Rethinking Foreign Policy -- Can Pakistan and India Agree?

The author seems to be too magnanimus towards Pakistan.

Yes, we should be very kind-hearted, benevolent and magnanimous towards Kashmiris-both sides. But towards Pakistan?????? To be good to a person whose hands are soaked in the blood of thousands of Kashmiris and Indians??

Sir, its an order too tall. To my mind there is no point in talking to Pakistan over Kashmir. There are only two solutions to Kashmir--either Pakistan returns all the illegally occupied territory of Azad Kashmir and Northern Areas(as claimed by India to be its part) or accept status-quo i.e. LOC as international border for Indians/Pakistanis and soft border for Kashmiris.

Other than that nothing in for Pakistan. If they think Allah/ God/ Bhagwan/ some peer-faqir/ Ouliya etc. will change the position to their favour, well our best of luck.

It seems that Musharaff`s time is running out and there is no point in discussing anything with him.

Dear Harish,

Fair enough - Your posts are there and mine are there.

As for BJ kumar.. or anyone else you wish to quote as some sort of gospel... BJ for one is someone who routinely abuses women who don`t agree with him. Same goes for most of your other ``gawahs`` ...

So stick to the facts- WAIT that might cause a system overload.

#18 by Mantolives

[As for BJ kumar.. or anyone else you wish to quote as some sort of gospel... BJ for one is someone who routinely abuses women who don`t agree with him.]

Yaar Yasser, please try fooling some newcomers, they might actually believe you (although it is highly unlikely). I know how you abuse women (Sadna comes to mind rightaway), so what does that tell you about yourself?

[So stick to the facts- WAIT that might cause a system overload.]

I know facts always cause a system overload, which is why you resort to rumor-mongering and myth-peddling.

Dear Harish...

Beyond calling Sadna a liar and a dishonest hypocrite which she has proved herself to be I have not made any sexual innuendos about her... as BJ has done so repeatedly.

Infact allegedly the one person who has closely mirrored BJ`s performance is our very own Salim Chauhan who was apparently writing ``limericks`` in praise of Sadna`s ``private parts`` while describing all Hindu women as prostitutes - according to a very credible interactor. I haven`t seen Chauhan do it ... and so I can`t say anything ... but if he has then so much for your praise of him as the most likeable interactor on chowk.

Anyway... stop attaching too much importance to yourself.

#20 by Mantolives

[Beyond calling Sadna a liar and a dishonest hypocrite which she has proved herself to be I have not made any sexual innuendos about her... as BJ has done so repeatedly.]

So you set the standard on what abuse is and what is not? Abuse is abuse, whether sexual or otherwise.

[I haven`t seen Chauhan do it ... and so I can`t say anything ... but if he has then so much for your praise of him as the most likeable interactor on chowk.]

So you haven`t seen Salim do that, yet are willing to believe that ``credible interactor``? So much for your honesty.

[Anyway... stop attaching too much importance to yourself.]

And please stop confusing wishful thinking for reality.

BTW, when are you going to provide us evidence of RAW`s repeated bombing of Paki cities in the 1980s?

`` Despite this rosy economic picture, Pakistan can be said to be passing through one of the darkest periods of its history. It is facing crises both internally and externally. Internally, Pakistanis are increasingly unhappy with President Musharraf’s policy of cooperation with the U.S and military action in Waziristan. The population of Pakistan in general and the NWFP in particular is generally sympathetic to the militants waging war in Afghanistan. Dissidents in Balochistan are up in arms and the army has to use helicopter gunships to deal with the insurgency. The religious parties are angry also with the West’s insensitivity towards Muslim sentiments. The civil society is upset with Musharraf’s reluctance to give up his military uniform and hand over the rule to civilians. ``

Pakistan has no choice but to co-operate with USA. Pakistani secular politicians will strike deals with USA. The religious parties are lackeys of the military. They will make noise to increase the ``rent`` the military can extract from the West.

`` The remaining two categories of Jihadis are the Taleban who are waging war against the U.S led coalition in Afghanistan and those fighting a war against the Indian occupation of Kashmir. These two groups of Jihadis are the creation of Pakistan and have been supported by funds, manpower, logistics and training by both the civilian and state actors in Pakistan. Asking Pakistan to destroy them is like God asking Abraham to sacrifice his son. Pakistan agreed to curb their activities as the US pointed the gun to its head, but lacks the enthusiasm it has for destroying the other two categories of jihadis. ``

Pakistan has a choice to make - hostility or friendship with India.

`` It is in this context that one has to view the increasing disenchantment of the U.S with Pakistan and the de-hyphening of its relationship with India. The recent Bush visit has crystallised what had been apparent for quite some time now; namely, that the U.S considers India to be a key partner in how it views the future shape of the world in general and Asia in particular. This partnership will endure even if the Indo-U.S nuclear deal fails to pass the Congress because the Americans increasingly view India as an anchor for their Asian strategy. The U.S has realised that being the sole super-power is not enough to manage international relations; they also realise that they may not remain the sole super-power for long, with China fast gaining the wherewithal to be a super-power in another decade or two. While India has no desire to be an American vassal in its attempts to contain China, it does not mind taking advantage of the situation to boost its own ambition to be a world power, a strong regional player and a pre-eminent South Asian power. ``



`` Pakistan, on the other hand, is viewed as a not-too-trustworthy-but-necessary ally in the War on Terror. It is also viewed as a potential nightmare if Musharraf is replaced by forces inimical to the U.S. Mark Shield on Jim Lehrer Hour Report on the PBS quoted inside U.S Administration sources as saying that the biggest nightmare of Bush is not Iraq or Iran but things potentially going wrong in Pakistan. In short, the U.S views Pakistan as a short-term solution but a long-term problem. ``

While Pakistan is a problem they are dependent on USA, Saudi Arabia and China for survival. I doubt Pakistani regime can resist a oil embargo/financial sanctions by Saudi Arabia and UAE.

`` On the Pakistani side, too, the disenchantment with the U.S is complete. The Pakistani news commentators are almost unanimous in proclaiming that the U.S is no longer a reliable ally, especially when it comes to dealing with helping Pakistan with its Kashmir agenda. There are rumours about some uneasiness within the army brass as well. The voices for a re-think of the Pakistani geopolitical alliance are getting louder. ``

If USA cannot compel Pakistan to change its Kashmir policy it is stupid to expect India to change its policy in response to American pressure.

`` India also has an external reason for ending hostility with Pakistan. India’s dreams of becoming a world power have never been closer to becoming reality than now. But to do so, India has to be acceptable as a leader in its own backyard. For that to happen, it needs to be perceived as a Big Brother and not as a Big Bully. It needs to be a force for stability and progress in the neighbourhood. Pakistan is passing through a difficult phase. It can help it maintain stability and prosperity by strengthening Musharraf’s hands against forces of instability, a stable Pakistan is good for a stable India. ``

India has a long way to go before becoming a world power. The answer lies not in Pakistan but in improving the lives of its citizens. The IT boom has nothing to do with Pakistan.

Yawn.

Other than the credible actor, sadna herself has been claiming this all over unplugged ... even accusing me of cheering Salim when he did that.

As for RAW`s bombings... ever hear of a terrorist called ``Manjit Singh`` ... on death row? One of the many disgusting terrorists funded by your intelligence agencies to create chaos and havoc in Pakistan and take innocent lives...

#23 by Mantolives

[As for RAW`s bombings... ever hear of a terrorist called ``Manjit Singh`` ... on death row? One of the many disgusting terrorists funded by your intelligence agencies to create chaos and havoc in Pakistan and take innocent lives...]

You mean Manjit Singh bombed Pakistan`s cities for a full decade through the 80s and the Paki intelligence agencies were unable to catch him? What about the others from among the ``many disgusting terrorists funded by our intelligence agencies``? Or was Manjit Singh the only Indian spy you inept guys have to show for in almost 3 decades?

No I am sure there are more.

But then again- you consider yourself judge jury and executioner for purposes of ``evidence`` ascertainment- so whats the point?

If you believe Indian intelligence agencies have not sponsored terrorism in Pakistan- continue to believe so... but then don`t act surprise that your opposite numbers in Pakistan - the similarly deluded zombies fed on a wretched diet of state sponsored propaganda- deny the existence of ISI`s involvement in Indian terror attacks.

BTW, there was one Paki who confessed on NDTV that he was forced by the intelligence agencies to implicate Manjit. The next day he again was on TV, appearing scared and harassed, he told the NDTV correspondent that he was getting threatening calls and was worried about the safety of his family. That blows holes into your `Manjit was a terrorist` theory.

Acha so now that is conclusive evidence? Supreme Court of Pakistan is lying but some dude on NDTV is right.

Talk about double standards... and you ask me for evidence. Get a frikkin` life.

#25 by Mantolives

[If you believe Indian intelligence agencies have not sponsored terrorism in Pakistan- continue to believe so... but then don`t act surprise that your opposite numbers in Pakistan - the similarly deluded zombies fed on a wretched diet of state sponsored propaganda- deny the existence of ISI`s involvement in Indian terror attacks.]

In the case of ISI, third-party intelligence agencies like the CIA, Mossad, and even the German intelligence agency have provided evidence of its involvement in terrorist attacks in India, while not once has RAW been accused by them of orchestrating attacks on Paki soil.

So this equal-equal game needs more basis than just Yasser`s words, because we all know you are capable of a flip-flop within no time.

``Blows holes``

If only the world operated according to your whims and judgements...

Regardless of your confident assertion that no Indian can be a terrorist - that terrorist murderer Manjit will hang. Meanwhile you can bring a thousand more people on NDTV willing to ``confess`` that they were forced to implicate him...

28-

Making big claims doesn`t do anything. Provide some concrete evidence and not that some alleged Paki confessed on NDTV...

As for RAW... it was the lackey and lap dog of the KGB and it carried out a number of attacks and when that terrorist bastard hangs ... justice will b served.

#27 by Mantolives

[Supreme Court of Pakistan is lying but some dude on NDTV is right.]

A Supreme Court upholds Musharraf`s election in a referendum (by a 97% margin at that) that even Pakis could not stomach, so you`re fooling no one except yourself if you think it can be anything else.

[Get a frikkin` life.]

At least I spend my time worrying about contemporary events. You are stuck with `restoring` Jinnah`s pride, so it is you who should get a life.

Look no one is going to buy some ``alleged Paki`s`` confession on NDTV about that terrorist Manjit Singh... Whatever your view of the SC ... it has the power to hang that terrorist and that is precisely what will happen- soon.