

Posted by shoaibo | Report as abusive

Shoaibo: “But Pakistani players like Akram, Akhtar et al stared them down eyeball to eyeball, sledge for sledge. Even if they were blasting us for sixes all over the ground !!! lol.”

That kind of standing up has started with Indian cricketers as well. In the Sydney test it took the peak form where Harbhajan Singh would not bow down. The test ended up as a farce and Austrailans were sat down and made to change their methods. In the Perth test they played like nuns and lost the test match to India. After that they have not been able to beat India.

I have not been to Pakistan and will give credit to your words about complexes about white people. In India for sure there is a lot of complex.

Posted by KPSingh01 | Report as abusive

“People in South Asia, Middle East and the Orient suck up to the white people. Caucasians get extra attention and hospitality everywhere.” Posted by KPSingh01

You can also add South America, Africa & Carribean countries to that list. I don’t buy that it’s any different in Pakistan. Although I haven’t been to that country, I’ve seen enough Pakistanis behave in a similar fashion in other countries.

Posted by Mortal1 | Report as abusive

I did not suggest a complete absence of the trait but a difference in degree of application.
Please make a Pakistani friend and visit his home. Your heart may not soften but your opinion will.

Posted by shoaibo | Report as abusive

I’ve visited quite a few Pakistani homes & attended Pakistani-hosted parties, to know a thing or two about Pakistani hospitality, no issue there. I was referring to the “no special treatment to caucasians” part.

“Your heart may not soften”

You seem to have pre-concieved notions about everyone here & that’s a bit strange for a newcomer. My advice is the same: Stop judging people, you know nothing about!

Posted by Mortal1 | Report as abusive

Ahhh. I was referring to hospitality. I retract my judgement.

Posted by shoaibo | Report as abusive

Guys

WE have heard quite a bit about warm hospitality. How about an equally important point of being a gracious guest?

Posted by rehmat | Report as abusive

[...] top, the current phase combines the two.  Prime Minister Manmohan Singh’s impromptu  invitation to his Pakistani counterpart Yusuf Raza Gilani to watch last week’s India-Pakistan cricket semi-final coincided with [...]

I agree with Afridi that Indians do not, repeat, DO NOT have same hearts as Pakistanis. Indians do not wish to fly any flag in Islamabad as against Pakistani wishes of flying Islamic flag in Red Fort (Built by a Muslim Shehenshah Shah Jahan and a glory and pride of every Indian irrespective of his/her religion and then a symbol of Indian, supposedly a Hindu nation’s Independence, is there a greater irony or stupidity in Pakistani thoughts), we do not wish everyday bomb blasts in Karachi/Islamabad/Peshawar etc, we do not want any fundamentalism of any kind be it try to subscribe to any religion, we do not wish to attack Pakistani Parliament, we do not consider ourselves being victimised because of our religions, we do not wish to get into any arms race with anyone, we have not taken it upon ourselves to provide nukes to every other person who pays.

I bet had Afridi gone home after beating India he would have said something along the lines of conquering India and hindus in game of cricket. He is just trying to save his a** and nothing more is to be read into it.

On hospitality, frankly speaking both the countries might have problems because both have all kinds of people and a small sample can never be considered a result. This is error of sample collection. Too small size of sampling can never throw up correct statistical results. Full Stop.

Posted by 007XXX | Report as abusive

Pashtoons by and large are hospitable people. One could agree with such a generalisation. Afridis are also Pashtoons! This does not however follow that Afridis are also hospitable!! Nor or those Pashtoons hospitable in the classic sense who were integrated into the Indian culture for centuries. Imran khan does claim that his ancestory is of Pashton origin, but his culture is very foreign to Pashtoons.
One could compare Afridis with the dutch or Scottish people, who are the most miser among the europeans!

Sorry Afridis, Dutch and Scotsmen, no harm was intnded.

Posted by fibs | Report as abusive

Pashtoons are by and large hospitable, when compared with Indian folks. Afridis are Pashtoons. This does not, however, follow that Afridis are hospiable people as such.
Americans are the most hospitable and generous people in the world! This is continuously changing ofcourse, due to the mix in their population.

Rex Minor

Posted by pakistan | Report as abusive

[...] the top, the current phase combines the two.  Prime Minister Manmohan Singh’s impromptu  invitation to his Pakistani counterpart Yusuf Raza Gilani to watch last week’s India-Pakistan cricket semi-final coincided with the [...]

[…] still can be done.  An Indian reader in a comment on a companion blog saw the match as an opportunity to renew ties and bury the rancour of the recent past. “ If […]